Apostles, Judas, GB, Raymond, Satan, Holy Spirit

[FelixCA]

4 hours ago, Anna said:

Have you read the book?

Both! I have read other apostate books as well. I only see meaningless understandings just like any other ex-JW book out there. There's nothing original that the world doesn't already know. Canon fodder for people like butler. 😁

[Anna]

6 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

I only see meaningless understandings just like any other ex-JW book out there. There's nothing original that the world doesn't already know.

What do you mean by meaningless understandings? And what do you mean by "what the world doesn't already know? Please explain a little. Perhaps give examples of the 'meaningless understandings' you have in mind. And what is the 'knowledge' you are talking about that the world ready knows?

[JOHN BUTLER]

@Anna You asked. What attracted you to what Jehovah's Witnesses taught'? Why did you become one of Jehovah's Witnesses? Surely there must have been something that you recognized as valuable?

I was fresh out of a horrible children's home (details I've written about before) and my brother helped me a lot. He and his wife were JW's and i sort of thought they are leading a good life and they are good to me. I tended to believe everything my brother told me about any subject. He's my older brother by 8 years, and I thought he had more experience of life than me so I trusted him to teach me the right things. He's now an Elder in a congregation in our hometown... And the people on 'ground level' were good and friendly. BUT that just makes it like a social club. I fell for it all. I did as I was told and didn't ask questions. It all seems to make sense. 

THEN, as time went on, the GB/JW Org changed the meaning of scriptures, changed teachings/doctrine, and well you know why I left. And the more I'm reading on here, the worse the Org seems to be. ... 

The  Org uses the word 'Truth' as a trick word. They are saying being in the JW org is being in the Truth. Hence any thing outside is all lies. It's done to kind of frighten people, that if a person looks outside all they will find is lies. But that is the lie. 

I think it's funny that JW's pretend they don't put their faith in men. Whereas it can easily be seen that JW's are told to believe what the GB tells them. JW's do not question the GB's words, hence why wrongdoing has been going on for so long in the JW Org. Proof from past Watchtowers shows that the Org presents itself as God's only organisation, and the GB as God's only spokesperson, and again the Org as the only means of salvation. And JW's do not question that.  

Quote "I am sure you have faith in your wife, in your children and others? "

You are totally wrong. I have faith in no human, and trust no human.. I'm married to my third wife, the previous two committed adultery. My childhood completely ruined my life. And no I'm not blaming, I'm stating fact. The emotional damage 'killed' me. I'm a shell. But you and others will never understand, only God and Jesus Christ can understand, and I will be judged by them.  

[FelixCA]

48 minutes ago, Anna said:

What do you mean by meaningless understandings? And what do you mean by "what the world doesn't already know? Please explain a little. Perhaps give examples of the 'meaningless understandings' you have in mind. And what is the 'knowledge' you are talking about that the world ready knows?

What is the Ex-JW and opposers perception about 607BC, 537BC 1874, 1878, 1914, 1917, 1919, 1925, 1969, 1975 etc.? This is a common theme for ex-JW's books. Nothing original.

If people never understood the significance of these dates, yet are willing to break ranks because of a misguided understanding, what would be the message for loyal witnesses, and what would it be called aside from meaningless.

What does the power of Satan have to do about seeking truth? It becomes a personal opinion about something they believed was understood like Raymond, and then the facts weren’t. Don’t you think Raymond put too much faith on research gathered, rather trust in God the vast research done by the organization reached a different conclusion? How can anyone prove it one way or another? Yet, Raymond and people like Raymond came to an absolute decision, they are correct. By who's standards are they correct?

So, excuse me, I rather trust in God and Bible understanding rather than men trying very hard to prove the organization wrong.

When the same distorted information is circulated, what is the benefit? When the same topics are offered in a closed setting just because some don’t appreciate a response that refutes such claims, what is the difference with what the GB is being accused of?

At some point, this rhetoric needs to make sense? Not just become a selling point for the other side.

[JOHN BUTLER]

Quote "I rather trust in God and Bible understanding... " 

BUT maybe you are not, maybe you are trusting in different men, the GB. 

[Anna]

26 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

What is the Ex-JW and opposers perception about 607BC, 537BC 1874, 1878, 1914, 1917, 1919, 1925, 1969, 1975 etc.? This is a common theme for ex-JW's books. Nothing original.

