Posts by rockhound

39

Comments You Will Not Hear at the 4-2-06 WT Study (Increasing Light)

by blondie in

comments you will not hear at the april 2, 2006 wt study (february 15, 2006 issue, pages 26-30)(increasing light).

review comments will be in red.

wt material from today's wt will be in black.

rockhound

Beware!!! of the side effects of "New Light Syndrome"

ROCKHOUND

5

"This thing called Love"

by rockhound in

"this thing called love" has surely proven to be an elusive thing, to put your finger on.

in an organization who "equates disagreement with disloyalty" it seems that almost every one in the congregation down deep is harboring something that they disagree with about the organization, but they know better than to let anyone know, except their closest friends, and even then their words are well chosen and spoken in guarded terms.

"please don't repeat what i just said to anybody" is the usual caution.

rockhound

"This thing called Love" has surely proven to be an elusive thing, to put your finger on. In an organization who "equates disagreement with disloyalty" It seems that almost every one in the congregation down deep is harboring something that they disagree with about the organization, but they know better than to let anyone know, except their closest friends, and even then their words are well chosen and spoken in guarded terms."Please don't repeat what I just said to anybody" is the usual caution. WHY??

How are doubts possible in "Spiritual Paradise"? More and more though, behind closed doors where the elders can't see, the computer keyboards prove to be the cork that lets the Genie out of the bottle. Why is this necessary in an organization that is constantly telling its readers how loving it is? I believe the answer is that all to many times the brothers have seen what happens to those who have voiced a disapproving comment about the obvious lack of Christian love that they see going on in the congregations.

All to many times, dreams of a loving united brotherhood become nightmares ending with divided families, and lost friends. "How could this happen to me?" "I loved the brotherhood, and they loved me!! " Didn't they"????? How could people we have known for years, join the "Gossip Mill" and worse yet, believe all those loose lips, when they have never talked to us personally about any concerns that we may have. When I read about "This thing called Love" in the Bible, I am drawn to it like a magnet, I feel deeply moved, when I see the words of Scripture followed as they were meant to be. On the other hand, when I stand back and take a good look at the "Spiritual Paradise" found in congregations today, I find that just as in the "Paradise of Eden", there are serpents that lie and deceive. When the "Wizards" curtain is pulled back, the one pulling the strings and pushing the levers is corporate, and not divine. Who can save us from "This thing called Love" (Watchtower Style) that causes so much pain to so many for so long? Even the Watchtower is getting out of Brooklyn. Maybe its time we did to.

ROCKHOUND

33

Why all the fuss about 607 and 1914?

by rockhound in

"so what's the big deal about the date 607 b.c.

being off by 20 years?

" "that was a long time ago, and i can't see where it really matters".

rockhound

"So what's the big deal about the date 607 B.C. being off by 20 years?" "That was a long time ago, and I can't see where it really matters"

Many of us have heard comments like the above when we tell our friends, and relatives our concerns about the society's chronology that is used to arrive at the year 1914. "Can't you just put this all behind you, and come back to the meetings?" seems to be their way of solveing this problem. Maybe we could just spray "WINDEX" on this problem ( like in the movie "My Big Fat Greek Wedding") and this whole problem would disappear.

As the book

"The Gentile Times Reconsidered" states: " Few people are fully cognizant of the very central role played by chronology in the claims and teachings of the Watch Tower Society. Even many of Jehovah's Witnesses are not fully aware of the indissoluble connection between the Society's chronology and the message they preach from door to door. Confronted by the many evidences against their chronology, some Jehovah's Witnesses tend to downplay it as something they somehow can do without. "Chronology is not so important, after all," they say. Many Witnesses would prefer not to discuss the subject at all. Just how important, then, is the chronology for the Watch Tower organization?" " An examination of the evidence demonstrates that it constitutes the very foundation for all the claims and message of this movement."

As we can see from the following statement, the date 1914 constitutes the very core of the "Good News" that over six million witnesses faithfully preach from door to door, world wide.

"Let the honest-hearted person compare the kind of preaching of the gospel done by the religious systems of Christendom during all the centuries with that done by Jehovah's Witnesses since the end of World War I in 1918. They are not one and the same kind. That of Jehovah's Witnesses is really "gospel" or "good news," as of God's heavenly kingdom that was established by the enthronement of his Son Jesus Christ at the end of the Gentile Times in 1914." (Watchtower, May 1, 1981, p. 17)

A Jehovah's Witness who attempts to down play the role of chronology by making comments like the above, simply does not realize that he or she is radically undermining the major message of the "Good News" as it is preached by the society today.

