On 8/21/2016 at 2:20 PM, JAMMY said:

THE WATCHTOWER (STUDY EDITION) JUNE 2016

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-june-2016/man-with-inkhorn/

 

In the modern-day fulfillment, the man with the secretary’s inkhorn represents Jesus Christ, the one behind the scenes who marks those who will survive

 

The WTS says that Jesus was at one time favorable to C.T. Russell being the man with the inkhorn marking his followers with a the shape of the cross (+):

The Finished Mystery, WTS 1917: http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/finishedmystery/fme9.html

EZEKIEL 9

THE MAN WITH THE INKHORN

54 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

This is weird. It sounds like The Apost(ates)Creed.

 

Even though it would mark a turning away from what they had said was the truth, I don't think the men on the WTS GB would consider their actions to be apostasy, even though that IS their definition of it.  More likely it will read something similar to the presentation of changed beliefs used in the 11/15/2016 WT:

For many years, this journal suggested that the times of the Gentiles ended in 1914 and "the one who has the legal right" to the Davidic crown, Jesus Christ, became King in that year. However, for reasons that we shall outline in this article and in the one following, a re-examination of the subject was necessary.  

The scripture this puts me in mind of is not found in Hebrews.....it's in 2 Timothy 3:7 "always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

32 minutes ago, Witness said:

Hi Holly, I thought you might be interested in this article concerning new changes outlined in the 11/2016 Watchtower.

here

Jesus is barely mentioned throughout the magazine.  There are quotes such as this one, which is particularly troubling:

 

 

Love for God and neighbor and the urgency of the Kingdom-preaching work move God’s people “to come forward . . . with a gift in hand for Jehovah” by making voluntary donations. How thrilling it is to “honor Jehovah with [our] valuable things” and to see how such resources are used faithfully and discreetly to do the greatest work in human history!—Prov. 3:9

 

 

Besides guilting one into thinking we show love to our neighbor by supporting a corporation supposedly leading one to life, holding out one’s full palm of earthly valuable things toward the “faithful and discreet slave” contradicts the teachings of Christ.  Didn’t he overturn the tables of the money changers?  Money changers were basically bankers. Obviously, Jesus was not convinced they were faithful or discreet with the people’s money. 

 

 

 ^“And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers doing business.  When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables.  And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!”  Then His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Your house has eaten^[a] Me up.”  John 2:14-17

 

 

Matt 21:12-13 - Then Jesus went into the temple of God and drove out all those who bought and sold in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who sold doves. ³ And He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a ‘den of thieves. ‘”

 

 

The use of Prov 3:9 to promote the giving of one’s “valuable things” to the organization is ironic.  The chapter goes on to say,

 

 

Happy is the man who finds wisdom,
And the man who gains understanding;
 For her proceeds are better than the profits of silver,
And her gain than fine gold.
 She is more precious than rubies,
And all the things you may desire cannot compare with her.
Length of days is in her right hand,
In her left hand riches and honor.
 Her ways are ways of pleasantness,
And all her paths are peace.
 She is a tree of life to those who take hold of her,
And happy are all who retain her.  Prov 3:13-18

 

 

Wisdom is found in the Word, Jesus Christ, and will further be found in his complete Bride in God’s Kingdom.  This leads us back to where our faith should lie, and where we store our “treasure”, our “valuable things”.

 

 

 “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal;  but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.  For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.  Matt 6:19-21

 

 

Jesus also said,  ^“Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him.”  John 6:27

 

 

I hope this becomes clear to JWs.  Our heart’s motivation can be either in the faith, in Christ; or we can have faith in an organization already filled with earthly treasures.  We can’t have it both ways.  Matt 6:24

 

 

By giving money to the organization, the “money changers” then “sell” their spiritual goods to the hearer.  A spiritual corrupt commerce is evident.  It is an alarming fact that the beasts of Revelation, work together to support such a spiritual fornication.  Rev 13: 11,15,17

 

 

Testing whether we are in the faith, in Christ, can be determined by the source of our spiritual sustenance.  Do we procure it free from Christ, or must it be purchased through the organization?

