Category: Meetings

  • “Never has Jehovah ever Popped up on my Social Media Notifications”

    One sister commented yesterday, in one of the social media paragraphs of the Watchtower Study, that if she mentions sports, soon her feed fills with sports. If she mentions vacations, soon her feed fills with vacations. If she mentions tableware, soon her feed fills with tableware, and so forth. She followed this with: “We talk about Jehovah all the time in my household. But never, ever has “Jehovah” popped up on my media notifications. Not even once.”

    It wasn’t stated as proof of anything, but whatever it was not stated as proof of, it sure did prove it.

    That social media paragraph made me think of a certain journalist commenting on the democracy that we are all used to in our neck of the woods: He described it as “the pathetic belief that individual ignorance adds up to collective wisdom.” Nothing is more democratic than social media, in which a truly thoughtful remark is immediately followed up by one from a complete moron, who nonetheless has equal time.

    Then there was material on how easy it is to distort with half-truths, and how social media slams us all with ideas undercutting Christian values, so that one must be on the alert lest they be swept along with the tide.

    It all brought to mind for me the public speaking brother who played up being honest with your children, even in areas parents don’t usually think about. He told of the child who, when young, asked her parents if Santa was real. The parents assured her that he was. There were some kids down the street, however, who told Sally the truth.

    When she lost her baby teeth, her parents told her that there was a tooth fairy who would leave some cash under her pillow. The kids down the street told her the truth.

    When Easter came, her parents told her about the Easter Bunny….a generous rabbit who would fill your basket with chocolate eggs. The kids down the street told her the truth.

    Sally reached adolescence and her responsible parents told her about sex.

    But she‘d never gotten a straight answer from her folks. It was always nonsense. The kids down the street, on the other hand, had never been wrong. And so, with regard to sex, they had a different explanation, and the boys among them offered to demonstrate. She really came to resent them later—but also her parents, for have always served her garbage.

    ******  The bookstore

  • Setting Matters Straight Between Us

    “Come, now, and let us set matters straight between us,” says Jehovah. “Though your sins are like scarlet, They will be made as white as snow; Though they are as red as crimson cloth, They will become like wool. (Isaiah 1:18)

    Many times I speak with people. Rarely do I precede my remarks with “Come now, and let us set matters straight between us.” It means that what follows is a big deal. It means that what follows is something not intuitive, something a person might easily not think of on his or her own.

    That something is that, if you repent of and leave off your wrong course, God will completely forgive. These points were the highlight of Sunday’s (September 20, 2026) Watchtower Study.

    David was set as an example. After being called to account over his outrageous sin with Bathsheba, in which he even plotted another man’s death, 2 Samuel 12:13 says: “David then said to Nathan: “I have sinned against Jehovah.” Nathan replied to David:“Jehovah, in turn, forgives your sin. You will not die.” It reads sort of light here, just presented as an excerpt, but the complete context indicates he really was cut to the heart.

    Thereafter, consistent with forgiveness, whenever David’s subsequent doings are mentioned, there is never attached a footnote: “But, you know, that dude did some pretty bad stuff.” Someone spoke up at the meeting that the common pattern today is, should someone do something bad, that course defines him for the rest of his life—popular opinion will accept no reform. But, with God, the reality is:

    “I [Jehovah] am the One who is blotting out your transgressions for my own sake, And I will not remember your sins. (Isa 43:25)

    It is: “For I will not oppose them forever Or always remain indignant; For a man’s spirit would grow feeble because of me, Even the breathing creatures that I have made.” (Isa 57:16)

    Thus is presented the reason behind Isaiah 1:18 and why matters must be “set straight between us.” It is that one’s spirit may not “grow feeble because of me [God], as it surely would otherwise, upon contrasting his stature and ways with the fact one has so blatantly transgressed against them. The fact is, forgiveness is a thing with Him—and this is BEFORE the revealing of Christ, who would pay the price to redeem us from sin.

    It was a fine meeting that went on to explore related points. Participation was heavy. It always is at our Hall. Few paragraphs do not strand a few hands, as the conductor presses on to cover material within the allotted time. Rarely do I get all my remarks in, though in some cases it is due to the conductor [rightly] suspecting I may launch a zinger.

