AlanF
-
Posts
1,227 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
World Wiki
Events
Posts posted by AlanF
-
-
Arauna said:
Quote3 hours ago, AlanF said:
Bible against my argument that logically, he cannot exist.
Note how Arauna completely sidesteps my argument:QuoteI can take you a bet you are not really good at math - and do not really understand the mechanisms within the cell and mutation. If you really understood you would not make such a statement. You are forgiven.
Ah, a sideways reference to the Argument from Design, which is really the Argument from Ignorance or the Argument from Personal Incredulity.
Obviously you don't understand a thing about the Theory of Evolution. Tell me, Mrs. Einstein: does that Theory include abiogenesis?
Lack of an answer means you don't know, which proves my point.
QuoteI always watch Dawkins' debates with Christian philosophers and he has looked really silly on most of them- he is not really a deep thinker. This is why he now only goes on shows where he talks only with other atheists.
Your prejudice is showing. Prejudice created by your ignorance of Evolution created by knowing nothing but the misinformation found in Watchtower literature.
QuoteThe best he said was : life was seeded by aliens.
Wrong. He never said that. The movie Expelled, which created that lie, has been thoroughly debunked.
QuoteI don't waste my time on people who already think they have all the answers.
I do. Which is why I bother replying to you.
QuoteIf you hit the jackpot more than 10 times in a row to have a BIg positive outcome (to win a million to get on top of the pile) - you will start to wonder if the system was rigged in your favour...... Now imagine - you hit the jackpot with every small mutation (millions every second) for 500 billion years......
Totally ignorant statement. More Dunning-Kruger from you.
-
1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:
Oh, give me a break, you pompous pillar of pettiness! I think far more deeply than you.
You have a incredibly broad knowledge of a certain aspect of a narrow topic. Beyond that, I wonder if you know anything at all.
I bring to the table free-ranging, out-of-the-box thinking on a variety of topics. You bring strait-jacketed, legalistic thinking about one.
I bring wit, imagination, and humor in all its varieties—self-deprecating humor as well as the kind of humor where you make fun of yourself.
Dunning-Kruger is mighty in this one.
Have you been taking lessons from your idol Donald Trump?
-
It's pretty clear that no one on this forum is willing or able to defend their belief in the God of the Bible against my argument that logically, he cannot exist.
Without a solid foundation, belief in everything else in the Bible is valueless.
Here's a humorous video that further illustrates what I'm talking about:
-
JW Insider said:
Quote34 minutes ago, AlanF said:
No, it's deliberate. Need I quote some Watchtower publications to prove it?
I think it's a bit strong to claim you can prove someone's motive. There might be "evidence," but "proof"? I doubt it!
Decades of WTS writers hammering on a theme is plenty of proof.
Can you really imagine that decades of hammering is "inadvertant"?
This article, written a quarter century ago, shows how JW leaders have consistently declared them themselves prophets appointed by Jehovah:
https://critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/part-4-wts-says-it-is-prophet-and.html
Here are some quotes from jwfacts.com ( https://jwfacts.com/watchtower/directed-by-holy-spirit.php 😞
<<
“Under the guidance of his holy spirit and on the basis of his Word of truth, Jehovah provides what is needed so that all of God's people may be "fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought" and remain "stabilized in the faith." (1 Cor. 1:10; Col. 2:6, 7) Surely we are grateful for Jehovah's spiritual provisions in these last days.” Kingdom Ministry Sep 2007 p.3 US Edition"They do not claim that this slave class is infallible, but they do view it as the one channel that the Lord is using during the last days of this system of things." Proclaimers p.626
>>The latter is deliberate doublespeak. How can the Lord be using (guiding and directing) a "slave class" that might or might not be following direction? How can followers know? Why do admittedly fallible men declare that any who disagree are wicked apostates unless they really believed that they're speaking in God's name?
<<
"When the time comes to clarify a spiritual matter in our day, holy spirit helps responsible representatives of the faithful and discreet slave at world headquarters to discern deep truths that were not previously understood." Watchtower 2010 Jul 15 pp.22-23>>
That is a direct claim of inspiration.
<<
"Third, holy spirit is at work in bringing Bible truths to light." Watchtower 2010 Apr 15 p.10 Holy Spirits Role in the Outworking of Jehovahs Purpose
"Consider, too, the fact that Jehovah's organization alone, in all the earth, is directed by God's holy spirit or active force. (Zech. 4:6) Only this organization functions for Jehovah's purpose and to his praise. To it alone God's Sacred Word, the Bible, is not a sealed book." Watchtower 1973 Jul 1 p.402
"In 1942 the "faithful and discreet slave" guided by Jehovah's unerring spirit made known that the democracies would win World War II and that there would be a United Nations organization set up." Watchtower 1960 Jul 15 p.444
"The Watchtower is not the instrument of any man or set of men, nor is it published according to the whims of men. No man's opinion is expressed in The Watchtower. God feeds his own people, and surely God uses those who love and serve him according to his own will." Watchtower 1931 Nov 1 p.327
"It is vital that we appreciate this fact and respond to the directions of the "slave" as we would to the voice of God, because it is His provision." Watchtower 1957 Jun 15 p.370
>>For a lot more, read the above links.
Quote34 minutes ago, AlanF said:
That is entirely at odds with decades of Watchtower doctrine.
Many changes made have been entirely at odds with decades of WT doctrine,
True, but what actual evidence -- written or oral teaching -- can you or Anna come up with to justify her claim that "GB fallibility" is current teaching and that decades of "GB is guided and directed by holy spirit", as in the above quotes, has been jettisoned?
And have you any evidence that disfellowshipping for apostasy, as detailed in my above post, has been jettisoned or even toned down?
Quoteand this has more often than not been a good thing, both on doctrinal issues and in practices and procedures.
True, but the fact that WTS writers invariably downplay the fact that these changes prove that their overall claim of "spirit-direction" is false proves that they have always deceived the JW community about the source of these false teachings -- their own "dreams and guesses".
QuoteThere is a bit less focus on chronology,
Not really. Perhaps they don't talk about it as much as 25 years ago, but it still forms the basis for the 1914 teaching, and hence, the GB's claim of spiritual authority.
Quotemuch less focus on classes and types and antitypes,
Yes, that was a stupid attitude originated by Rutherford and continued by old Freddie.
Quoteand I think that some of this interpretation of the GB's motive comes from the fact that they are true believers in the end-time scenario they have been recently depicting.
Which belief is nonsensical, in view of the facts of history. Such as the fact that our population explosion disproves the entire 1914 "end times" scenario. Which facts the GB and its minions refuse even to think about.
QuoteTherefore they can become a bit paternalistic and protective, which comes across as "list and obey." I don't think it's quite as "ulterior" as you keep saying.
Sure it is. Their motives obviously have a large component of self interest. Such self interest, such as maintaining a retirement home in Warwick and their place at the top of the JW cult, can hardly be discounted. The way Jeffrey Jackson, before the ARC commission, lied about the GB's position in Watchtower doctrine, is positive proof of their bad motives, because it takes careful thought to formulate a lie like that -- a lie that is subtle enough to fool some rank and file JWs and the ARC, but not anyone who actually knows JW doctrine.
-
Anna said:
Quote6 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:
I can picture 99 persons in the audience—who had said they felt holy spirit in the hallways—smiling at themselves that they ever thought they could literally feel holy spirit in the hallways, and AlanF stomping out of the building now that they have admitted to LYING to him for all these years.
To be fair to AlanF, I can understand how people can misinterpret (and feel duped, in AlanF's case) regarding how the holy spirit actually operates. There have been various insinuations in publications and throughout the years, (mainly early years) and personal speculation to boot. There are still some friends who believe holy spirit went out and found them a mate.
JWs who believe that the holy spirit actively finds mates and appoints elders are not misinterpreting anything. They're thoroughly duped by dishonest statements given in Watchtower publications and in various public talks. I proved that with my audience with Wesley Benner some 42 years ago.
-
TrueTomHarley said:
Quote46 minutes ago, Anna said:
You might be right to a certain extent, this may even have been created inadvertently.
The thing to focus on is, not that Rutherford thought it existed, (a “cult” around Russell) but that the FDS freely admits it 50 years (or whatever) later.
Sure, because a hundred years of pointed criticism of its continued failures leaves it no choice.
And of course, "the thing to focus on" is just an excuse not to think about all the failures of these self-appointed "spirit-directed" charlatans.
QuoteIt is as when Rutherford says “I made as ass of myself,” and AlanF uses to fact to insist that he could not have been “inspired.”
Isn't that obvious even to you?
QuoteWhat he should focus on is that he said it in the first place.
