JOHN BUTLER

From what time period were those men told by the GB to 'go to prison' instead of doing alternative service ?
From what date until what date ? 
I notice you mention 1996, as when the Organization reversed its policy on alternative service.
The reason I'm asking is that in 1962 (or so I've just read) the 'Society' changed the meaning of the Romans 13 scripture, back to its original understanding, that is, that the Superior Authorities are the governments / rulers of this world. Hence, if a government / ruler of a country offered Alternative Service that was not going against the will of God, then the people should obey it. 
Romans 13.
 Let every person be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God. 2  Therefore, whoever opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God; those who have taken a stand against it will bring judgment against themselves.
Wow, now that is very clear, isn't it.
So if the Society / GB deliberately took this stand against those Rulers that had the authority from God to rule, then the Society / GB were in fact taking a stand against GOD Himself. 
 

So let's be blunt. The Governing Body sat on their arses in some nice room and decided other men should go to prison. There was basically no scriptural reasons for it. The GB just had that power over people to do it.
Now that proves how much those people were serving the GB. The GB did not give them the choice to use their God given conscience. It proves dictatorship.
Felix is a GB worshiper so I'm not interested in his opinions on this. 
As you have posted  "But their inability to explain the reason for their stand shows that someone else has done their thinking for
them."  That says it all. Case proven. 

@Srecko Sostar  Quote " Today, looking on my period in prison, jail, and obligation on going to army, I came to conclusion how decision to reject army service is more decision of WT Corporation aka JW Church than my clear conscience stand on  matter. Perhaps i assured my self it is my conscience, but in fact it was about behavior according to group (JW congregation) i was belong in that time. It was expected to do it that way. "
Srecko, I have tears for you my friend. The GB have a lot of things to answer for. 
I hope God removes the GB from 'power' and replaces them with a true Anointed class. 

I laughed. i think here in UK that people are too lazy. Even those in the JW Org are lazy.
It is difficult to get people to do the ministry, but would be probably impossible to get them picking up litter. 
And there is a snobbishness, they think they are too posh / important, to do such things as pick up litter.
English people are strange and yes I'm English.  

From what time period were those men told by the GB to 'go to prison' instead of doing alternative service ?
From what date until what date ? 
I notice you mention 1996, as when the Organization reversed its policy on alternative service.
The reason I'm asking is that in 1962 (or so I've just read) the 'Society' changed the meaning of the Romans 13 scripture, back to its original understanding, that is, that the Superior Authorities are the governments / rulers of this world. Hence, if a government / ruler of a country offered Alternative Service that was not going against the will of God, then the people should obey it. 
Romans 13.
 Let every person be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God. 2  Therefore, whoever opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God; those who have taken a stand against it will bring judgment against themselves.
Wow, now that is very clear, isn't it.
So if the Society / GB deliberately took this stand against those Rulers that had the authority from God to rule, then the Society / GB were in fact taking a stand against GOD Himself. 
 

As usual. Once again, you are wrong to think I have any input on what others were saying. So, don’t put words in my mouth to make an insulting conclusion.

What does selective service have to do with anything Raymond corrupted because of his action? It appears you continue to evade the issue on why the claim of apostasy was levied on him.

If he was an innocent man, why did he evade having to justify what he referred to about 3 simple principles?

1.       144,000 interpretation

2.       33AD interpretation

3.       1914 interpretation

Initially, he had the first meeting taped, even though he claimed he was wronged by not getting a copy. He wasn’t wronged as he stated since the first committee didn’t involve the allegation of GOSSIP, by many Bethel members.

He could have simply stated his position but instead evaded. This is when a member referenced he resign. An innocent man would not have resigned.

That just shows, either he was too proud, or the claims were true, not just on his position of rejecting those 3 claims, but also being involved in the Gossip of certain high ranking members teaching such a doctrine at the kingdom halls.

