Jump to content
The World News Media

The French Speaking Baptist Church of Stratford is now located in the former Jehovah's Witnesses Kingdom Hall at 494 Milford Point Road.


Jack Ryan

Recommended Posts

  • Member
3 minutes ago, divergenceKO said:

I recommend, you don’t antagonize the true owners of this forum. TrueTomHarley and JWinsider. They are the ones to decide if you stay or get removed for promoting the truth or give negative reviews. That’s been the experience of others I know to have taken place.

Yes. I am warning all you miscreants. Any more shenanigans and I will kick your sorry cans to the curb. Especially you, @James Thomas Rook Jr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 5.8k
  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

(Luke 12:41, 42) . . .Then Peter said: “Lord, are you telling this illustration just to us or also to everyone?” 42 And the Lord said: “Who really is the faithful steward, the discreet one, whom his m

I believe that the illustration of the Faithful and Discreet Slave applies to the Governing Body. But I also believe that it is presumptuous for anyone to limit the meaning of the Faithful and Discree

For me, this was a matter of prayerfully considering and meditating on the full meaning of the 2014 talk by Brother Splane when he admitted that many teachings were all being dropped at once because t

Posted Images

  • Member
8 hours ago, Sean Migos said:

What kind of humility can be said about causing division among the brothers regardless if it’s out loud, in private or in secret?

Can you tell me how that is possible in practice? How can someone cause a division among the brothers if no one hears of it because it's in private?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Yes. I am warning all you miscreants. Any more shenanigans and I will kick your sorry cans to the curb. Especially you, @James Thomas Rook Jr.

Is it possible with one of your team? It appears it must be true about Anna, ComforMyPeople, JWinsider, TrueTom, James Thomas Rook Jr to be in the same team. I will accept this group runs the forum. Question. If we are not allowed to vote our conscience, what's the point with the emojis?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
37 minutes ago, Anna said:

Can you tell me how that is possible in practice? How can someone cause a division among the brothers if no one hears of it because it's in private?

Can it be that difficult? Can Jehovah not expose those with evil intent?

 Hebrews 4:13 American Standard Version (ASV)

 13 And there is no creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and laid open before the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

2 Timothy 2:16 American Standard Version (ASV)

 16 But shun profane babblings: for they will proceed further in ungodliness,

 You would think, those calling themselves Jehovah’s witnesses would already know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, divergenceKO said:

It is an interesting read. Can you find the parallel on how people debate error with prophesy about the Watchtower, and yet Mr. Orwell made a predication in 1946, that no one seems to debate.

You can discuss a novel, such as 1984, but you cannot legitimately debate an "alternative history" novel.

Its FICTION, and everybody understands that it is fiction, and it does not represent itself to be anything BUT fiction.

It's the magnificent expression of new and important ideas that make "1984" a classic, which I read in High School a half century ago in Virginia, and all three of my children read in high school twelve years ago, in North Carolina high schools.

The 200 or so fictional representations by the WTB&TS that JW Insider mentioned above , as it turns out, were ALSO fiction, but they were represented, under penalty of social exile, to be the inspired Word of God from God's own self-appointed spokesmen.

There are people that still think all these things, once declared to be the understandings of Jehovah God .... now abandoned as complete fantasy made up out of NOTHING!, are true.

I would say "still true", but they were NEVER true, and the "grind my gears" red button for me is "Gog of Magog".  Being forever wrong about that one has consumed YEARS of people's lives learning, and re-learning, and re-learning great heaping steaming piles of utter nonsense, backed up by DOZENS of buzz word scriptures, now well known to have had NO value whatsoever to support the authors of the drivel.

The debates ongoing are not between the people that know the difference, and people that don't ... it's between the ideas that are right ... and the ideas that are wrong, which are embraced with loving arms.

dt190825.jpg

 

2019-09-04_001025.jpg

2019-09-04_001121.jpg

2019-09-04_002302.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, divergenceKO said:

and yet Mr. Orwell made a predication in 1946, that no one seems to debate.

I'll be happy to discuss it. The first thing I find about a 1946 prediction is on this site: https://www.shortlist.com/news/george-orwell-made-this-incredible-political-prediction-in-1946

George Orwell made this incredible political prediction in 1946

"The man was an actual prophet"

. . . Deacon unearthed this passage, written back in 1946 by George Orwell, taken from one of his columns in Tribune magazine (which were collected in Seeing Things As They Are earlier this year) which eerily seems to describe exactly what is currently happening.

