Evacuated

5 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

Cats were once considered gods and were worshipped seriously, cats were from a pagan god?, so the pagans believed. so why are jw's allowed to have cats in their homes

Because this is what some of them (cats) WERE (worshipped as gods), silly!

PS does this remind you of anything?

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I noticed that an article here, linked below,

This is a truly fascinating study. Thanks very much for sharing it.

I noted this passage: 

"In short, the citizens of both Thasos and Rhodes took steps to ensure that the families of fallen warriors would suffer no loss either socially or economically. It should also be clear that these steps were taken out of self-interest, not for pure humanitarian reasons. State-sponsored care for orphaned sons and daughters, as well as for elderly parents, was designed to remove impediments to military service and to ensure a continuous supply of citizen-soldiers in the future." 

which is a remarkable confirmation of Proverbs 12:10 "But even the mercy of the wicked is cruel."

However, in all this there is scant reference to Jehovah himself, who really is the greatest example of one caring for orphans, over and above His delegation of that duty. There can be no more glaring example of need than the forced orphanage and  subsequent abuse and exploitation of the human family at the hands of the manslayer, Satan the Devil. Jehovah's provisions, culminating in the Ransom Sacrifice, amongst many things, provide a basis for restoring the orphaned family of Adam to their relationship with their heavenly father, rather in the spirit of 2Cor.6:18: "“‘And I will become a father to you, and you will become sons and daughters to me,’ says Jehovah, the Almighty.”"

There is no plausible excuse for the neglect of orphans and widows amongst those who claim to represent the true God, Jehovah as His Witnesses today, which is why the enjoinder at James 1:27 is, (borrowing from Prof. John T. Fitzgerald), so apodictical.

"The form of worship that is clean and undefiled from the standpoint of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself without spot from the world."

However, the final clause in that verse, with it's wider implications,  must not be overlooked. ?

.

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I didn't think directly of the scribes contributing to her plight. Good point. A society that does not organize itself well enough to care more efficiently for all its widows crossed my mind. I wondered about the relationship of the Temple to the people in encouraging the following of the Law on this topic.

“Beware of the scribes ......They devour the houses of the widows...." Mark 12:38,40

The scribes were gaining monetary support from those ill-equipped to give it. One of their teachings was that the greatest act was to give money to a teacher. There is little to illuminate on what actually went on here but some historians have suggested encouragement for lavish gifts, mismanagement of the property of widows dedicating themselves to temple service, charging of exorbitant legal fees and expenses for estate management on behalf of widows. This was very much a man's world. Even sponging on hospitality has been suggested although the "devouring" description indicates a more sinister practice such as "squandering". This matches the activity of the Prodigal son in his squandering of his father's resources on fleshly pursuits (prostitutes). Luke 15:30.
In any event, this heinous practice cannot be over condemned. Jehovah provided amply for Israel in order to delegate to them the requirement to provide for widows. The scribes enriching themselves at the widow's expense and then showily making so called gifts out of their consequent surplus into the temple contribution box constitutes one of the most cynically, offensive actions any apostate religionist in Israel could have taken.

And yet that widow still trusted in Jehovah' s arrangement, despite the conduct of those entrusted with its stewardship. It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to see that functioning within an arrangement (organisation), regardless of it's divine origins and sanction would not serve as a guarantee of God's favour anymore than rejecting it on the basis of the behaviour of hypocrites within it. The widow still trusted in Jehovah and supported His organisation (arrangement) with all she had left. 

On 6/26/2018 at 3:11 AM, TrueTomHarley said:

If a Governing Body member were to be on social media, it would be a huge change in method of communication. He would not do so without abundant notice given beforehand on trusted channels.

Didn't a trusted channel say last year "It has also been observed that fraudulent social media accounts and websites have been created in the name of the organisation, the Governing Body, and its individual members. However, no member of the Governing Body maintains a personal web page or a presence on any social media site"

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

It's easy to understand why there were constantly new widows and orphans to look after as times were harsh, and Judea and Galilee were basically in a constant state of revolt where Romans could impress any man into service for themselves, or execute them. Men risked their lives in rickety ships, among robbers, on dangerous construction sites, and of course pockets of armed fighters were regularly killing and dying until things boiled over in 66 - 74, with Jewish fighters holding out well into the second century.

