Jehovah`s Witness/whats with Rando


Hi Mr Holland. I sent this to Rando a couple days back because after seeing how this 1874 discussion has gone, it became clear to me that he owes this board some sort of apolgy.  I thought he would finally come clean, but I guess not.  Even Eddie the guy who didnt want to answer my question, finally had to admit that his religon did teach that Jesus came in 1874.  Which is exactly what you said they did, and what Rando said they did not. If he is such an expert on his own religon then why did he not know what they taught?  I think he did know and that is why he did not want to give me a straight answer. I sent him this a few days back.

“ Your question was

I want to know why you lied to this board about 1874? For what reason? Does your religon teach its ok to decieve people? You said the watchtower never taught Jesus came in 1874. You attacked Holland for saying they had. Now your best bud Eddie has even been forced to admit that they did. But only after Holland kept the stranglehold on. What is with you? Nearly everything you write is a lie. Why should anyone believed a thing you say? Its about time you explain yourself.

You are very welcome.

Expert: Brother Rando”

Mr Holland what kind of person tells a lie, gets caught in a lie, and then wont say anything about the lie when asked? Shouldnt we see some sort of  statement from this guy at least saying he got it wrong? And all we read from him lately is how you lie, yet you had 1874 right and he didnt.  What gives with this guy that he thinks he doesnt have to answer for lying to us?

Good evening, Sir, and its good to hear from you again.  I have probably had about a hundred of these sent to me over the years (Rando's rejections), but I never cease to be amazed each time I see it repeated.  

Yes, we SHOULD see some sort of statement of clarification, retraction, correction, or something. But we are not likely to.  In fact, I think what we have been seeing, is what we will continue to see.  It has been this way for his 7 years on this forum.  Lying, getting caught, and then viciously attacking the person who exposed him, by completely changing the subject.  I honestly think it is tragic that someone would make a conscious decision to be willfully dishonest and deceptive.

As of late, Rando has spent nearly all of his time (that he SHOULD have been spending correcting his falsehoods and telling the readers the truth) attacking various Baptist groups (none of which I am a member of), as if that is some sort of indictment on me.  Exactly what it all has to do with him not being honest about 1874, is a mystery.

You know, this 1874 topic has gone far beyond what I ever thought, or intended it to.  I saw where Eddie grudgingly had to finally admit that they did teach it, but then, couldn't just let it go at that.  Instead, he made some comment about how we "like to dig in the past" (or something similar to that), I suppose meaning that we try to find past errors and use it against them.  

Well, let me briefly remind Eddie, that I am not the one who started this whole 1874 debacle.  Rando did.  I merely made a very benign passing reference to 1874 and 1914, and how we know that Jesus didn't come in either of those years.  There was no intent to start a discussion about 1874, and spend the next 2 weeks on it.  The post where I mentioned it, was actually about something else.  The fact is, it was Rando who decided to take that passing reference of mine, and use it to publicly call me a liar, change the wording of the quote, and then lie to the readers about whether the WT ever taught it.  Had he just kept his mouth shut about this one isolated statement, nothing would have been made of it.  But after he decided to call me a a liar about it, then the record had to be straight as to who was lying.  

And we have now all seen who that was....Rando.  Again....

So far from it being the "opposers" trying to dig something up, the whole conversation never even had to happen, had Rando not stupidly decided to make an issue of it.  What was he thinking?  There was no possible way he was going to win that one.

At any rate, the truth has come out, and it has now been admitted by Rando's own best forum pal, that the WT did in fact, teach exactly what was originally stated that they taught.  

And instead of saying "I'm sorry" , or "I made a mistake" , Rando's ego has once again gotten the best of him.  We are seeing this one lie of his, being made worse by his irrelevant attacks and further lies on other subjects, all in an attempt to change the topic of conversation.  The best thing that could happen to the JW religion, is if Rando exited the forum.  And its not just me saying it....There are several JWs who feel the same way.

You know, Scott, Rando is trying to cover one lie, by telling a bunch more.  What a terrible strategy.  It never works....never has, never will.  He should've just answered your question, with some sort of acknowledgment of error.  People would respect him more.  He just doesn't get it.

You know, it is sad that this has become a sickness for him.  I pity him, I really do.  So many false statements have been made by him in retaliation, that he has only made himself look ridiculous.  I meant to address this one right after it was made, but never got around to it.  But its yet another example of Rando just saying whatever comes to mind, with no regard as to whether or not it is true.  

An example....

WHAT RANDO SAYS:  "The Common teachings of Freemasons and Baptists are identical:  

1) Trinity that consists of three persons."

Both claim to be "Christian" faiths."

WHAT THE FACTS ARE:  Rando's above statement is completely false.  Freemasonry does NOT identify "God" as a Trinity.  In fact, while there are some Trinitarians who are Masons (and really need to study the satanic aspects of this affiliation), there are many who are not.  In fact, a MUSLIM can be a Mason.  The only requirement for being a Mason in regards to a belief in "God", is that the person believe in the "Great/Grand Architect Of The Universe", and that he be monotheistic.

I will prove this.  From the web site....

we find the following statements, made by former Masons....

"How does Freemasonry define God?

Monotheism is the sole dogma of Freemasonry. Belief in one God is required of every initiate, but his conception of the Supreme Being is left to his own interpretation. Freemasonry is not concerned with theological distinctions. This is the basis of our universality.

