Jehovah`s Witness/The lying....
Good day, DW. Sorry to be so slow in answering the questions you asked me, but had a very busy day yesterday, and also have been under the weather a bit.
You know, in reading this latest answer of yours, I don’t know whether to actually be somewhat impressed, or to shake my head in amazement. I say this, because there were actually some “positives” in your response that showed a little decency on your part, then you would turn right around and completely blow it, with more of your illogical thinking that leaves a person wondering what planet you are from.
First, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention the positive aspects of your reply. You actually DID offer an answer to my 2 questions. Thank you for that. Also, you showed some fairness in acknowledging that a liar should be addressed, even if they are a close friend. On that, we agree. But it remain to be seen that you will actually DO it. Talk is one thing…doing is another.
But DW, the rest of your post was amazing, and bordered on comical. Your “logic” that you pride yourself on, merely makes objective readers thankful that they still have their thinking facilities intact. I will tell you why I say this, but since you answered my questions directly, let me do the same to the 2 questions you asked me to address at the end of your letter.
YOU: “Have you said that we as Jehovah's witnesses cannot give any scriptures that point to Jesus as being Michael the archangel?? If you have it's a lie!!!
Have you said that we as Jehovah's witnesses can't Scripturally point to 1914 as the year Jesus became King?? If you have it's a lie!!!
Answer these questions if you want to prove you're not a liar!!!”
DW: Perhaps you have misunderstood…I have absolutely NO desire, nor reason to “prove” anything to you. Neither does Dee, nor does Richard, or anyone else. I am not an honest man just because I prove to you that I am honest, nor am I liar because you label me as such. Your opinion simply does not enter into it.
So get this straight for the record…I am not trying to “prove” that I am not a liar. The burden of proof is not on me…it is one you, because YOU have labeled me a “liar”. When you feel free to slander someone’s good name in this manner, despite the fact that NO ONE who actually knows a person would call them a liar, then it is up to YOU to do the proving. And you do that, not by SAYING they are a liar, but by showing where they lied. You know, like I do when you guys lie.
Now that being said, let me deal with your 2 questions. Funny, I don’t remember these questions being part of the 5-6 lies on your “list”, but okay….
1. I do not recall wording my statement in the manner you do here, in regards to you having Scriptures that you think “point to” Jesus being Michael. If you have a comment to this effect from, then by all means, post it. Then we will talk about it. The fact is, I am well aware of the few Scriptures used by the WT, to “point to” this teaching. 1 Thess. 4:16 would be one of those Scriptures. So no, at the present, I do not believe that I have ever said that Jehovah’s Witnesses have no Scriptures that they “point to”, to say that Jesus is Michael.
What I HAVE said, is that they have no Scriptures that SAY or TEACH that Jesus is Michael. I HAVE said that Jehovah’s Witnesses have NO statement in Scripture that Jesus is Michael. And that, dear friend, is the truth. You know it, and I know it.
Now, if you have a comment from me where I worded it another way, then post it, and if something needs correcting, then I will correct it. And you will also be wise to refrain from jumping the gun and calling people “liars” without first asking them what they meant and giving them the opportunity to explain/correct what they said, while you have your own people simultaneously posting outright INTENTIONAL lies and slander about other people.
So, if I said that Jws have no Scriptures they “point to”, then show where I said that.
Its just our belief in the Trinity, DW. You, as a JW, would say that “Trinitarians have no Scriptures which state there is a Trinity”, or that we “have no Scriptures that support the Trinity doctrine”. But SURELY you wouldn’t be so dense as to say that we don’t have some Scriptures that we “point to”.
So you can certainly understand that, while acknowledging that someone has Scriptures that THEY believe “points to” a certain teaching, that does not mean that you have to believe that those Scriptures actually SAY or TEACH the doctrine.
So stop trying to manipulate and twist my words into something that wasn’t said, by changing a word here or there. Or else, just show where I said it in the way you claim.
By the way, DW…You and me both know that Jws have no Scripture that SAYS Jesus is Michael. Perhaps that is why there are MANY in your own religion that don’t swallow the teaching either, and claim that “JWs believe the Scripture ‘indicates’ such, but believing it isn’t a matter of salvation”.
So don’t kid yourself…If its such a clear-cut Scriptural teaching, then why are there so many in your own faith who don’t buy it, and admit that they are embarrassed when asked to explain it?
2. Your other question was….“Have you said that we as Jehovah's witnesses can't Scripturally point to 1914 as the year Jesus became King?? If you have it's a lie!!!”
