Jump to content


The Reproach of Child Sexual Abuse Falls on the Abuser

Topic Summary


Last Reply



TrueTomHarley -
Space Merchant -

Top Posters

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

And it talks about pagan judges, when God has put them judges in their place to do God's work as scripture tells us.

It's talking about pagan judges, judging on matters (disputes) that should be figured out by the congregation who use the Bible which is superior (God is judge) as their guide. They're not talking about "pagan" judges, judging a criminal case. Don't keep mixing the two up. Does it need to give specifics? It clearly says disputes. Of course unless like some elders you believe child molestation is a dispute....

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

I don't know for sure if it was a Watchtower production. If it was, it is a poor production piece when many things are omitted for the worst. I don't believe the Watchtower would pay for something like that. I'd rather trust the writing. But, as usual, people tend to use internet content, that may or may not be the whole original piece.

Gimme a break!

If you are not already a Watchtower Lawyer ... you should apply. 

With your talent they would probably pay for your legal education, as they did for a son of a GB member, if memory serves.

Watch the whole video I posted from Youtube ... THEN... you are entitled to a sane opinion.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:


This Video is available on YOUTUBE.

No one needs to go to "apostate sites" ... it is all in the public domain.

By the way ... the Original Video being analyzed for content was NEVER made available to us who paid for it,  through official channels ... but it was leaked by someone who thought we should KNOW.

....after all.... WE paid for its creation and production !

It came from JW.ORG

(Sans analysis....)


The problem with the video is that the commentator (by that I mean the critic) is obviously slanting it towards child abuse. I am not saying it may not apply, but it is a general video about all areas of function. America is the land of lawsuits, and it forces one to protect oneself down to ridiculous minuscule specifics. What if this.....what if that..... Sometimes it's things that a normal person wouldn't even think of (well not a European person for sure). It was only recently that I found out that the reason many landowners put no trespassing signs up is not necessarily because they want privacy, but because they are worried about lawsuits. What if someone walking through their land twists their ankle on a twig? Yup, that person can sue. And the more money a defendant has, the better. So it makes logical sense to destroy drafts and notes which may be used as evidence against you. I would not want someone reading my drafts, they may get a completely wrong picture of what I am trying to say.

The important thing is that approved content is not destroyed. Those kind of records have to be kept. So the accusation that records have been destroyed needs to be specific. Were these drafts of records or content approved records? This is the question that the BBC report is asking. So far apparently the evidence is that content approved records have not been destroyed.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

So, blame the UK government for the Watchtower complying with secular law. 😉 The legal department caters letters that pertain to individual governments and their laws. It's not one size fits all.  🙂

That is true.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

If you are not already a Watchtower Lawyer ... you should apply.

I wrote about this video:

At a supposedly confidential 2017 meeting of elders, leaked for Internet perusal by a self-styled freedom fighter—a meeting dealing with the ramifications of child sexual abuse litigation, a Witness representative stated: “Well, we know that the scene of this world is changing, and we know Satan’s coming after us, and he’s going to go for us legally. We can see by the way things are shaping up.” It is not hard to imagine what certain ones are doing with the explanation that “Satan’s coming after us.”

How could he say it? With religion in general, it is the misconduct of leaders that has come home to haunt them. With Jehovah’s Witnesses, it is misconduct of members whose cases allegedly were mishandled. God help us if the members of other faiths are put under the magnifying glass, as with Jehovah’s Witnesses. On the other side of the world, Jehovah’s Witness are banned in Russia for reasons having nothing to do with child sexual abuse—the topic was entirely absent, as government and media partnered to whip the public into a froth, hurling many virulent accusations against the faith—but never that one.

There, it is “professing the superiority of one’s religion.” There it is being Western spies disguised as a religion. There it is blood transfusions, and should a Witness refuse one and thereafter die, the death is invariably attributed to the refusal, with leaders of the faith likened to murderers. Surely, somewhere along the line it should be acknowledged that Jehovah’s Witnesses have absolutely no deaths at all attributed to illicit drug abuse, overdrinking, and tobacco use, save only for when someone is slipping into old habits. All things considered, they are, far and away, the ‘safest’ religion out there. Yet they are said to be the murderers.

Keep in mind that we are speaking of the faith whose members are universally recognized as ‘pacifist,’ who will on no account resort to violence or support war efforts. It is highly unusual for a large group of people to have absolutely no blood on their hands in this regard, but they do not. Is it so crazy for the Witness spokesman to say: “Satan is coming after us?” Given the foregoing, it would be crazy for him not to. One thing that we know about opposers: they will always overplay their hand.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

To defend the TRUTH, you do not even need any lawyers at all. NONE To defend property and treasure, and your position ... you need a LOT!


Still, I’ll put off the verse for as long as I can.

they went about in sheepskins, in goatskins, while they were in need, in tribulation, mistreated;  and the world was not worthy of them. They wandered about in deserts and mountains and caves and dens of the earth.”

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Forum Statistics

    Total Topics
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    Total Members
    Most Online
    Newest Member

  • 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.