Jump to content

Anna

Why John Butler Left Jehovah's Witnesses

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Anna -
JOHN BUTLER -
441
6977

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
23 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

The Kavanaugh hearings also ought to have made clear that the lauded impartiality of the world’s justice system is but a bad joke. Law is not the issue. One’s interpretation of law is the issue and that is forged in emotion which is forged in one’s personal experience.

I watched the Kananaugh Senate Hearings this past Thursday for the whole 9-1/2 or so hours, and was VERY impressed.  I also watched on Friday the Committee's deliberations that moved his nomination along ... about 3 hours.  I was very impressed once again.

How much, TTH, did YOU ACTUALLY WATCH, to form your opinions as stated?

Since you COMPLETELY avoided my simple, straightforward question I will state that once again you have stated a strong opinion about which you know nothing at all.

You are one super scary dude, dude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Since you COMPLETELY avoided my simple, straightforward question I will state that once again you have stated a strong opinion about which you know nothing at all.

You are one super scary dude, dude.

It may be that I don’t consider this forum your own personal courtroom so that you can try your own vendettas and cross-examine opponents at will. Have you attended all the legal JW trials that you lecture the rest of us about?

Summaries, reviews, commentaries, and concordances usually get the job done. The trick is to be sure they are not all penned by your own people but also by those you disagree with. I pass this test.

Otherwise, one ought not comment on any Bible verse without first having demonstrated competency in Hebrew and Greek. Moreover, there are plenty of elitist boors who think it is that way, and they try to run every opponent off the road who has not ‘attended the proper schools’ as they.

I read continually, sometimes original sources, sometimes not. Suffice it to say that builds up a reservoir to draw on more quickly than does watching every offering from Hollywood, watching nine and a half hours of the Kavanaugh hearings, or reading the phone book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Anna said:

I didn't notice that. Which magazine was that?

In this 

    Hello guest!

Here is only place i find they mention about male victims. All other paragraphs  talking, giving experiences about girls and woman.

"Studies in the United States suggest that one in five girls and one in ten boys suffer sexual molestation before they grow up."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Anna said:

What makes you think this is new?

WT 1988 /4/15 page 11. par.6

"Distrust has increased because of another growing fear in our day: the fear of becoming a victim of crime.

 I think this is general statement, about all crimes in society. Article mentioned among others crime and child molestation. But this is not told by WT authors, but by newspaper editorial in Puerto Rico declared: 

Reporter who wrote article said in fact - child molestation is a crime. Not WT magazine.

Let see again what you paste:

 

WT 1988 /4/15 page 11. par.6

"Distrust has increased because of another growing fear in our day: the fear of becoming a victim of crime. Many now do like the woman who said that she sleeps with a revolver under her pillow. Another fearful woman said: “I resent it. . . . My grandmother never locked her doors.” Thus, a newspaper editorial in Puerto Rico declared: “The ones who are imprisoned are us,” yes, in our own barred and locked homes. These fears are well founded. In the United States, for example, one woman in three is likely to be assaulted during her lifetime. The surgeon general there noted that “some four million Americans fall victim to serious violence every year—murder, rape, wife-beating, child-abuse, muggings.” Such crime is common in many lands, further damaging the trust that people have in others".

Beginning and the end of this paragraph you paste, have quotation mark. It seems that source of that text is not WT author, but some secular source, newspaper, book or interview. 

 WT talking about sin not about crime. When Bible speaking about some bad human behavior it is always in context with sin never with crime. WT running religion so they talking and teaching  in such lexical and historical way about human behavior. Bible, the Law of OT and NT Commands  not speaking about CRIME but only and always about SIN.

