Jump to content
The World News Media

JW Insider

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by JW Insider

  1. As I play it, I realize that it is too easy these days to look up 7 and 8 letter words. This was not so easy the last time I played this, many decades ago, through snail mail. There should be a rule against too many 50 point bonus words, or each player will have to become better at defensive plays. In the example above, only one more Triple Word score can be played with a 50 point bonus, and this leaves player 2 in a much worse position to ever try to catch up, even though more 50 point bonuses can be played in lower scoring areas. (This is why a 'handicap' scoring system should probably be worked out to keep player one from getting too much advantage.) A


    23 minutes ago, admin said:

    I’m wondering if a wiki post that is editable would work for you?

    That might work well, too. First, of course, I have to drum up some more interest. 🙂


    KETUBOTH would also catch 2 Double Word scores, and use up more remaining high scoring letters (K B H)

    17x4=68, plus 50 point bonus = 118.

    Followed by LONGWAYS to catch the bottom right Triple Word score and the 7 tile bonus for 107 points.

                                    Player 1   Player 2  
                                    QUETZAL 120 BANJAXED 91
                                    FRESHLY 140 ZODIACAL 128
                    B               KETUBOTH 118 LONGWAYS 107
            K       A   F                  
            E       N   R                  
            T       J   E                  
          Q U E T Z A L S                  
            B     O X   H                  
            O     D E   L                  
            T     I D   Y                  
            H     A                        
                  L O N G W A Y S          
                A A A A                    
            C     D D                      
              E E E E E E E E              
        F   G G                            
        I I I I I I I I             TOTALS 378   314
            L M M     N N N N              
      P P     R R R R R                    
          S S       T T T                  
        U U U V V   W                      
      [ ] [ ]       O O O O O                  


  3. Which calls for ZODIACAL. Hey this is so fun, I might just play this one out myself.

    21x3=63, plus OX (9), plus DE (3), plus ID (3) = 78 plus 50 point bonus.

                                    Player 1   Player 2  
                                    QUETZAL 120 BANJAXED 91
                                    FRESHLY 140 ZODIACAL 128
                    A   F                  
                    N   R                  
                    J   E                  
          Q U E T Z A L S                  
                  O X   H                  
                  D E   L                  
                  I D   Y                  
              A A A A A                    
        B   C     D D                      
            E E E E E E E E E              
        F G G G   H                        
        I I I I I I I I   K         TOTALS 260   219
            L M M   N N N N N              
      P P     R R R R R                    
        S S S   T T T T T                  
        U U U V V W W     Y                
      [ ] [ ]   O O O O O O O                  


  4. Just had to add FRESHLY to the above because it catches TWO Double-Word scores, so that you get 4 times the word score (4 x 16), plus QUETZALS, plus the 50 point bonus, for a total of 64+26+50=140, and most of the high scoring letters are already used up.

                                    Player 1   Player 2  
                                    QUETZAL 120 BANJAXED 91
                                    FRESHLY 140    
                    A   F                  
                    N   R                  
                    J   E                  
          Q U E T Z A L S                  
                    X   H                  
                    E   L                  
                    D   Y                  
          A A A A A A A                    
        B C C   D D D                      
            E E E E E E E E E              
        F G G G   H                        
      I I I I I I I I I   K         TOTALS 260   91
          L L M M   N N N N N              
      P P     R R R R R                    
        S S S   T T T T T                  
        U U U V V W W     Y                
      [ ] [ ] O O O O O O O O                  


    Anyone else can start their own games below.


  5. 52 minutes ago, Anna said:

    Ok. Just testing here. But I can't find the strikethrough button.....

    My edit buttons include B I U S, and the S is the strikethrough. But you don't need it. I think it's better to just erase the used tiles. Seems easier. For example, let's say I responded to QUETZAL with BANJAXED (I never knew that word before today; cheating is encouraged!). I merely erased the used letters. The problem is that it is harder to see if a mistake was made in the erasing.

    0 Points - Blank tile.
    1 Point - A, E, I, L, N, O, R, S, T and U.
    2 Points - D and G.
    3 Points - B, C, M and P.
    4 Points - F, H, V, W and Y.
    5 Points - K.
    8 Points - J and X.
    10 Points - Q and Z.

    The color-codes here are

    • Triple Word
    • Triple Letter
    • Double Word
    • Double Letter

                                    Player 1   Player 2  
                                    QUETZAL 120 BANJAXED 91
          Q U E T Z A L                    
          A A A A A A A                    
        B C C   D D D                      
          E E E E E E E E E E              
      F F G G G H H                        
      I I I I I I I I I   K                
        L L L M M   N N N N N              
      P P   R R R R R R                    
      S S S S   T T T T T                  
        U U U V V W W   Y Y                
      [ ] [ ] O O O O O O O O                  

    Sorry, I added the O's on the last line instead of after the N's.

  6. Better yet, just copy this to the next post and anyone who wants to play can just edit the first play and I will be the second player, or the first player can request another player who is on the forum. Part of scoring is to mark which letters are left and to put the scores in the appropriate columns on the right.

    The only difference between this and regular Scrabble is that you choose which letters you would like, rather than picking them randomly without looking.

                                    Player 1   Player 2  
      A A A A A A A A A                    
      B B C C D D D D                      
      E E E E E E E E E E E E              
      F F G G G H H                        
      I I I I I I I I I J K                
      L L L L M M N N N N N N              
      P P Q R R R R R R                    
      S S S S T T T T T T                  
      U U U U V V W W X Y Y Z              
      [ ] [ ] O O O O O O O O                  


  7. This was made from a Google Spreadsheet which will be shared between players so that a person with the link can edit it. (Will be sent by PM to whomever wants to play, and each updated screen can be displayed here after every valid play is made.) After any play, the player can tally up their points and will need to cross out the letters they used from the letter "pool."

