xero

That's one of the movies I love to watch occasionally, in my list of favorites. Thankfully for watching it I did research and learned the pro's and con's of drinking gatorade. 
Thanks for the video's btw, nice to see some fresh material on this site.
Just a side joke, I had a friend post last year that he was seeing snowflakes hitting his windshield, (here in the SW NM US we don't get a whole lot of snow). So he posted he was seeing snowflakes hit his windshield and I replied on his thread....'I hope your not driving your car through protesters again'.

I am lazy. I suppose I also don't want people to get the idea that I have any original ideas. I want to positively affirm that.

Watched it! I had a friend who was IN it.   (as an extra....)

Have you watched the movie Idocracy?

Nothing to be confused about. People have scare time and resources. They allocate these by a process of reasoning. These should be able to explain the rational process whereby the decided to expend their energies in one place over another. This is especially so if they are evangelical in their zeal.
Connecting the dots.
The phone rings. You pick it up. On the end of the phone there's a solicitor who (we'll give the benefit of the doubt) is representing a cause of some kind. Let's say we even think it's not a bad cause. Our response might be.
"I'd like to thank you, 1st of all for choosing to be part of the solution, rather than a part of the problem. So many are unwilling to give of themselves these days."
*Pause as they blush*
Then follow this up w/the question. They should be able to answer this question.
As JW's it's an easy thing. The kingdom is the solution. Man's govts as well intended as some have been have always failed to deliver in one way or another. Death is still there. Justice is not punishment, but the complete repair of the wrong done. Choosing to learn about the kingdom and subjecting ones' self in advance of it's takeover is a benefit now and into the future. It doesn't mean being unconcerned w/the proximate evil, but it does place things in their proper perspective. Men w/o God, w/o the knowledge that justice will be done take it on themselves to try to bring about a utopia, and each and every time they try to put their hand out and eat from the tree of life and eat and live 'till time indefinite - they bring death, misery and destruction on their neighbors. It always happens. A proper estimation of one's station as a created, limited being will allow one to do what one can as palliative measures until the kingdom arrives - w/or w/o the assent of the planet.
On the other hand you have a myriad of causes, none of whom I've found can give a rational account for why their cause needs to have supremacy over all other concerns - these simply have gone where the winds of the moment have taken them.
Take "apostates" of any group - be these EX-JWs, EX-Mormons, EX-Muslims, EX-whatevers - these have causes, and usually it's not to say "This is the way, walk in it my people." it's "This is NOT the way, don't walk in it."
Very hard to live a life studying "disease" and "disorder" and studying "mental illness" to know what good functioning and a good life (insofar as one can have one now) is focusing on what's wrong.
People generally keep their balance when they are moving forward, using whatever positive momentum they have. As soon as they stop and try to statically stay in one spot, for fear of falling over, the more they fail.
BUT having diverged a bit, you can see that one simply has to be able to answer the question especially if one wants others to spend their own scarce time and resources in support of their peculiar cause.

I have noticed that the desire to see God's promises fulfilled (nothing wrong with that of course), drives the human spirit to "predict" or "hope for" the end always in their life time. The pattern is clear: Russell hoped for the end in 1874 then 1914, Rutherford 1925, Franz 1975, the 80's GB by the end of the 20th century, today's GB between now and aprox. 2035.
Each generation would say their children aren't going to make it to school....now those  children have children of their own...and grandchildren
There are recent discussions on JW talk with brothers and sisters giving this old world no more than 5 years, and there are a few optimistic ones who say within a year. If you were to ask members of your congregation when do they think the end will come, you will hear similar sentiments. Many believe the pandemic will lead straight into the GT.
Of course logically, the end will come in someone's life time, and one day we will be right.
I admire Isaac Newton because his "prediction" defied the rules of wishing for it in one's lifetime. For that reason he seems more believable. But of course I hope he is wrong...because of course I would like it to happen in our lifetime! Oh, the irony of it! 😂
It is not wrong to hope for good things to come, what is wrong is our serving God only for that reason, and building our hope up to the point of expectation delayed making us sick.
You have probably heard this sentiment before, it's great, and I like to remind myself of it periodically: "Plan ahead as if Armageddon won't come in your lifetime, but live your life as if it will come tomorrow"