Have you personally looked at the evidence yourself ?

The date 607 is being, and has been rejected by "all but the most blindly devoted". The society has been playing a shell game ( three walnut shells and a bean under just one, you guess under which shell the bean is to be found) with the year 1914 for over 100 years and whole books have been written about the importance of it. Ideology has confronted reality, and ideology has bent, and that's why most witnesses would rather this inconsistency would just go away.

ROCKHOUND

Does is really matter?

by rockhound in

"so what's the big deal about the date 607 b.c.

being off by 20 years?

" "that was a long time ago, and i can't see where it really matters".

rockhound

"So what's the big deal about the date 607 B.C. being off by 20 years?" "That was a long time ago, and I can't see where it really matters"

Many of us have heard comments like the above when we tell our friends, and relatives our concerns about the society's chronology that is used to arrive at the year 1914. "Can't you just put this all behind you, and come back to the meetings?" seems to be their way of solveing this problem. Maybe we could just spray "WINDEX" on this problem ( like in the movie "My Big Fat Greek Wedding") and this whole problem would disappear.

As the book

"The Gentile Times Reconsidered" states: " Few people are fully cognizant of the very central role played by chronology in the claims and teachings of the Watch Tower Society. Even many of Jehovah's Witnesses are not fully aware of the indissoluble connection between the Society's chronology and the message they preach from door to door. Confronted by the many evidences against their chronology, some Jehovah's Witnesses tend to downplay it as something they somehow can do without. "Chronology is not so important, after all," they say. Many Witnesses would prefer not to discuss the subject at all. Just how important, then, is the chronology for the Watch Tower organization?" " An examination of the evidence demonstrates that it constitutes the very foundation for all the claims and message of this movement."

As we can see from the following statement, the date 1914 constitutes the very core of the "Good News" that over six million witnesses faithfully preach from door to door, world wide.

Notice the importance that is given the date 1914 in the Watchtower:

"Let the honest-hearted person compare the kind of preaching of the gospel done by the religious systems of Christendom during all the centuries with that done by Jehovah's Witnesses since the end of World War I in 1918. They are not one and the same kind. That of Jehovah's Witnesses is really "gospel" or "good news," as of God's heavenly kingdom that was established by the enthronement of his Son Jesus Christ at the end of the Gentile Times in 1914." (Watchtower, May 1, 1981, p. 17)

A Jehovah's Witness who attempts to down play the role of chronology by making comments like the above, simply does not realize that he or she is radically undermining the major message of the "Good News" as it is preached by the society today.

Major claims about the date 1914 should require major proofs that the method of arriving at this date is relieable. For this date to be credible , it must come from an accurate starting point. Thus, the controversy over the date 607 B.C. Any proofs should be rock solid, and have much evidence to verify it is in fact accurate. Have you checked out this date yourself?

Trying to make 607 B.C. harmonize with the evidence, is like trying to put 10 pounds of potatoes in a 5 pound bag. It just doesn't work!!!

ROCKHOUND

4

because we're the "We Say So" corporation

by rockhound in

if the watchtower says that up is down, up becomes down.

the loyal witness makes the mental switch because the "we say so" corporation says so.

this is relativism in its purest form; and it does not serve truth.

rockhound

If the Watchtower says that up is down, up becomes down. The loyal witness makes the mental switch because the "We Say So" corporation says so. This is relativism in its purest form; and it does not serve truth. Under relativism, the familiar points of reference such as up and down, black and white, lose their traditional, reality-based meaning. They become whatever the organization proclaims them to be.

The atmosphere of indifference and apathy that prevail in the organization is no accident. The average witness mind is programmed to accept the "Official" Watchtower version of events without consideration of any and all contradictory evidence. Injustice becomes Justice, Lies become Truth, Hate is called Love.

An unwillingness to confront the evidence, and thus the inability to come to rational decisions based upon verifiable facts, become a major hurtle for all of us that try to reason, with those we love, that are still being spoonfed by the society.

Question: How have some of you finally cracked the nut, and gotten past the "Wall" of fear with your relatives?

