Anna

That is the logical conclusion of course. Unless we look at our preaching as an opportunity to express our faith and teach others like Jesus said we should. I suppose it is up to Jehovah how he handles the part where no one gets a chance to ever hear (such as India and China and other places like that) and I am confident he will handle it with love and justice. That is why I think (my opinion) that we (the org.) is being a little presumptuous  in saying that only Jehovah's Witnesses will be saved (specifically go through Armageddon) HOWEVER, it IS what the scriptures indicate. I am talking about non Christian religions, (which have billions of adherents!). And when the Bible talks about "doing good to Christ's brothers" (assuming he means other people, whether religious or not) then that would make the other parts of the scriptures where it is clearly stated that to be saved one must believe in Jesus, questionable. The only way around that would be if that scripture was applied after Armageddon where the people would be given a chance to be informed and then choose. The ones who would go through Armageddon would be ones who have had their hearts read and were seen as having potential of accepting Jesus. These are just my musings

“Beware of the scribes ......They devour the houses of the widows...." Mark 12:38,40
The scribes were gaining monetary support from those ill-equipped to give it. One of their teachings was that the greatest act was to give money to a teacher. There is little to illuminate on what actually went on here but some historians have suggested encouragement for lavish gifts, mismanagement of the property of widows dedicating themselves to temple service, charging of exorbitant legal fees and expenses for estate management on behalf of widows. This was very much a man's world. Even sponging on hospitality has been suggested although the "devouring" description indicates a more sinister practice such as "squandering". This matches the activity of the Prodigal son in his squandering of his father's resources on fleshly pursuits (prostitutes). Luke 15:30.
In any event, this heinous practice cannot be over condemned. Jehovah provided amply for Israel in order to delegate to them the requirement to provide for widows. The scribes enriching themselves at the widow's expense and then showily making so called gifts out of their consequent surplus into the temple contribution box constitutes one of the most cynically, offensive actions any apostate religionist in Israel could have taken.
And yet that widow still trusted in Jehovah' s arrangement, despite the conduct of those entrusted with its stewardship. It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to see that functioning within an arrangement (organisation), regardless of it's divine origins and sanction would not serve as a guarantee of God's favour anymore than rejecting it on the basis of the behaviour of hypocrites within it. The widow still trusted in Jehovah and supported His organisation (arrangement) with all she had left. 

We should preach because we want people to share the joy that we share. We don't preach because we are making choices about who seems most worthy of becoming a JW. If that were true I think we would be looking into better ways to get to territories we can't currently reach very well or very often. Instead we repeatedly hit the easiest territories, and the most popular in my congregation appear to be the ones from which our average demographic is mirrored. Rarely do I see a Witness go out of their way to speak to a homeless man or people in shelters. "Old Folks Homes" (assisted living) are worked hap-hazardly. We are not the ones doing any of the saving. Our preaching, in fact, is much like the way the mouth naturally speaks out of the abundance of the heart. It's a joy to share good things with our neighbor. In another sense, it's a bit like prayer. Jehovah can read our thoughts constantly and there is no specific need for Jehovah to listen to a specific prayer to know who we are what we need how sincere we are in asking for forgiveness, etc. But just like with another human, we should find our relationship with Jehovah to be warmer and closer when we take the time and focus to speak about our petitions, supplications, and burdens. It's our chance to speak out of the abundance of our heart.

That is the logical conclusion of course. Unless we look at our preaching as an opportunity to express our faith and teach others like Jesus said we should. I suppose it is up to Jehovah how he handles the part where no one gets a chance to ever hear (such as India and China and other places like that) and I am confident he will handle it with love and justice. That is why I think (my opinion) that we (the org.) is being a little presumptuous  in saying that only Jehovah's Witnesses will be saved (specifically go through Armageddon) HOWEVER, it IS what the scriptures indicate. I am talking about non Christian religions, (which have billions of adherents!). And when the Bible talks about "doing good to Christ's brothers" (assuming he means other people, whether religious or not) then that would make the other parts of the scriptures where it is clearly stated that to be saved one must believe in Jesus, questionable. The only way around that would be if that scripture was applied after Armageddon where the people would be given a chance to be informed and then choose. The ones who would go through Armageddon would be ones who have had their hearts read and were seen as having potential of accepting Jesus. These are just my musings

