Jump to content

Noble Berean

Member
  • Content Count

    175
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

142 Excellent

3 Followers

About Noble Berean

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Disfellowshipped individuals are far from just ignored at the meetings. What do you mean family ties still remain? Disfellowshipped children are to be shunned in every sense of the word. They are treated like they are dead already. What difference does it make whether they are young or old or living at home vs. living somewhere else? You shouldn't shut off your love for your child just because they're not living the same life as you. "Despite our pain of heart, we must avoid normal contact with a disfellowshipped family member by telephone, text messages, letters, e-mails, or social media." Watchtower 2017 Oct p.16
  2. Are we talking about the JW shunning that I am familiar with? If so, a JW parent will completely cut an exJW child off. Nothing more than well-being checkups. You know the gravity of that--it's not a minor thing. Christians shouldn't return evil for evil, but they also shouldn't reward bad behavior. There has to be a balance. And shunning of children goes beyond what can be tolerated--it is an immoral practice. A grandparent has no rights to see their grandchildren; it's actually a privilege and a blessing to be a part of their lives. It makes absolutely no sense for a person to reward their shunners with that opportunity.
  3. Noble Berean

    FOXNEWS FLASH! PENNSYLVANIA ACCUSES HUNDREDS OF PRIESTS !

    It's only a matter of time now before the media begins to publicly scrutinize the org's child abuse policies.
  4. Sounds fair to me, but JWs will usually shun the grandchildren too. Even though they're innocents in the situation. I knew this woman who seemed liked the sweetest older lady, but she flat out told me she will have nothing to do with her worldly grandkids.
  5. How many suppositions are made in the WT quote? The org states that they 1. have special anointed ones with access to exclusive info from heaven 2. this info is specifically being imparted by heavenly anointed ones 3. this connection has led to correctly identifying the great crowd. We're just supposed to "take it at their word" in 3 different ways. That's a lot of faith with no evidence to back it up. How can we know their info is correct?
  6. This reasoning just hurts to read. Are we supposed to just take their word for it that they have the "correct identity" of the great crowd? Isn't it odd that only an exclusive group have access to this divine insight? Where's the proof?
  7. Why are you separating law from spiritual matters? The GB claims to take the lead over the ENTIRE organization--not just the spiritual. The "buck stops" at the GB. They've claimed that responsibility, and they have to accept accountability. The child abuse legal troubles are due to policies that the GB gave a stamp of approval on. The GB may delegate responsibilities to helpers such as lawyers, but all entities within the organization must report to the GB and get their stamp of approval. Very little is getting past the eyes of the GB. Elders act based on the GB-stamped direction they receive from Bethel. It's set up to be that way, because the GB want maximum control over the group as the self professed "faithful slave." To suggest that the GB was somehow disconnected and not responsible for ineffective abuse policies is ridiculous. The org is controlled from the GB down. Elders have been sending files of alleged pedophiles for years to the branch. This has been a long, ongoing issue.
  8. Child molestation occurs in many large organizations--religious, governmental, and academic--that in itself is not a red flag. When it continues unabated, that's when there's a problem. It is clear that the JW organization has an ongoing problem with child abuse. When confronted on this issue, the org had the opportunity to make positive reforms and reevaluate its policies. Instead, the org staunchly defended the policies that have created the problems in the first place. They've used the two-witness Bible principle as a crutch for their inaction through the years--a fact they're very proud of in the JW Broadcast. There is this smugness among the JW leadership, as if Jehovah God approves of elder inaction that gives predators a free pass to continue preying on children. The ego and lack of accountability by those taking the lead is alarming. I'm not sure how they reconcile all this exposure with their own conscience. In situations like this, where proactive action is vital, there is actually a laissez-faire attitude by the org. Why? It is the moral obligation of the elders to protect the flock: not only the victim but other potential victims. This is not like other sins--this is predatory and hurts others. To drag your feet isn't an option. The secular authorities can be an important resource to elders in investigating and uncovering abuse (a capability that the elders lack), but the org emphasizes an avoidance of police involvement as much as possible. Why is this? Why the mistrust of authorities? This is something JWs must ponder. Where are the org's priorities? Saving face or protecting their own? The org has made itself a martyr to worldly entities that dare question their abuse policies. Their policies have created actual victims to abuse, but the org has twisted it to make itself the victim! And that's the way "in" JWs perceive these inquiries--as attacks by Satan. Has the Watchtower "addressed" this issue to its adherents as another board member suggested? No. It continues to proport itself as a spiritual paradise and ethically superior to any other organization on earth. These inquiries like the ARC are nothing of substance--nothing more than Satan's attacks on the true religion. So information is being heavily distorted by the org to its adherents--another alarming reality. Because child molestation is a huge problem in the org, and its policies play a part in it. But JWs are ignorant to this and are consequently put in a dangerous position. It is our responsibility to seek the TRUTH...if it wasn't for independent research I wouldn't have know about the ARC or Candace Conti or any of the lawsuits. We can't accept the distorted reality the org is selling.
  9. Saving face or the trauma of an investigation is really no excuse not to report. It's not just about punishment. By identifying sexual predators, law enforcement can remove the offender from society or monitor his whereabouts. If a child molester isn't reported to police, he can go and do the same evil to another innocent child. In fact, evading punishment can embolden a sexual predator. It's disturbing that predators were able to hop from congregation to congregation leaving a trail of abuse. JWs look to the elders for direction--we know many JWs that await their permission for the most mundane things. But their example shows a resistance to reporting abuse unless the legal system forces their hand. So what does that communicate to these ones? Don't get the police involved. That's read between the lines. Why resist the authorities that have the means to uncover evidence of wrongdoing? The elders cannot get a warrant to search a person's property--their investigations are reliant on willing testimony. Even with evidence, they can't make an arrest. It seems odd to resist a resource that could potentially expose a predator and keep the congregation clean. TBH I think the org decided many years ago to not get involved in child abuse and to put the burden on the family. How often can it be said that a family's choice has authority in this org? This was likely to cover their butts from legal accountability. This means the elders have limited capacity to protect the flock. It's unfortunate that this lawyer attitude has permeated the org. At some point, the org is a beast that behaves with its own self-interests and not the individuals that make up it. The org uses human law more and more to justify it's behavior.
  10. Honestly, if we start reasoning that God created pre-Adam humans, wouldn't it make more sense to throw out the whole book as inspired by God? Because at that point we have strayed so far from the Bible's narrative.
  11. Let's not do whataboutism. The organization has frequently used the pedophile cover ups in the catholic church and secular institutions to support their moral superiority and divine backing. So should we now accept that this organization is no better than them? Isn't the whole point that our org is BETTER than these other religions/organizations because we are a spiritual paradise? I understand that child abuse is a problem that cannot be stamped and is present in all large organizations. BUT the organization has done itself no favors by doubling down on their messed up policies which have allowed abuse to continue in congregations. And they have been completely zip-lipped with their own members--refusing to be transparent about this ongoing problem. JWs are owed transparency on this matter. It's the least they could do.
  12. This has no place in controversial posts. This is the reality of the organization. 1000s of unreported sex case allegations.
  13. @Shiwiii it disrupts the idea that the organization is a "spiritual paradise" or an oasis of purity in an evil world. Adherents can't realize that the organization has filth in it just like many other organized religions, because it would destroy the notion that the WT is superior as the "true religion". In fact, today the CO at my kingdom hall referenced child molestation as a way to verify that a religion DOES NOT have God's backing! JWs 100% deserve transparency on this matter, but they've gotten the opposite. The way this has been handled proves that men are calling the shots here and not God. Only an imperfect human would think they could "contain the stink." Maybe they can prevent JWs from seeing the ugly truth, but they cannot conceal it from Jehovah God.
  14. The February 2017 WT had this to say about the GB: Compare this to the November 2016 WT which had this to say about the GB's authority: The GB wants the unquestioned control and the credit for leading God's organization, but they also wants total freedom from accountability when they are wrong. The existence of the org is based around everyone accepting this premise. But how is this premise not 100% illogical and absurd? The GB is presenting itself in 2 completely conflicting ways: The GB is uninspired, fallible, and errs, so they should not be blamed for incorrect direction. The GB should not be questioned by JWs, and there is no place for independent thinking. The GB cannot state they make errors in their direction and simultaneously demand unquestioned obedience to their direction. That doesn't make any sense. If anything, JWs should be skeptical of the GB's directions because of their history of incorrect direction. However, critical thinking is discouraged as a negative trait in organization literature--even when that thinking is based on the Bible. If there is a God, then surely he is just, and I cannot imagine he would structure an organization on such an illogical premise. Think of how this premise negatively affects JWs. Adherents are essentially commanded to follow direction that may be 100% wrong. They are told to "wait on Jehovah" if they have doubts. This also means that a JW could be punished for having a correct idea that is currently not in harmony with the GB. I'm sure this has happened with JWs over its history. Also, isn't it disturbing that the GB have set things up so that they have maximum control and minimum accountability? It's the definition of plausible deniability. Everyone here is well aware of the legal issues with blood transfusion rejection and the sex abuse. In these legal matters, it is pretty clear that the organization is distancing themselves from any accountability and is instead placing the burden on the individual JW. This flies in the face of the culture of the religion where everything a JW does revolves around supporting the organization. There is no room for personal opinion. To suggest otherwise in legal cases is very dishonest and shady. Moreover, it goes against the idea that their is an equal relationship--we're supposed to die over organizational doctrines but the GB won't even acknowledge their role in court proceedings? The very fact the organization uses plausible deniability in their literature is highly suspect. The fact that they can force JWs to follow their direction, but when it's wrong they can point to a WT and say, "See! We said we were fallible and uninspired!" It all smells dishonest and shady.
×

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation