Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Guest Nicole

Samson

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Guest Nicole -
Guest Nicole -
1
1270

Top Posters

  • Guest 1

Recommended Posts

Guest Nicole

When we need help, who can help us? Samson gave the best example! "Samson now called out to Jehovah..." (Jud. 16:28-31). By @luizbera

 

 

Screen Shot 2016-09-16 at 8.16.56 PM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Witness
      A message from a former Bethelite.
       
       
    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      Is it fair?
       
       
      Is it FAIR.wmv
    • By Jack Ryan
      Do not complain at Bethel exjw.mp4
    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      (New news ....)  A MONTANA Judge Orders Jehovah’s Witnesses to Turn Over Internal Documents Related to Childhood Sexual Abuse
      April 12, 2018
       
      On April 5, 2018, Judge James Manley of Sanders County, Montana ordered the Jehovah’s Witnesses religious organization to produce documents and testimony related to internal reports and investigations into the childhood sexual abuse of NPR’s two clients.
       
      In this case, the two Plaintiffs were sexually abused as children by a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Elders in the local Jehovah’s Witness congregation in Thompson Falls, Montana were aware of the abuse and failed to report it to the police, choosing instead to handle the reports and investigations internally pursuant to Jehovah’s Witness guidelines. Their decision not to report the abuse to authorities allowed the perpetrator to remain in the congregation and continue to abuse one of the Plaintiffs.
       
      Throughout this case, and similar childhood sexual abuse cases across the country, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have refused to produce documents related to their internal handling of reports of sexual abuse and related investigations and disciplinary actions claiming that the information is protected by the clergy-penitent privilege and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
       
      Through briefing to the court, NPR convinced the Judge that Defendants’ privilege claims were unsupported and improper under the law. The Court agreed that Defendants could not blanket everything related to their investigations in secrecy and that they must turn it over to the Plaintiffs. Often, this is the very evidence that can win or lose a case like this against a religious institution.
       
      The case of Nunez, et al. v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, et al.  is set to go to trial in September of 2018.
      The plaintiffs in this case are represented by NPR partner D. Neil Smith and associate Ross E. Leonoudakis.
       
      ----------------------------------------------------------
      A Jury of 12 held in public view ... or a tribunal of three held in complete secrecy.
      Which would YOU choose,  to get Justice?
       
    • Guest
      By Guest
       
      The inhabitants of San Antonio da platina in Brazil are witnessing a very strange phenomenon; a frightful rain of spiders. This phenomenon is apparently due to what is called " Spider ballooning a technique that allows young spiders to jump in the air to find another habitat. These paintings are in the form of a veil and one breath of air to take them away. If it's not uncommon for spiders to fly, it's exceptional to see millions landing in the same place. There's worse than rain, hail or lightning: the rain of spiders! The small town of Goulburn, in Southern Australia, experienced this frightening phenomenon last week. The inhabitants have seen their gardens and houses being covered by a large amount of paintings falling from the sky. On These: millions of tiny spiders. Ian Watson described this spectacular scene on Facebook: "I am 10 minutes from the city, and we can clearly see hundreds of small spiders floating with their paintings and my home is covered". a balloon ride if The phenomenon seems to trigger a general panic, it is not uncommon in this part of Australia. It is actually due to a change in climatic conditions. After heavy rains, spiders living on the ground or in des are trying to escape drowning. To do so, they take flight thanks to a technique called " hot air balloon ". " hot air balloon is not a rare behavior for many spiders. They climb to a high area and point their back to the sky and release the canvas. Then they just take off," explained the arachnologue Rick Vetter to livescience. So Les use their canvas a bit like paragliding. More amazing, according to Rick Vetter, this behavior takes place more often than you think, " it happens all around us, all the time. Just, we don't notice ". what's really rare is that millions of spiders take off at the same time and land in the same place. Angel Hair? Of course, by practicing the hot-Air Balloon, spiders don't control where they go. They can be carried by the wind. And if there's a sudden depression, it happens that they all fall down to the same place. Like in Goulburn. Such a surprising stop for the inhabitants of the city as for small animals. When you observe such a quantity of spiders that have made the hot-Air Balloon, you call this phenomenon " rain of spiders ", or " Angel hair " because of the long light wires that they give up a little everywhere after their landing. The largest "Landings" observed nearly 40 kilometres wide!



    • By I want see you in paradise
      Cleaning the Hall of the Kingdom in São João da Boa Vista - São Paulo! ??
    • By The Librarian
      mayersoares
      Campinas, Sao Paulo  Welcome to the Best Life Ever Bro!!

