according to our sources belgium bethel will be very soon closed and the building sold.... selters germany bethel will take care of this area....
Wow. Thanks for the update! I guess this new-news? I.e. in addition to all all the announcements of sell-offs that came in half a year back.
ps.
If anyone has any news at all on the scandinavian bethel I would be very interested (you can PM and I promise to keep things confident)
being brought up as a jehovah's witness means you are so used to the term that you rarely stop to think about it.. one thing i've noticed is that people unfamiliar with the religion will say "jehovah witness" (no 's) instead which i always found a bit grating.. but watching the us election, something struck me.
people are often referred to as "trump supporters", not "trump's supporters" and so on.
thinking about other things, people would say they were "united fan's", not "united's fans" and so on.. it seems weird that a group would refer to themselves as though it was someone else talking about them (in the 3rd person, if i have that right).. what do you think?
You are going to love this abbreviation I often encounter here in my country:
"Jehovahs"
as as: "The Jehovahs are not allowed to celebrate birthdays" lol.
the jehovah's witnesses put 69 adams st. in dumbo up for saleby lore croghanbrooklyn daily eagletennis, anyone?.
the jehovah's witnesses have just put onto the sale market a development site in the heart of dumbo, 69 adams st.the building that now occupies the site has a four-story recreational facility and an 84-space parking garage.
its rooftop is graced with an open-air tennis court — which is topped by a fence so cars and pedestrians down below don't accidentally get pelted with over-exuberantly hit balls.the watchtower recently posted the sale offering online without alerting reporters.according to the posting, 69 adams st. is “a 157,410-square-foot development opportunity adjacent to the iconic manhattan bridge.” the jehovah's witnesses did not offer any comment about their sale offering to the brooklyn eagle when asked about it.
i've been using the forum to vent and post a lot more frequently lately as a venting purpose & way to obtain peace of mind with the craziness i've been going through recently as i fade away form the org.
anyways today i'm sitting here at work and thinking to myself about demons... ok i know this sounds crazy but has anyone else out there been traumatized by the thought of demons?
i had a dream the other night, just flat out spooky and i woke and couldn't help but feeling it may have been evil ole' satan and his demons at it again.. i don't want to believe that, (trying not to, & just brushing it under the rug so to speak) but have any of you out there been talked up about demons?
the jehovah's witnesses put 69 adams st. in dumbo up for saleby lore croghanbrooklyn daily eagletennis, anyone?.
the jehovah's witnesses have just put onto the sale market a development site in the heart of dumbo, 69 adams st.the building that now occupies the site has a four-story recreational facility and an 84-space parking garage.
its rooftop is graced with an open-air tennis court — which is topped by a fence so cars and pedestrians down below don't accidentally get pelted with over-exuberantly hit balls.the watchtower recently posted the sale offering online without alerting reporters.according to the posting, 69 adams st. is “a 157,410-square-foot development opportunity adjacent to the iconic manhattan bridge.” the jehovah's witnesses did not offer any comment about their sale offering to the brooklyn eagle when asked about it.
the universe can be observed to be expanding.. an expanding universe must have had a beginning.
whatever begins to exist had a cause.
therefore the universe had a cause.
the universe can be observed to be expanding.. an expanding universe must have had a beginning.
whatever begins to exist had a cause.
therefore the universe had a cause.
Perry:
bohn, your false assumptions were already refuted pages ago. And you know it.
The universe had a beginning. You can't change that.
Beginnings have causes. You can't change that either.
I am not making any false assumptions, I am simply stating what the article says and do not say. The two research articles are freely available on ArXiv, please feel free to quote those sections that supports the idea that OUR universe (not the considered classical model universe that does not take a quantum model of gravity into account) had a beginning.
YOU are the one who are making the false assumption the article proves our universe had a beginning. It plainly does not. In fact at least one of the authors of the papers believes our universe did not have a beginning. You are either doing more of the old lyin' for Jesus (isn't that supposed to be a sin?) or you are just being plain ignorant.
evolution works by the non-random selection of random mutation.
natural selection accumulates favourable random chance events.. the experiment that was began on 24th february 1988 on e coli bacteria by dr richard e. lenski and his team is surely one of the clearest demonstrations of the power of this process.. e.coli is one of the commonest bacterium on earth, there is around 100 billion, billion of them in the world at any given time and around 1 billion of them in your gut right now.
most of the time they cause no problem, until a new strain wreaks havoc on its host's digestive system.. if we assume the probability of a particular gene mutating to be 1 in a billion, the size of the population is so high that just about every gene in the e.coli genome will have mutated somewhere in the world every day.
Anyone can read the short posted article and its references. If you still think that the O.P. provides proof that the evolutionists claimed version of history is true over creation than that's fine.
The article incorrectly summarizes the experiments as a man who misses his arms might "gain" the ability to wiggle through the pipe. This summary misses that new genetic information arose by gene duplication, i.e. a gene was copied in such a way that it came under a different control mechanism and thereby gave the bacteria the ability to metabolize citrate. Can we agree on that?
evolution works by the non-random selection of random mutation.
natural selection accumulates favourable random chance events.. the experiment that was began on 24th february 1988 on e coli bacteria by dr richard e. lenski and his team is surely one of the clearest demonstrations of the power of this process.. e.coli is one of the commonest bacterium on earth, there is around 100 billion, billion of them in the world at any given time and around 1 billion of them in your gut right now.
most of the time they cause no problem, until a new strain wreaks havoc on its host's digestive system.. if we assume the probability of a particular gene mutating to be 1 in a billion, the size of the population is so high that just about every gene in the e.coli genome will have mutated somewhere in the world every day.
I don't post articles for the Evo-dogmatists here.
I totally get you, name-calling is properly a better approach than discussing the evidence.
evolution works by the non-random selection of random mutation.
natural selection accumulates favourable random chance events.. the experiment that was began on 24th february 1988 on e coli bacteria by dr richard e. lenski and his team is surely one of the clearest demonstrations of the power of this process.. e.coli is one of the commonest bacterium on earth, there is around 100 billion, billion of them in the world at any given time and around 1 billion of them in your gut right now.
most of the time they cause no problem, until a new strain wreaks havoc on its host's digestive system.. if we assume the probability of a particular gene mutating to be 1 in a billion, the size of the population is so high that just about every gene in the e.coli genome will have mutated somewhere in the world every day.
Some of this might be due to what would more accurately be described as "devolution" rather than supporting unequivocally the evolutionists claimed version of history over creation.
Yes, and an arguments for why god exist might be illogical, the ICR website might be lying, your favored political party might consist of crypto-nazis and your neighbor might be a murderer. The word "might" is not worth a lot in a conversation about what is.
Rather than speculating that Coftys argument might suffer from this or that why not focus on what is the case? is this a case of "de-evolution"? In which case is it then not the case this organism "de-evolved" new genetic information responsible for a new metabolic pathway?
