TrueTomHarley

It can go the other way, too with references to the “immorality of the soul.” But nothing matches reading aloud one of those interminable “Is it” questions of Fred Franz and only realizing that the very end you should have read it with the inflection of an “It is”—because it was a statement, not a question.

Sure, it's Acts 15:24, highlighted further below, but you'd probably want to see the context. And keep in mind that I am just interpreting, too. In Galatians, where Paul clearly makes a point that he did not get any apostolic authority or theocratic assignments from the "so-called pillars" at Jerusalem. Paul says in Galatians chapters 1 & 2:
"nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before I was. . . .Then after 14 years I again went up to Jerusalem with Barʹna·bas, also taking Titus along with me .  . . .But that matter came up because of the false brothers brought in quietly, who slipped in to spy on the freedom we enjoy in union with Christ Jesus, so that they might completely enslave us;  we did not yield in submission to them, . . .But regarding those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me, for God does not go by a man’s outward appearance—those highly regarded men imparted nothing new to me. On the contrary, . . . . . . James and Ceʹphas and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars. . . . However, when Ceʹphas came to Antioch, I resisted him face-to-face, because he was clearly in the wrong.  For before certain men from James arrived, he used to eat with people of the nations; but when they arrived, he stopped doing this and separated himself, fearing those of the circumcised class. The rest of the Jews also joined him in putting on this pretense [Greek, hypocrisy], . . .
So this is the backdrop of Acts 15. The NWT cross-references "the false brothers brought in quietly, who slipped in to spy" to Acts 15:1 and 15:24:
(Acts 15:1) Now some men came down from Ju·deʹa and began to teach the brothers: “Unless you get circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”
(Acts 15:24) Since we have heard that some went out from among us and caused you trouble with what they have said, trying to subvert you, although we did not give them any instructions,
It's not as important but "men from James" is cross-referenced to Acts 12:17, evidently to show that "James and the brothers" was a way of referencing the Jerusalem congregation. The WT uses this idea to say that James must have therefore been the "chairman" of a governing body at Jerusalem.
So, putting it all together, the situation is that JAMES, was one of the highly regarded men, who SEEMED to be important. But JAMES had sent spies to see if Paul was really preaching against the need for circumcision. But these spies, were evidently just supposed to spy for James, and report back to him. These men from James evidently did NOT have instructions to begin subverting Paul's preaching by promoting circumcision.
At any rate, you can see from Acts 15:24 that, in the message that went out from Jerusalem, it admits that these men "went out from among us" and "caused trouble" and admits that they were "trying to subvert." James says they did not give them instructions, which is a nicer way than Paul would have said it, of course.

Ah. So the real headline to be taken from the Rolf book, obscured by 50,000 wet dream malcontent internet  pages, is 
“Top Norwegian Awesome Scholar Proves that CSA Hysteria Against Jehovah’s Witnesses Is Bogus”
In writing this headline, I hesitated to use the word ‘proved.’ Had he really done that? But then I deferred to the words of the other scholar on this forum, 4Jah, who said of Rolf’s book (without reading it): “I think this gentleman and his book proves the point I'm making here.”
In fact, it ‘proves’ just the opposite.
In a roundabout way, Rolf brings his gift to the altar. Are legal machinations against the WT on account of how they viewed elders in the 1940s? Or are they about sensationalized investigations of CSA? Put Rolf on the stand as star ‘expert’ witness for the defense—after lauding him as Moses descending with the tablets, opposers can hardly say that he is delusional—and knock the legal ball out of the park.
In view of this service, compromise with Rolf. Appoint a panel to look at the GB’s doings. Get a few of the helpers. And, for balance, an impartial outsider or two like myself or @Arauna (you keep out of it JWI) We’ll have this ship righted again in no time.
 