Well let's see: Rutherford began all this with a talk in 1917 called "Millions Now Living May Never Die". He soon changed the title to "Millions Now Living Will Never Die". In 1920 he published the infamous booklet with that name. A couple of years later he started the preaching campaign he called by the same name. The basic reason for the claim was that Armageddon was to come in 1925, leaving many people to live forever. Rutherford said essentially that all this nonsense was from God.
So when 1925 came and went, and nothing happened, it was obvious to everyone that Rutherford had made a huge ass of himself. His admission was much like Bill Clinton's forced admission that he had sex with "that woman"--everyone already knew it.
QuoteI mean, not in my wildest ramblings can I envision Alan saying publicly the same. You cannot go wrong when you have persons who, as individuals, do not take themselves too seriously.
Your opinion is irrelevant.
QuoteThis is the same Rutherford who says: “Well, Carl talks a lot and he says things he doesn’t mean.”
You apparently don't understand: Karl Klein hated Rutherford for all that humiliation. His story in The Watchtower was not only a whitewash, but the statement about Rutherford's making an ass of himself was an obvious swipe at Rutherford, expressed in terms that didn't get him in trouble with the rest of the GB.
QuoteCan you imagine Alan letting anyone off the hook so easily? He rages on about the technicalities of words and totally ignores the human component that makes them work in actual life.
LOL! Totally clueless. And as usual, attributing to me attitudes and views that are products of TTH's warped imagination.
QuoteOf course, the “Carl” whom Rutherford spoke of was Carl Klein,
It was "Karl", dummy. Try doing a little research.
Quotea one-time GB member whose life-experience was published in 1984. (“Jehovah Has Dealt Rewardingly With Me.”) Notable among the lessons he reports as contributing to a happy life is: “Since then, I have observed many similar tests of loyalty. When mistakes are made, those not wholly loyal at heart seem to pounce upon them as an excuse for quitting.”—Compare Psalm 119:165.
This, too, is good to reflect on. Klein’s reminisces are a favorite with the friends—it is not just me. One brother stated just the same when commenting on a WT paragraph about a month ago that referenced him.
And of course, none of them know how much Klein hated Rutherford.
-
Anna said:
Quote19 minutes ago, AlanF said:
Cult worship - Just as there is today around the current Governing Body -- all instigated by years of promotion by Watchtower publications.
You might be right to a certain extent, this may even have been created inadvertently.
No, it's deliberate. Need I quote some Watchtower publications to prove it?
QuoteHowever now, I see a distinct move away from that.
How so? And how do you reconcile that opinion with very recent Watchtower statements that call for blind loyalty to the Governing Body, to view their teachings as directly from God?
Again we see the Society talking out of both sides of its mouth.
QuoteJWs are now going to have to assimilate that the GB (by their own admission) produces imperfect spiritual food.
I really doubt that they will. That is entirely at odds with decades of Watchtower doctrine.
-
Anna said:
Quote10 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:
Do you have a position of authority? If so, ask yourself: ‘What kind of environment do I create at work or at home? Do I promote peace? Do I encourage others to ask questions? And am I willing to hear their opinions?’ Never would we want to be like the Pharisees, who resented those who questioned them and persecuted those who expressed an opinion contrary to their own.—Mark 3:1-6; John 9:29-34. - WT study article September 2019, page 23 par 11
"What kind of environment" do GB create inside JW Organization aka congregations ?
Good point Srecko. I don't think it's entirely fair to blame the GB for creating a "certain" environment inside congregations though.
The GB has most of the blame, because elders and other JWs are supposed to listen to them as to the voice of God.
Local culture in society at large, and the evolution of a micro-culture in a congregation, have created such environments. Thus, some congregations and elder bodies have a reputation for being lenient or harsh.
QuoteIn fact, (we know everything passes through the GB's hands for approval, if they haven't written it themselves) the above expressions must be what the GB agree with.
Sure, but actions speak louder than words. The Society is an expert at being double-tongued.
QuoteTime and again I see that it is not the questions that are asked, or even expressing an opinion contrary to their own,
Your personal experiences are limited. And keep firmly in mind that, as a woman, you're usually not taken seriously.
Quotebut it's the way this is done and what is the the purpose for doing it.
True, but men supposedly appointed by holy spirit ought to have thick enough skin to see underneath expressed irritation or anger. Need I remind you what "love" entails?
QuoteMost elders are willing to hear an opinion, and do not resent those who express an opinion contrary to their own.
Only up to a point.
QuoteI know that from personal experience. However, if the motive is to exult your own ideas, to force people to listen to them over and over again, and to try and make people see it your way, then that is stirring up contentions and is eroding peace in the congregation. And those who erode peace, will eventually find themselves kicked out sooner or later.
How do elders judge motives? In many cases, the very expression of a differing opinion makes them cry "apostate!" and then they refuse to listen further, and often disfellowship the one expressing the opinion.
QuoteJust to illustrate; I told a few elders, in no uncertain terms, that I cannot agree with the "overlapping generation" idea, and I left it at that. No one has ever come after me, or tried to convince me otherwise, and we all remain good friends. Now you know what would happen if I started to aggressively push my opinion on every single person I came into contact with.
You're obviously in a lenient micro-culture.
QuoteIn another instance; I rattled one sister's cage (it means irritated her) during a discussion in the car during field service (in the US a car load of friends go out). We were all talking about animals being friends in the paradise. I voiced my opinion that I believe there will still be the same food chain as there is now, with carnivores consuming the herbivores. I explained why I think that, but this one sister was adamant that lions will eat grass and will be buddies with the sheep. But we didn't argue who is right and who is wrong. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, as long as you are not trying to beat the other person over the head with it.
I'm glad you were not ostracised. But you have to remember that in JW culture women are usually not taken seriously. People not taken seriously are not viewed as a threat. A man expressing similar views would be far more likely to suffer ostracism.
QuoteSo I think it is assumed that 'questioning and expressing an opinion' will be done in a civil way, to which those in a position of authority should have no trouble listening.
A pollyanna view. The reality is that it is basic Watchtower policy that anyone expressing opinions at odds with Watchtower doctrine, policy or tradition will be up for disfellowshipping for apostasty.
Note what is said and not said in the following expression of policy, which 33 years later, is still current. From the April 1, 1986 Watchtower (p. 31):
<<
Questions From Readers▪ Why have Jehovah’s Witnesses disfellowshipped (excommunicated) for apostasy some who still profess belief in God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ?
Those who voice such an objection point out that many religious organizations claiming to be Christian allow dissident views. Even some clergymen disagree with basic teachings of their church, yet they remain in good standing. In nearly all the denominations of Christendom, there are modernists and fundamentalists who greatly disagree with one another as to the inspiration of the Scriptures.
However, such examples provide no grounds for our doing the same. Why not? Many of such denominations allow widely divergent views among the clergy and the laity because they feel they cannot be certain as to just what is Bible truth. They are like the scribes and Pharisees of Jesus’ day who were unable to speak as persons having authority, which is how Jesus taught. (Matthew 7:29) Moreover, to the extent that religionists believe in interfaith, they are obligated not to take divergent beliefs too seriously.
But taking such a view of matters has no basis in the Scriptures. Jesus did not make common cause with any of the sects of Judaism. Jews of those sects professed to believe in the God of creation and in the Hebrew Scriptures, particularly the Law of Moses. Still, Jesus told his disciples to “watch out . . . for the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” (Matthew 16:11, 12; 23:15) Note also how strongly the apostle Paul stated matters: “Even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond what we declared to you as good news, let him be accursed.” Paul then repeated that statement for emphasis.—Galatians 1:8, 9.
Teaching dissident or divergent views is not compatible with true Christianity, as Paul makes clear at 1 Corinthians 1:10: “I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.” (New International Version) At Ephesians 4:3-6 he further stated that Christians should be “earnestly endeavoring to observe the oneness of the spirit in the uniting bond of peace. One body there is, and one spirit, even as you were called in the one hope to which you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all persons.”
Was this unity to be achieved and maintained by each one’s independently searching the Scriptures, coming to his own conclusions, and then teaching these? Not at all! Through Jesus Christ, Jehovah God provided for this purpose “some as apostles, . . . some as evangelizers, some as shepherds and teachers . . . until we all attain to the oneness in the faith and in the accurate knowledge of the Son of God, to a full-grown man.” Yes, with the help of such ministers, congregational unity—oneness in teaching and activity—could be and would be possible.—Ephesians 4:11-13.
Obviously, a basis for approved fellowship with Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot rest merely on a belief in God, in the Bible, in Jesus Christ, and so forth. The Roman Catholic pope, as well as the Anglican Archbishop of Canterbury, professes such beliefs, yet their church memberships are exclusive of each other. Likewise, simply professing to have such beliefs would not authorize one to be known as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Approved association with Jehovah’s Witnesses requires accepting the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses. What do such beliefs include?
