Srecko Sostar

So, the thoughts of men. Or it seems the thoughts of one man. 
To be sure God had no part in such reasoning. 
It seems homosexuality and probably sex with animals was enough for God to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, but not enough for divorce it seems  

Well-said. I see your point. It's also true that we only have his side of the story. And I know there was some concern among at least one of his peers to take care of some of the issues he exposed as soon as possible.
But these issues he brings up, along with a review of our own organizational history from WT publications, all support the idea that someone in his situation could easily have had a crisis of conscience. I think he should have had one. I thought it should have led to him resigning from the Governing Body before he was asked to resign, rather than just take a leave of absence from the Governing Body during this time of crisis.
His crisis seems to be initially about whether he should have continued to work for more scriptural policies from the inside, or whether he should stand up more strongly for his own beliefs, or whether he should acquiesce. For years, apparently, he always acquiesced. Within the Governing Body, he would vote against creating a new rule that married couples could be disfellowshipped for oral sex, for example. But then when overruled by at least two-thirds of the rest of the Governing Body, who got the assignment to write it up?
He would be the one asked to write up the Watchtower article to provide the scriptural defense of something he conscientiously believed was not scriptural. Kind of like your point (in TTvTA) about how people are taught to debate by being assigned either side of an argument.
Now as a member of the Governing Body, he could remain and fight for what he thought was the scriptural position: that there was no explicit Bible rule stating that married couples must be dragged through a judicial hearing if, for some reason, the couple admitted to a friend, for example, that they had engaged in oral sex of some kind.
At the same time, the Watchtower claimed that a man could have homosexual relations with another man or an animal, and it was not "fornication" and thus did not constitute grounds for a scriptural divorce. R.Franz still believed, as did his colleagues, that these forms of sex were wrong, and not to be engaged in, and that the person could be disfellowshipped. But for some reason he did not stand up for his conscience and take a stand against what was clearly an unscriptural case of using the supposed "letter of the law" to kill the "spirit of the law."
Of course, he reports that he did fight for the change, from the inside, and sometimes it would take months of collecting letters to the Service Department, and sometimes it would take years. And patience. But in large part, apparently, these areas of conscience were resolved and the rest of the Governing Body finally acquiesced. We have the Watchtower articles that provide evidence to fit his claims.
This might sound self-aggrandizing for R.Franz, but it makes perfect sense considering the persons who made up the Governing Body.
Working as an artist for most of my 4 years at Bethel, I knew who was writing which articles and books. In fact, the initials of the writer and an additional series of initials of those who had seen and approved the article were always at the top of the first typewritten page. This also helped proofreaders and artists know who their department head might talk to if there was a question.
Listening to the Governing Body members rotate through their 15 minute talks every day, sometimes rambling unprepared, and sometimes well organized, it was easy to tell who deferred to whom, and which members were interested in Bible topics and which were interested in organizational rules, and rarely did the twain meet.
Between that experience of hearing them speak daily and knowing which Watchtower articles a GB member had written lets me know that everything R.Franz says in the book makes perfect sense with respect to those who spoke up and what they probably would have said during GB meetings. I should also add that I could sometimes hear L.Swingle and F.Rusk (non-GB) speaking to other writers from their offices. (Most GB members never wrote a Watchtower article, and most had almost nothing to do with Writing of any kind.) It also makes sense why, by way of explanation, R.Franz goes into the history of the creation of the Governing Body from the time it began in the early 70's.

