Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. - Religion (5) - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. (19071 Views)
Man Shoots At Jehovah Witnesses For Visiting / "Firstborn" Does It Mean First Created? Jehovah's Witness! / Jehovah's Witnesses: the only true religion? (2) (3) (4)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (14) (Reply) (Go Down)
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Freksy(m): 8:24pm On Aug 11, 2012 |
Nimshi: . Is it not glaring that you are shying away from something? What stops you from answering my post? The source you are feeding from fits you perfectly - sites from apostates aimed at tarnishing the image of the witnesses. Prove you are not a liar by answering the question that arose from some of your previous links. Like I promised you, I will keep reposting it so that all will know what you are running away from. It's the post that closely follows this. Once again, if you are not lying against the witnesses, I challenge you to show how 587-B.C.E. blends perfectly with various scriptures that relate to it like I have done regarding 607-B.C.E. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Freksy(m): 9:07pm On Aug 11, 2012 |
Nimshi: Recognized authorities accept 539 B.C.E. without any question as the year Babylon was overthrown by Cyrus the Great. The following gives a small sampling from books of history representing a cross section of both general reference works and elementary textbooks. These brief quotations also show that this is not a date recently suggested, but one thoroughly investigated and generally accepted for the past one hundred years. "Cyrus entered Babylon in 539 B.C." (Encyclopœdia Britannica, 1946, Vol. 2, p. 852) "When Cyrus defeated the army of Nabonidus, Babylon itself surrendered, in Oct. 539, to the Persian general Gobryas."—Ibid., Vol. 6, p. 930. "In 539 B.C. Babylon fell without a struggle to the Achaemenid Persian, Cyrus the Great."—The Encyclopedia Americana, 1956, Vol. III, p. 9. "Babylon was captured by Cyrus in 539 B.C."—Yale Oriental Series · Researches · Vol. XV, 1929, Nabonidus and Belshazzar, Dougherty, p. 46. "The Persians took the city in 539 B.C." (The World Book Encyclopedia, 1966, Vol. 2, p. 10) "In 539 B.C., the Persians conquered Babylonia." (Ibid., p. 13) "Nabonidus, the last king of Chaldean Babylonia, who reigned from 555 to 539 B.C."—Ibid, p. 193. "The downfall of Lydia prepared the way for a Persian attack on Babylonia. The conquest of that country proved unexpectedly easy. In 539 B.C. the great city of Babylon opened its gates to the Persian hosts."—Ancient History, Hutton Webster, 1913, p. 64. "In 539 B.C. Babylon, too, was captured by Cyrus."—The Story of the Ancient Nations, W. L. Westermann, 1912, p. 73. "In 539 B.C., however, Cyrus advanced for the conquest of Babylonia. . . . Sippar was taken without a blow and, two days later, the van of the army of Cyrus entered Babylon."—History of the Hebrews, F. K. Sanders, 1914, p. 230. "It is not likely that there was a long interval between his [Nebuchadnezzar’s] death and the fall of the Chaldean Empire before the onslaught of Cyrus in 539."—The Biblical Period, W. F. Albright, Reprinted from The Jews; Their History, Culture and Religion, edited by Louis Finkelstein, 1955, p. 49. "Cyrus entered Babylon on October 29, 539 B.C. and presented himself in the role of the liberator of the people."—The Zondervan Pictorial Bible Dictionary, 1965, p. 193; see also pages 93, 104, 198, 569. "Nebuchadnezzar had surrounded Babylon with huge walls, but after the defeat of Belshazzar’s army the city surrendered with slight resistance in 539 B.C."—World History at a Glance, Reither, 1942, pp. 28, 29. "When the Neo-Babylonian Empire fell to the Persians, Babylon opened its gates to Cyrus in 539 B.C. without opposition."—The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, 1962, p. 335. "In the seventeenth year of Nabonidus (B. C. 539), Cyrus captured Babylon."—The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopœdia and Scriptural Dictionary, Fallows, 1913, Vol. 1, p. 207. "Cyrus the Great, in 539 B.C., added the Babylonian to the other empires which he had acquired and consolidated with magical ease and celerity."—A New Standard Bible Dictionary, 1926, p. 91. "The city [Babylon] was taken by surprise B. C. 539."—The Universal Bible Dictionary Peloubet, 1912, p. 69. "539 B.C. marked the collapse of Semitic hegemony in the ancient Orient, and the introduction of Aryan leadership which continued for at least a thousand years. This conquest of Babylon by Cyrus laid the foundation for all the later developments under Greek and Roman rule."—Darius the Mede, Whitcomb, 1959, Introduction, p. 2. "It was Cyrus, also, who conquered Babylon in the year 539 B.C. and thus became master of Mesopotamia and Syria."