Grand Lodge of Indiana, Indiana Monitor & Freemason's Guide, 1993 Edition, page 41

Therefore, if a Mason's concept of God is left to his own interpretation, than as far as Freemasonry is concern, it doesn't matter what or who its members believe in just as long as they believe that He, or it, is one in the same, which again is the basis of Masonic universality.

So, for example, if a Muslim Mason's view of God comes from the Koran and a Christian Mason's view of God comes from the Bible, it's okay because they are still worshiping the same God. If the Koran teaches that God has no Son, and the Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, then it stands to reason that it is impossible for both of them to be worshiping the same God. Yet, Freemasonry would have them believe that they do.


"You will find that the answer is no, because while the Bible does teach that there is only one God, it teaches that this one God is triune and made up of three distinct persons, God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy Spirit."

The God of the Bible is a jealous God and rightfully doesn't want us to worship any other god, nor does He want to be worshipped in addition to other gods (Deuteronomy 32:16). Therefore, Freemasonry is teaching heresy about the nature of God."

This is quite a different picture, than what Rando has painted for us.  But as Rando's tendency has always been, when you are fresh out of real facts, then make some up as you go along....and hope nobody knows the difference.

And from this site....

"Freemasonry requires each Mason to believe that there is only one God and teaches that all men worship that one God, simply using a variety of different names. In the case of the Wiccan, he satisfies the requirement for belief in A Supreme Being by believing in the Horned god of Witchcraft.  The Hindu may satisfy the requirement with faith in Vishnu.

Clearly the members of these pagan religions do not worship the God of the Bible, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."

And this....

"Mason’s View: There is no exclusivity in Jesus Christ or the Triune God who is the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; therefore there is no doctrine of the deity of Jesus Christ. It is deemed to be un-Masonic to invoke the name of Jesus when praying, or mention His name in the Lodge. Suggesting that Jesus is the only way to God contradicts the principle of tolerance. The name of Jesus has been omitted from biblical verses that are used in Masonic rituals. Jesus is on the same level as other religious leaders."

Now, from a PRO-Masonic site.....

"Is there a Masonic God?

No. The names used for the Supreme Being enable men of different faiths to join in prayer (to God as each sees Him/Her) without the terms of the prayer causing dissension among them. There is no separate Masonic God; a Freemason's God remains the God of the religion each member professes. Masonry leaves it up to the individual Mason to choose his pathway to God. The Mason is expected, quite properly, to get that spiritual guidance from his own denomination, which he is encouraged to support with both his energy and his personal finances."

So Rando, tell us again where you got the idea that Freemasonry is a Trinitarian belief system?

What is up with all this misinformation that you are spouting off to the good readers of the forum?  Why do you just continue to make things up out of the clear blue?

Furthermore, when we do some more research into the Masonic lodge, we find something even more disturbing.  Far from believing in the Trinity, the God of the Bible, we see that their belief about "god", is actually Luciferian.  I believe that many Masons in the lower levels of the Lodge, are not aware of this, but when one becomes higher up, they become aware of it.  This is from the testimony of former Masons who came out of the Lodge.

It seems that Rando has pulled out all the stops.  Another instance of where he owes this board an apology, has already been mentioned by several people....his quoting from a fake parody site, designed to mock Baptists, as if it were a genuine Baptist site.

A reader left the following note after one of my answers, relating his experience in asking Rando WHY he would use "Landover Baptist Church" as proof of anything regarding Baptist belief, when it is not even a genuine Baptist site, is not run by Baptists, and such a church exists nowhere.  

I quote from Jeff (the GOOD Jeff, not the one who has been trying to stir up strife).  He sent the following question to Rando.....

JEFF:  "Expert: Brother Rando

Subject: landmark baptist church?

Date Asked: 2014-11-10 23:27:48

Date Answered: 2014-11-11 01:10:06


My question is if you want to discredit a church, why do you use as your source a parody site designed by atheists that not affiliated with the Baptist church or any church for that matter?"

Reasonable question, right?  I mean, if you're going to discredit a church, it seems you would find a source that actually reflects the TRUE BELIEFS of the group you are trying to discredit....not a site designed by atheists, which is set up merely to mock the Baptist faith.  Why did Rando then use the "Landover Baptist Church", and claim this was a real Baptist Church?  

That was Jeff's question.  Here was Rando's answer, in a "Rejection", of course....


Your Religion is a joke.

Seriously?  I believe the "joke", is trying to deceive the readers and slander Baptists, by using a false site.  And when asked about it, Rando doesn't say that he made a mistake, or he didn't know it was a fake, or he is remorseful?  

No, he simply replies...."Your religion is a joke"

I think we all see who the "joke" is.

Rando, you have been caught time and time again.  Lying is a sin, its unscriptural, and Jehovah doesn't approve of your doing it...under ANY circumstances.  The lying needs to  You are the sole reason this forum is a laughing stock.  Why people like Eddie and Sister T go along with you when its obvious what you're doing, is beyond explanation.  But be that as it may, its still lying, and there is no place for it on a forum that is supposed to be "Christian".  

The lying needs to cease immediately.  Print facts, or print nothing.  But your lies are getting you nowhere.

Scott, I want to thank you for sending me this rejection of his.  I am sorry that you have experienced this now from 2 experts, for merely asking legitimate questions.  I also apologize for using my answer, to bring up these other issues.  But it just seemed like a good place to do it.  The lies need to be shown for what they are.  And they need to stop now.

I hope you have a great evening, 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.