Terry

Joined

• started 1,986 topics
• posted 18,437 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Terry

• 
  13

  Catholic encyclopedia misquote

  by alcyone in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  i do not know if this misquote has been discussed here already.. new catholic encyclopedia says this about jw:.

  "judge" rutherford introduced important changes in the witnesses' creed and transformed the congregational structure of the sect as it was under "pastor" russell into a rigid theocracy.

  the third leader, "brother" nathan h. knorr, gradually replaced the offensive convert-making tactics of the rutherford era by suave manners that have gained the witnesses their current reputation as one of the best-behaved groups in the world.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  How does an encyclopedia make a statement about what is "known"?

  Wouldn't this sloppy statement be better served with a citation of quotations to the effect?
  
  Sounds like a JW press release accepted as proof of a true fact, to me.
• 
  16

  A Brief History of MONEY and the Watchtower religion

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  watch tower corp has changed a long-standing policy in regard to donations which had been in place a long, long time.

  to appreciate how drastic these changes have been, you'd have to know how it was from the beginning.. .

  watch tower corp has changed a long-standing policy in regard to donations which had been in place a long, long time.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  Watch Tower Corp has changed a long-standing policy in regard to donations which had been in place a long, long time. To appreciate how drastic these changes have been, you'd have to know how it was from the beginning.

  
  

  Watch Tower Corp has changed a long-standing policy in regard to donations which had been in place a long, long time. To appreciate how drastic these changes have been, you'd have to know how it was from the beginning.

  To understand the original policies (about money) and the changed (new policy) we have to take a peek into the past.

  I don't want to bog you down in history. You can research on your own using Google.

  Here are salient facts.

  _________________________________________________

  Charles T. Russell, age of 13, joined the Congregational church (dumped Presbyterian).

  He went (like Girl Scouts are sent out with cookies to sell) door to door to RAISE MONEY for the Church.

  Russell hated fund raising. He had to ask poor people to part with their money. He said he felt he was "fleecing the flock."

  Russell sold 5 men's clothing stores for: $6,521,739.13

  $300,000 of 1876 dollars would be worth : $6,521,739.13 in 2016.

  http://www.davemanuel.com/inflation-calculator.php?

  _______________________________________________________________

  He threw his money into publishing End Times writings. He spent the family fortune like a drunken sailor on his favorite topics.

  If somebody wrote something Russell agreed with he'd pay for the publishing.

  If that somebody disagreed with Russell, he'd pull funding.

  Russell finally fell in love with his own writings to the exclusion of everybody else (including his wife) and began writing 7 ambitious volumes.

  He wanted to set everybody straight.

  1886 the money dried up due to the immense amount of money spent in printing and distributing the first three publications.

  He was spending about a million dollars a year! (In today's money.)

  GUESS WHAT YEAR Russell tried to sell his books in bookstores? 1886.

  _______________________________________________________________

  By 1897, nearly one million Dawns had been distributed, largely by the colporteurs. DOOR TO DOOR BOOK SALESMEN.After 1931, the term “colporteur” was replaced by “pioneer.”

  Pastor Russell's volumes were sold at about $2 a set or $2 of 1900 dollars would be worth: $55.00 in 2016 purchasing power.

  Russell also turned to writing sermons as a newspaper columnist and built up a readership of about fifteen million people.

  Having built a customer base (faithful readers) Russell went on tour giving sermons IN PERSON becoming one of the most recognized and 'famous' ministers in the world, like Joel Osteen or Joyce Meyers today.

  Russell had no problems accepting private donations!

  Pastor Russell had made a name for himself by refusing to take collections during meetings.

  The slogan "Seats Free - No Collections" angered many clergymen because it was a slam on the traditional collection plate process.

  _______________________________________________________________

  
  

  The Watch Tower turned to advertising miraculous beans as a free giveaway and then switched to Miracle Wheat for a dollar.

  In 1911, the market price for wheat was 59 cents to $1 a bushel. In Charles Taze Russell's Hicks Street Tabernacle, "miracle wheat" was being sold for $60 a bushel, or $1 a pound.

  (The beans and wheat had been DONATED to Russell's ministry)

  $1 of 1911 dollars would be worth: $24.39 in 2016 buying power.