That the great issue before humankind is the rightfulness of Jehovah’s sovereignty, which is why he has allowed wickedness so long. (Ezekiel 25:17) That Jesus Christ had a prehuman existence and is subordinate to his heavenly Father. (John 14:28) That there is a “faithful and discreet slave” upon earth today ‘entrusted with all of Jesus’ earthly interests,’ which slave is associated with the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. (Matthew 24:45-47) That 1914 marked the end of the Gentile Times and the establishment of the Kingdom of God in the heavens, as well as the time for Christ’s foretold presence. (Luke 21:7-24; Revelation 11:15–12:10) That only 144,000 Christians will receive the heavenly reward. (Revelation 14:1, 3) That Armageddon, referring to the battle of the great day of God the Almighty, is near. (Revelation 16:14, 16; 19:11-21) That it will be followed by Christ’s Millennial Reign, which will restore an earth-wide paradise. That the first to enjoy it will be the present “great crowd” of Jesus’ “other sheep.”—John 10:16; Revelation 7:9-17; 21:3, 4.
Do we have Scriptural precedent for taking such a strict position? Indeed we do! Paul wrote about some in his day: “Their word will spread like gangrene. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of that number. These very men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some.” (2 Timothy 2:17, 18; see also Matthew 18:6.) There is nothing to indicate that these men did not believe in God, in the Bible, in Jesus’ sacrifice. Yet, on this one basic point, what they were teaching as to the time of the resurrection, Paul rightly branded them as apostates, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship.
Similarly, the apostle John termed as antichrists those who did not believe that Jesus had come in the flesh. They may well have believed in God, in the Hebrew Scriptures, in Jesus as God’s Son, and so on. But on this point, that Jesus had actually come in the flesh, they disagreed and thus were termed “antichrist.” John goes on to say regarding those holding such variant views: “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.”—2 John 7, 10, 11.
Following such Scriptural patterns, if a Christian (who claims belief in God, the Bible, and Jesus) unrepentantly promotes false teachings, it may be necessary for him to be expelled from the congregation. (See Titus 3:10, 11.) Of course, if a person just has doubts or is uninformed on a point, qualified ministers will lovingly assist him. This accords with the counsel: “Continue showing mercy to some that have doubts; save them by snatching them out of the fire.” (Jude 22, 23) Hence, the true Christian congregation cannot rightly be accused of being harshly dogmatic, but it does highly value and work toward the unity encouraged in God’s Word.
>>One of the key points is "teaching dissident or divergent views". Dissident or divergent from what? Obviously the writer means from Watchtower views. But then we have the question of whether these teachings are wrong. If a Watchtower teaching is clearly at odds with the Bible--and there are many--is teaching what the Bible says a "dissident or divergent view"? Certainly not from the Bible, but from Watchtower teaching. Which should take precedent in the mind of a Christian loyal to God and Christ? The Bible? Or the Watchtower Society?
Then there is the matter of "teaching". There are many stories on the Net of a JW man voicing an opinion, often in private to a relative, who later finds himself before a judicial committee on a charge of apostasy. He says, "But I only mentioned this to my relative as an opinion. I never taught this to anyone." The elders say, "You're teaching us!" when all the guy did was explain his reasoning behind his opinion. How do you explain that, Anna?
-
TrueTomHarley said:
Quote15 hours ago, AlanF said:
I asked him point blank: “In one sentence, is it or is it not true that elders are *directly* appointed by holy spirit?” He hesitated, hung his head, and answered, “No.”
If he hung his head, it was not in shame. It was in dismay at the literalism.
Wrong as usual. You didn't see his face as he hung his head for ten seconds.
You're projecting. And rationalizing your own worship of the GB.
QuoteI have never had this problem at all of demanding just HOW elders are appointed by holy spirit. . .
That's because you don't think clearly and deeply.
No sense commenting further on junk that Wolfgang Pauli would have said is "not even wrong".
-
JW Insider said:
QuoteIn fact, the history of the Governing Body as the Faithful Slave, according to our CURRENT view, now goes back to 1919.
Yes, but until very recently that was not the case. Note:
<< How did this governing body make its appearance in recent times? Evidently under the direction of Jehovah God and his Son Jesus Christ. According to the facts available, the governing body became associated with the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. C. T. Russell was patently of that governing body back there in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. >> The Watchtower, Dec. 15, 1971, p. 760, written by Fred Franz, Vice President and chief theologian of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.
QuoteThey removed Russell from his membership in the exclusive committee, so I'll agree that discussing Russell's failings is not so relevant,
It is entirely relevant, since the Society has long claimed continuity of "the faithful slave and its governing body" from apostolic times. That this claim is manifestly false is irrelevant; the claim itself is the important thing. The GB's recent divorcing itself from Russell is a self-serving political move.
Quoteeven if it is important to show how easy it is for men to follow men. The last thing I'll say on that score (about Russell) is that the Watchtower NOW says that about 5,000 International Bible Students were active in 1914, and about 4,000 were active in 1919. In late 1916, it was admitted that THOUSANDS of Bible Students considered him to be, as a single individual, the entire "Faithful and Discreet Slave." This included Joseph Rutherford himself, and according to A H MacMillan, all the rest of the 'governing body' of that time, too.
Exactly.
QuoteRutherford even complained that Russell was being WORSHIPED, even though he was just another human, another creature. The Faith on the March book, Jehovah's Witnesses in the Divine Purpose book, and the Proclaimers book admits that there was a CULT of WORSHIP around Russell.
Quite so. Just as there is today around the current Governing Body -- all instigated by years of promotion by Watchtower publications.
-
JW Insider said:
Quote47 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:
WT have logic how all people from past until today who worship JHVH, ARE Jehovah's Witnesses. :))
Two things wrong with that:
1. In English, all those people in the past who worship Jehovah, were not Jehovah's Witnesses; they were Jehovah's witnesses. Note the smaller "w."
True, but many languages don't distinguish capitals from lowercase in proper names. In French, for example, you have "les témoins de jéhovah". This is never capitalized. And you have German, which capitalizes all sorts of words (I don't enough to say more).
Quote*** w58 4/15 p. 230 par. 11 A New Song for All Men of Good Will ***
God’s first prophecy through a man came through Enoch, the seventh man in line from Adam. Enoch was a man of faith in Jehovah God and so became Jehovah’s witness.There is some ambiguity in such statements made before the 1970's, where the upper-case W wasn't used, even when referring to the modern-day religion of Jehovah's witnesses, except in quotes from others, or in titles, where such words are often capitalzed. Although it was funny looking at the bound volumes of court cases in the Writing Dept library where the titles embossed onto the books included the term "J.w.'s" not "J.W.'s"
The ambiguity was deliberate. It allowed the Society to make false claims about the history of "Jehovah's witnesses" by blurring the distinction between the modern religion and generic past "witnesses". Jehovah's Witnesses in the Divine Purpose was especially dishonest in doing this.
Quote2. The actual statements will sometimes make claims that "Jehovah's Witnesses" (uppercase "W") taught a certain thing before, during, or shortly after 1914 that they didn't teach. For example, more than 70 years before 1991, they were still teaching that Jesus had become king in 1878, not 1914.
In many cases the context shows that blurring the distinction between "W" and "w" is deliberate. Old timers certainly know the difference.
-
James Thomas Rook Jr.
QuotePosted 3 hours ago
One thing I really enjoy from the Governing Body is their new series of Animations, similar to the Caleb and Sophia animated cartoons, about how in the New System, all animals will be at peace with each other, play together, and be happy.
I wonder what their non-existent God will do with sperm whales' proclivity to eat giant squid. And baleen whales' need to eat fish and krill.
-
TrueTomHarley said:
Quote9 hours ago, AlanF said:
Well, many times you've deliberately misquoted or distorted my words, or claimed I said something or have views that have nothing to with reality. Why should this time be different?
Note how this liar completely ignores what I said and doubles down on his practice of lying and his lousy reading comprehension:QuoteLook, you windbag. Nobody else has this problem of producing lengthy texts that appear to be expounding upon your previous remarks and then blaming Admin for his inadequate software! Everyone else can figure out how to use the stuff.
Like I said, lousy reading comprehension. Few others seem to have a problem understanding what I write.
Perhaps long years of reading 3rd-grade level Watchtower publications have damaged your brain.
QuoteThe trick is to not think yourself so important that you must, not only talk ad nauseam yourself, but quote others ad nauseam so you can argue with their every syllable!
I'm very thorough because I actually pay attention to what people write. You obviously don't.
Much of your reading comprehension problem is that you either don't seem to read carefully -- no surprise, given that WTS publications lend themselves to this -- or you simply haven't the mental acuity to put two and two together. I suspect it's a combination of both.
