Patiently waiting for Truth

Yes. 

No nation on Earth considers death by warfare to be either murder or suicide.
Neither does Jehovah God.
Among the ancient Jews, killing someone with premeditation  in warfare was one thing .... premeditated killing someone in "civilian" life was considered murder.
.... be a sport ... look it up.
Meditating on this fact, when fully understood and integrated, will change you WHOLE VIEWPOINT on many many aspects of everything you thought was true.

Think, how both questions have good position. Maybe we can be in better position about answer, if we take in consideration what would be chance to survive and continue to live (in this life of course :))) ) in each of this situations. 
On other side, by refusing blood you not participate in defending other people who had been attacked by evil force.
Reason or reasons for refusing blood, standing in theological explanation of how should be understood verse in Bible, and how are your personal feelings about God's will.
By this action (refusing blood) you directly help or harm yourself, and indirectly harm own family. Those people who going to war because they want to help people, are ready to put  themselves  in danger situation for (theoretically) only one reason - to help known and unknown people on cost of own life.

Would dying by going to war for your country be suicide?

@Arauna How do you actually know that the GB members  " never personally touched a child (actually too innocent  to comprehend how wicked people can be - too good for this world), " ? 
There is it seems a massive data base of Child Sexual Abuse accusations hidden within the Org. And do you have all that information, so that you know who is and who isn't on that list ?  Do you know why the GB are holding back that list ? 
In Australia the brothers must have handed over their list of names about CSA accusations.
Here in the UK, after court action, the brothers handed over their list of CSA accusation.
But in the USA the GB and /or their lawyers are refusing to hand over their information ? 
Someone will scream 'but the laws are different in USA'. It would make no difference if the laws are different in USA,   IF the GB would act on the scripture 'We must obey God as ruler, rather than men'. 
Seems quite funny that the GB /Org tells people to disobey laws of man when it involves some things, such as joining the armed forces, but yet the GB hides behind laws when it suits them. 
@Srecko Sostar  Thank you, but did you actually read ALL of that ?  Sorry i only read bits. Too much for me. 
 
. 
 

There's trust as in the type of trust you have in a trusted friend, and blind trust in someone who turned out not to be what you thought they were. I don't think of the organization as the religion we trust in. True religion is helping people who we can best help - materially, spiritually, emotionally -- with the proper unselfish, loving motivation, and therefore without spot from this world. An organization, i.e., a publishing house, researchers, coordinators, a legal department, etc., are just tools that a group of sincere Christians might be expected to utilize for a more efficient method of getting the word out in the midst of a complex world. It's not something to trust blindly as if it is Christianity, or even as if it represents true Christianity.
(These are my opinions, of course.)
I think that a lot of persons get baptized as Witnesses with a kind of naive view that the organization is more than it really is. This might even be true of new GB members who are asked to join that particular committee of elders. Perhaps they are surprised at the difference between reality and expectation. But I think they are better prepared, since they have already worked at various levels of the organization.
I didn't mean to call myself JW Insider here. I intended to use "The Bible's Advocate" but when I joined someone was making a claim that was easily clarified by someone who had worked directly with members of the GB before. I had worked with members of the GB from 1976 to 1982. I worked directly for a member of the GB from about 1979 to 1982. I planned to tell some of the stories from that period, and therefore called myself "JW Insider" and allowed it to stick, in spite of some unintended implications.
But I mention this because if a person can work with (and around) some of these same persons for a few years, then they are already prepared for an experience that is quite different from the expectation of the average Witness. They have seen them in a bad mood, they have seen them curse and yell, they have seen them make mistakes, they have seen their prejudices, seen them connive, possibly even be dishonest. I have seen all these things among a couple of them, but I'm obviously talking about exceptions to their usual conduct and demeanor. And for MOST of the members that I knew, I never saw any of these things, they always came across as perfect "saints." But I would not have been surprised to learn of a different side, because of what I had seen in a very few others, even if I only saw it rarely.
I also had an advantage of an uncle who was a circuit overseer, and a grandmother and grandfather who seemed to know all the "big shots" from headquarters. (My great grandfather was a Chicago Bible Student who traveled with Russell and spoke at conventions with him.) But most of these relatives were apt to say things like, "Jehovah puts half of us here to test the other half," when referring to some of these same persons. Before going to Bethel, I heard a Circuit Overseer evoke laughter from another by asking, "Can you imagine how the Apostle Paul would have blown up if anyone told him he had to keep all these numbers [records] on everyone?"
So, I probably come at some of these human imperfections from a different perspective than most. I'm hardly surprised at anything. My grandparents who knew Rutherford thought he was sleazy. My table head at Bethel had a personal "hatred" of him. But Russell himself was apparently dishonest, too, sometimes. Both Russell and Rutherford weren't defined by these errors, because their greater goal was to spread the word about the Kingdom hope amidst expectations of the imminent end. And now, we've gotten rid of most of that chronology rhetoric and spend more time highlighting the positive, life-changing aspects of the message. And I see a great value, like a pearl, in the overall set of teachings we stand for. And I do tend to fall back on how the Israelites had asked for a king and got a range of kings, from evil to good, but none perfect, of course.
I am out for the rest of the day without much access, so I won't spend much time revisiting issues already covered. And I know the answers won't be satisfactory anyway. I should also say that I hope you don't lose your spirituality. Many exJWs do. Also, I wouldn't make too much of the fact that I used the word "apostate" when referring to the challenges you offer. I don't think of you as apostate as long as you are in a stage, as you describe, of anger and confusion. That could be understandable. I would hope you could see that there is a beautiful baby in that bathwater before you throw it all out.

@Arauna How do you actually know that the GB members  " never personally touched a child (actually too innocent  to comprehend how wicked people can be - too good for this world), " ? 
There is it seems a massive data base of Child Sexual Abuse accusations hidden within the Org. And do you have all that information, so that you know who is and who isn't on that list ?  Do you know why the GB are holding back that list ? 
In Australia the brothers must have handed over their list of names about CSA accusations.
Here in the UK, after court action, the brothers handed over their list of CSA accusation.
But in the USA the GB and /or their lawyers are refusing to hand over their information ? 
Someone will scream 'but the laws are different in USA'. It would make no difference if the laws are different in USA,   IF the GB would act on the scripture 'We must obey God as ruler, rather than men'. 
Seems quite funny that the GB /Org tells people to disobey laws of man when it involves some things, such as joining the armed forces, but yet the GB hides behind laws when it suits them. 
@Srecko Sostar  Thank you, but did you actually read ALL of that ?  Sorry i only read bits. Too much for me. 
 
. 
 

As I said before: eight old men who never personally touched a child (actually too innocent  to comprehend how wicked people can be - too good for this world), mentioned in court documents while people like Epstein who had 37 cases against him in 2007 got off because the FBI covered up for him and went after the victims. A plea bargain made without the victim's lawyers informed.
All Epstein's workers who knew what was going on since 2007, all his high-up friends and his girlfriend who coached the girls - NOTHING!   New cases in England as well where rape gangs raped young girls - covered up.
What does that tell you about the condition of the world when the real unscrupulous predators go off free and the innocent who do NOT condone this, are accused.   
People like you - who just go after JWs- get so much joy out of this......... but this tells me personally that when good is bad and bad is good, we are ever closer to Armageddon.
Just a little while longer and the wicked will be no more....... thanks to Jehovah, Jesus is the judge.

Perhaps these would help. It is good to read for your own first.  
517900_2019_John_Michael_Ewing_v_John_Michael_Ewing_SUMMONS___COMPLAINT_1.pdf

I know nothing about law and defo' nothing about American law. So can someone kindly break this down into simple terms for me.
What exactly are the GB members being accused of ? I ask because I don't want to gain or give wrong information. 
Does this involve the Child Sex Abuse database ? It is does would it mean the GB / Lawyers would have to hand over the database to the courts / authorities ? 
Maybe @TrueTomHarley would have some kind of 'level headed' input on this ?
@James Thomas Rook Jr.  I haven't got to understand where you are in / out of JW Org but do you have any 'sensible' input to this ? 
You may or may not know but us British are not allowed to receive some info' / news reports etc, from some countries. I often go in to do research and get a bit NO from certain sites. Something to do with data protection maybe ? 
So I am deeply interested in this info from @Jack Ryan . Thank you Jack. But I'd honestly like some level headed, neutral information to clarify what the GB members are being accused of and what it will or could mean for the JW Org. 
I have often seen on this Forum that the GB are the top guys and cannot be removed from 'office' as there is no one in a position to remove them. Will this court action make a difference to the GB's position in the JW Org ? 
I have to agree with @TrueTomHarley on many things he says. The JW Org speaks truth according to scripture on many things. And with a bit of tweaking it might just serve God well  . The GB or Writing dept' do spoil it all though with, what i call running ahead of God. So I do wonder what the future holds for JW Org. 

