by AndersonsInfo 40 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Thanks Barbara for sharing, Marvin for originating. Thanks to you too, Farkel, for your great perspective as well.
This is big.
As I see it, it may be important to the lurker JW to get his own certified copy of one or more of these passport applications. To the hardcore Jw the one attached to the essay could have been forged.
Therefore, my question (Barbara, Marvin?) is how many dollars (you say considerable expense) would it take to get one?
Len Miller
A request for a copy of someone's passport application who is not related to you or is not your own application is $60.00. Add $30.00 if you want it certified. Send request to Secretary of State in Washington, DC. Look on the Internet for the rules to follow. The following information, which I took off someone's blog this evening, is very helpful if included in your request.
Application for United States passport #B1494270 issued to Nathan Homer Knorr on May 21, 1971, at the New York Passport Agency (approved May 19, 1971)
Application for United States passport by Charles Taze Russell issued March 7, 1910, (Passport Application Number 21454)
Application for United States passport by Joseph Franklyn Rutherford issued April 1, 1922, (Passport Application Number 136794)
Application for United States passport #733078 issued to Milton George Henschel approved September 22, 1952
Fatfreek,
:As I see it, it may be important to the lurker JW to get his own certified copy of one or more of these passport applications. To the hardcore Jw the one attached to the essay could have been forged.
:Therefore, my question (Barbara, Marvin?) is how many dollars (you say considerable expense) would it take to get one?
How many dollars is it worth to find the truth? Is twenty dollars enough? Or is one hundred dollars enough? How many dollars is it worth to save your life and deliver you from an evil life in an evil Cult? If your threshold is twenty dollars, then I say, you are not worthy of that deliverance. Stay with that evil, and save yourself twenty bucks. And pay for that decision for the rest of your life. But, Hey! You saved the twenty bucks!
Dl you have any idea about the rarified air that Barb and Marvin and the likes of me breathe? Any LITTLE mistake, even a misplaced comma spells disaster in the JW spin and damage-control world. Any LITTLE mistake that is found by the JW apologists and their ever-vigilent Legal Department(tm), no matter how insignificant and no matter that it doesn't affect the quality of the rest of the work is seized upon and labeled as a not a "Fact" that the rest of the material MUST be a lie because of that little mistake.
It doesn't matter that the WTS said "God Inspired(tm)" them to predict Armageddon (in most cases with a near-absolute certainty, going so far as to say that the 1925 prediction for Armageddon and resurrection of the ancient worthies was more certain than the Noachian Flood prediction) on at least a dozen dates starting with 1914 and ending with 1975, but hinted at the imminent onslaught of Armageddon for several dozen years later. No problem. They are just imperfect men. But what DOES matter is that an opposer of those shameless and wrong predictions writes a scathing expose of WT lies and produces a boatload of actual FACT, but gets a small thing wrong, or gets some grammar wrong. Then THAT is definite proof that the whole other body of pure evidence MUST be full of lies.
So, Fatfreek, let me mention this: I've know Barbara Anderson for close to 10 years. I've spoken for many hours on the phone with her. I've presonally met Marvin Shimler. He gave me thirty bucks when I desperately needed it, and fed me a good meal, so I definitely like him, too. Barb was a primary researcher for the Watchtower Printing Corporation. She has written articles for Awake! magazine. (She wore a head-covering the whole time, and bowed her head in deference to the floor whenever a male Bethelite wandered by, picking up trash in her area.) She was at Bethel for, as I recall, about 12 years. She did a ton of research for the Proclaimers book and that caused her to take a deep breath and wonder what she was doing. Then she discovered the pedophile problem deep in the bowels of the WTS records at headquarters.
If Barbara Anderson was accompanied by the Lord Jesus Christ himself, with Jehovah God on the other side of her and they BOTH said she was honest and did not lie and distort, I can guarantee you that the Watchtower Corporation would say it was staged by apostates.
Therefore, you can easily obtain legitimate copies of Knorr and other WTS luminaries from legitimate government authorities, and braindead dubs would claim they were forged, also. We are not concerned with braindead dubs. They are hopeless and lost. We are concerned with dubs who have more than a half-dozen braincells themselves and who have the courage to research WTS history themselves.
One cannot hope to help save souls from religious tyranny and lies that do not want to be saved.
Farkel
Bookmarking. Thanks everyone!
bttt
I bet every change on blood fractions, transplants, oaths etc have always been made to serve the interests of one or other of the Gibbering Buddy.
The DF ban on vaccinations was only lifted because nathan Homo Knorr (of ALLEGIANCE OATH fame) wanted to do his round the world tour in the early 50s, and knew he would probably come home in a coffin if he visited the third world without them.
Note with interest that when they lifted that ban, it was entirely a conscience matter, but that the society "would not be responsible for the legal consequences of refusal" (of vaccination- which some states had made compulsory in the 20s and 30s)
I think when they get rid of the blood ban it will follow the same pattern.