WORD CRIME almost not EXIST in Bible, as i know. NWT using word "crime" only in Luke 23:4. But here  is about Pilates who said how he can not find any CRIME about Jesus.  Then Pilate said to the chief priests and the crowds: “I find no crime in this man.”  Other translations using words; Charge, Condemn, Guilt, Fault. So, if Pilates really used word CRIME, that would by explainable by fact that he was servant of Roman Empire and Roman Legal and Judicial System that possibly using such terminology in Courts and in Roman Legislative. Perhaps somebody other here can tell more about word CRIME and Roman Empire. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

"Studies in the United States suggest that one in five girls and one in ten boys suffer sexual molestation before they grow up."

Invisiblechildren.org, first brought to my attention by JWI, gives a figure even higher: one in four for girls, one in six for boys.

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Contrary to your own personal belief, acquaintance with what is inside a box of Band-Aids, does not qualify you to have profound surgical opinions.

I would never say that going to original sources is valueless. I do not practice abstinence in that regard myself. But large amount of anything original is throat-clearing rubbish. You do as well, often better, considering what the thinkers have said about it, and processing the pros and cons that they observe. . 

Unless you are a thinker yourself. Possibly you will modestly admit that you are not. Are you not the one who relies on 'chain-saw logic'?

"Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud."  Theodore Sturgeon

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Anna said:

WT has NEVER shielded or protected known perpetrators. The GB have not mishandled cases of child abuse, the elders have. Elders have apologized to victims where possible. The whole organization cannot be held responsible for every case that happens in congregations. Have you personally had experience of having to handle an accusation of child molestation by someone in the congregation? If not, then you cannot know what you are talking about. If yes, then please let us know what happened.

1) The GB have not mishandled cases of child abuse, the elders have.

Elders are extended arm of WT system. GB claim that they are appointed to giving "spiritual food". What is spiritual food? All what is told and written to GUIDE God's People on Earth. GB are Chanel of Communication between JHVH and Jesus .......and their Earthly Organization, Chosen People, Spiritual Nation that will survive Armageddon . They will survive if they Listen and Obey what FDS aka GB Teach and Instruct Jehovah's Witnesses.

Is here something that confused You Anna? :)        

2)  Elders have apologized to victims where possible.

Agree! .........But also Top Management have same obligation.

3) The whole organization cannot be held responsible for every case that happens in congregations.

WT was explained few times in publication, very rare done, i can recall one most two time when they discus about Personal and Collective Responsibility.  Yes, Organization is that Entity that is RESPONSIBLE for what members of that same Organization DOING! If you are member of the "Club" you are expected to play by the rule of the Club. If you not Club have to deal with You. If Club ignore what members doing and if members harm each other (or outside people) Club is obligated to call those who can handle issue. Club must know what they may and can and must solve "in the family" and what must go to Authority.

4)  Have you personally had experience of having to handle an accusation of child molestation by someone in the congregation? If not, then you cannot know what you are talking about. If yes, then please let us know what happened.

No, i have no personal experience in this issue.  ....and you are close to right conclusion how i am clueless what is going on :))))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ANNA says "WT has NEVER shielded or protected known perpetrators. The GB have not mishandled cases of child abuse, the elders have.." 

Did the GB and or it's Legal Departments  (for W/t and for JW Org)  refuse to hand over the documents in America. 

I believe they admitted having such documents which relate to twenty years worth of Child Abuse accusations.

Is it then true that the Legal dept of one (either W/t or JW Org) wrote a letter to the other asking for the documents, and the other Legal dept wrote back saying they would not hand them over. When in fact the GB rule over both and could have given orders for the documents to be handed over directly. 

That is why the courts became annoyed because the GB were deliberately wasting time. 

If all the info had been passed to police at the time each event happened, instead of storing it all up in 'secret' for twenty years, then the situation would never have taken place, and the lives of some people would not have been ruined because they would not have become victims of abuse.... 

To use the excuse of whether the Pedophiles were KNOWN PERPETRATORS, is very poor. Because it was just so easy to say that the victims didn't have two witnesses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

That is why the courts became annoyed because the GB were deliberately wasting time. 

Do you mean the court whose demand was overturned by a higher court as overreach, so that, in reality it was more like the thief becoming annoyed with his target for wasting time forking over the goods?