 

Ah. So the real headline to be taken from the Rolf book, obscured by 50,000 wet dream malcontent internet  pages, is 
“Top Norwegian Awesome Scholar Proves that CSA Hysteria Against Jehovah’s Witnesses Is Bogus”
In writing this headline, I hesitated to use the word ‘proved.’ Had he really done that? But then I deferred to the words of the other scholar on this forum, 4Jah, who said of Rolf’s book (without reading it): “I think this gentleman and his book proves the point I'm making here.”
In fact, it ‘proves’ just the opposite.
In a roundabout way, Rolf brings his gift to the altar. Are legal machinations against the WT on account of how they viewed elders in the 1940s? Or are they about sensationalized investigations of CSA? Put Rolf on the stand as star ‘expert’ witness for the defense—after lauding him as Moses descending with the tablets, opposers can hardly say that he is delusional—and knock the legal ball out of the park.
In view of this service, compromise with Rolf. Appoint a panel to look at the GB’s doings. Get a few of the helpers. And, for balance, an impartial outsider or two like myself or @Arauna (you keep out of it JWI) We’ll have this ship righted again in no time.
 
 

I’d better bring up CSA before 4Jah soars to a font too large for the page.
Does he mention CSA? Ray thought it was an overblown concoction of media. What say Rolf?

Is his post still up where he said my remark was obvious click bait and I said ‘how can that be, you dodo, since there is nothing to click on?‘

How can it be click bait, you klutz—there’s no place to click!

I can instantly see this. It is true of me, as well. Bitterness has no place at....excuse me—
“Hey, you rotten kids! Get off of my lawn!!!!”
(Sorry—couldn’t resist) Of course you are not bitter. It’s quite plain. Nor am I. Not at all. Frankly, if you still hang on to bitterness at our age you will soon be dead from it.
I posted in Twitter just now, and it doesn’t perfectly fit, but it almost does. 4Jah is right—I like to hear myself talk, or more to the point, I need someplace to go for a writing workshop. Why not here?
 
For a long time I’ve practiced, if I follow one viewpoint on Twitter, I also go out and follow its polar opposite. In that way I’ve come to see that such polarization is everywhere, not just politics, not just my field of religion, not just social issues, but everywhere....1/3‬
It is very rare for people to switch from one camp to another. The notion that we are rational beings is largely a facade. In the context of religion, I say ‘the heart chooses its beliefs and then entrusts the head to devise a justification...2/3‬
‪Who can say what makes the heart? But our individual experience no doubt are a huge factor, if not the dominant one....3/3‬
By this measure, Jehovah’s Witnesses (not those born into it) are a most unusual people. They have changed on fundamental outlook—something almost nobody does. And what their ‘apostates’ who have gone back to the things left behind? Aren’t they unusual, too? Nah—they just got cold feet as to the changes they made and retreated back to the seeming normalcy of Demas.
Maybe that’s why (within limits) I can hang out here without taking offense at anyone, even should things be specifically directed at me. We are all but actors in a play. It is the play that is the topic to follow. The actors are not all that important. You don’t have to know much about the actors to follow the play—it can even be a distraction if you do.
 
 
 

This kind of thing often fails because enemies will not let it remain low-key. It has made their day, if not year, and they will pump and pump until it becomes the only story that matters.
But the young man again said, this time emphatically, “My Lord Moses, restrain them!’ Moses mildly replied: “Not a problem. Chill.”
But the young man once again said: My Lord Moses, restrain them!!!!! Moses mildly replied: “Let’s stay low-key about this.”
But the young man once again said: “MY LORD MOSES, RESTRAIN THEM!!!!  (this is going to be good!!!!)“