Okay, I am trying to check the way you worded this one very carefully also, to make sure you aren’t playing one of your tricks on this one, as well. Maybe its late, and maybe its because I’m full of flu medication (I don’t drink, by the way), but I can’t see anything wrong with the way you worded this one.
So, I will say “Yes” to that one…I have made that statement.
Now again, I will say that I know you guys have Scriptures you “point to”, to arrive at this view. But you do NOT have a solid Scriptural foundation, with Scriptures that actually TEACH it. This is another whole debate in and of itself, and how you guys misuse the word “parousia”, but I will emphatically state that the Scriptures do not teach a thing about Jesus becoming King in 1914.
That Sir, is not a “lie”…that is a disagreement in doctrine, and Scriptural interpretation.
Okay, I believe I have answered your questions. It was only fair, since you answered mine.
Now, your illogical reasoning needs some comments as well.
YOU: “You are a liar it's been proven. But I never said you where a liar on this subject all I said was that you hadn't proved anything. It seems a bit strange that you made an entire argument about Bro Rando being a liar based on where Dee posted from, but you knew about I.P scramblers all along!! That's a bit strange to the neutral observer.”
ME: DW, let me just tell you something about internet scramblers…Have I heard the term? Yes. Do I know what one is, where you buy one, what they look like? No. I have no idea. I have never used one, I have no idea if or why apostates use them (I imagine some would), I don’t own one, and I haven’t thought about one since I first heard the term.
Now, when I wrote that paragraph to you, talking about how we decided to use an Internet scrambler to keep the all-wise Rando from figuring out years down the road that Dee was Luis, SURELY you knew that I was being sarcastic and not serious. If you didn’t catch that, then do not ever call ME “thick” again. Do yourself a favor, and just don’t. I would assume you knew that was not a serious remark, but that’s the only basis I can figure out, for your comment that I “knew about internet scramblers all along”. How else would you even arrive at that? As I said, I haven’t thought another thing about an internet scrambler since I first heard the term. I am not trying to hide from anyone, Rando has already told the readers where I live, and I am not an apostate, so I have no need to use such a thing.
Besides, that whole excuse about an internet scrambler, does NOTHING to get the liar Rando off the hook. It only shows how far you will go to shield and protect him, and cover for his lies. You see DW, I think you know that Rando has issues. I think you know this quite well, since you and he go way back. I think you know deep down that he does bend the truth. Maybe you cut him some slack because he has been your friend. Maybe you are taking into consideration that he has issues….Nothing wrong with that in and of itself.
But what IS wrong, is when you bend so far backwards and even make your own self look ridiculous, because you have to keep a “united front” and help a fellow JW cover his lies and slander. That is simply wrong.
Now, there are 2 possibilities here, the way I see it:
1. Luis left the board 3 years ago, and has either moved to NY, or is using an internet scrambler to disguise the fact that he wanted to come back 3 years after leaving, and write as “Dee”, and claim to be a study……
2. Luis actually lives in Florida, and is male, while Dee lives in NY/NJ, and is female
Hmmm…I wonder which one it could be.
You know, DW, and I’m being serious now…as one human being to another………….It is nice that you want to stick with your friend. But your friend is wrong. Your friend is over the line. Period.
You act like Dee has to prove something, or that Luis does, or that I do. We don’t. YOU guys are the ones making the accusations with no basis, or facts to support it. And with ONE motive…to discredit. So, guess where that puts the burden of proof? We don’t have to disprove ANYTHING, that there is no evidence for in the first place.
You said in regards to my statement that Luis is not Dee…”We only have your word for this”.
Yes, and my word is enough. You have tried to slander my word, and you will not succeed. I am a man of my word, and I take my word very seriously. If I believed they were the same person, I would not have spent 2 hours typing that post exposing Rando for his lies. I would have kept my mouth shut. But Rando lied, and I knew he was lying, because he has done it before.
You aren’t going to help him out of this one, DW. You see, there are simply too many problems here.
You see, consider the problems that Rando’s lying tongue has created for him….
1. If all of Rando’s statements are true, then I myself am Dee. You know why? Because Rando also accused ME of being Luis, back when Luis was here. Now, I have met Luis…therefore, I know that we are not the same person. But if I am Luis, and Luis is Dee, then I must be Dee.
Do you think I am Dee, DW?
