Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 02/01/2016 in Blog Comments

  1. 2 points
    TrueTomHarley

    Euphemisms and Jehovah's Witnesses

    While profanity ought justifiably be taboo, I tend to think abhorrence of crude language is more a Victorian relic than a biblical one. Used sparingly, crude words are powerful and I do not fret overmuch about purging them, though I would not say them at the Kingdom Hall. For example, when Elijah taunts Baal before all onlookers - 'maybe he has excrement and has to go to the privy' - I somehow cannot see him using that clinical word.
  2. 2 points
    My opinion, NEVER quit ! In the biggest need always humans are importend, not money. Without money, we could have a better world with more peace ! Many families destroyed after a big millions winnings. Money never makes long happy, thats my view of F.T.I. H.N.F. HAS NO FUTURE...
  3. 1 point
    Not bad.... but people often so different, not so easy. I learned alot from Samy Molcho He is unique, I like him ! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samy_Molcho Samy Molcho (born 1936) is an Israeli mime and an expert in body language communication. He was professor at the University of Music and Performing Arts and at Max Reinhardt Seminar in Vienna, Austria until 2004. Samy Molcho... He studied dance and mime in Israel. From 1952 he was a dancer at the city theatre of Jerusalem. In 1956 he became a solo dancer (modern dance) in Tel Aviv. In 1960 his first mime performance took place. He performed in more than 50 countries on four continents. In 1987 he did his last tour as a mime. Since then he has been concentrating on body language communication. He has published several books and has held many workshops.[1] He is a practitioner and exponent of the Barrault-Marceau classical style of mime.[2] He is now a citizen of Austria. He has been married since 1978 and has four sons.
  4. 1 point
    The Librarian

    Euphemisms and Jehovah's Witnesses

    @JW Insider It is getting increasingly difficult to moderate (or even legislate) good behavior. There have been times that I understand the "free speech" that the @admin prefers for the majority of the forum.... but in this category I tend to be somewhat more restrictive. The thought of just giving up and letting everything hash itself out has occurred to me more than once. A small handful of people tend to get on my nerves though and force me to act.
  5. 1 point
    The Librarian

    Euphemisms and Jehovah's Witnesses

    I tried (albeit unsuccessfully) to move @JW Insider's comment here: So here it was... I can understand why parts of the forum geared toward Bible discussion are expected to have less bad behavior and no foul language. People can be "stumbled" or "disturbed" in a setting where serious spiritual points are discussed. But the WWW is like the Wild, Wild West. No one expects it to be fully tamed except in tightly controlled parts -- usually places where none from the outside can comment. I have no problem at all dealing with foul language from others, even if I have never been able to break into the habit of using such language in speech. I'm sure I couldn't pull off foul language without it sounding fake. But I don't look down on others for using it. I mean, do we really think that the Hebrew word for what came out of Eglon's gut was "fecal matter"? (Thanks for the reminder on this one @tromboneck.) Do we really think that the Hebrews spoke of false idols as "dungy" idols and weren't thinking of the worst possible word they could muster up for "dung"? When Jesus said: (Matthew 5:21, 22) . . .’ 22 However, I say to YOU that everyone who continues wrathful with his brother will be accountable to the court of justice; but whoever addresses his brother with an unspeakable word of contempt will be accountable to the Supreme Court; whereas whoever says, ‘You despicable fool!’ will be liable to the fiery Ge·henʹna. Do we think Jesus actually used a phrase that meant "unspeakable word of cotempt" or did he just, instead, utter that particular foul word? Turns out that Jesus evidently used the foul word itself. (Raqa in Aramaic). Language taboos are created to perpetuate class differences and other such distinctions. Which one of the following three translations is probably the translation that gets closest to the Hebrew here? (1 Sam 15:22, KJV) "So and more also do God unto the enemies of David, if I leave of all that pertain to him by the morning light any that pisseth against the wall." (1 Samuel 25:22, NWT pre-2013) "So may God do to the enemies of David and so may he add to it if I shall let anyone of all who are his that urinates against the wall remain until the morning.” .(1 Samual 25:22, NWT 2013) "May God do the same and more to the enemies of David if I allow a single male of his to survive until the morning.” The footnote in the latest translation says Lit., “anyone urinating against a wall.” A Hebrew expression of contempt referring to males. Does the latest translation give any indication of "contempt" by translating the entire expression as "a male"? ---------------------- Abusive language is something different. It picks on a specific individual who espouses a specific idea in a way that is intended to create a kind of power over them. They are bullied into cowering and not defending themselves because they don't have the will to engage back to the abusive party in the same way. The internet is also full of abusive argumentation, a form of cyber-bullying where an ideology is promoted through a more subtle belittling of all who espouse another one. But it can be more insidious because it sometimes doesn't appear with abusive language on the surface. Even a simple and "funny" meme can be abusive in this way. The ability to say, "Oh, I was just kidding," or "Obviously you are oversensitive," is a part of the game. Abusive argumentation also takes the form of repeated "logical fallacies." We all use logical fallacies when we aren't thinking clearly, but a repeated, purposeful use of them is one of the most insidious forms of abusive argumentation to watch out for. While I am not bothered in the least by someone who displays bad behavior through abusive language, I must admit that I am often bothered by logical fallacies. Pointing them out just makes someone look pedantic and argumentative. Rather than a foul language moderation bot that some forums employ, I fantasize about a a bot that catches logical fallacies and labels them automatically. Perhaps using labels like these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies
  6. 1 point
    The Librarian

