Jump to content

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 12/02/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    It would be wrong of me to tell you what i really think of you, but I'll just say you have a completely warped sense of reality. VICITMS of child sexual abuse were THROWN OUT OF THE JW ORG and then shunned. You are totally brainwashed by your GB and it's ORG. Can you honestly give me a quantity / number, of ex-JWs that you had known personally, that left the JW Org, and can you give proof of them going on to take drugs, immoral sex, smoking et al ? But then you'd probably go on to tell lies just as JW's do. By what you have written above, it is you that is 'spreading false info' about others. At least oposers have some proof of what they say about : Child Sexual Abuse, Lies told in courts, False teachings and false predictions, teachings of men taught as doctrines, etc.... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Separate Comment :- Well it looks as if the GB's lawyers have learnt 'the wisdom of this world' by the way they tell lies in courts. And your GB must have learnt the 'wisdom of this world' when they go on about tight pants and masturbation, and accuse people of opposite sex of having committed fornication when there is no proof of it. And as for the 'empty speeches' and 'false knowledge', um, we don't have to look too far back in history of the Bible Students and Watchtower / JW Org. Yes your GB have definitely deviated from the faith.
  2. 2 points
    James Thomas Rook Jr.

    Creationism

    YES! That's it! It's so clear to me now!
  3. 2 points
  4. 2 points
    What is the difference between being dogmatic and critical argument? Is it philosophy or belief in polarization? Do I believe witnesses are dogmatic? Compared to, which religious organization. Can we say Jesus was dogmatic? Does anyone have an answer about Jesus and the apostles?
  5. 2 points
    Because that kind of gossip travels fast! Yes, very dogmatic. Obviously this was when they "didn't succeed" in not being dogmatic. I didn't say they were never dogmatic.
  6. 2 points
    Anna said: It's gross deception. Why? Because it deliberately gives a completely false picture of what the Bible Students said. That's like saying the Nazi's tried hard not to be dogmatic about Nazism, but didn't always succeed. Tell me if the statements quoted below about 1918 and 1920 are dogmatic or not. The Finished Mystery, 1917, pages 62, 64, said with great authority: << The data presented in comments on Rev. 1:1... prove that the Spring of 1918 will bring upon Christendom a spasm of anguish greater even than that experienced in the Fall of 1914. The awakening of the sleeping saints, A.D. 1878, was just half way (three and one-half years each way) between the beginning of the Times of Restitution in 1874 and the close of the High Calling in 1881. Our proposition is that the glorification of the Little Flock in the Spring of 1918 A.D. will be half way (three and one-half years each way) between the close of the Gentile Times and the close of the Heavenly Way, A.D. 1921. >> These predictions failed. More forceful language was used in the predictions of a terrible destruction due to come on Christendom's churches and their members in 1918, with their dead bodies strewn about unburied. Pages 484-485 said: << Also, in the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by millions, it shall be that any that escape shall come to the works of Pastor Russell to learn the meaning of the downfall of "Christianity." >> Page 513 said: << In the year 1918, when Christendom shall go down as a system to oblivion.... God will cause the nations to shake with gigantic revolutions. >> The book also predicted stupendous events for 1920. On page 258 it said: << Even the republics will disappear in the fall of 1920... Every kingdom of earth will pass away, be swallowed up in anarchy... The three days in which Pharaoh's host pursued the Israelites into the wilderness represent the three years from 1917 to 1920 at which time all of Pharaoh's messengers will be swallowed up in the sea of anarchy. >> On page 542 it said: << As the fleshly-minded apostates from Christianity, siding with the radicals and revolutionaries, will rejoice at the inheritance of desolation that will be Christendom's after 1918, so will God do to the successful revolutionary movement; it shall be utterly desolated, "even all of it." Not one vestige of it shall survive the ravages of world-wide all-embracing anarchy, in the fall of 1920. >> How about the following statements about 1925? Were they dogmatic or not? The book Millions Now Living Will Never Die, 1920 Edition, said on pages 89-90: << . . . we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old . . . >> The May 15, 1922 Watch Tower said: << We have no doubt whatever in regard to the chronology relating to the dates of 1874, 1914, 1918, and 1925. It was on this line of reckoning that the dates 1874, 1914, and 1918 were located; and the Lord has placed the stamp of his seal upon 1914 and 1918 beyond any possibility of erasure. What further evidence do we need? Using this same measuring line... it is an easy matter to locate 1925, probably in the fall, for the beginning of the antitypical jubilee. There can be no more question about 1925 than there was about 1914. >> I could go on with this for a long time, but here's the link on this that I already gave you: https://critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/part-3-statements-concerning-1918-1925.html Not dogmatic? Please! The split is more like 90-10 when it came to anything to do with the Gentile Times stuff the Proclaimers book was discussing. Believe what you like. Quotes like the above say different. Time to go beddie-bye.
  7. 1 point
    Matthew9969

    Jehovah hates turkey

    Got another reminder from my jw mom that Jehovah hates thanksgiving. I haven't hosted a thanksgiving dinner in over 12 years, so this year I wanted to relax at home and cook my own turkey this year, and was further reminded how much Jehovah hates turkey because it's a grave sin to cook turkey on a certain day, so much so that Jehovah is willing to kill billions of people if they cook a turkey and eat it. But thanksgiving is over, now jw's can feel free to enjoy their post thanksgiving dinner as thousands of jw's will be cooking turkey today and secretly enjoying their own thanksgiving holiday. So you naughty jw's better plan on spending extra time at those carts this weekend so you'll get Jehovah's forgiveness for eating that turkey.
  8. 1 point
    Arauna

