Jump to content
The World News Media


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by LloydSt

  1. Has anyone had success installing the JW Library app on a Chromebook? If so, which brand and model number? Thanks!
  2. I find it absolutely wonderful that we can: 1. add notes to our electronic Bible now. Every time that a scripture is explained now, I'll make a note in my electronic Bible, quoting the explanation and where it came from. 2. use the electronic device in service, often playing back videos to the householder to where a sufficient volume is necessary. 3. study, for instance, The Watchtower, with highlighting and adding notes that might be useful when commenting at meetings or for use later 4. access the Watchtower Library CD for use when an explanation is from a publication that was pre-2000. 5. take notes on and record audio on an electronic device at conventions But with that in mind, one wonders what the best electronic device is that can do all that well? Any ideas? I immediately rule out: a. any devices that only provide low volume such that a householder would have trouble hearing a video. (Many a Samsung device has low volume) b. Any devices onto which one cannot put the Watchtower CD. c. Any devices that I worry would not have enough space for all I want to use it for. d. Any slow devices, best tested by attempting to run a video in 480p and which device is unable to smoothly handle that video. Better still would be a device that would even handle high definition videos. e. Any overly heavy devices that would be and look awkward to carry in service, like for instance a regular 15" laptop. f. Any devices that I can't type on easily, especially at conventions where, if for instance, I had a 15" laptop, my elbows would be poking into my neighbors when trying to type. With all that in mind, does anyone have any recommendations? Now seems to be an especially good time to choose and use one device that can handle all that, thus hopefully being able to easily access all that information on that one device for many years to come. Thanks! Lloyd
  3. I'm android and use Moonreader for studying the Watchtower. And I downloaded the ePub version of the NWT which I added to Moonreader. (I won't use anything but ePub files because of the links that one can click on so easily which aren't available with pdf documents (as far as I know). At any rate, I will add notes in that Moonreader epub NWT whenever I come across an explanation of a scripture. An example was the explanation of how Jesus could be both the twig and root of Jessie from "Digging for Spiritual Gems" in this weeks midweek meeting (Dec 19 - 25, 2016). I simply clicked on the link to the Watchtower's explanation which was there in the workbook, and then copy and pasted that explanation into a note within the NWT Bible within Moonreader, to where whenever I come across that scripture again, I can just click on my note and there the explanation will be. But does anyone know of a better way? The downside in using my way via Moonreader is that getting to the scriptures via Moonreader instead of the JW Library app takes longer and is not laid out as well as the JWLibrary app. Yes, I know it will be a happy, happy day when we can add notes within the JW Library app. But till then, does anyone have a better way than what I just decribed above wherein I use an epub version of the NWT within Moonreader? Thanks! Lloyd
  4. 1. Holly said: "Others have also posted using the comparison of science to what we believe the Bible teaches. I don't agree with this comparison because of what the Bible tells us. For instance, Paul did not expect his teaching to change: Galatians 1: 8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed! 9 As we have said before, so I say again now, if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, he is to be accursed!" Holly c'mon. Seriously? We're talking about the attempt at understanding the Bible to be able to preach what it says correctly. You comment would mean that anything written by anyone in an attempt to understand God's word would by definition be "another gospel". And it would require that someone be absolutely right about what they wrote on their first attempt and that they couldn't change. That is ridiculous and unreasonable. We've already covered this 2. Holly said: "He also cautioned against being "tossed here and there by waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine," Ephesians 4:14." May I suggest that the very winds Paul was talking about are the non-witness ideas being floated here!
  5. Holly wrote: "I think the point Shiwii is making is that you would accept the Trinity doctrine, or any other doctrine you were told to accept, in order to, as you've said, not break unity with the other members of the WTS. This would be looking to men and not to God." And if pigs could fly............. That's just a word trap that he's trying to led me into. The governing body would never accept the trinity and neither would I. If one doesn't know that, then one doesn't know who Jehovah's Witnesses are.
