just letting off a bit more steam.
why can't sisters look after the library or the sound.
what makes the brothers so damned special???.
"Even in my questionable state my status was ranked higher than a sister. But in my questionable state I could not read. In some cases the sister had already read the first paragraph or so. What did the conductor do?"
He stopped the sister from doing any further reading and did the reading himself?
just letting off a bit more steam.
why can't sisters look after the library or the sound.
what makes the brothers so damned special???.
You gave me an idea for a question:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20140105155855AAzjHzF
just letting off a bit more steam.
why can't sisters look after the library or the sound.
what makes the brothers so damned special???.
I can think of no biblical reason why sisters are not permitted to man (or woman) the sound system or rove the mikes. The bible only says women should not exercise authority or teach. Roving the mikes and operating the sound system do not constitute exercising authority or teaching.
In fact, operating the sound system is somewhat comparable in purpose to serving as a sign language interpreter. Both tasks involve effectively transmitting what the speakers say. If sign-langage sisters are allowed to interpret talks given by brothers then why should sisters not be allowed to operate the sound system being used to convey talks given by brothers?
With the shortage of brothers, don't be surprized if the organization decides in the future to permit sisters to operate the sound system and rove mikes. There really isn't any biblical basis for excluding them.
if i were the all-powerful creator of all the universe it would be a very easy thing to prove my existence, requirements and will in an indisputable and unambiguous way.
everyone would know of my existence and requirements without them having to put forth effort to believe based on limited, ambiguous evidence that is highly subject to interpretation.
i would regard faith as a harmful trait that makes one vulnerable to being deceived.
Seraphim23, I take your point about absolute proof and absolute knowledge being somewhat elusive for us. However, there's no denying that there is such a thing as abundant and reasonable evidence. The kind of faith that religion glorifies does not involve anything close to abundant and reasonable evidence.
1) the signs of the times are qualified:.
luke 21:.
then he said to them: nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.
As I recall from other threads, during the Knorr-era, they considered linking "great signs from heaven" to the launch of Sputnik, but had a change of mind and decided not to run with that idea.
Re: Sputnik:
“The powers of the heavens will be shaken,” Jesus continues. He thus indicates that the physical heavens will take on a foreboding appearance. The heavens will not simply be the domain of birds, but they will be filled with warplanes, rockets, and space probes. The fear and violence will exceed anything experienced in previous human history. - The Greatest Man Who Ever Lived, chapter 111, paragraph 14
The fundament error in the reasoning is that blood is too sacred to be put to any use other than on the sacrificial altar. This is clearly not the case since blood flowing in our veins does not violate its sanctity but is being used for the very dignified purpose for which it was created, namely sustaining life. So if the native blood being used in our veins does not constitute a violation of the sanctity of blood, why should donated blood being put into the veins to serve this very purpose be considered a violation of the sanctity of blood? Is it the act of removing the blood from the donor that constitutes a violation of its sanctity? If so then removing the blood from the veins of an animal by slaughtering it also constitutes a violation of its sanctity! Unlike eating blood, transfuing blood involves the use of blood for the very purpose for which it was created! How can this obvious difference escape their notice? Their reasoning really makes no sense when carefully examined!
called sodom and egypt.
located where messiah was crucified.
becomes a river of blood (70ad).
I'm inclined to agree with you searcher. It is the religious leaders that persecuted the prophets and 1st century christians. It is the religous leaders that many policitians looked to to give them legitimacy in the eyes of the public. It is the religious leaders that succeeded in forcing Pilate's hand. Thus they have a kingdom over the kings of the earth.
Babylon the great is not just false religion - it's the powerful, manipulative religous leadership associated with many religous organizations including the "faithful and discreet slave" of the JWs. But I think it's focusing not on all religious leaders but specifically those associated with Judaism and christianity (christianity comes from Judaism). You would notice that Revelation mentions the fall of Babylon the great twice. Perhaps the first mention pertains to the judgment in 70CE, of the religious leaders of Judaism who persecuted christ and christians. The second mention could pertain to the judgment of the clergy of christendom which started from in the early centuries and persists down to our day. This harmonizes with Paul's words at 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12 about the "man of lawlessness" who lifts himself up. The 8-man F&DS GB is part of it!
Why I don't believe it refers to all religious leaders is that the bible tends to be very limited in it's view. For example, there is no mention of the Americas in the bible. The focus in on palestine and asia. Revelation was written to first century christians. There is no reason to think that the writer had Buddism, Hinduism and other religions in mind given that these religions either didn't exist or were outside the context that early christians were familiar with. What they were familiar with was christianity and Judaism and it thus seems most likely that BTG would pertain to that religious context.
it's got to be reading the old testament.
that is some messed up sh!t.. .
your choices are basically to think it's based on things that happened but men's version of events, there is tons of allegory, that it's just a bunch of made up nonsense, or to rip those parts of your bible out and pretend they don't exist.. .
KateWild: " My favourite scrpture to keep me critically thinking is 1Cor 14.34,35 talks about women keeping silent, it makes me puke. It is in all translations known to me. It's sick."
The one in 1 Timothy 2:11-14 is worse, in my opinion:
"Let a woman learn in silence with full submissiveness. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach, or to exercise authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 Also, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was thoroughly deceived and came to be in transgression."
Verse 14 implies that women are inherently more gullible than men as exemplified by Eve being decieved while Adam was not. It is essentially saying that women aren't as mentally competent as men to hold positions of authority. What glaring sexism! In verse 13 the writer says that the male gender was created before the female gender and that's implied to be a reason why men should have authority and women shouldn't - seriously! It's almost as if the writer was desperately reaching for petit excuses to justify sexism.
And don't forget to check out the load of anti-Cretan bigotry at Titus 1:12,13:
"A certain one of them, their own prophet, said: “Cre′tans are always liars, injurious wild beasts, unemployed gluttons.”
13 This witness is true. For this very cause keep on reproving them with severity, that they may be healthy in the faith,"
i am trying to put together the worst of 2013. the first quote that comes to mind is possibly your "favorite" too.
do you have any other disturbing quotes from the publications in the wt?.
elders who are reading this article can draw some useful conclusions from the account we have just considered: (1) the most practical step that we can take to prepare for the coming attack of the assyrian is that of strengthening our faith in god and helping our brothers to do the same.
i am trying to put together the worst of 2013. the first quote that comes to mind is possibly your "favorite" too.
do you have any other disturbing quotes from the publications in the wt?.
elders who are reading this article can draw some useful conclusions from the account we have just considered: (1) the most practical step that we can take to prepare for the coming attack of the assyrian is that of strengthening our faith in god and helping our brothers to do the same.
Never a JW I think the "irrational obedience" quote you highlighted is indeed the worst. But you missed something in your highlighting - a great hidden irony to be found in (4). Let me hightlight to illustrate:
"At that time, the lifesaving direction that we receive from Jehovah’s organization may not appear practical from a human standpoint. All of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether these appear sound from a strategic or human standpoint or not . (4) Now is the time for any who may be putting their trust in secular education, material things, or human institutions to adjust their thinking."
A very human institution - the WTBTS - is telling JWs to be ready to obey instructions from them that may seem unsound; and yet it turns around and tells them now is not the time to put their trust in human institutions. O the irony!