 

 

“I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see” Rev 3:18

 

 

And He said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. I will give of the fountain of the water of life freely to him who thirsts.  Rev 21:6

 

 

And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.  Rev 22:17

 

 

“Ho! Everyone who thirsts,
Come to the waters;
And you who have no money,
Come, buy and eat.
Yes, come, buy wine and milk
Without money and without price.
Why do you spend money for what is not bread,
And your wages for what does not satisfy?
Listen carefully to Me, and eat what is good,
And let your soul delight itself in abundance.  Isa 55:1,2

 

 

Christ is the bread of life given freely to those who listen.  The Watchtower sells tainted teachings, otherwise known in the bible as wormwood.  Amos 5:7; Jer 23:15; Rev 8:11 

http://4womaninthewilderness.blogspot.com/2014/12/wormwood-armageddon-false-prophet.html

 

Thank you, Witness!  Yes, I'm very interested......how timely!  Eoin Joyce and I were just discussing the subject of changing beliefs!

4 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

As I said @HollyW,  there is no reason to expect the process of change to cease. It is the essence of life after all.  

Well, I'd be among the last one to tell you to keep clinging to an incorrect teaching such as the Gentile times ending in 1914, and it's good that you're open to changing your belief about it, even expecting to do so from the sounds of things.  That's the thing to do, isn't it, when a teaching you believed was based on the Bible turns out to be based instead on the speculations and expectations of men.

So, the Gentile times did not end in 1914, Jesus did not become King in 1914, the Messianic kingdom was not born in 1914, the presence of Jesus did not begin in 1914, and no inspection took place between 1914 and 1919, therefore no appointment of a faithful slave took place in 1919.

You can see the domino effect dropping 1914 would have, which might be why it hasn't been changed yet.

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

 So there is no reason to expect this to change in the future.

I think that's what we're talking about, Eoin----there's every reason to expect change in the future, even of the date 1914 for the end of the Gentile times.  And when that change takes place, there will be a number of other teachings that will go with it.

19 minutes ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Thanks for reminding me of the warning Jesus gave about false Christs and prophets.  .

You're quite welcome, Eoin.  

It means, doesn't it, that for the WTS to say, "Here's the Christ" in 1876 (pointing back to 1874) it was a false claim. They've admitted it was false---well, that was probably not the word that was used---"error" is probably closer to what they've said.

And, of course, in 1914 they were still saying "Here's the Christ", still pointing back to 1874, AND they were saying the birth of the Messianic kingdom in Revelation 12:6,7 was the birth of the Antichrist! (see Ch. 12 of "The Finished Mystery" of 1917).

So If the gentile times did not end in 1914, the WTS would again be in the position of having falsely proclaimed, "Here is the Christ!"

Since they've tied Jesus' becoming King with that date, that belief who have to be adjusted, as would---here's a thought!!---as would the good news of the kingdom being established in heaven in 1914.  It would be an event JWs would still be waiting for just as they are now awaiting the appointment of the Anointed over all the Master's belongings (an appointment that had been presumed to have occurred in 1919).

However, you may still consider this no big deal one way or the other.

8 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

 

If by this you are implying that the present system will end later rather than sooner, then surely Paul's words to the Hebrews at 11:13 would continue to apply to many currently alive who do not live to see God's intervention in human affairs:

"In faith all of these died, although they did not receive the fulfillment of the promises; but they saw them from a distance and welcomed them and publicly declared that they were strangers and temporary residents in the land."

In fact, many who truly serve Jehovah will continue to have an experience similarly to Abraham (Gen.25:8) : "Then Abraham breathed his last and died at a good old age, old and satisfied, and was gathered to his people."

These scriptures hold good regardless of when the Gentile Times end and would do so even if we had never heard the expression in our lives.

Thanks, Eoin.  I agree with you that the Gentile Times not ending in 1914 would not cause any scriptures to not hold good.  And it may seem like it's no big deal one way or the other, as your post seems to indicate.  But there's something else in what the WTS teaches about that date that would have to be revised as well.  Take a look:

Luke 21:24 “And Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations [“times of the Gentiles,” KJ, RS] are fulfilled.”