  6. 1. Holly said: " If the men on the governing body did claim to be infallible, what would that change for you?" Why do I feel like I'm being set up for some quote from many years ago that someone might interpret as the governing body or a Watchtower president saying they are infallible? So let's skip ahead. Here's the answer to that upcoming quote (if I have guessed right). While it may appear that they had been saying that they were infallible, actually they likely did believe that what they had come to believe was correct, perhaps even as if it came from Jehovah's mouth. But in that, they could have been somewhat mistaken. The happy conclusion is that, as demonstrated by the quote from the Revelation book, that, as a group, they humbled themselves and purposefully admitted that they were NOT infallible. 2. Holly said: "As you posted earlier, 1 Cor. 1:10 was Paul admonishing the Christians in Corinth to be in agreement and not be looking to a person nor promoting one person over another, even if that person were himself or one of the apostles. It's a call for Christian unity, not a call for uniform acceptance of teachings that keep changing." How is it even possible to speak in agreement if there is no agreement about the tenets of the group? That makes no sense. When there was a disagreement about circumcision, the governing body of Biblical times decided what was correct and sent out a decree to the congregation so that they would all be in agreement. This is basic. 3. Holly said, "Don't you count on those in other churches to ignore this very scripture and change their beliefs to yours?" I'm not sure I know what you mean. I know, as I'm sure you do to, that there is an almost shocking lack of agreement amongst even individual denominations, not to mention the so-called "Christian" groups as a whole, and amongst almost all other religions as well, witness the disharmony amongst Muslim religions today. However, we welcome folks to come out from those non-unified religions to become part of one that is unified on a worldwide basis, in harmony with 1 Cor 1:10.
  7. Kudos to Holly for explaining what she did to Shiwiii about misinterpreting my "trinity" comment! Thanks kiddo!
  8. Ok, let's start with this: 1. Shiwiii purported that Lloyd wrote: "if the Watchtower suddenly published an article that said that the Trinity doctrine was correct, then I'd believe that" This tells me that you are following MEN and not God." What I actually wrote was pretty much the opposite. Here it is: "It seems, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that you [Holly] want to boil it all down to where any truth, being "fluid", could change at any time. In other words, if the Watchtower suddenly published an article that said that the Trinity doctrine was correct, then I'd believe that, which is foolishness.....on several levels." See those words "which is foolishness"? 2. Shwiii wrote: "So you would accept that the org is right even though you know that they are not. That is called Cognitive dissonance. " Again an attempt to put words in my mouth, a common tactic called a "straw man" argument where one takes issue with something that is easy to contend with, but which is quite different from the original discussion. But the answer is that if I thought I might have happened onto something that seemed more correct than what we had thought, I hopefully would just keep my big mouth shut and wait on Jehovah. How would I really know that I was correct about a matter anyway? 3. "Who according to the Bible is to teach us all things? Who is to be called "teacher"? Who directs us? The answer to all of these is most definitely not an organization." So is it you? You're the one that has presumed to know more than the organization right? Further, who did Jesus tell, 3 times, to feed my little sheep? Who made the decision about circumcision that was distributed to the congregations? As I have already said, it is a group effort and by definition that involves organization. They try their best to understand the Great Teacher and what is said in the scriptures and to use that understanding to build up those who want to be Jehovah's servants. Try to grasp that. 4. Shiwiii said, "So your hope is in the elders to tell you what to do and what not to do. This is not the "main plot" or theme of the Bible." Again, I never said that. Just another straw man argument that Shiwiii relies on quite heavily. What I hoped that the elders would do in a case where I broke from the unity of Jehovah's people is to point out that I was embarking, like Eve did, on a course of independence. And yes, choosing independence, as Eve did, over submission to Jehovah IS the main plot! 5. Shiwiii wrote: >Lloyd: "I would hope that just because I hit on a point or points that were ultimately correct that I wouldn't feel superior to others or try and push ahead." Shiwiii: "No one said anything about feeling superior to others or tooting your own horn." Dude, YOU asked me, and I quote, "So tell me this, if YOU or someone understood a scripture to mean something and it was in disagreement with the WT. YOU were reproved for this because it went against the org, and later it became that YOU were right, what would that say to You?" (caps mine) See the words, "What would that say to YOU?" You are asking me to come at this as if I was the one with the problem, not you. And if I was embracing beliefs that would break unity with Jehovah's people, i would feel like I was being superior and tooting my own horn, at least in my mind. 6. Shiwiii said: "This is the thinking that has been ingrained in followers to not think for themselves, or else they are being proud or boosting their own ego. This keeps people toeing the company line and turning in those who think differently.' Wow. You really have no idea how Jehovah's people think, do you? Dude, we've studied, sometimes for years and pondered deeply over just exactly what we are doing, thinking for ourselves, and coming to the conclusion that this is the way. What you call "toeing the company line" is in reality a purposeful decision to remain loyal to an organization that obeys Jesus command to preach and teach the good news worldwide and has done so in over more than 700 languages with more to come, in some cases risking imprisonment or even death, and in almost all cases being made fun of, or how did Paul put it? Ah yes, "we have become as the refuse of the world, the offscouring of all things." You think that's fun? But we endure because we choose Jehovah's side, and not the independent side. We try to be patient, show a waiting attitude, and don't push ahead. Yeah, we know lots of people have lots of different ideas, but we know from intense study that what we have been taught, coming from an organization that is actually doing what Jesus said to do before the end comes, is generally vastly superior to anything else. So we don't take issue. Instead, having received this vastly superior knowledge, we try and show gratitude and deep appreciation. If one receives a beautiful work of art, is it wiser to condemn that art because there is a minor flaw somewhere, or would it be wiser to express gratitude that you even were able to own such a masterpiece? Fact is, you know the drill, and it seems that you have made your choice. But you have precious little time to become humble, and pray that Jehovah allow you to return. Everyone would think most highly of you if you did so. But I'm gonna guess that you will remain stubborn, remain independent, and continue to choose Eve's way. Big mistake. Big.
