Nana Fofana

OK. Need to clarify. Obviously there is a camp that is quite satisfied with the current understanding the Governing Body have of the generation.
There is another camp that patently is not, and is quite zealous in criticising and denouncing Bro Splane, the GB, and anyone else adhering to the explanation offered in the recent Broadcast. 
My question was addressed to the latter group and I was interested not in their criticisms, but in their alternative suggestions.

Quite true! In fact, I am sometimes reluctant to get into a car driven by the average very theocratic Pioneer.
But I would look for more than an aeronautical designer to explain John 3:16 to me.

Regardless of age, isn't this cartoon direct and to the point? Isn't that EXACTLY the way it is? 

Well, all three of my children turned out well, by any criteria you would want to use, and they are all three serving Jehovah, and Kingdom interests whole souled ... and when they were growing up they thought what I required of them was oppressive, and several times I got "WHAT! ... Don't we get a vote?".
I always replied the same thing (paraphrased): "This is NOT a democracy, this is a tyranny, and I am the tyrant ... when you get to be 18 years old you are on your own and can do whatever you want to do ... when you are paying all your own bills, including rent.". It must not have been too bad, because my oldest stayed at home for about  three years after he turned 18, and when my youngest turned 18, they ALL (including my ex-wife) moved out.
I had been out of work for almost a year, and was completely out of money, and very sick ... the "ATM machine" was dry.
I perhaps over-did it, but my concept of being a good Father was to first be a Father ... and if I had any energy left over ... be a friend.
Unfortunately, I was stretched to my limit, and was only able to be a Father.
Life is hard ... then you die.
It was a learning experience for the entire family.
The "Society" had NOTHING to do with my operational philosophy .... perhaps more to the point too many John Wayne Movies.
.
 

People who have so much time on their hands, they must hunt obscure misinformation and post it as fact with the only purpose to sow seeds of doubt.
Jehovah's people never envolve themselves with politics, however, sometimes a seeming political support of issues involving Kingdom interest are made available and whether or not these are used are no indication of God's people taking sides.
There is a huge difference between respectful submission and active support.

You can always spot an apostate. How? It is so easy, and it is not rocket science either! Jesus address this kind of apostate attitude in anyone, but especially the hipocritical thinking of the Scribes and Pharasees of his day at Matthew 23:13 which reads:
Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you shut up the Kingdom of the heavens before men; for you yourselves do not go in, neither do you permit those on their way in to go in."
"They" (the apostates") are not interested in the truth nor in teaching others the truth. "They" only want to spread misinformation in order to confuse, distract, take away, sow seeds of doubt, waste people's time, impose, and promote their agenda. And what is "their" agenda? Get people to care less about Christ's brothers. Make people think that there is no difference between Christ's brothers and any other religious organization. Justify any mistreatment of Christ's brothers. They could care less about Christ's brothers, from the least of them upwards. They fault-find any imperfection Christ's brothers have to the extreme of being ridiculous, even stupid, like the NGO's decades ago even though it was for a short period, and who knows why or any details thereof.
The bottom line and purpose of apostate thinking is simply to keep people indifferent. "They" point to something better ... NEVER.
DID I SAY "NEVER"? HOW ABOUT "NEVER EVER"! Any follower of Christ should simply ask himself: "If I leave, Should I go back to believing in the immortality of the soul?" "Should I join a religion that is doing a BETTER job of fulfilling Matthew 24:14?" "Should I join a religion that has more that a thousand DIFFERENT languages on their website that surpasses JW.org?" "Should I join a religion that makes more sense to a person born deaf, or even born blind and deaf, or that even makes sense to an atheist with no nonsense attached to it?"
As an ex-atheist myself, when I was presented the good news in 1968, a week after Robert F. Kennedy was killed, I was amazed that there was a religion that gave logical explations of every question and argument I presented.
My issue with apostates is, FIRST, show us something BETTER"! KNOCK-KNOCK-OUR-SOCKS-OFF BETTER!! WOW US!!! SHOW US WORKS EVER GREATER THAN THOSE OF JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF DURING HIS THREE-AND-A-HALF-YEAR MINISTRY!!! POINT US TO A RELIGION THAT ALL OF ITS MEMBERS, evn though imperfect, ARE BETTER AT JOHN 13:34-35 than Jehovah's Witnesses.
When apostates come vomiting filth on message boards that witnesses use to share information and then post links, just spot these and view it the same a ponography. It is just there and we just don't click on it nor would we bother ourselves in trying to witness to the male, female or transvestite prostitue that wants to get a few clicks for financial gain or to get us the lust after naked pictures of them in graphic pop-ups that would be difficult to get out of our heads.
There is no difference between pornagraphy and apostasy. At least prostatudes and be shamed, apostates can't be shamed. "They" are shameless and disgusting in their spiritual prostition and proud of it. Why give any of them the time of day?
I am not giving any of them nor the apostate who posted garbage on this link my time of day with this message. I am just giving my thoughts about how I view anyone who has traded 24-Karate gold for human dung and encourage others to trade in their gold for their dung. And dung is a very Scriptural graphic corresponding ilustration with hundreds of reference to dungy idols and apostasy with the nation of Israel.

