JW Insider

Interesting to see what the Memorial plans will be in areas where no more than 10 or 15 can meet at once. We were supposed to get a feed from a congregation in Florida last week, but had to make do locally, after a feed failure. But I don't think it's right to use virtual emblems. For non-partakers, the tradition is to hold the emblem and pass it on, to prove we are refusing it, I guess.

On 2/23/2020 at 1:21 AM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

As to whether they will personally vote for someone running in an election, each one of Jehovah’s Witnesses makes a decision based on his Bible-trained conscience and an understanding of his responsibility to God and to the State.

Outside of that one sentence from the 1999 article, there is absolutely no indication that a Witness can cast a vote in a political election. But even the above sentence does not actually say that a Witness can conscientiously vote in a political election. It could be saying no more than the 1950 article was saying when it used similar words.

The above quoted sentence might only be explaining why Jehovah's Witnesses will consistently make the same conscientious decision as to why they will not personally vote even if their conscience allowed them to go into the voting booth. And that explanation includes the idea that their decision is based on a Bible-trained conscience. [Note that all the Scriptures in the article showed why a Witness would NOT vote]. The rest of the explanation is that the Witness has an understanding of his responsibility to God and to the State. [Curiously, Romans 13:1 was used in the original 1950 article to include a reason why Witnesses would not vote, based on the idea that Romans 13:1 cannot refer to the State.] Of course, this older view of the "superior authorities" could provide an argument that the 1999 article needed an update that therefore could change the position on the conscience and political voting:

Here's the relevant portion of the original 1950 article:

*** w50 11/15 pp. 444-447 pars. 18-28 Subjection to the Higher Powers ***
18 It cannot be said of the other political powers and authorities of this world that they were types of Christ as God’s Chief Servant and that therefore God gave such political powers their authority. ...
19 The political powers of this world are, therefore, not the “superior authorities” to whom Christian souls are to be subject in every demand they make. ...
20 ...” (Gal. 6:16) So the Jewish Sánhedrin was no longer a governing body among God’s true people, but was an alien governmental body now. ...
21 In view of not recognizing worldly political powers as the “superior authorities” ordained by God, but recognizing only God and Jesus Christ to be such now, the Christian witnesses conscientiously refrain from taking part in the politics of this world, yes, even from voting. ...
22 In some countries today the legislature wants to make all the adult citizens responsible for the government. To enforce the democratic way upon them they are required by law to vote in the national elections. Under such circumstances what are Christians to do, since they are under divine command to keep themselves unspotted from this world? By dedicating themselves wholly to God through Christ they have vowed their unswerving allegiance to the kingdom of God, and they cannot divide their allegiance. So how are they now to proceed? Can they register as qualified voters? Yes. The apostle Paul held onto his Roman citizenship and fought for its rights, even appealing to Caesar in defending his right to preach the gospel. In lands where military conscription is in force Jehovah’s witnesses register the same as all others within the age limits, and they write down their relationship to the matter. They remember how Joseph and Mary complied with Caesar’s decree and traveled to Bethlehem-Judah in order to be registered at their home town. (Luke 2:1-5, NW) But it is when these ministers of Jehovah’s Word are called up for induction into the army that then they present themselves and take their stand according to God’s Word and pay to him what belongs to him. Likewise where Caesar makes it compulsory for citizens to vote. After they have registered and when election day comes, they can go to the polls and enter the voting booths. It is here that they are called upon to mark the ballot or write in what they stand for. The voters do what they will with their ballots. So here in the presence of God is where his witnesses must act in harmony with his commandments and in accordance with their faith.
23 It is not our responsibility to instruct them what to do with the ballot. They must act in accord with their conscience as enlightened by the study of God’s Word. In lands where voting is not compulsory, the ministers of Jehovah’s Word remember that his people are theocratically organized. According to the divine law under which they are organized the popular vote of the majority does not put servants in office, but all appointments in the theocratic organization are from God and through those whom he puts in authority in his organization. Even in his visible organization the individual members of the congregation do not vote democratically and put qualified men into positions of overseers and ministerial servants by majority vote. No, but the appointments to all official positions of service are made by the spirit of God and through the governing body according to the Scriptural requirements. Even the governing body which make the appointments are under instructions from the “superior authorities”, God and his Christ. To them it is written: “Never lay your hands hastily upon any man; neither be a sharer in the sins of others; preserve yourself pure.” (1 Tim. 3:1-13 and 5:22, NW) So the ministers of Jehovah’s Word do not possess the vote within his organization. As for the governing body, it does not lay its hands hastily upon a consecrated person, lest it should become responsible for his sins in office due to a hasty appointment of an undependable, unqualified person.
24 Since they do not exercise the popular vote to put even consecrated servants into office even within the theocratic organization, they consider it improper to exercise the democratic vote by which unconsecrated persons are put into worldly political offices. They do not choose to share in the responsibility for the sins of such worldlings in governmental offices. They want to preserve themselves pure from this world. They abide by God’s appointments through his theocratic organization, and they accept his appointment of Jesus Christ to the kingship of the righteous new world.
THE AUTHORITIES ORDAINED BY GOD
25 Paul was a member of the governing body of the congregation of the first century. He gives the reason for being in subjection to the superior authorities, saying: “The existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God.” (Rom. 13:1, NW) How could this be true of worldly political governments? There those in official positions are put in by popular vote, by machine party-politics, by dictatorial seizure of power, by executive appointment, by hereditary law of a dynasty, by legislative action or parliamentary appointment. God is not manipulating worldly politics like a political boss. It is only within his theocratic organization that the existing authorities stand placed in various positions with relationship to one another by God....
27 Rightfully Jehovah God has reserved for himself the position of Supreme One of the “superior authorities”. He shares that position with no one else, trinitarians to the contrary. Whom, then, has he placed next highest with relation to himself? Jesus Christ, who proved his loyalty to his heavenly Father to a violent death in the midst of Satan’s hostile world. ..

