Posts by Vinny

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

If you live anywhere close to where your were DF'd it simply can't happen. Everybody knows everybody. No way around it.

If you live hundreds of miles away but have a lot of people that are still in that care about you, it would be busted very quickly. Possibly even during the very same night announcement is made. (When my son was DF'd and moved 5000 miles away, I called his new congregation to make sure he was okay and they stopped in on him).

If you had MINIMAL friends and family that cared about you, and if lived many miles away from old congo and if you could pull the wool over the eyes of your original judicial committee and if Headquarters didn't find out about it and if no sharp circuit overseer to follow up on you then maybe, just possibly you could get away with it. And what about the supposed new congregation CO getting a letter to check on the newly reinstated fellow.

But then again if you have minimum family and friends who cares about getting reinstated. What's the point?

And in the case where we had a deleted thread we had a former elder, with decades of experience wanting to get reinstated for family.

That is a sure case of no chance it will last.

And when is falls apart all chances of getting back with family and or congregation will be shot down in flames for a very long time if not permanently.

The exact reasons that would cause some to take a look at this bogus reinstatement idea (family and kids and loved ones) are the very same reasons it would get busted up very quickly. Family, kids and loved ones checking up on them.

And for the people that possibly could pull it off (if getting away with it legalistically), what incentive is there if not for family, friends and loved ones?

It's just a no win deal here, IMO.

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

PSS- I just realized I misspelled Besty's name many times again in my last post. Now, I truly tried to get it right. For some reason Besty turns into Betsy. This was 100 percent by accident. Sorry about that.

"Besty" (especially when I apply an apostrophe "Besty's") is just not an easy one for the english language for some reason for me.

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

Jeff, my initial replies are found on page one. They were reasonable in content and tone, IMO. You can tell me if you disagree. In fact my first one I just quoted Snakesinthetower's excellent post from the now deleted thread.

As I helped Besty see last evening, this thing took a downward turn last night when he misunderstood my laughing with him, at his natural selection comment, to thinking I was crying/boohooing at him. (And I think Besty could have at least acknowledged that misreading to soften our exchanges some).

It was then that BETSY (not me) came across sarcastic, as a smart a$$ and in his own words hasty. From that point on I addressed his every reply in detail. Nothing more nothing less. I do that with JW's as well. And nobody seems to mind then. Well maybe not Reniaa and Spike so much.

Anyway, I tried many times to end this last night and today. He continued. I just wouldn't let him get away with points that I felt were either untrue or continuous shots at me without the good favor of a reply.

My replies are also full of content here, not just playing around picking on Betsy. Arguments themselves do have value. If you read my comments I always post content along with some of the fluff.

I've always enjoyed both of your and Betsy's posts here (and still do) and I've seen the same from you guys where you have valued mine.

It was a simple misunderstanding here that lead to a good ole brouhaha and what some have called entertainment along with a discussion of specific issues.

No harm done. If I were to pick on somebody else, initially, I can expect some replies in return. Nothing different with me here. Besty did start this thing going downhill. I just hopped on for a fun ride. Maybe I could have just let it go. But there was was too much going on at the time, I guess.

When JW's say things that you Jeff think are worth getting back to them on you do just that. Ask our resident JW Reniaa. Same with most people that I know of here. It's what makes us decent human beings. We care enough to offer a reply. I don't view that as any kind of negative quality, rather in fact the opposite.

Now, I'd like to nominate Alltime Jeff as a JWN moderator. (even if a slanted/biased one at times)

Any takers?

You get paid in satisfaction and many fun times here and better than the movies.

Vinny

PS- For Besty: (no this is not saying you are drunk, this is to having a couple of cold ones after a fun ride).

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

Once again Jeff you make generalizations without content about the exact issues we have been discussing here. I believe you apologized the last time you did just that.

I simply replied to Besty's posts word for word. Where is the harm in doing that? At least I offered specific details to what he wrote.

