has anybody ever written bethel and just flat out asked for an accounting report on the society's finances?
we all keep batting around speculation about the wtbs and money, and actual information seems non-existent.
what would they do if somebody asked for a financial statement?
I suspect they'd round file the letter if somebody liked one of us sent it, what about if it came from a body of elders?
They would get a stern talking to :)
But if you want to:
Mr. J. R. Brown
Office of Public Information
I've wanted to ask Mr. Brown about the $40 million transferred into and out of the Caymens.
Its a legitimate question I think.
"don't be dismayed by good-byes.
a farewell is necessary before you can meet again.
and meeting again, after moments or lifetimes, is certain for those who are friends.
...and where empathy is more scarce than it is inside a doomsday cult.
I'm offended by this... moderators please censor this unfeeling post.
Cmon ihunt, is that what this forum has to become? Whe're P's and Q's are constantly carefully checked and monitored? Currently there already exists a flag button with every post made. If something is really offensive you can report it.
in 1935, clayton woodworth (editor of the golden age - later the awake!
magazine) devised a 'new' calendar that he proposed was far superior to the pagan calendars that have been used in human history.he wrote a three part series for the golden age (i am not sure if these were actually published) that laid out his justifications for how this new calendar was more accurate and of course, was right in line with the divine plan.
the calendar was published in the 1935 yearbook, but the watchtower magazine later published a retraction to the calendar.
lifeday?...Like Wookie life day?
i've just spent a big part of today watching interviews, debates etc with richard dawkins.
when i was a jw i used to hate this man with all my energy, i looked on him as the devil's offspring, he represented an idea that totally terrified me.
today i found myself saying i love the man.
...at Oxford University... he then taught himself programming language using zero's and 1's so he could make the computer do his calculations, and then ended up 'teaching' his fellow scientists the programming language.... my respect for him suddenly went through the roof... this guy is the man's man for sure...
Check out the documentary on YouTube called: Nice Guys Finish First BBC (Richard Dawkins) 1986.
There you'll see how he used evolutionary algorithms to produce a fascinating variation in body shapes. He was a pretty good researcher (kid playing with cool stuff) back in the day.
i've just spent a big part of today watching interviews, debates etc with richard dawkins.
when i was a jw i used to hate this man with all my energy, i looked on him as the devil's offspring, he represented an idea that totally terrified me.
today i found myself saying i love the man.
...'am I technically an APOSTATE' now I'm sharing these ideas with people on this forum?
Yep you're done for.
I used to hate Carl Sagan and Dawkins.
But now I love them both. Carl Sagan in a sexual way (just kidding), no like a gentle and kind friend, and Dawkins like a cantankerous uncle.
I respect and admire Hitchens very much. An exceptional and funny orator/writer but he also could become very personal when he was confronted with some questioning or facts he did not care for.
I would have liked to have had a fist fight with him when he was still alive and healthy.
Sadly not to be so I declare myself the victor by default... ah hahahaha... take that Hitchens.
is prince still a jehovah witness?
from the look of his new album, i think he has different ideas.
it will be interesting to see how they deal with this.
Oooh he looks like he's doing a spaced out Jimmy Hendrix thing...
Welcome back to reality Prince/Symbol/Whatever..,erm or should that be welcome back to psychedelic shroom land?
the faithful and discreet slave are free to look back now and make a mockery of whatever beliefs were previously held by jehovah's witnesses.. they are also free to make types and anti-types of some parts of scripture, and not of others.
they do that thing where they focus on one part so as to distract from the fact that they are doing the exact same thing with another part.. for example, in his talk featuring the new understanding of the "man with the secretary's inkhorn," geoffrey jackson goes on to say:.
we know in recent years we've been careful not to try and make types and anti-types of every aspect of what the bible says.
We know in recent years we've been careful not to try and make types and anti-types of every aspect of what the bible says...It doesn't matter! (uproarious laughter from audience)
Would he, or any of the Governing Body, [have] stood up and said that directly to the face of Fred Franz back in the day?
Definitely not. What I hate is that when Geoffrey Jackson is dead and gone the next generation of Governing Body members will say the exact same thing about the previous generations theological turds.
There will be no accounting for the Governing Body's nonsense. Ever.
Oh wait... the ordinary JW members will keep paying (some even with their lives) for their theological fertilizer.
But just as Oubliette always writes: "Lets review, its a cult.", I also have my own motto/consolation:
Today's Governing Body is ill equipped.
a older sister in miami florida has told me that the special pioneer couple who got their walking papers last week said they are also voting members of the watchtower society.
also his stock share is valued at $800,000!.
i did some research and spoke to some longtime witnesses and found out that there are 500 voting members of the society and they are also called shareholders.. has anyone ever of someone selling his share?.
