Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/25/2020 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    I think two reasons...one for protection of the sheep...and one for their own protection. True apostates are devious and incredibly selfish...con men and women who speak artfully contrived things and aid in scattering the sheep who are already beaten down and wounded,....Apostates were stumbled..and need to have ones think like them to justify their stumbling. Keep in mind many who are branded Apostates are not True apostates...I’m talking about True Apostates here, Secondly They truly have been used by Jehovah in advancing Gods work and knowledge of his Great Plan....BUT....pride and humility And abuse of such a position may also prove to be their stumbling stone...
  2. 4 points
    I am not sure, but do you mean that God communicates with us through the GB? If you do, then I do not agree. I do not think the GB are like Moses, or any prophet who Jehovah used in the past to communicate with his people the Israelites. Jesus did away with all that, he is the only high priest, and we have the holy spirit to help us. This goes for both the annointed and the great crowd. Not much difference in my opinion. Now do I agree there has to be organizational leadership, yes. I also think there has to be someone who makes sure the Bible is followed and upheld. So the GB calling themselves "guardians of the doctrine" as per Br. Jackson is ok too. Also the "spiritual feeding" is understandable as well, as long as it's not made up food and is always based on the Bible. But as for communication, well doesn't Jehovah communicate with us through his written word? I know whenever this is discussed "Bible publications" are brought up, which is also ok, but those publications are not rocket science. You could write them. Would it then mean that God was communicating through you? Not unless you wrote something which was an interpretation of a scripture. And we know what happens with that, some were wrongly interpreted. That's hardly Jehovah passing on information. Sorry if this sounds like a rant. I finally convinced my hubby that the GB are like the rest of us, except somebody has to take the lead....and the great thing is actually, GB agree with me 😁
  3. 3 points
    It’s true. With Zoom, I thought I could get away without wearing a tie. When the speaker noticed it, he told the cable company to cancel my ISP, and now I have to communicate through smoke signals. I had imagined that the beard I have grown would have covered up the lack of tie, but no such l**k. On the other hand, it might have been the Farmer Mort pants my wife has taken to wearing.
  4. 3 points
    If it was JWI, you’d still be reading it. Because that “merely” is a pretty big merely. What if my roof caves in tomorrow and I decide it’s God’s fault? What if I park on the Kingdom Hall lawn, the elders tell me not to, and I say, “Oh yeah?! Well I show you right here on my blog!!!!” If I do it at Bethel, the GB will “merely” decline to put their stamp of approval on my rant—they will put me on potato-peeling detail in the kitchen instead, and call up someone from the bullpen who has his head screwed on straight. But if I am a loose cannon with my own blog—there is nothing anyone can do when I go haywire. That’s why I don’t ever expect to be acknowledged for my self-appointed role as an apologist, much less commended for it. Even the real apologists of the early centuries have not fared will at the hands of the writing committee, that tends to focus on things they got wrong. No, the “merely” is a big deal. It makes for constancy and consistency. Call it a “think tank” at Bethel if you will. It is a concentration of gray hairs and experience, of meeting trials, of knowing they are to be judged for their actions (or inaction), of following up on having brought understanding of the sacred writings to begin with. I can just shoot my mouth off here, say whatever pops into my head, insult 4Jah whenever he deserves it (which is almost always), praise the Benoit Blanc movie even though there is crude language—and perhaps I have never faced a care in the world. But they can’t. What are my morals? I could (to paraphrase Bob Dylan) “be respectably married—or running a whorehouse in Buenos Aries.” Nobody knows. But the Bethel writers are vetted, not just for being good writers, but for being good Christians. They take it for granted that if your conduct is sullied, somehow that will come out in your guidance, even if it doesn’t seem to at first glance. I had a friend that, eccentric though he was, had a gift of making complex things simple—even oversimplifying to drive the point home. I can still hear him recounting to someone just how it works in Jehovah’s organization: “At Bethel, the Governing Body study their Bibles. An idea will occur to one of them. They will discuss it among themselves and when they all come to agreement, it will appear in print.” “Now, the thing is,” he continued, “you also study your Bible. The same idea might have occurred to you, maybe even before it occurred to them. ‘And if this were Christendom, you’d run out and start your own religion over it.’ But because you know it is not a free-for-all, and you know that Jehovah is a God of order, you wait for material to come through the appointed channel.” So if they have called themselves “Jehovah’s mouthpiece” in the past, I can live with that. They have the greatest think tank collection of gray hairs that per the scriptures denotes wisdom, of experience in Christian works, in safeguarding and extending the king’s belongings, in knowing the will be held accountable before God. They have the greatest sense of direction and following up on momentum. No, I will not do a Miriam and say—“does not Jehovah speak through all of us?” I am happy to have a thought that makes sense—I don’t go thinking I am God’s gift to the brotherhood for it. The trouble is that there are so many literalists who see the expression “crocodile tears” and take it as proof that the one shedding them is a crocodile. There are so many literalists who do not strive to think of how phrases like “Jehovah’s mouthpiece” might apply, but they strive to think of how they don’t. It is the same with “being led by spirit.” It is almost too explosive a phrase to use because of the literalists—if you go to the bathroom—well—how can you be guided by spirit? since holy spirit would never do THAT! It’s the same with elders and servants being “appointed by holy spirit.” How do you know they are? To my mind it is because the qualifications are in the Book inspired by holy spirit and the judgment as to how they measure up is made by a (small) “think tank” of holy spirit, and seconded by a traveling minister patterned after scripture—another repository of holy spirit. It works for me. But there will be some who think that if an appointee ever goes bad afterwards it must be that they were not appointed by holy spirit. I think not. Any of these terms must necessarily be “watered down” some when put in the context of humans, “in whose heart the inclination to do bad” is ingrained from youth up. I think of certain brother appointed upon the recommendation of the BOE. The circuit overseer, an older and very experienced man, okayed the recommendation, with the observation: “He’s not the most humble brother in the world.” He didn’t have to be. All he had to do was to meet each of the qualifications to an acceptable degree. Alas, the CO should have listened to his gut, for the man in time went apostate. He was the one who was a history buff and used to impress the householder by answering, “Because I’m an historian,” when asked how he knew this or that about the past. Once I said to him, “Will you knock it off?! You are a history buff. An historian is when other people acknowledge you, not just you yourself!” I could be wrong, but I bet the GB has learned to be very leery of such phrases and terms as “mouthpiece” and “inspired” and “spirit-directed”—not just for all the literalists, but for all the critics (who are often the same). Some things if they say just once, it is magnified 100 times. Other things they say 100 times, only to find it ignored. “Don’t save seats for everyone you know,” they would say about the Regionals, “think of the elderly.” Finally, they gave up, and said to let the elderly in early, and everyone else only after the oldsters were seated. Innumerable directives went unheeded. Yet if they speak just once about “forums,” theIr words are enshrined for all time. I alluded to this in Tom Irregardless and Me. The organization would say that the Governing Body does not endorse such and such, and the friends would accordingly have a helpful sense of priority and focus. And then Oscar or someone would be found doing it, and Tom Pearlandswine would descend to tell him that the Governing Body DOES NOT ENDORSE!!! such and such. You never know what quote will be magnified and what will be forgotten, but I bet they are advancing on the learning curve.
