JOHN BUTLER

If and when we see them abuse their authority, we can point it out as Paul often did, 
I like this. There were times when an Elder would give me a headache / chew my ear off I think is an expression, and i would simply say to him,  'Show me three scriptures to back up what you are saying, or go away'.  They would walk away.
One of the points regularly was not wearing a jacket and tie in hot weather. In my opinion neither God nor Christ demanded it. 

@JW Insider  Quote "Those who have seen the evil in people up close and personally may actually have a keener "intuitive" sense of potential evil. Or perhaps that "intuitive" sense has been destroyed for the same reasons. I have no idea, so I am not trying to answer John directly on this topic."
In a nutshell. I suffered 3½ years of sexual abuse, physical abuse and emotional abuse in a Children's Home, from age 13 to 16½. It was suffer and keep quiet, or be moved into an Approved School, which i was assured was 10 times worse.  We didn't have sex education back then so i was very nieve, and I was under the 'care' of the council (local government) so could not just walk away from it. I could not report it to the police as they were all part of the same system and i would have been 'moved'.  

I thought you said many JW's use the American Standard Version or something like that. Sorry if i misquoted you. 

@BillyTheKid46 Quote  " The irony, you attack the GB when your heart in no better than the soulless being you present, not just here but elsewhere. "
The difference being that i don't pretend to know the truth, and i don't want power over others. I don't make rules for others to follow. I do not mislead anyone as I do not try to 'take the lead' in any way. 
I do not pretend that i am the 'Faithful and discreet slave' of God through Christ. 
And I'm not frightened to admit that i have no love or trust in anyone. 
But then i don't hide pedophiles either, and I don't tell people how tight or loose their clothes should be. I don't make up rules about who can speak to who. I don't write magazines that tell deliberate lies about what God requires of us. I don't make up rules about the use of blood and then change those rules at a later date. 
I am only responsible for me. Your GB has made itself responsible for millions of people, but they have no proof that the responsibility is guided by God or Christ. 
Your GB has no love of people, only love of power over people. Your GB does not care about the victims of Child Sexual Abuse, they only care about 'their' money being spent in compensation. 
Your GB is prepared to sacrifice innocent lives to cover up the wickedness of the W/t and the JW Org.
Your GB 'cleans the outside of the dish or bowl, but leaves the inside full of disgusting things'.
And you Billy just worship your GB so much that you are completely blind to it all.
 

Every once in a great while, you will find an excellent Doctor , who is exceptional, but he never went to medical school and does not have a license to practice.  Several movies have been made about this sort of thing, wither about doctors, policemen, and even airline pilots.
Take whatever lessons you want from this observation.
 

No, I said that I don't ... when in Field Service .... if memory serves.
Therein lies the problem.

Did you tell him that?

@TrueTomHarley  Ok let's take one step at a time with your over long comment. Over long deliberately to deceive people, to try to take people away from the true points of my comment. Nice try Tom.
1. I quote " This is exactly how it was in the Jewish nation, per laws given to Moses, that serve as a last-ditch method of discipline."
No in the Jewish nation people were born into it, they did not volunteer themselves into it. A big difference. Hence I've said before, children should not be baptised, they should have to wait until they are 'adult' age, then it would be voluntary. 
When  a person volunteers themself to be a JW (gets baptised) they think, at the time, that they are 'giving their life to God'. But in truth they are joining the JWOrg /W/t / GB run club. However it is voluntary, not born into. Big difference. 
But once a person is in that 'club' they become ensnared. They are told not to mix with people 'in the world', not to do business with 'people in the world', always bo no part of that 'wicked world. So of course they build their whole world around the JW Org . W/t, GB.  Then they are trapped. All their eggs in one basket.  If they leave the 'club' they lose everything, in a sense.
However as I've found by leaving that 'club', it does not mean turning my back on God or Jesus Christ. 
2. Many witnesses openly admit that they are physically in / mentally-spiritually out.
You took this and tried to make a comedy out of it. It didn't work Tom.  It didn't work because so many people know that many JW's are not 'fully committed' to your GB and it's JW Org. I think it was James that said that many JW's don't even use the NWT bible. 
As for doing preaching hours, it only takes ½ an hour PER MONTH to put in a Monthly Report. 
3. Quote "There is no NT writer who does not deal with apostates. If they existed then, why would they not exist now? "
It is so easy for you, the Gb and the Org to use that silly word Apostates. I say silly because it loses its meaning by overuse. 
The NT writers suffered opposition from Jews that did not believe that Jesus was the Christ / Messiah,  or did not want to let go of the power they had. And from the Romans of course. However those 'writers' were inspired of God and could do works to PROVE it. 
What the GB / JW Org / W/t is suffering now is not opposition to God or Jesus Christ, it is opposition to false teachings, opposition to man made rules, opposition to Child Sexual abuse in the JW Org / w/t, opposition to the GB demanding that they are seen as the only 'Faithful and discreet slave',  opposition to oppression from Elders, get the picture. 
Your GB cannot prove that they have the authority to give themselves the position they do give themselves. (Remember your argument about proving the Trinity). They do not have WORKS to PROVE their authority.
Tom you should probably carry on writing fairy stories as you seem to live in that sort of a 'world', a dream world.  

This is exactly how it was in the Jewish nation, per laws given to Moses, that serve as a last-ditch method of discipline.
 
I had someone contact me via email, trying to get me going, saying he was one of them—physically in, but mentally out. And—here’s the kicker—he said that after he placed literature he would later return to warn the householder not to read it! Or if he did, not to act upon it. Now, just let me get a mental picture of how that might go down:
Why did he place literature in the first place? He is “a member of a controlling cult that monitors everything he does, and so he has no choice!”—I guess he would have to say something like that. And they “control” him by threatening to take his family away if he doesn’t follow every “command” that they issue! It is too late for him, but not too late for you, Mr. Householder. Run and save yourself!
Really? Could that truly be?
Look, if you want to present the picture that opposers are batsh*t crazy, I can’t think of a better way to do it. On Christmas Eve, he goes to homes to sing Christmas carols. On every other night, he goes to sing Hotel California: 
‘You can check in any time you like—but you can never leave!’
or House of the Rising Sun:
‘and it’s been the ruin of many a poor boy, and God, I know, I’m one’
or For What it’s Worth:
‘step out of line, the men come to take you away!’
Sheesh. People are crazy. Batsh*t crazy—pure and simple.
He also said, (with a hee hee hee) that he was one of thousands! Could that be? Or is his army like that of Gideon, making such a god-awful racket that they seem far larger than they really are? Or is it just him? Or is it not even him—look, going door to door for even the right reason is a challenge—but to go twice to say that you want to take back what you said the first time because you are actually an undercover guerrilla fighter—when the householder wasn’t all that interested in the first place? What kind of a nutcase could pull that off? 
No matter. I don’t run away from these things. I run toward them. I think of the Philippians verse: 
“True, some are preaching the Christ through envy and rivalry, but others also through goodwill. The latter are publicizing the Christ out of love...but the former do it out of contentiousness, not with a pure motive, for they are supposing to stir up tribulation....What then? [Nothing,] except that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is being publicized, and in this I rejoice.” (1:15-18)
The object is to get the good news out there, and these unhinged nutcases only help the cause. To be sure, it is a strange way to get it out there, but it does get it out there. The whole program is strange, as I told one fellow trying to run a garage sale that no one was showing up for. Appear out of nowhere as a complete stranger and say you want to talk about God? Christians are a theatrical spectacle in all the earth, says Paul. Tell me about it.
Nor am I ashamed that there are so many “apostates.” I am proud of them. I consider them additional proof that what we have fulfills the Bible pattern. If we didn’t have any—that would be a test of my faith, for I would wonder why. There is no NT writer who does not deal with apostates. If they existed then, why would they not exist now? In fact, as we get closer to crunch time, you would expect them to be more numerous and virulent, and would wonder what was the problem if they were not.
To be sure, many Witnesses run away from these things—it has been the pattern. The time may come when they will tackle them head-on. Opponents are having their day in the sun—beyond all question they have thrust awkward, even disagreeable, aspects of JWs front and center on the world stage. I take my hat off to them. Well done! That does not mean that I admire them. It is more like when the Jurassic Park security chief says of the pterodactyl circling round to pounce on him, ‘Good girl!’ Then he was eaten alive amidst bloodcurdling screaming.
Will the beasts do the same this time? I think not. We are used to presenting the gem of the Christian way of life through it’s most appealing facet. Let us learn to present it through it’s least appealing one. It is the same gem. “The game is the same, it’s just up on another level.” That’s the song we should be singing—leave it to the lunatics to sing Hotel California!
The trick is not to try to sanitize the present. It is to de-sanitize the past. It is to say of Peter, ‘He is the most prominent one, and yet he cowers like an adolescent—his action can be (probably was) painted as hypocrisy on steroids! Once the Jewish Christians show up, he avoids company of the Gentile ones? And he is given the keys to the kingdom? Yes. That is how it is. God uses people despite phenomenal weaknesses. 
Transport it to the present day. We have people who did not avoid the trap that everyone else has fallen into. They wished not to advertise their dirty laundry—and to carry on as though they had none. They did it for perfectly understandable reasons—for fear of tarnishing the Name that they tried to stand proclaim. But they did it. The fact that they alone sought to investigate an evil in order to mete out discipline and protect other congregations does not matter.
They can ‘reform’ in the eyes of the reasonable world, and likely have done so even now, with various tweaks culminating in that May 2019 issue. But they will never ever reform enough in the eyes of their virulent detractors. At some point, perhaps they will take on detractors more openly—judiciously, and not so as to satisfy the detractors, which cannot be done, but to offer a defense of the Christian way to those whose ear the detractors have gained. This is what you want to be writing your books about, Greg Stafford, not arguing over the Trinity.
In other words, the things that detractors paint as sordid are exactly the traps that well-intentioned and imperfect people who are ‘insular’ (no part of the world) could be expected to fall into. We’ll learn, where necessary, to present the truth through this facet so easily spun as a negative. 
It is the same with disfellowshipping, which opposers (many of them disfellowshipped themselves) have made into a monster issue, and in this age where ‘victimization’ is all the rage, have thrust it into the public eye. Keep it there where it belongs. Don’t try to skulk away from it.
Jehovah’s Witnesses are a faith that adherents take seriously. If you don’t participate, even if you stop, that does not create ripples. If you turn 180 degrees and flame what your family holds most dear, that probably will. The scriptures “tell” congregation members what to do in that event. Leadership merely alerts to those scriptures & afterwards their job is done. It could be tweaked—has been already— but any competent leadership would know of the same verses & principles behind them. Most people will have little difficulty in accepting that if you persistently by word or deed refuse to conform to the standards of any group, you may find yourself out on your ear.
The malcontents who carry on that ‘if it is not perfect, it is filthy’ would not have lasted two minutes in the first century. They would have honed in on the ill doings of those Revelation 2 and 3 congregations and started screaming back then just as they are screaming now. 
And if they would not have lasted two minutes during the early days of the Christian congregation, they would not have lasted two seconds in the early days of the Jewish nation. Yes, yes, there are some things that are not exactly the same. But the similarities far outnumber the differences.
 
