Beware of the Poisonous Food on the Table of Demons
--
Focus
(w94 7/1 Class)
please forgive the poor quality of the shot.
this pic tickled my funnybone.
in case you can not see it clearly, every brother and sister around this table, bethelites all, has a toothy grin as they gleefully study the day's bible text.. i need a better caption than the one supplied.
Beware of the Poisonous Food on the Table of Demons
--
Focus
(w94 7/1 Class)
i don't know if this information has already been posted or not, so i'll go ahead and post it here.. on january 1st 2003, bill bowen sent the following information to everyone on his e-mail list:.
press release -- distribute freely.
tuesday, january 1. contact:.
Kismet: I agree. You have inadvertently paraphrased my posts on this.
PopeOfEruke: I agree.
hillary_step wrote (emphasis mine):
.. the most important issue, which both supporters and non-supporters of Bill seem to have a problem grasping. Bill seems to me to be a decent man who thinks with his heart and not his head, I suspect that is why he has been able to achieve so much more than many others in the past in bringing the problem of the abused children within the JW religion to a wider audience.
Bill is a boiler-room man
Well, hillary, I didn't have any problem grasping this, and my post earlier in this thread says all of this. And perhaps I was a step ahead of you when, ten weeks ago, I penned in http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=39486&site=3 :
Of course Bill is often pushy and has a bandwagon to induce people to jump on to.
Of course Bill is now a showman.
Of course Bill now is melodramatic.
He needs to be.
He has to be.
He MUST be.
He has activated the press and international media like no one else before him.
Without being a melodramatic, aggressive showman, he would not have got their attention.
Yep. The name "Silentlambs" helped.
Bill has damaged the Watchtower more than Franz ever did. Whatever either of their intentions may have been.
Explains some things? Perhaps, perhaps not.
And this is despite the fact that Ray Franz, quite evidently, is more articulate and "studied" than Bill. And probably more intelligent (which is not in any way to suggest that Bill is unintelligent)
But the key is: Is Bill basically speaking the truth?
That is the question.
I hold that Bill is.
...
[Ray] is IMO:
(a) more learned
(b) more authoritative
(c) more restrained and much less melodramatic
(d) much, much less of a showman
(e) a better writer
(f) better presented
(g) more effective, in his gentle works of text, with wavering dubs
(h) old; much older (and so finding it more difficult to adjust his thinking on a major issue now, perhaps?), with such respect that this must here command,
(i) probably more kind
(j) possibly more humble
than Bill
And at http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=39318&site=3&page=6 I wrote :
Bill and Ray are very different persona. One is a crusader and showman, the other reflects and chooses his words with enormous care. One is a man of physical action and energy, the other (even when much younger) one of mental agility and calm, armchair rebuttals - a man of words. One values tact, form and discretion, and one believes they have their place.
If Bill was not Bill, he would not have got the media rolling as he did. He gave them the soundbites, not essays as Ray, or I (and I dare say you) might have. He K.I.S.S.'d it for them, as they needed it.
...
Bill sometimes chooses the wrong words (possibly trying to oversimplify or to dispense with "formalities"). Had he used "expositor" instead of "author", what would you now say, Carl? Perhaps to Bill there was but a small difference therebetween. To men who set store in their precision of expression - men such as Ray, and some others, including (blush) perfectionists such as myself - there is, of course, a whole world of difference.
And I too have described Bill as a simple "heart" person. This is no criticism of Bill. It is what helped him achieve what he did. As I believe you, hillary_step, fully realize.
Depersonalization of Silentlambs is hard for Bill. It is Bill's baby. But it must happen, and the sooner the better.
Trauma: I understand you have just revealed on a public board your interpretation of part of the contents of a private email Bill sent to you. Am I correct in understanding this?
RevMalk: While I realize that you are hurt, I counsel you also to sit on your hands for a while rather than post on about this tonight or in the morning, and write things you might later regret. Emotions are evidently and understandably running high.