Hi OrphanCrow,
That is true - according to the 1945 amendment.
However, if you check the most recent amendment (2003) that we have access to...
As far as I can see the 2003 re-statement is for the WTBTS of New York and the 1945 amendment is for the WTBTS of Pennsylvania. These are separate corporations and the Pennsylvania corporation is the primary one which offered shares to the public and which were dissolved into voting shares for the 500 appointed voters.
However I guess it would make sense for them to also have changed the Pennsylvania corporation in the same way (using bylaws for election), but unfortunately that document is not yet publicly available.
The heart of your reasoning comes down to this:
Let's imagine that some of those nonJWs are...let's see...bloodless surgeons....Would it be in the interest of people who work in bloodless medicine to have the WTS drop their blood doctrine? No, it wouldn't. But, keeping that doctrine in place would pay 'dividends' to the bloodless industry and anyone connected to it.
Well the GB control the doctrine and so I read up on what the Watchtower says in this regard. Since 1971 the voting members no longer even re-elect the governing body at all (I did not know that). Since then (1971) the GB elect their own members by themselves:
"In 1971 the same speaker explained that the members of the Watch Tower Society could not vote in the members of the anointed Governing Body. Why? “Because,” he said, “the governing body of the ‘slave’ class is not appointed by any man. It is appointed by . . . Jesus Christ, the Head of the true Christian congregation and the Lord and Master of the ‘faithful and discreet slave’ class.” Clearly, then, the members of the Governing Body cannot be voted into office by the membership of any legal corporation."
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2001051
a older sister in miami florida has told me that the special pioneer couple who got their walking papers last week said they are also voting members of the watchtower society.
also his stock share is valued at $800,000!.
i did some research and spoke to some longtime witnesses and found out that there are 500 voting members of the society and they are also called shareholders.. has anyone ever of someone selling his share?.
Let's imagine that some of those nonJWs are...let's see...bloodless surgeons. Or maybe administrators connected to blood management. How would their membership in the Society benefit them? Would the blood doctrine that the WTS has power over have any effect on their profession? Of course it would.
Well if their were non-JW members voting it would mean the charter has been violated.
This means that all the matters the members voted on may be null and void... even the re-election of the board.
a older sister in miami florida has told me that the special pioneer couple who got their walking papers last week said they are also voting members of the watchtower society.
also his stock share is valued at $800,000!.
i did some research and spoke to some longtime witnesses and found out that there are 500 voting members of the society and they are also called shareholders.. has anyone ever of someone selling his share?.
According to the 1945 charter amendment the Watchtower is a non-stock corporation with only voting shares.
The voters are selected by the board and have to be dedicated male witnesses.
If they elected non-JW's the Watchtower board would be violating the charter, and for this there can be serious consequences:
First, there is a doctrine called ultra vires. It is a Latin term that essentially means that acts outside the permissible scope of authority set forth in the governing documents is unauthorized activity that cannot be ratified by the board. As an example, if a nonprofit enters into a contract that is outside the scope of its permissible activities, the contract could be voided. While there may be other arguments that could be raised to enforce an ultra vires contract, acting “ultra vires” puts the nonprofit at risk as well as those that are entering into transactions with it.
Second, if directors act in ways that conflict with the nonprofit’s governing documents, they may be opening themselves up to an argument that they are breaching their fiduciary duties including the duty of due care and the duty of obedience. In most states, fulfilling one’s fiduciary duties is a prerequisite to a statute that basically says the board members can’t be held personally liable for their mistakes so long as the mistakes were made in good faith, out of loyalty and obedience to the corporation, and with due care. By failing to fulfill their fiduciary duties, the directors risk personal liability for any harm caused by their actions.
Third, if the directors are ignoring the rights of the nonprofit corporation, most states have a process that permits a group of directors (or voting members in a membership corporation) to get together to bring a derivative suit on behalf of the corporation. In the nonprofit context, a derivative suit is a law suit brought by a group of directors or members against a third party. That third party can be another insider such as another director or group of directors. These suits are brought from time to time when relations break down and factions form on the board of a nonprofit.
Fourth, the typical saviors for wayward nonprofit officers and directors, D&O insurance and corporate indemnification, won’t save directors who act outside the scope of their authority. D&O policies typically exclude ultra vires acts from coverage and corporate indemnification is generally not available to those acting outside the scope of their authority.
from: http://charitylawyerblog.com/2010/07/14/nonprofit-law-jargon-buster-ultra-vires-acts/