—Ancient and Medieval History, Hayes and Moon, 1930, p. 92. "Nabonidus (Nabunaid) . . . was the last King of Babylon (555-539 B.C.)."—The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1907, Vol. 2, p. 184. "In 539 the kingdom of Babylon fell to Cyrus."—The New Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia, 1952, Vol. 10, p. 3397. "The Chaldean Empire, with its capital at Babylon (Second Babylonian Empire), lasted, . . . until 539 B.C., when it collapsed before the attack of Cyrus."—The Outline of History, H. G. Wells, 1921, p. 140. "Cyrus conquered Babylonia in 539 B. C."—The International Standard Bible Encyclopœdia, 1960, Vol. 1, p. 367. "In the year 539 Cyrus conquers the city Babylon, Babylonia becomes a province of the Persian Empire."—Translated from the German Bibel-Lexikon, edited by Herbert Haag together with associates, printed in Switzerland, in 1951. See page 150 under Babylonia. With the date 539 B.C.E. so firmly fixed and agreed to by so many scholars, now let's consider the following scriptures: 'And this whole land shall be a desolation and an astonishment, and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. ‘Then it will come to pass, when seventy years are completed, that I will punish the king of Babylon and that nation, the land of the Chaldeans, for their iniquity, ’ says the Lord; ‘and I will make it a perpetual desolation.' -Jeremiah 25:11-12 (NKJV) 'For thus says the Lord: After seventy years are completed at Babylon, I will visit you and perform My good word toward you, and cause you to return to this place.' -Jeremiah 29:10 (NKJV) "Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia" (at least before the spring of 537-B.C.E.) ..."the LORD stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia"... He issued the famous edict permitting the Jews to return and rebuild God’s temple. - Read Ezra 1:1-4 (NKJV) It is now a simple formula to determine when the seventy years began. One has only to add 70 to 537 to get 607. Now, let compare the two dates (587 and 607)-B.C.E. to see which is in harmony with the scriptures. 607 - 537 = 70..........................................number of years that the Jews were in exile (it's in harmony with the scriptures) The book of Haggai and Zechariah were written in 520B.C.E. and 518-B.C.E. respectively (years after the Jews had returned to their homeland). Biblical chronology of 607-B.C.E. fits in perfectly with the above dates. 587 - 537 = 50...........................................number of years that the Jews were in exile, according to secular chronology. (False and it's out of harmony with the scriptures). Again, if 587 is correct, the desolation would have ended in 517-B.C.E. (587-70 = 517), when houses had already been built and crops grown for some 20 years in Jerusalem before their return.This would also suggest the Bible books of Haggai and Zechariah which were written in 520B.C.E. and 518-B.C.E. respectively, were written before the return of the Jews.(Huge discrepancy!) Considering the above, 607-B.C.E. [/b]is the only date that fits perfectly with the Bible as the date for desolation of Jerusalem, [b]not 587-B.C.E. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by truthislight: 10:30pm On Aug 11, 2012 |
truthislight: @ nimshi |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by truthislight: 10:40pm On Aug 11, 2012 |
@nimshi guy you are leting us down. Why are you no longer resourceful that you now resort to going to web sight of JW detrators that even a 10yrs old child can Google online? This material are so many on the net and it is what you can offer. Come off it, you can do better than this! Hahaha. Lol 1 Like |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Maximus85(m): 3:28pm On Aug 12, 2012 |
Nimshi:I can't be tired. Armageddon is the day of God's anger. No Jws will tell you that Armageddon will destroy those that are not Jws. Read Zephaniah 2:3. Psalms 37:34. Rev. 7:9, 10, 14. All those following God's directives with a complete heart will be saved. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Maximus85(m): 3:46pm On Aug 12, 2012 |
For all those saying Jehovah's witnesses molest and abuse children. You are wrong, we all cannot be pure. So if you want to judge us all by the sin of an individual...get yourself checked or go get educated. And that JWs habor child molester/fornicator, we have it in what you call "our Bible" that people like that should be removed from our midst. 1 Corinthians 5:11-13. 1 Like |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Nimshi: 11:44am On Aug 13, 2012 |