 
 

Um, reading TTH's comment above concerning the Trinity, it seemed to me to fit well into the idea of the GB calling themselves the 'Faithful and Discreet slave'. Following on Tom's logic then the 'burden of proof' is for the GB to prove they are that 'slave'. 
Quote "With very few exceptions, all ‘proof’ of the Trinity is based on taking literally certain passages which, if they were spotted anywhere else, would instantly be dismissed as figures of speech. I can picture these yo-yos reading of ‘crocodile tears’ and seizing upon it as proof that the writer is a crocodile."  
I can picture the GB 'reading of ‘crocodile tears’ and seizing upon it as proof that the writer is a crocodile." ' 
The default position favors the Ex Witness....  :) :) :) 

Yes Billy I'm married to one, but I don't trust her and she knows that. 
The children know that I don't trust them either. 
i once wrote on my FB page :-
Which is worse : Love based on lies, or, Hate based on truth. 
You see Billy i am not you. I do not think like you. I do not act like you. I do not have the feelings / emotions like you. 
When you and others, begin to see other people, as OTHER people, not as people like you, then you and others may just start to begin to understand that not all of us live by the same rules.
You are trying to tell me I trust my wife because I'm married to her. Wrong. The trust died many years ago. 
I have no love for anyone, no trust in anyone. It does not mean that I hate people, it simply means I have no feelings for  them. 
I demand nothing, I expect nothing, therefore i no longer get disappointed by anyone. 
 