Yes. As Jesus Christ is my leader. (Of course I remember some elders questioning my methods once and when I showed the example Jesus set and how I was "following it closely" one said... yeah, but now you're tail-gaiting Jesus)
 

I'm not sure how following this scripture is controversial.
BTW - I think the obsession some have w/the term 'anointed' and all the associated baggage is a distraction.
Yes, there are some who appear to be engaging in GB-Anointed worship, but that's their problem, not mine.
The scriptures tell me what to do, how to live and what to hope for and I try to live by these.
I could obsess about obesity in the congregation too if I wanted to. Let's say have people step on scales and if their BMI wasn't w/in a healthy weight, then they'd be disqualified from serving in any capacity.
But I don't.
I haven't been above teasing people at times, like when one brother asked me if I watched the game. I replied "No. I was probably praying or in the ministry."
There are always some who people imagine (or they themselves imagine of themselves) that they are "superfine apostles" - 2 Cor. 11:5 There were in the 1st century and will be today the same issues.

I remember one bro who was "stumbled" when he moved to another state and on his return he said "the brothers there don't let me do anything!" (he was prominent locally before he moved - his illustrations are still in the pubs) - I said to him "What! You mean they won't let you go in FS??"
He got my point, but he wasn't amused.
In the congregation there are always going to be people who aren't happy and have to wrestle to see who's plumage is shinier than the next.
That's not me. I suppose if I were a Calvinist, I'd be more likely to embrace the "Doctrine of Total Depravity" ... Sounds cool doesn't it!
 
‘I Am A Depraved Wretch,’ Says Calvinist Smugly

BURLINGTON, VT—According to preordained sources, a 37-point Calvinist bravely and openly admitted his own depravity this week during a brutal intellectual beat-down of an ignorant atheist. Witnesses were shocked by the young man’s great honesty about his fallen condition, in addition to his luminous intellect and well-oiled beard.
  “Listen, it’s written plainly in the Doctrine of Total Depravity,” he said. “I’m totally depraved. I’m a worthless sinner with no merit deserving of God’s grace...duh. If you deny that, it’s because God in his mercy has not yet chosen to awaken your spirit with the divine light of his unmerited favor. You are an enemy of God and you are completely repulsive to Him. I say this with gentleness and respect because I love you.”
As the Calvinist spoke through a thick cloud of the finest pipe tobacco smoke, sources say they detected a hint of smugness in his smile. The atheist detected the smug attitude and pointed it out.
"Point proved!" said the Calvinist. "I am a depraved sinner and my smugness proves that point!"
The hapless atheist replied, "I don't know... I don't feel like I'm really that bad of a person."
This was the moment the young Calvinist had been waiting for. He set down his pipe, looked at the poor deceived sinner through narrowed eyes, and with a wry smile, demolished the atheist’s puny argument once and for all. “...by what standard?” he said.
The atheist stood there dumbfounded with a dumb atheist look on his face. He knew he had been beaten and was left with no choice but to repent.
Sources in heaven say that thanks to this bold, brilliant Calvinist’s bold and brilliant witness, God decided to go ahead and choose the atheist for salvation before the foundation of the world.

That last post was as much a bit of self-analysis as it was of anyone else. I'm sure anyone who's been associated has gone through some dark moments.
Reminds me of David, "a man after God's own heart", the beloved and how he actually left to work as a mercenary for the philistine king of Gath when he was being hunted by the anointed of Jehovah - Saul (his dark moments), and how he vowed not to lift up his hand against the anointed of Jehovah, and how Jehovah helped him to fulfill that oath when it seemed he might fail in that regard when he was on his way to fight w/the Philistines when at Aphek the men w/Achish complained and he was sent along w/his men back to where they'd been. This prevented David from being in the battle. But it also may have sent a signal that there might have been a rearward attack which interestingly may have led to Saul's forces not covering the entrance to the Jezreel Valley leading to his ultimate death on Mt Gilboa - Jehovah's judgment.
Some people may feel the need to flee from whatever persecution they may be feeling (whether real or imagined) but leaving the judgment to Jehovah strikes me as the course of wisdom. Even non-JWs like Stephen Covey (I remember an illustration of his) said "chasing the serpent is what drives the poison to the heart".
So maybe you got bit, and maybe you got yourself bit unknowingly by poking your hand into some "hole" the advice not to return evil for evil (or even perceived evil) is good advice for anyone.

May as well include this list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_events
https://www.openculture.com/2015/10/in-1704-isaac-newton-predicts-the-world-will-end-in-2060.html
I used to joke that if it doesn't come by 2034 (120 years from 1914) that I might reconsider. (Somehow people didn't think that as funny as I did.)

“Put it on the floor and hook it up, you moron. If you had any brains (like I do) you’d have stupid tradespeople to do it for you.”

I suppose Paul's use of his Roman citizenship would have been made him a supporter of the Roman Empire by the logic of some as would using it's roads or any of the downstream advantages of the Pax Romana. 
 
 

Lol - in your mind yes - because you are so far gone you do not even know how far beyond help you are.  Just the mention of Mr T's  name triggers you into thinking someone is a T supporter

This reminds me of what the widow of the Doctor Seuss books said. He had vehemently resisted commercialization of his work during his life, but as soon as he died he was outmaneuvered. “If Ted could see this he’d say, “I’m glad I’m dead,” she said.  

I am lazy. I suppose I also don't want people to get the idea that I have any original ideas. I want to positively affirm that.

Gasp!! For once, I share the same viewpoint as 4Jah. What is the world coming to?
I’ve nothing against videos. Knowing the source, I may well squeeze these in. It is just that I can read the same material in 10% the time, so that is usually what I hold out for. Because it is @xeroI’ll watch at least one.
It is amazing how many opposers with a lay a lengthy video on your lap—sometimes an hour or more—with the directive, “Here—watch this!”
Oh, yeah—I’ll get right on it! There is such a thing as “Introduction that arouses interest.” Do these people have nothing to do with their time?
”I am well along in life. I have reached the point where I take only those cases that interest me. And my interest in your case is dwindling.” - Hercule Poirot

I like this question. It is a variation of “If you could solve any problem of the world, which one would it be?” It is given more import in that you ask it when people actually are trying to solve one of them. I like it a lot, as well as the logical followup: Given that we have only so much time, where do we get the most bang for our buck?

"By what process of reasoning did you determine that this was the one problem facing humanity that deserved your scare time and resources?"

It is you who makes sweeping statements that are wrong.
I have read at least two, one of the Sean Carroll books and one of Carl Zimmer. I give Sean considerable credit, though in the end I saw no reason to join him. A 3-part commentary of his work is included (along with other material) here:
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2011/09/epochs-and-aeons.html
I have said i rather welcome the relative peace and quiet now that he is gone.
When I get news via television, it is usually CBS, rarely Fox. I probably have visited Newsmax, but that is because I visit everywhere, I do not know what OAN is. I have never listened to a complete Sean Hannity. A few times while driving, I have caught maybe 30 minutes, but such times are very rare. There is no broadcast I go out of my way to watch or listen to.
For every conservative source I follow on Twitter, I follow a liberal one for balance. I don’t pursue any of them overmuch. Nor would I describe any of them as “criminal.” You are the calcified one here, not I.
You only use this expression as a sophisticated means of insult. You would have no interest in it otherwise. 
It is just like when you make assumptions about me and every one of them is wrong.
Actually, I routinely do this and the quality of my writing takes their breath away. Unfortunately, deprived of breath they die, and so cannot properly praise it.
The above paragraph is called humor. Look up the word in the dictionary, along with imagination, metaphor, and hyperbole. Your parched writing might suffice for instructions on installing a toilet, but otherwise it is just too-rigid, too condescending, and Lord knows, too insulting to endure.

You know what's funny, is that most of the people I've seen who were partakers were weird in some way or another.
We're told that their spirit tells them. We're not supposed to question it.
We do of course. We try to correlate their external behavior and appearance w/being 'anointed'
I have to say I don't know who is or isn't, but it doesn't matter. It's not as if someone's personal profession makes them any more knowledgeable or holy than anyone else in any given congregation.
I remember the 1st memorial I went to. There was all this fanfare and yet the talk was dull and we all had to be careful not to spill the wine and everyone's ears were listening quietly to see if they heard any crunching sounds. ("Psst! Did you see that! So and so partook!") Then we had to rush out so the next congregation could get in.
I thought it all pretty silly at the time and over the years if I saw anyone not one foot into the grave w/decades of service I thought "Huh". But I reconciled myself to the decisions others made as their problem (if any) and not mine.
Suppose someone professes to be of the anointed, should I change my behavior towards them? No. Defer to them when they present a scriptural argument that doesn't wash? No.
I have seen though that a lot of people have been looking at all this either waiting for them to die off, like they are the sands in the hourglass counting down to the end of this system.
Not that I blame them. Any more than I blame anyone. I do see, however in some the desire to be in charge, and I'm always suspicious of anyone who revels in telling others what to do and how to do it.
If I've gotten in any trouble w/fellow elders it's because I don't dunk on publishers when I could. So sister X is weird and partakes. So sister X has a lot of opinions. Hey, maybe she has something to say, maybe she's just feeling lonely and unremarkable and wants to feel remarkable. Fine.
One CO said when some bros complained about another bro that he didn't do things unless he got a lot of praise - "So praise him. No skin off your nose."

For the life of me, I cannot take this fellow seriously. With a level of abuse (granted, I provoked it here, but it is just so much fun. And this is not really an example of it) that is off the charts, it is virtually the only thing about him worth mentioning.
I can’t imagine why the Librarian (that old hen) puts up with him, when she has dropped the abuse hammer on others. Poor CC suffers it every time you turn around—not necessarily unjustly, but certainly no worse than this fellow. Even Brother Fullalove (me) triggered an abuse complaint long ago.
I can only think that when commenters answer him without rebuke, or at least reproof  (most do not make that error) it is because somewhere through probably painful experience in life they have learned what is expedient with abusive men.

You know what's funny, is that most of the people I've seen who were partakers were weird in some way or another.
We're told that their spirit tells them. We're not supposed to question it.
We do of course. We try to correlate their external behavior and appearance w/being 'anointed'
I have to say I don't know who is or isn't, but it doesn't matter. It's not as if someone's personal profession makes them any more knowledgeable or holy than anyone else in any given congregation.
I remember the 1st memorial I went to. There was all this fanfare and yet the talk was dull and we all had to be careful not to spill the wine and everyone's ears were listening quietly to see if they heard any crunching sounds. ("Psst! Did you see that! So and so partook!") Then we had to rush out so the next congregation could get in.
I thought it all pretty silly at the time and over the years if I saw anyone not one foot into the grave w/decades of service I thought "Huh". But I reconciled myself to the decisions others made as their problem (if any) and not mine.
Suppose someone professes to be of the anointed, should I change my behavior towards them? No. Defer to them when they present a scriptural argument that doesn't wash? No.
I have seen though that a lot of people have been looking at all this either waiting for them to die off, like they are the sands in the hourglass counting down to the end of this system.
Not that I blame them. Any more than I blame anyone. I do see, however in some the desire to be in charge, and I'm always suspicious of anyone who revels in telling others what to do and how to do it.
If I've gotten in any trouble w/fellow elders it's because I don't dunk on publishers when I could. So sister X is weird and partakes. So sister X has a lot of opinions. Hey, maybe she has something to say, maybe she's just feeling lonely and unremarkable and wants to feel remarkable. Fine.
One CO said when some bros complained about another bro that he didn't do things unless he got a lot of praise - "So praise him. No skin off your nose."

You know what's funny, is that most of the people I've seen who were partakers were weird in some way or another.
We're told that their spirit tells them. We're not supposed to question it.
We do of course. We try to correlate their external behavior and appearance w/being 'anointed'
I have to say I don't know who is or isn't, but it doesn't matter. It's not as if someone's personal profession makes them any more knowledgeable or holy than anyone else in any given congregation.
I remember the 1st memorial I went to. There was all this fanfare and yet the talk was dull and we all had to be careful not to spill the wine and everyone's ears were listening quietly to see if they heard any crunching sounds. ("Psst! Did you see that! So and so partook!") Then we had to rush out so the next congregation could get in.
I thought it all pretty silly at the time and over the years if I saw anyone not one foot into the grave w/decades of service I thought "Huh". But I reconciled myself to the decisions others made as their problem (if any) and not mine.
Suppose someone professes to be of the anointed, should I change my behavior towards them? No. Defer to them when they present a scriptural argument that doesn't wash? No.
I have seen though that a lot of people have been looking at all this either waiting for them to die off, like they are the sands in the hourglass counting down to the end of this system.
Not that I blame them. Any more than I blame anyone. I do see, however in some the desire to be in charge, and I'm always suspicious of anyone who revels in telling others what to do and how to do it.
If I've gotten in any trouble w/fellow elders it's because I don't dunk on publishers when I could. So sister X is weird and partakes. So sister X has a lot of opinions. Hey, maybe she has something to say, maybe she's just feeling lonely and unremarkable and wants to feel remarkable. Fine.
One CO said when some bros complained about another bro that he didn't do things unless he got a lot of praise - "So praise him. No skin off your nose."