    The first two items are just an example. Let's say the first player plays QUETZAL in such a way that they get 120 points. (Double letter score on the Q and double word, and a 50 point bonus for using all their tiles.) Let's say the next player plays XI in such a way that the X counts for 16 (double letter) for the word AX, and 16 again for the word XI, and also makes LI, for a total of 34 points. And every letter used gets a strikethrough, or gets greyed out in the pool it was chosen from. After that play the game board would look like this:

                                    Player 1   Player 2  
                                    QUETZAL 120 XI 36
          Q U E T Z A L                    
                    X I                    
      A A A A A A A A A                    
      B B C C D D D D                      
      E E E E E E E E E E E E              
      F F G G G H H                        
      I I I I I I I I I J K                
      L L L L M M N N N N N N              
      P P Q R R R R R R                    
      S S S S T T T T T T                  
      U U U U V V W W X Y Y Z              
      [ ] [ ]                                  


    Obviously, the first player has a great advantage in taking out the best letters. A final score will probably reflect this, and perhaps should be accounted for with a "handicap." Perhaps the handicap could be that the first play is split evenly among the two players, or a percentage of that first score is given to the player who goes second.

    It's also possible in most browsers to actually just edit the game right here for each new play and then copy the final board now and then to the next post. You might need to check the scoring against an actual board, or look up the letter values on Google.


  8. 4 hours ago, Anna said:

    As it is a syncretic religion, the figure of the Virgin Mary was associated with that of the Pachamama for many of the indigenous people.

    So true in many countries. That's part of what I meant when I said that ...

    8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

    the Catholic church had already found ways to compromise by allowing "folk" religion to continue to live alongside Catholicism, even among Catholic converts.

    It seems they've found weasel-words to show that something might look like idolatry but it technically does not fall under their definition of idolatry. This is so different from the words the Bible uses such as "abstain" from idolatry, or "flee" from idolatry, or "guard yourselves" from idols. There's no room left for staying that close to idolatry but using technical definitions to claim it's not.

  9. On 10/13/2020 at 1:49 AM, Arauna said:

    Bizarre compromise from the catholic church ....... but what does one expect from one of the "man of lawlessness?"  Recently the Pope had sharmins (spiritistic native Amazonian Indians) dancing around their idols at the Vatican

      Hello guest!

    This was big scandalous news, especially among Catholic conservatives, but barely had time to get noticed before the pandemic drowned out the discussion. To touch on the original topic, native religions in Brazil have historically been persecuted with adherents being killed, massacred, and tortured.  That war between Western religion and Brazil's religions was won long ago, although the Catholic church had already found ways to compromise by allowing "folk" religion to continue to live alongside Catholicism, even among Catholic converts. Today the issue is more about civil rights for Brazil's indigenous people as they are driven from their homelands and "persecuted" for the sake of taking the timber and other resources.

    The Vatican synod with the Brazilian bishops (which included presentations of native dances and even the presentation of "fertility objects") was held in October 2019. Immediately after that (also October 2019) was an interesting OCHR (Oxford Consortium on Human Rights)

      Hello guest!
    discussing the way in which indigenous people, especially, were treated by police and national forces.

    For indigenous "Amazonians" it was once Western-style religion at the point of a gun. Now it's Western-style economic [unsustainable] development at the point of a gun.


    I'm highlighting some interesting points from the Vatican article linked above:

    VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis’ controversial meeting on the Amazon took a criminal twist Monday after thieves stole indigenous fertility statues from a Vatican-area church and tossed them into the Tiber River.

    Video of the pre-dawn theft from the Santa Maria in Traspontina church was shared and celebrated on conservative social media. The Vatican’s communications czar, Paolo Ruffini, termed it a “stunt” that violated the idea of dialogue.

    Even before the three-week Amazon synod opened on Oct. 6, conservative and traditionalist Catholics had blasted its agenda as a heretical celebration of paganism, given its deference to indigenous cultures and spirituality.

    Their criticism reached a fever pitch at the synod opening, when Francis presided over a prayer service in the Vatican gardens featuring the statues of naked pregnant women that were presented to the pope. Conservatives said the “Pachamama” statutes were pagan idols; the Vatican said they were symbols of life and fertility.

    The statues were then placed in a side chapel of the Traspontina church, which is located just steps from St. Peter’s Square and has been the headquarters of the indigenous celebrations organized alongside the synod.


    Francis called the meeting of Amazonian bishops to propose ways to better care for the Amazon and minister to its indigenous peoples, who face poverty, exploitation and the destruction of their homes by unregulated logging and mining.



  10. On 10/4/2020 at 6:26 PM, Anna said:

    The UN is only evil and disgusting in the sense that it is haughty enough to think that they may achieve all these good things by themselves, without God, thinking they can give themselves credit for something that is clearly not in their capacity to achieve.

    Yes. I think that you have hit upon the reason that the quote about peace and security was considered "Satanic." It was haughty in the sense of being far too optimistic and ambitious. Perhaps the words "supremely" and "vision" also give it a religious sense.

    "In+ these+ Goals+ and+ targets,+ we+ are+ setting+ out+ a+ supremely+ ambitious+ and+ transformational+ vision.+ We+ envisage+ a+ world+ free+ of+ poverty,+ hunger,+ disease+ and+ want,+ where+all+life+can+thrive.+"

    Of course, we know from the context that we are likely trying to read into it things that just aren't there, if we try to make too much of the supremely flowery rhetoric.