In the appendix of the Bible Teach book, this scripture in Luke 21:24 is tied to this one in Ezekiel 21:27:

Ezekiel 21:27 "It will not belong to anyone until the one who has the legal right comes, and I will give it to him.”

And this is explained as "The one who has the legal right" to the Davidic crown is Christ Jesus.  So the 'trampling' would end when Jesus became King. [bh p.216-218]

And this in turn is said to mark the fulfillment of Revelation 12:5 "And she gave birth to a son, a male, who is to shepherd all the nations with an iron rod," which you believe was the birth of the Messianic Kingdom in 1914 showing that Jesus had become King.

It would mean, then, that the WTS has been wrong yet again about the presence of Jesus (teaching in 1914 that it had already taken place in 1874), which calls to mind the following scriptures from Matthew 24:

Matthew 24:23-27 "Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look! Here is the Christ,’ or, ‘There!’ do not believe it.  For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will perform great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones.  Look! I have forewarned you. Therefore, if people say to you, ‘Look! He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out; ‘Look! He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it.  For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence of the Son of man will be."

8 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

 

 

• What if the Gentile Times did not end in 1914?
• What would it mean for the WTS and JWs if 1914 was not the end of the Gentile times?  
• What teachings hinge on this date and would need to be understood differently when and if the Governing Body changes JW's belief about 1914?

Are we getting too many questions in one posting here?

"Take off the last 2."

Sorry 'bout that, Eoin.   I wondered why no one was answering.  I guess it must have confused more than just you.

Let's go with the original question, then, and we'll get to the others as we go along.

What if the Gentile Times did not end in 1914?  

On 8/15/2016 at 11:28 AM, Ann O'Maly said:

What bugged me was that Ivery said the cameraman/neighbor "had it all wrong" when he was asked if he was a convict and on the register.

I would have preferred something along the lines of, "Yes, that's me. I committed this terrible crime and I'm on the sex offender's register for life. I served my time, I repented and became one of Jehovah's Witness. Nevertheless, to allay your and the neighborhood's concerns, not only am I monitored by the authorities, but I have certain restrictions within the congregation, and an elder who knows my background has to accompany me whenever I'm out in field service sharing my faith. If you wish to check with the police, please be my guest. Good day to you, sir." Then with voice lowered, "Psst, and by the way, the more recent allegations against those sisters were never proven." 

I agree, Ann,  The car group definitely missed a witnessing opportunity. If the other fellow in the van who ducked down and put his hands over his ears is the elder who is supposed to accompany convicted sex offenders, he could have come 'round and explained the WT policies and assured Vargas that this man was being carefully monitored by him while out representing the WTS in field service.  Could have had it all on camera, but they shut their car doors and left the neighborhood.

30 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

*** w95 6/15 pp. 21-22 “Sacred Service With Your Power of Reason” ***
Slaves of God and Christ, Not of Men
13 Elders have to allow those under their care to use their power of reason. The members of the congregation are not slaves of men. “If I were yet pleasing men,” wrote Paul, “I would not be Christ’s slave.” (Galatians 1:10; Colossians 3:23, 24) In contrast, the Pharisees wanted people to believe that it was more important to gain the approval of men than that of God. (Matthew 23:2-7; John 12:42, 43) The Pharisees took it upon themselves to become moral dictators who formed their own rules and then judged others by how well they measured up. Those who followed the Pharisees were weakened in the use of their Bible-trained conscience, in effect becoming slaves of men.
14 Christian elders today know that the flock is not principally accountable to them. Each Christian must carry his or her own load. (Romans 14:4; 2 Corinthians 1:24; Galatians 6:5) This is as it should be. Indeed, if members of the flock were to be slaves of men, obeying simply because of being monitored, what would they do when those men were not around? Paul had reason for joy over the Philippians: “In the way that you have always obeyed, not during my presence only, but now much more readily during my absence, keep working out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” They were truly slaves of Christ, and not of Paul.—Philippians 2:12.
 

