BTK59

Certainly! I'm thrilled that you've finally acknowledged the extraordinary abilities that you possess and are actively employing, particularly in implementing your ban capabilities, which you've undeniably possessed all this time despite your initial refusal to recognize them.
I briefly believed that you censored me by disabling my ability to post comments, but thankfully I am now able to do so again. I attribute the issue to a minor technical glitch for the time being. It is possible that your future decision to ban me will be a deliberate strategy to enforce your personal rules by defending and protecting unchristian people here.
I'm confident that you possess the same capabilities as us. There are specific reasons why certain information being shared here is actually a disinformation campaign, intended to perpetuate further deception.
It's accurate that people often ban those they have a personal issue with or dislike. However, over the course of 10 years, have they truly managed to suppress the truth from being revealed?

Have you ever considered the consequences of your actions, JWI? You have caused a great deal of harm and division by pitting brother against brother. It is not enough to simply excuse yourself and seek refuge in a loyal fan base within a closed club. Remember the stains of blood on your own hands.
Instead of imposing your own beliefs on these matters, why not engage in a constructive dialogue within an appropriate setting? Your apostate views are not suitable for an open forum, especially if you identify as a Jehovah's Witness. Before passing judgment on others, consider your own actions. You do not have the authority to judge the Governing Body, and your credibility to judge the elders is questionable. Your personal opinions hold little value in this context.

I guess it's only funny to the ones doing the banning, not the ones being banned.
Oh! By the way, @nkboswell Watch out! You have just received the kiss of death. You are now marked as one of us. I suppose you are now Allen, George, Alphonse, me or perhaps one of the many other aliases he enjoys linking to one individual while he "refuses" to link the ones generated by Tom to cleverly mock a shameful reaction.

That's just the way things are here. If you embrace JWI's logic and pay homage to him, you'll be alright. To maintain favor with Tom and JWI is crucial, reminiscent of how first-century Christians were compelled to do so with the Pharisees.
 
 

I couldn't agree more, Kimball. 
(Proverbs 6:16-19) 16 There are six things that Jehovah hates; Yes, seven things that he detests: 17 Haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 A heart plotting wicked schemes, and feet that run quickly to evil, 19 A false witness who lies with every breath, And anyone sowing contentions among brothers.
Haughty eyes: Most of us have failed at times in thinking more of ourselves than we ought to think. But there are several accounts on this forum that quickly come to mind when most of us think of haughtiness: persons who constantly boast that they are the only true Witness here and who spend most of their time denigrating others, sometimes even indicating that there is only one sincere individual on the entire forum, and the weighty responsibility that this one person has taken on.
A lying tongue is harder to judge from a distance. Except for certain claims that have appeared to be ridiculous, or which have been later contradicted by the same person (sometimes under a different account name), no one can tell whether a person is "lying" or just has issues where reality gets mixed up and overridden through an obsession with their own ulterior motives. You can often suspect when a person is plotting to manipulate or using wordplay and technicalities to deceive, but we can't always judge whether the motive was defending something they don't themselves understand, grasping at straws and strawmen and logical fallacies, but without the true willful motivation of lying. We leave this one in Jehovah's hands. 
Hands that shed innocent blood. Fortunately, on a forum like this few will physically murder anyone. Some will take on personas like B.T.K. or Billy The Kid, known for shedding innocent blood, but this is just their own form of fantasy gunplay. There is a concern that is sometimes brought up that if someone brings up a controversial doctrine here (like chronology date setting related to the times and seasons, or "overlapping generations" or "pyramidology") that this alone will stumble persons and they will no longer respect the Watchtower or the Governing Body, which in turn can lead to their falling away and losing eternal life. That's a valid concern, but this can be taken so far as to be the equivalent of a claim that no one should read books, or read the old Watch Tower publications, or Russell-related court documents, or newspapers, or use Google or Bing. When all the same controversial information is available from Mr. Google, what does it matter if another person brings it up here? If there's a good answer to the controversy, then where else but to bring it up online, where the controversy can exist side-by-side with the truth about it. A person would only likely be upset about this if they want to continue to believe a perspective that they cannot defend. 
And anyone sowing contentions among brothers. I skipped a couple to get right to the big one. It's interesting to me that this is the one that ends the list, giving it special emphasis as if it tops off all the rest and somehow becomes tantamount to shedding innocent blood. When it comes to this forum, I believe that most persons only think of ONE person, and that person's DOZENS of accounts over that last 10 years. The person might mean well. They might even think they are a vigilante appointed by God to be a Wyatt Earp, N.K.Boswell, Walter Prescott, Moise Racette style lawman in a Wild Wild West World Wide Web. But it's worth considering why God would even want someone so prone to contentiousness to be his one and only spokesman of truth on a backwater no-account forum like this.

