All Eight Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses members are now individually named on two New York Child Victims Act case documents

[AlanF]

1 minute ago, TrueTomHarley said:

You read too much into this. You are a windbag, that’s all, and an unbelievable nasty one at that. 

I can overcome one or the other malady, but not both in tandem.

Crimestop at work yet again.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Doubtless it is the same with the announcement that replaces the one about disfellowshipping. 

It used to be announced from time to time that “so and so has been disfellowshipped.” For several years now—what is it? maybe 10? it is “so and so is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

It gets the job done, and it avoids the problem of being attacked over the fact that “disfellowship” is not a word that appears in the Bible—and so villains try to spin it as an evil corporation of man-made rules “controlling” the minions. 

The revised announcement has all of the “upside” and none of the downside of the former one. “Upside” is in quotes, of course, because it is a downer when the announcement is made. It is a moment of silence, all fidgeting, daydreaming, and chattering halts. It is a very sad time, even if everyone concedes the necessity of it, and the road to recovery is not so plain at all. There may not BE a recovery. DF is a last-ditch measure of discipline, when all else has failed, to jolt the transgressor, but more importantly, to safeguard the congregation from the influence.

To be sure, it can be perceived as mean-spirited, and it certainly is here by many persons who in most cases are opposed to JWs regardless, but given the way humans are built, the case can be made that values of the congregation cannot be preserved “without spot from the world” any other way. That is the lesson drawn from the book Secular Faith, by Mark Smith—a book the WT has quoted for a separate but related reason:

https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/in-defense-of-shunning.html

Of course opposers will rail at it because the well-being of the congregation is of no concern to them.

If someone is doing the deeds and saying the sayings of Jehovah’s Witnesses, then that person is one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. If someone refuses to do that, how can it be said that he or she is still one of Jehovah’s Witnesses? The “improvement” of the new announcement over the old is that congregation members recall from the Bible just how a person who has served Jehovah and then willfully rejects that life is to be viewed. They think of “treat him as a tax collector and man of the nations,” that Jews had “no dealings” with. They think of “not even eating with such a man,” “never saying a greeting.” They will recall the counsel to “reject empty speeches that violate what is holy, for they will lead to more and more ungodliness, and their word will spread like gangrene,” (2 Timothy 2:16-17) and it comes to mind just how one deals with gangrene.

Thus, it is indisputably the Bible that directs congregation members. It is the Bible that tells them what to do, and for now, it is not illegal to follow the Bible. Opposers want to spin it that they are fighting a “corporation;” they are temporarily thwarted with this announcement. They are forced to reveal that it is not the corporation they are opposing, but God, insofar as the Bible represents his thinking, which to Jehovah’s Witnesses it does.

It is a better announcement than the previous one, not just for thwarting opposers, but also for us. It clarifies even for us that the Bible directs our conduct. The only “sin” that the “corporation” has committed is educating members as to what the Bible says on all aspects of life.

It allows more internal freedom to examine just what those verses above and others like it actually mean in all areas of life, such as the ones people carry on here about—ones involving minors, ones involving words as well as deeds, and what kind of words. All of this re-examination is going on now, I am convinced, even if every minor little tweak is not heralded with the announcement that malcontents insist upon, mostly so they can get right to work at undermining it.

With young people, the obvious tweak—and I think it happens now—will be to cut them some slack when they err, as young people almost by definition are apt to do. It is not to shut them out of the adult world of acting upon something once they come to know it is right. The late John Holt, a pioneer of homeschooling, used to maintain that juvenile delinquents are made that way—when they try to enter the world of adults and are shut out.

A sign that today indicates most Witnesses are well aware that the Bible directs their conduct, and not an organization, is the frequent complaints of those who have gone POMO—physically out as well as mentally out—that they are kept at a distance by family members even though no announcement was ever made—not of “disfellowshipping” nor “no longer one of JWs.” They rail and rail about this—the ‘brainwashing goes really deep,” they say. They cannot link their “shunning” to an announcement, and thus they are forced to conclude (though they refuse to) that members are allowing themselves to be directed by the Bible and not some human organization. Close family members have discerned that someone has turned away from Jehovah, and they don’t need an announcement to apply scriptural direction to the situation.

The man who studied the Bible with me and “brought me into the truth” had problems with this and went apostate himself—he may be sitting at Alan’s right hand now. Several were baptized through his efforts, and he later went back to try to undo some of the “damage” that he had done. To my knowledge, however, he had no success in this.

