You seem to be confusing "things people chose to do" with "things people do because their religion commands it".
Nope.
this you will never see on the mainstream media.
before you comment watch the whole video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.
You seem to be confusing "things people chose to do" with "things people do because their religion commands it".
Nope.
so had to check it out to see what it's all about.. what i got was more cloudiness.
as in luke 2:9.... suddenly jehovah’s angel stood before them, and jehovah’s glory gleamed around them, and they became very fearful.
the notes point out.... jehovah’s angel: this expression occurs many times in the hebrew scriptures, starting at ge 16:7. when it occurs in early copies of the septuagint, the greek word agʹge·los (angel; messenger) is followed by the divine name written in hebrew characters.
The appendix says:
Recognized Bible translators have used God’s name in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Some of these translators did so long before the New World Translation was produced. These translators and their works include: A Literal Translation of the New Testament . . . From the Text of the Vatican Manuscript, by Herman Heinfetter (1863); The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson (1864); The Epistles of Paul in Modern English, by George Barker Stevens (1898); St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, by W. G. Rutherford (1900); The New Testament Letters, byJ.W.C.Wand, Bishop of London (1946). In addition, in a Spanish translation in the early 20th century, translator Pablo Besson used “Jehova ́ ” at Luke 2:15 and Jude 14, and nearly 100 footnotes in his translation suggest the divine name as a likely rendering. Long before those translations, Hebrew versions of the Christian Greek Scriptures from the 16th century onward used the Tetragrammaton in many passages. In the German language alone, at least 11 versions use "Jehovah” (or the transliteration of the Hebrew “Yahweh”) in the Christian Greek Scriptures, while four translators add the name in parentheses after “Lord.” More than 70 German translations use the divine name in footnotes or commentaries.
this you will never see on the mainstream media.
before you comment watch the whole video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.
LoveUni I am saying very plainly exactly what I mean. The idea that the only way to be a "good" Muslim is to be an ex-Muslim is an attempt to deny any respectable identity to anyone who claims the label "Muslim". That is a sly tactic and disgusting rhetoric.
And I am very familiar with all the bigoted excuses for claiming there are no good Muslims.
1. "Muslim's can't be good because they believe the Quran and it's violent."
- yeah but so is the Bible it doesn't mean there are no good Christians.
2. "The Bible might be violent but Christians ignore the violent bits, so they are not the problem like Muslims are."
- oh really? Bush and Blair's "crusade" in Iraq, which they prayed about, and were convinced God supported, and now millions are dead as a result. That wasn't violent on a scale above and beyond any extremist terror attack? But no, Christians are not violent, only Muslims of course.
3. "There are practically no moderate Muslims anyway, look at all the survey evidence, they are violent monsters, open your eyes you fool,"
- I guess you can come to that warped conclusion if 1) you don't know Muslims personally and 2) you believe all the nonsense you see on right wing blogs and YouTube channels as your main source of information.
this you will never see on the mainstream media.
before you comment watch the whole video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.
Simon the allusion is in the form of words and the exclusion of the possibility of there being such a thing as a "good" Muslim. It's disgusting rhetoric.
In the 19th century Americans discussed whether there was a useful distinction between good and bad Indians, hostile and reservation Indians. Some expressed the view that there was no meaningful distinction and that the "only good Indian is a dead Indian".
Now some people are arguing that there is no meaningful distinction between violent extremists and those who practise Islam peacefully. Even going so far as to say the only "good" Muslim is an ex-Muslim.
If others can't see the parallel or why it's disturbing there's not much more I can say.
this you will never see on the mainstream media.
before you comment watch the whole video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.
Yes it's different than commending Nazis for abandoning Nazism for a few reasons:
1. In liberal democracies we respect religious minorities not stigmatise them.
2. Saying that there is literally no "good" way of being a practicing Muslim is counter-productive for inter-community relations. It doesn't show respect or seek better understanding.
3. It also happpens to be categorically and empirically false. Since there are many Muslims who live productive and good lives and are an asset to the community because of the impact their faith. And they should be commended and encouraged not stigmatised.
To state the bleeding obvious.
this you will never see on the mainstream media.
before you comment watch the whole video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.
What are you talking about?
You said a good Muslim is an apostate. Or do you deny saying it? It's only a few posts back!
I am pointing out where that sort of language derives from and why it is disturbing.
this you will never see on the mainstream media.
before you comment watch the whole video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.
Yes. as I said above - "A good Muslim is an apostate or a lapsed Muslim at best".
You do realise this quote alludes to the old saying the "only good Indian is a dead Indian" or "the only good Indians I ever saw were dead"? Not exactly the most reputable cultural allusion on which to build a rhetorical case.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/541345?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
this you will never see on the mainstream media.
before you comment watch the whole video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqaigeqxqgi.
The only people talking about "serious social problems" in Sweden are right wing idiots most of whom have never been to Sweden.
The Swedish police who cooperated with the "documentarian" that Trump referred to say he quoted them out of context and pretended they were answering different questions than they were answering in order to stigmatise migrants. They say they won't cooperate with such people making "documentaries" in future.
has anyone else heard of these situations with congregations and halls in your area?
i thought the ground breaking mandatory pledge a little while ago was to keep up with "immense" growth?
how soon they forget... looks really bleak for the future of the wbats, the jw gravy train seems to be coming to a slow and agonizing yet inevitable stop.
In the early 20th century, when Christian Scientists began declining, the church responded by declaring it a sin to count membership or publish figures. (Citing the OT passage where David was forbidden from counting the number of Israelites) I wonder how Watchtower will react.
What the Christian Scientists couldn't hide however, was the reduction in congregations, and sales of church buildings.
I think it will be the same with JWs. They may stop publishing numbers soon and bunker down, ramping up the rhetoric.
But if they stop publishing statistics, we can still quantify the decline, mainly by monitoring the reduction in the number of congregations and Kingdom Halls.
has anyone else heard of these situations with congregations and halls in your area?
i thought the ground breaking mandatory pledge a little while ago was to keep up with "immense" growth?
how soon they forget... looks really bleak for the future of the wbats, the jw gravy train seems to be coming to a slow and agonizing yet inevitable stop.
I am not surprised. The congregation figures over the next few years will be very interesting.