Arauna

Even from Genesis times, the kings think nothing of killing someone, but they will not disregard the institution of marriage. 
If the Lord could only see you now.

Maybe years ago one could go to university without making crippling debt and also being indoctrinated in a spiritually crippling way.
Today, one has to self-censor at all universities (freedom of inquiry and freedom of speech is curtailed by political correctness) and there is no longer a guest for truth in the humanities.  One sends a child into the class and they come out with LGBTQ indoctrination due to the fact that they have to select one of these courses.... no matter what they are studying. I have watched several interviews with students..... they are not learning to think any longer.  It is truly better to learn a vocation..
There are some sciences that are still good but most have to follow the Darwinian dogma.

If one looks at the kind of 'science' in scholarship these days - where a  person can now choose a gender despite a Y or X chromosome -  then the state of scholarship is in chaos.  
The most prestigious universities get grants from certain pharma giants and then a study appears shortly after which just happens to bring more money into the pocket of the corporation. Now that is excellent scholarship!
So much for scholarship....... although I must say one has to work exceedingly hard to get a PHD in an ancient language - three times harder than the social sciences - but this does not make you an expert on 'everything' pertaining to the bible. 
Nevertheless, Feruli's years of service and record sounds commendable and maybe qualifies him to have a negative say about the direction of GB....... but must he do it so publicly? ......So as to garner undue attention to his person and his scholarship? 
I would like to know the outcome of this.....   
An important question.....
Anyone can say something " just because they think they are qualified to do so". 
Lol......
Thanks Ann.  I guess the older I get the lazier the eyes and brain.... 
 

I agree that there are times we step up to the plate..... when needed. 
I also do not like it when some brothers act as though they are the sole self-appointed guardians of the truth, always correcting others...... this again is also out of balance.  This is also self-importance and ego at work.

I agree that there are times we step up to the plate..... when needed. 
I also do not like it when some brothers act as though they are the sole self-appointed guardians of the truth, always correcting others...... this again is also out of balance.  This is also self-importance and ego at work.

Editors get involved with a printed book and then the printing process itself gets 4 proofs which are read and re-read and corrections made. ( I worked as a publicist for many years).  It is truly a blessing to have different eyes on a paper. 
As I said before- you throw this word around like candy. Mr Feruli himself agrees that all the core teachings are correct..... The ones I think of is the teaching of mortality of the soul, the name jehovah, jesus who really died for our sins, we are no longer under mosaic law, the kingdom government, the preaching work,..... and much more. We have an abundance of spiritual food, videos, movies, songs and videos for the young ones! 
Why MUST some people have a platform to prove themselves!  It comes from ego and ambition!   Some are never thankful and count their blessings! The glass is half empty if they cannot have a "spiritual " say......
The core teachings are there! So what can you add?

Those words are the key - past tense. All new sillabuses now teach absolutely shocking things which is downright pornea. It also depends on the school board and the state. 
The new sex education is pushed by the UN together with atheism.
In UK the Muslims were up in arms and demonstrated in front of schools.  The school was cordoned off and they were not allowed near the campus. High court intervention.
I have seen local school meetings in USA where parents have tried to stand up for morals...... it is getting harder and harder. Most parents are not aware because the children do these courses online.
I do keep up with what is going on at universities and schools. And what is going on is shocking!  No freedom of thought or speech. I would not like to be student on campus now where common sense is no longer accepted and one has to deal with militant atheists, pro-abortionists,  militant LGBTQ and ANTIFA hooligans thrown in the mix.
I totally agree. I was in Africa at the time and in the truth for two years. It seems some people here push one narrative and others another. It is a matter of perception and who you knew at the time.... and the tales.
PLEASE ASK YOURSELF THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: 
It may come as a shock to you all..... but how will we keep unity in the faith (one message) if anyone can stand on the stage and add scriptures and give their own interpretations? 
There must be some measurng stick? At home one can speculate, or speculate with all your friends.... but in a public space .... stick to the outline.... is this not better?
We have a lot of freedom..... to speak..... why must one push your own visions on stage?  That is exactly how the 1975 saga ran away with itself and got extra legs!
I am always chatting and speculating with friends.... but we should be aware that we can push ourselves too much!  Knowledge puffs up  - but love builds up. 1 cor 8:1....  Stick to the love part then one can never go wrong!
If you do not agree with my question, then please give a solution and not just critisize!  It is easy to critisize if you do not have a workable solution.
 