--
Focus
(Peace A Chance? Class)
Edited by - Focus on 2 January 2003 21:57:33
i don't know if this information has already been posted or not, so i'll go ahead and post it here.. on january 1st 2003, bill bowen sent the following information to everyone on his e-mail list:.
press release -- distribute freely.
tuesday, january 1. contact:.
Trauma
The process of getting one's registration as a Charity processed and approved may be lengthy and involved. I agree it is a good question.
waiting:
Yes, you have seen what a veritable Confederacy of Dunces has missed. As I indicated, Bill (speaking for the Silentlambs) is happy to give the other side a (relatively) easy way out, and blame "the apostate" - if it helps the lambs.
Anything which makes it more likely is therefore good.
Not that the WTS are likely to take this way out, as you know. Just that they are even less likely to take it if they can't deflect some or all of the blame.
Legally, there is no question of culpability civil or criminal on the part of Ray: any such contention would be ludicrous. He was a servant of the publisher, writing at their direction, in a work uncredited to him, and for whose enforcement he bore no responsibility and took no part.
IslandWoman wrote:
//All red herrings, strawman argumentation and unwarranted insults snipped - nothing at all written by IW left behind//
IslandWoman, you were here caught, outright and red-handed, by me in what was either a direct and outrageous LIE or an example of gross stupidity.
You accused Bill of doing something he had absolutely not done.
Bill wrote "they will stand before Jehovah and will answer to him" (as all Watchtower Cult believers - and this includes all the people whom Bill was addressing - believe everyone will).
But you claimed Bill had stated that he, Bill Bowen, was speaking for Jehovah and that he, Bill Bowen, and not Jehovah, was judging the hearts of exactly the same "them".
Your claim is thus seen to be utterly free from merit.
You have been shown up for what you are - a COMMON LIAR and CHEAT, or a QUASI-LITERATE IDIOT.
I hope you are just a quasi-literate idiot.
Of course you refuse to address this issue. Your misrepresentation in this very thread speaks volumes.
And this new attack is just one of a hundred similar ones that you have made here. Pretty much all in one direction. Your numerous boastful claims along the lines of your being party to some mythic Trojan Horse movement that is subtly altering Watchtower thinking and bringing about reform is just a lot of apologist horse excrement. And the Trojan Horse movement is probably a Bowel Movement of some sort. As my tutor Farkel eloquently put it, you seem to contend there is some "high road" to take while one is actually navigating the moral sewer that is Bethel.
I'm sure it is embarrassing to be caught out so thoroughly, IslandWoman. Learn from it, and move on. You would not qualify for the humblest position on the Writing Staff: a much more polished level of linguistic deceit is required therefor.
To be insulted by one such as you is probably a compliment. Thank you.
Simon wrote:
I just don't like seeing blame laid at people's door who I don't think deserve it.
I still think it is a bogus claim
I reiterate that I wish Ray's name had not been invoked in the communication. Few of us like seeing the feelings of a good old man hurt (again).
But do you think I want blame mislaid? No, surely I do not.
Ray simply DID "author" (the root of the term Bill employed) the said guidelines found in OR. I am sure that Ray did, not only because of what Ray wrote after being DF'd, but also because of the similarities in language used between the material in question and Ray's other writings.
bogus here means Fraudulent; Spurious; fictitious; sham; counterfeit. Which of these did you mean, Simon?
In my considered opinion, the claim actually made (rather than some strawman) is NOT bogus. Your emotions are carrying you away, Simon.
and ill thought out
Perhaps, and certainly in that all its effects may not have been considered.
But no more ill-thought out than Ray's original work from the early 1970s and earlier (the OR work is drawn from earlier material, right? Similarly authored.). Let me expand on this assertion by me.
Sure, child abuse was not what most people had on their minds, and I am confident it was nearly unthinkable to Ray (and most others) at the time he wrote or revised the wording of the guidelines.