Then I found the actual thing Deacon said, here: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/10/08/how-george-orwell-predicted-brexit/ where he quotes from another book he (Deacon) had been reading, and it was noteworthy for how well it matched all the arguments of the EU referendum campaign for "Brexit":

“The fact is that there is strong popular feeling in this country against foreign immigration,” wrote Orwell. “It arises partly from simple xenophobia, partly from fear of undercutting in wages, but above all from the out-of-date notion that Britain is overpopulated and that more population means more unemployment.”

The most necessary step is... to raise the general level of public understanding: above all, to drive home the fact, which has never been properly grasped, that British prosperity depends largely on factors outside BritainGeorge Orwell, November 1946

On the contrary, argued Orwell, more immigration was needed, to compensate for “the ageing of the population” and Britain’s “frighteningly low” birth-rate. Unfortunately, he said, efforts to encourage European immigration had been “met by ignorant hostility, because the public has not been told the relevant facts”.

Above all, he concluded, the government must “drive home the fact, which has never been properly grasped, that British prosperity depends largely on factors outside Britain”.

Sounds familiar, doesn’t it?

Of course, Orwell was not actually a prophet, otherwise he would have foreseen that attempts to “drive home this fact” would be successfully dismissed as “talking Britain down”. Were he here today, Orwell himself would be cast as a sneering metropolitan liberal elitist, out of touch with the legitimate concerns of ordinary hard-working families.

Still: pretty remarkable. That article was written 70 years ago, and yet – excluding its references to the Second World War – it could easily have been written in 2016. Orwell effectively foresaw the arguments of the EU referendum campaign, decades before the EU even existed.

Oh – and he also noted that there was no popular support in Britain for admitting refugees, because the public believed they were only economic migrants.

Curiously, even the part where Deacon dismisses Orwell as "not a prophet" because he didn't correctly foresee the "driving home" of counterarguments, well, this could be dismissed now that this "drive" has also become a public part of the Brexit debate. After all, the article above was written in 2016, and here we are 3 years later when the debate has gotten even stickier.

@divergenceKO, Was that the topic you were referring to? If so, I think it makes Orwell very observant, but not really a prophet.

Reminds me a bit of when the Watch Tower publications declared Rutherford to be prophet in 1924, while proposing that a British politician of the time was also a prophet because he was declaring some of the same rhetoric that Rutherford was declaring.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
34 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

You can discuss a novel, such as 1984, but you cannot legitimately debate an "alternative history" novel.

Its FICTION, and everybody understands that it is fiction, and it does not represent itself to be anything BUT fiction.

If Mr. Orwell’s 1946 predictions were just stories, then he was specific about certain events. Mr. Orwell’s books spoke of real power, and spoke negative against England as he saw it as a poor Indian with a humble upbringing. The same can be said about Muhammad. It wasn’t until after he stopped being a cop did he focus in his books. His 1984 book was finished shortly before his death.

I was enlightened with a war time piece he made about WW1.

The fact the ”Old George’s Almanac” attempted to put a comedic spin on that 1946 prediction, still left the reader disheartening.

There is no comparison other than personal provocation. If one is going to debate, then all avenues are critical.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Reminds me a bit of when the Watch Tower publications declared Rutherford to be permeated with the real Biblical and prophetic spirit, while proposing that a British politician of the time was also like a prophet because he was declaring some of the same rhetoric that Rutherford was declaring. At the time, Rutherford was still trying to overcome the problem that 1914 had failed to be the fulfillment of that time of trouble, and he was pushing for the new idea that 1925 would resolve that problem by being a new time of trouble, and even the time for the physical resurrection of Old Testament faithful men of old to the Millennial age on earth.

The Watchtower liked this "prophet" because he said that 1924 was to become even worse than 1914. By 1939 to 1944 it could be said that the true climax of these prophecies about 1924 had come true. Prophet Ramsay MacDonald and Prophet David Lloyd George hadn't predicted a resurrection, though.

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I can show you cases where this exact kind of wording apparently "fooled" the translator into creating inconsistent (less ambiguous) results in Simplified English, French, German and Greek. 

Yes please, do post some examples. Although all this is hugely off topic, who cares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

It is one thing to predict a climax of horror such a as mankind has never witnessed ... that could be an asteroid strike, global smallpox, or World War II ... of for those that don't get out much, having relatives show up looking for a place to live.

It is quite another thing to falsely predict with absolute certainty a resurrection of the dead, as Rutherford did ... and live in a house in San Diego with a complete staff laboring to get it perfect

Nevertheless, that mansion had not a fallout shelter ... but an actual BOMB shelter.

There is a difference.

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

    • Pudgy

      Pudgy 2,381

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • misette

      misette 209

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

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

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    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.