    ******  The bookstore

  • “Eat my Flesh and Drink my Blood”—What About it?

    That Watchtower Study last week, How to Remain Loyal When We Face Tests of Faith, begins with a consideration of Jesus’ words:

    “So Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves. Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I will resurrect him on the last day.” (John 6:63-64)

    He loses disciples right and left over this remark. “This speech is shocking; who can listen to it?” they grouse. (vs 60)

    “Owing to this many of his disciples went off to the things behind and would no longer walk with him.” (vs 66)

    It would have been the perfect occasion for Jesus to say, ‘Oh no, no! I didn’t mean THAT!’ But he explained it no more. He let them go. They were all fair weather disciples, apparently. He is okay with people being tested. After all, his own twelve passed the test:

    “Therefore Jesus said to the twelve: “YOU do not want to go also, do YOU?” Simon Peter answered him: “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life.” (vs 67-68) Most often that’s the answer you must give rather than harp on what seem to be missteps.

    Early Christians were accused of cannibalism. It’s hard to believe those words of Jesus wouldn’t have been used to fuel those charges. Cannabalism was among the early slanders of Christianity, usually something that happened at their “love feasts” where they “incestuously” (in the eyes of their detractors) called each other brother and sister. Testifying to how common was the accusation is the fact that a Roman governor, Pliny the Younger, looked into it. He pronounced it a nothingburger. Wrote he to Emperor Trajan: their communal meal consisted only of “ordinary and harmless food.”

    Given this circumstance that later enemies would capitalize on to spread rumors of cannibalism, you’d almost think Jesus wouldn’t say something that could so easily be misconstrued that way. Apparently, it’s not a concern. They would have done it anyway. It was standard fare back then for anyone accused of being a ‘cult.’ And while there are many reports of the cannibalism accusation, there is no record anyone ever appealed to Jesus’ words to support those accusations. It makes sense that they would, but there’s no record that anyone ever did it.

    Food and drink are constant metaphors in the Bible for spiritual things. Jesus was building upon those metaphors himself in John 6, likening himself to the “true bread” that comes from heaven. However, the “fair weather” disciples who left in a huff had no discernment whatsoever of these greater patterns. They were just there for the grub:

    “Jesus answered them: “Most truly I say to you, you are looking for me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate from the loaves and were satisfied.” (John 6:26)

    Seen in that light, it was sort of a screening that Jesus did, to separate the wheat from the chaff.

    ******  The bookstore

  • Sarah Walks with God: Genesis 20

    Sarah Walks Courageously with God

    Sarah was the noted figure last night in Courageously Walking With God. Leaving her home and all in Ur, a comfortable life, to follow her husband and traipse all over on camels. The contrast was drawn with Lot’s wife, who wasn’t about to give up the good life, who looked behind as her family was fleeing Sodom, and who subsequently turned into a pillar of salt.

    I know she did this because I saw that drama played out at the St Louis International convention years ago at Busch Stadium. They ran from the diamond into the outfield, as though chasing a fly ball. Midway, she raised her colored cloak inside out over her head. It was white on the inside. From afar, she looked exactly as though turning into a pillar of salt.

    In Sarah’s case, her sacrifice of the good life was remedied after a time. Abraham passed her off as her sister in Negeb, for fear the king might kill him off to take her as his wife. They were known to do such things—killing didn’t bother them but stealing another man’s apparently wife did. So Abimelech absconds with her, figuring he’s going to woo her over. ‘Keep your paws off her,’ God says in a dream. ‘She’s married!’ Whereupon, Abimelech falls all over himself to make amends, showering both Sarah and Abraham with gifts:

    “Abimelech then took sheep and cattle and male and female servants and gave them to Abraham, and he returned his wife Sarah to him. Abimelech also said: “Here my land is available to you. Dwell whereveryou please.” And to Sarah he said: “Here I give 1,000 pieces of silver to your brother. It is a sign of your innocence to all who are with you and before everybody, and you are cleared of reproach.”

    I mean, if you were wanting to scam the guy you could not do better. I’ve even thought of copying the scheme myself next time I run across a rich king, for my wife is also a looker, and as it is I have to constantly beat off louts giving her the eye. Trouble is, I’m a little worried she might become enticed with the good life and cut me out of the picture entirely.

