César Chávez

I'd love them to knock my door. I haven't been to a meeting for a long while and would love to ask them what new things they have learnt.  I've asked on here but there doesn't seem to be any important news. 

TrueTomHarley said:
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.
Isn't that obvious even to you?
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.
Your opinion is irrelevant.
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.
LOL! Totally clueless. And as usual, attributing to me attitudes and views that are products of TTH's warped imagination.
It was "Karl", dummy. Try doing a little research.
And of course, none of them know how much Klein hated Rutherford.

Anna said:
No, it's deliberate. Need I quote some Watchtower publications to prove it?
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.
I really doubt that they will. That is entirely at odds with decades of Watchtower doctrine.

Quote " But 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. "
@JW Insider  But WE don't ignore ...   Is JW Insider actually admitting to be an Elder here ? 
And @The Librarian  whom Mr Harley refers to as 'she' and 'the old hen', has actually admitted to being a Man, I believe. So probably another Elder.
One more point though. Some of you guys tell stories of working with members of the GB and in the Writing Dept etc... . So you are not just ordinary 'run of the mill' JW's. A person doesn't go from being a 'member of a congregation' to being assistant to the GB.  And it had me thinking that if you've worked at the HQ in America, then maybe some of you know each other personally way before ever joining this forum.  Some of you, if you are to be believed, have such deep information that could only come from first hand experience at HQ Bethel USA, so I would presume some of you that defend the GB and the Org, know far more than you will ever make known on here. 
 
 

TrueTomHarley said:
     
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.
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".

When Bill Ford fired Lee Iacocca, he said: “Sometimes, you just don’t like a guy.”
Fortunately, I do not have that problem.
Look, 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. The 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! 

John Butler was banned because he went too far in calling for illegal harm to be done against some public people. Not because of his stance on the child abuse matter. Once you cross the law you are definitely banned.
Billy the Kid aka Allen Smith..... I have tolerated on many occasions.. until soon thereafter he is so rude and abusive toward other members I have to ban him. He needs to find another sandbox to go play in. Not this one.
I'm not saying that others don't at times get abusive..... but my tolerance with Allen Smith is very thin... he "rubs me the wrong way" every time. 
-----------
 

I suspect you don't like education.   
Is that the best  you can do ? Walk on 

I should add that the meaning of 'persons who say "I am he" ' is probably best spelled out in Matthew's version:
(Matthew 24:23-28) . . .“Then if anyone says to YOU, ‘Look! Here is the Christ,’ or, ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will give great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones. 25 Look! I have forewarned YOU. 26 Therefore, if people say to YOU, ‘Look! He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out; ‘Look! He is in the inner chambers,’ do not believe it. 27 For just as the lightning comes out of eastern parts and shines over to western parts, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 28 Wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together.
It is ironic that Russell put out a book called "The Time is at Hand" AND simultaneously taught that the solution to the "great mystery" doctrine was that those who were of the higher calling, including Russell himself, could rightly speak of themselves as "the Christ." The Christ was not just Jesus, but the full 144,001. Therefore, it was even possible for those who considered themselves of the 144,000, the Bride, the Higher Calling, to refer to themselves as:
"the Christ" "the Saviour" "the prophet greater than Moses" "eternal Father" "the Mediator" FWF was said to have often hinted in the 1940's and 1950's that this doctrine was still in effect. It was one of the reasons that "great crowd" were not invited to the Memorial for several years. But in the 1960's the Watchtower clarified that the expression "The Christ" could not refer to the rest of the 144,000. Even after that point however, books written by FWFranz, including "Then is Finished the Mystery of God" used the expression 144,001, which had evidently been a reference to the older version of this doctrine.
*** w63 9/1 p. 539 Names for Christ and His Congregation ***
“THE CHRIST”
We come now to a consideration of those terms or titles that apply or are used to refer to Jesus Christ apart from his body members. . . .
But what about the expressions “the Christ” and “Christ”? Does the use of the article with “Christ” designate something different from when no article is used? Might it be that, whereas the term “Christ” refers to Jesus Christ alone, the term “the Christ” could also include the 144,000 members of his body? Do the Scriptures support this thought or distinction?
No, they do not. . . .
In fact, the expression “the Christ” of itself at no time includes the members of Christ’s body. So the title “Christ,” with or without the definite article, refers to Jesus Christ, the article serving to draw attention to or to emphasize his office as the Messiah.
And of course there was no little disruption when FWFranz yelled at all of us one morning at Bethel breakfast because a few (somewhere?) had been balking at a recent article that said Jesus was not the Mediator of the great crowd. The much earlier view that had not been repeated in many years was that the 144,001 WERE the Mediator.
 

