Hey Skimmer, are you in Colorado?
AlanF
if you want to try some aussie beer for free, go to this site and they will crate out 2 bottles of australian beer anywhere in the world!.
the things you find when you're surfing the net!!
here: http://www.stone-dead.asn.au/silly-stuff/fosters/main.html
Hey Skimmer, are you in Colorado?
AlanF
i recently stopped by my father's house to pick up some mail and to drop off my brother's sunglasses.
my father, a zealous dub with 24 years in the collective, asked to talk to me.. for those who don't know, my fiancee and i are having a baby, which for obvious reasons causes some consternation on my father's part: you don't have to be a witness to believe that sex before marriage is wrong.
(if someone wants to discuss whether this is a valid position or not, do it in another thread.
Dedalus, I think that you should carefully explain the situation to your relatives and see what they think of your Dad's dishonesty and unloving behavior. If it's their party, they can decide who's there. If you Dad doesn't want to be there if you are, that's his decision for himself. I hate to see people sucked into playing JW games and I think it's a good idea to rub their dirty noses in their shitty behavior.
AlanF
don't mean to waffle on but, it was our dc today...... now i've missed them before....as i no longer atend..... but the weird thing was i was driving through wolverhampton (uk) today(sunday)....and low and behold....the ring road was jam packed.... what was going on i wondered...... cars everwhere...... when suddenly i realised......cars full of people wearing suits and long dresses....even wearing badges!!
!......i even spotted some cars with their car park vouchers on the window!!!!
it was the dc!!!!.
Hey zev! Any chance you could tape record the talk where the experience is given where a woman gives up all volunteer activities and becomes a pioneer? This is real important. Please write me at [email protected] if you might be able to do this.
AlanF
just wondering......!.
a recent survey suggested that 70% of couples with pets insisted that their pet was removed from the bedroom before they indulged in sexual activity.
the remaining 30% didn't mind in the least if they were observed by rover or tiddles.
Whatsa matter, Fridolin? Don't like your pedigree talked about?
Let me guess: your Daddy was a Proboscis monkey and your Mommy liked guys with large parts.
AlanF
these days it's pretty clear that the jw organization is running on autopilot.
charles taze.
russell, joe booze rutherford, nathan knorr and freddie franz all had a certain amount of vision.
Actually, Worf, Rutherford's remark about women wasn't just a drunken slip of the tongue. It was his studied opinion. He borrowed the remark from one of Rudyard Kipling's books.
My Dad, who was in Bethel from 1938 to 1946, told me what happened. Several young Bethelites had decided to get married, which meant they had to leave Bethel. Rutherford got pissed and lambasted them at the Bethel breakfast table. He railed that it was a damned shame that any young man would want to trade the wonderful life of serving Rutherford for a mere "bag of bones and hank of hair". I believe he did this a number of times, and the Bethel brothers -- I don't how the sisters reacted, but probably like the dumb cows they were merely accepted it and asked for more beatings -- laughed and thought it was great. My Dad thought it was real funny, too, until he met my Mom, got horny and left Bethel in 1946. I think that the encouragement Rutherford received from the Bethelites spurred him to repeat the remark at the next assembly.
AlanF
adoption by jehovah's witnesses is blocked .
the independent - united kingdom; may 26, 2001. by brian farmer.
a couple originally approved by a council as adoptive parents have been refused permission by social workers to adopt a child, because they are jehovah's witnesses.
Like almost all JWs, largo, you have some serious misunderstandings of scripture brought about by unthinking devotion to Watchtower teaching.
Since Bible writers and their early readers knew nothing of blood transfusions, it is obvious that Acts 15 is talking about abstaining from eating blood. A transfusion is in no sense eating blood. Therefore Acts 15 does not apply. Period.
