Patiently waiting for Truth

Quote @Arauna Depends on your inclination and the subject.  Here on this forum you hold up well because there is only one view spewed by you.. a destructive one.  I think I can make a good case for NOT watching videos against JWs.  You are a good example of it ...... your hate-…... seems to be fueled by watching all these videos against JWs which are spinned and propagandized in a certain way.
I READ news articles and i try my best to read them from different sources. I don't watch videos. I can never understand what they are saying on the videos. As for HATE, Arauna HATE seems to be YOUR favorite word. I would say you have OCD about it.   I love those close to me as i know them well enough to have reason to love them. JWs don't have love, they just pretend. It is so obvious because they would not be able to just switch it off like they do if it was real love. I still haven't seen any true use of scripture, that would say SHUN those that leave the CCJW for the right reasons. 
 

Arauna, it seems you might be a little confused about who posted the video.  It was me, not @4Jah2me.  As I recall, it is difficult for him to hear any videos posted here, at least at one point.  Perhaps that has changed by now.  
 
You must play golf, since I've heard this example from you before.
As the Watchtower shows, young adults - children - have been forced to leave their homes when disfellowshipped.  The lawyer was lying.  
 
Should we be comparing the rules of a club to our worship of God?  
I know you've seen this before:

I think that is why there is so much injustice in many places. The court system is broken.  I marvel at some of the decisions taken these days. 
I think we can refer to it in a modern word of our choice, which serves the purpose, as it embodies what the BIBLE tells us to do with rebellious people. We cannot use an old Greek word...... If you belong to a club you have to follow the rules of the club or you are shunned/disfellowshipped/ told not to come back.  Just try it ...and behave badly at a golf club and see what happens to you.  As video shows - disfellowshipped means spiritual contact lost and one can be re-instated.
This very idea was tried in court a while back was it not? When a gay couple took a baker to court for refusing to bake their wedding cake.  The baker was shunning them was he not?  he did not even want to take their money.  You see, legally we are on shaky ground here.  When these kind of people start winning court cases then they can come for all religion... force you to accept LGBTQ and what else?  And this is what our dear friend MR 4JAH does not understand... He is so blinded by being right (or finding fault)  that he does not get the subtle nuances of these things. The autonomous decisions of different religions is being eroded...…(JWs included) .. in a big way at present.  So when he gleefully publishes these clips..... I just shake my head.
We know the system is coming for ALL religion soon and the world is heating up to it.  Satan is busy getting ready to create a counterfeit world government to bring peace and security to the earth.....and Satan's moral rules will be forced onto all of us such as LGBTQ, pedophilia may be included, no rights to shun, no male elders (according to them it is a white supremacist, colonizer, patriarchal idea which comes from the patriarchal bible which has been the oppressor of humankind for a long time), vaccinations and blood forced on you...…...and replaced by atheism and the immorality and free sex and free whatever now already taught in most schools. 
(By the way I am not antivaccine but I read this morning how they are making it and I believe it has potential to harm DNA in the body - trials started in UK, brazil and South Africa and Oxford university is doing it -  big money can come from it).  Just like before the flood there is a horrible arrogance and a changing of human DNA.  They are messing with things they should be leaving alone.)
 
Depends on your inclination and the subject.  Here on this forum you hold up well because there is only one view spewed by you.. a destructive one.  I think I can make a good case for NOT watching videos against JWs.  You are a good example of it ...... your hate-…... seems to be fueled by watching all these videos against JWs which are spinned and propagandized in a certain way.

Well, that I can readily agree with!

Does the court know the inside and out of jw . org?  This man is to represent an organization, in truth, and under oath.  
Yes, he will be "disbarred" by Jesus Christ and the Father....unless he repents.  

Oh, I see you added more to your initial comment.  
"He just said something you did not like" - Of course I don't like it, because it is a lie. 
"which is not the same as “committing perjury.” 
Perjury:  "the offense of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath or affirmation."
He stated:
 
 
 
 

I knew my comment would open a wave of persecution to come my way. 🙂  

Wait till you see what’s coming your way soon. 
If he was committing perjury, he would be disbarred. Wait till you see if that happens before you crow. He just said something you did not like, which is not the same as “committing perjury.”