BUT RAY IS A HIGHLY INTELLIGENT MAN. CHILD-ABUSE, WHILE ARGUABLY THE MOST EGREGIOUS OF SUCH CRIMES, IS FAR FROM THE ONLY CRIME WHERE IT IS UNLIKELY THERE WILL BE ANY WITNESS (OR EVIDENCE) OTHER THAN THE SOLE ALLEGED VICTIM. MANY TYPES OF FRAUD FALL INTO THIS CATEGORY TOO.
And BY THE GUIDELINES STATING THAT THE WITNESS(ES) MUST BE TO THE SAME EVENT OR OCCURRENCE OF THE CRIME, MANY GUILTY ONES WERE SURE TO WALK FREE.
Get this straight. A JW fraudster defrauds a number of different people at different times, always by promising to "invest" their money (though perhaps in differing ways), which he takes from them in folding money and without witnesses being present.
Surely the fact that there are multiple charges of broadly similar nature brought against the one person would be pretty conclusive to most people.
BUT THE GUIDELINES, AS WRITTEN, SUGGEST HE OR SHE WOULD "GET OFF".
Why Ray did not cater for such circumstances more competently must be a good question.
Let us say he did not because the real policy was made clear to him (the origin is Biblical, as is much nonsense) and he was just penning it (Simon's point).
Well, let me explain to you how someone like Ray would have worked in the Writing Department. He was a high-flier. The only person who would have checked his work would have been Nathan Knorr or Fred Franz. He would have known this.
The Watchtower is interested in getting in the $$ for the nonsense it prints. It is usually not too careful about exactly what the nonsense is. Ray would have known what he wrote would have pretty much gone through "on the nod" as long as it broadly adhered to what he had been asked to produce. This was not some spirit-led organization!
it was created for them, by them
It is well-known that when drafting rules, THE DEVIL LIES IN THE DETAIL. Always.
So why did Ray not put in the detail, making clear that there were bound to be some exceptions? The Bible does not give exceptions. But a sentence or two in the Bible was being expanded into a half-page of rules. Something was getting added, right?
He would not have been stopped or censured for doing so. It would have been passed. And Ray would have known this would happen. Especially the second time around.
The simple truth is... Ray didn't think about the ramifications carefully enough at the time he was writing the detailed rules. He didn't have to envisage Child Abuse to realize that there were going to have to be clearly set out exceptions. And he wasn't so naive as to think a rigorously rule-oriented organization (was he still blind to this in the early 1970s??) were going to interpret the rules liberally, right?
Sure, Ray was trying to protect the innocent from malicious complaints. But the line of division is complex, and that is why we have Courts and a legal system. Not bunches of self-important, pig-ignorant fool-Elders. Please, no one mention OJ.
I won't go further than that. "We don't go beyond that which is written", right? Now who am I quoting there? And in what context?
and at best 'irrelevant'
Relevant if the inclusion of this material embarrasses the Watchtower into making a change that it is very, very reluctant to make (knowing it may open the floodgates to legal actions from aggrieved victims who had until then held their peace).
Bill does not care if Ray feels hurt by this, I surmise. He thinks the greater good is served by shaming the WTS into acting to end this murderous policy as soon as possible.
Very regrettable, for sure. "Collateral damage" is how someone could hurtfully portray it. Many (myself included) could have worded the letter to minimize or eliminate offense to Ray, without noticeably reducing the effectiveness against the WTS. But the repeated baiting of Bill, as takes place here, makes it more rather than less likely that intemperate wording will be used.
Focus, folks.
--
Focus
(Focus Class)
Edited by - Focus on 2 January 2003 19:43:20
i don't know if this information has already been posted or not, so i'll go ahead and post it here.. on january 1st 2003, bill bowen sent the following information to everyone on his e-mail list:.
press release -- distribute freely.
tuesday, january 1. contact:.
