Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/08/2019 in all areas

  1. 4 points
  2. 2 points
    Interesting point, one in which I have also questioned concerning the jws. This semantics of word play of parousia vs coming is only used when the shoe fits whenever I have spoken to a jw. If we look at the context of Jesus' words in Matthew, we see His proclamation against the thought of invisible observance . Matthew 24:23 Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you beforehand. 26 So, if they say to you, ‘Look, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out. If they say, ‘Look, he is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. Here Jesus is saying that if someone tells you "oh, He's is in the inner rooms, or somewhere else that you cannot see right now", it is a lie and for us not to believe it. This is because He told us that there WILL be false prophets who say such things. Not to mention the whole 1914 as His parousia and being enthroned king. After Jesus resurrection He made this statement" 18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. If at this time when He was with the disciples after His resurrection He had all authority, what then is there for Him to acquire in 1914? Isn't "All authority" already the qualities of a king? What more authority is there to gain if He has it all?
  3. 2 points
    James Thomas Rook Jr.

    1970s Computers

    I used to work on a computer every day that had a stainless steel hard drive as big as a car steering wheel, and NO monitor. The output was on a wide bodied dot matrix printer with holes on both sides, with paper on a continuous roll below the table. In 1971 it cost $26,000, and was as big as a desk.
  4. 1 point

    what does 1914 really teach?

    wt and jws believe 1914 was the parousia of Jesus and His being enthroned king. After Jesus resurrection He made this statement" 18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. If at this time when He was with the disciples after His resurrection He had all authority, what then is there for Him to acquire in 1914? Isn't "All authority" already the qualities of a king? What more authority is there to gain if He has it all?
  5. 1 point
    Here is another question. If Christ has ALREADY come to Earth as an invisible presence, and is ruling as King NOW ...... starting in 1914 ...... why are we still celebrating the Memorial?
  6. 1 point
    Here is a picture of it:
  7. 1 point
    Agreed. There are certain spirits that can be used as medicine. That’s why scripture cautions against overindulgence of consumption. Another, the use of spirits as an antiseptic. There is plenty of proof on that use. Therefore, if I were to stockpile spirits, it would certainly be for that reason. Antibiotics have a shelf life, spirits last longer. What I find fascinating is your comment on Venezuela. I recall my mother telling me a story of how one-day money would become useless to a point of seeing it roll down the streets without anyone thinking to pick it up. This was back in the '60s.
  8. 1 point
    Melinda: You provided SO MUCH information, I faded out. Can you please tell me what from your posting SPECIFICALLY answered my SPECIFIC question? Thanks! ( at 72 years old, I have lost all patience for many words ....)
  9. 1 point
    Spirits can form part of preparedness, as antibiotics and other medicines might be non-existent or scarce. However, true spiritual preparedness is what will save us. However, we won't want to dull our senses with too much alcohol. Jesus refused the drugged wine when he was going through his most severe test. Then again, wine and other luxuries will be scarce in the great tribulation. Note what is going on in Venezuela now. Money blowing around in the streets. (Revelation 6:6) 6 And I heard a voice as if in the midst of the four living creatures say: “A quart of wheat for a de·narʹi·us, and three quarts of barley for a de·narʹi·us; and do not harm the olive oil and the wine.” (Ezekiel 7:19) 19 “‘They will throw their silver into the streets, and their gold will become abhorrent to them. Neither their silver nor their gold will be able to save them in the day of Jehovah’s fury. They will not be satisfied, nor will they fill their stomachs, for it has become a stumbling block causing their error.
  10. 1 point
    Before they stopped making those car seats, they started coming out with a warning sticker "Do not fold up car seat, with baby inside."
  11. 1 point
    Perhaps it is time to learn that song "Daisy, daisy" ........ My mind is going. I can feel it..mp4
  12. 1 point
    What's your theme song today? 😎
  13. 1 point
    What is everybody up to tonight? besides on here of course.... I need to head to bed soon to wake up early for work. I had some pizza with some delicious Italian sausage.
  14. 1 point
  15. 1 point
    Yeah, the irony here is, people are speaking about the GB or a member of the GB. It has NOTHING to do with Bethelites that were going rogue on their own to be dismissed. The Watchtower has factored that in. The cleansing of Bethel was not just for that purpose, but also for apostasy. Do you recall Raymond Franz and his writing department cronies? Sorry, to say, Your intention is one of being misguided by defending those that shouldn’t. What former Bethel members refer to is being caught in the mix. Who knows if those at that time were part of the problem. I wouldn’t trust the word of a former Bethel member between 1968-1984, even though I personally know many from those decades. I have one in my hall. Once again, No Bethel member really knows the PERSONAL lives of the GB. Once again, let's stay focused and on target. The Librarian has mentioned it, and it was seconded by Queen Esther. FOCUS!
  16. 1 point