 

I think there's been new understanding about this, JWs are to obey the elders even if they are wrong:

[wt 4/1/2007 p.28, par.8-9] 8 We obey the elders not only because we are directed to do so in God’s Word but also because we are persuaded that they have Kingdom interests and our best interests at heart. We will certainly be happy if we willingly accept their leadership.

9 What, though, if we are not convinced that in a certain case the elders’ direction is the best way of doing things? That is where submission comes into play. It is easy to obey when everything is clear and we agree, but we will show that we are truly submissive if we yield even when we do not personally understand the direction provided.

2 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

My my, Allen. I'm going to need a license to fish out all the red herrings swimming in your post.

Only in your imagination. 

Yes. Conti, Campos, Karen Morgan, 'A' (the one referred to in the OP), several more. 

Which cases have you followed? Seeing as I have asked you this a number of times now, I can only conclude that you haven't really followed any.

Was this a JW case? If so, who was it and where? I'd like to check it out. 

Do you think the cases I just mentioned above were ambulance-chasing, bogus ones? Or were they 'legitimate'?

So you didn't read them ... otherwise you wouldn't have written such twaddle. But for the sake of argument, what protocols in your opinion does the government need to recommend to improve institutions' responses to child abuse allegations? Do you have any concrete ideas? Or are you going to continue to blow smoke?

Was this a JW case? If so, who was it? I'd like to check it out.  

You asserted that the WTS was sued for breach of confidentiality when elders reported crimes to the authorities. You haven't backed up your assertion, and the evidence from Watchtower's own documentation and elders' own testimonies in court reveal that elders did not routinely notify the authorities about child abuse during the '80s and '90s. 

We've been over this, doofus. You are wrong. I have shown you why you are wrong. All 1006 cases were classified as Child Sexual Abuse. The commission is only interested in child sexual abuse incidents hence it being called (see if you can spot the clue in the title) 'The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.' 

Do you really think Watchtower Australia inflated its own figures by including adultery, fornication, masturbation and 'improper contact' in its child sexual abuse stats? Lolol.

Um, no. That's not how it happened. Watchtower didn't want to produce the necessary documents on some pretext that it wasn't practical because it would take a crazy amount of time (somewhere in the order of 20 years) to give the court what it wants. A computer expert testified that the needed info could be extracted in a couple of months so it became evident that Watchtower was talking BS. Although the default judgment (i.e. the terminating sanctions because Watchtower had violated the court's discovery order) was overturned on appeal, Watchtower is still ordered to produce the needed documents and will have monetary sanctions imposed for each day it doesn't.

http://dumaslawgroup.com/2016/06/28/jehovahs-witnesses-face-sanctions-withholding-documents-sex-abuse-case/

I should hope they are. That's JW publishers' dedicated funds they're wasting! 

Because it's not there in the ARC evidence.

Horse-hooey.  

Hahaha! Saying there were 2 testifying victims 'is a far cry' from my contention that there were 2 testifying victims? Brilliant. At least you've conceded on this point.

You have forgotten your own train of thought. The point I was responding to was your suggestion that Mr. Stewart was ignorant of the difference between 'criminality and civil culpability.' I asked whether you really believed that. You then answered with something completely irrelevant about 'spiritual cleanliness' so I cut it from my post.

Ah, now you are trying to proof-read. (Psst, you bolded and italicized the wrong part.) 

Why did you quote UK law, then?

Not if the authorities have taken no action - which is contrary to what you stated.

Clap ... clap ... clap. You caught one. I hope you don't mind me taking the liberty of highlighting every punctuation and spelling mistake of yours that I've copied and pasted in this post. I may not have caught them all (there were so many) but I've found there is always room for improving our written presentations, don't you agree? 

I'll give you a hint. If you look through my previous post, you might just see it among the 2 transcript extracts I quoted. Now, don't pester me for more clues. I don't want to spoil all the fun for you. Good luck! 

As I said, both victims had already disclosed to the elders seeking help, so yes, they were willing to participate in exposing the wrongdoing.

 The 'flip-flop' confusion is because your brain is jumping around like a frog in a box. 

