b4ucuhear

6 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

"now adays"

6 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

"loosing" legal battles

Are you volunteering as a poster boy for the need for higher education?  

9 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

You seem in line with Mr Harley when you say people have 'a hateful agenda', and this does truly show how the Organisation really does brainwash the congregants. It appears so often on here that anyone that finds faults with the GB and the JW Org seem to have a 'hateful agenda'.  When in fact all of us are just humans, trying to live our daily lives. 

Simply stating an opinion that some people have a hateful agenda doesn't mean they are "brainwashed." It's simply an observation/opinion borne out by what we see and experience. I could just as well say that you are "brainwashed" because you disagree with me. You can either agree or disagree according to your observations - you are entitled to your opinion. Brainwashed has become a derogatory term used too loosely these days and especially apparently, by you when someone disagrees with you. 

9 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

There is only one standard that is worthy of consideration, God's standard.......... And if JW congregants follow the GB / Elders / JW org without question, then they are not adhering to God's standard but man's. 

Once again, you are welcome to your opinion. And while I agree that mindless unquestioning obedience to whatever is said by imperfect, uninspired men won't always reach God's standards, by the same token, you too are an imperfect, uninspired individual - as is every other human alive. But I'd put far more weight toward what I have learned through JW's than I would with you. So feel free to believe what you want. 

9 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

You are once again in line with @TrueTomHarley and @Arauna here with your idea of 'any standards', because it means you are comparing JW's with the standards of this wicked world. 

Thank-you for the compliment of being "in line" with TTH and Arauna and thank-you for noticing. Once again, you are going beyond the scope of your reference after that. While it may be true that we compare JW's standards with those of this wicked world (a fair thing to do by the way, as long as you don't leave it at that), we also try to align our standards with what we read in God's Word. That is why JW's are known for being honest, truthful, law-abiding, loving, loyal, peaceful... But you already know that. It seems that for you, it's like coughing up a fur ball for you to acknowledge anything good about JW's.

9 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

The cars I drive are cheap and nasty, but if, when the weather is wet and cold, I compare my cars to a bicycle, then my cars are wonderful, near perfect in fact.   Do you get t he picture now ? 

Yes, I get the picture...that you don't know what you are talking about and that the cute comparison in the context of our discussion only shows you drive cheap and nasty cars. Nothing more. There is nothing cheap and nasty about JWs as a whole (even though there are some bad apples). And JWs for the most part have already made the appropriate comparisons by either being raised in one of thousands of different religions or exposed to the different ideas of those same ideas in the field ministry. 

One thing should be obvious to you by now. Most JWs have heard your negative rants and character assassinations before. In fact, they may have even entertained those same views prior to becoming JW's. So they aren't going to change because some anonymous loudmouth spews vitriolic diatribe over the internet. (I'm not specifically accusing you of that)

9 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

all of us are just humans, trying to live our daily lives. 

Yes, that's all. "Just humans, trying to live our daily lives." So why are you spending your daily life on websites such as this singling out Jehovah's Witnesses? Aren't there bigger fish to fry out there? What about all those religions that go to war killing millions of their fellow worshipers; celebrating pagan holidays; teaching people they will burn for all eternity in hell for some imagined infractions; terrorism and suicide bombers and a myriad other greater infractions? I could go on and on but apparently you seem conspicuously silent on the big issues and big fish.

I wasn't planning on wasting more of my time with people who have an agenda. 

Learning and making money to support oneself/family isn’t a problem. But putting oneself in an environment that promotes standards and objectives that conflict with or are at odds with our own spiritual outlook and objectives CAN be a problem - and it has often been that way in real life experience. Sure, there are exceptions to both sides of the equation. But there certainly is more of a risk to one’s spiritual health on a number of fronts. If one of your primary objectives is to preach the gospel and support yourself while doing that, where would your focus be? Jesus, the apostles, early Christians all made choices that reflected their priorities - even if at times it meant leaving lucrative businesses. Why should it seem so strange that Christians today with the same mandate would choose to do the same? A human perspective that doesn’t take God into consideration would logically pursue a course tilted toward this world’s thinking/reasoning/priorities. But if you have faith in God’s promise to provide what you need when you put his will first, your choices would logically be different. So, if you actually believe that God will see to it that you have what you need, then going much beyond that would be for what are “wants” - and for that you would likely need more money and sacrifices will have to be made on one side to gain on the other. “You can’t serve two masters“ as Jesus correctly pointed out. He lived by what he said. Look at the hundreds of thousands of pioneers in the world today - or even in your own congregation. Sure they have challenges like the rest of us, but are they suffering/destitute or unhappy generally? “Money can be a protection“ but as they say: “Money can’t buy happiness.” True happiness comes from within and having a good relationship with God - we were created that way. The main host of one of the tv travel documentaries was asked: “Who did you find were the happiest people in the world?” (No he didn’t say JWs although that may have been true;) His answer was that the happiest people were also the poorest materially. He referred to a very poor group of people in a village in Sri Lanka whose families often could only afford one meal a day. Poor yes, but also the happiest. I’m not suggesting that we should follow suit, but just making the point that happiness is a quest anyone would want. But this system promotes satisfying essentially spiritual needs with physical “things.” Pursuing higher education is often less about satisfying basic and legitimate needs and more about lifestyle. Wise king Solomon knew the truth about these things. His observations are worth a second look. 

