Patiently waiting for Truth

Anna said:
JWs who believe that the holy spirit actively finds mates and appoints elders are not misinterpreting anything. They're thoroughly duped by dishonest statements given in Watchtower publications and in various public talks. I proved that with my audience with Wesley Benner some 42 years ago.

Quote " But we don't IGNORE most forms of bad conduct. The elders are to watch over the flock, and give good counsel when they learn of bad forms of conduct. "
@JW Insider  But WE don't ignore ...   Is JW Insider actually admitting to be an Elder here ? 
And @The Librarian  whom Mr Harley refers to as 'she' and 'the old hen', has actually admitted to being a Man, I believe. So probably another Elder.
One more point though. Some of you guys tell stories of working with members of the GB and in the Writing Dept etc... . So you are not just ordinary 'run of the mill' JW's. A person doesn't go from being a 'member of a congregation' to being assistant to the GB.  And it had me thinking that if you've worked at the HQ in America, then maybe some of you know each other personally way before ever joining this forum.  Some of you, if you are to be believed, have such deep information that could only come from first hand experience at HQ Bethel USA, so I would presume some of you that defend the GB and the Org, know far more than you will ever make known on here. 
 
 

Nothing at all suspicious about that.
Swiss banks then transfer the funds to the Cayman Islands, then the Captain Nemo Vulcania Offshore Treasury Banking System, Northeast of the American Samoan Islands in the Pacific Ocean, and then to the final recipients in the exclusive gated community of Colony Park, New York.
Nothing at all suspicious.
Completely normal.
Nothing to see here.
Move along.

The thing to focus on is, not that Rutherford thought it existed, (a “cult” around Russell) but that the FDS freely admits it 50 years (or whatever) later.
It is as when Rutherford says “I made as ass of myself,” and AlanF uses to fact to insist that he could not have been “inspired.” What he should focus on is that he said it in the first place. I mean, not in my wildest ramblings can I envision Alan saying publicly the same. You cannot go wrong when you have persons who, as individuals, do not take themselves too seriously.
This is the same Rutherford who says: “Well, Carl talks a lot and he says things he doesn’t mean.” Can you imagine Alan letting anyone off the hook so easily? He rages on about the technicalities of words and totally ignores the human component that makes them work in actual life.
Of course, the “Carl” whom Rutherford spoke of was Carl Klein, a one-time GB member whose life-experience was published in 1984. (“Jehovah Has Dealt Rewardingly With Me.”) Notable among the lessons he reports as contributing to a happy life is: “Since then, I have observed many similar tests of loyalty. When mistakes are made, those not wholly loyal at heart seem to pounce upon them as an excuse for quitting.”—Compare Psalm 119:165.
This, too, is good to reflect on. Klein’s reminisces are a favorite with the friends—it is not just me. One brother stated just the same when commenting on a WT paragraph about a month ago that referenced him.

You might be right to a certain extent, this may even have been created inadvertently. However now, I see a distinct move away from that. JWs are now going to have to assimilate that the GB (by their own admission) produces imperfect spiritual food.

JW Insider said:
 
Yes, but until very recently that was not the case. Note:
<< How did this governing body make its appearance in recent times? Evidently under the direction of Jehovah God and his Son Jesus Christ. According to the facts available, the governing body became associated with the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania. C. T. Russell was patently of that governing body back there in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. >> The Watchtower, Dec. 15, 1971, p. 760, written by Fred Franz, Vice President and chief theologian of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania.
It is entirely relevant, since the Society has long claimed continuity of "the faithful slave and its governing body" from apostolic times. That this claim is manifestly false is irrelevant; the claim itself is the important thing. The GB's recent divorcing itself from Russell is a self-serving political move.
Exactly.
Quite so. Just as there is today around the current Governing Body -- all instigated by years of promotion by Watchtower publications.

