What would you give up?

Originally posted by galveston75
Yep as I know this will never eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnndddddddddddddd.

thats poor form, fmf has answered your questions despite them seeming irrelevant to the subject matter. why cant you give him a straight answer. it makes things seem worse, like you have something to hide when questions like his are dodged.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
thats poor form, fmf has answered your questions despite them seeming irrelevant to the subject matter. why cant you give him a straight answer. it makes things seem worse, like you have something to hide when questions like his are dodged.

No one is under duress to answer any questions, your insistence that it reflects badly is
ludicrous as are your insinuations of clandestine motivations for doing so. In fact
withholding information from those one does not deem worthy or who have no right to
that information has a scriptural basis.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No one is under duress to answer any questions, your insistence that it reflects badly is
ludicrous as are your assertions of clandestine motivations for doing so.

thanks for your totally un-biased input there robbie.

iits hardly duress. if he doesnt want to answer questions, then he shouldnt be asking question back. do unto others and all that business.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
thanks for your totally un-biased input there robbie.

iits hardly duress. if he doesnt want to answer questions, then he shouldnt be asking question back. do unto others and all that business.

dont mention it, any time, why don't you get a lamp and a dentist chair and strap the
Gman in, i am sure you vill find ze vays of making him talk!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No one is under duress to answer any questions, your insistence that it reflects badly is
ludicrous as are your insinuations of clandestine motivations for doing so. In fact
withholding information from those one does not deem worthy or who have no right to
that information has a scriptural basis.

surely anybody should have the right to know j.w. policy regarding these issues. isnt it best to clarify. do people wanting to become j.w's have access to your policy regarding the disowning of fellow. my mothers friend didnt know and after she questioned her hall regarding some rather dodgy tactics for getting new members she was kicked out. which sent her into a deep depression as the j.w. world became everything to her and then it was gone. so i think, no, i know that fmf's questioning is important and to suggest answering it is 'beneath' a j.w. is elitist snobbery at its worst. nothing is beneath anybody.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
surely anybody should have the right to know j.w. policy regarding these issues. isnt it best to clarify. do people wanting to become j.w's have access to your policy regarding the disowning of fellow. my mothers friend didnt know and after she questioned her hall regarding some rather dodgy tactics for getting new members she was kicked out. which sent ...[text shortened]... swering it is 'beneath' a j.w. is elitist snobbery at its worst. nothing is beneath anybody.

The procedure is Biblical, you may look it up in a copy of any Bible. No one is ever
kicked out, you are disfellowshipped for failing to repent and are free to attend any
meeting, many persons who are disfellowshipped return and are reinstated. Let me
just repeat that so you are clear, you are only disfellowshipped for wilful non
repentance after every effort has been expended in trying to help you, do you
understand? I don't believe a word of your friend, sorry to be so
blunt, questioning alleged dodgy practices for getting new members is not a
disfellowshipping offence, your friend is talking pants and no its not elitist snobbery,
FMF has no right to any information, if he is really interested he can look the
procedure up in any Bible, but you and I both know, he is not interested in doing so,
is he and instead produces the usual lame arguments, its a subjective interpretation
blah blah, if its subjective then let him render an alternative, otherwise, he is clearly
wasting the Gmans time and the Gman is both displaying wisdom and discernment
from simply refraining from engaging him in his trolling activities.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
The procedure is Biblical, you may look it up in a copy of any Bible. No one is ever
kicked out, you are disfellowshipped for failing to repent and are free to attend any
meeting, many persons who are disfellowshipped return and are reinstated. Let me
just repeat that so you are clear, you are only disfellowshipped for wilful non
repentance ...[text shortened]... g wisdom and discernment
from simply refraining from engaging him in his trolling activities.

oh its true robbie. we went through the whole ordeal with her. she wasnt kicked out in any official sense but she was made to feel very unwelcome, ostracized you might say. the funny/sad thing about the story is - the recruitment methods she was unhappy with were methods used to recruit her. as you know religious people do not always behave in a religious way, the bending of rules and abuse of power happens all the time. if it can happen in the vatican then it can happen in a local kingdom hall.

i think its a good idea to quiz believers on their personal views and beliefs. referring to the bible doesnt always give you the full picture, is the bible going to give me an insight into how the westboro baptist church run their flock.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No one is under duress to answer any questions, your insistence that it reflects badly is
ludicrous as are your insinuations of clandestine motivations for doing so. In fact
withholding information from those one does not deem worthy or who have no right to
that information has a scriptural basis.

galvston75's motivation on this thread is not "clandestine" in the slightest. Even you suggest that he is withholding information from those he does not deem worthy and who he deems have no right to the information.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
[FMF] is clearly wasting the Gmans time and the Gman is both displaying wisdom and discernment from simply refraining from engaging him in his trolling activities.

galveston75 said that the conversation would end unless I answered his question in full. But when I answered it [and the follow up question too], he stopped the conversation abruptly anyway. And he still hasn't answered my question about the competing onus on a Christian to be tolerant, humble and generous of spirit. I have my own follow up question about the competing onus on a Christian not to be judgmental and vengeful [something both you an galveston75 have talked about a lot on this forum] and how this squares with concerted shunning. Unfortunately galveston75 has bailed, mid-conversation.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
oh its true robbie. we went through the whole ordeal with her. she wasnt kicked out in any official sense but she was made to feel very unwelcome, ostracized you might say. the funny/sad thing about the story is - the recruitment methods she was unhappy with were methods used to recruit her. as you know religious people do not always behave in a religio ...[text shortened]... , is the bible going to give me an insight into how the westboro baptist church run their flock.

