Jump to content

Jack Ryan

Bethel and Alcohol

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Jack Ryan -
16
473

Top Posters


Recommended Posts


@Jack Ryan Clearly one must drink such in moderation.

There is a clear difference and drinking responsibility vs drinking to the point of being drunk, however, some drinks tend to send people overboard really fast, thus the one in question needs to control themselves and limit themselves so they do not succumb to drunkenness. At the same time should one become drunk, it will result in many problems, drunk driving, fighting and a slew of other things, even rape, which tends to happen a whole lot at gatherings involving young people and or on the college/university scene. Other times depression, drinking being the only way to cope, even a good man can succumb to strong drinking habits even though he is not the type of person to do such, this also goes for those with suicidal intent and or suffering from some sort of guilt and or action.

That being said, one needs to be very careful. I myself do not drink, I choose not to for various reasons, in addition to that, out of experience, I had seen quite the situation of drunkenness numerous times, even convinced someone to stop drinking to heavily.

 

Also just wanna put this out there: Friends don't let friends drive drunk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Librarian said:

Another video lost... ugh....

Does anyone have a link to the original? I don't even remember the details of the video

The video must've vanish due to the Copyright Heroes and Internet, basement dwelling Trolls who have nothing better to do.

The only chance you got is other sites that are somehow linked to Youtube that has the video by name even though the video is unreachable. Your other option would be to search https://d.tube/ however it is by chance.

Know this, if it is said and or done and posted on the internet it is there and isn't 100% gone, just have to look elsewhere.

As for original, I do not have a source, perhaps via keywords you can look it up, but it will not be easy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, The Librarian said:

Another video lost... ugh....

Does anyone have a link to the original? I don't even remember the details of the video

As I have mentioned before ... you can download any YouTube videos with the FREE (Free is a VERY good price!) software  -   "Freemake Video Downloader"  -   @The Librarian.  I think the video deleted above was one I downloaded, but I do not remember either.

TA-DAH!

This is NOT a link ... you can download this to your computer from HERE.

 

LEAKED_ Bethel video talk about alcohol [mixology version!].mp4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@James Thomas Rook Jr. Interesting, did you have the video this whole time or manage to download it somehow before it got taken down by the Copyright troop?

For if something is missing and or gone private, I know it cannot be downloaded.

I do not know if you know this website, but Music Clips now referred to as mp3 converter, can turn YouTube videos into mp3s or mp4 and or other formats. An interesting tool, nonetheless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

@James Thomas Rook Jr. Interesting, did you have the video this whole time or manage to download it somehow before it got taken down by the Copyright troop? 

Knowing that people in general, including myself when I have a "brain fault", and the WTB&TS in particular, like to hide their goofiness, and cringeworthy stuff, I download these things as soon as I see them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2018 at 1:50 AM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

As I have mentioned before ... you can download any YouTube videos with the FREE (Free is a VERY good price!) software  -   "Freemake Video Downloader"  -   @The Librarian.  I think the video deleted above was one I downloaded, but I do not remember either.

TA-DAH!

This is NOT a link ... you can download this to your computer from HERE.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/6/2018 at 1:50 AM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

"Freemake Video Downloader"

My McAfee warns me to download this is dangerous - viruses and spyware. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 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