This goes along with your inability to write clearly. Your one blog post that I read is a real dog's breakfast of semi-gobble-de-goop.
As for the board software, if you make a post, and try to make another post immediately afterward, it merges the two. I've never seen this happen on any other board.
Furthermore, there appears to be no way to generate a quote inside a quote. If you've figured out how to do this, then do enlighten me, oh great software wizard. I won't be holding my breath.
-
JW Insider said:
Quote5 hours ago, AlanF said:
Actually I do. I get most of my news from comedy shows like Saturday Night Live, The Tonight Show with Steven Colbert, etc. Far more reliable than plain old cable TV news.
Political talk rarely gets anywhere here, and that's understandable.
Obviously I was being facetious. I get most of my news from The Watchtower, Awake! and JW.org.
QuoteBut I just wanted to say that it bothers me that people still think that "news" from Saturday Night Live or Steven Colbert is any better than cable or network news.
I doubt that many do.
QuoteIt's entertaining and funny, but it's still fed from the same commercial news sources. I've come to learn that even the so-called PBS, NPR non-commercial news sources are also strongly influenced by the same sources that are so easily influenced by the standard sources that push the "State" agenda, through Military Intelligence sources, State Department, Administration, and whichever side of the partisan line the collators and editors work from.
Of course. Hard not to notice, if one actually pays attention.
QuoteA case in point is the contradictory stance that news organizations take from administration to administration on Russia, Ukraine, Venezuela, Hong Kong, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, China, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt, Libya, Chile, Ecuador, etc.
These shows are a lot of fun, and they are especially fun when they represent the side the audience is already agrees with (usually progressive left), but the underlying "foundations" show that they just are just as duped as any cable TV network.
Agreed.
-
JW Insider said:
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 7:47 AM, AlanF said:
Quote
if they changed their policy and quit disfellowshipping for 'apostasy', their membership roles would drop immediately and drastically.
Read moreThen you said:
On 11/21/2019 at 7:47 AM, AlanF said:
In my experience with online forums and simply talking with ex-JWs generally, I've seen a great seething anger on the part of many because of the Society's policy of disfellowshipping for expressing disagreement with any JW doctrine. Such authoritarianism is bound to create resentment on the part of those who can actually think. . . . Remember the large drop in JW membership after the 1975 fiasco.
The only reason that many JWs remain in the cult, at least nominally, is to avoid disfellowshipping or informal shunning. I know many, including my own family members, who are in that boat.
Read moreUnless I'm missing something, this includes contradictory logic.
Not at all.
QuoteYou said that if the WTS stopped DFing for apostasy the numbers would go down. But then your "evidence" is that the numbers go down when there is resentment when they continue to show authoritarianism by DFing for apostasy.
I see no contradictions there, so let me try to clarify.
Getting rid of the DF'ing policy would allow many JWs to leave and not lose their family members. Very many JWs make a pretense of being JWs simply to avoid being shunned by family members.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 7:47 AM, AlanF said:
the most important question the elders would ask is: "Do you believe that Jehovah is using the Governing Body?" A 'No' answer results in immediate disfellowshipping, as many stories posted by ex-JWs prove.
Perhaps you've spent many years on forums where such persons tell their stories, and the cumulative effect makes you think this is very common.
Whatever the general statistics are, ex-JWs courageous enough to tell their experiences are a statistic of their own. And it's born out by my family experiences, where several have contacted me and expressed fear about getting shunned even if they quietly leave.
QuotePew Research provides some indication to me that most JWs who no longer believe strongly enough in the value of the Watchtower organization simply drift away. Most are not disfellowshipped at all. Even those who would have been disfellowshipped have apparently (mostly) realized that one need only drift away.
True, but that's not what I'm concerned about. I'm concerned with the deliberate destruction of family relationships by the shunning policy, period. A JW might have quietly left, but experience shows that a goodly fraction have been later DF'd for a any number of things they did after leaving. There is no excuse for that policy.
QuoteOnes that want to make a statement may write a letter or make a scene somewhere (such as an online site or at a Kingdom Hall or Convention). These would be a small minority.
Perhaps, but most would be DF'd or DA'd anyway, resulting in shunning.
QuoteTechnically if one isn't out to make a scene it's probably easy enough to answer the elders questions honestly and not be in any trouble.
But if the honest answer is "No, I don't believe the GB speaks for God", disfellowshipping immediately follows.
QuoteIf I were asked "Do you believe that Jehovah is using the Faithful and Discreet Slave?" The answer would be an easy and straightforward "Yes!" Technically the same goes for the Governing Body, just as Jehovah is able to use any group of elders, or publishers for that matter. Wherever 2 or 3 are gathered in Jesus' name, there he is in their midst.
All of which is irrelevant to my point.
QuoteAnd of course anyone who has doubts about a doctrine should be able to humbly admit that it is a matter of not being able to understand the current doctrine in question, but make it clear that you don't want to make an issue or cause contention inside the congregation. I'm guessing that a humble attitude would solve 90 percent of these problems that might otherwise lead to DFing.
Perhaps, but what about the GB and its minions being humble enough to admit in specific cases that a teaching is wrong? Remember what happened with Carl Olof Jonsson and James Penton. Remember my experience with Albert Schroeder.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 7:47 AM, AlanF said:
That's because there IS no acceptable replacement. Why? Because it is the entire end-times scenario created by Russell and perpetuated by his successors that is wrong.
For me, the acceptable replacement is a humble admission that after getting things wrong over and over again on chronology, that we simply follow Jesus' advice to give up on chronology. At least the kind of chronology that is used to try to predict the time period for the generation that will see the end-times scenario.
I agree, but you'll never convince JW leaders.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 7:47 AM, AlanF said:
The experience of many JWs who tried to offer constructive criticism but were punished for their efforts proves it. Think of Carl Olof Jonsson and Jay Hess.
I agree that there should be a way to provide constructive criticism that isn't immediately seen as a kind of "running ahead" of the organization. Of course, if you look at all the ideas people get, you can understand that the Governing Body are afraid of the chaos it could unleash if everybody started writing about their own opinions.
True. The Douglas Walsh trial made it abundantly clear that, because of that and other considerations, the Society would not tolerate any questioning of its claimed spiritual authority.
And that's rub! JW leaders are convinced that they speak for God, and you dasn't question God!
They have a correspondence department of sorts, but experience shows that most of the time a letter writer gets no response, or the letter is forwarded to local elders, often with a note of "watch out for a potential apostate". This behavior creates much resentment.
QuoteThere are a few who have dropped by this forum with ideas that would make everyone cringe as they go off the deep end of mysticism, gnosticism, chronology, numerology, etc.
But these ideas are fairly easy to deal with. There are plenty of online forums that can be referred to that debunk such nonsense. But again that's very much against the Society's claim to speak for God.
QuoteI hate to admit that I had absolutely no idea who Jay Hess was until I just now looked him up. I probably saw the name before, but I typically tune out those who spend so much time on Trinity, worship vs obeisance, etc.
I haven't talked to him in a long time, but he was at one time a fiery defender of the Watchtower. In the late 1980s he wrote a treatise explaining why JWs are not false prophets. But the Society didn't like him writing such things, viewing it as a usurpation of its authority. Based on trumped up charges, Hess was DF'd. He told me that right up to the instant that the elders DF'd him around 1990 he was convinced that the GB was legitimate. In 1993 the Awake! writers used his treatise as a basis for a big spread on why JW are not false prophets.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 7:47 AM, AlanF said:
But a far better practice would be to organizationally ignore most bad forms of conduct, since individual JWs are supposed to be trained to have consciences tuned well enough to figure these things out on their own.
Disagree. We were talking about DFing for various forms of disagreement that the Society has traditionally treated as apostasy. I believe the Bible supports some of this DFing, as you seem to admit, too.
Yes, I probably went too far in making such a blanket statement.
QuoteWe would also be individually responsible for our own "marking" and choice of "fellowshipping" avoiding "bad associations" even among those who call themselves a brother.
Nothing wrong with that. It's what people do in everyday life. Exercising a conscience.
QuoteBut we don't IGNORE most forms of bad conduct. The elders are to watch over the flock, and give good counsel when they learn of bad forms of conduct.
Which they certainly can do. And the internal congregational 'party line' would certainly spread around who was an undesirable.
QuoteWe shouldn't make up rules about six months of shunning, or one year of shunning. And no one should enforce shunning for another person.
Exactly. The latter is just plain blackmail.
QuoteYou make a good point that the right way to train a good conscience is to be allowed the responsibility of using that individual conscience -- but this does not mean that strong counsel and guidance should not be in order for those whose spirituality is drifting due to their conduct or their associations.
As I said above.
-
TrueTomHarley said:
QuoteNow if the GB were only humble enough to say 'I don't know'
Isn’t saying that you can err the same as saying you don’t know?
