BillyTheKid46

Of course not.
It is an argument almost too stupid to make. I can’t believe that people are nevertheless making it with regard to who gets to be counted as clergy.
The only brand of religion that an irreligious world recognizes is a monetized one, in which the minister “has a church” and “gets paid.”
Try to do it as did Jesus or Paul and you are incomprehensible to them.

The Clergy Privilege is a PRIVILEGE THAT ONLY EXISTS IF IT IS CLAIMED!!!!
If we RECANT it ... it will INSTANTLY cease to be a factor in any deliberations.
That little piece of fluff is REMOVED from the considerations of any firm, persons', corporations', or religious organizational OTHERWISE legally mandated reporting requirements.
Even though in courts of law the Society now claims the Elders and up  are Clergy, and that the World Headquarters is a "Monastery", for real estate zoning purposes, and we should be treated with the same deference as the Catholic Church, this position is held when it is beneficial, and claimed not to exist when it does NOT serve the Society's financial and political  interests.
The Clergy Privilege is a PRIVILEGE THAT ONLY EXISTS IF IT IS CLAIMED!!!!
And CLAIMING something does NOT make it so.
A sad little Lizard claiming ancestry with a T-REX dinosaur only makes it a sad little lizard ... but since happy lizards are in such short supply, I might have a penchant to humor him.
But NOT when The Society demands they be treated like Clergy .... that is flat out DANGEROUS.
To understand that, which I do, would require an essay of massive proportions.  It's a lot simpler to watch the 1939 movie "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", with Charles Laughton and Maureen O'Hara and understand how important the concept of "Sanctuary" is as it has evolved over the centuries, and also the "Priest/Penitent" religious custom which is embodied like concrete in the societal matrix ... and even extends to lawyers who have inviolate "lawyer/client" privilege.
That is between ONE person and ONE other person.
Although when it is to their advantage, the Society has represented themselves in court many, many times as being a hierarchical organization "exactly like the Catholic Church", in matters of Clergy/Penitent privilege, and also in the ownership of Kingdom Halls and other real estate assets, the fact remains that a Congregational trial is held before three or more people, with full details the Circuit Overseer,  copies to the Society's legal department, prepared by the Congregational Secretary, so all in all,  not to even mention back channel gossip from Elder's wives whose curiosity would put Sherlock Holmes to task, this "confidential matter" might be shared with 8 to 15 people.
These Clergy/Penitent laws have a 1200 and more year history in Roman and British and others' "common law" and it has ALWAYS been between ONLY two people ... at least in Theory.
In actuality, the Priests of the Catholic Church have ALWAYS acted as political intelligence officers for the nations they were prostitutes for, and of course for the Vatican, so while giving absolute lip service to the Priest/Penitent relationship, in order to get the gullible faithful to believe in THEM, as they served as spies with that information, serving their own interests.
People KNOW this, but believe to the very core of their bones it is not the way things really are.  They want to see examples of honorable men, where there are none ....or at the least, very few.  Very VERY few.
The Society is trying to have it BOTH ways ... trying to convince the legal systems that they are due the same respect, deference, and privileges long firmly established by the Catholic Church,, when in fact BOTH are completely disingenuous.
Simpler to watch the movie, than for me to continue for the next 20 pages.
If that does not work, read the 1831 novel by Victor Hugo.
I have an audition to host a local radio talk show next  week, and I did not sleep at all last night, mind racing like a mile wide tornado, so I am completely worn out.
Also, remember Ferengi Rule of Acquisition No. 48:
"The Bigger the Smile ... the sharper the knife".

I can be AFFORDED the opportunity to claim a free Elephant at the Zoo, but unless I invoke that OPPORTUNITY ( NOT a requirement..) the Elephant stays at the Zoo.
If I represent myself as an Elephant handler, and demand the privileges of a trained professional, it complicates my life, and opens me to MANY financial, ethical, moral, and legal considerations I would not otherwise have.
I do not want to be ELEPHANT CLERGY.
The Secular Authorities even have rules for the ethical treatment of Elephants, how they are caged, fed, treated, etc. 
There are different rules for Veternarians, Zoos, Owners ....  and even Restaurants.
Like the WOPR computer said once when playing Global Thermonuclear War Games ...
"The only way to win ... is NOT PLAY"
 

The fluff is removed if the privilege is RECANTED, and no longer claimed.
The OBLIGATION still exists to report to authorities, where required by law, as stated above for all people, and  legal entities,
Removing ONE element from the equation changes the answers, but does not eliminate the other elements.