16 minutes ago, Kosonen said:

I have little bit difficult to understand this 

You might be speaking of the way I gave my opinion, which I deleted, about using the verse from Proverbs on a forum such as this one, where it is difficult to judge people.

I assume you are speaking about the apparent contradiction in Proverbs where we have a "P and not P" example. It's a great example. I was extending it to James' idea about how "faith without works is dead" and Paul pretty much saying "works without faith is dead." Similarly, it's not really a contradiction.

(James 2:20, 21) . . .But do you care to know, O empty man, that faith without works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father declared righteous by works. . .

(Romans 4:2, 3) . . .if Abraham was declared righteous as a result of works, he would have reason to boast, but not with God. 3 For what does the scripture say? “Abraham put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness.”

53 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

I try to participate with music in Arts and Culture club.

I thought it was only supposed to be about "Boy George" so I avoided it. 😉

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Probably Revelation 2:2 accounts for it:  “I know your deeds, and your labor and endurance, and that you cannot tolerate bad men, and that you put to the test those who say they are apostles, but they are not, and you found them to be liars.“

Excellent point. And it goes back to what some have already said: that Jesus is still the Head of the congregation. He knows deeds, and he knows the heart behind those deeds, whether they are motivated by love and undeserved kindness.

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

You mentioned before about how Bart Ehrman is not nearly so annoying when he is just recalling background history, and not desecrating the scriptures themselves. So when he highlights how almost immediately Christianity began to be divided into factions—moving up the date of such to the minute after Jesus died—whereas we would say till the death of the apostles, . . . .