    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
    • Guest Nicole
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      Why child marriage is so popular in Brazil
       
       
    • By TheWorldNewsOrg
      The mystery of 'twin town' in Brazil
       
       
    • By Queen Esther
      NEW  WORLD  WARWICK  CENTER,  HEADQUARTERS,  USA 
      The  beautiful  entrance  hall ❤
    • Guest
      By Guest
      Shared by @craigcarsonea
    • By admin
      Doctors in Brazil are testing the skin of the fish tilapia as a bandage for second- and third-degree burns — a innovation that arose from an unmet need.
    • By TrueTomHarley
      I like the song video; ‘Why We Went to Bethel.”

      I like that it is all children. Adults are in the background for support. They clap, sway, play instruments. But the centerpiece is the kids. 

      If you weren’t paying attention, you might miss that it is shot in different countries, with different choirs of kids. That’s how seamless it has been produced by really capable people.

      I like the child that pops up at the end, “Thank you, Jehovah.”

      The brother who I think I would like in person will not join in the singing. He just won’t do it. But he will watch the Sergei vignettes just before, which are just as good. In fact, they are better.

    • By The Librarian
      Preaching in the Amazon region in Brazil. Photo shared by @likke_miller
       
       
      View the full article
    • Guest Nicole
    • Guest Nicole
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      This is  brother Cross, he has served 45 years at Bethel. He was going around giving Sophia and Caleb cards to children with information about them. 
       

    • By The Librarian
      Photo shared by @steentime

       
       
      Patterson Bethel. Photo shared by @steentime
       
       
      View the full article
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Amazonas, Brazil
       

    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Happy testing equipment for dubbing of videos in Tagalog at Philippines Bethel

    • By The Librarian
      lol....
      When they don't listen to your message... "Shake the dust off your feet" ... and leave the building in ruins like Babylon. ;-)
      Looks like a volcano behind her.
       