    ******  The bookstore

  • The Potter Molds the Clay—Jeremiah 18

    (see Part 1)

    Though the world contain scoundrels a’plenty, though even in the congregation ones are not immune to falling away, the apostle says, “But in your case, beloved ones, we are convinced of better things, things related to salvation, even though we are speaking in this way.” (Hebrews 6:9)

    Yes. Of course. The potter molds the clay and you hope for the best. It doesn’t always work out that way, but he hopes. At Jehovah’s direction, Jeremiah “went down to the house of the potter, and he was working on the potter’s wheels. But the vessel that the potter was making with the clay was spoiled in his hand.” (Jeremiah 18:3-4)

    This recalls a visit to my college friend ages ago. There he was with a soldering iron in the lab trying to finagle a part for the centrifuge. But the project wasn’t go well. At length, he looked at the dubious results and said, “Well—this might be okay for the toilet, but I think not for a precision centrifuge.”

    Maybe he tried it out in the toilet, but he probably just scrapped it. As to Jehovah and his spoiled project, “So the potter reworked it into another vessel, just as he saw fit.” He didn’t save it for the toilet.

    Even so, the toilet is a better analogy than at first appears. A later passage of Peter speaks of another “toilet” of sorts, a “low sink of debauchery.” (1 Peter 4:4)

    “For the time that has passed by is sufficient for you to have done the will of the nations when you carried on in acts of brazen conduct, unbridled passions, overdrinking, wild parties, drinking bouts, and lawless idolatries. They are puzzled that you do not continue running with them in the same decadent course of debauchery, so they speak abusively of you.” (4:3-4)

    Not all translations keep the literalism of water. Even the 2013 NWT version has abandoned “low sink of debauchery” for “decadent course of debauchery.” Balancing literalism with conveying the meaning is ever a dilemma for translators. But there are plenty of translations on biblegateway*com that read “flood.” DARBY says “sink of corruption.” Evangelical Heritage Version (EHV) seriously ups the ante with “plung[ing] into the same overflowing river of filth with them.”

    Suppose you accidentally drop your glasses or your pen or—Lord, I hope not—your phone in the toilet. Then you must brace yourself for an unpleasant task, made especially unpleasant if that toilet is occupied with substance. Imagine if the pen or glasses or—Lord, I hope not—phone were to say to you, “Nah, don’t worry about it. I’m good here.” It’s essentially what they say in the “low sink.”

    ‘Water’s fine in the low sink,” they say, both surprised and nettled that anyone would have a problem with it. They are “puzzled” at first. As soon as they resolve their puzzlement, they “speak abusively of you.” So it is with the crowd of Jeremiah 18:12. They’re both surprised and irritated that the prophet should call them out. ‘We’re good here,’ is their response. ‘Potter, schmotter—we like the way things turned out. “They said: ‘It is hopeless! For we will walk after our own thoughts, and each of us will act according to the stubbornness of his wicked heart.’” (Jeremiah 18:12)

    But, defying theologians, the JW meeting that week of July 19, 2026 was more along lines of Hebrews 6:9. , “But in your case, beloved ones, we are convinced of better things, things related to salvation, even though we are speaking in this way.” (Hebrews 6:9)

    “‘Can I not do to you just as this potter did, O house of Israel?’ declares Jehovah. ‘Look! As the clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel,” the potter narrative resumes at Jeremiah 18:5.

    ******  The bookstore

  • Committing the Sin of Eisegesis—Reading Today into Yesterday

    The preamble is clear. God says to his people: “Turn back, please, from your bad ways, and reform your ways and your practices.”

    “But they said: “It is hopeless! For we will walk after our own thoughts, and each of us will act according to the stubbornness of his wicked heart.” (Jeremiah 18:12)

    It’s a tricky verse, for it seems to indicate inner conflict. As though, they would like to shape up, but knowing their past, they figure the task is hopeless, as though anticipating that they would just start out and immediately get tripped up by something else.

    ‘Nah, it is not that way,’ AI told me, summing up the majority view of commentators. They don’t despair. They are defiant. They just try to put a good face on it. They are framing defiance as though it were despair.