ROCKHOUND

2

Extra, unrecorded king(s)...ONLY possible explanation of the facts

by AuldSoul in

mrs. congeniality gave us this: easy math for 586/587, which is a stripped down version of alleymom's kiss method.. the upshot of this reality is that for 607 bc to be correct, a king or kings must have reigned for 20 collective years before jehoiachin's exile (a.k.a.

jeconiah) in 597 bc and be missing completely from the record.. the reason for choosing this date as pivotal is two-fold, (1) the number of years between the exile of jehoiachin and the destruction of jerusalem is known and was entirely covered by nebuchadnezzar's rule, and (2) the time that passed from jehoiachin's release until the restoration is known.. why could not jehoiachin have been exiled in 617 bc as the wts asserts?

because, if that were the case, babylon was destroyed in 559 bc instead of 539 bc.

rockhound

AuldSoul

That missing 20 years does seem to be itch that the Watchtower can't seem to get scratched.

Carl Olof Jonsson in his book The Gentile Times Reconsidered said :

" People may believe the most peculiar ideas, not because there is any evidence to show that they are true, but because there is little or no evidence to show that they are false. For many centuries people believed that the earth was flat, simply because this view could not easily be tested and falsified..."

The problem for the society is that all the neo-babylonian kings are linked together with so much evidence. I think that most people have it in their mind that there is in reality, just a fragment of evidence here, and another fragment of evidence there, and the Society knows best, so they just accept that "the earth was flat" and they accept it all without question. For those that do really look into the massive amount of evidence that has been found, their minds open up, and they can see that the Watchtower has painted themselves into a cornner with their chronology.

I enjoy your posts. Thanks for all your efforts on this subject!!

ROCKHOUND

6

Nebuchadnezzar NOT KING in 607 B.C.

by rockhound in

the watchtower society certainly has had much to say over the years about king nebuchadnezzar destroying jerusalem in the year 607 b.c., and over 6 million loyal followers have accepted their every printed word as if the very finger of god had written it in stone and had handed it directly to editors of the watchtower magazine.

well, it would seem, that someone back in brooklyn doesn't know whether they "are a foot", or "horseback".

over and over, the soceity uses a.k.

rockhound

Hello Judc please note my original statement:

The Watchtower Society certainly has had much to say over the years about King Nebuchadnezzar destroying Jerusalem in the year 607 B.C., and over 6 million loyal followers have accepted their every printed word as if the very finger of God had written it in stone and had handed it directly to editors of the Watchtower magazine. Well, it would seem, that someone back in Brooklyn doesn't know whether they "are a foot", or "horseback". Over and over, the soceity uses A.K. Grayson as an authority on the neo-babylonian tablets, and every time I check out the actual source (Graysons translation of the tablet) I find the watchtower society has put Grayson's dates aside, and inserted their own dates.

A good example of what I mean is in the Insight Book under the topic of Nebuchadnezzar:

The inscriptions further show that news of his father’s death brought Nebuchadnezzar back to Babylon, and on the first of Elul (August-September), he ascended the throne. In this his accession year he returned to Hattu, and

"in the month Shebat [January-February, 624 B.C.E.] he took the vast booty of Hattu to Babylon." (Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. K. Grayson, 1975, p. 100) In 624 B.C.E., in the first

The Society has taken Grayson's quote and inserted their own date within the quotation marks of his quote. They are using Grayson to lend legitimacy to their inserted bracketed date. I personally find this very dishonest

ROCKHOUND

6

Nebuchadnezzar NOT KING in 607 B.C.

by rockhound in

the watchtower society certainly has had much to say over the years about king nebuchadnezzar destroying jerusalem in the year 607 b.c., and over 6 million loyal followers have accepted their every printed word as if the very finger of god had written it in stone and had handed it directly to editors of the watchtower magazine.

well, it would seem, that someone back in brooklyn doesn't know whether they "are a foot", or "horseback".

over and over, the soceity uses a.k.

rockhound

The Watchtower Society certainly has had much to say over the years about King Nebuchadnezzar destroying Jerusalem in the year 607 B.C., and over 6 million loyal followers have accepted their every printed word as if the very finger of God had written it in stone and had handed it directly to editors of the Watchtower magazine. Well, it would seem, that someone back in Brooklyn doesn't know whether they "are a foot", or "horseback". Over and over, the soceity uses A.K. Grayson as an authority on the neo-babylonian tablets, and every time I check out the actual source (Graysons translation of the tablet) I find the watchtower society has put Grayson's dates aside, and inserted their own dates.

