How does Jehovah's direction differ from pulling it out of your *ss

by Terry 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Netty
    Netty
    How does Jehovah's direction differ from pulling it out of your *ss

    it doesnt.

  • Scully
    Scully

    Interesting analogy, Terry. One hugely important ingredient is missing in the GB scenario though: the "patient's" right to make an informed decision.

    The GB, whilst pulling all of this Divinely Inspired? direction out of their collective @r$Є, is negligent in not informing their "patients" of the potential risks of following their Spirit Directed? bum-steering:

    • minimizing the immediate and long-term ramifications of lost earning potential, secondary to educational deficits (i.e., none or hardly any pension savings, due to Armageddon? being Right Around The Corner?) and inadequate financial outcomes secondary to having to resort to menial labour such as window washing
    • refusing to address very real concerns of people that Refusing Blood? à la Watchtower doctrine du jour, could potentially result in the loss of their own or a loved one's life; instead they whitewash the concerns by insisting that Faith? is all that is necessary, and that Jehovah Will Protect His Servants?
    • grossly exaggerating the negative aspects of what The World? has to offer - scaring JWs to death with thoughts that immorality, STDs, drug dealers, rapists, and child molesters, etc. are the only things you can ever hope to encounter outside of the Safety? of the Organization?, essentially creating a barrier of distrust for anyone outside The Truth?
    • applying the principle of Theocratic War Strategy? against their own followers and potential converts: "While malicious lying is definitely condemned in the Bible, this does not mean that a person is under obligation to divulge truthful information to people who are not entitled to it." - (Insight on the Scriptures, Volume 2) Obviously, the GB do not feel that JWs and potential JWs are entitled to truthful information that would expose the GB for the lying liars that they are, otherwise they wouldn't be re-writing their history or labelling people as Apostates? when exposing their lies.

    If the GB was required, the way physicians are, to disclose to their followers in a manner equal to that of the laws regarding informed consent, the WTS would no longer exist as we know it.

    Love, Scully

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    Vm44

    Where was that mentioned? In CoC?

    Yes. Please look at the following pages in coc, second edition 1992.

    Fred franz goes way back to charles russel. Ff came into the position of vicepres in 1944 (pg 85, 6th line). Under knorr he was already quite powerful (pg 60, starting at the second paragraph, to pg64, including footnotes). Knorr relies heavily on ff, the vicepres, as the oracle (pg 60 pg 2, pg 87 footnote #15). Ff regarded himself as the only qualified teacher (pg 86). Knorr and vicepres ff came up w the nixing of alternate military service (pg 101, last line). The other members are basically out of the loop. It was ff who came up w 1975 (see pg 199 pg 3, pg 208).

    Starting in 1976, ff loses some of his power to the other members. He continues to cling to it as best he is able - pg 93 pg 3 halfway through:

    'By that point the general concesus of thinking was fairly evident (based on individual comments that were made) and often his remarks were opposite to the trend of the majority. Perhaps nothing illustrates more strikingly the changed thinking of the Body during this period as does the fact that the voting, while sometimes showing a shift due to the influence of the vice president's last-minute remarks, often went contrary to his expressions. In the main, however, during this period he gave no indication of his thinking until the customary show of hands was called for, as the official "Minutes" record "Sixteen [or whatever the figure might be] in favor; one abstention," involved changes of policy regarding so-called "disfellowshiping matters."

    If certain ones, including fred franz voted in a certain way, certain others would vote the same way (page 228, last paragraph).

    S

  • Terry
    Terry

    I was driving in the car today thinking about the Law being the "shadow of things to come".

    The High Priest in Israel "pictured" Jehovah.

    The sacrifice "pictured" Jesus.

    Where oh where is the Faithful and Discreet Slave "pictured"? In the grunts gathering up the spilled guts and blood around the altar?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit