Anna

To me, this is tops among the fine points you bring to the table. I don’t necessarily endorse them. But that is only because I do not have the background or sources that your have. You state things that no one else does, and you state them persuasively. You help me envision the truly monumental changes that we may soon have to adapt to. I appreciate that.
Meanwhile, as long as we remain busy in Jehovah’s service, as you, me, and several others are doing, we can hardly go wrong. He knows when his time has come, even as we struggle to read the tea leaves.

When speaking with others of a different point of view, it is important to treat them with a modicum of respect. It is important not to taunt and ridicule and insult. Of course, if such is your only object, then it is okay to do these things, but not if your goal is to persuade. It is important to present oneself as cognizant to the laws of civility. That way, in the event that you actually do make a valid point, you find that it is not rejected out of hand by persons who simply resent how ill-mannered you are. My greatest fear is that Alan’s cherished evolution is right and that he is the final product of it. If so, kiss goodbye any future for the human race, for that is ensured, not by big dumb animals with horns ramming each other to prove ‘who’s da man?’ but with ordinary persons of moderate intellectual abilities and superior social skills—the latter of which our boy Alan has not a speck.
Arguably, this point highlighted above is valid. It is not a game-changer, but neither is it ridiculous. It may be that the “apostate” brush paints far too broadly and many regarded as such do not strictly fit the bill. They fit another bill, that of fomenting divisions, displaying an unyielding spirit to the point that unity and progress ceases, elevating self to godhood, or some such woe. It is in the Book somewhere—certainly the overall spirit should cover it.
It is sort of like that StarTrek episode where Picard snapped: “Those Stenchiites have been beating us over the head with that blasted treaty for days! There must be something in it that can benefit us!” There was. Provision in the treaty called for arbitration of disputes, the plaintiff to choose the arbiter, and so Picard chose the Sleepyites, now in the 2nd year of their 20 year hibernation state. For some reason that I do not recall, time was of the essence, and so the Stenchites yielded on their legalistic point.
Legalism only takes you so far, and is counterproductive if pushed beyond that point. It is like looking at those solid electrons that dissolve into mush if examined too closely. @Arauna is right when she concedes that Witness has a huge reservoir of verse, but she is totally unable to put them to any practical use. It is the same with AlanF. Yes, he knows a lot of facts and he shows off with them to the most anal degree, but when push comes to shove, what can he show for them? An ability to destroy a WorldNewsMediaForum thread, and not much more. He, like Witness, is good at tearing down (though in different ways). But can he build? Don’t make me laugh.
He ladles contempt on any who would stick to an arrangement that they know to be fallible. What in the world is wrong with him? Or his disciple, 4Jah2Me, who puts even “make mistakes” and “errs” under the electron microscope and discovers worlds of difference between them! He says—for he has not yet shed everything, as he presently will—that the end is at least ten years off. In that time, God will be able to raise up a pure anointed who represents him without flaw. I say, “Go for it!” Maybe you can start it up in your basement—as a collaboration with Witness. Ten years down the road I’ll take a look, and if in fact, you have pulled off the trick, I will join you.
Meanwhile, I will tell Kim Jung Un to hold off on the nukes, Trump to stop carrying on so others hate his guts, Xi to dismantle social rating and be nicer to those in his camps, Putin to “cut it out,” Greta to just be patient for a few more years. Yeah, go for it 4Jah2Me! I’m sure it will happen that way. Meanwhile, trash the good while holding out for the perfect.
Michael Hart wrote about Plato and his ideal government as realized in his concept of philosopher-kings, notable for their ability to convert their academic book-learning into practical results. The concept has never actually been implemented, Hart said. I wrote that it had been. Anyone familiar with Jehovah’s Witnesses will realize at once that his idealist concept fits almost to a tee their Governing Body.
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/01/plato-and-the-governing-body.html
I’m serious with regard to 4Jah2Me. Ten years for God to make a better anointed that has enough Holy Spirit to satisfy him? Fine. Run with it. I’ll stay where I am in the meantime because JWs are quite plainly in the vanguard, even with their blunders. Besides, I don’t know how many of their blunders are actually blunders. I do note that John rejoiced that “SOME of your children are walking in the truth.” That’s a pretty weak statement. Don’t you think he would rather have said, “ALL of your children are walking in the truth?” Were the “some” that left all due to the ineptness of that early Christian governance? Or was it the best that could have been expected then (and now) in the course of letting light shine in a world that prefers darkness? “When the son of man arrives, will he really find the faith on earth?” Jesus asks. “Not if I can help it!” Alan says, with an upvote from 4Jah2Me.
So bring me what you have in ten years, and if it is the same, only minus the imperfections, count on my support. I’ll bolt. I’m not vested here. I am tired of guys who “make mistakes and err.” I want to be where they don’t make mistakes and they don’t err. Get cracking on it, and if there still is a system of things in ten years, I’ll join you.
 
