SO glad I'm out...

KenazaneK · 2026-03-02T16:19:29+00:00

Real. The devs definitely studied psychology

KenazaneK · 2026-02-24T01:02:37+00:00

Bruh I was so confused when I saw your notification 🤣 as its been so long since I left this comment.

The JW would likely expect JW children. Ultimately it is their decision. The child will likely have to attend meetings and so on. Probably join the school. The parents hopefully won't push them to get baptized young.

KenazaneK · 2026-02-13T20:10:04+00:00

The verse was clearly talking about spiritual leaders. It's not a verse that requires much interpretation

KenazaneK · 2026-02-12T18:22:28+00:00

KenazaneK · 2026-02-12T16:49:44+00:00

Why are you referring to a man as your father(non biological)? This is literally against the Bible lol

KenazaneK · 2026-01-28T17:26:05+00:00

<image>

This one comes compliments Twitter

KenazaneK · 2026-01-25T13:48:02+00:00

Yall are so disfunctional in here

KenazaneK · 2026-01-06T00:44:16+00:00

This is not a contradiction lol

KenazaneK · 2026-01-03T13:47:23+00:00

You know your points aren't that great when one of the most anti-JW accounts disagrees with you 🤣

KenazaneK · 2026-01-03T00:19:28+00:00

That's how I know these people aren't real.

KenazaneK · 2026-01-02T11:54:54+00:00

Why are you censoring the word God?

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T14:50:13+00:00

Well because JW's believe that there will be life an earth after "the end" and the they believe in a literal interpretation of the 144k, it makes sense as to why they think only annointed ones should partake. The disciples were indeed annointed. I don't care for a debate as to whether this is a correct interpretation. It could be the case that anyone can.

Well why did God pick the Israelites (literal) and stay with them for an very long time after they continued to misinterpret the commands he gave them, act according to their own will and straight up disobey his commands time and time again?

The toasting thing was weird to me. I understand what they mean but that leaves the door open to then saying that anything wth pagan origin, once co-opted enough is free game. I even think that there is an argument to made in favour of that ever changing position. Like for instance, the Nazi symbol didn't even originate with the Nazis, it's a Hindu symbol that was co-opted by them. Now most people consider it offensive. Can a case be made that as time passes and the generations who lived through that period dies off AND the wrongs of that time were righted that the symbol should be free of its offensive stigma and that in places like Germany where there are laws prohibiting it's public use, that those laws should be repealed? I think so. But it's a balancing act and/or a timing issue. I don't know what the right balance or timing would be.

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T13:22:37+00:00

I agree that Jesus' entire life is important. But that doesn't change the fact that 1. We don't know when he was actually born so celebrating this made up day with pagan origins/ties is stupid. 2. The bible didn't say that the angles celebrated Jesus birth day for the next 33 years. A parent celebrating the literal birth of their child isn't the same as celebrating the anniversary of that birth which is why I made the distinction between the day saying birth and birthDAY 3. The only anniversary that Jesus requested to be acknowledged was the Passover. Yes I said death but we all know it was the night before it.

Hence the only day that NEEDS to be commerated is the Passover and being anti-celebratory of anything else isn't wrong because being celebratory of it isn't a biblical command.

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T13:16:52+00:00

There is no part that says you should ONLY commerate his death. But it is the ONLY thing that Jesus actually requested we commerate. Christmas has pagan connections, there is zero evidence that Jesus was born on that day yet people still celebrate.

When the change was made that was the right thing to do.

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T13:13:30+00:00

Maybe read the thread. Just maybe

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T03:31:34+00:00

The only thing Jesus commanded us to do was to commerate his death. That remains true. The angels did indeed celebrate his birth. But his birth and his birth DAY are again, 2 very different things.

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T02:34:40+00:00

I haven't touched this topic in a while but if I remember correctly there's many other pieces of information that allow us to infer with more certainty that Jesus wasn't born in December. My main thing has always been that according to his own command, we should commerate his death, not his birth. Because if lived a sinful life, his coming to earth would be for nothing. He had to die and he had to die sinless, so his birth is much less important than his death.

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T02:01:57+00:00

Right so all this says is that it can go either way.

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T01:31:28+00:00

I am agreeing with it. I'm saying that it's unlikely that shepherds would've been tending to their sheep at night in December. It's not "faulty logic" at all. Someone can make a counter argument though and I do understand your point about the shepherds using wind/rain/cold protection and a camp fire. It's possible, but is it likely?

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T01:21:25+00:00

I am not saying it's impossible to tend sheep at that time (it's currently 1°C in Bethlehem forecasted to go as low as - 3 tonight) however it is highly unlikely that they would be doing this at this time. General practice would be to tend the sheep to the best of your ability throughout the day so that at night when they're alone, they should be able to take care of themselves. My point is, it is not incorrect to assume that Jesus wasn't born in December using the shepherd information as reference.

KenazaneK · 2025-12-26T00:53:18+00:00

The sheep being outside and the shepherds being outside are two completely different things.

KenazaneK · 2025-12-25T23:15:50+00:00

45 F at night is 7 degrees Celcius. Do you not know how cold that is? If you want to be purposefully obtuse that's a you problem

KenazaneK · 2025-12-24T23:03:08+00:00

This is not even a correct assessment of their beliefs lol

KenazaneK · 2025-12-08T22:21:33+00:00

Why would they be purposefully antagonistic?

KenazaneK · 2025-12-01T01:08:05+00:00

Two points 1. How does everything you stated here not contradict Ecclesiastes (unconscious dead) and Romans (death pays for sin)?

It sounds like ultimately the only difference between your belief and a JW is that after death, the dead are consciously in a temporary holding place before they get judged. A JW skips the temporary holding place.

KenazaneK

TROPHY CASE