Writing down the actual dates that Grayson recorded in his book " seems to high a hill for the society to climb."

Note: Grayson's translation of the BM 22047 shows without doubt that Nebuchadnezzar was (not even king )of babylon in the year 607 B.C.

Nabopolassar was still very much alive and was king of bablyon in 607 B.C. His son Nebuchadnezzar was "Crown Prince" and acting as a military commander of his fathers army.

Note A.K.Grayson's translation:

Late Years of Nabopolassar (ABC 4)

The Chronicle Concerning the Late Years of Nabopolassar (ABC 4) is one of the historiographical texts from ancient Babylonia. It deals with the wars of the Babylonian king Nabopolassar and his crown prince Nebuchadnezzar against nations that were interested in taking a part of the former Assyrian Empire. This chronicle is the last part of one large text that began with the Early Years of Nabopolassar Chronicle (ABC 2) and continued with the Fall of Nineveh Chronicle (ABC 3).

For a very brief introduction to the literary genre of chronicles, go

here. The translation on this webpage was adapted from A.K. Grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles (1975) and Jean-Jacques Glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles (Atlanta, 2004).

This text is inscribed on a small tablet, BM 22047 (96-4-9, 152), which, like Chronicle 2, 6, 9, and 15, has the shape of a Neo-Babylonian business document. It measures 45 mm long and 54 mm wide. The text is in splendid condition, so that only a few words are missing.

Translation

1

The eighteenth year of Nabopolassar (608/607): In the month Ulûlu the king of Akkad mustered his army and

2

following the bank of the Tigris to the mountains of Bit-Hanunya

3

in the district of Urartu, he went up. He set fire to the cities and

4

plundered them extensively. In the month Tebêtu the king of Akkad went home.

5 The nineteenth year (607/606)

: In the month Simanu the king of Akkad mustered his army and

6

Nebuchadnezzar, his eldest son, the crown prince,

7

mustered his army. They marched to the mountains of Za[...].

8

The king of Akkad left the prince and his army there while he returned to Babylon in the month of Du'ûzu.

9

After his departure, Nebuchadnezzar did battle at Biranati, situated in the mountains

10

captured Biranati, set it on fire, and took many prisoners.

11

He conquered all of the mountains as far as the district of Urartu.

12

In the month Ulûlu the prince returned to Babylon. In the month Tašrîtu the king of Akkad mustered his army and

13

marched to Kimuhu, which is on the bank of the Euphrates.

14

He crossed the river, did battle against the city, and in the month Kislîmu he captured the city.

15

He sacked it and stationed a garrison of his in it. In the month Šabatu he went home.

16 The twentieth year (606/605)

: The army of Egypt marched [17] against the garrison of Kimuhu

17

which the king of Akkad had stationed inside. For four months,

18

they laid siege to the city, captured it, and defeated the garrison of the king of Akkad.

19

In the month Tašrîtu , the king of Akkad mustered his army, marched along the bank of the Euphrates, and

20

pitched camp in Quramatu, which is on the bank of the Euphrates.

21

He had his army cross the Euphrates and they captured[22] Šunadiri, Elammu,

22

and Dahammu, cities of Syria,

23

and plundered them. In the month Šabatu the king of Akkad went home.

24

The army of Egypt, which was in Karchemiš, crossed the Euphrates and

25

against the army of Akkad, which was camped in Quramatu

26

it marched. They pushed the army of Akkad back so that they withdrew.

27 The twenty-first year (605/604

): The king of Akkad stayed home while Nebuchadnezzar, his eldest son

28

and crown prince, mustered the army of Akkad.

I also thought that a few more of the societies quotes about dates that have proven less than reliable, might be of interest to lurkers of this site.

The Watchtower Society says:

The

fall of the empire. The Babylonian Chronicle B.M. (British Museum) 21901 recounts the fall of Nineveh, the capital of Assyria, following a siege carried out by the combined forces of Nabopolassar, the king of Babylon, and of Cyaxares the Mede during the 14th year of Nabopolassar (632 B.C.E.): WRONG !!!!

The BM 21901 actually says Note the date change

The fourteenth year

[612-611 ] : The king of Akkad mustered his army and marched to Assyria. The king of the Medes marched towards the king of Akkad and they met one another at [...]u. The king of Akkad and his army crossed the Tigris; Cyaxares had to cross the Radanu, and they marched along the bank of the Tigris. In the month Simanu , the Nth day, they encamped against Nineveh.