That being said, I would have to admit that taking the choice as to what type of education to pursue out of the hands of parents and individuals and handing that choice to imperfect men who may not be any smarter does sound cultish to me. True, people can actually choose, but it’s like “choosing” whether to jump off a bridge or not, when you will be punished for not making the “right” choice. On the other hand, and to be fair, when people in positions of responsibility set an example of accepting a course that could put one in harm’s way, it could set a harmful precedent. So there’s that.. 

2 hours ago, AlanF said:

You're covering over the fact that in most regions only certain religious and other public officials are required by law to report. In the U.S...

I am not in the U.S. and so cannot confirm or deny your comments. I can say that reporting is mandatory in my country.

3 hours ago, AlanF said:

such 'appointment' by God is only in a manner of speaking. It is not literal, direct appointment such as described of the Old Testament prophets.

I agree with that. After all the GB themselves have appointed men who were not whom they appeared to be (as have other levels of authority within the organization.) As for the rest, I assume you are referring to Deut. 18:20 which JW haters are so fond of parroting. You are going beyond the scope of your reference in your suggestion especially as to how JWs use the term as applying to themselves. The GB put out a video explanation of that for clarification as it seems some JWs needed to be clear on that issue as well. 

I was willing and planning to write a point-by-point response to the things you have written - including those I may agree with. But frankly, now I think it's just a waste of time. You clearly have an agenda that won't be swayed by what I consider "facts" and your hateful diatribe (from someone who apparently doesn't even believe in God in the first place) is to me, counterproductive. I am happy having a purpose in life, a wonderful hope for the future and a warm loving relationship with my creator and many friends. I wish the same for you, but of course, you may already be happy and content with what you have. We will have to agree to disagree - on some points at least. 

2 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

I just love the way some JWs make up all the excuses, but then admit to the faults of the GB and It's Org.

Umm...it's called being honest in case you don't recognize it. You noted correctly that I was willing to acknowledge negative things that may happen, but when I wrote what I considered to be reasonable explanations/positive points, you dismissively wrote it off as "excuses." Truly, there is no pleasing people who appear to have a hateful agenda and only see the bad. You are of course welcome to your opinion. It's just that on some points I don't share your opinion. Is that OK? 

I have been willing to honestly acknowledge both positive and negative things about us, but I've only heard negative, hateful diatribe from the naysayers here with not one positive thing to say in all these missives. There are millions of JWs who are good people by any standard, but if anyone bought into your nonsense they would all be viewed as bad or negatively. I may not agree with Muslims, Catholics, Pentecostals... but I can always find points of agreement when engaging them in conversation and things I like about them - even when it isn't a religious discussion.

So as far as I am concerned, you are not only unfair in your blanket characterizations, I simply don't find your association either enlightening, helpful or even fair-minded.

@AlanF 

13 hours ago, AlanF said:

Not just 'appears' -- it IS that way. Through at least the late 1980s it was unofficially stated but strongly enforced Watchtower policy that "keeping Jehovah's name spotless" was above all other goals in handling judicial and other matters. "Jehovah's name" was deliberately conflated with "the Watchtower Society's reputation". Thus, elders' prime goal was usually to keep all sordid situations under wraps. Hundreds of examples of this have been reported in various public and private media.

Good points! Tolerance is a form of enabling, which in some cases is even worse than the crime.

While I do try to defend "the organization" as much as possible as a JW, I'm not one of those who feels that mindless unquestioning obedience is a mark of "loyalty." Yes, at times we don't second guess the direction we receive and progress has been made, but it is also true to say that organizationally we haven't always been that forthcoming. The fact is, that at times what has masqueraded as "discipline from Jehovah" has been nothing more than some men in authority silencing whistleblowers who have exposed the wrongdoing of those self-same men in authority - removing or even disfellowshipping those who they perceive as a threat to their position and reputation. (While I have seen that happen, it's important not to paint with too wide a brush here.) Saying one "doesn't have all the facts" in some cases is just utter nonsense. It at times can serve to protect those who should have been on trial while vilifying/diminishing the whistleblower. Yes, I have seen that happen and that's why I don't buy into the idea that Jesus controls everything that goes on in the congregation - especially when God's Word warns us of "wicked men and imposters," "wolves in sheep's clothing," "rock hidden below the surface..." I don't understand why people after reading these clear warnings in God's Word appear to think they can't actually happen. True it doesn't characterize the organization which is full of loving people who sincerely want to do the right thing, but it does happen and to categorically dismiss these things by implying Jesus controls everything is tantamount to blaming him.  

