Jump to content

Happy now baptized, Blessings continue...
 

Happy now baptized, Blessings continue...

Bible Speaks
Sign in to follow this  
@almaguers123 from Corpus Christi,Texas, USA shares with us: “Our first part as a family!!! My husband finally made the truth his own and was baptized this year. So happy we almost couldn’t contain ourselves. Thanks to Jehovah’s undeserved kindness we are enjoying many blessings together.”
Baptisms Corpus Christi Texas USA

Sign in to follow this  

Photo Information for Happy now baptized, Blessings continue...


Recommended Comments

There are no comments to display.

  • Similar Content

    • By 4Jah2me
      I do hear occasionally on this forum, the expression of, (oh dear it's gone now), I'll say Basic beliefs, Foundation beliefs, of Jehovah's Witnesses. 
      My point being, when were those basic foundations started ?  Yes we have Russell and Rutherford et al. So who decided what was what and when ? 
      We have things like 'hell fire' eternal damnation' ' soul in continual punishment' etc. But who basically found the truth from God's word about 'The dead are conscious of nothing at all' ?
      Then we have the 'resurrection of the dead',  those being split into heavenly and earthly. Who decided these things from scriptures ? And when ? 
      It would probably take me 10 years, which I probably do not have left, to research all the things I wish to know. 
      So here is a question. From 1960, what new serious Bible knowledge do we have from those whom regard themselves as the F&DS or top of the tree ?
      What have they given to the congregation that is of extreme importance ?  BUT, more importantly what have they given that they haven't changed since giving it ? 
      So we've lost the 7,000 year creative days. We've lost Armageddon in 1975, We've lost no blood / replaced with blood fractions. We've lost the Superior Authorities as God and Christ, and probably lots more. BUT what important beliefs have we gained since 1960 ? What IMPORTANT SCRIPTURAL input have those at the top made since 1960 ? 
       
    • By 4Jah2me
      Point 1. I really do laugh at this term "Only game in town"   As I've said before the JEWISH RELIGIOUS LEADERS would have said that serving God by obeying THEM and the Mosaic Law, was the only game in town. Jesus however proved those Religious leaders to be wrong. Jesus and his disciples carried over the good points of the Mosaic Law and discarded the bits no longer needed. (Such as animal sacrifices, circumcision etc). 
      Russell & Co came out of former religions. I presume they must have carried over some good points from those former religions, then made adjustments or changed doctrines.
      So why would it not be possible for people that have left the JW Org to form a new religion ?  Carrying over the good and disposing of the bad, of which there seems to be plenty....
      I'm not saying it will happen but it does dispose of this idea of 'the only game in town' brainwashing. JW's seem to be taught that there cannot be anything else ever. What if Russell had believed that, the Bible Students would have never been formed. 
      Point 2.  The 'Truth' / JW Org.
      As I read more and more on here I am finding out that the Governing Body / Writing Dept'  / Legal Dept' et al,  have deliberately told many lies.
      The latest I'm reading (on a new topic on here) but the info stems back a while, seems to contain information whereby the 'Org' / those in charge at the time, implied, that children cannot get baptised, and that blood transfusions were acceptable to the Organisation. It seems that this was written in order to get favours from a certain government. 
      Both of those things are lies but seem to be deliberately used for some form of dishonest gain.
      Then of course we have lawyers telling lies in court about shunning. 
      And C.S.A court cases have proved that elders and others have deliberately lied. And the American 'section' of the JW Org deliberately withholding information regarding such matters.
      Link this to misuse of scriptures, such as, Superior Authorities, which deliberately took away people's conscience / freedom of choice, in WW2.
      And I'm sure people here can come up with lots more examples of lies, deliberate wrongdoing, mistakes, misinterpretations, 'new light' corrections et al.
      Why am i writing all this ?  Well I am proving two points. 
      1. If it's your 'only game in town' then it's not a good one. 
      2. That calling it 'The Truth' is totally deceptive.
      I do not think you would like it if I gave you a meal that was three quarters yummy, but a quarter poison. The poison might well contaminate the good food !
      So, saying that the Org / GB are three quarters right does not help. 
       
       
       
       
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
    • By Bible Speaks
      How did you learn the Truth? 
      I was raised in the Truth. ?