Oh, yeah! It's him all right. 
There he is in a meeting with the rest of the Governing Body, and he keeps them all waiting so as to answer tweets. Or he slaps his laptop right down there at the Bethel dinner table to peck away on Facebook. After all, he knows he must answer 'instantly.' That @Witness is on to something. As she says: 'How do you know until you ask him? What'sa matter? Chicken?'
More likely, the lowlife interrupts his tea party with Witness to anwer an incoming missive.
Let us not be (overly) unkind here, but imo it is a good thing she got outmaneuvered from her true status as annointed. If she ever assumed powerful heavenly position, I would fear for the earth to spin the wrong way.

Thanks for pointing this out. I thought it was unfair for the paper above (from 2017) to have focused on his racing hobby after a car accident that was more likely caused by distracted driving, the article says. His business was window-washing, but his wife apparently brought up the hobby because that's evidently where more people knew him from:
He was well-known in model racing circles, npi. Looking up Jon Grainger Slot Cars on Google will give you pages of articles and images showing how well-known he was to hobbyists and competitors:
Jon Grainger – The Digital Slot Car Association
www.officialdisca.com/2017/11/jon-grainger/   Jan 25, 2018 - Jon Grainger of Norwich, UK, first took part in DiSCA competition in the Pendle Slot Racing hosted Group C series of 2013. Joining the Racing ... Jon Grainger (ferraif40), a life cut short - The Pit Lane - SlotForum
www.slotforum.com › SlotForum › SlotForum Community Forums › The Pit Lane   Nov 14, 2017 - It is with great sadness that I'm sharing the news here that Jon Grainger, know on the forum as ferraif40, has passed away. I'm not aware of the full details of his death other than that he was involved in a car accident yesterday. ... ...So sad and shocking to hear that Jon's life has ...
Merc W196 and Maserati 250F Streamline - Scratch building ... Dec 31, 2015 UK Slot Car Festival pre-1986 Racing British Classics - Page 3 ... May 18, 2014 News from 'Stryker Racing Slot Car Kits - News - SlotForum May 22, 2013 Stryker News; Ferrari 126C2 - Resin Kit - News - SlotForum Jan 21, 2013 His web site probably from about 5 years ago (https://strykerracing.weebly.com/about-us.html ) says the following about his hobby:
About Us

-ABOVE The main shape of the car is formed- Stryker Racing Slot Car Kits specialise in the production of 1.32 scale slot car bodyshells. Stryker Racing is ran by Jon Grainger, an 18 year old slot racer living in Norwich, whos interests lie between building beutifull models and racing them on the track. Hence the cars are not only fantastic models, but also hand picked thanks to their good diemensions, making them perfect for racing.

Some of our models are made using 3D printing, but mainly cars begin their life in the hands of Martin Field, one of the very best model and pattern makers in the world. Martin is well-renowned, and has been employed by some of the biggest firms in the world, and has worked in many different countries.

The main shape of the car is crafted in Ureol, an epoxy modelling board. Further details are soon added, using filler, brass tube and wire, and plastic. This is then
coated in 'self etch' a filler which smooth’s out the shell in preparation for moulding. Further details such as wings, wing mirrors and wheel inserts are also produced by Martin and prepared for casting. The whole master is thinned out so that a two part mould can be produced, perfect for racing, as it keeps its
strength, while losing excess weight.

The finished master is then sent to Steve Francis, a London based caster, who works his magic with silicone and resin, turning the pattern into a resin slot car shell. Its a messy and smelly job, but despite this, Steve produces perfect replicas of the original
master.