    61,691
    Total Topics
    114,645
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,513
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    pastel
    Newest Member
    pastel
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 2011, after the Nation realized they could NOT keep their doctor, they could NOT keep their health plan, and the $2500 every person was going to save on their Health Care, was going to cost them about $10,000 more, and if they did not buy it, the IRS would add a whopping fine to their Income Tax return. On a related note, in 1980, the Governing Body in considering the "signs in the heavens ..." actually considered declaring Sputnik to be the fulfillment of Bible Prophesy, Schroeder, Karl Klein and Grant Suiter proposed moving the beginning of the "generation" to the year 1957, to coincide with the 1957 Sputnik event,  and it almost became "new light", except a 66-2/3 majority vote was needed to adopt that policy, and one member of the Governing Body went to the restroom, and when he came back, he changed his vote, and it failed by one vote. In retrospect, perhaps the Brother should have held his water.
    • What year did robocalls from the cloud begin besieging every man woman and child on earth day and night?
    • All jokes have to have an element of truth ..... and THIS one certainly does!
    • It's a difficult doctrine, with an easy explanation. The Earth is about 3.5 billion years old. Each creative day is (3.5 billion divided by 7 = 500,000,000) about 500 million years.. Armageddon will occur at the "End of Days". Therefore ... "Stay Alive, 'till 500,001,975". See? The math works out perfectly, AND it agrees with fossils ! TA DA! Plus! --- the .ORG gets a LOT of "wiggle room". As Marvin Webster sez: "Ya'll think about it."    
    • Like you, I find it difficult to envision Christ's enthronement in 33 CE, for pretty much the same reasons as you. The urgency and keeping on the watch would almost seem cruel, if it was to last nearly 2000 years. Unless you think about those who have been waiting since the end of the 1800's and that have now died. Well for them, it was a lifetime of waiting anyway, so pretty much we could say that there would be no difference between someone waiting their whole lifetime in the middle ages and dying, than someone waiting their whole lifetime and dying now. I mean with respect to the individual. It seems like the scripture "Therefore, beloved ones, since you are awaiting these things, do your utmost to be found finally by him spotless and unblemished and in peace"  would have practical meaning for both individuals. I am assuming that most ordinary folk (at least in Christianized nations) were aware that if they lived a good and godly life they would land in heaven. That was the reward. But you do make a good point when you say that the holy writings were not accessible to ordinary folk, and most couldn't read so would they even know  what Peter wrote about in 2 Peter ch3? On top of that, "Christian" religion, Catholicism, did not advocate millennialism much, if at all. It wasn't until the protestant reformation in the 16 the century that millenialism was revived. Excerpt from the Catholic encyclopedia: (I don't expect you to read it all, just here for info) " Protestant fanatics (lol) of the earlier years, particularly the Anabaptists, believed in a new, golden age under the sceptre of Christ, after the overthrow of the papacy and secular empires. In 1534 the Anabaptists set up in Münster (Westphalia) the new Kingdom of Zion, which advocated sharing property and women in common, as a prelude to the new kingdom of Christ. Their excesses were opposed and their millenarianism disowned by both the Augsberg (art. 17) and the Helvetian Confession (ch. 11), so that it found no admission into the Lutheran and Reformed theologies. Nevertheless, the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries produced new apocalyptic fanatics (lol) and mystics who expected the millennium in one form or another: in Germany, the Bohemian and Moravian Brethren (Comenius); in France, Pierre Jurien (L'Accomplissement des Propheties, 1686); in England at the time of Cromwell, the Independents and Jane Leade. A new phase in the development of millenarian views among the Protestants commenced with Pietism. One of the chief champions of the millennium in Germany was I.A. Bengel and his disciple Crusius, who were afterwards joined by Rothe, Volch, Thiersch, Lange and others. Protestants from Wurtemberg emigrated to Palestine (Temple Communities) in order to be closer to Christ at His second advent. Certain fantastical sects of England and North America, such as the Irvingites, Mormons, Adventists, adopted both apocalyptic and millenarian views, expecting the return of Christ and the establishment of His kingdom at an early date. Some Catholic theologians of the nineteenth century championed a moderate, modified millenarianism, especially in connection with their explanations of the Apocalypse. So it would appear that anyone living from 33 C.E  up to the 16th century (apart from the disciples and early Christian congregation, and some early church fathers) would have no idea about even the existence of the coming of Christ as king of a 1000 year kingdom...  
    • No idea. The primary point was that people would tremble at such signs in the heavens. A space race with military implications was already hinted at in part of the yw book, which was already about Daniel and therefore had the king of the north in its sights.
    • Another sinister feather in the cap of the northern king. Did he want to tie in the Daniel prophesy?
  • 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.