“At some point”. Yes, he prayed because he said he did nothing but what the Father told him.  John 5:30; 8:28.  Since God knows all things, do you believe He would keep Judas as the betrayer a secret from Jesus, letting him find out on his own?   You are saying Jesus had no ability given him by God, to read the heart of man. Scriptures say otherwise.  John 2:23-25; 6:64  Judas was chosen as a betrayer.  It sounds like your saying that Jesus was in the dark about who of the 12, would betray him until he proved himself to be a thief.  Both God and Christ knew his heart.  John 2:23-25.  Jesus knew “from the beginning”.  “He knew all men”.   
John 17:12 - While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled.
Do you believe he didn't know how he would die, or that Pilate would be instrumental in sending him to his death at the demand of the Pharisees?  He knew exactly how it would happen and by whom. 
Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. 55 Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and obey his word. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad.”
57 “You are not yet fifty years old,” they said to him, “and you have seen Abraham!”
58 “Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!”   John 8:54-58
Judas’ role as the betrayer was fulfilled. Ps 41:9; Mark 14:19-21   Jesus’ choice for the twelfth apostle was Paul; another stumbling block most likely, for JWs. He personally chose all 12 apostles, as well as who would betray him.  Matthias was chosen by men, who cast lots. Acts 1:26
Here are examples of Jesus’ knowing what was in the heart of each person even before speaking with them.
Now some teachers of the law were sitting there, thinking to themselves, 7 “Why does this fellow talk like that? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”
8 Immediately Jesus knew in his spirit that this was what they were thinking in their hearts, and he said to them, “Why are you thinking these things? Mark 2:6-8
 
When Jesus saw Nathanael approaching, he said of him, “Here truly is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.”48 “How do you know me?” Nathanael asked.
Jesus answered, “I saw you while you were still under the fig tree before Philip called you.” 49 Then Nathanael declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel.” John 18:47-49
How did Jesus see him?  Spiritually, physically?  How did he determine that Nathaneal had “no deceit” unless he read his heart?  John 18:47-49
 
 
 
 

But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him.  John 6:64
Jesus said to him, “He who is bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you.” 11 For He knew who would betray Him; therefore He said, “You are not all clean.”  John 13:10,11
 Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name when they saw the signs which He did. 24 But Jesus did not commit Himself to them, because He knew all men, 25 and had no need that anyone should testify of man, for He knew what was in man.  John 2:23-25
 
 
 
 

Yes they are idolaters based on their belief that if you leave a group of men, aka the governing body, you are leaving Jehovah.

Ps 119:30 – “The unfolding of your words gives light; it gives understanding to the simple.”
Dear JWs,
Can an idol hear the words of God?  Idolatry is sourced in the spirit of the world, where Satan wields his authority. 1 John 5:19  An idol cannot speak the words of God, aiding others to reach the light of understanding and truth.   John 17:17 
An idol has no compassion toward those in need, extending its hand to comfort the afflicted and those suffering in sorrow; fully able to sense their needs.   It cannot comprehend the examples of love and compassion we have in Christ.  Matt 11:28-30   
If an idol is unable to hear and speak the Word of God in Christ, then surely we know it can never walk in the path of Christ, or shine the light of truth when under the power of the wicked one.    1 Sam 12:21; Ps 119:1-5
Can an earthly fabrication, run by men, EVER bring salvation to ANYONE who joins it?  And what if it does purport to be the way to salvation; can those who represent it, hear, speak, and walk in the Word of God and the path of Christ?  No.  It would be an act of rebellion to assign salvation to anything other than the name that scripture declares as our salvation. Its leaders would be false teachers, appearing as “ministers of light”, “holding to a form of godliness, although having denied its power”.   Ps 18:2; Acts 4:12; 2 Cor 11:13-15; 2 Tim 3:5   
 Yes, idolatry IS an act of rebellion against God.  Ezek 20:8;Ps 78:58  
How do you feel about the following proclamation by your leaders, JWs?
Watchtower 1981/11/15:  “come to Jehovah’s ORGANIZATION for SALVATION”   pg 16-21 par 18
“There are those who rebel against the light, who do not know its ways or stay in its paths.” Job 24:13
If we take another fork in the Watchtower’s twisted road to “salvation”, what do your leaders say?
Watchtower 90/11/1 p. 26 – “We cannot take part in any modern version of idolatry – be it worshipful gestures toward an IMAGE OR SYMBOL or the imputing of SALVATION to a PERSON or an ORGANIZATION. 
Please, think about this the next time you view an exJW as an “apostate”.  Do you know that the most threatening “apostates” to the organization are those who have turned fully to God and Christ?  Why?  They do not hide their “lamp” under a basket, but speak the Word of God boldly for all of you to hear.  The Word of God is truth, which exposes the Watchtower’s idolatrous identity.  Luke 11:33; Rev 11:1-3; 13:1,5,11,14-17  
There is no need to return to “Jehovah’s organization”, since it is, according to the above Watchtower quote, an IDOL.  Those who desire to walk in the light of Christ, seek out the pure words of God, untainted by men, their decrees and twisted reasoning.  They have come to know that the Father does not stand on equal ground with an organization, but He alone is our Rock and our fortress.  Isa 46:5; 42:8; 2:7-10  
They have found the true God. They have returned to pure worship. Isa 57:13; Ps 24:3,4
Watchtower 1953/3/1 p. 143:  “Ask yourself now, Did Christ Jesus, who set our example and told us to follow his example to gain life, join any church ORGANIZATION in his day?  No.  GOD DOES NOT REQUIRE US TO DO THAT; but he requires us to worship him…  We have the Bible to show us the right way.  CERTAINLY IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR A PERSON TO BECOME A MEMBER OF A CHURCH TO GAIN EVERLASTING LIFE.”
Who then, is the apostate?  One who stays clear of worldly organizations and worships in “spirit and truth”, or is it you, and your leaders who have rebelled against God by glorifying “Jehovah’s organization”?    Please, reject the Watchtower Idol, JWs.  As with all idols, this one is destined to topple soon.  John 4:23,24  
 