  Miracle Wheat brought in $1,800 of 1911 dollars would be worth: $43,902.44 in 2016

  _______________________________________________________________

  1897: When his wife Maria petitioned the court for a LEGAL SEPARATION (not a divorce) it was granted with Alimony.

  Russell transferred his funds into the WTS account and strung Maria's alimony out torturously to make her dependent and to teach her a lesson.

  Russell was litigious if he thought he could win a lawsuit.

  The Washington Post partially quoted Maria's testimony about his claim "he floated from woman to woman like a jellyfish."

  Russell sued and was awarded one dollar in damages. But--he relentlessly pursued an appeal making himself a legal nuisance and the case was settled for $15,000. $15,000 of 1915 dollars would be worth : $348,837.21 in 2016.

  _______________________________________________________

  http://www.watchtowerdocuments.com/documents/1915_A_Great_Battle_in_the_Ecclesiastical_Heavens.pdf

  Russell's attorney was Judge Rutherford who wrote a pamphlet: Great Battle in the Ecclesiastical Heavens defending Russell's reputation.

  "This is a non-stock corporation; it pays no dividends, no salaries, and no one has ever, as its books clearly show, reaped any financial benefit therefrom. It is supported entirely by voluntary contributions made by those who are interested in the promulgation of Bible Truths. Its work is exclusively religious.

  For each contribution of $10.00, the contributor is entitled to one voting share. While there are nearly two hundred thousand shares, and it would be an easy matter to elect some other man as president, there never has been cast a vote against Pastor Russell."

  Ten dollars times two-hundred thousand shares = $2,000.000 $2,000,000 of 1915 dollars would be worth: $46,511,627.91 in 2016

  Bingo! (Note: 1913 Federal Income Tax was passed into law.)

  _______________________________________________________________

  NINE MILLION people saw the PHOTO DRAMA of CREATION (a slide show) presented to audiences around the world. Stop and consider:

  No collection plate was passed--however--DONATIONS were accepted. (A donation box in plain sight.)

  On September 23, 1912, the Eagle ran a cartoon called "Easy Money Puzzle."

  Russell sued the Eagle for libel, demanding $100,000 in damages for "injury to his reputation, good name, fame and standing."

  The case was brought before Justice Charles H. Kelby and a jury in the Kings County Supreme Court.

  One of the juicier allegations made against the Watch Tower Society was that it had coerced an insane man, Hope Hay, into contributing $10,000 to its funds. William E. Van Amburgh, secretary-treasurer of' the Watch Tower Society, acknowledged that Mr. Hay was in an "insane asylum" and that the Watch Tower Society was footing his bills, but denied that Mr. Hay had not given his money of his own free will.

  The jury of twelve men was out for less than forty-five minutes before it returned a verdict of not guilty in the Eagle's favor.

  This is just a historical snapshot of how money and the Watch Tower had their beginnings.
• 
  44

  My "best" friend (active JW) has just died

  by Terry in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  johnny santa cruz and i met around 1959 at a movie theater in fort worth, texas.. the purpose of that meeting was to create a fanclub for horror movie director william castle.

  a week or so later, johnny stopped me as i was walking home from elementary school.. "hey--i think i know you.

  weren't you at the william castle fanclub thing?".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  Johnny Santa Cruz and I met around 1959 at a movie theater in Fort Worth, Texas.

  The purpose of that meeting was to create a Fanclub for horror movie director William Castle. A week or so later, Johnny stopped me as I was walking home from elementary school.

  "Hey--I think I know you. Weren't you at the William Castle Fanclub thing?"

  And in that encounter, my entire life was fated to change forever.
  ____________

  I soon discovered, Johnny Santa Cruz was a Jehovah's Witness and the continuity of our friendship, I would also discover, hinged upon his converting me.

  This process took him about 4 years before I was baptized.

  Because of my direct connection to Johnny and his family, I went to Federal prison as a conscientious objector and afterward married his sister.

  My 1st three children are his sister's children.

  ___________

  Johnny and I were best friends. He was my FIRST friend of any consequence.

  His influence was boundless. He was larger than life in many ways.

  He was six feet three inches tall and ponderous! He had one eye, red hair, freckles and large flat feet.

  The laugh of his could fill a stadium. We kept each other laughing a lot in those early years. His personality was irrepressible. By imitating his aggressive nature, I learned to emerge from my super-shy backwardness socially. I thank him for that.