Douglas was an incredibly zealous man. His enthusiasm was boundless. He was a welder for the public utility, and I was assigned to be his assistant for a summer job in between semesters.

“Now according to the church, there’s far more wicked people than good, isn’t that true? For every good person, there has to be —how many?—say...100 wicked people? Right? Isn’t that what they teach?” he would gush, and then hit his punch line: “When was the last time you went to a funeral and the priest packed someone off to hell?!!!” I can hear him now, 40 years later.

After several weeks of such, he invited me to his house, where he conducted a classroom—about a dozen chairs were laid out, most of them filled—and he conducted a Bible study out of the Truth book. Soon after, or maybe it was before, he invited me to a Sunday meeting for a really good public talk, I thought. Same was true the next Sunday, and the next one after that. But on the fourth, he whispered to me, “This one is kind of a dog, but they are not usually like that.”

We had the incredible circumstance of an engineer who was so unbelievably inept that he would twiddle his thumbs for weeks on end, and those downstream from him, such as “his” welder and that one’s assistant, had nothing to do until he got his act together, which he never did. There must have been more to it than that—maybe he was someone’s relative—because even then that is not something that would normally happen. Speaking of one klutz, who had been fired, from an entirely different time, my Dad said, “You almost think that they could find a place for a donkey like him.” He said this because he came from a time and place in which large companies would do that. If they hired a man that turned out to be a clunker, they would say, “Ah, rats! Oh well—our bad. After all, he still has a family to support,” and they would give him a broom and find a spot for him where he could do minimal damage.

So it was that Don would witness to me 8 hours per day for several weeks, and neither he nor I were goofing off—there was literally nothing for us to do but await instructions that never came. Holy spirit had arranged for this engineer to be an idiot. (I just threw that line in for Alan, but having said that, the holy spirit is like the wind that you cannot see, and if anyone says holy spirit did this or that for me, even finding a mate, I never counter them—how would I know?) The first move was not his, but mine. This engineer didn’t get along too well with Douglas (nor with anyone else, as I recall) and he rebuked him at one point with, “You think you know so much just because you are one of those ‘Bible students!’” This intrigued me. I didn’t know that there was such a thing. 

“What do you mean ‘Bible student?’” I asked him later. “What’s that all about?” I had been brought up in a liberal Presbyterian church (it comes in several varieties) where few knew much about the Bible—at least not those that I knew of—and didn’t bemoan the loss. That was not why they attended. It was more of a social thing. I did not usually want to go. I hated being herded off with my siblings by mom, with dad’s full approval because it meant peach and quiet for him with the Sunday paper—I envied him, as he said, “religion is good for kids.” He never set foot in that church himself, and indeed was not very hospitable toward the minister. “Just remember who is the source of that contribution!” he told the poor fellow when he had come to call. My mom was a housewife—which was pretty much the norm back then, and did not otherwise work.

Seeng as I could not get out of it, I angled toward attending the church service itself, and not the Sunday School that I hated. I recall that there was some resistance to this from my mom, but in time I prevailed. I would there try to understand the Bible which was not explained—at most there was a ten-minute or so “sermon” to punctuate the service. I really did try to understand it, mostly because I liked the idea of understanding anything, but I could not understand it. I always assumed that it was my fault—I was not devoted enough, or studious enough, or persistent enough. I never dreamed that it was their fault.

I made the first move with this welder, not he with me. I think for this reason I will only go so far in “chasing” people in the ministry. “Well, the angels have to do something!” I have been known to say. Some Witnesses are so persistent with chasing down “interest” that they train householders not to show any, imo.

So.....fast forward now to after my baptism, and I run into Douglas at a circuit assembly. He is glad to see me, of course, and I him—we had met only one or two times after circumstances had taken us separate ways. This time he was different, however. This time he was not so enthused. This time he asked me—baptized less than a year—whether I thought ministerial servants and elders were really appointed by holy spirit. “Well, sure...I mean, I guess so,” I responded. It struck me as an odd question, and the next thing I know, he had gone apostate, he and his wife (though his wife later returned). In hindsight, I think that he felt he deserved to be a ministerial servant and was disgruntled at being passed over.

I have seen this several times with different people. One brother—plainly immature, though he went through the motions, would actually storm out of the Kingdom Hall if new servants were announced and he was not one of them. (He never was, and subsequent events demonstrated what a wise omission that was.)

