THE FINAL VERDICT IS DELIVERED!!! (page 5)

Dagney

Wow. Just listened while I was working late.

Thank you for sharing. No matter what...DF'd just because.

Matt; you handled it really well . I like how with every question you brought them back to the causes of the first jc. and you did a number jn 6 and peter saying jesus had the words of life you did great there. In facT you did GREAT HOLDING YOUR COOL. as you know I have enjoyed you toying with these ZOMBIES. for the past year. YOUR LIKE A LAWYER and the trial from 1954 shut them up and they lied about the wts charter. Is that the best elders they have over the pond? you sure made easy work out of them. your fellow WT EXPOSER judge rutherFRAUD

passwordprotected

It's unfortunate this means that the situation is a bit contrived and does not perfectly reflect how a committee would normally take place.

If any JW were to go back to the start of the audio recordings, to when Ronnie and Gordon (and then Ronnie and Paul) visited Matt and Lorraine, then they'd get to hear what it's really like. Matt and Lorraine weren't proselytizing and they weren't going to the meetings, yet two elders still came and pumped them for info on what was going on "spiritually". The Appeal Committee is the most contrived part of the whole proceedings, the only part that Matt actually instigated himself.

The elders had decided (with a little pushing from certain other people who may or may not be related to me) to get blood. Several months passed between the home visits and Matt's initial JC. In-between times he had gone on holiday with us and called Ronnie out at the Kingdom Hall. That was all they needed to act on what he had said during the home visits. Lesson? If you really, really must fade, don't allow the elders to visit you and never, ever speak to anyone who knows you about how you actually feel. (Just DA is my advice....)

Also, what the Appeal Committee audio demonstrates to any JW who may listen is that the elders are not interested in what you believe about God, Jesus or the Bible. It went a little something like this "Ok, Matt, let's put aside the compelling evidence that the decision to disfellowship you for saying Jesus is to be worshipped was a miscarraige of theocratic justice. So, how do you believe "faithful slave" is being used by Jehovah on earth today?" -- that's all they care about.

Also, their comments about "not being legalistic"; I hope any practising JW hearing Martin Benzie say that the proceedings weren't legalistic will choke on their coffee and donut. Not legalistic...for real? 6 elders who serve as prosecutors, jury and judge? Testimony bearing witnesses? Having to "address the chair" when you want to cross examine a witness? Deliberation? Judgement? None of that is legalistic? Hmmm....

MrMonroe

It went a little something like this "Ok, Matt, let's put aside the compelling evidence that the decision to disfellowship you for saying Jesus is to be worshipped was a miscarraige of theocratic justice. So, how do you believe "faithful slave" is being used by Jehovah on earth today?" -- that's all they care about.

That's so true. A year ago my wife and I spent an uncomfortable few days with friends of ours interstate where we knew the issue of our decision to stop going to meetings would be raised. And it was, in a heated, very emotional and very long discussion, although we were resolute in our decision not to give him any reason why we left. We wanted to give him no ammunition. He could die wondering. And the weird thing was my good friend (or so he'd always been until our decision to withdraw from The Club) suddenly asked my wife, "Do you believe Jehovah is using the faithful and discreet slave as his organization on earth today?" It was such an insanely loaded question, brimming with assumptions and dangers, that it stopped us short. My wife stalled for time and I managed to change the subject and he never came back for an answer.

I have never stopped thinking about the question. Where did he get it from? Had someone suggested he ask it? It's a carefully framed question designed to trap. (Is there a "faithful and discreet slave"? Does God use "an organization"? If he does, who says it's the WTS?) Is this a question elders are instructed to ask?

dozy

Listened to podcast – thanks again Matt for doing this.

A few observations – like others , I always felt that essentially the 3 Cos were just trying to uphold the appeal & get away as soon as possible. There seemed to be no effort made to “gain you” , but I guess this is a consequence of the appeal system which simply seeks to determine if the DF one was repentant at the time of the original hearing. Though they quoted the scripture several times about “those who have doubts..snatch them out of the fire” , this was done in an adversarial manner to indicate that even someone who has private concerns should be dealt with under the “stubbornly holding to false views” catch-all basis.