 

Oooooh I gots itchy feet to answer all of Alan's arguments. But I won't butt in. Alan still has to reply to mine...

..... sigh ......
Apparently ... sometimes my jokes are just for me!

I'm still waiting to see blood pudding in a box in the pudding section of grocery stores.
 

It's a super healthy alternative so you can order the awesome onion rings to go along with it.

Oooooh I gots itchy feet to answer all of Alan's arguments. But I won't butt in. Alan still has to reply to mine...

Feel free. I can't really stay on today anyway. I might keep the computer open and access from a remote desktop on my phone, but I won't really be putting enough effort into answering. If you do feel like taking on AlanF's argumentation, have him sign a waiver that he'll read your whole answer before responding to it. Ithinks sometimes he just assumes what you must have said even if you didn't say it. Hold his feet (if you dare) to the fire, if you will. (Especially if your own itchy feet are contagious.)

I've heard whole congregations give an enthusiastic Amen when the prayer includes thanks for the bounteous feast of spiritual food provided by the faithful and discreet slave. I've heard entire assemblies and conventions of people respond with joyful applause when a speaker mentions the opportunity to express appreciation for the Governing Body.
It's a social club with a basis in faith in God and in the merits of Jesus' sacrifice and the Kingdom hope for a new heavens and a new earth. Christianity is social.
Yes, an unfortunate percentage are in terrible personal situations because of circumstances imposed on them from the rules and processes. It's a relatively smaller percentage but I do think you are right that this reflects an unloving spirit and shows that many of us are capable of showing "no natural affection." Of course, there are some situations where even close relatives wouldn't talk to each other under similar circumstances when it has nothing to do with the WTS. Humans cut off other humans based on their conduct. If any of my parents or children turned out to be child molesters, for example, I think I'd pretty much disown them.
Yes. This is another area we need to clean up. People are leaving over it. I talked to one myself, although it's a combination for him: both the child abuse cases and overlapping groups within the last generation before the end. Still, my guess is that most JWs don't even think about it in any negative way.
Teaching that Christ never really existed and trying to work that into their teachings among the Christian congregation.
(1 John 2:22, 23) . . .Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son. 23 Everyone who denies the Son does not have the Father either. But whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
(1 John 4:2, 3) . . .This is how you know that the inspired statement is from God: Every inspired statement that acknowledges Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God. 3 But every inspired statement that does not acknowledge Jesus does not originate with God. Furthermore, this is the antichrist’s inspired statement that you have heard was coming, and now it is already in the world.
(2 John 7-11) 7 For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those not acknowledging Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Look out for yourselves, so that you do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that you may obtain a full reward. 9 Everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. The one who does remain in this teaching is the one who has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. 11 For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.
 

I did not say that. I said God obviously didn't appoint Greenlees.
No it does not, it does not depend on that. No man can apply the scriptures perfectly. If they could, then there would be no need for Jesus to die. Also, man judges only by what he can see. So if someone appears to qualify according to the requirements in Timothy, then they are appointed.
It does, because you asked :
To which I replied, no God was not fooled but man was. Connect the dots please.
There are a few people that I met in my life who I suspect may be that way inclined. But I have no proof.
Holy spirit can be ignored, because we all have free will.
 I think this part should be put under a different topic heading. Perhaps JWI can do that? And then I will reply to it there.
You mean people like Bowen?
I doubt that.
My point was that if we really know the details, discoverable by reading detailed transcripts and unravel the complexity, then we can see that often there was no cover up, it merely appeared that way on the surface. I am sure you know about two sides to a story. With CSA there are multiple complex sides, its not easy to get the facts unless you hear all the sides. For example you find out that a disfellowshiped man molested an 8 year old girl, and that the elders knew about him molesting another girl years prior to this one. Those are the bare bones. Then you find out that the mother (of the child) took the child to the perpetrators house (who happened to be the mothers step dad) for baby sitting, knowing that he had previously molested her (the mother's) sister when they were young.  "The first to state his case seems right,Until the other party comes and cross-examines him". Prov 18:17
 
Ummm....., that tells me merely your opinion.
It is a process that is outlined in the Bible for the appointment of elder men. How else do you want me to understand it?
 
