uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
Well, his paid Patreon numbers seem to be miraculously above 320 again today but... I only just noticed he doesn't appear to have posted any messages for his members since the end of April. Almost two months!
Don't tell me he's going cold on even his Patreon membership now!
I also noticed this:
How prophetic! Is it really 607, or should that be 587? 586?
things are moving right along.
“israel” has gone to war with iran.. who is fooled?.
this is uncle sam, same as in ukraine.. daniel layed out clearly the events of “d day” june 6, 1944 as the “ships of kittim” would sail against the king of the north.
“Complete and Total Ceasefire “
It is apparently the noisiest C&TCF that mankind has ever known.
Did everyone agree to a ceasefire and then launched an attack anyway?
It would appear so.
Trump's rage and shock that Israel and Iran have continued to attack each other despite his intervention to order a "complete and total ceasefire" is the FIRST time I've almost felt some sympathy for him, EXCEPT for the fact it is based on his own complete misunderstanding of world politics and totally over-inflated view of his own influence and status.
He genuinely thinks that when self-centred and arrogant people like Putin, Netanyahu, the Ayatollah and any others "promise" him they will or won't do something, that they have been brought around to his way of thinking by his "superior" negotiating powers and the force of his will! He can't seem to grasp that they are playing him, even though his naivety and ignorance of international politics, and his transparent behaviour are obvious to all and easily manipulated by anyone as canny and crafty as the leaders of Russia, Israel and Iran.
It's clear that Netanyahu in particular - despite being a "friend" to the USA unlike the other two - has become so full of himself and so used to having America jump for him whenever he demands it, that he will do as he damned well pleases regardless of what the West says. He's been emboldened since having an entire year to pummel the Gazans and publicly commit numerous atrocities (including striking journalists, medical staff and international workers) with no real consequences from anyone in the USA, Europe or the UN.
(matthew 24:36) “concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the son, but only the father.".
(jesus seems to have forgotten to include the holy spirit not knowing either).
(acts 1:7) "he said to them: “it does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the father has placed in his own jurisdiction.".
The obvious answers are that God knows the time because he’s God, Jesus doesn’t know the time because he isn’t God, and the holy spirit isn’t mentioned because it isn’t a person.
I guess you found a scripture Trinitarians overlooked. Just wait until the Pope sees this verse. There's just no way to explain it.
There are literally dozens of scriptures that refute the Trinity, possibly even hundreds, but that hasn't stopped them until now. Even this thread shows there will be no end to Trinitarians trying to use contorted arguments or fancy diagrams to illustrate what cannot be illustrated or explained, because it is simply false.
That's why I usually stay out of these interminable debates, but I have to admit sometimes it's amusing to drop in and see how they get themselves worked up into a tizzy trying to explain the inexplicable. And failing that, they'll fall back on the old one: "It's a divine mystery!" 🤣
i recently had a heart attack, after arriving at a&e they gave me an angiogram and it was discovered i need a bypass (quadruple).
will i was being prepared for surgery to consultant said he needed to speak to me and he said on your notes it says you’re a jw (i’ve been out over 20 years) i said no and i was willing to accept blood and my notes were updated.
i dread to think what would have happened if i had been unconscious and unable to clarify the situation.
Sensible advice, whatever your view on what medical procedures to follow or not follow, and for whatever reasons (ethical, religious, personal).
Never leave it to chance, or to the whims of a medical practitioner or a judge if it came to that, if you have strong views on what you do or do not want done to your body.
I hope all goes well for you, moley.
*** km 9/76 p. 8 question box ***.
might a discussion using the bible alone be reported as a study?
(…) but at times persons are unwilling to use any literature other than the bible.
Yes the word "study" is used in two different contexts here.
The CBS - formerly Congregation Book Study, now Congregation Bible Study (but often shorted informally by the R&F to exclude the word "congregation") - is a congregation meeting part, usually at the end of the midweek meeting. At that, everyone attending follows through a chapter (or more usually now, just a few paragraphs) of a WT-produced book based on some Bible account or characters, which will include Bible verses to look up. The current book being "studied" is based around the Bible book of Acts and is called “Bearing Thorough Witness About God’s Kingdom". That will finish soon and a new book is starting in July called "Lessons You Can Learn From The Bible" Both of these are available in PDF from the JW website if you want to know what they are looking at.
