Jehovah`s Witness/Paranoia or Bipolar?


Are you kidding me Mr. Holland? Rando boy or Eddie boy?  You don't dictate who I write. If you want to claim I am Brother Rando or Eddie G, then that tells the board just on desperate you really are. Obsessing aren't we? Why not try a little decency if you want people to take you serious?

Hello, Danny Boy.  How are you?  Well, the questions from the UK, just keep pouring in.

First off, thank you for writing in an attempt to correct a misunderstanding.  I believe I said that it was my opinion, and not something I could prove.  So, there was no "claim" that you were Eddie or Rando....just speculation.  I will talk more about that in a minute.  And just to be clear, nobody was "dictating" to you, who to write.  I don't care who you write.  Unlike some of the Witnesses here, I believe every person has the right to write whomever they choose.  That wasn't the point.  But the fact is, normally questions from the outside, do not come in in bold print.  That is something that is usually done by the "experts" themselves.  

That being said, I see that your writing does originate in another country, and I'm glad you wrote in to make his correction.  I have no problem with that.  But just so you will know, I am going to tell you WHY it appeared to me that you were one of them writing to themselves.  

First of all, it happens quite often, and even if this is not one of those times, the fact remains...its still a very regular occurrence.  However, since your question originates from another country than what I know Rando and Eddie to live in, then I accept that you are not either of them.

Secondly, to just be blunt with you with no disrespect intended, your comments were about like something they would write.  In your comment, you said that you "see" that I did not answer Eddie's question, which I certainly did.  This is typical of what they do....deny their questions were answered, while not answering mine.  The fact is, I actually had given a direct answer to Eddie's question, as proven in my other post this morning about Eddie and Misquoting.  So, this comment was very Eddie/Rando-like.  I really didn't want to think there was actually another reader out there, who would claim a question was not answered, when it most certainly was.  Furthermore, your intent on writing them, was to insult me...No doubt about that one.  Its odd to me that you would be more concerned with my not answering a question that certainly was answered, then them not telling the truth about a whole host of other subjects....1874, what Baptists believe, etc.  Seems like you would have an interest in truth being told.  

And if you're referring to Eddie's past questions on the Trinity, his misrepresentations have been addressed, as well.  I simply don't let them change the subject back to it, every time they are pounded on another topic.  The Trinity is their "default" discussion topic....Every time they get caught lying about something else (1874, Christ's bodily resurrection, etc.), they always try to steer the discussion back to the Trinity.  Its a diversionary tactic they use....I simply don't play by their rules.  But yes, their misrepresentations about the Trinity, have been answered thoroughly.  But they always keep repeating the same ones over and over, so I see no need to address the same lies each and every time.

However, the question Eddie claims was not answered, about "Who is Mr. Holland arguing with?", certainly was.  

However, unlike them, I do not want any of my replies to contain anything that is shown to be inaccurate.  If I jump the gun, I will happily admit it, and apologize.  For thinking you were one of them, I apologize.  I am genuinely glad you wrote to me, to set that straight.  

But as your motive in writing to Eddie was still to insult and attack me, I do not apologize for pointing out that your statement was completely inaccurate, as I certainly did answer the question that you claimed I had not.  In fact, in his reply to you, Eddie intentionally edited out the portion of my reply, where the answer was contained.  Not very honest.

As I said, I do not want any inaccuracies in my answers, so I want you to know that I have gone back to the answer in question, and revised it so that it contains no inaccurate statements.  Nor does it contain the inflammatory title, either.  I am unable to do anything about the "question" part, but the "reply" part has been edited, to remove any reference to you being either of them.  

Now, if we can just get you and your friends to correct the inaccuracies from the JW side, we will be in business.

My jumping the gun about your identity notwithstanding, the facts still remain that Eddie and Rando have lied about the history of your religion, and that truth needs to be told.  And any attempt to attack or ridicule me in your writings to them, will not deter me in that endeavor.  It is still a fact that Rando has lied about 1874, quoted a phony "Baptist" site as if it were real (and repeated it again in today's post), and made slanderous accusations against myself and Richard.  

And we have every right to answer those, Sir. And make no mistake....We will.

Now, I do sincerely thank you for writing.  I should not have identified you as them, without more to go on.  My mistake.  Now, they need to start correcting theirs.  I can't say that you have been friendly or cordial in your writing to or about me, however, I have been asked to show you some grace, so I will.  And you did have the right to correct me where I was wrong, so I respect that.  

At the end of the day, truth needs to be told here.  Please be very careful when you choose to defend those who willfully attempt to alter truth.  I am an honest person...that is why I'm willing to make any correction of an inaccuracy.  If they were honest men, they would do the same.  

Danny, my prayer for you, is that you will prayerfully research this Organization that you are a part of, or are defending.  There are some serious things in its history and its policies, that prove beyond all doubt, that Jehovah is not leading it.  These guys do not want those things brought out, and they have not been honest with the readers of this board, about what has happened, and what has been taught.  I pray you will find salvation by faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ alone, and realize that He, and He alone, is your only hope.

Have a nice day, and take care.


Jehovah`s Witness

All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts


Derrick Holland


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.


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

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 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.

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 All rights reserved.