So if you can answer the question as to why these conditions prevailed, you have part answered the question as to why there was a poor widow there in Jerusalem. And if you had read what I said carefully, you would notice that your point here:

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

You almost seem to say that it was more important to think about the widows devotion than think about why she was not being helped out of her situation as a poor widow.

is actually the opposite of what I was saying. (And last time I looked the Samaritan featured in a parable not a real life event).

And also, did no one think to include the scribes as possible factor in the widows plight?

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

who is to say that Jehovah does not impute righteousness and "Christianity" on them for purposes of judgment?

Now! Imputed Christianity??? That is a new one on me! Is it something like being a Jew on the inside rather than the flesh???

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Governing Body members and their helpers spend much time organizing conventions that are more about Biblical and prophetic understandings than they are about ways in which we will help those in need in spiritual ways.

I am not sure you're saying what you meant to say here? I would see the provision of Biblical and prophetic understanding as meeting a high priority spiritual need?

Anyway I will presume you mean that there is a danger of over emphasis on Biblical and prophetic understandings at the expense of noting and meeting more practical needs experienced by many?

On that basis, isn't that why Paul was counseled at his meeting with James and Cephas and John to "keep the poor in mind" in the excitement and intense focus of his missionary assignment?(Gal.2:10). Which, as he said, he had "earnestly endeavoured to do".

On a local level, only recently in our reading of Mark's gospel we were given a very stark reminder of the importance of caring for widows and ophans in the account of the "poor widow" with her "two small coins" (Mk.12:32). Did anyone in your congregation ask the questions like: , "Given the high priority Jehovah gives to the care of widows in the Law and Prophets, how was it possible that there was even one poor widow in Israel?"  "Do we have any poor widows in our midst today?" Or was that point lost in the (quite valid) recognition of her whole-souled devotion despite scant resource, or that even the smallest contribution is noted by Jehovah and Jesus?

On 6/25/2018 at 8:54 PM, JW Insider said:

the Bible never says that there is one physical organization that embodies that one true religion.

Isn't it more the case that the Bible indicates there is one true religion that would be organised? Even from this basis: 

On 6/25/2018 at 8:54 PM, JW Insider said:

The true religion is looking after orphans and widows in their tribulation.

which is what James stated at James 1:27, we can see an organised approach to ensuring this was carried out effectively as outlined in Acts 6:1-6.

@The LibrarianAny source for this please?

14 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

THE TRINITY OF THE GODHEAD

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

millions of them do feel exactly that way

Yes that is probably correct. Just as a similar number likely feel that even if others were to abandon their faith under test, they never will!

I, for one, am a Jehovah's Witness. That is what I put on official forms that ask what religious denomination do I belong to. But I for one do not believe that only those religiously designated as a "Jehovah's Witnesses" will survive Armageddon. Carrying the name of a religious group of people in this 21st Century does effect how I am viewed. For example, being termed "Jehovah's Witness" on, let's say, a variety of databases will have an effect on the way maybe medical professionals handle the management of my case, in some places. It will also have an entirely different effect on the way I am viewed and likely treated in a political/religious context in some other parts of the world.

But as for surviving the end of this system of things when Armageddon takes place, regardless of its timing or absence of expectation on my part? Well, I do not think what is written on my (so-called) "Blood card" is going to be any more relevant to my survival than the name and address tag on my pet dog's collar.

My survival of the coming cataclysmic end of this system of things will really depend on:

1. That I am actually alive when it occurs.

2. Whether the" judge of all the earth" and the "man who he has appointed" evaluate that I actually fit the symbolic criteria outlined at Rev. 7:14-15:" “These are the ones who come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. That is why they are before the throne of God, and they are rendering him sacred service day and night in his temple;" " I do not see a modern day religious designation written there.

So, with regard to the religious designation of "Jehovah's Witness", adopted by a group of people seeking to distance themselves from the corrupt mass of Christian-flavoured religious slurry manufactured by Satans masterpiece of apostasy, Babylon the Great, it is just what it is, a religious designation.

