Anna

To a certain extent yes. But we will never know what is being discussed behind closed doors. I would say it doesn't matter, it's not our business, but it is, because it affects everyone of us. (When I get around to it I want to make this a topic in the closed club, here is not the best place)

I just want to pipe up here. The internal struggles ARE what shaped "what Jehovah’s Witnesses as a people have done" . I know, and I agree, we do't want to focus on the negative. But in my personal opinion it helps to know these things sometimes because it helps us become more grounded in reality, rather than what we think is the reality, and then get disappointed, to the point of being stumbled. I don't know if I have explained that very well. I'm not talking about fault finding or criticism. Just reality.

Yeah, @JOHN BUTLER, where you can’t come.
Nyah, Nyah, Nyah.

I just want to pipe up here. The internal struggles ARE what shaped "what Jehovah’s Witnesses as a people have done" . I know, and I agree, we do't want to focus on the negative. But in my personal opinion it helps to know these things sometimes because it helps us become more grounded in reality, rather than what we think is the reality, and then get disappointed, to the point of being stumbled. I don't know if I have explained that very well. I'm not talking about fault finding or criticism. Just reality.

I suppose. 
But somewhere there is a story of some old-time Bethelite who, when the younger ones would start squabbling over something, would tilt back and marvel at how Jehovah was able to do SO MUCH with what little he had to work with.
I mean, there’s always going to be people. They’re always going to do things. How God pulls a rabbit out of his hat with them around I’ll never know, but he consistently does.
It’s not my area of focus, that’s all. If I was shocked at it, I wouldn’t be here.
You commented a while back about pulling back the curtain at Oz. The fact that GB members show themselves on TV indicates to me that they pull back the curtain upon themselves as well.

Never saw CSA in a publication. Seems you will be soon be using USA however you like.  CSA means Canadian Standards Association, along with the others mentioned above.  

Are you really still in school? Well well well. Most here are far older. You express yourself uninhibitedly.
What!? A day off? For cold weather??!!!
You kids are soft!
Why, back in MY day....
#WalkFiveMiles #Uphill #BothWays.  

I don't actually think God is watching every one of us every second. 
God has the ability to do so of course, but probably chooses not to. 
 

Well that is not what we were talking about. You said the victim is afraid to come forward. Maybe that is a little technicality you maybe should have mentioned earlier but didn't.
But as you said, when someone knows, there is nothing stopping them from reporting it
In your own words: Finally, they finally get it that it is the wrong doer who is the bad guy and not the reporter 
And as for your argument that this is just lip service because of the two witness rule, then no, the two witness rule only applies in order to form a judicial meeting. No one has to have two witnesses to bring it to the authorities.
I don't have time for anymore of this rubbish, just going round in circles. You either have a hard time comprehending, or you are purposefully taking my time up.

I suppose it tells me I should walk into a Police station and tell them directly. 

Of course I agree with everything you say, and I am sure GJ would too. He obviously didn't want to go into so much detail. The last part of your quote would have no doubt made a good impression on the commission as it could have been linked to the child abuse issue and its resolution. You are probably thinking of the misapplication of scripture which led to problems for the worldwide body of Witnesses in the past. I think now though these are being considered much more, and I would say lives are changed for the better. But this can also be a matter of opinion, because some things are still being judged as a "law" rather than a principle and left to be a matter of conscience.

Yes.... I know, I know. He obviously had strong opinions. Perhaps he was covinced these opinions were guided by holy spirit? But were his intentions bad? I think you said everyone at Bethel though he acted haughty and self righteous, and that that was just his way. I wonder how he was received at his final calling. I wonder if he is speaking beyond the veil to the new "kids on the block", telling them not to make the same mistakes. Perhaps he already did, through, Raymond's book 