I'm not sure how following this scripture is controversial.
BTW - I think the obsession some have w/the term 'anointed' and all the associated baggage is a distraction.
Yes, there are some who appear to be engaging in GB-Anointed worship, but that's their problem, not mine.
The scriptures tell me what to do, how to live and what to hope for and I try to live by these.
I could obsess about obesity in the congregation too if I wanted to. Let's say have people step on scales and if their BMI wasn't w/in a healthy weight, then they'd be disqualified from serving in any capacity.
But I don't.
I haven't been above teasing people at times, like when one brother asked me if I watched the game. I replied "No. I was probably praying or in the ministry."
There are always some who people imagine (or they themselves imagine of themselves) that they are "superfine apostles" - 2 Cor. 11:5 There were in the 1st century and will be today the same issues.

I remember one bro who was "stumbled" when he moved to another state and on his return he said "the brothers there don't let me do anything!" (he was prominent locally before he moved - his illustrations are still in the pubs) - I said to him "What! You mean they won't let you go in FS??"
He got my point, but he wasn't amused.
In the congregation there are always going to be people who aren't happy and have to wrestle to see who's plumage is shinier than the next.
That's not me. I suppose if I were a Calvinist, I'd be more likely to embrace the "Doctrine of Total Depravity" ... Sounds cool doesn't it!
 
‘I Am A Depraved Wretch,’ Says Calvinist Smugly

BURLINGTON, VT—According to preordained sources, a 37-point Calvinist bravely and openly admitted his own depravity this week during a brutal intellectual beat-down of an ignorant atheist. Witnesses were shocked by the young man’s great honesty about his fallen condition, in addition to his luminous intellect and well-oiled beard.
  “Listen, it’s written plainly in the Doctrine of Total Depravity,” he said. “I’m totally depraved. I’m a worthless sinner with no merit deserving of God’s grace...duh. If you deny that, it’s because God in his mercy has not yet chosen to awaken your spirit with the divine light of his unmerited favor. You are an enemy of God and you are completely repulsive to Him. I say this with gentleness and respect because I love you.”
As the Calvinist spoke through a thick cloud of the finest pipe tobacco smoke, sources say they detected a hint of smugness in his smile. The atheist detected the smug attitude and pointed it out.
"Point proved!" said the Calvinist. "I am a depraved sinner and my smugness proves that point!"
The hapless atheist replied, "I don't know... I don't feel like I'm really that bad of a person."
This was the moment the young Calvinist had been waiting for. He set down his pipe, looked at the poor deceived sinner through narrowed eyes, and with a wry smile, demolished the atheist’s puny argument once and for all. “...by what standard?” he said.
The atheist stood there dumbfounded with a dumb atheist look on his face. He knew he had been beaten and was left with no choice but to repent.
Sources in heaven say that thanks to this bold, brilliant Calvinist’s bold and brilliant witness, God decided to go ahead and choose the atheist for salvation before the foundation of the world.

Yes, of course. I think most who write here write for some other motive. It is certainly true of me.
Sure. It could be I’ve been here too long. I’ve come to regard the forum as “mine”—indeed, some have thought it is—and here I ignore that good advise with impunity. I suppose that’s not good—it certainly is not according to our training. Alas, I’ve come to know the characters too well, or at least have become set in my view of the characters. I have to set my own terms for being here, because I think it is not right to earnestly discuss spiritual things with those who unequivocally hate the Christian organization. (not to imply that you have no problem with it, of course. I don’t think it. You’re doing what all faithful visitors do, what I did at one time.) But neither do I want to be seen as an attack dog.
Having said that, see how long it takes for that idiot 4Jah to get on your nerves. You can write a post about torture and he will attach a laughing emoji to it. He asks JWI about Santa Claus, for he is not sure himself, and JWI says there is no Santa Claus. Then he calls JWI a hypocrite for observing December. 
(Let the reader use discernment, but if he doesn’t want to, that’s okay too. Maybe I’ve been here too long.)