Jump to content
The World News Media

Is it time for this forum to close its doors?


Ann O'Maly

Recommended Posts

  • Member
18 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Ann is routinely cutting in her remarks. "I am amazed (but maybe I should not be)" she hurls at someone who has resisted her instruction on another thread.

Haha. You do not know my and Neil's history or the biting insults he's hurled my way in our time. We are both broad-shouldered and we understand each other. He evidently enjoys a good pummelling or he wouldn't keep coming back for more. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 5.7k
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I won't speak for the @admin since he is probably not even aware of this "controversy" right now.... BUT.... I just can't imagine Jesus Christ creating JesusChrist.org to publish his words..

My thoughts exactly @The Librarian So many concerning takeaways from this article. 1. It's a-okay for the org to completely restrict an entire area of preaching (social media). Social media

From the April 2018 Watchtower, p. 30-31. This is a bona fide, unadulterated copy (honest).  What are your thoughts on this article? Btw, I hope the irony of posting this here is not lo

Posted Images

  • Member
4 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Haha. You do not know my and Neil's history or the biting insults he's hurled my way in our time.

No I do not. Background knowledge always mitigates one's remarks. Online, one never has it. Maybe Bro Morris would caution about it for that reason, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

"Stick with what we have authorized. You'll be safe." The article just underlines AMIII's admonishment and warning that 'unauthorized' internet activity exposes JWs to "spiritual danger."

Is this forum and those like it GB authorized and approved? Of course not. 

And remember the Question Box from the km 9/07?

"Stick with what we have authorized."

There will always be those who love to research and openly discuss their views online, and thereby have to rationalize away the GB's clear counsel. I say GOOD! because this new article is another attempt at information control.

 

Well Ann, I've got news for you :)

No one on earth can make anyone do something that they don’t want to do. This has been proved throughout history, when even under duress, and with the threat of death, people have stood their ground.  As you know, only Jehovah can make people do what he wants, but he has only done so on extremely rare occasions under specific circumstances. He created us with a free will and wants us to use that free will. We are completely free to make choices in our lives. But the problem lies in people having a hard time accepting consequences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Within reason, there is nothing wrong with ad homenem attacks

The only problem with those is when used in the wrong setting they are distracting and take away from the real issue. It's annoying when the messenger is attacked, instead of the message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
15 minutes ago, Anna said:

No one on earth can make anyone do something that they don’t want to do

You sure about this?  

When JW explaining to other people in preaching, for example,"how is possible that people doing so bad things, as killing in wars, when all people in fact want peace?, then JW provide explanation that all World are under influence of devil. That also means how one person under influence of devil can make also influence on other people and drag them into the violence with or without their deep, inner consent. Ap. Paul was under influence (did he want to renounce, deny Jesus willingly or not??) 

Do you separate sources of influence on, "earthly sources", and on "heavenly sources"? You said; "No one on earth..." Do you mean by that how people can not make no one else on earth to do something he don't want?? Because in continue you said; .... 

16 minutes ago, Anna said:

 Only Jehovah can make people do what he wants, but he has only done so on extremely rare occasions under specific circumstances.

Does this mean how only good spirits can make people to do something against their will?? You said; " Only JHVH can make people......" But,

when god JHVH ask angels who will go....  20"Then a spirit came forward and stood before the LORD and said, 'I will entice him.' And the LORD said to him, 'How?' 21"He said, 'I will go and be a deceiving spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.' Then He said, 'You are to entice him and prevail also. Go and do so"- 2. Chron. 18

If you go to other Bible verses you can see how devil and demons can do exactly same thing - deceiving humans.

So devil have no such power??? Influence on human. Yes he have.

Your statement are contradictory to WT JWorg stand on this issue. More important, comment you gave are opposite to claim how JHVH gave humans "free will" to choose between two or more possibility, circumstances, paths of living. If "free will" is not possible to be always practice - actively or passively  by humans - then we have not free will , because you also said how JHVH has done exactly that in some rare occasion. Rare - as 1 in a lifetime - or periodically, if somebody using his power over you to exercise his "free will" over your free will, then in that rare moment you are losing your free will, even for a few seconds in your lifetime.     