@JW Insider you shared fine thoughts and showed your awareness and understanding of objections and questions other people accented and saw as serious items that need to be put on table for discussion and challenged. That is one of reason i like to read your comments which are respectful to other people, even when you are in a disagreement with them, about subject.    
What you described, can be also applicable for many human activities. For example, people who have common interest in producing food and living in some rural area, joined together. Looking for ways how support each other and care about each other and shield each other from outside bad influence, greedy merchants, natural disasters and so on. Well, in technical way, things can be looked as same. People, in that small community, will be facing inside problems and making regulations, rules and laws. 
How far will they go? To proclaim such rules as "God given"? Would they stick to rules at any cost or would be, as TTH said, "adaptive to modern technology". Or, not only to technology :))) 
Of course, we always have fear and potentially difficult situation in both directions - to stick with old things, as well to accept new and unknown. Burden is heavier, because in all this we (they) want to PUSH God as reason, motive and result.

First of all, before I begin answering, I wanted to say that I have long expected that any JWs who go online to defend their views publicly will see more and more of what is beginning to happen here. The specific challenges coming from you (@4Jah2me), @Witness and @Srecko Sostar (and a few others) have lately seemed like a stronger "anti-JW onslaught" than this forum has seen before. Personally, I think it's a good thing that more and more JWs are prepared for just this type of barrage. At the moment they are all coming apparently from ex-JWs that we would call "apostates." But the Internet easily allows anyone to become capable of bringing these exact same challenges to us. So they are not specifically "apostate" challenges.
Of course, I've brought up some of these same challenges myself, because I think we all need to think about them before we answer with our typical, traditional responses. I believe that we need some doctrinal adjustments, and therefore, I'm not exactly defending the GB position against your challenges. I like it that @TrueTomHarley is standing in for me, but he is probably also concerned that, on my own, I'll end up throwing the GB under the bus.
I'm not talking about some of the minor throw-away complaints (like 'Bible Studies are really just Book Studies' and we're trying to replace the Bible with these books, etc.). The GB challenge is probably the most difficult to address in a way that can rationalize some recent inconsistent statements, the play between spirit-directed and inspired, modern "apostolic" precedent, the GB's request to be trusted while admitting that some of the teachings and processes are bound to be mistaken now and then. And we have the challenge of when and whether conscience comes into play, whether legalism has gone too far, and truly difficult doctrines to defend such as overlapping groups within "this generation" and overlapping blood components with blood fractions, etc.
Yes. The GB dictate to the congregations and, unless the dictate is seen as unconscionable or unscriptural, the members of the congregations are expected to obey. Naturally, this can go too far, but the reason for this should be easy to understand.
For the following situation, for now, you might just want to insert your own view of what a proper Christian is, if you completely reject the possibility that a JW can be a true Christian:
Hypothetically, a Christian may find himself/herself in a place with no fellow Christians to associate with, and all efforts to make disciples might fall on unproductive soil. But let's say that a Christian in this situation is happy and zealous for what he has learned from the Scriptures, has followed Jesus' command to make disciples so that others will know what Jesus taught, and is successful in converting 40 persons to Christianity and they all, because of their Bible reading, want to establish a community congregation to try to follow closely their view of the 1st century congregations as closely as possible. 
As everyone has unique abilities, and was converted at various times, the congregation will naturally have members of various levels of experience, and they likely want an orderly process for meeting and teaching and participating in the activities that they agree are important and consistent with their beliefs. Not everyone will want the same meeting times, not everyone will be teaching from the platform, or leading or suggesting the activities. There will be compromises as to meeting times, topics discussed, the depth or simplicity of those topics, how much to spend on activities, building maintenance, color of carpets, etc.
Most will appreciate that those who qualify as "elders" Biblically, will also be capable of making those decisions in a way that benefits the majority in the congregation, even though it's not perfect, and no decision will be right for all members. Some of the decisions will be compromises, some will be about process, and very mundane things.
But some will be about teachings, and it's likely that new things will be learned, and questions will be asked that make persons rethink something that might have been taught a different way than before.
I hope you can see that, even with JWs out of the picture, you could probably accept this entire situation as a possible, and even normal, Christian congregation. So now we take it a step further:
The excitement and joy in this congregation of 40 soon becomes 80 and 160 as more and more share in Jesus' command to make disciples. They are now spread over 100's of miles, and need 4 congregations. This turns to 400 miles and 20 congregations. We would expect that some of the qualified elders would be chosen and invited to give talks and instruction in some of the other congregations? News of congregation events and experiences in one congregation might want to be shared to build up those in another congregation? Perhaps a newsletter is in order that's shared among all 20 congregations? Perhaps even some of the more successful methods of making disciples could be shared? And these 20 congregations might find it nice to have a chance to gather together will all 20 congregations of those related to them in the faith on special occasions.
It will soon be useful, perhaps necessary, to have certain members of these congregations specifically involved in (assigned to) tasks related to coordination, writing, topics for sermons, administration duties, and some assurances that their doctrines are being "double-checked" against the Bible so that one congregation is not teaching something that another congregation would find unbiblical or even offensive. The doctrine checking would no doubt go to those elders most experienced at teaching and preaching and who had experience visiting multiple congregations.
I believe that most of these ideas would not be offensive to you, when you think of how naturally they occur in various denominations all around the world.
With JWs, a large body of doctrine has been built up, and remodeled, over the last 135 years or so. Those elders who act as elders of multiple congregations instead of just one local congregation will see themselves as the "guardians of doctrine." (The term, as used by Brother Jackson, sounds too much like a protector of traditional doctrines, but I think he truly meant it as guarding the doctrines so that they remain consistent with the Biblical "constitution" even when amendments are necessary.)
What I'm saying is that it is quite natural that we have a GB function. And I don't think it starts with how much they think of themselves, but the very high regard they have for the unique value of the doctrines in their care that makes them accept that they are handling a very special function. So they have looked for a Biblical way to highlight that value and ended up creating a doctrine (in 2012) about the GB being the same as the FDS, not even including the "Helpers." It's based on the one parable that highlights the way spiritual food is distributed to the entire congregation. (It appears they also considered using the parable of the loaves and fishes, but this one has too many participants in the distribution.) To me this is a doctrine that will likely need to be adjusted back to what it was from about 1928 to 2011, where the few in charge of writing and publishing doctrines only spoke of themselves as "representing" the rest of the FDS.
Their function would be the same, however, with or without their current explanation of the FDS parable. But that doctrine itself has caused some problems in that it tends to highlight the importance of 8 persons when the entire focus should be on the overall value of the unique set of doctrines. I don't think any of us should have a problem, however, with the idea that a small group of elders who are seen as "faithful and discreet slaves" would perform many of the same functions as the Governing Body are now forming.
They are elders, and they deserve respect. Most JWs think the GB are the equivalent of the FDS, so this is not a problem anyway. But I'm sure there are many who have already put this idea to the test, and it makes sense to them. Many others have put this idea to the test and they realize, as I said above, that it could be a doctrinal mistake, but would have no great effect one way or another if the doctrine were changes. (In fact, I have found long-time Witnesses who thought this had been the doctrine for nearly 50 years, since the GB arrangement.)
Also, those of us who have remained JWs, even after questioning that particular doctrine, do so because we believe the majority of the basic doctrines being "distributed" are correct, otherwise there are other denominations to look into. My own criteria, based on the Bible, immediately knocks out just about all the other denominational options at a glance.
I don't see the same huge difference. Paul spoke of the removal of the gifts of inspiration. So even if they were inspired, we should not expect inspiration to take the same form today. Also, the GB model themselves, not directly on the apostles, but on the Council of elders at Jerusalem, which was best known for correcting a big mistake that came right out of their own congregation, from under their noses, which Peter and James (not an apostle) had even hypocritically participated in. Also, even the apostles were not "inspired" at all times. 
No one goes to the door with the overlapping generations message. Our message is that the time for this wicked system is short, and that the Kingdom offers the perfect solution, so lift your heads up and rejoice, and if you really want to do some good, join us in spreading that same message to others. 
Haven't seen that invoked for a while. It gets drummed up by exJWs from some old 1950s Watchtower. It's been used again since 2000, but it's in the context of preparation for persecution as a possible way to be "cautious as serpents yet innocent as doves." The basic idea is not to give more information than a person is entitled to, especially so as not to put our brothers and sisters unnecessarily in harm's way.
Yes. I know the quote, and I've heard others like it. It's an imperfect statement made by an imperfect man. But the motivation from context is the idea (perhaps patronizing) that most of us are like children who need a lot of reassurance. A parent wants a child to show trust even though the parent knows that he or she will make mistakes. But because the motive of most parents is loving, those mistakes will rarely outweigh the value of a child's trust in the parent. A good shepherd will show love to the flock under their care as if they are like his "children." I'm not offended because I think the phrase was properly motivated. 

She puts a bug in the ear of the chemistry teacher to tell them it is okay.