Simon wrote:
If I were the WTS, I would be jumping up and down clapping and phoning Bill up to say "yes, yes ... we'll blame it all on Apostate Ray !!". Look - they get rid of silentlambs and apostates in one fell swoop !
Doh!
Bill has repeatedly said that getting the Watchtower to CHANGE ITS POLICY ON REPORTING AND DEALING WITH CHILD SEXUAL-ABUSE within the Borg is what Silentlambs wants. Not the destruction of the WTS, the victory of "apostates", etc.
And I think this is right.
He may have personal goals that are in addition to the above. But the Silentlambs goal is to remove the additional barrier that the WTS places on child victims of sexual abuse (additional, that is, to all the barriers in place outside, which themselves permit many active pedophiles to continue their nefarious activities undetected), period.
And if the Watchtower makes this change, does it matter if "they" jump up and down and clap and say "We won!"?
Bill is simply being consistent with the Silentlambs causa. Victims, and prevention of there being avoidable future victims, first.
He has to walk a tightrope. He can be more easily discounted by the WTS as being "yet another disgruntled apostate".
Cut him some slack, please.
I am truly tired of the in-fighting on this matter. The hours of Dateline and Panorama has hit the WTS harder, in percentage terms, than anything since W.F. Salter - and that was an awfully long time ago. But that is not my beef.
Bill is a showman, may be somewhat prideful at times, absolutely lacks tact and diplomacy, IMO impetuously acts without thinking things through fully (but has many loads to bear, so I shall not cast stones), and does not have Ray's way with words - or Ray's accurate and delectable choice thereof. BIG DEAL! Some of these "qualities" are exactly those which permitted Bill to break through into the media, against the predictions of many of the Jonah Class here and elsewhere. As far as I am concerned, Bill's heart is in the right place - as is Ray's - and that is of paramount importance. Which is more than I can say for a few other "true apostates".
And he doesn't lack guts either.
--
Focus
(Silentlambs Class)
i don't know if this information has already been posted or not, so i'll go ahead and post it here.. on january 1st 2003, bill bowen sent the following information to everyone on his e-mail list:.
press release -- distribute freely.
tuesday, january 1. contact:.
wasasister and MegaDude:
Ray Franz
While I would not have brought Ray's name into the communication, here are some thoughts:
(a) IMO, BB is writing for and to the world at large, NOT to the "in" community. The world at large, which is being warned about the nature of the Watchtower Cult, has pretty much never heard of Ray Franz. CoC/ISOCF are not best-sellers, You Know...
(b) Please read the use of Ray's name IN THE CONTEXT EMPLOYED. BB is not attacking Ray: he is attacking the WTS. By mentioning that Ray is their most famous "apostate", quite OTOH Bill's words suggest to the general reader that Ray (long ago a proponent, though not the originator, of the policy whose absurd application has caused so much grief) NO LONGER supports the said policy (when rigidly applied even in such cases). Therefore this is not some fresh attack on Ray.
(c) As is clear from the tone and content of the communication, Bill does not think much at all of the Borg. This is apparent to virtually every reader. Therefore referring to someone as an "apostate" from it in the same material is a compliment to that person.
Please read in context!
This said, I strongly counsel Bill to refrain from bringing Ray's name into this issue any more. He is an old man; he has stood a lot, and he did finally respond to that inner voice, forsaking pretty much everything in a material sense. Ray deserves a lot of respect. Rightly or wrongly, Bill, your words are being used to portray you as someone either jealous of Ray, or resentful of Ray, or contemptuous of Ray, or who wishes to cajole or coerce Ray into a course of action which, however desirable, he is unwilling to take. For this reason, you should stop doing this.
And I would dearly wish to see a new edition of CoC with an additional chapter entitled "Interpreting rules with mercy and common sense" or the like...