    But, do we really know what is the demarcation line for calling an organization evil and disgusting? Is it the grand scope of the optimism? The scope of the effort? Is this because they envisage the whole world to be better, not just limiting their efforts to a small country here and there? 

    We don't call a school teacher evil and disgusting if he or she spearheads a project for a cleanup of a park, or a tree planting effort. But what if all teachers in several different countries support the idea of an "Earth Day" where several hours of that day every year are used for the promotion of such projects? What if the teachers optimistically claim that such efforts will save the world from a climate crisis? What if it turns out that the funding and promotional materials for these "Earth Day" efforts come from policies and think tanks at a government level, and these governments are haughty enough to think they can achieve these good things without God?

    (I noticed that even evangelists like Billy Graham and others have felt a need to counsel their audience that Earth Day is not evil.

      Hello guest!

    So should Christians care about Earth Day? Yes.The contemporary environmentalist movement has often been flawed and clumsy and sometimes evil, as any movement made up of fallen sinners tends to be. But, at the core of it, is a concept Christians ought to recognize.

    But there is always a conspiratorialist somewhere who will be happy to find evil in anything. Here's

      Hello guest!

    Don Stewart’s letter (News Messenger, April 22, page A5, “Celebrate Earth and not Lenin”) argued that Earth Day is connected to Lenin’s birthday as both fall on April 22. Celebrating Earth Day shows you are a red Communist and plotting much evil in the world of capitalism.

    Snopes.com even had to produce

      Hello guest!
    , since Lenin had supposedly murdered and "composted" his girlfriend. Other pro-capitalists found other political reasons for calling Earth Day "evil."
      Hello guest!

    The UN policymakers and think tanks look at the world as a bunch of projects. When they look at poverty, they see how some government policies have succeeded in a short amount of time in bringing very poor countries on their way out of poverty, from say 80% below a UN-defined poverty line only 8% still in poverty.  Or other countries bring the meaningful amount of free health care from 50% of their population up to 100%. Or free education of children that was available for 20% of a population is now available to 100%. So the UN recommends some of those same ideas to other member countries in such a way that doesn't bring any specific God or gods into the equation.

    But for us, if the UN wants to promote projects they see as good, they will always be seen by some of us as "evil and disgusting." Even if member countries think this is a good thing in the eyes of their God, bringing God into the equation is a sure way of bringing prejudice and sabotage to these projects.

    And what if they did bring God into the equation? Wouldn't that just make them more evil and disgusting in the sight of most of us? The United States Supreme Court and other government agencies put up a sign that says "In God We Trust." Does that make them any more or less Satanic in our eyes?

    I know we don't tie the term Satanic to all political organizations and entities as we have done in the past, but especially when it comes to the UN, we are apt to use words like evil and disgusting. We can do this, while at the same time praising their efforts.

    Rutherford looked at the British armies occupying Palestine in the early decades of the last century and saw them as the "disgusting thing;" "the abomination of desolation." At the same time the Watchtower temporarily praised the League of Nations, using words saying, in effect, that it was the political expression of the Kingdom of God on earth.

    I see the United Nations as just another governmental organization about which we need to stay neutral. We can watch it as we would any government on earth. We can see its failures and see its successes. And we can see how people put too much faith in it, and their own governments. But if we start calling it specifically evil and disgusting then we are not neutral. We are not idolizing the UN if we point out its successes, just as we are not demonizing it when we point out its failures. 

  11. 34 minutes ago, Anna said:

    Does anybody think that way?  We know not everything the UN does is evil. Not everything the Governments do is evil either, as Paul brings out; "Keep doing good, and you will have praise from it;  for it is God’s minister to you for your good". Wanting to do things "green" is a good thing...

    I think you are mostly right. And I was only trying to show how unreasonable the results could be if this was taken seriously. However, I doubt that Arauna is alone in a similar line of thinking that there must be something diabolical even in quotes like the following that she found in the UN documents:


    In+ these+ Goals+ and+ targets,+ we+ are+ setting+ out+ a+ supremely+ ambitious+ and+ transformational+ vision.+ We+ envisage+ a+ world+ free+ of+ poverty,+ hunger,+ disease+ and+ want,+ where+all+life+can+thrive.+"

    To this exact quote, you may have notice that she responded to it by saying:

    "SOUNDS LIKE THEY WANT TO BRING PEACE AND SECURITY !  SATANS VERSION OF JEHOVAH'S GOVERNMENT. See below where they talk of peace and security linked with sustainable development."

    So, this type of thinking might not be as absent from among us as you indicated.