As long as you mentioned Ehrman, he gets a lot more than the usual attention because he spends a lot of time trying to denigrate the "NT" texts based on variances that appear to be direct contradictions. I suppose there might be a few "contradictions" that could have crept in as textual edits, maybe even quite early ones, such as "kyrios" over a possible version of "yhwh". But I noticed that a lot of these assumptions are just based on complete misunderstandings of the purpose of a specific verse or chapter. Or an entire book, like the letter of James, for example. James was nearly rejected from the canon by no less than Eusebius, because he thought it completely contradicted Paul. Then Martin Luther comes along 1500 years after James and claims James was not inspired at all and should be left out of the canon. And these ideas, even among supposed Christians, are just based on the exaggeration of an ideology instead of making the attempt to understand a common way of thinking among the Jewish audience, where "conflicts" were resolved as different "faces" of the same thing.

By that I mean something close to this quote from a book about the differences in Greek and Jewish thinking. The book is called Against the Greeks: Understanding the Classical Jewish Worldview:

For Aristotle, language is conventional, and therefore Aristotle's law of exclusion tells us that we can have either "P or not P." However, in Jewish thought "P and not P" can exist simultaneously. . . . Aristotle considers only one dimension of meaning in the text as opposed to the rabbinic view that there are 70 faces . . . to the Torah's meaning."

What might look like a contradiction is an intentional presentation of various aspects that the Jewish mind was quite capable of resolving for a deeper understanding. Not so different from aspects of poetry, which is also a dying art, at least as a standalone art. It survives fairly well in song lyrics, such as they are, post-Dylan.

12 minutes ago, Tom Henry said:

those that have been baptized and then return to worldly views and have no repentance in their hearts loose that earthly hope of redemption.

This is very true, and applies to those of us with the earthly hope and those of the heavenly hope. It seems more serious for those of the heavenly hope:

(Hebrews 6:4-6) . . .For as regards those who were once enlightened and who have tasted the heavenly free gift and who have become partakers of holy spirit 5 and who have tasted the fine word of God and powers of the coming system of things, 6 but have fallen away, it is impossible to revive them again to repentance, because they nail the Son of God to the stake again for themselves and expose him to public shame.

(Hebrews 10:26-29) . . .For if we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, 27 but there is a certain fearful expectation of judgment and a burning indignation that is going to consume those in opposition. 28 Anyone who has disregarded the Law of Moses dies without compassion on the testimony of two or three. 29 How much greater punishment do you think a person will deserve who has trampled on the Son of God and who has regarded as of ordinary value the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and who has outraged the spirit of undeserved kindness with contempt?

The same principle applies to all of us, however. All of us need to remain united in love and truth. All of us need to make sure we are not just following people blindly, but make sure we are not going against accurate knowledge of truth. Just as the Jewish law could demand death for those who trampled that Law, a Christian could trample the law of undeserved kindness and love.

48 minutes ago, Kosonen said:

May be, I don't understand this yet fully.

I don't either, but the Watchtower publications going as far back as Russell and Rutherford all associate the anointing and the spirit with light and lamps. As does Acts 2, Matthew 25, parts of Revelation, etc.

*** w04 3/1 p. 14 par. 8 ‘The Faithful Slave’ Passes the Test! ***
Now, anointed Christians needed to go out and meet him in the earthly courtyards of that temple. It was time for them to “shed forth light."

3 hours ago, Kosonen said:

Yes, I have been waiting news concerning this. Hopefully this news you brought up has to do with that.

It doesn't. 😎

3 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

I found ironic this situation about canceling JW meetings.

Our KH was going to stay open for the smaller non-English congregations, but then they were cancelled, too. But most of the congregation (maybe all?) had the ability to tie in to sound at least. Two brothers handled the talk and WT study, which was broadcast from the KH. Singing sounded like about 5 people, including one elder's wife and two daughters. Must have been a strange experience at the Hall.

I think that the @admin will soon give up on trying to create topics that are supposed to be religiously neutral. The most active participants here (including me) will keep trying to make every topic about Witnesses ("CCJW").

1 hour ago, Kosonen said:

But I just recently read a sobering scripture we all probably remember. Revelation 2:1

Yes. It's a good scripture, and it might even indicate how a person could even endure unto death, and yet still, if their actions were not based on "love," Jesus would remove their approved condition.