Betsy started the sarcsm and smart a$$ remarks. I only replied to them.

He claims he cannot understand some things about fading after being DF'd. So I clarified for him.

He wanted an apology so I gave him a good one.

My very last post I said I am out of this. But you jump in with barrels blasting like Yosemite Sam.

If you are a moderator then say so. Otherwise why not just let us work this out or at least make some kind of specific contribution to the issues?

Rather than taking sides with one person from the one side of your mouth while agreeing with my exact position from the other side.

If Besty or Flipper or whoever else wants to get all sarcastic and smarta$$ (((FIRST))), then I have no problems dealing directly with them and their issues myself.

I would hope you can see this.

One more time now... over ... and ... OUT!

Vinny

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

Besty writes: "I support the concept of almost any idea that may help people exit the WTS being developed. No contradiction here - sorry Vinny."

**** Too bad you instead wrote, " "I would say it's a good idea to take the concept (((of FakeReinstate 1.0)))) and work with the more knowledgeable posters on this board ((((to come up with a refined enhanced version-FakeReinstate 2.0.)))) "

Accepting "the concept", of, "almost any idea", is quite different from, "accepting the concept of Fake reinstatement 101 and seek to improve that same Fake Reinstatement to 2.0". They are two different points of view as written. You just now changed up your opinion. You supported the concept of Fake reinstatement initially. It's in print Besty. Here, I'll just quote your own words again:

"I would say it's a good idea to take the concept of FakeReinstate 1.0 and work with the more knowledgeable posters on this board to come up with a refined enhanced version - FakeReinstate 2.0."

Besty writes: " I'm not sensitive or offended by you Vinny - mind-reading is a great skill to master though - keep working on it.

But then the very next sentence writes: "I note you have offered no apology or retraction for accusing me of being drunk or of being insane, and now of being hypocritical as well - that is one sophisticated set of ad hominem argumentation techniques you deploy - wow - we should all watch out for your white hot debating skills."

**** It looks to me like you are speaking trough both sides of your mouth in one paragraph Besty.

And all the while YOU are the one that started with the smart a$$, sarcastic one liners. Go Read again! What a hoot. Where was my apology Besty? Of course I never asked for one or care for one. This is a public forum and we are both old enough to mix it up without getting all worked up and hurt feelings.

You wanted to dish it out, but could not take it, and only NOW wanting an apology. Amazing stuff here.

Okay then Besty, here she goes: I am sorry I replied to your sarcastic, smart-alec one liners the same way you did to me. I did not realize you wanted only to dish it out and could not take the heat in return. I apologize that you saw fit to accuse me of doing what you had initiated to begin with. And I am truly sorry that you cannot see how you are being a real hypocrite on this thread because of doing to me all the things I just apologized to you for.

How's that Besty?

Bestsy writes: "I don't recall disagreeing with your specific points - what I did disagree with was your wholly negative approach to the entire idea."

**** I disagreed with the idea itself and explained exactly why I disagreed with numerous details listed. That's not a "negative approach" to the idea, that's called disagreeing with the idea after looking at it closely and explaining why.

And ironically you agree with me now as well. This only gets better...

Bestsy writes: "You even said that fading after being DF'd would pose no more difficulty than a fake reinstatement. Sorry mate - thats just plain impossible to fade after you get DF'd. Why you even suggested fading as a solution to beat the system on a thread about DF'd ones is difficult to grasp."

**** Then allow me to help you to "grasp it". I thought you'd easily understand on your own.

When one is DF'd and shunned (as you and many others are right now); we have two ideas on the table how to get reinstated so that you can have relationships with family and loved ones.

Option A- Fake reinstatement letter that won't work in almost every scenario and which you also disagree with yourself now. Bad idea.

Option B- You go back to the meetings solely for the purpose of getting reinstated and then getting those relationships back. (I'm sorry if you still cannot grasp yet, sounds pretty simple to me).