I think you interpret holding a different opinion as yourself as being 'brainwashed. At 2/2 with total 4 hours per week, all the rest of the time carrying on as normal? You're joking!
 
Yes. If you claim you were brainwashed at only 4 hours per week, you only testify to how stupid and helpless you think you are. Why not just say you changed your mind, reassessed your goals? I have done that. Everyone has. People change their minds. There is no shame in saying that. But if you carry on that the only reason you could have reversed a decision you made is that you were brainwashed - surely that is pathetic.
Look, I didn't say they were brainwashed in college. I said college splendidly meets one classic criteria of brainwashing: separate the victim from all that is familiar. Ones who later come to regret their college time seldom say they are brainwashed, despite that 24/7 criteria. How much more ridiculous to say it happened with 4 hours per week.

The context was use of the Internet. What he said was: "Be careful on the Internet...I don't know how many times we have to tell you, be careful!...We're just warning you. That's all we can do is admonish . . ..Stick with what we have authorised; you will be safe. You want to go out there? It's at your spiritual risk."
A person who claims to be an apostate has put up just a short snippet here as if it is something more nefarious, but keep it in context and notice that it doesn't say, "you will be saved."
 

Of course. This is a no-brainer. You ought not carry on as though it were evil.
Nor should you carry on about it being a 'corporation.' It is only a corporation because the laws of this world will not let you operate otherwise. Even the old individual halls were usually  'corporations' - as are church bodies - because that is the only way legally permitted for a group to own property. Even the 'apostles and old men' of the first century would have organized themselves as a corporation if that were a necessity to legally operate.
This is a big 'Duh' and for you and yours carry on as though you've discovered the secrets of the dark side is a bit much.

... it's funnier, south of the Mason-Dixon line.

In 1609 they had rudimentary baseball games that they played with the Cleveland Indians, in Ohio.
The team was then called the New Amsterdamn Yankees.
 