    You sure it’s not the other way around, I challenged AI—and thereby the majority of commentators. You sure it is not really despair, discouragement over their previous history of defiance? You sure it’s not like trying to break free of an addiction. You sure it’s not that they would like to, but they’ve failed so many times before that the task presents as hopeless. Society these days is empathetic towards those battling addiction.

    Well, it wasn’t in those days! AI shot back. You’re doing “eisegesis”—reading today’s attitudes into the past! How are you going to be a theologian if you keep doing that?! You need more exegesis. You need to interpret passages as they would have been understood then! Draw out its meaning as they would have done it, not what you think it means today.

    It is hard to argue with AI. Moreover, I do want to be a theologian, just like Pinocchio wanted to be a real boy. That’s why I was steamed when the JW o**********n built an entire meeting around the despair part of that verse and downplayed the defiance, taking for granted there would be some who wanted to repair their relationship with God. (week of 7/19/2026) I got on the phone to Bethel and complained to them. “How can you do that?” I muttered. “That’s eisegesis! Theologians say you can’t do that! Oh, how embarrassing to be out of step with smart people!”

    ‘Yeah, well, we don’t care,’ they told me. ‘If it can help someone, we’re going for it.’ And so the whole meeting was of people trying to come into accord with God’s purpose, either for the first time or returning to it. The task would look daunting at first. They had deviated so far. However, counsel was given that you don’t take on everything all at once. Of course you will feel despair it you look at it that way. Figure it’s like recovering from an illness. You start out very slow—broth, at first. Meetings revolve around a central theme, these days, combining whatever can be pulled out of that week’s Bible reading coupled with present needs.

    I actually think that the nerdy theologians are right. It IS eisegesis the Witnesses are committing—something not allowed by the rules of theology. The overall pattern of Jeremiah IS one of God’s people being defiant. But, just how bad is the sin of eisegesis in this instance? Rather than strut around and show off how smart you are, isn’t it better to employ verses so that they help people?

    For example, in the sixth chapter of Hebrews, Paul speaks “hardball” as to those who had fallen away, but then he follows with: “But in your case, beloved ones, we are convinced of better things, things related to salvation, even though we are speaking in this way.” (Hebrews 6:9) Of course. That’s what that midweek meeting did. Love hopes all things, says 1 Corinthians 13:7. Sometimes it’s wrong but it still hopes all things.

    The meeting theme even dovetailed with the new study book being considered, Walk Courageously with God. This could not have been pre-planned, I don’t think, since both the Bible reading (Jeremiah 18-19) and the study book selection were separately placed on the calendar long ago. Instead, it has to be that it reflects the overall tone of meetings. Look for the good whenever one can.

    Take this excerpt of paragraph 7 from that book, for instance:

    “Jesus also expressed confidence in his followers. Imagine the reassuring tone of his voice when he told them: “Take courage! I have conquered the world.” (John 16:33) He knew that they could follow in his footsteps​—and they did. Jesus used the expression “take courage” on a number of occasions. He said it to a paralytic before assuring him that his sins were forgiven. (Matt. 9:2) He said it to a woman after healing her grievous illness. (Matt. 9:22)

    These are instances of “take courage” where you might not ordinarily expect them. “Take courage” for I have conquered the world, Jesus says. That doesn’t mean that I will. “Take courage” to the man forgiven of sins. That doesn’t mean he may not commit some more. “Take courage” to the woman healed of illness. She might get sick again. But in all cases, the “take courage” is an assurance that Jesus has triumphed, is leading the way, and, through holy spirit, will help you as well.

    ******  The bookstore

  • Conscience, the July 19 2026 Watchtower Study, and Child Sexual Abuse

    Prior to the meeting, I met up with the Watchtower Study conductor in the parking lot. He told me of the Jiminy Cricket tune from 1940, Always Let Your Conscience be Your Guide. He had somehow run across it as something that fit in well with the Study to come: Your Conscience—Use Bible Principles to Train It. During the Study, he might just show snippets of that Pinocchio movie in which the song appeared, he quipped, adding that if he did it would be the last thing he ever did. It is, at the Kingdom Hall, “instructed by Jehovah,” after all, not Walt Disney. But, it would have fit well. “A conscience is that still small voice that people won’t listen to,” Cricket says to Pinocchio, the wooden puppet who wants to be a real boy but doesn’t quite know how to pull off the stunt. “Now you see the world is full of temptations,” Cricket says. “They’re the wrong things that seem right at the time but… even though the right things may seem wrong sometimes, sometimes the wrong things may be right at the wrong time or… visa versa. Ahem. Understand?” Of course. Who wouldn’t?

