Jump to content

  1. Rose Moreno

    Rose Moreno

  • Similar Content

    • By Witness
      Here's another one,  @TrueTomHarley
       
       
      He snuck out on Sunday morning to go to a liquor store (bypassing many others stores close by) out of state to spend almost $1000 bucks on whiskey. He should have been doing 'pastoral' duties that Sunday morning in the Headquarters where he lives and runs the place.
      Instead he dressed up in disguise; a trenchcoat, tennis shoes, and a low billed hat to go out of state at a special 'spiritual' time to get his liquor instead of dressing up in a suit with other brothers and going like normal, or having those under him purchase it.
      Many critical thinkers here believe that it belies a dishonesty. He could have picked a better time and place, and manner of dress to get his 12 bottles of high end scotch, at the least. Also, the manner of his purchase suggests a bigger problem, not only with him, but within the compound itself, if this is allowed, while they preach the opposite to the masses.
       
       
    • By The Librarian
      When and how should parents talk to their children about this important subject?
      Source
    • By Jack Ryan
      https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dvHUoDKCAHF6efu2XQxfk6o8AmBqE5rm/view
      Here's the 2018 outline, see page 3 under 'THEOCRATIC PROCEDURES FOR INVESTIGATING WRONGDOING.
      To summarize: 
      'Legal blood-alcohol limits vary depending on local laws and do not necessarily establish that a person was Biblically drunk.
      At times, elders may feel pressured to take judicial action due to notoriety and/or bad publicity.
      Strong suspicions and negative hearsay reports do not establish wrongdoing; elders must adhere to the Scriptural requirements'.
      This is quite a low-key affair with booze. I've seen it before, a gentle reminder here and there to drink less, because you've been stumbling other brothers. But it really sets the tone for how matters which reach the public eye should be handled...what it's saying is 'ignore negative publicity, as long as it doesn't disagree with the bible then the law won't affect your standing in the congregation'. Starting with booze is a sly move to recommend that this format is perfectly acceptable to be applied to more serious issues.
      Now imagine this same template applied to child abuse. I am well aware this is already partly being done, but I can see the scale of it growing exponentially. The quantification of child abuse...the law may say you're guilty, but scripturally there's not enough evidence to disfellowship. Your LEVEL of abuse appears to be significantly less that what the media would have us believe. Did he really rape a child? The media says he did, but our brother wouldn't lie, would he? He's admitted he did touch the child, but he completely denied he actually raped her. We must ignore the pressure applied from the world to remove this brother from the congregation when clearly there is no evidence he did rape the child. 
      Innocent until proven biblically guilty.
      Very frustrating when you see the potential of this outline and how easily it can be taken advantage of.
    • By Jack Ryan
      This is a common question from the public.
    • Guest Nicole
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Here’s another reason, as if you needed it, to feel crippling anxiety about everything you eat and drink. A new study published in the journalAddiction concludes that alcohol consumption causes cancer — and you’re at risk even if you just enjoy the occasional glass or two of Pinot. Most people probably realize drinking can cause liver cancer, but that’s just thebeginning. The study’s analysis directly links alcohol consumption to the development of seven types of cancer, including that of the breast and liver, and now there’s growing evidence that it can cause skin, pancreatic, and prostate cancer. According to the study, 5.8 percent of cancer deaths around the world can be attributed to drinking.
      Author Jennie Connor, a professor of preventive and social medicine in New Zealand, drew on studies conducted over the last decade by the World Cancer Research Fund, the World Health Organisation’s cancer body, and other organizations. While she says heavy drinkers are most at risk, Connor insists that public-health campaigns should encourage everyone to cut down, and tells The Guardian light drinkers experience a “considerable burden.” That, of course, is the exact opposite of how drinking should make you feel.
      Over in England, the country’s chief medical officer caused some hoopla earlier this year when she warned women that drinking could cause breast cancer. She also helped usher in new government guidelines that suggest men limit their alcohol consumption to seven pints of beer a week. (That limit sounds particularly unrealistic now that the country’s citizens are coping with the consequences of Brexit.) One doctor with Cancer ResearchUK even went so far as to suggest alternating rounds of booze and soft drinks, or drinking low-alcohol cocktails. One thing’s certain: It’s another great reason to avoid blue wine when it hits the market.
      http://www.grubstreet.com/2016/07/study-linkes-drinking-alcohol-to-cancer.html
  • Forum Statistics