However, I believe that those who will experience salvation through the end of this system will fall into the category of "witness" as described by the apostle Paul in Hebrews 11-12, in company with the one termed as the "faithful and true witness" at Rev. 3:14.

Now, I have made a judgement call that true witnesses of the potential calibre described above are indeed grouping together in association with those who are collectively termed "Jehovah's Witness" in this 21st century. There will be no need to identify a religious organisation in this way after Armageddon, but at present, if I want to continue developing the the spiritual identity as described symbolically at Rev.7:14-15, which will give me at least a shot at survival, then I am sticking with this easily identifiable group. And anyone I come in contact with I am advising to do the same. As for the outcome for those who are yet unaware of God's purposes with regard to this earth, then I will happily leave their prospects in the hands of one who "does not desire anyone to be destroyed, but desires all to attain to repentance." (2Pet3:9).

It is really, after all, due to a succession of miracles that any of us have come to know about Jehovah at all after the combined attempts of mighty forces to suppress the truth of God's Word for centuries. It would not be amiss for the Creator of heaven and earth to unleash a few more of these miracles before He finally calls time on this wicked and smugly selfish system of things. 

Will only Jehovah's Witnesses be saved? (No offence intended here to @Anna who raised this "hoary old chestnut" ?)

This is such a hoighty-toighty topic. It appears to be rooted in the same kind of attitude displayed by 1st century, pre-Pentecost followers of Jesus and exemplified at Mark 14:29-30: "But Peter said to him: “Even if all the others are stumbled, I will not be.” ............Also, all the others began to say the same thing." 

We all know where that got them: "..they all abandoned him and fled." Mark 14:50

I can't think of anyone who deserved salvation more than Jesus himself and yet we are told that "During his life on earth, Christ offered up supplications and also petitions, with strong outcries and tears, to the One who was able to save him out of death, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear." Hebrews 5:7.

So, whilst we know that recognition of Jehovah, Jesus, adherence to the pattern of life exemplified by Jesus, as well as ensuring we "worship in spirit and truth" (John 4:24) are all factors in  "being saved", the words from Paul's letter to the Hebrews, quoted above, should provide us with fuel for sober self-examination.

The religious designation "Jehovah's Witness" is a modern term coined from the words of Isaiah 43:10. Whilst the idea of Christians being witnesses of Jehovah precedes the year 1931 when those formerly known as "Bible Students" accepted the name as a formal designation, it is nevertheless a modern mission statement designating the identity of a group of people and their collective intent of purpose. It in no way was intended to serve as a talisman or token of salvation any more than any other name by which they had been called, even the 1st Century divinely provided designation,  "Christians". The history of misuse and misapplication of that designation needs no repetition here. Jesus's clear words at Matthew 7:21-23 should provide sufficient warning to any who would presume on 'salvation by association' with a name or organisation, devoid of the appropriate "fruits".

The term "Jehovah's Witnesses" serves to separate and identify a group of people. Of course there are responsibilities attached to any attempt to align oneself with the God of the Bible in such a clear, defined, and uncompromising manner. This accountability is much weightier for those who sincerely beleive the name to have been divinely provided. But the fact remains that nomenclature is no basis for salvation any more now than it ever has been in the history of those who would seek "righteousness and meekness" in an attempt to effect the probability of their concealement from "Jehovah's anger" (Zeph.2:3).

The most succinct official answer to this question is found here with an abundance of links to related topics:

https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/who-saved/

16 hours ago, JW Insider said:

About October 1, 4026 B.C.E.

Based on the view that the oldest calendars start the year about Oct 1? Bit of a slim argument, but when else could it have been?

Dang!...... Surely Adam kept a record of his first wedding anniversary...................somewhere?

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

the suicide rate for ex-JWs

Higher than for ex-apostles? 

18 hours ago, Witness said:

Why is the guy in the lower right corner staring at the artist, or...staring at you!  

Arr! That be...Judas! He's not fooled....is he?

3 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

Maybe they used the same method the watchtower used to calculate the day Adam was created on?

Which was?

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I have the flu, and am very tired and congested.

..and possibly a little delirious...

Thanks @Anna. This bit of the quote is interesting too, even though we can all read it for ourselves. Thanks to @Jack Ryan for a fascinating snip although the motive is unclear.

