Jehovah`s Witness/No excuses asked for

Advertisement


Question
QUESTION: Mr Holland I had asked for no excuses.  The only one that did not give me an excuse was Mr G. He could see what I was trying to convey to the 5 of you.  I have no respect for Mr Rando.   I do find your knowledge of great interest. However you do yourself a great injustice by the pride you show in yourself wanting to defend yourself and not your faith.  Mr Holland you said you have  the right to defend your reputation, and I agree with that right.  I also agree with the right that you and  witnesses have to defend your faiths. What I find most upsetting is the unchristian way the 5 of you go about it.  There are civil ways of responding to people as the good book says in those passages I found and quoted.  This forum would be much more informative if the 5 of you used adult mature approaches to defending you side of the arguments. As a reminder those verses were and please read them carefully

The Lord said “ But I say to you not to resist evil: but if one strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other:” Matthew 5:39

Saint Peter said about the Lord “Who, when he was reviled, did not revile: when he suffered, he threatened not, but delivered himself to him that judged him unjustly.” 1 Peter 2:23

Saint Paul said  “ Let your speech be always in grace seasoned with salt: that you may know how you ought to answer every man. “ Colossians 4:6  Douay Bible

By all means defend your faith but do it with mildness and learn to "turn the other cheek" as our LORD commands.

ANSWER: Good morning, Bob, and thank you for following up.

You said..."Mr Holland I had asked for no excuses.  The only one that did not give me an excuse was Mr G. He could see what I was trying to convey to the 5 of you."

Nor were any excuses given, Sir.  I merely told you that I believe that I have the right to defend my reputation against slander, and my beliefs against misrepresentation.  To which point, you agreed.  I don't believe there was anything in my statements that "excused" unchristian conduct or speech.  There is NO excuse for that from anyone, me or them.

So, here is what I am going to ask of you.  You are giving a lot of broad and general accusations, but nothing specific.  I believe that what you have seen in my writings, are a defense of my reputation against attack, and exposing of obvious lies, which have now been clearly shown to be lies.  I believe the best way for this to not be necessary, is for Rando to cease his lying.  

If you have a specific example of anything in my responses that you believe is unchristian, slanderous, or a personal attack against a person's character, then please bring it to my attention.  I will certainly be fair and open-minded to your objections.  I just know that I try to steer clear of personal attacks, unless someone like Rando simply reveals beyond all doubt that his intention is to lie, which he has certainly done.  I have no problem "calling a spade a spade".  

About the only thing I can see that you might be referencing, would be in my debates, sometimes jabs or accusations are exchanged.  Perhaps that could be toned down some.  I simply know how JWs "debate", as I have been doing this for years now, and it happens without fail. They will divert, change the subject, bring up unrelated issues to cloud the issue you're talking about, and insult you.  Sometimes, this needs to be pointed out.

But Bob, if something you have seen in my writings offends you as being unchristian, then by all means, please bring it to my attention.  I cannot address general and broad comments of being "unchristian", unless I know what you're talking about.


You said..."I have no respect for Mr Rando."

Well, I certainly can't blame you there.  I don't think many people do.

Bob, can I say something to you, and you take it in the spirit it is intended?  We're being straight up with each other, in a friendly manner, right?  Okay, here goes....

Your reaction to Rando wasn't much different from mine, and you have only experienced a small sampling of what I have from him.  I followed your conversations with him.  The way I recall it, you approached him about his concealing his identity.  He wrote you and called you an "apostate", which is his favorite designation for those whom he hates, or expose him.  

You then told him you were not in his religion, which IS the way most JWs define "apostate" (one who has been a JW, but no longer is).  But as you and I both have experienced, Rando defines "apostate" in any way that suits him.  You told him you were not asking a Scriptural question, nor wanting to debate.  You then learned what hundreds before you have learned....that getting Rando to give a straight answer to anything, is like trying to eat Jell-O with chopsticks.