It is evident in Raymond's case, that he only wrote what the Societies' understanding of those dates were at the time. He added nothing of his own understanding or interpretation to these dates. He quotes nobody else but the Societies' literature concerning these dates. It had nothing to do with anyone else's perception but only of the perception of those who mentioned these dates in the first place ( Barbour, Russell, Rutherford, Franz...)

These dates are only a common theme for ex-JW books because most of them derived this information from Raymond's books

35 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

If people never understood the significance of these dates, yet are willing to break ranks because of a misguided understanding, what would be the message for loyal witnesses, and what would it be called aside from meaningless.

I think they understood these dates, but most of these dates failed in their expectations and had to be revised, several times. I think it is up to each individual person to asses whether this is meaningless for them or not.

40 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

It becomes a personal opinion about something they believed was understood like Raymond, and then the facts weren’t.

I am not sure what you mean by this. But assuming I understand what you mean then again, I don't think this is a matter of personal opinion if you quote (in context) the other party. I think it became quite clear how certain things were supposed to be understood. Many times it was crystal clear.

44 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

Don’t you think Raymond put too much faith on research gathered, rather trust in God the vast research done by the organization reached a different conclusion?

I am assuming you mean that Raymond put too much faith in his own research of the society? If that's what you mean then it doesn't make any difference whether Raymond put faith in his research or not because research, or the evidence provided, should be able to stand on it's own, and it should be up to each individual to decide how much faith they will put in the evidence shown. It's what we do with our Bible studies, we show them evidence, and on the basis of that evidence the student decides whether they will accept it or not, or reach a different conclusion. It doesn't matter how much faith in that evidence we have ourselves.

If you mean that Raymond did separate parallel research on the same subject as the organization, then I do not see that in his first book (I didn't read his second book). From what I've seen, Raymond merely reports on beliefs already held, and how those beliefs had to change due to inaccuracies. I do not see him espousing his own ideas.

55 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

Yet, Raymond and people like Raymond came to an absolute decision, they are correct. By who's standards are they correct?

Well he 'only' quoted the organizations own literature and or/letters from branch offices.  So you decide by whose standards are they correct.

59 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

So, excuse me, I rather trust in God and Bible understanding rather than men trying very hard to prove the organization wrong.

I don't think that this late in the stream of time it is difficult at all for anyone to see that the organization has had wrong expectations and understanding. Time itself has has proved this. No one has to try very hard at all.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200277174

https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/jw-doctrine-changes/#?insight[search_id]=2d58f3a4-a39b-4bab-8385-d3b8065094d5&insight[search_result_index]=1

What Raymond does focus on though is how some of these misunderstandings have had detrimental results in the lives of some friends.

1 hour ago, FelixCA said:

When the same distorted information is circulated, what is the benefit?

Distorted information has no benefit of course. Did you have something in mind in Raymond's book that would be considered distorted information? There are some things I remember that I did not agree on, but it has been a while since I read the book and I cannot remember what they were. Perhaps you can be quicker in giving an example.

[FelixCA]

2 minutes ago, Anna said:

It is evident in Raymond's case, that he only wrote what the Societies' understanding of those dates were at the time. He added nothing of his own understanding or interpretation to these dates. He quotes nobody else but the Societies' literature concerning these dates. It had nothing to do with anyone else's perception but only of the perception of those who mentioned these dates in the first place ( Barbour, Russell, Rutherford, Franz...)

These dates are only a common theme for ex-JW books because most of them derived this information from Raymond's books

I will disagree with this assessment. misinterpreting articles and Watchtower lead information does not the truth make

[FelixCA]

If we use that standard, it would be, we couldn’t trust our own heart. It would amount to the same thing if we use men literally rather than men lead by the Holy Spirit. Matthew 15:19

The figure of speech would suggest people weren’t trusting the apostles as ordinary men but rather as messengers of God. How else can we see the power of the Holy Spirit? Raymond fell for the deception.

The Vatican fought holy wars. Their preachers still go into combat as a show of faith that God is on their side. Can we trust people that should understand not to shed blood? 1 Chronicles 28:3, Hebrews 12:4

These people profess to have the Holy Spirit guided by God. What say you about ACTIONS?

