Jump to content
The World News Media

IICSA: survivors speak of influence of religion


Recommended Posts

  • Member
10 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:
10 hours ago, Anna said:

[to 4Jah]: And bad people will do what they want, and of course they will do it in secret, and when chalenged they will deny and deny. How would you handle that?

Not to worry. We can expect a True Anointed to come along any minute and fix it.  (Tom's words)

Acts 5 : 1-4 

However, a man named An·a·niʹas, together with his wife Sap·phiʹra, sold some property.  But he secretly held back some of the price, with his wife’s knowledge, and he brought just a part of it and deposited it at the feet of the apostles.  But Peter said: “An·a·niʹas, why has Satan emboldened you to lie to the holy spirit and secretly hold back some of the price of the field?

Here is the answer. So think on it. How did Peter know the truth of the matter ?

You of little faith. You have stopped believing in God's Holy Spirit and it's power.

With a True Anointed, God can use them. God can send His Holy Spirit which will know truth from lies. But you people only think in a physical way. You have stopped believing in God's powers. If God wants a truly clean Organisation, HE will have one. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Views 6.3k
  • Replies 363
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

... apparently not, as it IS up to God ...

Parents are the ones who give consent to anyone, whether it be an Elder, a ministerial servant or a publisher to study the Bible with their child and/or go in service.  It is a private arrangement and agreement between the parent and the relevant person. Everyone is educated at the meetings, including the children who should sit with their parents. If someone else is "teaching their children" or if children are sitting with someone else besides their parents, then that is by the parents own arra

Noted, and probably deserved. It is good for me to be rebuked on this from time to time, for I might be far worse without it. On the other hand: Actually, arguing doesn’t play a role in “scriptural arguments.” You know the verses as well as I: debates about words, leave blind guides be, answering a fool, even spreading pearls before swine. At least if I spread stuff before “swine,” it is not pearls. I can think of a way of solving that problem. In addition to blasting away at

Posted Images

  • Member
8 hours ago, Arauna said:

I should have used the world "when".  And then you go off on a totally different subject about research on this concept............ srecko .... you always go to the ploy of semantics to change the point of the thread. 

You asked about 2 kinds of unrighteousness...... I give the answer..... without considering this (my use of the word "if" sends you off on a totally other subject...... ....can you not concentrate on one subject at a time...... or is it a deliberate  ploy to troll?

"If he gets  a resurrection in the new system" ??

I don't know what made questionable about this man, and you said IF. Jesus promised him that he will be with him in Paradise, so is your IF showing lack of faith in Jesus promise to criminal man? And about when and where he will live is not in our interpretations.

Yes, Arauna, you are right. I should have known you had faith in every word of Jesus.

But I also assumed you had faith in most of what the WTJWorg interpretation is, so your IF confused me a bit. Because WTJWorg explains how this criminal will be with Jesus in Paradise not in heaven but on earth. That claim can be true, or it can be wrong. 140 years of publishing at WTJWorg gives us reason to be wary. :))

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
10 hours ago, Anna said:

Back to the topic of CSA

There is absolutely nothing one can do to control what members do in the privacy of their own homes, or other people's homes, regardless their status in the congregation.  Elder "oh so nice" at the KH could be touching Jane, his 6 year old daughter every night during bedtime story time. Ministerial servant "extra helpful" could be touching Tommy, his 12 year old Bible student, while conducting a Bible study with him at his home, with the unsuspecting single mother in the next room; grateful that she could approach a servant to help her with the fatherly task of educating her fatherless son. None of these things the congregation or JW org can be held responsible for. It would not stand up in court. This is why in the case of Candace Conti, for example, it was so important for the court to establish that she was molested during field service, because that was recognized as a church based activity, which the congregation could be held responsible for.

Years later, when Jane and Tommy have reached adulthood, they finally disclose their abuse. Not to the elders, but to the media. And later file a lawsuit. What is the congregation/JW org. supposed to do?