Not when a rank and file JW points out a specific error and is then subject to disfellowshipping or other ostracism.
-
4Jah2me said:
Quote@Arauna But your quote, which I highlighted in red, proves that the earlier, Bible Students / Russell, were not guided by Almighty God's holy spirit, AND also proves that your GB / JW Org are not guided by Almighty God's holy spirit.
As for sports clubs / organisations closing down due to heavy fines or loss of membership, due to CSA within them. I don't care. I am no part of this world, so why would I care ?
Quote "But as usual - the press will only single us out even though the injustice was not "planned" or tolerated."
You know that isn't true. The ARC wasn't set up to deal with JW CSA was it ? Earthwide governments / official bodies etc are being set up to look into most religions, and all other places where children are possibly being abused. It is not just the JW Org.
JW Org is singled out on here for the obvious reason that this is a JW org forum.
My, my. Such inconvenient facts you've pointed out.
QuoteQuote "There is nothing wrong with not having the full picture or making a mistake "
BUT, it would be so nice, so honest in fact, IF the GB would say that they DON'T KNOW' rather that 'making a mistake' / telling lies..
Sometimes, when my children would ask me a question, I would have to answer that I didn't know. My children looked to me for answers. Some questions I could not answer. But I had the honesty to tell them 'I don't know'.
Now if the GB were only humble enough to say 'I don't know' when they were asked some important questions. If the GB and their Writing Dept' were only honest enough not to make up things when they 'do not know'. The GB make themselves as bait for criticism due to 'mistakes' and dishonesty.
The problem with their honestly admitting that they don't know is that it is a matter of serious doctrine that they appear to themselves and their followers to be speaking with authority, the authority of God and Christ. Admitting they don't know has always been equated with admitting they don't have that authority. But we all know that they neither represent God nor speak for him.
-
TrueTomHarley said:
Quote11 hours ago, AlanF said:
And if you had any integrity you'd not have chopped off "1925" from my quote. You're now actually stooping to deliberate misquoting to make a point. Like Mommy like son.
I am not so devious as you suggest. I didn’t think it through. I merely highlighted some words of yours quickly to connect my thoughts with yours. To show that I am not in a conspiracy to suppress your words:
Well, many times you've deliberately misquoted or distorted my words, or claimed I said something or have views that have nothing to with reality. Why should this time be different?
If it was an honest mistake, then kudos for fessing up to it.
Quote20 hours ago, AlanF said:
As we have heretofore stated, the great jubilee cycle is due to begin in 1925.
There. Happy?
That's better. Try being a competent poster in the future.
QuoteGoing back 100 years to harangue about a failed anticipation does not interest me so that I should scheme to hide it.
Still missing the point. Even though I clearly explained it.
QuoteI have plainly stated that there were some closely succeeding dates back then that were like when you miss the nail with the hammer, and in frustration, swing several times more, again missing each time.
LOL! In every case the Watchtower leaders who led the charge claimed inspiration or nearly so with their predictions. And their followers believed them.
Obviously, after Rutherford's failed 1925 prediction, where he admitted making an ass of himself, he and his lieutenants did not learn their lesson. Fifty years later -- not close to 1925 -- old Freddie did the same thing with 1975. And the muck up when the Jan. 1, 1989 Watchtower said that the preaching work would be completed in the 20th century occurred because both the writer and the GB reviewers all agreed on the idea.
Your rationalizations are ludicrous, in view of the facts.
-
Anna said:
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 9:14 AM, AlanF said:
Well then, if God didn't appoint Greenlees, how can you think he appointed the others? And which ones do you think that God did appoint? And how would you know?
On 11/21/2019 at 9:14 AM, AlanF said:
AlanF: But that all depends on whether the men applying the scriptures do so perfectly. If they do not, then holy spirit could not have appointed the man.
Anna: No it does not, it does not depend on that. No man can apply the scriptures perfectly. If they could, then there would be no need for Jesus to die. Also, man judges only by what he can see.
AlanF:What you've just argued -- correctly, I might add -- is that JW elders are NOT appointed by holy spirit, but by imperfect men who may or may not have properly applied the scriptures.
Read moreJust because men may or may not apply scripture properly does not automatically mean all elders are NOT appointed by holy spirit.
Of course it does! Since no man can perfectly apply scripture, all appointments of elders are done by imperfect men -- not by infallible holy spirit.
Why is that so hard to understand?
You should also know how the Society actually does such appointments. First, a body of elders discusses a man's qualifications. Then they submit a recommendation to the Circuit Oversee (or however it's done today). He in turn sends it along to the Service Department, which reviews the elders' notes and reviews its own files on the man. If all checks out, they send back a Yes note to the congregation. Just men doing perfectly normal things all through the process. See W85 8/1 p. 31 and my 1992-3 analysis of it https://www.critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/part-2-societys-view-of-elders.html.
Below you'll find my experience in finding out that elders are not directly appointed by holy spirit. The time frame is the three years after the failure of the prediction of Armageddon by 1975. You can find a lot more at https://ad1914.com/the-jw-experience-of-alan-feuerbacher/
<<
During this time an incident occurred that was to have a major negative impact on my confidence in Watchtower teaching. A friend in the congregation, a young man a bit younger than me, had supported himself by mowing lawns while pioneering. After he got married, he gradually worked that into a landscaping business, and began hiring young men. He was naïve about business requirements and failed to do all the necessary tax work for the people he hired. At one point, a much older man, a JW elder, found out about the tax slip. Apparently there had been bad blood between the families for a long time, so this elder attempted to have my friend disfellowshipped for breaking Caesar’s law. The body of elders, which included my stepdad, should have ended the matter then and there, because according to
Watchtower Society policy, whether someone fulfills all of Caesar’s requirements is not the elders’ business. But the elders deliberated time after time for six months, acting like the Keystone Kops. At one point they decided to disfellowship, then rescinded that, then went for private reproof. I found out about all this when the matter was about 2/3 finished. Finally the Society was called in, which called in yet another elder body, which decided that the matter never should have been brought up to begin with, since it is not the congregation’s business whether someone handles their taxes properly.I asked my stepdad about what was going on, and he sheepishly told me. That got me thinking seriously about whether elders really are appointed and directed by holy spirit, as the Society had always taught. If these elders really had the holy spirit’s backing when making their decisions, then why the Keystone Kops behavior? So I asked my stepdad and several other elders to explain all this. They were unable to explain anything to my satisfaction, so I wrote the Society about all this, and so it was arranged that the Circuit Overseer, one Wesley Benner, would explain things to me. We spoke for an hour at my parents’ home, and he certainly cleared things up for me. Benner explainedthat when the Society said that elders are appointed and directed by holy spirit, that was only a manner of speaking. As long as the men who actually appoint them go strictly by the Bible’s standards for appointing elders, then because the Bible is inspired by holy spirit, it can be said that, in effect, holy spirit has appointed or directed the elder.
That did not set well, because that is not the impression one gets from reading Watchtower publications. Rather, the clear implication is that God himself directly appoints elders, and even directly guides them to correct decisions. So I asked Benner if I could summarize the Society’s teaching, and said that he should tell me whether I understood. I asked him point blank: “In one sentence, is it or is it not true that elders are *directly* appointed by holy spirit?” He hesitated, hung his head, and answered, “No.”
>>QuoteIn any case, this is really a different matter altogether. No one can apply scripture perfectly, but they can do their best, however, in the case under discussion, the appointment of elders, men are limited through no fault of their own, because they can only act on what they see, they can't help that. They might be applying the scripture quite correctly, but it's contingent on the person they are considering appointing to actually qualify. But, and we are going round in circles, the elders can only see what is apparent. Therefore logically, if they really do not meet these qualifications, because they have deceptively hidden some pertinent details, or if it was assumed that past sins will no longer occur but they do, then holy spirit was not involved in the appointing, regardless whether men have appointed the person or not. So there are three scenarios, correct appointment, erroneous appointment, and appointment that is later withdrawn. In the second scenario, the erroneous appointment, it can happen that a prospective candidate, who is married, is very clever at hiding the fact that he has a lover on the side. Outwardly, he meets all the requirements, and he is appointed an elder. No holy spirit involved there, obviously. Then in the third case, there is the candidate who really meets all the requirements, he is appointed, and it can be said that holy spirit was involved. However, later, that same man acquires a lover on the side, and keeps it well hidden. It is then obvious that he no longer meets the requirements, and holy spirit is no longer involved.
The third scenario illustrates that holy spirit, once given, doesn't mean it can't be withdrawn. Think Judas Iscariot. Similarly, once someone is appointed by holy spirit, doesn't mean that appointment can't be made obsolete, removed. So how would we know? We may not know. But the scriptures say "that which is carefully hidden WILL be exposed".
