BARRISTERS: @MyJoe
Myjoe, you know that you can easily fall into what you accuse people of, and may i say that you should stop imposing your own reasoning skill on someone else! there is no way an objective reader will read what transpired above between us,without you programming the brain of such reader that you will not be laughed here!,
in a court you cant sustain the argument to convince a judge because you would have been commited to ''court pleadings'' bearing those statements.

i dont have anything against you but your attack of these jws is noteworthy,and i can say that arguing on their issues strenthens me a lot, i knew they may not like my way of some insults but icant help it, it comes authomatically, so i dont even trust mu next post, im not a jw yet, and thats it!

if you doubt that you are the right one in the statements that ensuied above, can we put it on another tread? and let people put their response and be our judge,later we count! because you cannot be your own judge, do you agree? let me know first!.

djmummy: Been reading thru this thread and I have to say...BEWARE OF APOSTATES...Jehovah's witnesses have a very thorough method of spreading the good news and that is door to door...that's what Jesus ordered that's what they follow.
On this forum MANY lies are spread

BARRISTERS: @djmummy
yeah, Apostatates do not have two heads, only one!

i've got their time! and let them come now!!!, thanks for your advice but im not going back! it must be a finished project, i 've got to kick some ass on this page as many time as possible!

BARRISTERS:
where are your primary proofs from the U.N that it does not change, give us one!other than those calculated fabrications from the opposers 'meant to tickle ears because thats what people wants to hear' ?
before then, lets have some clarity here;

truthislight:

artful dodger.

Why not let the readers deduce that for themself?

Slippery guy.
Lol

artful dodger.

Why not let the readers deduce that for themself?

Slippery guy.
Lol

Maximus85:
Satan is here on this thread to make the Jws here go against each other but it wont work. Truelight, you were the first poster to insult on this thread. At that point i doubt if you are a jw. And if you are, you should know better that no matter how angry they make us, we must remain respectful in our teachings/preaching.
I intentinaly left some issues unattended to because they'll only lead to more arguments. Lets not allow satan here. They know the truth but they dont want to accept it. The Bible said that in this situation, we should let them be and we should go in search for those that are ready to listen and accept the truth. Being a Jw is not easy but its a sacrifice we must make. Jesus gave his life, so why can't we endure the hatred and insults?

what about subsequent years when renewals were made? Check the renewal form, the December 1999 one, you pasted again. I believe I see “signature” there.

“Opposers” (letter): Oga UN, did the conditions for affiliation change between 1991 (time of joining) and 2001 (time of withdrawal)?

UN: (letter): No, the conditions for affiliation did not change between 1991 and 2001.

“Opposers”: The UN says the conditions affiliation never changed. You lie! Here’s the UN’s letter.

Barristers: Where is your primary proof there was no change? Give me one! Forget calculated fabrications from opposers.

MyJoe:
You are strange, Barristers. I set out a conversation without inserting words to even “explain” yet you accuse of me of “imposing” my “reasoning”, “programming” and doing what I accuse you of which is comprehensive dishonesty? The only thing I did was to highlight the entire sentence, including the part I accused you of covering with your finger – is that what you call programming, highlighting a sentence?

Like I said earlier, you make allegations without bothering to build a premise for them. First, you copied and pasted the post where you alleged I said I would de-covert you. Then you provided a link to it. Now you want to open a thread and take it away from context – doesn’t matter really. You don’t know the meaning of “speculate all you like about imaginary motive I have” but you believe the objective reader is with you. Ok, you want to satisfy yourself - go ahead and open this unnecessary thread to convince yourself of your obtuseness! Reminds me of the tortoise proverb again. You don’t need my agreement to open anything. I will be reading the thread. Since it is such a senseless idea and the thread will be such a useless one, I will only comment if someone lies against me or misrepresents me as you and your comrade are wont.

Looking at the statement again and taking your highlight into consideration, maybe you did actually make an honest mistake in reading my statement. You are a very dishonest person but I will give you the benefit of the doubt on it and I think I am right. You know, there was a time in the other thread when I thought you were better than Mr truthislight, such that on an occasion when his obtuseness led him to twist what I wrote, I told him I was sure you would understand what I wrote. Now I realise I was wrong. You’re just as dense as him. I wrote a sentence describing any motive I have to de-convert you as being imaginary and speculative and you understand it to mean that I want to de-covert you. Was there anything in the thread that led to that reading?