From what I have read and understood from the topic, it seems that most past participants who have not been removed for taking on the responsibility for the truth and mostly those who remain are insincere individuals except one. That is indeed a significant burden to carry, especially considering that you may not be able to change the minds of those who have already firmly made up their minds and hearts, not necessarily in the right direction, but in their own way.
Wouldn't it be simpler to convey God's message of disapproval using texts such as Proverbs 6:16-19 without engaging anyone here? It seems clear that they will not be able to convince us in the public eye of the behavior described in the Omnibus Mand and the conclusions drawn from it.
 

And what about Dr Inhibitor’s nurse, Hep See? Where is she? No special characters at all in her name, though she herself is a character.

You have made a false accusation in this open forum regarding the Watchtower's reference to the end of the world in 1975 by citing publications from 1966, 1968, and 1969. Before you continue down this path of deception, I urge the public to read the Watchtower literature to gain a genuine perspective on the meaning behind the year 1975, which primarily focuses on the 6,000 years of human existence.
Although there was certainly an excessive amount of overthinking in the past, leading to incorrect conclusions, one would have needed to experience that era in order to grasp it fully. Furthermore, during that time, there was an "assembly" titled "Why We Have Not Been Told ‘That Day and Hour" that provided an explanation to the brotherhood that could not have been any clearer. It aimed to guide individuals and ensure their genuine comprehension. This is the reason the Watchtower put an end to such speculation in 1974 with the publication of the following insightful article.
*** w74 10/15 p. 635 Growing in Appreciation for the “Divine Purpose” ***
The publications of Jehovah’s witnesses have shown that, according to Bible chronology, it appears that 6,000 years of man’s existence will be completed in the mid-1970’s. But these publications have never said that the world’s end would come then. Nevertheless, there has been considerable individual speculation on the matter. So the assembly presentation “Why We Have Not Been Told ‘That Day and Hour’” was very timely. It emphasized that we do not know the exact time when God will bring the end. All we know is that the end will come within the generation that sees fulfilled on it the sign that Jesus Christ said would then be in evidence. (See Matthew chapters 24, 25.) All indications are that the fulfillment of this sign began in 1914. So we can be confident that the end is near; we do not have the slightest doubt that God will bring it about, the speaker stressed. But we have to wait and see exactly when, in the meantime keeping busy in God’s service.
 
The article "Divine Purpose" is rooted in a series of assemblies that emphasized the divine aspect, such as "1971 Divine Name," "1972 Divine Rulership," "1973 Divine Victory," and so on. Most of the congregation comprehended the significance of the year 1975 without misinterpreting previous articles or taking them out of context, unlike some irresponsible individuals who falsely claim to be witnesses.
Although I don't agree with the topics discussed in the closed club, as they often revolve around irresponsibility, there's no need to perpetuate this distortion to the public, especially when they are already aware of the false narratives propagated by former members.
Now you can understand JWI's beliefs based on what he posted.
He fully supports the apostate propaganda without reservations.
This is the type of deceit and dishonesty that disgusts people and leads to banning. Joking aside, the image that Toms presents is just a way to divert the public's attention from their true hidden agenda: deception. Using the name of the Watchtower to defame and slander God's people is a highly irresponsible act. Such individuals shame both God and the Watchtower by misusing its name in an open forum, thereby engaging in irresponsible behavior.

This comment is specifically for your fan base, not intended to be an expression of truth. However, I will refrain from expanding further on the matter.
Absolutely! It is crucial for visitors to witness firsthand how personal perspectives can be used to deceive. They should have the opportunity to explore Pastor Russell's words in writing, where he clearly stated the truth. It is perplexing that you, along with some former and current members of the Watchtower, persist in making baseless accusations while refusing to acknowledge this.
So, you're suggesting that instead of addressing the issues with Russell, you now want to argue about Rutherford? Are you also interested in discussing your misleading interpretation of events in 1975, which you seem to be defending, even though it's a false narrative?

It is important to note that you both seem to be intentionally referring to Tom's aliases and pretending as usual. The fact that Tom's old aliases are still accessible only confirms the moderator's power to ban after years of deceit. It is evident that past aliases banned by you have not been able to reconnect under the same name, making it an unjust behavior. It is clear that there have been instances of rudeness, insults, and obnoxious behavior from your side. This obsession with deception should stop. Didn't you just admit you have insulted in the past? Why have you not imposed a ban on yourself? Once more, this blatant double standard in defending the indefensible is becoming apparent.

