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

[FelixCA]

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

You should have already bee aware that R.Franz never made any such claim like this either.

I see you are going to use my words against me. I find that insulting.

 

1975: ‘THE APPROPRIATE TIME
FOR GOD TO ACT’

DURING the second half of Rutherford’s presidency most of the older time prophecies so strenuously argued for in the first half
were gradually dropped or relocated. The start of the “last days” was moved up from 1799 to 1914.
The 1874 presence of Christ was also moved up to 1914 (as had already been done in 1922 with the 1878 official start of Christ’s active Kingdom rule)...Governing Body member Bill Jackson smilingly said to me, “We used to say, you just take the date from this shoulder and put it on the other shoulder.”

at most,” “the final few years,” all used in the Watchtower and Awake! magazines with reference to the beginning of the millennial reign and all in a context that included the date 1975. Do such words
mean anything? Or were they used loosely, carelessly? Are people’s hopes and plans and feelings something to be toyed with? To fail to be concerned about those factors would be both irresponsible and insensitive. Yet theWatchtower of August 15, 1968, even implied that one should be careful about putting too much weight on Jesus Christ’s own cautionary words.

Your characterization of me is 100% speculation. This is why we all have different opinions.

[Foreigner]

6 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

What became of his wife? I never hear about her.

a algunas personas les gusta impresionar a los demás pretendiendo buscar cosas, cuando ni siquiera conocen a las personas que están buscando.

https://www.commentarypress.com/

 

[FelixCA]

16 minutes ago, Foreigner said:

algunas personas les gusta impresionar a los demás pretendiendo buscar cosas, cuando ni siquiera conocen a las personas que están buscando.

Hermano. Por eso me niego a aceptar cualquier cosa tangible de los sitios apóstatas. Sobre todo viniendo de Peter Gregersons. 😉

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

@FelixCA Quote  " I get the impression Butler believes the GB to be equal to Christ, not above him as you state. "

Felix you are a complete nutcase. A self loving nutcase at that. You follow the GB's example by putting yourself on high

Remember the scripture in Luke 14 v 11 Well you certainly exalt yourself... So it follows 

 For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.”

You also follow the example of Space Merchant on here,. You start off talking to one person then you drag as many peoples names  into your rant as you can find. 

You know that your comments are complete rubbish so you hide behind a 'cat'. You may be man or woman, who knows. But then who cares. You say nothing worth taking note of. 

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, FelixCA said:

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

You should have already bee aware that R.Franz never made any such claim like this either.

I see you are going to use my words against me. I find that insulting.

I'm sorry about insulting you. I don't think I am. Perhaps you can explain how.

I wish I knew a better way to say it. But it's still true that you are presenting something as if it is a fact, when it is clearly untrue.

You indicated that R.Franz said that in 'Watchtower literature . . . [it states] unequivocally the world would end in 1975'

That's the claim I was responding to. It's a false statement because R.Franz never said that in either of his books. In fact, you appear to have known this, or at least you know it by now. And you even offered a quote that shows that R.Franz understood exactly what the Watchtower literature was stating about 1975.

Unfortunately, when you wish to show someone that their words are not true, it seems best to quote which words aren't true. It's not like everything you said is untrue, so I didn't wish to make a blanket statements and assumptions about your ideology as you have about mine.

In fact the portion you quote from the chapter called "1975: 'The Appropriate Time for God to Act'" is quickly followed up with these words proving that R.Franz was being very accurate:

Had the organization said “flat out” that 1975 would mark the start
of the millennium? No. But the above paragraph was the climax to
which all of the involved, carefully constructed argumentation of that
chapter had been building.
No outright, unqualified prediction was made about 1975. But
the writer had been willing to declare it to be “appropriate” and “most
fitting on God’s part” if God would start the millennium at that
particular time. It would seem reasonable that for an imperfect man
to say what is or what is not “fitting” for the Almighty God to do
would call for quite a measure of certainty, surely not the mere
‘expression of an opinion.’ Discretion would require, rather, would
demand that. Even stronger is the subsequent statement that “it would
be according to the loving purpose of Jehovah God for the reign
of Jesus Christ, the ‘Lord of the sabbath,’ to run parallel with the
seventh millennium of man’s existence,” which seventh millennium
had already been stated as due to begin in 1975.

1 hour ago, FelixCA said:

Your characterization of me is 100% speculation. This is why we all have different opinions.

I had noted that you listed 5 points supposedly about R.Franz, and you got all 5 of them completely wrong about R.Franz, so I speculated that you didn't really know as much as you thought about him. By the way, this matches what you said earlier in this same topic about me. I hope you didn't think you were insulting me. 😉 

At any rate, I agree that we all have different opinions, and I think I can manage to avoid further speculation.

[FelixCA]

59 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

I'm sorry about insulting you. I don't think I am. Perhaps you can explain how.

I wish I knew a better way to say it. But it's still true that you are presenting something as if it is a fact, when it is clearly untrue.

You indicated that R.Franz said that in 'Watchtower literature . . . [it states] unequivocally the world would end in 1975'

That's the claim I was responding to. It's a false statement because R.Franz never said that in either of his books.

Try separating the 2. 1 by what opposers believe, and 1 by the innuendoes Raymond implied. Why would he found it a need to stipulate how witnesses would feel if 1975 wasn't going to be realized as indicated by the Watchtower publications. Your defense of Raymond is illogical. Perhaps to a weak heart, you will have success.

