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

[Anna]

8 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Anna gets told off for fault finding and criticism

Don't you know it! lol

[TrueTomHarley]

On ‎2‎/‎1‎/‎2019 at 12:06 PM, FelixCA said:

. I'm, sorry friend, the world doesn't revolve around JWI, for as much as you admire his limited knowledge of Bethel.

I'm going to have another go at this.

I do not think that 'TrueTom vs the Apostates!' is a great book in its writing. It is adequately written. It gets the job done. It is even a little haphazard in its organization. Another person might do it better.

However, it is a great book in that it is the only one of its kind. And it should not be. There should be more, but there are not. I am convinced that there are many friends and onlookers who need such material. Maybe there shouldn't be, but there are.

@JW Insider, more than any single person, helped me in my writing of it. His input was very slight, no more than a sporadic word or two on occasion, sometimes publicly, sometimes not. Where I was too aggressive or undiscerning, his observations put me back on track. Where I was flat-out wrong on a few things, he bluntly corrected me and thereby made my work more effective. He knows where I am coming from. Where I ignored him I afterwards came to realize why I shouldn't have.

Whether it is wise for him to carry on at such length as he does here I do not know. But I do know why he does it and why he does it the way he does it. I respect him for it, and I cannot detect an ill motive. That is not to say that he might not be loony, but in my case, he has proven more valuable than he knows.

[FelixCA]

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I do not wish to justify R.Franz' doctrines, per se. If some of his ideas seem worth looking into, I am only concerned with evaluating the evidence he offered for his perspective. I did not know that R.Franz thought that the 144,000 was a symbolic number until I read his book. I was not surprised however, because it was fairly common to hear brothers ask about why it had to be literal if the number 12,000 was symbolic, or the number 24 was symbolic (symbolic of the 144,000!?!, at that). And I knew that at least two other persons in the Writing department had been discussing this question.

Personally, I do not know if the 144,000 is a literal number or not, so I cannot give a scriptural example.

It appears you have the same reservation as Raymond when it comes to fully understand scripture on an ecclesiastical level. Perhaps that’s why you hate Fred so much.

Let’s take your comment about the 144,000 thousand that isn’t mentioned in scripture as a literal number. We both know this comment is a flat lie. But let’s see where you fail to understand the exegesis. Let’s take 14^{th part C} of Revelation.

We know the saints (anointed) were purchased for the lamb, would amount to men gathered from the earth that wasn’t tainted and loyal to Christ. This, of course, doesn’t mean sinless just in case you want to misapply my words as you usually attempt to do to confuse the narrative.

These men are composed to reflect the 12 tribes of Israel. A symbolic initiative with literal numbers. Meaning, after Christ included others rather than just the Jews, ALL nations on earth were given that opportunity to serve in heaven as saints, and all the nations would receive the opportunity to be saved. Of course about the 12 tribes, we are referring to this literal number of 144,000 saints (anointed).

Shouldn’t these saints be positioned in a specific place somewhere in the new heavenly kingdom of Jerusalem? Just wondering with the other numbers mentioned.

I guess I would have to ask if you believe that we will get to see Jesus and the 144,000 saints in mount Zion, even though if we take that as a literal meaning, it wouldn’t be possible for millions that weren’t around a certain part of the world at that time to marvel and witness the Glory of Christ, since it would be impossible to literally see it from another part of the world. Ezekiel 37:22

Therefore, I guess all the nations that would stand to see Christ glory and victory from heaven is false, and shouldn’t be included in scripture. Perhaps I can see where you might agree with Raymond. A quiet man in public, but just as loud as Fred in private.

Revelation 7:9 King James Version (KJV)

⁹ After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;

I guess that would be the difference, Fred was not a hypocrite to hide his true nature like Raymond. Did it make him any less qualified? I wonder when I read the historical facts about  PETER and PAUL.

Since we all should know, 144,000 thousand saints is a literal number, my question to Raymond and Fred early on in my life, was, if some saints were still earthbound, would these saints be the ones to automatically be raptured into heaven to complete the cycle. After all, everything would have to be complete and set in place in heaven so the heavenly kingdom would have full control of all the earthbound survivors.

Now, I appreciated Fred’s answer even though it wasn’t an answer. If the Holy Spirit truly dwells in you, there is no question as to what scripture means. Perhaps I didn’t quite understand then because of my age, but it sunk in as I grew older.