    A child’s car seat, 1970s

    Oh geez... I remember these....and notice no seat belts? Safety first! Your child will be safely seated while he and the seat fly through the windshield. How did we ever survive those decades? LOL
  17. 1 point
    Wasn't it Terrence O'Brien during the Australian Royal Commission, who said something to the effect, "we (those at the Branch) have been doing this a lot longer than the governing body has..." If God puts it in their hearts, it will be done. With God, all things are possible. Matt 19:26
  18. 1 point
    PROVING PROOF IN ALCOHOL The word proof came about in the 18th century when sailors, unloading their ships of cargo and whiskey, had only one way to tell the strength of the liquor they were carrying: they would mix a little bit of whiskey with a pinch of gunpowder and drop a lighted match into the mixture. If it ignited with an audible “proof!”, the sailors knew at least half the content was alcohol. Alcohol needs no lawyer – it has proof. Audible, visible and otherwise! They want to say he is an alcoholic without 100% proof?
  19. 1 point
    Wow! just wow.... Incredible place to be at the right moment with a camera. Serious photographer.
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    I swear that stuff is only $23 per bottle at my local supermarket.
  22. 1 point
    quote --- Within Christianity, there tend to be three major views of the place of excommunication: [1] We shouldn’t excommunicate anyone, because it’s not merciful. [2] We should excommunicate, because we want to purify the Church of the damned. [3] We should excommunicate, because it’s merciful to sinners. So which of these views is the one endorsed by Scripture? Number three. In fact, the first two are rejected outright within the Bible itself. To those who fall into the first camp, who reject the place of excommunication within New Testament Christianity, I would point you to Jesus’ words in Matthew 18:15-18, If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Jesus is solemnly entrusting the Church with the power to bind and loosen, and this is closely tied with the Church’s ability to excommunicate unrepentant sinners. And it’s more than just an ability. Jesus actually instructs it as the appropriate course of action to be taken in the case of certain unrepentant sinners. They are be ostracized, in the way that the Jews of the time treated Gentiles and tax collectors. St. Paul, writing in Romans 16:17, similarly instructs: “I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.” So excommunication is Biblical, but it’s easy to understand why some people are uncomfortable with it, and find it contrary to mercy. After all, some of the noisiest defenders of excommunication defend it for the wrong reasons. As Rex Edwards of Columbia Union College wrote back in 1976: EXCOMMUNICATION has been regarded by ecclesiastics as the ultimate disciplinary measure. As a “weapon” it has been conspicuous for its abuse. It has been employed as a penalty, often plunging the defendent into a situation of abysmal irreversibility. Luther in his “Discussion of Confession” emphasizes the punitive aspect of excommunication, while Calvin declares it to be a public ecclesiastical censure for the purpose of purification. But excommunication isn’t treated as punitive in Scripture, and the idea that we are the ones who will purify the Church is actually an idea condemned by Jesus in Matthew 13:24-29, Another parable he put before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field; but while men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. And the servants of the householder came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then has it weeds?’ He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ The servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ But he said, ‘No; lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. Let both grow together until the harvest; and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’” So the servants of the Lord want to go and try to purify His Kingdom by separating out the wicked from the righteous, but Jesus stops them from doing so, since their attempts to do so would surely result in unjustly condemning the righteous. Instead, He tells them to let the weeds grow alongside the wheat until the harvest. When the Disciples ask what this means, He explains (Mt. 13:40-43): Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the close of the age. The Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers, and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear. So it’s the job of the angels, not us, to purify the Church. And they’re going to do it at the Last Judgment, not now. In other words, the entire Protestant attempt to create a holy Church by creating a Church of only the righteous, of only the saved, failed from the start because Christ told them not to do it. All of this is to say that creating a “wheat-only” Church isn’t why we excommunicate. And yet, we are to excommunicate. So if that isn’t the reason, what is? For the good of sinners. Scripture is quite clear on this. When St. Paul writes the Church in Corinth, he’s aghast that they are letting a man openly engage in a sexual relationship with his other stepmom. In fact, they had become proud of what they apparently thought of as their tolerance and mercy. St. Paul rebukes them for this, writing (1 Corinthians 5:1-5): It is actually reported that there is immorality among you, and of a kind that is not found even among pagans; for a man is living with his father’s wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you. For though absent in body I am present in spirit, and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment in the name of the Lord Jesus on the man who has done such a thing. When you are assembled, and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. He goes on to issue a general call for excommunication (1 Corinthians 5:9-13): I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with immoral men; not at all meaning the immoral of this world, or the greedy and robbers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But rather I wrote to you not to associate with any one who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or robber—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Drive out the wicked person from among you.” So St. Paul clearly doesn’t fall into the “don’t excommunicate” camp, and he’s not impressed with the false tolerance of those who do. But notice why he calls for the man’s excommunication. He orders him to be delivered to Satan “that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” In other words, you publicly condemn the man for the same reason you would tell a student that he’s failing: not to write him off, but to let him know that he needs to get his act together while there’s still time. Better to be condemned now and repent, than to be indulged in your sins now and condemned at the Last Judgment. And note well, St. Paul’s tough love worked. Or at least, so it seems from his follow-up letter to the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 2:5-11): If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you to some extent—not to put it too severely. The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him. Another reason I wrote you was to see if you would stand the test and be obedient in everything. Anyone you forgive, I also forgive. And what I have forgiven—if there was anything to forgive—I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes. There’s a time to shame the sinning man, and there’s a time to comfort him so he isn’t overwhelmed by his shame and sorrow. In other words, the excommunication was medicinal, it was for his good. Rather than looking on the sinning man as an enemy of the Church, Paul looked on him as an erring brother who needed to be rebuked to be brought back in line. And Paul lays this model of Church discipline out succinctly in 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14-15: Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us. […] If any one refuses to obey what we say in this letter, note that man, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not look on him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother. That’s a perfectly clear endorsement of the third of the three ways that I laid out above: excommunicate, but out of love, not an attempt to create a perfectly-pure Church. So there it is: the basic case for why we should (and why we shouldn’t) excommunication. --- end quote
  23. 1 point