A variation of this happened within the last few months. An unbaptized woman whose family has been loosely associated but inactive as long as anyone can remember, came to the hall yesterday—she rarely does. I resolved to speak with her, and as she headed out during the song, I followed her and caught up with her in the parking lot. I asked her about her son, who had been recently baptized, had been very enthused for a time, volunteering for many things, and then had disappeared, taking a job that required about an hour commute both ways. I didn’t play spiritual concerns, but personal ones. “Doesn’t matter to me just now when he returns, or even if he does. How is he doing?” I framed it.

She told me that she had been stressed out dealing with all the rubbish, as though making amends for leaving in such a rush, and I made it clear that I didn’t care about that, but about her. Thinking I had an “in,” I repackaged a comment I made during the Watchtower study at a paragraph stating how many persons feel unfulfilled and stressed out by their careers. I had said: “Being of that age, many I know are retiring. Sometimes they are Witnesses, sometimes they are non-Witnesses, sometimes they are people I meet in the ministry. Almost always they include the observation that they just can’t take the baloney anymore—and they don’t always say ‘baloney.’”

I repeated this line to the woman in the parking lot, using the real word, and she replied that she hadn’t been speaking of the BS of the world—“you expect that,” she said, but “the BS here” is what she was talking about. I laughed. “Oh, the bullshit here,” I repeated. I really don’t think there is any—at least not enough as might be expected anywhere that people are involved, but I didn’t want to overreact. I tried to draw her out, promising that I would not put everything she said on the internet.

She was miffed that her son had not been made a ministerial servant! That was the extent of it—at least in this case. He had done everything asked of him, he had volunteered for this and that, and they had not made him a servant! “Does he think that he was used?” I ventured, and I got the impression that this is far more her complaint than his—that is not to say that he doesn’t share it. At any rate, I said that I would love to see him again, that I have tried—for I was one of those ones who he volunteered to help when I was slogging through some unexpected troubles. 

Probably there is more to the story. The son was very zealous, and likable in every way, but he was new enough that I can’t quite imagine him expecting an appointment, much less becoming embittered with it not coming his way. I’ll speak with him in time—he really was a good sort, and probably still is. He had some that were trying to discourage him when he was putting himself out there—maybe they in time prevailed. Probably it is Alan. “Had enough of that overbearing know-it-all, yet?” I will ask him. “I know @Araunawishes to God that she had never learned of his existance”
 

Mr Harley it  looks like you are laying a road not writing a comment and IMO it is to hide half of what you have actually written, because you know yourself it is complete tosh.  So you have made it difficult for anyone to comment on it by writing for five miles long. 

However, quote . 

' It used to be announced from time to time that “so and so has been disfellowshipped.” For several years now—what is it? maybe 10? it is “so and so is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.”

It gets the job done, and it avoids the problem of being attacked over the fact that “disfellowship” is not a word that appears in the Bible.. '

Oh dear, how sad you are. Was it ever announced that 'so and so has left the JW's ?  Because the obvious reason for this 'newish' way of telling it, is purely to hide the FACT that many JW's are actually LEAVING the JW Org. The GB wishes to hide the numbers of those disassociating themselves from JW Org. 

Add to this that may Victims of CSA  have said they were d'fed for either complaining to the Elders or to outside authorities. So now the GB can, through it's 'police dept' (elders), d'fed someone who has suffered CSA but does not have enough proof, but that still complains to the elders. The elders can still threaten d'fed action with or without  the new 'rule book'. 

Quote " They think of “treat him as a tax collector and man of the nations,” that Jews had “no dealings” with. "

Are but we are not Jews, we are NOT under Mosaic Law. JESUS would eat meals in the homes of Tax Collectors. Wasn't Matthew a Tax Collector ?  And the disciples / apostles went out to the people of the nations to gather them to God. 

Quote " They think of “not even eating with such a man, "  BUT you have forgotten the whole scripture here. 

New International Version
But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

So tell me o worshipper of the GB, what is the case if a person leaves the JW Org, and no longer calls himself / herself a brother or sister ? That scripture cannot applyote "

Quote " it is indisputably the Bible that directs congregation members. It is the Bible that tells them what to do, "

You are having a laugh Mr Harley. Congregants know who are pulling the strings, but congregants love being puppets. It means they do not have to think or have a conscience. If they go wrong they can blame the Org for it's misdirection. They, like you, worship the GB.

Quote "The only “sin” that the “corporation” has committed is educating members as to what the Bible says on all aspects of life. "

Oh if only it was the only sin. You are so blinkered. GB / Org sins include, CSA, disfellowshipping for false reasons,  Telling the Anointed not to contact each other,  pretending to be the F&DS, telling lies to congregants and to the world by false teachings, Telling lies in Courts and probably many more. 