On the other hand, when Raymond set me aside, he expressed an opinion with regard to rapture. This is when I asked him to elaborate since scripture clearly states the accounts of Enoch, Genesis 5:24 and Elijah, Second Kings 2:11.  After his comment, this is why stupid children need to grow up to understand, I left it alone. I’m assuming here since he never had kids of his own he had no patience with children.

This, however, would be a good argument for the final rapture of the saints “if” there are still some left. Now, not everyone who partakes will eventually be of the anointed class.

I had a second cousin that started partaking of the emblems. That was a joke since we knew what kind of person he was. That just means there are some that have a passion to believe. He eventually stopped.

Now, all my nephews and nieces that attended Bethel, are successful and righteous in serving Jehovah without reservations whatsoever. They don’t dwell in the past and keep their eye on the prize, promised by God.

So, which 12,000 do you think we should do away with?

Luke 12:32 King James Version (KJV)

³² Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.

John 10:16 King James Version (KJV)

¹⁶ And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

Revelation 7:3-8 New International Version (NIV)

³ “Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God.” ⁴ Then I heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel.

⁵ From the tribe of Judah 12,000 were sealed,

from the tribe of Reuben 12,000,

from the tribe of Gad 12,000,

⁶ from the tribe of Asher 12,000,

from the tribe of Naphtali 12,000,

from the tribe of Manasseh 12,000,

⁷ from the tribe of Simeon 12,000,

from the tribe of Levi 12,000,

from the tribe of Issachar 12,000,

⁸ from the tribe of Zebulun 12,000,

from the tribe of Joseph 12,000,

from the tribe of Benjamin 12,000.

Since you seem to be the favorite of True Tom and Anna with ecclesiastic wizardry, how far back do you wish to argue the interpretation of scripture?  I say this because you are so good with grammar and words that people tend to admire someone for the wrong reason. Well, at least TTH.

So, which ones should we dismiss, or where would you like to ADD to scripture to allow others aside from the 144,000 thousand anointed to rule in heaven as kings and priest?

Now, don’t respond with Watchtower literature. I’ve had enough distortion on the subject. Stick to scripture if it’s at all possible.

Just like the obsession you have with the 6000 years. Maybe if you look at it by someone else’s perspective. It’s pretty drawn clear you don’t trust or care for the Watchtower literature unless you find something to criticize about it. Perhaps this is the objective of this site and always has been.

To find the same kind of people with no faith and a weak heart.

HA1423

Similarly the pseudo- Barnabas, a very ancient though Apocryphal writer: "Consider, my children, what that signifies, He finished them in six days. The meaning is, that in 6000 years the Lord will bring all things to an end," &c.
The same expectation as to the six days of creation typifying 6000 years, as the term of the present world's duration,
continued, as we have seen, (see p. 230, &c, supra) even among the anti- premillennarian fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries. Only they explained the sabbatical seventh day as typical, not of a seventh sabbatical Millennium of rest, but an eternal Sabbath: - - a view generally adopted afterwards.

[FelixCA]

6 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

@JW Insider, more than any single person, helped me in my writing of it. His input was very slight, no more than a sporadic word or two on occasion, sometimes publicly, sometimes not. Where I was too aggressive or undiscerning, his observations put me back on track. Where I was flat-out wrong on a few things, he bluntly corrected me and thereby made my work more effective. He knows where I am coming from. Where I ignored him I afterwards came to realize why I shouldn't have

It could be, that’s the problem. Loyalty. I wouldn’t lose my personal relationship with God, for the sake of writing a book that is being collaborated by someone who is clearly a bad association and influence my decision to have an input of that book, right or wrong. Proverbs 3:3-13, 1 Corinthians 15:33

Too much of that kind have, authored books about the Watchtower, that allowed misinterpreted claims to stand. Raymond was one of them. 1 Corinthians 5:11

That just means, the desire of this world still dwells in the heart and minds of many Christians, instead of willfully trusting in Jehovah for guidance if they have a desire to print. 2 Corinthians 6:14

Could this be the reason TrueTom and JWinsider conspired to remove this Allen Smith JWI is so obsessed about? When it seems people like Butler can be more obnoxious yet still hold an account here? That would lead me to believe this person was proving some false claims here. That type of action should be embarrassing and shameful.

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, FelixCA said:

It could be, that’s the problem. Loyalty. I wouldn’t lose my personal relationship with God, for the sake of writing a book...

