self-aware npc has an upload that the ""top-secret"' elders only secret boxes is a drum roll here......a new brochure.....ta dahhhh🤪.
i mean how more dramatic can we get..
11/6, 6/11, 9/11... This is starting to sound suspiciously like numerology and gematria.
I know Russell and many of the early Bible students followed all of that, but I thought we'd left most of that behind in these "more enlightened" times...
Not to mention the classic statement from Jesus about "concerning that day and hour nobody knows... only the Father".
august 2023 study watchtower, page 13, par.
20 - “these events will lead directly to the final war of armageddon.”.
.............repeating what has been said for years -.
It could be argued that the second reference is correct, as it says Armageddon will be the final war "against Satan's world". Once the 1,000 year reign begins, the world will no longer be Satan's - he will no longer be the predominant force and his earthly organisations and structures will have been destroyed - so once he is released at the end, he will be in the minority rather than being the 'ruler' of that world.
However, the first reference would still be wrong in simply stating “these events will lead directly to the final war of Armageddon" without qualifying that.
What's also interesting is that that Rev 20 scripture still refers to "nations" - will mankind still be split into national groups, or is that a figure of speech, like "people of all nations", simply meaning from all backgrounds? Or will it mean that those near the end of the 1,000 year reign who choose not to live by God's rule will split off into independent 'nations' elsewhere on the earth? The verse also implies a physical location (or several) for the enemies of God ("they advanced and encircled...") and also a single physical location for the followers of God ("... the camp of the holy ones and the beloved city").
original reddit post (removed).
A week later and it looks like he's not getting the response he wants...
Michael Purbrick was never liked in our congregation, everyone glad to see the back of him.
I don't know anyone who's ever said otherwise! He's the only person - CO, elder or anyone else in a JW congregation - that I've never heard anyone have a good word for!
The only thing I can say in his favour is that he was a very good speaker.
I remember him giving a talk about the impalement of Jesus, and his ability to paint the picture of the last hours of Jesus' life, including the nails being driven into him and the likely effect on his heart of the pressure of being suspended so long on the stake (or cross, if you prefer) causing the heart muscles to rupture and produce the "blood and water" separation the Bible refers to, was very vivid and dramatic.
Especially now in these days of 30 minute public talks, and items and 'symposium' parts which are so salami-sliced and dumbed down, I miss those captivating speakers who could hold an audience for 45 minutes or more without needing to resort to a script of Q&A questions or, even worse, a video or animation.
However, of course the main point of a CO should be that he can do the pastoral care part well - encouraging and supporting everyone in the congregation - and Purbrick had no gifts in that department at all!
In reality, most COs are just administrators - like regional sales auditors sent in to assess overall performance and report back to the branch. But it's a bonus when you do find one who actually seems to care for people, not just numbers and rules.
original reddit post (removed).
Spacey, Schofield, Evans - The root of the problem in all of them is the same: denial of the true facts or extent of their fault or failings, stemming from egotism.
Instead of just putting their hands up and saying "Yes, I did something wrong, I'm sorry and I want to make amends", the excuses follow the same sort of pattern with such people.
First it's some form of denial like:
"No, I've done nothing actually WRONG, I've been misunderstood."
"No, I've done nothing actually WRONG, it's my haters spreading lies."
Then if the pressure to admit the truth continues, it becomes downplaying and deflection of blame:
"Ok, I may have done something wrong but I just made a mistake, a slight misjudgement."
"Ok, I may have done something wrong but I'm not well (mental health, 'stress', or other vaguely defined 'condition')."
"Ok, I may have done something wrong but I was influenced by [my parents or upbringing/genetics/society/my peers]"
"Ok, I may have done something wrong but I was badly advised by my [friends/partner/business associates]."
"Ok, I may have done something wrong but now I'm being hounded for it by my enemies who want to destroy me."
"Ok, I may have done something wrong but now you're just trying to persecute me because you're prejudiced that I'm [poor/black/foreign/disabled/gay/bi/non-binary/trans - insert minority group I identify with]."
"Ok, I may have done something wrong but I'm not as bad as the people who [rape kids/slaughter animals/traffick people/etc]"
helloo guys, anyone who did theyre pioneer school book and still got their notes from it?
please share with me , i need answers asap , pioneer school coming up in 2 weeks thank you!
i need answers from when you were fully pimi.