No, the issue is not that the Jehovah's Witnesses have individuals who r.ape children The issues are more important that that, and some of the issues with this are: 1) because you want to protect the name of your god Jehovah, you protect the child r.apists (see: www.silentlambs.org) 2) you don't inform parents in a congregation when a chid rapist joins the congregation, even when you have the record of the r.apist 3) you allow these child r.apists to go to people's houses to preach your bad news of the kingdom 4) you hire expensive lawyers to make trouble for your members who have been r.aped by your elders & ministerial servants 5) you value the name of your religion more than the safety of defenceless children 6) when a child reports that s/he has been r.aped, you require two witnesses to the crime (not much different than the Taliban) to believe it And, you people lie: 7) In your congregations, you have a hierarchy: Presiding Overseer (PO), Body of Elders, Ministerial Servants; the PO is the main responsible 8') You teach that all Christians who are not Jehovah's Witnesses are unbelievers (even your Watchtower of 01 July 2012, pg 29 confirms this) 9) In advanced nations, your reputation as protectors of child r.apists is now fairly well-known; in Nigeria and other 'third world' countries, there isn't much information. Your religion continues to prey on the innocent and defenceless . . . When are you people going to answer the simple doctrinal question on Sodom & Gomorrah? Will those people be ressurrected or not? . |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by MyJoe: 5:30pm On Aug 13, 2012 |
@Nimshi 1, 2 & 5. I guess we will disagree on that. But I suspect it’s our definitions of “dangerous” that differ. For example, I don’t go to bed worrying that my uncle and his entire family, or his married children and their entire families, will come to any danger as a result of being Witnesses. I am close to them and I believe they are fine. It is at this basic level that I am considering danger and asserting that the religion is not particularly dangerous. That is at the individual level. For societal danger, I don’t think any beliefs held by the JW pose any danger to the society the way some people’s beliefs have posed danger to babies across Africa. I cited the case of raped babies across Africa earlier. Now, I cited that case as an EXAMPLE of how BELIEFS HELD BY INDIVIDUALS can put a society in danger – nothing more. I still don’t get how you related it to the discussion about child abuse among the JW and concluded that I was sanitising the issue. There is a misunderstanding there, as the statement was not made in the context child abuse among the JW. Your definition of danger probably differs and is more encompassing. Religious danger to me is Jim Jones and similar stuff. But for you, it’s probably temporary trauma resulting from disfellowshipping and shunning. For example, plaetton asserted in one thread that the religions pose a danger and should be ridiculed – or something like that. He cited the example of people who give 10% of their income to their churches even when their families are in dire financial straits. I think that is their choice and that is it. But that is not how plaetton sees it. And, yeah, MyJoe’s familiarity with an issue does not impact on its level of danger. Ha. Now about the new recruits you are concerned about. I agree many of them don’t fully realise what they are getting into. But if they did, what would change? You seriously think that telling someone who has just “found the truth” and has been subjected to the JW’s highly effective insulation techniques will give it up once you tell him that he is going to be disfellowshipped and shunned if he commits “fornication” or is sighted with a stick of cigarette? Or that she will listen when you walk up to her and “your religion is dangerous. You’ve been brainwashed?” You have mentioned that Watchtower invested money in arms and tobacco companies. That would cause outrage in normal people considering the dictates handed down on such matters to the rank and file, but have you seen anyone evince a slight angst here? A Witness reads all you have written here and he is happy that Witnesses are hated and persecuted just like Jesus said. A couple of years or so back I saw your exchange with a new Witness recruit called Perrito4u. What reaction did you get from her? Once you start, she remembers all the talk about the fact people would try to discourage her and her faith in the religion (which has been sly substituted for God in her mind) is strengthened. She feels “vindicated”. She had been fortified for just the kind of things you were saying. Bear in mind that Perito4u was calm and had some capacity to follow arguments, even though she often gave pre-fabricated responses, unlike most of the ones in this thread who happen to represent the average JW who loses it once you display close knowledge of the church rather than stick to Trinity and