Sounds like you are angry that I wouldn't get angry. "Fiery coals on the head" syndrome I guess. 
The 1914 Bible Students Monthly has already been discussed at length, so I won't belabor it again here under this topic. Best if people do their own research as you say. The easiest way is to get the ZWT database that was once available for free from Bible Student websites. Look up: "end of the age" "end of the world" "consummation of the age" "cosmos" "Matthew 24:3" "Matthew 28:20" etc., and especially pay attention to the previous years of Bible Students Monthly. Then of course, one could go and see Rutherford using the same exact definition of the word "world" when he repeatedly announced: "The World Has Ended - Millions Now Living May Never Die!"
*** w84 2/1 p. 24 par. 11 ‘Oneness of Spirit’ in a Rapidly Growing Flock ***
Thus in 1918 the president of the Watch Tower Society delivered a talk in Los Angeles, California, on a subject later to be repeated by hundreds more speakers, under the title “The World Has Ended, Millions Now Living May Never Die.”
 

@"Hammer" Rubi @"Hammer" Urabi @Dr. Adhominem @Dr. Adhominum 
No. My guess is that when the software for the forum has to be reloaded now and then for maintenance issues, there were a couple of yours that got lost during updates due to attempts to include too many items of special characters and punctuation. Also you can see the attempts to create near duplicates as in the ones I listed above which might sooner or later get flagged by software as superfluous.
Or maybe I imagined that they were being rude to me or insulting me, or worse yet, downvoted me, and I just banned them without telling you. More power to the moderators!!

Tom, come on! Seriously, Vic the Parrot strikes again. At least your alias isn't vocal, but be careful Tom: downvotes are seen as an ad hominem attack. I recommend you refrain from attacking yourself. lol!
Does that only apply to me, Alphonse, and the now-banned George?

That reminded me of Donna Summers song, Hot Stuff, lol! Continue creating aliases and accounts that support your perspective. Love it! Just highlights how "one" person is unfairly targeted, lol! Keep it up!

Yes. I wish he would grow up. There is nothing wrong with upvotes. They show that other people think you’re hot stuff.

I can easily refute your claim here, JWI, by providing a simple example.

When you're publicly proven wrong, it's understandable to feel offended and let anger take over. However, allowing emotions to get the best of you, as George did with Tom, can lead to undesired consequences of being banned for showing deceptions. I will encourage the public to conduct their own research on the topic I am discussing. It is important to verify information independently.
 

Alright, I was referring to the activity section, not the privileges you have as a moderator. All I can see is Alphonese, and...

Are you concerned that your supporters only express their opinions through votes without anyone supporting the truth?
 

What is the reason behind your insistence on having these games? Is this criticism stemming from the wave of "upvotes" you received from comfortmypeople, which you conveniently removed to justify your unwarranted excuse to criticize?

It's been 10 years, why not behave in a manner consistent with adulthood.
 
 

I believe Juan Rivera expressed a similar concern about George. What authority did George have to criticize people in this context? While George was critiquing the impact of individuals misrepresenting themselves as JWs in good standing, by their actions and behavior, it's evident that even some sisters here are outspoken and are conforming to rules of equality put forth by men, rather than by God. There should be a clear distinction between addressing grammatical errors and addressing errors with personal character. If an Elder has the responsibility to correct misconceptions of another Elder through a committee, it should be carried out through God's Holy Spirit, not by the opinions of those who do not possess such authority from God.
Now what does correcting an Elder have to do with correcting typos?
In the past, typos were corrected through new publications, which former members interpreted as an attempt to conceal something. However, with the convenience of electronic means to correct typos, why do you believe this would have a detrimental impact worth addressing publicly? What sort of dialogue are you looking to initiate in this open forum?

I don't support Anna's cynical comment, but you seem to do that effortlessly. Despite this, we all enjoy a good laugh at posts, particularly those that lack conviction. However, we both understand that you won't change my opinions generally with your views, and I don't anticipate changing anyone's mind here. In the end, we will all be judged accordingly. I suppose humor only takes into account our intentions.
Oh! I was unaware that speaking the truth is considered insulting. Perhaps this reveals more about the person receiving the truth than the person speaking it. Does this imply that you have a problem with scripture instructing us to "rebuke" our brothers? Just a moment ago, you stated that you don't have any objections to disfellowshipping. So, which is it then? It would be beneficial for the public to comprehend your steadfast defense when it concerns your perspective on conformity.
Is that why you inadvertently linked "elders" and "typos"? I would love to see your response and get my fifth laugh in, lol!

If we are all imperfect, back in the day when the Watchtower had proofreaders like perhaps you were part of in the writing department, and you made an error like sometimes you actually do here, who would correct your mistake as a proofreader?
I ask because it appears that you are asserting your superiority in judgment, despite being an imperfect human being.