(Exodus 18:17-23) 17 Moses’ father-in-law said to him: “What you are doing is not good. 18 You will surely wear out, both you and this people who are with you, because this is too big a load for you and you cannot carry it by yourself. 19 Now listen to me. I will give you advice, and God will be with you. You serve as representative for the people before the true God, and you must bring the cases to the true God. 20 You should warn them about what the regulations and the laws are and make known to them the way in which they should walk and the work that they should do. 21 But you should select from the people capable men fearing God, trustworthy men hating dishonest profit, and appoint these over them as chiefs over thousands, chiefs over hundreds, chiefs over fifties, and chiefs over tens. 22 They should judge the people when cases arise, and they will bring every difficult case to you, but every minor case they will decide. Make it easier for yourself by letting them share the load along with you. 23 If you do this, and God so commands you, you will be able to stand the strain, and everyone will go home satisfied.”
A "hierarchy" not unlike governments and businesses too.
Also, you might have referred to this case:
*** w03 4/1 pp. 18-19 par. 14 Mildness—An Essential Christian Quality ***
After Jehovah appointed him leader of the nation of Israel, Moses’ quality of mildness was still in evidence. A young man reported to Moses that Eldad and Medad were acting as prophets in the camp—even though they were not present when Jehovah poured out his spirit upon the 70 older men who were to serve as Moses’ helpers. Joshua declared: “My lord Moses, restrain them!” Moses mildly replied: “Are you feeling jealous for me? No, I wish that all of Jehovah’s people were prophets, because Jehovah would put his spirit upon them!” (Numbers 11:26-29) Mildness helped defuse that tense situation.
This full situation always reminds me of this:
(Mark 9:38-40) 38 John said to him: “Teacher, we saw someone expelling demons by using your name, and we tried to prevent him, because he was not following us.” 39 But Jesus said: “Do not try to prevent him, for there is no one who will do a powerful work on the basis of my name who will quickly be able to say anything bad about me. 40 For whoever is not against us is for us.

Okay, JWI has posted a new topic. I don’t want to catch any of you saying irrelevant things. I don’t want 4Jah talking about CSA. I don’t want Allen talking about Zondervan. I can post some of my vacation pictures, of course, but everyone else had better behave. You want me to blow you in to the Old Hen?

Okay, JWI has posted a new topic. I don’t want to catch any of you saying irrelevant things. I don’t want 4Jah talking about CSA. I don’t want Allen talking about Zondervan. I can post some of my vacation pictures, of course, but everyone else had better behave. You want me to blow you in to the Old Hen?

the Librarian. It’s a long story.

I wouldn’t exactly call it the pure language, but I am glad to see that it is catching on.
Just a heads-up, JWI, in case Allen comes around trying to impress you with his diploma from Bible 101. It is genuine, but not earned in the traditional way. He argued so unceasingly with the results of every test, quiz, term paper, and lab project, that we finally gave him a diploma just to get him out of our hair.

