I am confused about the tactic of the Sunday WT article. It seems to be talking about staying loyal to Jehovah when chased by enemies and then it turns it around to saying stay loyal to Jehovah by accepting elder decisions on who to disfellowship. The odd thing about it, is that David was chased in two different ways, by his son who wanted to usurp his throne. His son Absalom sought to remove the anointed right of David. This was wrong, David himself was anointed to be king and he never sought to remove anointed Saul from that throne. Anyone could say that his mere presence while Saul slept to let Saul know he could have been killed might be regarded as disrespect for Jehovah's anointed. So many JWs would say of others that it was an intent to kill in one's heart just to do this. No they don't accuse David, but they would accuse you if you did this. After all that is what is of issue, the fact that JWs will let Satan's evil in their heart to accuse their own brothers of having feelings like this. They cannot recognize when the words off their tongues are not a scourging form Jehovah (a warning to someone else thru them off their tongue as discipline) versus being like Judas and letting Satan pop in to say evil to destroy, (how often you hear about other brothers or sisters the words LOOK WHERE THEYRE AT NOW, or YOU DONT SEE THEM AROUND ANYMORE DO YOU). Granted, apostles themselves say these ones are no longer with us. Yet brothers & sisters will fabricate and claim what it is and why they arent. It bothers them not if what they say are lies that will reach the ones they speak off. Like those who leave the WatchTower and want the anointed to pay for it, be blamed for it, they are like Judas offended and insulted and want payback. BUT the words in a WT article itself proves whether it is the anointed who wrote it, or Judas who writes for them, as Judas did for Jesus holding the money box and distributing by his own decisions approved by Jesus. No where does it say that Absalom is the disfellowshipped one who chases David to dethrone him. To the contrary, it is David disfellowshsipped from most of Jerusalem via Absalom and people. Likewise, when Saul ruled on Jehovahs throne, David was then too disfellowshipped from the king and the people. So how could anyone write an article to say that loyalty to Jehovah means you must stick with Jehovah's anointed king Saul and the people of Jerusalem in the decision to disfellowship David as an enemy. How can anyone compare that to those who in a whole group sided with wrong Absalom and the people as if disfellowshipped people grouping with disfellowshipped Absalom, when in fact though Jehovah was with David, it was David on the run or disfellowshipped from all the bad ones who ought to be disfellowshipped and are not. The article is not relevant to the spirit of Jehovah. It starts out all for Jehovah with Jehovah and then twists it to say so abide by the elders who dsifellowshipped even if done wrong. This is Judas trying to rule for Jesus (the anointed bride). I can hear Judas saying that he follows Jesus and that John the Baptist does not. This doesnt elevate Judas and what he does above that of John. Jesus confirmed John was Elijah but Judas was the son of destruction sitting right beside him. The simple fact remains that the article on loyalty to Jehovah is not about David disfellowshipping Saul or for that matter Absalom died and he was mourned while almost all JWs will despise a brother or sister mourning their disfellowshipped relative. Further, Jesus is correct, how come these JWs cannot see Elijah was rejected by Jehovah's Jews and had to dwell with a pagan unclean Syrian which according to Jews proved Elijah was the sinner not them. Jesus made it clear, do you people not even stop and think and ask yourself how come there was no Jewish women who took Elijah in. It is because JW women were more wicked than this Syrian woman. Indeed any Elijah who is taken into safety's arms is accused by JWs as being a fornicator with her, and associating with the world. Likewise Jesus also said that David ate in the temple with his soldiers, how is it this was of Jehovahs way to feed them rather than curse them and remove David permanently. The blind do not see nor understand this, but instead repeat that loyalty to Jehovah is being loyal to how THEY see things, because THEY are Jehovah. I recall when i came back abused, financially raped, and spiritually raped and they gathered at least 12 elders in one room so the visiting elder could be "a brother gained back" 24 hours before they have him give Sunday's talk. The brother said an apology "I am sorry I ever did anything for you". and the elders applauded that this was an apology. It was clear Satan was in them not Jehovah. Jehovah has since put the fat slob to death with a heart attack from his cholesterol. This was an elder who wanted me to glorify him for supporting a moment of confusion in my life seeking some college in Brigham Young University. He actually said i should pleased that he told the other elders that they should let me go to this Mormon BYU. In prayer to Jehovah, after finding that BYU couldnt get papers organized or straight, i then relaized my love for discovery of bible history would become a conflict by mere fact that as Mormons they would take credit for anything i ever discover. I got a phone call from a Mormon bishop in Utah because i sent a letter calling them Morons, and we agreed i didnt wish to go to BYU. But what does that say of Mr.elder who gave his already planned sunday talk by judicial ruling games. I had walked out, having a ride with my mother, and here at 25 they acually had the audacity to call my mother to tell HER to bring me back. (The use of relatives for political presure and ploy.) So this is not THEIR loyalty to Jehovah, and it means to be loyal to THAT is thus also not loyal to Jehovah, rather it is being loyal to J.W.Eli and his fornicating J.W.sons.
ELIJAH comes to judge not bless