So, your attempts of proof to justify Raymond’s actions are meant to obscure what really went on at Bethel, just as you are attempting to sway the same ideology for him. Therefore, your submissions are inconsequential.

Fact is...   in MANY countries and towns,  brothers and sisters were helping by cleaning their towns !  Also in my german town STADE, every year....   Its NOT strange, all that is TRUE, bec. I was helping too.   Ask competently  brothers, then you still can learn a little

Thanks John for emotions you put publicly.
All in all, my prison time went well, working, going to school inside prison walls, not have problems with other prisoners, after 2 years get my first vacation to visit home. I am kind of introvert, and to be alone is not so harsh punishment  in my case :))) i like more to be alone in 3x2,5 cell than in crowd. Perhaps .... or certainly/ obviously.... i have some unsolved psycho and early childhood issues :))))   

@Srecko Sostar  Quote " Today, looking on my period in prison, jail, and obligation on going to army, I came to conclusion how decision to reject army service is more decision of WT Corporation aka JW Church than my clear conscience stand on  matter. Perhaps i assured my self it is my conscience, but in fact it was about behavior according to group (JW congregation) i was belong in that time. It was expected to do it that way. "
Srecko, I have tears for you my friend. The GB have a lot of things to answer for. 
I hope God removes the GB from 'power' and replaces them with a true Anointed class. 

So let's be blunt. The Governing Body sat on their arses in some nice room and decided other men should go to prison. There was basically no scriptural reasons for it. The GB just had that power over people to do it.
Now that proves how much those people were serving the GB. The GB did not give them the choice to use their God given conscience. It proves dictatorship.
Felix is a GB worshiper so I'm not interested in his opinions on this. 
As you have posted  "But their inability to explain the reason for their stand shows that someone else has done their thinking for
them."  That says it all. Case proven. 

Never known it here in England either Srecko. 
In that country where they are doing good practical work, they get treated so badly. 
Perhaps Russian authority thought the JW's would be liked too much by the people. 
Weren't the Egyptians frightened of the Israelites getting too powerful ? Maybe the Russian authorities felt that JW's were getting to powerful too. 

Just one moment for say something as general conversation :)))
In this part of world in that period of time (until 1988/89, with fall of Wall and democratic changes in East Europe and in Yugoslavia) there is no alternative service. After, with time, came optional services with this GB "philosophy". Who is in charge and order service? Nonsense of sort, for sure.
Today, looking on my period in prison, jail, and obligation on going to army, I came to conclusion how decision to reject army service is more decision of WT Corporation aka JW Church than my clear conscience stand on  matter. Perhaps i assured my self it is my conscience, but in fact it was about behavior according to group (JW congregation) i was belong in that time. It was expected to do it that way. 
Similar as to  expectations and obligation on JW brothers to not wearing beards :)))). If you want be ok for God, for congregation, do shave every day :))) Issue is not for comparison, but "principle" coming from same idea. To be different, to not to be "part of the world", "to be holy".
Levels of our obligations and obeys to man, is in gradation. You will obey something to certain level, until your "conscience" or belonging to particular group, or Bible verse (interpretation of that verse) said you to NOT doing or obey man, authority or so.
Similar is with army service. If young man wearing uniform, running whole day to get condition, cleaning, learning about weapons, shooting and so ... but not hurt anyone, then some will find such activity to be acceptable. When somebody order you to kill other people, that is situation in what you must have your stand and do as you think is right.
Some religious groups are very active in "proselytizing", preaching to other people. Some have unique "uniforms" and others are "civilians". But their "service" as "soldier of Christ" or "soldier" of their church, can bring also some good and some very bad results. This religious service in the name of god are called "spiritual battles". And all such "soldiers" are able, in spiritual sense, accidentally or purposely, to hurt and to "kill" other people with, sometimes,  persistent consequences. Religious teachings are the "bullets".
Parable...... Well, FDS aka GB are "Army officers" for 8 mil JW members. Would you as  an ordinary JW  rank and file "soldier" obey all commands coming from GB "superior authority"?? 
   