People do this ALL THE TIME. There are so many stories of people that get reinstated for the only reason of getting family and loved ones back and nothing more.

Now, you still cannot talk about too many JW things, but once you are reinstated, you do not ever have to go to another meeting again. You just need to be discreet about it all from there on out.

But neither could you talk about anything critical of JW's, or birthdays, the JWN, apostafets etc etc if you somehow pulled off a fake reinstatement.

IN BOTH CASES you would be dead in the water if you brought up any of these anti JW things.

And this is what I explained last night and which you avoided completely in your reply.

So, which of the two is easier, and more possible to last and to get back your family?

You just have to put on a front to get back in. Occasionally a year or so, usually six mos from my experience, and even less at times depending on reasons you were DF'd.

If you don't want to do that then you are out of luck. Just live with your new life and hope they somehow come around. It's an unfair system but it does work since most JW's are still in the dark.

Which is why I try to help people online. Just like I saw the light online three years ago.

Besty writes: "Anyways - time to sit outside in the sun - I'm an unemployed waster but even I have my attention span limits."

**** Agreed on attention span. Far too much time here. You can even have the last word... (unless of course you get too out of line)...

Over and OUT!

Vinny

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

Besty wants to continue...

Betsy writes: "Vinny If you don't grasp by now that I'm not a supporter of fake reinstatements per se I guess you never will :-( Thats why I haven't felt any need whatsoever to refute the good or bad points you make."

**** Then why did you write this in your very first comment on this thread: "I would say it's a good idea to take the concept of FakeReinstate 1.0 and work with the more knowledgeable posters on this board to come up with a refined enhanced version - FakeReinstate 2.0."

Sounds like you think, "it's a good idea", to me. I wonder if that's because you used those exact words in your very first comment.

Not one time did you say you were not a supporter, or why you are not a supporter until now. In fact you tried to give me a hard time because I was not a supporter and explained just why in detail.

And now you want to try telling me that I simply couldn't grasp that you are not a supporter (even though you said it's a good idea and said let's refine/enhance it and then complained when I did not support it).

This is some pretty lame-a$$ commentary from you now Besty. You'd have been better off just letting it go or going to the grocery store. Same with last night. But you can't for some reason.

Besty then writes: "What you have put your name to is permanently on the Internet for other people to guess your motivations and to glimpse your personality. Some have already commented on what they see ;-)"

**** Watching you get taken to the woodshed is not a fun thing to do. And that's exactly what happened last night. I gave details you could not refute. I was not on board with this plan. (Nor is almost anybody else from the comments I read... and now, ironically, including YOU). But you then started with the sarcastic/smart remarks and I then straightened you out for it with a little fun of my own.

Only you were like a sensitive baby when on the receiving end of it. You can obviously dish it out but cannot take it Besty. Explain that. You then try to chastise me for for the personal jabs all the while you started with them. And I showed you this. I noticed you avoided that in your reply here too.

Betsy writes: "I am a supporter of allowing almost all ideas to live or die on their own merits."

**** Part of that living or dying on its own merits is how will an idea can stand up to scrutiny and examination. Which is precisely what I offered. I also stated many times that these were only my opinions and I'd be all for it if it could be accomplished and to go for it if you folks see it differently. You seemed to miss that part and instead sarcastically thanked me for giving you permission. And that was when you had to get SPANKED right here Besty. Which you were, but then you cried about it like a spoiled little kid not getting his way. Amazing things from you on just this one thread.

What people can see with me is a man that will say what he truly believes, and offer specifics to support or back up what he thinks and truly believes. I can be very gentile and empathetic too. But when you start up with your own smart and sarcastic little one liners you can also be prepared for something in return. Only you fell apart when you got yours. Okay, so now we both know. It would be a smart idea if you can't take the heat to avoid starting a problem Betsy. Just some advice for you.

