Why doesn’t the Governing Body hold debates to asses the qualifications of a new GB member?

I believe in overlapping

A new front runner in the Democratic debates is climbing the ladder to number one as most likely to beat Trump in 2020.

Tulsi Gabbard

Conservative Democratic who were considering on voting for Trump instead of voting for far left extremist, are now considering flipping back and voting Tulsi Gabbard.

All it took was a few minutes of debate for Tulsi Gabbard to bring down one of the many top contenders, Kamala Harris

The system is not the best, but at least the public is made aware of some of the candidate’s hypocrisy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMT5-C3igZ4

Now why is this not possible with the Governing Body? The members have no idea what qualifies someone has to be a member of the Governing Body.

Members have no idea who he is, what his background is, why he is the most qualified. Members know absolutely nothing about new members of the Governing Body who are appointed.

Leo Greenlees was a Governing Body member and was a pedophile and no one had and idea except those young boys who were molested by him.

Kenneth Cook was the last appointed Governing body member in 2018.

What were his qualifications?

What determined he was qualified?

Does the Governing Body search all their data base on pedophiles to make sure Kenneth Cook was never accused of molesting a child?

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/mp/r1/lp-e/w19/2019/65

rickroll

The GB is not going to tell you or anyone how they pick a new member.

eyeuse2badub

jehober picks the gb members. Every jw knows that!

just saying!

blondie

While the WTS did have debates in the days of Russell, since 1954 this is the WTS position on debate:

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1954606#h=1:0-15:0

Questions From Readers

● Does the Watch Tower Society accept challenges to debate publicly the Scripturalness of various religious teachings?—J. P., United States.

longgone

That was an accidental dislike above, (I believe in the overlapping.) Sorry it was intended as like.

road to nowhere

Surely they assess the candidates. Big question is how do you apply? Sitting at your desk and suddenly decide you are annointed, but how do you draw attention?

All they can do is recommend a person for the GB then they have to wait for the next Circuit Overseer visit so he can go over the person qualifications so he can send the recommendations to the Wt. Society. So the GB can approve it. Then the beat goes on and on and on. Lol. Still Totally ADD

I believe in overlapping

Hey blondie, interesting article from 1954. I wonder though if this still applies. They encourage the bible study to invite a minister from each group and ask questions and let the bible study hear the discussion and decide who has the truth.

So in our time wouldn’t the Watchtower be terrified at what the minister could bring up?

How about 607?
What the deal with the overlapping generation?
Who’s paying for the thousands of child abuse lawsuits?
Why didn’t your elders report the pedophile to the police?

There was no internet in 1954. I bet the Governing Body wouldn’t approve of this article anymore.

Watchtower article quote;
Usually those wanting to debate are more interested in getting attention and publicity than they are in presenting the truth.
To determine the Scripturalness of a teaching we must go to the Bible and calmly weigh all the texts bearing on the point under consideration. The ideal place to do this is in a home, with the two or few involved sitting at a table with open Bibles, dispassionately considering the evidence to “make sure of all things; hold fast to what is right.” (1 Thess. 5:21, NW) If a person is in doubt as to a doctrine, he can have a minister from a religion that believes it come to his home and discuss it. The next evening he can have a minister from a group that says it is false. Or he may even wish to have a minister from each group there the same evening and ask questions and hear the discussion. Thus the truth will be more likely to get calm and careful attention, as also will the falsehood. Sincere ones honestly searching for the truth will see the advantage of this method,.

Longgone don’t worry about it. I wouldn’t have even known had you not mentioned it. I never look at the likes or dislikes anyway, I’m more interested in what others have to say on the subjects I post.

What I am concern about is that my girlfriend “Didn’t Like” the fact that I forgot her birthday. That is something that will affect me, at least for a couple of days. That’s what happens when you were raised in a religion that never celebrated birthdays and you start dating a girl who always celebrated birthdays.

pale.emperor

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1954606#h=1:0-15:0
Questions From Readers
● Does the Watch Tower Society accept challenges to debate publicly the Scripturalness of various religious teachings?—J. P., United States.
Crowds are not always reasonable. They are swayed by bombastic oratory and showy eloquence aimed at the emotions rather than the mind. In a debate as much error as truth is presented, and by playing upon emotions and personal prejudices the final conclusions of many hearers may often favor the error.

Oh the irony!

blondie

I believe, it still applies, just not mentioned directly. Most jws don't know about Russell's or Rutherford's debates. Most jws were not in or old enough to remember the required weekly reading and talk from the Proclaimers book. I doubt many new or young jws even care. But when a negative article appears in the newspapers or some other news media, the WTS will not directly address it. They might give the news people a prepared PR piece and/or have someone "qualified" on the WTS PR staff, give a very general response, not addressing it directly.

Local jws, including elders, have been told not to talk to local news media personnel (too many of them give answers not approved ahead by the WTS). There is usually an elder locally designated to represent the WTS regarding PR. The articles seen in newspapers, are based on a formal PR presentation supplied to the news outlets. Any interviews of jws (such as during a convention time) are carefully selected and coached. The WTS does not feel they should draw more attention to the organization by getting into a debate. (I'm not saying that an individual jw might not know these WTS requirements and give a ridiculous answer to news media)

Occasionally, a carefully selected (by the WTS) brother might give a talk at an event where various religions are invited to give an informational talk. But rarely. But that is not a debate, just each group giving an informational talk.

When negative comments about jws/WTS are widespread, the WTS has printed special brochures and delivered to government officials.

1996

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/301996001#h=54:0-54:365

Other specially designed brochures have been prepared in the past couple of years to counteract the gross distortions regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses that the clergy and apostates have fed to officials and the media. Such brochures have been delivered to government officials, those in the legal field, and other professionals in Hungary, the Czech Republic, Austria, and Bulgaria. In Greece such material was not only delivered to officials but also made available to the general public.

Why doesn’t the Governing Body hold debates to asses the qualifications of a new GB member?

Share this