HB
That double speech on the part of the WTS leaders is utterly despicable, specially when considering how they have commanded to JW children to abstain from saluting to the flag, singing national anthem, etc, making them targets to harassment. Of course, having ordered Malawyan JWs not to buy that party card while at the same time these leaders were so lenient with themselves is plainly criminal. In doing so, they showed that they were true heirs of Rutherford, who didn't hesitate to send German JWs distribute provocative tracts under Hitler's windows, knowing perfectly well about the retaliations that woud ensue, while he was warm, comfortable and safe in his californian residence. There will have to be a divine judgement for such individual and collective duplicity.
Thanks for the great article. Last year I came across this article: 1/15/1973 WT, p. 63:
[beginning of article] ? Without compromising one’s position as a Christian, can one take a ‘loyalty oath’?—U.S.A.
Whether a Christian can conscientiously take a certain oath or not depends primarily on the purpose, content or nature of the oath.
Back in the first century C.E., Jesus Christ corrected the Jews for making light, loose and indiscriminate oaths. They swore by heaven, by the earth, by Jerusalem and even by their own heads. But Jesus reproved them, saying: “Just let your word Yes mean Yes, and your No, No; for what is in excess of these is from the wicked one.” (Matt. 5:33-37) A worshiper of God should not need to back up every statement by an oath in order to make it more believable.
Under certain circumstances, however, the Mosaic law required oaths. (Ex. 22:10, 11; Num. 5:21, 22; Deut. 21:1-9) And Jesus himself did not object to being put under oath by the Jewish high priest. (Matt. 26:63, 64) So Jesus’ statement about swearing cannot be used as a basis for condemning all oaths. But what kind of oaths may a Christian take without injuring his conscience?
This he must determine for himself by comparing the oath in question with Bible principles. Jesus Christ stated: ‘Pay back Caesar’s things to Caesar, but God’s things to God.’ (Matt. 22:21) Hence a Christian could not swear to anything that would require him to do things that are contrary to God’s law. But there would be no objection to his taking an oath to ‘uphold or defend’ the provisions of the law that do not stand in opposition to God’s law. The Christian recognizes that his defense and support of Caesar’s law must be within the limitations imposed by God’s Word. He can ‘defend’ the law by word, by his daily conduct and, in legal matters, by his testimony in court. Christians are told: “Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities.” (Rom. 13:1) So there would be nothing objectionable to swearing to do something that one is already obligated by God to do.
Many enlightened countries, though, recognize the reasonableness of the Christian’s other obligation, to ‘give to God what belongs to God.’ Thus the Constitution of the United States, as well as that of many other nations, guarantees freedom of religion. It is understood, then, that a Christian is not going to be required to do anything contrary to his religious beliefs and his obligations to God. There is no danger to the country in this provision, because true Christians do not engage in subversion; rather, they strive to be exemplary, law-abiding citizens.
Since a true Christian takes his worship and his relationship with God very seriously, he ought to give careful thought to any oath he is asked to take. He should be convinced in his own mind that the oath will not cause a violation of his conscience or compromise his neutral position as regards the political nations and their controversies. (Compare Romans 14:5.) If, after reasoning on the matter, he finds that he can take a particular oath, he will have to bear his own responsibility. He should always keep in mind his prior obligation to the Supreme Sovereign, Jehovah God, before ever putting himself under any other obligation.
[end of article]
This article appears to back up the position taken by the WT officials in Marvin's article. When I read this WT article, I thought 'wow, this sounds awfully reasonable--but why doesn't this apply to other oaths like the pledge of allegiance?" As has been enunciated by others on this thread, it's another example of the WT leadership using the rank-and-file as cannon fodder, while having a different set of rules for the leadership.
An example of the type of loyalty oath that is a "conscience matter" according to the '73 WT is the oath that attorneys must take in order to be admitted to a state bar. Typically, these oaths include a promise to bear full allegiance to the Constitution and that you take the oath without reservation or purpose of evasion. No doubt the WT attorneys take such oaths. I wonder if Rutherford and Covington took such an oath before they represented the Gobitis and Barnette kids in the flag salute cases before the supreme court...
Many thanks to all of you involved in this article. This is precisely why I left the WTS. The Mexico/Malawi scandal is what did it for me. Now this is just more icing for the cake. Many thanks again.
The Claw.
I just feel so angry that my little grandson is going to have to endure his school years with maybe ridicule and bullying, when that horrible face of Nathan Knorr looks out under the title of allegiance.
Use that anger wisely summer wine. Proclaim what you now know and have as evidence of deception and blatant corruption.
If many more would simply do this, YOUR GRANDSON, AND THAT OF MANY OTHERS, will not HAVE TO ENDURE ANY of what you fear for him/ them.
Yet, so many, STILL, have hard evidence of so many truths, and do not tell others in their congregations or those at the door. THEY CONTINUE TO PERPETRATE THE LIES...NOT THE TRUTHS.
It IS that simple.
______________
LURKERS AND OTHERS INTERESTED:
THIS IS AN EASY EMAIL PROJECT IN YOUR COMMUNITIES.
Happy trails!!
sKally