It is impossible to even fathom how God operates. One thing is sure; He has the power and the desire to fulfill his purpose.  He can do it anyway he wants, and in his superlative wisdom he knows the best way. I cannot deny that He probably works some type of miracles today, but I cannot see how he would single out certain individuals because he thinks their life has more value than another person’s life. The only factor that may play a part is if that certain person has a role in fulfilling his purpose. The person himself will not even be aware of that. But whether Jehovah protects someone because of a role they play in fulfilling his purpose, or does not protect someone because they have a less important role, eventually both persons will gain everlasting life.  So the reward  will be the same for both. And another factor to think about (and I think it has already been mentioned)  is if Jehovah would protect individuals serving him, then Satan’s challenge he raised with Job would have no meaning.  So I am usually pretty sceptical when it comes to claims that Jehovah stepped in and saved someone.  Anyone can claim that, but that doesn’t make it true. I have already shared this story on here somewhere, but it’s relevant so I will mention it again: A while ago a sister, a Bethelite, was walking back to the Bethel from having been out in service all day when someone grabbed her from behind, stabbed her in the neck and ran off with her handbag.  The surgeons were amazed and said that the chance of the blade missing her jugular was almost zero. They told her she was lucky to be alive. This sister (and others) believes Jehovah saved her, by making the blade miss the jugular. Personally, I believe it was chance. But I cannot deny that if Jehovah had wanted to, he could have of course. This sister works in the translating department, so she plays quite an important role. So did Jehovah “save” her because of her role? And had she worked as a housekeeper, would he have allowed her to get killed? Housekeepers are a dime a dozen, good translators are not.  But then Jehovah could bring in a replacement couldn’t he? So where would the line be drawn with regard to “interfering” in man’s affairs, and putting a "protective fence around his people"?
All good things come from God. But they may not always be directly caused by God.  People can do good deeds by themselves, because that is an innate trait created in them by Jehovah when he created man in his image.  We should give thanks to God for every good thing, so there is nothing wrong with this sister thanking Jehovah, even if Jehovah may have had nothing to do with it.
Also, as JW Insider pointed out, many people who believe in God also attribute apparent miracles to Him. If the sister had been a Catholic lady walking to her church, no doubt she would have also attributed this “miracle” to God.
But as @Srecko Sostar mentioned "time and chance happens to them all". Some for better and some for worse.

I know some brothers  who will use very similar expressions with very specific things to do with assignments for  KH cleaning for instance. This is only a slightly exaggerated example; "Jehovah's direction is to use the swifter rather than a mop and bucket to clean the floor in the restrooms". Some people just have a knack....

Yes.... I know, I know. He obviously had strong opinions. Perhaps he was covinced these opinions were guided by holy spirit? But were his intentions bad? I think you said everyone at Bethel though he acted haughty and self righteous, and that that was just his way. I wonder how he was received at his final calling. I wonder if he is speaking beyond the veil to the new "kids on the block", telling them not to make the same mistakes. Perhaps he already did, through, Raymond's book 

Of course I agree with everything you say, and I am sure GJ would too. He obviously didn't want to go into so much detail. The last part of your quote would have no doubt made a good impression on the commission as it could have been linked to the child abuse issue and its resolution. You are probably thinking of the misapplication of scripture which led to problems for the worldwide body of Witnesses in the past. I think now though these are being considered much more, and I would say lives are changed for the better. But this can also be a matter of opinion, because some things are still being judged as a "law" rather than a principle and left to be a matter of conscience.

Excellent point!

I can see why you might be disappointed, but I thought it was a pretty good explanation, lol. I just cannot imagine someone (in this case GJ) describing going into some kind of trance or supernatural state, or some inexplicable feeling. I suppose one could say that the HS guiding someone could be similar to someone KNOWING they are of the anointed. I have heard it said that it took some anointed a while to recognize the calling. Could it perhaps be that it takes a while for someone to comprehend what the HS is telling them and that is why mistakes have been made? I do think though that using the Bible as a kind of "mediator" or channel for the HS to do it's work is reasonable. Without the Bible we would have nothing to base our faith on, regardless of the HS.
In any case, those are my thoughts. How do you think the HS works, how do you think GJ should have described it?

It is impossible to even fathom how God operates. One thing is sure; He has the power and the desire to fulfill his purpose.  He can do it anyway he wants, and in his superlative wisdom he knows the best way. I cannot deny that He probably works some type of miracles today, but I cannot see how he would single out certain individuals because he thinks their life has more value than another person’s life. The only factor that may play a part is if that certain person has a role in fulfilling his purpose. The person himself will not even be aware of that. But whether Jehovah protects someone because of a role they play in fulfilling his purpose, or does not protect someone because they have a less important role, eventually both persons will gain everlasting life.  So the reward  will be the same for both. And another factor to think about (and I think it has already been mentioned)  is if Jehovah would protect individuals serving him, then Satan’s challenge he raised with Job would have no meaning.  So I am usually pretty sceptical when it comes to claims that Jehovah stepped in and saved someone.  Anyone can claim that, but that doesn’t make it true. I have already shared this story on here somewhere, but it’s relevant so I will mention it again: A while ago a sister, a Bethelite, was walking back to the Bethel from having been out in service all day when someone grabbed her from behind, stabbed her in the neck and ran off with her handbag.  The surgeons were amazed and said that the chance of the blade missing her jugular was almost zero. They told her she was lucky to be alive. This sister (and others) believes Jehovah saved her, by making the blade miss the jugular. Personally, I believe it was chance. But I cannot deny that if Jehovah had wanted to, he could have of course. This sister works in the translating department, so she plays quite an important role. So did Jehovah “save” her because of her role? And had she worked as a housekeeper, would he have allowed her to get killed? Housekeepers are a dime a dozen, good translators are not.  But then Jehovah could bring in a replacement couldn’t he? So where would the line be drawn with regard to “interfering” in man’s affairs, and putting a "protective fence around his people"?
All good things come from God. But they may not always be directly caused by God.  People can do good deeds by themselves, because that is an innate trait created in them by Jehovah when he created man in his image.  We should give thanks to God for every good thing, so there is nothing wrong with this sister thanking Jehovah, even if Jehovah may have had nothing to do with it.
Also, as JW Insider pointed out, many people who believe in God also attribute apparent miracles to Him. If the sister had been a Catholic lady walking to her church, no doubt she would have also attributed this “miracle” to God.
But as @Srecko Sostar mentioned "time and chance happens to them all". Some for better and some for worse.

It is impossible to even fathom how God operates. One thing is sure; He has the power and the desire to fulfill his purpose.  He can do it anyway he wants, and in his superlative wisdom he knows the best way. I cannot deny that He probably works some type of miracles today, but I cannot see how he would single out certain individuals because he thinks their life has more value than another person’s life. The only factor that may play a part is if that certain person has a role in fulfilling his purpose. The person himself will not even be aware of that. But whether Jehovah protects someone because of a role they play in fulfilling his purpose, or does not protect someone because they have a less important role, eventually both persons will gain everlasting life.  So the reward  will be the same for both. And another factor to think about (and I think it has already been mentioned)  is if Jehovah would protect individuals serving him, then Satan’s challenge he raised with Job would have no meaning.  So I am usually pretty sceptical when it comes to claims that Jehovah stepped in and saved someone.  Anyone can claim that, but that doesn’t make it true. I have already shared this story on here somewhere, but it’s relevant so I will mention it again: A while ago a sister, a Bethelite, was walking back to the Bethel from having been out in service all day when someone grabbed her from behind, stabbed her in the neck and ran off with her handbag.  The surgeons were amazed and said that the chance of the blade missing her jugular was almost zero. They told her she was lucky to be alive. This sister (and others) believes Jehovah saved her, by making the blade miss the jugular. Personally, I believe it was chance. But I cannot deny that if Jehovah had wanted to, he could have of course. This sister works in the translating department, so she plays quite an important role. So did Jehovah “save” her because of her role? And had she worked as a housekeeper, would he have allowed her to get killed? Housekeepers are a dime a dozen, good translators are not.  But then Jehovah could bring in a replacement couldn’t he? So where would the line be drawn with regard to “interfering” in man’s affairs, and putting a "protective fence around his people"?
All good things come from God. But they may not always be directly caused by God.  People can do good deeds by themselves, because that is an innate trait created in them by Jehovah when he created man in his image.  We should give thanks to God for every good thing, so there is nothing wrong with this sister thanking Jehovah, even if Jehovah may have had nothing to do with it.
Also, as JW Insider pointed out, many people who believe in God also attribute apparent miracles to Him. If the sister had been a Catholic lady walking to her church, no doubt she would have also attributed this “miracle” to God.
But as @Srecko Sostar mentioned "time and chance happens to them all". Some for better and some for worse.

Excellent point!

Of course the account in Genesis is scriptural, and Psalms and Peter too, as you must specifically be referring to the "thousand years as one day with Jehovah." What was unscriptural was to say that just because we had a doctrine that said that all the 7 creative days were 7,000 years each (not scriptural) for a total of 49,000 years -- that a point that was 6,000 years into the 7th of those days should be significant as a time marker related to the end of this system. That would be building an unscriptural point on top of an unscriptural point which also happens to defy Jesus words that neither he nor the angels knew the day or the hour. After all, if that 6,000 year point really had been the significant time marker for Armageddon, if we only knew how long it was between Adam's and Eve's creation -- then surely the Son and the angels would have already known that time marker. Right?

Exactly the same point I have often made. This is why I don't blame the Watchtower for the personal decisions I have made, and this is why I never complain that I lost out on anything.
Edited to add: This is why I also have never expressed any kind of resentment, because I don't feel any. Someone on here who comments very little could testify that it was just early this morning when he asked me what I thought of my time at Bethel and my complete answer was:
I enjoyed it. I learned a lot. Loved the work. I'm an artist and worked in the art department. Then I got a lot of research assignments, so I got to go to the library a lot.

I believe it was at a District Convention, and the speaker was exhorting those not to believe every dumb thing, when the he related the one about the sole Witness walking the gritty streets at night with all the Society’s money and how he escaped mugging on account of the huge angels walking alongside.
”What was he doing alone at night with all the Society’s money?” the speaker said. “I’m sure the Society would like to know.”
I’ll overlook this bit of clumsiness just once. The byline for ‘TrueTom vs the Apostates!’ is a Dylan line: “The game is the same, it’s just up on another level.”
It is best to blame things like this on autocorrect. May its inventor rot in hello.

I think we might be a little harsh in judging F. Franz for having said this, as from your statement above it was obviously nonsensical. I feel it was just his way of saying things, or maybe the way some people spoke. Although it came across as haughty, I doubt Fred's intention was to put himself above God. Who does that?