This will not be the first time I am saying that you read and accuse me of things in a hurry. A more patient, more sensible or more intelligent human being would have noted there is no comma between “motive” and “I have” and avoided the error you have fallen into. Not that you need to get to considering the comma before realizing what I meant, but it should have helped you resolve any quandary. You have a dirty mind and are always on the lookout for something to hang the other person with. You have attacked stories without basis even though you have also told stories which others have taken the point you were trying to make out of rather than go into irrelevancies. You have read statements wrongly even though others have read yours patiently to understand them properly. You have declared victories even though you have not made a single good argument.

Really, I think you are just irredeemably dense. Discussing with you is tiresome when one has to keep stopping to explain the meaning of “dish out” or “reason” or “any imaginary motive I have”.

Show me where I have gone out of my way to attack the JW. You Witnesses have such an exaggerated sense of importance. You really think I care about them? I don’t. Any post of mine you will find in Nairaland mentioning JW was responding to another post that, in my opinion, contained a misunderstanding or a lie. And you will always find specific reference to the matter being addressed rather than general statements putting down the Witnesses. But since you say I have “attacked” them, you should be able to produce the proof.

MyJoe:

Another lie. But you must be new around here, as it has been demonstrated conclusively in this section of Nairaland that Jesus never preached from house to house and never ordered anyone to preach that way. In fact, he forbade it. But, then, you can prove your statement is not a lie by showing us the corroborating verse. You don’t have to debate or something. Just show the verse and go. One will do.


Lol.


You think you are kicking bottom? Here is a simple task for you. Ask someone you trust and believe is capable of some objectivity – he should be a non-JW and a non-Catholic. Don’t let him know you are BARRISTERS. Let him read the thread, starting from where BARRISTERS came in and then tell you what he thinks of the character BARRISTERS. That should help you.

MyJoe:
You are a fool. Since you wanted people to “deduce that for themself”, why did you hack out a misleading summary of the post? I merely asked you to substantiate your summary by highlighting the portion you supposedly got your “de-convert” and “effective” statements from.

Is that what you find so “slippery”? I think not. You simply lifted some artful and slippery statements from Barristers without even having a clue what they mean.

You are strange, Barristers. I set out a conversation without inserting words to even “explain” yet you accuse of me of “imposing” my “reasoning”, “programming” and doing what I accuse you of which is comprehensive dishonesty? The only thing I did was to highlight the entire sentence, including the part I accused you of covering with your finger – is that what you call programming, highlighting a sentence?

Like I said earlier, you make allegations without bothering to build a premise for them. First, you copied and pasted the post where you alleged I said I would de-covert you. Then you provided a link to it. Now you want to open a thread and take it away from context – doesn’t matter really. You don’t know the meaning of “speculate all you like about imaginary motive I have” but you believe the objective reader is with you. Ok, you want to satisfy yourself - go ahead and open this unnecessary thread to convince yourself of your obtuseness! Reminds me of the tortoise proverb again. You don’t need my agreement to open anything. I will be reading the thread. Since it is such a senseless idea and the thread will be such a useless one, I will only comment if someone lies against me or misrepresents me as you and your comrade are wont.

Looking at the statement again and taking your highlight into consideration, maybe you did actually make an honest mistake in reading my statement. You are a very dishonest person but I will give you the benefit of the doubt on it and I think I am right. You know, there was a time in the other thread when I thought you were better than Mr truthislight, such that on an occasion when he misunderstood me, I told him I was sure you would understand what I wrote. Now I realise I was wrong. You’re just as dense as him. I wrote a sentence describing any motive I have to de-convert you as being imaginary and speculative and you understand it to mean that I want to de-covert you. Was there anything in the thread that led to that reading?

This will not be the first time I am saying that you read and accuse me of things in a hurry. A more patient, more sensible or more intelligent human being would have noted there is no comma between “motive” and “I have” and avoided the error you have fallen into. Not that you need to get to considering the comma before realizing what I meant, but it should have helped you resolve any quandary. You have a dirty mind and are always on the lookout for something to hang the other person with. You have attacked stories without basis even though you have also told stories which others have taken the point you were trying to make out of rather than go into irrelevancies. You have read statements wrongly even though others have read yours patiently to understand them properly. You have declared victories even though you have not made a single good argument.