    Creationism

    I am not a creationist...... I do not believe the creation of animals and people took only 24 hours. This is what creationists believe. I do believe that jehovah created the earth and the physical universe and the age of the rocks on earth gives one an idea of the age of the earth. Genesis 1: 1 and 2 However, the earth is not as old as the estimates given by some evolutionists. There are many problems with carbon 14 dating as well as the other methods. Uranium breaks down into lead reasonably fast.... and there is still uranium left on the earth..... so if the earth is as old as they say, there would be no uranium left. I do believe that the earth after its creation was left to cool down and there was water on the earth from this process - as the bible indicates. After this God started to prepare the earth for human and animal habitation and only now calls each period a day. He used 6 periods, called a day, to work on this. But he also calls all the creation of heaven and earth (including its preparation) a day - one total period in genesis 2:4. When you promote the idea that the layers of the earth is not in line with bible chronology you are mistaken. You see the geological record together with the biblical record confirms the biblical history. Many geologists try to hide the evidence of a earthwide flood but the violent evidences of a flood is everywhere on earth - especially the animal grave yards which were mostly in gullys. The earth tore open and released waters deep under the earth and gave way to volcanic activity and tsunamis. It was an extremely violent event which left the earth completely changed afterwards. The earth moved considerably as water is not only heavy but extremely powerful in its movement when tectonic plates move. The weight of one bucket of water should give one an idea of the weight and pressing down of sediment involved. This pushed out all oxygen.... perfect for the formation of coal, diamonds etc. Water also drew back and this can be seen in some formations. The layers of animals packed down in the different layers of sediment is proof of a violent flood. And the same sediment layers appear all over the earth with the lighter materials higher up such as sea shells etc. Me thinks you dismiss too much evidence which honest scientists do not ignore! Yea- you will most probably call me a moron.... again....but because evolutionists do not take the flood into account and the change of the earth during the flood their carbon calculations and ice age calculations could be totally wrong..... No I do not punt..... I have a life. My life does not consist of sitting on internet talking to trolls who really do not care to even consider an aspect different to their own opinion.
  9. 1 point
    It might sound mealy mouthed, but it's hardly deception. They tried hard not to be dogmatic, but they didn’t always succeed. Sometimes they did well and were not dogmatic, and sometimes they didn’t do well, and were dogmatic. I believe they endeavored to avoid being dogmatic. But obviously didn't always succeed.
  10. 1 point
    Anna

    Leo K. Greenlees

    The reason why I said what I did in that post was to highlight that "a little molestation" leads to "big molestation" unless the "little molestation" is stopped. What happened to me was nothing really. It did not traumatize me, and I was on good terms with my uncle. I doubt I would ever think of bringing something like that to the police, and my mum obviously didn't think it warranted it either. And to let you know, my mum was a tigress when it came to protecting me. Then in my reply to you I said: I mentioned that elsewhere too. No one thinks child sexual molestation is ok. And no one thinks "a little molestation" is ok either (that is why I said something, and that is why my mum handled it). If my uncle had been a Witness, and not my uncle, my mum would have gone to the elders and told them what happened.The the perpetrator would have probably made some excuse, or shown remorse, got a warning and a slap on the wrist. He would probably never dare to do anything like that to me again. The pertinent question is, would he do something like that to someone else? And if he did, would that someone else report it? And if they didn't report it would the "little molestation" lead to "big molestation"? That is the problem. I have no idea if my uncle molested someone else. He was my aunts second husband and had grown children. It probably didn't cross my aunts mind. I don't think it crossed anybodies mind, that other children could be in danger. Its because that's not how these things were generally perceived or understood. I am not making excuses. That's just how it was. In a similar manner, elders in those days were not aware that others could be in danger. They probably thought that a warning was enough to ensure it would not happen again. We now know the likelihood of something like that happening again is high. Yes, unfortunately it does appear that way. But to be fair, I would put both on the same plane. Child molestation is abhorred as much as the accusation of being tolerant of it, or hiding it. Especially when felt it is not justified (the accusation).
  11. 1 point
    4Jah2me

    Leo K. Greenlees

    Quote @Anna Nor do I think that's the attitude of JW leaders. So what exactly is the attitude of the GB and it's lawyers for not handing over the complete 20 plus years of Database concerning Child Sexual Abuse accusations ? After all shouldn't they 'obey God as ruler rather than men' and wouldn't God want His name cleared ? Wouldn't God want justice for the victims? So it would not matter about what laws of men were in place. What is the attitude of the Australian Bethel brothers for not apologising to victims ? The Australian government apologised and people of different religions agreed with the apology, but not the JW Org. What was the attitude of the UK Bethel brothers / solicitors when they refused to hand over the information to the Charity Commission ? Even though later they had to hand the info' over. What did Jesus say ' If you are conscripted to walk one mile, then walk two miles'. Why can't your GB actually take note of what Jesus was teaching here ? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Separate Comment :- @TrueTomHarley Quote " The reason that you have been likened to Butler is that he had the same wont for overstatement,... " Oh come on then, show me my overstatement word for word. Just as John Butler did I try to write the truth as I know it. Unfortunately he got disfellowshipped for it here.
  12. 1 point
    4Jah2me

