REPROOF FROM THE PLATFORM

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

7 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Who knows the divine secrets except God himself ?

From an Engineer's or Detective's viewpoint, that is a VERY easy question to answer.

Just look at the TRACK RECORD of those who claim they have insight on the divine secrets, and tabulate how may times they have been right ... and how many times they have been wrong.

I does NOT get any simpler than THAT.

 

[Srecko Sostar]

 

  9 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So I'm not always silly and I'm not exactly mentally ill, but I am a bit of a dog then  

8 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

 Even Jesus used an expression for dogs, softening it to “little dogs”—puppies. That’s probably what I had in mind.

going deeper and deeper :))))))

[Srecko Sostar]

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

As @BillyTheKid46 has pointed out, the term "governing body" had already been used prior to 1971, and it was usually used in the sense that certain types of corporations used the term. In fact, for the Watchtower Society it was primarily used to refer to the "legal" leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses through the legal entity of the Society itself.

 

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

*** yb70 p. 65 1970 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses ***
So really the governing body of Jehovah’s witnesses is the board of directors of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, all of whom are dedicated to Jehovah God and anointed by his holy spirit.

Merge, compose, amalgam.

How from secular terminology about Corporation policy and Management comes to Spiritual meaning for followers, covered with Interpretations  about meaning of some Bible verses. 

[JOHN BUTLER]

Following on from @Srecko Sostar this management / board of directors now say that are the 'Faithful and discreet slave'. 

Thank you Srecko. 

But i lost it a bit about if they are all supposed to be of the anointed or not now.  Either way it does seem a crafty move and i find it quite funny that the W/t changed their title to suit their own convenience. 

Board of Directors = Faithful and discreet slave,   I don't think so   

As the Board of Directors of course, it is much easier to understand how they try to hide the pedopphilia problem and try to stop victims claiming compensation. It's big business isn't it ? They don't want their business to lose money or status.

Um, Judas was the money handler wasn't he, and look what he did and how he ended up.

[JW Insider]

4 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

But i lost it a bit about if they are all supposed to be of the anointed or not now.

The board of directors, which was the previous governing body, was supposed to be 100-percent anointed, and there was only one (known) exception to that prior to 2001. (Covington in the 1940's). Then in 1971 the governing body was redefined to include the board of directors plus other older brothers who were not on the board of directors and had never been on the board of directors, but who were also anointed. Then after 2000/2001, no members of the governing body were also on the board of directors. This way the board of directors needed to concern itself no longer with filling its positions from members of the anointed. But the governing body is still filled by members of the anointed. This will remain true for as long as possible. The governing body helpers make up the  extended committees of the governing body, and these persons need not be of the anointed, although several are.

[JW Insider]

7 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

You were doing so well until you had to add an unfounded accusation from disgruntled former Bethelites. Why can't you just stick to the truth without adding lies to the mix? Or as a normal person would put it, why cause a provocation without proof.

You are right that some of the claims came from former Bethelites, but they were certainly not disgruntled, as far as I know. However, I did add a disclaimer in front of that information, back in the original post. (By the way, I know firsthand about Quackenbush's run-in with Knorr, and I was there when he arrived back at Bethel when Brother Knorr died, and for a time we even sat at the same table.) This information should not be new or surprising to anyone, however. It's not that I think that Covington was in the right, or that he could have had much effect on the Society overall. Olin Moyle, the previous Watchtower attorney, had tried something similar. And it barely registered a blip in the overall history of the Watchtower Society.

Of course, I did add the information for a good reason (in my opinion). There are those here who automatically think that if anyone says anything negative about people at high levels of responsibility, they must be lying. This is one of the reasons that people need to keep their eyes open. Always be optimistic, trust in Jehovah, and expect the best from all our brothers; but also be cautious, and be prepared for anything.

[TrueTomHarley]

5 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Olin Moyle, the previous Watchtower attorney

I have never heard of this fellow. What’s with him?

I read once in Look Magazine (if you know of it, please please please cite the issue) that Covington was unique in that he could “sass” the Supreme Court Justices and get away with it. Did Moyle argue any before the Supreme Court?

[JW Insider]

16 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I have never heard of this fellow. What’s with him?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olin_R._Moyle

His letters to Rutherford and to his congregation are probably available to read if you can find the links. He resigned in 1939, the same year that Covington became the new Watchtower attorney. They both argued cases before the Supreme Court (2 for Moyle) although Covington had many more cases. They were both successful in front of the Supreme Court, but Covington's string of successes were all the more impressive considering the war-time zeitgeist.

Don't remember the quote about Covington in Look magazine. But I've heard that claim from somewhere.

[TrueTomHarley]

15 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Don't remember the quote about Covington in Look magazine. But I've heard that claim from somewhere.

Probably me. 

It drives me crazy—searching and searching in vain for something that you think you remember well.

This was a multi-page article, uncharacteristically favorable to JWs, in one of the large and now defunct (or so altered that it might as well be) glossy newsmagazines that I strongly remember as Look, but maybe, just maybe, it was Life or Saturday Evening Post. (I’ll probably find it someday in Popular Mechanics.)

The first paragraph or two was in the setting of some huge international convention, back in the days where there would only be one in a given year. The author framed it as threatening skies that looked like preparations would be for naught, but the brothers toiled on oblivious, as though confident that all would turn out well. And it did. Just before the convention was to begin, the skies cleared and the program got underway with nary a hitch.

[JOHN BUTLER]

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The board of directors, which was the previous governing body, was supposed to be 100-percent anointed, and there was only one (known) exception to that prior to 2001. (Covington in the 1940's). Then in 1971 the governing body was redefined to include the board of directors plus other older brothers who were not on the board of directors and had never been on the board of directors, but who were also anointed. Then after 2000/2001, no members of the governing body were also on the board of directors. This way the board of directors needed to concern itself no longer with filling its positions from members of the anointed. But the governing body is still filled by members of the anointed. This will remain true for as long as possible. The governing body helpers make up the  extended committees of the governing body, and these persons need not be of the anointed, although several are.

Wow, complicated huh. So, once upon a time the Board of Directors were the GB. But in 1971 the GB was the Board of directors + other older brothers. However since 2001 the GB and the Board of Directors are two seperate groups of men. 

Now I have more questions. The Watchtower B&T Society is one 'company', whilst the, Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses is a seperate 'company'.  

When exactly did they seperate and why ? 

So who rules over which 'company', GB or Board of Directors, or both ? 

And which of those two 'bodies' GB or B of D has the highest rank / control, over which of the two companies ?

I think the $4000 a day fine situation was because the GB / B of D  were deliberately slowing down court proceedings by sending letters between the W/T and the CCJW, as each has its own legal departments. 

Try comparing that to the 'early Christians'.  Did they have two 'companies' and two legal departments ? 

Jesus didn't even have a bed to call his own. 

It must cost the congregants a fortune in donations  

 

[JW Insider]

44 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

The first paragraph or two was in the setting of some huge international convention, back in the days where there would only be one in a given year.

That sounds like a Saturday Evening Post article. 9/14/40. I bought it on eBay, and will read it again to refresh my memory about what it said re Covington.

[TrueTomHarley]

1 minute ago, JW Insider said:

That sounds like a Saturday Evening Post article. 9/14/40. I bought it on eBay, and will read it again to refresh my memory about what it said re Covington.

Look Magazine....what was I smoking?