I have always been amazed at how the WT will quote Einstein in support of their positions whenever possible but ignore most of what he believed:
so again we go to the quality of evidence used by the wt.. you can read the article here - https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/awake-no5-2016-october/did-jesus-really-exist/.
you see the wt refer to experts with quotes.
as is usually the case the credentials are not represented, just that they are experts (so take their word).
I have always been amazed at how the WT will quote Einstein in support of their positions whenever possible but ignore most of what he believed:
so again we go to the quality of evidence used by the wt.. you can read the article here - https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/awake-no5-2016-october/did-jesus-really-exist/.
you see the wt refer to experts with quotes.
as is usually the case the credentials are not represented, just that they are experts (so take their word).
Yah that was predictably awfull. I dont doubt jesus existed, but it is amazing the wt cant even make a good argument when they are right.
full set: http://imgur.com/a/1ru5z .
sample:.
.
I actually thought it would be bigger. Any idea about how many it will house?
whilst browsing my local football team's fan forum, i spied this thread.... http://www.northstandchat.com/showthread.php?340338-10-000-expected-at-the-amex.
Yah, nice comment. The shitty youtube videos are a gift that keeps on giving.
i kid you not, giving money is an act of love according to jwtv (juli edition).
I swear this is the last one. After this i will never proofread another sentence.
i kid you not, giving money is an act of love according to jwtv (juli edition).
This one has less embarrassing spelling:
Has they ever done this before? Said that contributing is an act of love?
and yah, it's a nice touch that it is one or more folded notes that is being contributed. None of those coins cheapskates.
i kid you not, giving money is an act of love according to jwtv (juli edition).
I turned the latest money begging into a picture:
It's at 13:25: https://www.jw.org/download/?fileformat=MP4&output=html&pub=jwb&issue=201607
The whole broadcast is pretty cringeworthy.
i kid you not, giving money is an act of love according to jwtv (juli edition).
I kid you not, giving money IS an act of love according to jwtv (juli edition)
we had a number of posters report on the baptism rate at conventions which is usually less than 1% and rates lower than 0.5% is by no means uncommon.
despite this there is still a positive growth rate in the us (0.71% according to the yearbook) and i wonder how these numbers relate.
i wonder if anyone can help me out if these assumptions are true:.
nonjwspouse: I agree that (DF'ings, etc.) is a confounded, however I am not sure it would overturn the effect.. Let's say that in 1990 100'000 new converts (i.e. door-to-door converts and not children of witness) enter the witness at an average age of 30 and lets suppose that by year 2000 about 30'000 has left. This still leaves a net influx of 70'000 30-year-old in 1990 which will drag down the average age of the witness in the years to come and lead to a lower /effective/ mortality rate as long as this influx happens.
Once the source of converts is removed (i.e. replacement happens by birth) the witness population will begin to closer resemble the average population and the mortality rate will go up -- leading to less growth or even stagnation despite the same conversion/birth/retention rate.
If we assume a percentage of teenagers leave (never to be seen again) I think that effect is better understood as a lower "effective birth-rate". Of course I don't dispute there is some demographic skewing because people (presumably) preferentially leave at a given age and not when they are very old, however I think the above effect is there as long as we assume the source of new (fresh, door-to-door) converts is declining.
we had a number of posters report on the baptism rate at conventions which is usually less than 1% and rates lower than 0.5% is by no means uncommon.
despite this there is still a positive growth rate in the us (0.71% according to the yearbook) and i wonder how these numbers relate.
i wonder if anyone can help me out if these assumptions are true:.
One hypothesis could be the following: Historically, up to around the 90s, the JWs has expanded primarily by conversion. The "average convert" is probably a younger person say around 30 year old. He or she then has children which are brought into the group as very young. Taken together that means the JWs should have a higher birth rate (or "effective" birth rate due to conversion of small children) than the rest of the population and be younger than the rest of the population. Accordingly the death rate of the JWs is lower than the rest of the population.
However when conversion rates drop (i.e. most converts are descendants of JWs) the JW population will become more representative of the actual population (i.e. older). That means the death rate will increase and the fertility rate will drop. If this is true that means that even if the current conversion rate/ability to baptize and keep children in is maintained the resulting total growth may be lower than now.
I think this hypothesis is (plausibly) true in terms of the overall direction of the effect but I got no idea if it is significant or not, that would need to be checked by looking at the numbers.