    Leo K. Greenlees

    @b4ucuhear Quote " I agree with you on that, since I know a number of brothers who have been disciplined for child molestation in various congregations. All of them have been faithful brothers for many years now without incident. But a potential problem with that type of weakness is the rate of recidivism that can accompany that type of behaviour. Naturally, there are some very thorny legal issues associated with appointing a person with such a history and whether he would even potentially offend again." I wonder if those brothers are in the 20 year long DATABASE that the GB are refusing to hand over to the authorities. If you KNOW A NUMBER OF BROTHERS WHO HAVE BEEN DISCIPLINED FOR CHILD MOLESTATION, then shouldn't you go to the Police or authorities with your information as @Anna likes to tell people to do. After all if they 'have been disciplined for it', then they must have done it. The plot thickens. And @TrueTomHarley says not many JW's do it. Child Sexual Abuse and Homosexuality, and still trying to pretend that the JW Org is clean. Remember Jesus saying 'First clean the inside of the dish, then the outside will also be clean'.
  13. 1 point
    AlanF

    Leo K. Greenlees

    Look beneath the surface, Anna. Your last post was excellent and well describes the attitude shown by TTH and so many elders, including and especially the Governing Body. "We abhor child molestation! But not as much as we abhor public exposure of anything that makes us look bad."
  14. 1 point
    :)))) I like this description. Can we make agreement how Truth is not Dogmatic. Because Dogmatism of any sort has no chance to be Truthful at all. If we have religious men (GB in this conversation) who giving direction to members we learned this from them: They decide to say how they are not inspired. They explained how because that particular reason (not been inspired) they err in doctrines and teachings and instructions. How sounds this to you? It sounds very nice. These are definitions that no one would named as Dogmatic. You agree? I also agree. But what is reality? GB have mechanisms to implement all uninspired, err and wrong doctrines, teachings and instructions in life of congregants and to successfully hold them (members) in obedience, not to Truth, but to Dogma. Because many GB doctrines, teachings and instructions based on False Ideas are Dogmas not Truth. That means how Dogmas in form of Religious beliefs are dogmatic itself (Dogmas are not Doctrines or Teachings, because we aspect this last two to be truth), and people who pushing Dogmas on other are Dogmatists. As we see, when GB talking about self as people who can err, sounds as very reasonable people. But still, despite that, they want you to obey their dogmatic ideas. No, i would not go to such level of comparison. Many of us here agreed with statement how Jesus taught Truth only. Because of that he didn't need to be dogmatic. He left to people choice to choose will they accept or reject his teachings. Authority from God, you mentioned, not give him right nor he want to used such authority to demand from people, not even from those who followed him, to blindly follow and obey him. And because of this reason we don't consider him to be dogmatic. He didn't spread dogmas. But his followers did and doing that today. All areas in Jesus' teachings i don't put on two or more levels. As we would need to see some of teachings to be more and other as less important. Do we have some examples from which we can conclude how he considered meetings as more important than preaching or vice versa? Or, to give money in temple box to be more important than helping needing one (brother or not brother) with that same money? If you know Bible text who give more light on this it will be good to read. What is more important for Christian to do today? Going to Betel service or to preach? If preaching Kingdom is of ultimate importance for JW members you don't need Betel buildings. So redirect all money to preaching and if you need building for some reasons, make it smaller and less expensive and employ 10 people not 400. Just illustration. :))) In what areas Jesus give you freedom and in what he is demanding? In what areas GB give you freedom and in what they are demanding? Try to make comparative list! :)) I am interested to see result you or any other will have. I guess how this is not sin against HS, but just opinion ..... about fact how people's spirit are stronger ... sometimes.
  15. 1 point
    AlanF

    Leo K. Greenlees

    It's exactly the attitude TTH displays here -- "Oh, molestation is no big deal!" -- that has gotten JW leaders in deep doo doo, and is the source of the extreme disgust about them shown by so many people.
  16. 1 point
    TrueTomHarley

    Jehovah hates turkey

    This year in our part of the world storms impacted travelers both to AND fro Thanksgiving weekend. In service, whenever I saw cars in the driveway, I would include mention of this, with encouragement to stay safe, delay travel if need be, etc. There is something nice about not being locked into holiday routine so that if you have something planned and the weather is rotten, you can say: “Forget it! Let’s move it back a month.”
  17. 1 point
    Arauna

    Jehovah hates turkey

    I love mince pies, turkey and fruit cakes - the real rich ones. Wait a few days after the world has celebrated their pagan festivities and then go down to the shop....... get them at a much reduced price and put them in the freezer........ then have a feast afterward..... whenever you like. No need to feel deprived ..... heh?
  18. 1 point
    That always occurs when writers have no other skills and need to eat and sleep warm.
  19. 1 point
    AlanF