The UK has no statute of limitations for sexual crimes. The U.S. does.

The main point is to do with the person (allegedly) responsible for sexually assaulting these women and calling him to account before a court of law. If there were others involved who had knowledge of and/or knowingly enabled the crimes to take place, hopefully they will be called to account too. But the only reason I mentioned Cosby was to make a connection in your head about the statute of limitations barring victims from initiating lawsuits after a set period of time since the crime, thereby countering your point about victims suing 40, 50 years later.

Very well said, Ann!  

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

With only a few exceptions. I'm not going to get into details, but I'm sure I could manage to get whatever is necessary reported to the proper authorities and also meet the obligations of the congregation.

The obligations of the congregation?  Can you elaborate on that?

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

I do not mean just eye-witness evidence; after all, eye-witness or video evidence is rare. I mean "direct" in the sense that the case, or a confession, or complaint, were brought directly to my attention.

 

Well, would an allegation made by a victim to you be a complaint that you'd definitely report to the police?

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

If I had direct evidence that a JW had committed a serious crime (murder, rape, child physical abuse, child sexual abuse). I would definitely report it to the police. My wife, as a school principal has had to report several such instances, even of suspected child physical and/or sexual abuse, because she has always worked in very large school districts, where she has had an obligation under the law to do so..One of those instances involved a JW parent.  

Direct evidence?  Do you mean an eye-witness?  Are you excluding suspected abuse then?

From this website http://www.churchlawandtax.com/cltr/2013/july-august/2013-child-abuse-reporting-laws-for-churches.html there's this:

Every state has a child abuse reporting law that requires persons designated as mandatory reporters to report known or reasonably suspected incidents of child abuse. Ministers are mandatory reporters in many states. Some states exempt ministers from reporting child abuse if they learned of the abuse in the course of a conversation protected by the clergy-penitent privilege. Ministers may face criminal and civil liability for failing to report child abuse.

In one of the child abuse cases against the WTS, they tried to claim clergy-penitent privilege because of a confession but the court ruled that since the confession was to more than one person (two or three elders had to hear it) it was not considered to be a case of clergy-penitent privilege.  It's sickening enough that the WTS would try to use that, and it's ironic that their procedure of having two or three elders in on it worked against them.

56 minutes ago, b4ucuhear said:

Those who use their authority to insulate themselves from scriptural accountability are manifesting a lack of faith in their accountability to God. ("Jehovah is not seeing...") It is a manifestly political view of matters that should be viewed from a spiritual, faith-based point of view.

Amen.

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

So what do you think? Do governments have to legislate so that 'God's organization' is made to do the right and moral thing? Or should the Org's own sense of morality and justice make it proactive rather than reactive when formulating its child safeguarding procedures?

   

Great post, Ann.

If the WTS was really God's organization, it would have set the moral standard for all the other organizations to follow long ago. Instead it has reacted in such a way that protects itself and the predator, at the expense of the victim, the endangerment of the congregation, and abandonment of the elders who can be found individually culpable for not reporting this crime to the police.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

LOL! Hilarious response to AllenSmith (and JWTheologian).

I was thinking about the reasons for the use of duplicate accounts by Allen. Anyone here who has the IP address displayed already knows for a fact that AllenSmith and JWTheologian are the same person. Not that anyone actually needed specific evidence since Allen has also used these same two names (among a couple of others) in the JW-Archive forum. And he ties them together with a unique vocabulary including the same misspellings, and the unique use of words like "recreants" etc.

But what actually ties them together even more clearly is the fact that he regularly resorts to using the language of abuse and bullying. On the jw-archive forum, in fact, his new names were used specifically so he could continue his abusive behavior when prior user names had reached the limits of the abuse allowed by moderators.

I did a little experiment with Allen that might seem either funny, revealing or embarrassing. I'll explain below:

As many people know, Allen's prime use of the two names on this forum is not so much to allow him to hide his abusive behavior. After all, both names are still in use, both have been equally abusive, and I'm sure that AllenSmith is aware that the two names don't really fool anyone here who is involved in dialogue with him.