    • By JOHN BUTLER
      "All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness,"
      2 Timothy 3 v 16
      Was this in it's way a small prophecy ?                 
      The 2nd book of Timothy was written 65 C.E.  However 1,2,3, John and Revelation were written much later.
      So we have two points, 1. The writings were not complete when Paul wrote that information. 2, The Bible had not been constructed so no idea would have been formed as to what the Bible would contain. 
      Were there other writings ? Would they be considered as Scripture? 
      It seems that Paul was inspired to write that "All scripture is inspired.... " 
       
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      A lawyer for Pharrell Williams sent a cease-and-desist letter to U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday after he played the artistsÂ’ song Happy at a political rally on the same day as the mass shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue.
      The rally in Indiana was held just hours after the shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue, where 11 people lost their lives.
      https://globalnews.ca/news/4610513/pharrell-williams-donald-trump-happy-copyright-violation/
    • By Bible Speaks
      “Send out your light and your truth. May these themselves lead me.” Psalm 43:3.  JEHOVAH is very considerate in the way he makes his purposes known to his servants. Instead of revealing the truth all at once in one blinding flash of light, he enlightens us progressively. Our trek along life’s pathway might be compared to a walk that a hiker takes down a long trail. He starts out early in the morning and sees little. As the sun begins to rise slowly over the horizon, the hiker is able to distinguish a few features of his surroundings. The rest he sees in hazy outline. But as the sun continues its ascent, he can see farther and farther into the distance. So it is with the spiritual light that God provides. He allows us to discern a few things at a time. God’s Son, Jesus Christ, provided spiritual enlightenment in a similar manner. Let us learn how Jehovah enlightened his people in ancient times and how he does so today.

    • By Srecko Sostar
      "clear, pure water of truth" ?? ...and famous question that can be hear from platform and in witnessing "Would you drink water from a glass with just one drop of poison in it?"
       
      Water That Leads to Life
      ..."Jehovah’s Witnesses invite you to taste the pure waters of truth." .....
      [Picture on page 9]
      "You can find the ‘waters of truth’ at your local Kingdom Hall"
       https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102009003
    • By Jack Ryan
      In paragraph 9 of this weeks Watchtower it was talking about how children’s comments at the meetings can prompt newly interested ones to recognise the ring of truth.
      I donÂ’t recall ever hearing it referred to as the ring of truth before. Is this a new phrase theyÂ’re going to try and get everybody using along the lines of, the truth, the brotherhood, this wicked system of things, etc etc.
       
    • By Jack Ryan
      That quote came at the end of paragraph 4 of this weeks Watchtower study and the subject of having a pleasant smile and kind demeanour was mentioned at least 3 or 4 more times during the watchtower, particularly about when engaging in cart witnessing.
      Remember, we’re a happy people, because they tell us we are.
      via GIPHY
    • By Queen Esther
      THE  TRUTH  ABOUT  CHRISTMAS......
      The year was 1928, when Jehovah's people came to understand the God-dishonoring roots of Christmas. Since then, the pagan roots of Christmas customs have become general public knowledge..... but few people have made changes in their way of life as a result. But, Jehovah's Witnesses are always willing to make the needed changes in order to become more acceptable as servants of Jehovah God.
      When shown that celebrating the birth of Jesus had actually become of greater interest to people than the ransom provided by his death; that the revelry of the holiday and the spirit in which many gifts were given did not honor God;  that the magi whose gift-giving was being imitated were actually demon-inspired astrologers;  that parents set an example for their children in lying by what they told them about Santa Claus;  that  "St. Nicholas"
      (Santa Claus) was admittedly another name for Satan the Devil himself;  and that such festivals were, as acknowledged  by Cardinal Newman in his "Essay on the development of Christian Doctrine" were "the very instruments and appendages of demon-worship"  the church had adopted....  When made aware of these things, Jehovah's Witnesses promptly and permanently ceased having any part in  Christmas  celebrations.
      Jehovah's Witnesses do have good times with their family and friends. But, they do not participate in holidays and celebrations that are linked with pagan gods (as is true of such holidays as Easter, New Year's Day,  May Day and Mother's day).  Read, 2.Cor. 6:14-17.  Like the early Christians,  Jehovah's Witnesses do not even celebrate birthdays. They also respectfully refrain from sharing in national holidays, that memorialize political or military events and also refrain from giving worshipful honor to national heroes.
      WHY ?
      BECAUSE  JEHOVAH'S  WITNESSES  ARE  NO  PART  OF  THE  WORLD !
      Reference, Proclaims Book,  pages  198-200....
      ( by  Brother  Roger B. Elder )     Thank  you  Brother  Elder !
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Transcript - Promoting Love and Respect for Truth.pdf
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
    • By Jack Ryan
      Governments who support “religious freedom” over the equal human rights and dignity of others condone, and even endorse discrimination.