Hmmm.  It's too bad this Witness attorney was not ordered to shut up for committing perjury.
"Jehovah's Witnesses don't use the word, shun or shunning, they refer to it as disfellowshipped, disfellowshipping...."
WT's infamous video bears the title,  Loyally Uphold Jehovah’s Judgments—Shun Unrepentant Wrongdoers
 
Your use of adhominen attacks remind me of how little intellect you care to show for scriptural truth.  Maybe because you don't care to possess such discernment - of what is truth and what is a lie?   


 

I sure find humor in them, however.
Of course.
I think that is hardly settled. Who is to say that Franz’s take on the language is inferior?
I don’t think that is such a sin, to speak of God or Christ in the superlative, to heighten their “importance.” Are they just good ‘ol boys that you might belly up to the bar with?
Still, I appreciate your input on things that happened away back then.

Victor Blackwell, a Witness attorney who defended many brothers before the various town courts of the American south during WWII days of conscription, told of his experience with one. The judge ordered him to shut up!—he, the defending attorney—or he would throw him into jail himself! “I looked around and I saw lawyers, prominent businessmen, and educated persons—I knew I wasn’t going to jail, so I said, ‘Your Honor, if we have reached the sorry state when justice has so disintegrated that an attorney is barred from defending his own client, then at that time the most appropriate place for me to be is behind bars with him.” (not an exact quote) Blackwell related at a special assembly in Niagara Falls how the judge’s face reddened and his veins stood out on his neck. A week later, he died of a stroke. “You killed our judge,” townspeople told him at his next trip to that area. “I”m sorry,” he replied, but it seemed that his degree of true remorse was suspect.
“I killed another judge,” he told the entertained audience, of whom I was one, and he went on to relate events in another town. Interestingly, he treated the judge’s of high courts with the greatest deference, especially those of the Supreme Court, whom he practically revered—as well as those justices of military courts—they were professionals who knew the law thoroughly, but the judges of some town courts were little more than popularly elected swaggering bullies popularly who often didn’t know much of anything other than what they wanted.
Now...let’s see if we can get 4Jah going. C’mon, let’s see what happens:
Now, let us change the setting to that of Jesus on his final night on earth:
“About the ninth hour, Jesus called out with a loud voice, saying: “Eʹli, Eʹli, laʹma sa·bach·thaʹni?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matt 27:46)
Okay—I admit it—it’s a little bit of a cheap shot. But nobody deserves it more than that piece of work 4Jah, who sits at the feet of Anna and JWI as though at Gamaliel’s, thankIng them profusely whenever they drop some nugget he thinks beneficial to his cause, and heehawing like a donkey throughout everything else they say.

Just remember : it is much easier to critisize than to build up, easier to destroy than to show love.  When you are ready to destroy, one can use just about use anything as a weapon and you can hold your own because it is easier to break than unify.   Try it on your wife and you will see I am speaking truth.  

Br. Glock can't prevent nor fix damage GB + Helpers and WT Lawyers doing for very long time. 

Dear Arauna, you misquoted, used my quote out of context. You didn't QUOTE my FULL SENTENCE. It would be better to quote whole sentence or paragraph. :)) Thanks in advance!
In general context, we have to follow governmental direction based on Romans 13 regulation or principle or command if you wish.
In critical thinking context, we have to interrogate, to question and to check many things that comes from "higher instance", secular or religious, because of  historically proven reasons.
Well, to go back on your comment, again. It is out of question, or it is not issue, did GB made good/bad decision about Covid 19, before or after government regulation. After all, GB did, i guess, collected health and medicine information from secular sources aka science (virologists, experts in the field of public health, institutions dealing with the study of infections etc) In this context, GB made decisions not on "spiritual" facts or possibilities revealed in Bible, but based on existing secular knowledge about Covid 19. When medical experts found more about disease, GB will also know more. NOT vice versa. Croatian crisis headquarters made better decisions at first, than many other governments and they made it BEFORE many others. Well, what that have to prove? Who has decided before, to close all public meetings ? GB or Croatian crisis headquarter ? :))