Wasn’t this answered before? Yet you barrel on as though it never was. No wonder some here think you are unbalanced and I have to restrain them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@TrueTomHarley I am pretty sure this was discussion in another thread, which ended up being closed, thus going into another thread from a Greek user here, and such is spilled over to other threads as if a child knocked over a glass of fruit punch on to the carpet. Not easy to clean, but a few scrubs will eventually get the juice stains out, in this sense, information upon information until the spill happens again.

But it is getting a bit silly, people think they can end child abuse when the reality is it cannot be stopped, better solutions can be made to prevent, but trying to stop something of this scale, is like trying to stop world hunger and or racism, perhaps violence around the globe when that is neigh impossible.

Even within the justice system itself is also a problem.

That being said, I take it no one hear the news that, hence child abuse is globe, it is taking place in restaurants now, for I guess all restaurants should now be held accountable, granted with the mentality of some folks.

Yep, such was answered before, time to make use of that carpet cleaner - again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@JOHN BUTLER and @Srecko Sostar

The Governing Body and the body of elders strive to keep the congregations morally clean. It is a fact that is acknowledged  by other religions and even by opposers . A practiser of any kind of immorality is not tolerated, is thrown out of the congregation and can no longer be called one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.  With one exception, yes, you’ve guessed it. Those who have sex with children are welcome. In fact the GB and elders just love to have these adorable  pedophiles roaming in their congregations and molesting their children. Don’t ask me why, but perhaps they reason that these people obviously love children a lot, and who could argue against that being a bad thing? Didn’t Jesus say let the children come to me?

Now it gets a little difficult sometimes because these lovable child molesters are generally  NOT liked by the authorities and other members of society. So it has become necessary to employ clever ways, such as the two witness rule and deliberate obfuscation in courts to help keep these lovely child molesters safe and hidden inside the congregations so they can get on with their sexual preferences undisturbed.  There is a rumor that one GB member suggested it might even be good for the children. So most elders agree as they don’t want to go against the words of the GB. Some enthusiastic (sometimes called brown nosers) elders even encourage their own children to sit in the laps of these affectionate molesters.

It’s getting more and more difficult however to shield these friendly deviants because society is getting very hostile  towards them and wants to throw them in jail. The GB and the elders are hoping that these poor misunderstood  pedophile souls continue to find refuge in their congregations and get true satisfaction playing with their children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Anna said:

The Governing Body and the body of elders strive to keep the congregations morally clean.

Think, I would not praise them for good deeds they doing, because they are obligated to doing good deeds and to have good intentions. They take/took voluntarily this responsibility. No one force them to take position of lead.

What i stress is/are things they not  doing  well or they have done even bad in some case.

Thanks Anna :)  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if somebody decides, in their wisdom, to make a topic about ME and why they THINK I left the Org.

And then they or others say that I'm mentally unbalanced etc. 

Perhaps, just like the GB of JW Org, they bring things on themselves. 

All I was doing was commenting on a previous comment of Anna's which is here on this topic.

But of course Anna and others are allowed to mention the Child Abuse freely, but me, oh no.

Well, Jesus was hated for telling the truth about others, wasn't he ? 

And the scriptures tell us to pick up our 'cross / torture stake' and follow Jesus. It isn't supposed to be easy being honest and truthful. 

There is so much I could say to Anna but I'd only get 'shot' for it. 

Admin close this topic if you wish. Have a good day y'all. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Well if somebody decides, in their wisdom, to make a topic about ME and why they THINK I left the Org.

I am a little worried that admin or someone will start a topic entitled ‘Why TrueTom did not leave Jehovah’s Witnesses.’ Then I will feel obligated to write pages and pages and pages of pure brilliance and I simply do not have the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Hey, you know what might be fun? Let’s upvote @Anna for a comment on this forum and then downvote her for the same comment on another forum!