    The Watchtower Study fleshed out conscience, naturally, but the point is that it used to be common sense, so that it would even be taught to children in a (ground-breaking at the time) Disney movie. The Study article explored how that internal guide could be molded for the better. Explored also was how it could be damaged, even ruined. One brother commented of sort secret fraternity of which he had spoken to a member. The fellow had been literally branded in the shoulder—all prospects were. Didn’t that hurt? Our friend asked. Oh, it hurt like hell, was the answer, but only for a moment, after which the nerve ending were destroyed so that they never felt anything again. Conscience is like that, too. It’s an internal guide. You don’t want to make a habit of ignoring it—a theme explored quite well in that Pinocchio movie.

    I would never claim that Witnesses are the only ones who recognize our God-given conscience, but they doubtless are among the ones who discuss it most thoroughly, That’s because they cart to the curb, mostly unread, the competing rubbish of evolutionary psychology which holds that it all evolved. In that collection of emotions we call conscience (it is not a term they use) each came about separately and over the eons fused together because, in some way, each enabled the clan evolving it to beat out the competing clan that had not yet got around to it. Though it masquerades as science, the stuff will strike any person of common sense as pure fantasy guesswork, consistently conflating correlation with causation (whereas, if you did that, you would be promptly told how stupid you were).

    “Everything is ex-post reasoning: we can run fast, detect cheating, kill our stepchildren, because…and here you simply insert anything from the days of being a member of a small, close-knit endangered tribe to justify this. With this one can explain almost everything without actually ever bothering to prove anything,” complained a letter to the Economist (Jan 24th, 2009). The field—how can it be other than pseudoscience?—is born of inadequate tools for the job coupled with a refusal to let a divine foot in the door. It is convincing only to true believers. The Watchtower will have none of it.

    Participation was lively, as it almost always is. Two topics were specifically spotlighted in which conscience might be brought to bear (smoking and wedding celebrations) then a booklet was referred to which I had forgotten existed: Scriptures for Christian Living. Time was there was no way you could forget. They were introduced with much fanfare at the convention, then you had to queue up in long lines to get one from an attendant with many boxes of the item. But now they are released more or less like Steve Jobs used to introduce an Apple product: ‘Oh, and one more thing . . . “ You can sort of lose track of them.

    There are about 100 topics in that brochure, or whatever it is—now that I do everything digitally it can be hard to tell. They are all areas in which conscience can be refined by Bible passages, after which to sharpen up that guide even if those passages are forgotten. You can take any one them and construct your own series of daily texts over it to better get a handle on the quality.

    Let us extend the list a bit, beyond that specific Watchtower Study. What about when a sleazy situation comes up that would blow Jiminy Cricket out of the water and there are no mentors around, no scriptures around, no protectors around? Say that something is child sexual abuse. It existed in Jiminy’s day, no doubt, but it was never mentioned and he would not believe it were someone to tell him. However, the times they are a’changing. Every sort of wickedness is on full display these days. Jiminy must be brought up to speed.

    A Watchtower video entitled Protect Your Children, released in 2016, spotlights conscience as the prime defense when no protector is around. It is an episode of the Caleb and Sophia cartoon series that Witness children know well. The series is incorporated by most Witness families in training their children. They sure are being trained in that video, as parents tell the children that Jehovah gave them a conscience, after which they follow up with asking what would they do if someone tried to touch them somewhere that made them uncomfortable?

    Protect Your Children captures the imagination of the child and depicts sexual abuse as a monster, for it is monstrous, and any child knows that monsters are malevolent creatures from which to flee. It vaporizes the moment the children tell it: “No. Stop doing that! I’m telling on you!” However, to ensure that no child misses the point, the mother urges: “Even if it is someone you know and trust!” and papa adds that they should right away “tell daddy or mommy,” who, in the video, take the news most seriously.