Keep playing that same old record to yourself Kid, you might convince yourself one day. 
Who was the member of the GB that said 'It's all Apostate lies' 
Well Kid you are doing just the same. You are just a puppet to the GB and it's Org. But if that keeps you happy so be it. 

Where is the fun in that?
lighten up ... you will live longer and be a lot happier.

This is why Elders are admonished not to interfere with the secular authority's investigation.
So was the video of the brother telling Elders to destroy evidence because 'Satan is coming after the Organisation', true or false ? 

I do not know if the ARC did or didn't submit these findings to their legal brief. What I do know is that those letters had a very limited audience. Regular publishers had no idea about these letters, they had no idea how elders were supposed to handle these situations. They were completely in the dark. As a consequence, regular publishers were at the "mercy" of the Elders. The ARC changed that. Now everyone knows the procedure and can be on the same page. It's a pity this transparency didn't happen sooner.

@BillyTheKid46 Another problem is that the powers that be are covering their own even though they know who is the abuser. They will allow those at the bottom to seek out and go after a whole institution for the actions of a few, which we see today in schools and churches. Something of which I was adamant about is to teach people, to prevent abuse and or harm.
Abuse of this nature, by any means, cannot cease from the face of thee earth, only God can wipe that all away.

I will agree that it is all very difficult to deal with, for the Org and for the victims. Do i know any answers, no I don't. 
It's just such a shame that the JW Org is in such a mess. 
And like you say Billy it seems the lawyers are just using the victims as a way of earning more cash for themselves. 
Yes the sun is shining here, I'm in a better frame of mind. :) Have a good day all. 
 

I was really steamed at how Joe Paterno took the primary hit on this for fulfilling his legal duty but failing “to go beyond the law.” The man’s lifelong reputation had been sterling. He was to become villain of the year, fired from his decades-long career where he had garnered nothing but praise , and he was dead in two years.
A similar scandal broke a short time later with regards to SU coach Jim Boeheim. He initially said a very perilous thing, but he quickly did an about face and managed to redeem himself.
I posted about both these events:
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2011/12/jim-boeheim-and-joe-paterno.html
I even have a personal anecdote about Boeheim. I was once a part of a student news production team that rotated positions weekly. When it was my turn as ‘sportscaster’ I interviewed the coach in the stands with the team practicing below as a backdrop. I didn’t know the first thing about basketball, yet he patiently answered all my ‘questions.’ He may have even suggestd a few.
 
 

To the rest of you that feel the need to rally round and stick up for the ones you worship. The GB and it Org.
You are completely missing the point of this Watchtower. It is aimed at the Elders.
It is not so that congregants can know what to do. IT IS TO TELL THE ELDERS TO BACK OFF. TO TELL THE ELDERS. NOT TO TELL THE CONGREGANTS TO KEEP QUIET. 
BECAUSE IT SEEMS THE ELDERS WERE TELLING THE CONGREGANTS NOT TO REPORT THINGS TO THE POLICE OR THE AUTHORITIES. 
UNLESS AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, YOU ARE CALLING ALL THE VICTIMS LIARS. 
And for the Kid, yes Kid experience is better than second hand information, but Kid i have both. 

@TrueTomHarley    Quote "I had you in mind when I wrote the above, John, and I honestly feel sorry for you."
Nice of you to think about me Tom. Thank you. But feeling sorry for someone is such a negative attitude, and in your case i feel the sorrow is not genuine. Why ? 
Quote "Though apparently wrapped in a newfound ‘personal relationship with Jesus,’ "  That is sarcasm Tom and shows your lack of 'feeling sorry for me'  I do not have a 'personal relationship with Jesus', nor do i pretend to have.  Can you quote me as saying that i have ? 
I have always thought that individuals should pray to God through Jesus Christ. And surely all Christians should pray in such a way on a daily basis ? I went into our back garden early this morning and put food out for the birds, and when birds arrived i thanked God for the happiness those birds bring to humans. Just watching those birds in the garden, such a simple thing, but it gives me such pleasure. Now God must have built that into humans to like or love animals / birds / creatures. So in that way you could say we all have a 'personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ', or would you not agree ? 
If you don't agree that people can have such a relationship with God and Christ then it seems as if you are saying that a person can only give praise twice a week, that being at JW meetings............. Now that creates a Clergy Class doesn't it ? 
But oh yes that reminds me Clergy Class, Clergy privilege. 
The clergy–penitent privilege, clergy privilege, confessional privilege, priest–penitent privilege, clergyman–communicant privilege, or ecclesiastical privilegeis a rule of evidence that forbids judicial inquiry into certain communications (spoken or otherwise) between clergy and members of their congregation.
I do believe that Elders are using this 'excuse' to refuse to give evidence in court cases. Am I right in this thinking ? 
But of course the JW Org does not have a 'Clergy Class' does it ? Contradiction i think. 
Quote " applying Christianity. "  That phrase means different things to different people Tom.  If all those Pedophiles in the JW Org had applied Christianity then all the aforementioned on this topic would not exist. 
 