To which he then completely ignored your question, and made his answer about me, claiming you were my supporter, and then asking you why I said something that we have now seen that I did not say.

Then, it all went downhill from there, with you getting increasingly angrier with each writing, to the point where you issued him a warning that you were going to go to the other experts.  You also were quite frustrated with him, when you wrote....

"I am sorry it has come to this but your evasive and dishonest methods are forcing my hand."

and....

"It is about YOUR honesty as a person."

Now Bob, I do not blame you for getting upset with him.  Nor do I blame you for calling his honesty and character into question, because it was completely warranted...Rando IS dishonest, and everybody knows it...yes, even the ones who support him.  Now, I was out of town when this conversation was going on, but I was checking the board from my phone whenever I was in a place where I could get a cell signal, and I genuinely regretted the way he was treating you.  

But Bob, how is your pointing out his dishonesty and evasiveness, any different than my doing it?  He really hasn't slandered you to the point he has me...not even close.  

Then, to beat it all, you sent your last question to 5 experts, and Rando was the only one who was nasty and hateful to you.  Nor did he answer that question either, unless you asked him to worship the Trinity and I just missed that part.  His reply had nothing to do with anything you had said.  You asked him about changing his mannerisms and speech, and he replies with "No thanks, I don't want to worship the 666 Trinity" ??  

This proves the kind of mentality that you are dealing with here.

My point in bringing all this up, is that ANYONE who has dealings with Rando and voices disagreement with him, is going to become his target for slander and abuse.  Welcome to the club, my friend.

But I do not believe I am out of line for exposing his lies, especially the one he has told over 10 times in the past month, about my claiming that the "Holy Spirit changed His mind" about something.  I let it go, and let it go, and let it go, because a JW wrote to me and asked me to please make peace with him.  But after he posted it AGAIN the other day, I decided "enough of this lie, is enough" .  I'm not allowing him to make people think that I said something like that.

Again, Bob, if you can think of anything "unchristian" in my replies, I will certainly keep an open mind to what you have to say. And I invite you to please bring it to my attention.

You said..."I do find your knowledge of great interest. However you do yourself a great injustice by the pride you show in yourself wanting to defend yourself and not your faith."

First off, thank you for the compliment about my "knowledge", if you could call it that.

About the pride issue, I don't see it that way, and I certainly do not want to come off as prideful.  There are other Christians who know far more than I do.  I simply have a lot of knowledge of JW doctrine, and how that doctrine relates to the Scriptures. Again, I would like for you to bring to my attention, what you are speaking of, specifically.


You said..."Mr Holland you said you have  the right to defend your reputation, and I agree with that right.  I also agree with the right that you and witnesses have to defend your faiths. What I find most upsetting is the unchristian way the 5 of you go about it."

And I too agree with you, that BOTH sides have the right to defend their faith.  I am not the one who is going to argue with you on that.  Now, you just saw the statements from Sister T, yesterday.  She continues to claim that this forum is for people to ask questions TO Jehovah's Witnesses, and she doesn't have a clue what she's talking about.  She has no understanding of the rules, or the purpose of this forum, yet she continues to make this false claim.  This is NOT a JW forum...it is a public forum, for information ABOUT Jehovah's Witnesses.  It is not a forum associated with this religion in any way, and the only qualification to answer here, is that you have sufficient knowledge, not that you are a practicing member of the religion.

Now, I said that, to say this...You seem to be mistaken in your belief, that this is about open and respectful dialogue.  I think you are somehow under the impression that everyone here wants that, but that some of the experts just don't know how to go about it, because they are abrasive.  

Not true, Bob.  This is NOT about having open and respectful dialogue, where both JWs and Christians express their views.  The JWs that you have named and have a problem with (with the exception of one), do NOT want open dialogue here....they want to SQUASH open dialogue, where anything that shows their religion in a bad light, is presented.  Why do you think they lie and attack?  The quicker you understand that point, the quicker you will have your answer, as to why they act the way they do.