Hopefully that has not happened.

1 hour ago, FelixCA said:

that is being collaborated by someone who is clearly a bad association and influence my decision to have an input of that book, right or wrong

Without weighing in on whether he is bad association or not, he is one of the very few who offered constructive criticism of CSA matters. Whether he should have done so on this forum is a matter for others to haggle over, but the fact is that he did and I benefited from it.

For example, the Philadelphia.com slimed JWs with a front page lead that must have been seen by everyone in the city and well beyond. It was too much for me.  I subsequently declared war on this sort of thing. I submitted a reply to them. This was a big deal for me, to reply at length to a prominent source and tell them they owed it to their readers to publish my reply as prominently as they published the slam. There was a chance that they would do so. I didn’t want to screw it up. I ran it by JWI privately, knowing he has Bethel experience, he reasons well, and he wants to see CSA matters resolved WITHOUT burning Bethel to the ground. (the solution of the opposers) He did not disappoint me. He made valuable suggestions, most of which I accepted.

What follows is what I sent to the Philly source, followed by the refined version that is an early chapter of TTvtAp.

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2018/07/an-open-letter-to-the-philadelphia-inquirer-because-they-did-not-acknowlege-much-less-print-the-sent.html

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/four-incendiary-articles.html

So he helped me. A lot. I don’t care if he is bad association or not. If I was worried about bad association, I would not be here. Nor would you.

1 hour ago, FelixCA said:

Could this be the reason TrueTom and JWinsider conspired to remove this Allen Smith JWI is so obsessed about? 

It takes a while to know the players & you do not know them yet. Both of us worked very hard to retain him on this forum. Besides, I am not sure that he is gone. As for JWI, he spots him everywhere as does the groundhog his shadow.

 I pleaded with @The Librarian (that old hen) that if for nothing else, Allen should be honored because he proves the resurrection.

As to your point about John being more obnoxious and still remaining here, THAT point is certainly valid.

[Srecko Sostar]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I don’t care if he is bad association or not. If I was worried about bad association, I would not be here. Nor would you.

Up-vote!

 

Another thing.

It is good that You speaking about issue on your blog. No matter of your intention to defend GB. But it is positive that You talking how cases are open and they are in the midst of JW people. Those JW who will go on Your page will find, I guess, more information than from WT official channels of communication. hehe

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley  quote " As to your point about John being more obnoxious and still remaining here, THAT point is certainly valid. "

 Perhaps because I speak TRUTH. 

 

•  

[JW Insider]

9 hours ago, FelixCA said:

It appears you have the same reservation as Raymond when it comes to fully understand scripture on an ecclesiastical level. Perhaps that’s why you hate Fred so much.

Nonsensical non sequitur just to imply I might hate Fred Franz. I have never hated Fred Franz. I was always very impressed at his abilities. But I also felt badly for him, because he entered the Bible Students under Russell back at a time when the Watchtower freely admits that many of the Bible Students had turned it into a "cult." According to Rutherford it was a personality cult that worshiped Russell. Rutherford himself had apparently fallen victim for a time, if you listen to his eulogy at Russell's funeral. (And if you read the twisted logic he employed in order to defend Russell in the booklet "A Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens.) Now that I have seen numerous additional examples of the same behaviors I saw in Fred Franz, I believe that he was a high-functioning autistic person. (Something akin to what many psychologists will now diagnose as "Asperger's Syndrome.") This does not belittle him as you might think. But it explains a lot of his anti-social behaviors, and it explains a lot of his talks and comments that were clearly intended to provoke, or push the envelope in terms of what he might get away with verbally.

If you think I have expressed something like anger here, and I hope I haven't, it might be related to the same way that that Raymond Franz felt anger, but not about his uncle, at a funeral of R.Franz' nephew. This was the funeral where F.Franz gave the talk, and started out, very loudly: "Isn't it grand to be ALIVE!"

[F.Franz] walked up to the podium, paused, and then in a very loud, almost
stentorian, voice said: “Isn’t it grand to be ALIVE!” After that
introductory exclamation, for several minutes he discussed, effectively
and dramatically, the meaning of the words at Ecclesiastes
7:1-4.  As yet my nephew had not been mentioned in any way.
Then, after approximately ten minutes, in referring to the words
about it being ‘better for us to go to the house of mourning,’ the
speaker said,  “And the reason why is that sooner or later we’re all
going to end up like THIS!” and, without turning, he threw his hand
backward in the direction of the coffin where my nephew’s body
lay. The talk went on with further commentary on the Biblical section
but with no other reference to the dead man until the close
when the standard statements of the reason for the occasion and
the names of the deceased’s survivors were given.