  9. Holly said:"I think you can see that even though the men on the governing body say they don't claim to be infallible, what they determine to be a Bible teaching must be accepted just as though they do claim to be infallible." Another swing and a miss. Your conclusion that the reason Bible teachings are agreed upon as they are revealed is NOT because the governing body wants to be accepted as "infallible". But I'm gonna give you a little hint. What does 1 Cor. 1:10 say?
  10. >Witness said " I can serve the Father in Heaven without the need of an earthly organization" You cannot and at the same time fulfill Jesus command to, "Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you." You cannot at at the same time with all the brothers, "speak in agreement and that there should be no divisions among you, but that you may be completely united in the same mind and in the same line of thought." You cannot and at the same time, "in the midst of the congregation I will praise you with song." You cannot and at the same time, "consider one another so as to incite to love and fine works, not forsaking our meeting together." Look man. You've gotta come to grips with reality. You cannot isolate yourself, perhaps only "gathering" with some folks every now and then who also want to criticize JW's at a home or online. How's that inciting to love and fine works? Further, it's a group effort, and by definition that involves organization. Let go of pride, self-righteousness, and that independent spirit. Taking hold of Eve's hand, almost the entire world bows down to the spirit of independence like it was a god. They are all on the wide road that Jesus spoke of. Brass it out, show a little courage and break free, and soon you'll find yourself once again enabled to serve shoulder to shoulder with those, imperfect though they may be, whose foremost intent is to uphold Jehovah's sovereignty by obeying him willingly from the heart. Look, before you go firing off a response, check out this video I watched myself for the first time last night. Kinda long: 42 minutes, but well worth it. I think you'll be able to identify.
      Hello guest!
  11. >" to change your beliefs about what the Bible teaches whenever that organization tells you to change them. This tends to give "the truth" a rather fluid quality. " Again with the black and white thinking Holly? It seems, and please correct me if I'm wrong, that you want to boil it all down to where any truth, being "fluid", could change at any time. In other words, if the Watchtower suddenly published an article that said that the Trinity doctrine was correct, then I'd believe that, which is foolishness.....on several levels Again, please try and grasp the similar scientific concept wherein there are many things that are established, such as Newton's Laws and Archimedes Principle that will never change, at least for the normal environment in which we now live. But the fact that there are many things that are established and that will never change, does not mean that in other more nuanced investigations, new things might be learned in time. You did hit the target however when you said this, "you've agreed by your dedication and baptism [that I wish to be identified] as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in association with the organization you believe Jehovah is using." Quite true.
  12. >"I grew up in a farming community, and in 1975 I remember my father saying JW farmers he knew were selling their land, home, everything in anticipation of Armageddon. Are you saying that because it didn't affect you, that it didn't affect anyone of a worthy amount in God's eyes?" Did I say that? "Surely you have heard of the talk given in 1967 at District Convention by DO Charles Sunutko, "Serving with Everlasting Life in View". "Well now, as Jehovah's Witnesses, as runners, even though some of us have become a little weary, it almost seems as though Jehovah has provided meat in due season. Because he's held up before all of us, a new goal. A new year. Something to reach out for and it just seems it has given all of us so much more energy and power in this final burst of speed to the finish line. And that's the year 1975. Well, we don't have to guess what the year 1975 means if we read the Watchtower. And don't wait 'till 1975. The door is going to be shut before then. As one brother put it, "Stay alive to Seventy-Five"" And how long have you let this stumble you? How long will you let the unpublished words of an over-zealous District Overseer keep you from serving Jehovah whole-souled? And would you let those words deprive you of everlasting life where suchlike things will be as nothing in comparison?
