John 20 in Jamaican patois:
Island Man
JoinedPosts by Island Man
-
-
-
-
16
Showing Kindness To Strangers
by FedUpJW ini feel pretty foolish after reading the drivel in today's wt.
here i was operating under the impression that showing kindness to strangers was something that one did unselfishly.
boy was i wrong!
-
-
Island Man
The article was an exercise in hypocrisy. They actually had the nerve to print the words "religious prejudice" in the article, when talking about how the Egyptians may have treated the Jews when they were in Egypt. The fact that JWs are themselves steeped in religious prejudice completely escaped their notice. Because of their religious prejudice they derogatorily label all non-JWs as "worldly" and "bad associations" and are not to marry them nor befriend them. Talk about blind hypocrisy!
And since hospitality is kindness to strangers, isn't showing kindness to non-JWs a greater measure of hospitality than showing kindness to JWs - brothers and sisters ... spiritual family? Isn't a non-JW more of a stranger to the JWs than a fellow JW from a foreign land? But they show disdain for strangers when they bigotedly label non-JWs as "wordly" and "bad associations" and impute bad motives and bad morals to them, purely on the basis that they're non-JWs and before they get to know the person.
-
13
Was the ransom premature? Shouldn't the effects of Adamic sin have been reversed at the time of Jesus' death?
by deegee inif the ransom was paid at the time of jesus' death (mark 15:45, matthew 20:28, 1 timothy 2:6, hebrews 2:9), then why weren't the effects of adamic sin (sickness & death) reversed at that time?.
it seems to me that either:- the payment of the ransom was premature.
- god was not satisfied with the payment of the ransom; it was not sufficient to make up for adam's & eve's so-called "sin".hasn't god extracted enough from mankind as payment for adam's & eve's "sin" given the billions of persons who have lived and died?.
-
-
Island Man
Another thing is the way the condemnation of death due to Adam's sin, falls on all his offspring automatically without them having to put forth any effort or exercise any faith in his transgression. Yet, the ransom is not applied the same way - it is not automatic, but beneficiaries have to exercise faith in it and work at proving worthy of the undeserved kindness by not willfully practicing sin.
It is not fair. Since the condemnation was automatic and not the fault of Adam's descendants, the ransom should likewise be automatic. Christianity unfairly stacks the odds against the innocent offspring of Adam who inherited his sin through no fault of their own. It is a fundamentally immoral worldview where the innocent are blamed and punished for the sins of their ancestors.
-
18
Changed Wording in February 2017 WT Article
by Ding inthe february 2017 wt had stated that the gb is "neither inspired nor infallible" and that it can make errors in doctrine.. the language of the online wt issue now says, “the governing body is neither inspired nor perfect.
therefore, it can make mistakes when explaining the bible or directing the organization.”.
why the change?
-
-
Island Man
What about Judge Rutherfords "Millions Now Living Will Never Die" talk .
Changed to ,
"Millions Now Living May Never Die"Actually it was the other way around. It was originally briefly worded as "Millions ... May...." then later changed to "Millions ... Will...". But today Watchtower dishonestly seeks to give the impression that it was always "Millions ... May..."
-
11
I'm not the only one who sees the similarity am I?
by NikL ini've been thinking this for some time.
we all know what this picture is.... .
well, this is dachau concentration camp.... .
-
-
Island Man
I know what you mean. The new headquarters actually does kind of look like a modern prison.
-
35
Sanctimonious, "WE'RE Thankful EVERY day."
by stillin inthanksgiving is really just a nice, traditional, family-oriented day set aside on a national level.
no babylon the great.
give me a break with the holier than thou, "we don't celebrate thanksgiving.
-
-
Island Man
millie210: If a special day of remembrance is wrong, then why go on and on about Memorial?
Exactly the point I was about to make! The JW religion is fraught with inconsistency and hypocrisy.