what a piece of nonsense, first of all she was kicked out then she wasn't, then made to feel unwelcome and then ostracised, sorry i don't believe a word you say. First of all in order to become a witness you need to study, usually for a minimum of a year, sometimes two, that means she would know the standards of conduct that was expected making the assertion that she never utter nonsense, further to becoming a witness she would have been asked a series of questions relating to her study and to ascertain if she was in agreement with the principles that were being applied, further highlighting the falsehood of the statement that she was unaware. Recruitment methods? We go from house to house trying to ascertain if there is anyone interested in having a Bible study, the practice is Biblically established and is not done in secret, to talk of this as if its some kind of nefarious practice is slanderous and a bending of rules or an abuse of power simply highlights the complete and utter nonsense that has embodied your text, again, sorry to be so blunt.

A witness must study and is asked a whole serious of questions prior to being accepted for baptism and if the knowledge is not sufficient they are rejected until they can demonstrate a proper understanding.

Originally posted by galveston75
Again you say you do understand the scriptures that explain this issue. Right? Then why are you questioning them?

Stop avoiding the point which is your hyprocrisy.

You started this thread with another sanctimonious, vainglorious attempt to position yourself as the self-sacrificing victimised Christian who suffered at the hands of your inlaws who 'shunned' you for choosing to join your religious cult; the chocking hypocrisy of your stance is that you yourself have 'shunned' members of your own family for religious reasons.

There is no escaping this point Galveston; you are a hypocrite.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what a piece of nonsense, first of all she was kicked out then she wasn't, then made to feel unwelcome and then ostracised, sorry i don't believe a word you say. First of all in order to become a witness you need to study, usually for a minimum of a year, sometimes two, that means she would know the standards of conduct that was expected making the ...[text shortened]... owledge is not sufficient they are rejected until they can demonstrate a proper understanding.

your over defensiveness and scream of liar liar say a lot about your fears of anything remotely bad reflecting on your church. this again just makes you look like you have something to hide.
im sorry i used the phrase kicked out, but effectively thats what happened. she was in the circle then she was out.
im not saying she wasnt aware of jw practices when she joined. i think her problem is that what she was asked to do went against what she was taught. who ever was in charge possibly didnt have the churches best interest at heart. maybe they were looking to climb the greasy pole with impressive recruitment stats - who knows, im speculating. are you saying that every single j.w. hall follows your rules 100%, that you never have a problem with corruption at all???
i think you should retract your implication that im lying robbie. a claim based purely on the fact i dont know what the correct j.w. terminology is. especially hard as it seems you wont have a word for it, as its something they shouldnt have done to her.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
your over defensiveness and scream of liar liar say a lot about your fears of anything remotely bad reflecting on your church. this again just makes you look like you have something to hide.

stellspalfie, in the last 5 years here at RHP, I have never, ever - not once - not ever - heard robbie accept any opinion, comment, testimony or perspective from an ex-JW, or any information, quotation or observation about the JW organisation or about JW members, from anyone in a position to offer a perspective or an account of a personal experience, as long as that testimony or information was negative in any way. Never. Not once.

Originally posted by stellspalfie
your over defensiveness and scream of liar liar say a lot about your fears of anything remotely bad reflecting on your church. this again just makes you look like you have something to hide.
im sorry i used the phrase kicked out, but effectively thats what happened. she was in the circle then she was out.
im not saying she wasnt aware of jw practices ...[text shortened]... y hard as it seems you wont have a word for it, as its something they shouldnt have done to her.

you do realise that once you are in hole its advisable to stop digging. If vile
insinuations and backtracking and assertions which have no foundation in reality or
in practice is all you have then carry on, there may be a job at the News of the
world, errr i mean the Sun newspaper for you. Impressive recruitment stats, you
really have no idea do you and are content simply to fabricate further slander, time
and again our organisation has emphasised, 'the widows might', in that its not how
much you are able to do but your motivation for doing so once again bringing the
wheels of your now flaming chariot, firmly to the bottom of the forum floor where
they now lie, in a dung heap of smouldering wreckage.

Here is a piece of advice, see if you are unaware of the practices or standards of an
organisation and if you have incomplete details of what actually transpired, just
remain quiet, it will spare you the trap of egotistically trying to defend and
indefensible position, due to lack of knowledge and of partial details.

I did not state that you have deliberately lied, i simply stated that you are talking
nonsense because you self evidently have not the slightest idea what transpired nor
what our standards and procedures are and instead have gone into some tirade with
a partial understanding and a limited perspective, what did you think was going to
happen?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you do realise that once you are in hole its advisable to stop digging. If vile insinuations and backtracking and assertions which have no foundation in reality or in practice is all you have then carry on, there may be a job at the News of the world, errr i mean the sun newspaper for you. Impressive recruitment stats, you really have no idea do yo ...[text shortened]... y trying to defend and indefensible position, due to lack of knowledge and of partial details.

I don't think this rather overwrought ad hominem aimed at stellspalfie is helping to answer the questions that galveston75 has been dodging, robbie.