    Creationism

    God temporarily gave them permission to fly.
  20. 1 point
    I will have to ask my new Android v. 12.6 (as seen on TV) RONCO DOGMATIC. Cereally though .... I suppose the difference is if the arguments are based on verifiable reality, or hopes and dreams, masquerading as facts.
  21. 1 point
    Kind of like "he endeavored to avoid being dead". But he didn't always succeed. You are what you are until you're not. I don't think so, more like "some people just can't help themselves"
  22. 1 point
    Yes, JWs exercising Orwellian crimestop do get bored with topics that clobber their beliefs. My ex-wife did the same thing. As for this discovery, I saw the same show but was not entirely convinced that they had the dating right. Recent discoveries in northwest Africa strongly indicate the presence of Homo sapiens 300,000 years ago, and it is well known that today's Sahara desert has alternated between wet and dry periods for several million years. Archaeological discoveries in Egypt, Libya, etc. clearly show modern human habitation from more than 50,000 years ago. So who knows how the Emirates discovery will pan out?
  23. 1 point
    Kind of like "he endeavored to avoid being dead". But he didn't always succeed. You are what you are until you're not.
  24. 1 point
  25. 1 point
    Sorta like taking a handful of caffeine tablets so you don't sleep through the public talk?
  26. 1 point
    I have some time today ... so i’m moving a few posts not related to the title of the topic
  27. 1 point
    @James Thomas Rook Jr. is such a wuss. We all know it. Given how, at the drop of a pin, he lauds Trump to the high heavens, and given how Alan is unambiguous in denouncing that luminary, @Anna and I thought we had front row seats for the battle of the century! They are both pugnacious. Neither knows the meaning of holding back in the slightest detail. How could we go wrong? We sold tickets to the event. We lined up vendors. We had programs printed. And what happens? A LOVEFEST! “You have never disappointed me, James,” Alan coos. It has cost us serious money in refunds—and I had most of my money spent pampering Mrs. Harley! WELL, IT IS NOT HAPPENING AGAIN!!!! ”Man-induced climate warming” is a problem that “may well” end the world, Alan says—and WHO has raged on and on that global warming is a HOAX to fool the GULLIBLE sheeple for the sake of left-wing politics, the politics that Alan adores? JTR - THAT’S who. By all rights, this ought to be the mother of all wars, even greater than the Trump/no-Trump war! But he punted on that war! He will punt on this one, too—the big wuss. Anna, keep your counsel to yourself! I am NOT going to print up tickets, again.
  28. 1 point
    I CAN explain it all ... I have been watching, and studying for more than 50 years. I try NOT to think like, or be, a professional child. I do NOT think I have enough "spirit" to judge anyone .... in the sense of somehow punishing them. My only judgement of "them" is to avoid and ignore "them" ... I do enjoy the option of being able to enforce my preferences, if necessary. ...which most people might consider a blessing.
  29. 1 point
  30. 1 point
    Since most people are shunned for unrepentant immorality - I think you are missing the point. Those few who leave for other reasons often end up in "relationships " or some other habits like drug abuse, smoking etc. Many, who are totally unrepentant end up opposing JWs in very deceitful ways, spreading false info about us.
  31. 1 point
  32. 1 point
    Anna said: The Society made direct statements as well as more subtle suggestions. Take a gander: << How thrilling that must have been for Paul and Barnabas-sailing to their first foreign assignment! The apostle Paul was spearheading the Christian missionary activity. He was also laying a foundation for a work that would be completed in our century. >> January 1, 1989 Watchtower, p. 12 Note that "in our century" was changed to "in our day" in the bound volume and in the CDROM Library. Note that when the following statements were made, the Society was teaching that "the generation of 1914" meant the group of people alive in 1914 who survived until "the end". << Shortly, within our twentieth century, the "battle in the day of Jehovah" will begin against the modern antitype of Jerusalem, Christendom. >> -- "The Nations Shall Know That I Am Jehovah"-How? - 1971 << And if the wicked system of this world survived until the turn of the century, which is highly improbable in view of world trends and the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, there would still be survivors of the World War I generation. However, the fact that their number is dwindling is one more indication that “the conclusion of the system of things” is moving fast toward its end. >> -- October 15, 1980 Watchtower, p. 31 << It has been thrilling to see the fulfillment of Jesus’ sign showing that the Kingdom was established in the heavens in that momentous year 1914. And Jesus has told us to rejoice at seeing the dark storm clouds of Armageddon gathering since that time. He has told us that the “generation” of 1914—the year that the sign began to be fulfilled—”will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Matthew 24:34) Some of that “generation” could survive until the end of the century. But there are many indications that “the end” is much closer than that! >> -- March 1, 1984 Watchtower, pp. 18-19 << The Time for a Change Is Near! Carole, from France, has a “marvelous hope” and foresees, for the near future, “something marvelous—not at all like the world we live in.” Samuel, a 15-year-old youth from the same country, also believes in a complete change: “For the year 2000, I visualize a world transformed into a beautiful paradise! But I don’t think that either the present world or its rulers will live to see that day. . . We are living in the last days of the system of things.” Ruth, a German girl of 16, also expresses her confidence in these changes: “I know I’m not smart enough to change the world and make things run right. Only Jehovah, our Creator, can and will do that soon.” >> November 8, 1986 Awake!, pp. 7-8
  33. 1 point
    I am still of the opinion that when translating from ENGLISH, to another language, a person MUST be a fluent EXPERT at both languages, and have lived in areas where both are spoken extensively, and also have a DEEP knowledge of the history and culture of both places, AND have a potload of plain old common sense .... which is not all that common. I suspect that this is true in all other language translations. We have Bible translations in over a thousand languages (...or is it just some Bible literature?) ... but how good are those translations? The Polish people fought the Nazi tanks on horses, with horse drawn artillery, and they acquitted themselves magnificently ... but it was no contest, and they lost miserably. ..... same thing.
  34. 1 point
    @Arauna you must really have OCD about sex. Quote " The signs read: "love does not shun". True, the liove of this world with its "practices" of fornication, LGBT does not shun. " The sign is about emotional family love, nothing to do with immorality. Reminds me of those on here taking about 'tight pants tony'... You JW's seem to have relate everything to sex or to this rotten world that belongs to the devil.
  35. 1 point
    Outta Here

    Hey Siri, when was Jerusalem destroyed?