 

That's not what I said.
And yes, that's true. The last people who were inspired were Bible writers.
 

Now that sentence tells me you were a witness in name only - a counterfeit.  You were totally complicit in a cover up....  have you ever contemplated that?  What I see and hear from you is not mature.  
People are people and get up to all kinds of things.  Sometimes the elders open a can of worms where they wonder what the person has NOT done.  You see when a person starts going beyond their conscience there is nothing they cannot do.... and the hidden things are usually the last things to be revealed.    
 

You remind me of the guy who wrote Thirty years a WT slave.  He was a slave....  You really believe the claptrap you talk.  I have been a Witness for 45 years.  I have never been in awe of anyone...... not you either.....
Some witnesses are inclined this way..... but they would be like sheeple even if they were not JWs.   I think JWs teach them to be less useful to governments who use the sheeple to fight their wars and they are less pliable to their political agendas and propaganda because they obey the GB suggestions. They are also less pliable to scholarly  deceit and amorality.

I think you are wrong here. I think that there are fewer apostasy disfellowshippings than you think, so the net effect can't be determined. Also, among JWs, there is a great appreciation for the good that comes out of association with others of like faith in the brotherhood. I'm sure you think this is irrelevant, but it would override any effect a few more or a few less disfellowshippings. 
In fact, I think the effect could be opposite. Membership roles might even increase as persons who had been pushed away would feel more comfortable associating again where they can now feel more supported, even if it weaknesses in their faith that caused their doctrinal deviations. It does not mean that less DFings would necessarily be right, because there are many who are only interested in disruption, chaos, contentions, and causing trouble and discomfort. These ones are not conducive to the comfort and encouragement of the brotherhood, and they should go.
It might produce a more flexible theology as it sounds like there would be less enforcement of deviations. But it would take a while for most JWs to be comfortable with the idea of any kind of deviations, anyway. For the most part we already have a high appreciation of what has been given to us through the organization. This is even true of those of us who recognize the GB as elders handling some specific necessary ministries, and do not think of them as the "governors of our faith" or the exact equivalent of the FDS.
When it comes to deviations of current doctrine, even "overlapping generations" would probably take some time to go, because no one has offered a consistent acceptable replacement yet. Witnesses are generally very comfortable with their leadership. We actually appreciate the humility it takes to remind us that they are imperfect and will make mistakes and that not all the food will be perfect. It would be considered even more discreet to stop DFing for certain kinds of apostasy.
Of course, the Bible already gives us a guide that shows there are also very serious kinds of apostasy, and therefore we would always expect nearly complete and unanimous approval about some disfellowshipping for apostasy.

Totally agree. I come from Africa and know all about this.  I also preach to Muslims (arabic) and they sell their daughters to old men, the highest bidder.... or when they need cash.  My bible study was sold at age nine because her father needed the money for her older brother.  She had 4 children by age 17. .... and later 4 more.
I do not take you seriously because you are NOT a wise person. You cite tons of  scriptures but cannot apply them in a practical way.  It seems to be only knowledge and very little practical love.  A lot of judgment ..... too with no good suggestions..... just poison.
I do preach eternal life NOT hate like you do.  I am always aware that I am a sinner even though I do not commit gross sins.   I understand from scripture that I must be preaching (it is a duty for a true Christian) and I need to help a person to have a 'group of people'  - a body of people, with practical infrastucture for meetings and preaching ,  where they can incite each other to fine works and receive encouragement. 
I cannot take interested ones to a church because they teach a dogma of immortality of the soul - they teach that jesus did not really die.  I read in the bible that in last days there will be a "slave" providing spiritual food. Matt 24:45.  I also read in Isaiah 2:2-4 that there will be one nation in the world comprised of all nations that do not do war....... so OK - JWs fit these bible descriptions.
So now,  I expect to have spiritual association - BUT to still be the master of my own faith.  Do I expect some of thesepeople to deviate and become apostates - yes the bible warns against this.  Do i expect a measure of protection - maybe a little .... but how much - this the real question? 
If I expect perfect protection from everything that can go wrong...... then I must also expect the group leaders to mix in my private life to find out everything about me (past and present) and make everything known about me...... so others can be protected from my bad inclinations.  This sounds like the scientologists..... 
So obviously, there needs to be balance regarding the protection given...... and what about the parent's responsibility?  Must elders take this over too?  
So.... where there is freedom with personal responsibility - there will always be those who expect perfection and personal accountability from other individuals for their own mishaps..... or their own parent's oversight.
A call for perfect protection because an organization is religious is claptrap and based on a naive conception of the world.  When a person has been convicted in court or enough evidence collected for shunning then this is a different matter.  But as I said before - even professionals struggle to get the evidence..... So now they accuse the GB of being too unprofessional in their protection policies.  I guess these people should have joined the scientologists who have a better surveillance system. 
I do believe the GB should have reviewed their policies sooner - in line with the new government laws as they improved in each country - but they cannot protect every person from every danger.  It is the parent's duty to give that protection so the child is never in a compromising situation. 
The one law which governments have not yet changed is the law relating to confessional protection.  Lawyers and clergy have this.   The catholic church has refused to use confessions from people against them as well - as in JWs.    
What is WRONG in the catholic practice is this: the Catholics have moved clergy AFTER legal convictions were obtained or evidence was given and payouts made ....it is  pattern or practice in the organization.   Child molestation is everywhere where there are children..... and escalating by law right now as a legal blind eye is held when children are married against their will at age nine.
 
 

I think you know that past WT articles have used a sense of apostasy that is not the equivalent of "rebellion against God." I could point to a post here where I discussed an "apostasy spectrum." But you are already aware that the WTS has stated that the "apostate" need not have specifically tried to turn away from God, but they are expressing a desire to leave the organization. (This is enough, and it is even reflected in the new way of announcing those who leave.)
@Arauna even made a point I've heard before that any organization has a right to expel persons for conduct or representation that the organization deems to be detrimental to its interests. A "Golf Course" can expel persons for its own reasons.

I like that you included some of the articles from the Awake! and mentioned that persons associated with the WTS sometimes could and should have been more aware and more careful. This is often very true, and parents should be very alert to potential child abuse. On the front lines, as it were. Also they know the personality of the child, assuming they are involved with them, and communicating with them. If something is wrong a parent who is in close daily communication with their children will often sense when something is off. Of course, during the ages when children are often abused, they are often going through personality changes that are difficult for parents to navigate with them.
Also, I noticed you made a big point out of the specific term "grooming" as if the Awake! had used this term before it was ever used in "the law." You said:
And you highlighted the timeline where you indicated that the Awake! had been discussing this in 2004 and 2007, implying that the law didn't catch up to the Awake! until 2009.
There are a few points to consider:
1. The Watchtower publications are not using the term in a legal sense, they are only copying the way in which the word had recently been used in worldly news reports, publications and newspapers. 
2. There is nothing special about the term, since it's merely the equivalent of various descriptions of the way a predator might prepare a victim and make them feel more and more comfortable in a situation where they will be further victimized. A single term that involved a range of activities is a time-saver, and can help communicate the need for a law, or help to effectively communicate the guilt of a person who is involved in activities that might otherwise not be prosecuted on their own. It's only when they can be seen as part of a pattern that the predator uses to escalate opportunities to find and create victims that they are seen as prosecutable.
3. The argument that knowledge of the term should make parents and guardians more aware, can backfire back onto the elders or other leaders of congregation activities, when they, as leaders and teachers, should even be more aware of everything printed in the publications, even those publications like the Awake!, that are not studied in a congregational setting. You are potentially arguing that elders are potentially more guilty for creating and permitting situations when grooming can take place.
Going to point number one, we find a description of the grooming process in discussions of child sexual abuse going back to the 1970's and probably before. The actual term "grooming" shows up in the 1980's, about 20 years before the Awake! used it.
The Oxford English Dictionary includes this definition of grooming:
Of a paedophile: to befriend or influence (a child), now esp. via the Internet, in preparation for future sexual abuse.
   1985 Chicago Tribune 28 May v. 8/2 These ‘friendly molesters’ become acquainted with their targeted victim‥, gaining their trust while secretly grooming the child as a sexual partner.    1996 A. Mullender Rethinking Domest. Violence vii. 200 Children have been ‘groomed’ by their abusers to associate abuse with apparently harmless topics that can continue to be mentioned in letters and cards.    2005 Big Issue 3 Jan. 18/2 While ‘stranger danger’ does exist—like internet chat-rooms where abusers groom children—sexual abuse often involves people intimate to the family or even within the family.
Legally, you can also see that the "idea" of prosecuting for "preparation and influence" goes back to discussions of predators in the AOL chat rooms of 1999. The following site points to a legal precedent from 2011 in footnote 3. But that footnote looks at sets of precedents from before:
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_interest/child_law/resources/child_law_practiceonline/child_law_practice/vol-34/november-2015/understanding-sexual-grooming-in-child-abuse-cases/
Footnote 3 points to https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/218946/united-states-v-chambers/
That 2011 precedent was based primarily on a 2006 ruling (over a much earlier precedent, see the end of the post), which already did everything except use the actual term "grooming":
18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), which makes it a crime to use interstate commerce to attempt or to knowingly persuade, induce, entice, or coerce any individual under the age of eighteen to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any individual can be charged with a criminal offense.
The idea that activities in these preparatory steps might seem not to be serious enough on their own for prosecution was taken care of with:
United States v. Rovetuso, 768 F.2d 809, 821 (7th Cir.1985)
And further research tying it all back to what was now called "grooming" went back to 1998:
Grooming refers to deliberate actions taken by a defendant to expose a child to sexual material; the ultimate goal of grooming is the formation of an emotional connection with the child and a reduction of the child's inhibitions in order to prepare the child for sexual activity. Doe v. Liberatore, 478 F. Supp. 2d 742, 749-50 (M.D.Pa.2007); Sana Loue, "Legal and Epidemiological Aspects of Child Maltreatment," 19 J. Legal Med. 471, 479 (1998).
-------------
United States v. Robert Owen Bailey, 228 F.3d 637 (6th Cir. 2000)
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Filed: October 3rd, 2000
Note that this very similar case from 2000 refers to 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), which has amendments but actually goes back to 1910. In the 1940s the version already had statements that could easily be applied to the Internet:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2422
Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both. (b)
Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life.   ---------- A 2002 book discusses "Grooming" in excruciating details in its many stages:             Protecting Your Children From Sexual Predators By Leigh Baker
 

"Oh- so you said-"    is a tactic of putting words in my mouth I did not say.  I see you use this a lot.  
What I am saying that "scholars" were hoodwinked by pedophiles  so why would "uninspired" elders not be hoodwinked?  You are the one with unreasonable standards and bias.  

I did not say that. I said God obviously didn't appoint Greenlees.
No it does not, it does not depend on that. No man can apply the scriptures perfectly. If they could, then there would be no need for Jesus to die. Also, man judges only by what he can see. So if someone appears to qualify according to the requirements in Timothy, then they are appointed.
It does, because you asked :
To which I replied, no God was not fooled but man was. Connect the dots please.
There are a few people that I met in my life who I suspect may be that way inclined. But I have no proof.
Holy spirit can be ignored, because we all have free will.
 I think this part should be put under a different topic heading. Perhaps JWI can do that? And then I will reply to it there.
You mean people like Bowen?
I doubt that.
My point was that if we really know the details, discoverable by reading detailed transcripts and unravel the complexity, then we can see that often there was no cover up, it merely appeared that way on the surface. I am sure you know about two sides to a story. With CSA there are multiple complex sides, its not easy to get the facts unless you hear all the sides. For example you find out that a disfellowshiped man molested an 8 year old girl, and that the elders knew about him molesting another girl years prior to this one. Those are the bare bones. Then you find out that the mother (of the child) took the child to the perpetrators house (who happened to be the mothers step dad) for baby sitting, knowing that he had previously molested her (the mother's) sister when they were young.  "The first to state his case seems right,Until the other party comes and cross-examines him". Prov 18:17
 
Ummm....., that tells me merely your opinion.
It is a process that is outlined in the Bible for the appointment of elder men. How else do you want me to understand it?
 