--
Focus
(Anti-"Heroes" Class)
i don't know if this information has already been posted or not, so i'll go ahead and post it here.. on january 1st 2003, bill bowen sent the following information to everyone on his e-mail list:.
press release -- distribute freely.
tuesday, january 1. contact:.
Bill Bowen wrote:
If the Service Department chooses to ignore the date of your disassociation then they will stand before Jehovah and will answer to him for supporting and serving wicked men.
IslandWoman wrote:
Does the writer of this letter speak for Jehovah now? Does the writer of this letter claim to know the hearts of all those in the Service Department?
Apparently!
Matthew 7:15-20
Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Sounds like Bill is applying the teachings of Jesus, IslandWoman. By their actions they will be judged.
And not judged by Bill. But, in his direct words, by "Jehovah" (and NOT by BB, as you IslandWoman wickedly, falsely, deceitfully, cruelly, and SHAMELESSLY assert).
And even indulging in your unlearned Bible-Babble, IW, and giving credence to all this Jehovah-nonsense, saying that they "will answer to [Jehovah]" is NOT at all "speaking for Jehovah".
Can't you even read?
Or is it that you can read, but wilfully choose to twist and misrepresent?
Which is it? Dishonesty or Stupidity?
If you think I am being unduly harsh with this unfruitful work of darkness, check "her" long and shameful posting record here.... Less than a week ago, I caught "her" performing the same vile character assassination and abuse in the thread http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=43240&site=3 wherein "she" slanderously and viciously put all variety of words into my mouth that had never been uttered by me.
And now "she" does the same with Bill.
What nature of infernal creature is it that we are dealing with?
And: Why does Bill's work SCARE you so much, IslandWoman?
Did you burn when the Dateline and Panorama shows were aired?
And why do you repeatedly misrepresent (as you have been squarely caught doing above)the words of those who show up the FILTHY WHORE for the disgusting abomination that she is?
All your talk about gentle and slow and gradual reform of the WHORE is, at best, an expression of your own naivete and idiocy, and at worst, it is SPIRITUAL-PORNOGRAPHY indeed.
Perhaps you should be counting your time when you post here. Your endless negativity and snide remarks (not just relating to BB - "she" tries to undermine all sorts of attacks on the WTS) show that for someone allegedly "free from the Watchtower" you are both still within it and still performing its evil works. Might as well (re)sign up
The real question is, O Older Sister: AT WHOSE TABLE ARE YOU FEEDING, ISLANDWOMAN? How often is your excuse going to be "I find myself in this peculiar place of seemingly defending the Watchtower but what I am really trying to do is speak for 'common sense.'"?
Enquiring minds already know. The question is just for doofuses somewhat slower on the uptake.
Please turn to Deut. 28:20 and oblige, IslandWoman. Be with others of your "kind". And I mean that in the kindest manner possible.
--
Focus
(Anti- "Daughter Harlot" Class)
my 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.
J,
I hope you get better. Keep cheerful... keep smiling... for:
Laughter is the BEST medicine.
Till we speak again!
--
Focus
(Wishing you good luck! Class)
as posted here
if maitreya is the anti-christ, he sure is a lazy one!
the guy is holed up somewhere in london and is about middle aged by now.
See 1 Jn. 2:18,22 and 2 Jn. 1:7. There is no The Antichrist, just An Antichrist (as there were said to be many of them). The only singularity is expressed at 1 Jn. 4:3 - but when referring to the spirit of antichrist, in context which I interpret as meaning "acceptable philosophy"
Don't learn your Bible from watching "The Omen" and its sequels, folks. The real thing is a lot worse.
On this forum I also represent the lions, who got a lot of bad press for their hard work in those dusty arenas.
--
Focus
(Anti-Babble Hosea 13:7 Class)
http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/soon_realized.htm.
" - http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/soon_realized.htm ?
http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/soon_realized.htm.