Good point Srecko. I don't think it's entirely fair to blame the GB for creating a "certain" environment inside congregations though.
In fact, (we know everything passes through the GB's hands for approval, if they haven't written it themselves) the above expressions must be what the GB agree with. Time and again I see that it is not the questions that are asked, or even expressing an opinion contrary to their own, but it's the way this is done and what is the the purpose for doing it. Most elders are willing to hear an opinion, and do not resent those who express an opinion contrary to their own. I know that from personal experience. However, if the motive is to exult your own ideas, to force people to listen to them over and over again, and to try and make people see it your way, then that is stirring up contentions and is eroding peace in the congregation. And those who erode peace, will eventually find themselves kicked out sooner or later. Just to illustrate; I told a few elders, in no uncertain terms, that I cannot agree with the "overlapping generation" idea, and I left it at that. No one has ever come after me, or tried to convince me otherwise, and we all remain good friends. Now you know what would happen if I started to aggressively push my opinion on every single person I came into contact with.
In another instance; I rattled one sister's cage (it means irritated her) during a discussion in the car during field service (in the US a car load of friends go out). We were all talking about animals being friends in the paradise. I voiced my opinion that I believe there will still be the same food chain as there is now, with carnivores consuming the herbivores. I explained why I think that, but this one sister was adamant that lions will eat grass and will be buddies with the sheep. But we didn't argue who is right and who is wrong. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, as long as you are not trying to beat the other person over the head with it. 
So I think it is assumed that 'questioning and expressing an opinion' will be done in a civil way, to which those in a position of authority should have no trouble listening.
 
 

Somehow you missed how the elders judged the victim, a 14 year old girl, as the one to be blamed.  
Depends on the laws at the time?  What about God's laws fulfilled in Christ?  
For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”  Gal 5:14
Did the elders enact that law when speaking with the victim?
The first to respond to the issue were the elders, whose response only added to the trauma the victim was suffering.  The biggest flaw here, is the system that the girl depended on to give her spiritual support.  The elders' "hasty decision" aided the woman to consider suicide.  

JW Insider said:
     
True, but many languages don't distinguish capitals from lowercase in proper names. In French, for example, you have "les témoins de jéhovah". This is never capitalized. And you have German, which capitalizes all sorts of words (I don't enough to say more).
The ambiguity was deliberate. It allowed the Society to make false claims about the history of "Jehovah's witnesses" by blurring the distinction between the modern religion and generic past "witnesses". Jehovah's Witnesses in the Divine Purpose was especially dishonest in doing this.
In many cases the context shows that blurring the distinction between "W" and "w" is deliberate. Old timers certainly know the difference.

In Croatian are some different rules about uppercase and lowercase letters in these sort of two words names, titles. Because of this, I wasn't careful enough about what it would mean in the English language. Croatian WT magazines are translated with small letter for word "Witnesses" in name JW.
When I connected the past and the present and all those various people who showed themselves to be "witnesses" for JHVH in some specific way, then that meant continuity. Not only or not at all the continuity of a legal entity - an organization, but the existence of a type of people, as individuals and as groups. That is something how JW organization and WT Society, as legal entities, looking on themselves ...as continuation, as heirs of true faith, as witnesses for JHVH, from the time of the all faithful man of old and old patriarchs. 
 
In that sense, a legacy that the WT Society draws from Bible Students of Russell (teaching, doctrines, ideas, beliefs, administration) legally belongs to today's JW as facts that created and been cause for future "destiny" of those who continued the work of founders in 19th century. In such way of logic, all Russell's teaching and belief system, later abandoned, stay as real history of this, today existed JW organization. Museums halls that exists in worldwide Betel's buildings (Branch Offices) proves this. JW of today are proud of their history and beginnings in 19th century (not before, because Bible pictures of faithful men and Israel nation is heritage that many other religions want to appropriate for themselves too). By publicly showing and talking and writing about that in such way, JW accepting all what was said (teachings) before 1931 as own spiritual heritage that must to be carry today (as sort of burden).    