Mr Rook would not be so thin-skinned to see it that way. He would have had a good belly-laugh over it. You would have us believe that you were his friend? You did everything you could to separate him from his God. Remember, he was on my side of the Great Issue, not yours.
He came to have the same problem that Rolf is going to have—having “false friends” sucking him dry for info, kissing his feet with praise, ecstatic at the ‘dirt’ they think he is spilling, then turning around and saying he is delusional for not abandoning every last vestige of Witness belief—just like you do with JWI. At the same time, his genuine friends distance themselves. At least Rolf will find some companionship within the airy world of ‘scholarship’—no such luck for JTR.
It was worse for JTR. Rolf makes perfectly clear that he regards his faith as true. I gather that he is not too different from JWI, who has issues with some organizational matters, but has no problem acknowledging that there must be leadership and cooperating with it on that basis.  In contrast, JTR came across as a ‘spiritual terrorist,’ and it is only upon close examination—which the average Witness will be not inclined to do in view of his outrageous remarks—that one can see his love for Jehovah was genuine. Even his own kids deserted him—something he freely admitted—this despite the fact that he was not under congregation censure..
You simply cannot go about harshly criticizing ones held in high esteem—ones loved for their hard work and example—and expect to keep your friends. The loudest applause at any convention is at the question, “Would you like to send your greetings to the brothers in Bethel?” It’s like if some would come around and pretend to be my friends, saying the nicest things about me, yet they absolutely cannot stand my wife, and never fail to hurl abuses at her. Is that going to work with me? Will I be taken in? I don’t think so. And yes, the earthly organization is likened to a beloved human—a mother, as that AlanF, with the IQ of a Descartes and an EQ of the Sesame Street Cookie Monster, changed to ‘mommy,’ hoping to infuriate people.
I like to think with JTR it was a case of Psalm 141:5 and that he has time to undo the damage. Of course, you always have time to undo it with Jehovah if your turnaround is genuine, but I hope it is with family and friends as well.
“Should the righteous one strike me, it would be an act of loyal love; Should he reprove me, it would be like oil on my head, Which my head would never refuse. My prayer will continue even during their calamities.” 
I like to think it was that way here with a few who slammed him pretty hard but also made clear that the rebuke was not personal—and that he as a person had some very appealing qualities. I tried to do that, and I had some acknowledgement from him in ‘thanks’ emojis, not just upvotes. Others did this, as well—his spiritual brothers with his best interests at heart. I could well be a little too Pollyanna in reviewing how it has turned out—but his last few comments very neatly tie into a Pollyanna view—so that’s the one I’ll take. 
He wasn’t really wrong in the factual nature of anything he said—he was ‘wrong’ in how he had processed it. You can’t go about life being hypercritical. You have to be ready to move on. You can’t go digging through the diamonds to find the dirt. You have to be ready to forgive. It is an important theme of Jesus that he came to feel he ought more fully get his heart around.
You kept telling him how he could bask in a fine relationship with God while sticking it to the visible organization. He had too much common sense and honesty to fall for it. He knew that path leads inevitably to become fully part of the word—in time, doing all that the world does and thinking it can be offset with a smiley God emoji. 
Mark Smith’s book Secular Faith points out that the typical church member has more in common with atheists than with members of his own denomination of 100 years ago. That is what happens in the absence of an earthly counterpart to the heavenly organization. JTR knew that. That was among the things he meant when he lamented that he should have been closer to Jehovah.
Go ahead, you idiot—slap another braying emoji on this one. 

Okay, JWI has posted a new topic. I don’t want to catch any of you saying irrelevant things. I don’t want 4Jah talking about CSA. I don’t want Allen talking about Zondervan. I can post some of my vacation pictures, of course, but everyone else had better behave. You want me to blow you in to the Old Hen?

Okay, JWI has posted a new topic. I don’t want to catch any of you saying irrelevant things. I don’t want 4Jah talking about CSA. I don’t want Allen talking about Zondervan. I can post some of my vacation pictures, of course, but everyone else had better behave. You want me to blow you in to the Old Hen?

When you keep calling someone "old hen" you are not behaving, Tom.  And I don't even know who it is.

Okay, JWI has posted a new topic. I don’t want to catch any of you saying irrelevant things. I don’t want 4Jah talking about CSA. I don’t want Allen talking about Zondervan. I can post some of my vacation pictures, of course, but everyone else had better behave. You want me to blow you in to the Old Hen?