Besty writes: " I am a supporter of using the wisdom of the crowds to make the best possible strategies visible to a wider audience than JWN alone can reach."

**** Which is exactly what I offered on this thread last night. And now you say you agree with me (and everybody else) that fake reinstatement program is not something you support. It simply won't work in almost every case, IMO. Try something else then. I already wrote that I'd be on board if something else comes up. But you were too busy being offended for some reason to remember that part of what I said.

Besty writes: "I am a supporter of not being dogmatic, opinionated and condescending."

**** Yet you were all of the above on this thread alone. That is called being a hypocrite Besty. No other way to put it.

Besty writes: "And I am a supporter of allowing people the dignity to come to their own informed conclusion as to what will work for them."

**** Yet rather than allow me the dignity to share my my own conclusions you instead get smart and sarcastic because of them. And then offended and sensitive when I come back to you with some of my own.

Bestsy writes: "I hope our little tête-à-tête gave JWN readers as much pleasure as it gave me."

**** I'm glad you had fun and pleasure Besty. Only this reply (along with ALL YOUR REPLIES LAST NIGHT) sure sounds like you didn't have any fun and pleasure at all. Should I quote all your lack of pleasure comments and complaints?

Besty concludes: "Keep smiling people - the WTS are f**king up another 192 families today - we need all the ideas we can get to help them. All the posters on this thread have made a valuable contribution to the idea machine."

**** And this is what I have contributed towards for over 3 and a half years now since leaving the JW religion. My letters and posts are all over the internet whenever I can give my time.

I can agree with an idea or disagree. I have that right and option to do so, and have done just that here. Because I offered details as to why I thought this was not a great idea, alomng with the fact that most others on this thread agree with me that the idea of phony reinstatements and congregations is not the best direction to go, I believe I have made a positive contribution on this subject and thread.

Even if having to go through pages of stuff like this along the way.

Now, I have spent far too much time on this thing already.

It's just not a good idea, IMO. If I were to try any of this in my own case it would not fly off the ground for two seconds.

The elders in my congregation would laugh at this thing and I'd look like a complete loser to all JW's for even trying it.

I am open to other ideas. Notice the title to my DA letter here:

http://newsblaze.com/story/20081209054218zzzz.nb/topstory.html

That title alone caused many a current JW to read it all the way through.

And then look at how many e-mails I received from it (and many others not posted up yet):

http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/experiences/168958/1/EXPOSING-THE-WATCHTOWER-SOCIETY-ONLINE

There are numerous ways to help people see the facts as they are.

Just a couple of weeks ago I spent many days debating JW's on this thread on USA Today:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/religion/2009-06-15-jehovahs-witness_N.htm Over a dozen different JW's (that showed up) all were educated and then all ran away after getting thoroughly refuted on every issue they could bring up. Read it for yourself. It was 100 percent lopsided. It was just far too easy. And how many other people simply READ what was written and educated themselves? USA Today has a huge audience. I chose to spend time on that thread because it had such a large audience of people. Last night I saw this article and posted a comment on it: http://extratv.warnerbros.com/2009/07/mother_katherine_opens_up_abou.php I do not have time to keep doing this. Nor do I want to. I have a good life, but also a busy one. But whenever I can I do like to find ways to help educate people so they can at least have all sides of the JW faith to make a better decision. So once again I can agree with and do support whatever can be used to help people see the real truth about the JW religion. And if I disagree with a suggested tactic (as most here also feel and agree with me on this one), then there is nothing wrong with sharing that point of view either. All the best, Vinny

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

Besty writes: "Vinny it is unsustainable to assert that this cannot and has not worked - unless you are privy to worldwide statistics from Brooklyn on such failed attempts? Please share these stats with us. Yes you have offered your opinion, and it stays in the realm of unsubstantiated opinion without facts.

**** I do not need worldwide statistics to tell you why I think an idea will not work. Just a little common sense and some specifics. And I shared specific details just what I think would happen. You did not refute any of it, btw.