 

It's not a terrible translation ... but when it is deliberately kept ambiguous as a catch-all like a dragnet to suppress anything a Local Elder would like to suppress, based on his personal preferences, culture and political awareness of policy from New York, and accuse someone of "Brazen Conduct" if he or she asks an incorrect, unapproved question with unapproved words .... and is therefore deemed a danger to the congregation   ... a BRAZEN  rogue ... with a BRAZEN tongue ...
.... perhaps something LESS terrible and better defined, and more specific would be in order.
THE REASON THAT SPECIFIC WORD WAS CHOSEN WAS NOT FOR GREATER BIBLE ACCURACY ... IT WAS CHOSEN TO SUPPORT STATEMENTS MADE THREE YEARS PREVIOUSLY IN THE 2010 ELDERS HANDBOOK, THAT HAD NO SCRIPTURAL BACKUP,  UNTIL INVENTED, THREE YEARS LATER IN THE 2013 NWT.
 
 

@BillyTheKid46 Quote  " The irony, you attack the GB when your heart in no better than the soulless being you present, not just here but elsewhere. "
The difference being that i don't pretend to know the truth, and i don't want power over others. I don't make rules for others to follow. I do not mislead anyone as I do not try to 'take the lead' in any way. 
I do not pretend that i am the 'Faithful and discreet slave' of God through Christ. 
And I'm not frightened to admit that i have no love or trust in anyone. 
But then i don't hide pedophiles either, and I don't tell people how tight or loose their clothes should be. I don't make up rules about who can speak to who. I don't write magazines that tell deliberate lies about what God requires of us. I don't make up rules about the use of blood and then change those rules at a later date. 
I am only responsible for me. Your GB has made itself responsible for millions of people, but they have no proof that the responsibility is guided by God or Christ. 
Your GB has no love of people, only love of power over people. Your GB does not care about the victims of Child Sexual Abuse, they only care about 'their' money being spent in compensation. 
Your GB is prepared to sacrifice innocent lives to cover up the wickedness of the W/t and the JW Org.
Your GB 'cleans the outside of the dish or bowl, but leaves the inside full of disgusting things'.
And you Billy just worship your GB so much that you are completely blind to it all.
 

@JOHN BUTLER, for all his nuttiness, is not a warlike person and does not follow war commentaries. 
If he did, he might point to the widely held British view that, with good guys and bad guys apparent from Day 1, the Americans hid their bodies and blood, cowered behind their fire and steel, allowed the Brits to be slaughtered wholesale, and only then, when they saw that it would not be enough, did they deign to lift a finger.
In both wars, supplying armaments to the Brits, though being too chicken to do anything more, they eventually drew attacks from the enemy determined to stop the flow, and only then did they reluctantly conclude that they could no longer let Britain do all the bloodletting.
If you are going to go Captain America on all of us here, you should at least modify your chest-thumping with these observations.