    Ancient Mexican Batman

    via .ORGWorld News
  24. 1 point
    Well the scripture says speak to the congregation. But if a brother or sister did speak to the congregation they would be accused of 'causing a division in the congregation' And even when a person is disfellowshipped the reason is not given, it's kept hidden from the congregation.. Makes is soooo easy for them to disfellowship people easily for no scriptural reason. Just the way one Elder threatened me. There are so many scriptures that prove that the GB and it's Org do not serve God through Christ.
  25. 1 point
    This was the oldest sister who attended. From left to right 71,103 and 93 years. All Native Mayan speakers
  26. 1 point
    Why Coca-Cola Hired This Man to Laugh Really, Really Hard on a Crowded Subway Train Soda brand's latest stunt from Belgium By Tim Nudd
  27. 0 points
    the old hen
  28. 0 points
    Well…I fully expected you NOT to answer me because you said…. Besides, I left the comment with questions, which you seem to be ignoring. No appreciable kinks in the gathering of the anointed Body of Christ, you say. When you observe the Memorial, why is it that all JWs attend? The only ones gathered for the last supper with Christ were God's chosen ones to be the foundation of the Temple/Body of Christ. If all believers in Christ were to be there, Jesus would have performed a miracle to feed every one of them. Instead, scattered among all "nations", the remnant of "living stones" of God's Temple must observe a meal signifying the New Covenant with God's priesthood, with "Gentile elders" handing them the emblems. Here's a question. Is this scriptural?
  29. -1 points
    Wasn’t it Jesus pattern, whenever he sought to draw his disciples out with questions, to wait for them to answer before telling them what was what? This straying from his example alone makes me dubious. In fact, my answer would have been different from the one you told me I should have. It would have been either 1. How would I know? or 2. I suppose so. It would be the same as if you had asked me about the cabinet of some human government. Are they unified? How would I know? An assembly speaker (one of the Gentile elder Babylonian guardians, I suspect, or whatever you call them) spoke of the flow of holy spirit in one’s life & likened it to water coming from a hose. If you have turned the faucet on (asking for Holy Spirit, in his parallel) yet find that there is no water coming out the nozzle, you retrace the length of the hose to search for what you know you will find: a kink. The fact that spiritual food comes in abundance for we lowly sheep & a considerable system of support comes with it suggests to me that there are no appreciable kinks in the gathering of the body of Christ & that whatever you are insisting that I must pay attention to is not the real thing.

  • 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.