Yes, it's only my opinion, and I said just that too many times to remember now. Only you said something in response like, "Thanks for giving me permission" afterwards.

Which of course prompted my reply that you didn't care for.

Look, this is done and over for me. Far too much time on this thing already. I have stated just why I think the idea of a phony reinstatement program will not work with numerous details expressed.

I have addressed/refuted your reasons why you and others like it, also in detail. At least for me I did.

I will conclude with some of those exact reasons given below without the sarcasm (and name spelling corrections) this time.

Have a good one,

Vinny

Besty quotes Vinny: "If you want to beat the system go ahead and do a fade then."

Besty Replies to vinny quote: "There is no one correct solution for all cases. Fading is particularly problematic for those already disfellowshipped, which was the subject of the original post."

**** No more problematic than pulling off a fake reinstatement once people start checking up on you and congratulating/encouraging you.

For starters most people do not live hundreds of miles away from the congregation that disfellowshipped them. So then what? They are dead in mud under your new plan right there. That aint much of a plan to me.

It takes usually six months to a year for reinstatement if you go to meetings for most cases. If you did something heavy, like practicing adultery, then it could take longer. BUT, THE INITIAL JC WILL ALSO SEE RED FLAGS RAISED if you come in any sooner for serious offenses like that.

Obviously people have not thought this thing out very well.

Besty quotes Vinny: "My wife has faded and she can talk to most JW's today."

Besty replies to my quote: "I'm happy your wife can enjoy partially restricted interaction with fundamentalist cult members. Does she have the freedom to discuss her birthday celebrations with her love bomber buddies?"

**** How will wifey be able to talk birthday celebrations under any bogus fade, true fade, active JW, disfellowshipped JW or anything else under the sun? She will not have ANY freedom of speech with ANY JW under ANY circumstances.

Besty writes: " There is no simplistic one-size-fits-all answer to exiting a high control group."

**** All I'm saying is I think your plan for bogus congos and bogus reinstatement letters is a bad idea.

Besty quotes Vinny: "If you instead want to create a phony congregation and phony judicial committees , then go for it. I sure won't stop anybody."

Besty Replies to vinny: "Thanks for the permission to try new ways to defeat the WTS."

**** That'll cost you $250. I'll send permission in writing once I get the funds in hand.

Besty concludes: " If a DF'd person is being shunned how much worse can it get for all concerned? Go on Vinny - unleash the inner optimist that is begging to create new ways to undermine the WTS....or die in a fatalist coffin"....

**** I have seen many ways to undermine WT Society. But this idea sure aint one of the best I've seen. Like I said in beginning anybody that lives close by to congo where DF'd is already dead in mud.

Do you realize that yet?

And those that do move far away will still get caught very soon if it can be pulled off at all.

Like I said on last nights deleted thread: (and good riddance)

"What do you think happens after he gets the reinstatement letter read on Thursday night?

Take a stroll here Cognac...

This guy is a former 20 year elder . And the judicial committee in his old cong that makes the announcement will be asked where he's at today by other elders and by friends and family that know him.

It will get around to other congregations in his circuit that also knew him and that he likely gave talks at for 20 years.

So then what happens? Will ANYBODY want to call to congratulate him? Will anybody call his new cong to get his number? What happens when ONE PERSON calls his congregation and finds out right then and there that he was never reinstated or they never heard of the guy?

Will his old or new C.O. make sure they check on him too?

How about his closest family. Will they be curious to see when he started going to meetings again? Will they want to see him and maybe visit him in his new congregation? Only to find out what?

I can go on and on. Just use your mind and you can see this will never work.

If he really wanted to beat the system he should have just continued going through the motions and gone to the meetings and writing new reinstatement letters until they said yes. He could have written the Society about all those times the brothers kept saying no.

He could have talked to the CO about it when he visits twice a year face to face.

But what was done here is just plain foolish and will never work for any amount of time.

And then after being exposed for this bogus reinstatement with XXXX, what are the chances this guy will ever get reinstated even 10 years later again??"

**** Back to current. Just use some common sense here folks. This is a bad idea. Sorry I think you guys need to go back to the drawing board here.

Vinny

**** Over and out this time!

Aloha,

Vinny

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

Misunderstand here.

Betsy wrote: "thats my point Vinny - we have enough smarts on this board to create 2.0 FakeReInstate for those that want to try....

attempt number 1 is not usually the final version - it's called natural selection :-)"

And Vinny Replied: **** (with nothing else written)

And now Betsy replies: "let the reader decide who started the disrespect - my post evidently didn't demand any more recognition from you than cutting and pasting my text and adding your 4 **** and a boohoo icon....."

**** My Reply to all of this now:

You have obviously misread my reply then. Okay, so now that might explain why you started with sarcasm in your following reply. And why I followed with the same in mine.

Just to be clear, this was a mistake on your part. But at least we know where this took a turn downward.

Now let's see once again the very comment that I replied to you about. You wrote:

"thats my point Vinny - we have enough smarts on this board to create 2.0 FakeReInstate for those that want to try.... attempt number 1 is not usually the final version - it's called natural selection :-)"

**** Now notice, what is the very last thing at the end of your comment Besty? Take a close look, what do you see? Yep, that would be a SMILEY FACE.

YOU put that there, not me.

Now, I thought your comment was funny as well. And here is my reply to you:

That folks is what I call Bwaaahahahahaah laughing. I am laughing just like Besty is laughing at the end of his own comment.

And it sure ain't a boohoo emoticon (as you now claim Besty), I can tell you that for sure. THIS is a "boohoo" emoticon:

But going even further here, to drive my point home, Besty asks me to comment about that smiley, saying I live on an island etc and then I do comment with this:

"Bwaaahaahahahaaha" (and then a wink).

Now if you can't tell I am laughing from the icon, then you should surely tell I am laughing with Bwaaaahahahaaaha and then a wink.

There was no jesting in that exchange at all.

But obviously you saw it differenty and then kept getting smart/sarcastic.

I then came on much more sarcastically after that in my detailed reply explaining why I think it's a bad idea to have bogus reinstatement congregations and letters.

And then we did the tit for tat thing where you kept losing.

heh (I am laughing again....

At least it should all be clear now. I was laughing just like you were laughing and even said just that Bwaaaahahahaah.

Vinny

60

The truth is that the reason my wife and I left was bound up with "Making the Truth Our Own"

by gubberningbody in

jw
friends

you get contacted, you come in, you learn the bible their way, then you learn the bible your way and then you leave.. you make the truth your own..

Vinny

Not so fast Spike.

Folks our new resident JW Spike Tassel wants to chalk all those WT mistakes (((( FOR OVER 100 + YEARS NOW ))) up to some good ole new light getting brighter nonsense.

