miss you, bro.
just in case you still lurk, i wanted to let you know.
i'm doing much better now, and no longer have the 'brother' issues.
I miss Gumby too. I watched him a lot when I was a kid. I liked the shape of his head. I had one of those flexible Gumbys too. And a Pokey.
Oh and yes, I have wondered what happened to the member of this board named Gumby, whose head, I would surmise, was more normal-looking.
http://jwsurvey.org/governing-body-2/new-light-watchtower-magazine-leaked-from-organization-weeks-ahead-of-general-release.
if doctrinal explanations are missing from the article, it is because they are also missing from the magazine.. i would like to give my thanks again to my source for supplying me with the magazine article weeks ahead of its scheduled release.
it showed remarkable courage, because risks were taken.
One thing I will attempt to point out is that the 'change' in understanding about who attacks religion from 'the United Nations' to 'elements within the U.N.' and back to 'the United Nations' seems of little consequence. The UN is comprised of its members. When its members decide something, it is the same thing as saying that the UN decides something. The UN is not some entity that exists apart from its member nations.
I think this 'change' is merely a different use of terminology, and that it could well be termed 'elements within the UN' or 'member nations of the UN' or something of that sort at a future time.
And one more point Cedars: I don't think the charicature of you at the bottom of your articles does you any favors. It looks silly. You go to great lengths to write informative articles and then post an exaggerated comic of yourself, which, to me anyway, slightly undermines your effort.
a trusted source informs me that the "new light" about the faithful slave is to make its first printed appearance in the july 15th watchtower, which should be available for download online three weeks from now, on around april 15th.. i'm led to believe that the references to the new understanding are made in such a manner as to suggest the "new light" isn't that new at all, which suggests to me that little or no effort is being made to explain the doctrinal connotations.
my source and i are hoping to get a key paragraph posted at the earliest opportunity.
watch this space!.
Actually, the apparent "new light" in this case, that the FDS is the Governing Body, makes more sense, to me anyway. Here's why:
Years ago, we had an old sister around who was a partaker and thus supposedly part of the "Slave". But here was an old lady who contributed nothing to the feeding of the "domestics". Most of the anointed, in fact, do little to "feed" anyone spirtually.
So from their standpoint, it makes more sense that a group directly involved in the publication and dispensation of such 'spirtual food' would be those who actually had a part in it rather than some old woman or man who partook but did little else.
i can't found any topic in this forum about this verse.
may be you can enlightened me.. zec 12:10 and i will pour out on the house of david and the inhabitants of jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication.
they will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.
I recently came across this verse (Zech 12;10) while reading the NIV, and noting the odd structure (and difference between the rendering in the NIV, and many translations) and the New World Translation, I felt obliged to research it, which led me here, among other places. Leoleia's explanation and others, are very helpful. It seems as though the bottom line is that this verse is indeed very difficult to resolve, whether John's application of it is included or not.
perhaps this has been discussed before.
1 tim 6:4. nwt .
4 he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words.
Weymouth uses "crazy" which seems about on the same level as "mentally diseased".
so 2 weeks ago i received an email from the po... he wants to give my wife and i a shepherding call very soon... but get this... he mentioned that they had already made shepherding calls to the entire congo and we were the only ones left... i don't know whether i'm i supposed to feel loved or despised (by that completely irrelevant comment).
he's probably doing this to impress the co who is probably visiting soon.... my response to his email was basically: no problem... please feel free to stop by anytime... however, no need to come with a second person.
i would prefer a 1 on 1 meeting (not 2 on 1).
He knows you're married, and that may be another factor. What if he visits alone and your wife is home but you're not there for some reason? It's a precaution.
how could jesus have been a perfect human on earth if he was born from mary?
doesn't thewatchtower believe since we are all sons and daughters of adam and eve, that we are all genetically imperfect?
so if mary also came from adam and eve like the rest of us but gave birth to jesus then wouldn't jesus have been born imperfectlike the rest of us?.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/discoblog/2009/01/09/the-science-of-virgin-birth/
Problems arise, as the article states, but science has manipulated the process. Those who believe in God obviously maintain that He could do the same, while overcoming the problems.
anyone planning to watch 'the bible' tv show march 3 on the history channel.
five episodes focusing on o/t and five about the n/t.
any thoughts?
I watched it. It was OK, not great. They skipped over major stories as already mentioned, such as Joseph (one of the most compelling stories in the OT) and golden calf incident. They seemed to take some dramatic liberty, especially at Sodom with the Samuri Angels.
The best scene so far, to me, is Abraham's dialog with God as they looked upon Sodom.
I also liked how they portrayed God's voice. Not all booming and thunderous, just sounded like someone talking. The quieter tone and higher pitch actually seemed to enhance the seriousness of what God had to say.
3.. why did jesus say that his disciples would not complete their circuit of preaching "until the son of man arrives"?
(matt.
10:23) [jan. 14, w10 9/15 p. 10 par.
Actually, their web site is an ace in the hole in this matter. They now have a means of widespread 'preaching' without talking directly to the 'hearers'. In fact, one might well wonder why, after using means of mass communication in their early days such as radio and sound cars, they pulled back and relied mainly on direct contact.
15 one brother who was raised in a christian household wrote that for as long as he could remember, he struggled with homosexual tendencies.
he said: i always felt awkward.
it seemed that i didnt fit in anywhere.
This excerpt does seem to acknowledge that such tendencies are with a person from the get-go.