    Euphemisms and Jehovah's Witnesses

    Well... that paragraph was written 46 years ago. I guess times have changed and swear words are much more common now. This is what happens as we age I guess... we keep the traditions and customs of how we were taught when young. (correct or not)
  7. 1 point
    TrueTomHarley

    Euphemisms and Jehovah's Witnesses

    Aren't you at the bay window looking down at the receding earth. Are any of those weird coneheads or boneheads from outer space there in the lounge with you? How are the drinks? And who did you leave in charge of the library books? They'll just walk out the door without checking them out, you know. And if you think anyone will pay their overdue fine, I have news for you.
  8. 1 point
    The Librarian

    Fertilized duck egg offered by vendors

    You never shared more from your country....
  9. 1 point
    Bible Speaks

    Crushes

  10. 1 point
    sharonpy

    Priest Reading JW.org Publications

    All sorts of people!
  11. 1 point
    I feel sorry for the father. As a mother I understand how distraught it must have been for him to see your child dying and believe that it could have be prevented. " Hughes's 16-year-old daughter Bethany was the focus of a high-profile court battle in 2002 in Calgary, Alta., over her refusal to accept blood transfusions after being diagnosed with leukemia. I don't have much knowledge about leukemia, but it seems like blood transfusions are no longer used to treat it. It seems that chemotherapy and stem cell transplants are the treatment preferences now, no doubt because they are more effective than blood transfusions. http://www.webmd.com/cancer/tc/leukemia-treatment-overview#1 "A court eventually ordered that Bethany receive the transfusions, but she died from the aggressive form of leukemia a short time later". This indicates that the blood transfusion was the last resort and was no guarantee even if she would have received it earlier. Aggressive types of Leukemia are not treatable and there is a 50% mortality rate for teenagers, as the above article mentioned. The trouble with an article like this is that it's based on peoples opinions and assumptions and not on facts. For example this statement is ludicrous: "They say if you get a blood transfusion, you could get AIDS or the soul of the person who donated the blood. If that person was crazy, you'll go crazy. If that person was homosexual, you'll be a homosexual," he said. The only correct part is you could get AIDS. "Hughes also said he was made to sign a card declaring he would refuse blood transfusions in front of two church elders. "If you don't sign that card, you're in big trouble," he said. Outright lie - Nobody is made to sign anything. Having a "no blood" card is completely up to the person.
  12. 1 point
    JAMMY

    College students will be facing mandatory ROTC

    The Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) are a group of college-based officer training programs for training commissioned officers of the United States Armed Forces.[1][2][3] ROTC officers serve in all branches of the U.S. armed forces (although the U.S. Marine Corps and the U.S. Coast Guard do not have their own respective ROTC programs, graduates of ROTC programs do currently serve as Marine Corps and Coast Guard officers).
  13. 1 point
    admin

    College students will be facing mandatory ROTC

    What is ROTC?
  14. 0 points
    He hates Christendom so much cos' the WTBTS said he does ! And the WTBTS said that if you want to be a member in good standing you MUST accept everything that comes forth out of the Watchtower magazine ...or else ! Cos they are the Guardians of Doctrine and they can cock-up anytime they feel like it but you cant ! Otherwise he is actually quite loving ...............to ALL persons not just a select group!




×
×
  • 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.