When those who claim to speak for God turn out to be liars.
.
.
.
Is this the MOST painful one-line response to that question in the subjectline, or can you think of something even more painful in one sentence or less?
Derrick
Derrick
JoinedPosts by Derrick
-
18
WHAT IS THE MOST PAINFUL FORM OF BETRAYAL?
by Derrick inwhen those who claim to speak for god turn out to be liars.
.. .. .. is this the most painful one-line response to that question in the subjectline, or can you think of something even more painful in one sentence or less?.
derrick
-
-
-
131
Last Post - My Most Painful Public Confession
by Amazing inmy most painful confession
note to simon: i will use some expletives, but i hope that they will be retained as this is intended to be an otherwise civil and thoughtful post to all my fellow ex-jws.
please read on, as this is most painful.
-
-
Derrick
No words can express how I feel after reading your post. All I can say is this from my heart of hearts, Jim:
May the God to whom Jesus prayed, Yahweh, comfort you in this life and the next -- not the "Jehovah God" persona created in the lonely hearts of those who never understood the true God of love, those who are loyal to the Watchtower's organization, those who spend their lives in Kingdom Halls like cloistered nuns and monks worshipping a surrogate god who is nothing more than a concept of a generation that has almost passed away.
Of all those who I have known on the forums throughout the years, you truly stand out in my mind and heart as someone who is deserving of peace, spiritual fullness, good health and a good life. I watched you grow and I began to understand that you lost faith in the Watchtower, a manmade organization, not in Jesus and his Dad.
Remember Jim, the end is better than the beginning! So said the ancient proverb. Try not to fret about the past, don't look back, and continue the forward momentum you have worked so hard to achieve.
Warm regards,
Derrick -
138
I'm banned from the Silentlambs Website
by Trauma_Hound ini discovered a major security flaw on the silentlambs website, i e-mailed bill about it, setup up a small demonstration, mind you i told no one else about this.
and the demonstration was benine, because this flaw could allow someone to forward the site to say porn sights.
i won't go into detail, but let's just say i could cause alot of havoc with it.
-
-
Derrick
Yizuman wrote:
After I read his open letter to the WTBTS, I am convinced that Bill is still blind to the WT's doctrine and that Bill believes the borg is still the true organization, only the problem is that it's run by corrupt men. So he wants to get these corrupt men thrown out of the borg and changes be made to meet his satifaction and I believe right then he will ask to be reinstated. Correct me if I am wrong, but that's my impression. I feel like if he keeps this up, he may think of himself as being a hero for saving the borg in the name of Jehovah.
Your comment represents typical misconceptions amongst the ex-JW crowd about JW reformation.Those who have risked their lives in the sense of facing the potential loss of family, friends and sometimes income on behalf of this reformation are trying to, amongst other things, change the misnomer that the Watchtower Society represents the one true religion.
Also, one of many problems is that the organization is presently run by corrupt men. This is by no means the only problem as you misstate.
Yes, those who are practicing corruption to the detriment of the organization who are in high positions of responsibility must get rooted out. Yes, changes must be made to meet NOT the satisfaction of Bill or any other who believes in JW reformation but to meet the satisfaction of ALL SINCERE CONCERNED.
Once these changes percolate through the organization, many will seek reinstatement. Shall Bill be amongst them? Among other things IMO it is quite rude for you to even speculate on a matter that involves a personal and private decision one must make between themself and God. If he chooses reinstatement who are you to criticize his choice of worship? That has nothing to do with his resolve to root out evildoers in the organization who molest and sexually abuse children!
Bill does not strike me as one who would attempt to take credit for the reformation of Jehovah's Witnesses and Watchtower Society. I believe Bill humbly considers himself as part of a bigger picture that is orchestrated by Christ and his army of angels assigned to earthly affairs. We each play only a minor part on this big stage of humanity. Many people around the world including those in high places within this vast org have fought nobly together to root out the obvious wrongdoing and scriptural misconceptions throughout the organization and its many falacious teachings. The result of reformation if achieved will be a glorious victory, not of men, but of Christ who is trying to bring as many people into the light as possible using such organizations such as Jehovah's Witnesses.
As Jesus Christ's original followers and Apostles had to be corrected constantly in their quest to follow in our Lord's footsteps throughout their entire lives, this has been the same quest for many throughout the last two millenniums leading up to the modern-day churches who worship Christ <i>including Jehovah's Witnesses</i>. Every congregation on this earth who profess belief in Christ's sacrifice, including Jehovah's Witnesses, each need to work out their salvation if they truly believe the Bible is the word of God.