"The  “Great  Tribulation.”
When answering the question of his disciples concerning the sign of his presence and the conclusion of the system of things, Jesus mentioned a “great tribulation such as has not occurred since the world’s beginning until now, no, nor will occur again.” (Mt 24:3, 21) As a comparison of Matthew 24:15-22 with Luke 21:20-24 reveals, this had initial reference to a tribulation to come upon Jerusalem. The fulfillment came in 70 C.E., when the city was besieged by the Roman armies under General Titus. This resulted in severe famine conditions and much loss of life. The Jewish historian Josephus relates that 1,100,000 Jews died or were killed, whereas 97,000 survived and were taken into captivity. The temple was completely destroyed. Contrary to the wish of the Roman commander Titus, Roman soldiers set the temple itself on fire. According to Josephus, this took place in the same month and on the same day that the Babylonians had burned the former temple on this site. (The Jewish War, VI, 249-270 [iv, 5-8], 420 [ix, 3]; 2Ki 25:8, 9) The temple destroyed by the Romans has never been rebuilt. Such a “great tribulation” has not occurred again or been repeated upon Jerusalem. Nevertheless, Biblical evidence indicates that the tribulation upon Jerusalem in 70 C.E. pointed forward to a far greater tribulation, one affecting all nations.
Jesus continued his prophecy by describing events that would occur during the centuries after Jerusalem’s destruction. (Mt 24:23-28; Mr 13:21-23) Then, at Matthew 24:29, he added that “immediately after the tribulation of those days,” there would be fear-inspiring celestial phenomena. Mark 13:24, 25 says that these phenomena would take place “in those days, after that tribulation.” (See also Lu 21:25, 26.) To what “tribulation” did Jesus there refer?
Some Bible commentators have reasoned that it was the tribulation that came upon Jerusalem in 70 C.E., though they also realized that the events described thereafter evidently would take place at a time that, from a human standpoint, was then distant. They reasoned that the expression “immediately after” conveyed God’s perspective of the time involved or that the certainty of what was to occur was being expressed by language that placed the events immediately before the reader.
However, since the prophecy at Matthew 24:4-22 (also Mr 13:5-20 and Lu 21:8-24a) clearly has a dual fulfillment, might the “tribulation” referred to at Matthew 24:29 and Mark 13:24 be the “tribulation” during the second and final fulfillment of what was foretold at Matthew 24:21 and Mark 13:19? Viewed in the light of the Bible as a whole, this seems most likely. Do the terms used in the Greek text allow for such a view? Definitely. When Matthew 24:29 refers to “those days” and when Mark 13:24 mentions “those days” and “that tribulation,” the Greek grammar does allow for such an understanding. It seems that Jesus’ prophecy is saying that after the outbreak of the coming global tribulation, there will be striking phenomena (as represented by sun and moon being darkened, stars falling, and powers of heaven being shaken) as well as fulfillment of “the sign of the Son of man.”
About three decades after Jerusalem’s destruction, the apostle John, with reference to a great crowd of persons from all nations, tribes, and peoples, was told: “These are the ones that come out of the great tribulation.” (Re 7:13, 14) Earlier, the apostle John had seen “four angels” holding back destructive winds so that the sealing of the 144,000 slaves of God might be completed. This sealing evidently links up with the ‘gathering of the chosen ones’ that Jesus foretold. (Mt 24:31) Accordingly, the final destructive fury of the “great tribulation” must come after the chosen ones have been gathered and their sealing is completed and when the four angels release the four winds to blow upon the earth, sea, and trees. (Re 7:1-4) The fact that a great crowd ‘comes out of the great tribulation’ shows that they survive it. This is confirmed by a similar expression at Acts 7:9, 10: “God was with [Joseph], and he delivered him out of all his tribulations.” Joseph’s being delivered out of all his tribulations meant not only that he was enabled to endure them but also that he survived the afflictions he experienced.
It is noteworthy that the apostle Paul referred to the execution of God’s judgment upon the ungodly as tribulation. He wrote: “This takes into account that it is righteous on God’s part to repay tribulation to those who make tribulation for you, but, to you who suffer tribulation, relief along with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance upon those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus.” (2Th 1:6-8)
The book of Revelation shows that “Babylon the Great” and “the wild beast” have brought tribulation upon God’s holy ones. (Re 13:3-10; 17:5, 6) It therefore logically follows that the tribulation to come upon “Babylon the Great” and “the wild beast” is included in the “great tribulation.”—Re 18:20; 19:11-21.

Thank  you  dear  Blanchie

. ?

❤ ❤ ❤ .•*¨`*•..¸♥☼♥¸.•*¨`*•.  ❤ ❤ ❤

                                    ❤ ❤ ❤ .•*¨`*•..¸♥☼♥¸.•*¨`*•.  ❤ ❤ ❤

16 Therefore, we do not give up, but even if the man we are outside is wasting away, certainly the man we are inside is being renewed from day to day  ----

We would assume that Michael, the archangel, became a fetus, a baby, then a toddler, then a young boy, then went through puberty, and became a young man, and then a full grown man who gave himself over to the authorities to be killed. This should give us a glimpse into the level of humility and love shown:
(Philippians 2:7-11) 7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and became human. 8 More than that, when he came as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to the point of death, yes, death on a torture stake. 9 For this very reason, God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, 10 so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend—of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground— 11 and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. Michael means "Who is like God?" and Immanuel means "With us is God." The Bible never makes a specific point about identifying Michael as either Jesus or Immanuel or Christ. But this is not so different from Matthew saying that he will be called Immanuel, and yet we never hear Jesus called Immanual anywhere either. He was mostly called Jesus, Savior, Rabbi, son of man, son of God, and Messiah (Christ), etc.
I know this wasn't necessarily your point in bringing it up, but a lot of people think we are the only religion that ever thought of claiming that Michael was the same as Jesus Christ prior to his earthly presence. The idea had been around for many years before Jehovah's Witnesses came along. 

Please!! I'm not coming up with answers. I'm inviting them from others. 

Meditate on the content of your contributions. (No pun intended). It wouldn't be fair for me to spell it out. I'll give you a clue:
 

Somewhere there is someone saying "how long must I put up with you?' Sigh....I mean, C'mon! Are there no limits?
In their overall picture, the videos represent one tenth of one percent of their output, if that. And they are shown infrequently.
 