In fact (and this may be the primary use) both names: AllenSmith and JWTheologian have been used to bolster the reputation of each other. AllenSmith very often give "likes" or a "reputations" to his own posts of both names. And JWTheologian has also given "likes" or "reputations" to his own posts of both names. In fact, for most of his posts that have been given a like or reputation, he is the only one who likes them.

Knowing this, I wondered how important that self-made reputation was to Allen. I decided to give a "Down-vote" as a "reputation" which hurts AllenSmith's and JWTheologian's overall numerical "reputation." But I only gave that "down-vote" to a small number of his posts. (In fact there have been a couple of posts in the past where I have given a "like".) I only down-voted a few of the posts where AllenSmith and/or JWTheologian had already boosted his own reputation by giving himself an up-vote AND where he was being nasty, abusive, or was clearly using an ad hominem.

The experiment worked. Both AllenSmith and JWTheologian quickly came back at past posts of mine under several topic areas. He left some with a "minus one" reputation and some where he just knocked a point off the overall count where others had already up-voted my post.

It seemed a bit ironic in topics like this one where one of the sub-topics is a discussion of how and why a society or entity will cover up abuse for the sake of "reputation."  

Your post has cleared up a lot of things for me.  Thanks.  I was wondering if maybe they believed bullying, abusive speech, and unkindness make JWs look good.

Quote

My own view has always been that I should do my best, where possible, to expose this kind of problem, whether I would learn of evidence of it in a local high school, or a sleazy photographer surreptitiously taking pictures of children in our local park, or even our own Organization. Exposure is the best solution that most of us can help with.

And now, I've also done my small part to expose the abuses of an individual perpetrating abuse, ad hominem and bullying on this forum while simultaneously trying to boost his own reputation.

Does that mean that if you found out a JW had abused a child, would you go to the police or the elders, or maybe both?

On 3/17/2016 at 8:05 PM, Mr_VHC@WNF said:

2 Corinthians 13: 5 "Keep testing whether you are in the faith; keep proving what you yourselves are. Or do you not recognize that Jesus Christ is in union with you? Unless you are disapproved".
 

 

Good question, Mr V

21 hours ago, Witness said:

Here is another WT quote:

 

 “The faith” is the body of Christian beliefs revealed in the Bible. If our words and actions match those beliefs, then we pass the test and show that we are“in the faith.” Of course, we must also compare our lives with the entire scope of Christian teaching. We cannot pick and choose which parts we will follow.—Jas. 2:10, 11. w/14/3/15  pp 12-16

 

And good quote, Witness.

The importance of this scripture to JWs becomes evident when considering their history of beliefs they thought were revealed in the Bible but turned out not to be after all, and those beliefs were re-examined and adjusted.  

For instance, at one time they believed the Bible revealed organ transplants were cannibalism and were forbidden by God. However, further testing of this belief caused them to adjust their thinking about it and they realized God did not consider it cannibalism.  It was the same with vasectomies and tubal ligations, believed at one time to be the mutilation that God forbids, but further testing of their beliefs with what the Bible reveals showed them it was not mutilation at all, but responsible planning.

A more recent adjustment has been the identity and appointment of the faithful slave.  At one time they believed the faithful slave was just one person, but testing of this belief brought them to the conclusion that the Bible revealed all of the 144,000 should be viewed as the faithful slave,  Further testing has revealed that to be in need of adjustment.  Let's hope that further testing will reveal to them that all Christians are called upon to be faithful and wise servants.

Taken from Luke 21:24 “And Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations, until the appointed times of the nations [“times of the Gentiles,” KJ, RS] are fulfilled.”

What would it mean for the WTS and JWs if 1914 was not the end of the Gentile times?  

In light of what Russell had said would happen, and didn't, it's very likely that 1914 did not see the fulfillment of Luke 21:24 after all.  What teachings hinge on this date and would need to be understood differently when and if the Governing Body changes JW's belief about 1914?
 

If everyone on earth were a Jehovah's Witness, would there still be wars?  The WTS answer may surprise you....because its answer is Yes.