I felt a sense of burning anger—not at my uncle, for I sincerely
and honestly believe he thought this was the best way to deal with
the situation, the best way to combat the natural sensations of grief
and loss. What I felt incensed at was the organizational attitude
that allowed a person to feel fully justified to speak in a way which
essentially transformed the dead person’s body into a vehicle or
platform on which to base a talk, a talk that expounded organizational
doctrine, but which throughout simply made no mention of
sadness at the loss of the person whose life had ended, as though
by ignoring this the hurt would be lessened. I kept saying to myself,
“James deserves something better than this—surely the text
about a ‘name being better than good oil’ calls for talking about
the name he made for himself in life.

This is the kind of thing I remember most about F.Franz' comments in the morning, too. Fortunately, his assembly talks were rarely like this, although a couple of his Gilead talks seemed to test the limits. An nearly hour-long scriptural talk on "the Biblical meaning of the Liver," sounded like it could have been a F.Franz satire from "The Onion," in part, but was also intended to sound very serious by the Gilead Graduation audience. (Brother Schroeder implied to me that he took it as a satirical attack on a talk that he [Schroeder] had recently given.) Another example was his wearing of a T-shirt with the word "HELL" in its message, for nearly the entire week during his morning worship comments in response to Sydlik's call for a Kingdom Hall like dress code at Bethel breakfast.

But I liked that his rants at breakfast were not about dressing down specific Bethelites that he wanted to belittle, the way that Rutherford and Knorr had used much of their 'morning worship' time. He railed against certain questions that had come up, and process changes, but mostly he always tied what he said to a Bible passage or topic, even if it was a rule he wanted to talk about. Some GB members rarely spoke on Bible topics, like Henschel and Jaracz, for example. (Sometimes MH & TJ would literally start out a talk with: "Jehovah is a God of order, therefore . . . . " or, "Our God is a God of rules, so let's talk about . . . .") However, I always appreciated something in what F.Franz said every day that he spoke.

I think a lot of the things he said could be taken as funny and thought-provoking. But I don't think it was healthy for the organization that he carried on in such a socially immature manner for so many years. He seemed to have a bit of an obsession with the Russell and early Rutherford years, and more than once told the story of how Rutherford said he had made an "ass" of himself over his 1925 predictions. But he would always emphasize the word "ass" for dramatic effect. Some of his later talks highlighted Russell and Rutherford's Christmas celebrations, birthdays, pyramids, false expectations, dates, etc., but without a stated purpose except maybe just for effect. 

With F.Franz, there was a lot to like, and a lot to feel sorry for. I think he could be brilliant and foolish at the same time. Nothing to hate.

[TrueTomHarley]

19 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Those JW who will go on Your page will find, I guess, more information than from WT official channels of communication. hehe

“The Witness organization cannot be expected to defend itself on social media, if on any media. It takes the scriptural view of Jesus at Matthew 11, noting that grumblers slam him no matter what he does, before finally saying, ‘Don’t worry about it,’ “wisdom is proved righteous by its works.” It is like David who kept mum as ‘all day long they muttered against him.’ ‘It is like the plowman who knows that if you look behind while plowing, the furrows get all flaky.’ They don’t do it. The common view of opposers is that the Witness headship is telling members what to do, while it cynically manipulates all from above. That view is wrong. They practice what they preach and they do it themselves. The organization headship cites Hebrews 13:7 about ‘imitating the faith of those who are taking the lead among you.’ They don’t go on social media at all. They prefer a less raucous channel, and content themselves with news releases at the website that inform but do not kick back at the critics.

“It is scriptural. It is proper. But there is a downside. By staying mum on specifics, essentially our enemies get to define us to the news media who refer to a cover statement about “abhorring child abuse” as “boiler-plate” and then go to former members who will eagerly fill their ears with accounts that we could counter by adding context but don’t. What’s a reporter to do? He goes to who fills his ears.

