Jump to content
The World News Media

Is it time for this forum to close its doors?


Ann O'Maly

Recommended Posts

  • Member

This is the scripture I think the Librarian referenced.

(Mark 9:38-42) 38 John said to him: “Teacher, we saw someone expelling demons by using your name, and we tried to prevent him, because he was not following us.” 39 But Jesus said: “Do not try to prevent him, for there is no one who will do a powerful work on the basis of my name who will quickly be able to say anything bad about me. 40 For whoever is not against us is for us. 41 And whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ, I tell you truly, he will by no means lose his reward. 42 But whoever stumbles one of these little ones who have faith, it would be better for him if a millstone that is turned by a donkey were put around his neck and he were pitched into the sea.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 5.7k
  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I won't speak for the @admin since he is probably not even aware of this "controversy" right now.... BUT.... I just can't imagine Jesus Christ creating JesusChrist.org to publish his words..

My thoughts exactly @The Librarian So many concerning takeaways from this article. 1. It's a-okay for the org to completely restrict an entire area of preaching (social media). Social media

From the April 2018 Watchtower, p. 30-31. This is a bona fide, unadulterated copy (honest).  What are your thoughts on this article? Btw, I hope the irony of posting this here is not lo

Posted Images

  • Member

This is not hard.

It is their material. They want to control its distribution. They have voiced no objection whatsoever to linking to their material. When you do this, it always remains obvious that it is theirs. @Anna

But if you reproduce it - pictures, logo, articles, anything from their art department - it suggests to the casual reader that you are them. And you are not. If you are a liar trying to misrepresent their work, the problem is obvious.

But even if you are a friend you should not suggest that you are them because each of us has his/her own hangups.

I can be crass and sarcastic. I like homeopathy. I comment on things political from time to time (they don't do it at all). If I do this on my own, I am okay. If I do it and include a link to something of theirs, I am okay. If I do it and reproduce the jw.org logo or some picture, I am not okay because I am suggesting I am them and that they identify with my views. The discerning reader will know it is not so, but not all readers are discerning. Most are not.

Many brothers on Facebook reproduce their artwork, thinking it is fine because they are faithful. They shouldn't. I won't say i have never done it before. I don't think I have ever done it here, but I have done it a handful of times on Facebook. I won't anymore. 

Primarily, they are not 'laying down the law' for the vile people. The vile people will not listen to them anyway. They may have to be confronted legally. But it is more challenging to do this when every Tom Dick and Harry of a Witness is also reproducing their work, thinking it is okay because they are friends.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
23 minutes ago, admin said:

If Watchtower Legal Dept. tells me to take something down that is their legal copyright I would immediately comply.

Of course. 'The sons of this system of thing are wiser in a practical way than are the sons of the light'

23 minutes ago, admin said:

Geez.... You guys are a piece of work.

Um.....yeah        But not all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Thanks for all your comments. :) 

Yes, I doctored the image. It was partly fun, partly to make a point.

Quote

"If the spiritual food passes through other channels,
there is no guarantee that it has not been altered
or contaminated.—Ps. 18:26; 19:8."

However, you all immediately noticed something was 'off' and you could compare with the original on the jw. org site. And yet, there is no guarantee that the spiritual food on the jw. org website hasn't been altered either. 

Consider this:

A critic of JWs may allege that there was an Awake! article on the topic of Creation and Evolution that misused a respected scientist's quote. 

A JW may retort that the magazines NEVER misuse quotations because the writers research very carefully and honestly - there was even a recent Broadcast showing us this was so. The critic must be LYING!

So the critic produces this scan with the relevant part marked in red:

Rama_Singh_original.png:

But there is no sign of this particular quote on jw. org nor in the downloadable digital versions. Other than the red marking, has the image otherwise been doctored? Is this critic trying to pull a fast one?

It turns out that the scientist complained to the Org about the magazine's use of his quote and the Org removed the quote from the website's article and the digital download editions. The quote will still be found in the original hard copies and downloaded editions saved to people's computers.

The critic was telling the truth and, apart from the red marking, the scan was a true representation of the original page.

You see, just because the publications are reproduced on other sites, it doesn't mean that the content has been tampered with. Equally, just because a publication appears on the jw. org website, there is no guarantee that the content has not been tampered with - whether it is due to a scientist's complaint about how his work was used, or due to new understandings in doctrine. Website content is so easy to edit now.

@Anna  made the point about it not violating copyright to post links to the jw. org site. True. The article says:

Quote

"Therefore, as the Terms of Use
indicates, you may e-mail someone an electronic
copy of a publication or share a link to material
found on jw.org."

But the receiver of the email-attached copy isn't getting it direct from the official website. S/he's getting it from a secondary source and we're back to this.