heaven where they have verses lined up and love to, as you put it, “play ping pong”. Look at the angry responses your comments have invited here. I know Witnesses tend to get angry once discussions take this turn. Still, there is no need to hand them just what the leadership of the church wants. The typical Witness reaction as seen here – disowning reason, refusing to consider anything unfamiliar or capable of showing the church in bad light, calling you the devil’s spawn, etc – can’t be prevented, considering what you are dealing with, but you can present your case in such a way that when any thinking person, including Witnesses, comes around he can relate to it. This reminds me of the words of Salvador that it takes a highly elevated spirit or intelligent mind to accept certain truths. I don’t take Witness hate sites seriously because of the manner they go about things. I have read Randy Waters and I think the sort of things he writes will hardly impress any sincere and active Witnesses. You’ve read Franz’s Crisis of Conscience or In Search of Christian Freedom? Now, that is how to present a case. I am not surprised that Randy Waters does not think much of Crisis of Conscience. If these acerbic methods work on anyone, I would be surprised and it would be an exceptional case. Many new recruits are aware of these things and that has not stopped them. I seriously doubt anyone can “save” them. I’m not discouraging you, though. I may even be wrong. Just stating it the way I see it. No, I don’t believe that Witnesses are in serious danger and I have a duty to safeguard them and help them get out. Even if they were in danger I doubt I can help them or that it’s a task I’d be hungry to undertake. All I do here is to point out inconsistencies and inaccuracies in arguments where I see them and have the inclination to do so. I then leave things at that. Well, that is all I try to do –opinionating is fine as long as it is not allowed to overshadow facts. I do the same with other faiths and religions since I treat them all alike. If my adult child or brother wants to become a JW, I would try to present facts in a non-judgemental manner and leave matters at that. At the end of the day, we all make our choices. But you do have a different approach – that is your prerogative. 3. Of course, I was talking about the balance of responsibility. Both the leadership and the rank and file are to blame for any folly, no doubt about that. I was making that post from a mobile phone and wasn’t explicating things sufficiently. 4. Ok. I was hearing it for the first time and have definitely read or heard it said that physical structures will not make it into “the new system”. 6. I can’t get the exact quotes right now, but I have a definite recollection of it. It was announced that these things done by some brothers had cost the church money as the society had had to make pay outs. This was at conventions throughout the US that year. 7. Well, that is sad. Anyway, it’s called “protecting the flock”. That individual had to “protect” himself from the danger posed by certain websites and books so he had to get clearance to read a book. Not following the society’s recommendations on the internet and on reading can lead him to leave the church – something worse than death. Why? Because “that is what the Society said!” I would personally not suggest such a book to a Witness or give him links to “anti-Witness” websites, though. Apart from the fact that I am generally respectful of people’s wishes, including those of people who have given up their fundamental right to read and meditate freely, there’s more than enough inside the church’s own publications for anyone who is prepared to pause, to think and to remember. The JW leadership is convicted by its own literature. I know the Watchtower Society’s censorship goes as far as its own publications as it routinely removes articles with the potential to do some damage from its own “comprehensive” library on CD ROMs. But there’s always enough left there. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 5:48pm On Aug 13, 2012 |
MyJoe: I've been waiting for him to respond to your objection but he is no where to be found. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by MyJoe: 5:50pm On Aug 13, 2012 |