    61,662
    Total Topics
    114,375
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,503
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Guticolu
    Newest Member
    Guticolu
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • IF holy spirit reached anyone in the JW Org it would be a great surprise to me.   IF holy spirit reached the congregants then would they carry on serving the GB and the Org ? IF holy spirit reached the congregants then would they still go into the 'ministry work' teaching the LIES to other people ? Would congregants take on Bible Studies and teach LIES of men from books, by not using the Bible properly ?  Would congregants encourage families into the K H knowing that there may be a paedophile in there ? Well the congregants would know about the paedophile situation, if  the congregants were blessed with holy spirit.  No, there is no holy spirit in the JW Org. If ever there was, which I cannot now believe, it has vanished. Almighty God has turned the 'tap' off. And you, Mr Rook, will know this more than I. Because you see the faults and lies, the injustice and lack of love, the lack of mercy, the man made rules as a heavy burden (as you mentioned).       
    • It would be nice to see any written 'rules' made by the GB or others in regard to shunning a person that has left the JW Org. Maybe JW congregants should be issued with a GB rule book of do's and don'ts. That way every one would know exactly what procedure is right when serving the GB and it's Org.   My feeling is that in the first century, all those that became true Christians, serving God through Christ, were of the Anointed, heavenly calling. Therefore it was more important for them to be 'without spot from the world'.  So stricter discipline would be more acceptable to those of the Anointed class. 'To whom more is given, more will be demanded'.  Hence IMO, the scriptures are written for the Anointed, and then the Anointed should teach the earthly class. (The GB are not of the anointed. By their works you will know them).  So then @Srecko Sostar the questions would be more complicated. Should stricter rules apply to the Anointed than to the earthly class ?  The Anointed should be inspired of holy spirit and capable of more self control........ All those scriptures were written by Anointed ones for Anointed ones at that time.    
    • They are that these are not your words. Who wrote this?
    • Thanks! If you go to listen and watch some other videos, you will also notice how she, Lara, going  complètement  with emotions through song while singing.   
    • ma nouvelle chanteuse française préférée
    • In the OT, there is a direct command, “Thou shalt not kill (murder)!” This command should contain God's view of human life, which emphasizes that life is holy, sacred before God, but also that people must have the same feeling about the lives of other people around them. By reading the Bible, which describes the events before and after the occurrence of this commandment, we can see that this commandment has no absolute power. Within the same set of legal provisions, there are other commandments that were binding on the Israelites, too. For example, commands like; "Don't steal, don't lie, don't commit fornication ...". These commandments should never have been ignored or mitigated by some extraordinary circumstances. The specificity of this commandment, "You shall not kill," is evident in the fact that it was not of valid, obligation for all men and for all circumstances. Powerful individuals in Israel sometimes making their own decisions to go on military campaigns against others (Israelis and non-Israelis) The law also justified killing for revenge. In some other places, God commands the death penalty against an individual. Also, the Bible describes that God instituted great actions that justified killing of other people. These were most often military actions aimed at killing soldiers of the enemy army, but also their families. The killings of these other tribes and people were justified on the basis of several facts: 1) they were not Israelis  2) they lived in territory that the Israel nation were to conquer for themselves, 3) they belonged to other religions. The execution of the death penalty for a crime still exists today in some societies and legal systems. Obviously, the death penalty decision is based on balance. The one who killed must be killed. But from some other biblical examples we have seen that murder is not the only crime punishable by death. The disobedient child was also sentenced to death. Different religious affiliations or different religious beliefs also led to the death penalty. Adultery was punished by death. From what we have described so far, we can see how the command, "shall not kill," had a stretched meaning. It is therefore necessary to look at religious practices that are not new but may draw some parallels in symbolism and meaning. As you may already guessed, it is about an act of symbolic "killing" that is carried out in such a way to exclude (disfellowship) another person from a particular social (religious) group in a specific way - by ignoring aka shunning. Shunning (this is about JW organization in particular) can be made because of two conclusions. The first conclusion is reached by an individual JW member who believes that another member of the congregation has wronged/sinned against the Bible and its principles to the extent that he / she personally presents a spiritual anomaly (in the form of a spiritual illness or threat) and decides to "label" particular person as inappropriate for him to have socializing contacts. He seeks to avoid contact and minimize any literal and spiritual communion. In second conclusion, the conviction of the inappropriateness of a member is made by the body of the elders. The judgment may be based on the morally inappropriate behavior of an individual member, or it may be that an individual no longer agrees with the ideological and organizational structure or with the theological solutions of the organization what made him/her as "hostile element". This is when a person is removed from congregational members aka "spiritually killed" in such a way to excommunicate (dfd) them (he,she) from the community and impose a ban on almost every contact with the dfd person. The ban has few variations and interpretations of how the shunning should be carried out. But the very core of such a demand not to contact the excluded person is evident from the widespread practice that JW members have consistently implemented - the excluded (dfd) is not even greeted with the simplest “Good afternoon” greeting (hallo) on the street. JW's want to be peaceful people who go to jail in some countries because not want even to carry weapon in mandatory military service. They don't want take self-defense courses even for protect themselves when attacked. But they are motivated to be active in using spiritual weapons and warfare against ex members who are in a disagreement with doctrinal issues. And "killing" them with shunning.   What are your thoughts?       
    • Absolutament incroyable!
  • 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.