    My question would be then: Can we count our time spent in trying to get Siri, and Alexa, for that matter, and any other voice assistant out there, to give correct answers to Bible Questions? (I know only 1 peson can count the Return Visit and Bible Study). P.S. I discontinued the study with my Tom Tom! It was just unproductive. It is not spiritually minded. But I am getting somewhere with my telephone anwering machine!
  36. 1 point
    JW people often emphasize how old Israelite's were all educated and could read and write and nations around them are less educated. Question. What levels of education have existed at that time in the nation of Israel. Just to know read and write? Or, what was equivalent for education, in their time, we called today high school and university? Did elders of Israel congregation teaching young people /male and female/ not to educate self more in various knowledge's, that is not only spiritual aka religious? Did they talking to people; Israel Nation and State and Country is just temporary here on Earth, God will destroy all on Earth, so why to loosing your time in seeking for "worldly" knowledge, even inside Israel Land Boarders? :)) For a contrary, they believed how they will stay there Forever and have Kingdom Forever.
  37. 1 point
    ON COMPETENT ADVICE: it is up to EVERY INDIVIDUAL Brother and Sister to review in their own mind how COMPETENT this advice was .... because it has not changed ... Taking sound, reality based advice will, barring chance and unforeseen circumstances, make your life better, happier, EASIER, and more fulfilling. Most of the REAL PROBLEMS I have had in my life have been caused by being poor, and constantly STRUGGLING to keep gainfully employed. Gainfully employed in THIS day and age is not the same as in the time of John the Baptist, where you could dress in rags, live in a hole in the ground, and eat locusts (YUM!), and die of exhaustion, deprivation, starvation ( No, I'm FASTING! ...uh... yeah... uh... that's it .. uh "fasting!") .and disease, and a LONG life for the average genetically disposed person was around age 34 and you were full of infection of every sort, and your teeth had rotted out of you head. You walked everywhere, and died on the side of the road from exposure. It is up to EVERY INDIVIDUAL Brother and Sister to review in their own mind how COMPETENT this advice was .... because it has not changed. The RESULTS of taking INCOMPETENT ADVICE are completely indistinguishable from being chained to deliberate, premeditated evil. The Three Elders who came and counseled Job for three days did not just sit in the dirt and stare at him for 72 hours ... they were yapping their heads off ... but after three days ... nothing they said was worth recording. .
  38. 1 point
    During 1994, in my first-ever sit-down discussion on theocratic issues with one of Jehovah's Witnesses (JW), Albert Schroeder, of the Watchtower Society Governing Body, put me to school with the Christian Gospel of Saint John, chapter 6, verse 44, to wit: "... No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day....' (kjv) Albert Schroeder said to me: "...go home and ...study this verse..." And so,... the most unlikely person - me - is now a Disciple of Christ, a Bible student, one of Jehovah's Witnesses in vindication of the Sovereign Jehovah God. Albert Schroeder had tagged along with JW Elders from Liberia who were before my United Nations/New York committee which was assessing effects of the then ongoing Liberia civil conflict on Liberia's religious groups. At the end of the review with the Liberia JW delegation, Albert Schroeder introduced himself to me. Of course, I did not then know who he was, but I did notice that the Liberia JW group was according him deference, so I inquired of him his role with the Watchtower Society. Still not knowing exactly what the Watchtower Society Governing Body did, I presumed he was some sort of "head honcho". Considering that I was of the Catholic Church's Seraphic Order, a Worthy Sir of the Holy See, as well as an active participant in many other religious groups because of my political and diplomatic connections, I asked Albert Schroeder if I could acquire honorary membership in the Watchtower Society. His reply was, "...do you have a Bible?... go home and study the sixth book and forty-fourth verse of the Gospel of John, study this verse ...". I did so; and, at the following United Nations review meeting three months later, Albert Schroeder and I began an exchange of notes which guided my work in establishing the modalities of the peace process in Liberia. Note that between 1994 and 1998, I did not attend a Kingdom Hall, associate with a JW Congregation, or begin a formal study of the Holy Scriptures, until two JW sisters came knocking on my door while out in field service distributing invitations to the Memorial of 1998 to be held on 14 Nisan (10 April 1998, ironically the day before my birthday of 11 April). Interestingly, these two JW sisters appeared at my door exactly as I was in the midst of praying to Jehovah God, "...please show me women who love you...". My prayer was in reaction to the immense and stiff opposition of very close female relatives to my quest of seeking a true association with the love of the Sovereign Jehovah God. I have steadily progressed in my theocratic dedication and am now both a Pioneer and Ministerial Servant in the Watchtower Society. BTW,... I am of the persuasion that Albert Schroeder - more than anyone else - tremendously impacted the solid placement of instruments of peace in the cessation of civil conflict throughout Liberia. Ijoma Robert Flemister https://www.facebook.com/groups/jwinternational/permalink/1650901681827311/
  39. 1 point
    b4ucuhear

    Leo K. Greenlees

    "But I never heard any facts for sure about the molestation charges, although it was a well-known rumor." This brings to mind an interchange you and I had last year regarding information that may come out in mid 2016. It seemed from your response that you were leaning toward the idea of some potential homosexual encounter. The person I had In mind in my statement was in fact Leo Greenlees. I of course, knew about the "purported" charges of child molestation, but more recently a person who had been a well-known elder died, leaving an envelope stating it should not be opened until after his death. In the letter he made the accusation that Leo had molested him when he was younger. (Not the same individual who was involved in 1984 as far as I know since this elder was already an adult and elder by that year). In any event, to the extent that all of this is true, Leo would have already been a practicing child molester prior to his being appointed on the GB (although of course, the GB wouldn't have appointed him if they had known). Naturally, in the current climate of things, these types of things could prove "difficult" for current members of the GB who are aware of the details if governmental authorities get nosy. "The predisposition of someone should not disqualify them from responsibility as long as they can handle the responsibility without bringing reproach on Jehovah, on themselves, or others, and/or scandal upon the congregation. If a brother has already proven himself faithful and morally clean for many years, even if he struggles with sinful thoughts, then he is probably not so different from anyone else who was on the Governing Body at the time, even if these particular sins seem much more unexpected." I agree with you on that, since I know a number of brothers who have been disciplined for child molestation in various congregations. All of them have been faithful brothers for many years now without incident. But a potential problem with that type of weakness is the rate of recidivism that can accompany that type of behaviour. Naturally, there are some very thorny legal issues associated with appointing a person with such a history and whether he would even potentially offend again. My take on this is that even though information on certain websites (which we should avoid) may have some truth or even be completely true, my faith in and dedication to Jehovah is not dictated by the choices other humans make - regardless of what "position" they may have in "the organization." They too are imperfect, not miraculously inspired and make mistakes and have poor judgment at times. Kinda' like all the rest of us. But even with all of that, it's as close to pure worship and accomplishing our Christian mandate to preach the good news of the Kingdom world-wide as is possible to find today. You won't find brothers accomplishing that, regardless of how intellectual their reasoning may appear. Who is "walking the walk" as to the preaching work the Christian congregation was formed for? Im still not sure however, if there was more news we might expect regarding what you had suggested last year.
  40. 1 point
    JW Insider

