by AlainAlam 84 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Do you have any evidence that the GB had bad intent? As opposed to blind faith/cognitive dissonance and honest mistakes.
I'm inclined to think they have the best of intentions and are just wrong (primarily because the Bible is wrong), but I'm willing to consider the evidence otherwise.
I think they know that some of what they are doing is total BS. But they have their own interests at heart.
Well after my sister and husbands experience with how the WT handles child sexual abuse - I did my own evaluation of the bible vs the WT teachings. Specifically the prophecies of Daniel regarding the two witnessess/attack on God's people. I also read those portions in Revelation pertaining to that also. Once the WT filter is off, you can clearly see that they have it wrong. They claim to be the two witnesses, but the bible and their own tags on who the beast that ascends out of the abyss is, shows they are not.
After having a mind blowing experience over that, I thought, "I must have it wrong" and pulled out the book "Revelations Grand Climax.." and went to that section.
It was abundantly clear after comparing, that they knew what they were teaching was wrong. They purposely hid and chopped things up and misdirected. I went to the Daniel Prophecies book - same thing. They contradicted what was in the R.G.C. book and shuffled info.
I am sure they justify, excuse and reason it away in their minds. I have a sister that is still in, that is an expert at fooling herself in the same way. The end result is that they are never to blame for the things they say/teach etc. It is always the person who listens to them.
Well how about when Leo Greenless (Governing body member) was caught having sex with young boys....what did the GB do to him?
Disfellowshiped? Nope!
Public reproved? Nope!
Sent to Mexico and be a Special Pioneer so he could screw more young boys? Yep!
Read my book....
Everyone, any evidence?
1234 do you have any evidence I don't need to pay to access?
The GB/FDS' unwillingness to admit to the the magnitude of the child sexual abuse problem and their use lawyers to stave off judgments in favour of the abused is ample evidence of bad intent.
When self preservation including protection for abusers trumps justice and mercy for those abused, assertions of righteousness are nothing less that an abomination.
Vanderhoven "unwillingness to admit to the magnitude of the child sexual abuse problem", that's not necessarily bad intent. I don't publicize the extent of my mistakes either. And I'm pretty sure the Bible didn't publicize the extent of Abraham's, Moses', Isaiah's, John Baptist's or Peter's mistakes either.
"Using lawyers to stave off judgments in favour of the abused" sounds like bad intent. Do you have any links?
Lol, my OP actually got downvoted :D Maybe someone didn't like the fact I was open to considering the evidence in favor of the GB having bad intent :P Fanatic apostates give apostasy a bad name :)
Everyone, any evidence? - AA
Their response to the child abuse scandal is conclusive evidence of malice - no doubt motivated by misguided attempts at self-preservation.
I have not the slightest doubt that they know they have misunderstood the blood issue and continue to expose members to lethal risk.
They lied in a study article about the Greek words naos and hieron in an attempt to support their doctrine that the Great Crowd are not in heaven.
They know that Jerusalem was not destroyed in 607 B.C. and disfellowship anybody who asks awkward questions about it.
They lied about their focus on 1975
They knowingly lied about the reasons for their membership of the UN
They allowed members in Malawi to suffer appalling persecution for a legal technicality while turning a blind eye to elders and circuit overseers in Mexico joining the military reserve.
They lie to the media by telling them that nobody is compelled to shun family members
They lie to the media by telling them that members freely make their own decision whether or not refuse a life-saving blood transfusion.
They have lied again and again by misquoting prominent scientists and knowingly ripping their words out of context so as to make them say the exact opposite of their intention in order to support their moronic creationism.
I'm just getting started!