  13. >" So tell me this, if you or someone understood a scripture to mean something and it was in disagreement with the WT. You were reproved for this because it went against the org, and later it became that you were right, what would that say to you?" It would tell me that I lacked patience and was unwilling to wait on the organization Jehovah is using, and furthermore, thought more of myself and my own abilities than the organization that made so many things clear and published those things worldwide in over 700 languages as per Jesus' command. And that I was quite happy relying on my own understanding rather than taking the advice at Proverbs 3:5 to NOT rely on my own understanding. It would tell me than I had some serious Eve-like tendencies to do what I imagined was best. That goes straight to the "main plot", the main theme of the Bible, namely that Jehovah's ways are best, and I would hope that the elders would make that plain to me and I would pray that I would have the humility to accept that counsel. I would hope that just because I hit on a point or points that were ultimately correct that I wouldn't feel superior to others or try and push ahead. If I lived in Jesus' day and happened on the info that he said that the disciples couldn't bear, I would hope that I wouldn't start telling my fellow disciples about what I discovered, knowing that Jesus would reveal what he had to reveal at the time he thought most appropriate, even as he said. And so I would make a promise to myself that I would never again press my own ideas onto others, flagrantly trusting in myself. I would realize that I might get something right this time, but that might not be true the next time. I would hope that I would be humble and not let my pride force me to try and justify myself.
  14. Suggest "Witness" that you read my last post. Further, I lived through 1975. Guess what? No heartbreak. I think the heartbreak you speak of is vastly smaller than one might imagine. I know of no one back then who experienced heartbreak. We, as you said, adapted and it wasn't a problem. Everyone I knew thought that 1975 could be an interesting date, but our loyalty to Jehovah was much greater than that date. We don't serve Jehovah based on a date anyway. And by the logic you suggest, there would be no progress since everything would have to be exactly correct from the get-go. That's the mistake they cling to in Christendom and so they are locked into things like the "Nicene Creed" of 325 and 381 C.E. But progress doesn't work like that. And teachers don't teach like that. I took astronomy in college, pre-Hubble, and some of the things they believed and taught back then turned out to need to be adjusted, changed, and reversed. But progress has been made and we know more about the physical heavens now than we ever did. In fact, you'll commonly hear professors of every discipline regularly say, "It turns out that........", indicating that at one time they believed one thing, but after more discovery and consideration they've reconsidered and come to a better understanding of a subject. Why are you so adverse to the logical progression of Biblical knowledge, the steadily growing light of progress and understanding? Fear of not getting it exactly right could easily be the killer of progress, and certainly much worse than remaining stagnant because one might feel obligated to stick to what was originally presented. We search for truth. We grope for truth. We pray for truth. But that doesn't mean we always get it perfectly correct the first time. Sometimes it's not the right time as in when Jesus withheld info from the disciples because at a certain point of time they were unable to bear it. But progress comes in time, if one doesn't allow themselves to be stumbled, and if they remain loyal to Jehovah, whose organization feeds Jesus' sheep as they were instructed to do....now in over 700 languages and throughout the earth, as per Jesus commands. That fact alone should be enough to cause a person to examine themselves to see where they may have erred, as opposed to trying to blame someone else.
