When was this video produced? I thought they were easing up on the porn viewing thing because they were losing too many appointed men. Is this video several years old or is it actually "new" as the OP indicates?
Posts by Magnum
-
52EXPLOSIVE NEW LEAKED VIDEO OF C.O. CHASTISING ELDERS
by raymond frantz inhttps://youtu.be/np05twylal8?si=wjcdevvpxmlwxb2p.
shame is an ancient form of control.
shame is the mechanism used to control behaviour.
-
-
-
64
Ages of each user here?
by ukpimo ini'm interested to know the age demographics here.
it must be significantly different to other exjw forums.
it would be a damning report for watchtower if most of us appear to have left for decades.. you don't have to mention your exact age, you could always say "in my 50s".. i am in my 70s.
-
-
Magnum
Mid 60ish and could still take on the whole GB by myself - all at one time. That ain't sayin much, though; hell, my wife could handle most of them.
Been out at least ten years. I think I've been on this forum at least ten years.
-
13
1,500 Days since Stephen Lett said this:
by Chevelle in"so the events unfolding around us are making clearer than ever that we’re living in the final part of the last days.
undoubtedly the final part of the final part of the last days.
shortly before the last day of the last days.
-
-
Magnum
I'm trying to make a document showing the many failed predictions of JWs. Does anybody know the date on which Lett stated that? Is the video still online?
markweatherill, thanks for mentioning that Watchtower reference; I was not aware of it and have now recorded it in my notes.
-
41
New lawsuit against the Watchtower in Ontario, Canada
by yalbmert99 inthe new class action lawsuit against the watchtower for having covered up child sexual abuse will begin in court on may 13-14-15, 2024 in the province of ontario, canada.
it is not the same as in the province of quebec because the laws aren't the same.
i don’t have more details.
-
-
Magnum
ThomasMore, I agree with your entire post.
One litigant was advised to settle before WTC collapses financially.
I've thought about this before concerning my own case against the business.
-
86
New light on shunning?
by Mikejw inone theory why tony was booted out was because he was a stickler for not changing the shunning doctrine.
he actually said the words we will never ever change it.. they are slowly deleting all of tony’s videos and now losing court cases and losing government hand outs in places like norway.. it’s looking very likely they will release new light on shunning policy after losing this latest one in norway.. .
what are the odds they coincidentally get new light from jehovah and lighten up their shunning policy ?.
-
-
Magnum
Mikejw: I called it
You damn sho did! You slam dunked that one!
Elena: They are in panic mode.
Yep, they really are. I also call it survival mode. They are simply just trying to survive now. They are selling out. If they really believed their doctrines and thought they had the truth, they'd die for their beliefs, but they are changing to fit in, to be more hip and relevant, to survive, to get governments off their backs, etc.
I really think they've consulted with a PR firm that is advising to be more like a megachurch with casual dress, pop music, videos, cartoons, movies, relaxed policy, etc. Somebody posted on this site a few years ago relative to the softening and modernizing "What's next... congregation softball teams?" I wouldn't be surprised now if they did have softball teams soon. Anything to keep the gig going so the GB can continue to be rockstars in their own little worlds. Without the cult, it's "Welcome to WalMart" for the GB members.
-
194
GB Update #2, March 2024: Women allowed to wear pants, no ties/coats required if not giving a talk, & now able to greet DF ones in the KH!
by WingCommander inyou heard me correct, this is not a joke, and it is not april fools day!
the asl portion of the governing body updated #2 (march 2024) has been released a bit early and someone caught it.
summary: .
-
-
Magnum
WingCommander: These changes are them attempting to SURVIVE at this point, to come across as new, fresh, progressive even. They are in panic mode. No way in hell are these changes due to "the love from the Governing Body" or any other such nonsense. Can you imagine the hemorrhaging of people and MONEY that must be occurring for them to stoop this low? They are completely re-active at this point.
Abso-damned-lutely!!! They just want to be a hip & relevant megachurch now. They know the old JWdom is gone... that they lost... that they were wrong.
It's like some weird fever-dream.