Editors get involved with a printed book and then the printing process itself gets 4 proofs which are read and re-read and corrections made. ( I worked as a publicist for many years).  It is truly a blessing to have different eyes on a paper. 
As I said before- you throw this word around like candy. Mr Feruli himself agrees that all the core teachings are correct..... The ones I think of is the teaching of mortality of the soul, the name jehovah, jesus who really died for our sins, we are no longer under mosaic law, the kingdom government, the preaching work,..... and much more. We have an abundance of spiritual food, videos, movies, songs and videos for the young ones! 
Why MUST some people have a platform to prove themselves!  It comes from ego and ambition!   Some are never thankful and count their blessings! The glass is half empty if they cannot have a "spiritual " say......
The core teachings are there! So what can you add?

Those words are the key - past tense. All new sillabuses now teach absolutely shocking things which is downright pornea. It also depends on the school board and the state. 
The new sex education is pushed by the UN together with atheism.
In UK the Muslims were up in arms and demonstrated in front of schools.  The school was cordoned off and they were not allowed near the campus. High court intervention.
I have seen local school meetings in USA where parents have tried to stand up for morals...... it is getting harder and harder. Most parents are not aware because the children do these courses online.
I do keep up with what is going on at universities and schools. And what is going on is shocking!  No freedom of thought or speech. I would not like to be student on campus now where common sense is no longer accepted and one has to deal with militant atheists, pro-abortionists,  militant LGBTQ and ANTIFA hooligans thrown in the mix.
I totally agree. I was in Africa at the time and in the truth for two years. It seems some people here push one narrative and others another. It is a matter of perception and who you knew at the time.... and the tales.
PLEASE ASK YOURSELF THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: 
It may come as a shock to you all..... but how will we keep unity in the faith (one message) if anyone can stand on the stage and add scriptures and give their own interpretations? 
There must be some measurng stick? At home one can speculate, or speculate with all your friends.... but in a public space .... stick to the outline.... is this not better?
We have a lot of freedom..... to speak..... why must one push your own visions on stage?  That is exactly how the 1975 saga ran away with itself and got extra legs!
I am always chatting and speculating with friends.... but we should be aware that we can push ourselves too much!  Knowledge puffs up  - but love builds up. 1 cor 8:1....  Stick to the love part then one can never go wrong!
If you do not agree with my question, then please give a solution and not just critisize!  It is easy to critisize if you do not have a workable solution.
 

Sigh....tell me about it. See: ‘Pop Goes to the Movies’
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2007/06/pop_goes_to_the_1.html

This is reassuring to me. My books have suffered from this, too, and one of them positively reeked with errors, which took forever to ferret out. Several times I announced that all corrections had been made, only to find more blips.
Not long ago, I purchased a homeopathy books from someone supposedly renowned. I was amazed as how slipshod was the formatting, and how much beneficial editing could have been done but wasn’t.
It is a sign of the ebook times, and I am reassured that even Rulf the scholar is afflicted with it. Ideally, you proof a work with professionals, but that is pricey and with ebooks being so cheap, with no guarantee of sales, either you do it yourself or ask well-meaning (but essentially hobbyist) friends to help you out. It is a far more daunting task than it first appears to do it yourself, because you tend to read, not what is there, but what you recall being there. You can do tolerably well for a short article, but if we are speaking of an entire book—good l**k on that!
I even face an additional challenge. If I ask brothers who might be in position to help me out to do so, many will be unconfortable with the material and duck out. It’s frustrating. If I wrote a book about how the Easter Bunny was pagan, they would be lined up 5-deep to proof it, but if I confine myself to what seems more interesting, it is not that way.