Psalm 115:
Not to us, YHVH, not to us,
but to Your name give glory
because of Your faithful love, because of Your truth.
2 Why should the nations say,
“Where is their God?” 
3 Our God is in heaven
and does whatever He pleases.
4 Their idols are silver and gold,
made by human hands.
5 They have mouths but cannot speak,
eyes, but cannot see.
6 They have ears but cannot hear,
noses, but cannot smell.
7 They have hands but cannot feel,
feet, but cannot walk.
They cannot make a sound with their throats.

8 Those who make them are just like them,
as are all who trust in them.
9 House of Israel, trust in YHVH!
He is their help and shield.

10 House of Aaron, trust in YHVH!
He is their help and shield.

11 You who fear the Lord, trust in YHVH!
He is their help and shield.

12 The Lord remembers us and will bless us.
He will bless the house of Israel;
he will bless the house of Aaron;
13 he will bless those who fear the Lord—
small and great alike.
14 May the Lord add to your numbers,
both yours and your children’s.
15 May you be blessed by the Lord,
the Maker of heaven and earth.
16 The heavens are the Lord’s heavens
but the earth he has given to the children of men.

17 It is not the dead who praise the Lord,
nor any of those descending into the silence of death.
18 But we will bless the Lord,
both now and forever.
Praise the Lord!
 
Pearl Doxsey 
    "Can the Watchtower Crumble?"
    "Who is the False Prophet that Gives Breath to the Image of the Beast?"
 
 
 
 

It is understandable for me to see your disappoint about R.F. or similar characters inside JW. Yes, perhaps your view about him is correct. But for many of us is of less concern why he wrote a book about GB and WT. We can feel sorrow for him or we can say he is/was hypocrite. Nevertheless, information's we get from his inside insight about WT GB mechanism are more important then he alone. Because "The Truth" is in question, not he, not me, not you. 
He was the one who has must struggle with HIS conscience why he stay inside and support all wrongs he knew about, despite knowledge he had. He was the one who has been responsible for covering this too long and so on. I do not care, in final stage of matter, what was his motive. Only important thing for me is;  Is it that or this, what he said, true?      