Explain in detail please and then explain how it is connected to this topic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I am a little worried that admin or someone will start a topic entitled ‘Why TrueTom did not leave Jehovah’s Witnesses.’ Then I will feel obligated to write pages and pages and pages of pure brilliance and I simply do not have the time.

Wouldn't take much space to say 'Because True Tom is a puppet of the Org and does not ask questions or think for himself'. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Anna and others are allowed to mention the Child Abuse freely

Everyone can talk about child abuse, but in other topics that is all you bring up when 2 topics with the very discussion you brought up on child abuse has been questioned and answered over and over. You brought up child abuse on several unrelated topics time and time again, and the answer is the same, and those same answers of which you viewed previously are still there, go back a few thread pages to find those 2 threads, the closed one and the one with the Greek user.

You can speak your peace, but do so in a smart way, otherwise the end result will be the very fruits you pick from the trees.

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Wouldn't take much space to say 'Because True Tom is a puppet of the Org and does not ask questions or think for himself'. 

No one is a puppet here. Everyone here has a different background, they come from different walks of life, each of us have experience and or something knowledgeable to say even to correct, each of us are of a faith community and or non-religious, etc. The claim of puppets have already been done by you elsewhere, need not for the cycle to repeat itself.

That being said speak your peace, it will only take a few copy and paste of any same response answered before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I am a little worried that admin or someone will start a topic entitled ‘Why TrueTom did not leave Jehovah’s Witnesses.’ Then I will feel obligated to write pages and pages and pages of pure brilliance and I simply do not have the time.

Perhaps, but I don't think admin would write such about anyone here, the only instance was the unmasking of a specific individual if I recall correctly and a ban followed right after it only for so and so to reemerge.

Other than that, what I will say here, again, is child abuse is everywhere, no one is immune to it, and as of recently, restaurants are not immune either and due to a child abuse case an act of Jungle Justice was almost done, the restaurant remains but the culprit is taken care of.

 

At the end of the day, all men is imperfect and child abuse will not stop a man from practicing a faith, for if that was the case all religions should have been done away with long time ago and the Bible, as well as the Qu'ran, would have been destroyed on sight.

 

The blame one blame all mentality is pretty silly, if I may add, but people still do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Similar Content

    • By JOHN BUTLER
      Jehovah has clearly and unambiguously prohibited the use of blood for sustaining human life.  Many times, OT and NT.
      Can I question this point please ?
      Did Jesus ever forbid the use of blood to save a human life ?  Can you show me a scripture where JESUS forbids the use of blood to save a human life ? 
      Let us look at a few points here.
      I think it is true that the Jews / Nation of Israel practised something known as Pikuach Nefesh 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
      This meant life was precious and should be saved even if it meant going against the Law.
      Add to this that Jesus gave an example which in my opinion goes much deeper than the actual words of the scripture.  Matthew 12 v 9 through 12.
      9  After departing from that place, he went into their synagogue, 10  and look! there was a man with a withered Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  hand! Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  So they asked him, “Is it lawful to cure on the Sabbath?” so that they might accuse him. Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. 11  He said to them: “If you have one sheep and that sheep falls into a pit on the Sabbath, is there a man among you who will not grab hold of it and lift it out? Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. 12  How much more valuable is a man than a sheep! So it is lawful to do a fine thing on the Sabbath.”
      Surely here Jesus is saying that it is right to go against 'the Law' and /or the principles of it, to save a life. 
      And please tell me, from where do those 'blood bits' come from that the GB say the congregants can use ?  I honestly have no idea on that one. 
      However if those 'blood bits' come from blood itself then isn't that actually using blood ?
      My wife hates cherries in cakes, so she picks them out, but she still eats the cake. If a person uses bits out of blood then in my opinion they are still using blood. 
      Over to you guys. 
  • Forum Statistics

    59,741
    Total Topics
    106,221
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    15,995
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    ivanovich008
    Newest Member
    ivanovich008
    Joined




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.