I know you asked for a response, but you have sometimes indicated that you feel insulted by my responses, so this response is directed only to others who might have also wondered what I meant.
I was referring to the 16 years between late 1979, the last time when R.Franz was involved in the last vote on this issue, and 1996, when the Society finally was able to get a large enough majority for the second time, and the change was finally made. Many brothers who would not have gone to prison by being allowed to act upon their own conscience during those extra 16 years, actually did serve prison time during those years. 
Anyone who wishes can probably see that this is a point that R.Franz made in his book, here:
The twothirds
majority was gone. After further discussion, when another
vote was taken it read: Nine in favor, five against, one abstention.
Though still a definite majority it was no longer a two-thirds majority.
Though only a minority of the Governing Body favored the
continuance of the existing policy and the sanctions it applied toward
any who accepted alternative service (unless sentenced
thereto), that policy remained in effect. Year after year, hundreds
of men, submitting to that policy although neither understanding
it nor being convinced of its rightness, would continue to be arrested,
tried, and imprisoned—because one individual on a religious
council changed his mind. Witness men could exercise their
conscientious choice of accepting alternative service only at the
cost of being cut off from the congregations of which they were a
part, being viewed as unfaithful to God and Christ.
Surely such instances make clear why no Christian should ever
be expected to mortgage his conscience to any religious organization
or to any body of men exercising virtually unlimited authority
over people’s lives. I found the whole affair disheartening,
tragic. Yet I felt that I learned more clearly just to what ends the
very nature of an authority structure can lead men, how it can cause
them to take rigid positions they would not normally take. This case
illustrated the way in which the power of tradition, coupled with
a technical legalism and a mistrust of people’s motives, can prevent
one from taking a compassionate stand.
The matter came up on one other occasion and the vote was
evenly split. Thereafter it was dropped and for most members it
seemed to become a non-issue. The organization, following its
voting rules, had spoken. The Branch Committees’ arguments need
not be answered—they could simply be informed that “nothing had
changed” and they would proceed accordingly. The men in prison
would never know that the matter had even been discussed and that,
consistently, half or more of the Governing Body did not believe
they needed to be where they were.
...
If the published statements in the Watchtower and Awake!
magazines have any validity at all, then, when compared with the
statements of these Branch Committee members, they clearly identify
these young Witness men as either very vulnerable to brainwashing
or as already victims of indoctrination and mass persuasion.
In 1996, when the organization reversed its policy on alternative
service, many hundreds, even thousands, of these young
men were right then in prison, like thousands before them, but they
really did not know why the position they took, which led to their
imprisonment, should have been taken. They accepted a policy
without seeing a sound basis for it, they allowed their decisions to
be governed, not by solid evidence from God’s Word, but by
“group loyalty,” and “organizational loyalty.” These are the same
forces that give such potency to indoctrination on the part of what
Witnesses call “worldly” organizations. It is a case of doing what
one’s associates do and what the authority (the organization) says,
even though one finds the reasons given to be insubstantial, even
“artificial.” The view of alternative service these persons accepted
was clearly a “borrowed” one, not their own. Concern over what
others in their religious community would think, concern over reprisals
by the organization in the form of excommunication, certainly
must have weighed heavily in their thinking, causing them
to shut out any questions from their minds and simply submit.
These young Witness men stood before government tribunals and
declared themselves bound to an uncompromising position of rejecting
alternative service unless first arrested and tried and sentenced
to perform it by a judge, and they perhaps thought that such
was their own conviction. But their inability to explain the reason
for their stand shows that someone else has done their thinking for
them. Recall the Watchtower statements earlier quoted:
 

With or without Raymond, the FDS / GB has demonstrated (show it until today) how things are in WT.

The picture is really nice. I could live there  
However the poem seems a bit strange. 
Was it written in English or am i seeing an English translation from another language ? 