  5. 3 points
    Aaah Tom you talk a lot..you have a lot of words.....and you at times come over as a bit self righteous...why did I chose thinking,,,not for the reasons you so wrongly presume....thinking was ..because I simply often dont know...what to think...is this right...is that right?...is he right...what if I’ve got it wrong?..Am I leaning on my own understanding??....always thinking..because I cannot afford not to...not having your confidence and assurity of one self...so alas..as old as I am...I have to keep thinking...to make sure...You are to cocky Tom...too self assured....but hey...every Congs got one.... If you read his book he clearly explains he spoke up because of the many who were disfellowshipped wrongly ...he had first hand experience ....and there was a lot of truth in this section of his book. there were other reasons also...but that one stood out to me the most... I guess he fell on his sword because he felt it was the right thing to do basically..he is getting old..his time is short...maybye there are other reasons..but I don’t know the brother myself..not personally. ive never spoken to him...never watched him with other brothers and sisters...I have not read his other books....but that would prove nothing....Personally I think he would have done more good staying with in the cong..But he must have thought speaking up was worth the sacrifice. your on a forum..I’m on a forum...JWI is on a forum...Billy the kid is on the forum.....but that’s okay...our sin is not as big as Rolfs sin after all...Is it?....ours is just a little sin...so we should be right....after all...a forum is different to writing a book isn’t it....Rolf did on a big scale what we do on a small scale... you gotta give it to him...he had more guts than me and nearly everyone else on this forum...name and picture up for all to see.... we all use monikers ( not you ) because we know very well if we published our names and pictures we would be marked or out in that back room like jack flash. we have been warned from the platform about forums...when we had meetings...I have anyway.... thats one point he was making in the book... I totally agree with you that all the scholarly knowledge means nothing with out the basic love...And words are just as useless with out love too....Now I’m writing a novel...picking up your bad habit I think 😉
  6. 3 points
    Don't know who has had the midweek meeting yet. But the CBS this week is chapter 120 of Jesus - The Way, The Truth, The Life. The comments showed that so many were taking to heart that all of Jesus' disciples are the branches, and all should bear fruit, and this fruit is especially shown by following the commandments, and the greatest of these commandments is "love one another." Everyone was perfectly in sync with how this can and should apply to themselves. To me, this is part of the great progress we have made in applying the lessons from Jesus' teachings to everyone. And then, at the last paragraph, a very knowledgeable older brother, makes a long comment that showed how an older WT said that bearing much fruit can apply to the effort in the ministry, not the success rate of making disciples. That was OK, I guess, but then he added that another older WT from 2002 says 'but of course the branches represent only the 144,000.' It made me wonder whether some of that enthusiasm the whole congregation seemed to share in those previous answers might have been dampened just a bit by this idea that it doesn't really apply to most of us after all. Earlier in the meeting, of course, there was the Covid19 announcement that implied the GB were in no hurry to open things back up. (There is a separate rumor that the current plan includes extending Zoom*style meetings all the way into 2022 in many countries, and seeing whether this might even be a preferable way to go forward in some countries.) During that part, the idea was repeated a couple of times that the GB ["slave"] had given instructions to be obeyed even though they didn't make sense from a human perspective at the time. The chairman commented after the video that instructions about Covid were the equivalent of spiritual food because it's about being cautious and saving lives, and that the video had included a couple of lessons from Proverbs and a lesson about following the secular "superior authorities" too, based on Romans 13. I don't see anything wrong the instructions, but it made me think about the fine line between spiritual food and just good advice, and how closely this "spiritual" admonishment was the exact same thing as the "secular" advice we are simultaneously getting from governmental agencies. In a kind of "worst case" scenario, I wondered if a brother in Chile might have read a directive from the WTS that said they needed to put up the national flag of Chile on the KH property because of Romans 13, and then thanked the GB for the "spiritual food."
  7. 2 points
    Questioning their motives is not being rebellious. I obey carefully, especially if they want me to do something against Jehovahs law. Peter himself said we must obey God rather than men. So I think you do not understand this issue properly. Will you go to war if the government tells you to? Will you support LGBTQ and abortion if the government requires it? I am not here to teach you.... .... I suggest you read up a little more about it.
  8. 2 points
    The DS is a nice vehicle. They look lovely. You should have kept it....... I have 3 cars, 1 van, 1 motor scooter. I dare not show people the one i mainly drive, which is a 1961 car. My van is small and scruffy, like me . My wife has a 1970 Morris Minor, which lives in the car port and hardly ever sees daylight. She has a small blue car, a modern thing, which is her daily transport. The Motor Scooter is an LML, like a Vespa, but it is automatic. Hopefully it will be sold soon as I do not like it and do not use it.... Two of the cars are very cheap to run as they are MOT exempt (don't need to be examined for road safety) and are tax exempt (don't have to pay to use them on the roads). So it only cost money for insurance and fuel.... The thing with vehicles is this. If you treat a vehicle well and look after it, it will work well and not cause you any trouble. BUT, no matter how nicely you treat people you cannot be sure they will not cause you trouble. I much prefer vehicles ....
  9. 2 points
  10. 2 points
  11. 2 points
    @Arauna This is the problem, Srecko speaks of equipping wisdom, however, he has not done anything since 2018 concerning child abuse. For anyone who lacks what child abuse is and how to stop it, educating is key. Even ARC stresses this, you have people like Srecko and 4Jah2me, who does not put the application. 4Jah2me whining about the bystander syndrome when he himself expresses it greatly when all this time he could have used social media as a platform to teach people, granted, he does favor social media.
