Selfish?
LUCKY?
question:.
while in the "truth", what was the first thing said when a fellow congregation member bought a new or used two door car?.
there is no prize.
Selfish?
LUCKY?
from the olin moyle trial transcripts: .
direct examination of clayton j. woodworth, editor of the consolation magazine (which used to be the golden age, and later became the awake!).
q. how old are you mr. woodworth?
To see for myself what Olin Moyle sued over - like I said, I wasn't aware of this, and if the Governing Body used the WT to libel an individual, then I personally believe that to be well out of order especially after what I have just read in the ''Scottish Case'' transcripts.
from the olin moyle trial transcripts: .
direct examination of clayton j. woodworth, editor of the consolation magazine (which used to be the golden age, and later became the awake!).
q. how old are you mr. woodworth?
Am trying to find the link / a quote for the Watchtower 15th October 1939 - without success :(
from the olin moyle trial transcripts: .
direct examination of clayton j. woodworth, editor of the consolation magazine (which used to be the golden age, and later became the awake!).
q. how old are you mr. woodworth?
lol - I was just doing a google search on the Olin Moyle trial (as I'm not familiar with it) but I HAVE just read that :-
During the Scottish trial the directors of the Watchtower Society admitted....
1. They taught ERROR
2. They have promulgated (published) FALSE PROPHECY
3. Any Jehovah's Witness who DISAGREED with the organisation, and said so, would be DISFELLOWSHIPPED.'AND JEHOVAH GOD HIMSELF IS BEHIND IT ALL'
....hmmmmmmm
from the olin moyle trial transcripts: .
direct examination of clayton j. woodworth, editor of the consolation magazine (which used to be the golden age, and later became the awake!).
q. how old are you mr. woodworth?
''SON'' - is that literal though - or as a priest would call one of his flock?
admittedly i'm an outsider but i do not get why witnesses feel so darn compelled to "tattle" on each other?.
i do remember my friend telling me (as justification for the shunning) that when a witness is baptised, they understand that they are accepted into a special society that requires a commitment to the "rules.
" she went on to say that those that don't follow the rules are well aware of the consequences.
Interestingly, there is no mention of getting proof for your allegations before running to tattle
I think the ''2 Witness'' rule is applied when it is beneficial to do so - in my PERSONAL experience, an untrue rumour was acted upon.
where i live, its not usual for people to "dress up," especially business people and executives, you are more likely to see them with a button up shirt, khakis, and one of those fleece vests on.
so, on the whole, jws look very out of place wearing their cheap suits (though a few elders didn't wear cheap suits and they made that known, "look at this, i got a spot on my new $200 designer shirt" -- really, something like this happened).
but what i did notice is that, in my area, dressing guidelines usually weren't followed, or enforced for that matter, for good looking women.
I have never understood why ''sisters'' are not permitted to wear trousers - what is the thinking / reason for this? In Western Society, trousers have been an accepted part of a woman's wardrobe for MANY years - both casually AND formally. How can it be deemed ''inappropriate'' for a ''sister'' to wear a very smart trouser suit?
.
i can't find this document/post anywhere, and i'd like to send it to someone who just woke up about the wt!
if someone would please post the link, i appreciate it!
Thanks for that AlmostAtheist - and very good point you make there Sweetp.
while searching google for some research i stumbled across this .
http://www.sec.gov/archives/edgar/data/922330/000106299302000371/form10k.txt.
in this document it mentions rand camengine corp. is a privately held company whose stock is reportedly owned 50% by.
There's people here with ''fingers on the pulse'' - am sure they can update ta all in advance !!
gina's sister and her husband haven't been df'd yet, contrary to what we were told.
she will be announced this thursday.. she's not aware of the "organization" side of the organization, gina and i both feel she is unaware of her right to appeal.
if we tell her, and she appeals, i think she stands a decent chance of having it overturned.
My Heart bleeds for you - what chance has your Sister-In-Law (with difficultires) got against a body of pre-programmed Elders (no offence) - they don't care, and they have the upper hand. They just rub their hands together - pathetic little men - did I say that out loud?
....get out of her my people.....where DID I hear THAT?