Jump to content

Spirit infused new light
 

Recommended Comments

  • 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 Queen Esther
      THE VIDEO OF BROTHER ANTHONY MORRIS    ( source, our  Brother  Jose Antonio Gutierrez Garcia )
      My dear brothers and sisters,
      I respond to those who have asked for my opinion. Therefore, those who do not know what I am talking about, do not ask me.
      The past days, I received in the mailboxes of my Facebook and Youtube pages, a video that is circulating among the apostates of our Faith. Evidently it has been sent to me as a joke.
      Of all of you my deep disgust is known for all those who are not satisfied with their distance from our community, now they have dedicated their poor lives to be our satellites, whining how poor they are, and looking for ways to intoxicate weak minds like their own.
      The video in question tries to convince those who want to swallow it, that one of the members of the governing body, Brother Anthony Morris, is in a liquor store, buying a lot of bottles of whiskey, a very high price on the bottle, and spending a large amount of dollars.
      Do you know what it is to EDIT A VIDEO? I explain it to you.
      It is a process by which an editor places fragments of video, digital effects and any other audiovisual material on a tape or a computer file. To edit a video is simply to MANIPULATE it, that is, to join some images to others, eliminating some, enlarging or reducing others already edited, incorporating music and sound, digital effects, titles and any other material.
      That can be done with bad intentions. It is a way of cheating.
      Well, brothers, the idea is this.
      FIRST, I have no doubt that apostates are human beings. But, that is precisely his unforgivable sin. Because if they were pigs or literal dogs as the Bible calls them, they would have some mercy from Jehovah. Now, they are intentionally sinning against the holy spirit, by attacking the holy people of Jehovah.
      SECOND, everything, absolutely everything that these people do, aims to slander, blaspheme and lie against our people. Proverbs 18:48 says that "the mouth of the wicked causes bad things to bubble up." And Psalm 35:20 says: "For it is not peace that they speak, but against the quiet of the earth things of deceit are still plotting."
      THIRD, the video in question is EDITED. It is not a continuous image, but it is formed by different cuts, attached to each other at the will of the person who recorded it. Does that matter a lot? You are right. Because it raises unanswered questions, such as where is it that the brother takes the bottles with his hands? Where is it that the brother goes with his cart and the 8, 10 or 12 bottles (depending on who tells the story) to the box and pays them? Where do you see that the cart that the brother of the store takes out, carries those bottles?
      Moreover, my brothers, let us suppose that Brother Morris really buys a few bottles of whiskey. Do we know its final use? Is it for your own consumption or is it for the Bethel house, where many guests are received among travelers, Bethelites, volunteers, civil authorities, etc., etc.? The hypocrites will say that we can not drink alcohol. That is false, I can drink the wine or the liquor that the Bible authorizes me, without the excess that leads to drunkenness.
      But there are even the hyper-hypocrite people who accuse the brother of spending the money that the "poor little" brothers donate in the contribution boxes of the whole world. And who knows what is paid in cash? Where is the teller's testimony telling us the amount paid? Who claims that Brother Morris paid with Bethel money or did it out of his own pocket? Many may not know, but we have brothers who were millionaires before leaving their businesses and keep monthly revenues to devote exclusively to the Kingdom. But the hypocrite will say that they make a vow of poverty and of course, according to them, that means becoming hermits, wearing sacks and asking for alms in the streets.
      Finally, those who have fewer neurons in their heads, wonder how it is that the brother was not preaching on Saturday morning. You have to have your face like the flint to demand from US accounts of how we direct our spiritual life. I do not intend to answer that stupidity, considering how the faithful slave dedicates 100% of their lives to serving the entire community of witnesses.
      SUMMARIZING:
      I'm sure they read these apostates, simple people to whom it's easy to cheat. Let's see if your mind manages to assimilate these words: Whatever you do, say what you say, you can spend the rest of your sad lives plotting, make the videos that you like, slander what you like, deceive those who are like you .. .... but LIVE GOD, you will never get the attention of the world Jehovah's Witness community. You are indifferent to us. We know that the hour of your punishment is approaching and we are moving away from you lest we spill your blood. It is true that some "presumed witnesses" pay attention to you, even cowards who remain in the congregations betraying their brothers without being discovered.
      1 John 2:19 says: They came out from among us, but they were not of our kind; because if they had been of our class, they would have stayed with us. But [they left], so that it would be shown clearly that not everyone is of our class
      TO MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS:
      Few words to say. It is more of the same. YOU DO NOT READ, NEITHER LOOK, NEITHER HEAR, nothing that comes from our opponents. They take refuge in what we are forbidden by Jehovah, to speak to them and that is why they speak in the desert, boasting that because we do not answer them, they are right. Stupid, the youngest of the witnesses would sweep you off the map, with the biblical arguments that we have. The great tribulation is prepared. Everyone that the angels catch in contact with this hybrid apostate offspring will be dead. I call them hybrids because they come from the union of two individuals of the same genus but different species, humans and demons.
      MAY JEHOVAH BLESS YOU WITNESSES OF JEHOVAH FAITHFUL.