Brazen sounds a bit archaic, and can sometimes offer ambiguity if persons are familiar with another meaning of brazen, such as the ONLY definition (made of brass) that it had in the previous NWT. In the Appendix of the NWT Reference Bible (1984):
*** Rbi8 p. 1575 4D “Tartarus” ***
In Job 41:31, 32 (41:23, 24, LXX) we read concerning Leviathan: “He makes the deep boil like a brazen caldron; . . . "
But it's not a terrible translation, as it really was used in Greek with reference to "brazen hussies." (shameless hussies, and wanton hussies - and brazen hustlers, too, for that matter.) Literally, it meant people who were not so moral as those good folks up in the town of Selge, Pisidia, Asia Minor. It's much better than the old translation in the NWT (loose conduct) which was actually a mistranslation because it implied lesser moral infractions of a more general variety.
Note Thayer's:
ἀσέλγεια, -ας, ἡ, the conduct and character of one who is ἀσελγής (a word which some suppose to be compounded of the α privative and Σέλγη, the name of a city in Pisidia whose citizens excelled in strictness of morals [so Etym. Magn. 152, 38; per contra cf. Suidas 603 d.]: others of α intensive and σαλαγεῖν, to disturb, raise a din; others, and now the majority, of α privative and σέλγω equivalent to θέλγω, not affecting pleasantly, exciting disgust), unbridled lust, excess, licentiousness, lasciviousness, wantonness, outrageousness, shamelessness, insolence:Mark 7:22 (where it is uncertain what particular vice is spoken of); of gluttony and venery, Jude 1:4; plural, 1 Peter 4:3; 2 Peter 2:2 (for Rec. ἀπωλείαις), 2 Peter 2:18; of carnality, lasciviousness: 2 Corinthians 12:21; Galatians 5:19; Ephesians 4:19; 2 Peter 2:7; plural "wanton (acts or) manners, as filthy words, indecent bodily movements, unchaste handling of males and females, etc." (Fritzsche), Romans 13:13. (In Biblical Greek besides only in Wis. 14:26 and 3 Macc. 2:26. Among Greek writings used by Plato, Isocrates and following; at length by Plutarch [Lucull. 38] and Lucian [dial. meretr. 6] of the wantonness of women [Lob. ad Phryn., p. 184 n.].) Cf. Tittmann i., p. 151f; [especially Trench, § xvi.].
I took 4 years of Hebrew in College (7 semesters) and learned a bit of Greek at Bethel. Still an amateur, of course, but learned enough to know that the NWT is actually an excellent translation with only a few verses where bias has created areas for further study. Most of its "mis-translations," in my opinion, do not necessarily add false informaiton, just interpreted information. Most of the time I'd say the interpreted information is quite likely true, just unnecessary for a pure translation.
Personally, I find both the 1984 and 2013 NWT to be very good, even the simpler revised version. But I couldn't do without an Interlinear. There was more consistency in the old NWT, and where words were added there were usually brackets around them. You have to really know a more literal translation well, for the Revised NWT to also be as useful. And, for the present, most JWs have a good knowledge of the NWT (more literal) and the NWT Revised, which puts them in pretty good shape. A simpler, easier to read version, is better for grasping the context, and a literal translation is better for study. We have them both, plus an excellent Interlinear (KIT).
I might have a few minor complaints with the NWT, but I have hundreds more with the KJV, RSV, and ASV. There are a few things I like better about the Jerusalem Bible and the RSV, but it doesn't matter so much any more. We all have the ability to check all kinds of good Bible language resources online, and dozens of parallel Bibles online for comparison.

Not this again!
But this time I won't get involved. I counsel myself:
(Proverbs 26:17) . . .As one grabbing hold of the ears of a dog is anyone passing by that is becoming furious at the quarrel that is not his.

Yes Billy I'm married to one, but I don't trust her and she knows that. 
The children know that I don't trust them either. 
i once wrote on my FB page :-
Which is worse : Love based on lies, or, Hate based on truth. 
You see Billy i am not you. I do not think like you. I do not act like you. I do not have the feelings / emotions like you. 
When you and others, begin to see other people, as OTHER people, not as people like you, then you and others may just start to begin to understand that not all of us live by the same rules.
You are trying to tell me I trust my wife because I'm married to her. Wrong. The trust died many years ago. 
I have no love for anyone, no trust in anyone. It does not mean that I hate people, it simply means I have no feelings for  them. 
I demand nothing, I expect nothing, therefore i no longer get disappointed by anyone. 
 
 