  But, he also broke my heart eventually. Maybe we broke each others' hearts.

  _________________

  I did not remain Jehovah's Witness. His sister and I divorced and she died in a car wreck. We stayed in touch in violation of JW shunning policies.

  When I moved back to Ft.Worth from California and he moved back from Corpus Christi, the first thing he did was contact me and invite me (although I was disfellowshipped) to a family reunion.

  Later, he would sneak off and visit me at least once each week at my place of employment and we'd sit and talk for hours. . . usually arguing over JW's being False Prophets.

  He admitted many (if not all) of the Watchtower failures, but shrugged them off. He admitted "most of the Elders are idiots" but shrugged that off too.

  "I know how to play the game." He once told me, and he meant he saw through the pretentious rules and set his own course carefully within bounds.

  One of his DF'd kids discovered he had been visiting be regularly. His son saw my postings and figured out the "Johnny" I was talking about was his dad.

  When he confronted his father, Johnny lied and said that I was just a lying Apostate trying to get him in trouble!

  He never admitted otherwise, but many people knew about it and did not report him. He had a golden bubble of protection around him. He was the male in the Santa Cruz family and was the little Prince. The daughters didn't seem to count for as much. I think most of them would tell you that.

  After Johnny was 'outed' and he cut me dead, I never heard from him again. When I wrote my book, I Wept by the Rivers of Babylon, much of that book was devoted to Johnny. As far as I know, he never read it.

  I have asked to be invited to the funeral. I'm sure they'll tell me to go pound sand--but that would not be right and they know it.

  I'm shocked at his death--but, not surprised.

  His health was lousy. He weighed over 300 pounds and was the sort of person who sneaked the wrong foods behind his wife's back.

  He sneaked around a lot as a JW and saw movies that would shock the Elders if they knew. He went his own way.

  I am still processing this.

  He is, as I said, a large part of my life story. It hurts to know we never got to have one last conversation.

  It hurts he put out that I had lied about he and I meeting all the time.

  I do understand, but I hate that I have to understand.

  This will take a long time to truly get over.

  I loved you, Johnny. I really really loved you.

  Goodbye
• 
  29

  Diddling, adjusting, changing Doctrines? Why not leave it alone?

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have kept on asking myself why the jw's put targets on themselves by constant diddling with their own doctrines?

  why not leave it alone?.

  mainstream christianity has fixed teachings.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  I think they are moving toward eliminating "literature" as a source of income. The customers are the members themselves. Getting pledges to pay up works for the churches at large and the semi-TV ministry is crowd-funding of a different sort.

  I saw the OLD JW's religion and I am alive to see the NEW JW religion. Folks, it just isn't the same religion.

  It is a doppleganger.
• 
  29

  Diddling, adjusting, changing Doctrines? Why not leave it alone?

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have kept on asking myself why the jw's put targets on themselves by constant diddling with their own doctrines?

  why not leave it alone?.

  mainstream christianity has fixed teachings.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  I know cognitive dissonance is ever present inside the Kingdom Hall.

  However, I also know the nagging feeling "something just isn't right" is also there. The wall between the dissonances is only so high. When the bullshit gets above it, it slops over and awareness flashes. We tend to refer to that dawning awareness as "waking up."

  It comes down to the same crisis moment an ADDICT faces. If they have lost everything and are at rock bottom inside the religion--the only way out is up and through the looking glass. An inevitability suddenly appears. When and how it will become real is a test of strength of character and basic raw courage.

  To choose to make your world go away is the most difficult choice imaginable. The rational side of the mind is crippled by indoctrination. The emotional side of the mind is crippled by fear. The social side of the mind is blocked by potential loss of all your friends and JW family.

  So what is left?

  Reality=oxygen. How long can you hold your breath?
• 
  26

  Jehovah’s Witnesses are Taught to Lie but to then Lie about Lying

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah’s witnesses are taught to lie but to then lie about lying.

  first off, let’s define what it means to tell a lie.

  i prefer the definition offered by aristotle way back in 4th century b.c.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  Yes, it is a highly "selective" honesty.

  It is an "the end justifies the means" honesty.

  Like the entire religious doctrine, it is carefully fabricated to appear

  solid while remaining fluid and porous.