  • Forum Statistics

    61,680
    Total Topics
    114,509
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,508
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    AliciaBarbosa
    Newest Member
    AliciaBarbosa
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Wouldn't a core doctrine be one in which we put "unwavering" faith. This is the whole reason I mention "core" or "key" doctrines. If we were to be killed unless we publicly renounced our faith in Jehovah God as the Creator, and Jesus Christ as the one through whom the Ransom comes, we should be willing to die for that doctrine. I would not be willing to die over my certainty that Jesus was only using hyperbole when he said that the men of Sodom would do better in a resurrection of the unrighteous on Judgment Day, than persons in towns that rejected Jesus during his earthly ministry. (Only the most diabolical of inquisitors would ask such a question anyway. I think I would go for "theocratic war strategy. 😉 )
    • I like that. It's an excellent explanation of one of the points made in the day's text and commentary. Perhaps. And so were all the 1 year old babies destroyed in the Flood. And so were the 185,000 of Senacherib's troops. I used that one because it's one for which most of us would be the least surprised if we discovered that the WT changed the teaching again.  Not sure what you mean. I already believe that the primary core doctrine is God's value through his Son's ransom sacrifice. Other doctrines are also just as necessary, though.  There actually is a contradiction between the Bible and AD 1914. And we don't need any independent understanding not supported by Scripture, such as the independent understanding of John Aquila Brown, or more specifically, that of Nelson H Barbour, neither of which were supported by Scripture. It should ALWAYS be the exploit of any faithful Witness to uncover truth and try to resolve any contradictions that can be resolved by Scripture itself, not anything independent of Scriptural support.  On the matter of the 1914 doctrine, an easier explanation with human controversy --but no scriptural controversy-- has already been posted. Easier isn't proof that it's better, but it's definitely easier. Here it is: Jesus came to earth to preach about a God's Kingdom through Christ and give himself over to death as a perfect ransom for sin, to fulfill the Law, and SIT AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND and therefore RULES AS KING since the time of his resurrection in 33 CE. That's it. Simple. No contradictions with any Scripture. From that point on, in 33 CE he SITS AT GOD'S RIGHT HAND and therefore RULES AS KING ruling in the midst of enemies, including war, famine, sickness, and will continue ruling as king until God has put all enemies under his feet, including the last enemy: death.  The current belief in 1914 creates a contradiction with this very point, because we are currently forced to ignore 1 Cor 15:25, which indicates that "sitting at God's right hand" is the same as "ruling as King." Right now, our current teaching is that Jesus sat at God's right hand in 33, and THEN LATER began ruling as king in 1914. Paul says that Jesus began ruling as king WHEN he sat at God's right hand. I'm swapping them because they mean exactly the same thing to me. No difference. Doctrine means teaching. True but notice the words that Paul used instead of "sit at my right hand" here: (1 Corinthians 15:25) 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. Turns out that when a king sits on a throne, this is actually an expression meaning rule as king. Just like when we say that a man "sat on the throne" starting in AD 1066, for example. Turns out that a king does not have to stand up from a throne to begin ruling as king. Turns out that sitting on a throne is not a synonym for just waiting around. By that logic, Jesus is not even NOW ruling as king, because God has not yet put the last enemy Death beneath his feet. (1 Corinthians 15:25,26) 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. 26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing.
    • If only you would stop quoting outside sources, and just be more basic with your comments, then i may understand them . Yes I understand 'if your throw out all the good, only the bad is left.  But the reverse is, if you only see the good, you are not being honest with yourself or others.  @Arauna is a case in point.  
    • @JW Insider Quote " The day's text is about the resurrection, and the commentary speaks of the importance of including this among our key doctrines, as if it might not have been "up there" with the rest. " That seems rather strange to me. But then they are getting short of things to say.  However, i would have thought every Christian, no matter what ever 'sect' or  pigeon hole you put them in, would definitely believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and put it up near the top of important beliefs.  However making Bible Facts, doctrines, seems unfair to God and to the Bible itself.  doctrine a belief or set of beliefs held and taught by a Church, political party, or other group.   It's as if the JW Org tries to 'own' such things. @TrueTomHarley quite often goes on about the things that the JW Org teaches. As if those things 'belonged to the JW Org'.  Whereas a lot of the same beliefs are held by thousands of people, and they not all being of the same organisation.     Quote " The Teaching about Christ's Kingdom -  Of course that final one might be a nod to "1914" as a key teaching, but it is worded here in such a way that no one could dismiss Christ's Kingdom as a key teaching. "   Now here we see a difference between Bible truth and JW doctrine.    Christ's Kingdom is Bible truth.   1914 is JW Org doctrine.   (This would bring us back to. Would a person be d/fed or 'watched' if they did not believe the 1914 doctrine?)    Matthew 22 v 44    ‘Jehovah said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies beneath your feet”’? So if Jesus was to sit at Gods right hand, until God had put Jesus' enemies beneath Jesus' feet.  Then Jesus could not have had the power to do it himself. Therefore surely Jesus was not ruling as King immediately ?    As for 1914, we know that no one of the Bible Students or JW leaders, were or are inspired of Holy Spirit. So maybe 1914 is just another guess or misuse of scriptures.    What is your view of the difference between 'Core doctrines' and Key teachings ?    And you seem to keep swapping expressions from Core doctrines, to Core teachings, to Key teachings.  Can you explain the difference please ?    
    • I confess that I am falling well short of the 100 times a day that I ought. I ask your forgiveness. Human limitations is the only excuse I have to offer. If you negate the upside, then all there is left to look at is the downside, and that is the case with many here.  I keep coming back to a line from The Scarlet Letter: “It is remarkable, that persons who speculate the most boldly often conform with the most perfect quietude to the external regulations of society.” Nobody speculates more boldly, departing from the herd-like thinking of this world, than Jehovah’s Witnesses. True to that Hawthorn line, they have no difficulty conforming to the “external regulations of their society.” Though Hawthorn does not say it, the reverse is also true. Those who cannot “conform to the external regulations of that society” and so leave it, perhaps guys like Shiwiiiii, are the most non-bold thinkers of all. They are individualistic in superfluous ways, but conformist in all the ways that matter.
    • Perhaps you are reading something into the book of Jude that I haven't been able to see. To me, the reason for the letter was this: Jude 4 I say this because some ungodly people have wormed their way into your churches, saying that God’s marvelous grace allows us to live immoral lives. This was similar to the problem in Corinth, where certain brothers were PROUD that they could put up with a notorious case of incest, due to a misunderstanding and misuse of "undeserved kindness." (1 Corinthians 5:1, 2) . . .Actually sexual immorality is reported among you, and such immorality as is not even found among the nations—of a man living with his father’s wife. 2 And are you proud of it? Should you not rather mourn, so that the man who committed this deed should be taken away from your midst? Such persons who used the idea of forgiveness, mercy, and undeserved kindness (grace), as an excuse for loose/brazen conduct were not blowing the whistle on wrongdoing, but were PROMOTING wrongdoing. It was the same as dismissing and speaking abusively against things that Jesus himself had said to "prove false to our only owner and Lord, Jesus Christ." Michael wouldn't even speak abusively of the Devil and yet these people are going to go further than that and think it's OK to speak abusively of Jesus and the angels? It's also possible that the leaders (elders) are considered the "glorious ones" but this makes less sense to me. Perhaps a topic for further discussion?
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.