    Leo K. Greenlees

    Brother Greenlees and Brother Chitty are not mentioned in the Proclaimer's book. Interesting that Percy Chapman (included in the picture above) is still mentioned now and then, often in the same context with Brother Greenlees. He was more "openly homosexual" to the dismay of Brother Knorr who continued to work with him anyway. I never knew that Brother Ewart Chitty was homosexual and assumed it was a rumor although I was told it was a fact by several. People also told me that Brother Greenlees was homosexual. In his case, there was good reason to believe them. But I never heard any facts for sure about the molestation charges, although it was a well-known rumor. I should add, however, that there may be nothing wrong with trusting a homosexual brother to handle high levels of responsibility. The predisposition of someone should not disqualify them from responsibility as long as they can handle the responsibility without bringing reproach on Jehovah, on themselves, or others, and/or scandal upon the congregation. If a brother has already proven himself faithful and morally clean for many years, even if he struggles with sinful thoughts, then he is probably not so different from anyone else who was on the Governing Body at the time, even if these particular sins seem much more unexpected. Paul spoke of struggling with sin even as an apostle.
  41. 0 points
    4Jah2me

    Jehovah hates turkey

    On topic. I have honestly known JW's that will not have a proper cooked dinned on Christmas day, as it looks like a Christmas dinner. 'For fear of stumbling others'. They just have a salad or soup or some other small meal. I remember when working with some brothers years ago (they were builders) and i took a box of mince pies for lunch. Not one of those brothers would eat a mince pie It was soooooooooo funny. When i think of what wicked things go on in the JW org, and then some JW's worry about christmas day dinner and mince pies. Where is the common sense ? Where is the sense of balance ?
  42. -1 points
    Put yourself in the latte category if you are spiritual and you want to go to college. But in general, we try to get our specialized education a la carte, since the 4 or 6 year experience packages acknowleged gems in a dumptruck load of turds. Put yourself in the latter category if you are spiritual and you want to go to college. But in general, we try to get our specialized education a la carte, since the 4 or 6 year experience packages acknowleged gems in a dumptruck load of turds. Put yourself in the latte category if you like to break at Starbucks in service.
  43. -1 points
    The way the Bible expresses it is: “Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you, turning away from the empty speeches that violate what is holy and from the contradictions of the falsely called “knowledge.” By making a show of such knowledge, some have deviated from the faith.” 1 Tim 6:20 The verse you are looking for is: “The wisdom of this world is such that God could learn a thing or two from it if he wasn’t so brain-dead.” Let me know when you find it.
  44. -1 points
    Thanks for those references. I obviously must have read some of them, especially the ones from the 80's and I am aware that our mothers would say we would never go to school, that Armageddon would be here by then. This was nothing new to me since we were saying this almost since the founding of the JWS. What I was questioning was the specific date 2000. That Armageddon would come in that year, in the same way as was insinuated for 1975. "Within the 20th Century" is open, and just because 15 year old Samuel "visualizes something happening in 2000" doesn't mean we had to think it will happen exactly then, lol. Samuel is 48 today, probably with kids, maybe a grandad, and probably still a JW. I know plenty of people who visualized something happening, and nothing happened, and they are still visualizing it. But, everyone in their right mind yearns for good things, and Jesus told his followers to "keep on the watch" and Peter "await and keep close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah". As for the society setting specific dates for the end, 1925 sticks in my mind, for which Rutherford apologized, and 1975, which was not official anyway. And 1914 of course....
  45. -1 points
    Of course he said it. He is now trying to walk it back because, despite all his blustering, he couldn’t quite make it stick. It is as you say. The nearness of the end has been impressed upon Witnesses from their inception, but the only specific date in anyone’s lifetime today is 1975. They burned their fingers on that one so badly that they resolved never to do that again. So far they have kept to that resolve. Every subsequent pronouncement has been generic, and is in harmony with Jesus’ counsel to “keep on the watch.” Alan’s just upset that they have not said not to keep on the watch. In fact, he’s probably upset that they have not denounced God, for he writes that he has “disproved” him. If you can distract the Librarian for a moment, I wrote long ago of another such revision that Alan has no doubt chronicled. If by some miracle he missed it, it is another that he can throw on the stack: Paragraph 18 [of the Revelation book] on page 94 states "some scientists forecast mathematically that an accidental nuclear war is virtually certain to take place within the next 25 years - let alone a planned nuclear conflagration!" The updated version, however, yanks this phrase for the blander: "some scientists speak of the possibility of an accidental nuclear war - let alone a planned nuclear conflagration!" [!] The reason the publishers have done this is because Tom Barfendogs has marked on his calendar (to the day, hour, and minute) exactly when 25 years from the first book's publication expires. He is praying, hoping, pleading that there is no nuclear war within that time frame (after that is okay) so he can launch into yet another false prophetscreamfest. https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2007/07/will-the-real-a.html I wrote the post 12 years ago and it stands up reasonably well. The line that I like most is “after that is okay.” It is the same with Alan. The prospect of nuclear war isn’t as disturbing to him as the horror that JWs might get credit for warning of. It is the same with countless other factors that have this world teetering on the brink. He doesn’t think it is in any great trouble, or if he does, he certainly doesn’t want anyone looking anywhere else outside of human answers for the remedy. In this sense he is the biggest hypocrite of all. He rails against Jehovah’s Witnesses, but it is really God, the Bible, and specifically the notion of his kingdom coming that rankles him.
  46. -1 points
    Like I said, reread those passages you try so hard to defend. It will give you evidence you are not willing to learn the truth. My excuses or yours. The only deception I see comes from people that don't educate themselves about history. Anyone can take something out of context in order to express a negative outcome. What those people can't do is teach an educated person how to lie, especially when those, lies are poorly drawn.
  47. -1 points
    TrueTomHarley

