Nice little summary by Barbara Anderson re dear old Geoffrey GB and "presumptuousness"...

by umbertoecho 14 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse


    "In recent decades, that slave has been closely identified ( by the Governing Body ) with the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses ( who consider themselves the "slave"!!).

    Now that's some f***ed up logic.


  • millie210

    thought the same thing when I read that DataDog.

    What does that even mean "has been closely identified with"?

    They dont have any problem calling out the wrongdoing of churches. They dont have any problem DFing thousands every year for supposed "wrongs".

    So why get so immersed in legalese and mumbo jumbo when they talk about this?

    You would think they would be proud to claim what they are supposedly (?) claiming.

  • Brokeback Watchtower
    Brokeback Watchtower
    Mr Jackson need to take his presumptuous feelings a little deeper and admit his presumptuousness in claiming to be this ficticous faithfull and discrete slave that must be obeyed even when they are a little wacky.
  • Esse quam videri
  • talesin
    Did you know how (in sworn testimony during the recent Australian Royal Commission hearing) Governing Body member Geoffrey Jackson responded to the question, “Do you see yourselves as Jehovah’s spokespeople on earth?”
    Jackson replied, “That, I think, would seem to be quite presumptuous to say that we are the ‘only spokesperson’ that God is using.”
    Really? Was he being truthful and honest when he replied that way?

    {bold is mine}

    Q1. Yes, he was being truthful in the strictest sense, because he completely dodged the question. So, technically, or perhaps legalistically, he did not 'lie'.

    Q2. No, he was not being honest. His evasive reply was completely dishonest, and a clear attempt to subvert the truth..

    (EDIT: And *poof* .... once again, half my reply disappears...... hmm, do I have a '# of characters limit' now? haha)

    Now, what did I type?

    Oh, yes, Theocratic Warfare - that's what they call it, but really, it's protecting the corporation at any cost. That is what a Board of Directors (in this case, they call themselves the Governing Body) does. I don't know if they are legally a BofD, but they act like one.


Share this