You made important point. If someone can not defeat your arguments or evidences then they questioning your motives. So pathetic!!! 
"Yes, it can be how this what he said was happened, but WHY HE said this? ... because HIS MOTIVES are bad". 
And WHO are you? to judge my motives ! :)))  

I've been thinking about this claim for a while. I don't consider Carl Olof Jonsson nor Raymond Franz to be apostate. Not apostates from Christianity, nor apostates from Jehovah's Witnesses, nor apostates from the Watch Tower Society.
The reason is because they didn't "go out from among us." Both of them acquiesced for several years. Both of them were kicked out -- pushed out, instead of just leaving. They didn't go out on their own. And questioning certain doctrines does not constitute leaving the religion, according to directives given in our publications today. Besides most of the doctrines that were questioned have already now been shown to be incorrect anyway. The 2010 change to the generation doctrine was already an admission that 1914 was no longer tenable as the start of the generation that would see Armageddon within their lifespans. Back in 1980, Brother Schroeder himself had questioned this doctrine when he proposed that the Governing Body change that date for the beginning of the generation from 1914 to 1957. I don't think this makes Brother Schroeder an apostate, nor would it even if he had been disfellowshipped over that proposal.
So yes, I think R.Franz should get credit for mentioning Carl Jonsson. They both had studied the same material on chronology, and both of them had decided to go to the experts. But one of them (Jonsson) had decided to carefully question the Society first, and give them several opportunities to respond, and even several years to respond to specific points, before finally going public with the research he collected. So, even after becoming convinced in his own mind, he acquiesced to Witness protocol. Even though he did not originate much of this research, he made it accessible to many more Witnesses. It was very important research in my opinion, especially as it cleared up the problem that the Watch Tower Society was facing at the time. He basically found that the Biblical, scholarly, historical and archaeological evidence perfectly supported the Bible's accounts and resolved the chronology issues that the Watch Tower had been struggling with, changing, stretching, and fretting over for over 100 years. When a Christian Witness has a gift and talent for research, it is a fine thing to share it with others -- to bring one's gift upon the altar -- especially after Carl Jonsson had given the WTS the benefit of the doubt that they would handle things appropriately in time.
Almost exactly a year after Jonsson's manuscript got to Bethel, Brother Bert Schroeder traveled to WT Branches in Europe in 1978 with the idea of building a case against Carl Jonsson during a couple of these meetings. I traveled a good portion of this trip to about 10 of our European branches with Brother Schroeder and met up with him at several of the same cities he visited. But, after breaking schedule in Athens, I was not in Wiesbaden, Copenhagen or Oslo on the same days, and I knew almost nothing of any portion of Schroeder's meetings regarding Jonsson. It was a few months later that I was told that Jonsson's document had now been at Bethel for a year already, still spending almost all of that time on a shelf, untouched.
This is quite true, but just because the Society made many mistakes about "1914" and the "1914 generation" over the course of many years, it doesn't make them evil. The intention was probably very good on the part of almost all believers in the doctrine, in all its forms at least between 1879 and up until 2010. The idea that the Watchtower could make very specific claims about certain dates might have been based on haughtiness and presumptuousness, but there is no intention to be presumptuous or haughty. So I don't think even a falsehood need be labeled "evil" in any way. 
Quite true. I'm guessing you are referring to C.Jonsson's book influencing R.Franz. I'm referring to the dozens of disingenuous ways that our chronology doctrine had been supported, although, fortunately, most of these ways of explaining it have now been dropped.
No one need follow in R.Franz' footsteps. It's true that many of the points he made will cause confusion to some. But they are already out there, and this is why they need to be explained and discussed honestly. If they are true, we should be prepared for how we deal with such truths. If they aren't true, we need to search out evidence to defend against those points. But, no matter what, they need not result in leaving the Witnesses or getting disfellowshipped. Because what happened to R.Franz has nothing to do with whether the points he makes in his book are accurate and true. His books can and will be misused. Just as encyclopedias, and websites, and Watchtowers are misused.
But if he said some things that are true, do they suddenly become untrue just because R.Franz was the one who pointed them out?
R.Franz pointed out that the generation doctrine was going to have to change again in the next few years. He turned out to be right. But do you say he was wrong just it because he said it in his book? R.Franz pointed out that it was the Watch Tower Society that put restrictions on our ministry in Mexico and not the Mexican government. It was the Watch Tower Society that later lifted those restrictions on our work when they determined that the circumstances were right. R.Franz pointed out that the situation with imprisonment of brothers in South Korea and other areas was about to change because it had already received enough votes to change. (But then Lloyd Barry reversed his vote, so that nothing changed.)  We know that it finally changed more recently, after a long delay. But do you doubt the accuracy of the R.Franz book? If so, on what basis, specifically. Just because it was R.Franz who pointed it out?