  12. 2 points
    How does it not make sense to you. The issue here is control. First ex-witnesses make claim that witnesses are being brainwashed by the Watchtower. Then they claim, the Watchtower is NOT brainwashing members enough? Which is it? The Watchtower deals with spirituality like Jesus and the apostles. When did they implement personal physical protection, when they couldn't give it to themselves. Are you suggesting Jesus and the apostles died of natural causes? You need to make better sense of your argument.
  13. 2 points
    The leaked BOE letters attest to that. When did you decide, Elders became robots, or they weren't brainwashed enough not to follow sound instructions. I believe Elders and Ministerial Servants need to find common ground when it comes to spiritual wisdom and man's laws. I find that to be a task not worthy of many. You are correct, those that have stepped down for their own personal understanding and grievances needed to step down. They should go even further, and leave. Theirs no place in Christ Body for conflicted members. That leads to an understanding. When did you decide Elders are lawyers, caretakers of peoples free will. When did the Watchtower decide, they are responsible for an individuals personal life. Spiritual life, YES!, But personal life, never! That "responsibility" belongs with each individual. If not, that means, after being born, government has been responsible for whatever happens to us in life. Does that make any kind of sense?
  14. 2 points
    Correct! However, ex-witnesses don't want to read sound logic. They prefer to hear from insiders that have a problem with how the organization is being run. They don't believe in God's plan, and how God cleans an organization that has been corrupted by outside influence. I believe Dr. Furuli's new book speak volumes on that kind of influence. Ex-witnesses don't understand the outside politics such as in, how Australia overturned Cardinal George Pell, sexual child abuse conviction that he "personally" was charged with, not because of priest actions but his own action. Where does that leave their irrational ideology? Will it stop them, they can't. They have invested years of being "wrong" they can't do anything but continue to harp on nonsense, from either outsiders or insiders.
      Hello guest!
  15. 2 points
    To the extent that this is true, it undermines everything else you have said. You should take a month—it will take that long—to delete all of your tweets. They have “rules,” do they, that children must sit with their parents, and in the ministry they must be with a parent? Then what is all your eternal beefing about, since you here state there is nothing to it? Are you sure you are sane? A sub theme of virtually every post of yours is that JWs do anything the GB tells them to and do not do whatever they are not told. Well, here they tell them to do what in your eyes is the safest, most wholesome, practice in the world! What is it with your nasty tweets?
  16. 2 points
    Anyways, another factor to this whole situation is the fact Jehovah's Witnesses do not own and or build hospitals, have clubs for children, let alone preschools, any form of educational and or religious based institution for children and a list of other things, they do not have sporting events youth clubs, etc. I cited an article before, but did not add this part in yet, so paraphrasing from what I had read thus far.
  17. 2 points
  18. 2 points
    Obtain your copy now at the link below while the supply lasts: ‘Tom Irregardless and Me’—Starting with Prince, a fierce and frolicking defense of Jehovah’s Witnesses. A riotous romp through their way of life. “We have become a theatrical spectacle to the world, and to angels and to men,” the Bible verse says. That being the case, let’s show some theater! Let’s skewer the liars who slander the Christ! Let’s pull down the house on the axis lords! Let the seed-pickers unite! All persons with names like ‘Irregardless’ are real though generally composite. You can meet them in my circuit or even yours. Events related are faithfully depicted except for a few that I’ve made up. Persons with names recognizable from history or current events – you’re nuts! – it’s not those people at all!
      Hello guest!
    ”Puts Rolf’s book to shame!”.....Oscar Oxgoad ”A highly entertaining author—especially if you’re not fussy”.....Tom Brexit ”Acceptable after a fashion. But his grasp of science and is weak, and his critical thinking abominable.”....Bernard Strawman ”A pack of lies! I hate it!”.....Vic Vomodog ”His chapter on blood transfusion taught me some valuable lessons.”....Dr Max ‘Ace’ Inhibitor
  19. 2 points
    Doryseeker

    Bible

    On Tuesday April 28th 2015, a man named Franklin Minaar, member of the Branch church went to the East London South Africa zoo, climbed over the wall of the lion’s enclosure, walked up to the lions and said, “Let the battle begin.” He was mauled to death. According to his sister Audrey Minaar he was a very religious man, and said her brother had previously been treated for mental illness at Cecilia Makiwane Hospital. For some reason or other, his Bible was found in the in the same old age home where I am. The owner allowed me to keep it. With the exception of a few chapters in Kings and Chronicles, he went through the entire Bible, changing the word God into “El”, (Gen. 1:1) Lord God into “Yahweh” (Gen. 2:4). At the bottom of the page in Afrikaans, he wrote, “HWHY” (JHWH reversed) “Because the Israelite text was from right to left.” From there onwards he used Tippex to blot out every text containing words, Lord or God and wrote Yahweh using at first a red pen, and later black. In the Greek scriptures he also used Tippex to blot out the word “Jesus” and wrote “Yahoshua”. Seeing that I’m going on 90 years old, I asked a much younger friend of mine, to keep his Bible until the resurrection. Imagine how happy Mr. Minaar would be when hears that we kept his Bible. He will have two new friends to teach him all that transpired since his death. My friend will also be keeping my Scofield Reference Bible which was used when anointed brother Andrew Jack studied with me during 1956. Jack, Andrew: yb07 183 (dx86-16 Latvia) w09 7/15 p. 24 Ninety Years Ago I Began to ‘Remember My Grand Creator’
  20. 2 points
  21. 2 points
    Totally agreed with you 4jah4me, the society has a huge database, and no matter how much pretty words they write in their magazines or how much people (JWs) like to make excuses for, the fact is that they are still covering it and we had a taste of it here in Australia. The funny thing is that the society has an organised committee for HLC around the world and thats a proof that Jehovah God is with them (according to JWs interpretation) to uphold their man made rules of the blood doctrine but for child sex abuse they cant be bothered to have one small committee to safe guard children 😆😆😆.
  22. 2 points
    This will sound a bit cynical, but I assumed that the GB have been on a constant lookout for a really good practical example to make that old quote from the 11.15.2013 Watchtower seem less "scary" to outsiders. They latched onto this one and hoped it would make sense to enough people, and then they searched high and low for a Witness or two who had been "living in a cave." And I hope that their cave does not get the Internet, because I'd hate to have just insulted someone who is also on this forum. (See how easy it is to contradict oneself?)