      Tim Rymel, M.Ed., Contributor Author | Educator | Dad
      In April, Russia’s Supreme Court labeled Jehovah’s Witnesses an extremist religious group. “It effectively means that holding their beliefs and manifesting them is tantamount to a criminal act in Russia. They risk new levels of persecution by the Russian authorities,” said international legal counsel, Lorcan Price.
      In America, most of us think of Jehovah’s Witnesses as that occasional Saturday nuisance. They interrupt our morning breakfast or afternoon chores to tell us their version of the Christian faith. They cheerfully drag their families along for quiet strolls through the neighborhoods, and pass out Watchtower Magazines for us to throw away later.
      Annoying? Yes. Disruptive? Usually. But extremist? That depends.
      Growing up in the Pentecostal faith, I was taught that Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and Catholics were not Christians. Anyone who converted to those, or other non-mainstream Christian sects, was deceived by the devil. Though we didn’t use the word “extremist” to define those religions, we certainly saw them as a threat to the true people of God who were susceptible to “false teachings.”
      Religion, to paraphrase Merriam-Webster, is generally a belief in the supernatural with a commitment to keep up the attitudes and practices surrounding that belief. In other words, religion is more than just a belief it is an action. For some, that means attending church on Sundays. For others, it means killing people for believing the wrong things, or believing in the wrong way.
      The BBC noted that Al Qaeda’s purpose is to avenge “wrongs committed by Christians against Muslims.” The organization wants to implement a “single Islamic political leadership,” and drive away non-Muslims from areas it deems belong to the nation of Islam.
      ISIS, on the other hand, is a group of Scriptural fundamentalists who believe all other Muslims are apostates. William McCants, director of the Project on US Relations With the Islamic World at the Brookings Institution, says that ISIS wants “to restore the early Islamic empire called the caliphate and eventually take over the whole world.”
      Most of us can agree that Al Qaeda and ISIS are extremist groups. After all, they plan and implement terrorist attacks. They kill people, sometimes brutally. But is violence the only indicator of religious extremism?
      It could certainly be argued that when a religion becomes violent it becomes extremist. But even Christianity, in it’s many definitions, has a sorted history, which is seldom talked about and often dismissed. From the Spanish inquisition to the convert-or-die tactics used on Native American Indians, Christianity has been used to commit horrific acts of violence throughout the centuries. Judaism, from which Christianity arose, recorded shocking details in the Torah of the slaughter of entire populations, including women, children, and animals.
      Any religion, which purports to, alone, have all truth, and to, alone, have a direct line of communication to God, has a propensity toward extremist ideology. As University of Notre Dame Professor, Gary Gutting, points out:
      Any religion that denies the value and humanity of others is an extremist religion. Whether those actions lead to direct harm, or simply reduce protections through legislation, extremist ideology seeks to create one class that is believed to be more valued than another.
      The grandstanding that fundamentalist Christians have done since marriage equality passed in 2015 has created a growing, and disturbing trend toward extremist Christianity.
      The Oath Keepers, a vigilante Christian group, vowed to protect Kentucky County Clerk, Kim Davis, when she refused issuing a marriage license to a gay couple. They stated the judge in Davis’ case “needs to be put on notice that his behavior is not going to be accepted and we’ll be there to stop it and intercede ourselves if we have to.” And then, in an ironic twist to the story, the infamous Westboro Baptist Church, of “God hates fags” fame, picketed Kim Davis because of her multiple divorces and remarriages.
      Since then, dozens of “religious freedom” bills have been introduced across the country with the sole purpose of reducing or eliminating protections for the LGBT community in housing, employment, benefits, and even where they can go to the bathroom.
      The problem, of course, is that “religious freedom” is based on nothing more than a belief. Governments who support “religious freedom” over the equal human rights and dignity of others condone, and even endorse discrimination. In any such environment religious extremism is the outcome, threatening the very existence of democracy.
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/when-is-a-religion-extremist_us_590de8e3e4b046ea176aeb98
    • By The Librarian
      “What Is Truth?”
      THAT question was cynically posed to Jesus by the Roman Governor Pontius Pilate. He was not interested in an answer, and Jesus did not give him one. Perhaps Pilate viewed truth as too elusive to grasp.
      Pilate indifferently rejected the opportunity to learn such truth. What about you?
      Learn more about Jesus Christ:
       
       
    • By Bible Speaks
      25 "Therefore, now that you have put away deceit, each one of you speak truth with his neighbor, because we are members belonging to one another." (Eph.4:25) NWT
      Don't let your ears witness what your eyes didn't see. Don't let your mouth speak what your heart doesn't  feel.    Live a honest life for Jehovah! 