What's interesting is that, although someone might be able to see this as ultimate condemnation, it would have been just as possible to see this as a removal of their spiritual standing as anointed persons, and not necessarily leading to an ultimate condemnation. The lampstand could be an indication of their "anointing" as the spirit is often associated with light and lamps. In fact the counsel to the congregation in Ephesus includes hope for those who endure unto death (conquers) by concluding with:

(Revelation 2:7) . . .To the one who conquers I will grant to eat of the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.’

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

the swine flu which began in 2009 with the influenza virus known as H1N1, it spread around the world and according to the CDC there were 61 million cases globally, between April 2009 and April 2010, and globally, 575,000 people were killed by it.

Just nit-picking your numbers a bit. Wikipedia quotes sources supporting the following numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swine_influenza

It is estimated that in the 2009 flu pandemic 11–21% of the then global population (of about 6.8 billion), or around 700 million to 1.4 billion people, contracted the illness—more in absolute terms than the Spanish flu pandemic. However, with about 150,000–575,000 fatalities, it had a much lower case fatality rate.

You quoted 61 million cases, globally, which was the CDC's estimate for the number only in the United States, where about, 300,000 were hospitalized, and 12,500 persons were said to have died from it.

8 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Somewhere in 8-1/2 million people it seems reasonable that this issue has been adjudicated one way or the other, already.... and the question HAS been answered in actual practice.

I asked my father about this, because he has been to 'elder's school' in the last few months. I didn't ask how recently it came up, but he implied that it came up at a previous elder's school a couple of years prior. I don't know if he was quoting an instructor, but it sounded like he might have been trying to. His answer went something like this, not an exact quote:

Obviously, we don't want to create any documentation that makes it look like we are interfering with a person's right to participate in political activities. In some countries, that can be very dangerous. But if a person is so willing to get so involved with the world, then it surely means that he is not taking Jehovah's counsel to heart in OTHER areas, too. He will need counsel and discipline and we [elders] need to be alert to the OVERALL spiritual welfare of the brother.

He wouldn't say if he thinks this position might result in trying to replace the "discipline" for political involvement with "discipline" for other areas of conduct or belief. Actually, he said he didn't think so, but that it just meant that political involvement is a symptom of spiritual weakness.

On 3/14/2020 at 9:19 AM, John Houston said:

Where in scripture does it say that all the first century Christians were of the 'anointed', those of the 144,000?

The scriptures actually do give indications that ALL first century Christians were anointed, and therefore that all of them were "of the 144,000." But, as pointed out earlier, we also have the indications from verses like Matt 5:5 and Rev 21:1 and 2 Pet 3:13 that there was (or would be) an earthly hope included as part of Jehovah's kingdom through Christ.

On 3/14/2020 at 9:19 AM, John Houston said:

No, Jehovah has chosen only 144,000 and has done it carefully and with patience. He has the time and having Holy Spirit was not a requisite, it gave them gifts, tools for the ministry, not a seat on a throne in heaven!

What you say appears logical. And it might even be scriptural. My only point was that you might not realize you are rejecting a long-standing Watchtower doctrine: that all of the early Christian were "anointed" and that, according to the Watchtower, this meant that they only had the heavenly hope in front of them.

I'll provide some examples:

*** w17 September p. 24 par. 2 “The Word of God . . . Exerts Power” ***
The Bible mentions one anointed Christian in the first century who had to be disfellowshipped; later, he was reinstated. (1 Cor. 5:1-5; 2 Cor. 2:5-8)

*** w16 November p. 14 par. 1 Do You Highly Esteem Jehovah’s Own Book? ***
Consider the first-century Christians Euodia and Syntyche. Serious problems arose between these anointed women.

Why do you think the Watchtower, above, concludes that this incestuous man was anointed? Why were these two women necessarily anointed?

*** w16 January p. 26 par. 15 “We Want to Go With You” ***
15 Jehovah chooses when in history he will select anointed ones. (Rom. 8:28-30) Jehovah began choosing anointed ones after Jesus’ death and resurrection, and it seems that all in the first-century Christian congregation were anointed.

