Evacuated

"28,000 volunteers belong to some 1,900 PVGs on six continents. *" This can't be new???

@Jack Ryan (July 8 2018) "Only the servants in Egypt were black?" Legitimate question and may well be asked by children using My Book of Bible Stories. Speaking of this matter in ancient Egypt, Wikipedia states: The use of cosmetics differed. Everything in Egypt was changed slightly between social classes, where more make-up was worn by higher class individuals, as wealthier individuals could afford more make-up. Although there was no prominent difference between the cosmetics styles of the upper and lower class, noble women were known to pale their skin using creams and powders.This was due to pale skin being a sign of nobility as lighter skin meant less exposure to the sun whereas dark skin was associated with the lower class who tanned while taking part in menial labor such as working in the fields. Thus, paler skin represented the non-working noble class, as noble women would not work in the sun. The BBC news website highlights this as a continuing UK issue in the report of 6 August 2018, headlined: Skin-whitening creams: The battle against illegal products

Me too. And without any particular college education, just plain old self-taught. Using the intellectual freedom gained by pursuing rather mundane employment activities whilst "pioneering", I was able develop skills that later brought sufficient financial reward to care for personal familiy responsibilities, and then eventual financial independence to continue "pioneering" without secular constraints. Works well for me, but I have to admit: "t'was the Watchtower made me do it, Officer!"

Good point. But it's probably more about work than thermal efficiency.

My Mother said "If you cannot stand the heat... get out of the kitchen".

Not sure this can be substantiated? "Her leaders judge for a bribe, her priests instruct for a price, and her prophets practice divination for money. And yet they lean on Jehovah, saying:“Is not Jehovah with us?No calamity will come upon us." Micah 3:11

They will have a problem when this happens then: "Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power" 1 Cor.15:24.

For some, maybe, but as pointed out, the suggestions made by Masoretes are ancient. Others today may want to dispute and search further, but for me it is not a reasonable quest. In fact is has a resemblance to Holy Grailism to my mind. The Shaw book sounds interesting but I can't access it anywhere so will observe from the sidelines. ?

Ivan Panin) Obviously not, because it isn't. The suggestion regarding these "acrostics" found in the book of Esther has been around a lot longer than any of us, and any associated with modern day Bible Students and the like as is thoroughly documented in the linked .pdfs. Previous discussion on the extremes gone to by some on Bible "coding" (Ivan Panin), or God's name searching (the notion that the Tetragrammaton appears in the DNA code), has shown that the basic "crankiness" exemplified in beliefs such as "pyramidology" is alive and well. Meeting these ideas whilst engaging in field ministry recently underscores this. My suggestion is based on an objection to what I consider to be an academic smugness I find in many similarly detailed discussions. Whilst the research is admirable, as is the painstaking reasoning demonstrated in these documents, there is a tendency to draw conclusions that are really a reflection of opinion. The latter statement I quoted regarding the intention of the human author of the book of Esther is an example of this. We can only guess at the author's intention, (a very well educated guess perhaps, but nevertheless, a guess). The author of Esther may well have had no idea at all that the acrostics in question appeared in the writings. This idea is lost in the discussion on (limited despite detailed) use of language at the time of writing. And there is no mention at all of any suggestion that Jehovah Himself (the real author of the work) is quite capable of using acrostics of His own name wherever He chooses to do in His word, an observation I am afraid not subject to contradiction as it rests in the mind of the beholder. As stated, it remains that this matter is one of those in which the reader is at liberty to use their own discernment.

Oh dear! You are just sooooo yesterday on all this https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/247826.php Loosen up...please!

Interesting discussion. Two statements stood out to me: The first "there is no reason to “encode” the divine name." Obvious response to this one is "From whose standpoint?" The second, (presumably from the author's standpoint): "it is hoped that the evidence presented here will allow the reader to make an informed decision that results in dismissing belief that the author intentionally hid God’s name within the Hebrew text of Esther." Now this is an obvious conclusion. if it is believed that the author was solely human and, at most, whose inspiration was arising from some external creative impulse related to the subject matter and not in the sense conveyed by the apostles Paul and Peter at 2 Tim3:16 and 2 Pet.1:21. If we are to accept, however, the principle of divine inspiration in the sense (for example) of Paul's words at 2 Tim 3:16, then it is quite possible that the hiding of God's name within the Hebrew text of Esther took place without the awareness of the human author. One of those matters in which the reader is at liberty to use their own discernment it would seem.

Oh come on! Is that the best they can do? Surely when a rented house returns to its owner it doesn't change location? This is like the other attempt in saying that a spirit "going out" means it leaves the through the door or something? (Ps146:4) when it is just as when a flame "goes out". It just has to be accepted that on death a person would just cease to exist if it wasn't for the graciousness of the Creator who can restore a "lease on life" to anyone he wishes at less than the "flick of a switch".

No more than a fire or flame change location when doing the same surely

Well, that's anyone with a knowledge of the background that is, which was patently not the case with regard to some I have discussed the matter with, despite their "qualifications". What interests me more is did/how did Jesus pronounce the name? And what reaction was there at the time?

Interesting. Seems to be a view amongst some I have met, particularly evangelicals, but also a number of clergymen from a variety of denominations. Granted, these encounters were all in England, but the individuals were from quite a variety of nations.

The double line spacing expands it considerably.

Because they don't appear to be protecting ones who need protecting within His own congregations is the reason given for this conclusion. Interesting that this is the same emotionally provocative reasoning as used by Satan the Devil when he challenged Jesus to throw himself off the roof of the temple (Luke 4:9-10). Perhaps to those who support such a view, the later experience of Jesus (Luke 23:46) was a confirmation of this conclusion. There was no shortage of these supporters at the time as they clustered around Jesus whilst he was dying on the stake. They said then " "He has put his trust in God, let Him now rescue him if He wants him, for he said 'I am God's Son' " There is no need to repeat here what the BIble says to counter this erroneous conclusion because for centuries the Gospels and Acts have had those who preach from them in city after city, because they are read aloud in the churches on every "sabbath".

Half-sister?

The one that indicates that "concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father." I presume you are talking about what constitutes a "generation" in Jesus prophecy at Matt.24:34? Well isn't it obvious? We cannot actually know how long the generation Jesus spoke of is until "all these things happen". If Jesus wanted us to know how many years were meant here, he would have said the number of years wouldn't he surely? So actually trying to put a number to it by convoluted mental gymnastics based on 101 general understandings and comparisons of what constitutes a "generation", Biblical or otherwise, is just a game to play while you're waiting for the bus. Nice table though , with an excellent theme scripture, very well demonstrated. That, I can use actually. Thanks. ?

I see where you are coming from now. So Yes, the devil is indeed the father or originator of the lie that one can exist with moral autonomy. Indeed, he did it first and enticed others to make the same choice. When Adam and Eve chose the same course, they were not the originators of that course. They just followed an already trodden path. The blame for the badness of the course itself, can surely be levelled fairly and squarely with Satan himself. The blame for the bad consequences of that course, whilst in large part the responsibility of the originator and promoter of it, is shared by all those who willingly follow it. In other words, those that follow in the course Satan originated cannot escape culpability for their chosen course. In other words, "the Devil made me do it" is an excuse that did not, and will not, "cut the mustard". However, this explanation in no way sets aside the spurious logic in the statement "the devil is bad therefore all badness is from the devil".

bad = worse, worst unpleasant and causing difficulties or harm Not sure either of what you mean regarding my dentist not being the the god of this world, although he might as well be when he has me in the chair. However, the inference that because the devil is bad, all badness comes from him is still not logical.

This cannot be a true statement. It is like saying my dentist is a dangerous driver, so all driving accidents in the world are caused by my dentist. How do you define "bad"?