Really, I think you are just irredeemably dense. Discussing with you is tiresome when one has to keep stopping to explain the meaning of “dish out” or “reason” or “any imaginary motive I have”.

Show me where I have gone out of my way to attack the JW. You Witnesses have such an exaggerated sense of importance. You really think I care about them? I don’t. Any post of mine you will find in Nairaland mentioning JW was responding to another post that, in my opinion, contained a misunderstanding or a lie. And you will always find specific reference to the matter being addressed rather than general statements putting down the Witnesses. But since you say I have “attacked” them, you should be able to produce the proof

Myjoe:Ok, you have shown that you have crase and I see you are determined to sustain a campaign of lies against me. Obviously, you don't know what you are doing to your reputation in this section. But if you still have hopes of being taken seriously,[size=14pt] please demonstrate (1) that I am angry (2) that I ever said anything about converting or "de-converting" you or any other person on this forum. [/size]For anyone reading, I have never entertained the notion of converting or "de-converting" Barristers, any member of the JW, or any member of any religion or faith group and I have never expressed such around here. But since Barristers claims I wrote something in a thread, he should be able to find the thread and the post and reclaim some credibility.

Barristers; now to reclaim my credibility(not from myjoe)but from onlookers, lets go on a journey here, on this link, page 5, post 22 (count from up towards bottom, around the middle myjoe's post with time 5:16 Pm. 3rd Aug.)https://www.nairaland.com/984261/what-does-jehovah-witness-watchtower/5

Myjoe;You gotta be kidding me! A repudiation of an intention to de-convert equals a threat to do so?

''that I ever said anything about converting or "de-converting"

MyJoe:
I saw a post where this guy was putting down atheists for “using the F word”. Obviously, it’s Jehovah’s Witnessically ok for Mr truthislight to insult as long as he does not use the F word.

BARRISTERS: @Myjoe



Goodboy, the renewal form rests solely on the original application that does not carry the signature in the first place,and that is to be able to have a continued usage of the library, but note, you dont need to agree with me!you have right to your opinion,and if you wait until i satisfy you on this matter,its not going to be possible,because you have made up your mind,all i need to do here is to provide sound basis for other forumites of which you cannot claim their mandate here to represent but you are just 'one' person,and that the signature thing does not bother is your opinion but leggally it signaled huge aknowledgement to a primary document expecially,and untill you provide a primary document where jws signed in accepting political UN affiliation house-filled insults will amount to nothing.

you have started using insultive words now and you will say 'where are the insults?' you want me to 'accept your insultive response' as normal? never,you can programme others brain to accept it,but me? never,you even hates when someone directs your attention to insults, and i have only given you this grace not to insult you back on only on this post,but will resume next if you persist.



you are just very funny,''did the conditions for affiliation change'' why are the opposers not specific by saying ''did the condition of applications of NGO-DPI(Non gov org,Dept. of Information)changed?

Obviously thats a BIG HOLE you need to fill there,using a blanket statement (NGO) is often nullified when specific details are not discussed.

Unfortunately you ignore this;from the conversation;

“Question: What is an NGO and how does it relate to the UN?
Answer: [size=18pt]NGOs have no status and are not part of the UN.”

[/size]

This alone is a blow 'below the belt' to all your arguments.

and now that the Watchtower has given us the reason, 'why' and your proofs lacked signatures, we belived them, and full truckloads of criticm or insults on the forum will not deter that an inch.

truthislight:

barrister, do you want to convince the devil's advocate?

barrister, do you want to convince the devil's advocate?

BARRISTERS: @Myjoe
Goodboy, the renewal form rests solely on the original application that does not carry the signature in the first place,and that is to be able to have a continued usage of the library, but note, you dont need to agree with me!you have right to your opinion,and if you wait until i satisfy you on this matter,its not going to be possible,because you have made up your mind,all i need to do here is to provide sound basis for other forumites of which you cannot claim their mandate here to represent but you are just 'one' person,and that the signature thing does not bother is your opinion but leggally it signaled huge aknowledgement to a primary document expecially,and untill you provide a primary document where jws signed in accepting political UN affiliation house-filled insults will amount to nothing.

you have started using insultive words now and you will say 'where are the insults?' you want me to 'accept your insultive response' as normal? never,you can programme others brain to accept it,but me? never,you even hates when someone directs your attention to insults, and i have only given you this grace not to insult you back on only on this post,but will resume next if you persist.

you are just very funny,''did the conditions for [color=#770077]affiliation change''[/color] why are the opposers not specific by saying ''did the condition of applications of NGO-DPI(Non gov org,Dept. of Information)changed?