8. Yeah. I guess I missed it somehow. Or maybe I didn’t pay sufficient attention to it and so don’t have it in my long memory. I have done a bit of reading of the matter and I am quite surprised. That in spite of the fact that the UN alliance matter exposed how hypocritical they can be. You see, I was quite prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt on the UN issue. I thought, “oh, well, perhaps Peloyan (then Awake editor, now late) advised the GB that the affiliation was necessary to enable magazine researchers get information about the UN and the GB believed it.” But this one is on another level. Well, it appears to be. You may be aware that in Nigeria, respected JW men, including circuit overseers, were involved in the pyramid schemes of 2001. In fact, they were known as “Watchtower lottery” in some places. Now, I just read someone speculating that Watchtower may have invested in Bernard Madoff’s scheme. Whether that speculation is true or not, I will keep an open mind on since it is just a speculation, but the mention of pyramid reminds me of the 2001 debacle. I have heard some express moral reservations about investment in the stock market and I share their sentiments and would be surprised that a group like the Watchtower would go anywhere near stocks. Still, I understand that most people see nothing wrong investing in the stock market. But military and tobacco? The reports about Watchtower’s investments in military and tobacco companies definitely have some trueness to them. What is not clear to me yet is who knew what and when. There are what look like authentic documents of the US Securities and Exchange Commission with Watchtower listed as shareholders in some of the “questionable” companies. I mean, there are facts that appear to suggest strongly that the Watchtower Society has military and tobacco stocks. It doesn’t look good. The Rand Cam case appears convincing at first, but I have read a letter purportedly written by the Watchtower Society in which they admit some link to the company but deny having received any contribution from the company and that their name which was listed in error has been removed in correction. Since I have not had sufficient time to go through things with a fine comb, I will put off making up my mind on that matter. However, I find the Riley Trust/Phillip Morris case hard to dismiss. I think thinking JWs will find it disturbing that their church would receive money from a trust that invests in the world’s most renown tobacco company (later changed name to Altrious, I think). And while you can say that it is not Watchtower investing in the cigarette company but receiving the proceeds, would that be a good defence, since the trust exists solely to make money for the Society? Another angle to the investment in Phillip Morris could be that the guys managing the trust bought those shares without Watchtower’s knowledge. Would that also be a good defence since Watchtower magazines counsel Witnesses to know whatever it is they invest their money into? The evidence appears to weigh against the Society, but I have not looked through all the information available and will do more findings before making up my mind on whether Watchtower is guilty of knowingly or negligently investing in smart bombs and cigarettes. I can't find any JW Lockheed Martin links. Of course, I am aware that if it was reported that the Catholic Church had investments in a company making weapons – like it was found during the Vietnam War, I think – or one making stuff used for aborting foetuses, the Watchtower and Awake magazines will write about it without trying to mitigate or weigh up anything. But what sickens me in all this – just as much as investing in military industry or tobacco would be – is the fact that the Watchtower Society would carry on big business in this manner while condemning the “greedy merchants” of the world as well as “Christendom’s churches” for doing business with those “greedy merchants”. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 5:53pm On Aug 13, 2012 |
truthislight: This is what brainwashing does to people who have been blinfolded into believing a lie. I provided the evidence that your organisation published and instead of you proving me wrong you go on to blackmail me accusing me of telling lies. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by MyJoe: 5:55pm On Aug 13, 2012 |
Nimshi:Right. During my inquiries years back, one of the most valuable materials I ever had access to was put together by a serving JW. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 5:56pm On Aug 13, 2012 |
truthislight: Are you claiming that the publication I posted does not come from your organisation? |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 5:59pm On Aug 13, 2012 |
truthislight: Are you still insisting that the pdf has nothing to do with the JW organisation? How have I taken over the thread? |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 6:05pm On Aug 13, 2012 |
truthislight: Aha! It's good that you have seen my point (that you called a fraud) but where's your teacher to address it and that if he can see my point at all. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by truthislight: 9:31am On Aug 14, 2012 |
