at 20:00 - 21:30 in his testimony, mr. geoffrey jackson - in answer to mr. stewart's question about the governing body claiming to be god's spokespersons - claimed that it would be presumptuous of them to say that they were the only spokespersons which god was using.
mr. jackson doesn't seem to know what he and his fellow g.b.
members - and the providers of his lifestyle, the wtbts - actually teach as "bible truth.
This is the way the organisation is, not just Jeffrey Jackson.
They don't have a concrete stance on anything, but constantly revise their position and reinterpret their own words.
Good grief, they even put new meaning into well established words in order to distort, confuse and allow room for maneuver.
(Micah 6:12) . . .their tongue is tricky in their mouth.
at 20:00 - 21:30 in his testimony, mr. geoffrey jackson - in answer to mr. stewart's question about the governing body claiming to be god's spokespersons - claimed that it would be presumptuous of them to say that they were the only spokespersons which god was using.
mr. jackson doesn't seem to know what he and his fellow g.b.
members - and the providers of his lifestyle, the wtbts - actually teach as "bible truth.
suavojr One Jdub said Jackson was acting like Jesus and not saying where he got his authority from.
There was no question that Jesus had power, it's just that Jesus didn't say where from.
The GB have never demonstrated they even have Jesus choosing, let alone anything else.
Their authority comes from themselves, which is no authority.
2 Cor 10:18 For it is not the one who recommends himself who is approved, but the one whom Jehovah recommends.
this question is known to be posed by jws to other jws as an acid test of loyalty.
i'm not the first to notice what i'm about to point out and comment accordingly, but today i felt compelled to add a short article on my blog highlighting the new language that governing body member geoffrey jackson supplies as a response.
a person who honestly hesitates to respond with a robust "yes!
For the purposes of the WT publications there is no doubt, no question.
The GB are Jehovah's spoke person, there is nowhere else to get salvation, you cannot question them.
For the purpose of the court and public exposure there is a fabricated, artificial humility.
"I think it would be quite presumptuous to say we are the only spokesperson God is using".
"We view ourselves as trying to fulfill that role [of the faithful slave]".
If JG had God's spirit, if he was abso-f***ing-lutely certain that the GB are God's highest authority on earth, he would have responded
"Yes! The GB alone are directed by God to speak biblical truth in a Satanic world."
"We dictate doctrine and understanding direct from our brother Jesus."
"If you think there is something wrong with our procedures then know these are God's procedures. Take it up with Him!"
JW's around the world would have cheered loud and hard at this man's confidence.
Instead we get a wishy washy answer from a weak man removed from his fan base.
Charlatans.
justice mcclellen asked g.jackson about compensation for victims of child abuse , and mcclellan suggested it be by a consortium of groups , presumably religious and secular in nature as a pool to dispense approppiate compensation to all of the victims involved .. g.jackson hesitated and said they would have to look at the details of that proposal , before committing to it.. jehovah`s witnesses consider themselves as the only true religion and ,all others as false religion .. they take pains to separate themselves from from any association with other religions , not even being included in newspaper notices about church services.they want to keep themselves separate and distinct from false religion as they see them.. so how do you think they will handle this suggestion / requirement ?
will they join in aligning themselves with "babylon the great" in compensation .?.
didn`t they align themselves with another religion in the u.s.a. some years ago , that had to do with the w.t.
If forced to offer compensation, the WT seek to organise this process themselves.
Given that they have already mistreated and further harmed abuse victims with traumatic and inadequate procedures and unqualified elders, they seek to compound the damage by making the victims apply to the WT (and all that would entail) for compensation.
I think the WT are worried that if there is a simple and caring way for survivors to claim compensation, then every one of the abuse victims would do so, and the WT would be powerless to dissuade them.
Without their usual non-disclosure clauses it would become public and expensive.
wt publications http://www.a2z.org/wtarchive/archive.htm (old).
united nations http://www.randytv.com/secret/unitednations.htm .
when pornography is mentioned by the wts they mean men, who obviously cant control their sexual desires, so that even a moment is too much.
Thanks Blondie, always read your analyses.
BTW, where's your avatar? I don't recognise this nondescript brown thing as I'm scanning posts.
justice mcclellen asked g.jackson about compensation for victims of child abuse , and mcclellan suggested it be by a consortium of groups , presumably religious and secular in nature as a pool to dispense approppiate compensation to all of the victims involved .. g.jackson hesitated and said they would have to look at the details of that proposal , before committing to it.. jehovah`s witnesses consider themselves as the only true religion and ,all others as false religion .. they take pains to separate themselves from from any association with other religions , not even being included in newspaper notices about church services.they want to keep themselves separate and distinct from false religion as they see them.. so how do you think they will handle this suggestion / requirement ?
will they join in aligning themselves with "babylon the great" in compensation .?.
didn`t they align themselves with another religion in the u.s.a. some years ago , that had to do with the w.t.
Everything they despise in one question.
Spending money, having to publicly acknowledge their guilt and being lumped in with Babylon the Great.
Oh please let it happen, and on a world wide scale!!
your going to enjoy the latest rumor i heard why i have not been to meeting for around nine months, i am a homosexual!
i was caught having a drink at one of the gay bars for business, yes people still talk business in bars.
revelation 17:4).and murderers, and fornicators (cf.
It is inconceivable for someone to leave the JW's unless they are doing something evil.
When someone quits, the JW mindset simply has to assign some bad character trait, otherwise it becomes too difficult and confusing to comprehend.
A genuine, warm, intelligent person leaves the JW's?
No way! They were actually a closet homosexual drug taker, who has an apostate blog.
under coodinators comitee pt63.
you can now request your personal records from the branch check it out.
@The Rebel
Yes, in the UK you can do both of those things.
If you think the Society will comply with either request then you are in for a surprise.
Clause 62.g. is something else that doesn't get mentioned when you're baptised:
"[...] all of Jehovah's Witnesses have consented by virtue of their free and willing decision to become Jehovah's Witnesses and identify themselves as such."
Is that one of the baptism questions?
"Do you agree that your personal data and any correspondence about you can be handled however the Society see's fit, retaining it forever and never allowing you to see it or remove it?"
"All say 'YES'!"
under coodinators comitee pt63.
you can now request your personal records from the branch check it out.
Talk about being two faced and double tongued!!!!
First it says that data correction and deletion can be granted (no doubt the clause they will repeat to anyone who asks about this), then the next two sections explain why this shouldn't be done!
63.a. "A data subject's right to the protection of personal and sensitive personal data and to the correction or deletion of personal and sensitive personal data is to be granted according to the practice of JW's as set forth in this policy".
63.c. "If a data subject requests access to, correction of, or deletion of personal data or sensitive personal data about himself, the organisation will fairly consider granting the request by balancing the interests of the individual [...] against the legitimate religious interests of the organisation [...]"
63.d. "The organisation has an interest in permanently retaining data regarding an individuals status as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. Deleting such information would unduly infringe on the organisations religious beliefs and practices."
i can't help thinking that there is something essentially wrong with gj's new description of the role of the gibbering biddies as guardians of the doctrines..
guardians immediately take on a role of authority, (dont ever forget who is in charge!
) guardians outside of the legal sense of adoptive parent has another resonance, it sounds like the inhuman bullies in some dystopian novel about oppressive religious politics.
A guardian is someone who defends or protects something.
They are doing a very bad job as guardians then, since doctrine is being constantly revised.
A better description would be Fiddlers Of Doctrine.