I think the biggest problem with this reasoning is that it assumes that Jehovah's Witnesses, who believe Jesus and God are two separate beings, somehow designate Jesus to a low position. But that is not the case at all. I will not deny that Jesus (when not in human form) is god-like. A powerful spiritual being like God. This position allows perfectly for a son father relationship. The father was first and the son was second. Just like it is with humans who have a family, with the father being the head, so it is with the spiritual heavenly family also. God is the head over all the other spiritual beings including his only begotten son, who he created exclusively by himself before anything else was created. Indeed a very lofty and special position for Jesus. All the other spiritual beings were also called sons of God, as are even humans, but only Jesus had a unique beginning, that being personally created by his father. The point is he had a beginning, whereas God did not. Also Jesus is able to think and act independently of God. Jesus is god, or if you like, even god the son. But he is not Almighty God. He is not one half of a Siamese twin nor clone with Almighty God. I do not see the Bible teaching that. God did not disembody himself and send one part, the "Jesus" part, to the earth. I do not see the Bible teaching that either. What I do see the Bible teaching is that, at great pain to himself, he sent his most precious son to the earth, to become a human, so that he could buy back what Adam and Eve lost. Because Jesus is able to act and think independently of God, the sacrifice had validity. If Jesus was God, then how would the sacrifice even work? It would make no sense at all....
 
 

Well, he/she interprets it the way he/she wants to, because for some reason he/she thinks it's better for God to be in three joined pieces, rather than a whole.
I find that when someone has this conviction, then there is actually no point of arguing. Only persons who are open minded admit that the teaching of the trinity makes no sense.....
It is interesting to see that if a person has no prior bias (no prior knowledge of the Bible or Christian religions) and they read all of the Hebrew scriptures, they naturally conclude that God and Jesus are two separate beings. 

Why don't you ask him? His page says that he typically "replies instantly". Let me know what he says 

Personally I am not comfortable with some of the comments the GB have made regarding faith in the organization, apparently putting it on the same level as faith in God. I do have a problem with that. On the other hand, if this reasoning is made in good faith, and has the effect of unifying the brothers, then as mentioned previously, that is the opposite of fragmenting, and fragmenting has been blamed as the cause of disunity and an excuse for Christendom.
A few broadcasts ago, (March?) one of the GB members in his talk, implored the friends to "trust the Governing Body". I thought to myself, well why not? You've got to trust someone right?  Of course, first and foremost we trust God, but because we trust God, we also trust that as long as we, as individuals, stick to Bible principles, he (Jehovah) will make sure we will be OK spiritually. On top of that, surely the GB know that trust has to be earned. You cannot trust someone if they have given you a reason not to in the past. I have not had such an experience to date. There are things I do not agree with, but they are not fundamental. I would like to see more transparency, but at least I have seen glimpses of improvement on that front. 
No we didn't, but as I explained, there was nowhere for them to gather. They were on their own. Stuck in their denomination, but usually they either fought against it, disagreed with it, or left it. By that, we judge they must have been the wheat.
Who is to say that Jehovah ever stopped finding wheat among the denominations and gathering them together with the other wheat within the confines of a physically defined denomination? I would assume that once true worship was restored, (or maybe at some point during the restoration) that was the point at which the wheat started to be gathered together into a group ..
and the Governing Body know that too.
I will address your other point about the glass of water later....

Did you ask him?  Did you check it out, or are you too afraid to?  If so, how can you be so naive?  The posts are benign, with the comments made by JWs.  You can look them up and see. The same goes for his "friend", Anthony Morris III. There is not one sarcastic note about either page.   For both pages, the activity stopped around March/April., and I am guessing because of the statement made by the organization concerning the GB and social forums.