You are totally weird Felix. i have not proved your point on anything. 
And your comments are not worth looking into. So I'll go back to listening to music on Youtube.
Anyone that tries having a meaningful conversation with you is wasting their time.
GB = 8 men who dream they are important. Just as you dream the same Felix.  

Try separating the 2. 1 by what opposers believe, and 1 by the innuendoes Raymond implied. Why would he found it a need to stipulate how witnesses would feel if 1975 wasn't going to be realized as indicated by the Watchtower publications. Your defense of Raymond is illogical. Perhaps to a weak heart, you will have success.
Is this why you told TrueTom you couldn’t find anything about Cynthia when there is plenty of ex-witnesses to applaud her for sticking by her man? A man that failed as an intellectual and spiritual person. Sorry. I don’t hold him, his research, or books in high regards as you do.

That means we have a difference of opinion with Raymond criticizing the year 1975, as though people thought it would become the end of the world just like any weak-minded witness.

Word salads are insulting. When I prove you wrong, it is not conjecture. This is why defending Raymond is wrong. And if you bother to read the remarks in the WordPress, His actions had a serious impact on others in a negative Christian way.

Who was this man to decide? This is a question he will have to answer for leading God’s children astray. A question that some here will have to answer for.

@FelixCA Quote  " I get the impression Butler believes the GB to be equal to Christ, not above him as you state. "
Felix you are a complete nutcase. A self loving nutcase at that. You follow the GB's example by putting yourself on high
Remember the scripture in Luke 14 v 11 Well you certainly exalt yourself... So it follows 
 For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.”
You also follow the example of Space Merchant on here,. You start off talking to one person then you drag as many peoples names  into your rant as you can find. 
You know that your comments are complete rubbish so you hide behind a 'cat'. You may be man or woman, who knows. But then who cares. You say nothing worth taking note of. 

@Anna Quote "but you still do have faith and trust in so many people." ...............  WRONG.
No we don't have milk persons (PC) delivering milk. I don't 'fly' anywhere. I have no faith or trust in medical staff, hence I had to be in excessive pain before the ambulance came and took me in to hospital with pneumonia, and I ask to leave hospital asap after treatment. Was only in three days, then recovered at home. I have no faith or trust in the Police force, none at all. But it is all there in its place, and God's word tells us that these things stand in place with His permission and to serve His cause at this time. 
On this latter issue, the Police. When I was being abused in the Children's home my feelings were that i could not report it to anyone as they 'were all in it together'. Children's home / Local Council - Government / Local Council - Police / Local Council-Children's Department Social Services.... There was no one left to report it to................... Even a few years ago when I finally got some of my personal documents regarding my time in 'care', most of it was 'redacted' / Blacked out. One page completely black. So where is any reason to trust ? 
You are probably right on one thing. It is no longer possible to lead anormal life.............  As for my brother, I sort of feel sorry for him. He has 'given' his life to JW org. If he lost it, it would finish him. He no longer contacts me. I can understand why, but you are right I no longer trust him...
Quote " With the Org changing the meaning of scripture, and teachings, I am assuming you preferred the previous ones better? Or is it because you think there should never be any change? "
The Creative Days being 7,000 years long, and us being in the 'Rest Day' of 6,000 years , then 1,000 years of Christ's rule. It made sense that all the days were 7,000 years long. God being a god of order not disorder............   But other changes are constantly being discussed on here, such as the F&DS once being the whole 'body' of the Anointed, but now only 8 men............ The teaching about 'this generation' .... the teaching about 'the superior authorities'.............. You don't have to look far to find them do you ? 
Quote " But that really is no different than putting faith in anyone else who is doing a particular job,   " 
Sorry you are totally out of line here.. You are talking about 8 men that dictate to over 8 million people, by pretending that those 8 men are the 'Faithful and Discreet slave'. Those 8 men misuse that title, which they have given themselves, to promote their thinking NOT God's thinking. 
As for the 'wrongdoings', they mount up to the heavens it seems. Giving themselves that title which means they put themselves above other Anointed...... Luke 14 v 11  answers that one............ Deliberately misusing scripture to rule over others.   Reasons for disfellowshipping/shuning, is another.... The Child Abuse situation, and on this one, if only i could find the video, I'm sure a member of the GB said it was 'all lies and just apostates causing trouble'...... 
Quote " Every time a brother or sister speaks about the promises in the Bible, they are being a spokesperson for God.. " 
Wrong...Most times a' brother or sister' speaks, they are being a spokesperson for the GB or JW Org.  They go out with 'literature' more often than they go out with GOD'S word. There is such a big difference. JW's are taught what to say. Please remember I went to the Ministry School meetings / Work book meetings. It is all written in there. What to say, what to offer. It's JW literature, not God's message through Christ.... 
Your last paragraph is of course right.... But that is because you give a direct scripture. 
How wonderful it would be if the GB and it's writing department, and all the other 'people/men' in positions of 'power'  within JW Org / Watchtower, would stick completely to scripture. And only to write the things which they have 100% proof of.  They wouldn't write much of course  
Have a great day Anna. 
 
