Shiwiii

This right here is what I am talking about. Arauna, I'm sure you won't like this, but please don't take it and read into what I am saying. This subject between you and I, has nothing to do with religion or beliefs, but rather our human nature and ability to accept those who are different from us. A hair style is nothing but hair, it does not speak to character, it does not speak of beliefs........its just hair. Now I can understand your position and experience, however it doesn't make it absolute in every circumstance. When a person singles out others who have a different look and labels them in a derogatory way based only on looks, it is no different than straight racism based on the color of their skin. Anyone can spin it this way and that, but those are the facts.

wow, so you do align with the view that Jack Ryan was describing. Singling out someone and making assumptions based on looks. Nice example of stereotyping!

Interesting that not a single jw here has responded (given me a good witness) as to why my view is incorrect since it contradicts what the wt says. Well, this isn't the first time and I'm sure it won't be the last, but it does speak volumes.

I disagree with those resurrected during the 100 years. See my explanation below. 1. yes 2. depends on how you view Pauls statement in 2 Corinthians 5:1-10. I do believe that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord. 3. See below 4. See below It doesn't, See below for my understanding. all references to a particular verse pertain to Revelation 20, unless otherwise noted. All of Revelation chapter 20 explains this I feel. Starting at verse 1, we are told of how Satan would be bound for the 1000 years. Then we see how those who have been give n the authority to judge, will do so. Whom are these going to judge? Verses 4-6 tell us that they are those who have done well and lived as God has required, No image of the beast, no mark, their testimony about Jesus. We are told these are blessed and holy. 1 Corinthians 15 23-26 explains the order in which resurrection takes place and to whom, those who belong to Christ. This chapter in 1 Cor tells us more. It tells us that not all who belong to Christ will die first, nope some will be changed without ever tasting human death, 1 Cor verse 51. No mention of the unjust yet. Rev 20 verse 7 states "When the 1000 years are over,..." so this takes place after the 1000 years. This is after Kingdom rule started and those who were still alive AFTER Armageddon. This is proven by Rev Chapter 19 where it is stated that the beast was captured and false prophet were thrown into the lake of burning sulfur. The signs that these two performed prior were what deluded many into taking the mark of the beast and worshiping the beast. So at this point it is chronological, ch 19 then ch 20. So during Armageddon, some will survive, but not all. Those who do survive are under rule for the 1000 years. There is no mention of ANY resurrection during the 1000 years, only after. Judgement of the dead comes after the 1000 year reign and after the battle of Gog and Magog. This is not the judgement of the living, but those who died anytime prior to this moment. Verse 12 tells us that all of the dead are standing before the throne awaiting judgement and they were judged based upon what they had done while living. Ch 20 verse 15, If their names were not written in the Book of Life........gone, lake of fire gone, second death. Once this judgement is over, the new heaven and new earth come into play and ch 21 verses 6-8 restate whom will be thrown in the lake of burning sulfur, the second death. I'm sure not all of you will agree with me, its ok. However, this is what I believe based on God's word. So if jw's believe that there is a second chance/resurrection to try again during the 1000 years or after, I completely disagree. I just cannot see where in scripture that can be supported. If someone can show me, that would be great, but I just don't see it.

NO,no,no...... This topic is not about what scripture says, AND the topic is not about "What is the point of surviving the judgement day if you can achieve the same thing after the 1000 years?" This topic is about the contradicting statements by the wt in their same magazines! I did not write this title, my title was" Which is it?" in other words......what does the wt expect you to believe when they speak out of both sides of their mouth/mag.

So as I am sure there are plenty of you folks here that adhere and read the wt and "awake". Have any of you who have read these considered the wt Oct study edition this year? In particular this little quote: "KEEP TRYING TO MAKE DISCIPLES 14. According to Jesus’ instructions recorded at Matthew 28:19, 20, what do we try our best to do, and why? 14 Read Matthew 28:19, 20. As we conduct Bible studies, we have to try our best to “make disciples . . . , teaching them to observe all the things [Jesus has] commanded.” We need to help people understand how important it is for them to take their stand for Jehovah and his Kingdom. This means trying to motivate people to make the truth their own by applying what they learn, dedicating their life to Jehovah, and getting baptized. Only then will they survive Jehovah’s day.—1 Pet. 3:21." So one must be baptized as a jw in order to survive Jehovahs day (judgement day). That is basically what is being said. What about this statement by the wt? "Millions of others will have the opportunity of gaining everlasting life when they are resurrected. Jesus performed a resurrection when he visited the city of Nain. The only son of a widow had died, and Jesus, “moved with pity,” raised him to life again. (Luke 7:11-15) Also, the apostle Paul said: “I have hope toward God . . . that there is going to be a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.” So which is it? What is the point of surviving the judgement day if you can achieve the same thing after the 1000 years?

and yet you still think this is the only game in town? C'mon JTR, you already see the reality of it all.

context of your statement tells the story, not your denial.

Oh yes, Indiana, I have and what i found was that Jesus ate with sinners and had compassion for ALL people. He even forgave the criminal who was on the cross next to Him, a criminal! Self professed criminal at that. Did Jesus avoid the adulteress? Nope. Hmmm, maybe we can look at what He said as well.....Matthew 7:1-2....or perhaps we can take a look at what Jesus did for another sinner at John 5:14? So why don't you tell me, Are the actions of shunning ANYONE on par with how Jesus treated others? but this was your implication when you said "On another note tonight I learned a lesson: before attending a wedding ask if they invited a disfellowshipped 🤭" With a smiley face at that. hogwash! EVERYONE attending the wedding would know that the grooms mother would be there, its his wedding.

Is this how Jesus treated others?