Who gets called "The Oracle"? Who realizes that the primary scripture  that stands in the way of his 1975 obsession was when Jesus said that no one knows the day or the hour, and then he himself toys with that very verse in a dismissive way by saying that 'now is not the time to toy with that verse'? Who calls the non-governing Jehovah's Witnesses the "rank and file"?  Who writes all of the explanations for parables and prophecies as if they are doctrines from on high which cannot be questioned? Who claimed that even doubting 1914 was a form of apostasy whether one stated it out loud or not? Who would rant angrily that Jesus can't be the mediator of "every Tom Dick and Harry" but is only the mediator of the 144,000? Who would refer to the Society as if it was not only the Lord's mouthpiece, but that its pronouncements were the same as "the Lord" himself speaking? Example: Here is how Franz put it in the July 1, 1943 Watchtower (p.205):
Now, the apostle says, Jehovah speaks to us through his
Son. (Heb. 1: 1, 2) The Son has returned as King; he
has come to his temple. He has appointed his "faithful
and wise servant", who is his visible mouthpiece, and says
to those who are privileged to represent him upon the
earth, "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in
all the world for a witness unto all nations" ...
These expressions of God's will by his King and through
his established agency constitute his law or rule of action
for the "faithful and wise servant" and for their goodwill
companions today... The Lord breaks down our
organization instructions further . . . . He says, 'Let us assign the field,
the world, to special pioneers, regular pioneers and companies
of Jehovah's witnesses. . . . He [the Lord]
says the requirements for special pioneers shall be 175
hours and 50 back-calls per month, which should develop
into a reasonable number of studies; and for regular
pioneers 150 hours and as many back-calls and studies as
can be properly developed during that time. And for
company publishers he says, 'Let us make a quota of 60
hours and 12 back-calls and at least one study a week
for each publisher.' These directions come to us from
the Lord through his established agency directing what
is required of us; . . . This expression of the Lord's will should be
the end of all controversy. It is for your good that these
requirements are made; for thereby you are enabled to
prove your integrity and magnify the Lord's name.
These directions from the Lord come to us as individuals
and as collective units called "companies". ...
They are to carry on all the forms of magazine work in
that assignment. ...
... The Lord through his "faithful and wise servant" now
states to us, "Let us cover our territory four times in six
months." That becomes our organization instructions and
has the same binding force on us that his statement to
the Logos had when he said, ''Let us make man in our
image." It is our duty to accept this additional instruction
and obey it. 
A similar attitude was shown in R.Franz experience after the GB had elicited input from various Branch Overseers in many countries where "alternative service" was an issue. In the book "In Search of Christian Freedom" page 268, R.Franz writes:
Indicative of this, the Society’s president, Fred Franz, also expressed
doubt as to the weight to be given to the expressions of
the Branch Committee members. He reminded the Body that he
had not voted in favor of the worldwide survey and then, sharply
increasing the force of his tone, asked: “Where does all this information
come from anyway? Does it come from the top down? Or
from the bottom up?” He said that we should not build our decision
around the situations found in different countries.
As noted, this phrase regarding “top” and “bottom” was not new
to me. As recently as 1971 in a Watchtower article, Fred Franz had
used it, along with reference to the “rank and file” members of the
organization. But the whole tone of the discussion was extremely
upsetting to me, particularly such expressions as “If we allow the
brothers this latitude.” When recognized by Chairman Klein, I reminded
the members that it was the Governing Body’s decision
to write the Branch Committee members, that those men were
among the most respected elders in their respective countries, and
if we could not give weight to their expressions then to whose
expressions could we do so? I felt compelled to add that my understanding
was that we considered ourselves as a brotherhood and
had no reason to look on ourselves as the “top” of anything, that
we should even find the concept personally repelling.
Edited to add that the Watchtower article written by Fred Franz from 1971 referred to above is this one, an article stating that the Governing Body can't be voted in because they are appointed by Jesus Christ himself:
*** w71 12/15 p. 760 A Governing Body as Different from a Legal Corporation ***
They do not want to cause anything like a situation where the “administrative agency” controls and directs the user of that agency, which user is the governing body as representing the “faithful and discreet slave” class. No more so than to have the tail wag a dog instead of the dog’s wagging its tail. A legal religious instrument according to Caesar’s law should not attempt to direct and control its creator; rather, the creator of the legal religious instrument should control and direct it. . . . Rather, it governs such corporations as mere temporary instruments useful in the work of the great Theocrat. Hence it is patterned according to His design for it. It is a theocratic organization, ruled from the divine Top down, and not from the rank and file up.
 
