Evacuated

Now, now me old china! You're getting a bit hoighty-toighty yourself here. For those unable to follow the links to jw.org, what these posts include (my bold) follows: "The Bible mentions tattoos just once, at Leviticus 19:28, which says: “You must not put tattoo marking upon yourselves.” God gave this command to the nation of Israel, thus setting them apart from the neighboring peoples who marked their skin with the names or symbols of their gods. (Deuteronomy 14:2) While the Law given to Israel is not binding on Christians, the principle underpinning this law is worth serious consideration." and: "What questions should I ask? "What are the health risks? How would it affect your reputation? Will you always like it? What Bible principles apply? Colossians 3:20 1 Peter 3:3, 4 1 Timothy 2:9 Romans 12:1 In view of these factors, many people have decided against getting a tattoo." So, before you start firing off insulting accusations about who is presuming to speak for GOD, please notice that there is no prohibition on tattoos binding on a Christian. However, there are several thought provoking questions and some well chosen scripture texts to enable those who value their Christian freedom to make a well-considered, personal, and conscientious (moral) choice in this matter. Cheers mate!

Maybe my earlier answer wasn't clearly stated. No. He does not. If anyone wants to explore the matter further and to get some guidance on how appropriate the modern (secular) fashion for tattoos would be for Christians then try: https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/bible-say-about-tattoos/ https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/family/teenagers/ask/should-i-get-a-tattoo/

Cos The complexity of your argument both here and in other posts indicates a higher level of intelligence and comprehension than this quoted statement would appear to reveal superficially. Even a cursory knowledge of the belief and practice of Jehovah's Witnesses provides for the fact that they pray to Jehovah in the name of Jesus Christ, and believe this to be in harmony with the personal instruction of Jesus at, for example, John 16:23:"Most truly I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything, he will give it to you in my name.". So both the name of Jehovah and His son Jesus would appropriately be included in worshipful address tp God, which fact your references appear to support. Notwithstanding, to assert that a practice which obviously is at odds with Scripture, relies for support on a text that can be ambiguous in isolation, and that has also been subject to scribal interference is quite simply, inadequate. I will refrain from speculating on other motives for doing this. So, unless you can provide sounder arguments of a less insulting nature, I will have to defer to another poster's words as below:

Quite true. What I had in mind was more regarding speculation based on scripture rather than it's direct statements.

Don't think He does, does He?

Interesting article and very carefully reasoned through. However, I couldn't commmit to his conclusions any more than agreeing that he raised some interesting possibilities. The author quotes Ewin Monsma: 'Reformed scholars have generally been of the opinion that the Bible gives no evidence of death among animals before the fall.’ He does not seem to refute this idea, so appears to share it. I believe there is controversy on this matter amongst those who call themselves (or are called) "creationists", but was surprised recently to find that some Jehovah's Witnesses also adhere to the view that animals only die as a consequence (somehow) of the rebellion in Eden, and that this will not always be the case. (There seemed to be an element of pet bereavement in this). I haven't met any (yet) who extend the resurrection hope to animals that have died however. Interestingly, this does appear to be a Mormon belief: "The animals, the fishes of the sea, the fowls of the air, as well as man, are to be recreated, or renewed, through the resurrection, for they too are living souls.” Joseph Fielding Smith. Conference Report, October 1928, p. 100. The mind boggles on the logistics of this! There is an obvious difference of opinion between Jehovah's Witnesses on animal diet and behaviour, both historic and future as shown in the discussion here. It is pretty clear that a literal interpretation of popularly referenced scriptures such as Isaiah 11:6-9; 65:25, Mic.2:4 is encouraged both in the text and illustrations in Watchtower publications, and there is no denying the appeal of this view. However, the view is open to considerable extrapolation and it is this I think that polarises opinion. Early on in my theocratic education, it was clearly pointed out to me that paradise promises in the Hebrew Scriptures relating to Israelite restoration should not be interpreted out of their historic context. For example, they should not be used as an authority for concluding that lions will begin roaming the entire earth so that each child can have a lion as a pet. Nor should we think that, regardless of climate conditions, grapes and figs wiIl flourish everywhere. However, they do provide a basis for believing that peaceful and paradisaic conditions will prevail amongst the entire creation here on earth, under Jehovah's Kingdom rule. The relative peace between members of the true Christian congregation as "animalistic" behaviour is replaced by the "fruitage of the spirit" can be seen as a token of what is to come. This allows for a wide variety in the personal visions individuals may cherish on what conditions will prevail in the paradise earth to come, but in no way allows for an imposition of such views on others where there is no clear Scriptural basis. By the same token, the relatively harmless views of others should be respected, regardless of any perceived naivety on the part of those who feel their more educated perceptions deserve higher credence. A couple of Scriptural principles that moderate my grip on personal views that can only be termed as benign speculation regarding the exact detail and logistics of many aspects of life in the coming paradise earth are contained in these texts: "For the Kingdom of God does not mean eating and drinking, but means righteousness and peace and joy with holy spirit." Rom.14:17 "But just as it is written: “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.” 1Cor.2:9