This thread is NOT about the merits and demerits of atheism or Christianity, thanks all the same (for the irrelevant URL too). One thing at a time. IW has already established and buttressed her position as the ass in this thread, Jack, so you must find gainful employment elsewhere if you wish to play that role. After all, we know what two asses make... right?
--
Focus
(Balaam-the-Agnostic Class)
Edited by - Focus on 28 December 2002 5:50:26
http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/soon_realized.htm.
" - http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/soon_realized.htm ?
http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/soon_realized.htm.
IslandWoman scribbled:
The Watchtower always uses its older literature surely you must know this. The congregations are regularly instucted to purge themselves of the old literature by placing it in the field.
I will briefly deal with the appropriateness of your analogy between using up paper copies of old literature and continuing to place, without disclaimer and with a highly-misleading date, old material on the website, later on in this refutation.
First, some history lessons for other readers.
(1) Sure, the WTBTS hates losing profit. Selling books or using pamphlets, even if they contain "Old Light" for which the R&F could be DF'd for promulgation, until stocks run out is a Watchtower speciality. For example, in "God's Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached" (1969), the Watchtower, distancing itself from its sixty years of hinting or claiming that Charles Russell was the FDS, claimed on pages 347/356:
"Creature worship .. This view was prominently featured in the book published in July of 1917 by the People's Pulpit Association of Brooklyn, New York. This book was called 'The Finished Mystery' and furnished a commentary of the Bible books of Revelation and Ezekiel and The Songs of Solomon. On its Publishers page the book was called the 'Posthumous Works of Pastor Russell.' Such a book and religious attitude tended to establish a religious sect centered around a man .. in the year 1927 any remaining stocks of the six volumes of Studies in the Scriptures by Russell and of 'The Finished Mystery' were disposed of among the public. It was the published and accepted thought down till 1927 that he was 'that servant' of Matthew 24:45"
But this claim is fraudulent. The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence of March 15, 1928 - after 1927 - on page 126 specifically instructed brothers to distribute these books to the public (though they had been already classified as "old light".
And The Watch Tower and Herald of Christ's Presence of November 1, 1929 - after 1927 - on page 322 stated:
""The Society has decided to designate the week beginning November 10 as a special drive week for the sale of Studies in the Scriptures"
And in the December 1, 1932 - after 1927 - copy of the Bulletin appeared:
"1,646,316 bound books .. placed in the hands of the public .. during 1931 over 100,000 Studies in the Scriptures were included in the total"
And in the Watchtower Cost List, Volumes III, IV and VI of "Studies in the Scriptures" continued to be listed into the 1960s - after 1927.
Indeed, SiS Volume IV ("Battle of Armageddon"; till 1910, "The Day of Vengeance") showed up in "Kingdom Ministry" (as it was then called) until 1966 - after 1927 - after which it appeared as "out of stock"
So for many decades after reversing/dropping its teachings (SiS IV contains hundreds of teachings abandoned by the WTS prior to the 1960s), the Watchtower continued to distribute "Old Light" and get more money in. One thing having books available in the libraries - another distributing them to publishers and public alike, all without attached disclaimers! What utter recklessness on the part of the self-claimed "discreet" slave!
Or simply yet more evidence that "THEY" KNEW it was all BALONEY at the time they were spewing it forth.
Either way, they are not at all what they claim to be. Mutton-headed Morons or Thieves, Cheats and Liars.
Also the "People's Pulpit Association" mentioned (probably in order to suggest the work was not quite exactly a work of the WTBTS) is none other than the WTBTS itself - as admitted somewhere else "Such a corporation came into legal existence February 23, 1909, and was named People's Pulpit Association. Thirty years later, in 1939, the name was changed to its present one, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, Inc." ("Qualified to be Ministers" (1967), page 309).
So getting the dollars in counts, not getting the (present) truth out!