But i won't be so selfish as to take up as much space as you did My Harley............. 

 

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

1 hour ago, Anna said:

True. It does not automatically disqualify him, but usually it does. I listened to a tape recording of an Irish bother in the 80's who was disfellowshipped for apostasy. I quote him:

 “ I will say to you brothers and sisters over there, don’t be afraid, serve Jehovah with all your heart, if some start to believe the Trinity, well, allow for that. Many godly men believed the trinity down through the ages of human history. I like what one of the Roman emperors said, if God is offended, he can handle it, actually he said if the gods are offended, let them handle it. But Jehovah is not offended at men’s ignorance or innocence, he understands  our background, our sociological conditioning.......our educational standard, he can grasp all that, and allow for that......In fact my prayers are so much closer in speaking to Jesus, in fact I did ignore him over the years, but I have been speaking to him much more since, and I find that great.....”

As you can see, most of what he says there, flies in the face of scripture.

So wow, you found one person to fit your purpose, congratulations. 

If ex JW's can prove how wrong the GB and JW Org are, then they are serving God's purpose to either clean up that Org or to get rid of it, so that God through Christ can use it or replace it with true worshippers. 

If your GB tell Anointed brothers and sisters not to contact each other, then that is obviously wrong, as those brothers and sisters are of the same BODY OF CHRIST. 

Did God use the Romans to destroy Jerusalem ? Or did God just remove His protection from Jerusalem ? 

Is God using ex JW's or just allowing them to do HIS work ? 

[AlanF]

15 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

Did God use the Romans to destroy Jerusalem ? Or did God just remove His protection from Jerusalem ? 

Is God using ex JW's or just allowing them to do HIS work ? 

You're asking questions impossible for JWs to answer without exposing the contradictions inherent in their worship of the Governing Body, i.e., their equating its words with God's words. They get to the heart of whether JW elders are actually appointed by holy spirit, or merely in the self-deceiving sense that the Pope is appointed by holy spirit.

[TrueTomHarley]

15 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

But i won't be so selfish as to take up as much space as you did My Harley............. 

the Librarian has assured me that bytes are cheap and there no added cost to using up a lot of them

Besides, Alan has already set the standard for abusing space, with comments just as long that are unreadable for their nastiness, and also because they contain as much as a dozen dialogue boxes that must each be opened so as to see the few paragraphs that he wants to argue with.

Look, not all that you say is unworthy of discussion. But most of those items you bring up have been discussed at length on other threads. Some of those I have taken part in. You must forgive me if I do not weigh in to a full extent every time. 

[Anna]

1 hour ago, 4Jah2me said:

So wow, you found one person to fit your purpose,

No, he is just an example of how a large % of those who leave (still believing in God) turn out.The leftover % might still believe in God, but have no regard for him in their day to day life. I don't think you or anyone would expect me to write an extensive list of individuals, and what they did and believe since they left the JWS. There are plenty of real life examples on the internet and in real life. I was illustrating this because Srecko said that disfellowshipping does not automatically disqualify a person as individual to continue to be a Jehovah's witness according to Isaiah or any other Bible verses describing a person living according to JHVH will and Jesus' teachings. I said it wasn't automatic, but reality shows that it is a general rule: most do not live according to JHVH's will, nor Jesus' teachings.

1 hour ago, 4Jah2me said:

f your GB tell Anointed brothers and sisters not to contact each other, then that is obviously wrong, as those brothers and sisters are of the same BODY OF CHRIST. 

What nonsense. We are all brothers and sisters and anyone can contact anyone else. Are you purposefully missing the point?

Jan 2020 study edition WT p. 28

"Anointed Christians do not feel that they should spend time only with other anointed ones, as if they were members of an exclusive club. They do not search out other anointed ones, hoping to discuss their anointing with them or to form private groups for Bible study. (Gal. 1:15-17) The congregation would not be united if anointed ones did those things. They would be working against the holy spirit, which helps God’s people to have peace and unity.—Rom. 16:17, 18".

1 hour ago, 4Jah2me said:

Did God use the Romans to destroy Jerusalem ? Or did God just remove His protection from Jerusalem ? 

Is God using ex JW's or just allowing them to do HIS work ? 

I suppose those are just rhetorical questions you don't really expect me to answer.

