Jump to content

  1. Lussier Denis

    Lussier Denis

  • Similar Content

    • By 4Jah2me
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  
      Don't know if this is exactly new news. but it 'sort of' sounds interesting.
      Trump Delivers on Promise to Advance Religious Freedom Abroad 
      This week, President Trump issued a historic executive order that ensures international religious freedom will be a major piece of his legacy. The new directive gives the U.S. government more tools than ever before to advance religious freedom globally and to penalize foreign nations that perpetrate or allow religious persecution.
      Link to article at top. 
    • By Srecko Sostar
      In the age of this Corona contagion, the term "social distance" emerged. In recommending how to protect their health against this virus, health care providers have introduced some measures regarding the behavior of people in their interactions with each other. One of them is famous "social distance".

      What does it mean first of all to have "social distance" in this Corona context? This means that the physical distance between persons must not be less than 1 meter, or 2 meters or similar. This is actually about physical distance, not social distance. Because, no one forbade people to talk and exchange thoughts. By any means, directly or virtually, using technology.

      From this we could conclude that the term/word and the means used to prevent infection is deficient in clarity, is wrong. Having a "social distance" would mean refraining from making intellectual and emotional contact with other people. It would mean that we do not want to talk to them, that we do not want to accept them as people belonging to a particular "social" group. It would mean that don't want to see them, literally and transmitted. Specifically, we see that these disease measures primarily seek to reduce physical contact between people. This is about "close physical contact". Anything less than 6 feet. :))
      What is interesting about Corona measures? WTJWorg using both sort of measures to control "disease" inside Organization for very long time, and without possibility to "relax" this measures. With "shunning" policy JW's members using social and physical distance on people who are not JW members any more. That could mean how "Corona" existing constantly inside WTJWorg, long before Wuhan :)).
    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      WHY .... doesn't Jehovah God consider warfare ... murder?
      It seems clear to me that Jehovah allows civil governments to run their own affairs as they see fit, and even has no objection to them judging and executing wrongdoers ... and even commands us to be in subjection to these governments, as even the very worst of them are better than anarchy.
      People generally misinterpret the scripture that say " Thou shalt not kill." where the scripture more actually says "Thou shalt not murder".
      There is a very real difference.  A sovereign government, executing a wrongdoer is implementing the political will of that government ... whether it be a government the size of a continent .. or an extended family sized tribe of Jewish sheepherders living way out in the middle of nowhere, living in tents, governed by a patriarch.
      I have not been able to find in the Bible where actual warfare, committed by any sovereign group, is considered to be murder ... either by the perpetrators of the war, or the defenders of the war against them, except in the case of "war crimes" against non combatants and other cases.
      Did you know it is legal to drop napalm on civilians in war, from an aircraft ... but not from a flame thrower from a soldier on the ground?
      ....but I digress.
      Even people that warred against the Jews  were not considered murderers..... they were considered warriors.
      I am working on getting this all straight in my mind now ... as there seems to be a profound truth buried in this stream of thought, somewhere, but I cannot get it to crystallize, or perhaps it is approaching 3AM, and I am too tired to think about it.
      But whatever it is that is ... what profound basic principle that I am missing ...is based on having a correct answer  as to WHY ... WHY does God NOT consider warfare to be murder.
      I suspect when I figure it out, it will be like driving down a road in a southerly direction, thinking you are going North ... and then you see that landmark or sign that indicates you are really going South ... and that feeling you get when your whole frame of reference rotates in your head, like the world just rotated 180 degrees.
      It's like deja vu, and geography, combined.
      Perhaps my premise is faulty, but I don't think so.
      Please feel free to destroy my premise, or my stream of thought, or my conclusions.
      I try to be "loyal" to whatever is true, and not an agenda of defending an agenda.
      Knowing "WHY?" things are the way they are, is the key to good philosophy.
      Bad philosophy will waste our lives, which are pitifully short.
       
       
       
       

    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      WHY .... doesn't Jehovah God consider warfare ... murder?
      It seems clear to me that Jehovah allows civil governments to run their own affairs as they see fit, and even has no objection to them judging and executing wrongdoers ... and even commands us to be in subjection to these governments, as even the very worst of them are better than anarchy.
      People generally misinterpret the scripture that say " Thou shalt not kill." where the scripture more actually says "Thou shalt not murder".
      There is a very real difference.  A sovereign government, executing a wrongdoer is implementing the political will of that government ... whether it be a government the size of a continent .. or an extended family sized tribe of Jewish sheepherders living way out in the middle of nowhere, living in tents, governed by a patriarch.
      I have not been able to find in the Bible where actual warfare, committed by any sovereign group, is considered to be murder ... either by the perpetrators of the war, or the defenders of the war against them, except in the case of "war crimes" against non combatants and other cases.
      Did you know it is legal to drop napalm on civilians in war, from an aircraft ... but not from a flame thrower from a soldier on the ground?
      ....but I digress.
      Even people that warred against the Jews  were not considered murderers..... they were considered warriors.
      I am working on getting this all straight in my mind now ... as there seems to be a profound truth buried in this stream of thought, somewhere, but I cannot get it to crystallize, or perhaps it is approaching 3AM, and I am too tired to think about it.
      But whatever it is that is ... what profound basic principle that I am missing ...is based on having a correct answer  as to WHY ... WHY does God NOT consider warfare to be murder.
      I suspect when I figure it out, it will be like driving down a road in a southerly direction, thinking you are going North ... and then you see that landmark or sign that indicates you are really going South ... and that feeling you get when your whole frame of reference rotates in your head, like the world just rotated 180 degrees.
      It's like deja vu, and geography, combined.
      Perhaps my premise is faulty, but I don't think so.
      Please feel free to destroy my premise, or my stream of thought, or my conclusions.
      I try to be "loyal" to whatever is true, and not an agenda of defending an agenda.
      Knowing "WHY?" things are the way they are, is the key to good philosophy.
      Bad philosophy will waste our lives, which are pitifully short.
       