  23. 2 points
    @Thinking True. Mankind is imperfect after all. Perfection sheds no mistake whatsoever, but it's counterpart, imperfection, will commit to a mistake here and there, despite improving doing better in some instances, there is no way it can be immune to making no mistake. That being said, I am sure everyone here has made some mistake in their lives, be it minor, or major... Perhaps even embarrassing.
  24. 2 points
    I don't think they put two and two together.... I wonder why he had the need to add that "correction" Yes, I noticed that too and wondered what this had to do with the covid situation. Following those instructions makes perfect sense from a human perspective! Unless by human perspective the GB mean anyone who is naive and of lesser intelligence, or someone who lives in a cave.. However, those who follow the developments in the world and read the guidelines as proposed by human agencies (as you mentioned) will know this pandemic is by no means over, and may last a very long time. We don't need the GB telling us what we already know. However, we do appreciate their reminders and concern. But to cloak this in a way that insinuates they have more knowledge, when all they do is follow the same developments that are accessible for anyone else to read and study, is....well, funny. As an after thought, they do mention following the guidelines of these human agencies. So this is just such a bad example of "might not make sense from a human stand point" because they kind of contradict themselves half way through. When this phrase was used in connection with instructions for the GT, where we might be told by the GB to do something that "doesn't make sense from a human stand point", is it something like this they had in mind? Lol. Food for thought more than anything 🤪
  25. 2 points
    @Anna One thing is for sure, Apostasy can be damaging, especially if there is a sprinkle of Unchristian Philosophies that are involved, which is indeed a faith killer for the one who is unaware and or ill-equipped to fight and or see it. Something of that nature would render who stripped of faith, and believing that God does not exist without even touching Atheistism.
  26. 2 points
    Equivocation

    Bible

    Yahweh and Jehovah are fine for the English speaker. Some people also prefer Yehovah, Jahweh and other names that points to the YHWH. You can say whatever, Jehovah knows who is calling his name in prayer through Jesus. 😁👍🏾
  27. 2 points
    Continued.... So going back to the brother who asked the question; "how we would feel if suddenly Jehovah stopped existing". I wonder how we would feel if suddenly if the GB stopped existing? Would we fall apart? Yes, well said. Yes. And funny you mentioned too many chiefs and not enough Indians, I was going to mention that very phrase, lol. Actually, I was going to say you can't have more chiefs than Indians. Same thing. Going back to the fear of apostates, it makes me wonder why they (the GB) are so afraid, to the point of putting the fear of God in you if you so much as glance at something apostate related. That has always bothered me a bit. Are they afraid that their influence be undermined? That people will lose trust in them? If that is so, where then does the trust in Jehovah figure? Are we not supposed to trust Jehovah more than any man? Does it not reveal that our trust may lie more in the GB than Jehovah? Recently, in one of the study articles it was mentioned that idolizing someone (the reference was to the GB) could become a stumbling block if that someone falls away. Is it then not better to see the "contrasting view" because that might help us be more realistically grounded. And as JWI alluded (I think it was JWI) why try and "hide" something unless we are ashamed of it (meaning the GB) and why not be candid and transparent? Why have all this "secret" stuff for the apostates to dig up and wave around? Stuff that the GB does not want us to read? Do they think our faith in Jehovah is so fragile? When you believe in God, then this inevitably leads to questions about his purpose for us and the meaning of life. This in turn leads to an analysis of writings which claim to explain that. This leads to admitting that the Bible has the most intelligent explanation, and that Jehovah's Witnesses are the only ones who adhere to all of it despite some personal sacrifice on their part. When you do not accept there is a God, like Amber, all that is no longer relevant. Of course those who no longer believe there is a God fall back on so called "scientific proof" . And yes. There are things that don't quite add up about the timeline of the flood, the fossil record, and the age of man, etc. but despite that, even JTR, who believes in evolution (with a helping hand from Jehovah) is still with us. For any intelligent person there is more proof of the existence of God than there isn't. Those who deny the existence of God do it more for personal reasons than because of science. When it comes down to the crunch, in the end, things are always personal, even if people try to imply some other noble cause or scientific enlightenment, or apostate reasoning. So what are the GB so afraid of?
  28. 2 points
    Wow Tom, that was a long reply! At first I thought it was JWI 😂. I am just playing, no disrespect to either of you, I do the same I know, especially when I get in my rant mode. Gotcha! I think you meant that Jehovah will raise up a prophet like Moses in reference to Jesus, the future Messiah. Which shows that Jesus became the "greater" Moses. What does that make the GB? That is why I don't think they can be viewed as Moses. Jesus already filled that role. We both agree they have some similar tasks in leading the people organizationally, and providing Bible literature, but as for having the status of being Jehovah's "mouthpiece", (or similar) I am not so sure about that. Many friends do think that, probably because the GB in the past have referred to themselves in that way. Is it any wonder then that some have this idea that the GB are more than what they actually are. And this can create problems, and has created problems where people leave the Truth because of this erroneous understanding. You inadvertently point out the problem: (in bold) Those in the crowd might be less inclined to view things that way if the GB were NOT behind a curtain in the first place. And saying things like "we are Jehovah's mouthpiece" and "we will give you instructions that may not make sense from a human stand point" do not help. But I agree with this though: I write supportively, as a apologist. Rolf writes as an investigative reporter When I said the above, I was not comparing you to Furuli. By publications I meant the WT etc. I meant you could write them. Anyone with some intelligence and Bible knowledge could. My example was to show that the spiritual food provided by the GB is nothing that isn't there already (in the Bible). Just made more understandable and applicable in practical terms, which you could do as well. (in fact as we know, the writing department does all this, the GB merely proofread and put their stamp of approval on it). So how can it be said that God is communicating through the GB, (the FDS) if it's nothing new, and if you could do the same? That is what my argument was about. But you already explained what you meant. Thanks (blushing modestly). No but seriously, it has done me some good too, I feel the same way: Just gives you a broader view. I think any and all knowledge is beneficial, whether to deter you from doing bad, or