Translation is an ART ... not a science ... and some are very good at it ... and some are very bad at it ... and most are somewhere in the middle.
The 2013 NWT ( Silver Sword)  began using the term "brazen conduct" for the first time, to conform to the 2010 Super Secret (NOT!) Elder's handbook, which FIRST used that term, without any scriptural basis, referencing the OLD NWT ... or any (repeat ANY) other Bible translation in existence.
It's not in "The Emphatic Diaglott" by Benjamin Wilson ... and it's not in the "Kingdom Interlinear Translation" by the Society.
The Scriptures in the dumbed down 2013 "Silver Sword" NWT were changed to conform to the Elder's handbook, published THREE YEARS EARLIER.
Since I cannot comprehend Greek, I have to trust those two interlinear translation  books ... BOTH now published by the WTB&TS, by the way.
When I go out in Field Service, I take the "American Standard" version of the Bible, ALSO now published by the WTB&TS ... NOT the NWT.
( From Wikipedia ...)
" The ASV has also been used for many years by Jehovah's Witnesses. The reasons for their choosing of the ASV were twofold: its usage of "Jehovah" as the Divine Name, which was a translation of the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) into English as some early Bible scholars had done before (i.e. Tyndale at Ps. 83:18[9]). They also derived their name from Isaiah 43.10, 12, both of which contain the phrase, "Ye are my witnesses, saith Jehovah." Also, there was a perception that the ASV had improved the translation of some verses in the King James Version, and in other places it reduced the verses that they found to be erroneously translated in the KJV to mere footnotes, removed from the main text altogether.[10]
Jehovah's Witnesses' publishing organization, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, had printed its own edition of the King James Version since 1926, but did not obtain the rights to print ASV until 1944. From 1944 to 1992, they printed and distributed over a million copies of the ASV. By the 1960s, the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, made by members of their group and the rights to which they controlled, had largely replaced ASV as the Bible used most by Witnesses.[11] Though now preferring the NWT, Jehovah's Witnesses' publications frequently quote from other translations, including ASV."
 
 

@JW Insider Quote "But there is another thing about this particular verse in Revelation 17:14. It's not translated correctly in the NWT."
I can't remember the scripture that says something about 'Anyone that adds to or subtracts from the scriptures, will suffer for it '. I know that is not exactly what it says but .......
Now, are you saying that the GB / Writing dept' deliberately mis-translate scripture, even adding in words, to suit their own purposes ?  Because that is what it looks like to me.  
( Reminds me of 'torture stake' which I believe is not a true translation. )
Is that why the GB say not to get educated. Educated people can use Greek and Hebrew to English translations, and not just stick to the one NWT Bible. 
It gets worse. Even the JW Bible cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Your words JWI  "It's not translated correctly in the NWT." 

@JW Insider Quote "But there is another thing about this particular verse in Revelation 17:14. It's not translated correctly in the NWT."
I can't remember the scripture that says something about 'Anyone that adds to or subtracts from the scriptures, will suffer for it '. I know that is not exactly what it says but .......
Now, are you saying that the GB / Writing dept' deliberately mis-translate scripture, even adding in words, to suit their own purposes ?  Because that is what it looks like to me.  
( Reminds me of 'torture stake' which I believe is not a true translation. )
Is that why the GB say not to get educated. Educated people can use Greek and Hebrew to English translations, and not just stick to the one NWT Bible. 
It gets worse. Even the JW Bible cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Your words JWI  "It's not translated correctly in the NWT." 

@JW Insider Quote "But there is another thing about this particular verse in Revelation 17:14. It's not translated correctly in the NWT."
I can't remember the scripture that says something about 'Anyone that adds to or subtracts from the scriptures, will suffer for it '. I know that is not exactly what it says but .......
Now, are you saying that the GB / Writing dept' deliberately mis-translate scripture, even adding in words, to suit their own purposes ?  Because that is what it looks like to me.  
( Reminds me of 'torture stake' which I believe is not a true translation. )
Is that why the GB say not to get educated. Educated people can use Greek and Hebrew to English translations, and not just stick to the one NWT Bible. 
It gets worse. Even the JW Bible cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Your words JWI  "It's not translated correctly in the NWT." 

Now THAT is a GREAT piece of work!   Next time the Brothers have a talent show, do that as a routine....
... don't hold your breath.

I think I already had some fun with that idea in this post from 6 months ago when I discovered that Gog is spelled the same way in Hebrew as one would spell GOOG and that it appears as EL-GOOG in Hebrew which is read from Right to Left instead of Left to Right. 
אֶל־גֹּוג means when transliterated EL-GOG.
But the O between the two G's is actually a 'vav' which when used as a vowel (as it is here) is not just used for O, but also for U, pronounced OO. Therefore:
אֶל־גֹּוג can also be transliterated as EL-GOOG.
Transliterated left to right as it appears on paper, this is אֶל־גֹּוג or GOOG-LE.
 

Hmmm... could it be that the Scripture should read Google of My Google?

I agree completely. But he asked. (And he asked nicely, and I think he was really interested.)