  12. *** w20 November pp. 14-15 Take Courage—Jehovah Is Your Helper ***
    13 What help do we receive? When it is in harmony with his purpose, Jehovah may use his powerful holy spirit to cause people in authority to do what he desires. King Solomon wrote: “A king’s heart is like streams of water in Jehovah’s hand. He directs it wherever He pleases.” (Prov. 21:1) What does this proverb mean? Humans can dig a canal to divert the water of a stream in a direction that fits their plans. Similarly, Jehovah can use his spirit to divert the thoughts of rulers in a direction that is in harmony with his purpose. When that occurs, people in authority feel motivated to make decisions that benefit God’s people.—Compare Ezra 7:21, 25, 26.
    14 What can we do? We can pray “concerning kings and all those who are in positions of authority” when these individuals are called on to make decisions that affect our Christian life and ministry. (1 Tim. 2:1, 2, ftn.; Neh. 1:11)

    I notice that the Watchtower also includes this within the idea of paying back Caesar's things to Caesar, and even the idea of "being ready for every good work" is subsumed under the idea of performing "government" sponsored works:

    *** w90 11/1 pp. 11-12 pars. 7-8 The Christian’s View of the Superior Authorities ***
    7 Further, Paul’s exhortation to be in subjection to the superior authorities is in harmony with Jesus’ command to pay back “Caesar’s things to Caesar,” where “Caesar” represents secular authority. (Matthew 22:21) It also agrees with Paul’s later words to Titus: “Continue reminding them to be in subjection and be obedient to governments and authorities as rulers, to be ready for every good work.” (Titus 3:1) Hence, when Christians are ordered by governments to share in community works, they quite properly comply as long as those works do not amount to a compromising substitute for some unscriptural service or otherwise violate Scriptural principles, such as that found at Isaiah 2:4.
    8 Peter also affirmed that we should be subject to the secular authorities of this world when he said: “For the Lord’s sake subject yourselves to every human creation: whether to a king as being superior or to governors as being sent by him to inflict punishment on evildoers but to praise doers of good.” (1 Peter 2:13, 14) In harmony with this, Christians would also heed Paul’s admonition to Timothy: “I therefore exhort, first of all, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, offerings of thanks, be made concerning all sorts of men, concerning kings and all those who are in high station; in order that we may go on leading a calm and quiet life.”—1 Timothy 2:1, 2.

    Srecko brought up a point about how neutrality might be equated with lack of knowledge, but it is clear that knowledge would be necessary to distinguish whether those community works requested by authorities are not some form of compromise. 

    It's easy to imagine a group of Witnesses who are told by government authorities that they must clean up a polluted lake or waterway before undertaking some large building projects on its shores, or that they must clean up the toxins that can carry runoff into the water to protect animals depending on it. In spite of the recent article about neutrality, when such situation occurred, Witness lawyers (and others) actually lobbied the relevant government authorities for favorable rulings. Lawsuits were initiated by the WTS to overcome the costs of some of these decisions. I know that brothers were called in to gain a lot of knowledge about the situation before some of these actions were taken. But I also talked personally with one of the lawyers involved and it was my assessment that the spirit of Jesus' words here were not taken to heart:

    (Matthew 5:40-46) . . .And if a person wants to take you to court and get possession of your inner garment, let him also have your outer garment; 41 and if someone in authority compels you into service for a mile, go with him two miles. 42 ... 43 “You heard that it was said: ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 However, I say to you: Continue to love your enemies and to pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise on both the wicked and the good and makes it rain on both the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 For if you love those loving you, what reward do you have? Are not also the tax collectors doing the same thing?

    In the future, if WItnesses are told to build buildings that meet certain "green standards" to meet certain SDG's (Sustainable Development Goals) do you think that some Witnesses might rightly lobby against it, because these SDG's were suggested to governmental authorities by the UN, who only promoted them because they were a way of promoting "peace and security"? And we all know that when we support anything that combines "UN" with "peace and security" we are supporting Satan's schemes?

    A little bit of knowledge won't hurt us. We should not be ignorant of Satan's designs either:

    *** nwtsty 2 Corinthians Study Notes—Chapter 2 ***
    we are not ignorant of his designs: Paul does not just say that “we are aware of his designs.” Rather, he uses a figure of speech called litotes, that is, an understatement made in order to give emphasis by saying that the opposite is not true. (An example of litotes can be found at Ac 21:39, where Tarsus is called “no obscure city,” which means an important city.) Accordingly, some translations render this phrase “we are well aware of his schemes” or “we know his wiles all too well,” which conveys similar emphasis.

    This is a double-edged argument. Arauna is correct therefore to look to whether any of these "community works" are actually compromising. She correctly said she would have to "go along" with some of them even if she hated where they were coming from. But since we all stand individually before the judgment seat, we should all have a reason for the stand we take.

  13. 9 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

    Seriously, would that not constitute a violation of neutrality, to be praying for the success of human schemes? It is enough not to be praying against them.

    I don't think the scripture meant that we need to pray out any particular persons or schemes, only that the men in high positions who make decisions that might affect us, and our preaching work, will make decisions that result in the kind of peace and security that have a net positive effect.

    9 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

    That’s how 1 Tim 2:1,2 should be understood, I think, that the governments come to understand our apolitical nature and thus leave us be to do our Bible education work.

    There's something to that, I agree. We get the necessary peace when they stay out of our way. But the verse can mean a range of things to different persons in different circumstances. Some get more specific in their prayers than others. I think we could even pray that someone comes up with a vaccine for Covid19. Some would say no, because that's like praying for a worldly medical institution.

  14. On 10/2/2020 at 5:29 AM, Arauna said:

    Evidence provided by UN I suppose.

    No. I never saw any evidence provided by the UN with respect to this man from Ethiopia. I never saw any evidence from you either. Just a claim with no evidence.

    On 10/2/2020 at 5:29 AM, Arauna said:

    you have enough time to sit in front of your computer all day and look up articles written by PRO_UN sources and put it on these pages.

    Your assumption and judgment are both wrong in this case.

    On 10/2/2020 at 5:29 AM, Arauna said:

    I do not have that kind of time BUT I have been watching the UN for a longer time than you have and believe me

    Perhaps you have been watching for a longer time, and perhaps, as you say, you don't have the kind of time to watch. But I get the impression that your sources are not from watching the UN anyway, but they come from conspiratorial, racist, lying and/or biased sources. I like to look at the viability of as many sources as I can, and I agree that this can be very time consuming. And I also don't think people should merely repeat slanderous accusations without taking some time to research these claims first.