If he hung his head, it was not in shame. It was in dismay at the literalism.
He was probably wondering, “How did this fellow ever get past ‘I and the father are one’ to become a Witness in the first place?
He was probably wondering, “How did this fellow ever come to believe in God?” since the cosmonauts traveled through the heavens and didn’t see him.
Lord, save us from the literalists.
By definition, you cannot get to see spiritual things. It is the wind that blows where it will and you hear the sound of it but cannot otherwise nail it down. (John 3:8)
In the ministry, I will not argue with a trinitarian (having learned from experience). I say, “95% of the scriptures that are said to prove the trinity would, if they were seen in any other context, be instantly dismissed as figure of speech.” Yet somehow grown persons make themselves children when they see them in the Bible, and insist: “The Bible SAYS what it MEANS and MEANS what it SAYS.” I simply cannot play that game. I don’t want to prove that “crocodile tears” does not mean the crying person is a crocodile. I don’t want to have to produce the bush after I have told someone not to beat around it. I don’t want to explain to a grown-up that there is no Santa Claus.
I have never had this problem at all of demanding just HOW elders are appointed by holy spirit. Jesus said (above) that it can’t be done. It is enough to say that appointees are measured against the Bible template, which is an acknowledged product of holy spirit, the measuring is done by existing elders, and is cleared by HQ, where presumably there is a file cabinet stuffed with holy spirit.
I do note, however—I mean it clicks together just now—a possible reason for that last letter from the circuit overseer. “I have appointed” so-and-so as an elder in the congregation, he said. It is a tactic to stay one step ahead of the scoundrels who are adept at “framing mischief by decree” to make clear that, contrary to their insistence that they are fighting a “corporation,” what they are actually fighting is the Bible itself, and to the extent that the Bible is God’s Word, which we believe that it is, God himself. Verses directly say that traveling ministers appointed elders. Frame it the same way today so that they must redirect their attack against scripture itself and thereby reveal exactly what is their desire. Many changed wordings and announcements likely come about for the same reason, causing JTR to rant about “legal machinations,” but it cannot be any other way, because attacks are often framed legally.
After changing the wording, then say, as did G Jackson, “the Bible says that there will be such and such, and we are doing our best to fulfill that pattern.” Surely THAT should not be illegal.
(What he said was: “Jesus said that in the last days - and Jehovah's Witnesses believe these are the last  days - there would be a slave, a group of persons who would have responsibility to care for the spiritual food. So in that respect, we view ourselves as trying to fulfill that role")
Davey the Kid, from the final chapter of Tom Irregardless and Me, is a real person, immensely capable, who served several years at Bethel. He died a few years back, so perhaps I could give his last name, but then some sorehead here will produce evidence that he farted once and will start a thread about that. Davey related that, while at Bethel, visitors would tour and some would say that they could feel holy spirit in the hallways. You cannot literally feel holy spirit in the hallways, Davey said, as he went on to discuss just how holy spirit can be expected to back those who do God’s will, as they do in a focused way at Bethel. 
I can picture 99 persons in the audience—who had said they felt holy spirit in the hallways—smiling at themselves that they ever thought they could literally feel holy spirit in the hallways, and AlanF stomping out of the building now that they have admitted to LYING to him for all these years.

This is actually a very good answer. No one has to kiss up to these guys. It is enough not to oppose them.
No national leader stands by and sees his legitimacy trashed. You don’t get too far in Russia or China by doing that. Look how much trouble Trump is causing that “whistleblower” and the uproar over it from those who want to undermine him. Obama did the say with a different set of whistleblowers. 
It is enough not to try to grab the wheel of the bus. Simply “do not think about them at all” if you cannot get your head around everything they do.

TrueTomHarley said:
     
    
Note how this liar completely ignores what I said and doubles down on his practice of lying and his lousy reading comprehension:
Like I said, lousy reading comprehension. Few others seem to have a problem understanding what I write.
Perhaps long years of reading 3rd-grade level Watchtower publications have damaged your brain.
I'm very thorough because I actually pay attention to what people write. You obviously don't.
Much of your reading comprehension problem is that you either don't seem to read carefully -- no surprise, given that WTS publications lend themselves to this -- or you simply haven't the mental acuity to put two and two together. I suspect it's a combination of both.
This goes along with your inability to write clearly. Your one blog post that I read is a real dog's breakfast of semi-gobble-de-goop.
As for the board software, if you make a post, and try to make another post immediately afterward, it merges the two. I've never seen this happen on any other board.
Furthermore, there appears to be no way to generate a quote inside a quote. If you've figured out how to do this, then do enlighten me, oh great software wizard. I won't be holding my breath.