I do not participate in the large "JWN" forum. I've tried but there is no way to actually have a Biblical discussion due to the number of non-believers and ridiculers of all things spiritual.
I have participated in forums for studies of the Ancient Near East (ANE) and Biblical Greek and Hebrew, but it's been years since I tried to get questions answered there. I got invited to a chronology forum based on a correspondence with Rolf Furuli. This "theworldnewsmedia" is the only one I have looked at in months. I think it makes a good place to write out my own opinions and concerns and usually get some thoughtful feedback. It's not too crowded, and I'm pretty sure it's small enough so that no one from HQ will take much interest. I'm sure it's not run by elders, btw. Mon 25 @ 11:50 Ong

I have no idea who she really is, but she is a name known from the big exJW forum (Simon something-or-other) and I have seen the name on a private yahoo forum run by Witnesses where I have discussed chronology. I haven't checked it in a couple of years, but it has included some Rolf Furuli defenders. (Furuli is a JW with a PhD who has tried to make the Watchtower chronology seem possible. No one outside of a few Watchtower defenders have ever taken him seriously.)

Do some of your guys spend your life on the web, going from blog to blog / forum to forum ?  How many JW / Ex JW 'sites' are  there ? I'd rather go for a long walk in the countryside and see what God has created, myself, but each to their own  
 

So true. I am not impressed with his so-called knowledge.  Hard to reason with anyone who ignores or spurnes other people's reasonable arguments and just grabs something egotistically he can elaborate on which  is a form of intellectual bullying. It does not get my respect.
It seems he has done a lot of research about the inner circle problems the GB had at one time - to the extent where it can be called a  tabloid with all the little titbits about the rumours about some individual's sexuality and preferences ..... real gossip column stuff..... etc. 
I do not read tabloids and neither will I bother to get the inside story on which GB member did what to whom.  As I demonstrated earlier: Jehovah himself appointed a loser in Saul.  Jesus appointed Judas iscariot...... so who are we to get it right every time?  Tests come in all forms and can be exasperating.  Some will lose faith because they put trust in men.  (I know the truth and I know where I learnt it).    Many top brothers may fall out and do bad things  but my faith in the core truths are solid.  Yes, there may still be shame in the pipeline as retro-active law suits are placed.  That is inevitable and part of life as there are Judas' and Sauls everywhere who bring shame on Jehovahs name.  
He is not interested in reason or justice, just destruction.  To win at all cost....... not the ideal kind of person to reason with...... why would he respect a human when he does not respect God?

Actually you are completely wrong! The club is ran by an old hen, who got tired of having to listen to all the squabbles and mindless arguments in the chicken coop. She wanted to raise the 'roost' a little higher so she created this, so she could, with the help of some sheep, 'ewesdrop' on some quality human interaction. Actually, to be honest I am not entirely sure about all of this, but one thing I am 100% sure of is that it IS an old hen. TTH says so.

The opposite of JW Elders would probably be True Christians. 

Does it really matter who a person on here is ?  Does it matter if a person uses 10 different 'usernames' ?
If a person can bring some info' to the table that is surely good ?  Then others can confirm or criticise that info. 
But to waffle on about who a person is or is not, what good is that doing any of us ? 
I have a theory that this Forum is run by JW Elders. The purpose of the forum being to study the feelings and actions of JW's, Ex-JW's, Apostates, et al.  Then those Elders report their finding to a superior body, and it may even get to the GB.  
But this theory does me no good, nor anyone else, so I will keep it to myself  .  Coffee time. 

The thing is what it comes down to is that - is it true or is it alleged? Because when it comes to odd people, people you do not like, and or hate, or have some other reason, there will always be an accusation against them. So, evidence over facts.
I prefer it black, no sugar, no nothing due to the fact that I fast for nearly 2 days.

Earlier in the day yesterday, someone had just asked me privately about some details that came out of the Lloyd & Ted drama. I wrote up an answer containing most of the information in the post to AlanF. I mentioned in that answer that although I thought my source or sources were excellent, I still thought some of the details seemed a bit contrived and hard to believe.
Later in the same day, AlanF shows up here, and I recalled that he, or persons in his family, had met a lot of these same people. So I copied what I had already written and then tried to edit it quickly. As it turns out I don't think AlanF could add much to it. And I don't get the impression that he's into the kind of quiet, reasonable discussion I was hoping for. 😞

Lol I have given up reading this discussion.
It reminds me the time when I was a naive JW  I used to discuss the same thing with Catholics and guess what the same excuses and reasoning is given... 
 

Anyone on this thread right now could be a child molester, jw or xjw or anti-jw. Or a on looker....or a governing body member gathering info.