Yes that is probably correct. Just as a similar number likely feel that even if others were to abandon their faith under test, they never will!
I, for one, am a Jehovah's Witness. That is what I put on official forms that ask what religious denomination do I belong to. But I for one do not believe that only those religiously designated as a "Jehovah's Witnesses" will survive Armageddon. Carrying the name of a religious group of people in this 21st Century does effect how I am viewed. For example, being termed "Jehovah's Witness" on, let's say, a variety of databases will have an effect on the way maybe medical professionals handle the management of my case, in some places. It will also have an entirely different effect on the way I am viewed and likely treated in a political/religious context in some other parts of the world.
But as for surviving the end of this system of things when Armageddon takes place, regardless of its timing or absence of expectation on my part? Well, I do not think what is written on my (so-called) "Blood card" is going to be any more relevant to my survival than the name and address tag on my pet dog's collar.
My survival of the coming cataclysmic end of this system of things will really depend on:
1. That I am actually alive when it occurs.
2. Whether the" judge of all the earth" and the "man who he has appointed" evaluate that I actually fit the symbolic criteria outlined at Rev. 7:14-15:" “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. That is why they are before the throne of God, and they are rendering him sacred service day and night in his temple;" " I do not see a modern day religious designation written there.
So, with regard to the religious designation of "Jehovah's Witness", adopted by a group of people seeking to distance themselves from the corrupt mass of Christian-flavoured religious slurry manufactured by Satans masterpiece of apostasy, Babylon the Great, it is just what it is, a religious designation.
However, I believe that those who will experience salvation through the end of this system will fall into the category of "witness" as described by the apostle Paul in Hebrews 11-12, in company with the one termed as the "faithful and true witness" at Rev. 3:14.
Now, I have made a judgement call that true witnesses of the potential calibre described above are indeed grouping together in association with those who are collectively termed "Jehovah's Witness" in this 21st century. There will be no need to identify a religious organisation in this way after Armageddon, but at present, if I want to continue developing the the spiritual identity as described symbolically at Rev.7:14-15, which will give me at least a shot at survival, then I am sticking with this easily identifiable group. And anyone I come in contact with I am advising to do the same. As for the outcome for those who are yet unaware of God's purposes with regard to this earth, then I will happily leave their prospects in the hands of one who "does not desire anyone to be destroyed, but desires all to attain to repentance." (2Pet3:9).
It is really, after all, due to a succession of miracles that any of us have come to know about Jehovah at all after the combined attempts of mighty forces to suppress the truth of God's Word for centuries. It would not be amiss for the Creator of heaven and earth to unleash a few more of these miracles before He finally calls time on this wicked and smugly selfish system of things. 
 

It is rather a sloppy article but the subject is so visceral that such things are overlooked.
All is told from the point of view of the wronged girl. I don't claim she speaks untruthfully. It is simply that, humans being what they are, we are inclined to remember things the way we remember them...embellish certain points and downplay or forget others. For example, when the judge recalled certain things in a matter-of-fact way, the victim says that's not how she recalled it, and the reporter at that point forgets all about the judge and runs with the victim. I suspect that the judge recollects it more accurately, because he has not carried the emotional baggage for two decades.
When Lett, many years later, speaks of 'apostate lies,' the reporter presents it as though he is calling his old friend a liar. Of course, he is not. No one says that what happened is a lie; it is the spin that enemies (which now seem to include the Inquirer) put on it that is the lie.
I answered at some length the Inquirer's first story and emailed it two two editors and the reporter. It was never acknowledged in any way. Instead, the reporter followed through on remarks he had made on the Reddit forum, that he had more material in the hopper that he considered damning to the Witnesses. Of course, this story that Witness is so thrilled about is what he had in mind.
I take it as evidence that the Philadelphia Inqurer wants this story told one and only one way. If there is anything to mitigate a damning verdict, they do not want to hear it. Of course, they have a story. No one would say that they do not. It is a variation of the "If it bleeds it leads" theme - familiar and not so terrible in itself, but the refusal to consider or even acknowledge a different lens through which the topic might be viewed, is to paint it, imo, as a not very good newspaper. Adding to this perception is that the paper does not seem to have a comment section for its online articles.
Comment sections are not necessarily great, as they attract many a moron, especially on 'hot' topics. But they have become ubiquitous and the fact that the Inquirer does not have one seems but another indicator that they will breach no dissent on what stories they report.
It is the religious version of the shabby journalism that has become the norm today. Reporters of the right or left hype up their view to the point of hysteria, and refuse to look at things that in any way confound their conclusions.
 

