well last night i was doing a few boaring things and then this idea just popped in my head.
i was thinking about differant ways that a true 'disturbance' could happen from the ground up in the organization.
the basic idea is this: .
OK, so maybe it wouldn't get accurately reported by those liars, but I liked Drew's idea, anyway.
If you think about it, some people in their midst are already doing this (even if they really think the are the annointed). That 8,200 number is sure not following any kind of normal actuarial decling for people who should be at least in their 80s...
I have thought for a long time that they may just quit counting the annointed to get past the embarrasment.
i just brought balaam's ass' post about his co experiences to the top.
he'd been posting here for a few months, but just a very few times.. .
said he'd been a co for 9 years, stopped last august.
It would suck big-time if he was for real and we got him pissed off because we didn't take him seriously.
On the other hand, if he is lurking, now would be a good time to defend oneself...
I looked back at his posts - the first one was 4th May 06; he says he is just beginning to fade.
On 13 June 06, he identifies himself as a 9-year CO, and says he finished his assignment last August.
So, by that time frame, he would have been an acftive CO who was also a fader for four months - surely a unique situation.
So, come on out from wherever you are and prove yourself up!
i just brought balaam's ass' post about his co experiences to the top.
he'd been posting here for a few months, but just a very few times.. .
said he'd been a co for 9 years, stopped last august.
What I meant about the "end of the posts" was that he came right out and promised some CO tales for us, and then disappeared without a word. Didn't mean to imply that anybody who quits posting is automatically a poser.
I also was hoping that he was real, because there sure should be some good stuff if it had been so.
But, now I have lost patience with it. And, some are suggesting that they knew this guy under another avatar.
i just brought balaam's ass' post about his co experiences to the top.
he'd been posting here for a few months, but just a very few times.. .
said he'd been a co for 9 years, stopped last august.
I kicked that one (where he promised to publish his memoirs by the end of the week) back to the top when the thread about newbies who just quit posting came out...there was a string of comments on it, but finally most everybody decided that he was phony because that was the end of his posts...
during the service meeting part that dealt with how the organization is govern, i can't help but wonder...looking at the time from jesus death to the death of the apostle john some 60 years +/-, the times of the apostles, the letters of paul and the others, the letters to the 7 congregations- where is the mention of looking to the governing body- look to the faithful and discreet slave?
wouldnt you think jesus in talking to the 7 congregations would have mention that since the counsel he gave meant their salvation?
especially since the wtbs says there has always been a fds thru out time !!!!.
Blondie made by far the best point on this a while back - if you really think the f&ds was around continuously since the time of Christ --
OK, so who was the faithful and discrete slave immediately before CTRussell? Did they pass the reigns over to Charles Taze personally, or did he just disqualify them and take up the mantle on his own?
And, why did he think it was him personally rather than the group of the annointed class?
turning a life affirming rule into a death-dealing policy is an amazing accomplishment.
we can thank the watchtower society for a mindset which makes this possible.. i've gone into great detail before about the watchtower blood policy itself.
it is a blatant and deliberate publicity stunt which takes the rather simple prohibitions of the laws of noah for gentiles on murder .
Well, maybe so...but I think that the thread poster makes a good point here anyway -
This biblical blood rule would not be there except for the so-called "life symbolism" of blood itself. Why else the sacrifice law, cutting the throats of the victim, the saying "drink the blood of Christ", etc...? There is also the issue of whether Christians are really under these Mosaic rules anyway - much of the NT context seems to have to do with pagan sacrificial rites.
So, it is not too big a jump to make the analogy that these rules were there to cause humans to respect life. (and, such respect would certainly include not murdering.) I do not believe for a moment that they were there for any kind of medical reason.
This would then make it ridiculous to create an unrelated (unrelated in the sense that a transfusion is not "eating" blood at all) set of doctrines which could in effect cause an otherwise preventable death. Such a thing would be contrary to the original purpose for of the respect of blood.
after replying to a recent thread, it made me think:
i`ll bet that there are some wacky elder experiences out there.
what was the wackiest thing you saw an elder do or say?
We got a new congregation servant at our hall in Okla. City. He was kind of sponsored by the circuit overseer and was moved in from somewhere in west Texas. Young guy, complete with the ego to match Donald Trump.
He gives a closing prayer about six weeks later, in which - (get this) - He praises Jehovah for the special spirit of goodness in the congregation since he had been appointed as the overseer. He was also quite fond of saying (many times over) - "now, brothers & sisters, if you have any problems with your life, just approach myself".
Search the songbook racks for a barf bag!
and some more monkeys.
everytime a monkey learns the trick, he adds this knowledge to the "collective consiousness" of the monkeys.
people have this same "collective consiousness".
Hundreds? And their mind-control methods were helpless to cure them?
and some more monkeys.
everytime a monkey learns the trick, he adds this knowledge to the "collective consiousness" of the monkeys.
people have this same "collective consiousness".
So how come the Mayans got their sorry cannabilistic human sacrificin asses kicked by somebody who happened to have guns?
and some more monkeys.
everytime a monkey learns the trick, he adds this knowledge to the "collective consiousness" of the monkeys.
people have this same "collective consiousness".
to quote you, sir:
I'm not here to defend David Icke, nor the reptillian concept. I'm quoting him because some reader may be familiar with him and get my point.
So, what the hell was the point? (besides the reptillian concept)
If you can't put it into about 36 words or less, then nobody is going to get it.