It appears to me that hiding behind the umbrella of "not bringing reproach on Jehovah's name," - which we should totally try not to do anyway, has at times been used by imperfect and sometimes wicked men to protect themselves. I ask: When has Jehovah ever withheld needed discipline because he was afraid of what the neighbours think? Did he forgo discipline to the nation of Israel knowing full well that the nations would attribute the victory to their false gods? No. Jehovah has always been true to himself and his standards - regardless of what puny imperfect humans think, do or say. He wasn't straightjacketed into non-action. fearing "reproach" from others. Still it would be unfair, as stated, to paint with too wide a brush. There are millions of kind, loving, sincere people who are actively trying to serve Jehovah the best way they can. And it can't be denied that despite the bad actions/choices of some relatively few individuals (some of whom may be in positions of authority) this is the best place to be. We recall that all of us are accountable - from members of the Governing Body to the newest publisher. We may not always be in a position to do much about it, but we can have faith in the promises found in God's Word that there will be accountability. Our policies, like our beliefs/expectations on certain things have and are changing - more in some areas than others. 

With regards to "being appointed by 'holy spirit,' a few things to keep in mind. A recent "Treasures From God's Word" stated: "The stars are under Jesus' full control, power, and direction." That COULD be a bit misleading depending on how literally you view that statement. Should we assume then that elders will do everything perfectly - as if Jesus by holy spirit has them on remote control - controlling every thought, decision and action within the congregations? If that was the case, the elders/GB would always act perfectly. Should we actually expect that today? Recall, that even while Jesus was letting the first century anointed elders know that they were accountable to him as to how they used the authority entrusted to them, what was actually going while he was yet speaking? Apostasy, immorality, lukewarm, half-hearted service that wanted to make Jesus vomit them out of his mouth... Why would that be the case when Jesus is in authority?

As we recall, we are often reminded not to expect perfection from our brothers and sisters - including appointed elders. The  apostle Paul candidly described his battle with good and bad inclinations. But there are other reasons too.                                    

1) Holy spirit does not give appointed men a miraculous ability to read hearts and minds. A person is spoken of as being "appointed by holy spirt," when they are seen to live up to the qualifications set out in God's Word - which is inspired by holy spirt. But humans are limited in that respect and sometimes mistakes are made. (i.e.. GB appoints an individual as an elder and later as a Circuit Overseer who turns out to be a communist spy that turns in the brothers causing some to stumble. Jesus didn't direct that to happen. After all, he would be working against his own interests - like a house divided. It was human limitation.)

2) Neither Jesus nor holy spirit take away a person's freedom of choice. (As was evidenced by what was going on even while Jesus was speaking). As we also know, in the first century, there were men in the congregations described as "rocks hidden beneath the surface." They weren't forced or directed to do that. That was their personal choice - which is important because our heart conditions are revealed by the choices we make. Anyone - including men in authority can make a wrong choice if they don't guard their heart. Freedom of choice is important for obvious reasons. 

3) If something isn't dealt with right away, does that indicate Jesus isn't in control of the congregation? No. As the comments point out, "if someone needs correction, Jesus will see to it that this is done in his own time and way." And it should come as not surprise that it's always been that way. As 1 Tim. 5:24 states: "The sins of some men are publicly known, leading directly to judgment, but those of other men become evident later." Later?!! How much later? The Bible historically answers that too. Sometimes the sins of some men like Korah and others became publicly known leading directly to judgment (when the earth swallowed up the rebels.) But other times, faithful men endured injustice for years, or decades and some would never see justice until the resurrection. So at times, things don't happen when and how we think they should. Or when we think is best. But we can have confidence that, as in the past, they will be dealt with one way or another. 

4) The operation of holy spirit can at times, be hard to "quantify." The first century Christians had strong and undeniable evidence they were anointed by holy spirit and some even had miraculous gifts. Even so, they didn't always have a complete understanding of things and some expectations were premature - although they were very interested as to where they thought the spirit was leading them. Likewise today. At times the leadings of holy spirit are easy to recognize and at other times not so much. Sometimes organizationally, we "go beyond the things written" as to dates, types and antitypes, times and seasons and even doctrinal issues. Well meaning, yes, but sometimes we forget that instead of making "predictions," (even while admitting we are not miraculously inspired prophets), our mandate is to preach and teach - not make up stuff that doesn't have a specific Biblical foundation. Historically and biblically there is nothing new to this. God's people have always had a gradual understanding of the outworking of God's purpose - and often leaning new things means we have to discard old things.

  But in all of this it's important to remember what is truly remarkable about benefitting from Jesus' authority as head of the congregation and what he has been able to accomplish using imperfect men. Miraculous some would say.

A) Jesus has been able to direct a world-wide preaching work using imperfect men, women, children and yes, imperfect elders. But it's much more than that when you think about it. We are preaching in Satan's backyard. He is the "god of this system of things" and has the support of powerful spirit creatures (henchmen) and world governments. And what is part of the message we deliver? "Satan is a malicious liar and that he and all of his spirit buddies, along with the world system he has spent thousands of years to develop, are all going to be destroyed." We preach that "right in his grill." How do you think that goes over? We would never be able to accomplish that if Jesus wasn't a powerful king in control of the congregation. So do we faithfuly follow the direction of appointed elders as to the details of accomplishing this ministry?

