Jump to content

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

TheWorldNewsOrg -
James Thomas Rook Jr. -
5
183

Top Posters


Recommended Posts


Guest Indiana

Look at those legs, that is a great HIIT cardio work out 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Jack Ryan
      Those born with artistic taste and a love of all beauty were doomed if they were born in the Soviet Union. Practicality and uniformity dictated all spheres of life, including fashion. Our heroes begged to differ, becoming the vivid flecks on the Iron Curtain’s drab surface. Strange as it may sound, it was not fashionable to be fashionable in the USSR. The Soviet Union dictated that people should wear simple clothes made of cheap, rudimentary materials that would better suit the working class. But there is always someone who wants to think – and dress – outside the box. Slava Zaitsev and Leka Mironova were among those people in the USSR. Find out about the past and future of the famous Russian designer and the top Soviet model.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Early in its existence, the Soviet Union turned Vladimir Lenin’s dictum that “religion is the opium of the people” into official policy.
      Atheism was what Lenin wanted for the Soviet empire, and it’s what it got.
      Assuring such an outcome were laws discouraging faith — such as requirements that religions register with the state — and denying Communist Party membership to anyone religious.
      Many people expected a flowering of faith when the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991.
      But it hasn’t happened, largely because the countries that emerged from the ashes of the USSR have repressed most religions, the main exceptions being Russian Orthodox Christianity and certain brands of Islam.
      The repressed have included denominations of Christianity that are widespread in other countries, such as Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Lutherans and Presbyterians.
      As with other regrettable trends in the former Soviet Union, Russia has set the tone for the repression of religion.
      Countries as diverse as Belarus, Kazakhstan and Armenia have followed the Russian example.
      Russia’s enactment of a law governing religion in 1997 has made it difficult for faiths besides Russian Orthodox Christianity to survive, let alone thrive.
      Religions were required to register in Russia before 1997. The new law required them to reregister by 2001, and made it more difficult for them to do so. About 2,000 were unable to comply with the new regulations, and were disbanded.
      The Russian Orthodox Church was required to reregister, too. But because the law gave it special status as Russia’s traditional faith, and because most government officials viewed it as the country’s only legitimate religion, it had no trouble reregistering.
      Vladimir Putin’s lock on Russia’s leadership since 2000 has given the Russian Orthodox Church an even more commanding position in the country’s religious picture.
      Putin has publicly called the church, which he attends, a vital part of Russian life and tradition.
      Not surprisingly, Russian Orthodox Church leaders have hailed him as a great leader.
      Belarus is one of the former Soviet countries that has passed a religious law modeled after Russia’s.
      The legislation bans faiths that are not registered with the government, requires government approval of all religious materials, prevents non-citizens from leading religious organizations, and prohibits most religious meetings in private homes.
      As in Russia, the law assures that the Russian Orthodox Church holds a commanding position in the country’s religious life.
      Russia passed anti-terrorism legislation in 2002 and 2007 that critics say has been used to repress non-Orthodox faiths.
      It was billed as legislation to help law enforcement go after religious and nationalist extremists, but it has been used to prosecute members of such peaceful faiths as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Hare Krishnas.
      Kazakhstan passed sweeping anti-terrorist legislation after a series of radical-Islamist attacks unnerved the country in 2011.
      Although ostensibly designed to help law enforcement go after extremists, the law has been used to shut down religions that Kazakhstan deems “non-traditional.” Only five faiths fall into its “traditional” category: Russian Orthodox Christianity, Roman Catholicism, Judaism, Islam and Buddhism.
      The law requires a faith to have 50 members to obtain official recognition at the local level, 500 members to obtain recognition at the regional level and 5,000 members to obtain recognition at the national level. If it fails to mount those numbers, it it considered to be operating illegally.
      The Kazakhstan legislation had the repressive effect critics had predicted. In the year after it was passed, the number of denominations the government sanctioned fell from 46 to 17.
      People of faith both inside and outside Kazakhstan couldn’t help but note the irony that President Nursultan Nazarbayev had long trumpeted the country’s ethnic and religious tolerance — and part of the evidence he offered was that Kazakhstan recognized more than 40 faiths. Despite the post-2011 crackdown, Nazarbayev continues to paint Kazakhstan as a faith-tolerant society.
      Armenia’s main brand of Christianity enjoys the same privileged position that Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan’s do.
      At one time the government used to excuse Armenian Apostolic Church clergy and seminarians from the country’s mandatory military service. But it jailed members of denominations who refused to serve because they were conscientious objectors — in particular, Jehovah’s Witnesses.
      Changes in the law have led to conscientious objectors being allowed to perform alternative public service under civilian — rather than military — leadership.
      Meanwhile, Armenian schools require students to take a course on the history of the Armenian Apostolic Church.
      The course is mandatory; students cannot opt out on religious grounds.
      Although the course is supposed to be about the role the church has played in Armenia’s development, in practice it is often focuses on the church’s precepts and beliefs, critics say.
      In other words, it is a proselytizing and faith-affirmation tool, according to the detractors.
      As the examples from Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Armenia show, the former Soviet Union has a long way to go in bestowing religious freedom on all its citizens.
      In fact, the trend in the past 10 to 15 years has been to shrink rather than expand such freedom.
      The only hope for those who embrace non-traditional faiths is that the repression will ease as time passes.
      Armine Sahakyan is a human rights activist based in Armenia. A columnist with the Kyiv Post and a blogger with The Huffington Post, she writes on human rights and democracy in Russia and the former Soviet Union.
       
      Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/armine-sahakyan/hopes-of-religious-freedo_b_9509396.html

  • Forum Statistics

    61,680
    Total Topics
    114,508
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,507
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    AliciaBarbosa
    Newest Member
    AliciaBarbosa
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • 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?
    • :)) sorry for poor quality of video. Language is Croatian with few Italian refren. Train To Genoa I haven't seen you for a long time And now I am on my way to you On the cold window glass I wrote Your name and Rijeka - Genoa   I haven't seen you for a long time Are you still the one I know? This train is cozy But I'm restless I'm drinking my third coffee On the train to Genoa   [Refrain] Do you still love me, tell me What does your heart say Are we still together If that's not love Tell me what is love Tell me truthfully   I remember everything You can see the bay Ships' lights from your room But I, I don't want it to end This train is running late I hope you're waiting for me https://lyricstranslate.com/en/il-treno-genova-train-genoa.html
  • 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.