    On 10/2/2020 at 5:29 AM, Arauna said:

    So dominate these pages by quoting irrelevant data produced by the "right" people with the credentials YOU approve of.

    It's easy to claim things you don't agree with are simply "irrelevant." If you have evidence, point to it. Show it. Give a link to the person who claimed that the WHO president genocided his own people, for example. I think there is none. But there is quite a bit of evidence that this was a lie from racist and politically motivated sources. I go where the evidence takes me, and it's not my fault when evidence for one way or another seems to "dominate."

    On 10/2/2020 at 5:29 AM, Arauna said:

    I have more important things to do than arguing with people who have ONE skill only - that of looking up articles which confirm their bias....... like many of the scholars you quote.

    We all have more important things to do. But I don't have anything against providing evidence. Evidence can come from scholars on all sides of a controversy. We can listen to all of them. And evidence doesn't have to come from just scholars and experts, either. An average person like me can take a video of something and it provides good evidence, too. An average person can track down an expert's contradictory statements, or admissions of making false statements, and this can provide evidence, too. (I just found an amazing admission of false statements by someone this morning and I'll make a post about it when I get time.)

    On 10/2/2020 at 5:29 AM, Arauna said:

    I am in the process of moving countries and so may not be here on these pages again.  I think it not worth my time....

    I've given up on this forum a couple of times. But it's the only forum I use. I have a FB account I haven't written on in 4 years, and I have a Twitter account to read news, but I never write anything there. Also, this is a diverse group willing to talk about a lot of different subjects. I don't think any of us know many people at our Hall that would be comfortable with a lot of these topics. So I typically tend to come back after a few days.

    I hope your move goes well, and I hope to see you on these pages again.

  15. On 9/25/2020 at 2:10 AM, Arauna said:


    By the way, the evidence indicates that this is nothing more than an outrageous lie. I think we should be careful is not to slander people just because some propagandist or conspiracy theorist or even racists made some claims that were so easily debunked. The evidence was already presented under another topic. In the case of the leader of WHO, evidence showed that the slander was most likely both politically and racially motivated.

    The fact that you included this without any evidence puts a cloud of suspicion over everything else you have claimed without evidence.

    I hope everyone who reads your comments recognizes that the majority of what you included in that post were your own comments, not quotes from the UN documents. And your comments usually had nothing to do with the UN statements.

    On 9/25/2020 at 2:10 AM, Arauna said:


    Try to find a UN based source that shows that the UN (UNESCO) is enforcing sex education that teaches children from age 4 to touch themselves and teaches the grossest forms of porneia. Based on the above, i suspect you will have no success.

    I went to the UNESCO site and found their guidelines. They are summarized here:


      Hello guest!
    is designed to assist education policy makers in all countries design accurate and age-appropriate curricula for children and young people aged 5 – 18+.

    Based on a review of the current status of sexuality education around the world and drawing on best practices in the various regions, the Guidance notably demonstrates that sexuality education:

    •  helps young people become more responsible in their attitude and behaviour regarding sexual and reproductive health

    • is essential to combat the school dropout of girls due to early or forced marriage, teenage pregnancy and sexual and reproductive health issues

    • is necessary because in some parts of the world, two out of three girls reported having no idea of what was happening to them when they began menstruating and pregnancy and childbirth complications are the second cause of death among 15 to 19-year olds

    • does not increase sexual activity, sexual risk-taking behaviour, or STI/HIV infection rates. It also presents evidence showing that abstinence-only programmes fail to prevent early sexual initiation, or reduce the frequency of sex and number of partners among the young.

     The only thing produced by UNESCO is guidelines to assist educational policymakers. It's 139 pages. It reads almost identically to the guidelines that have been in place for the US Dept of Ed for decades. There is no enforcement. You can look through the guidelines in the link above and the worst thing you might find in the Age 5-8 category. (There are "age-appropriate" differences in the guidelines for ages 5-8, 9-12, 12-15, and 15-18+.

    For 5-8, here are the places where "touch" "touches" "touched" "touching" etc are mentioned. As a parent, I'd be concerned about which levels teach what, but I saw nothing in here that strikes me as dangerous. I learned about the gross forms of porneia at the Kingdom Hall and through Bible reading, even before my parents mentioned them, or I heard anything at school. But I think that publishing this set of guidelines and some expectation of consistency is good for parents to be able to mitigate "damage" where possible. But this is going to be true even of subjects that deal with history, religion, evolution, biology, etc., too.

    Learning objectives (5-8 years)I

    Key idea: There are healthy and unhealthy relationships

    Learners will be able to:

    list characteristics of healthy and unhealthy relationships (knowledge);

    define good touch and bad touch (knowledge);

    perceive that there are healthy and unhealthy friendships (attitudinal);

    develop and maintain healthy friendships (skill

    Learning objectives (5-8 years)

    Key idea: Everyone has the right to decide who can touch their body, where, and in what way

    Learners will be able to:

    describe the meaning of ‘body rights’ (knowledge);

    identify which parts of the body are private (knowledge);

    recognize that everyone has ‘body rights’ (attitudinal);

    demonstrate how to respond if someone is touching them in a way that makes them feel uncomfortable (e.g. say ‘no’, ‘go away’, and talk to a trusted adult) (skill);

    identify and describe how they would talk to a parent/guardian or trusted adult if they are feeling uncomfortable about being touched (skill)

    Learning objectives (5-8 years)

    Key idea: People can show love for other people through touching and intimacy

    Learners will be able to:

    state that people show love and care for other people in different ways, including kissing, hugging, touching, and sometimes through sexual behaviours (knowledge).