Now, I said with the "exception of one".  I still believe that you are in error, for putting Mr. DeLaurentos in this discussion.  Unless of course, you have had some private conversation with him that I am not aware of.  I have never once seen him be insulting.  Once he was a little harsh with a questioner, and he came back and apologized for it.  Much better than some of the others.  I personally have recommended him and Mr. Hepburn, for someone who wants a JW point of view, in a Christian manner.  I do not see what your issue is with him.

Now, regarding the Scriptures you listed....Yes Bob, they are wonderful Scriptures, and SHOULD guide our actions.  I do not believe you can justly say that my posts "revile" anyone, or "strike anyone".  I do my dead-level best to keep it about the issue, and not the person.  If I see the person being rude, dishonest, or trying to divert, then I point it out.  But I do not lash out at their character, when I do not know their character.  Again, if you see an example of this, please let me know.

As for your third Scripture, I would like you to consider what it says, when it makes reference to our speech being "in grace, seasoned with salt".  Salt does a number of things....It makes things taste better.  It preserves.  But it does something else...It STINGS an open wound.  When people are acting in a dishonest and slanderous manner, then sometimes simply pointing it out, is like pouring salt in an open wound.  

I'm sorry that Rando needed to be exposed again for lying.  I'm sorry that he lies, period.  But he does, and it had to be done.

You know, Bob, it isn't always easy to find the perfect balance of keeping all the Scriptures, no matter how hard we try to do so, and realize the need to do so.  The Scriptures you listed, certainly should guide our actions and speech.  The Bible also COMMANDS us to expose error, which isn't always pleasant, and normally doesn't create a very nice reaction in people.

Jude 3-  "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints."


Prov. 13:1-  "A wise son heareth his father's instruction: but a scorner heareth not rebuke."


Prov. 27:5-  "Open rebuke is better than secret love."


1 Tim. 5:20-22-  "Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality

Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure."


2 Tim. 3:16-  "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:


2 Timothy 4:2-4-  "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Titus 1:10-13, 16-  "For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:

Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.

One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, The Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.

This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.


Bob, these Scriptures are just as much a part of God's Word, as the ones you listed.  While we are certainly supposed to be Christian in the way we go about our speech, sometimes exposing error, by its very nature, causes tension.  All any of us can do, is try and find the proper balance, in obeying ALL the Scriptures, to the best of our ability and with the help of God.

I agree that there are civil ways of responding to people, while defending the faith.  I do not believe I have been un-civil.  If I have, please show me where.

Thank you for writing, Bob, and I really do hope to hear back from you.  Take care, and God bless.

Derrick



---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Mr Holland all those passages you quote are just what I am saying defend your beliefs but  do it honorably. Your whole line of arguments would have more force if you follow those texts in defending your faith as well as doing it in a mild manner regardless of what others say. Yes I feel regret for the way I responded to My Rando. I did do what you do and I am ashamed of it. I will not be reading that mans replies again nor will I try correspond with him. I was going to ask you some questions but now I am having second thoughts because you give me the impression that you come above your belief in your God by the pride you show in your own writings. Yes you do have the right to defend yourself, you need to learn to do it in a less argumentative and personal attack way. Learn to turn the other cheek and chose use manners. I have to say that your depth of knowledge is very good, but to balance that out your pride gets in the way of the theology you try to present. There are a few people here who ignore personal criticisms and stay by they beliefs.   By the way I do not think you or any other non witness should be here but on the site that is for critics of jehovahs witnesses.

All I have been trying to do with writing to the 5 of you is get you all to be more tollerant. The LORD is the judge not us  Matthew 7:1,2 "1 Judge not, that you may not be judged. 2  For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you mete, it shall be measured to you again."

Answer
Hello, Bob.

You...."Mr Holland all those passages you quote are just what I am saying defend your beliefs but  do it honorably. Your whole line of arguments would have more force if you follow those texts in defending your faith as well as doing it in a mild manner regardless of what others say."

