So....how exactly did that letter get there?
It's all thanks to this guy:
The Watchtower 11/15/2014
by wifibandit 101 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Fencing
Makes me wonder if the GB has a luxury bunker somewhere.
That's assuming the GB actually believe deeply enough to think they'll need a bunker. I have some doubts that they drink their own koolaid to that degree.
-
NewYork44M
I am with you - the hunker-down mentality is only a shtick to keep the r&f in expectation. The fact that the GB know it is a shtick only reinforces this as a cult.
When a group screams sacrifice - your first question should be who benefits from this scacrifice.
-
ADJUSTMENTS
The brother with tie is the only one who will survive, everyone else will die because they are dressed too casual, especially the old white brother wearing the hoodie he is going straight to Sheol!!!
-
ctrwtf
Let me guess. There ia a sign on the door that says NO CATHOLICS! Real christianity at work I see.
-
yadda yadda 2
You have to admit this is an absolutely brilliant propaganda piece by the Society, although to be honest, there are loads of orthodox Christian groups who meet in secret just like this in many countries. In China, for example (Google it...there is a massive Chinese underground Christian world).
A picture paints a thousand words and there's just so much classic JW cultish manipulation in this image: massive persecution complex (harking back to WW2 underground JWs); the end must be really really near now; remain in the organisation to survive; be very afraid of the future, no joy whatsoever on their faces.
It looks like a tornado bunker neighbourhood hunkerdown rather than a happy Christian group (fear written all over their faces - the little girl's fearful expression is quite deliberate).
To any neutral observer, this photo is basically a drop dead admission that it's fear-based doomsday cult. It's like they have all gathered in the basement because the US has just declared Marshall Law and JW's have been outlawed.
The Russian's are on to them for what they are (mind-control, brain-washing, manipulative cult) and this just reinforces the Russki's reasons for illegalising them.
-
moomanchu
Is Muhammed Ali the conductor's body guard ??????
Muhammed Ali & Vin Diesel, shit no wonder they made it so far !!!!!!!!
Vin is thinking
It's getting Dark
There's only one rule: Stay in the light
-
moomanchu
There are bad days, and then there are legendary bad days. This was shaping up to be one of those.
Whole damn planet wanted a piece of me. Can't stay in the open. Can't risk another attack.
Of course they were gonna try and kill me.
-
Sayswho
- Yes, that is intentional and calculated. It's N Korea tactics. Why does the org have to say over and over "listen to me", "obey me", "listen, obey, and be blessed", etc.? If it had acquired a record of being right over the years, it wouldn't have to keep telling everybody "listen to me". People would naturally want to listen to it.
Excellent point...
SW
-
Magnum
Oubliette: You can't be "more wrong" than wrong!
I respectfully disagree. You seem to assume that wrong is absolute – that there are no degrees of wrong. “Wrong” is not an absolute adjective like “dead.” One can’t be more dead than another, but one can be more wrong. There are degrees of wrong. I know of no society that doesn’t recognize degrees of wrong. US law and courts recognize degrees of wrong; there are different punishments administered according to degree of wrong. It is well documented and widely accepted that the word “wrong” has a comparative form – “more wrong” (some accept also “wronger”). It would not have a comparative form if it were considered to be an absolute (or ungradable or non-gradable) adjective. I have never seen the word “wrong” on lists of absolute adjectives.
Consider this from the Wikipedia article “Wronger than wrong”:
“Michael Shermer has described as "wronger than wrong" the mistake addressed in what he calls Asimov's axiom, after the noted author Isaac Asimov, who discussed the issue in his book of essays, The Relativity of Wrong. A statement that equates two errors is wronger than wrong when one of the errors is clearly more wrong than the other. As Asimov put it:
"When people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
If someone asks whether 7x9 equals 63, and some answer “no”, then clearly they are wrong, and one is not more wrong than the other. However, suppose, instead, that he asks what 7x9 is, and he gets two answers, “64” and “164”. I think he would be logically justified in saying that “164” is more wrong than “64”.
Suppose one predicted an event was going to occur in 1960 and another predicted the same event was going to occur 1980, but the event occurred in 1982. I say that both were wrong, but the one who predicted 1960 was more wrong.
Also, it seems logical to me to say that one can be more wrong by virtue of his being wrong more. One who has wrongly predicted financial trends more than another is, to me, more wrong than the other. It is with the concept drawn from that I said “The passing of time has shown the supposed slave to be more and more wrong.” I see nothing wrong with that logically or grammatically. The org adds to its lists of wrongs with the passing of time. Its wrongness is ever more evident. It is more wrong now than it was in the past as it has built a bigger record of wrongness.