encouraging you to do good. But then am I reasoning like Adam? Why would he want to eat from the tree of knowledge? Hmmmm..... That's off topic, but maybe it could make an interesting topic! I thought you quit that long ago. I have. There is no point. Maybe Reddit is different and compels you more to respond. I don't read Reddit. There is only one apostate forum I check on every now and again just to see if there is anything new. Not in their reasoning, that's the same old, but they are the first with leaked videos etc. That forum is more like a club where people of like mind associate. It helps them to cope with what they've left behind as they find encouragement from people of like mind and situation. If there is a JW club, (not here, I mean JW-Talk) you know there has to be an ex- JW club too. Yes. And poor Amber. I do actually feel sorry for her. (bold mine) "Why wasn't she better prepared for the contrasting view"? Yes, it may have helped. But have you ever wondered why the likes of me, you, JWI, Arauna, Outta Here, ComfortMyPeople, b4ucuhear, JTR and others, although we have become familiar with the "contrasting view" we have not gone "rogue"? I have though about this quite a bit and my opinion is that those who fall away, do so not necessarily because they find out something "shocking" and thus lose faith, but because they find out something that gives them an excuse to fall away because they were already subconsciously that way inclined. Amber was unhappy in her marriage. I think overall she was not content with her life, hence looking for something different (China). Then comes along a charming kindred spirit that "opens her eyes" to the wonders of another world outside the JWs. She falls in love. And there you have it. The perfect end to a concoction to finally do what she really wanted. I can't speak for the others, but I have no need for any of that. I suppose I have matured enough now to see through these things. And yes, really making the Truth your own is key. Ok, I don't want do a Peter here and say we can never be stumbled and fall away, we can, but I would hope it would be a temporary lapse like it was with Peter. We are all weak in varying respects....but what is there outside of Jehovah? A brother asked the other week for us to imagine for a moment how we would feel if suddenly Jehovah stopped existing. I know how I felt. Is that perhaps another key to understanding why some leave and some stay despite man's (GB) imperfections? Got to go, will continue later.
  29. 2 points
    I'm sure TTH will speak for himself, but you probably know that it is difficult to make a clear point without sounding self-righteous. It's difficult to call oneself JW Insider, or my intended name 'Bible's Advocate,' or nearly anything without sounding self-righteous to someone. ("Meekest man on the face of the earth"?) When we have an opinion, it's nearly impossible to remember to put the "IMO" caveat after every sentence, so you just stop doing that and state your position. I'm sure we end up sounding overly confident and self-righteous as a consequence. (1 Peter 4:11) 11 If anyone speaks, let him do so as speaking pronouncements from God;. . . But many of us have probably learned a lot and changed opinions over time here, too. I know I have. And I've seen evidence from several others, including TTH. Let's just hope that those opinions have changed in the right direction. I agree. And I had high hopes for the book providing some value to the GB, if it was in a completely different spirit from his previous books. At this point in the book I saw a bit of love coming through. But when it reverted to a bit of braggadocio I couldn't help but see it as a continuation of his former persona. At any rate, you are right that none of us can judge correctly, and none of us can see his motives in total. I do agree that what he did might very well have been an act of self-sacrifice in bringing his gifts to the table. I saw it as a mix of good and bad motives, probably because I was unable to give him a clean slate. I'd be happy to rethink my position and concerns about him, and assume that he did not intend to convey some of the characteristics I thought I saw in him. I promise to re-read and give him every benefit of the doubt, and see what I can make of it.
  30. 2 points
    I see what you are saying, but this is like comparing pumpkins and slippers (Thanks to Arauna for the expression, possibly inspired from Cinderella). You are doing quite the opposite of what it appears that Furuli has been doing. I agree that the narcissism label is fraught with problems. But it is not evidenced in people who admit that they will likely agree with someone on things and disagree on other things and simply not understand one way or another on other things. This is already good evidence that you are NOT a narcissist. I don't think Furuli is a narcissist simply for writing a book that trashes the current accepted view of the GB. As you probably know, I agree with much of what he says about that same subject. Just as I agree with what Fred Franz said about the subject from a scriptural perspective. And I have long presented my view that the "faithful slave" is a lesson for all of us, not a lesson about a clergy of appointed slaves to serve spiritual food for the good for nothing slave laity. The idea of narcissism comes from the scholastic dishonesty he has engaged in. And, believe it or not, from my own perspective, I'm giving him a generous rationale for his scholastic dishonesty. If it is based on the inability to see where he has ever been wrong, then this is an explanation for why he cannot deal with evidence that shows he is wrong. A person can engage in scholastic dishonesty without being purposely dishonest in the sense of being devious. A narcissist will create such an extreme bias to protect their own ideology that it produces a mental block against rational handling of counter-arguments and counter-evidence. Extreme bias can make one engage in dishonesty without making them a purposeful liar. On the topic of 607, this really has nothing to do with whether the date is right, or whether Furuli or anyone else has the doctrine right or wrong. It's simply about his many cases of obvious scholastic dishonesty. Even if he was absolutely right about 607 he still handled the evidence dishonestly. I agree that it's quite possible I'm wrong. But if it has no overriding mental basis, I'd be inclined to see his past actions as absolute, purposeful, devious dishonesty just to keep his reputation intact. I have to admit that I think he has at times, engaged in this type of dishonesty, too. One time, on a very academic Biblical language forum he said something that was proven to be absolutely false, and he couldn't deny it. He couldn't admit he was wrong, so he claimed that what he wrote had started out as a purposeful presentation of the wrong side, that he had sent without the correction. To me, that was either a mental inability to admit being wrong, or it was purposeful "devious" dishonesty. And, as you say, he may be right on many of the points made in this latest book, but many of them continue in this consistent pattern of having promoted a certain ideology, from somewhere around the 1970s, for example, but with the inability to admit that anything that changed after that point had ever have been wrong in the first place. I'd like to think that this latest book is a complete turning over of a new e-leaf, and I could dismiss the past foibles. Yet, he still wants the creative days to add up to 49,000 years.