A Bible study (often shorted informally by the R&F to just "a study", eg: "I'm going on a study later" or "how many studies do you have now?") is any repeat return visit that has developed beyond three returns, where the JW can report it as ongoing. Despite the name, it doesn't need to be any kind of "study" really these days - it could be just reading one paragraph and a Bible verse at a time, or it could be as long as sitting down for an hour to do a whole chapter from a book or brochure, reading the Bible verses included there as you go. Very rarely, it might be using ONLY the Bible - but that would only be if the "householder" insists, and the JW involved will usually try to "move" the study on to using a publication ASAP, or to at least show some of their videos (JWs are heavily encouraged to show video clips from the JW website to householders now).
it’s been discussed before that few jw leaders, past and present, have had children.
this is in contrast with other groups, such as the mormons, whose leaders have had a lot of children.
i wonder if this has impacted jw growth.
To be sure, elders must ‘pay attention to themselves and to all the flock. (Acts 20:28)) If they are married, this includes their wives. (notice how many times the WTS says balanced, without giving any examples and specific ways to do things differently).Yes, blondie, that was a shockingly direct article for the GB, and although it's true they (or their predecessors) caused the problem in the first place, it was a surprise they even bothered to address it so specifically. It's an indication of just how bad the neglect of wives and families must have become, if they even felt the need to tackle it so openly.
That would have run too much risk of diminishing the sense of End-Times urgency.However, and linked to Vidiot's point there, they now find themselves in a bind. By admitting that many serving men were neglecting their husbandly duties and need to "adjust" themselves to find a better "balance", they are at the same time effectively saying that many serving men need to do less in "theocratic" and congregation activity and concentrate on spending more time and attention on their wife and/or family.
This is of course entirely morally and scripturally right, but it creates a problem for the Org (one of many of their own making), because it gives elders (and even MS to some extent) a valid reason to step back from doing so much (as mentioned in the other thread "JW light Elders?")
That's of course why the Org is not keen to give specific examples, because anything they do say can be used by brothers to their local body of elders to say: "Well the WT of xx/xx/xx says..." and to "beg off" any assignments they do not want to do. As a result, the only examples they are likely to give are the most extreme or obvious ones, perhaps - rather like they do when giving examples of say, an elder who is burned out. They will always give an example of a brother who had his OWN balance out of kilter, rather than one who was overwhelmed by demands of others (including their own coordinator or CO). Then they can sort of "blame" the brother and say something like "he had to pray to Jehovah, talk with his wife, rearrange his schedule and find his own better balance - now he's happy".
Never will they be candid and simply say something like: "the local coordinator or CO was demanding too much of the brother and had to back off", or something like that, because that will imply there is something wrong with the way the Org itself operates!
so many elders are now saying no to pretty much everything.. they are saying no to assignments and away talks.
saying no to jobs in the cong.
the cos and the super fine elders are using scripture and the elders manual to try to persuade them to step up.. many are coming off as an elder, but even more are simply saying the cost of living or other reasons they are just finding it hard to fulfill all their assignments.. if you say you want to come off the public talks list altogether they still try putting you down for some and making a fuss saying you have to give some public talks.
They're in a real bind with this, because of course the only and ultimate sanction they have for an elder who they feel isn't pulling his weight is... to take him off being an elder!
In the days when being an elder was considered by most to be a "real privilege", that might have worked as a threat, but for many now, their response to that would be: "Ok, then - go ahead!"
Punk asks why this situation has arisen. I think it's simply that most elders are more focused on the immediate needs of their families and their other commitments now. They're not prepared to give and give and give for nothing in return right now, with the vague promise that everything will be alright in the ever-delayed Paradise.
Also, another factor is that many are no longer prepared to slavishly follow what the GB says. They may obey it up to a point - going on field service some of the time, giving talks in their local congregation, etc - but they're not willing to do it to the exhausting degree that they've seen their predecessors do it.
Many congregations also have at least one elderly elder (or MS) who is nearing at the end of his life, has been waiting for "the end" for decades, and in the meantime has either been single all this time, dedicated to the "cause" and seen no benefit for it, OR did marry and/or have kids but his wife is now dead, the kids are grown (and either no longer JWs, or they've flown off to other places to get on with their lives and never visit him), so he is left lonely and with little in his life except to keep struggling on. Seeing that, few younger men who are elders or MS are prepared to follow in those footsteps and sacrifice everything in their life to end up like that!
And on top of all that, a lot of the mental, physical and social problems in congregations are getting worse, so there is a tide of problems that the elders are expected to deal with that the newer generation do not wish to take on, as they know they are ill-equipped to do it and, unlike their older predecessors, are not prepared to just bluff through with trying to manage these problems by following fancy talks and letters from the GB.
it’s been discussed before that few jw leaders, past and present, have had children.
this is in contrast with other groups, such as the mormons, whose leaders have had a lot of children.
i wonder if this has impacted jw growth.
I wonder if there's any connection between them not having children to their indifference(?), allowance(?), to all the abuse within the org?