Is this why you told TrueTom you couldn’t find anything about Cynthia when there is plenty of ex-witnesses to applaud her for sticking by her man? A man that failed as an intellectual and spiritual person. Sorry. I don’t hold him, his research, or books in high regards as you do.

That means we have a difference of opinion with Raymond criticizing the year 1975, as though people thought it would become the end of the world just like any weak-minded witness.

Word salads are insulting. When I prove you wrong, it is not conjecture. This is why defending Raymond is wrong. And if you bother to read the remarks in the WordPress, His actions had a serious impact on others in a negative Christian way.

Who was this man to decide? This is a question he will have to answer for leading God’s children astray. A question that some here will have to answer for.

[FelixCA]

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

You also follow the example of Space Merchant on here,. You start off talking to one person then you drag as many peoples names  into your rant as you can find. 

Thank you for proving my point on how you view the GB. JWinsider used you as a "fine" example. He was wrong to do so since it was a horrible example coming from a meaningless person.

[JOHN BUTLER]

2 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

Thank you for proving my point on how you view the GB. JWinsider used you as a "fine" example. He was wrong to do so since it was a horrible example coming from a meaningless person.

You are totally weird Felix. i have not proved your point on anything. 

And your comments are not worth looking into. So I'll go back to listening to music on Youtube.

Anyone that tries having a meaningful conversation with you is wasting their time.

GB = 8 men who dream they are important. Just as you dream the same Felix.  

[Foreigner]

24 minutes ago, FelixCA said:

Is this why you told TrueTom you couldn’t find anything about Cynthia when there is plenty of ex-witnesses to applaud her for sticking by her man? A man that failed as an intellectual and spiritual person. Sorry. I don’t hold him, his research, or books in high regards as you do.

Hermano, deja que el incrédulo tenga su día. No vale la pena el tiempo que se imprime. La mentalidad apóstata es lo que el diablo apoya.

[JW Insider]

2 hours ago, FelixCA said:

the 2/3 majority vote just like it is done now with the majority rule, is NOT applicable to the conscience but to a sign from the Holy Spirit.

Another interesting belief. What you state would normally mean that you believe that seeing a 2/3 majority vote, is the same as seeing a sign from the Holy Spirit.

Amazingly, that would mean that when Brother Lloyd Barry saw that the vote was a two-thirds majority in the vote on alternative service, he should have recognized it as a sign from the Holy Spirit. But, then why would he decide to change his vote. We know that he had just realized that only one vote would make this go against the vote of Fred Franz. Could that be why? Or, if you are right, then he deliberately fought against a sign given by the holy spirit.

You have Brother Barry thinking something like the following:

"Oh look, a sign from the Holy Spirit -- a two-thirds majority. I wonder if I should kick against the goads of the Holy Spirit and change my vote, or just accept the sign. Well, it doesn't have to be me does it? After all Fred Franz saw it, too, and we call him the 'Oracle.' So surely Fred will see that there was as sign from the Holy Spirit and he will change his vote accordingly. But then again, we all know that the voting goes pretty much like this (as taken from CoC, p.279) : 

If, for example, the hands of Milton Henschel, Fred Franz, Ted
Jaracz and Lloyd Barry went up, one could generally be sure that the
hands of Carey Barber, Martin Poetzinger, William Jackson, George
Gangas, Grant Suiter and Jack Barr would go up as well. If the hands
of the former stayed down, the hands of the latter would generally
stay down also. Some others would likely vote with these but their
vote was not as predictable. With rare exceptions, this pattern prevailed.
The pattern held particularly true if any traditional policy or
position was under discussion. One could know beforehand those
members who would almost certainly vote in favor of maintaining
that traditional policy and against any change therein. Even in the case
of the “alternative service” issue, already discussed in a previous chapter,
though here outnumbered, these members were still able to prevent
a two-thirds majority vote from altering the position on that issue.

But we know that Fred Franz almost never changes his vote, and Klein won't change unless Fred does. But we do have Jaracz going against his usual pattern and voting to change this thing, even though Franz is voting to leave it as it is. So really it should be be Jaracz who changes his vote. Maybe I can find some excuse, and then change my vote to be in line with Fred Franz again. I owe him after that GB vote where I begged him to join the rest of us to make it unanimous.

As it happened, Barry was able to find an excuse to change his vote. So he did. Then the vote had to come up again to see if it would still pass. This time Barry stepped away so as not to be included. The first time it was F.Franz, Henschel, Jackson and Klein who opposed the change. If one more had taken his place, it would have passed with the two-thirds majority. But this time Carey Barber switched sides, too. And Jaracz, who had voted for it the first time, abstained from voting.

 

[FelixCA]

3 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Another interesting belief. What you state would normally mean that you believe that seeing a 2/3 majority vote, is the same as seeing a sign from the Holy Spirit.

Wrong again. There is no such thing as having a vote from the Holy Spirit. Once again, try not to obscure, administrative with the gift of the Holy Spirit. To give people spiritual nourishment, the responsible body has to be in full accord when receiving the same gift from God. Don't quote me Raymond's books anymore, that's insulting too.

[JW Insider]

11 hours ago, FelixCA said:

There is no such thing as having a vote from the Holy Spirit.

I didn't say there was. And I never thought you were saying there was.

11 hours ago, FelixCA said:

Don't quote me Raymond's books anymore, that's insulting too.

I won't be quoting it for you. But why would you claim he said something in his book and then find it insulting when I show you that he said the opposite? Isn't it possible to simply acknowledge or even apologize for the error and move on without feeling insulted?