  31. 2 points
    It would be simple to say, anyone that gets removed from a possession of responsibility or gets disfellowshipped have a need to take a cheap shot at the Watchtower. Is that an Ex-Witness ideology?, maybe, but I know many ex-witnesses that accept their own fate and use the "live and let live" model of conformity. Furuli won't be the last person to profane sound Christian ethics and Bible understanding. He should have argued his complaints here. At least a faithful witness with as much time invested in the organization would have made him see the many errors his heart now, lies. If you can save such a person from himself, then it would have been well worth it. /
  32. 2 points
    I know very well that he did this on his own. I did not link him with others, although I see that he has linked himself with others. Why did you think otherwise? If you would like to defend him, then you should do that. I try to defend his evidence where he is right, and criticize it where it is wrong. I think his writing has now provided further, consistent evidence that reflects on him personally. Also, in the way he decided to defend himself, he went to great lengths to find evidence against the current structure of the GB, and he has apparently relied on the Gilead graduation speech by Fred Franz and the books of Raymond Franz to do this. I have never said that either of these men were were wrong in their scriptural evaluation of the role of the GB. Raymond Franz said he agreed with the scriptural reasons that Fred Franz had given for avoiding the creation of a GB. But I think R.Franz was inconsistent in his reasoning on this topic, too. But so was Fred Franz. Furuli follows an inconsistent mix that includes inconsistent reasoning from both of them. If you don't think so, don't just claim it's wrong because of how easy it is impute bad motives to others. Base your argument on evidence from Furuli's writings or what you know about him. I already provided evidence from his own writing, and am willing to provide even more. "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." When it comes to evidence that he tried to help the Org move forward, I think he might have ended up with a few good ideas that could be useful. He can point out problems, yet his own solutions are weak (imo). Still, most of his life has also been spent trying to defend the Org in a way that would keep it from moving forward. He wrote a book on Bible translation that praised the old NWT but with points that could be used to fight against the revised NWT. In his book he brings up some of these same points to denigrate the revised NWT. He also spent a lot of time looking for ways to defend a couple of dates that the Watchtower has long made use of to tie Watchtower doctrines to a chronological tradition tied to the Second Adventists of the 1800's. In his book he is still tied to these old traditions. So I don't see him as very progressive or forward-moving. If you do think this is progressive, please give evidence.
  33. 2 points
    I have been very consistent over the years in "putting the man down," especially over the "scholastic dishonesty" in two of his previous books. And I'm not a scholar. Yet his glaring problems have been obvious even to me. Persons who are much better at evaluating Furuli's writing on questionable topics have shown just how obvious these problems were. If you had read a few more of my posts, you would know that I am constantly concerned about the CCJW, WT. (1 Corinthians 12:24-26) . . .Nevertheless, God has so composed the body, giving greater honor to the part that had a lack, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but its members should have mutual concern for one another. 26 If one member suffers, all the other members suffer with it; or if a member is glorified, all the other members rejoice with it. I have never claimed that the CCJW is the equivalent of the entire Christian congregation or "the body," but I believe that, in principle, we should all try to identify a group of Christians to associate with who at least fit our "ideal" of what the first-century Christian congregation should look like in twenty-first century circumstances. You constantly deride that choice for anyone who would stick up for the CCJW, but you have never specifically offered a better choice. There is a time to tear down, and a time to build up per the book of Ecclesiastes. For me that means there should be a balance between what we criticize and what we commend. Among the brothers and sisters we should spend our time building up (Heb 10:24-25), and I think we should choose carefully those avenues through which we offer criticism. And we should be happy to accept public criticism of our public criticism. I have to assume that you have found Christian association for upbuilding and encouragement outside of this forum, if I were to judge from the amount of time you spend on negative, critical topics inside this forum.
  34. 2 points
    I believe that when a person reads Furuli carefully they will see evidence for such traits of narcissism. And as long as I am saying this, I think that what came through in the subtext of his books also appealed to persons having similar traits. The persons who had been Furuli's most vocal defenders in the past, like a person named "scholar JW" is an example who has shown the same extreme indifference to the "counsel of evidence." Any correction provided by evidence was always thrown back as if the reputation of the sources of correction needed to be trashed and dishonored for daring to correct them. Examples of this type of reaction to counsel and evidence abound in discussion forums, too. And any and all of us can fall into that trap of pride: (But keep an eye on yourself, for fear you too may be tempted.) Furuli, for example, didn't like the fact that all the hundreds of Neo-Babylonian scholars, 100 percent of them, told him that he was wrong to believe that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE. So he focused on one piece of evidence that clearly shows the 607 date is wrong. And what does he resort to? He trashed the scholars, he trashed the museum curators. He accused them of fraud, even accused unspecified persons of sanding down evidence of the original cuneiform and replacing it with markings that makes it fit their own scheme. (He doesn't bother to point out that this is only one of thousands of pieces of evidence that supports a 587/6 BCE date and that there is still absolutely zero evidence going against that accepted date, Biblical or secular.) Now moving forward to the present, there is evidence that Furuli was being told he was wrong about "higher education" and that he was wrong to want to stick with "Fred Franz" interpretations when the rest of the GB had already moved on from that. He would have seen the example of "A. Smith" that Brother Splane spoke about at the 2014 Annual Meeting as "counsel" against his own view that hadn't changed. He clearly compared himself to Fred Franz, and wanted to continue that role. If he was a narcissist, then he would have seen the need to trash and dishonor these counselors. And he did! He needed to project back onto them, some of the same traits that he should be able to see in himself, but can't. Especially in the case where he knows he is about to be "proven" wrong to the worldwide congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, he would be forced to trash those who had decided he was wrong. Narcissists simply cannot accept counsel or evidence that says they are wrong. I could be wrong, but that's how I currently see it.
