Jump to content
The World News Media

Furuli's new e-book: "My Beloved Religion - And The Governing Body"

Ann O'Maly

Recommended Posts

  • Views 30k
  • Replies 692
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I brought it up because it's one of several places where Furuli's book provides the exact type of anecdote I am familiar with. These types of interactions were evidently memorable and important to Fur

In this world nothing is perfect because humans tend to overstep boundaries - even Moses did so. But if we are really prepared to give our life for another (spirit of christ), then reading our bi

If it was JWI, you’d still be reading it.  Because that “merely” is a pretty big merely.  What if my roof caves in tomorrow and I decide it’s God’s fault? What if I park on the Kingdom H

Posted Images

  • Member
2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Look to the world that scholars have collectively built—for the most part, this system of things is run by highly educated people—to properly evaluate ‘scholarship.’

If one looks at the kind of 'science' in scholarship these days - where a  person can now choose a gender despite a Y or X chromosome -  then the state of scholarship is in chaos.  

The most prestigious universities get grants from certain pharma giants and then a study appears shortly after which just happens to bring more money into the pocket of the corporation. Now that is excellent scholarship!

So much for scholarship....... although I must say one has to work exceedingly hard to get a PHD in an ancient language - three times harder than the social sciences - but this does not make you an expert on 'everything' pertaining to the bible. 

Nevertheless, Feruli's years of service and record sounds commendable and maybe qualifies him to have a negative say about the direction of GB....... but must he do it so publicly? ......So as to garner undue attention to his person and his scholarship? 

I would like to know the outcome of this.....   

2 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Does he convey any sense that Jehovah is running the show or is it all political maneuverings with him?

An important question.....

Anyone can say something " just because they think they are qualified to do so". 

1 hour ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Allen/Wyatt Earp guy (is he still posting?).


1 hour ago, Ann O'Maly said:

(the FDS doctrine, @Arauna)? 

Thanks Ann.  I guess the older I get the lazier the eyes and brain.... 


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
38 minutes ago, Arauna said:

If one looks at the kind of 'science' in scholarship these days

These are challenging times to offer nuanced views of things. Few people accept nuances. Thus, if you do not accept every premise of your opponent’s view, you are ‘Brother Watchtower’ as that silly Witness says of me. But I don’t take offense. I don’t exactly flatter her, either.

It nettles me when I see brothers gush all over ‘science’ and ‘critical thinking.’ Why should they do that? It constitutes the prime tool of our adversaries. I’m not against science. It’s great stuff. Pour me a double-shot of it. But to rely on it as the be-all and end-all is surely to court folly.

Do not scientists, for the most part, urinate all over Genesis and blood? Are we to imagine that those are the only things that they are all wet on? Yet many brothers would seem to. The GB does not, which earns them my tremendous respect. They recognize it as a tool—not valueless, but also not THE GAMECHANGER. Scientists mostly lean this way or that? Well—take note of it but don’t let it ruin your day. Tomorrow you may see the headline, “Everything You Thought You Knew About Such-and-Such is Wrong!”

38 minutes ago, Arauna said:

The most prestigious universities get grants from certain pharma giants and then a study appears shortly after which just happens to bring more money into the pocket of the corporation. Now that is excellent scholarship!

There is an ex-pharma VP online who makes just that point. ‘Nobody has any money,’ he says. ‘Universities don’t  Governments don’t. Think-tanks don’t. But Pharma has lots of money. It commissions scientists from one of those penniless outfits to study this or that new drug. If the outcome if favorable to Pharma, that outfit can expect to be funded for more studies. If it is unfavorable, that outfit will never hear from Pharma again. ‘No money has changed hands,’ he says. ‘No agreements have been entered into. But everyone knows what they must do.’

The ones who shove ‘science‘ down everyone’s throats are not necessarily even scientists, I am convinced, but are a second buttressing and uninvited layer that I call ‘scientist-philosopher-atheist-cheerleaders.’ Scientists just go about doing science, and many of them see no contradiction between science and the spiritual world—they are two different ways of examining things, and ‘one key does not unlock all.’