The WTS teaches that during the millennium everyone will live in peace and harmony, anyone out of harmony with (enemies of) Jehovah will either not be resurrected or will be summarily annihilated during that time, until by the end of the 1,000 years everyone on earth will have reached perfection physically, mentally, morally, spiritually; and will have become perfectly sin-free, as Adam was before he sinned. Everyone on earth will have studied from the new WTS publications (Revelation 20:12) especially designed for them to come to know Jehovah and his requirements, and will have chosen to serve him as his Witnesses.  

But then Satan is released and persuades a vast number of these perfect Jehovah's Witnesses to go to war against fellow JWs.

Why do you believe the WTS is the organization Jehovah is using?

Hmmmm......still no answer.  Is it because you don't know why you believe it?

1 hour ago, Ann O'Maly said:

 ... asks somebody with two or more accounts and whose handle picture is of Wyatt Earp. 

 

I wondered who that was.

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Also, exposure of all accusations (within reason) will also help a congregation learn that not all accusations are immediately credible....

I would say the policies of the WTS are already doing that.  The victim is not believed unless the accused confesses.   

12 hours ago, JW Insider said:

One of the other important factors surrounding this problem might just explain why Witnesses have had so much trouble dealing with it.

The most surprising aspect of child abuse (to me) is the fact that this crime is apparently commonly related to "authority." The higher the "authority," the more common the crime. It's not limited to religious authority; it occurs via the levels of authority with family, teachers, bosses, boy scout leaders, military authority, etc.

 

Maybe the level of authority is something to consider in this since it's the policies of the WTS that are causing them trouble with how they deal with child abuse, and those policies are made by those with the highest authority in the WT hierarchy.  No doubt those with higher authority want to protect the organization at all costs and they are the ones responsible for the poor procedures they insist on for child abuse cases.

For instance, elders are told to report these crimes, not to the police but to the WTS legal department. Nor are the elders told to tell the victim and/or the victim's parents to report it to the police.  

In addition to the ghastly two witness rule the WTS has invented for this, the WT procedure flat out takes the word of the accused over that of the victim.  To stop this they need to report each and every accusation to the civil authorities.  Child abuse, child molestation, child rape are all crimes. 

12 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I tend to agree.

The following are just my thoughts and current opinions. I don't claim to have studied the subject in any depth.

To avoid making any assumptions I might reword what AllenSmith said as: "Probably not very different than any other religion that is dealing with a worldwide problem." In fact, I would say that the problem among JWs is not likely as bad as the problem in the Catholic Church where sexual repression based on required celibacy of the priests probably attracts a number of priests who have not adequately dealt with their sexuality and sexual proclivities before selecting the priesthood as a profession. It may also attract those who already realize that their abnormal sexual fantasies are deplorable, but who therefore hope(d) that choosing the priesthood as a lifestyle would bring them closer to God and would therefore help them to never act upon those fantasies. I would also add that the Catholic religion is one of those religions that tends to promote the idea that specific activities (works & rituals) can absolve one of the guilt from sinful actions and sinful fantasies. In addition, the Catholic Church promotes several activities which would afford priests the opportunity to be alone with children. (Priests as teachers and disciplinarians in Catholic schools; priests who train altar boys, priests who teach choir, etc.)

Therefore, many priests with sexual problems will likely find themselves closer to children instead of finding themselves closer to God.

But this is only a portion of the story with the problem of sexual abuse of children. Problematic proclivities might be higher among priests and opportunities for sexual abuse crimes might also be higher among Catholics, but it's the other portion of the story that affects not just Catholics, but many other religions (and secular organizations, too.)

I hope to add some more thoughts on that in another post.

I agree that JWs are no different than any other religion, but the thing is, JWs condemn all religions, including Christianity other than themselves, as being led by Satan, so when you say JWs are no different than any other religion, it places them in a group they try to maintain they are no part of. 

To excuse the WTS by pointing to the faults in other churches does not make the WTS right, and there is no basis for their two witness rule for child abuse nor for allowing the predator to question the victim in a private meeting nor for not reporting this crime to the proper authorities.  I mean, they aren't trying to be like the Catholics, are they?