I have a quote of anna above but I direct it to a few of the 'spiritual elite' over on this forum. 
I just marvel at you guys - you have lived in or like to be living in a literary world, or scholarly world  (or must I rather call it a critical thinking bubble), where every word is literally dissected.  A normal regular guy will not be able to come on this forum and chat with you because you guys will destroy his every word.....for real.  He cannot say what he thinks in the best words for him without an over-reaction.  I find it a pity that your thinking is so one-sided or should I call it self-centered?  (I think Furuli became the same....his scholarly habits caught up with him when he retired and he could only think of all the things he needed to critically analize.....  and then wrote his final dissertation .... pity.  He did not see the good things any longer or the mitigating things). He made his own puffed-up trap.
The reality in the world is:- it consists of mostly people who are plain, common people.  Yet, you do not make any excuses for people who have never learnt to put their thinking on paper.  There are many people out there who have never done this or looked at their writing self-critically.  They plainly say what they think or feel.  Once they have been shamed by a bunch of puffer upper poisonous fish... they run away or be silenced and you will not hear from them again.
Just remember, their experience in the world out there was totally different to yours. This does not mean that they can be dismissed or their ideas are de-legitimized and cannot be explored by a question... why do you say this..... etc.. The attitude here is that when you come here you must be able to converse with the real mature men! … 
Is it possible that you can broaden out your thinking?   I stand up for the common man..... please think of your actions or what you are doing. That was a brother!!!!!!  I have luckily been in both worlds.... and to tell you the truth, I prefer people like him... they say what they think…in the passionate words they know...... without first looking up the words on Google or looking it up in some historical book... or looking it up …or critical thinking or political correct or ….. well... I have said my say.
Think outside your box.
 
For your information - the GB closed our meetings BEFORE government regulation. So GB had caution and respect for life and most assuredly prayed to Jehovah for direction.  
Tom, most probably like me, does not humor modern-day Judas'..... He can see the difference between those who sincerely make mistakes, or are imperfect, and who sincerely are looking for answers...... and those who have made a conscious choice to oppose anything to do with GB, JWs - regardless of mitigating reasons or not.  He does not need me to stand up for him... he will just ignore you...… but I am quite sure he has matured up.
I am not a Hebrew scholar - but it is very closely related to Arabic..... and Arabic has causative verbs..... so I have no issue with Franz' translation of the causative verbs into English.  " to prove to be".   In Arabic it is understood that you already exist, therefore  (to be) is built into all its verbs. That is why 'I AM' is not the correct translation - because Jehovah would reveal himself as one who "causes to become" in Egypt with causing plagues and miracles.
I think the organization changed the verbs in the revised edition to simplify it.... because that was the purpose of the revised translation.
 

I am probably misunderstanding the point you are trying to make. I don't think science has anything to do with Br. Glock's use of the word "proof' in the context he used it in. I think you might be over thinking things....

And if you look at the NWT for related words, you will see something of further interest. In the related words below, the first number is the frequency in the pre-2013 NWT, and the second number is the NWT (revised).
prove 360/57, proved 273/30, proven 0/0, proves 23/1, proving 20/7 proof 21/8, proofs 2/1
for a total of 699 "proof" words, reduced to only 104. A drop of "7 times."
Except for the word "proof(s)" itself, the vast majority of these terms are carryovers from a favorite verb construction credited to F.W.Franz, apparently because he wanted to translate Jehovah's use of "ehyeh" to Moses with "I will prove to be" rather than just "I am." So to be consistent, he sometimes even took mundane phrases similar to "I will speak" and translated them as "I will prove to be speaking."
In other words, Jesus never says "prove yourselves cautious as serpents" he just said "be cautious as serpents."
Jesus never said: "On this account, prove yourselves ready," he just said "On this account, be ready."
And Jesus didn't say: ". . . prove yourselves my disciples," he just said ". . .you shall be my disciples." (Although in this last case the full construction is: "My Father is glorified in that you are bearing much fruit and [so that?] you shall be my disciples." So a translator might be justified in either adding the word "true" to disciples, or using "prove to be" because of the probable implication of the entire construction where the usual word for "and" can sometimes imply "so that.")
Although 600 of the 700 verb constructions were dropped in 2013, there was no real reason to keep the other 100 as carryovers, either. It was mostly a quirk of the old NWT where it gave an important "sound" to the phrase, but with very few times when it translated the true meaning of the verse. That's why in current Bible reading, the revised NWT simply removes the following cases of "prove" or "prove to" and just leaves it as "be."
(Exodus 10:7) . . . After that Pharʹaoh’s servants said to him: “How long will this man prove to be as a snare to us? . . .
(Exodus 12:5)  The sheep should prove to be sound, a male, a year old, for YOU. . . .
(Exodus 16:5) . . .And it must occur on the sixth day that they must prepare what they will bring in, and it must prove double what they keep picking up day by day.”