Me, "as regular Joe", have to be sad and have amusement in the same time  about your  idea how God "oversee and monitor the work of the GB".  If He doing this monitoring, that is in a manner how he view many other human activities - to allows them but not to approved them.
What is real point in this? How WT lying about own history and their position before God? In informal way, Bible students (in Russell time) were been (and are under different names today) witnesses for JHVH. WT have logic how all people from past until today who worship JHVH, ARE Jehovah's Witnesses. :))

11 Do you have a position of authority? If so, ask yourself: ‘What kind of environment do I create at work or at home? Do I promote peace? Do I encourage others to ask questions? And am I willing to hear their opinions?’ Never would we want to be like the Pharisees, who resented those who questioned them and persecuted those who expressed an opinion contrary to their own.—Mark 3:1-6; John 9:29-34. - WT study article September 2019, page 23 par 11
"What kind of environment" do GB create inside JW Organization aka congregations ?

No Anna, in this issue not. In Department (Writing Dep. i assume) i guess there is a people who doing writings for commissioned articles about this and that, or have some list of topics to cover. And then some overseer of department splits the tasks to best writer for particular theme. 
Is there any committee or individuals that oversee or monitor the work of the GB? My guess is it doesn't exist. So there is no objective, more real picture of the true state of GB.  The conversations conducted here show that there are many valid reasons for correcting GB.
If someone inside Betel writes an article about GB, his writing is influenced by his employer, which is GB. Writing in the first or third person loses all meaning if we have a text that is not objective about those who are being written.
 
You said:  Sometimes they, the GB get more personal and say "we, the GB have decided.....etc"  I can't recall something was written this way. It reminds very strong on Bile report: WE and HOLY SPIRIT..... DECIDED to.....:))))) but because GB are not inspired, decision is only from them NOT with/under HS cooperation/influence.
It wasn't that long ago when most JWS didn't even know who the members of the GB were. Or only had very slight knowledge. But there are autobiographical articles (life stories) about members of the GB in the publications written in the first person. That is true. And this PR about GB members not going to be blessing for JW's, as i see. Because, while readers looking on text they are/been limited on letters and words and on own understanding and reasoning. Now, when you can see person who speaking those words, his look and gestures and mimics, his tone of voice...picture getting to be clearer, bigger and stronger. Viewer of JWTV program now have better chance to reject preaching of such religious leaders, than he/she got while reading paper only.  

JW Insider said:
Not at all.
I see no contradictions there, so let me try to clarify.
Getting rid of the DF'ing policy would allow many JWs to leave and not lose their family members. Very many JWs make a pretense of being JWs simply to avoid being shunned by family members.
     
Whatever the general statistics are, ex-JWs courageous enough to tell their experiences are a statistic of their own. And it's born out by my family experiences, where several have contacted me and expressed fear about getting shunned even if they quietly leave.
True, but that's not what I'm concerned about. I'm concerned with the deliberate destruction of family relationships by the shunning policy, period. A JW might have quietly left, but experience shows that a goodly fraction have been later DF'd for a any number of things they did after leaving. There is no excuse for that policy.
Perhaps, but most would be DF'd or DA'd anyway, resulting in shunning.
But if the honest answer is "No, I don't believe the GB speaks for God", disfellowshipping immediately follows.
All of which is irrelevant to my point.
Perhaps, but what about the GB and its minions being humble enough to admit in specific cases that a teaching is wrong? Remember what happened with Carl Olof Jonsson and James Penton. Remember my experience with Albert Schroeder.
     
I agree, but you'll never convince JW leaders.
     
True. The Douglas Walsh trial made it abundantly clear that, because of that and other considerations, the Society would not tolerate any questioning of its claimed spiritual authority.
And that's rub! JW leaders are convinced that they speak for God, and you dasn't question God!
They have a correspondence department of sorts, but experience shows that most of the time a letter writer gets no response, or the letter is forwarded to local elders, often with a note of "watch out for a potential apostate". This behavior creates much resentment.
But these ideas are fairly easy to deal with. There are plenty of online forums that can be referred to that debunk such nonsense. But again that's very much against the Society's claim to speak for God.
I haven't talked to him in a long time, but he was at one time a fiery defender of the Watchtower. In the late 1980s he wrote a treatise explaining why JWs are not false prophets. But the Society didn't like him writing such things, viewing it as a usurpation of its authority. Based on trumped up charges, Hess was DF'd. He told me that right up to the instant that the elders DF'd him around 1990 he was convinced that the GB was legitimate. In 1993 the Awake! writers used his treatise as a basis for a big spread on why JW are not false prophets.
     