  An amazing ability to latch on to and confirm the unconfirmable mixed with a REBOOT button to wipe it all clean--is evidence of mind control.

  They will love you and give their life for you one minute and call you a "mentally diseased Apostate" and refuse to pray for you the next.
  
  The dysfunction is sociopathological.

  Smiling, organic robots are a wonder of the world. I wonder what sort of world keeps them going if not delusion and fear.
• 
  28

  PAINTING THEMSELVES INTO A CORNER or WHY was the "GENERATION" teaching started in the 1st place?

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  setting the scene.

  pastor russell died in 1916. those who had 'followed' him were known pejoratively as russellites.

  you could call it a 'cult of personality' if you wanted to sneer.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  I'll bet--and I'm not being silly--the Watchtower could publish an article explain how a circle has pointy protuberances--and the Dubs would run out the next day and insist it is true.
  
  When you stop and think about it, word tampering is the supreme art perfected by the Watchtower.

  The GB redesigns "meaning."

  All "Truth" has a shelf life.

  Spare parts abound!
• 
  26

  Jehovah’s Witnesses are Taught to Lie but to then Lie about Lying

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah’s witnesses are taught to lie but to then lie about lying.

  first off, let’s define what it means to tell a lie.

  i prefer the definition offered by aristotle way back in 4th century b.c.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  New American Standard Bible
  "But let your statement be, 'Yes, yes ' or 'No, no'; anything beyond these is of evil."

  
  

  Yes, evil!
• 
  28

  PAINTING THEMSELVES INTO A CORNER or WHY was the "GENERATION" teaching started in the 1st place?

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  setting the scene.

  pastor russell died in 1916. those who had 'followed' him were known pejoratively as russellites.

  you could call it a 'cult of personality' if you wanted to sneer.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  The Watchtower stole a page out of the Koran when it came to

  justifying lying. JW's call it Theocratic War Strategy.

  Islam calls it Tequila. (Well, it sounds like that word :)

  
  

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F4wBeshTsw
• 
  26

  Jehovah’s Witnesses are Taught to Lie but to then Lie about Lying

  by Terry in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jehovah’s witnesses are taught to lie but to then lie about lying.

  first off, let’s define what it means to tell a lie.

  i prefer the definition offered by aristotle way back in 4th century b.c.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Terry

  Jehovah’s Witnesses are Taught to Lie but to then Lie about Lying

  
  

  
  

  
  

  First off, let’s define what it means to tell a lie.

  
  

  I prefer the definition offered by Aristotle way back in 4th century B.C.E.

  “To say the opposite of what you hold to be the truth is to tell a lie.”

  
  

  ________________________
  
  

  Parsing the definition of “LYING.”

  In a court of Law, a witness is required to swear not just to “Tell the truth.”

  Something more absolute and comprehensive is required.
  “I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God.”

  
  

  Why should this be necessary?

  We all know the answer to that. It is possible to answer a question in a deceitful way and “technically” give no further information, and thus hide the truth.

  But, a person on the witness stand swears not to engage in this cat and mouse game of not completely revealing what is asked.

  
  

  This topic applies to Jehovah’s Witnesses because the Watchtower leaders came up with a controversial lesson to teach centering around something they called THEOCRATIC WAR STRATEGY. (Search in vain in your Bible for that one!)

  
  

  
  

  
  I ran across a JW apologist Blog wherein excuses were offered to get the bad taste of “Liars” off their tongues.

  _______________________

  
  

  Let me quote in part from the Blog:

  
  

  In the May 1st, 1957 Watchtower, in the article, "Use Theocratic War Strategy", it gave the example of a sister who was in her ministry in Eastern Germany. When she saw a violent opposer of Jehovah's Witnesses, she immediately went around the corner and changed from a red blouse to a green one. When an officer stopped her and asked if she saw a woman with a red blouse on, she said, "No." Was she lying? No. She had seen no woman walking around with a red blouse on. She, in fact, was the woman, but chose not to reveal that matter. Then the article tells of several examples where such strategy was appropriately applied.

  
  

  “Did the woman lie about doctrine? No. Did she lie at all? No.”

  _________________________________

  
  
  

  Let’s probe this opinion to a greater depth, shall we?

  Move slowly through the following reasoning because it has subtle snares.