 
 
 

Here is a perfect example of NOT being a spokesperson for GOD, BUT being a spokesperson for the GB and JW Org. 
Not using God's word the Bible but using JW Literature... 
That is how people outside are taught the so called 'truth'. But is it truth ? 
@Anna An example for you. 

Fred Franz definitely used a lot of Scriptures to criticize the idea of a Governing Body, but he was outvoted. When the "board" came to vote the actual creation of a Governing Body that could share in the decision-making votes of the Society, and thereby reduce the autocratic power of the office of the Society's President, Fred Franz was quite literally outvoted. But his Scriptural reasoning in his talk was still valid to show how the Bible does NOT support the creation of a Governing Body.
 

The person he associated with was not disfellowshipped. Many persons in his congregation still associated with the same man, because he was related to them, and was in a position to help them out financially, running a business that had hired them. Besides 1 Corinthians 5 says the following:
(1 Corinthians 5:9-11) . . .In my letter I wrote you to stop keeping company with sexually immoral people, 10 not meaning entirely with the sexually immoral people of this world or the greedy people or extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world. 11 But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. Which one of these labels do you attach to this former member of the local congregation who was not even disfellowshipped? Was he greedy? Sexually immoral? An idolater? An extortioner? A reviler? A drunkard? Also, even if he was such a person --and I think you probably know he wasn't-- what did Paul mean when he said that we don't stop keeping company entirely with such people. Obviously, for purposes of employment, living in the world, we might need to associate with a person who is any one of these types.

You would have read enough comments on here to know how JW's treat those that are d/fed and those that leave the org.
Some Witnesses have no feelings, they just go by the 'rules' of the JW Org. For instance :-
Our only daughter (H) that is still in the Org, 'grassed up' one of our other daughters, to the Elders. 
(H) didn't even consult us, mum and dad, even though I was still a JW and my wife was attending meetings with me and was an unbaptised publisher. (H) had some information and she just wanted to go straight to the Elders. She has no love, no mercy, she is just a robot JW. But other JW's see her as a really good person. 
The daughter that was 'in trouble' chose to leave the Org. But even though i was still a JW I stated to everyone that I would not shun my daughter. And my wife and I kept in contact with her.  So like I say it is an individual thing. 
However, when I left the JW Org of my own choice, because of the serious Child Abuse problem within it, I was completely shunned by the whole congregation, around 120 to 130 people. 
Now you show me 3 scriptures that directly state that congregants should shun me for leaving the Org for a good reason ? 
In my honest opinion the scriptures are written for the Anointed, not the earthly class. 
Much more is expected of the Anointed because they have a much closer relationship with God. (And i mean the true Anointed, not your GB) 
But your comment is about your worship of men, the GB. You are trying to protect their reputation. 
You are not looking for justice or mercy. You do not have 'the mind of Christ'. You are like our daughter (H), just a robot for the JW Org. 
Using silly expressions such as Anti-Pauline. Does it make you feel good ? I'm not impressed. 
God and Jesus Christ know everything about everyone. They know when people are falsely disfellowshipped, that is, disfellowshipped for non scriptural reasons, and they know when a person is shunned because that person takes an action in line with God's word. 
Your GB have placed themselves on high. They think they have the right to make non-scriptural rules to domineer people, just like the Pharisees did. 
If you are happy with that so be it, but be careful they may just turn on you some day. 
 