    Key idea: Children should understand what is and what is not appropriate touching

    Learners will be able to:

    define ‘good touch’ and ‘bad touch’ (knowledge);

    recognize that there are some ways of touching children that are bad (attitudinal);

    demonstrate what to do if someone is touching them in a bad way (skill).

    Learning objectives (5-8 years)

    Key idea: There are healthy and unhealthy relationships

    Learners will be able to:

    list characteristics of healthy and unhealthy relationships (knowledge);

    define good touch and bad touch (knowledge);

    perceive that there are healthy and unhealthy friendships (attitudinal);

    develop and maintain healthy friendships (skill)

  16. On 9/25/2020 at 2:10 AM, Arauna said:

    I quote agenda 2030:

    I noticed that even with all that quoting from Agenda 2030, you found absolutely nothing that supported any of the conspiratorial fear-mongering that is so prevalent all over the Internet.

    I'm glad you finally looked it over, however. In the past you said: "Just read the documents." So I did. I've learned not to give so much credence to propaganda and conspiracy theories. It reveals that there has been, not just a lot of conjecture, but a lot of outright lying from those who tried to make us believe that those conspiracies are actually to be found somewhere in the UN documents.

    On 9/25/2020 at 2:10 AM, Arauna said:

    The plan is to have this MOSTLY completed by 2030 AND THEN COMPLETELY BY 2050.

    The UN's version of the 2030 agenda is here:

      Hello guest!
    and it is a plan, basically from 2015, for countries that sign on, to set a good example over the next 15 years (from 2015) by resolving to eliminate poverty, and address many other types of injustice, along with pollution, climate issues, education, human rights, etc. They think they can manage to do good in all these areas by partnering with supportive governments, and other NGOs, and various other organizations which have also expressed optimism.

    Of course, we know that in spite of all the good it wants to do, the UN has little to no power. The World Economic Forum site you mentioned points to sites that show some of the SDG's (sustainable development goals) are so far off track that they are not realistically expected before the 2070's.

    I notice that you still see some of the goals as "bad" and some of the methods for trying to achieve them as "bad." I expect this old system in this old world to screw up almost any good goals and turn good into bad. But that is not the fault of the goals themselves. Many countries will set laws that say, for example: no more pouring of untreated sewage into a certain lake or river, or no more paying women less than men for the same job, or no more than 1 steer or 10 sheep per hectare of grazing land. But even if these laws are wonderful for people and the environment, there will always be people lobbying for a way to delay laws or make exceptions, because rising profits will always be more important in the short run, than good goals in the long run. And there's also ways that governments just get it all wrong. Look at the 20th century dust bowl days in the United States, or going after the wrong pests in China, or spraying carcinogenic pesticides everywhere. It's the way of the world.

    I notice, of course, that although you could find nothing in the UN documents that was "bad" you added comments throughout to make certain things seem bad.

    On 9/25/2020 at 2:10 AM, Arauna said:

    SOUNDS LIKE THEY WANT TO BRING PEACE AND SECURITY !  SATANS VERSION OF JEHOVAH'S GOVERNMENT. See below where they talk of peace and security linked with sustainable development.

    I should hope that an organization with the stated goal of promoting peace and security would "sound like they want to bring and security." The likelihood of overall success is practically nil, of course, but you think it's some sort of evil thing that they should want it? Why do you think peace and security is such a bad goal? You are supposed to be praying for governments to find ways to obtain peace and security. 

    (1 Timothy 2:1, 2) . . .First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgiving be made concerning all sorts of men, 2 concerning kings and all those who are in high positions, so that we may go on leading a calm and quiet life. . .

    Do you pray that those in high positions work for peace and security, so that at the very least we can continue to preach more freely, or even so that we can lead a peaceful life in this world?


  17. A previous topic that had already gone on for about 40 pages was quickly turning into a place to discuss the many different things we see going on in 2020:

    • Covid19 lockdown and the expectations for the near future because of it.
    • Covid19 leading to food shortages, turned into a discussion about Christian food distribution (my fault)
    • that turned into a discussion of who are Christ's brothers.
    • and, as the usual end-times sub-topics:
      • the UN and various claims regarding the UN, some of which seem conspiratorial.
      • the "disgusting thing" (abomination of desolation)
      • etc.

    Even after splitting off that discussion to a new "shorter" topic here, it's already 5 pages long, but that's still easier to navigate than 40 pages under the previous topic.

    This new topic will end up moving some of the posts by: @Arauna@TrueTomHarley@Anna@Witness@4Jah2me

  18. 2 hours ago, AlanF said:

    From time to time this forum sends me emails pointing to some topic.

    Come to think of it, I get those too. It's just that I made up an email address to start my account here that I haven't checked in 5 years.

    33 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

    And I didn’t put in the Elton John music, either. That might have been JWI.

    Oh no. A pop culture reference that I don't get. Am I going to have to go back and read the posts I skipped that were among you, scholarJW, and AlanF?

    I'll assume the song was "Saturday Night's Alright For Fighting."

    Or was it:


    Daniel is having a dream to explain
    He can see King Neb is quite like, a man who going insane
    Oh and I can see Daniel praying on high
    Looks like God's with Daniel, but that King Neb lost seven times.