I have observed Bill's fine work in Christian reformation and helping to bring justice to those who have been cruelly and wickedly abused by those criminals who are sexual deviants. As regards his latter volunteer work, why would any decent person who wants justice for the young victims of crime keep criticizing him and the www.silentlambs.org? Surely your intent is not to discourage him and other volunteers in this organization from continuing to help those who are victims of heinous sexual crime?
I want to commend Bill for his determination not to let anyone discourage him from helping others, and for remaining steadfast in his faith in God and Christ's ability and desire to bring about the wonderful future they have in store for mankind and all living things on earth!
Bill, if you're reading this, the tests of your faith have only begun. I find your spiritual strength empowering to myself.
Derrick
-
40
silent lambs sabotaged
by wednesday inour worst fears has happened the website has been sabotaged.
we are working to restore a back up copy and will try to get up running soon.
i have asked the new webmaster to provide an explanation when he can.
-
-
Derrick
Silentlambs wrote:
Our worst fears has happened the website has been sabotaged. We are working to restore a back up copy and will try to get up running soon. I have asked the new webmaster to provide an explanation when he can.What lowlife miscreant would commit such a heinous act against young victims of sexual abuse? Goes to show once again that the world is a terrible place with terrible people in it.
Bill, my prayers are with you in dealing with those who enjoy hurting, humiliating and taking advantage of those who have suffered the most in this life. I have always admired your strength, your courage and most of all your uncompromising conviction in helping those too weak to help themselves in receiving the delayed legal justice they deserve.
Warmest wishes to you and yours,
Derrick
-
24
Danny, et al, I never claimed to have the answers
by Derrick inyou, farkel and others continue to mete out unfair assessments of the position i have taken because it apparently is out of sync with your worldview.
also, that remark implying that simon tolerates my posts as if my expressed beliefs are a nuisance on this forum are putting words in his mouth.
you seem to think that it's inappropriate to express views on jehovahs-witness.com that don't support the specific partylines of two major camps: partyline jehovah's witnesses as represented by the watchtower society or farkelline ex-jehovah's witnesses with strong steinhaugist underpinnings.
-
-
Derrick
Whether you're mistaken that baptized JWs in good standing will leave this board shortly after their arrival, as opposed to working it like a difficult territory, is a moot point. However, it seems we have reached a classic impasse or stalemate, deddaisy, in trying to reason this thing out. It's sad these discussions about real JW issues tend to crash and burn on the runway before the topic even gets any air speed.
Derrick
-
38
DFd for gluttony
by Tyler_Durden in"now the works of the flesh are manifest and they are... drunken bouts, revelries, and things like these... those who practise such things will not inherit god's kingdom" (galatians 5:19-21) .
it's 6 months since i disappeared from the dub scene but the elders finally tracked me down!
thing is i so wanna be dfd, i wanna move on with my life... but i need (for personal reasons) to leave the jws in crazy-style .
-
-
Derrick
You are playing with fire, because believe it or not many local bodies of elders are composed of decent hardworking family men (and admittedly I speak only based on observations from my local community) who abhor the thought of having to disfellowship anyone! Putting them through the wringer by creating a false dilemma will lower yourself to someone who exercises human cruelty just to inflict emotional pain on others. If you feel the elders "deserve" this treatment then why not leave the vengeance to Jehovah God?
The elders in my congregation are maxed out in supporting their families and selves in a treacherous economy, they're stressed out and some are bordering on nervous breakdowns, and those with families are spending time with them; and all this on top of performing the responsibilities required of elders to manage the congregation and Kingdom Hall facilities. For the most part, I have observed that elders try to avoid judicial committee situations if at all possible. Most of them believe in disfellowshipping members of the congregation for these major reasons:
- Protect the congregation from dishonest conduct, immorality or a perceived threat such as "apostasy" (even if many JWs on the "fringes" such as myself know this is fundamentally wrong because shunning should be a conscience matter practiced by each congregation member individually). The elders may believe in their hearts disfellowshipping is scripturally correct and they have an obligation to protect the congregation by going through this time consuming ordeal:
- Extreme examples where elders must take action to at least investigate include:
- investigating someone allegedly involved in satanism
- investigating someone allegedly engaging in prostitution or drug selling
- investigating someone allegedly attending another church
- investigating someone allegedly promoting "apostate" teachings to other congregation members
- investigating someone allegedly committing fraud against congregation members or non-Witnesses or tax evasion or credit fraud
- Protect a congregation member from harming themselves by investigating situations where harmful conduct is suspect:
- Extreme examples where elders must take action to at least investigate:
- investigating someone they believe is enslaved to smoking
- investigating someone they believe is morbidly obese and the elders learn it is due to extreme overeating (as opposed to a medical condition they have no control over)
- investigating some they believe is addicted to drugs
You really don't want to convince the elders you are a glutton, because to do so would require you eat until you are morbidly obese and then lie to the elders by claiming you uncontrollably eat. Optionally you would have to become morbidly under-weight and then lie to the elders by claiming you deliberately binge and purge for the sole purpose of enjoying eating as much food as is humanly possible. (The latter claim will often cause the elders to believe you are suffering from bolemia and mental illness, which most people who practice binging and purging actually suffer from.)