Does this statement mean anything to any of you/us? I'd like to hear your thoughts. I ran across it today and I wanted the opinion of this group. It reminds me of the scene in full metal jacket where private Joker refuses to reverse himself because he knows he will be beaten harder if he does. Have any of you made a mistake, or lied, and kept up with it even after you realized you were wrong?

Bahahahahahaa See, I said you were funny. I'll help you out since common sense and logic escape you: One day you will come to realize the error in front of you that you cannot see at this time in your life, it will hurt your pride/ego/mind when you do realize it, but you will one day realize it. Why do you think everything is a personal attack against you? Is it because you are the one normally making such attacks and expect the same in return? Or is it because the wt told you that anyone who is not a jw will attack you? I forgot to add.....eeek, I'm scared.

You're funny. I mean really. Didn't answer my question at all, just created more chatter to try and build yourself up. Oh BTK, one day you'll get it, it will hurt, but you'll get it.

have you not read the court transcripts? If you have, then you are being dishonest, If you haven't, then you need to educate yourself.

right! oh, wait......it is the wt who classified them as such.

I wonder what that will do? Will the wt abide by the law? Will the wt appeal? Will Norway become a reproof only region?

Agreed. Key words: "crime" "secret" "qualified"

Why? Give me one good reason why one would NOT report it? I disagree. The law does not state that clergy is NOT allowed to report. That being said, if they report, they are not breaking the law. This is partially true, the clergy privilege is when something is confessed one on one, not in the group setting as in a judicial meeting. How would anyone else in the cong know if it was only confessed to the elders? They wouldn't, unless they were part of it This is why a private reproof is BS! again, you are thinking along the lines that secular authorities need to correct the wt, they will, just wait and see. Why is it that in the elders handbook that vandalism is reported immediately but child abuse is not? Does that seem right to you? I know it doesn't and that you don't think that way, but the wt does.

I agree with you. Why can't the wt see this as well? Why does it take force to do the right thing? Why does it take secular laws to force the wt to be Christ-like?

Court transcripts: In February 1994, Evelyn and Andrea reported Kendrick's July 1993 sexual abuse of Andrea to the Fremont Police Department ("Fremont Police") and to Child Protective Services---Conti-Watchtower_North_Freemont_Cong._appellate_brief.pdf $35 million in Montana Fessler settlement Conti Campos 16 cases handled by Love & Norris law firm and a pay out of over $13 million just to name a few and I am sure there will be plenty more to come. And again I ask: Did they (edlers/wt) act in a Christ like way in the way that they handled any of these cases? Of course you don't. It doesn't work that way. I am glad to hear you say these things. I think we all want this. if it helps others , I agree. I think some of what you said in this paragraph is a little extreme, but I get the gist of what you are saying. Restricting people shouldn't be the answer, reporting it to those who are trained to handle such cases is. I really want to know your opinion on this, Do YOU think it is right that elders are to contact the legal dept and not the police?

It couldn't have been. Why you ask? because it would make "Jehovah" sad.......( It makes a huge difference as seen in the many many court cases going on right now against the wt. Lots of money is being taken from the wt because of their failure to report when they are aware of the abuse happening. Your prerogative, yes, however you've been trained not to because it would bring reproach on the name "Jehovah" aka. the wt. It didn't help Candice because the wt didn't warn the cong. Again, it is all because it would make "Jehovah" sad. She won, period. There is no law about letting the cong know, I get that, but I would hardly say that the elders were "protecting the flock". Let me ask you something: Did they (edlers/wt) act in a Christ like way in the way that they handled Kendrick and his potential to harm more children? Maybe, maybe not. But you know what she did get? Publicity! That right there opened the flood gates to give courage to others who were abused, to stand up and do something about it. it was the leak in the dam, and when the wt lost, others saw that it was possible to make the wt pay for their crimes! you can claim that she is a hater or a seeker of money, but that is what you have been told she is, but it doesn't make it so.

No truer words spoken. It really isn't the rank and files fault either, they have been conditioned over the years to think that way by the way the publications are worded. If they say it subtly enough times, its bound to stick.

You know it wasn't an elder who reported it, right ? Because it would have NEVER happened if it was left up to the elders to report. There in lies the crux of the problem and EXACTLY why Candice won. I do not feel that she was out for the money, but rather to stick it to the jw where it hurts them most.

I get that, but to say that there is on one who can fire them, is not a true statement. I highly doubt that you throw your hat in with everything that they believe. Also, you did "fit in" Being a self professed cowboy, renegade, man of guns, you don't quite look the part with the suit and tie in those pictures you posted. I also doubt that you put that suit on each day regardless of whether or not you are headed to the kh. Just saying.

I get it, it isn't real easy when that has been your whole life up to this point. The reality of it though is that it is quite that simple and easy. I'm sure you can relate if you put it in perspective. When you were a young child in school, I'm sure you noticed the different clic's, the group of rockers, the cowboys, the preppy kids, jocks etc. When figuring out your niche, you tried to fit into a group that you thought was "you", only to find out that it wasn't worth trying to please the group and become someone you just weren't. You left hat group and continued through life without much thought. You took with you some things you liked of the group and moved on and developed your own character. We all do it, have done it. This clic, the wt, is just like that. Take from it what you choose and drop the rest. You have the power and ability to control your own life, without excess baggage. Does this mean "leave Jehovah and make him sad" ? Quite the opposite, it means taking control of your own life and pressing into God with all of the knowledge you have gained thus far. I mean, the gb has already stated that they are not inspired and can very well screw up with what they force the rnf to accept. Why not allow the Bible alone to guide you WITH the knowledge you have taken from the clic? Unless you truly believe that by studying the Bible alone will lead you into darkness in a matter of months?