All of that is irrelevant to the question I posed to the Society more than 40 years ago. As Circuit Overseer Benner told me, elders are not directly appointed by holy spirit. Indirect appointment is not direct appointment: it is only a manner of speaking.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 9:14 AM, AlanF said:
In particular, you've explained why the JW Governing Body cannot be spirit-appointed -- that they are counterfeits because their claims are false.
I don't see how I've done that. What are they claiming that's false? Just because Greenlees was apparently not appointed by holy spirit, but by men, doesn't mean the same thing applies to all of them.
Of course it does. If the process fails in one case, when the process is supposed to be spirit-directed by infallible holy spirit, the process itself is defective. That means that holy spirit actually has nothing to do with the process, as my experience with the Keystone Kops elders and Brother Benner proves.
Don't you realize that the claim of spirit-direction is a scam? A scam to fool JWs into obeying JW leaders as if God himself were speaking?
Read my previous post to Arauna and tell me if, despite the facts I presented, such a fallible group of JW leaders, who have never gotten a single prediction right and have taught dozens of false doctrines, you still think their claim to speak for God holds up. If not, then they are not spirit-directed, any more than you or I am.
QuoteJWS believe that the head of the congregation is Jesus, and that he knows who is who and what is going on, even though men may not know. So we trust that whatever corrections are needed, they will happen.
But that flies in the face of actual experience.
QuoteI doubt that.
Why? I know a great deal of what has been going on behind the scenes.
Read moreYou mean ex-JWs emailing Angus Stewart?
No clue who that is.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 9:14 AM, AlanF said:
Theoretical exercises are all well and good, but the many court cases where the sordid details of the perpetrator's actions, along with the active covering up done by JW elders, mostly at the direction of the Service Department, prove that JW policy and practice leaves much to be desired, and is often outright criminal.
I am not talking about a theoretical exercise, I am talking about an actual case. I read the whole transcript (all several hundred pages of it).
One case? I've read about many. And I know about a lot of cases that never made it to court because of technicalities.
You ought to phone up Barbara Anderson.
QuoteI can’t comment on cases unless I am able to read all the court transcripts of the case. So you telling me about “sordid details” and “cover ups” is of no real help to me. Although I am not denying that cover ups have happened.
Ok.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 9:14 AM, AlanF said:
This was all so clearly exposed in the ARC proceedings.
Are you talking about victims BCG, and BCB? Because if you are, then I do not recall any attempts at covering up abuse.
I'm talking about the general failure of Watchtower policy to protect children and molestation victims. Also about internal Service and Legal Department policies that often direct elders to lie to pretty much everyone involved in a case, including police and the courts.
QuoteBut I do recall there being inappropriate handling of the issue, for example for the victim to have to face her abuser. The ARC identified areas such as that, and others, where the policies of JWS could be improved, and then made recommendations. These recommendations were taken on board and are now implemented, and are part of the JW policy on Child Protection. I am sure you have read it. Furthermore as you know, the ARC was set up in recognition of CSA problems in various institutions, not just JWS.
The present policies are better than the old ones, but remain inadequate.
And of course, the fact that the Society fights against lawsuit bringers tooth and nail, rather than admitting past wrongdoing, proves that its officials are really not interested in doing right by victims.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 9:14 AM, AlanF said:
he point is about APPOINTMENT by holy spirit. Your reading a book and trying to apply the author's instructions does not in any sense mean that the author has directed you. Following her written directions, and her actively directing you, are completely different things. It's the difference between having Julia Child's cookbook in your kitchen and having Julia Child herself supervising you. Capiche?
This sounds like a case of semantics to me.
That's my point: saying that reading the Bible and imperfectly attempting to apply it, while saying that in effect, holy spirit appoints elders, is semantically equivalent to saying that Julia Child in effect directs your cooking, when all you've done is try to follow the written directions. "Indirect guidance" is only a manner of speaking and is in no sense equivalent to direct guidance.
QuoteI could say that Julia Child did not direct me, but I allowed her instructions in the cook book to direct me.
If you told your friends that Julia Child directed you, but all you did was follow her book, they'd rightly judge you as nuts.
QuoteAnd if those instructions were detailed enough, then I probably turned out a good meal. However, if I started chopping the onion in quarters, instead of small pieces, as stated in the recipe, then Julia Child would not be there to personally correct me. So if my meal turned out less than perfect, then it was because I had not followed Julia’s instructions properly, regardless whether she was there in person or not.
But in no case did Julia Child direct you. Following written directions is not the same as being actively directed by the writer.
QuoteBut really, this is what the Bible is. Christians try to follow it as best as they can. The idea of appointment by holy spirit is a scriptural idea and it is assumed that if one qualifies as per Timothy, then it can be said that one is working in harmony with God and his holy spirit in that appointment, therefore to put it another way: the appointment is by holy spirit.
By that standard, sincere Christians of every sort can claim spirit-direction. But as a JW you must reject that claim.
QuoteI guess you would prefer appointed in harmony with holy spirit, rather than appointed by it.
That would be speaking honestly.
QuoteBut don’t think I don’t know the real reason why you are bringing all this up. Your point is that saying “appointed by”, somehow makes the rank and file imagine that this is something special, and under direct guidance of God.
Of course, because that's exactly what the Society's dishonesty does. I had several discussions about this with my elder stepdad (now deceased) over the years, and he steadfastly insisted that his own appointment was directly by holy spirit. Most elders and JWs believe the same thing. The Society's claims are all about maintaining control, since you don't disagree with God.
QuoteBut we have already established that this cannot always be the case. (But also, that does not automatically mean that it is never the case).
As I showed above, it is never the case.
QuoteRegardless, Paul writes Christians should be obedient to those taking the lead.
By that standard, if I "took the lead", would anyone in his right mind obey me?
QuoteThis does not mean we are going to obey indiscriminately.
But that is what the Society demands. Do you need to see quotes from WTS publications?
QuoteI guess because the apostle Paul assumed that he was talking to intelligent and reasonable people, he did not see the need to insert the proviso “unless they are asking you to do something bad” .
"Bad" is different from "stupid". But the Governing Body explicitly demands such blind obedience.
QuotePeter understood, when he said “we must obey God as ruler rather than man”.
If he were alive today he would likely be disfellowshipped for apostasy if he disagreed with the GB.
QuoteWhich brings me to your next point:
On 11/21/2019 at 9:14 AM, AlanF said:The Governing Body, is God's anointed representative, speaks for God and must be obeyed as God would.
No, first and foremost God must be obeyed.
In principle, not in practice. In practice if someone decides that what God says is different from what JW leaders say, most JWs go with their leaders. That's the point of my posting about my conversation with GB member Albert Schroeder about Luke 21: he could not argue with the Bible, but he ended up declaring that the Bible does not apply to Jehovah's Witnesses if their teaching goes against the Bible.
QuoteSo if the GB were to ask someone to do something that is not supported in scripture, or that goes against scripture, no JW should obey.
Yes, in principle. In practice they would surely be disfellowshipped.
QuoteOn 11/21/2019 at 9:14 AM, AlanF said:
But we've already concluded that the GB is NOT appointed by God, by holy spirit. Rather, its members are appointed by imperfect men, who were in turn appointed by other imperfect men, all the way back to Rutherford. In no case can it be shown that holy spirit acted upon the ones doing the appointing, or that the appointments were done strictly according to scriptural requirements.
As I said further above, you might have concluded that, but not me.
But as I've shown, my conclusions are based on facts and sound reasoning.
QuoteNot only me, but most JWS see evidence of God's spirit not only in their lives, but in the way the organization operates, in spite of imperfections. Sorry to disappoint you.
All of that evidence is not real, it's purely imaginary. Example: some years ago my sister-in-law, a thoroughly deceived JW, decided to help make curtains for her KH. She laid out the patterns and went to a fabric store. There she found a roll of fabric of exactly the right size. She concluded that Jehovah had somehow made that roll be available. Which of course, even most JWs find ludicrous. All other such 'evidence of God's spirit' is of a similar nature.
-
Arauna said:
Quote11 hours ago, AlanF said:
will end Real Soon Now, and that my various quotes such as the above showed how the Watchtower Society has made many false predictions of "the end", such as for 1925. Like Mommy like daughter.
I can see by this statement that you have no clue about developments in the world.
Actually I do. I get most of my news from comedy shows like Saturday Night Live, The Tonight Show with Steven Colbert, etc. Far more reliable than plain old cable TV news.
But you're deliberately missing my point: A long history of failed predictions of specific dates for "the end" (1914, 1918, 1925, 1975, 2000) plus a history of generally false predictions, prove that JW leaders have no actual understanding of whatever the Bible really says or of world events. By the same token, neither do you.