Yes, I probably went too far in making such a blanket statement.
Nothing wrong with that. It's what people do in everyday life. Exercising a conscience.
Which they certainly can do. And the internal congregational 'party line' would certainly spread around who was an undesirable.
Exactly. The latter is just plain blackmail.
As I said above.

4Jah2me said:
My, my. Such inconvenient facts you've pointed out.
The problem with their honestly admitting that they don't know is that it is a matter of serious doctrine that they appear to themselves and their followers to be speaking with authority, the authority of God and Christ. Admitting they don't know has always been equated with admitting they don't have that authority. But we all know that they neither represent God nor speak for him.

Right. Don't ever make a mistake like this:
*** w09 3/15 p. 16 par. 4 “Be Vigilant” ***
Since 1925, Jehovah’s Witnesses have recognized that World War I and the events that followed amount to sure evidence that Christ’s presence in heavenly Kingdom power began in 1914.
*** w01 11/1 p. 25 “Religious Tolerance Day” ***
Jehovah’s Witnesses have used various methods to spread the good news. For example, in 1914—during the era of silent movies—the Witnesses were showing the “Photo-Drama of Creation,” a motion picture and slide presentation that included synchronized sound.
*** w98 9/15 p. 32 The War That Destroyed the 19th Century ***
For over 120 years, Jehovah’s Witnesses have pointed to 1914 as the end of what Jesus called “the appointed times of the nations.”
*** w93 5/1 p. 12 par. 7 Shedding Light on Christ’s Presence ***
True to the prophecy, Jehovah’s Witnesses, the modern light bearers, have suffered persecution for the past eight decades.
*** w91 4/1 p. 7 Is It Later Than You Think? ***
Since 1914, however, Jehovah’s Witnesses have done that, in spite of the persecution Jesus foretold—government bans, mob violence, imprisonments, torture, and many deaths.
In 1919 there were 4,000 of Jehovah’s Witnesses preaching this good news.
[8 decades from 1993 reaches back to the decade from 1910 to 1920]
*** w91 4/1 p. 5 Is It Later Than You Think? ***
In 1914, World War I started. Jehovah’s Witnesses of that decade were immediately on the alert.
*** w91 4/15 p. 6 When Will Lasting Peace Really Come? ***
For more than 70 years, Jehovah’s Witnesses have been proclaiming around the world the good news that Jesus Christ began to rule in God’s Kingdom in heaven in the year 1914.
And speaking of poor history, this last quote is saying that Jehovah's Witnesses began proclaiming this date for Jesus' rule as early as 1921 or before. The idea is that it was being taught in 1919, but this was not a clear teaching until about 1925.

TrueTomHarley said:
    
Well, many times you've deliberately misquoted or distorted my words, or claimed I said something or have views that have nothing to with reality. Why should this time be different?
If it was an honest mistake, then kudos for fessing up to it.
     
That's better. Try being a competent poster in the future.
Still missing the point. Even though I clearly explained it.
LOL! In every case the Watchtower leaders who led the charge claimed inspiration or nearly so with their predictions. And their followers believed them.
Obviously, after Rutherford's failed 1925 prediction, where he admitted making an ass of himself, he and his lieutenants did not learn their lesson. Fifty years later -- not close to 1925 -- old Freddie did the same thing with 1975. And the muck up when the Jan. 1, 1989 Watchtower said that the preaching work would be completed in the 20th century occurred because both the writer and the GB reviewers all agreed on the idea.
Your rationalizations are ludicrous, in view of the facts.

