Jump to content
The World News Media

#MandelaDay on 18 July is #Time2Serve. Mandela’s 1990 @UN address on #equality for all races...


TheWorldNewsOrg

Recommended Posts


  • Views 439
  • Replies 3
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Member

Mandela divorced his first wife who remained a faithful JW until her death.  He was more militant in his youth (peaceful means did not work) and then married Winnie - the wife who shamed him so much by being responsible for black children's deaths. Winnie was without any scruples or morals.  He divorced her after he came out of prison and married the widow of the Mozambique president.  

I often think that he had time to think when he was in prison and maybe (just maybe) he remembered a little he had learnt from his first wife because he became a reconciliatory figure in South African politics - which made him a great man.  I had the impression that he did not really want to be the first president but was obliged to take the position due to his popularity.  After his first term as president he graciously stepped down.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Guest

Nelson Mandela´s youngest sister Was Also a Faithful Witness:

 

NELSON MANDELA HEARS THE TRUTH AT HIS SISTER'S FUNERAL. 

Report on Sister Lieby Piliso's Funeral held on February 9th, 1997 at 
Mount Frere, in the Eastern Cape. 

Sister Piliso, the youngest sister of Nelson Mandela, President of 
South Africa, was a witness for twenty years.. 

Mr. Mandela's first wife - Sister Evelyn Mandela, has been a strong 
and a faithful witness of Jehovah for the past 40 years. Although she had 
been divorced that long by Mr. Mandela before his imprisonment, she has 
remained a highly respected lady by all in this country, including Mr. Mandela 
himself, who has written to her on several occasions expressing his deep 
appreciation for her integrity and gracious qualities as a godly woman. 

There was a strong lobby within the African National Congress circles 
for Mr. Mandela to remarry her, but Sister Evelyn stood her ground that she 
did not consider remarriage and above all her former husband is not a 
worshipper of Jehovah like herself. 

As anticipated, this funeral drew a lot of attention from the media 
and especially from the people of the Eastern Cape. It goes 
without say that the presence and appearance of President Mandela 
always draws large crowds. Even at this funeral some expected him to say 
something to the throngs that gathered to see him. 

Sister Lieby Piliso was a a faithful servant of Jehovah up to her 
death for over twenty years, although her husband was not a believer. She was 
one of 5 or 6 sisters forming their Isolated Group and her home is in one of 
the most remote villages in rural Transkei. It took more than one and a half 
hours to negotiate up the hills and ravines on a dirt road to reach the home 
of Sister Piliso. 

A large number of witnesses travelled from Umtata - about 150 km 
away, while an even larger contingent of brothers came from Butterworth about 280 
km away to give their moral support to this remote group of publishers. 

The funeral was scheduled to start at 11.00 am. 

The village appeared to be under a state of siege! 

There were police and military armored vehicles guarding the entrance 
to the village. 

There were police and army personnel, traffic officers. security 
officers and secret service personnel. 
There were hundreds of school children. 
There were thousands of local villagers. 
There were seven Kings and Chiefs. 
There were government ministers both in national and provincial 
parliaments. 

As could be expected there also were clergymen. 

About 5 minutes before 11:00 am a fly past of army helicopters 
signalled the arrival of president Mandela. 

After the presidential helicopter landed, he and his entourage 
disembarked and were driven in the two 4 x 4 vehicles to his late sister's home 
to hear the discourse to be given by an elder of Jehovah's Witnesses. 

There were approximately 3,000 in attendance. Seated on the podium 
were: 

The President, Evelyn [his first divorced wife], Winnie [his second 
divorced wife], Graca Machel [his present wife], his children from the first 
two marriages, the Parliamentary Ministers, the Kings, Chiefs and their 
aides, the clergymen, the Piliso family members, could be seen to nod to 
scriptural points and several references from the Society's publications. Even 
the priests were listening attentively. 

After 30 minutes the service was closed and the audience proceeded to 
the grave site. 

While the casket was slowly lowered into the grave, the Witnesses 
sang song 58. 

The following are some comments made to Bro. Douglas Maduma, the 
speaker, after the funeral: 

President Mandela: 

"Thank you for such eloquent words of wisdom. I did not miss a word 
of what you said! I am pleased when young men speak such words of wisdom with 
eloquence and clarity " 

Stella Sigcawu - Minister of Public Affairs: 

"Thank you very much for the way you presented the sermon. Your 
message was clear, not hurting anybody. You have a different way of saying the 
great things about God. Thankyou." 

Mrs. Graca Machel - (now Mrs Mandela): 

" Thank-you for this service. It was such a dignified funeral. It is 
the first time for me to attend such a dignified funeral. In some funeral 
I have attended there is usually a lot of tension. 

Before leaving, President Mandela spoke to Brother Yonga and other 
Witnesses.

 
He said: 

"Thank you very much for all you as witnesses have done. You have 
conducted beautifully the funeral of my sister." 

A supreme court advocate, a personal aide to the president said: 

"You have rekindled my interest in God I have come to appreciate that 
this life cannot be all there is. Please help me to learn more." 


Kind regards, 
Henry van Staden. 
Johannesburg, South Africa.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...




  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
    • I'm not bothered by being singled out, as you seem to be accustomed to defending and protecting yourselves, but it's a good idea to keep your dog on a leash. Speaking of which, in a different thread, TTH mentioned that it would be great if everyone here shared their life stories. As both of you are the librarians here, I kindly ask you to minimize any signs of intimidation or insincerity. It is you people who need to be "banned" here. However, it is quite evident that you hold a negative influence, which God recognizes, therefore you are banned from your own conscience in His eyes.
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,679
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • 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.