He believes that God is with WT-world despite all the mistakes and embarrassments costing JW lives, JW careers, JW families, JW prison time, and more. Spike Tassell is in sad shape here as we will now see. He quotes 1 Cor 13 and says that, "knowledge is not complete". So that somehow means God is with WT world ONLY , but not with any other christian religion or people of those religions regardless of how spiritual or devoted to God and Christ they are today. ONLY (((THE JW'S))) GET THIS FREE PASS TODAY because he quotes 1 corinthians 13. HOW BOUT THAT! With powerful reasoning like this, there must be a LOOONG line to sign up for new JW's. But where are they. I don't see them here in JWN. Maybe they are all sleeping Spike. Maybe they are watchinhg movies today Spike. Everybody makes mistakes personally. As I have said many times. But WT land goes FAR BEYOND JUST MAKING MISTAKES (((PERSONALLY))). They (((COLLECTIVELY))) ---- ((((( PUBLISH )))) those mistakes, ((((( AS "FOOD FROM GOD" ))))) --THEN force them on all JW's,-- WITH THREAT OF DISFELLOWSHIPPING-- and and then say God is directing ONLY them. You just gotta love that. IF GOD'S SPIRIT WAS LEADING THE JW'S THEN THE TEACHINGS WOULD NOT JUST BE BELIEVED TO BE TRUE... THEY WOULD IN FACT (((((BE TRUE))))). I guess God's "spirit", that was prayed for by the JW's just wasn't up to the task those days. I guess God just purposely MISLEAD all those JW's so that later on God could "refine" them. Is that what happened Spike? With powerful logic like this from Spike who needs Vinny? Or anybody else? What a mess they have on their hands today. Got an extra week free, then just enjoy some more of this: http://www1.tip.nl/%7Et661020/wtcitaten/part1.htm Yep God's spirit was sure with those JW's alright! The printed page tells it like it is. Printed WT Pages are the JW's BIGGEST PROBLEM TODAY. But then that same "God's spirit" leading JW's (as Spike and Reniaa believe) obviously must have misled those JW's. Cause JW's sure got lots of things wrong and embarrassed themselves too many times to count. JUST TAKE A LOOK AGAIN: http://www1.tip.nl/%7Et661020/wtcitaten/part1.htm Folks this is exactly why many JW's come to their senses and say, "Nope the JW's aint for me". Spike and Reniaa IGNORE all the facts placed in their laps. Many pages worth. They instead tries to say that since some bible folks made mistakes that JW's are proven to be God's organization and light gets brighter nonsense. This is completely WORTHLESS. As has been proven many times now. So folks let's all do a little math from JW's! According to JW's, "God's spirit" is with the JW's while they make decisions based on God's infallible word. Those decisions are wrong again and again and again. Proving embarrassing mistakes for WT world, causing people to lose out on many things like buying homes, getting education, not having families, kids, pets, not being of 144,00, and more. Those decisions led by the same "God's spirit" also cause some JW's to (((DIE))) and to go (((TO PRISON))) for no reason for many years including RIGHT NOW. A n d t h e FACTS show that WT world is wrong RIGHT NOW on many things. But somehow all this light getting brighter as excuse for mistakes does not apply to any other sincere Christians or Christian denominations. ONLY TO JW'S!!!

But JW's seem forget some things like: 1914 came and went. 1925 came and went. Beth Sarim (was huge WT embarrassment) and came and went. 1975 came and went. The generation of 1914 came and went. The 20th century came and went. Vaccinations stomped out polio, diptheria, tetanus, flu, cholera, measles, mumps, yellow fever, rubella and more. Organ transplants were never the same as "cannibalism" as Wt land stated and have saved or extended hundreds of thousands of lives. Many times dropped doctrinal understanding has been brought back. That aint not "light getting brighter" folks. That's called BLINKING LIGHTS. You see this is why Spike and Reniaa are fighting a losing battle. The WT was never God's anything. One look at the whole picture proves this without a doubt to any rational mind. But change is tough for some. It is not easy to see the truth for some JW's. All the best, Vinny

113

Hypothetically, If Someone Created a Fake Congregation to Trick Another...

by OnTheWayOut in

let's just stay hypothetical.

if someone wanted to create a fake congregation in 7-miles-from-nowhere, north dakota (7-m-f-n, n.d. congregation) in order to trick the elders at another congregation, what could they get away with?.

just assume that they use a p.o.

Vinny

I see Spike and Reniaa are acting up on other threads. I am leaving this one. I like your work Besty.

What we are doing is helping others to see a complete JW picture rather than just the view they get from a JW bible study. And that is a noble cause, IMO.

I hope you agree we both have better things to do than argue about a phony reinstatement program. You think it's a good idea I think it's a bad idea. We can agree to disagree then.

Aloha,

Vinny