B) We have what everyone has wanted for thousands of years but been unable to achieve. World unity. Despite being from all nations, tribes and tongues - from different backgrounds and stations in life, we are united. But we aren't just united in a stalemate - "I won't attack you if you don't attack me." No. We are united because of the love we have for one another. The type of love that Jesus taught and demonstrated in our behalf. 

C) Many/most of Jehovah's Witnesses come from other religions. Even those born into the truth are exposed to many people from different faiths. And there is one thing we can all testify to: Spiritually, we are BY FAR, the best fed people on earth. More than that. We are the best fed group of people who have ever lived. We even know things first century Christians didn't know. Al of this is readily available. That is no accident. and Jesus continues to educate us using (imperfect) elders as teachers in the congregation. 

We benefit from a loving arrangement Jesus has by holy spirit set in place for our benefit. It's helpful to liken this arrangement to having good parents. As we grew, they fed us, cleaned us, clothes us, disciplined us, taught us, cared for and sympathized with us. When we were hurt they supported us. And even when we reach maturity, they are there for us and continue to love us. Again, this is possible by means of Jesus direction in the congregation and holy spirit.

3 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

If you KNOW A NUMBER OF BROTHERS WHO HAVE BEEN DISCIPLINED FOR CHILD MOLESTATION,  then shouldn't you go to the Police or authorities with your information as @Anna likes to tell people to do. After all if they 'have been disciplined for it', then they must have done it. 

I can respond to that since you appear to be drawing assumptions without having all the facts. I completely agree that one should go to the police when dealing with such issues involving a minor. In fact, the direction we get from the society is to do just that. One of the reasons we are instructed to call Bethel is to make sure we comply with all current reporting laws regarding child molestation. Some of the problems we have had in the past (and I have personally attended in court), have been because brothers had not acted in harmony with the instructions given because they haven't paid attention or been casual about doing their homework. The examples I had cited were from many years ago when the current laws were not in place and in fact, they have been evolving over the years - and in some cases, a moving target. Those individuals affected are now adults with the freedom to choose to go to the police under the current laws if they so choose. However, if what they had done decades ago occurred now, it would be an entirely different story. Our policies have changed as well to comply with legal requirements. 

In my country years ago, both doctors and clergy were simply not allowed to go public with what was then considered private/protected/privileged information and if they did so, legal repercussions could arise. For instance, it wasn't until the '80's that the laws changed and doctors were required to report cases of AIDS for - which was then transferred to a national data-base. One of the reasons for this was that certain individuals were deliberately spreading AIDS and partners needed to be warned. Likewise as molestation cases came to the fore, the laws gradually changed. But even then, at times they applied in different ways and in different areas, or not at all. (i.e. ARC hearings...) We now have more comprehensive laws that address these injustices - requiring/allowing religious authorities to report them without legal repercussions. So to be clear, elders are REQUIRED to report these cases now and the legal department is involved to ensure they do just that. Unfortunately, we have had to learn the hard way what would have been the morally right thing in the first place. But we have made the changes. 

 If anyone in a responsible position is aware of child molestation going on, he is legally bound to report it to the authorities. But if he fails to do so and must face the legal consequences for his non-action, (which as we know can have devastating consequences for the minor) I can't say I'd feel sorry for him. 

Gen. 42:22 "Did I not say to you, 'Do not sin against the child,' but you would not listen?' Now his blood is certainly being asked back.

James 4:17 "Therefore, if someone knows how to do what is right and yet does not do it, it is a sin for him."

11 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The context was use of the Internet.

Nice catch JWI, I didn't see that. "Sign that boy up."

IRONY: the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of it's literal (intended) meaning; a manner of organizing a work so as to give full expression to contradictory impulses; an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been expected.                               INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY: characterized by a biased, dishonest attitude ie. relevant facts and information are purposely omitted when such things may contradict one's hypothesis; facts are presented in a biased manner and twisted to give misleading impressions to to support one view over another. 

The "irony" here is that intellectual dishonesty was used to support the contention that the original quote was intellectually dishonest. It is noteworthy and fair to note that Srecko did acknowledge his error. Not so great was still trying to spin it into a negative right after...

11 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

after we make you you safe you will be saved

11 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

"We are not inspired, we can err in instructional and doctrinal matters ...."   

That is a point well worth considering, especially when the GB start making predictions of things that haven't happened yet. It's fair enough when they admit that "this is our understanding at this time, but that could change." It's another thing entirely when they present uninspired predictions as fact and become dogmatic about it. That plays right into the hands of those who quote Deuteronomy to make the "false prophet" accusation. With what seems to be an almost 100% failure rate, I would say: "it's time to lose the crystal ball guys." True we have said in the past that "prophecy is best understood after it has happened," but really, we don't even get that right, making changes to our understanding even a century later. If it was Jehovah's will that we go "beyond the things written" and start predicting details of how things will work out, he would have given us a miraculous ability to see the future as he had with his prophets in the past. Our mandate is to preach the good news of the kingdom, teach and make disciples. We can commend our brothers on the GB for overseeing and accomplishing this great task. But please, enough already with the predictions. It makes it hard to defend our position as doing a prophetic work with a straight face - especially with the dismal track record we have established and the selective definition of a prophet opposers would like to impose on us. 