I am not saying the case of Jane and Tommy happens in all cases. Not at all. There are many various scenarios. But the case of Jane and Tommy are based on true stories that actually happened.
Then we have other cases where suspicions of a persons vile acts were reported while the victim was still a child (unfortunately that does not happen very often as children rarely disclose) and usually these cases are reported to the police by the parent. Often times the police don't do anything! If the parent only reports it to the congregation, then the elders have to use their judgement to verify the facts. This is the only time it's possible for the elders to screw up. They may not believe the child or think the child may be exaggerating especially if the perpetrator denies. The child may be saying the truth, and the perpetrator may be a liar. The case gets put on the back burner. A year later the perpetrator molest another child, who says nothing, then another child, who also says nothing...until we have several children who have been molested by the original perpetrator. Now THIS is BAD indeed. Years later one of the victims comes forward and takes the case to court. Now it looks as if we harbor pedophiles. But in fact it's because the elders screwed up, made a mistake in judgement, not because they believed the guy was really a pedophile, but because they did not believe he was a pedophile. Big difference. Bad mistake, no doubt about it.

So you are barking up the wrong tree when you are trying to find fault with the JW organization but really, it is a problem with the organization's members (elders, servants, publishers) when they do bad things in secret. At the KH everyone can put on an act, but who you really are becomes manifest in private. The organization has no control there.  Sometimes, even with simple things, the congregation overseer's job is comparable to trying to herd cats. Trying to motivate people to cooperate is a nightmare sometimes. And bad people will do what they want, and of course they will do it in secret, and when chalenged they will deny and deny.

How would you handle that?

In WTJWorg, a structure is set up, a hierarchy that is both - spiritual and administrative. According to this measure, the WTJWorg Institution (I remind you again, JW lawyers claim in Court that according to the hierarchical system they are the same as the Catholic Church) determines who is allowed to say what and who is allowed to do what and how to do it.
Because of such an "organized system", because the JW Church is an Organization, a Legal Body aka a Corporation and the people who are in the governing structures of this Organization have responsibility for the way they act and for the consequences of how they react to all events within each assembly. If the Organization is not able to “lead” the herd, if it is not able to have “under control” the elders and their ability to handle everything they have to solve in the assembly then it is a good question you ask; 
How would you handle that?

The second part of the problem is the mentality of people (members), shame, hiding, feeling powerless, the question of who and how to ask for help, caution. 

And then we have the question of trust between members, trust between members and clergy (because elders want to be like Catholic clergy by privilege) , so we again have JW lawyers asking the Court Clergy Privilege, for what is being condemned as “unbiblical” in WTJWorg publications and in members mind. There are double measures inside congregations, favoritism and other "institutional (organizational) sins". And many more. So you ask good question:  How would you handle that?

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

Back to the topic of CSA

There is absolutely nothing one can do to control what members do in the privacy of their own homes, or other people's homes, regardless their status in the congregation.  Elder "oh so nice" at the KH could be touching Jane, his 6 year old daughter every night during bedtime story time. Ministerial servant "extra helpful" could be touching Tommy, his 12 year old Bible student, while conducting a Bible study with him at his home, with the unsuspecting single mother in the next room; grateful that she could approach a servant to help her with the fatherly task of educating her fatherless son. None of these things the congregation or JW org can be held responsible for. It would not stand up in court. This is why in the case of Candace Conti, for example, it was so important for the court to establish that she was molested during field service, because that was recognized as a church based activity, which the congregation could be held responsible for.

Years later, when Jane and Tommy have reached adulthood, they finally disclose their abuse. Not to the elders, but to the media. And later file a lawsuit. What is the congregation/JW org. supposed to do?