Here, above, was one of the very first times that the Watchtower added the word "seems" to this idea. As if they were not sure any more.

In fact, there were literally hundreds of thousands of persons who thought they were Christians who actually gave up their lives for their faith and to protect other so-called Christians within the first couple centuries after Christ. The Watchtower has had to identify most of these so-called Christian martyrs as "weeds." For example, in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, there were 144,000 martyrs around Egypt alone. Another 40,000 suffered martyrdom under Nero, another 700,000 here, another 17,000 there.

Think about that! Hundreds of thousands, or even millions of persons were baptized as Christians, and would not compromise their faith or their neutrality and were therefore killed (matryed) for being Christian. But we have to identify the great majority of them as "weeds" to judge them to eternal death, rather than allow them to be included in a chance for a resurrection to life on earth.

*** w16 January p. 26 par. 15 “We Want to Go With You” ***
From the first century until the beginning of the last days, the vast majority of those who claimed to follow Christ were false Christians; Jesus likened them to “weeds.”

Judging them as weeds would not be necessary if the Watchtower had the option of just considering them as weak, uninformed, unrighteous persons. Instead of judging them as "weeds" worthy of going off into everlasting destruction, they would have had an opportunity to be included in the resurrection to potentially accept life on earth.

The Watchtower once ran this information about such persecutions:

*** w51 9/1 p. 518 Hated for His Name ***

Brief respite followed the death of Nero, but by the latter years of the first century the second great persecution, under Emperor Domitian, flared up. It is said that in the year 95 alone some 40,000 suffered martyrdom. . . . Diocletian assumed the crown A.D. 284. At first he seemed friendly to the Christians, but in the year 303 he gave in to persuasion and opened the tenth persecution, probably the most ferocious of all. Suffocation by smoke, forcible drinking of melted lead, mass drownings and burnings, breaking on the rack of men and women alike ran the empire with blood. In a single month 17,000 were slain. In the province of Egypt alone, 144,000 such professed Christians died by violence in the course of this persecution, in addition to another 700,000 who died as a result of fatigues encountered in banishment or under enforced public works.

But that information triggered a question from readers just a few months later:

*** w52 1/15 p. 62 Questions From Readers ***
According to the article “Hated for His Name” in the September 1, 1951, Watchtower, hundreds of thousands of Christians died in the “ten persecutions” starting in Nero’s time, 144,000 dying in Egypt alone during one of the persecutions. How can this be harmonized with the Scriptural limitation of 144,000 placed on the number being in Christ’s body, and which position was the only one open to Christians during those centuries?—J.A., Dominican Republic.
The article did not class with any finality the individuals that died during these persecutions, but spoke of the results in a general way. Note that a key qualification was made in the case referred to in the question: “In the province of Egypt alone, 144,000 such professed Christians died by violence in the course of this persecution, in addition to another 700,000 who died as a result of fatigues encountered in banishment or under enforced public works.” The victims are identified as “professed Christians”, not Christians in fact. Many of those persons might have been caught in the wave of persecution, but may never have actually preached the truth or followed in Jesus’ footsteps, being only professed Christians. They knew the world they lived in was rotten and they were listening to the message of the Christians and willing to die for it even though not in line for the high calling in Christ Jesus. Many professed Christians today might be willing to die for their faith, but still not be Jesus’ footstep followers and meeting the Scriptural requirements for such.

We would probably hope to be able to read into this answer the idea that they could have been Christians who did not meet the requirements for the heavenly hope but might still be in line for an earthly resurrection. That idea is avoided, because the only choice given is between being "anointed Christians" or "professed Christians." So, typically, they were mostly judged as "weeds." My table head at Bethel said that these questions had seriously bothered some at Bethel at the time they first came out because Fred Franz had commented that almost all the millions of "Christian" martyrs were "weeds" destined for Gehenna. He [Bethel elder, table head] even claimed to know which Gilead missionary with the initials J.A. had just gone to the Dominican Republic, and had been the person behind the question above.