(2) Sure, the WTBTS hates having to bother changing text. For example:
"The Scriptural proof is that the period of his presence and the day of God's preparation is a period from 1874 A.D. forward. The second coming of the Lord, therefore, began in 1874; and that date and the years 1914 and 1918 are specially marked dates with reference to his coming." This material is found on page 289 in the 1927 edition and page 310 of the 1939 edition of the book "Creation". But the dogma that the second coming/presence was in 1874 (held for 55 years by the Society) was abandoned immediately after the 1929 edition of "Prophecy" (page 65-6 contains its last restatement in a new work) - for example, Light I (1930) and Vindication I (1931) had commenced the weasel-wording to pretend the WTBTS had really been talking about 1914 (rather than 1874). So why, a whole decade after the old teaching became in nature "apostatical", reprint a book without excising the "Old Light" inside it?
So, IslandWoman, as you are well aware, the Watchtower has a long history of such absurdity and/or greed. Thanks for providing me an opportunity to remind others of this.
The fact that they did not change some "old light" in the brochure does not indicate some sinister plot to fool people.. Imo, you exaggerated this thing to the point where it was misleading to many here.. Focus importunes in his post that this "article" may be something more than what it really is. In reality it is just a reprint of an old brochure. He insinuates that this "article" may signal a going back and forth in the understanding of the "generation" teaching. I dislike disinformation.. If Focus had only posted that the Watchtower stupidly has on its site an old publication that still has the old 1914 generation teaching, I would have agreed. What I disagreed with is the attempt to say that this whole thing is somehow a Watchtower plot.. sloppy and unprofessional work .. but not imo more than that, which I feel Focus was implying.. I just don't think there is enough evidence in this instance to call this some attempt at a slight of hand or a sinister plot on the part of the Watchtower.
But WHERE PRECISELY did I state or imply it was a "sinister plot" or "slight of hand" (sic - you mean "sleight"), you PRIZE DOOFUS IslandWoman? Can't you read? Or did something change before your eyes, you villain?
The title of the thread is: "God's Purpose Soon to Be Realized: WT idiocy", right? Not WT "weaseling", right? Doh! Or has the flickering light of your Spiritual Mommy made you so dizzy you see Focus doing the same?
In the very first post of the thread, I wrote: "So then why, six years later, was the Watchtower still teaching 'some people who were alive in 1914 will still be alive when this system comes to its end.' - http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/soon_realized.htm ? What confusion!". What part of the word "confusion" do you not understand? Doh!! Does "confusion" mean "plot" on your island, woman?
Check on the meaning of "reprint" while you are about it. The article and brochure is a NEW, REARRANGED 2001 EDITION, as the (c) notice says. No "1993" attribution thereon. And again the strict 1914 dogma.
YOU HAVE FALSELY ACCUSED YOUR BROTHER, AND SMEARED HIM AND HIS ASS, YOU SHAMEFUL LITTLE TROLL! WHERE IS YOUR APOLOGY?
If I wish to insinuate and imply things, I'd do it in a manner that even put those wicked monsters in the Writing Department to shame. But it lies beneath my dignity to so do, ten minute flashbacks excepted.
I don't care whose name is attached to a post,
The Watchtower taught us well!!
Yes, and you continue to do its bidding. Do not think encomiums from AlanF, whom I view as at times bordering on WTS-apologia himself, cuts the mustard with me, IW.
I find myself in this peculiar place of seemingly defending the Watchtower
You should be quite at home in that place, then, for I catch you there all the time, IW.
but what I am really trying to do is speak for "common sense."
Acquire it first, methinks.
AlanF wrote:
Sure, I agree that there is no major, nefarious plot hatched by the GB to deceive people in the case Focus is talking about here.
Yep.
For the record, I never said there was neither. I don't make accusations I can't prove, at least on the balance of probabilities.