-
8
Where Does The Governing Body Stand On "Obeying The Superior Authorities" @ Romans Something Or Other?
by Brokeback Watchtower inwhere do they stand of the issue obeying the governments even though they publicly teach that all governments are under satanic control and doomed to destruction by their jehovah deity.. and have they considered this scripture on their past and currant policies of not reporting any fellonies to the superior authority their elders have had to handle judicially and keep it confidential.
and if they have taken into consideration what misimprisonment of a fellony is:.
https://www.google.com/search?q=false+imprinonment&rlz=1c1chzl_enus716us717&oq=false+imprinonment&aqs=chrome..69i57.28245j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=utf-8#q=misimprisonment+of+a+felony.
-
-
Island Man
Their position is: Obey the superior authorities to the extent that doing so does not conflict with the requirements of GOD (Guardians Of Doctrine). So obeying Watchtower policy always takes precedence over obeying the secular authorities.
-
-
-
Island Man
I bet it's mentioned as minorly/partly fulfilling a prophecy (along with other things) somewhere in Watchtower's Pay Attention To Daniel's Prophecy book in their speculations about the details of the saga between the king of the north and the king of the south. If Watchtower is to be believed then just about every major political development of the 20th century has at least been a part fulfillment of something that Daniel wrote. Daniel is Watchtower's Nostradamus.
-
43
Why Is YHWH Used Regularly In OT and NEVER in NT?
by minimus inand if the name jehovah is that important why is it that jesus christ never use that name in a record of scriptures?.
-
-
Island Man
The OT was written long before the prohibition on using the name YHWH developed. So there are many OT manuscripts that contain YHWH. But by the time of the writing of the NT, the prohibition on vocalizing and even spelling the name YHWH, had already taken firm hold among the Jews. So the Jewish founders of the Christian religion grew up in conformity with this prohibition and thus it is reflected in their NT writings, which are devoid of the name YHWH. Also, when their NT writings quote from OT passages that contain the name YHWH, they are quoting, not from Hebrew copies of the OT that contain YHWH, but from the Greek Septuagint translation of the OT which replaces YHWH with Lord. Thus the NT is devoid of YHWH because it was never in there to begin with.
-
22
I Think I have Found a Way to Litigate
by Simon Templar ini have been thinking about how the wtb&t society bullies all of its members into submission with the threats they use (by practice), i.e.
“if you do this we will df you and you will be shunned”.
“if you da yourself, we will make an announcement and your friends, relatives and family will abandon you”, etc.
-
-
Island Man
I beg to differ with the prevailing sentiment that it cannot be done. Many are looking at this issue as one of trying to legally force JWs to associate with ex-members. It doesn't have to be that way for it to work.
Right now in many countries there are laws against inciting violent hatred toward groups of people. Such laws do not force everyone in the country to perform acts of kindness toward groups of persons. They only seek to prevent the public dissemination of hateful propaganda against groups.
In a similar way, Watchtower can be called to account for unduly inciting JWs to shun their ex-JW relatives. The crux of the issue is Watchtower inciting the members against their ex-JW family - not forcing JWs to associate with their ex-JW relatives.
JWs should have the right to freely choose whether or not they want to associate with their ex-JW relatives WITHOUT Watchtower inciting them not to and punishing them if they do. Most JWs shun their ex-JW relatives BECAUSE Watchtower tells them to and BECAUSE they face negative consequences if they refuse to comply.
If Watchtower is called to account for its incitement and is legally restricted from such incitements and is barred from punishing members who choose to associate with their ex-JW relatives, then over time conditions will change such that far less JWs will be shunning their ex-JW relatives. But they will still have the freedom - true, unfettered freedom - to do so if they wish. Right now Watchtower is practically coercing JWs to shun their ex-JW relatives so they're not really doing it of their own free will free of all duress.
So I think there is a case to be made but it has to be articulated the right way. It's not about forcing JWs to associate with ex-JW family. It's about punishing and halting Watchtower's use of undue influence to coerce JWs into shunning their ex-JW family. Yes no one can force JWs to associate with who they don't want to. So why does Watchtower get the right to force JWs to shun? It has to work both ways - no forcing either way.