june 27, 2017 to all congregations in britain and northern ireland re: donations to regional conventions using jw.org.
june 27, 2017 to all congregations in ireland re: donations to regional conventions using jw.org.
.
I've just noticed that the UK letterhead has changed; no mention of The Watchtower at all! Is this due to the current UK Charity Commission investigation? Have they changed the name of their financial side of the organisation again?
How come there is a different letterhead for Ireland? That branch doesn't even exist anymore as far as I'm aware!
in the latest 2013 revision the footnote of john chapter 8 states; a number of ancient and authoritative manuscripts omit vs 53 (of chapter 7) to chapter 8, vs. 11.. yet the 1984 revision quotes a similar footnote, however the passage of scripture is included in the text, albeit separately at the bottom.
this passage of scripture is about the scribes and the pharisees who brought a woman that was accused of adultery before jesus to test him on the punishment to be meted out.
then came his famous reply; let the one of you that is sinless be the first to throw a stone at her.. i just found it interesting that the wtbts would leave this out in the latest revision.
Actually this is one thing of the few things they actually got right. See this article:
https://bible.org/article/my-favorite-passage-thats-not-bible
It is an important point to note that although the story of the woman caught in adultery is found in most of our printed Bibles today, the evidence suggests that the majority of Bibles during the first eight centuries of the Christian faith did not contain the story. Externally, most scholars would say that the evidence for it not being an authentic part of John’s Gospel is rock solid.
How, then, has this passage made it into modern translations? In a word, there has been a longstanding tradition of timidity among translators. One twentieth-century Bible relegated the passage to the footnotes, but when the sales were rather lackluster, it again found its place in John’s Gospel. Even the NET Bible (available at www.bible.org), for which I am the senior New Testament editor, has put the text in its traditional place. But the NET Bible also has a lengthy footnote, explaining the textual complications and doubts about its authenticity. And the font size is smaller than normal so that it will be harder to read from the pulpit! But we nevertheless made the same concession that other translators have about this text by leaving it in situ.
I believe it’s time for us to own up to our tradition of timidity and recognize that this has not helped the Church in the long haul. It’s time to close the gap. I am calling for translators to remove this text from the Gospel of John and relegate it to the footnotes. Although this will be painful and will cause initial confusion, it is far better that laypeople hear the truth about scripture from their friends than from their enemies. They need to know that Christ-honoring, Bible-believing scholars also do not think that this text is authentic, and that such a stance has not shaken their faith one iota. No cardinal truth is lost if these verses go bye-bye; no essential doctrine is disturbed if they are cut from the pages of the Word of God.
the watchtower has held for many years that jesus died on a stake and held strongly to this teaching.
w 1951 3/15 the above agrees with the new world translation of the christian greek scriptures in its appendix, page 769, in saying that the instrument upon which jesus was nailed was a stake without a crossbeam, and not the religiously represented “cross”; and that the greek word used for that instrument in ancient time meant a “stake” and not the conventional religious cross.
they are no longer certain on this point.
I wonder if there are any half worldly couples who agreed to name their kid Stavros in honor of all the arguments they have about Jesus.
Or in honour of the creator of the Daleks!
the watchtower has held for many years that jesus died on a stake and held strongly to this teaching.
w 1951 3/15 the above agrees with the new world translation of the christian greek scriptures in its appendix, page 769, in saying that the instrument upon which jesus was nailed was a stake without a crossbeam, and not the religiously represented “cross”; and that the greek word used for that instrument in ancient time meant a “stake” and not the conventional religious cross.
they are no longer certain on this point.
Actually that paragraph on their website:
https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/did-jesus-die-on-cross/
A contradiction in the same paragraph!
However, the Bible does not describe the instrument of Jesus’ death, so no one can know its shape with absolute certainty. Still, the Bible provides evidence that Jesus died, not on a cross, but on an upright stake.
the watchtower has held for many years that jesus died on a stake and held strongly to this teaching.
w 1951 3/15 the above agrees with the new world translation of the christian greek scriptures in its appendix, page 769, in saying that the instrument upon which jesus was nailed was a stake without a crossbeam, and not the religiously represented “cross”; and that the greek word used for that instrument in ancient time meant a “stake” and not the conventional religious cross.
they are no longer certain on this point.
Half banana
Since when have the JW organisation started to use logical reasoning?
If they really go in that direction they might all wake up.
We can live in hope!
found this little gem of an article in the june 15, 2011 wt.... should youths get baptized?“i am so happy that my daughter is now a servant of jehovah, and i know that she is happy too,” said carlos, a christian father in the philippines.
a father from greece wrote: “my wife and i are delighted that our three children were baptized as jehovah’s witnesses during their adolescence.
they are making spiritual progress and are happy about serving jehovah.”christian parents have reason to be overjoyed when their children get baptized, but sometimes the joy is accompanied by uneasiness.
No! Jesus was 30 when he got baptized and the WTS say they do everything based on the Bible so nobody should be baptized until they are at least 30!
i'm in the middle of dissecting the june 2017 jw broadcasting video.. in the first minute, they summarize a story about a guy who apparently was a one-time bad ass (showed a picture of him with a beard while posing on a chopper).
then, they show him shaving at the exact same moment the narrator is saying how he regained "a clean conscience".. this no-beard obsession by the jws is beyond nuts.. .
Yes John, but then your employer wouldn't have the gall to say "but we don't make rules, especially as God doesn't make arbitrary lists of rules like the Pharisees did" whilst at the same time expecting you to follow the list rules you were just given!
· for what reasons does jesus have the formerly demonized man tell others about what jesus did?.
but jesus tells the man: “go home to your relatives, and report to them all the things jehovah has done for you and the mercy he has shown you.”—mark 5:19.. .
(mark 5:18-20) .
Thanks for your efforts Somebody.
From your scans I can see that Luke 8:39 uses the word "Ιησους" (Jesus), whilst Mark 5:19 uses the word "κύριος" (Lord) and I notice they use a capital (uppercase) "L" in the English, meaning God (you can check that under definition "C" on Bible Hub: http://biblehub.com/greek/2962.htm)
Thanks for the intriguing question.
two weeks ago marked one year over my disassociation.
time for an appraisal.. quick summary of my story for those who came in lately: my mother brought me into the witnesses when i was 4, grew up the role-model jw boy, baptized at 16, married a zealous reg.
pio.
Thanks for sharing your experience with us and I'm glad that the majority of your family still speak to you.
same theme scripture as last week deut 32.
3/4 "a god... who is never unjust".
do i share that spirit ?
In the example of Naboth, the Israelites were used to God intervening directly so if he was allowed to live then Naboth's relatives would have known for sure that God had his reasons and not to go against them.
Today God does NOT intervene in human affairs, despite what the WTS would have you believe. That's the whole point of Satan being in control of the world, no? Therefore, when (not "if") injustices are committed by the elders, by no means should you put up with it.
Of course my comments are directed at those who still believe in God, otherwise it's just a moot point.
