Jump to content
The World News Media



Recommended Posts

  • Member
13 hours ago, Arauna said:

Especially if you are preaching full time and you have a property lying fallow - it can later be sold for a profit.

Did Jesus or any apostle advise to be economically smart in a such way anywhere? 

I have only found advices like this:

2 Thessalonians 3:12 To such people we give the order and exhortation in the Lord Jesus Christ that they should work quietly and eat food they themselves earn.

13  For your part, brothers, do not give up in doing good.


1 Thessalonians 2:9 Surely you remember, brothers, our labor and toil. We were working night and day, so that we would not put an expensive burden on any one of you, when we preached the good news of God to you.


1 Thessalonians 4: 11 Make it your aim to live quietly and to mind your own business and to work with your hands, just as we instructed you, 12  so that you may walk decently in the eyes of people outside and not need anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Views 8k
  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I don't believe the maker of the video was showing jealousy; but instead, he was showing your leader  up as a hypocrite.  As this video also shows, about the vow of poverty that all in Bethel are unde

I can't imagine even one exjw being jealous of Stephen Lett.  It's not about jealously.  It's about hypocrisy, which is the opposite of righteousness.  

He did ... he owns a huge piece of wooded property where the road that serves Warwick HQ Tees into the main State road .... PERFECT for motels, gas stations, or a strip mall.  This can be researched t

Posted Images

  • Member

So you are saying we only use the old testament when it suits us?  No - the principles in the old testament stand till today.  Hard work, providing for your family and buying property is not wrong.  Eccl 31 . .... even women can buy property and work hard to provide things for the family. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
13 minutes ago, Arauna said:

buying property is not wrong. 

It depends on the circumstances. We need of course to have a place to live on. So we might need to buy it. I rent my apartment. And I have not money to buy. But I am content with that. But if I had two houses, then I would really have to think about Jesus' advice to sell off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
24 minutes ago, Arauna said:

Eccl 31

I'm sure you meant Proverbs 31 but, interestingly, Ecclesiasticus 31 says the following:

1 Watching for riches consumeth the flesh, and the care thereof driveth away sleep.

2 Watching care will not let a man slumber, as a sore disease breaketh sleep,

3 The rich hath great labour in gathering riches together; and when he resteth, he is filled with his delicates.

4 The poor laboureth in his poor estate; and when he leaveth off, he is still needy.

5 He that loveth gold shall not be justified, and he that followeth corruption shall have enough thereof.

6 Gold hath been the ruin of many, and their destruction was present.

7 It is a stumblingblock unto them that sacrifice unto it, and every fool shall be taken therewith.

8 Blessed is the rich that is found without blemish, and hath not gone after gold.

9 Who is he? and we will call him blessed: for wonderful things hath he done among his people.

10 Who hath been tried thereby, and found perfect? then let him glory. Who might offend, and hath not offended? or done evil, and hath not done it?

11 His goods shall be established, and the congregation shall declare his alms.

12 If thou sit at a bountiful table, be not greedy upon it, and say not, There is much meat on it.

13 Remember that a wicked eye is an evil thing: and what is created more wicked than an eye? therefore it weepeth upon every occasion.

14 Stretch not thine hand whithersoever it looketh, and thrust it not with him into the dish.

15 Judge not thy neighbour by thyself: and be discreet in every point.

16 Eat as it becometh a man, those things which are set before thee; and devour note, lest thou be hated.

17 Leave off first for manners' sake; and be not unsatiable, lest thou offend.

18 When thou sittest among many, reach not thine hand out first of all.

19 A very little is sufficient for a man well nurtured, and he fetcheth not his wind short upon his bed.

20 Sound sleep cometh of moderate eating: he riseth early, and his wits are with him: but the pain of watching, and choler, and pangs of the belly, are with an unsatiable man.

21 And if thou hast been forced to eat, arise, go forth, vomit, and thou shalt have rest.

22 My son, hear me, and despise me not, and at the last thou shalt find as I told thee: in all thy works be quick, so shall there no sickness come unto thee.

23 Whoso is liberal of his meat, men shall speak well of him; and the report of his good housekeeping will be believed.

24 But against him that is a niggard of his meat the whole city shall murmur; and the testimonies of his niggardness shall not be doubted of.

25 Shew not thy valiantness in wine; for wine hath destroyed many.

26 The furnace proveth the edge by dipping: so doth wine the hearts of the proud by drunkeness.

27 Wine is as good as life to a man, if it be drunk moderately: what life is then to a man that is without wine? for it was made to make men glad.

28 Wine measurably drunk and in season bringeth gladness of the heart, and cheerfulness of the mind:

29 But wine drunken with excess maketh bitterness of the mind, with brawling and quarrelling.

30 Drunkenness increaseth the rage of a fool till he offend: it diminisheth strength, and maketh wounds.

31 Rebuke not thy neighbour at the wine, and despise him not in his mirth: give him no despiteful words, and press not upon him with urging him to drink.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I like the greeting each member of a society gave each other. in a Science Fiction story I read about a half century ago.

They would, say, meet on the street, wave ...smile, and one would say say "MYOB!"

The other would wave, smile and say "MYOB!".

Toward the end of the story it turned out "MYOB" meant "Mind Your Own Business"

I think I also remember the Bible saying something about not being a "busybody", concerning other peoples' activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 3/19/2020 at 1:11 PM, Srecko Sostar said:

Yes, some people can afford to have "holiday property next to sea or mountain". But, if you or any other JW and GB "preaching" how spiritual "things" are what really matters ...than what is a point to have another house, and invest more money to have it, to keep it??? You need to earn more  money to buy and to hold second house. In the same time some other people can't afford even basic things for life. System is wrong, we can agree. But we making system to live, and we make decision to have holiday property and with that contribute to injustice, generally. 

This is what it's about @Arauna  The same man who flips property out of an insatiable appetite of accumulating earthly treasures, is the same man who tells JWs to dig deep in their pockets to support his other dream - building his "kingdom" projects.  

By the way, it appears that Lett may have also bought property very close to Warwick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Kosonen said:

But I am content with that. But if I had two houses, then I would really have to think about Jesus' advice to sell off.

I thought as you do, and rented a house for eight years, and the rent was $56,000 for the eight years. Then I realized that instead of recouping those expenses when I moved , and more because of Real Estate appreciation over time, ... all I had was receipts and cancelled checks.

It is much better to be able to move, with $70,000 in your pocket ... worth educating yourself on the many creative ways to buy a house with little or no money down.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
6 minutes ago, Witness said:

By the way, it appears that Lett may have also bought property very close to Warwick. 

He did ... he owns a huge piece of wooded property where the road that serves Warwick HQ Tees into the main State road .... PERFECT for motels, gas stations, or a strip mall.  This can be researched through county courthouse records on line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
15 hours ago, Arauna said:

No - the principles in the old testament stand till today. 

Please, explain and show us WHAT Principle in OT supporting slavery, for example. And how that Basic Principle for issue of Slavery, can and may be in use for people today?? Does this Particular Principle (for slavery) in OT is in power nowadays, does it "stand till today" ??

Because Bible Principles are eternal, people say !!??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
16 hours ago, Arauna said:

Eccl 31 . .... even women can buy property and work hard to provide things for the family. 

"even woman can buy property"

.... this sound very patriarchal . Well, this kind of wording, argumentation how EVEN WOMEN can do this or that is so humiliating, and sound as very special privilege for women. It is sad when society of every sort (in this case Old Israel) and in what ever period of time have to put in law, something that must be NATURAL RIGHT for human been, no matter of sex.


It came to me now, how OWNING something perhaps is NOT NATURAL. No matter is it about owning another human been or piece of land or spring of water or .....

Issue of "Owning" is for further discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
5 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

argumentation how EVEN WOMEN can do this or that

That is exactly the point. Some people believe the bible to be exceedingly patriarchal but yet the bible says a capable woman is one of business who can  buy land (a field) and her trading is profitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
21 minutes ago, Arauna said:

Some people believe the bible to be exceedingly patriarchal

I am curious to understand this. 

from JW page:


Did God create a woman so that she would be subordinate to a man?

In short, it is not. ..... - https://www.jw.org/hr/biblioteka/casopisi/wp20120901/kako-bog-gleda-na-zene/

subordinate = having less power or a lower position than someone else in a company or an organization -https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/subordinate

"Let a woman learn in silence* with full submissiveness." - 1. Tim

submissive = showing a willingness to be controlled by other people: - https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/submissive

When JW women or other individual not showing submissive position inside "congregational arrangements" than she/he will be rejected if continue in such behavior. Because hierarchical system giving favor to men on position of power

If you not show willingness to obey congregational arrangements than you will be "forced" with various methods to position of subordination. If you still resist, you will be marked, shunned and/or dfd.

Words subordinate and submissive are very close in meaning with same final demand and repercussions.

In this i see contradictory in WT publications when explaining position of women or other individuals in Bible history and JW congregation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 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.
    • One issue with historian Flavius Josephus is that he suggests that the Royal Captain of the (Guard) can also be regarded as General Nebuzaradan. A confusion arises from Josephus' account of the captives mentioned in Jeremiah, as he claims that they were taken from Egypt instead of Babylon. Since Nebuchadnezzar was occupied in Rilah, he directed his generals to lay siege to Jerusalem. This could potentially account for the numerous dispatches that Nebuchadnezzar would have sent to the west, but the considerable distance to Borsippa still poses a challenge. As a result, the Babylonians managed to gain control of regions such as Aram (Syria), Ammon, and Moab. The only territories that remained were the coastal cities, where the Egyptians held sway. King Josiah decided to form an alliance with Babylon instead of being under Egyptian rule. So, that part of the territory was covered until King Josiah was defeated.  It's interesting how they started back then in 4129, but still end up with the same conclusion with Zedekiah's Defeat 3522 607 B.C. 3419 607 B.C. even though their AM is different.  
  • Members

    • linwllc

      linwllc 0

      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
    • Most Online

    Newest Member
  • 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.