    Apologies for ruining these lyrics:

    Daniel is travelling tonight on a plane
    I can see the red tail lights heading for Spain
    Oh and I can see Daniel waving goodbye
    God it looks like Daniel, must be the clouds in my eyes


  19. 27 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

    What time frame would this mean. Even I understand it to mean 609BC. What's the point you are trying so hard to make? The rest is none responsive. 

    Yes, I think you are about right. It means 609BCE (Watchtower 629 BC), based on the other items from Allen Smith in the post:

    It started with the death of King Josiah and ended with the toppling of the Ottoman Empire in 1914AD

    The time of the Gentile began with the loss of King Josiah.

    This is borne out by the Watchtower's chronology in the Insight book:

    *** it-1 p. 205 Assyria ***
    the death of King Josiah of Judah (c. 629 B.C.E.).

    *** it-1 p. 418 Carchemish ***
    King Josiah of Judah unwisely tried to turn the Egyptian forces back at Megiddo and was killed in the attempt (c. 629 B.C.E.).

    *** it-1 p. 450 Chronology ***
    Pharaoh Necho’s battle resulting in Josiah’s death likely came in 629 B.C.E.

    *** it-1 p. 768 Euphrates ***
    Pharaoh Nechoh took the city about 629 B.C.E., engaging Josiah’s army at Megiddo and killing that Judean king while on the way there.

    You asked what's the point I am trying to make. It's the point I already made, that the Watchtower rejects placing any deportation to Babylon even in 625, much less 629, as the Watchtower only admits a deportation with Jehoiachin and another one with Zedekiah, none with Jehoiakim until several years after 625, pushing that one to 618 so that it matches the deportatin with Jehoiachin. 

    Another question that comes up is why you and Allen Smith appear to reject the Watchtower's chronology for the date of Josiah's death. The Watchtower calls it 629, and you call it 609. Do you not accept the Watchtower's date of 629 BCE?

    I notice that both of you have said things similar to another point made in Allen's posts, where he says:

    I have no problem with the secular timeline, either,

  20. 10 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

    Where in the Watchtower have you seen it "reject" the first deportation. You are once again, twisting words to benefit you just because someone contacted AlanF to fight your losing battle. 

    I did just show you a couple posts back, where the Watchtower always moves this first deportation from 625 to 618 (Watchtower chronology), which is 605 to 598 BCE. If you think this benefits me, you'll have to explain how.

    Forget AlanF. I doubt he even agrees with me on all these points. If he does, I don't really care. And I surely didn't invite him here, nor did I invite ScholarJW, but I'm sure both of them could easily have used bot searches to flag them whenever 587 or 607 gets mentioned here. I've seen ScholarJW's name pop up almost immediately in the "Recently Browsing" box when these key dates are mentioned. When a name is italicized in that box it means they are writing something.




  21. 10 hours ago, César Chávez said:

    Keep looking further or maybe they were erased to help you all keep your false application from seeing the light of truth.

    I have no trouble searching the archives, even deleted posts, because I have copies locally in Microsoft OneNote. I sometimes find problems with the local search function here, but they come up instantly in OneNote. When I quote from them however, you can't pay attention to phrases like "Edited 5 hours ago by allensmith28." That's because those time stamps are often from several years ago.

    Since you have said so many of the same things that Allen Smith said, perhaps you can explain the belief that the Gentile Times actually begins in the time of Josiah (rather than Zedekiah) which was near the time that secular experts give for the 607/605 time period. (Currently 627/625 in Watchtower chronology.)

    Here are just a couple of the quotes from OneNote. For length considerations, I skipped the Qabus story, and the evidences for Israelites in Egypt in 1513 BCE, but I still left a lot of the extra context below so that you might recognize the discussion. (I can put back the skipped portions if you want to discuss them.) The yellow highlights were Allen's, but I have added some "orange-yellow" highlighting, where Josiah and Jehoiakim were mentioned:

    Tuesday, January 2, 2018


    • Advanced Member


    • Member
    • 90
    • 59 posts

    Posted 6 hours ago (edited)


    This is the reason, that, Carl Olof Jonsson FAILED to disprove the time of the Gentiles that was distant by the loss of King Josiah a REFORMER, and King Jeoiakim that REFUSED God’s Command, and the freedom of the Jews once again in 1914AD.

    Since the Alyahudu archives, show 3 exiles instead of 2, opposers furiously have to defend 598BC to coincide with 587BC. Even, if their own secular chronology DISPROVES it.

    Yahudu Archive and addresses the three waves of exile—in 604, 597 and 587 B.C.E.—as well as the end of the Babylonian Exile and artwork depicting these Biblical episodes.

      Hello guest!

    They also need to defend their contradiction of 2 Kings 24:1

    2 Kings 24:1New International Version (NIV)

    24 During Jehoiakim’s reign, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon invaded the land, and Jehoiakim became his vassal for three years. But then he turned against Nebuchadnezzar and rebelled.

    Where are apostates placing these 3 years  and where are they placing

    2 Kings 24:2New International Version (NIV)

    The Lord sent Babylonian,[

      Hello guest!
    ] Aramean, Moabite and Ammonite raiders against him to destroy Judah, in accordance with the word of the Lord proclaimed by his servants the prophets.


    Where would the actual destruction of Judah and Jerusalem, have started? 607BC-604BC, 598BC or 587BC-586BC?

    Since the Al-Yahudu documents were first, referenced in 2004? Where would, COJ, have gotten the information prior to the release of his fourth edition, in that same year. Sounds a bit deceptive, but OK!!

      Hello guest!