“It will fall upon the Witness journalist to do it, if it is to be done, and there aren’t many of them. If fourteen years of blogging, not shying from controversial things, does not qualify me to take a shot at it, what does? If you are in a spiritual paradise, or even a vacation paradise, you do not have to concern yourself with removing the trash. It may be even dangerous to do so, because there is broken glass and used syringes. It’s not for everyone, and maybe for no one. But I thought I’d give it a go, and I at last got under this fellow’s skin, the big baby.”

...

 

If it was up to me, there would be an ‘Opposer Servant’ in each circuit. He would say: ‘Look, follow Matthew 11 if you can. But if you can’t, if you simply must have a specific reply to the negative publicity that is becoming frequent fare for mainstream news outlets, here is training on how to deal with them.’

Regarding my book itself, I repeated the thought:

“The book is not recommended to all Witnesses. Read it if you want a specific reply to charges laid against the faith. For those able to focus upon forward motion only, the book is not recommended. For those not, it is. The line that invariably gets the largest applause at Regional Conventions of Jehovah’s Witnesses is: “Would you like to send your greetings to the brothers in Bethel [headquarters]?” The hard work and integrity of these ones is appreciated by all. So not everyone will feel the need to check out every derogatory report.”

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

52 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

“The Witness organization cannot be expected to defend itself on social media, if on any media. It takes the scriptural view of Jesus at Matthew 11, noting that grumblers slam him no matter what he does, before finally saying, ‘Don’t worry about it,’ “wisdom is proved righteous by its works.” It is like David who kept mum as ‘all day long they muttered against him.’ ‘It is like the plowman who knows that if you look behind while plowing, the furrows get all flaky.’ They don’t do it. The common view of opposers is that the Witness headship is telling members what to do, while it cynically manipulates all from above. That view is wrong. They practice what they preach and they do it themselves. The organization headship cites Hebrews 13:7 about ‘imitating the faith of those who are taking the lead among you.’ They don’t go on social media at all. They prefer a less raucous channel, and content themselves with news releases at the website that inform but do not kick back at the critics.

“It is scriptural. It is proper. But there is a downside. By staying mum on specifics, essentially our enemies get to define us to the news media who refer to a cover statement about “abhorring child abuse” as “boiler-plate” and then go to former members who will eagerly fill their ears with accounts that we could counter by adding context but don’t. What’s a reporter to do? He goes to who fills his ears.

“It will fall upon the Witness journalist to do it, if it is to be done, and there aren’t many of them. If fourteen years of blogging, not shying from controversial things, does not qualify me to take a shot at it, what does? If you are in a spiritual paradise, or even a vacation paradise, you do not have to concern yourself with removing the trash. It may be even dangerous to do so, because there is broken glass and used syringes. It’s not for everyone, and maybe for no one. But I thought I’d give it a go, and I at last got under this fellow’s skin, the big baby.”

...

 

If it was up to me, there would be an ‘Opposer Servant’ in each circuit. He would say: ‘Look, follow Matthew 11 if you can. But if you can’t, if you simply must have a specific reply to the negative publicity that is becoming frequent fare for mainstream news outlets, here is training on how to deal with them.’

Regarding my book itself, I repeated the thought:

“The book is not recommended to all Witnesses. Read it if you want a specific reply to charges laid against the faith. For those able to focus upon forward motion only, the book is not recommended. For those not, it is. The line that invariably gets the largest applause at Regional Conventions of Jehovah’s Witnesses is: “Would you like to send your greetings to the brothers in Bethel [headquarters]?” The hard work and integrity of these ones is appreciated by all. So not everyone will feel the need to check out every derogatory report.”

 

@TrueTomHarley    I see you are pushing your book again. Well I suppose it saves on paying for advertising  

As for the line :-

The line that invariably gets the largest applause at Regional Conventions of Jehovah’s Witnesses is: “Would you like to send your greetings to the brothers in Bethel [headquarters]?”

Well when you are preaching to the converted / brainwashed, what would you expect.

I expect Hitler got the same amount of applause back in the day too  

 

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

@Srecko Sostar  I can see that you speak from your heart. I agree with all that you have said here. 

(your last comment on page 17) 

[JW Insider]

7 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

It is at the point now where one must flip from one to another to follow the discussion.

I can try to move the CSA centric posts here to there, but they will sort themselves by the time of the post and might cause some confusion there too as they "interleave" with the original posts, there. I'll look to see if it might improve things.

OK. I moved them. This will effect posts by @Witness, @Srecko Sostar, @Anna, @JOHN BUTLER, @TrueTomHarley