    Leo K. Greenlees

    Of course! What in the world is so controversial about that? In Western law, it is called, “presumed innocent until proven guilty.” In common parlance, it is “refrain from gossiping.” I sort of miss the times when outright gossip did not form the stuff of headlines Unless I am missing something, that is because he was not. 13 years is what it looks like from the article. He is removed when an apparently creditable accusation surfaces. It is shocking, perhaps, that he might do such a thing, but it appears pretty uncontroversial in the way it was handled. And sometimes you wish that there was more differerentiation in “molestation.” At present, anything from a hand on the inner thigh or rear end to outright rape is described (and sometimes deliberately confused) as “molestation.” None of those actions are great, of course, but there is a substantial difference between them.
  48. -1 points
    Anna

    Leo K. Greenlees

    That was not the impression TTH gave me. Nor do I think that's the attitude of JW leaders. I think it's ignorance of how child sexual molestation really works, and naivete regarding "repentance" is what has caused all the doo doo.to happen.
  49. -1 points
    Yikes! $50 per minute to speak with a householder?! So says a gag sign posted on someone’s porch. “Doorknockers, please note. This householder charges $50 per minute to listen to any sales pitch, religious messages, or fundraising stories! Payment required in advance. By knocking on this door, you indicate that you are agreeing to these terms.” Video has captured a couple of visitors—our people, I think. The one on the sidewalk says: “What’s it say?” and the nearsighted woman squinting to read it responds with: “Let’s skip this one.” I’m done for if this catches on!...... Actually, as far as I am concerned, this sign represents a win-win. It does not make me mad. It is doing me a favor. If anyone doesn’t want to talk to me, then I don’t want to talk to them. There is a squirrelly assumption that underpins this meme: that Jehovah’s Witnesses are determined to talk to each householder no matter what,and are incredibly frustrated if stymied. It plays into the infantile view that they are “recruiting,” a view popularly spread by “anti-cultists” who obsess over all the ways that people can “manipulate” others. They abhor all forms of “brainwashing” except for the brainwashing that is theirs, as they safeguard mainstream values—values that have not worked out very well insofar as promoting overall peace and well-being. If the mainstream thinking contained answers to the vexing questions of life, people would’t have to worry for one second about “sects” and even “cults”—they would be rejected out of hand. So are Jehovah’s Witnesses “recruiting?” “I am going to ask you to convert,” I told a certain householder, “but it is not going to happen until the 100th call—and what are the chances It will go on for so long? In the meantime, it is just conversation.” To householders who state they have their own religion or spirituality and who decline conversation on that basis I say, “Well, I’m not going to ask you to change, and if I do, you can say No.” I mean, it is fine to decline conversation—more people do than do not—but just not on that basis. You might say it to an evangelical Christian—the sort that actually dofeature instant conversion of the “Come down and be saved!” variety. You might say it to a Moonie, because their people are known to disappear off the surface of the globe, only to reappear selling flowers in robes. But you ought not say it to one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, whose members live and work in the general community. No, the sign does me a favor. I have no problem with it. It might be different if they proliferated so that they became a commonplace gag sign, just a fad witticism inspired by late-night TV that didn’t necessarily mean anything. In that case, I might just walk away or I might playfully attempt to negotiate terms before deciding if I wanted to enter into such a “contract.” “Well, a guy has to serve the Lord,” I will say non-aggresively to some while trying to size them up. You’ve got to have a sense of humor. Like a No Soliciting sign, there are no legal consequences to blowing past it, [in the U.S.—it may be different elsewhere] and like a No Soliciting sign, it doesn’t necessarily mean anything. It might be put up by a previous owner, and the current one sees no reason to remove it. It might be put up by a family member that died. It might have been put up after those pushy people selling vacuum cleaners left. It might be put up in the heat of election campaign season. It might be put up to dissuade Jehovah’s Witnesses, but I do not assume that is the case. ”I saw your sign and was a little concerned that you might think it applies to me,” I sometimes say when one of them is staring me in the face. “It doesn’t—but you might think it does.” You can assess by the response if the householder had that intention or not, and if he did, I have no problem moving on from what would cause both of us stress. Don’t argue, “We’re not soliciting,” because it really doesn’t matter whether you are or not. What matters is what the householder thinks you are doing. Of course, you can tell him that what he thinks is wrong, but that is never a fine foundation for a visit, is it? I have said at times, when my attention is directed to such a sign, “Oh. Well....I’ll make sure not to do that, then,” either by soliciting money (which Witnesses never do) or soliciting opinions—drawing people out—which we do. Simply tell them stuff, don’t ask them a thing—that is enough to technically comply with such a sign. But the trick is not to argue over technicalities. The trick is to see if such and such a vague sign actually means anything to the householder and respect his wishes if it does. No, a No Soliciting sign means nothing legally, same as this new $50 per hour JW sign that some are giggling over means nothing. The only sign with legal consequences (in the US) is a No Trespassing sign, and even that only has legal consequences for individual dwellings—you can’t wall off an entire community with a No Trespassing sign. To be sure, some are trying to change that, but the idea of answering for large swaths of other people is repugnant to most and so the change may not readily happen. Let’s face, this sign is kind of crude, and not too many people are