Bob, I would suggest that you read the passages that I listed again.  Not all of them were about merely defending my faith.  In addition to my listing passages about defending the faith, there were also passages listed, where public rebuke is often in order.  Again, it is never a pleasant task, but is a necessity when people lie.  Even Paul referred to some as "liars", and pointing out that someone is a liar when they are shown to be lying, is not unchristian in the least.

The lying is what is unchristian, Bob....Not the exposing of the lie.

Bob, did you consider the passage in 1 Timothy 5:20-22?  Let's look at it again....

1 Tim. 5:20-22-  "Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality

Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure."

Now, there is some excellent advice here, from the inspired words of the Apostle Paul....

1.  If a person sins, and refuses to repent of their sin, but instead shows a pattern that indicates that they intend to persist in their sin, then they are to be rebuked before all .

2.  There is to be NO PREFERENTIAL treatment, or partiality.  Meaning....if one of my own brethren were on here spreading lies about JWs, then I should should not look the other way when its him/her doing it, while continuing to accuse JWs of lying about us.  This, Sir, is exactly what these JWs do.  MOST of them, with a few exceptions.  

By the same token, when a JW is on here and OBVIOUSLY lying, and making the Organization look bad, the other JWs should not look the other way, nor stand up for that person.  Instead, they should care enough about his/her spiritual condition, to approach that person in love.  

Instead, we have several JWs who support this man in his lies, and one even went so far to say that a proven liar is "on Jehovah's side" , and then this same person turns right around and makes this mind-boggling statement....

"If I sit back and say nothing when a falsehood is spoken then how can I rightly call myself a minister of the true God?"

Yeah, that's a great question....Why does this very person sit back and say nothing, except, "Well, I don't really know the details" , when she knows full well the man is guilty of lying?

As far as I'm concerned, they are in direct violation of this verse.  This passage goes on to say that we are to lay hands suddenly on no man , meaning, that just because they SAY they are of a particular faith, we should not automatically place confidence in them, or support them, when their conduct goes against what they claim to be.

Its about time some of these people who lecture everyone else about "truth", realize that standing for truth is more important than supporting someone who practices sin, just because that person wears the same religious label.  Funny how quick they can be to apply a double standard.

The advice from the above passage, is not to stick up for any and all people claiming to be JWs', even when they lie.  The advice from Scripture, is "neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure."

Not really too hard to understand.

Now Bob, that being said, you cannot just ignore the verses that call for public rebuke of the one lying, and sinning.  There is a time and place for exposing what is counterfeit, and a public forum like this is a place where it is necessary, when the person's conduct warrants it.

So yes, while we are supposed to maintain Christian compassion for that person, there is simply no "sweet" way to expose lying and make everyone happy while doing it.


You...."Yes I feel regret for the way I responded to My Rando. I did do what you do and I am ashamed of it. I will not be reading that mans replies again nor will I try correspond with him."

Well, that's where we differ.  Rando lied, you immediately caught onto the fact he was dishonest, and you called him out.  Personally, I think he needed it.  

The person who should be ashamed, is the one who lies....period.  Here he calls you dishonest for writing under 2 different names, and he hypocritically posts questions to himself all the time, using different names, and actually thinks people can't see that he's writing himself.

Take the latest one this morning from "Craig", for instance.  "Craig" is one of the aliases he often used after he came to this board.  Now, he has decided to bring it back, and use it again.  But its obviously written by him, to him.  No question about it.

By the way, you feel so bad about poor Rando.  Did Rando APOLOGIZE to you, for calling you my "supporter", when it is now quite obvious that you are not?  Did he once humble himself, and say "Looks like I made another blunder, and I retract my wrong statement?"  Did he apologize for posting about you, and calling you a "big baby"?  Do you think he feels bad, Bob?  And he is supposed to be, as he terms it, one of the "only Christians walking around on earth today".  

You..."By the way I do not think you or any other non witness should be here but on the site that is for critics of jehovahs witnesses."