    Edited 5 hours ago by allensmith28


      Hello guest!


    This story puts Nebuchadnezzar in, WESTERN ASIA as indicated by JAMES USSHER. An area that the Babylonian chronicles don’t cover. Also, the time period indicates the transitional period between the Judean Kings Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim. This would also be a reason to track down King Necho II in the western province. This would have to be factual in order for the Babylonian Army to travel freely in that region. Something COJ, Ray, or anyone that didn’t bother to consider it and hasn’t factored the military aspect of that time.

    So, YES! Every scholar has inherited some kind of error. It’s up to the unbiased ones to tell a correct story and a correct timeline, instead of BEST GUESS. Furuli has an excellent view, but, it could be refined when he states Jerusalem and the Temple were “destroyed” in 607BC. Here, one needs to use the hypothesis behind Occam’s razor. While I have no problem with Furuli’s timeline, I have no problem with the secular timeline, either, if both are told to coincide with scripture. The burning of the temple CANNOT be in the SAME instance. There are 3 Kings mentioned in scripture before one can conclude the burning of the temple in King Zedekiah Reign. No matter how you slice it and wish for it. It’s not going to happen. This is the point? Where is an honest mistake, and where are deliberate mistakes to cause, deception. The Watchtower has NOT made any deliberate mistakes to cause deception, but secular chronology has, by ignoring “completely” what was going on between King Jeriokim and Royal Prince Nebuchadnezzar (Commander) of his own army in WEST ASIA. Thus making a complete assumption as to the destruction of Jerusalem in 587BC, when all that can be hypothesized is the opposite to only the burning of the temple, possibly the royal palace, and homes of dignitaries in 587BC. Now, it also states a wall. Was this the siege wall or a wall that was already erected?


    I was told on the authority of Hisham b. Muhammad: Luhrasb, the nephew of Qabus, . . .


    Now Edwin Thiele shifted his decision from the burning of the temple in 586BC in his 1944 article to 587BC. Peer pressure I would imagine. But, he had in 1944, a scheme that resembles the Babylonian chronicles without those specific dates mentioned as to the whereabouts of the Babylonian army and its conquest in the Babylonian Chronicles.




    Screen clipping taken: 1/2/2018 6:23 PM

    Now, I place my faith in the WT Chronology as a scholar, not for the thousands upon thousands of archeological finds, or written stories? It only takes 1 confirmation of a chronological scheme to set you in the right direction.


    Either way. By WT chronology or secular chronology? The time of the Gentile began with the loss of King Josiah. That can be proven by the non-Jewish governments, the Jews were subjected to. Timeline. By the ARABS, ROMANS, CHRISTIANS, and finally, MUSLIMS. All these governments were none Jew (GENTILE). There’s NO DISPROVING THAT, no matter how hard ex-witnesses wish it.

    Now can you prove the end of the gentile time? Many, are skeptic, and they usually resort to a common theme. NO! Because, how can you prove Jesus sat on his invisible throne in 1914AD. Since none of us have superpowers, just like the GB claim for themselves, and is being misunderstood. They get their divine message by God’s Holy Spirit.

    Pastor Russell claimed something would happen by 1914AD, and it did, by his calculation, it came to be true. That’s one. Divine intervention, or the luckiest guess man, made in the 19 century.

    Can we use WW1? No need to. But it was the catalyst to bring in the end of the gentile time.

    General view: The Great War, 1914–18 1998

    It toppled the German, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, and Russian empires; it swept the Bolsheviks to power in Russia; it marked the beginning of the end of European empire overseas; it used up centuries of accumulated capital, transforming European states into debtors and the United States into financial

    leadership; and the profound disillusionment following the war sowed the seeds of fascism in Italy and Germany. The conflagration of 1939–45 cannot be understood without examining that of 1914–18. The Great War truly cast a long shadow. [p.20]

    The History of the Ottoman Empire during World War I began with the Ottoman's attack on Russia's Black Sea coast on 29 October 1914. The attack prompted Russia and its allies, Britain and France, to declare war on the Ottoman Empire in November 1914.


      Hello guest!

    The Balfour Declaration was a public statement issued by the British government during

      Hello guest!
    announcing support for the establishment of a "national home for the
      Hello guest!
    people" in
      Hello guest!
    , then an
      Hello guest!
    region with a minority Jewish population. It read:

    His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country… Immediately following their declaration of war on the Ottoman Empire in November 1914, the

      Hello guest!
    began to consider the future of Palestine.

    Between 1913, and November 1914, Britain liberated the Jews from the Muslims (Ottoman) Empire. Closing the GENTILE TIMES. Can the Gentile Times be proven? YES!!!!

    It started with the death of King Josiah and ended with the toppling of the Ottoman Empire in 1914AD (ARAB-MUSLIM). So, there has NEVER been a good reason to RECONSIDER the Gentile Times!!!! History Proves, what the symbolism is, behind scripture, means? Another failed COJ assertion, nowhere in scripture does it mention the Gentile Times.




    From <https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/5510-607-bce-is-it-biblically-supported/?page=13&tab=comments#comment-78663>

  22. 27 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

    Wrong. I'm saying that theologians are beginning to see a new perspective on something that has been known for centuries. The fact they are now just catching up, has made past arguments null and void.

    I see that you didn't explain why the Watchtower also rejects this "FIRST deportation" you are promoting as important for some reason. Nor have you explained why it is important yet. Are you saying that perhaps the reason the Watchtower rejects your "first deportation" will change because something recently seen, "has made past arguments null and void" including our own?

  • 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.