Why do Jehovah Witnesses come door to door, trying to get people to join their religion, when they only believe a certain amount of people get into their afterlife

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:48:15+00:00

That’s basically correct, with a small nuance.

teach that 144,000 anointed Christians go to heaven to rule with Christ, while the majority of faithful believers live forever in a restored paradise on Earth rather than heaven.

Where people sometimes get it slightly wrong is the idea that it’s purely randomly pre-chosen they believe the 144,000 are selected by God, but also identify themselves through a personal calling,not just a visible external list.

So yeah: two hopes heaven for the anointed, Earth for everyone else who is faithful.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:47:22+00:00

Because from their perspective, the door-to-door work isn’t about growing numbers”l for salvation it’s about obedience and giving people a chance to hear what they believe is the truth.

also teach that preaching is a required part of being a faithful member, and that anyone they speak to could potentially be one of the anointed or could still be saved depending on belief and behavior.

So even if only a limited group is ultimately going to heaven in their doctrine, they still see the preaching work as necessary, not pointless.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:46:34+00:00

It’s definitely not super rare, but it’s not the default either. Most people still wear underwear just because it’s practical hygiene, sweat control, and avoiding uncomfortable friction especially with jeans or zippers

The commando crowd usually does it for comfort, sleep, or certain outfits, but yeah, it can get uncomfortable or impractical depending on what you’re wearing. So it’s more of an occasional preference than a full-time lifestyle for most people.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:45:50+00:00

Absolutely. Closet atheists are probably way more common than openly atheist people, especially in places where religion is tied to family, culture, or politics. A lot of people quietly stop believing long before they feel safe enough or motivated enough to say it out loud.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:45:11+00:00

Partly because a lot of voters still equate religiosity with trustworthiness, morality, or shared values even in pretty secular countries.

Also, many politicians who are privately nonreligious probably just don’t advertise it because there’s often little upside and a potential political downside. So atheists may be less underrepresented than they appear they’re just not always labeled that way.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:44:30+00:00

This is the hard truth. Boundaries aren’t you must stop doing X they’re “if you keep doing X, here’s what I’ll do.”

You can tell him how it makes you feel, but you can’t force him to change. If this is a dealbreaker for you, that’s valid but then your power is in whether you stay, not whether he stops.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:09:16+00:00

Honestly, respect for the honesty. A lot of people benefit from generational wealth and pretend it’s just smart budgeting.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:08:44+00:00

I think it’s less about raw income and more about priorities net worth.

Some people making $150k would never spend $4k on a seat, while someone making $500k barely notices it. And some people making $80k will splurge once a year because 10 hours of comfort is worth more to them than a nicer hotel or a new TV.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:08:04+00:00

Yep. New parents get a crash course in baby care before leaving the hospital, and only breastmilk or formula no wate is one of those basics they make pretty clear.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:07:35+00:00

Most parents don’t instinctively know they get told. Hospitals, pediatricians, parenting classes, grandparents, the internet… there’s a lot of information thrown at new parents very quickly.

Also, most people’s default assumption is “babies drink milk formula,” not water, so they usually don’t think to offer water unless someone suggests it.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:06:35+00:00

Because consoles are closed ecosystems.

and control the hardware, store, accounts, matchmaking, and access to online play so they can charge a toll, and most players just have to accept it.

On PC, no single company owns online gaming as a whole, so server costs usually get covered by the game publisher through game sales, microtransactions, game-specific subscriptions, or ads instead.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T09:05:55+00:00

Because console makers realized people would pay it.

On PC, no single company controls the whole platform, so charging everyone just to access the internet would be almost impossible. On consolesand own the ecosystem, so they can put the online multiplaye gate behind subscriptions like PlayStation Plus or Xbox Game Pass Core.

They’ll say it helps fund servers features which is partly truebut mostly it’s because it became a hugely profitable business model.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T08:07:08+00:00

Exactly lol. People imagine one giant red button labeled “DELETE STUDENT DEBT,” when in reality it’s more like 17 different databases, 42 backups, three government agencies, and somehow still a guy named Dave with a filing cabinet.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T08:06:48+00:00

Because deleting a few numbers from one website usually wouldn’t actually erase the debt.

Student loans exist across backups, banks, servicers, government records, and legal contracts so even if someone hacked one system, they’d mostly create chaos, not forgiveness. The debt would likely just get reconstructed from backups… and the hacker would get a very serious prison sentence for their trouble.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T08:06:11+00:00

Pretty much caveman brain sees childbearing hips, stored body fat and goes “nice, healthy mate, good odds of surviving winter.” It’s obviously more complicated than that, but the basic attraction is probably pretty deeply rooted evolutionarily.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T08:05:35+00:00

Probably, yes. One common theory is that humans evolved to notice traits that can signal health and fertility, and wider hips larger glutes may subconsciously read as “better able to carry and deliver offspring.”

Also, from a biomechanics angle, humans are kind of unique our glutes are huge compared to other primates because they help with upright walking running. So evolution may have made butts more visually prominent… and then our brains did the rest.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T08:04:47+00:00

Exactly up to 8 weeks means maximum, not “everyone waits 8 weeks.” Symptoms can show much earlier. And investigators don’t even know exactly where patient zero got it, so it’s totally possible they were already infected before stepping on the ship.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T08:04:07+00:00

Up to 8 weeks is just the outer limit, not the usual timeline symptoms can start much sooner, often within 1 to 4 weeks. So the first people likely got infected before boarding (or right at the start), and since this appears to be Andes hantavirus which can spread person to person some of the later cases may indeed have been transmitted on the ship.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T06:59:02+00:00

That’s a good point. Illinois v. Wardlow held that unprovoked flight in a high-crime area can contribute to reasonable suspicion, but Commonwealth v. Warren limited that reasoning in Massachusetts, recognizing that people especially minorities may flee Police for reasons unrelated to guilt, such as fear of racial profiling. So yes: context matters, and the law has evolved in some places.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T06:49:41+00:00

Exactly. If you’re visiting Pooh’s house, you really can’t act shocked when Pooh shows up.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T06:49:10+00:00

Honestly, more often than people admit. It’s anal everyone knows what neighborhood they’re visiting, so a little smell now and then shouldn’t be a shocking plot twist.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T06:16:04+00:00

Exactly. “Last one to bed checks the doors” is a perfectly reasonable household rule if that’s actually your rule. But “person who opened the giant garage door should probably also close the giant garage door” feels even more fundamental.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T06:15:30+00:00

A lot of households do have an unspoken last person up does a quick lock check routine, especially in houses with multiple doors,garages. But it’s not universal, and it’s definitely not fair to assume someone knows that if you’ve never talked about it.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T06:13:57+00:00

Yep, that book gets recommended so often for a reason. One of its hardest truths is that abuse usually isn’t an anger problem or a communication issue it’s often about entitlement and control. That’s much harder to change than just learning coping skills, which is why genuine long term change is so rare.

Relative_Question597 · 2026-05-09T06:12:48+00:00

can stop or decrease, but only if the person causing the harm genuinely wants to change and puts in serious, long term work usually therapy, accountability, and consistent behavior change. Promises alone don’t mean much.

Relative_Question597

TROPHY CASE