They said how here in Croatia is origin of tie (kravata - Croata, Cravate - in English, from French word Cravates for Croatian people )  typical scarves worn by Croatian cavalrymen,  an accessory which became the ubiquitous necktie of today...

What did John the Baptist wear when telling folks to repent while he was in the desert? 
Oh, so lemming mentality is just fine with you? The Hare Krishna shave their heads like monks do, is that the same then? Should you be shaving your head because these guys do? 
 
Are you equating clothing and money extortion in God's house? I'm pretty sure I didn't read that part about Jesus making a whip to whip those in tight pants or who wore a beard......err wait, didn't Jesus wear a beard? 
 
Tell that to the beggars Jesus visited and ate with and healed. 

When the tight pants sinful brother touches your $30 suit
 

Should we make the Brothers and Sisters who won the genetic lottery, the ones who are handsome and beautiful, beat themselves in the face with a steel rod until they resemble the rest of us ... and the ones who CAN wear standard body type attractive clothing wear frumpy and dumpy clothing instead?
They ALREADY want the children's ice-cream money .... and use cartoons to get it!
What's next?

Perhaps I have missed something ... but I thought everybody in this picture was dressed appropriately ... even though the Brother in the Tan suit looked afraid he was about to become a hand puppet.
 

The Brother in the above picture, on the left with the pale blue shirt has his shirt sleeves partially rolled up ... is that it?
Is that the problem?
 
 

Are but who's choice of modesty ? Oh of course the GB's and the Elders.  
Maybe what Jehovah wants of every one is a bit of individuality.    
Are I've just noticed you say 'JW' standards, not God's standards. 

@Space Merchant  True Christian JW's are supposed to 'quit being fashioned after this system of things' and put away national identities and embrace the JW culture above all.
There is NO place for such nationalistic pride within the JW community. But that is for another discussion.
Meanwhile... no skirts above the knee for sisters!!!
AND while we are at it.... those tight pants... FORBIDDEN!!!
"You must be perfect". or else.... sisters will gossip about you as in the illustration above.
Welcome to the mentally warped world of JW fashion and life. Hypocrisy at its best.

what would be the difference from any other ExJW that writes a book with the same old storylines? I don't see how his book is more special than any other.

Actually, you might have hit on the exact reason that many Witnesses have read it secretly when you said:
It's the fact that he purports to tell people what went on in the GB.

This book became a long, ongoing conversation for a few years among my former roommates at Bethel and another Bethelite who was a groomsman at my wedding, and a friend who had remained in the Writing Department for 30 years after my last Bethel assignment. (In 4 years at Bethel, I had 5 different roommates, and four of them have talked to me about the book.) This doesn't prove anything, but a former roommate (Service/Correspondence), and the brother in Writing, have both confirmed that copies of R.Franz books were kept in the Writing Dept "special" library since the early 1980's.
Of course, he had bias. And I'm sure he would only choose or emphasize details that would lead one toward that same bias. We are all taught to do that, because there is nothing wrong with bias if it's a bias toward what's true. And, though I don't have proof yet, I also think he was wrong about a couple of things, too. But I tend to think he was factually accurate because I have found good corroboration for a couple of things I personally questioned. Also because it is much more important for someone in his position to pay more than the usual attention to all details claimed, for the same reasons that an outsider plaintiff must be extra careful in a "David v. Goliath" type of court case. One false claim and you get crushed.
If you can recall any of those items you thought "twisted" that could be very important to the current discussion.

It is understandable for me to see your disappoint about R.F. or similar characters inside JW. Yes, perhaps your view about him is correct. But for many of us is of less concern why he wrote a book about GB and WT. We can feel sorrow for him or we can say he is/was hypocrite. Nevertheless, information's we get from his inside insight about WT GB mechanism are more important then he alone. Because "The Truth" is in question, not he, not me, not you. 
He was the one who has must struggle with HIS conscience why he stay inside and support all wrongs he knew about, despite knowledge he had. He was the one who has been responsible for covering this too long and so on. I do not care, in final stage of matter, what was his motive. Only important thing for me is;  Is it that or this, what he said, true?      