The people who have undertaken to do the task his word assigns to them, of Matt 24:14. Witnesses can look around everywhere and see that the money they donate is being put to good use.
 
A suggestion is not a requirement. And even that is an aggregate amount per congregation - not per person. We have covered this. Why do you carry on as though we haven't?
 
A suggestion is not a requirement.
Look, if you hate the message, you will hate the messenger. That is a valid position - to hate the message. Just be upfront about it, would you please?

I'm sure there is.
Whenever I am stuck, I also reach for some highbrow perch from where I can sneer at ones who have not yielded. I wonder too, at how they cope with their 'cognitive dissonance,' - as in:  "Surely your cognitive dissonance must be crippling you if you can withstand the brute force of my brilliant reasoning!"
No, @Shiwiii, your point, which you have repackaged endlessly for re-submission each time you see it shot down, is not valid. It is juvenile. 
Nobody is less intrusive than Jehovah's Witnesses when it comes to money matters.

Go to Youtube and google "12 hours dog barking".
Play this LOUD when you leave the house.

Someone said somewhere: 'what you are doing, get done more quickly,' so you almost wish that if someone is going to leave the faith, they would have done it long ago. That way they do not carry on about being misled or even brainwashed. Why do they not leave quicker?
Does one become a Witness through brainwashing? If so, there are far better examples. College is foremost among them. The student is separated almost 24/7 on campus from all that is familiar to him or her. In contrast, on the pathway to become a Witness, you will go to two meetings a week and have a personal Bible study which lasts an hour or two per weekly session. And you'll get to know people and cultivate new relationships in exactly the same way you would cultivate new relationships anywhere else. A special event or two and that's it. 95% of the time you are in the same well-trod territory you have always been in.
Moreover, nothing about the way God uses a human agency to direct his people is ever hidden. It is manifest from day one. So it seems disingenuous to grouse about being misled. Instead, one simply reassesses matters over time. They decide the cost is too high and the reason for paying it too nebulous or far off. They depart because they were 'not of our sort' and because they decide that they like this system of things after all, or at least do not dislike it enough to keep such distance.
An exception would be those raised in the faith. They never did see both sides. Or, rather, to the extent most of them saw both sides, it was both sides presented through the eyes of the theocratic organization, which hardly represents the other side as that side would represent itself. How to solve this?
I don't know. It may already be solved to the extent it can be. The reason Obi-wan does not want Luke to go over into the dark side is that he really thinks it is the dark side. He is not trying to control Luke. He is not trying to deprive him of anything. He is looking out for him. He truly believes the dark side is bad, and he doesn't say 'why don't you go over there and roam around for a while so you can make an informed choice.'
So it is with the GB. Charges that they try to control people are so juvenile, so adolescent, that they are hard to countenance. How could anybody be so stupid? No. They truly believe the theocratic side is good and the other side is - well - the dark side. Though that viewpoint is objectionable to some, it is exactly how the Bible presents matters. I don't know how you get around it, or if you even want to, though it does result in the problems mentioned above. 
Furthermore, if the GB ever 'misrepresents' the non-Witness world, it is not because they are sinister. It is because they don't know it themselves. They take their own counsel, which is the Bible's counsel, and they don't go there. They are lowly people who have poured themselves out and who now find themselves in places that are 'high for them.' They don't puff themselves up over it. They trust in God and actually, like the kings of old supposedly did, read their Bibles daily. They keep away from what is 'falsely called knowledge' and from 'empty philosophies that violate what is holy and toss people about as though the waves of the sea.' They have run their own lives with the lesson of Haggai ever foremost - 'clean will be contaminated by unclean,' not the reverse - and so they don't go there. Because they don't go there, they know it only through the lens of Scripture.
If the Bible says, in effect, that the 'world will chew you up and spit you out,' they assume that it does. if they find someone who says exactly those words, they eat it right up and broadcast it. And who is to say the words are untrue? Some get chewed up and spit out so decisively and quickly that no one would ever deny it, but with others? Who is to say the scriptures are wrong on that point? It may just take a longer time to get chewed up and spit out. Certainly the one out of ten senior citizens from the other post might have come to think that, seeing everything they had worked for drained away.

...
 

This may be one of the most evil schemes I have ever read, and it is all the more evil in that it is perfectly legal. It is more evil still in that perpetrators may think themselves benefactors. Rachel Aviv deserves a Pulitzer. No punishment is too severe for the perpetrators, who may be legion. People who insist upon gun rights will say this is exactly why they advocate for them.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/09/how-the-elderly-lose-their-rights