What I have found disappointing in both JCs is that although you consistently told the elders that you didn’t want to discuss your views ,and that any previous discussions had been in a shepherding or family discussion context and shouldn’t be used as evidence against you , yet despite this ,all 6 brothers continually probed and asked you what you thought about various subjects in an effort to get you to incriminate yourself.

The difficulty that you had in this situation was that by calling the appeal you were , technically , trying to convince the brothers that you wished to remain one of JWs. This did limit your scope , somewhat , in defending your views.

Quillsky

Dozy said.............

in an effort to get you to incriminate yourself.

That's what it amounted to, didn't it?

When Jehovah's Witnesses use the word "spirituality" it sickens me. There is nothing spiritual about the cult-attack that happened here.

passwordprotected

Spirituality is measured in units of loyalty to the "slave" (not the King).

For example, Matt's brother Paul's spiritual stock has increased immeasurably. I suggested to Matt many months ago that his brother would move against him, even testifying against him in the Watchtower's star chamber, all so that his spirituality is recognised and rewarded. Matt didn't think his brother would do that. The evidence suggests otherwise, sadly.

I guarantee you that Brother Paul Barrie will become an even brighter star in the Lanarkshire #1 Circuit; he was so loyal to the "slave" (not the King) that he was prepared to compile evidence against his kin and then present that evidence as a demonstration of his loyality (to the "slave, not the King).

But remember, "no one should be forced to choose between his family and his beliefs" . Brother Paul Barrie knew that. Remember this the next time you hear him (or Benzie, Jones or Shanks) at your next Lanarkshire #1 Circuit Assembly or Special Assembly Day or District Convention.

passwordprotected

A few observations – like others , I always felt that essentially the 3 Cos were just trying to uphold the appeal & get away as soon as possible. There seemed to be no effort made to “gain you” , but I guess this is a consequence of the appeal system which simply seeks to determine if the DF one was repentant at the time of the original hearing.

The Appeal Committee would have been fully briefed at the destructive influence Matt was on my and my wife. People were out for Matt's blood for what he'd done to us, how he'd poisoned our minds against the "slave" (not the King). In truth, I was the one who went to Matt with my doubts and issues, not the other way around. That fact is merrily ignored as it doesn't fit with the presumed truth.

Notice that Matt was asked about attending religious services in homes or other buildings. That had nothing to do with the original decison to DF and the Appeal Committee (Phil Jones in particular) knew that. This question arose because it was strongly suspected that Matt was going to church services with Gail and me. Which he was. This alone points to "behind the scenes" discussions on how to nail him, along with the question on blood transfusions. Blood transfusions weren't mentioned at the original hearing, but it was known that Matt had questions about blood fractions and hadn't carried a Blood Card for years.

As Phil Jones pointed out, in Matt's current "condition" he's "had it" at Armageddon. That's the level these guys are operating on; they genuinely believe they have the power of eternal life or death over you. Is awareness of that power matched with humility and love? Well, as Ian Shanks said, "he has a diploma from the Society", all they care about is "the slave", not the King. And certainly not the lives of the people over whom they preside.

dozy

password protected - "Spirituality is measured in units of loyalty to the "slave" (not the King)."

I have to agree that this is a definitive JW definition. One comment during a Watchtower from a congregation elder really threw me when I was starting to doubt "the truth" - "You can see how spiritual a brother is by how closely he obeys the faithful & discreet slave". Huh?

One slightly creepy moment was when Shanks asked Matt about the questions that he had answered at baptism and that he was being baptised under the direction of the faithful slave and that obliged him to obey the WTBTS (side note : if he had been baptised pre-1985 the questions would have not included this reference). One wonders how many adults would get baptised if the full implications of these questions were explained before baptism.

passwordprotected

And then we have Shanks's comment about the organisation being "like a club". Notice how he chews this over, as if the thought was coming to him for the first time. Basically faith in Christ is like being in a club to these people.

And remember, it's loyalty to "the slave", not the King, that determines if you're worthy of retaining your club membership.

THE FINAL VERDICT IS DELIVERED!!!

Share this