  35. 2 points
    I think that there may be a way to understand Rolf Furuli in terms that might sound very judgmental. Of course, it's always problematic to try to put labels on people "out loud" in public, even though we can't avoid evidence that leads to such judgments that most of us keep to ourselves. So the following should be taken in the sense of trying to readjust a person who has taken a false step before he is aware of it. Or at least there is a lesson here, in 20-20 hindsight, about how such a person might have been helped had he taken to heart good spiritual counsel he may have received from others. (Galatians 5:25-6:5) 25 If we are living by spirit, let us also go on walking orderly by spirit. 26 Let us not become egotistical, . . . 1Brothers, even if a man takes a false step before he is aware of it, you who have spiritual qualifications try to readjust such a man in a spirit of mildness. But keep an eye on yourself, for fear you too may be tempted. . . . 3 For if anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he is deceiving himself. 4 But let each one examine his own actions . . . 5 For each one will carry his own load. There is a subtext to all of Furuli's books that might help explain his latest action. That subtext says: "I don't like being told that I am wrong and I will go to furthest possible extreme to project blame back onto the ones pointing out where I am wrong." It's true that no one likes being told they are wrong, especially when we think the evidence shows we are right. But If two people or groups disagree, and one can show the other that the evidence shows they are in the wrong, then the normal response should be to consider that evidence and thank the person for pointing it out and use it to look for areas of agreement. And if the person thinks the evidence is not enough, then they can at least "agree to disagree" and move on in a spirit of mildness. But it is even more true today, as in Paul's day, when Paul warned Timothy to watch out for the following: (2 Timothy 3:2-4) 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, . . . boastful, haughty, . . . .3 having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, without love of goodness, 4 betrayers, headstrong, puffed up with pride. . . The Insight book starts out defining PRIDE like this: *** it-2 p. 681 Pride *** PRIDE Inordinate self-esteem; an unreasonable feeling of superiority as to one’s talents, . . . rank, and so forth; disdainful behavior or treatment; insolence or arrogance of demeanor; haughty bearing. . . . Some synonyms of pride are egotism, arrogance, haughtiness. The combination of several of those traits should remind of the counsel in Proverbs about a kind of "insolent pride" as some translations/commentaries would put it. One Bible commentator who comments online has shown how this insolent pride matches the current term "narcissism." Level Scoffer (Insolent Pride) Trait Narcissism Trait 1 Proverbs 15:2 – A scoffer does not love one who reproves him, he will not go to the wise A narcissist will first avoid situations where he may be told he is doing something wrong…..no matter how wise the “reprover” might be 2 Proverbs 13:1 – “…A scoffer does not listen to rebuke” But if a narcissist somehow does find himself in position of being rebuked, he will refuse to listen. Have you ever tried to rebuke a narcissist? He will ignore you, verbally fight you, tell you why you are the one who is wrong – anything to keep from admitting that they may be wrong. 3 Proverbs 9:8 – “Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you..” . . Proverbs 26:24-26 – “He who hates disguise it with his lips, but he lays up deceit in his heart. When he speaks graciously, do not believe him, for there are seven abominations in his heart. Though his hatred covers itself with guile, his wickedness will be revealed before the assembly.” Not only will a narcissist refuse to listen, but he will also hate you for reproving him. He will disguise his hatred, and even speak graciously to you, but when he has the chance to trash you publicly he will take it. 4 Proverbs 9:7 – “He who corrects a scoffer gets dishonor for himself…” This results in a narcissist trashing your reputation. A narcissist will not hesitate to trash the reputation of those who try to correct them – resulting in dishonor to you for daring to correct them.
  36. 2 points
    Talk of removing him as an overseer goes a ways back, but I never heard that this was actually done. If it was done recently this could even explain a few things. But I couldn't tell for sure if this was just your opinion or a guess.
  37. 1 point
  38. 1 point
  39. 1 point
    I am not declare myself as Storm Trooper (from Star wars or any wars). Yes, i am free as a Bird :)))
  40. 1 point
    If Arauna and SM don't believe You, why would strangers on the street believe in this JW problem!?
  41. 1 point
    True, UNESCO has promoted a new curriculum in most countries of the world for the past 20 years. Poor countries see their fundi cuts if they do not comply. Under child sex education they teach children about worst forms of porneia and how to find pleasure in sex - oversexualizing them at a very young age. If you think this generation is promiscuous - wait until this generation hits young adulthood. You can already see the effects of the school education on the youth at universities right now. They have NO respect for life and the rights of others to have an opinion. The lawlessness and rioting (for whatever the reason) is beyond normal behavior.
  42. 1 point
    Did WT magazines gave enough proper "train" to JW elders and JW members in 1980's ? If yes why JWORG have such massive problem inside Organization 30-40 years later? Are they actually fighting it the wrong way as all other ?! Articles about CSA in WT publications came from what source? From inside WTJWorg wisdom "guided by HS", or by "worldly" source or from mixed sources? Train yourself? WTJWorg trained themselves in this subject? But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil. - Heb 5:14 Even with this advanced self training collective attitude G. Jackson publicly asked ARC The Hon Justice Peter McClellan, "tell us please how you want us to deal with CSA and we will." He, GB member asked "worldly person" for advice and direction and instruction to be incorporated in Australian legislative. But on other hand WTJWorg instructed all "self trained elders" to call Legal Department in Branch Office first and skip Secular Government legislative. :))
  43. 1 point
    The report also said this. which is of course a direct lie. "The Jehovah's Witnesses have not sponsored any programs or activities that separate children from their parents at any time," it said in a statement to AAP. Well in fact JWs do separate children from their parents in field service. Elders have been known to take other people's children on field service and in fact this has been proven in some court cases. Just an Elder or an older brother or sister with a child, and no 2 witnesses. I've been on the ministry in the past and a child has actually asked to be with me on the doors. I've declined as I think children should be with their parents. Also Elders do private Bible study or 'shepherding calls' with children, without parents being in the room. A Bible study can last an hour, just that Elder and child in the room, no 2 witnesses. Please remember I was a JW for 50 years. I do know what I'm talking about. Now a bit of balance :- the report says this, but "This will result in survivors receiving nothing," Knowmore principal lawyer Anna Swain told AAP. I don't think this is true either. It just means that each survivor will have to take the CCJW or the individual Elder / brother / sister to court individually. It will mean lots of separate court cases but that will cost lots of money of course.
  44. 1 point
    And one other thing that puzzles me is, in the ARC investigation the Australian Bethel seemed to have reports of CSA going back 50 years, but in America, where the religion started, they only have reports / database going back to 1997. So i wonder what they did with all previous reports ? Did they destroy them ? There could have been information previously about men that have 'high positions' in the Org now.