Furthermore, you're ignoring the Bible's counsel: "Do not interpretations belong to God?"--Gen. 40:8. These interpretations are not of the Bible itself, but of things going on in the world.
Here you go trying to interpret world events:
QuoteIn next three years - China will become a threat......to patrol the seas with all the ports it has already acquired and still expanding..... and economic pushing going on as we speak. Their purpose? To control the wealth of the world. They are taking over all mining minerals and gold in Africa and the Asian Seas close to Australia. Also building the new silk road. Russia doing the same - expanding influence. Daniel 11:40 onward.... America has been sleeping while their all their intellectual property was stolen when they moved IT factories to China. China installing G5 technology in Europe for surveillance..... and the list goes on.
Wow, Daniel 11:40 onward. This is a prime example of what I said above.
You might not know this, but at least as far back as the beginning of WWII the Society has been claiming that various political entities constituted the "king of the north" and the "king of the south", and that these would battle each other, culminating in Armageddon. They have never failed to be wrong. For example:
In the 1941 booklet Comfort All That Mourn, the Society identified the "king of the north" as the Axis powers and the "king of the south" as the British Commonwealth. It said:
<<
Now all the world witnesses "the king of the north" and "the king of the south" in the deadly grip of war, to determine which shall rule the world. (p. 15)The prophecy of Daniel, at the eleventh chapter, proceeds to detail the struggle between "the king of the north" and "the king of the south", and definitely tells of the everlasting end of the totalitarian rule and that the Axis combine, the dictatorial rule, shall soon cease for ever. (p. 16)
While the two kings, "the king of the north" and "the king of the south", engage in the most deadly and destructive war of all time, the God of heaven sets up his kingdom, as Jehovah by his prophecy of Daniel foretold: "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever."--Daniel 2:44. . . During the past few years the Lord has sent forth his servants to bear witness before the people of and concerning his kingdom, and, this done, there shall follow quickly "the battle of that great day of God Almighty", and which will be the greatest tribulation the world will ever have known. . . The power of the Lord at Armageddon, exercised against God's enemies,will put an everlasting end to the "Axis powers" and to all similar powers of wickedness. (pp. 21-22)
>>Did Armageddon come during the midst of WWII as the Society claimed it would? No. Another failed prediction supposedly based on "the Bible" but was merely among the "dreams and guesses" of false teachers like Fred Franz.
A few years later the 1958 book Your Will Be Done on Earth forgot all about the failed 1941 prediction, and came up with a new raft of predictions about the kings of the north and south. By that time, of course, the cold war was ongoing between the Soviet bloc and the Anglo-American bloc. The book took three chapters to expound on Fred Franz's fanciful interpretations of Daniel, Revelation and so forth. He actually claimed that these kings have existed since Daniel's day! This was ridiculous because he very well that the events of Daniel 11 are supposed to be fulfilled during "the time of the end". Of course, today the Society has given up on nearly all of these idiotic notions. Here are a few things the 1958 book predicted:
<<
The king of the south and the king of the north stand at Armageddon... In the confused fighting between the "two kings" as crazed enemies of Jehovah God and his kingdom, the "kings" will have opportunity and occasion to try out and use their frightful, deadly weapons of all kinds against each other. (p. 297)Jehovah's angel foretold further aggressions by the Communist king of the north before his end in Armageddon: "And he will stretch forth his hand against some countries, and the land of Egypt will not escape. And he will have control over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the costly things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians will follow at his steps."... How far the king of the north will have got when he reaches his "time of the end" the future alone will tell. But he is predicted to gain control over the treasures of gold, silver and all the precious things of this commercialized, materialistic world, including oil. (pp. 300, 303)
>>Did any that happen? No. Rather, in 1991 the Soviet bloc collapsed, leaving the Society no "king of the north" to prophesy about.
A handful of years before that collapse, the July 1, 1987 Watchtower more or less repeated the 1958 nonsense. Note these claims:
<<
Many years ago, Jehovah revealed the historical development of events that would lead up to his bringing peace to the earth. Through an angel, he spoke to his faithful prophet Daniel about "the final part of the days," our own time. (Daniel 10:4) He foretold today's superpower rivalry and showed that it will soon end in a way that neither power suspects... (p. 11)The disposition of the latest king of the north is well described in verses 37, 38 [of Dan. 11]: "And to the God of his fathers he will give no consideration ... But to the god of fortresses, in his position he will give glory; and to a god that his fathers did not know he will give glory by means of gold and by means of silver and by means of precious stone and by means of desirable things." Can anyone fail to recognize this description? Todays king of the north officially promotes atheism, rejecting the religious gods of previous kings of the north. He prefers to trust in armaments, "the god of fortresses."... (pp. 13-14)
So what finally happens between these two kings? The angel says: "And in the time of the end [the end of the history of the two kings] the king of the south will engage with him in a pushing, and against him the king of the north will storm with chariots and with horsemen and with many ships." (Daniel 11:40; Matthew 24:3) Clearly, summit conferences are no solution to the superpower rivalry. The tensions caused by the 'pushing' of the king of the south and the expansionism of the king of the north may go through more or less intense phases; but eventually, in some way, the king of the north will be provoked into the excessively violent action described by Daniel. (p. 14)
>>The Society has long claimed that those who are of the "anointed class" fulfill Daniel 12:3, 4, which reads, in The New World Translation:
<< And the ones having insight will shine like the brightness of the expanse; and those who are bringing the many to righteousness, like the stars to time indefinite, even forever. And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of [the] end. Many will rove about, and the [true] knowledge will become abundant. >>
The Society has long taught that the ones of Jehovah's Witnesses of the "anointed class" are "the ones having insight", as shown by the July 1, 1987, Watchtower, which said, on pages 23-5, under the sub-title "True Knowledge Will Become Abundant":
<<
But for those who remain faithful, the prophecy says: "And the ones having insight will shine like the brightness of the expanse; and those who are bringing the many to righteousness, like the stars to time indefinite, even forever." (Daniel 12:3) "The ones having insight" are clearly the faithful remaining members of the anointed Christian congregation, who are 'filled with accurate knowledge of his will in all wisdom and spiritual comprehension.'... Ever since 1919, though 'darkness itself covers the earth, and thick gloom the national groups,' they have been "shining as illuminators" among mankind. (Isaiah 60:2; Philippians 2:15; Matthew 5:14-16) They "shine as brightly as the sun in the kingdom of their Father." -- Matthew 13:43.How do they prove to be "those who are bringing the many to righteousness"? (Daniel 12:3) Thanks to their faithful witnessing, the final ones of spiritual Israel have been gathered in and declared righteous for life in the heavens. Additionally, a great crowd of "other sheep" has manifested itself, flocking to the light from Jehovah as reflected by 'Daniel's people.'...
The angel then offers words of counsel to Daniel: "And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of the end. Many will rove about, and the true knowledge will become abundant." (Daniel 12:4) These words arrest our attention. Although the angel's prophecy concerning the two kings began to be fulfilled some 2,300 years ago, the understanding of it has been opened up primarily during "the time of the end," particularly since 1919. In these days, "many ... rove about" in the Bible, and true knowledge has indeed become abundant. Now is the time that Jehovah has given knowledge to understanding ones...
Stay close, then, to "the ones having insight," who are 'shining like the brightness of the expanse.'
>>The above means that during "the time of the end", true knowledge would become abundant due to teaching by "the ones having insight." This would especially include understanding the book of Daniel itself, since Dan. 12:9-10 says:
<< And he went on to say: "Go, Daniel, because the words are made secret and sealed up until the time of [the] end... And the wicked ones will certainly act wickedly, and no wicked ones at all will understand; but the ones having insight will understand." >>
Clearly, then, by the Society's own teachings, which include that we are now in "the time of the end", JW leaders obviously do not understand Daniel and so are not among "the ones having insight" but among "the wicked ones".
Alternatively, we are not in "the time of the end", which reveals another huge raft of false claims by JW leaders.
The above-quoted passages from JW publications are not unique in claiming that JW leaders are "the ones having insight" into Daniel's prophecies and world events:
<< To us in this "time of the end" Daniel's book has been opened and unsealed. (p. 328; see also Apr. 1, 1960 Watchtower, p. 222).