 

Whoa, didn't get the memo for the wedding. Other than that the both of them write better than me, that's for sure. 

And what's that supposed to mean? Because I caught you assuming something and called you out? How is that strange?
After all you said those things, not me, was being honest.
That is, do you want me to refer to you as an apostate so you can proudly boil those eggs of yours? 
You played this game last time, Pops, and you're too up there in age for that.
But yeah, I don't see you as one. I know apostates when I see them, even the aggresive ones that someone who I've calmed down, want to inflict pain to. Some apostates dont realize they are making enemies among themselves and outside. 

If there is not a clear demarcation of the priesthood/anointed ones in the organization, we have to ask ourselves why.  In Israel, it was evident who were of the line of Aaron and who should serve as a priest.  If the Watchtower organization belongs to God and Christ, then again there would be no question who his priests are, under our High Priest, Christ. 
Jesus said you will recognize those whom he sends by their fruits – their teachings as his priests.  Mal 2:7; 1 Pet 2:5,9; John 13:20; Matt 7:15-20   He also said there would be a ruling power over them during the last days that would remove their “sacrifices” of praise; their voice, before God and Jesus.   Dan 7:7,8,21,23,25; 8:10; Rev 13:1,11; Heb 13:15
Not until his priests speak up using their spiritual voice in defense of Christ; causing them to be “killed”/disfellowshipped and detached from the ruling power,  (John 16:2) will we then have the ability to hear/see their fruits.  In the organization, the anointed priesthood is kept under lock and key in obedience to the counterfeit priests, the elder body, and a wicked slave.  Rev 13:11-15 
This results in anonymity.  Would God’s organization allow this to exist? 
“But you and your sons with you shall attend to your priesthood for everything concerning the altar and inside the veil, and you are to perform service. I am giving you the priesthood as a bestowed service, but the *outsider who comes near shall be put to death."  Num 18:7
“Have you not driven out the priests of the LORD, the sons of Aaron and the Levites, and made for yourselves priests like the peoples of other lands? Whoever comes to consecrate himself with a young bull and seven rams, even he may become a priest of what are no gods. 2 Chron 13:9
This early arrangement of worship was made according to the “heavenly pattern” shown Moses on the mountain.  We now have a superior High Priest, the cornerstone of the Temple of God. Heb 7:26  His “living stones” /priesthood of that Temple must be servants only to their High Priest and God. 1 Cor 3:16,17   If the Watchtower organization belongs to God, we would clearly see this in action.  Instead, we see the power of men publicly announcing to God’s priesthood, not to BOND together under their only High Priest, Jesus Christ.  This is all accomplished under a cloak of divine direction. 
Who would be behind this idea, the backbone promoting a lie?  Who does not want to see the coming Kingdom of God and the fulfillment of the New Covenant promise (“woman”)?  Gen 3:14,15; Rev 12:7,9,17
Who can easily dupe people with the offer of riches, power and authority; which during the time of the end, conquers God’s priesthood with lies?  Luke 4:5-7; Matt 24:24; Rev 13:11,12,1,2,5-7; 2 Cor 11:14,15
 
 

Since you like to insinuate, allow me to state, 
If doctoral theology or ecclesiastical endorsement means nothing to a person that professes to have Bible knowledge, there is really nothing more that can be added for the wisdom of such a person. The exegesis defines and intellectuals understanding. Perhaps it’s beyond the comprehension for some.
To some, it is clear what is meant in Romans 12:2
Can I take it to mean Anna and JWinsider are husband and wife? since you have the same form of writing style? or is it just another overreach in your part. Perhaps other things are far more important than personal silliness.