The Watchtower Society says:

As Babylon’s crown prince, he and his army shattered the forces of Egyptian Pharaoh Necho at Carchemish. But a message compelled the victorious Babylonian prince to leave mopping-up operations to his generals. Learning that his father, Nabopolassar, had died, this young man named Nebuchadnezzar took the throne in 624 B.C.E. WRONG!!!!

The Jerusalem chronicle ABC 5 actually says

: Note: the date change

1.

In the twenty-first year [605/604; note 1 ] the king of Akkad [Nabopolassar] stayed in his own land, Nebuchadnezzar his eldest son, the crown-prince,

2.

mustered the Babylonian army and took command of his troops; he marched to Karchemiš which is on the bank of the Euphrates

9.

For twenty-one years Nabopolassar had been king of Babylon,

10.

when on 8 Abu [15 August 605 ] he went to his destiny; in the month of Ululu Nebuchadnezzar returned to Babylon

11.

and on 1 Ululu [7 September] he sat on the royal throne in Babylon

12.

In the accession year Nebuchadnezzar went back again to the Hatti-land and until the month of Šabatu

The Watchtower Society says

:

If the Mannai or Manneans were inhabitants of Minni, as some scholars say, then according to cuneiform inscriptions Minni was intermittently under subjugation, first by the Assyrians and then by the Median Empire. According to a Babylonian chronicle, in his tenth year of reign (636 B.C.E.) Nabopolassar "captured the Manneans who had come to their (i.e. the Assyrians’) aid." (Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. K. Grayson, 1975, p. 91) But by the time Babylon fell in 539 B.C.E. Minni was dominated by the Medo-Persian Empire. WRONG!!!!

The Fall of Nineveh Chronicle actually says: Note: the date change

The tenth year of Nabopolassar [616-615 BCE ] : In the month Ajaru , Nabopolassar mustered the army of Akkad and marched along the bank of the Euphrates . The Suheans and Hindaneans [people living south of Harran] did not do battle against him but placed their tribute before him.

In the month Âbu the army of Assyria prepared for battle in Gablini and Nabopolassar went up against them. On the twelfth of the month Âbu [24 July 616] he did battle against the army of Assyria and the army of Assyria retreated before him. He inflicted a major defeat upon Assyria and plundered them extensively. He captured the Manneans , who had come to the Assyrians' aid, and the Assyrian officers. On the same day he captured Gablini.

The Watchtower Society says :

In fulfillment of Nahum’s prophecy, Nineveh fell to the combined forces of Babylonian King Nabopolassar and Cyaxares the Mede in 632 B.C.E. The Babylonian Chronicles state: "The great spoil of the city and temple they carried off and [turned] the city into a ruin-mound. " WRONG!!!!

The Fall of Nineveh Chronicle actually says: Note: the date change

The fourteenth year [612-611 ] : The king of Akkad mustered his army and marched to Assyria. The king of the Medes marched towards the king of Akkad and they met one another at [...]u. The king of Akkad and his army crossed the Tigris; Cyaxares had to cross the Radanu, and they marched along the bank of the Tigris. In the month Simanu , the Nth day, they encamped against Nineveh.

From the month Simanu until the month Âbu -for three months- they subjected the city to a heavy siege. On the Nth day of the month Âbu they inflicted a major defeat upon a great people. At that time Sin-šar-iškun, king of Assyria, died. They carried off the vast booty of the city and the temple and turned the city into a ruin heap .

It would seem that the words of James Madison would apply "All men having power ought to be mistrusted"

ROCKHOUND

I

2

The Blinders On??

by rockhound in

i found this poem a few minutes ago, and i thought you might find it as thought provoking as i did.

"blinders".

ever-forward, ever-forward -- to think, to learn, and grow!

rockhound

I found this poem a few minutes ago, and I thought you might find it as thought provoking as I did.

"Blinders"

(an insomnia-induced "rhyme")

When I leaned upon my "heritage" to think, to learn, and grow.
A peculiar perk of that cultural path & its legacy to me
was a pair of dulling blinders which made it hard to see
the narrowness of my thoughts and inflexible naiveté.

The infinite array of other ways, to think to learn and grow-
lost in the periphery of my blinders; I simply didn't know.
Unseen and undiscovered, I simply didn't know
of the different ways of thinking & different ways to grow.