I am not saying the case of Jane and Tommy happens in all cases. Not at all. There are many various scenarios. But the case of Jane and Tommy are based on true stories that actually happened.
Then we have other cases where suspicions of a persons vile acts were reported while the victim was still a child (unfortunately that does not happen very often as children rarely disclose) and usually these cases are reported to the police by the parent. Often times the police don't do anything! If the parent only reports it to the congregation, then the elders have to use their judgement to verify the facts. This is the only time it's possible for the elders to screw up. They may not believe the child or think the child may be exaggerating especially if the perpetrator denies. The child may be saying the truth, and the perpetrator may be a liar. The case gets put on the back burner. A year later the perpetrator molest another child, who says nothing, then another child, who also says nothing...until we have several children who have been molested by the original perpetrator. Now THIS is BAD indeed. Years later one of the victims comes forward and takes the case to court. Now it looks as if we harbor pedophiles. But in fact it's because the elders screwed up, made a mistake in judgement, not because they believed the guy was really a pedophile, but because they did not believe he was a pedophile. Big difference. Bad mistake, no doubt about it.

So you are barking up the wrong tree when you are trying to find fault with the JW organization but really, it is a problem with the organization's members (elders, servants, publishers) when they do bad things in secret. At the KH everyone can put on an act, but who you really are becomes manifest in private. The organization has no control there.  Sometimes, even with simple things, the congregation overseer's job is comparable to trying to herd cats. Trying to motivate people to cooperate is a nightmare sometimes. And bad people will do what they want, and of course they will do it in secret, and when chalenged they will deny and deny.

How would you handle that?

The elders didn’t screw up Anna..it was the way things were done back then...their hands were tied....we have to acknowledge that...our policies have changed because of the ARC....

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
17 hours ago, Anna said:

Habakkuk 1:2-3

How long, O Jehovah, must I cry for help, but you do not hear? How long must I ask for help from violence, but you do not intervene? Why do you make me witness wrongdoing? And why do you tolerate oppression? Why are destruction and violence before me? And why do quarreling and conflict abound?

We're all familiar with Habakkuk's plight and we can add our own sentiments; "how much longer do we have to watch people suffering because of the things he mentioned, but also because of disease, starvation, old age etc.". My mother in law is 90, and is in severe pain from arthritis every day. Two of my friends died a horrible painful death from cancer. Small children dying of cancer and other diseases... everywhere you look there is SO much anguish and suffering. We ask the same questions as Habakkuk did 2600 years ago.... and Jehovah has had to watch mankind's suffering since the inception of sin. I have to keep reminding myself that Jehovah is the wisest being in the universe, also just and kind. Only he knows the perfect time to step in. Then also if we compare a lifetime of suffering of 80 years or so, and then eternity of mental peace and happiness and physical health, the suffering then is short lived and pales into insignificance.

It's a little easier to bare things if you know they are temporary....

I’m guessing it will go so far as tho we may feel we have been deceived or tricked....or he has completely  forgotten us....

I hope not but I often wonder if we will be tested as Jesus was...

Mathew 27:46

My God My God why has thou forsaken me....

( how utterly terrifying to feel that ) and STILL REMAIN faithful to A God who you think has left you..

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
12 minutes ago, Thinking said:

our policies have changed because of the ARC....

As I said before -  JWs had to get by without proper government laws.  Now that governments were at last  taking their responsibility seriously,  to have an inquiry to see how they can close the loopholes in the laws. Now we can use this to improve the outcome of these matters. The ARC came way too late... there were many loopholes in the law.... same as in USA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
On 2/26/2021 at 10:55 AM, Anna said:

Love reading your experiences!

We have discussed this issue a number of times on here. Jehovah reads hearts.

Also, what about all those people who have never heard the good news? And since time does not stand still, there will always be those who have never heard, because people are being born and living through the stream of time, so people will not all be in exactly the same position when Armageddon comes. There will always be someone who may have accepted the truth had they learned it sooner, but then Armageddon came....will Jehovah say sorry, too late?....For sure he will not because he is a just and loving God. So when we say only baptized JWs will be saved, it cannot be true...

He will probably treat them like he did the thief on the stake next to him but the thing is he repented at the last moment...where as the other fellow didn’t ......so what happens to him....wouldn’t he be covered by Jesus ransom...?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
9 minutes ago, Arauna said:

As I said before -  JWs had to get by without proper government laws.  Now that governments were at last  taking their responsibility seriously,  to have an inquiry to see how they can close the loopholes in the laws. Now we can use this to improve the outcome of these matters. The ARC came way too late... there were many loopholes in the law.... same as in USA.

Arauna I agree with so much of what you say...but as a people we shouldn’t have needed the ARC..to do the right thing....that’s what some are arguing here.

And they are right....BUT..we have corrected  the error..even if it was forced on us....our policies have been updated..and this would never happen again...it will never be sorted in house or quietly .

we are under Jehovah’s Laws...and there are no loopholes with them...but he taught us...thru the ARC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
1 hour ago, Thinking said:

but as a people we shouldn’t have needed the ARC..to do the right thing.

It depends upon what you define as “doing the right thing.” In the eyes of are determined critics, we still are not “doing the right thing” and will not until any so much as a hint of CSA allegation is immediately forwarded by elders to the police—effectively making them an arm of the state. It is not for elders to make any judgment as to credibility or severity. Send any allegation to police. 

We may think we have settled matters by making clear there is no stigma in affected or knowledgeable parties going to police with CSA allegations “unproven” or not.  But they will not think so.

Sometimes I think these matters of who is mandated to report and who is not would be best settled by extending it across the board. At present, clergy, or in our case those who parallel them in some respects, are called upon to “do the right thing.” Doctors also are called upon to “do the right thing.” Extend it to lawyers that they also must “do the right thing”—send any admission or suspicion of CSA straight to police—and the entire mandated structure of other parties might reverse.

So desperate is the world to stop CSA, so ineffectual are they at doing it, that the idea has been floated of make any person a mandated reporter.

Of course, in the eyes of our really determined critics, we will not be “doing the right thing” until we cease to exist. It is why I was so taken with Holly Folk’s frank caution: “If you are a past or present JW victim of CSA, be careful that you are not victimized anew by those who feign interest in your trauma so as to use you in their quest to take down a religion they dislike.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
10 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Extend it to lawyers that they also must “do the right thing”

Wow, yes please. Then the GB's lawyers might have to tell the truth, but then i doubt it. 

And maye it still boils down to the fact that if an Elder does not believe a victim, OR pretends not to believe a victim or victims parents, then nothing gets done internally or outwardly.  What a BIG loophole that is. 

10 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

and will not until any so much as a hint of CSA allegation is immediately forwarded by elders to the police—effectively making them an arm of the state. It is not for elders to make any judgment as to credibility or severity. Send any allegation to police. 

If the law was that ALL allegations had to be forwarded to the police then it would simply be obeying the Superior Authorities.  

Now if Elders, Circuit Overseers, et al, were not doing the jobs of the Anointed, then maybe the jobs would be done properly. If the True Anointed were in those positions the jobs would indeed be done better.  Because, regarding the Anointed, to whom more is given, more will be expected in return. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Member
13 minutes ago, 4Jah2me said:

If the law was that ALL allegations had to be forwarded to the police then it would simply be obeying the Superior Authorities.  

Yes. Geoffrey Jackson made that point to the ARC but they didn't want to hear it.

In the Dear Mr. Putin ebook, I included:

"Three times before the Australian Royal Commission, Geoffrey Jackson, of the Witness Governing Body, pleaded for universal, mandatory reporting laws, with no exceptions—if that could only be done, it would make the job of the Witness organization in policing its own without raising the ire of those outside the congregation “so much easier,” he said.

"Continuing his cross-examination, Justice Angus Stewart said: “Leaving aside the question of overriding mandatory law from the civil authorities...” I almost wish that Brother Jackson would have interjected at this point, “I wish you would not leave it aside, for it would solve the problem.” The greater world cannot make a dent in preventing child sexual abuse, and so it puts the onus on those who are trying to do something about it. Alas, our best lines invariably occur to us too late—had Brother Jackson picked up my line, it probably just would have got their backs up—and then (gulp) he would have looked at me with displeasure."

Alas, this passage does not survive into the rewrite, but I'll stick it somewhere.

If only CC could refrain from spewing battery acid on everyone--he really does have some valuable insights here.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites




×
×
  • 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.