I have suffered from both types of liars, too. But I don't think Stephen Lett is either. He was a District Overseer that included my present circuit. I've seen him up close in front of a congregation and at assemblies, although I can't say I have seen him interact closely with elders or other individuals. But he was known to be a man full of a lot of love and concern for others.
When it comes to defending something he loves -- and he loves the organization -- he is prone to the same kinds of mistakes that all humans make. They will often "spin" and exaggerate and filter out negative details to try to put the thing they love in the best light possible. Most people do this naturally when it come to speaking about their children, their spouses, and other loved ones. If you listen closely to what he said, it was also obvious that it was calculated to be a true statement. He didn't say that we have no trouble with such crimes, or that we are better than other religions. He said that we don't protect sexual predators and a claim that we protect predators is a lie that finds its source in apostate lies.
It turns out that he was trying to generalize, and probably spoke from a belief he holds to be true.
I believe he is wrong in some serious ways, but I don't know that he knew he was wrong. I think he thought he was right. I do have direct evidence that we have upheld policies that have protected criminals more than we have protected the victims of these criminals. This may have even protected criminal elders more than others persons in congregations where such crimes have been committed. I think that even now there are policies and procedures that tend to protect criminals more than they protect children, but the written policy is almost as good as it can be made under the restrictions of the two-witness policy (as we currently think we must apply it).

They do not.
It is your spin on them that they call false stories.
Assuming that it is true, In an ever-changing population of 8 million, there will be examples of anything.

I heard he carved it into the bark of a Norway Spruce. If only such a tree could survive the Flood!

That was very interesting. Of course, the real idea behind not believing in an immortal soul is that we don't believe there is a part of the person that goes on living as a separate entity (or life force) of some kind that can have its own memories of itself, and which can obtain and maintain new memories of things like suffering in eternal torment or heavenly bliss (or anything at all).
None of those ideas fit your idea that Witnesses believe in an immortal soul. But we do believe that something "like" what some people call "soul" is encompassed in the set of memories/personality/qualities/traits that make up a person and which can be remembered by Jehovah and recreated in a new body for either a heavenly or earthly environment. This can be summed up in the idea of "spirit" or "soul" but there is still quite a difference between the Witness belief and what most people think of when they hear those words.

I have often wondered it it was me, or EVERYBODY else, that had problems with delirium ...... and then I realized ! ...
... For me, it's not a problem ....
.... I rather ENJOY IT

Thanks @Anna. This bit of the quote is interesting too, even though we can all read it for ourselves. Thanks to @Jack Ryan for a fascinating snip although the motive is unclear.
"Carbon dating is not accurate enough to pin down the exact year the tree sprouted from seed; but, given the estimated age, the tree is supposed to have sprouted around 7550 BC. For comparison, the invention of writing (and thus, the beginning of recorded history) did not occur until around 4000 BC." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Tjikko

So ... assume every five years a branch bends over to touch the Earth, and it reproduces a tree trunk ... and the old trunk dies out..
That means that the trunk has replanted itself, and the old trunk died 1,912 times.
Boy, if the math had worked out to 1914 years this would have been GREAAAAT! to plug into the GB Body Member David Splaine's "overlapping generations chart!"
Now... 9,570 years divided by 5 DOES make 1914 years, plus ... you can get a "9" out of it and a "570", which sounds very biblical.
It is late ... I have the flu, and am very tired and congested.   I will let better minds than mine figure out the obvious typical / anti-typical ramifications.

Your posts are pretty much off topic and it seems you are going on a rant, but I couldn't help noticing the above statement.
Well that was the Pharisees wasn't it? We would not expect them to understand what Jesus meant would we?
On the other hand Jesus explained to his true disciples exactly what he meant: John 17: 20 -23
"“I make request, not concerning these only, but also concerning those putting faith in me through their word, 21  so that they may all be one,+ just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you,+ that they also may be in union with us, so that the world may believe that you sent me. 22  I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one.+ 23  I in union with them and you in union with me, in order that they may be perfected into one,* so that the world may know that you sent me and that you loved them just as you loved me".
Surely you would not suggest the disciples were God and/or Jesus would you? Rather it is obvious that Jesus was referring to the complete agreement that exists between him and his father and would also exist between them and  his followers.
In fact if you read further on in John 10: 34-36 Jesus shows that he rejected their (the pharisees) understanding (that he was saying he is God) and then  10:37-38 it is quite clear Jesus was saying he is God's son and that he is doing the works of his Father: "Do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’?+ 37  If I am not doing the works of my Father, do not believe me".

This is what the Wikipedia article says: " The trunk itself is estimated to be only a few hundred years old, but the plant has survived for much longer due to a process known as layering (when a branch comes in contact with the ground, it sprouts a new root), or vegetative cloning (when the trunk dies but the root system is still alive, it may sprout a new trunk)".
So in view of that, it's a bit misleading to say the tree itself is that old, but evidently the root system survived the flood and was able to sprout, probably repeating the process many times throughout several millennia...

JWs adhere to the teachings of Jesus, they do not believe Jesus is God for there is a clear distinction between God the Father (Yahweh/Jehovah) and Jesus, who is the Son of God. Is it hypocrisy if one, such as yourself, speak ill of another man who does the work of spreading the good news gospel, yet you do not adhere to command and commission? The answer is clear.
Clearly you do not have the Holy Spirit because of what you just posted breaks a very clear quality of what a Christian must profess, but you read the bible don't you? This should be very evident to you and we know what Jesus says about those who do not adhere to the law (Matthew 7:23), especially to someone such a s yourself who have no idea of what the Law of which every True Christians is bounded to.
 
They deny Hell because Hell isn't the lake of Fire, in fact, even bible translation makes this point clear, example, Revelations 20:14
And death and hell [hades] were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
So riddle me this? If Hell is the Lake of Fire, how can you cast Hell in Hell? See how silly that sounds? and Any man who knows God, can go to the Hebrew Old Testament and see for themselves in the Torah an the Laws, that God the Father is not a fan of Fire Torment, this practice was done by Molech Worshipers and Sorcerers who toss their sons and daughters into the burning fire - alive. God even stated such a thing would never cross his mind, so I ask you, you seem to get your giggles and delight out of eternal fire torment of people, ask yourself, if such a thing never crossed God's mind to begin with, why practice it? Of whom do you serve and to whom is your master? God the Father or Molech? You can't teach love with Fire Torment, playing with fire is bad.
They do not believe in the cross because the original form of the word was Stauros, meaning a pole or a stake (tree sticking up perhaps), the cross was a very late addition into Christianity, and the clue of the whole pole/stake situation we can look at Maryas, of which predates Jesus.
Quote yet no explanation. A dog who barks but does not bite, is no dog at all. You also make a small misstep on your part here.
Jesus didn't create everything, nor did he come on his own, nor did he consider himself to be God or equal to him. Your explain is weak and your claim is flawed.
Mormons do not preach the good news gospel, they believe they can be equal to God, they also believe God himself actually had intercourse with virgin Mary, they also only adhere to the book of Mormon and hold a strong view in polygamy and child marriage. JWs, are Restorationist, nuff said. Hardcore Bible pressed also, meaning stick to what the bible says, always. SDA believe in the Trinity, so technically, they are JWs who accept the Trinity. They also believe being part of the nation to fight for a cause. Clearly you do not read the bible very much, unless you are here to troll, it can easily be seen.
Your picture show holds no foundation also. therefore, your spirit has been tested, 1 John 4:1.

Know the difference between counterfeit Christians and true Christians. It's not a new teaching. The scriptures warn about this and give clear identifying marks to help distinguish the two.

Know the difference between counterfeit Christians and true Christians. It's not a new teaching. The scriptures warn about this and give clear identifying marks to help distinguish the two.