That's how I understand it. Basically, I feel that this "method" applies to any true Christian, whether anointed or not, and no need to be a member of the FDS either. The holy spirit is there for anyone who asks for it. But I  believe someone, a body, has to have the job of dispensing Bible truths, or food at the proper time if you will. I know you feel a bit differently about it. But it makes logical sense to me. Do I think that this "body" might or should receive a little bit more direction from the holy spirit than anyone else? On account of the job they do, it would seem reasonable that they might/should. Of course if Jehovah could make the stones cry out, then he can easily use a a group of people to do the same. Do I think this has been the case? To the exclusion of bad mistakes, I would say, in certain circumstances, yes. I feel certain he has blessed the effort of those who promoted Bible truths.  But He has obviously allowed blunders to be made as well. The GB are convinced they are a tool in God's hands, and I honestly cannot see why they couldn't be. As for "feeling special" about a decision, I think I prefer to leave that to the Mormons or Born Again Christians

The earth is a big place, I would assume anointed members like to live in their place of choice. Or do you think they should all live in a compound?
That's utter nonsense. The anointed are free to do as they wish, like any other member of the congregation. Their identity is revealed, whether they like it or not, when they partake of the emblems at the memorial. 
More nonsense. They can dispense as much spiritual food as they like, to anyone they like.  Throw them out? What, where, how? Such nonsense....
 

Quite a disappointing comment from you Anna, as i think you have actually supplied me with information previously which has helped me to give foundation to my accusations of the GB and it's Org. Note i said i think it was you that has helped me in that way, it may not have been.
But now that you have the 'snobs' club I suppose you can use this club just to put rubbish on.  

@BillyTheKid46  There you go Kid. I said TTH told me off sometimes. This is TTH and his sarcasm. So it's not just me that says things which may be considered out of line by some. I don't consider any of it out of line as i give as good as I take, but some get easily offended. 
TTH Do you have a problem with someone that wants to fight for truth ? At least I'm not writing books about JW's and hiding their lies. 
And  "renunciation." Yes of the GB and it's JW org, and it's Watchtower Soc'. 
I'm still a firm believer in God, Jesus Christ, Holy Spirit, the Anointed and the Bible. 
As TTH indicates, I'm still fighting for truth.  
Oh and i notice Kid, you had to cut my quote short as you didn't like the truth of it. 

Frightened at the guy who has one of those pissy little loud yappy dogs that nip at your ankles 24/7, and who says “Don’t worry. He justs wants to fight for truth!”?

Because @JOHN BUTLER brought up some speculation that Armageddon is likely far off, I mentioned the following:
@BillyTheKid46 responded:
When I responded to BillyTheKid, I ended up taking a part of this discussion far off the original topic, and there were several more posts that veered to this topic. Some contained intriguing content. However since they are off topic, I am going to move them under new topics. The original topic about the problem with the updated definition of the "generation" is in one new topic, here, and these other points by BillyTheKid will be under another topic:
 
For reference, these are the responses from THIS topic that will be discussed in the new topic here:
And this one:
And this one:
 

Perhaps, but it's not obvious yet to me.
You haven't been clear about what "it" is that active JWs understand, and do not minimize or dismiss.
Perhaps there are, and perhaps the current understanding of what 1914 represented is 100 percent correct. But the Watchtower does not speak of a first group of the this generation who merely "have understood what 1914 represents and what has always represented" does it? No, the Watchtower speaks of those who understood the sign that they were seeing in 1914, at the time they were seeing it.
*** ws14 1/15 p. 30 par. 15 “Let Your Kingdom Come”—But When? ***
When Jesus mentioned “this generation,” we understand that he was speaking about two groups of anointed Christians. The first group was present in 1914 and understood that Christ began ruling as King in that year. Those who made up this group were not only alive in 1914, but they had also been anointed by holy spirit in or before that year. This doesn't fit the current Watchtower explanation that they had it wrong at the time. They didn't even teach that this supposed sign in 1914 meant that Jesus had begun his presence. (His presence had begun in 1874, and this was still the official teaching until 1943/1944. No one we know recognized this in 1914.) So it would be difficult to claim that anyone saw the sign and understood it in 1914, unless you happen to know of someone who understood it that way. Fred Franz admits that he misunderstood it until 1943, and he is used as a primary example of a person in the first group.