Jump to content

Outta Here

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Outta Here

  1. Great to see one area of life at least where concern for the treatment of fellow humans, particularly children, is paramount in law. Although the focus is on retribution rather than prevention, at least the problem is acknowledged.
  2. They were " in the right place but it must have been the wrong time" Malcolm John Rebennack Jr. As for the billionaire illustration, we are not suggesting that Jehovah pays us to go to assemblies are we?
  3. Malcolm John Rebennack Jr. Got that right first line........ They may have "been in the right place but it must have been the wrong time"
  4. More complicated stuff! I presume you are trying to make a case for the need to speed up action in the case of Child Abuse crimes??? If that is the case, then it is a worthy cause, regardless of context. And one I agree with wholeheartedly, across the board. However, I don't think I could really comment on your hypothetical generalities unfortunately. Specific cases from a host of backgrounds where they have been brought to light in a legal context, appear to have been commented on extensively in the public domain by those qualified to do so. Where there are genuine reasons for criticising the handling of such cases and these have been dealt with, then presumably these instances have then been handled as appropriately as possible by the correct authorities? Any exposure of mishandling in specific cases then serves to inform all parties presumably. Quite how you have managed to morph a discussion on baptism questions into one on handling of Child Abuse allegations would be an interesting study in itself, but not one I have the inclination to unravel at this point of time. Anyway, if the topic manages to get back on track and any further points meriting discussion appear, I will be back. But for now, excuse me if I turn to other areas of interest.
  5. I don't follow your (presumably) reasoning that if crime and sin are synonymous then Secular Authorities could handle all "judicial matters", unless your are presenting it from a soulical perspective. Do you therefore think that the secular definition of sin and crime is the same as the sacred and that sacred and secular authority is synonymous in these matters?
  6. Of course they are, but their meaning (dare I say...) overlaps. The key to understanding is to consider against who the crime or sin is committed. The word sin is traditionally viewed by those of the soulical world as relating to the violating of God's laws or standards, whereas the word crime is understood by many of that same designation as referencing a violation of the requirements or laws of the secular state. Really, in the spiritual world there is no difference between a crime and a sin as any violation of God's laws or principles constitues a crime or sin. To sin is a criminal act. But we have no problem in speaking the language of the world if that is what they understand.
  7. Matters not how this topic of sin v crime is reasoned/wrangled/presented by you and others who reflect your view. Regardless of religious/moral/ ethical persuasions or stance, this the soulical perception of matters. You seem to think that what lies in the mind of man is what determines the existence of sin or crime. This is a soulical perception. You are effectively demonstrating what Paul descibed regarding this matter, although I am not sure if that is your intention.
  8. Without getting bogged down in semantics here, there is no real difference between the two words. The difference may lie in whose law is actually violated. The differentiation between a violation of Jehovah's law as a sin and not a crime would be a "soulical" percepton. We don't really care about worldly ("soulical") perceptions about laws, crimes, sins, lawyers, definitions, corporations etc. etc. Paul encapsulated the principle in his words to Timothy regarding the Mosaic Law (and by extension, law in general and all its appendages). 1Tim.1:8-10. Let those who fit his description be concerned with all the relevant definitions and arguments concerning "Law". Your complex definitions and arguments indicate your need in this regard. I hope you are getting it clear and it is enlightening for you. 😊
  9. Instead of "factually", I would use the word "physically", or "soulically" if you want to get scriptural. You have used the term "spiritually" in contrast. Both terms can be applied to the same set of facts, and focus on the "eye of the beholder". In the immediate instance, the "soulical" view is that baptism is the ratification of some sort of (business?) contract with a religious "corporation". This is not the view of a spiritual mind. (Compare 1Cor.2:14).
  10. Up to the individual. Neither required nor paticularly appropriate. We can all speak in our hearts and be heard .
  11. Does not matter a jot. The baptism is a symbol of the candidate's dedication, not that of the baptiser. If any words are spoken at all, they should be spoken by the one submitting to baptism, and directed to the one receiving their dedication. And, of course, such words, as evidence of a totally private and personal act of worship on the part of the individual, can, appropriately, be silently expressed.
  12. Nice try, and excellent selection of quotations. But, there is no point in Jesus mentioning the men of the nations and the tax collectors treatment as a consequence for wrongdoing if there was no significant difference in the way his followers were to treat unrepentant wrong doers. Your multiple selection of quotes are in connection with those who were acting as those who knew not what they were doing. This is not the case with the subjects of Jesus' Matthew 18 direction. Proposing the notion that other Bible writers contradicted Jesus' direction on this matter is based on the false premise that their direction was not inspired by the same inspirator of Jesus.