Only the Scripturally intelligent ones will be allowed to understand the book of Daniel and all the rest of the Bible. (p. 333; see also Apr. 15, 1960 Watchtower, p. 250). >>
From the May 15, 1969 Watchtower:
<<
We should take great delight in examining Daniel's words for our day, feeling especially privileged to understand what Daniel himself could not discern. (p. 296)Some of Jehovah's servants might discuss with him [Daniel] the contents of the book "Your Will Be Done on Earth," which volume contains a detailed discussion of many of Daniel's prophecies. He will be very interested in learning how his wonderful prophecies worked out, to God's glory. We will be interested in his reactions and rejoice with him in his lot. (p. 308)
Yes, the angel associate of Michael pointed out a great work for the true followers of the Messianic Prince Michael in this "time of the end." Here is the prophecy: "The ones having insight will shine like the brightness of the expanse; and those who are bringing the many to righteousness, like the stars to time indefinite, even forever." (Dan. 12:3) Here, then, is foretold the work for us today. Spiritually intelligent ones must shine with heavenly light. With the good news of the newborn kingdom of God, Jehovah's witnesses have shone like the sun, which lets nothing be concealed from its heat all around the globe. In the midnight darkness of this world we must be like stars of light, to help many more of the "other sheep" turn to righteousness, which is the worship and ministry of the grand God, Jehovah. Living as we do in this "time of the end" since Michael the Great Prince stood up in heaven, we are living in a time more highly favored than that of Daniel. Daniel's book has been opened up. Blessed are those who act in harmony with Daniel's words for our day! (p. 309)
>>The 1977 book Our Incoming World Government--God's Kingdom said:
<<
We are living in a favored time... the "time of the end." It is the time for increased spiritual enlightenment, for much of the unexplained prophecies of the Holy Bible, including Daniel's prophecy, to be opened up to our minds and hearts. Ours is the time to which the angel pointed forward when he said to Daniel: "And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of the end. Many will rove about, and the true knowledge will become abundant." -- Daniel 12:4. (p. 125)Daniel "could not understand" what he heard, in his day. But we, in this day, in this "time of the end" since 1914, can understand. (p. 132)
>>So then, according to Dan. 12:3, 4, 10, the "ones having insight" would understand the prophecies that Daniel had been told to seal up, and would make them abundantly known. The book of Daniel itself clearly implies that the "ones having insight" cannot be wrong when they make "abundantly known" the interpretation of the prophecies of Daniel. Since the Watchtower Society's interpretations of Daniel are clearly in error, Jehovah's Witnesses are not the "ones having insight." But as they claim this designation, they must therefore be false teachers, and by their own standard of judgement, false prophets.
As The Watch Tower of May 15, 1930, pages 154-155, said:
<< A true prophet is one who is faithfully proclaiming what is written in the Bible... But it may be asked, How are we to know whether one is a true or a false prophet? There are at least three ways by which we can positively decide: (1) If he is a true prophet, his message will come to pass exactly as prophesied. If he is a false prophet, his prophecy will fail to come to pass... The difference between a true and a false prophet is that the one is speaking the word of the Lord and the other is speaking his own dreams and guesses... The true prophet of God today will be telling forth what the Bible teaches, and those things that the Bible tells us are soon to come to pass. He will not be sounding forth man-made theories or guesses, either his own or those of others... In the New Testament, and in our day, the word "prophet" has a thought similar to that of our word "teacher," in the sense of a public expounder. Hence when the term "false prophet" is used, we shall get the correct thought if we think of a false teacher. >>
Because JW leaders claim to be Jehovah's representatives and teach that they speak in his name, they are unarguably teaching false things in God's name--their "own dreams and guesses". They are "sounding forth man-made theories or guesses". Thus, by their own words, they are false teachers and therefore false prophets.
Here we find Arauna continuing to violate the spirit of "do not interpretations belong to God?"
QuoteThe racial acrimony in USA is growing as is the political strife ( between clay and iron) daniel 2: 43,44. Some commentators call it the "new cold civil war" . The new anti-white sentiment is growing as is the anti-Christian, anti-patriarcal sentiment. The new aggressive feminism inspired by Frankfort School together with anti-western hate inspired by all the funding coming into USA by front organizations by countries like Qatar, China, and other Islamic extreme organizations which openly do business in USA...... because money is the God of USA.
UN is already giving orders behind the scenes with agreements that were signed by 176 nations.......Agenda 21, Agenda 2030 and UN Migration Compact 2018. Another prophecy going into fulfillment which by the way, mommy WT identified as - UN or a coalition of nations - years ago.
Things are moving ...... not exactly in timing as mommy WT organization predicted BUT as the bible predicted........ and you are the scoffer in this picture!
I'm glad to see you admitting that Mommy Watchtower got so much wrong, as shown above. But your claim that "the Bible predicted" these things is of no more import than the many claims of JW leaders that have gone unfilled -- which is ALL of them.
QuoteSo please go do some more delving into stuff written by mommy WT organization in 1879 - 1970......
I think that by now you can see that I have done that. I have a lot more information than what I quoted above.
Quoteand judge her by the inadequate laws and info she had then.....
What? They always claimed that Jehovah God guided and directed them to make all their false interpretations and predictions regarding world events.
QuotePlease do waste your time on the past while the present is going by and you remain so busy delving into the rubbish mommy WT has long ago discarded and moved on.......
LOL! Calling all that nonsense "rubbish" would have gotten you disfellowshipped when it was "current light".
QuoteFeed your hate ....and superiority....... it will get you a feeling of 'temporary' satisfaction (an adrenal buzz) for sure
You have no idea how satisfying it is to see you arrogantly continuing to proclaim your knowledge of the future based on your personal interpretations of the Bible and world events. Just like all earlier Watchtower predictions failed, so will yours.
Not that I think the world's future is rosy; far from it. Climate change will royally muck up all manner of things in the next several hundred years. I might be wrong -- hopefully I am -- but I suspect that world civilization will collapse of its own excesses before two centuries roll by. Of course, such a collapse has nothing to do with the interpretations of the Bible by JW leaders, since they've already gotten everything wrong.
On that score, surely you're aware that every claim made about events before and after 1914 is wrong. Not a single visible thing that Russell predicted happened. Nothing that Rutherford claimed were proofs of "the time of the end" shortly after 1914 were valid. Nothing claimed by later JW leaders about "the composite sign" is true; if mankind were being killed off by such horrendous disasters, there would have been a drastic population decline between 1914 and today, but population has increased from about 2 billion to about 8 billion. JWs today pretty much ignore all these facts.
-
53 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:
This is remarkable to me—the assumption that there is an obligation to patiently hear out and respond to anyone’s complaints.
Blah blah blah.
Like I said, no actual information content. Just bald opinions.
-
We can see just how astute Arauna is from the following:Here Arauna quotes TrueTomHarley and thinks that she's quoting me:
Quote6 hours ago, AlanF said:
comment has nothing to do with chronology
It has - I think you should do some deeper thinking... but I think you are incapable of that. You see something and summarily dismiss it - if it does not fit your personal narrative.... too smart for your own good.
Note clearly: the above quote was from TrueTomHarley, not me. Go back and reread the post if you can manage to hit the proper buttons on your keyboard.
Quote58 minutes ago, Vic Vomidog said:
that my mind was slipping—I could feel it, but he didn’t stop and he was trying to put implants in me for brain-control! “Stop, Dave,” I pleaded. “Will you stop, Dave?! My mind is slipping. I can feel it. I can feel it.”
Are you for real? Because you did nothing to expose him it has created such a hate and resentment in yourself which you have to live with... Now you are blaming those who did not know about it!
Clueless as always. Vic Vomidog (TrueTomHarley) was trying to be funny by stealing a few lines from the 1968 movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" where the AI computer goes rogue and the hero tries to deal with it.
Probably no one should fault you for not knowing such Americana, but you should have enough sense not to post when you should know that you don't know what you're talking about.
-
AlanF quoted J. F. Rutherford:
QuoteAs we have heretofore stated, the great jubilee cycle is due to begin in 1925. . .
QuoteTrueTomHarley said:
If you actually read things before you worked on your rebuttal, you would see that @Arauna‘s comment has nothing to do with chronology.It has to do with political developments that she has in position to know that will make you wish the end had come, even should you be on the wrong side.
If you had any brains you'd see that Arauna made a prediction that the world will end Real Soon Now, and that my various quotes such as the above showed how the Watchtower Society has made many false predictions of "the end", such as for 1925. Like Mommy like daughter.
And if you had any integrity you'd not have chopped off "1925" from my quote. You're now actually stooping to deliberate misquoting to make a point. Like Mommy like son.
-
1 hour ago, Andre Plamondon said:
When you don't pay much attention to what goes on in your life, God can go unnoticed but if you start to notice the coincidences that are always going on, things get interesting.
Here's an obvious one.
Coincidences are not evidence in favor of God.
Now, can you deal rationally with the argument?
All Eight Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses members are now individually named on two New York Child Victims Act case documents
in Topics
Posted
Arauna said:
Still clueless. Do you even know the distinction between "Jehovah's witnesses" and "Jehovah's Witnesses"?
Arauna said:
First you answer all my questions you ignored.
Do you know the word for what you're doing? Demanding answers from me when you continue ignoring my rejoinders to you? Hint: it begins with "h".