2 Here’s another one for you to try and blame me for…Rando once told us that Luis’ wife was NOT a JW. Now, he claims that Luis’ wife IS a JW. Now DW, BOTH statements cannot be true, UNLESS…
A. Luis’ wife converted to the JW religion in the past 3 yrs
B. Luis now has a different wife, who is a JW, while his other wife was not
But then again, since Rando does NOT really “know” Luis, then what in the name of common sense is he doing posting such nonsense on this board about people to begin with???? If the man has NO knowledge of the facts of a man’s life, or his family, then where does he get off coming on here and posting about it, and where do YOU come off trying to cover for it by claiming something stupid about using internet scramblers?
You people are out of your minds.
Your “internet scrambler” remark was about as dumb as when you tried to cover for him misquoting that article from Wikipedia, when you came on here and tried to imply that perhaps I edited the article in an attempt to frame him.
Stop being such a clown, DW. That’s not an insult…A clown is funny, and entertaining, acts goofy, and provides lots of laughter. That is exactly what you do, DW, with stuff like this.
You want the fact, DW? Here it is…Rando just lied. He wanted to slander Dee, so he made it up. You yourself know this. You talk to him behind the scenes. Surely you have had enough brains to ASK him by now, how he knows this, and what facts he has. So you know what I think? I think you know full well that he is posting this nonsense for ONE reason, and ONE reason alone….To slander and discredit.
And you are going right along with it, and trying to give it credibility. And you simply can’t do it, no matter how valiantly you try to stick up for your friend.
Oh, and you try to wiggle out of it, by claiming this…
“I never said you where lying on this particular subject. I merely offered alternatives to your so called proof. I.P address is not proof of anything”
Sorry DW, but that’s weak, and it isn’t going to work. Because YES, you are implying that I am lying on this, without coming out and saying it, because you know yourself that I am not.
And guess what?…Either Rando or me, is lying. We can’t BOTH be telling the truth. I have said that they are NOT the same person, and I have stated it as fact. Rando has said they ARE, and he has stated that as fact. Somebody is lying. Rando also claims to know Luis’ habits of attending the KH as a spy…Now how on earth would be possibly know something like that, DW?
C’mon…you aren’t THAT dense.
But you imply it with these 2 statements…
1. “You are a liar its been proven” (Actually no, we have just PROVEN that Rando lied)
2. Rando’s word is reliable
But then, you try to weasle out of it and say…”But Derrick, I never said you were lying about this”.
Well, SOMEBODY is….If I’m not, then Rando IS. Can’t have it both ways, DW.
Now, I am sorry that Rando is making a fool out of you. Here you are, trying to be a loyal friend and give him the benefit of the doubt because you believe him, and he knows full well who is lying.
And you want another bit of evidence? Who is still here talking about it, and willing to discuss the subject in detail, and who lashed out like a child and then disappeared into the woods? Does the honest person do that, or the liar? You tell me.
Now DW, I found this statement of yours beyond hypocritical, and I actually AGREE with the statement. Part of it, at least. It’s the fact that YOU made it, that I found amazing. You wrote…
“Lying is not acceptable as a christian. But the problem is you need proof, you're so desperate to try and prove us liars you stop at nothing and make yourself look foolish in the mean time.”
Well, first off, you are wrong about me being desperate to “prove you liars”. No, you do that by yourself by lying. I didn’t ask Rando to post his lies…he did that on his own. Do not attempt to blame me for what you people write, that happens to be false. I personally wish ALL of the lying would stop, so Scripture could be discussed in a God-honoring way, and so that this board would be a more peaceful place. That is really a dumb comment, because do you think I am desperate to prove Elbert Spears a liar? Brenton Hepburn? Pam? No, because as far as I can tell, they don’t lie.
So, your little “persecution” complex doesn’t carry any weight. You guys have made the choice to think you are going to come here and lie and slander, and discredit our reputations. Don’t get upset when we respond by exposing it. That is what I do, and will continue to do as the need arises. You would never have had the first confrontation with me to begin with, had you been peaceable and acted like a Christian. But I don’t take to religious bullying
Now, the part that I agree with, but find most hypocritical….You, of all people, talking about “needing proof” to make someone a liar, and you have been challenged to produce “proof” of my lies more times than I can shake a stick at, and all you do is keep REPEATING the same silly accusation over and over again, like someone keeps hitting your “rewind” and “play” buttons.
Truthfully, I hope you 3 will start acting like the Christians you claim to be, and I will never have to address another lie from any of you. So, your statement in that regards was completely false.