Surely you wouldn't go to these grotesque extremes to be the "first" to get DF'd for gluttony? If so then you might be suffering from mental illness without knowing it, and the elders might succeed in having you committed to a mental hospital for psychiatric observation if you succeed in "convincing" them in an attempt to get DF'd. Admittedly, I only speak from my own local experience. I realize there are reports of elders in parts of the U.S. and overseas that are on "power trips" and misuse their positions of authority in the congregations. Perhaps your congregation is one of these sad cases? Which could explain the basis for your bitterness that seems to lead you to want to play games with the judicial system, perhaps to teach them "a lesson" of some sort? I think life is too short. You should spend your time in other pursuits and just walk away if you feel this strongly. If you let God take care of any vengeance that may need taking care of, the wicked will get their comeuppance a lot better than you could ever mete out yourself! (I'm assuming there is a real bonafide reason you are so angry with them.)
Derrick
-
24
Danny, et al, I never claimed to have the answers
by Derrick inyou, farkel and others continue to mete out unfair assessments of the position i have taken because it apparently is out of sync with your worldview.
also, that remark implying that simon tolerates my posts as if my expressed beliefs are a nuisance on this forum are putting words in his mouth.
you seem to think that it's inappropriate to express views on jehovahs-witness.com that don't support the specific partylines of two major camps: partyline jehovah's witnesses as represented by the watchtower society or farkelline ex-jehovah's witnesses with strong steinhaugist underpinnings.
-
-
Derrick
Farkel,
You're a "fair and honest man"? Who am I to judge you on that assertation? However, I do admire your resourcefulness in creating challenges such as this:
Farkel wrote:What "unfair assessments of the position" you've "taken" have I made? Please be specific. I don't tolerate bullshit easily. Spell it out for me point-by-point and if I was wrong, I'll admit it and if I was right, you'll hear it from me.
I doubt Simon or other readers would appreciate it if I performed a search for all posts to Derrick written by Farkel and then proceeded to copy every rebuttal you have made against any position I have taken in my several hundred posts to-date. Neither would I appreciate spending all day on this sunny Sunday citing the links to all those posts, especially knowing that you would simply reply by asking me to "be more specific"!
It is safe to state that you have made assessments on many positions that I have taken, and that all those assessments were against my stated positions. A more fair question for you to ask me is: "Of the 'assessments of the position' you've 'taken' that I have made, did you consider them all 'unfair' or are there any 'assessments' that I have made resulting in your reassessment of your position?" (In other words, do I disagree with everything you posted in rebuttal to my position, or did anything you've posted cause me to take another look at my beliefs?)
If you asked that question then the answer would be "yes"! In roughly about a quarter to a third of your rebuttals to my posts where I state my position or belief, I have given my original belief a second look. In about 10% of those instances I realized that I was wrong. And in half of the instances where I realized that I was wrong I responded by stating that you were right.
Obviously, Farkel, you're probably going to deny that I ever posted a followup agreeing with any rebuttal to my stated position or belief! If you demand that I prove this, I would have to sift through years of my posts to find these rare gems where I posted a followup agreement with a rebuttal you made. Life is too short, and I won't go back and do this.
However, you seem to imply that I consider every assessment you have made about my beliefs as "unfair," and you want proof that you were unfair. I'm not going to spend all day on this Sunday digging up your posts and then commenting on volumes of your comments in order to satisfy your demand for proof that anything you have posted to me is "unfair." The posts are there for everyone reading this to search themselves, if it's important for them to do so, and judge for themselves which replies you have made to me in rebuttal to my positions/beliefs are "unfair" or not. That is why I wanted to state that I didn't consider all of your rebuttals as "unfair," erroneous, and so forth.
Derrick
-
24
Danny, et al, I never claimed to have the answers
by Derrick inyou, farkel and others continue to mete out unfair assessments of the position i have taken because it apparently is out of sync with your worldview.
also, that remark implying that simon tolerates my posts as if my expressed beliefs are a nuisance on this forum are putting words in his mouth.
you seem to think that it's inappropriate to express views on jehovahs-witness.com that don't support the specific partylines of two major camps: partyline jehovah's witnesses as represented by the watchtower society or farkelline ex-jehovah's witnesses with strong steinhaugist underpinnings.
-
-
Derrick
deddaisy wrote:Get real, if most of the posters here admired the work of the WTS, they wouldn't be on an apostate site now would they?