On 2017-10-05 at 10:00 AM, TrueTomHarley said:

An exception would be those raised in the faith. They never did see both sides.

An interesting observation I had to wrestle with before leaving, experiencing the world and then coming back again. So ineffect, I had to learn the "hard way" that Satans system and allurements were not what they appeared to be. That is not to say all is well within either. (I have seen the bad things that can happen and at times it's far more than just "imperfections" that seem to be our go-to response to these matters - but that's another story). 

In leaving the truth (for over 10 years) to try to see things more objectively - to see things without a JW lens, asking questions (and actually living a VERY worldly lifestyle) I came to a realization at one point that there was no real future in this system. It was a garbage can painted to look like gold. So I did a more earnest study of different religions, but I always had to come back to one fundamental question that could have saved me a lot of time. What did Jesus say would identify his true followers? Did the answer really require the lengths I was going to, to sift through all that garbage? John 13:34, 35 was what did it for me. How can you be fulfilling this requirement and killing your same brothers in war? How can you love even your enemies by killing them and their children in war? That really narrowed things down for me. 

Still, I wondered how would someone/me narrow it down further? Be exposed to different questions I may not have thought of asking? Or points of view that were foreign to me that I may have neglected to consider? Or even contrary to what I believed? How could the "scientific method" of thesis, antithesis and synthesis be practically applied? How could I be exposed to all this important information? The answer was simple and obvious: be active in the ministry. That is an acid test. People will express their views to you, uncoloured by a JW lens - directly from their perspective and it is up to you then to weigh the evidence in your reply. If your reply carries scriptural weight it will reinforce your beliefs. If not it will weaken them or require further research. So someone raised in the truth doesn't really need to waste years of searching. They just need to get down to doing what every Christian should be doing anyways. Preaching to others. 

On 2017-08-31 at 4:50 PM, Alessandro Corona said:

I left 3 days ago. Even though I still have faith in Jehovah and Christ, Jesus. But there are some doctrinal errors which are too great to ignore, and because of it I have been treated like a criminal by the brothers. 

Without knowing more details, it's hard to know how to respond without hopscotching over many possibilities. I'm sorry to hear you feel that way and I would caution against any knee jerk reactions based on emotion. (Not saying that's actually the case here since info is sparse). Questions you might ask: Where else would I go? Am I prepared to do the things the other religions do? (Go to war? Believe in hell? Celebrate pagan holidays? Support political systems under Satans control? Be part of an organization that is divided politically, racially, ethnically? Would I deliberately hide Gods name in a Bible? Would I believe Jesus and Jehovah are co-equal as part of a Trinity? Would I keep what I believe to be life-saving truths to myself instead of sharing it with others? Would I be comfortable supporting a paid clergy to receive what Jesus gave for free? Would I be as spiritually educated elsewhere? ...) would I be willing to wait patiently until a clarification/adjustment is made either in my understanding or from the society? - it may take years. If I didn't agree with everything other religions taught either,  would I feel comfortable/qualified becoming my own religion - a religion of one?

The idea/reality of being treated as a criminal by the brothers may be an exaggeration or it may be true. Often it depends on how you present your views. You can be perceived either as  a person who simply  has unanswered questions  or as an apostate who may want to draw disciples after yourself, or something in between. 

On 8/4/2017 at 9:50 AM, TrueTomHarley said:

the psalm that says if you love God’s law, there is no stumbling block. (Ps 119:165)

We sometimes make broad application of selected verses in God's Word as if there were no exceptions or as if they are true in every case. 

A legitimate example of this might be Heb. 6:18 "...it is impossible for God to lie." An example of another verse where we might not assume to make a broad application of is Proverbs. 16:7: "When Jehovah is pleased with a man's ways, he causes even his enemies to be at peace with him." Is that always the case? We might say it was true during Solomon's reign, but what about other faithful servants of Jehovah who obviously had enemies that were not at peace with them? (David, Jeremiah, Jesus, JW's today...) Could we reason conversely that if they/we had enemies, Jehovah is not pleased with them/us? Hardly. It's just that making a broad application to some passages raises obvious questions.