  13. Isn't the scripture clear? They would banish, treat as tax collector, avoid, hand to Satan, stop keeping company, not even eating with, remove, neither greet nor receive into their homes or say a greeting to. Do you need more? Ezra 10:8."he would be banished from the congregation of the exiled people." (For comparison). Matthew 18:17 "let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector" Rom.16:17 "keep your eye on those who create divisions and causes for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid them." 1Cor.5:5 "hand such a man over to Satan" 1Cor.5:9, 11 "stop keeping company", "not even eating with such a man." 1Cor.5:13 "Remove the wicked person from among yourselves.”" 1Tim.1:18 "Hy·me·naeʹus and Alexander are among these, and I have handed them over to Satan so that they may be taught by discipline not to blaspheme." As stated above: 2John v11 So work it out and apply it, if you are a Christian that is. It doesn't have any application to those who are not. Oh, and remember though, there is a purpose in it as alluded to by Jesus at Matt.18:11 "If he listens to you, you have gained your brother", and directed by Paul at 2Cor.5:6-7 "This rebuke given by the majority is sufficient for such a man; now you should instead kindly forgive and comfort him". You should be able to work an application process from this.
  14. I see your point Tom, but I incline more to the view that the modern day "atheist class" is more a result of the activity of the same old "man of lawlessness" that appeared over the 1st-3rd centuries. This class is just an inevitable expression of the "lovers of self" characteristic, spawned by the modern day reaction to apostate religion, particularly (but not exclusively) in Christendom. I wouldn't honour it with the status even of "man of lawlessness". The application of the term "man of lawlessness" to Christendom's clergy, as you have described that we make, is quite sufficient for me. Jesus warned of the weeds sown in with the wheat in secret, and a subsequent revelation of their activity and presence in the last days. Matt.13:36-43. Also Paul and Peter warned about their springing from within the congregation, from among those entrusted with the care of the flock. Acts 20:29-30; 2Pet.2:1-3. Paul's reference to a restraint that would get "out of the way", (2Thess.2:7), fits well with the notion of the passing in death of the original apostles.The state of affairs during the time of the last remaining one, John substantiates this development both in the Revelation report by the head of the congregation (Rev. Chap.2-3), and in his letter (1John 2:18-19). The current pusilanimous state of the clergy of Christendom in many (not all) parts of the world is no indicator of the need for an emergence of a "new" man of lawlessness. The effects on society of the degraded belief system, practices, and results on laity of the apostate parasitic fungus known as "Christendom's clergy class" are well described by Paul at 2Tim 3:1-7 as a sign of the "last days". This is clear both historically and currently to all who care and, albeit without spiritual significance, equally to those who do not. The power of the clergy is broken, the" man of lawlessness" has been revealed, and much to "his" chagrin, it is true Christians, now known as Jehovah's Witnesses, that have been instrumental in setting in motion this exposure and subsequent withering of power, particularly since 1914CE. (Comp. 2Thess.2:8). But we cannot overlook the fact that the now defunct and exposed clergy class still rears its ugly sting to inflict vindictive damage on true servants of God if possible (See the Russian affair). The foul scorpion has been trampled, but is not yet dead! The chorus of wailing accompanying your suggestions on this forum reminds me of the "goat songs" of ancient Greece, and I suppose are a rather fitting accompaniment to the inevitable demise of this apostate, self-promotIng demigod of Christendom's clergy in the tradition of the culture "he" so greatly admired. As for the "temple" reference in v4, this fits well with the application to a false Christian congregation in view of the illustration of the true anointed Christian congregation as a "temple" Eph.2:20-22. Rather like the Pharisees and scribes who sat themselves in the "seat of Moses"(Matt.23:2), the apostate clergy of Christendom are a counterfeit light to the world. In my opinion, of course.
  15. This is a statement implying uncertainty in the accuracy of what follows. This is no way to present the accusatory remarks that you make. It shows that at best they are only your opinion and that you yourself have doubt in their validity. How different from the example we have been set.
  16. True. Tell me, how do you "gird up your loins?" Job 40:7. Eph.6:14 Enlightening, So, although you sound like a myriad of others, you see yourself as an individual. You are doing yourself an injustice then in the way you communicate. It might help if every time you use the word "they" in a negative sense, you preface with the words "I think that". Then your rather parochial 50 year span of experience might at least reflect a semblance of the individuality you crave. This in turn might help some to avoid the misjudgement you refer to above.
  17. By the way, Lloyd Evans figures highly in the representation with this group. Some here may have more than a passing acquaintance with this individual.
  18. WT has been pretty clear on the requirement to comply with reporting regulations in these matters for a number of years. (1988 is the earliest reference I could find, relating to the situation in Canada). Where there is legal clarity, the obligation is clearly ststed. Where there is legal inconsistency, the branch office will direct. Individual elders confuse matters by not following direction, the whole matter is complicated further by allegations made by victims regarding mishandling. Reporting is still not generally mandatory in Britain although the JW policy stipulates that victims and their families are clearly informed of their right to unrestricted reporting. The whole matter is surrounded by fear which impedes proper care of the victims. The IICSA had it's preliminary hearing on child protection in religious organisations including Jehovah's Witnesses yesterday (23/07/2019). An organisation called Ex-JW Advocates Opposing Crimes Against Children is represented there with Jehovah's Witnesses's representatives providing a response. Hopefully, further legal clarity will ensue.
      Hello guest!
  19. @Jack Ryan said:How do you feel about being told that you MUST wear your badge even when out to dinner at night with your family after a convention? Never happened yet. But if it did, I would take it off.
  20. Glurp! And I thought the British were "conservative"! (In their views).
  21. SOME congregations. We don't have a beard restriction. Neat, tidy, well-groomed, free of food debris, vermin etc. is important, but having one is personal.

  • 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.