       
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      Geoffrey Jackson in his talk comparing GB with "watch dog who barking for no reason in a middle of the night" in 3:04 of this video. He send message how watch dog and FDS have similar "enthusiasm". :))
      It is funny, but also very concerning if you are member of organization under such religious Leaders.
       
       




  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Posts

  • Topics

  • Members

    • Esther

      Esther 0

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TrueTomHarley

      TrueTomHarley 3,691

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • 4Jah2me

      4Jah2me 471

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

    • Isabella

      Good ideas 
       

      · 0 replies
    • 4Jah2me  »  Srecko Sostar

      Hi Srecko. I hope you can see this photo. This is my daily driving car. It is outside a Dance Studio where  I have danced and hope to go dancing again, John 

      · 2 replies
    • Tennyson  »  Queen Esther

      Hello my sister, i have not head from you long sice. I hope you are wel. Hope to hear from you soon. Agape.
      · 0 replies
    • Doryseeker  »  4Jah2me

      *** it-2 p. 7 Jehovah ***
      The Codex Leningrad B 19A, of the 11th century C.E., vowel points the Tetragrammaton to read Yehwahʹ, Yehwihʹ, and Yeho·wahʹ. Ginsburg’s edition of the Masoretic text vowel points the divine name to read Yeho·wahʹ. (Ge 3:14, ftn) Hebrew scholars generally favor “Yahweh” as the most likely pronunciation. They point out that the abbreviated form of the name is Yah (Jah in the Latinized form), as at Psalm 89:8 and in the expression Ha·lelu-Yahʹ (meaning “Praise Jah, you people!”). (Ps 104:35; 150:1, 6) Also, the forms Yehohʹ, Yoh, Yah, and Yaʹhu, found in the Hebrew spelling of the names Jehoshaphat, Joshaphat, Shephatiah, and others, can all be derived from Yahweh. Greek transliterations of the name by early Christian writers point in a somewhat similar direction with spellings such as I·a·beʹ and I·a·ou·eʹ, which, as pronounced in Greek, resemble Yahweh. Still, there is by no means unanimity among scholars on the subject, some favoring yet other pronunciations, such as “Yahuwa,” “Yahuah,” or “Yehuah.”
      Since certainty of pronunciation is not now attainable, there seems to be no reason for abandoning in English the well-known form “Jehovah” in favor of some other suggested pronunciation. If such a change were made, then, to be consistent, changes should be made in the spelling and pronunciation of a host of other names found in the Scriptures: Jeremiah would be changed to Yir·meyahʹ, Isaiah would become Yeshaʽ·yaʹhu, and Jesus would be either Yehoh·shuʹaʽ (as in Hebrew) or I·e·sousʹ (as in Greek). The purpose of words is to transmit thoughts; in English the name Jehovah identifies the true God, transmitting this thought more satisfactorily today than any of the suggested substitutes.
      *** it-2 p. 7 Jehovah ***
      The Codex Leningrad B 19A, of the 11th century C.E., vowel points the Tetragrammaton to read Yehwahʹ, Yehwihʹ, and Yeho·wahʹ. Ginsburg’s edition of the Masoretic text vowel points the divine name to read Yeho·wahʹ. (Ge 3:14, ftn) Hebrew scholars generally favor “Yahweh” as the most likely pronunciation. They point out that the abbreviated form of the name is Yah (Jah in the Latinized form), as at Psalm 89:8 and in the expression Ha·lelu-Yahʹ (meaning “Praise Jah, you people!”). (Ps 104:35; 150:1, 6) Also, the forms Yehohʹ, Yoh, Yah, and Yaʹhu, found in the Hebrew spelling of the names Jehoshaphat, Joshaphat, Shephatiah, and others, can all be derived from Yahweh. Greek transliterations of the name by early Christian writers point in a somewhat similar direction with spellings such as I·a·beʹ and I·a·ou·eʹ, which, as pronounced in Greek, resemble Yahweh. Still, there is by no means unanimity among scholars on the subject, some favoring yet other pronunciations, such as “Yahuwa,” “Yahuah,” or “Yehuah.”
      Since certainty of pronunciation is not now attainable, there seems to be no reason for abandoning in English the well-known form “Jehovah” in favor of some other suggested pronunciation. If such a change were made, then, to be consistent, changes should be made in the spelling and pronunciation of a host of other names found in the Scriptures: Jeremiah would be changed to Yir·meyahʹ, Isaiah would become Yeshaʽ·yaʹhu, and Jesus would be either Yehoh·shuʹaʽ (as in Hebrew) or I·e·sousʹ (as in Greek). The purpose of words is to transmit thoughts; in English the name Jehovah identifies the true God, transmitting this thought more satisfactorily today than any of the suggested substitutes.
       
      · 1 reply
    • Isabella  »  admin

      💤

      · 0 replies
  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      62,823
    • Total Posts
      122,570
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      16,659
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Gwendolen
    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.