People who rail on about science tend to not notice when money hijacks their science, as in the Pharma example above. Scientists have to eat, too. They are also stubborn like anyone else—slow to yield to new data. They are not more so than others, but neither on balance are they less. One of the downfalls of ‘critical thinking’ is that those who espouse it most vehemently are prone to assume that they have a lock on the stuff.

As to Rulf—I’m not opposed to him. If he thinks that he will be DFed, as he has stated—well, who am I to argue? But I will accept it only when I see it. Brothers in charge have something that they did not have 40 years ago. They have a prior example to look at and to see how that worked out. They may or may not go a similar route. I’ll get my head around it regardless of how they go, but I won’t start until they go there.

38 minutes ago, Arauna said:

but must he do it so publicly? ......So as to garner undue attention to his person and his scholarship? 

Yes. And I note and agree that you put them as questions, not statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
34 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I could have told you that beforehand.

Probably true, Tom. I already knew that I would probably agree with plenty of his arguments related to his current view on the FDS and higher education. But so much more that he says, has already been said in so many words over here on this forum. Some of it very recently. The areas where many of us have long defended the Witness position with respect to war, neutrality, the two different hopes of salvation, use of God's name, identifying principles of the true religion, the value of a leadership body with respect to efficiently carrying out a worldwide preaching work, etc., etc. You'd think that he came over here and picked up a few ideas, although I'm sure he had already come to these positions through the WT publications and his own experience in defending them.

On higher education, he tends to present it a bit too positively, without enough warning about some of same dangers that have hurt Witnesses, sometimes spiritually, sometimes economically. I think he is too focused on how well it worked out for himself, and perhaps schools in Norway are more serious than some of the party destinations that attract students in the United States. To him most higher education is Biblically neutral, and he tends to promote higher education for those who can make room for it.

A lot of Witnesses (remember JTR?) have complained about the "dumbing down" of study habits and the lower levels of effort put into really learning scriptural and spiritual matters for ourselves. His issues with the NWT 2013 are also identical to things that have been said here in that regard. Furuli is not terribly consistent with his favorite subjects and pet peeves, but he has managed to explain the issues in very practical terms better than I've seen before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
43 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Do not scientists, for the most part, urinate all over Genesis and blood?

The new religion is science and technology - even pseudo-science has replaced God. And science these days is without scruples or ethics.  Saw a headline yesterday....... a mouse has been produced with 4 %  human genes.  Why? Most probably they had discovered that all lab mice were too interbred to have provided proper results in the last 25 years.. Who knows why. 

The research done in China labs and by the BIG tech giants is frightening and could put the future of humans in jeopardy -  if they carry on with what they are doing.  The developments in science are so quick at present that governments are not keeping up with proper legislation... and atheist countries do not care to place restrictions on these unscrupulous people.  To them it is a race to dominate the world with a new discovery...... and in this quest there are more than enough funds available from renegade, atheist super rich capitalists and oligarchs who wish to make more money from the results.

I saw a headline recently - the earlier vaccines were grown on animal material. There is talk that pharma covered up when they found retro-viruses in vaccines that were produced via monkey kidney material.  Since most animals have corona virusses ..... there is talk that AIDS originated from vaccines.

There was a court case filed end of Dec 2019 - here's what was copied from the headpiece of the document: Case 1:19-cv-11947 Document 1 Filed 12/31/19 Page 1 of 36.

This court case results did not appear in any media. There was no settlement in this lawsuit. It was mutually dissolved by both sides (plaintiffs/defendants) but the U.S. District Judge's (Hon. Lewis J. Limon) signed a stipulation acknowledging that the defendants (The CDC) could not produce any copies of safety studies - proving that safety studies were never done on vaccines.  They only produced 20 unrelated documents.

So NO safety studies were ever done and yet these pharma corporations, through lobbying, obtained blanket immunity from congress just before the turn of the century. They are not being held accountable in a court of law and a cap of 30 thousand dollars is placed on litigation for people who have  been injured by vaccines in court.  If your child is autistic one needs thousands upon thousands for special teachers etc.  This is the level of corruption going on in the system. The safety claims are fraudulent!

I found it on another website but this was sent me by someone:


To get to the meat start at 34:14. If you scroll down to around the 10th commenter, (Joe Knipp), outlines the show. At the very end circa 1:01:00 Del gives the CDC the ultimatum: Either take down the prominent declaration on their website that states Vaccines doesn't cause autism or ICAN is gonna pursue every possible legal avenue.

47 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

many of them see no contradiction between science and the spiritual world—

There IS no contradiction between science and the spiritual world if scientists follow only to where the truth leads them. Unfortunately in the modern world, science has lost the ball because they follow preconceived ideas that there is no god. So anything which may suggest design or anything hinting at God in the conclusion, simply has to be discarded and replaced with a different hypothesis and outcome.

1 hour ago, César Chávez said:

Pharisees and Sadducee

Apart from this legal entity (Sanhedrin) which had already been infiltrated by Greek oratory thinking, and was the highest authority in religious and self-governing matters of the Jews, there was a group of Christian apostles and elders in Jerusalem, according to acts 15, which took the lead.

They appointed 7 brothers of good repute to divide the food amongst the widows because these brothers had to keep busy with the commission Jesus gave the apostles, namely to oversee the Christian congregations and ensure that false teachings did not slip in. They were led by James at the time when Paul and Barnabas came to testify about the gentiles receiving holy spirit  while not circumcised.  The decision of this body (not called a GB then) was sent out to all congregations. Acts 6:1 -6 and Acts 15 "So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question."


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
45 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

higher education, he tends to present it a bit too positively,

Maybe years ago one could go to university without making crippling debt and also being indoctrinated in a spiritually crippling way.

Today, one has to self-censor at all universities (freedom of inquiry and freedom of speech is curtailed by political correctness) and there is no longer a guest for truth in the humanities.  One sends a child into the class and they come out with LGBTQ indoctrination due to the fact that they have to select one of these courses.... no matter what they are studying. I have watched several interviews with students..... they are not learning to think any longer.  It is truly better to learn a vocation..

There are some sciences that are still good but most have to follow the Darwinian dogma.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
    • I'm not bothered by being singled out, as you seem to be accustomed to defending and protecting yourselves, but it's a good idea to keep your dog on a leash. Speaking of which, in a different thread, TTH mentioned that it would be great if everyone here shared their life stories. As both of you are the librarians here, I kindly ask you to minimize any signs of intimidation or insincerity. It is you people who need to be "banned" here. However, it is quite evident that you hold a negative influence, which God recognizes, therefore you are banned from your own conscience in His eyes.
    • One issue with historian Flavius Josephus is that he suggests that the Royal Captain of the (Guard) can also be regarded as General Nebuzaradan. A confusion arises from Josephus' account of the captives mentioned in Jeremiah, as he claims that they were taken from Egypt instead of Babylon. Since Nebuchadnezzar was occupied in Rilah, he directed his generals to lay siege to Jerusalem. This could potentially account for the numerous dispatches that Nebuchadnezzar would have sent to the west, but the considerable distance to Borsippa still poses a challenge. As a result, the Babylonians managed to gain control of regions such as Aram (Syria), Ammon, and Moab. The only territories that remained were the coastal cities, where the Egyptians held sway. King Josiah decided to form an alliance with Babylon instead of being under Egyptian rule. So, that part of the territory was covered until King Josiah was defeated.  It's interesting how they started back then in 4129, but still end up with the same conclusion with Zedekiah's Defeat 3522 607 B.C. 3419 607 B.C. even though their AM is different.  
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
    • Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
    • Most Online

    Newest Member
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.