Quote @TrueTomHarleyDid you forget that I have television? I can see how obedient they are.
The UK lock down was obeyed by most people, not all, but most. The shops closed. The pubs closed. People were furloughed.  So many people stayed home and did food shopping online that for a month it was impossible to actually get a delivery slot. We had pre-planned and had a good stock of most items. The businesses that would normally deliver to hotels and eating establishments, changed their routine and started doing home deliveries to private houses. We bought lots from them. We are in a good position that cost doesn't matter. (money is for a protection).  You will of course know that the media hype up the things that sell the news. 
Peer-pressure is nothing if you have a strong character. And it is even less if you have a good Bible based conscience. Your problem Tom is that you seem to 'need to think' all non JWs are weak or wicked people.    As for my 60's clothing, it was smart and tidy, 70's was a bit different but it was all good fun. If you looked dorky that is your problem, I never looked dorky that's for sure. If looking different means looking dorky to you then it is you that lacks personality. Either that or you are so brainwashed by the CCJW that everything different seems wrong to you. 
 

@TrueTomHarley I know what you are saying, and I understand why you are saying it. It's similar to being a literalist. But that quote " proof they have God's backing" says  exactly what it means, and essentially boils down to this: In context Br. Glock was talking about apostate lies putting doubts into peoples minds about the GB. So, "In case you doubt the wisdom of the GB because they are imperfect and sometimes make mistakes and you want proof that they have God's backing, well here is proof". (Despite the fact that anyone can issue similar guidelines, and HAS issued similar guidelines). But sorry, all it proves is that the GB have been diligent in watching the world, are wise in applying the Bible's wisdom, wise in applying the authorities' advice and that they are concerned for us and want us to stay safe..
Really, the praise goes to all the hard working CO's, elders, and publishers who willing cooperate and actually make all this work! Without the co-operation of everyone in the organization, the GB can give wonderful advice till they're blue in the face and have Jehovah standing right behind them what would it prove?
Come on Tom, just admit it, it was not the best argument to prove a point ( Br. Glocks) or choice of words. And you must admit that this is somewhat of a clumsy effort at reassurance that the GB do have God's backing and that we can trust them. I believe there has been some success on the part of opposers in bringing the friends away. It was confirmed by a trustworthy elder, as I already mentioned in one of my posts. Br. Glock's talk is what the opposers like to call damage control. I won't call it that, because I am not on the opposers side. But I can see how some could think that! Actually, to be honest, I find it rather exciting as it may indicate something drastic is going to have to happen soon (oh, you don't say!)
By the way, apart from the "trust the GB because we have proof they have God's backing" bit I thought the talk was very good.
 

Certainly. But now I do wonder why Br. Glock said what he said. Is there a feeling that the GB's trust worthiness is under fire and is it gaining some success?

People can "invoke" whatever they want in "proving" their position on something. A reference to a “higher instance” does not mean that the higher instance approves a “lower instance” on every or all doctrine, instruction, directive and policy. That is what i saying.
 

Perhaps br. Glock is "Bible scholar", a person who has studied a subject for a long time and knows a lot about it, an intelligent and well-educated person who knows a particular subject very well.
In that context he should be aware of using particular words and their meanings, in/for his talk .

I thought the point I was making is that he could have chosen a different word and thus prevent this thread from coming into existence. Isn’t that your point as well?

Did you forget that I have television? I can see how obedient they are.
JWs have put themselves among company in which peer-pressure is going to nudge them in the safer direction. Non-Witnesses, many of them, (recall that I said “with some exaggeration”) have put themselves in a place where their peer-pressure will not. Do not think that peer-pressure is nothing. It is the reason that we look at our photos of yesteryear and marvel at how we ever could have thought those dorky styles back then did anything for us.