If a GB member said something that wasn't ever in PRINT we would not

by What-A-Coincidence 4 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  What-A-Coincidence

  officially believe it unless it was in a WTBTS PUBLICATION. Being printed in a publication is what makes it official. At Bethel we heard my 'Special Lectures', they could have been given a a GB Member or some other high ranking member. Many times Gerrit Losch of the GB would go off on who knows what.

  So at this point WE cannot take the WTBTS serious when even GB member is off his rocker cause eventually the WTBTS will say 'we never said that' meaning it was never in print.

  So if an Elder a C.O. even a GB member says something that's new, it has to be taken with a grain of salt cause it won't represent the WTBTS unless it has printed it.

  WAC-O of the 'damn, I wasted 10 years at Bethel class' and only got a plaque class.
• 

  Amazing

  Hi W-A-C,

  You are sort of correct in saying that the GB will not admit to what they say, unless it is in print. However, video and even audio tapes are adequate witnesses or evidence of what they did say and thus mean. And, this can be used against them if they direct activity that is unlawful, libelous, or makes them civily responsible for some activity that they orally directed. Also, witnesses to something an Elder said, or a CO said, or DO said, or even a GB person said can be used in testimony. For example, if a GB man directed some unlawful activity by word-of-mouth, RICO laws may come into play in prosecuting him. Also, the organization could be civily sued because their own man, who represents them as a responsible leader, caused harm. The RICO laws were developed initially to go after organized crime syndicates, such as the Mafia. However, these laws have been greatly expanded over the years to go after businesses, and even recently the Catholic Church in one Diocese in the south where the Church allegedly shielded a pedophile Priest.

  Af for their useless and pointless religious speculations they make orally, and later deny, well, then it must be in print in The Watchtower or Awake! or the GB can claim it was never said. And, even when they do put it in print, they can within a few year claim that it was old light, and no longer applies.

  Jim Whitney
• 

  avidbiblereader

  I like how Jesus put it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The agian Paul had an excellent point about going beyond the things written and being puffed up.

  Matt 5:37 37 Just let YOUR word Yes mean Yes, YOUR No, No; for what is in excess of these is from the wicked one.

  abr
• 

  compound complex

  Dear Friends,

  Re: the above and research I've done and posted already [would have to look up threads and posts]: Ray Franz has stated that very few of the GB are writers, but their "approval" [which is likely little more than a cursory overview of all that ends up in diverse publications] gives a FDS "flavor" to the articles. The R&F have no idea that many of the submissions are from women. Too bad Barbara Anderson did not write more than she had! And that letter from the Society, written to Bill Cetnar's sister-in-law Phyllis, about restraining her pet cat so that it would not eat unbled mice. Is the SD letter she received the "flavor" of the GB? Are we DFable if an WT fink sees our kitties eating mice that haven't been properly bled?

  CoCo
• 

  compound complex

  Please see "Who Actually Supplies the "Food"? [about mid-way down the thread on the Fictional Teaching of the FDS Class, response from Compound-Complex]:

  www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/125950/1.ashx

  CoCo