Yep, my deceased JW grandfather and others like him would be shocked if they could come back and see that it's 2024 and "this system" is still here and that their religion has become what it is now.
++++++++++++
So, like, Jehovah's leading them??? He aint' leadin them anymore than he's leadin Joe Biden. These charlatans are simply reacting to societal changes, court decisions, etc. and are trying to keep their gig going for selfish reasons. I just texted my wife and told her that our relatives who are still in are damned fools. -
49
What the Trinitarian perspective on John 8.28?
by slimboyfat inthis is not a verse that i’ve seen feature heavily in trinitarian debates but it seems to me it presents a problem for the trinity.
if there are any around i’d be interested to know your perspective, or anything you can find on the meaning and how it doesn’t contradict the trinity.
the verse says:.
-
-
Magnum
aqwsed12345, I quickly read (I'm at work) what you posted, but I will consider it more thoroughly later. I'm actually interested and I am (at least I think I am) reasonable and open-minded.
Here's the issue I have right now with what you posted, though... I have far better comprehension and ability than most of the population, and that's something I'm more and more convinced of with every passing day. However, even I have difficulty grasping your point. It's just so confusing. How do we expect the masses to comprehend and make sense of something so unclear and hard to grasp? It just makes more sense to me that the Father and Son are two distinct entities, the father being the creator and superior to the son who was created by the father (I know you mentioned something about their distinctness). I can't even tell from my brief reading of your posts if you believe that.
Please articulate clearly for me your point. Please answer these questions:
1) Is the son a created being (having a beginning)?
2) When the son was on earth, did he pray to a completely separate superior father who was in heaven while the son was on earth?
I say that the Trinity concepts presented in this thread, if true, condemn the masses to eternal destruction because they're just too complex for most people to grasp. It seems to me that something as simple as the father/son concept is being turned into something deeply mysterious and hard to grasp. Why would a supreme being use such "father/son" terminology with humans, knowing what those terms mean to them according to their everyday experience and expect them to realize he was referring to some confusing, mysterious concept that only a few will grasp? That just doesn't make sense to me. Jesus invited the masses to drink of life's water freely. Yes, some parts of the Bible (like parables) are presented in a way to see who would put forth effort to find the meaning, and I'm glad of that. I think such shouldn't be easy - that it should require effort in order to separate the deserving from the undeserving. Consider the parables, though. When the few returned to Jesus and said something like "Tell us, what does this mean?" He explained clearly and simply in terms they could understand. He didn't give them some deep esoteric answer.
However, again, I will consider what you posted more thoroughly later.
-
86
New light on shunning?
by Mikejw inone theory why tony was booted out was because he was a stickler for not changing the shunning doctrine.
he actually said the words we will never ever change it.. they are slowly deleting all of tony’s videos and now losing court cases and losing government hand outs in places like norway.. it’s looking very likely they will release new light on shunning policy after losing this latest one in norway.. .
what are the odds they coincidentally get new light from jehovah and lighten up their shunning policy ?.
-
-
Magnum
I don't know what's going to happen, but it's interesting to watch the situation. Some tell me to just forget JWdom, and then they go home and watch fictional series on TV. What I'm watching is real stuff. I'm watching a situation concerning an organization that greatly affected my life. It's not just interesting, but also educational and enlightening; it's a study in human nature, in psychology, in deception, in organizational behavior, etc.
-
49
What the Trinitarian perspective on John 8.28?
by slimboyfat inthis is not a verse that i’ve seen feature heavily in trinitarian debates but it seems to me it presents a problem for the trinity.
if there are any around i’d be interested to know your perspective, or anything you can find on the meaning and how it doesn’t contradict the trinity.
the verse says:.
-
-
Magnum
Joh 8:28 is one of many passages that, to me, indicate very simply and straightforwardly that Jesus and God are completely separate entities as JWs teach. Other passages indicate that God "sent" Jesus, "approved" of him, "loved" him, etc. Such language logically indicates that they are separate and distinct. Wasn't the Bible supposed to have been written in a way that would be clear to the masses, to common people? To try to make such passages harmonize with the Trinitarian view requires mental gymnastics that are beyond the ability of the common man. Why would the master teacher, Jesus, speak in such an esoteric way, a way that would misrepresent or cause people to believe wrongly?