Thanks very much @Kurt

Not on comments. Maybe in the clip dialogue, but not that I can understand.

No

Thank you. So, do we know who made this film?

??? Don't know what you mean???

Could you comment please on when and where this ocurred and who made the video? Ugent info please!

Could you comment please on when and where this ocurred and who made the video? Ugent info please!

Some obviously do.

probably Probably a number of similar British centres of urban activity are currently at risk. There's also the issue of the ongoing police investigation of the area along with structural repairs to the adjoining Victoria Station. Hence, the main area outside the venue remains closed.

Real empowerment for our ministry

Not now it appears. The convention is cancelled

You may not realise it, but you project a very jaundiced spirit here @HollyW. Are you/were you a JW? because you seem to speak from a position of knowing what they feel or think about things? But then you are not like JWs I know, although I won't say I know so many as to be an expert in how they view their relationship with other Witnesses. But you certainly seem to be hurting about something. However, I do know how I feel about things myself and am expert in that. And I will limit my comments to how I personally feel about things in this matter of making decisions about various practices or issues. What other Witnesses go by when deciding their course in life is up to them. That seems to me to be an honest approach.

Thought it said they would need to make their own decision? So they are neither allowed or permitted. The other issue was about joining a political party. I wouldn't join a political organisation under any circumstance, least of all the MCP, a party resolved to casting Jehovah's Witnesses out of human society and, self-confessedly, engaged in butchering opposers. I wouldn't join such a party any more than I would have joined the Nazi party. So I don't see the issue of going to a polling booth as the same as joining a political party. Maybe you do. That is your perogative. Maybe you would do both, or neither. It's in your hands.

Not explicitly, but, for me, implied. And giving approval to the MCP's treatment of dissenters. Unfortunately, in all these scenarios there is very little or no comment from any who have actually faced the issue. (Save 3rd party examples). I am not really clear on where you actually stand on the examples listed, and I certainly don't know what you would do in a real-life scenario. Not that you are in any way accountable to me. Why are you so concerned about what JWs do anyway? Were you one once?

Quite true. It's almost that those who continually argue for the misidentification and inappropriate worship of Jesus partly acheive their aim by forcing a diminishing of appreciation in those eager to counter their false claims. We discussed this issue in Kingdom Ministry and Pioneer School.

But was corrected as I think any faithful spirit creature would do when faced with an inappropriate human response. I doubt that the Scriptures were written to counter this false doctorine.

amen to that!

Is it compulsory to have the flag on a car license plate now in Chile? Does make you wonder, I agree. I have talked to Malawi brothers many years ago, but without the insight I have now. "worshipful ritual" required? Probably not much more than what was involved in getting the release document signed in the Nazi camps during Hitler's rule. As for getting a license plate or passport? Yeah, probably not much more effort for those either, but "apples and oranges" with regard to the "worship" aspect. (for me, that is). Are you connected with a Christian group that resisted the Nazis in this way? Or the MCP for that matter? PS. Docs below not direct translation of each other. Just samples.

who knows? Agreed. And as this refers to the Ps110:1 quote, for me, Stephen's vision of what that that Psalm describes closes the door on the argument. The "red herring" assertion is just an anomaly (or even an AnnO'Maly). Substitute "unthinkable" for "uncomfortable". We will indeed. As ever, enjoyed the exchange.