[FelixCA]

35 minutes ago, Anna said:

I don't think that this late in the stream of time it is difficult at all for anyone to see that the organization has had wrong expectations and understanding. Time itself has has proved this. No one has to try very hard at all.

The argument offered would lead us to what? In ancient times, I can offer many examples where the faithful people of God failed. What is the point, if we don’t allow God to make the necessary corrections rather than rely upon our own heart to make them?

It seems there is an understanding of not willing to allow God, lead his people to the promise land and wish to intervene whenever convenient. Exodus 14:11, Deuteronomy 8:2

Door to Door

“If the question were put to the headquarters organization of the Watch Tower Society whether each member (if physically able) must do house-to-house witnessing to be a true Witness, in fact to be a true Christian, the answer would probably be that this is not an absolute requirement. (Actually, it would be extremely difficult to get a clear, straightforward answer on such a question; the headquarters organization is remarkably reticent about expressing itself in writing on sensitive issues and, even when given, answers are often couched in ambiguous terms, or evasive and roundabout reasoning.) We have already seen, however, that responsible men in the organization acknowledge that there is serious reason to question whether in reality the Witness community as a whole engages in this activity simply out of a heartfelt desire to do it, as something freely motivated, done without any sense of compulsion.”

To read an error of attempting to argue against the door to door witnessing when scripture clearly states how Jesus would send the apostles are one of a thousand (exaggeration) ways; maybe not Raymond misinterpreted scripture to win the minds and hearts of troubled people. Therefore, his research was NOT incumbent on Bible truth. James 5:16-20

[Equivocation]

On 1/21/2019 at 11:15 AM, Anna said:

What would you say to Jesus when he handpicked Judas Iscariot as one of his 12 Apostles?

That's a good question. 

[Equivocation]

5 hours ago, FelixCA said:

Both! I have read other apostate books as well. I only see meaningless understandings just like any other ex-JW book out there. There's nothing original that the world doesn't already know. Canon fodder for people like butler. 😁

I remember the last time I confronted an apostate (who said he was a a Christian) and spoke of God, he said he'd kill me even though he was twice my age, even dared me to go to his town and that I'd be praying to wishing God was here in person when he is done with me. It didn't faze me that much because I was right about what I said because he was saying untrue things about God and about Moses and the Israelites. He was angry because he was corrected on the Old Testament. Even before that some of these apostates attacked the hall I was at, and caused someone who is connected to a sister to go to war against the apostates.

Always another day in the office it seems.

[FelixCA]

2 hours ago, Equivocation said:

I remember the last time I confronted an apostate (who said he was a a Christian) and spoke of God, he said he'd kill me even though he was twice my age, even dared me to go to his town and that I'd be praying to wishing God was here in person when he is done with me. It didn't faze me that much because I was right about what I said because he was saying untrue things about God and about Moses and the Israelites. He was angry because he was corrected on the Old Testament. Even before that some of these apostates attacked the hall I was at, and caused someone who is connected to a sister to go to war against the apostates.

I’m sorry to read about this personal experience. A dangerous one indeed. That just shows not all witnesses live a sheltered life like outsiders think they do. Confused witnesses are free to leave the organization whenever they want, and not be stocked like they do with Scientology. Just like it is anyone’s free will, NOT to associate with anybody that doesn’t share the SAME values of being Christ true followers with Christian ethics and faith. Example, If my brother became a drug addict, why would I want to associate with him? I would want him to repent and clean himself up. Raymond thought shunning a derogatory remark was unloving. How could he account for millions of outsiders that do the same?

Raymond Franz lost the mission as a disciple in favor of friendship and wanting personal power. A few examples on how perception, of some, can become clouded by following the same pattern of insincere ideals. They call it, “in search for the truth by understanding facts.” The problem there, the more facts are gathered the more confused the original research becomes. I wonder, what will Raymond say when he is judged by Christ. Not about himself, but when asked, did your book prevent anyone from knowing the gospel of Christ? Or interfered enough to prevent a soul from knowing the one true God according to my instructions left in the inspired books that became known as the Holy Bible. 2 Peter 2:20-22

Unfortunately, this is what happens when people confuse the administrative roles of the GB with doctoral understanding.

Stay safe my brother. Always remember with situations such as these, which I know only too well, Matthew 10:28.