 

I believe that R.Franz got a few things wrong. His facts were correct, but one can always come to a wrong conclusion based on true facts. But that still doesn't mean that we can judge his heart, of course. A person who disagrees with certain things but doesn't leave his faith over them is not included in the definition of an apostate. And besides, the things he thought we had wrong as an organization included issues he had every right, and even an assigned duty to consider, when he was a member of the Governing Body.
So he thought we had the generation definition wrong and it would have to be changed within just a few years. It was. He thought the Watchtower Society should not be repressing the work of Jehovah's Witnesses in Mexico. They stopped. He thought that it seemed Scriptural that homosexual or bestial relations should dissolve a marriage. This was changed. He thought that the Governing Body should complete the change on avoiding the military through alternative service. They did. Although he said there was nothing Scripturally wrong with door-to-door ministry, he thought the Society should also consider other methods of distributing its literature and not focus so much on hours and placements in just one form of ministry. Now it has (website, carts). Granted, he also thought that based on past historical experience, we should stop setting any kind of date or even a date range as a time limit for Armageddon to occur. This hasn't completely stopped per the new generation doctrine, but since 2010, time-setting is much more nebulous than it has ever been in the past. He also thought that the Greek Scriptures should not be so strictly applied only to the anointed who claim a heavenly hope. In recent years, the GB have come to see this issue in the same way, and specifically stated updates in our new understanding in those very terms used by R.Franz.
For me, even if he was wrong on some matters, it shows the truth of the Bible verse:
(1 Corinthians 11:19) 19 For there will certainly also be sects among you, so that those of you who are approved may also become evident. It's not a matter of R.Franz being right or wrong in a few things, or being wrong in more things than he was right about, or even if he was right about most things. But he was definitely right about some of the issues he brought up, or the Governing Body would not have changed over time toward his way of thinking.

@Equivocation  Quote " But if a suit and tie is that bad, why are you wearing a suit and tie, let alone clothing if you say it is tradition of man? " 
When i was in the JW Org, I obeyed the rules. Rules of men. I didn't want to deliberately cause trouble or to embarrass my family by being moaned at by the police, sorry I mean Elders, of the congregation. 
We had an Elder in the congregation, a big man, that really suffered with the heat causing him problems. He never wore a jacket or tie in the hall, BUT he still had to wear a suit and tie when he went up on the platform. They had to put a big electric fan on the edge of the stage each time he was on there. So tell me where is the love and consideration for that Elder ?
And yes they didn't question him for not wearing a jacket and tie in the hall, but I did get 'spoken to' once for not wearing a tie, hence in future I conformed. 
In my opinion it becomes 'traditions of men' when it is not scriptural but is still enforced by 'those in power', the GB down to the Elders. 
And yes certain types of clothing are traditions of men if dictated by humans.
This point has been proven by women in certain secular jobs having to wear high heeled shoes all day, when they would prefer to wear flat comfortable shoes. I believe this has got to the point of actual court cases. I think that proves the tradition of MEN in the true sense. 
And the suit and tie was supposed to represent decency, honesty, trustworthiness, etc. But in many cases it was just used to trick people into thinking that way. However, it has been carried forward to this day, as a tradition of men. 
So is it still necessary ?