Mr Rook would not be so thin-skinned to see it that way. He would have had a good belly-laugh over it. You would have us believe that you were his friend? You did everything you could to separate him from his God. Remember, he was on my side of the Great Issue, not yours.
He came to have the same problem that Rolf is going to have—having “false friends” sucking him dry for info, kissing his feet with praise, ecstatic at the ‘dirt’ they think he is spilling, then turning around and saying he is delusional for not abandoning every last vestige of Witness belief—just like you do with JWI. At the same time, his genuine friends distance themselves. At least Rolf will find some companionship within the airy world of ‘scholarship’—no such luck for JTR.
It was worse for JTR. Rolf makes perfectly clear that he regards his faith as true. I gather that he is not too different from JWI, who has issues with some organizational matters, but has no problem acknowledging that there must be leadership and cooperating with it on that basis.  In contrast, JTR came across as a ‘spiritual terrorist,’ and it is only upon close examination—which the average Witness will be not inclined to do in view of his outrageous remarks—that one can see his love for Jehovah was genuine. Even his own kids deserted him—something he freely admitted—this despite the fact that he was not under congregation censure..
You simply cannot go about harshly criticizing ones held in high esteem—ones loved for their hard work and example—and expect to keep your friends. The loudest applause at any convention is at the question, “Would you like to send your greetings to the brothers in Bethel?” It’s like if some would come around and pretend to be my friends, saying the nicest things about me, yet they absolutely cannot stand my wife, and never fail to hurl abuses at her. Is that going to work with me? Will I be taken in? I don’t think so. And yes, the earthly organization is likened to a beloved human—a mother, as that AlanF, with the IQ of a Descartes and an EQ of the Sesame Street Cookie Monster, changed to ‘mommy,’ hoping to infuriate people.
I like to think with JTR it was a case of Psalm 141:5 and that he has time to undo the damage. Of course, you always have time to undo it with Jehovah if your turnaround is genuine, but I hope it is with family and friends as well.
“Should the righteous one strike me, it would be an act of loyal love; Should he reprove me, it would be like oil on my head, Which my head would never refuse. My prayer will continue even during their calamities.” 
I like to think it was that way here with a few who slammed him pretty hard but also made clear that the rebuke was not personal—and that he as a person had some very appealing qualities. I tried to do that, and I had some acknowledgement from him in ‘thanks’ emojis, not just upvotes. Others did this, as well—his spiritual brothers with his best interests at heart. I could well be a little too Pollyanna in reviewing how it has turned out—but his last few comments very neatly tie into a Pollyanna view—so that’s the one I’ll take. 
He wasn’t really wrong in the factual nature of anything he said—he was ‘wrong’ in how he had processed it. You can’t go about life being hypercritical. You have to be ready to move on. You can’t go digging through the diamonds to find the dirt. You have to be ready to forgive. It is an important theme of Jesus that he came to feel he ought more fully get his heart around.
You kept telling him how he could bask in a fine relationship with God while sticking it to the visible organization. He had too much common sense and honesty to fall for it. He knew that path leads inevitably to become fully part of the word—in time, doing all that the world does and thinking it can be offset with a smiley God emoji. 
Mark Smith’s book Secular Faith points out that the typical church member has more in common with atheists than with members of his own denomination of 100 years ago. That is what happens in the absence of an earthly counterpart to the heavenly organization. JTR knew that. That was among the things he meant when he lamented that he should have been closer to Jehovah.
Go ahead, you idiot—slap another braying emoji on this one. 

You have not figured out yet that JTR was one of my aliases?

Is that what you think this forum is for—so that we may get far? Have you seen any sign of agreement from anyone over the last five years? The best thing that has happened is that JTR began to realize who all his comments were making him friends with and did a reappraisal. 

It can be learned. At Sheepandgoats U, there is a degree program on not responding to the ignoramuses. It is taught by a professor of impeccable qualtifications and sterling example - myself. 
Hesitate to sign up, perhaps put off by some examples that you have seen with your own eyes? Then consider a testimonial:
 

You have not figured out yet that JTR was one of my aliases?

I have not yet offered any scholarships, but that may change.
I’m not sure where all this Zondervan stuff started, but I wish that somewhere Rolf could have pointed out the conflict-of-interest in putting Big Business in charge of distributing the Word of God. 
He might, too, have highlighted the feat of inventing an entirely new publication and distribution channel so that the poverty-stricken fellow in a developing nation is not stuck with some 200-year-old turkey of a translation that he can neither afford nor understand. 
He might also point out how such a channel means that rigorously translating a ‘trinity’ scripture will not doom the Bible in the marketplace, as it would in Zondervan’s case.
He might acknowledge that the GB can’t be all that bad to have pulled off such a stunt.