This is the exact problem. Looking at it from the standpoint of a JW who has just purchased a web television device from one of the competing manufacturers of these devices, hooked it up, activated it, and found this site or intuitively typed www.jehovahs-witness.com or similar in the URL field, this JW will first assume at the very least the site is a debate site comprised of both faithful partyline JWs and "opposers"! As they start to read the posts it starts to occur to them its the exact opposite of its domain name. (IOW, they might be puzzled that a site such as this has 'jehovahs-witness.com' and not 'ex-jehovahs-witness.com' as its domain name.) They might get hooked on the concept of witnessing on this site just as someone with a territory mostly comprised of diehard Born Again Christians might dig in their heels and decide to work that territory repeatedly to help bring as many souls "into the truth" as possible.
So your very premise that the composition of JWs versus ex-JWs as a determining factor on whether true JWs post on this site is fatally flawed. As a matter of fact, to test your premise one must ask if ANY poster is a true JW. Based on your premise, a true JW wouldn't be posting on this site, and therefore anyone on this site claiming to be a true JW is a liar. Obviously anyone on this site who attends KH meetings, goes out in field service and "admires" the work of the Watchtower Society in areas such as alternate medical treatment for blood (which is going to be a lifesaver to billions on this planet if there is ever an epidemic that contaminates the global blood supply), is going to automatic know your premise is false. They might not come out and post it because they might feel it's pointless to argue with anyone whose opinions seem to be set in stone. (I happen to think that articulating my opinion is not only my right as someone whose beliefs this site's domain name represents but more importantly, someone reading my posts might actually examine their beliefs and make positive adjustments even if not exactly along the lines of my own expressed beliefs. Everyone needs to constantly examine their beliefs, and keep making course corrections in their lives. Even if we're all on different roads, who says that only one road leads to the same destination? The many different religious books in the world and percentage of people who worship God who have never been visited by JWs or any other Christian religion are evidence that God is leading many people to Him through many culturally different avenues.)
Derrick
-
31
Poll:
by Monster in.
how many of you hold to some of the beliefs jws taught, and what are they?
peace james
-
-
Derrick
I'm doing quite fine today, and yourself?
I hold pretty much most of the beliefs, but have a list of exceptions that would use up the rest of Simon's disk space. (Sorry, couldn't resist the attempt at humor.) Actually, there is a short list of exceptions I do not believe in that include:
- not allowing blood transfusions to be considered a conscience matter
- disfellowshipping
- diminishing the Holy Spirit to a form of energy or so-called "active force" without a soul
- death causes the soul to cease to exist until the resurrection when Jehovah God "recreates it" from His memory
Put another way, I believe:
- blood transfusions should be considered a conscience matter and personal choice, and congregation members should not judge those whose conscience allows them to receive any form of life saving medical treatment
- each individual congregation member should decide whom they associate with, and disfellowshipping should be done away with
- the Holy Spirit is much more than merely an 'active force' of Jehovah God's but as a "comforter" is therefore a conscious entity with a soul
- upon death our souls do not cease to exist except only in Jehovah God's "memory," but possibly continue to exist
- many souls of the dead might be somewhere in Heaven with Jehovah God, either resting or as the angels depending upon God's will for them
- the souls of humans who committed crimes against God and man and remain unrepentant might exist somewhere until their resurrection to judgment
- some souls might remain on Earth for a time after their deaths for reasons unknown
- 'ghosts' are not necessarily demons or evil spirit entities but might be the souls of living humans who remain on Earth for reasons I cannot understand
- it is possible that angels who have fallen in this day and age after Satan deceived them into rebelling against Jehovah God still have the opportunity to repent, and many are taking advantage of God's forgiveness and turning against Satan
I don't pretend to understand these beliefs fully, but these exceptions to my beliefs have evolved over time nonetheless as a result of contemplation and firsthand experience. Otherwise, I'm pretty much in accord with the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Hoped this help your poll.
Derrick
Edited by - Derrick on 7 December 2002 13:3:22
-
16
JWs mentioned on Coronation Street !
by Simon in.
ha ha ... 'we' got a mention on coronation street.
fizz (the plump girl with the ginger hair) tells her friend toya battersby that her mum used to tell them they were jehovahs witnesses so she didn't have to but them christmas and birthday presents.. lol
-
-
Derrick
LOL, for some crazy reason I recall an X-Files episode where a farmer answers the door to find FBI agents Skully and Mulder on his porch. Skully identifies herself as "Special Agent for the FBI" and the farmer asks, "is that the Jehovah's Witnesses?" to which she replies, "No, Sir, we are with the FBI." Mulder immediately reaches into his suit blazer pocket as he quips with a hint of sarcasm, "but I can offer you a free issue of the Watchtower."
Derrick