Great stuff! Pleased for them, but would be surprised if they beat Belgium.
And 4 month ban for Suarez. Silly man.
4 weeks of football and wimbledon tennis in between!?
life is beautiful.. aaahhhh!
i'm so excited!.
Great stuff! Pleased for them, but would be surprised if they beat Belgium.
And 4 month ban for Suarez. Silly man.
a new "fly-on-the-wall" documentary about the life of young mormon missionaries goes out this evening on channel 4.. .
Cool, will watch that, channel 4 had a documentary on the moonies a few years ago which was interesting, even though at the time I was all 'glad we're not like those guys' Oops.
yay for me!.
please take a minute to visit my blog and leave your comments: benpogge.blogspot.com.
have a good one!.
Good work! I wish I could go 6 months sober. :( I don't know you, but I'm proud of you.
http://youtu.be/dhn2to663cu.
im really channeling my inner blondie with my observation and critiques of these new watchtower videos.
something about them really turns my stomach.
Excellent commentary wing (and Ann) I didn't pick up on Jesus absence and I really should have!
Sir82, that reminds me of the time another JW and I were in a Kenya congregation. The Watchtower was on materialism and my friend answered about 8 times, as over half the Congregation did not have running water and electricity and we were staying in a 4 star hotel down the road I found this very embarrassing. At least I was self aware enough to understand my privilege, but a lot of JWs really are oblivious.
i managed to catch the new dvd on youtube last night before the inevitable takedown.
as a film i felt it wasn't anywhere near as good as the prodigal movie, the story wasn't as dramatic, the characters much less interesting and developed and the direction weaker.
i found the prodigal relatively entertaining (all things considered) this one was just dull.. here are some of my random thoughts anyway [spoiler alert - ha!].
Once, good point, in JW world this family would have been considered materialistic and spiritually weak (until the end of the movie) This would have hurt their JW social life, but of course this issue was never raised in the film.
i managed to catch the new dvd on youtube last night before the inevitable takedown.
as a film i felt it wasn't anywhere near as good as the prodigal movie, the story wasn't as dramatic, the characters much less interesting and developed and the direction weaker.
i found the prodigal relatively entertaining (all things considered) this one was just dull.. here are some of my random thoughts anyway [spoiler alert - ha!].
Konceptual, he states in the video he became a JW in his mid-20s. Assumingly after college, then.
i managed to catch the new dvd on youtube last night before the inevitable takedown.
as a film i felt it wasn't anywhere near as good as the prodigal movie, the story wasn't as dramatic, the characters much less interesting and developed and the direction weaker.
i found the prodigal relatively entertaining (all things considered) this one was just dull.. here are some of my random thoughts anyway [spoiler alert - ha!].
Yes, the house was enormous. Just because both parents work long hours it doesn't guarantee they'll be that wealthy.
I somehow forgot the very worst part of the film! There was a horrible analogy between a piece of machinery that the Father had developed in his job, it was slightly too small or something making it worthless, his point was that going even a small amount outside of Jehovah's boundaries can be disastrous. Or makes you worthless I guess. This was in a speech by a father to his daughter about dating a worldly boy. Horrible.
based on this weeks congregation bible study in the "draw close to jehovah" book, jesus is not yhwh from what you read in prov.
8:22-32. unless there it is a hebrew word snafu - at least verses 22, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31 speaks of two people.. correct?.
Hi hamsterbait, I was using it as the term for the Godhead. I am not sure that the Trinity doctrine is generally obvious in the NT, but there are verses which apply to Jesus statements about Jehovah from the OT, which is a big problem for JW christology. That is the point I wanted to make.
based on this weeks congregation bible study in the "draw close to jehovah" book, jesus is not yhwh from what you read in prov.
8:22-32. unless there it is a hebrew word snafu - at least verses 22, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31 speaks of two people.. correct?.
I am not ignorant. Trinitarian theology does say that Jesus is Yahweh. This is not the same as saying Jesus is the Father. Yahweh is not a name reserved exclusively for the Father according to Trinitarian doctrine. 'Even the Roman Catholic Church' would say that the point of Jesus 'I am' statement in John was that he was claiming to be YHWH.
based on this weeks congregation bible study in the "draw close to jehovah" book, jesus is not yhwh from what you read in prov.
8:22-32. unless there it is a hebrew word snafu - at least verses 22, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31 speaks of two people.. correct?.
Actually hamsterbait the Trinity doctrine does say Jesus is YHWH. There are a few NT scriptures which quote OT scriptures about YHWH and apply them to Jesus (Romans 10:13 the most obvious). The Trinity doctrine does say Jesus is not the Father, but the Father alone is not YHWH.