Poor Felix like a baby throwing his toys out of the pram again. 
Quote Felix "How convenient to all of a sudden develop a conscience to justify his own actions.. "
Um, one can only develop a conscience over time as one put things together. Things build up over time as one gathers information. So one's conscience builds with the more information one has on a subject.
But then it seems Felix has suddenly been given power from 'above' to judge Raymond Franz. 
Quote "I’m not mentally challenged spiritually .". That makes no sense at all. Spiritual things give wisdom from God.. Whereas we think mentally of our own choice. 
And this silly word 'apostate' is so misused now it really has no meaning at all. 
Remember, an apostate is someone that turns away from a former religion. They do not necessarily turn away from God or Jesus Christ. 
So it seems that Raymond Franz chose to serve God and not serve the GB or JW org. Hence the GB got annoyed with him. 
And once again we see typical GB / JW org attitude whereby Felix thinks he has the right to tell someone where to post his comments. 
As for faithful followers of Christ. A lot of them are already out, out of JW Org that is  ....

It is understandable for me to see your disappoint about R.F. or similar characters inside JW. Yes, perhaps your view about him is correct. But for many of us is of less concern why he wrote a book about GB and WT. We can feel sorrow for him or we can say he is/was hypocrite. Nevertheless, information's we get from his inside insight about WT GB mechanism are more important then he alone. Because "The Truth" is in question, not he, not me, not you. 
He was the one who has must struggle with HIS conscience why he stay inside and support all wrongs he knew about, despite knowledge he had. He was the one who has been responsible for covering this too long and so on. I do not care, in final stage of matter, what was his motive. Only important thing for me is;  Is it that or this, what he said, true?      

You made important point. If someone can not defeat your arguments or evidences then they questioning your motives. So pathetic!!! 
"Yes, it can be how this what he said was happened, but WHY HE said this? ... because HIS MOTIVES are bad". 
And WHO are you? to judge my motives ! :)))  

Are you saying you don’t know why Judas was handpicked?
 Simon Peter answered, “Lord, to whom will we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69 We have come to believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.”
70 Jesus replied to them, “Didn’t I choose you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil.” 71 He was referring to Judas, Simon Iscariot’s son] one of the Twelve, because he was going to betray him.  John 6:68-71
 
While they were eating, he said, “Truly I tell you, one of you will betray me.”
22 Deeply distressed, each one began to say to him, “Surely not I, Lord?”
23 He replied, “The one who dipped his hand with me in the bowl—he will betray me. 24 The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for him if he had not been born.”  Matt 26:21-24
 
His role was instrumental in fulfilling prophesy, and God who reads the heart thoroughly, could see clearly that Judas had already chosen his path, which was destruction. Are you equating this to the GB, or Raymond Franz as being “handpicked by Jesus” to do good, or evil?
We have full evidence that the disciples were inspired by Spirit. John 20:22;  Rom 8:5,9; 1 Cor 2:10  We don't have that evidence with the GB who must alter teachings continually.   We don't hear how the Spirit directs them, but that they are not "inspired"; so, instead, we hear how the GB put their heads together to come up with new decrees.  There is no comparison to the apostles.  Why make it?  
 
 

Getting back to the topic. I think R.Franz is a curious case in point. I do blame him for some of the child abuse problems because I think he was the person who would have invoked the two-witness rule into judicial matters that are too difficult to figure out through external knowledge and common sense alone. He seemed to have been the one assigned to most of the congregational judicial issues related to immorality. Didn't mean it was his decision, but he was the one assigned to find scriptural defenses for the way the rest of the GB had voted to handle things. He should have had the wherewithal to either speak up or leave the organization. Yet he stayed, and remained an elder, a JW in good standing, even after he was asked to resign from the Governing Body.