Nimshi: No, the issue is not that the Jehovah's Witnesses have individuals who r.ape children lies, i thought it is in the blood of witnesses to rape children all over the world why are you showing examples that you say took place in other nations in Nigerian forum and not the ones that took place in Nigeria? When you go to other nations forum you will post other ones there claiming it happened in Nigeria. About the nation of sodom and Gomorah why not read your bible and get the sense yourself why do you want this people you term as false to educate you like they did on 607BCE? Baby. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Maximus85(m): 9:55am On Aug 14, 2012 |
Nimshi: No, the issue is not that the Jehovah's Witnesses have individuals who r.ape childrenYou have been so blinded by your lack of any tiny Biblical Insight/knowledge. Do you own a Bible? I strongly feel so. Go read those verses i quoted. And please get a real job. Divert this time you use in cooking up these hatred based accusations into learning from the Bible and not from Wiki or Google. This is my last response to you. May God through his holy spirit see us all through. We are all worshiping one God but in different ways. Peace. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 10:15am On Aug 14, 2012 |
Maximus85: Are you ready to continue answering my questions now? |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by truthislight: 10:26am On Aug 14, 2012 |
MyJoe: 8. Yeah. I guess I missed it somehow. Or maybe I didn’t pay sufficient attention to it and so don’t have it in my long memory. the truth can not hide, in Nigeria so many witnesses got involved in pyramid schemes, and that is a fact. This actions has nothing to do with the GB it was an individuals thing. People thought that it is a good investment. The GB dont get involve in investment matters but has committee for virtually every thing. If i should rend my funds to a reputable fund manager that to the best of my knowledge does clean business, that cant be a bad thing? The bad thing is if it should come to your notice that the fund manager is involve in immoral business practices and you let your greed blind you to the fact and justify it and continue in it, then you stand accused = GREEDY merchant of this world. As long as the organization is concern they have been and continue to stay away from immoral practices that goes against what God and the bible stand for. With all there effort there are always those that want to use erroniouse or minor over sight as a result of third parties to defamed the GB. PLS, THE GB DONT GET INVOLVED IN ANYTHING MONEY BUSINESS BUT ARE CONCERN WITH THE PROVISSION OF SPIRITUAL FOOD. Peace |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by truthislight: 10:45am On Aug 14, 2012 |
OLAADEGBU: hey guy fraud. Are you still here? What other fraud do you have this time? Do you want to defend the bible with the proof for the date of 607BCE? As a christian where do you stand to defend the bible as God's word and not follow traditions? What purpose are you serving on this thread? |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by truthislight: 10:56am On Aug 14, 2012 |
MyJoe: right, no wander. Instead of finding out if what is being taught there is base on the bible and we are suppose to individually make the truth our own instead you leave the studying of the bible and pursued other things. John 17:3 If what you pursued and found was there not following the bible pls, show the proof on this thread. Lack of faith by an individual to follow what the bible says can not be the fault of JW. 2thessolonian 2:10-12 |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 11:04am On Aug 14, 2012 |
truthislight: Since you are in denial of the facts I provided and either you can not or would not answer the question let me move on to the next one: How sure was your Society that the date 1914 would not be "changed" and that it was "not the date for the beginning, but for the end"? |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Nobody: 2:57pm On Aug 14, 2012 |
. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Maximus85(m): 5:17pm On Aug 14, 2012 |
Josh090: sorry for bursting in on this your discussion like this, but i will very much appreciate if you can supply me with news reference of these pedophile cases from reputable news agencies, i doubt such news could not have made some few papers....and as you already asserted they made some t.v news.IF THE NEWS IS NOT ON BBC OR CNN....THEN FORGET IT. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by MyJoe: 5:43pm On Aug 14, 2012 |