Well, that is your opinion.  And that is all it is.  Unfortunately for you and Sister T, it is Allexperts who runs this site, and it is therefore Allexperts, who gets to make the rules for their own forum.  And according to Allexperts terms and rules, there is nothing that says an "expert" in a category, MUST be a current practicing member of that religion/profession.  The requirement is sufficient knowledge.  And since it is THEIR site, then THEY have the right to decide the rules.

This argument is about like saying a man shouldn't be able to answer questions in the category for auto mechanics, if he is not currently working as an auto mechanic.  Even though he may have worked on cars for 50 years, and know everything there is to know about them....he shouldn't answer questions on it, unless he is currently an auto mechanic.  Perhaps he isn't part of some Auto Mechanics Association, so the other ones who are, want him out of the category...even if he happens to be one of the most honest, and popular, and knowledgable guys on that topic.  Maybe he doesn't agree with the other practicing mechanics on their advice, but then again, maybe he's actually RIGHT.  But because he dares show where they are not answering the question correctly, they can lie about him, and slander his family, and whine about why he shouldn't be in that category.  

Yeah, makes perfect sense.

But its interesting....You don't think I should be here, but you are considering asking me a question on theology?  I mean, its fine if you do.  That's why I'm here.  It just sounds a little odd coming from a guy who says I shouldn't even be here.

Tell me, Bob...Who is the most qualified to be here, and answer questions about the Jehovah's Witness religion?

A.  A person who is a practicing member, but who lies about others, and will not give questioners all the facts about the Organization?  Especially if the questioner wants to know about the history of the Organization, or its past quack medical practices?  A person who will only give facts that cast the WT in a positive light, while omitting any facts that do not?

OR....

B.  Someone who is not currently a practicing member, but who will endeavor to provide ALL the relevant facts, to insure that the questioner gets an answer to their question, based on both sides?

You tell me.

And another thing...Since many of my questions are from Christians who want to know how to answer JWs' from the Bible, how are they going to get good advice on that, if only JWs are here to answer the question?

I think you misunderstand the "Critics" category.  My goal is not to "criticize"...my goal is to present the truth, and compare WT teachings from the Bible.  The "Critics" category, if you will read the questions, is not primarily a place for theological/doctrinal questions.  It is more for people who need help for the emotional scars/abuse that they may have encountered while in the religion.  My expertise is doctrinal, which is what is primarily discussed here.

But again, you are entitled to your opinion.  Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with the actual rules that Allexperts has made for their own forum.


You..."I was going to ask you some questions but now I am having second thoughts because you give me the impression that you come above your belief in your God by the pride you show in your own writings. Yes you do have the right to defend yourself, you need to learn to do it in a less argumentative and personal attack way. Learn to turn the other cheek and chose use manners. I have to say that your depth of knowledge is very good, but to balance that out your pride gets in the way of the theology you try to present."

Now Bob, I am going to be friendly and polite, but blunt.  Just as you are with me.

I asked you in my last response, to please follow up, which you did.  But I also asked you to follow up with a SPECIFIC example of something that I have said, which is "prideful" or "unchristian".  I also asked you to cease with the general and broad accusations, and you come right back with more of them, and still no specifics.  

Personally, I do no appreciate your saying that I implement "personal attacks", when I just stated that I steer clear of that method.  I believe I get far more personal attacks launched at me, than what I have ever thrown at anyone else.  

Now, I will say it again...If you have a SPECIFIC example of a personal attack, something unchristian, and something prideful, then please show me what it is.  But these general accusations with no basis, are getting nowhere.  And I was pretty clear in my last writing, that I wanted you to show something specific.

As far as asking me a theological question, you are more than welcome to do so, if you wish.  That is entirely up to you.  That's the beauty of this board, and the very REASON that both sides SHOULD be represented....because nobody forces anybody to ask a question of any particular expert.  Every person can read the individual profiles, and decide for themselves, without compulsion, who they wish to ask a question of.  That is why it is ridiculous to claim that someone with another view, should not be allowed here...Nobody forces anybody to ask anything of anyone they don't wish to.  