    However, mostly because she didn’t like Jehovah’s Witnesses, someone told me our video was garbage. She presented another from a certain child protective agency as the example to follow. This one, as though trained in the ways of evolutionary science, made no mention of conscience at all. Specific areas of the body that no one should touch are circled on a child’s body, apparently with the assumption that a child does not know its ass from its elbow.

    Look, it gets the job done, and so pernicious is the evil that there is room for both videos and many more. But the agency video struck me as a classic example of why so many children don’t like school. I remember when they would roll into the classroom the tall TV console for some “educational television.” I remember getting all excited about the change of pace but then let down at the dullness of the presentation. Who wants to be always instructed? One almost envisions in the agency video a child who is touched mentally consulting the chart he has memorized in order to determine if he should feel bad about it or not. No. Caleb’s dad is right. Jehovah gave humans a conscience. If you have not scratched it all to pieces updating it with the enlightened moral thinking of today’s overall world, it works pretty well.

    The Watchtower video has the added bonus, completely lacking in that of the agency’s, of instructing parents in how to teach their children and encouraging them to do so. It is thus family-friendly. It is a force for family cohesion. In the end, it is family that will protect a child better than any network of outside agencies, who so often drop the ball. Whereas, the agency video goes on the supposition that everybody—don’t even overlook the parents—are on the list of possible suspects.

    The Watchtower video steers clear of the possibility that the parents might be the villains. To be sure, that situation has happened, generally with step-parents. How to put that in a video? Do you really want to suggest to all children that their parents might be pedophiles? Even so, Protect Your Children clearly directs the children to let no one touch them inappropriately—no one at all. The agency video, on the other hand, specifically says it is okay for a doctor to touch private areas. Oh, sure! as a representative of modern science, how could that one possibly be anything other than trustworthy? Yield completely to that high priest of medical science. No need for even the slightest caution.

    It didn’t turn out to be good advice In 2016. That year, the U.S. Olympic team doctor was sentenced to 175 years in prison for molesting the teens in his charge over the course of three Olympics. 150 of his victims testified at the trial. Had they been asked which video do they think would have safeguarded them more, what do you imagine would have been their reply? The agency video of modern evolutionary science was probably that deviant’s dream come true.

    Save for that one very serious demerit, it’s not a bad video. Overall, it is very good. It can be recommended. But it has nothing on that of the Watchtower’s, which spotlights conscience as the first line of defense.

    ******  The bookstore

  • You Get to Comment at Witness Meetings

    You get to comment at Witness meetings. You can prepare for them. This is a very unusual norm for a religious gathering, where there is usually no point in preparing, nor anything to prepare for: they are just in-the-moment experiences.

    Not so with the Witnesses. One can comment. So, in connection with this week’s Bible reading (Jeremiah 16-17), I made a comment on 17:10:

    “I, Jehovah, am searching the heart, Examining the innermost thoughts, To give to each one according to his ways, According to the fruitage of his works.”

    My remark: The heart makes a grab for what it wants then charges the head to devise a convincing rationale. This lends the impression that the head is calling the shots but it is the heart all along

    The final chapter of the Bible Stories books was reached, culminating in Revelation. ‘What Bible character would you like to meet in the resurrection?’ was a final question. I observed that the line would be pretty long for the main characters, so I would drop down to second tier, such as Elihu. He was the fellow who stuck up for Job when the other three louts were feeding him to the shredder. At the same time, though, he gave Job correction, for the latter had gone too far in pushing back on these jerks. (I remarked in Workman’s Theodicy, ‘Who hasn’t been there? Going to where you would never otherwise go but for responding to the goads and taunts of others?’)

    Revelation 12:9 was included in that final chapter. I remarked on how it helps us get our heads on straight. Witnesses may hear that they are misled, that they are ‘brainwashed,’ even that they are of a cult. Revelation 12:9 points out that it is exactly the opposite, that it is Satan misleading the “entire inhabited earth.” For the most part, cult accusations come from those who want the greater world to dictate one’s terms, not any Bible-based agency that may set different goals.

    There were the questions posed young people—what might you do should this or that situation arise? Say—this was one of the questions—you want to give full-time service a shot but someone is leaning on you for college. How to respond? I’ve nothing against college, assuming one knows why one is going. Just because schools push that way is not a good answer. I observed that demanding immediate action is a fine tell for sniffing out a scam. ‘Well, I’ll think about it,’ followed by ‘No! You should do it now!’ It’s a sign of a scam.