  45. 1 point
    You certainly do not want to do that. It’s a horrible habit it be afflicted with. If I take a swipe at you as regards the moniker, I can hardly not expect a jab back. I don’t know why I did it, really. Cocky, I guess—it’s as good a verdict as any. The pieces fit together together for a diatribe I was cooking up. I forgot that the pieces have feelings. My bad. I apologize. I have no beef you whatsoever, never have, and your remarks are among my favorites. They do represent—well, “thinking.“ I might even encourage more of them, except that then you might have the experience, as I do from time to time, that in the abundance of words there does not fail to be transgression. “Aw, shut up, with your Kentucky-fried Foghorn Leghorn drawl!” the villain says to Benoit Blanc. it’s about time someone said it to me. (If you see the movie ‘Knives Out’—it is free on Amazon Prime—you must be prepared for a bit of language. It is by no means filthy, by today’s standards—I don’t recall a single f-bomb—but no way is it pristine like in the Kingdom Hall. It is an Hercule Poirot parody, with Daniel Craig playing the Christie-like eccentric, brilliant, and world-renowned sleuth, Benoit Blanc. There is nothing funnier, to my mind, then when he opens his mouth to speak an overbearing combination of French/Southern Redneck accent. He routinely says things that, at first glance are profound, but at second are just plain stupid.)
  46. 1 point
    Granted the article is ARC heavy, and information from everything pertaining to ARC, that statement of yours holds no water. The issue here is the accusation from News Corp itself and the whole Redress situation, however, the article is catering to the right, therefore, they are pressing the News Corp claims, i.e. the whole overseas thing, of which is deemed having inaccuracies. Thanks to Srecko here, some people can connect the dots. Moreover, are you aware of the former JWs mentioned in the article? Because somehow those linked it, have no idea who they are, as is their dealings with the police, which is mentioned in the article, to the point, they're blaming law enforcement and an authoritative entity, not just JWs. If you are unaware of the claims by News Corp, check out the copy of the article I cited, it is in the quotation. That being said, I do not understand as to why suddenly the article here is of anyone's interest, granted, Witness brought up the link, I merely had the article addressed in a small chunk here.
  47. 1 point
    Mr Rook would not be so thin-skinned to see it that way. He would have had a good belly-laugh over it. You would have us believe that you were his friend? You did everything you could to separate him from his God. Remember, he was on my side of the Great Issue, not yours. He came to have the same problem that Rolf is going to have—having “false friends” sucking him dry for info, kissing his feet with praise, ecstatic at the ‘dirt’ they think he is spilling, then turning around and saying he is delusional for not abandoning every last vestige of Witness belief—just like you do with JWI. At the same time, his genuine friends distance themselves. At least Rolf will find some companionship within the airy world of ‘scholarship’—no such luck for JTR. It was worse for JTR. Rolf makes perfectly clear that he regards his faith as true. I gather that he is not too different from JWI, who has issues with some organizational matters, but has no problem acknowledging that there must be leadership and cooperating with it on that basis. In contrast, JTR came across as a ‘spiritual terrorist,’ and it is only upon close examination—which the average Witness will be not inclined to do in view of his outrageous remarks—that one can see his love for Jehovah was genuine. Even his own kids deserted him—something he freely admitted—this despite the fact that he was not under congregation censure.. You simply cannot go about harshly criticizing ones held in high esteem—ones loved for their hard work and example—and expect to keep your friends. The loudest applause at any convention is at the question, “Would you like to send your greetings to the brothers in Bethel?” It’s like if some would come around and pretend to be my friends, saying the nicest things about me, yet they absolutely cannot stand my wife, and never fail to hurl abuses at her. Is that going to work with me? Will I be taken in? I don’t think so. And yes, the earthly organization is likened to a beloved human—a mother, as that AlanF, with the IQ of a Descartes and an EQ of the Sesame Street Cookie Monster, changed to ‘mommy,’ hoping to infuriate people. I like to think with JTR it was a case of Psalm 141:5 and that he has time to undo the damage. Of course, you always have time to undo it with Jehovah if your turnaround is genuine, but I hope it is with family and friends as well. “Should the righteous one strike me, it would be an act of loyal love; Should he reprove me, it would be like oil on my head, Which my head would never refuse. My prayer will continue even during their calamities.” I like to think it was that way here with a few who slammed him pretty hard but also made clear that the rebuke was not personal—and that he as a person had some very appealing qualities. I tried to do that, and I had some acknowledgement from him in ‘thanks’ emojis, not just upvotes. Others did this, as well—his spiritual brothers with his best interests at heart. I could well be a little too Pollyanna in reviewing how it has turned out—but his last few comments very neatly tie into a Pollyanna view—so that’s the one I’ll take. He wasn’t really wrong in the factual nature of anything he said—he was ‘wrong’ in how he had processed it. You can’t go about life being hypercritical. You have to be ready to move on. You can’t go digging through the diamonds to find the dirt. You have to be ready to forgive. It is an important theme of Jesus that he came to feel he ought more fully get his heart around. You kept telling him how he could bask in a fine relationship with God while sticking it to the visible organization. He had too much common sense and honesty to fall for it. He knew that path leads inevitably to become fully part of the word—in time, doing all that the world does and thinking it can be offset with a smiley God emoji. Mark Smith’s book Secular Faith points out that the typical church member has more in common with atheists than with members of his own denomination of 100 years ago. That is what happens in the absence of an earthly counterpart to the heavenly organization. JTR knew that. That was among the things he meant when he lamented that he should have been closer to Jehovah. Go ahead, you idiot—slap another braying emoji on this one.
  48. 1 point
    QUESTION: Why does Apple assume I want to be reminded of a photo memory from years ago? Do they not realize the pain they cause many people reminding them of dead loved ones etc? ANSWER: Because either their programmers are cruel, sadistic trolls who believe that creating pain in the morning will help them sleep better at night .... OR .... it just never occurred to them that you are that fragile, or thought that you would completely forget them, if not reminded, by a photo from the past.
  49. 1 point
    The primary issue is that you simply can't be a witness and not believe in the 1914 teaching.  Because the 1914 teaching is the only justification that the organization can give for destroying families and punishing people for disagreeing with them.  If they are not appointed by God and if they are not gods spokesman then it shouldn't be an issue when someone contradicts them or disagrees with them.  Unfortunately in a master class of arrogance they decided to punish and expel anyone who doesn't agree with their opinions about what the Bible says. this elders letter is still the current stance as far as I know  and they make it very clear that simply believing something that contradicts the organization's position is potential grounds for disfellowshiping.
  50. 1 point
    What do you mean leave before that. I'm constantly harassed by witnesses asking why I'm no longer attending meetings and I can't have an honest discussion with them because I know what the consequences will be. But as I said before you seem to have no issue when it comes to forcing someone to basically take a vow of silence and never express their reasons for leaving.




×
×
  • 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.