Furthermore, the Bible nowhere puts a blanket prohibition upon mankind or even Christians from eating blood. Only the Jews were prohibited from eating any kind of blood. However, Deuteronomy 14:21 expressly allows Jews to sell dead, unbled carcasses to gentiles for them to eat. It is inconceivable that God would make this allowance if he had already prohibited such consumption of dead carcasses to non-Jews. If he did, he would be aiding and abetting humans to break his own law. Thus, Genesis 9:4 cannot be an absolute prohibition on eating blood. A careful consideration shows that Genesis 9:4 simply instructs that people should not eat the blood of animals that they kill for food. It does not mean that people should avoid eating blood in animals that died of themselves. Thus, since Acts 15 is based not on the Law of Moses but upon Genesis 9:4, Acts 15 does not even prohibit the eating of all blood. And since a blood transfusion does not involve killing anyone for food, Genesis 9:4 does not prohibit transfusions.
A thorough discussion of these points can be found at http://www.jwbloodreview.org .
AlanF
sometimes change takes place over many years, in such a subtle.
and quiet way that those involved may not even discern that a. trend is forming.
as with social security and retirement issues,.
Julien, this is not something that the Society publicizes. In fact, they do everything to make it appear that celebrating a birthday is still a DF'ing offense. However, you won't find any instructions to elders anywhere in WTS literature that they should DF someone for celebrating a birthday. You won't find any such instructions in private WTS communications with elders, either. For example, the quasi-secret elders manual (the Flock book) lists a number of actions that can get one DF'd, such as celebrating a "pagan holiday". Conspicuously absent is any mention of birthdays. JWs used to DF for celebrating a birthday, and their literature lists such celebrations alongside other actions that JWs don't do, and that's why most JWs today still think that birthday celebration is a DF'ing offense.
AlanF
adoption by jehovah's witnesses is blocked .
the independent - united kingdom; may 26, 2001. by brian farmer.
a couple originally approved by a council as adoptive parents have been refused permission by social workers to adopt a child, because they are jehovah's witnesses.
Dear kenyata, it's becoming obvious that you have little idea what you're talking about. JW children often get baptized at very young ages -- far too young to make such an important and irrevocable decision. I've heard of children as young as seven getting baptized. My mother did at age ten. I did at age 15. Western society recognizes that children under age 18 are rather poor at making big decisions like this, and that's why children under 18 cannot be held to a legal contract. They cannot generally marry without parents' permission until age 18. Why would anyone think that joining a religious organization that might disfellowship them and cause the death of family relations would be less subject to age restrictions than getting married?
AlanF
adoption by jehovah's witnesses is blocked .
the independent - united kingdom; may 26, 2001. by brian farmer.
a couple originally approved by a council as adoptive parents have been refused permission by social workers to adopt a child, because they are jehovah's witnesses.
Excellent comments, fodeja!
I want to add that JWs are extremely dishonest in claiming that they refuse blood because it's dangerous. They imply that God wants people to abstain from blood transfusions because it's dangerous, and that's why they constantly harp on the dangers. But their actual arguments about God's wants have nothing to do with such danger. They argue that God views blood as sacred, not as dangerous, and so that's why God doesn't want people to use blood for anything at all.
The Society's claims about the dangers of blood are thoroughly disingenuous and designed only to fool JWs and the medical community into thinking that their idiotic religious restrictions are backed by scientific data. The fact is that the Society screwed up royally back in the 1940s by equating taking a transfusion with eating blood. This was due to the grossly stupid views of Fred Franz and a few others who had been deceived about vaccinations and such by the supreme nutcase C. J. Woodworth. Having said so much, they stupidly stuck with their basic claim for the next few decades. Today the Society is perfectly well aware that a transfusion is not eating blood, but again, having said so much, they can't back down without losing a lot of face. And that's why JW leaders are so stubborn -- their pride and their claim to speak for God would be greatly damaged by admitting they were wrong for decades and that their stupid policies resulted in many needless deaths. They also know that backing down would be an admission of bloodguilt.
AlanF
i have a strange tale to tell.
my current position is ...is that i just dont know!
my wife however has started attending a church and is really enjoying it.
Unconscious 'mind over matter'? Pure coincidence? Who knows?
When I was a kid we owned a dog that liked to chew on everything. One of our close family friends was in the habit of walking in the door without knocking. One day the dog started chewing on the cord of the plugged-in vacuum cleaner. At the precise instant the friend walked in the door, the dog bit through the cord and got zapped but good. She flew under the couch and hid, and whenever the guy came in the house for the next year she was deathly afraid of him. A lot of 'spiritual healings' are of this nature.
AlanF