    It may have changed, but I recall guidance counselors in high school alarmed at the suggestion that I might take a year or so off before pressing on to college. ‘No, you should do it now!’ they insisted, lest you lose the momentum. Mark of a scam, as far as I can see. I didn’t get much out of college, though I graduated, and never did a thing with it afterwards. My fault, not theirs. Not anyone’s fault, really, or if anyone’s fault, it was the guidance counselors who could not imagine anything but shoving kids into college whether they be ready or not.

    For the opening talk, Jeremiah-centered, “It Matters Whom You Trust,” the speaker mentioned the U.S currency that reads “In God We Trust.” I have heard this so many times over the years, but there was a new twist last night. Coins have said it since the Civil War. But paper bills did not say it until 1955. In the midst of the Cold War, it was a direct kick-back at the Russians. ‘Godless, atheistic Russia’ was then the object of Western fear, so America put slogans right on the dollar bill to show that their people were not that way.

    ******  The bookstore

  • ‘The God of Truth Always Fulfills His Purpose’-Part 1

    The Watchtower Study for June 14 (2026), ‘The God of truth Always Fulfills his Purpose,’ was everything in a nutshell, a good overview of God’s purpose towards the earth. That aspect of living forever on a paradise earth resonates with some. It is a major drawing that few others have. We are to believe that God put humans on an earth tailor-made for them because he wanted them somewhere else? No. For all but a handful, earth is the intended home.

    It is the truth in a nutshell. It doesn’t just happen. In the absence of loyal men to keep one focused, there are too many rabbit holes to veer into. The brotherhood that is JW is refreshed weekly by this regimen. Don’t overcomplicate it. Don’t muddy the waters. Don’t get consumed with trivia. There may be tees to cross, i’s to dot, and stray items to be uncovered. But the gist of it is simple and should not be obfuscated.

    There is the simple statement (paragraph 3) that God is the Maker of the heavens and the earth and the Source of all life, backed with a few supporting scriptures. Also, that he is the Sustainer of life—yes, capitalized in the article. It is not like when my wife set up a bird house but it blew down in the storm and as she was setting it up again the mama wren was perched a few feet away chewing her out for not doing it right in the first place: “Chip chip chip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip pip!!!!!” No. Unless the human wrens foul their own nest, God’s home for them endures. Alas, they do fowl the nest, in ever-increasing ways, enough for the Bureau of Atomic Scientists to set the Doomsday Clock, not at 10:30 AM, but at 85 seconds to midnight.

    Be that as it may, paragraph 4 relates what God had in mind putting humans on earth. It’s simple. “Jehovah created humans because he wanted to share the beautiful gift of life with them.” That’s it. Don’t overcomplicate it. Then there is the added proviso that “he gave us free will,” and the reiteration of “He created a beautiful home just for us.”

    The free will was abused early on. “Adam and Eve rebelled” is how it is stated, imposing upon themselves “the sentence of death,” throwing a significant wrench into the works. Not to worry. “Jehovah did not create the earth ‘simply for nothing, but formed it to be inhabited.’”—Isaiah is cited. (Para 5) Though “it might have seemed as if God’s purpose were being derailed . . . Jehovah is the Fulfiller of all that he promises”—again Isaiah is cited. That sentence of death is not immediate; it is just a curtailment of the non-ending life they would otherwise have enjoyed. Children are produced (who will also die, having inherited that defect.) In time, God “provided His only-begotten Son as a ransom to save Adam’s descendants and to give them the marvelous hope of living forever”​— and of course, the well-know John 3:16 is cited.

    Then follows a disclosure of the one who caused the problems to begin with, his own ambitions thwarted, and his ultimate outcome: From Revelation: “Down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth.” (12:9) It may be trendy to call those “brainwashed” who stay the Christian course today, but the reality is just the opposite. The Devil misleads, not the Congregation, but “the entire inhabited earth.” It is “the entire inhabited earth” that is victimized, as monitoring news media will suggest to any one of common sense. The ones most virulently attacked will, quite consistently and a few verses on, be those who “observe the commandments of God and have the work of bearing witness concerning Jesus.” (vs 17) Indeed, they are attacked. If they so much as scratch their rear ends, it’s all over the internet.