  
  

  A faithful witness does not love a false oath. So he tells the truth as he swore to do.What he does speak will be the truth. If he speaks at all he will tell the truth. To the extent that he chooses to talk he will state the truth. If for conscientious reasons he refuses to tell everything he will be willing to suffer the consequences if he be judged deserving of a penalty. He refuses to tell everything, not to escape punishment, but facing punishment for conscientious reasons. Even Jesus kept silent before Pilate, refusing to answer though knowing Pilate’s power.—John 19:8-11."

  
  

  Did you catch that? ”If for conscientious reasons he refuses to tell everything. . .”

  Isn’t this a shady way of simply saying, “If you lie for the right reasons. . .”?

  Let’s go back and finish the thought started. . .

  “ If for conscientious reasons he refuses to tell everything he will be willing to suffer the consequences if he be judged deserving of a penalty. “

  
  

  In plain language: If you lie for the right reasons and get caught be ready to pay the price.
  __________________________________
  
  Let’s pause for a moment to reflect. . .

  
  

  Imagine an Elder on the Witness Stand in a court of law. Imagine a trial concerned with child molestation by a JW accused of this crime. Imagine a looming multi-million dollar penalty hanging over the head of the Watchtower corporation and the bad publicity at stake.

  
  

  With those in place, read the following . . .

  
  

  The 1960 Watchtower, p.352, emphasized, "Should circumstances require a Christian to take the witness stand and swear to tell the truth, then, if he speaks at all, he must utter the truth. When faced with the alternative of speaking and betraying his brothers or not speaking and being held in contempt of court, the mature Christian will put the welfare of his brothers ahead of his own, remembering Jesus’ words: “No one has greater love than this, that someone should surrender his [life] in behalf of his friends.”"

  
  

  Can you see what advice is being given?

  LIE on the Witness Stand even if it means the death penalty!

  Sneaky and above all unethical and illegal. In short: suborning perjury.

  In American law the subornation of perjury is the crime of persuading a person to commit perjury — the swearing of a false oath to tell the truth in a legal proceeding, be it spoken or written.

  
  

  ________

  What does the apologist JW conclude?

  “What this is saying is that if the judge orders him to betray his brothers, he must hold his tongue. It does not say to lie.”

  Oh my! Your ethics are showing! (Actually, your lack of. . .)

  _________

  
  

  Let’s move forward. Another subtle scenario is presented.

  In the May 1st, 1957 Watchtower, in the article, "Use Theocratic War Strategy", it gave the example of a sister who was in her ministry in Eastern Germany. When she saw a violent opposer of Jehovah's Witnesses, she immediately went around the corner and changed from a red blouse to a green one. When an officer stopped her and asked if she saw a woman with a red blouse on, she said, "No." Was she lying? No. She had seen no woman walking around with a red blouse on. She, in fact, was the woman, but chose not to reveal that matter. Then the article tells of several examples where such strategy was appropriately applied.

  
  

  The Blogger presents a rhetorical question;

  Did the woman lie about doctrine? No. Did she lie at all? No.
  
  

  The Blogger is correct!
  The woman knew what complete information would reveal and she concealed it for self-protection.

  You see, we have switched context from LYING to protect others at a cost to yourself to that of concealing the whole truth about yourself to protect yourself.

  So what?

  In this case, the technicality of the “lie” is self-preservation solely.

  ______________
  
  Now our JW apologist moves to the most recent instance of Theocratic Strategy. Give careful and specific attention to contexts and exemptions.

  
  

  Does "Theocratic War Strategy" Teach Lying?

  
  

  By C. J. Williams

  
  

  The term "theocratic war strategy" has not been officially used in our publications since 1968. (Though a 1988 life experience article referred to its use during World War II.) Some of our opposers seem to be very fixated on this term even today, while referring to this doctrine that we still hold to. However, rather than sticking to what Jehovah's Witness publications state about the subject, many use erroneous statements from misguided individuals as proof of the meaning of the publications, as well as performing their own omissions of the facts. So let us examine the facts in their contexts.