I'm pretty sure that no current member of the GB would claim that the majority of these early Christian martyrs would be necessarily assigned to Gehenna. But the wording about "weeds" is not very reassuring.

36 minutes ago, Tom Henry said:

you believe the Watchtower is stating, all those people (First Century Christian) were anointed by God's Holy Spirit

Yes. That's it. I said nothing about all of them necessarily being apostles. I said nothing about the distinction of gifts. I said nothing about minimizing the responsibility of anyone. These are all ideas that you are adding into the mix.

36 minutes ago, Tom Henry said:

I understood your first prospect correctly.

Evidently, you did not understand it at all! @Allen_Smith

1 hour ago, Tom Henry said:

I will then like you to explain what you meant, by correctly applying your own words as substance.

Sure. Not a problem. I said exactly what you had requoted, which is this:

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

The reason is that it was The Watchtower saying that all the first century Christians were of the 'anointed', those of the 144,000.

The Watchtower has said that all the first century Christians were of the "anointed." Therefore they were of the "144,000."

That's the whole explanation. You seemed to read this as if I meant the following, quoting you:

2 hours ago, Tom Henry said:

"all" 144,000 anointed were calculated at that time

What you understood is incorrect, of course. It was never implied by me nor by the Watchtower publications.

43 minutes ago, Tom Henry said:

Can you provide an example not in text but with a publican where the Org mentions "all" 144,000 anointed were calculated at that time, rather than how the 144,000 anointed started being formed.

No. I can only provide examples for what I said, not for this incorrect idea you just asked about.

2 minutes ago, John Houston said:

Where in scripture does it say that all the first century Christians were of the 'anointed', those of the 144,000?

It's a good question. But be careful if you are asking this question publicly in your congregation. You might not realize that this question was once near the top of the list of red flags to identify apostasy. Also, it can get mixed up with another question that was, for a while, at the very top of the list of red flags to identify apostasy: "Where in scripture does it say that any Christians were NOT of the anointed?"

The reason is that it was The Watchtower saying that all the first century Christians were of the 'anointed', those of the 144,000.

On 3/11/2020 at 12:22 PM, Anna said:

I am sure this is common knowledge already, but for "kicks and giggles" I entered into google earth the location of the Wuhan Institute Of Virology and of course it falls right where the outbreak was identified, in Hubei.

I'm pretty sure that the statistics we are seeing are just partial "indicators" and are not accurate enough to give a real picture. There are serious persons who believe that the virus has already been in the United States for some time, and that some of the deaths that had been attributed to the flu season were already actually based on this COVID-19. An interview between Congress and a CDC official (recorded by CNN) already admitted that at least some recent flu deaths in the U.S. have been retested and found to have been positive for COVID-19. 

Japan, is an ally of the United States, and its relationship with China is much like the US relationship with Russia. Yet, several reports from officials in Japan have now stated that they believe this virus came from the United States. This is based on a study of the chronology and genetic makeup for each of about 4 perhaps 5 family variations of the virus.

Opposing that view (and therefore against the view that this was an artificially developed virus) are the scientists who have looked at the genes of the virus and evidently have determined that it has more indicators of a natural virus, not one in which sequences have been artificially recombined.

Also, a bit suspicious, but typical, have been the racist attacks on the head of the WHO, who is Ethiopian. Pictures have emerged of him on social media with bigger than usual lips, and racist attacks, licking the feet of his "controllers" or being walked like a dog. This has only been recently however, after he praised China for how well they were able to handle this, and keep it under control so that the rest of the world would have a chance to prepare testing kits, hospitals, beds, breathing support apparatus for impaired lung function, etc. Unfortunately, the rest of the world used this window of opportunity to twiddle its thumbs, and in the case of the US, to delay the partial replacement of severe cuts to the CDC, etc. (The CDC by the way has been notoriously bad in the past when it came to tracking and caring for H1N1, etc.)