I have thought about this a lot lately. My only answer to that question would be that maybe he was intentionally speaking in a way that would hide the real truth in order to see who would dig deeper and put forth effort to arrive at truth... sort of like the way he did with parables; he would speak in parables to see who would come back to him and try to figure out what he really meant.... to see who was really interested and would put forth effort to find truth.
My current belief is aligned with that of JWs. I don't believe Jesus was hiding anything with his language; I'm just exploring that option. To me, the great bulk of the NT shows the separateness and distinctness of Father, Son, and holy spirit. Consider Mt 3:16,17:
As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
How could this passage allow for the Trinitarian belief? It shows all three elements of the so-called Trinity in three different places at the same time. God was in heaven, Jesus was on earth, and the holy spirit was in between ("descending"), all at the same time. That, to me, just makes it clear that they are separate and distinct. Also, God said he was "well pleased" with Jesus; doesn't that logically indicate they're separate?
P.S. A few weeks ago Sea Breeze, mentioned on this site Joh 2:19-21:
Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” They replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” But the temple he had spoken of was his body.
I have given some thought to that, the Trinitarian argument being that Jesus resurrected himself (or at least his body?). That is, to me, one of the best Trinitarian arguments. I even looked at the Greek to see whether the verb (in "I will raise it") was in the passive voice so that it could mean "it will be raised," but the verb is in the active voice, so it should be translated with an actor (indicating someone performing action) as in "I will raise it," not "it will be raised" which does specify the actor.
I'm still pondering this passage. However, right now I feel that the overwhelming bulk of the evidence shows that God and Jesus are separate. I think of this: Suppose a wreck occurs at the big intersection and 997 out of a 1000 eyewitnesses say the traffic light was green, but three say it was red. I think it would be reasonable to be assume that the light was green and to try to figure out why the three said it was red. Was the sun obscuring their vision? Do they have some kind of color-blindness? Are they lying?
I think of Trinitarian "proof texts" as being like the three witnesses in the illustration above. I completely grasp the Trinitarian argument in connection with Joh 2:19-21; I'm just trying to explore the passage in the context of the entire NT (the 997 witnesses) and what I consider to be the overwhelming evidence concerning the nature of God and Jesus.
-
37
They Came To The Door!
by NotFormer ingoing door to door with their "memorial" invitation.
"so you can pass the emblems but nobody partakes?
them: "we can explain who is to partake".. me: "all jesus' followers".
-
-
Magnum
nowwhat?: Yep, the days of jdubs defending their beliefs are long gone
TonusOH: They are not prepared for someone who understands their beliefs and can challenge them.
NofFormer: they used to know what they believed and would defend it vigorously.
WingCommander: There is no fight or argument left in them. There is no "Theocratic Ministry School" to teach them proper responses and even the old brown "Reasoning from the Scriptures" book is considered "Old Light" and never referenced. It's simply, "Here, take this card and visit the JW.borg website. Bye!" as they anxiously scurry off to their coffee break. Better yet if they are manning a JW cart, because really - who comes up to them? LOL!!! Nobody!
Totally agree with all posts above. For any lurking here who are still on the fence, please note what's been posted here. This is a major indication that JWs are not what they claim to be. Would the one and only people of the sovereign of the universe be representing him like this? Shouldn't they be boldly defending their doctrine and strongly and boldly giving a clear shout of warning to an entire world they think is about to be violently destroyed? JWs actuallly are insecure about their beliefs, even if it's subconsciously. They like to talk with people who have very little knowledge and who make them feel superior. They get insecure when talking with people who are knowledgeable and label those people as "not ready for the truth" or something like that.
WingCommander: It's the cringiest cult on the planet, and it just keeps getting dumber and even more cultier.
Yep! Again, that shows they are not... they cannot be... what they claim to be. With the light supposedly getting brighter, they should be getting bolder and their message should be getting clearer and they should be getting better able to defend it, but the opposite of all that is happening. JWs are inept, cowardly, insecure, ignorant, etc.