It was a long time ago that I was at pioneer school, and like everything else since GB2.0 took full control, I believe it's been dumbed down (they've changed the course and produced a new book with fewer sections, removed the actual ministry part and reduced it to just one week, I think?) - so any notes I might still have wouldn't be relevant anymore.
Found this list on another thread from years ago, which I've adjusted to show the names better. It's from 2006, so I wonder how many of these have since been put out to pasture, or are perhaps not even JWs today? Maybe a few are pushing up the daisies by now.
Some familiar names there - Jolly, Storer, Birtles, Ainge, Rastall, Stokes, Spurr, Irons, Purbrick, Algar.
Vigo and Drage are familiar names from earlier comments too, of course. Also Doug Beavor.
Doug Turnbull. - Probably best not to mention what happened to him.
Didn't he abandon his wife and run off with a sister sometime in the 70s while serving up north?
one of my close pimo relatives showed me the article and spoke about today's study.
she was disturbed concerning the points/statements within it, such as: "so, the more we get to know those in the congregation, the more likely we are to see more of their flaws.
sadly, some have allowed the imperfections of others to stumble them.
The scripture from the article is Prov. 26:20 not Prov. 26:30, which in NWT reads: "Where there is no wood, the fire goes out, And where there is no slanderer, quarreling ceases."
I don't see what's so controversial here to rile your relative. I agree with your point that Matthew 5:23,24 is about straightening out problems with others in the congregation, and the org does still use that verse too. But I don't see anything wrong with suggesting people think seriously about Prov 26:20 first.
In other words, first think "Is this really such a big deal, or can I forget about it, to prevent possibly causing an even bigger issue and making things blow out of proportion?" (the Proverbs 26:20 bit - don't fuel the fire and don't be tempted to diss/slander the person you've have an issue with to others).
But if you decide, "no I can't just leave it I have to say something", maybe because the other person is affected by the difference you had, or it's damaging your relationship with them, then Matthew 5:23,24 comes into play and you discuss the issue with the person directly.
I see them as complementary points, not contradictory or opposites. Also, the context of that paragraph in the WT was if we think someone has offended us, not if someone else has something against us, so maybe that's why they didn't use Matthew 5 there.
Of course, the above reasoning should be obvious without needing scriptures to back it up (many people with no Bible knowledge or interest apply the same principles in their life), but those verses do support the basic ideas behind conflict resolution.
original reddit post (removed).
People that go too far don't sound credible, they make themselves sound like nutters.
I agree. However much I may enjoy seeing our 'friend' held to account for the things he's clearly done wrong, I can't condone the behaviour of that Lisa Sami. They sound like the kind of crazed vigilante who used to get on the news here in the UK for showing up as part of a mob outside the home of some old man living alone on a housing estate who they'd all decided was a 'paedo', baying for blood outside and smashing his windows.
It probably suits his agenda to have someone making accusations like that.
You're right that his personality is such that he can't resist trying to take on any opposition (whether real or perceived), and he will also use extremists like that to play up his supposed 'victim' status. Notice he went straight for the tired old "see what Kim Silvio has unleashed" mantra again.
Sounds like he went to watch the FA cup ... on a telly?
Back in the UK on another trip/holiday, eh? Clearly his financial status can't be that bad, nor is his work schedule as packed as he was recently making out. Didn't he say he was "swamped" with JW material to work on?
But how did he manage to find a pub in England that seemed so empty on a Saturday afternoon, especially one that's an FA Cup Final day?! Unless it was his natural charm and magnetism at work again, driving the other punters away!
i'm sure this will vary between jw to jw, but their choices are:.
1) they won't watch/read either.. 2) they will only allow lotr, not hp.. 3) they will only allow hp, not lotr.. 4) they will allow both.. in my experience, 3 never happens and 2 happens the most.
with the similar theme of magic, the occult, fantasy and monsters, i wonder what lets them think one is okay and the other is not.
Indeed.
As I said earlier, The Lord of the Rings and The Chronicles of Narnia have a lot in common in that respect.
One the one hand, that makes them both more acceptable to some Christians, while for others it makes them both taboo for others, as they see them as a mockery or false imitation of the Bible and its message.
Based on the strict interpretation of JW theology neither should be entertainment for JWs, but then every Witness has their own understanding of what is 'acceptable' for entertainment like this (contrary to the idea the org promotes that there is total unity among them).