John Butler was banned because he went too far in calling for illegal harm to be done against some public people. Not because of his stance on the child abuse matter. Once you cross the law you are definitely banned.
Billy the Kid aka Allen Smith..... I have tolerated on many occasions.. until soon thereafter he is so rude and abusive toward other members I have to ban him. He needs to find another sandbox to go play in. Not this one.
I'm not saying that others don't at times get abusive..... but my tolerance with Allen Smith is very thin... he "rubs me the wrong way" every time. 
-----------
 

That's funny. I was very close at one time in calling the elders in his ex-congregation to alert them of a potential pedophile in the congregation because John Butler wouldn't do it. Then he kind of decided he would alert the police, which he said he did, so I let it go.

Anna said:
     
Of course it does! Since no man can perfectly apply scripture, all appointments of elders are done by imperfect men -- not by infallible holy spirit.
Why is that so hard to understand?
You should also know how the Society actually does such appointments. First, a body of elders discusses a man's qualifications. Then they submit a recommendation to the Circuit Oversee (or however it's done today). He in turn sends it along to the Service Department, which reviews the elders' notes and reviews its own files on the man. If all checks out, they send back a Yes note to the congregation. Just men doing perfectly normal things all through the process. See W85 8/1 p. 31 and my 1992-3 analysis of it https://www.critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/part-2-societys-view-of-elders.html.
Below you'll find my experience in finding out that elders are not directly appointed by holy spirit. The time frame is the three years after the failure of the prediction of Armageddon by 1975. You can find a lot more at https://ad1914.com/the-jw-experience-of-alan-feuerbacher/
<<
During this time an incident occurred that was to have a major negative impact on my confidence in Watchtower teaching. A friend in the congregation, a young man a bit younger than me, had supported himself by mowing lawns while pioneering. After he got married, he gradually worked that into a landscaping business, and began hiring young men. He was naïve about business requirements and failed to do all the necessary tax work for the people he hired. At one point, a much older man, a JW elder, found out about the tax slip. Apparently there had been bad blood between the families for a long time, so this elder attempted to have my friend disfellowshipped for breaking Caesar’s law. The body of elders, which included my stepdad, should have ended the matter then and there, because according to
Watchtower Society policy, whether someone fulfills all of Caesar’s requirements is not the elders’ business. But the elders deliberated time after time for six months, acting like the Keystone Kops. At one point they decided to disfellowship, then rescinded that, then went for private reproof. I found out about all this when the matter was about 2/3 finished. Finally the Society was called in, which called in yet another elder body, which decided that the matter never should have been brought up to begin with, since it is not the congregation’s business whether someone handles their taxes properly.
I asked my stepdad about what was going on, and he sheepishly told me. That got me thinking seriously about whether elders really are appointed and directed by holy spirit, as the Society had always taught. If these elders really had the holy spirit’s backing when making their decisions, then why the Keystone Kops behavior? So I asked my stepdad and several other elders to explain all this. They were unable to explain anything to my satisfaction, so I wrote the Society about all this, and so it was arranged that the Circuit Overseer, one Wesley Benner, would explain things to me. We spoke for an hour at my parents’ home, and he certainly cleared things up for me. Benner explainedthat when the Society said that elders are appointed and directed by holy spirit, that was only a manner of speaking. As long as the men who actually appoint them go strictly by the Bible’s standards for appointing elders, then because the Bible is inspired by holy spirit, it can be said that, in effect, holy spirit has appointed or directed the elder.
That did not set well, because that is not the impression one gets from reading Watchtower publications. Rather, the clear implication is that God himself directly appoints elders, and even directly guides them to correct decisions. So I asked Benner if I could summarize the Society’s teaching, and said that he should tell me whether I understood. I asked him point blank: “In one sentence, is it or is it not true that elders are *directly* appointed by holy spirit?” He hesitated, hung his head, and answered, “No.”
>>
All of that is irrelevant to the question I posed to the Society more than 40 years ago. As Circuit Overseer Benner told me, elders are not directly appointed by holy spirit. Indirect appointment is not direct appointment: it is only a manner of speaking.
     