For any with poor reading comprehension, and before IW attempts to make some defense for her misconduct based thereon, my words in the first post in the thread "And check: http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/soon_realized.htm for yourself, before there is yet another deceitful change." do not imply that any changes so far that are specifically there (or thereabouts) were deceitful. But there is a proven record of the WTS deceitfully changing things ELSEWHERE and not admitting it has done so (remember the completion of the work in the twentieth century that did not seem to make it into the bound volume?). So it is prudent to check something that too is bound to be changed, before it is transformed or deleted. Sure, I want to highlight this web material so, when the WTS change it (as they must, as I have said earlier in the thread), we can all see whether they openly admit they have made a(nother) mistake - or just slip the change in quietly, which would then constitute "yet another deceitful change". Understood?
Any bets as to which happens?
As I said, check the URL and keep checking, before there is yet another deceitful change by the Watchtower.
//snip AF's correct reasoning// Thus I can only conclude that they left it in deliberately.
As I concluded too, on the balance of likelihood.
So back now to the dribblings of the Daughter-Harlot Class.
Re WT-apologist status of IslandWoman
there is really no way for you to know for sure is there? (Sorry, just thought I'd throw that in to fuel Focus' paranoia.)
When you misleadingly present arguments or material in support of the WTS dozens of times, there is no paranoia in branding you for what you are, IW. You are an apologist for the Great Whore. If you do not realize it, that is your further folly.
You IslandWoman attempt to derail (rather than refocus) many a thread that tears the WTS apart for its stupidity and/or deceit and/or hypocrisy, by bringing in strawmen and contrived asides. I predicted I would find you infesting "my" one. And here you are, trying to make out I was stating or implying there was a "sinister plot" etc., when I have not. Of course, better to attack the strawman...
I object! Simon does this count as a personal attack?!
I guess this post does too, then, you Monstrous Misrepresenter of my words!
Is it deceit or merely stupidity, IW, or something else altogether? If your agenda is improving my focus, which help would be commendable and gratefully and most humbly accepted, the responses you have had do not indicate that any consider that you have the competence or wherewithal to so do. If your agenda is defending the WTS against just attack, why would you create a strawman?
Perhaps you know that the colorful but correct attacks that I launch on the Old Whore are effective, and hence focus your attention on to derailing them. This will inspire me to provide more of the same.
//no sinister plot// My one and only point in this thread! Thank you!
If that was your "one and only point", and since I never stated or implied it was a sinister plot, what are you doing here at all? Please turn to Deut. 28:20 and oblige. The donkey has already correctly reproved ye, IW of the Eph. 5:11 Class - as at 2 Pet. 2:16 you were "rebuked for [your] iniquity: the dumb ass speaking with man's voice forbad the madness of the prophet."
it was called cleaning out the old literature.
A website may be changed "for free" - no wastage of paper involved in "discarding" old stuff. Your quasi-apologetic analogy, IW, is ludicrous! Sure, if the result of a mindset, it but illustrates the SHEER IDIOCY of the said mindset.
Do you think the GB and the others at Bethel are being accurately portrayed on this site?
If they are been protrayed as the Gibbering Baboon Class, then yes. If some of their number - and most of their entourage - are portrayed as a filthy collection of SPIRITUAL PIMPS, then yes. Next question?
I fully realize men know men
But "it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret"?
I do recognize that ..AF.. may know how to deal with the Watchtower men better than I do.
When dealing with the SWINE Class (see "The Finished Mystery" for the definition), the LASH works best. LEGAL ACTION, and WIDESPREAD PUBLICITY EXPOSING THE FILTHY MISDEEDS PERPETRATED BY THEM AND THEIR "SPIRITUAL" AND LEGAL PREDECESSORS.
No Woman Is An Island, So: WHACK! for misrepresenting my "clear as crystal" words! We should afford you the "benefit of the doubt" just as much as we afford the Watchtower the same. Wake up, IW, and take due note of the lovingly-proffered olive branch in this my post.
--
Focus
(Eph. 4:27 and the Writing Staff Class)
Edited by - Focus on 28 December 2002 5:20:48