Obviously thats a BIG HOLE you need to fill there,using a blanket statement (NGO) is often nullified when specific details are not discussed.

Unfortunately you ignore this;from the conversation;

“Question: What is an NGO and how does it relate to the UN?
Answer: [size=18pt]NGOs have no status and are not part of the UN.”

[/size]

BARRISTERS: @Myjoe
All i still want to say on the matter is that,

IN YOUR ''STATEMENT OF CLAIM HERE'',YOU WERE VERY CERTAIN AND SPECIFIC TO YOUR WORDS (IN BOLD)BELOW;

The two things that stood out here, is that, 'ever' have you said anything about ''de-converting''!
A,(2) that I ever said anything about converting or "de-converting" you or any other person on this forum.
B,But since Barristers claims I wrote something in a thread, he should be able to find the thread and the post and reclaim some credibility.
you went as far as daring me to extend my search to other tread where you did say that,

NOW, MY DEFENCE TO YOUR DENIAL;



here is your response below after you have been faced in your own words what you denied ever saying,below;



Now, what is an issue here? the issue is that you myjoe said;

that you never say anything, ''so A repudiation of an intention [/b]to de-convert''(bolded)is not an issue here, but [b]that you did mention something like that is the issue, and not ''why you mention that word'' because all these [b]''A repudiation of [b]an intention to de-convert equals a threat to do so'' [/b]that you are trying to 'repudiate an intention to de-convert''are after thoughts, and not in anyway an issue here, but that have you 'ever' say such? then what you mean will follow, dont be unfairly claiming the mandates of objective readers who have their own right to decide,and so you allow people to express their own judjement on this denial that you have made,and not 'you' authomatically becoming your own judge in your case,by telling them what you mean,but they should aknowledge that you mention something that you denied ever saying.

''that I ever said anything about converting or "de-converting"

in summary, it is been proven to you,with your own word [size=14pt]that you have made mention of ''de-converting'' someone from his faith, is a proven statement of fact that cannot be denied but could be seen in black and white,[/size] trying to ridicule ones understanding amounted to 'a threat to force one into submiting' to your after thought.

Maybe that is responsible for your attack on jws is left for forumites to decide. but denying it is laughable as tons of write-ups cannot exonerate you.

I have not read the posts above properly but I have skimmed portions of them. This is typical JW hypocrisy in full blast and[b] it would have been better if Barristers had shut up than post this. [/b]

I see you don’t have the common sense or maturity [/b]to leave the other thread to continue with its relative sanity but would import it here. You have never shown any maturity,

[b] To insinuate that having JW or religion makes a man moral and being without it makes another immoral contains zero rationality. It is idiocy, apologies to Enigma.

In attempting to pontificate on morality, you sound like a cripple attempting football of the American variant.

Now, Watchtower says in its defence that it joined to access a library. People say, no, you don’t need to affiliate as an NGO to assess a library. The UN agrees. (That is not a good defence for Watchtower, anyway. If affiliation was actually needed to use a library, or to use it beyond a certain point as you spin it, certainly Watchtower could have put up with such minor inconvenience and avoid affiliation with the seven-headed beast to maintain “Christian neutrality”.) On why it withdrew, Watchtower says it withdrew because the conditions for affiliation changed. UN says no, they didn’t. People say they withdrew because the affiliation was exposed, since the facts say they withdrew a day after the exposure by a London newspaper. These are the facts. You have ignored the fact of the date the exposé was made and withdrawal date which is the major plank the argument about reason for withdrawal rests on, but you quickly accuse me of ignoring an irrelevant point – that NGOs are not part of the UN.