Another scripture to consider is that found at Psalm 119:165: "Abundant peace belongs to those who love your law; Nothing can make them stumble ("for them there is no stumbling block")." The conclusion often drawn from that is that "true" worshippers can't be stumbled. But the reality is that quite often true worshippers are stumbled. If fact, that is not only a fulfillment of Bible prophecy, but in line with the warning Jesus gives at Matthew 18:6: "But whoever stumbles one of these little ones who have faith in me, it would be better for him to have hung around his neck a millstone that is turned by a donkey and to be sunk in the open sea." So clearly both Jesus and Paul (Romans 14:21) indicate that our "brothers" could be stumbled by the choices we make (even if those choices may be "lawful" according to our conscience.) Is there a contradiction here? It might seem that way and has in fact to some (this isn't the first time this issue has been raised.) If you you look in the CD WT library at all the references (it will take a lot of time) you will see that generally these articles focus on one OR the other without considering how one relates or contributes to our understanding of the other - but not all. Either "nothing can make true worshippers stumble," OR "be very careful about stumbling or fellow worshippers by the way we act on our conscience."  Is it fair to assume that those who stumble are not "true worshippers" or "not of our sort" going out from us? Hardly, because Jesus clearly identified such as "little ones who have faith" - and yet could be stumbled. However, as mentioned earlier, not all articles present these verses as an "either - or" situation. Here are some comments from the WT that explain this seeming contradiction:

"True, were all Christians fully mature, there would be no danger of stumbling another: (Ps. 119:165). but since not all Christians are strong in faith and mature, we must exercise care."

"The person being stumbled to a fall might be a 'little one,' but that would not minimize the seriousness for the one causing the stumbling in this case. Why not? Because it involved "one of these little ons that believe." This would designate a believer in Jesus as the messianic Son of God. The belief of such "little ones" puts them on the way to everlasting life. So, if anyone willfully, purposely, inconsiderately caused such a 'little one' on the way to eternal life to take due offence and stumble out of the the living way into destruction, it would be tantamount to committing murder. It would show a lack of love for the one stumbled." 

So we can surmise that Psalm 119:165 basically refers to those who have a level of spiritual maturity, because they "love God's law" and "rove about in it," - (but that might not be true of all true worshippers). Likely these mature ones would have experience in applying God's law -  and eating "solid food" (as mature ones would do) and so not be stumbled by what might stumble newer ones. But those newer ones acquainted only with "milk" and with weak consciences, could in fact be stumbled and we have to be careful about that. 

Finally, depending of the severity of the circumstance, even mature ones have stumbled by what they may have seen/heard/experienced. Therefore, the admonition at 1 Corinthians 10:12 is important: "So let the one who thinks he is standing beware that he does not fall."

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Here are things that have helped me.

Not bad. Thanks for caring enough about your brothers and sisters to share what has helped you. I might add something re: Psalm 119:165 later. I'm sure those who need it most will find this especially helpful. 

6 minutes ago, The Librarian said:

please see my last comment in this post....

Got it. Sorry. Was typing while you were posting it. Thanks and sorry again. 

2 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Child Molestation is a horrific crime by anyone's standard.

While I quoted just the beginning of your post there, I do mean the whole thing. I don't know why you would think I would disagree with anything there. I don't. (SURPRISE!)  EXCEPT for your snarky comment about "Anna believing the Governing Body was comprised to hold everyone's hand." Not fair and not true.

2 hours ago, J.R. Ewing said:

Please, the nonsense comes from the flip-flop you do with understanding the Watchtower, and scripture. It appears JWinsider sold you a bill of goods that you now accept with the year 1914.

Not sure that not being dogmatic about 1914 qualifies as a "flip flop." (In fact I am sure it doesn't - despite how you try to spin it.) Note truthfully that I am not against that date either - as you dishonestly try to make it appear. Here is my take on it and why I have very little interests in dates anyway - any of them. I didn't dedicate my life to a date. Not 1975; not 1922 or several others that haven't panned out; not even 1914. If some tie their faith to that it's up to them. But if Armageddon doesn't come when I expect it; or I don't live to see the fulfillment of earthly promises...that's fine. I'm in good company with many other faithful men who loved and worshipped Jehovah even though they didn't get to see the fulfillment of the reward. I know Jehovah's promises are sure to be fulfilled, and while I believe that time is soon, if it should delay, I'll just patiently wait. That's all. It's not about my salvation anyway. It's about living a life that honours Jehovah and proves Satan a liar - that when things get tough and I experience Job-like tests of faith I'll face those tests with dignity faith and integrity (although some stuff was VERY difficult, so I don't want to sound like more than I am). Job was a better man then me. So was David, Jeremiah, Joseph, Jesus, Isaiah and others whose examples were models for me to follow in dark times.

3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Body of Elders who could not believe what was right before them.

I respect you for that. Knowing bad things can happen yet having the strength of faith and character to stay - as you seem - spiritually strong in the truth. Might I ask you to share with us what enables you to maintain your faith and dedication despite faith testing situations (whether you were personally in that congregation or not?)

51 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

He is from far away. "In my culture," he says. Cut him slack on that account, or learn from him.

That's a kind suggestion I hadn't thought of and worth noting. I've been to Africa (much of the world actually), and while I haven't personally witnessed such atrocities, I know they exist there in certain places. You could be right. Maybe that's what's affected him.

On 7/31/2017 at 11:07 AM, TrueTomHarley said:

There comes a time when one must suck it up and move on - either stay or leave, but move on.