Quite likely. Rather like the old image of the Victorian grandfather type who disliked kids and felt they should be "seen and not heard" - someone like that is less likely to be sympathetic to any child's fears and concerns, or willing to pay attention to children who try to open up about abuse or suffering.
Thus for the desire to a have children to become a blessing, instead of a selfish longing, a drastic devaluing of theocratic 'careers' would have to occur.
That shouldn't have to be the case, if the Org had made a "balanced" (one of their favourite words) case for either choice in the first place. They tread that tightrope over marriage (albeit a bit awkwardly still), saying that neither being single nor being married is automatically "better" (though they do lean slightly more towards "singleness", at times in history more than others)
Also, there are plenty of examples in the Scriptures that show the value and blessing of having children, which they could draw on if they wanted to (eg: Hannah's prayer). They have even sometimes used these scriptures when writing material for existing parents to help them cope with challenges of parenthood. So why not extend that to those not yet parents but perhaps thinking of becoming so?
It's their inflated attitude towards "theocratic" assignments that already causes a lot of unhappiness. For example, lately they are having to produce a lot of articles to encourage JWs who are elderly or sick not to be "discouraged" that they can't do what they used to in "theocratic activity". But why are so many of the R&F feeling that way? Because for decades they have been told that the only way to be valuable is to be "reaching out" doing these activities! As a result, now that these individuals can no longer do as much, many of them are feeling worthless. And of course, Org policies like booting out lots of Bethelites make that worse and increase those fears.
Yet if the R&F had been given a more "balanced" view of ways to serve God, they would find it easier to switch between what they can and can't do, as they go through different stages of their life. It's similar with having children. In a healthy environment, a young adult will be taught simply to adapt their life to the needs at the time, for example, when younger and single, spending more time in studying, working and travelling is fine, but when you become a parent, your "work-life balance" shifts, and you need to allocate more time to parental responsibilities. That's neither a "better" or "worse" way of living, it's just what's needed for that stage of life.
Only very recently, and in very specific contexts has the Org begun to slightly hint that sometimes it might be good to reduce "theocratic activity" - that's been when writing about elders who have been neglecting their wives and families in order to do more in the congregation. Even that problem could have been prevented if the Org had been more "balanced" about the importance of congregation assignments in the first place!
things are moving right along.
“israel” has gone to war with iran.. who is fooled?.
this is uncle sam, same as in ukraine.. daniel layed out clearly the events of “d day” june 6, 1944 as the “ships of kittim” would sail against the king of the north.
The Iran regime exists for the purpose of genosiding Israel, the "little Satan". After that, they they want to kill the "big Satan" - The USA.
Again: having unstable regimes in the world that need managing and occasionally controlling does not justify ignoring international law (including going against your own previous leaders and policies), if you don't want to set yourself up for a lot of mess in the longer term.
The USA could've learned from the mistakes of the British when they had an Empire. Instead, they've behaved even worse and even more aggressively on the world scene when given the chance, and as a result - surprise! - they've attracted to themselves even more hostile enemies.
Of course regimes like Iran, North Korea, etc, need watching closely and concerted effort to prevent them from going overboard, but doing that by arbitrary military actions does not win supporters from neutral nations and just guarantees decades more hostility in the region, especially when other regional actors and new generations of their populations also see how blatantly Israel is allowed to act in the region with no consequences for any atrocities or breaches of international law on their part.
"perfect angels"?
a subtle shift in watchtower doctrine — and why it matters.
quoted paragraph from the watchtower september 2025, study article 38, paragraph 12:.
Watchtower is so busy with stuff that is actually going on in recent years ... So many things have been going on that are worth scrutinising, why on earth invent an imaginary change to talk about?
I agree with Blondie and slim. I don't think this is particularly significant.
Adam and Eve were "perfect" - until they weren't. I don't believe the use of the phrase "perfect angels" indicates any shift if the JW official view of angels. It just means the angels who have remained faithful to God up to now.
I had a brief look at the article online and I think it's just highlighting that, despite their position as "perfect" obedient spirit beings, the angels do not use their position or knowledge to belittle human servants who were less-than-obedient. So if even they don't, we as "imperfect" fellow humans shouldn't either.
The one thing this might reflect - as I've mentioned before - is how the present-day Org is changing its use of theocratic language, sometimes to become less precise than in the past, and sometimes just, I think, because, like HereIam60 mentions, they don't really think as deeply on a spiritual level about the choice of their words, as I'm sure was the case when Franz and his contemporaries were on the writing and teaching committees. So those of us attuned to the way the Org always used to write can sometimes feel a sentence we read in a publication now can sound odd or jarring.