You have ignored the fact of the date the exposé was made and withdrawal date which is the major plank the argument about reason for withdrawal rests on

johnck:

truthislight, i just hope u are not a JW, becos if u are,(from ur posts dat i've been reading) i will neva join such an organization-ur words are so judgemental. Although i've never seen a JW use such words while proselytizing in real life...however i'm now having dis instinct that they are only hiding their thru identity. U are condeming an individual! U are labeling an individual repugnant names; who d hell are u to do dat? Are u God?...can't u just refute d argument rather than the name calling? (like devil's advocate).

U guys (truthislight, Barrister,Myjoe etc.) seem to tink u are dicussing religion intelligently...however, in reality, u are making people hate religion...To prove my point, u guys shuld carefully read ur post objectively, u will notice d OBSCENE language dat u've been labelin on ur fellow human( e.g olodo, agbero omo ita, among many others)
I wouldn't believe dat a Divine will want dis...U guys should plz close dis tread becos it yields no good. It's only resulting to conflict!

MyJoe: "Devil's advocate" is just a phrase he picked up from the Adeboye thread. It's clear he doesn't know what it means.

Unfortunately you ignore this;from the conversation;

“Question: What is an NGO and how does it relate to the UN?
Answer: [size=18pt]NGOs have no status and are not part of the UN.”[/size]

truthislight:

i also want to believe that you wish to say that you did not notice the false accusations label against the JW.

What kind of person do you think will do such?

Any way. Any person that does not love the truth as in God's word cannot be a JW.

truthislight:

i also want to believe that you wish to say that you did not notice the false accusations label against the JW.

What kind of person do you think will do such?

Any way. Any person that does not love the truth as in God's word cannot be a JW.

Maximus85:

I started this thread just to share my knowledge about the Bible. Some of us JWs find it hard to stand opposition. Let me quote the Bible here. 1 Peter 2:12 "Maintain your conduct fine among the nations, that in the things in which they are speaking against you as evil doers, they may as a result of your fine works of which they are eyewitnesses glorify God in the day for his inspection" 1 Peter 3:15 said "But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone that demands of you a reason for the hope in you, but doing so together with a mild temper and deep respect" so truthislight was of defending his faith is totally not acceptable. Its is not how we the JWs are trainned to preach.

Maximus85:

I started this thread just to share my knowledge about the Bible. Some of us JWs find it hard to stand opposition. Let me quote the Bible here. 1 Peter 2:12 "Maintain your conduct fine among the nations, that in the things in which they are speaking against you as evil doers, they may as a result of your fine works of which they are eyewitnesses glorify God in the day for his inspection" 1 Peter 3:15 said "But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone that demands of you a reason for the hope in you, but doing so together with a mild temper and deep respect" so truthislight was of defending his faith is totally not acceptable. Its is not how we the JWs are trainned to preach.

Maximus85: When I started this thread, I never envisaged it would go this far. I never planned for people having hatred for Jehovah's Witnessea and some half-baked Jehovah's Witnesses. What are we preaching today? We are admonished to focus on preaching God's Kingdom and how to be a Citizen of that Government. What is happening here is not what the Faithful Slaves asked us to use our ministry time doing. We still have millions whom are yet to hear the truth not to talk of arguing about some negative issues AGAINST Jehovah and we his witnesses. We are admonished to follow the laid plans of the Preaching work - which is proclaiming God's Kingdom and his righteousness.

Do you think its easy for me just to ignore all these false accusations against the JWs? But we must all channel our strength on teaching and not arguing. Mr truthislight, if this accusations are happening in the field service, is this how you handle it? Is this how you call people names?

You accuse me of not answering questions, yet I have met with a viewer who loved the way I answered a question. And I have directed brothers from a closer congregation to her. This is the reason I started this thread and I have never regretted.

I answer questions that wouldn't lead to argument or insults. By doing this, you can preach and teach with utmost deep respect.
If we continue defending these accusations against the JWs, when will we have the time to really tell people of the main reason we are preaching?

In our Watchtower study article today, we studied how to allow Jehovah lead us to true freedom. Earthly freedom would only make us pursue the pleasures of the flesh while the freedom gained from the simple Laws of Jehovah is the path to true freedom. This is one of what we should preach and not arguing about distracting issues.

I need to conduct a Bible study now. We still have Lots to talk about. I am from Ayobo Congregation, Lagos Nigeria.

BARRISTERS: @ Myjoe, to you it looks childish with the bold letters, isn'nt it? but for a purpose, thats the way your answers will be treated from now!