going to put one up. It is sort of like that sign in which you find yourself as though staring down the barrel of a gun that says, “Never mind the dog! Beware of the owner!” I don’t just jauntily breeze by that sign as though is was a Welcome mat. I tread a bit cautiously. If my companion was to turn around and leave, I wouldn’t blame him a bit. Still, you never know. I was leaving one such home—no one had answered—and as I was walking away, a pickup truck drove in with a gun rack in the back window. “Great!” I muttered to myself—“probably a real hothead here!” He turned out to be the nicest guy in the world—very respectful of our purpose and of the Bible. There was a lot of crime in the neighborhood and he had just “weaponed-up” for the protection of his family. These signs are not a red light—No Soliciting, Beware of Whatever—but they certainly are a yellow light. They are not a yellow light legally, but they are a yellow light in that they might reveal something of thehouseholders wishes, and I have no problem always complying with their wishes once I know what they are. As it is, Jehovah’s Witnesses have a method to keep note of those who have emphatically said that the don’t want JW calls ever. It is an imperfect system and I usually forget to consult it, but it works better than nothing. Ironically, it may all vanish one day if the current “data-keeping” laws gathering steam in Europe, spearheaded by the same people who see “manipulation” everywhere, spreads to the US. It will be illegal to keep track of who doesn’t want a call. As it is, one US brother I know reported on a trip to Europe and how the brothers there were wrestling with these new anti data-gathering laws that had never been intended (at least, by most) for them, but were being applied to them, with: “Good! They’ve just made your job easier! Preach to one and all and don’t worry about any “records”—keeping track of them is a pain in the neck!” What about a child answering the door? For me, that depends upon the age of the child. For a teen, sometimes I will go Bible-lite, such as commenting on what the words of the Lord’s Prayer literally mean, and I do not press any point. Or show a video geared to teens—I have never had a teen not pay rapt attention to the video, “Be Social-Network Smart.” With teens, I have sometimes told them that I really don’t know what to do with teens, because they are learning and gathering data, but they are also under their parent’s roof, with the latter guiding that process, and so they may or may not want them speaking to persons of different beliefs at the door, and ‘which is it with them’? Even that doesn’t guarantee anything. One parent that I finally encountered said, “I don’t appreciate you speaking to my children,”—I had done so twice and had shown a couple of videos. I responded that I had never been looking for the kids—I had been looking for her—and that when the teens had answered I had asked them whether their parents would want them speaking to a visitor about religion and they had said she would not care. “Kids will say anything!” she told me. So I explained that I would not call again (she said ‘thank you’), repeated that I had never been looking for them in the first place, and even was able to give a brief synopsis for why we call at all—she became pleasant. Another teen—I had just finished something brief and similar—he had been home alone. As I left, the mother drove up in the driveway. I told her who I was, that I had spent a few minutes speaking with her son, I had asked him a question and he had answered intelligently. “You should be proud of him,” I said as I took my leave. Cultures are different. I once handed a tract to a child with directions to give it to her parents, and upon leaving, my companion said that she would have witnessed to the child. My companion was newly arrived from South America where it is commonplace for parents to allow and even encourage children to talk religion to anyone calling about it. There are congregations there heavily populated by children with the full blessing of parents who do not attend themselves—respect for God runs deep in some lands and the assumption is that you cannot go wrong allowing your children to learn about the Bible. Though the following has nothing to do with the Bible, it has everything to do with that fact that cultures are different, and so when the Witness organization speaks in a way that is not really my cup of tea, I say, “It is probably one of those others cultures that they are taking into consideration.” There is a large community of deaf persons in Rochester NY. Accordingly, there are a number of Witnesses who make their living as translators. One of them told me of a certain deaf family of two adults and two children—all deaf—who are known not only locally but also nationally, and the following story is told nationally as a way of highlighting the challenges of catering to different cultures: A neighboring “hearing” girl would come over to play at the home of the deaf family. The two children were surprised that she didn’t seem able to sign very well at all, but they all managed to sign well enough to each other to get by. Then the two children went to the little girl’s home to play, where they saw the mother not signing at all! Her mouth kept moving, and the little girl seemed satisfied with that, but there was no signing. Upon returning home, they related their bewilderment to their parents and asked, “Are there other people like that?”
  50. -2 points
    TrueTomHarley

    Leo K. Greenlees

    The reason that you have been likened to Butler is that he had the same wont for overstatement, the same near hysteria on the topic, the same resilience to any mitigating factors, the same shrillness at any comparison of JWs to “the world.” In his case, he was subjected to horrendous child sexual abuse by the British orphanage system. Yet he never (here) spoke a word against them—he took all of his rage out on Jehovah’s Witnesses that he joined much later, persons having nothing to do with his history. He has said or indicated nothing of the sort. This is completely your emotional take. This is yet another example of the Master of Rationality completely throwing that quality out the windows in pursuit of his ends. The trouble with critical thinking is that those who espouse it the loudest invariably assume that they have a lock on the stuff.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.