Quote

"If the spiritual food passes through other channels,
there is no guarantee that it has not been altered
or contaminated."

Which raises a question: If one plays safe and emails a link to the Org's publications page instead, would the 'link share' count as a placement on the report slip?

@Witness said about there still being Facebook pages for Lett and Morris. I guess we are to understand these are fraudulent. :)

And finally, the reasons for the thread title:

Quote

"Furthermore, posting our publications on websites
that allow comments provides a place for
apostates and other critics to sow distrust of JehovahÂ’s
organization. Some brothers have been
drawn into online debates and thus have brought
added reproach on JehovahÂ’s name. An online forum
is not an appropriate setting for “instructing
with mildness those not favorably disposed.”
(2 Tim. 2:23-25; 1 Tim. 6:3-5)"

This is the GB's 'loving counsel' folks. Discussion of JW publications on these forums is dangerous, inappropriate, and some JW 'brothers' who have participated have made Jehovah the Org look bad. 

So, time to pack up, shut up shop and go home .... *sniff*

?

.... Bwahahaha! :D

Are you kidding? It's much too late to stuff the genie of free online discussion back into its bottle! 

To quote Leah Remini:

Quote

"If your religion is so amazing and doing all these amazing things for the world, then it should stand up to some questioning."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
57 minutes ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Equally, just because a publication appears on the jw. org website, there is no guarantee that the content has not been tampered with - whether it is due to a scientist's complaint about how his work was used, or due to new understandings in doctrine. Website content is so easy to edit now.

Most would consider this a good thing that updates can be made so easily. But for research purposes it would be useful to know which "editions" contained which updates. For example, if this particular Awake! magazine had been on the Watchtower Library CD in its original form, it could still have been overwritten with later updates.

I noticed that doctrinal changes were being inserted into the "Insight" book for a year or more before a notice was added that the online versions may contain different content from the printed version. I still use the printed version of the Insight Book for some of the pictures and charts that don't show up very well in the online edition. I keep only two versions of the Watchtower Library CD on my computer, one from 2006, but the latest one is regularly updated online. I still have about 12 other years of CD's around, but I've never seen a reason to install more than a couple at a time. 

Of course, there is always this:

 

image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
5 minutes ago, Nana Fofana said:

He was quoted accurately. He was not entitled to have the quote removed, much less anything further.

Just found that on topix.com by "pcloadletter", thanks.

Then why do you think the Watchtower Society gave in, and did what he wanted?. Fear of men?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
20 minutes ago, Nana Fofana said:

He was quoted accurately. He was not entitled to have the quote removed, much less anything further.

Exactly.

http://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2011/01/darwins-eye.html

Actually, the fact that the Watchtower went the extra mile with this fellow undermines almost everything @Ann O'Maly says about them. She devotes a huge portion of her life painting them as villains. She throws it all away in a single post demonstrating that they are noble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

 

21 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I think it is no more than going the extra mile.

It might not seem right or fair, but when one quotes an academic, it is actually important to get the context.

(In this case it would have meant reading and understanding the point made here: http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/full/10.1139/g11-046#.WkfFXN-nFPa

and then recognizing that the quote could still have been used but with an explanation that Singh himself was trying to show just how poorly people understand the theory of evolution and how poorly even biologists have explained it. For this reason, he says, not only lay people, but even a lot of academics don't believe it.

The quote, if used correctly, could still have had some impact for the point the Awake! was making, especially since the opening graphic/survey question was based upon that quote. After removing it, the opening was much weaker, relying mostly on just 'Gerard the entomologist.' And if you have read enough of our publications you know that whenever a possible expert is only given a first name, or given just a generic title without a name, that he is probably a Witness, and we don't want that fact made too obvious, out of fear that it makes the argument seem weaker. Some countries, especially in Europe, have begun to look down upon this type of quote as "yellow" so that European language Watchtowers and Awakes will often contain the last name. (And, in Europe, the likelihood of someone knowing him or trying to contact 'Gerard the entomologist' is much lower.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I keep only two versions of the Watchtower Library CD on my computer, one from 2006, but the latest one is regularly updated online. I still have about 12 other years of CD's around, but I've never seen a reason to install more than a couple at a time. 

How do you keep the 2006 one from updating?

I have CDs from 2005, my personal copies of books from the '60s.  I stopped taking printed bound volumes from last year.  The old song books seemed to have disappeared. I have only from 1984. When you leave home, a lot of stuff if left and eventually gets lost or thrown out.  I recently found a well kept almost unused copy of the Let God Be True book, but then I realized it came from my husband's family, brought over by him.  It is good to keep these old books to compare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    • stephwat

      stephwat 3

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • George88

      George88 556

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    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.