Is that what I should have told my sister? My younger sister was sexually molested by an elder. She stayed despite that without making waves, until she started to see other things she found deeply disturbing and then she did "move on" as you say. Actually, she shouldn't have "moved on" because later on, most of the elders (the bad ones) were either removed or disfellowshipped - half of them were apostate (but that's not all they were up to). Of course nobody wanted to believe anything (even with concrete evidence) since they were regulars on the circuit assembly platform and on even on the district convention. It took about 10 years to sort itself out (should have been much quicker considering the evidence), but it did, (although it took other elders to step in and do what actually had to be done.) Still, 1 Timothy 5:24 will prove to be true if you wait, in one way or another. 

On 7/30/2017 at 9:34 PM, SuziQ1513 said:

If DF'g is used to protect secrets and not the congregation,   many will stumble and some will become active haters.

I won't say anything except that is exactly what would happen. 

On 7/31/2017 at 11:07 AM, TrueTomHarley said:

What anyone must be alert to is Hebrews 6:4-6: "For as regards those who were once enlightened and who have tasted the heavenly free gift and who have become partakers of holy spirit

This primarily is referring to anointed Christians who have "received the heavenly free gift and become partakers of holy spirit." However, by extension, we also apply it to the great crowd. It would be dangerous however to set ourselves up as being in the judgment seat of God and decide for ourselves that people whom we may disagree with (or are in fact wrong) can't make changes before they die or merit everlasting destruction. It would be pretty dangerous to throw that around lightly in this kind of venue.

On 7/31/2017 at 11:07 AM, TrueTomHarley said:

All I can note is that Revelation 2 and 3 makes clear that congregations of the first century experienced blemishes at least as bad as is claimed by some happens today, yet continued to be congregations.

I don't think anybody is suggesting there won't continue to be congregations, even despite stuff that shouldn't happen. As far as "...experienced blemishes at least as bad as is claimed by some happens today...," I just read those two chapters over and I won't comment on that, just to say I think "blasphemy" would be worse for sure. I couldn't add any further without being too specific. 

On 7/31/2017 at 11:37 PM, J.R. Ewing said:

Are you stipulating that a church can be more hurtful, than your average life?

Seriously? Ask a Catholic choir boy...or...

On 7/31/2017 at 11:37 PM, J.R. Ewing said:

Remember, scripture is being used. When one manipulates scripture to advance a personal cause, then how does that do any good for someone that visits this site and knows nothing about scripture

You mean like quoting John 8:7, and from a different translation that you cherry picked to agree with you? The F&DS tell us that the 12 verses at John 7:53-8:11 are spurious and "...have been obviously added to the original text of John's gospel." But having the NWT, you already know that don't you? So to highlight your own agenda you quote a spurious passage from a translation that we don't even use/accept the passage of (except on the side). Another reason some feel that verse is spurious is that it in principle, contradicts God's word - especially when it comes to exposing wrongdoing from within the congregation. 

On 7/31/2017 at 11:37 PM, J.R. Ewing said:

Christ Crucified Is God’s Power and Wisdom

 

 

¹⁸ For the message of the cross,,,

What religion did you say you were again? It doesn't read that way in our Bible. (And I won't bother to comment on your omission of verse 19 of 1 Corinthians 11 - as translated in the literal Kingdom Interlinear and pretty well every other Bible.) 

On 7/29/2017 at 9:13 PM, Gnosis Pithos said:

when did Jehovah Witnesses start relying on “apostate” NEWS by Johnny the Bethelite

I had never heard of "Johnny the Bethelite," "Rick Fearon" nor any of the blogs/websites you linked to until I saw your post. That is because I don't go to those places except by accident. But apparently, in direct violation of the clear direction we get from the Faithful and Discreet Slave, you do. Your post is like telling someone: "Hey there is a roaring lion down the path in that cave that wants to kill you. Why don't you go and check it out? In fact, I'll help you along by greasing that slippery slope with a direct link to it."  Whose side are you on anyway? It brings to mind a couple of expressions: "A danger to himself and others" and "with friends like that who needs enemies?"

On 7/30/2017 at 9:25 AM, J.R. Ewing said:

So, basically, what you're saying is, reject everything Jesus taught. I guess he also told the Apostles not to listen to him.

Are you kidding me? Someone disagrees with you and you come up with that nonsense? My intention has always been to help people stay active and in the truth, despite the things that have stumbled many. Things that they find hard to rationalize. Things that YOU can't even stand to hear, let alone experience in real life. The fact is, I would have found it very difficult myself had not others patiently and lovingly showed they understood what I was seeing/going through, having experienced it themselves and providing seasoned scriptural advice to make sense of this madness. No one else would have understood and I would have been on my own. I think such ones are a gift from Jehovah. And although some people live in "pretend world," or as most, simply never see this stuff, shouldn't  basic common sense tell you that this stuff goes on? When someone is df'd let's say as an apostate/immoral/molester... How long do you think that has been going on for? Just that day? Doesn't reality tell you that at times these (prophesied about) wicked men and imposters were men that were "not whom they appeared to be" for years, decades even? So what (sometimes) happens to the ones who are exposed to such men? Nobody believes them (or wants to believe them) - that's what. Or they are viewed as negative trouble-makers by guys like you. Guys who set themselves up as "keepers of the faith" while ignoring/denying these spiritual "widows and orphans."  These little sheep often leave the truth when they are treated like that. 