Google "New York Court"
http://www.nycourts.gov/
Scroll down, under "e-COURTS"
click
"e-Filing"
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/HomePage
Left hand column, under "Login" click
"Search as Guest"
Then enter characters and click "Submit"
https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/CaseSearch
Click "Name" then type in "Watchtower" and click Search
Then click on the "Sort By" box
Select "Received Date : newest to oldest"
Then click "Sort"
. . .
JW CSA Survivors in ALL 50 States can seek justice under the New York Child Victims Act
This law firm confirmed it. You can ask them :
Jehovah's Witness Sex Abuse Lawyers
https://www.jehovahswitnesssexabuselawyers.com/
Also, amongst other proof, Irwin Zalkin confirmed this on a video...links to that and other proof is in this video :
The New York Child Victims Act is for JW CSA Survivors in ALL 50 States
https://youtu.be/N3Kq_nG0434
 
"Although McDaniel's alleged abuse occurred in Oklahoma, her attorneys said they would argue that Watchtower, which is based in New York, enabled the conduct by way of negligent policies."
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/ywaj87/calling-out-sexual-abuse-in-the-jehovahs-witnesses-is-a-horrific-struggle
 
 

...EVERYTHING THAT GOES AROUND ...COMES AROUND ....

To quote Arauna  "We are citizens of a future government and learning and adhering to the laws of this future government."
It would seem you are 'citizens' of the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, and adhering to the 'laws' of it's Governing Body. 
@Srecko Sostar I like your last paragraph above. 
When Jesus was here on earth he healed the sick and helped those in need, in a physical way as well as a spiritual way.  Jesus has empathy and matched it with action.  Now did Jesus do this just to show what the future 'paradise' would be like, to show that through God's holy spirit he could solve all the problems of the people ? Or, did Jesus do those things because he really cared for the people ? Or both ? 
And thinking on the scripture from James concerning 'widows and orphans', is this action only to be used within the Org or more generally ? 
 

Would dying by refusing a blood transfusion be suicide?

To quote Arauna  "We are citizens of a future government and learning and adhering to the laws of this future government."
It would seem you are 'citizens' of the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, and adhering to the 'laws' of it's Governing Body. 
@Srecko Sostar I like your last paragraph above. 
When Jesus was here on earth he healed the sick and helped those in need, in a physical way as well as a spiritual way.  Jesus has empathy and matched it with action.  Now did Jesus do this just to show what the future 'paradise' would be like, to show that through God's holy spirit he could solve all the problems of the people ? Or, did Jesus do those things because he really cared for the people ? Or both ? 
And thinking on the scripture from James concerning 'widows and orphans', is this action only to be used within the Org or more generally ? 
 

To quote Arauna  "We are citizens of a future government and learning and adhering to the laws of this future government."
It would seem you are 'citizens' of the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, and adhering to the 'laws' of it's Governing Body. 
@Srecko Sostar I like your last paragraph above. 
When Jesus was here on earth he healed the sick and helped those in need, in a physical way as well as a spiritual way.  Jesus has empathy and matched it with action.  Now did Jesus do this just to show what the future 'paradise' would be like, to show that through God's holy spirit he could solve all the problems of the people ? Or, did Jesus do those things because he really cared for the people ? Or both ? 
And thinking on the scripture from James concerning 'widows and orphans', is this action only to be used within the Org or more generally ? 
 

I love to listen some folk საქართველო songs. Very long ago i heard one on radio before going to work in early morning, and i can't find it never again. Title was, if i remembered well, Don't rustle, privet. (Ne šumi kalino - in Croatian) 
Perhaps you know it, Arauna ?
Perhaps that sound too democratic :))) Non-Aligned Movement

That’s a little too flippant. I’ll walk it back. @Srecko Sostar @4Jah2me
Even @Witness
“To he who has been given much, much will be expected” is more like it, and the GB operates, in my view, in harmony with that.
Sometimes in pushing back, one overreacts. The idea that I was trying to convey is that humans are not perfect, even those with responsibility, and Jehovah’s Witnesses accept that as a given.

Excellent statement.  
It is the "word of God" that lives and imparts power, and discerns the "thoughts and intents of the heart". Heb 4:12  Can the words of men do that?  Can men judge another's spiritual outcome through their imposed "words"?  The organization does just that.  Disfellowshipping, a spiritual "killing",  is largely based on organizational doctrine.  Rev 13:15   Only God's Word is our judge, as stated in the scripture you supplied.   Men's doctrine does not contain life.   
 And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are naked and open to the eyes of Him to whom we must give account.  Heb 4:13
 
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’  Matt 7:21-23
Do the scriptures say that God's will includes following men's doctrine?