Of course it does. If the process fails in one case, when the process is supposed to be spirit-directed by infallible holy spirit, the process itself is defective. That means that holy spirit actually has nothing to do with the process, as my experience with the Keystone Kops elders and Brother Benner proves.
Don't you realize that the claim of spirit-direction is a scam? A scam to fool JWs into obeying JW leaders as if God himself were speaking?
Read my previous post to Arauna and tell me if, despite the facts I presented, such a fallible group of JW leaders, who have never gotten a single prediction right and have taught dozens of false doctrines, you still think their claim to speak for God holds up. If not, then they are not spirit-directed, any more than you or I am.
But that flies in the face of actual experience.
No clue who that is.
     
One case? I've read about many. And I know about a lot of cases that never made it to court because of technicalities.
You ought to phone up Barbara Anderson.
Ok.
     
I'm talking about the general failure of Watchtower policy to protect children and molestation victims. Also about internal Service and Legal Department policies that often direct elders to lie to pretty much everyone involved in a case, including police and the courts.
The present policies are better than the old ones, but remain inadequate.
And of course, the fact that the Society fights against lawsuit bringers tooth and nail, rather than admitting past wrongdoing, proves that its officials are really not interested in doing right by victims.
     
That's my point: saying that reading the Bible and imperfectly attempting to apply it, while saying that in effect, holy spirit appoints elders, is semantically equivalent to saying that Julia Child in effect directs your cooking, when all you've done is try to follow the written directions. "Indirect guidance" is only a manner of speaking and is in no sense equivalent to direct guidance.
If you told your friends that Julia Child directed you, but all you did was follow her book, they'd rightly judge you as nuts.
But in no case did Julia Child direct you. Following written directions is not the same as being actively directed by the writer.
By that standard, sincere Christians of every sort can claim spirit-direction. But as a JW you must reject that claim.
That would be speaking honestly.
Of course, because that's exactly what the Society's dishonesty does. I had several discussions about this with my elder stepdad (now deceased) over the years, and he steadfastly insisted that his own appointment was directly by holy spirit. Most elders and JWs believe the same thing. The Society's claims are all about maintaining control, since you don't disagree with God.
As I showed above, it is never the case.
By that standard, if I "took the lead", would anyone in his right mind obey me?
But that is what the Society demands. Do you need to see quotes from WTS publications?
"Bad" is different from "stupid". But the Governing Body explicitly demands such blind obedience.
If he were alive today he would likely be disfellowshipped for apostasy if he disagreed with the GB.
In principle, not in practice. In practice if someone decides that what God says is different from what JW leaders say, most JWs go with their leaders. That's the point of my posting about my conversation with GB member Albert Schroeder about Luke 21: he could not argue with the Bible, but he ended up declaring that the Bible does not apply to Jehovah's Witnesses if their teaching goes against the Bible.
Yes, in principle. In practice they would surely be disfellowshipped.
     
But as I've shown, my conclusions are based on facts and sound reasoning.
All of that evidence is not real, it's purely imaginary. Example: some years ago my sister-in-law, a thoroughly deceived JW, decided to help make curtains for her KH. She laid out the patterns and went to a fabric store. There she found a roll of fabric of exactly the right size. She concluded that Jehovah had somehow made that roll be available. Which of course, even most JWs find ludicrous. All other such 'evidence of God's spirit' is of a similar nature.

I certainly do not think you need to say it, or act like him, or act different from him. For me, it's helpful to try to remember the things that were his greatest concerns, in case you are him. When TTH said you had been DF'd by the elders, I hadn't remembered anything like that about you here, and just thought we shouldn't be quick to judge. If you are JB, I'm glad you're back. There is probably some kind of catharsis that people can get out of these forums. Or perhaps its a way to clear our own thought and logic processes by putting ideas out here for people to respond to. If a persons wants to be here, then they are finding something useful here. I'm all for temporary cool-down periods if things get heaterd, but I don't like the idea that a person gets "banned for life." Especially not people who are looking for a way to find association again with people that once shared a faith or ideology. It doesn't matter if they are critical, as far as I am concerned. I like a challenge.

The elders and the GB can take care of themselves. It’s when he failed to laugh at one of my jokes that I decided he was toast.
Well....you’re both from the UK, aren’t you? Doesn’t everyone on that island know everyone else?