Just picture the joyous laughter elicited by the majority of you people's posts. It's great that the public can witness your non-Christian behavior. lol!
Insults: Anna - 1 / BTK - 0.
Let's keep track of who starts first, Tom or JWI. It's time to face the truth about the way people are treated here, and the double standard that you're willing to embrace to justify such unacceptable conduct.

While under your moniker JWI, this is correct. However, you will never convince me otherwise with the link that you and Tom possess with the librarian. It is too obvious due to the electronic signature.
We will continue to pretend that I have no objections to your choice of whom to defend and your reasons for banning someone you've chosen to dislike. But before you deny the word "hate," consider the actions behind it.
When you personally insult someone subtly, it remains an insult. Yet, continuously portraying oneself as a victim only serves your fan base. Visitors who come here to observe and witness the exchanges can discern for themselves who is authentic and who is merely pretending.
I will not allow myself to be affected by any of your subtle insults, just like I did not let Anna's loud one get to me. It is inevitable that your anger, or even Tom's, may lead to me being banned, but I do not hold any expectations either way. It is a fact that people struggle to control their tempers, yet paradoxically they still wish to be seen as credible witnesses.
It's is what it is!

Sometimes, the writing department requires assistance, and any typos encountered should be corrected. On the other hand, if one decides to contact the Watchtower to suggest an interpretation of a particular passage, that person would need both the necessary credentials and God's blessing. These are two distinct areas of expertise that cannot be attained without the guidance of God's Holy Spirit. Just consider what Jesus said about the Pharisees.
Hemingway, having his own inner struggles, faced numerous challenges due to his literary stature. However, one of his daughters also experienced her fair share of mental turmoil. What happened to her? She committed suicide.
I am well aware of the process and, being aware of our human imperfections, I am also familiar with the concept of distractions. Yet, there is nothing worth criticizing about.
I have had numerous friends and relatives who served. These witnesses cherish nothing but cherished memories, as they steadfastly refuse to perceive any human imperfections as insurmountable. They gave their utmost during that time, and they continue to strive for excellence to this day.
One of my relatives had a life-changing experience after being sent to Japan from Bethel. This experience inspired them to venture into the textile business. Through the grace of God, the entire family has been immensely blessed, as they now own a multimillion-dollar company. What's more, every male cousin of that part of the family has become an Elder, further exemplifying the values and strength that have contributed to their success through God.
 

This is a matter of personal choice. In many cases, especially when criticism lacks value, it carries a hollow sound.
Philosophy traverses a vast and varied path.
Who is insulting whom with that comment about "you weren't speaking the truth"? What were you just saying about Anna? It is time to decide where your defense is heading.
Speaking the truth and not being accepted by someone who is deceiving themselves does not qualify a person as an expert. But once again, I notice that you employ subtle insults despite your argument against insults. This is where you lose your credibility.
Instead of focusing on pointing out my faults, why not take the opportunity to address your own shortcomings? By taking this approach, we can work towards meeting each other halfway.
Firstly, it is important to acknowledge that none of us possess the authority to rebuke those whom God has chosen. That task belongs solely to God himself. Secondly, it is crucial to highlight that when George was banned (disfellowshipped), it went beyond mere rebuke. Therefore, let us avoid making sweeping statements, as such a response can be perceived as lacking integrity.
When someone is part of the problem instead of being part of the solution, it is only natural for that person to be hesitant to make corrections of others.
Then, this thought should remain within one's mind, rather than being spoken out loud, as no one here possesses that qualification. That's why I mentioned, what's the purpose of being outspoken about something that cannot be connected.
 
This is second guessing. Where does scripture state an unqualified person has better input than those qualified?

Yes, there is such a thing as positive criticism. However, my experience here has been limited to receiving only negative criticism. It makes me wonder, how does negative criticism truly benefit anyone?
Do you believe that the Pharisees' criticism of Christ was beneficial for others to consider?
Then the word, "benefit" should come into play.
Do you want to go there? Why has the Watchtower been revised under the control of Jehovah's Witnesses? Why do you insist on bringing up topics from the Bible Student era when you are well aware that Pastor Russell was still learning and challenging the beliefs he deemed false from Christendom? Furthermore, there came a point when Barbour returned to his Adventist views, leading to a public fallout through their print publications. However, these disagreements do not diminish what Russell felt in 1874 - his personal experience of Christ's presence. With Russell's determination, he brought unique insights and blessings to the Bible students. Nevertheless, Russell also understood that the end of the Gentile times would occur in 1914, not the end of the world as claimed by former members.? Can you refute WW1?
That is the issue, JWI. A defiant attitude nullifies all your previous arguments, leaving people hesitant to follow anyone as a proofreader. There claim to possess proofreading skills, it is difficult to accept this when they consistently refuse to be corrected or proven wrong. This mindset distorts any logical understanding. Remember, it is impossible to be simultaneously right and wrong.