  15. Holly, as I have explained several times now, investigation of Bible truths is similar to investigation of the physical heavens or the human cell or a jillion other matters. Progression in understanding is the natural normal way for things to go. There may be the occasional misunderstanding, but the path is generally positive, and upward. Quibbling about whether new information conflicts with the older, to what extent, and whether or not that would violate Russell's maxim, "new light never extinguishes older light," has little value. It does seem obvious however that Russell was likely speaking about basic, well-established truths and not looks at things that may need need further clarification. In physics, math, and astronomy for instance, there are well established truths such as Newton's Laws and Archimedes' Principle. But that doesn't mean that nothing new can be learned and that adjustments can't be made where needed. Then too, as was written in the Revelation Climax book: "It is not claimed that the explanations in this publication are infallible. Like Joseph of old, we say: “Do not interpretations belong to God?” (Genesis 40:8) At the same time, however, we firmly believe that the explanations set forth herein harmonize with the Bible in its entirety, showing how remarkably divine prophecy has been fulfilled in the world events of our catastrophic times." I'm certain Russell would agree that what he wrote was not infallible, don't you? Look, in the 1920's, 1930's, 1940;s, 1950's and so on, Astronomy was taught to students. There were tests to be taken and answers had to be given according to the progress in knowledge up to that point in time. In the 1920's the answers given on tests might have resulted in a high score. But those same answers might have resulted in a much lower grade in 2016. That's how things work. Progress. An increase in light or knowledge. I don't think we can define exactly just to what extent Jehovah points the way or to what extent we grope in the direction he gives, but no matter. He remains the Father of Light and we do well to progress in understanding.
  16. How can you miss the point of the illustration HollyW? It is simple, practical, reasonable, and follows other disciplines wherein one attempts to understand a thing in a logical progressive way. Nor is there any conflict with God being a person of Light, without darkness, as I have already explained. Jehovah doesn't just spoon feed those who want to serve him. He has given them incredible brains and reasoning abilities and allows them to pursue the truth rather than just forcing it down their throats. Along the way, those who are humble can grow in understanding by admitting that they may have been off a bit initially and are willing to adjust to what has become clearer. Again, this is the clear advantage that Jehovah's Witnesses have other many other religions. Your view of Russell/Rutherford change in views was covered in the illustration wherein one tries to discern what the seedling 30 yards away was. One might not understand initially just what sort of plant that is. One might get the wrong idea and have to change one's view in light of new information. That could even happen several times. But eventually the evidence starts to mount and conclusions become more solid. This is common sense. If your point is that the light must be increasing in a strictly linear fashion, then I would suggest you take a step back and view the forest before you view the trees. Views on things like who the superior authorities are went back and forth for a time. So what? Eventually that became clear, and if one can step back, one can see the general slope favoring a positive, clearer direction of understanding overall. Again, this is simple reasoning. As one grows in knowledge, insight, and understanding older ideas that may have missed the mark are discarded, just as they are in the scientific community, and the truth becomes ever clearer. (Note: You said: "You illustrated something being seen in the darkness. 1 John 1:5 shows that this could not be from God because in Him there is no darkness at all." That is correct. The darkness referred to the major misunderstandings that Christendom still promotes today, and out of which Jehovah's people came via a generally progressive and positive beam of light) Holley, here is where one can get into trouble. That is by holding people to standards that are unreasonable and that reflect a strictly "black and white only" point of view. Someone says "progressive light" and you focus on the definition of "progressive" instead of the incredible advances of knowledge. See the point? Become humble in your understanding. Open your mind and you will be much more likely to find you way.
  17. >"I know you probably worked hard on your illustration, but it seems to me to be out of harmony with what the Bible reveals at 1 John 1:5 This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. " I"m sure you worked hard on your response as well, but I fail to see how my illustration conflicts with John 1:5. You gave no explanation. What is true however is that though we may progress in our understand of the scriptures, that in no way conflicts with the fact that God is Light and in him there is no darkness. I fail to see any connection between those facts and the fact that we try to progress in our understand of the scriptures. The same would be true as regards James 1:17 ( Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow. ). You seem to be trying to say that since Jehovah gives perfect gifts and good things means that our attempts at understanding the scriptures must be perfect from day 1, but that doesn't make logical sense nor does it harmonize with other scriptures. Need I list scriptures wherein Biblical characters grew in knowledge? And you misunderstand Russell. He did said, "any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth." But he was speaking about truth and not about the attempts at understanding it. Further, you misinterpret my illustration. It simply shows that what may appear to be one thing in the darkness, may prove to be something else entirely in the light and upon a closer examination. Moreover, does it really makes sense to you that Jehovah would "speak from the heavens", so to speak, on every little point? Is that how you see him, as a micro-manager being sure that every single nuance of every single act at understanding the scriptures is rigorously correct at every point in time? Or is he not a God who let's folks grope for him and search for him. Isn't he in fact a God who reveals things progressively, Jesus stating that there were certain things that the disciples were "not able to bear" at a certain point in time. Doesn't progressive understanding make much more sense? If pertinent, it would perhaps be wise to not allow pride to get in the way of logic and reasonableness.