There is no misunderstanding of Furuli here. He distances himself very well from the 1975 speculation. Not completely, but he apparently understood it a little better than some District Overseers in the United States. I'm wondering if part of it wasn't the understanding of the verb modal "would." He pins a lot of the correct understanding on that English word. In the United States there may have been more people who read the word "would" as having a slightly stronger meaning.
I have also used the words, "the time is short," in talks as a circuit and district
overseer. But I have never asked the audience to stop with this or that because the time
is short. As the district overseer from 1972 to 1974, I was the principal speaker at all the
circuit assemblies in Norway, and my talks would naturally influence the view of the
Witnesses regarding the year 1975. In 1966,when the book Life Everlasting in the Freedom
of the Sons of God was published, there was a course for circuit servants at the branch
office. When we discussed the book, I remember that the branch servant said that we
should never say that Armageddon would come in 1975 or before that year, because we
cannot know that. He pointed to some words on page 30 of the book: "It would not be
by mere chance or accident but would be according to the loving purpose of Jehovah
God for the reign of Jesus Christ, 'the Lord of the Sabbath' to run parallel with the
seventh millennium of man's existence." The verb "would" shows that this is a possible
but a hypothetical situation. I still have the notes for my talks, and the viewpoint that I
presented in my talks was as follows: 'We do not know when the end will come. But we
are eager to see if the 6,000 years of man's existence run parallel with the 6,000 years of
Yehowa's day of rest! If we can free some time and do more in the preaching work,
even become full-time preachers, while we are looking at the unfolding of world events
down to 1975, that would be very fine. But we should not commit ourselves to the year
1975 or another year. But as we do today, we should have balanced plans for ourselves
and our family that go beyond the year 1975, while we live normal lives and serve
Yehowa wholeheartedly.' [emphasis mine]
My uncle who was in Circuit work at the time, got a different sense of the word "would" in his meetings/training which came from the D.O. in his case. C.Chavez son of D.O. (aka Allen) and scholar JW have both claimed "jp" correctly ties JABrown GT to 2520, It doesn't. Yet, actual parallel zw. 7th mil and JC's 1k yr reign? No connex!

I presume you have every paper copy of every magazine from 1966 through 1975, to prove your point. 
Other wise you have no proof. That one article proves nothing. The CCJW back track all the time. 

@Arauna Exactly. I am not sure if you are aware of this, but they have been teaching in some schools that a man being with a man and a woman being with a woman is okay. A while back, I posted a video of a girl defending what the Bible says, but she was shut down and was put in the wrong for it. Around the US, there has been some schools that ban the usage of Bible verses, and consider the Bible as hate speech, or you have the system manipulate God's Word being making it seem as homosexuality is okay, in some instances, there is also drag-queen involvement in some learning institutions and or gatherings. On the other side of the spectrum, you have the media whereas they push the notion of pornography to children, as is with brazen conduct, which is accepted in today's world.
That being said, there are people out there who are skeptical about higher education, for the notion that this view is exclusive to the Jehovah's Witnesses is false, there are people out there with Spider-Sense level of concern when it comes to the education that their kids are getting, and often times opt for Homeschooling, and or simply sending their child to learn a trade instead.
That is also agreeable, the parents should know what their kid is learning, also, what their kids are doing (i.e. a parent would not know that the teacher put their Son in a dress and painted his fingernails with polish).
For the last bit it is a both of a yes and no. They do include ideas that would mold a child into becoming an atheist. Other times, if it is known of what the child's faith is, they can often try to mold the child to think some things in the school system is okay for God, or they test the child's faith by other means. In my case, I recall when I was younger, the teacher used the other children to push be into partaking pagan practices, even using emotion and the like, but such event I resisted. But now that is mentioned, granted for anyone they've mold, the other children and or teens can become somewhat of an opposition.
I mentioned on here before, to which to Srecko laughed at it, to help the children. In order to help, we must teach them the right way, and even stated if we can teach them about strangers, how to resolve conflicts, we can teach them about sex. To 4Jah2me's credit regarding child abuse, main thing that predators are happy about and seem to always be successful in their crimes is the fact that the child has no knowledge of sex, no knowledge when it comes to strangers, as is with no knowledge of knowing the dangers regarding child abuse thus it is stated that predators find such a person an easy victim. The schools will not teach the children this, so to prevent more bad deeds, we start by teaching, doing the best we can with solutions, and in my experience, this helped A LOT, in turn, I thank the communities and people I know who put this into application!
That is why I love this saying "For each, Teach One, Reach One" it is a very basic thing to do, but less people seems to be doing it, let alone promote it.
That being said, putting 100% confidence in the education system, even higher, can reap consequence. Essentially, higher education is like a bumpy road. The path is ahead, however, the more bumps you stumble upon, eventually your car would end up on the side of the road or broken down. An observant driver would do everything to stay on the road, but a distracted driver would succumb to the consequence of his or her car breaking down somehow.

