Jump to content
The World News Media

TOP STORY TODAY:  DETAILS TO FOLLOW …..


Pudgy

Recommended Posts

  • Member
3 hours ago, Amidstheroses said:

.But this is more than a tragedy.

We can view humanities imperfection in many ways. It won't change the outcome. Imperfection cannot be cured in this old system. Therefore, whatever the motive, it remains a human tragedy. It is compounded since the murderer decided to act at a kingdom hall. 

This incident is not the first time, a male shot a female at a Kingdom Hall. People are losing "reasoning" as we get closer to judgment day. Awareness and preparedness is something each individual needs to consider. The Org is making it very evident how we need to be cautious with our surrounding. 

Regardless how the media places the circumstance, they want to see American outrage. Who among humanity can tame Satan?

3 hours ago, Amidstheroses said:

Both local news sources, Denver7 and 9news, told in their original stories, which have not changed for over 24 hours, that the Police stated that the two murdered adults were former members of a Jehovah’s Witness congregation at this Kingdom Hall.

This depends on how we each view the reporting.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/25/us/colorado-jehovahs-witnesses-homicide-investigation-dead/index.html

The individuals were married and former members of the congregation, police said. 

To me, this doesn't indicate if they were or weren't. Doesn't it really matter? A couple went to a Kingdom Hall. Someone lost her life, the other ended his life. One life will be redeemed, while the other will be judged.

Now the other reporting about incendiary devises. There are many common items that can be considered incendiary. Gasoline can, Ammo Box, flares, etc. Can any of those media outlets see the future?

https://news.yahoo.com/multiple-incendiary-devices-found-christmas-182628560.html?fr=yhssrp_catchall

An investigator will have to determine if such devises were part of a plot or were they just simple, there in the vehicle before the incident.

The fact, the shooter ended his life without further incident, can mean, that person was only interested in hurting one person. The message about the usage of the KH is to be determined.

Did that person have a grudge against the Org, or the individual that was part of the Org, or was at one point a member, then left, and decided to return, thus angering the other.

This tragedy has too many unknowns, other than it being a tragedy. Without speculating, prayers are needed for our worldwide brotherhood. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 10.5k
  • Replies 267
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Did Elon Musk buy this platform?

Often this happens when the person has reached a resolution to follow through, given their first opportunity. Their paralyzing dilemma resolved, they can give the appearance that all is completely wel

Where is your respect for truthful speech?!  Every single news report told that Police said that they were MARRIED and FORMER MEMBERS of the Congregation.  Why the contentious spirit?  Who are you

Posted Images

  • Member
45 minutes ago, Amidstheroses said:

 

Apparently the ‘message‘ was not for you, Tom, because you don’t seem to have a clue! LOL

If it makes you feel any better, I’ll concede that this statement was probably window dressing:  :)

4 hours ago, Amidstheroses said:

it was announced that the murder was carried out by people who were not Jehovah’s Witnesses and it was coincidence that it occurred on Kingdom Hall property.

maybe not pure coincidence. I’ll leave it to someone better qualified at math—maybe an engineer who got all the toilets to flush in his city—to calculate the precise odds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
1 hour ago, Moise Racette said:

This depends on how we each view the reporting

The best thing would be if we got the facts from the brothers at that KH. But it's like trying to draw blood out of a stone....

Is it all about trying to make us look squeaky clean again?

I wonder if this will be mentioned on our website....With the facts? 

Let's all have a bet, yay on nay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Since each congregation handles their own internal problems, I don't believe anyone here will have access to the circumstance. It would be simpler to view the news if it's an interest. 

It has nothing to do with congregational facts, but with decency and privacy. I'm sure, no one here has aired their dirty laundry over the internet, their personal congregation, or made their personal issues known to the Org, on how they really view the Org.

It wouldn't surprise me if someone tried to contact one of their family member to ask, what happen, without someone replying, go jump in the lake, or worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Anna,

My best guess with the information we have at this moment in time is that the victim and the murderer or both were members of that particular congregation.

Whether it was because they died, or were  disfellowshipped or some other thing is ambiguous at this moment in time. They MAY have even been current JWs at a different Kingdom Hall.

At any rate, my best guess is that if these people were ever Jehovah’s Witnesses, it will not be mentioned on JW.org news.

It’s like the reporting they did on humanitarian aid of Haiti when they had the earthquake, and the Society worked with the United Nations and the U.S. Army distributing relief supplies.

You never heard that aspect of it, And almost nothing was reported on JW.org news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
32 minutes ago, Moise Racette said:

It has nothing to do with congregational facts, but with decency and privacy. I'm sure, no one here has aired their dirty laundry over the internet, their personal congregation, or made their personal issues known to the Org, on how they really view the Org

@Moise Racette@Anna@Pudgy@Thinking

@TrueTomHarley

Then why do we all know… What Noah’s daughters did to him? What Saul did to David? What David did to Uriah and Bathsheba? What Amnon did to Tamar? How Peter betrayed his Lord? What Ananias and Sapphira did with the profit earned from sale of their field? The list is extensive.

Isn’t there is a double standard when Jehovah is so honest and his people are secretive and deceitful?  It seems to be more a game of asserting one’s privilege and power to be “in the know” on matters, like this of general fellow feeling and concern for safety going forward. Aren’t we admonished to be imitators of God?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
15 minutes ago, Amidstheroses said:

Isn’t there is a double standard when Jehovah is so honest and his people are secretive and deceitful?  It seems to be more a game of asserting one’s privilege and power to be “in the know” on matters, like this of general fellow feeling and concern for safety going forward. Aren’t we admonished to be imitators of God?