You say you want to ask me questions about theology, but you are having 2nd thoughts.  Whatever you decide is fine.  If you decide you want to ask me about something theological or Scriptural, then I will give you the same polite and respectful answer that I give anyone else who asks me questions about the Bible.  And I will do my dead-level best, to give you a solid Scriptural answer.  But I am not going to beg you to, either.  If you choose not to, because of some imagined pride that you think you see in my writings, but cannot give an example of, then I will respect your right to do as you see fit.

I can be as fair as anyone, or as blunt.  I have been quite kind and patient with you, even with all your unfair scoldings, which you have not once even given an example of my doing the things you accuse me of, or explained why you would name David in your chastisements.

So, here is what I request of you, Bob....You are welcome to write again, if you choose to.  But in your next writing, please let it be either a Scriptural/theological question, or an example of the accusations you have been leveling.  Three writings of broad and general accusations, is plenty.

I'm really trying to be fair with you, but I am not going to continue answering non-specific charges.  If you can show a genuine example of my being prideful or unchristian, then I would certainly want to take the proper steps to correct that.

Thank you for your consideration, and have a wonderful evening.  Take care.


Derrick  

Jehovah`s Witness

All Answers


Answers by Expert:


Ask Experts

Volunteer


Derrick Holland

Expertise

I was raised in the religion known as Jehovah`s Witnesses for 13 years. Since becoming a born-again Christian, I have researched extensively this religion, especially their doctrines and their history. I can answer questions about their doctrines from the perspective of Biblical Christianity. To be clear: Jehovahs Witnesses is the religion of my upbringing, though I myself was never baptized into the religion, nor have I ever been considered as a Jehovahs Witness.

Experience

29 years of Biblical research into the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith, and how they differ from the teachings of the Watchtower.

Organizations
I would advise each questioner to this forum, to carefully READ the profiles of the various volunteers. There are several such as myself, who are not practicing JWs, but will provide you with an accurate and honest answer, regarding JW teaching. If we don't know the answer, we will try to research and get it for you. There are also some excellent practicing JWs here, who also endeavor to give you a factual and honest answer, based on their point of view. I believe by getting both points of view, the questioner can weigh the evidence for themselves, and make an informed decision. Unfortunately, there are also 3 here who claim to be JWs, but do NOT give honest, or well-researched answers. They will tell you only what they want you to believe, and they often hide facts about the history of their religion, as well as print untruths about other people's beliefs. This is done in an attempt to deceive the unsuspecting reader. It can be easily seen who these 3 are, simply by reading the public posts and "answers" which they write. Their posts will normally be filled with personal attacks, and if you question them about some teaching or aspect of the Watchtower that makes them uncomfortable, they will often reject your question, question your motives for asking it, tell you that you have been reading "apostate" sites, or turn the conversation into an attack on another expert. These ones are better avoided, as there is nothing to be gained by way of positive discussion, as they are not interested in intelligent conversation, or honest dialogue. If after reading the forum, you still have any questions as to who they are, just ask me, and I will be happy to tell you. And I can also provide documentation of their willful dishonesty. One thing is for certain...in a forum where people from both sides claim to be "Christians", there should never be any willful lying. Such ones only create a distraction in the forum, and provide nothing of any real value.

Education/Credentials
High School, some college. Studies of God's Word, the Bible, and how it compares to JW theology. I have found my own personal study and experiences to be far more valuable than any formal education or training. The Bible message is clear...Salvation is ONLY through and by the shed blood of Jesus Christ, and no religious organization has a thing to do with it. While attendance at a Bible-preaching, Bible-believing church is a must for spiritual growth and fellowship, no church can grant salvation to its members. Nor is joining a particular group a prerequisite for being saved.

©2016 About.com. All rights reserved.