      IMG_8907.mov
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    61,562
    Total Topics
    113,511
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,486
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Notawelder
    Newest Member
    Notawelder
    Joined




  • Topics

  • Posts

    • John Houston said: Sure it was. Read any decent books on geology and paleontology. The earth formed about 4.7 billion years ago, the earliest traces of life are at least 3.5 billion years old, macroscopic life with hard parts first appeared about 550 million years ago. Within a short time predators appeared. Do you not accept this? Ah, you're a young-earth creationist. No wonder you say such things. So if scripture said the moon is made of cheddar cheese, would you believe it? So you think the Bible trumps science and the fossil record. Most predators are both scavengers and active hunters. Problem solved. Predators that also scavenged. The fossil record records plenty of examples of predator/prey interaction. For example, many trilobites, up to 520 million years old, exhibit bites taken out of their shells. A few of these exhibit partially healed bite marks, showing that they survived an attack and lived on. That is not possible in a young-earth creationist view. So again, which do you accept? The fossil record and science, or the fallible biblical interpretations of a few religious leaders?
    • I would like to say this... when I read about the creation, life was not created as "red in tooth and claw" as you put it. Life was not eating each other to exist. At death maybe, but no life form was hunting another for food in the beginning. Things have to make sense if one believes in scripture. Can't believe in one concept and not another. If it is written that life was to eat, and that was ALL LIFE, green vegetation, then common sense would tell me, the only meateating was going on at death, scavengering a carcass. No, wild ferocious dinosaurs as science think they know from bones. But ask yourself, what cleaned away these massive bodies after they died? We have sharks in the seas, what is left over it settles on the bottom for scavenging. And we see that today. Animals not created to live forever had to be removed, cleaned up after, who,did that Adam? Come on think about it.
    • And yet the Prism and South of Baghdad says otherwise.
    • Yes. But with no change to the meaning or interpretation of the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" as we can see by every example of those officials who were impeached during the years when that phrase still held the British meaning. And we can also compare every example of those officials who were impeached in Britain during the centuries and decades leading up to the US Constitution, and beyond. I should also add that I think Trump is guilty of many abuses of power. If he was right about the way that he says Obama was guilty of abuses of power (and I think he was) then Trump must be guilty by his own admission. I also think that Trump definitely had in mind a quid pro quo with Ukraine. This doesn't mean that he got his way, however. The people around him often tend to reel him in, or just end up doing the more politically legal thing, even if Trump is ready and proud to do something illegal or unethical. Even if Trump only did the right thing after he was "caught" as Democrats would like to say, it doesn't make the desire to do the wrong thing, or even the request "impeachable" on its own. Trying to do the wrong thing, is not the same as doing it. One can point out the fact that aid was held up, and even that it was held up so that he would get something he wanted of personal benefit. But if the other side did not give him what he wanted, then we don't have the crux of the quid pro quo anyway. Personally, I don't even think it's the right thing to give aid to Ukraine. The whole point is to paint Russia as an evil adversary or enemy when we are not at war, or shouldn't be. We keep a proxy war going through Ukraine only because we (and especially Democrats) love the idea of a powerful bullying empirical power that shows it wants to stand up to Putin, even if this teases out a WWIII. The Democrats want to look even stronger against Putin, because they are still stuck on this missed chance to make it look like Trump is weak on Putin, or somehow in cahoots with Putin. Trump actually tends, most of the time, toward a foreign policy that is less hawkish than Democrats. Of course, that probably doesn't sit well with several of the military agencies and contractors who "need" more war. Many of Trump's "walkbacks" have been over times when he wanted to scale back military operations and expenditures, but came back the next day to show that it wasn't a real scaling back. Some say they can see a pattern which was especially predictable with Bolton, Pompeo, etc. As his advisors and cabinets change personnel, his own statements will still always be unpredictable, but his "walkbacks" are less so.  After listening carefully to a few minutes of the testimony today, I'm thinking that Biden's son was picked by Burisma for the same reason that a corrupt company like Theranos put Reagan-era George Schultz on its board. It is a way to pay for some credibility or even protect from too much inquiry or investigation. And after watching him become the most hated mayor in America, Giuliani is just about the kind of person I would expect to be looking for these same kinds of deals for his friends and relatives. Also I got the impression that the phone transcript of Trump's "perfect" call is not the full transcript. There was too much legal activity going on immediately after the call to make sure that transcript would become legal. There were some hints in the way legal-savvy people word their answers that raised some flags for me.  
    • 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.
  • 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.