Bible text make your statement questionable. But also history make weak such claim, belief. People can doing something against their will because they can be DECEIVED. If you are deceived then you are doing someone else's will not your. :))) Because you are without your full awareness and consciousness of what is happening in fact. Question of cognitive dissonance is just problem more that can make this situacion harder. But then we are on a doorstep when we are in moment to found the real truth or to go back to the image of the truth.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Ap. Paul was under influence (did he want to renounce, deny Jesus willingly or not??) 

I am sure you meant apostle Peter.

"Only Jehovah can make people do what he wants, but he has only done so on extremely rare occasions under specific circumstances."  - Anna

Example:  Jehovah made Balaam bless Israel when he wanted to curse Israel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
16 minutes ago, Melinda Mills said:

I am sure you meant apostle Peter.

yes, yes, thanks for correction. All those names , who would know what is right one :))))

17 minutes ago, Melinda Mills said:

Example:  Jehovah made Balaam bless Israel when he wanted to curse Israel. 

as you see, we here have all sorts of examples :))  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

When JW explaining to other people in preaching, for example,"how is possible that people doing so bad things, as killing in wars, when all people in fact want peace?, then JW provide explanation that all World are under influence of devil. That also means how one person under influence of devil can make also influence on other people and drag them into the violence with or without their deep, inner consent

But you know it’s no excuse to say “the devil made me!" (made me do something bad). So even though the whole world is under the influence of the devil, people can still chose to do the right thing .  But to analyze the statement you made; people want peace, but the problem is they want it on their terms. This is where the devil's influence comes into play. Do you think that such traits as pride, nationalism, racism, lack of self control etc. contribute to actual peace? Those are the devil's traits and the world is saturated with them. There will be no peace as long as people refuse to clothe themselves with “a Christ like personality”.

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Ap. Paul was under influence (did he want to renounce, deny Jesus willingly or not??).......

But also history make weak such claim, belief. People can doing something against their will because they can be DECEIVED. If you are deceived then you are doing someone else's will not your. :))) Because you are without your full awareness and consciousness of what is happening in fact. Question of cognitive dissonance is just problem more that can make this situacion harder. But then we are on a doorstep when we are in moment to found the real truth or to go back to the image of the truth.  

We can take the concept of “free will” into the realms of philosophy, and it gets very complicated. I believe common sense triumphs over philosophy any day, in that it’s actually useful and practical! I am just talking about the good old classic free will, where I decide to do something regardless of whether I was deceived or guilted (or whatever) into it. In my opinion, one has accepted the true concept of free will when one also accepts the consequences of it, and quits blaming deception, guilt, cognitive dissonance, imperfection or “whatever” for making a particular decision.  Although you meant Peter (as @Melinda Mills pointed out) the apostle Paul did lament the effects of imperfection in Romans 7:15-21. However, he was not just washing his hands off the whole problem and blaming imperfection for his decisions if they were wrong, what he was doing was acknowledging that it was a frequent battle to do the right thing, and he pointed out that one can win that battle with God's help.

Peter denied Jesus 3 times. No one made him do it. He was not under Satan's influence. It was his own weakness, and fear of man, his imperfection, just like what Paul mentions, that caused him to fail for a few moments. It was still his choice at that moment though and I don't recall him putting the blame on anyone or anything else for that choice.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
22 hours ago, Anna said:

No, that is not at all what it means. The Church of Christ's Holly Slippers can claim legal ownership of their Bible discussion and Bible interpretation, as can the WT claim legal ownership of their Bible discussions and interpretation. But to mix the two together, or exchange them whereby it is unclear who says what, could constitute a legal breech of the other party.

Legally, the WT has a basis to protect their literature from the few embittered ones who manipulate it to mislead others. But most anti-JW websites I see are pretty focused on referencing WT literature exactly as it is...they have no desire to twist it. They completely disagree with the core views of JWs, so cheap tactics like manipulation/photoshoppery aren't necessary. And to falsify content would discredit their own cause.

I'm not arguing against the validity of copyright law, but copyright doesn't come from the Bible. It's a man-made law. The Bible doesn't come with copyrights. It was offered free to all by God, and no one can say "I own this book so don't use it in a way I don't like."

The org has made 2 statements that when combined are concerning:

1. It is the exclusive source of true spiritual food. 

2. Its content is copyrighted.

If the org truly believes both of these things, then they must believe they legally own true Bible discussion and interpretation. But they're actually blending the Bible and man-made laws to achieve this control. It feels icky. And they also feel they can police organic discussions on the internet. I'm sorry, but I can't help but see that as a control grab.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

And remember the Question Box from the km 9/07?