Now DW, I also have a problem with your illogical thinking. Let me sum up the way you are coming across…
Basically, a person has the right to make ANY accusation or utterly absurd statement against their enemy that they wish to, and if the enemy cannot “prove” the accusation false, then the accusation is not a lie, and is an acceptable means of dealing with a person whom you view as “vile” or “mentally diseased”.
That is basically what you have told us….Rando can make countless claims which are well-documented, and no matter how utterly absurd and false they are, they are acceptable because we might be using internet scramblers, and so we must figure that the stupid comments must be true.
Okay, then let’s try that logic towards you, and see how YOU like it. Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that I feel a strong need to discredit you, because I don’t think you should be here in this forum. Now, I DON’T want to discredit you, but just humor me a moment for the sake of argument.
Anyway, I come on here and claim….”I have discovered evidence that DW is a homosexual, and that Rando and he have been involved in a relationship”.
Now, you hit the ceiling and scream…”LIAR”! Which you would have the right to do. You know why? Because I have NO proof that you are a homosexual. But hey, that doesn’t matter. Because there was a homosexual that used to write to this forum regularly, and I recognize similarities in the writing style that you and he had (actually, Luis and Dee had NO similarities in writing style). Therefore, because I noticed the similarities, I have every right to tell everyone that YOU are that homosexual who used to write.
Furthermore, since you cannot PROVE that you are not that homosexual, that also gives me the right to say that you are. You can SAY that you are not that homosexual, but you are a proven liar, so your word means nothing. You can point out that you are from England, and that homosexual was from Ireland, but you are just using an internet scrambler.
Then, Kevin can write and claim that you MUST be that homosexual, because my word is better than yours, and I said that you are. So, your denial means nothing.
Now, let’s take this a step further…Let’s just say that you really ARE a homosexual in hiding, but I have no way of knowing that, because I haven’t met you, and have no evidence that such is the case.
You know what that means? It means I am still lying…even if I happen to get lucky and guess right. If I state for a fact that you are a homosexual, and my intent is merely to discredit you, and I have NO knowledge whatsoever that my statement is true (even if it is), then I am STILL guilty of lying. Because I made a statement with an intent to deceive, with the purpose of discrediting.
Now, that my English friend, is what Rando did to Dee when he claimed she is Luis. She isn’t. That is what he did when he claimed he “found out” that I was a former JW. He lied…He didn’t “find out” anything, because there was nothing to find out.
Give it up, DW. The game is over. You people would have been much better off, to have just left the lying and slander out of it.
I just LOVED this one, where you said….”2. Rando claimed they are the same person, therefore, he lied>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We only have your word for this. No proof”
REPLY: This is hilarious…Uh, where is the PROOF that Rando’s claim of them being the same person, is the truth? Hmmm, DW?
So, its my word against Rando’s…I’m perfectly fine with that. The people who have followed this board, and who aren’t brainwashed, can figure that one out.
I’ve certainly given more reasons for them NOT to be the same person, than Rando gave FOR them to be.
One more thing, DW. On sort of a personal note. You shared some things about your family you did not have to share. The problem is, you used it to justify your judgment of Dee as an apostate, because you claim to know “how their minds tick”. As if you can make a sweeping statement like that, and claim to know the thinking of everyone on earth, or what their personal situation is based on your own family.
But I’m curious….You called your dad an “apostate”. I wonder if you shun and refuse to speak a word to him because this is what the WT Society teaches you, or do you still honor and respect him as your FATHER, as the Bible commands you to do? And I believe the WT has even indicated that you are supposed to honor your disfellowshipped parents as well….I sure hope you don’t shun the man who is the reason for your very existence. Prison or not, or no matter what he’s done, he’s still your father. To come on here and call him an “apostate”, with him sitting in prison, honestly I find sickening…I sure hope the man isn’t all alone with nobody in his life who even cares. Surely you have more Christian love in you than that. If not, then you have nothing to say to anybody worth while, and you would do well to read 1 Corinthians 13 and think about what its saying.
Now one final thing in closing, DW. I think its really sweet that you and Rando are such dear friends, and you “love him to bits”. Let me be clear…Nobody is asking you to disown him, not be his friend, or even to address him in public. But if one of my Christian brothers/sisters were on here spreading lies (and they AREN’T, by the way), then I would privately tell them that they need to make sure they are speaking the truth. Your friend Rando lied, and has been doing it a long time. He is convinced that it is okay for him to do that. Now, you are to be commended for SAYING that you would take him aside and say something. You should do just that.