As I continued along with my blinders on,
I began peeking side to side;
With curiosity I wanted to see
the "fuller, bigger picture", that my blinders tried to hide

My blinders built "privacy fences" limiting my line of sight
interfering with my reason and defining "wrong" and "right"...
Confined upon that narrow trail, with blinders on my face-
with tall fences on both sides -- what an awful place!

So I discarded my personal blinders and scaled the nearest fence
looking for a fuller picture -- one that made more sense.
It was a little overwhelming, the expansive open view-
so I had to rest & contemplate what I would choose to do.

Like Alice's adventure with the grinning Cheshire cat...
An infinite array of options - which would be my path?
With a Cheshire grin, I knew right then the direction I would go-
Ever-forward, ever-forward -- to think, to learn, and grow!

To Think, to Learn, and to Grow is not the "unforgiveable sin". To have a mind and not use it, is not a loyalty badge that all christians must wear with pride, or be stricken by God with a bolt of lightening.

Oliver Wendell Holmes once said "Mans mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimension".

ROCKHOUND

4

Is the word out that you are an "Apostate"?

by rockhound in

living in a "spiritual paradise" is not without its dangers.

at every turn lurks those who harbor private opinions born from independant thinking.

all are suspect to elders on a witch hunt.

rockhound

Living in a "Spiritual Paradise" is not without its dangers. At every turn lurks those who harbor private opinions born from independant thinking. All are suspect to elders on a witch hunt.

Apostates are everywhere, hiding behind a thin veneer of the brotherhood. Over and over at the weekly Watchtower study, the topic of apostates is drilled into all who attend. Drill enough holes in a board, and what is the end result? The structural integrity of the board is weakened to the point where its strength is completely lost.

When all are constantly "Spooked" with apostate talk, is it any wonder that elders in many congregations have taken it upon themselves to be self appointed inquisitors, sanctioned by the Society.

Having an opinion in the organization today on any subject differing from "Present Truth" is having a spiritual death wish. If having personal opinions is wrong, then why did the apostle Paul have so many of them? Please read 1 Cor.7: 39-40

39 "A wife is bound during all the time her husband is alive. But if her husband should fall asleep [in death], she is free to be married to whom she wants, only in [the] Lord. 40 But she is happier if she remains as she is, according to my opinion. I certainly think I also have God’s spirit."

2 Cor. 8: 8-14

10 "And in this I render an opinion: for this matter is of benefit to YOU, seeing that already a year ago YOU initiated not only the doing but also the wanting [to do]; "

1 Cor. 7: 25

25 "Now concerning virgins I have no command from the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who had mercy shown him by the Lord to be faithful."

Were Paul's opinions in line with congregation approved teachings? Evidently not, because Acts 21: 20-24 show that the charge of Apostacy was leveled at him as well. Had Paul abandoned Jehovah or Jesus? No!! Had he stepped outside the Box? Yes!! Think how the gossip mill of Paul's day shifted into high gear, when the charge of apostacy was leveled at him.

Rather than address questions or issues critical of the organization, the present posture of the elders is one we have seen played out so many times in the middle ages. Those in the congregation who discuss their questions even with only one or two other persons, are vilified as "Apostates" and deceitful persons, wanting to subvert the faith of others for dishonest gain.

The WT. May 15, 1986 p 25 on the abuses of power by religious councils and their use of the charge of heresy said:

" Charges of heresy proved to be a ruthless scheme to eliminate opponents who dared to defy Christendom’s church councils. Any who expressed differing opinions or even attempted to present Scriptural proof refuting the dogmas and canons (church laws) of the councils were branded as heretics."

Fear is being used by the Society to consolidate its power and to escape any accountability for its use. The whole aim is to keep the brothers alarmed, and clamoring to be led to safety, by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins and Apostates, most of which are imaginary.

When we feel afraid of possible attacks coming from any and all directions, we are like soldiers in a battlefield behind enemy lines, with the possibility of bullets coming from any and all directions at once. Humans in this kind of situation for long periods of time suffer from intense stress and eventually become unable to function altogether. The Society has reached this stage, and so have its followers. How could anyone in the so called "Spiritual Paradise" look at the organization and not slip into a severe state of depression? There just doesn't seem to be enough Prozac to go around.

ROCKHOUND