I feel so low-class. My wife and I have rediscovered Perry Mason.
The show is historically accurate, though. There were cars with such tail fins. Last night Perry impaled the villain on one of them just after he confessed and tried to flee the courtroom.

Changes start with the people should they apply these changes, mainly in regards to the solution of teaching. Otherwise there will always be problems, if people do not even read what is presented in front of them and or what is natural for them to do. This goes for, practically the majority of the US, as can be seen in this Pandemic.

That is the right word.  It triggers OCD.  That is why I rarely reply...... the response is always the same old, same old.  I like to learn from people I do not agree with...... but you always land up in a dead end.

@Arauna @JW Insider Yes. There is also the notion of philosophies that can prove damaging to those in the education system, as with other things being pushed on to the children early on, well into Tech school or College years. Outside of that, there is the moral aspect of things, for I recall, a friend of mine, also a Bible reading minister, often complained about Rutgers University and Princeton University. He's usually points out that, to quote him "Colleges are places that Christians must be very careful with". He tends to go a bit explicit of what he is pushing. Another incident, although the person is not a religious person, let's just say because of this girl being a victim into being introduced to brazen conduct, her parents did not take it too well; the shock of her Father was that of someone falling off of their chair, or passing out in shock kind of thing. Who wouldn't be should they discover their son or daughter in an explicit fashion in a college setting? Likewise, as I said in the past here, the specific cultures within the domain of higher education caused suicide due to pressure.
That being said, if anyone is sending their child to school and or college, it is best to have them mentally and morally strong so that they do not fall to such ideas. Likewise, should someone hold a Christian view and apply Bible Principles, they must be very careful to not fall away from God, and or fall to brazen conduct. For sometimes should someone fall, it is not easy for them to get back up.
That being said, out of all the bizarre things I had seen in school, was "The Pink Bible".

Maybe years ago one could go to university without making crippling debt and also being indoctrinated in a spiritually crippling way.
Today, one has to self-censor at all universities (freedom of inquiry and freedom of speech is curtailed by political correctness) and there is no longer a guest for truth in the humanities.  One sends a child into the class and they come out with LGBTQ indoctrination due to the fact that they have to select one of these courses.... no matter what they are studying. I have watched several interviews with students..... they are not learning to think any longer.  It is truly better to learn a vocation..
There are some sciences that are still good but most have to follow the Darwinian dogma.

These are challenging times to offer nuanced views of things. Few people accept nuances. Thus, if you do not accept every premise of your opponent’s view, you are ‘Brother Watchtower’ as that silly Witness says of me. But I don’t take offense. I don’t exactly flatter her, either.
It nettles me when I see brothers gush all over ‘science’ and ‘critical thinking.’ Why should they do that? It constitutes the prime tool of our adversaries. I’m not against science. It’s great stuff. Pour me a double-shot of it. But to rely on it as the be-all and end-all is surely to court folly.
Do not scientists, for the most part, urinate all over Genesis and blood? Are we to imagine that those are the only things that they are all wet on? Yet many brothers would seem to. The GB does not, which earns them my tremendous respect. They recognize it as a tool—not valueless, but also not THE GAMECHANGER. Scientists mostly lean this way or that? Well—take note of it but don’t let it ruin your day. Tomorrow you may see the headline, “Everything You Thought You Knew About Such-and-Such is Wrong!”
There is an ex-pharma VP online who makes just that point. ‘Nobody has any money,’ he says. ‘Universities don’t  Governments don’t. Think-tanks don’t. But Pharma has lots of money. It commissions scientists from one of those penniless outfits to study this or that new drug. If the outcome if favorable to Pharma, that outfit can expect to be funded for more studies. If it is unfavorable, that outfit will never hear from Pharma again. ‘No money has changed hands,’ he says. ‘No agreements have been entered into. But everyone knows what they must do.’
The ones who shove ‘science‘ down everyone’s throats are not necessarily even scientists, I am convinced, but are a second buttressing and uninvited layer that I call ‘scientist-philosopher-atheist-cheerleaders.’ Scientists just go about doing science, and many of them see no contradiction between science and the spiritual world—they are two different ways of examining things, and ‘one key does not unlock all.’
People who rail on about science tend to not notice when money hijacks their science, as in the Pharma example above. Scientists have to eat, too. They are also stubborn like anyone else—slow to yield to new data. They are not more so than others, but neither on balance are they less. One of the downfalls of ‘critical thinking’ is that those who espouse it most vehemently are prone to assume that they have a lock on the stuff.
As to Rulf—I’m not opposed to him. If he thinks that he will be DFed, as he has stated—well, who am I to argue? But I will accept it only when I see it. Brothers in charge have something that they did not have 40 years ago. They have a prior example to look at and to see how that worked out. They may or may not go a similar route. I’ll get my head around it regardless of how they go, but I won’t start until they go there.
Yes. And I note and agree that you put them as questions, not statements.

They usually are not strong on law....... it is more about 'feelings' to them. 
Laws are in place for a reason. Theft of intellectual property is a major problem. China has been stealing US patents for decades. 
Sometimes these people act outside the law and should learn a legal  lesson or two. 

If one looks at the kind of 'science' in scholarship these days - where a  person can now choose a gender despite a Y or X chromosome -  then the state of scholarship is in chaos.  
The most prestigious universities get grants from certain pharma giants and then a study appears shortly after which just happens to bring more money into the pocket of the corporation. Now that is excellent scholarship!
So much for scholarship....... although I must say one has to work exceedingly hard to get a PHD in an ancient language - three times harder than the social sciences - but this does not make you an expert on 'everything' pertaining to the bible. 
Nevertheless, Feruli's years of service and record sounds commendable and maybe qualifies him to have a negative say about the direction of GB....... but must he do it so publicly? ......So as to garner undue attention to his person and his scholarship? 
I would like to know the outcome of this.....   
An important question.....
Anyone can say something " just because they think they are qualified to do so". 
Lol......
Thanks Ann.  I guess the older I get the lazier the eyes and brain.... 
 

Speaking of Kosonen, a few things remind me of him, too. Even the tone of offering unheeded "correction" but also this idea Furuli has:
There is also a need for an
independent group of elders to review all the human commandments that
the GB has invented and to remove those that are not based on the Bible,
and which have caused harm for individual Witnesses.
But Furuli's book is starting to sound more like a Raymond Franz sequel (on those few points where they agree). Comparisons between the organizational hierarchy and the Catholic Church are even stronger here than in Franz' books. He even seems to acknowledge (or idealize) that there was a short period of time that immediately followed when R.Franz presented the scriptural meaning of elder, etc., to Knorr and FW Franz, and they humbly accepted the loss of power and authority.
I could go on an on with commentary, but I'll try to save it until I'm finished. Else I won't finish.

Same initials? Wait until Kos gets ahold of that one.

True, and even if it accuses, regardless of him being a scholar, without sufficient proof it is without substance. 
So detractors on the forum should not be so ecstatic ...... he does apparently urge brothers not to leave....... an idea which is abhorent to them .