  18. My Dad used to take me deer hunting when I was a teenager. We'd go out when it was dark and be in a deer stand in a tree as the light began to come up. At first you could make out precious little, but as the light slowly intensified, the tree stump that may have initially looked like a sleeping bear, became more easily identifiable. Once the morning had broken, much more became clear. Now if someone had asked me at that point if I felt I was required to believe that what I had thought was a bear really was a tree stump, the question would make no sense. Of course, it was a tree stump. Why would someone ask a person was required to believe it was tree stump when that was so obviously clear? But what about the seedling that was growing out of the ground 30 yards away? Well, at first, that was not even visible when there was little light. But then at mid-morning, one could see the seedling, but still it was unclear exactly what it was. Likely a relative of a nearby plant or tree. But upon returning to the sight a while later and doing some in research into the leaf shape, etc, we might come to some pretty good conclusions. But even then, the passage of time made the identification more discernible. Of course, in some situations, identification of the plant could have been mistaken or need to be altered if one realized that there could have been a slight error at the initial or subsequent examinations. Likewise, JW's understanding of the scriptures continues to grow and mature. This is one of the great advantage that Jehovah's Witnesses have over most other religions. It is their willingness to change or adjust based on new insights or investigations. That is in fact how science works (or at least is supposed to). How silly it would be to be required to, for instance, be bound to the beliefs astronomers had back in the 1900's. As Hubble peers into space and other bits and pieces of information are discerned, our knowledge of the stars and space grows. Likewise with the scriptures. The question as to whether we are required to believe the new insights might be best rephrased, "Does one want to progress in knowledge or not?" By way of contrast, it is most apparent that most churches are mired in the doctrine of the third - sixth centuries. They cling to, for instance, the Athanasian Creed. It's as if they are required to believe that the tree stump is really a bear! Now as to which camp one chooses to belong, that is a choice for each individual. But as for me and my household, we choose continual progress.
  19. I don't know why, but even after a good night's sleep, when I sit down in my seat at a convention, I almost immediately start to fall asleep. I don't want to, but it has happened to me time and again. And it's really almost impossible to resist, especially after lunch, no matter how light I eat. And I know I'm not the only one. It happens to one especially well regarded sister I know of as well. And a look around will almost always find others fighting it or with eyes shut. For some reason, it really helps me if the speaker has some humor in his talk. Or if I sit close to the speaker. Also, sometimes I've used the trick of crunching some ice. That always wakes me up when I'm driving and starting to get sleepy. But I always fear that my ice crunching will be distracting for others. (I'm the kind of guy who almost prefers distractions, or at least is never bothered by them, so feel free to crunch away if it's just you and me) But I know some are easily distracted, so if I use that technique, I do it as discretely as possible. Another technique I've used is going to try and find a "lonely place to rest up a bit" at lunch. A 15 minute nap can be so refreshing for me! But here's a new technique that is working, though I have no idea why. I recently acquired a 12.2 inch Samsung tablet, and you can buy a Logitech keyboard to go with it, which I did. And that keyboard is very quiet. So, using the free Evernote app, I started taking notes on that tablet with the quiet keyboard, and guess what? I stay awake!!! You'd think the same would work by just taking hand-written notes. But I still fall asleep when I do that, even to the point where my pen trails off into a flatline, humorously indicating little brain activity. That ever happened to anybody? But typing works! Maybe because it requires me to listen and quickly find the right keys to press at the same time. I don't know. But it works for me, so I thought I'd pass it on.
  20. How do I view my own death? Troublesome, because I'd hate to miss seeing my grandkids grow up and I'd really like to be married to my current wife in the new world. Those would be two of the stings of death I suppose. How do I view the death of others? For them if they died in the condition of having Jehovah's approval, it's almost like being called safe at 3rd base. (Successfully coming out of the 1000 yr reign would be safe at home) They'll make it into the new world. Hurrah for them! 'Course, till then, I'd miss them. One sister in our area came down with fatal cancer. But before she died, she said that she'd rather just quickly die now, safely in Jehovah's hands, knowing she'd be waking up soon cancer free, rather than go through the possible lingering ravages of that disease. And that happened.
  21. Ghana was mentioned several times in the July, 2016 Watchtower (study edition). May Jehovah bless your efforts there!
  • 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.