    • By Judith Sweeney
      It is no big deal.  At least he knows the best Scotches....:)    Nothing wrong with having a couple of drinks.   I imagine that he could use some relaxation from all of the pressure.     Geesh, people need to Get Busy....yeah, the new "GB"  get busy!  Clean the yard...mop the floor...better yet...LOOK IN THE MIRROR!
       
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    61,556
    Total Topics
    113,299
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,484
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    César Chávez
    Newest Member
    César Chávez
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • And, as I remember, the Colonists thought the British Interpretation of how things should be handled that was an onerous burden to them ... sufficient enough to go to war against the mightiest  army and navy of that time period.
    • Per Wikipedia, The Constitution says: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." When the Constitution was written, the terms "high crime" and "misdemeanor" were both used in senses that are quite different from the way we've come to think of them today. The original sense came from the laws that the framers had themselves been under, the British laws, which had used the term since as far back as 1386. It was originally a phrase to highlight the fact that almost any kind of "maladministration" --even things we might think of as NON-crimes-- could have a magnified effect due to the "high office" of the official, judge, president, etc. Most of the items that were considered "maladministration" would not be considered much of a problem at all if you or I practiced them. But they could become a perverting of justice or subject the populace to the ill effects in a way that only a person in high office had the ability to do. When James Madison discussed the formulation of the "constitution" with Mason, they started out with only Bribery and Treason, but Mason argued that the definition of Treason is too narrowly tied to enemies when at war, and that this would hardly cover situations when a president "attempts to subvert the Constitution." So the British term "maladministration" was suggested and then, after discussion, changed it to the more formal British term "high crimes and misdemeanors." According to the Wikipedia article on "Maladministration"  it means the following in UK law: The definition of maladministration is wide and can include: Delay Incorrect action or failure to take any action Failure to follow procedures or the law Failure to provide information Inadequate record-keeping Failure to investigate Failure to reply Misleading or inaccurate statements Inadequate liaison Inadequate consultation Broken promises That's such a vague definition that Madison said it would be the equivalent of just having a President who served at the pleasure of the Senate. It would "normalize" impeachment, and therefore the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" was deemed closer to the idea of "subverting the constitution." The phrase was definitely intended to narrow the reasons that the Senate might try to impeach a President, but was also a way to include things that would not nearly reach up to the definitions of bribery and treason. In Britain the phrase meant abuse of a high office even if the abuse did NOT violate any criminal laws. So this is how legal scholars have also applied it to the US presidency, usually with a focus on any subversion of the Constitution. The Wiki article on "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" includes the following that gives an idea of how the original framers understood it: Benjamin Franklin asserted that the power of impeachment and removal was necessary for those times when the Executive "rendered himself obnoxious," and the Constitution should provide for the "regular punishment of the Executive when his conduct should deserve it, and for his honorable acquittal when he should be unjustly accused." James Madison said that "impeachment... was indispensable" to defend the community against "the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate." With a single executive, Madison argued, unlike a legislature whose collective nature provided security, "loss of capacity or corruption was more within the compass of probable events, and either of them might be fatal to the Republic."[10] The process of impeaching someone in the House of Representatives and the Senate is difficult, made so to be the balance against efforts to easily remove people from office for minor reasons that could easily be determined by the standard of "high crimes and misdemeanors". It was George Mason who offered up the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" as one of the criteria to remove public officials who abuse their office. Their original intentions can be gleaned by the phrases and words that were proposed before, such as "high misdemeanor," "maladministration," or "other crime." Edmund Randolph said impeachment should be reserved for those who "misbehave." Charles Cotesworth Pinckney said, It should be reserved "for those who behave amiss, or betray their public trust." As can be seen from all these references to "high crimes and misdemeanors," the definition or its rationale does not relate to specific offences. This gives a lot of freedom of interpretation to the House of Representatives and the Senate. The constitutional law by nature is not concerned with being specific. The courts through precedence and the legislature through lawmaking make constitutional provisions specific. In this case the legislature (the House of Representatives and the Senate) acts as a court and can create a precedent. In Federalist No. 65, Alexander Hamilton said, "those offences which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."[11] The first impeachment conviction by the United States Senate was in 1804 of John Pickering, a judge of the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire, for chronic intoxication. Federal judges have been impeached and removed from office for tax evasion, conspiracy to solicit a bribe, and making false statements to a grand jury.[12]
    • France is in shambles right now. To this day the Yellow Vest still march, and as even stated before, which turns out to be true, protests everywhere, in and outside of France. The Americans will get quite the treat in a few weeks, this I am sure of due to the ongoing chaos we see now.
  • 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.