[AlanF]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

the Librarian has assured me that bytes are cheap and there no added cost to using up a lot of them

Besides, Alan has already set the standard for abusing space, with comments just as long that are unreadable for their nastiness, and also because they contain as much as a dozen dialogue boxes that must each be opened so as to see the few paragraphs that he wants to argue with.

The hypocrisy and doublethink are just breathtaking!

[TrueTomHarley]

57 minutes ago, Anna said:

4Jah2Me: “your GB tell Anointed brothers and sisters not to contact each other, then that is obviously wrong”

I always wondered where that stupid charge came from. I knew it had to be based on something. Thank you for providing the source:

57 minutes ago, Anna said:

Jan 2020 study edition WT p. 28

"Anointed Christians do not feel that they should spend time only with other anointed ones, as if they were members of an exclusive club. They do not search out other anointed ones, hoping to discuss their anointing with them or to form private groups for Bible study. (Gal. 1:15-17) The congregation would not be united if anointed ones did those things. They would be working against the holy spirit, which helps God’s people to have peace and unity.—Rom. 16:17, 18".

 

[AlanF]

Anna said:

Quote

 

    2 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

    So wow, you found one person to fit your purpose,

No, he is just an example of how a large % of those who leave (still believing in God) turn out.The leftover % might still believe in God, but have no regard for him in their day to day life.

 

That's true of a surprising large fraction of seemingly righteous JWs.
     

Quote

 

    2 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

    f your GB tell Anointed brothers and sisters not to contact each other, then that is obviously wrong, as those brothers and sisters are of the same BODY OF CHRIST.

What nonsense. We are all brothers and sisters and anyone can contact anyone else. Are you purposefully missing the point?

Jan 2020 study edition WT p. 28

"Anointed Christians do not feel that they should spend time only with other anointed ones, as if they were members of an exclusive club. They do not search out other anointed ones, hoping to discuss their anointing with them or to form private groups for Bible study. (Gal. 1:15-17) The congregation would not be united if anointed ones did those things. They would be working against the holy spirit, which helps God’s people to have peace and unity.—Rom. 16:17, 18".

 

You just proved 4Jah2me's point. A long time ago a prominent elder explained to me that negative suggestions from the Society are not merely suggestions, but commands from God not to do something. That's what language like "they would be working against the holy spirit" means. Where have you been?

[Space Merchant]

So any evidence to this as of late? This is similar to how people accused Tom Hanks in the past, but do not attempt to share evidence of such claim.

But from what I seeing nowadays, just as people in today's society uses sex as a weapon, it seems that they are doing the same for pedophilia. It is a shame of how something brought up years back is a reality to the land of foolishness and snowflakes, or in this case, the majority of Americans who ascribe to such.

[AlanF]

1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I always wondered where that stupid charge came from. I knew it had to be based on something. Thank you for providing the source:

You don't even know your current Watchtowers! LOL!

[Witness]

2 hours ago, Anna said:

What nonsense. We are all brothers and sisters and anyone can contact anyone else. Are you purposefully missing the point?

Jan 2020 study edition WT p. 28

"Anointed Christians do not feel that they should spend time only with other anointed ones, as if they were members of an exclusive club. They do not search out other anointed ones, hoping to discuss their anointing with them or to form private groups for Bible study. (Gal. 1:15-17) The congregation would not be united if anointed ones did those things. They would be working against the holy spirit, which helps God’s people to have peace and unity.—Rom. 16:17, 18".

Anna, YOU are missing the point.  

 In addition, anointed Christians do not view themselves as being part of an elite club. They do not seek out others who claim to have the same calling, hoping to bond with them or endeavoring to form private groups for Bible study. (Gal. 1:15-17) Such efforts would cause divisions within the congregation and work against the holy spirit, which promotes peace and unity.   wt 1/2016, "We Want to Go With You"

No bonding, no studying with other anointed ones.  This is oppression of a people.  This is men telling other people how to worship God, and these people are God's "special possession".  1 Pet 2:5,9  This is men acting as false "christs".  Matt 24:24  It is more important to uphold the unity of an earthly organization than to allow unity among spiritual "Israel".  

The Body of Christ:

Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 14 Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.

15 Now if the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But in fact God has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. 19 If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, but one body.

21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” 22 On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23 and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, 24 while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.

27 Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it. 28 And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. 29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30 Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues? Do all interpret? 31 Now eagerly desire the greater gifts.  1 Cor 12:12-31

Can an anointed one in the organization "suffer" , "rejoice", with another anointed if they can't seek them out?  The sad thing about this, is the majority of the anointed allow it to happen.