Maximus85:Years back, I think the BBC reported it, but I'm not sure of it at the moment. But the CNN, ABC and some other US networks certainly did. The recent case in which $28 has been awarded against the church by a California court was reported by several media houses, including the Huffington Post, the Oakland Tribune and MSNBC. By the way, your assertion that if an incident is not reported by the BBC or CNN it should be forgotten is preposterous. You may wish to reconsider and amend the post. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by Nobody: 8:15pm On Aug 14, 2012 |
. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by kieryn(f): 8:56pm On Aug 14, 2012 |
This is what happens to all JW forum it starts of with an objective and ends up being derail. Why cant someone simply share what their beliefs or answer questions without certain people having the need to air out someone dirty laundry, everyone has it we all humans.The OP aim is not to convert but to simply share his belief or answer any question about JW. Whether u agree or not that doesn't matter, take it for what it is their belief and not yours. If you do disagree, agree to disagree.Many people that come to make post (or the people that have these anti-JW websites) already have a strong dislike for JW or are disgruntled ex-JW, do you think that if I want to know what the JW are all about I will ask an opinion from them. When I no their aim is tear the religion down, there's no balance. Everyone has their right to believe and to worship how they like and as civilized people we can be very cordial in sharing our belief w/o tearing each other down. Please let's keep this forum as neutral as possible. Share your belief using the bible since that something we all come to the table with, and stop posting all these websites that are not affiliated with JW. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by kieryn(f): 9:03pm On Aug 14, 2012 |
@OP What your belief on the statement "once saved always saved"? Does one become saved after baptism and accept Jesus in your faith? |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by MyJoe: 9:20pm On Aug 14, 2012 |
Josh090: hmm..you do not have any other reliable source apart from the one you posted earlier then! am sorry but i am an ardent follower of foreign media and events especially any related to those of jehovah's witnesses organization and i have not come across such allegations, as such i can not agree with you on the matter of child abuse you're talking about!So you are an ardent follower of ABC, CNN USA and co. Anyway, those reports were made years back and any ignorance of them can be excused. But if you are unable to verify the July 2012 multimillion dollar California court case for yourself but prefer to read only the portion earlier mentioned, you cool, boss. As for your agreeing with me, I do not have a need for that. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by MyJoe: 9:55pm On Aug 14, 2012 |
kieryn: This is what happens to all JW forum it starts of with an objective and ends up being derail. Why cant someone simply share what their beliefs or answer questions without certain people having the need to air out someone dirty laundry, everyone has it we all humans.The OP aim is not to convert but to simply share his belief or answer any question about JW. Whether u agree or not that doesn't matter, take it for what it is their belief and not yours. If you do disagree, agree to disagree.Many people that come to make post (or the people that have these anti-JW websites) already have a strong dislike for JW or are disgruntled ex-JW, do you think that if I want to know what the JW are all about I will ask an opinion from them. When I no their aim is tear the religion down, there's no balance. Everyone has their right to believe and to worship how they like and as civilized people we can be very cordial in sharing our belief w/o tearing each other down. Please let's keep this forum as neutral as possible. Share your belief using the bible since that something we all come to the table with, and stop posting all these websites that are not affiliated with JW.I actually share the general sentiments of your post. I agree with you mostly. |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 11:05am On Aug 15, 2012 |
Maximus85: If the news was on bbc or cnn would you admit it? These things are easy to find you now, just google it up. Here is what CNN broadcasted about 2 years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwQoKygx0pE |
| Re: Jehovah's Witnesses Questions And Answers Page. by OLAADEGBU(m): 11:07am On Aug 15, 2012 |
MyJoe: Panorama on BBC certainly reported it. Check the suggested link below: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/2114320.stm |
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (14) (Reply)
Biafra: Anambra Church Declares 40-Day Fasting / If Heaven Is Real Why Are Christians Afraid To Die?? / Why You Must Make 2019 A Year Of Sexual Chastity
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 140 |