These racist attacks on China-praisers like Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, have also been traced to IP addresses in Hong Kong. Which has happened before, because Cantonese speaking HK citizens openly speak of Han Chinese (mainlanders) with words that are the near equivalent of the "N" word in America. Similarly, the Wikipedia page for Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has suddenly (only since this virus) been updated to include new information about potential controversy and problems. His praise of other nations that the US didn't like, but which have implemented excellent health reforms is the basis for the new controversies. And this about a man who has risked his own life on the front lines of outbreaks including ebola, etc. Even Reuters has openly acknowledged in reports that many politically-charged Wikipedia changes have been easily traced to CIA computers, and CIA IP addresses. And the close connection between the CIA and HK has been tracked and photographed.

Naturally, I don't claim to have followed up on all of these claims, but I did listen to the CDC interview about prior flu deaths in the US now being re-assigned to COVID-19. That one was correct. There is a place to watch the "watchdogs" who follow the sources of hotbeds of political bot attacks, political updates to Wikipedia, politically trending hashtags on Twitter, etc. There is a high turnover of cancelled accounts among this supposed watchdog group. These "whistleblowers" often complain that they can't get far-right, Nazi commentators banned from Twitter, yet they as a group suffer constant banning. I have seen some evidence of the truth of such claims, but can't say I've spent much time testing out these claims very deeply.

But it's enough to show that the nations still play dirty tricks and some of these tricks backfire. These "tricks" are played on fellow nations, "enemy" nations, or their own citizens.

Another example of such tricks that I just learned about: In a campaign promise, Trump said he would release some of the secret JFK files, and what did some show? That the CIA planned on sinking refugee ships from Cuba to the US, and bombing some Miami communities known for Cuban refugee populations --and blame it on Castro. This would scare refugees, send fear through Miami citizens, and increase support to pressure Castro, or even go to war with Cuba. Supposedly Kennedy's disagreement with some of these plans was why they were included in the files as potential reasons the CIA might have been suspected in the Kennedy assassination. Of course, it might also make us wonder which of the two countries was more totalitarian.

On 3/2/2020 at 11:08 PM, admin said:

The US has less than one million inpatient acute care beds. You read that right. Source, American Hospital Association:

The WHO/CDC statistics might already be making it possible to see some differences in health care quality among various nations around the world. Of course, there are still a lot of factors to account for that can't be seen in the public data. Still, I was looking at the statistics on the JHU site, now that over 121,000 infected persons have been reported. This is 81,000 from China and 40,000 from various countries around the world. Using this data as a "snapshot" in time we see the following:

• If we temporarily ignore the Hubei province of China (Wuhan) where the infection evidently broke out before quarantining began to take place then the rest of China has 13,000 cases and has only 116 deaths, which is less than a 1% death rate. i.e., 80,967(China) minus 67773(Hubei) with 3046 deaths in Hubei, and a total of 3162 deaths in all of China.
• South Korea, similarly, reports 7755 cases and 54 deaths, which is also a death rate of less than 1%..
• Italy, however, reports 10,149 infected with 631 deaths, which is a death rate of 6%.
• Iran reports 354 deaths out of 9,000 infected, which is a death rate of over 3.5%
• Spain is at 2%
• France is 2%
• Germany is at about 0.3%.
• Switzerland about 0.5%
• The United States is about 3%

Of course, if it turns out that a lot of people with the virus who showed little or no symptoms never sought testing/treatment, then we'll never really know what the true rate was. Also, there is always going to be a mistrust of the numbers. When the W.H.O. gave out statistics from another recent virus that apparently started in China a couple of years ago, China claimed the W.H.O. was "owned by the West" and was skewing statistics. When this virus was first measured by the W.H.O. and the "West" thought that the statistics should look worse for China, some media outlets promoted claims that the W.H.O. was "owned by China."

Also, the virus has been in China long enough for China to have measured most of the original cases as "recovered." Currently the total reported as recovered is 66,000 and almost all of this number applies to the 81,000 cases from China, not the 40,000 generally newer cases outside China. Hubei itself has 49,000 recovered out of its 67750 cases. So that in all of China, there may be only 15,593 remaining cases of the 81,000 infected. There are therefore many more active cases outside of China, than inside China. Several large Chinese provinces currently have ALL their cases eradicated and there is currently NO virus in several provinces that once had the virus. (This can change as quarantines become less restrictive before a vaccine/treatment is developed.)

22 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

‘Ace’ Inhibitor

I was at a U.S. Open tennis match and someone asked if that was a bandage on Roger Federer's arm. He had just faulted, and I shouted back that it was probably an "Ace Inhibitor bandage." The crowd immediately went wild, but probably not because of my joke. (It seems to have had more to do with the fact that his very next serve was an ace.)

18 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

You have not stated a connection.

Actually, he did state the connection. You don't even have to read between the lines. But you do have to understand "Allen-ese."

Allen Smith, under almost all of his guises, would post book covers that gave the impression he had done more research into a topic than anyone else. And he even would claim that only his own understanding was "real research."  And in about 95% of those cases where the posts highlighted book covers, he was attempting to "attack" one of my posts. He has done this for other persons, too, but far less often.

Over the years, Allen almost stopped referring to me as "JW Insider," but started referring to me as a person who had been at Bethel in the early 1980's (when, the "great purge" happened, and apostasy-related witch hunts were rampant). Or he simply refers to me as a JW who might not be in "good standing," or who might be a "disgruntled" or "fake Witness," or who "slanders" the GB by criticism, or who "blames" the Watchtower, etc. 

Unfortunately, "Allen-ese" is spoken by someone who often posted covers of books that, if he had read them, he would have discovered that they showed his arguments to be wrong, instead of proving that only he has the ability to do real research. It's not so different in his last post here, as he evidently didn't realize that this entire topic only gives the highest praise to Witnesses in Rwanda, just as I have made posts elsewhere giving the highest praise to Witnesses who suffered under Hitler's Nazi regime.

Lately, I prefer not to defend myself, but (believe it or not) there are people who have read Allen's unwarranted criticisms and who have immediately believed him. So I just wanted to make it very clear that I will still probably criticize things that I believe ought to be criticized, and this includes Allen's more egregious claims under any of his many names. (He still has a couple dozen names that haven't been used much recently.)

But this is a post that only offers praise, and absolutely no criticism, about Jehovah's Witnesses in Rwanda.

14 hours ago, admin said:

No. It had nothing to do with Watchtower in this case.

Glad to hear it. It seems most activity on this site has been WT related.

13 hours ago, admin said:

nope ... not you....

I hope it wasn't me either. But mostly I hope that you can continue the site without losing money. Proactive frivolous lawsuits for legal blackmail have become a thing.

Did I miss something? Why is this (and many other posts) in the JW Closed Club? When I saw all the non-Witnesses participating, I expected to see that it was in the JW Open Club. I personally have no problem if the clubs were merged, but several people wanted a separate place to discuss certain things without some of the more common diversions.

20 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

You said you ‘cringed’ at reading the Pedo chapter of Dear Mr Putin. Can I ask at what, beyond the obvious? 

If this was directed at me, it had little to do with specific things you wrote. (There were a couple of things, but not very important in the long run. And I recently addressed a couple of those types of things elsewhere, a few weeks ago.) The topic itself seemed like it should have been treated separately, as it was not a Russia-specific concern. And of course you have also treated this topic separately.

The most common sources of 'cringe' happen because it's too easy to say things that come across as one-sided bias, even if mostly correct.

The most cringe-worthy things we say are things in defense of our process and doctrine (our natural instinct) but which can still come across as insensitive to those who are still suffering. This might be the very reason you mentioned that you can't persuade certain persons who have certain beliefs or experiences, anyway. As you already know, the latter type will not be satisfied with ostensibly "good news" that the WTS has only a percentage of other organizations. Or, a defense that claims that a large percentage of cases were not as serious as rape, etc.