 

This is too juvenile. If you appoint someone who turns out to be a clunker, you say, “Guess that wasn’t so inspired after all,” and let that be the end of it. I wrote it up here:
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2019/08/the-loaded-words-infallible-inspired-and-perfect.html
There are people here who are like children that learn that there is no Santa Claus, and so they resolve to never ever celebrate Christmas again. Adults, however, do not cease celebrating for this reason—they fall back to the “greater meaning” of Christmas, and so forth. They realize that Christmas is much bigger than Santa Claus—he is something only for children.
Indeed, if the only problem with Christmas was that there is no Santa Claus, then we would be celebrating the day, some of us. Some would. Some wouldn’t.
In this case, the “no Santa Claus” is learning that the GB is made up of men who can make mistakes. Most never doubted that in the first place. But those who did and who truly love God and the core beliefs that identify Jehovah’s Witnesses and Jehovah’s Witnesses alone manage to make the adjustment without undo fuss, if only by reiterating the words of Peter: “To whom else shall we go?” Who else thinks the thoughts and does the deeds of Jehovah’s Witnesses?

I would have liked to merge this with my reply above, but had to go away and do something. Anyway, as I've already shown, I did not side step your question but I answered directly that I do not think God would appoint a man such as Greenlees:
 
Like I said:
The process by which holy spirit "appoints" is through that scripture. Since JWS believe the Bible is inspired of God by means of holy spirit, then if one works along with the scriptures, one is working along with the holy spirit. Obviously in the case under discussion, holy spirit could not have appointed this man because unbeknown to those making the decision, he did not qualify. Which also answers your other question:
Obviously it was not God but men who were fooled.
Obviously. However I very much doubt that someone would have purposefully employed a pedophile.
I am sure she has, and hopefully she has given that list to the Police.
Sure
I don't know much about him, only from what you and JWI said.
That's hardly and inspiration for reform.  I have seen them. Full of loaded language and sensationalism. However, the ARC was a different kettle of fish.
 
I am sure there have been coverups. But I am sure you know cases are very complex. I have read two court transcripts (two different cases) each several thousand pages long. So I know what I am talking about.
That's good. Children need protecting.
No, I did not say it was a lie. It's you, you are not comprehending the process. Those days of tongues of fire are long gone, with all the other outward manifestations of miracles etc.

That's not what I said.
And yes, that's true. The last people who were inspired were Bible writers.
 

Go back and read what you missed. It is the most valuable material here. 
And nobody, nobody, but nobody who knows me personally thinks me “self-righteous.”
Ask @Witness, who said she loves me so (not inappropriately—it was a manner of speaking) following a recent post. Even though she thinks I drink far too much of the “kooklaid.” Even though we have had some fearsome tussles. Even though she thinks me deluded as can be
But she does not think me self-righteous. Nobody does. 
Of course, Alan does. But he is so full of insults for anyone not coming around to his point of view that it doesn’t count.

I would have liked to merge this with my reply above, but had to go away and do something. Anyway, as I've already shown, I did not side step your question but I answered directly that I do not think God would appoint a man such as Greenlees:
 
Like I said:
The process by which holy spirit "appoints" is through that scripture. Since JWS believe the Bible is inspired of God by means of holy spirit, then if one works along with the scriptures, one is working along with the holy spirit. Obviously in the case under discussion, holy spirit could not have appointed this man because unbeknown to those making the decision, he did not qualify. Which also answers your other question:
Obviously it was not God but men who were fooled.
Obviously. However I very much doubt that someone would have purposefully employed a pedophile.
I am sure she has, and hopefully she has given that list to the Police.
Sure
I don't know much about him, only from what you and JWI said.
That's hardly and inspiration for reform.  I have seen them. Full of loaded language and sensationalism. However, the ARC was a different kettle of fish.
 
I am sure there have been coverups. But I am sure you know cases are very complex. I have read two court transcripts (two different cases) each several thousand pages long. So I know what I am talking about.
That's good. Children need protecting.
No, I did not say it was a lie. It's you, you are not comprehending the process. Those days of tongues of fire are long gone, with all the other outward manifestations of miracles etc.

Many, many lies have been told about me here! Maybe you have shared in this wicked plot. JWs are trying to silence me! They are afraid of what I know! Soon they will see that they are right to be afraid of me.