"Carbon dating is not accurate enough to pin down the exact year the tree sprouted from seed; but, given the estimated age, the tree is supposed to have sprouted around 7550 BC. For comparison, the invention of writing (and thus, the beginning of recorded history) did not occur until around 4000 BC." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Tjikko

8 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

a 9,560-year-old Norway Spruce

Who can verify this age?

14 hours ago, Cos said:

It becomes quite amusing how a well known Trinitarian, the Reverend John Skinner, is quoted with approval because it is thought he somehow supports the false idea that the Holy Spirit is not a Person.

What John Skinner stated is what he stated and it makes perfect sense to me without trying to interpret his meaning to fit a preconceived idea about what he meant. He has used a remarkable clarity in expressing his understanding of Is 40:13, and, despite the amusement the reference seems to afford you, it stands as an eloquent description of the nature of the holy spirit, far more so than some of the views  I have seen elsewhere expressed on this topic.

Not that his efforts in any way exceed or supplant that which is contained in scripture of course. In view of many of his expressions being likely published in the late 19th and very early part of the 20th Centuries, I would see him rather like Apollos in needing the way of God to be explained more accurately to him (Acts 18:26). I would see that as a reason for some of his other views providing apparent contradiction to that expressed in the quoted passage. As you correctly observe, his death rather excludes further discussion with him on the matter of his theology, for the present anyway.  ☺️

It is indeed the Northenden, Manchester Assembly Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses.

This building was originally constructed as a cinema in about 1933 and owes it's styling to a trend termed as Art Moderne, a much disputed offshoot of the earlier Art Deco movement of the mid 1920s. The websites linked will give you information on the status the building now enjoys as well as some historical background.

https://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/101385002-assembly-hall-of-jehovahs-witnesses-northenden-ward#.WyYfSaczqM8

http://old.manchesterconfidential.co.uk/Culture/Architecture/The-former-Forum-cinema-Northenden

12 hours ago, Cos said:

When a passage that ascribes personal characteristics or action to a thing cannot be interpreted literally, then the passage is using personification.

You are using perfectly rational logic here, but you seem to progress it in a way that loses it's sense.

12 hours ago, Cos said:

There is nothing in these descriptions of the Holy Spirit that cannot be true of an actual spiritual being.

You then assert that the descriptions that  are termed personifications in connection with inanimate or non-human objects are not so in connection with Holy Spirit. That appears to be because you assume that the Holy Spirit is a person, therefore the descriptors cannot be personification. So your conclusion would appear to be flawed here. The descriptors in themselves no more prove the Holy Spirit to be or not to be a person than the they do love, wisdom, fire, tongues or any other object to which they are applied.

Have you noted Isaiah 40:13: "who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord or being his counsellor hath taught him?" AV

I quite like John J. Skinner's comment on this text:

"the spirit of the Lord] denotes here the organ of the Divine intelligence (see 1 Corinthians 2:11). This is more likely than that the spirit is personified and then endowed with intelligence. The idea, however, does not appear to be found elsewhere in the O.T. The Spirit of God is ordinarily mentioned as the life-giving principle emanating from Jehovah, which pervades and sustains the world, and endows select men with extraordinary powers and virtues."
 

12 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

Here are some clues to help us find him: 

What! They have been chasing this guy since 2005 and still haven't found him? Is that 13 years? How difficult is to check if he is hiding in a Kindom Hall as they suggest? More pathetic incompetence and under-resourcing it looks like. What changes?

5 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

downsized to just 5 residence blocks and...no printery.

Excellent. Someone, somewhere had the good sense to get this thing under control!

4 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

I remember my mom underlining things to answer and I'd get passed the microphone and read them.

Shame! Sounds like you belonged to one of those weird brainwashed type families (of which there are many unfortunately) where meeting answers were just parroted. Did you not have discussions on these studies before you went to the kingdom hall? You don't mention your dad. Was he not involved? I know it is often very difficult for mums to train up their children in homes when the father is not involved. Not that dad's presence is always  guarantee of thinking ability development!

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

I never met Ernie Beavor

I did meet him a few times at our Kingdom Hall and I knew others of his family. I am pretty certain that is him in this photo.