This a very tempting conclusion and one that is constantly on my desktop. I am reluctant to file it as "agreed" for the simple reason that we just cannot know for sure what Jehovah does or does not do, unless He explicitly tells us. We just have to take His word for it on the basis of what He has revealed in the past. This appears to be one of the fundamental components of what we call "faith". When the first lie was told, it presented a conclusion that God was actually lying when He stated that Adam and Eve would die if they disobeyed Him. As no one had died up to that point, there was no way to counter that claim by any "verifiable actual fact". They chose to believe the contradictory statement. Their NOT dying immediately once they had acted on that conclusion may even have reinforced that view, for a period, despite their guilt. The facts proved otherwise...later. Anyway, the long and the short of it for me is that: 1. Jehovah God CAN interfere (is intervene a better word?) with the will of the nations and individuals, and CAN change the normal outworking of any person, place or thing, any way He LIKES, as past verifiable and actual facts testify. 2. Jehovah states that He WILL intervene with the will of nations and individuals, and WILL change the normal outworking of any person, place or thing, any way He likes, IF HE so chooses (and through the agency of His Son). (e.g. Is. 41:10; Matt.6:33; John 14:14). So on that basis, the tempting conclusion remains undrawn. I continue to thank Jehovah for good things that happen, ask for His blessing on personal action I believe to be founded on His will, and for His intervention in human affairs for a variety of scriptural reasons. I appreciate that my prayers give Jehovah an indication of where I am at spiritually, but that He is under no obligation at all to indicate to me where He is at. (Who can say to him, ‘What are you doing?’ Job 9:12). But I don't have that "genie in the bottle" concept of the Creator that seems to be suspiciously lurking in the minds of some I meet.

Hmm.....Probably a contradiction buried here. If they did lean on their own understanding, they would be unlikely to change.

Valid point. They might also find the following hard to defend: The first report of a death from a serpent bite occurred in 1922 at the Church of God Evangel. In 1955, George Went Hensley, the founder of modern snake handling in the Appalachian Mountains, died after being bitten by a rattlesnake during a service in Altha, Florida. In 1961, Columbia Chafin Hagerman died after being bitten by a timber rattlesnake during a service at the Church of the Lord Jesus, Jolo, West Virginia. In 1967, Jean Saylor, wife of a snake-handling preacher, died after being bitten by a rattlesnake in Bell County, Kentucky. In 1982, Rev John Holbrook died after being bitten by a rattlesnake during a service at the Lord Jesus Church in Jesus' Name in Mullensville, West Virginia. In 1983, Mack Ray Wolford died after being bitten by a timber rattlesnake during a service at the Lord Jesus Temple in Mile Branch, near Iaeger, West Virginia. In 1995, Melinda Brown from Parrottsville, Tennessee died after being bitten by a timber rattlesnake during a service at the Full Gospel Tabernacle in Jesus Name in Middlesboro, Kentucky. In 1995, Kale Saylor (husband of Jean), a Pentecostal preacher, died after being bitten by a rattlesnake during a service at a church in Crockett, Kentucky. In 1997, Daril Colins died after being bitten by a snake during a service in Bell County, Kentucky.[60] In 1998, John Wayne "Punkin" Brown (husband of Melinda), a snake-handling evangelist, died after being bitten by a timber rattlesnake during a service at the Rock House Holiness Church in rural northeastern Alabama. In 2004, Dwayne Long, a Pentecostal pastor, died after being bitten by a rattlesnake during a service in Jonesville, Virgininia. In 2006, Linda Long died after being bitten by a timber rattlesnake during a service at East London Holiness Church, London, Kentucky. In 2012, Mark Randall "Mack" Wolford (son of Mack), a Pentecostal pastor, died after being bitten by a timber rattlesnake while officiating at an outdoor service at Panther Wildlife Management Area, West Virginia. In 2014, Jamie Coots died after being bitten by a timber rattlesnake during a service at the Full Gospel Tabernacle in Jesus Name in Middlesboro, Kentucky Coots starred in the TV series Snake Salvation and his death was widely reported. In 2015, John Brock died after being bitten by a rattlesnake during a service at Mossie Simpson Pentecostal Church in Jenson, Kentucky. (Courtesy Wikipedia)