Quote

Does “the faithful and discreet slave” endorse independent groups of Witnesses who meet together to engage in Scriptural research or debate?—Matt. 24:45, 47.

No, it does not. ...

As you already mentioned, the "Kingdom Ministry" in September 2007 answered this question by saying: " 'the faithful and discreet slave' does not endorse any literature, meetings, or Web sites that are not produced or organized under its oversight."

I wonder how they could have known that for sure. Did they take a survey of 9,500 different persons? After all, in 2007 the "faithful and discreet slave" consisted of about 9,500 persons who all claimed to be part of that "faithful and discreet slave." And the Governing Body who also claimed to be part of that slave, claimed in 2007 that all the persons who were of the anointed remnant class were included in that slave class, not just the Governing Body

It was not until June 2009, that the Watchtower claimed that, even though all the anointed remnant were still part of that slave class, that only the Governing Body could represent them in "giving food at the proper time." To prove it, a scripture was quoted that had previously been used to prove exactly the opposite. The full context quoted should make it clear why this passage could be used to show that all the anointed remnant were part of the slave. But this time only the red portion of the passage was suggested for reading, and only the red, bolded, underlined portion below was actually quoted in the paragraphs:

  • (1 Corinthians 12:14-13:3) 14 For, indeed, the body is made up not of one member but of many. 15 If the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I am no part of the body,” that does not make it no part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I am no part of the body,” that does not make it no part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If it were all hearing, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But now God has arranged each of the body members just as he pleased. 19 If they were all the same member, where would the body be? 20 But now they are many members, yet one body. 21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I do not need you,” or again, the head cannot say to the feet, “I do not need you.” 22 On the contrary, the members of the body that seem to be weaker are necessary, 23 and the parts of the body that we think to be less honorable we surround with greater honor, so our unseemly parts are treated with greater modesty, 24 whereas our attractive parts do not need anything. Nevertheless, God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that had a lack, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but its members should have mutual concern for one another. 26 If one member suffers, all the other members suffer with it; or if a member is glorified, all the other members rejoice with it. 27 Now you are Christ’s body, and each of you individually is a member. 28 And God has assigned the respective ones in the congregation: first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then powerful works; then gifts of healings; helpful services; abilities to direct; different tongues. 29 Not all are apostles, are they? Not all are prophets, are they? Not all are teachers, are they? Not all perform powerful works, do they? 30 Not all have gifts of healings, do they? Not all speak in tongues, do they? Not all are interpreters, are they? 31 But keep striving for the greater gifts. And yet I will show you a surpassing way. 13 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels but do not have love, I have become a clanging gong or a clashing cymbal. 2 And if I have the gift of prophecy and understand all the sacred secrets and all knowledge, and if I have all the faith so as to move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 And if I give all my belongings to feed others, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I do not benefit at all.

This next scripture, also used in the past to show that all the remnant were part of the "slave" class, was not quoted this time, although it says essentially the same thing:

  • (Ephesians 2:19-22) 19 So you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, 20 and you have been built up on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while Christ Jesus himself is the foundation cornerstone. 21 In union with him the whole building, being harmoniously joined together, is growing into a holy temple for Jehovah. 22 In union with him you too are being built up together into a place for God to inhabit by spirit.

It was not until a talk in October 2012 and a Watchtower dated July 15, 2013 that the Governing Body finally claimed to be the "faithful and discreet slave" and changed the doctrine in a way that removed the rest of the remnant from the slave class.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
10 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Somewhat. It is because he knows the overall world is not Winnie-the-Pooh friendly toward Christian values. What is it with those who would disparage such counsel? They are exactly out of harmony with Scripture, in that they present the world as though it was.

I have the greatest respect for him, because he says what needs to be said, despite knowing that villains will beat him over the head with his own words and JTR will photoshop tight pants on him.

TTH:

Above you were talking about GB Bro. Anthony Morris III , and it makes me sad to think that YOU think that I would Photoshop tight pants onto Tight Pants Tony, or TPT, as he is affectionately referred to.

The image of that might send some Sisters into menopause, with hot flashes, and everything.

 

Z9Ehz9I.jpg

WFnkEX.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,670
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Apolos2000
    Joined
×
×
  • 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.