23 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Arguably, mature ones here who sometimes veer into discussing organizational flaws are not impeding anything, but by 'shining the bright light of journalistic truth' are encouraging everyone to shape up. Though that sometimes works, as often it is as when you shine a bright light upon cockroaches. They don't stop being cockroaches when you do that. They just go somewhere else.

I'm hoping that the purpose of posting isn't just to expose organizational flaws - it isn't in my case anyway. It's not fair for members of a family just to air dirty laundry. It seems apparent that Jay Witness has a bad agenda and as one poster mentioned in effect, we shouldn't believe everything opposers say.  It is more to get us thinking about our own attitudes toward wrongdoing we may face from within the organization. Some seem to have a culture of "see no evil, hear no evil" as if considering anything "negative" from within is somehow being disloyal or disobedient. "Only draw attention to good things; ignore anything bad/negative so as not to be discouraging." Question: Is that the example Jehovah set for us? Do you get the impression from reading his Word that in his organization (both heavenly and earthly) nothing bad ever happened? What about Jesus? Did he pretend badness/flaws didn't exist both in Jehovah's organization at the time (the Jews) or even among his followers? Or what about later when the Christian congregation was established...? Or what about the information published by the F&DS today? (i.e. chapter 28 of the Proclaimers Book: Testing and Sifting from Within). Can this all be just "airing dirty laundry?"  But yet, some feel if we consider these realities, it's somehow bad. To be clear: No one is suggesting a steady diet of negative experiences, so why consider them at all? To use your illustration: "...when you shine a bright light upon cockroaches...they don't stop being cockroaches...they just go somewhere else." When is that true? Whenever you look the other way and pretend they don't exist. Usually, when people go to the trouble of shining a light on something it is to do something about it. Otherwise, they just continue to exist - as you have correctly mentioned - and even proliferate. So, of course, we have a scriptural system in place whereby we don't just look the other way when we encounter wrongdoing. We report it and even when justice may take years, decades or even lifetimes, we leave matters in Jehovah's hands since we have fulfilled our personal obligation and not take matters into our own hands.I don't see anyone suggesting a mutiny for the organization to change here. Is that the end of the story though? What about in the meantime when we see people being stumbled or deeply troubled by something, THEN what is our obligation? Pretend it doesn't exist? Or apply God's counsel to us at 2 Corinthians 1:3, 4: "Praised by the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of tender mercies and the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all out trials so that WE MAY BE ABLE TO COMFORT OTHERS IN ANY SORT OF TRIAL WITH THE COMFORT THAT WE RECEIVE FROM GOD." Some of us have seen and experienced things that would assuredly stumble others (I don't even tell elders or Circuit Overseers because the problem is not whether they would even believe me anyway ((they wouldn't)), but rather, what if they DID believe me? (I wouldn't go around blabbing about this stuff anyway). They would possibly be stumbled - even though they may THINK they have "seen everything." Some of these things are WAY outside the box. Things people wouldn't even think would exist or call to mind as a possibility. That is why those specifics are not being mentioned here. The fact is, none of these things as bad as they may be should stumble anyone - they haven't stumbled us and we have survived. But often what makes these things (although rare) survivable is the kindness, understanding, validation, acceptance and love of those who really have been there. Who can understand and help one make sense of things they thought could never happen because "angels would cull out whatever would stumble anyone." (they misunderstand the import of that verse in Matthew and so have unrealistic expectations of what should happen.) One of Jehovah's provisions to help us, is the support we get from our brotherhood. They can be a personal lifesaver and comfort that you wouldn't normally get from a magazine or public talk 

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

The "stoplight" analogy applies to many things.

Glad to see you are posting again (or maybe I havent been around much). I always enjoy your pictures, comments and offbeat humour. I don't even know where you come up with this stuff (ie X-ray head with fish floating around in it...high-healed flippers...) Always good for a smile - and some insightful comments and observations too. Was worried you were being "leaned on" by "the man"  when it seemed you had stopped posting. 

Not sure why so much time is spent on refuting something based on a questionable premise. It's like arguing whether someone stopped at a red light, when there is no traffic light there to begin with.

The idea for being tormented for all eternity in "hell" presupposes the idea that humans have an immortal soul. Do they? Because if there is no immortal soul, then there is nowhere but the common grave for them to go. (Thats where I usually start anyway when someone brings up this topic). True, some mix "soul" and "spirit" together to come up with some hybrid notion of what a human soul is; or even centuries after the fact invent the unscriptural idea of "resurrection of the body" to answer the thorny question of: "If a person (soul) never really dies, why doe the Bible refer to a resurrection - why would we even need one?

So I think a pertinent question worth asking is: Does the Bible teach that humans have a conscious immortal soul that survives the body after death that automatically floats to heaven or hell - thus making any form of torment even possible? Or does it teach that when you die, that's it - unless you are resurrected back to life?