Jump to content
The World News Media

What were Jehovah's Witnesses Trying to Say With This Illustration?


Jack Ryan

Recommended Posts


  • Views 947
  • Replies 8
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

If she was wearing a suit of armor, it doesn't matter. What matters is what are the thoughts of the husband with LUSTFUL THOUGHTS, that is the meaning of the illustration. Not what the woman is wearin

That is why in our Congregation, when we all go to the beach once a year for a two week mini-assembly camping trip, when the Sisters swim in the ocean, they all wear canvas tents. Some Brothers d

Not!!! He is with his wife looking with lustful eyes at another woman

Posted Images

  • Member
2 minutes ago, John Houston said:

If she was wearing a suit of armor, it doesn't matter. What matters is what are the thoughts of the husband with LUSTFUL THOUGHTS, that is the meaning of the illustration. Not what the woman is wearing. Went right over some of your heads, did it again? Just like the Pharisees! My, my ,my!

By dressing attractively she is encouraging men to have lustful thoughts. Which is why there is encouragement to dress modestly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

That is why in our Congregation, when we all go to the beach once a year for a two week mini-assembly camping trip, when the Sisters swim in the ocean, they all wear canvas tents.

Some Brothers do get overly excited when the gals ankles show.

We have to throw buckets of sea water on them ... including the buckets.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

@James Thomas Rook Jr. You forgot the ice, succession rate is always 100%.

@Jack Ryan It is not always of how one dress, for even a woman who dresses 100% in total modesty, eyes seem to be looking in her direction no matter way. But there are some men out there with fleshly desires and ill intent, some to the point of brazen conduct. In some cases, there are men out there who want to see your mate/wife, if it comes to that, which results in some cases where a husband and or boyfriend of said girl is overly protective, and the one seeking to take his woman will do the most absurd things and even bad things.

In a way, it can go from minor to silly to absurd to violent, sometimes all the same fruit from the tree if it comes to it. At the end of the day, it always comes down to the type of person the man is, if he is lusting over other women, even women who are the mate of other men, and regardless if the women is dressed modestly, and in today's society, some women tend to also not dress modestly, they will and always will catch some eyes, mainly if said women looks like she is beyond the league of the man.

On the other side of the spectrum, you have women, who are not modestly dress, who do this stuff on purpose to attract someone, mainly one who is already married and clearly someone who is weak in his relationship will get caught in this trap.

The worse thing that could happen besides an angry spouse is getting slapped into next week, perhaps into next month... Or hope that your spouse does not know how to throw a punch or two at you for having such obvious lust for other women because the pants in the relationship will most likely change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • … and donchew forget now … the GB now allows Sisters to come to meetings and go out in field service in slacks or Mumus.  Or slacks AND Mumus, if poundage appropriate. Did I ever mention I once dated a Sister that made Mumus out of parachutes? She was an Opera singer, and had a UN diplomatic passport. She was on “speed”, couldn’t blink, and typed 600 words a minute with 100% errors. Occasionally she would get lipstick in her eyebrows.  
    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    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.