  
  

  Sources of "Theocratic War Strategy" Doctrine

  When the term was used, here was the direction in the Watchtower:

  
  

  February 1st, 1956 Watchtower says, "Never swear falsely in Jehovah’s name.Jehovah declares that at his temple he will be a “swift witness against . . . the false swearers.” (Mal. 3:5, AS) Never take an oath in his name and then tell lies as a sworn witness. Rahab of Jericho was under no oath in Jehovah’s name to tell the facts to the king’s officers and hence was not a false swearer or a false witness. “A faithful witness will not lie; but a false witness uttereth lies.” (Prov. 14:5, AS) A faithful witness does not love a false oath. So he tells the truth as he swore to do.What he does speak will be the truth. If he speaks at all he will tell the truth. To the extent that he chooses to talk he will state the truth. If for conscientious reasons he refuses to tell everything he will be willing to suffer the consequences if he be judged deserving of a penalty. He refuses to tell everything, not to escape punishment, but facing punishment for conscientious reasons. Even Jesus kept silent before Pilate, refusing to answer though knowing Pilate’s power.—John 19:8-11."

  
  

  The 1960 Watchtower, p.352, emphasized, "Should circumstances require a Christian to take the witness stand and swear to tell the truth, then, if he speaks at all, he must utter the truth. When faced with the alternative of speaking and betraying his brothers or not speaking and being held in contempt of court, the mature Christian will put the welfare of his brothers ahead of his own, remembering Jesus’ words: “No one has greater love than this, that someone should surrender his [life] in behalf of his friends.”"

  
  

  What this is saying is that if the judge orders him to betray his brothers, he must hold his tongue. It does not say to lie.

  
  

  In the May 1st, 1957 Watchtower, in the article, "Use Theocratic War Strategy", it gave the example of a sister who was in her ministry in Eastern Germany. When she saw a violent opposer of Jehovah's Witnesses, she immediately went around the corner and changed from a red blouse to a green one. When an officer stopped her and asked if she saw a woman with a red blouse on, she said, "No." Was she lying? No. She had seen no woman walking around with a red blouse on. She, in fact, was the woman, but chose not to reveal that matter. Then the article tells of several examples where such strategy was appropriately applied.

  
  

  Did the woman lie about doctrine? No. Did she lie at all? No.

  
  

  Modern Discussions of Omission

  The latest discussion of this "strategy" is found in the November 15th Watchtower, 2004. It states:

  
  

  "The faithful witness does not commit perjury when testifying. His testimony is not tainted with lies. However, this does not mean that he is under obligation to give full information to those who may want to bring harm to Jehovah’s people in some way. The patriarchs Abraham and Isaac withheld facts from some who did not worship Jehovah. (Genesis 12:10-19; 20:1-18; 26:1-10) Rahab of Jericho misdirected the king’s men. (Joshua 2:1-7)

  _______________
  The above statement is very carefully worded as a manipulation for coercive reasons.

  
  

  There are 3 parts to this manipulation.

  Part 1:

  this does not mean that he is under obligation to give full information
  Part 1 is clearly false. The Witness has sworn to tell “the whole truth.”

  Part 2:

  to those who may want to bring harm to Jehovah’s people

  Part 2: implies once again a kind of noble perjury for the benefit of religious allies. Perjury is illegal. For the Watchtower writers, it is suborning that perjury.

  Part 3: in some way.

  Part 3: This is wickedly vague! It leaves the door wide open to include child molesters!
  ______________
  What conclusion does the Blogger himself make?
  Yes, the doctrine holds today. But it is very succinctly spelled out here that we are never to lie under oath
  ______________
  This Blogger is either a dimwit, incapable of reasoning, or deliberately misrepresenting reality.

  He finishes his presentation vapidly:

  Jehovah's Witnesses are, in fact, the most honest people you will ever come across. We are neither in the practice of lying, nor do we lie to suit our own purposes.
  
  _______________

  Let us ask ourselves where the Watchtower leaders got this idea? The history of the Organization is rife with cherry-picking ideas from other religious groups, is it not?

  
  

  Take a look at taqiyya, a strategy in Islam for our answer! (Sounds like Tequila)
  Define taqiyya: In ISLAM, a legal dispensation whereby a believing individual can deny their faith or commit otherwise illegal or blasphemous acts while they are in fear or at risk of significant persecution.
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6F4wBeshTsw

  __________________
  
  

  Conclusion

  John 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and stayed not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
  
  
  Ephesians 4:29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace to the hearers.