Of course they do! It is true with any discipline.
The first follows from a clear Bible law to “abstain from blood,” one of the few carryovers from the Mosaic law.
The second is an adaption to modern technology and reflects an unwillingness to dictate people’s consciences. Some will say that even the tiniest fraction is blood. Others will say, “it’s not a cake until you mix the ingredients.”
Yes. And for the most part that account will be: “Oops,” and that will be the end of it. It is only you who expect perfection from these guys. Witnesses don’t. They didn’t sign on like kids expecting Santa Claus. 
(Plus, you would have to define what you mean by “empty.” Just because something is modified in the light of new developments does not mean the original was “empty.”)
Always the quarreling point will be the divine/human interface. It was even true with Judas. He and God were tight—there were no problems there! But that fellow that claimed to be the Messiah was not at all what Judas had been expecting. And those yo-yos he was attracting—don’t even go there.

In one hand this way of reasoning is valid. But, of course i need to notice this too. We can argue or make consensus about "core" teachings and about those that are "less" important teachings. If such categorization even exist!!! 
For example, blood transfusion.
1) CORE teaching is: we do not take transfusion of whole blood.
2) MINOR teaching is: we can take blood fractions.
What makes this two teachings to be in 2 categories? The 1) is command, mandatory and disobey such teaching brings you dfd and JHVH judgment. The 2) is not command, but your personal choice and no one will ask you to give report on your decision. 
Also, i would like to incorporate in this conversation and reasoning another element. But that doesn’t mean that the law has lost its force. It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the smallest point of God’s law to be overturned. ...... But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one tiny stroke of a pen in the Law to become void. - Luke 16 two versions
In this Jesus' words i see just opposite of common custom when WT Society and elders interpret, and you repeat it here, how some teachings are core and some are not. Why? Another reasoning we also find in Bible. If you are faithful in little things, you will be faithful in large ones. - Luke 16 With this looking on subject about teachings, that some  people consider to be somehow small or smallest in  significance and value, we see how Jesus' perspective is not on same level that people have, about what is big and important and what is small and unimportant.
With this what i wrote, I can't agree with explanation you offered, how some WT Society teachings are more important than others. Because, Jesus words showed me different way on how to look on details.
Also, as conclusion, few JW doctrines that are supposedly the truth, can't save you from judgement about others doctrines that are supposedly lie.  :))    But I tell you that everyone will have to give account on the day of judgment for every empty word they have spoken. - Mat 12

…for they do not practice what they preach”.  They were teachers of the law, and it was God’s law that they were not practicing. They had veered away from purely teaching the Word of God, resulting in spiritual immorality. So they, too, were “Jezebels”, who tacked on their own laws and traditions that were to be observed by the people.   Prov 30:5,6
“You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you.”  Deut 4:2
“But woe to you Pharisees! For you tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass by justice and the love of God. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. 43 Woe to you Pharisees! For you love the best seats in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces. 44 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like graves which are not seen, and the men who walk over them are not aware of them.”
45 Then one of the lawyers answered and said to Him, “Teacher, by saying these things You reproach us also.”
46 And He said, “Woe to you also, lawyers! For you load men with burdens hard to bear, and you yourselves do not touch the burdens with one of your fingers.
The entire time Jesus preached, he told the Jews to “come to me”, which would require leaving a corrupt system of leadership.  Matt 11:28
“Let them alone; they are blind guides. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.” Matt 15:14
That system was abandoned by God. Matt 23:38  Jesus taught that he brought fulfillment of the law through his teachings. Matt 5:17-20  If any anointed one fails to lead people to Christ, and instead lead people to themselves and their expectations of obedience to what they say; they too, are “jezebels”. 
19 Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Matt 5:19-20
Has the GB relaxed the commandments God established with his anointed priesthood?  Yes.  2 Chron 13:9; 23:6,7  Does the GB practice justice?  No, that is even recognized in the court systems.    Do they follow the form of a perfect “religion”?  No. Have they been exposed as liars?  Yes.  Do we have any obligation to adhere to their teachings?  No. Jer 23:16  Has their righteousness exceeded that of the Pharisees?  Absolutely not.  
 The reality when following Christ is that an earthly organized structure patterned after any other religion in the world, is not needed to worship God.  John 4:24  We can trust Christ and the Father to direct us, if we have faith.