The double standard you are alluding to is, man-made. It has nothing to do with God. God allowed certain things to be known in bible time, in order for society to learn. What can we possibly learn by being noisy at someone else's pain? Therefore, that power assertion is in an individual's mind.

However, truth be told, one of the commandments is thou shall not kill. A commandment the murderer will now be judged for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
31 minutes ago, Pudgy said:

It’s like the reporting they did on humanitarian aid of Haiti when they had the earthquake, and the Society worked with the United Nations and the U.S. Army distributing relief supplies.

Is that where the humanitarian aid was being warehoused? I don't recall, the government having individual warehouses for different NGOs. They were stockpiled in several distribution centers. So, the Org shouldn't have given aid if that distribution center was housed in a Military base. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
17 minutes ago, Moise Racette said:

Is that where the humanitarian aid was being warehoused? I don't recall, the government having individual warehouses for different NGOs. They were stockpiled in several distribution centers. So, the Org shouldn't have given aid if that distribution center was housed in a Military base. 

 

F4B37739-34CF-4D72-A354-AA339EFE4FE1.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member




  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • That was convoluted and strange. I assume it was that way on purpose. I have not tried to refute anything from VAT 4956. My "acceptance" of the evidence from VAT 4956 is not the same thing as "refuting" it. Unless you are doing that thing again where you say you can use words to mean whatever you want. Now you are doing that thing again where you hope to imply that the stance of 100% of the current "authorities" and "experts" the Watchtower has quoted just happen to agree with COJ. So, in order to make it easier to dismiss the conclusions of all those experts, you need to point out that those experts agree with COJ, therefore you can dismiss their conclusions.  This is not just stupid. It's dishonest because you have done it before. It's also hypocritical because you have never once ever been able to point out even one sentence from his GTR book that was wrong. When you finally did attempt to prove he was wrong about something, you picked his reference to Nabopolassar's years mentioned in the "Chronicles," you ended up inadvertently showing that COJ was perfectly accurate. That must have been embarrassing. As you know, COJ has nothing to do with this discussion. From now on, instead of referring to COJ directly, I think we should just refer call him, "the person that George88 has shown to be accurate." In fact, until you can show even one inaccurate sentence, that's how I will refer to "COJ, the person that George88 has shown to be accurate."
    • Try not to manipulate my words with your usual tactics. I said: "I’m sure you know by now that there is absolutely nothing in the diary indicating the year 588." I said this in direct response to your claim that the events on the tablet indicated 588. You said that the events on the tablet indicated 588. You said: "You can reference VAT 4956." . . .  "Why is this so significant? Pay extremely close attention to the language inscribed on this tablet" . . . "Year 37 of Nebukadnezzar, King of Babylon. Month I," . .  "Additional reports in this Diary include . . . Borsippa, . . . .This indicates that the conflict in that region in 588 . . . " No, you didn't actually say that. Besides I have no argument about 587. I only point out that ALL the astronomical evidence from the entire period shows that this was Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year. You have never made an argument (either valid or invalid) that "my argument about 587 can also be interpreted as 588."  Not that it matters in the least, but Borsippa is NOT way further in distance from Jerusalem. It's about 10 miles CLOSER "as the crow flies" and nearly the same distance using the usual travel routes of the time. Perhaps that's why no one mentioned it before. However, even here, I have already posted the entire contents of the tablet, including the reference to Borsippa. Not that it matters.  I certainly hope so!
    • That's completely false. You invariably attempt to weasel your way out of your false statements by claiming that someone has distorted your words. You make false claims about them and claim that they are the ones in the wrong. Then you bluster with some barely-related material hoping it impresses someone (or yourself) into thinking you are some kind of expert or authority. That barely-related material you make use of invariably says nearly the opposite of what you had claimed, which you should have known had you just read the context, or understood what you were reading.  I'll get to the specifics at a later time on this particular point, but it is nearly the same as with almost all these matters. I have learned to expect you to NEVER admit an error, no matter how much evidence is shown. I don't expect you to admit your error on these recent points, but your "style" provides a revealing display of the lengths people will go to, in order to support a pseudo-chronology.   
    • In response to your email, it is important to note that the Watchtower chronology begins at 4026, adhering closely to the numerical indications in scripture. The significant distinction lies in the fact that not everyone begins at 4026; some might commence their chronology at 4004, for instance. Consequently, this creates a noticeable gap between those who employ different starting points for their chronologies. Consider that the new Bible Students have rejected Russell's starting point and instead adjusted it to align with Modern Israel. They have suggested a year around 3954, or something like that, I can't remember, but it seems unfounded. Some of their sects started Criticizing Russell about this matter, and it appears unjustified, as their own knowledge may be limited. Following the Watchtower's guidance is straightforward: align events with their corresponding numerical values. It is important to remember that the Watchtower does not view its chronology as an absolute, unlike secular chronology which seeks to impose its perspective. According to the Watchtower, the pivotal date for the divided kingdom is 997. Look it up in our archives and publications.  The Watchtower's chronology will always diverge from conventional chronology due to its distinctive starting point. The organization holds steadfast to the numbers in the Bible, guided by faith in scripture rather than human interpretations. Despite persistent challenges, the unwavering stance of the Watchtower remains unchanged, as it is grounded in divine guidance, not the opinions of anonymous and faithless individuals.
    • Consider this: if we assume that the tablet dated back to 568 refers to Nebuchadnezzar, and that the king issued an order for Borsippa, a city 12-15 miles from Babylon, then it suggests that King Nebuchadnezzar might have been in his palace giving that order, since logically it would have taken weeks or a month or so for a runner to dispatch such an order from Judah that was for Borsippa in 588/587, as historically suggested, since we can use the same date 588/587 for that event.
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.3k
  • 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.