    Then there was “By preaching the “good news of the Kingdom,” we obey Jesus’ command and, at the same time, fulfill prophecy. (Matt. 24:14; 28:18-20) It’s simple. One need not know everything as to how it all turns out. Take part in the ministry and you know you’re not spitting into the wind because you have a few million spiritual brothers and sisters saying exactly the same thing. If you don’t reach a given person, they will, with the same message. It’s not just everyone giving their own personal testimonies, as though everything was about us.

    Meaningful work to do. Not unduly worried that we don’t know everything. Nobody has to. Most thought the system would have already ended, yet every day is more crazy than the day before. If your wife sails past her due date, that doesn’t mean she’s not pregnant.

    We live in a world where people aspire to be whistleblowers. It is almost a sacred quest, to be a whistleblower and dig up dirt on someone else. Nobody deserves to have the dirt dug up on him more than the Serpent, so in that sense Jehovah’s Witnesses are the greatest whistleblowers of all. When you lead off your presentation observing that ‘the world’s crazy,’ nobody (n the Western world) challenges you on that point. Indeed the intention of the entire article was “This discussion will help us to be bold and fearless Witnesses of Jehovah.”

    ******  The bookstore

  • You Almost Never Have all the Facts

    Lot was a righteous man. The Bethel speaker said so. Three times 2 Peter 2:7-8 says he was. So, he must have been.

    “And [God] rescued righteous Lot, who was greatly distressed by the brazen conduct of the lawless people—for day after day that righteous man was tormenting his righteous soul over the lawless deeds that he saw and heard while dwelling among them.”  

    It really bothered him to see all the riff-raff and how they were carrying on. 

    And yet, righteous is not the first word coming to mind when most think of him. What is? Quarrelsome? Opportunistic? Materialistic? Abraham offered him a choice and he chose the best portion. Just like the circuit overseer was dismayed when Ernie chose the biggest piece of pie. You’re not supposed to do that, he said, you’re supposed to defer to the other person. Well, which piece would you have taken? Ernie countered. He replied that he would have chosen the smaller piece. “Well, there you go,” the slick fellow said.

    But maybe, just maybe, the Bethel speaker said, Lot was older than Abraham—did you ever think of that? It could be. Abraham was probably the baby of the family. Long as their child-producing days were back then, his brothers might have been much older than he, so much so that their kids would also be older than him. So maybe Lot was. This led to the observation that the older man always gets the cushier place, which led to the sacrosanct Bethel practice of bidding on both rooms and apartments. I know this first-hand from our Bethel friends who maneuvered forever to get a fine apartment up there in the Sliver Building that Bethel owned, and there we were after a day of sightseeing in New York, up high in his apartment with wine and cheese and a magnificent view of Manhattan. Alas, soon afterwards, he and his wife were transferred to Patterson. What would they see outside those windows, cows?

    Then, too, since Lot had been kidnapped years ago, swept away, and it took a SWAT team to free him, maybe, just maybe, he suffered shell-shock, PTSD, and Abraham knew that, so no wonder Lot would thereafter avoid the wide open fields. No wonder he would seek out the safety in numbers. So there.

    Could the Bethel speaker prove it? No. But that was his point, he said. You also couldn’t disprove it. In fact, it was all a segue to lead into something else. His talk had nothing to do with proof, he said, nor with Lot, for that matter. His talk had to do with not jumping to conclusions when you don’t have all the facts. 

    We love to do it. We do it all the time. But we shouldn’t. You almost never have all the facts, and instead extrapolate from what you have, which sometimes is very little. The speaker next gave examples, one or two from the scriptures where such is frequently the case, but most from real life, in which it was easy to be hard on someone—until you knew a key missing fact which turned the entire situation around—as it might have with Lot. 

    That’s why it’s so much easier, not to mention more productive, to turn your scrutiny upon yourself, and not the other person. Even with yourself you may not have all the facts but you’ll have 100 times what you do with the other person. Remember what everyone’s mama used to say: when you point your finger at someone else, there are three pointing back at you.

    ******  The bookstore

    ,