You are also to be commended for acknowledging that lying is NEVER acceptable under any circumstances. The problem is when you say “Jehovahs Witnesses don’t lie“, yet we are seeing lies posted by them.
Have a great day, DW. The lying here needs to stop…period. No excuse for it.
The problem is Derrick you know just the same amount about logic as you do about scripture, which is nothing at all!! So i'm absolutely pleased you shake your head in disbelief at my posts it shows that what I say is absolutely spot on. So that's a good thing for me.
So let me address your post now.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<1. I do not recall wording my statement in the manner you do here, in regards to you having Scriptures that you think “point to” Jesus being Michael. If you have a comment to this effect from, then by all means, post it. Then we will talk about it. The fact is, I am well aware of the few Scriptures used by the WT, to “point to” this teaching. 1 Thess. 4:16 would be one of those Scriptures. So no, at the present, I do not believe that I have ever said that Jehovah’s Witnesses have no Scriptures that they “point to”, to say that Jesus is Michael.
What I HAVE said, is that they have no Scriptures that SAY or TEACH that Jesus is Michael. I HAVE said that Jehovah’s Witnesses have NO statement in Scripture that Jesus is Michael. And that, dear friend, is the truth. You know it, and I know it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Here's one of your statement's right here
<<<<<I will say that I have seen and read their so-called "evidence" for Jesus being Michael. Needless to say, there is NO SCRIPTURE that they can point to.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So you just told another lie
Besides that you say this
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<What I HAVE said, is that they have no Scriptures that SAY or TEACH that Jesus is Michael. I HAVE said that Jehovah’s Witnesses have NO statement in Scripture that Jesus is Michael. And that, dear friend, is the truth. You know it, and I know it.
Its just our belief in the Trinity, DW. You, as a JW, would say that “Trinitarians have no Scriptures which state there is a Trinity”, or that we “have no Scriptures that support the Trinity doctrine”. But SURELY you wouldn’t be so dense as to say that we don’t have some Scriptures that we “point to>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You admit you have said we have no scriptures that SUPPORT or TEACH Jesus being Michael.That is a blatant lie!!! We've just seen where you said we can't point to a scripture again a blatant lie!!
So let's bear in mind the context of these statements and what a lie is.
Here's the context:
You are supposed to be on here representing our beliefs and have studied us extensively yet you tell people we can't support or teach that Jesus is Michael from scripture. So you admit you lie here!!! So then people go away and may never visit this site or speak to a witness again and they go away thinking we pluck Michael out of thin air.
Do you think that's fair on people who want an objective viewpoint?? Do you think that's fair on people who are in a search for God??
People come here and think "I wonder why JWs say Jesus is Michael. I know what i'll do i'll ask a JW or someone who knows about their beliefs" and they come on here and think "oh this Derrick Holland's not a witness , but he knows what witnesses believe so I'll ask him" so they ask you and you tell a lie like this "Jehovah's witnesses can't show any scriptures that support or teach Jesus is Michael"
The scriptures are clear that Jesus is the firstborn OF creation. This means according to scripture he's the chief angel(Archangel)
Again your second point shows the same.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<So, I will say “Yes” to that one…I have made that statement.
Now again, I will say that I know you guys have Scriptures you “point to”, to arrive at this view. But you do NOT have a solid Scriptural foundation, with Scriptures that actually TEACH it.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So again you admit you lie!!
Because we do have solid scriptural foundation here's just one scripture here
7 "For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom"
For somebody who's studied us extensively you should know this whether you believe it or not is a different story. You are guilty of telling lies
Dictionary defines lies like this
1. a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive
So you admit to telling lies on this forum.To be on this forum and make statements like that shows a deliberate intent to deceive.It would be a different situation if you where talking to a friend. But you're actually on a Jehovah's witness forum as an expert in a religion you've studied extensively and your making false statements with the intent to deceive.
That's why you shouldn't be here!! Morally it's wrong but you have no morals, which is why you have no issue with telling these lies.
It would be the same as me being on a forum for trinitarians and someone saying to me "DW why do people believe in the trinity and I say I don't know,there's no scripture to support it"
That would be a lie because I do know why they believe it. I know what scriptures they use to try and support it, but my statement is misleading and therefore a lie.
This admission tells the readers five things
1)You admit to lies
2)You are a hypocrite
3)You shouldn't be here
4)You're only here to deceive
5)You use Satanic tactics
As for the rest of your letter no idea what it said I didn't read it there's no need you've been thoroughly exposed for what you are.