Anna

Aaaah, ok. Thanks for explaining!

I like that one too

The librarian must be away. I am surprised he hasn't already created a post with "John Buttler and the derelict mansion"

The scripture you quoted has nothing to do with allowing yourself to be taken advantage of in that kind of circumstance. It's talking about bad people taking advantage of you. Someone wicked slapping you. And if a person wants to wrong you, then you let yourself be wronged. If someone wants to rob you, don't resist because it could cost you your life. And if someone in authority (the boss) asks you to do a job, don't just do the basics, go above and beyond. The land owner is neither wicked (or is he) nor is he your boss. He might be a robber though

Spoken like a true American

I’m sorry John, even to be a house sitter, and using all the facilities or whatever, the decent thing for the owner of the house is to pay some kind of compensation for your services. I don’t know the details of what kind of an agreement you have but it sounds odd. I think having you taking care of the property ensures that there are no squatters. So you are doing the owner a BIG favour. As for wild parties, I mean, even if you had one every week, what damage would that do to an already dilapidated house? I assume your profile pic is of your son and his wife, or your daughter and her husband? So are they working on the property too, as the young lady is driving the digger. You are right, money is not a means to happiness and giving is better than receiving, but I think when Jesus said those words he didn’t have in mind free labour for someone with more money than you. The only thing that does make sense is that you are retired and so earning extra money would be a problem, and so you are treating this as a hobby, and I understand that. What I don’t understand is the owner. Hopefully he will be decent enough to reward you with some kind of compensation at a later date....

On a hand shake? What does that mean, lol. That you all agreed on slave labour? My goodness, I must have been out of the country too long and got used to everyone paying for everything and expecting to be paid for everything. No one one, I mean NO one (except the brothers and sisters) does anything for free in America! Time is money. Always.

Did you say you were doing all this for free??

I know. I've never known a country so bent on lawsuits! In any case, you're not a trespasser if you have roaming rights. I don't hink lawsuits were the only reason though. This should be an interesting read: https://www.amazon.com/This-Land-Our-Lost-Right/dp/073521784X/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0/130-3437771-3998608?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=GH6923Z4YCETS09WHXRR

One thing that upset me when I moved to the USA was the realisation that one cannot just walk anywhere. In Europe, for the most part, everyone has "the right to roam" which means you can pretty much go anywhere, even on privately owned land. In America, most land is owned by someone, and that someone does not tolerate anyone walking through their property. I'm sure @James Thomas Rook Jr. wouldn't hesitate to put a bullet through your head. There are "parks" but those parks are rarely within walking distance. You might have perfect hiking acreage right behind your house, but if it doesn't belong to you, you can't go there. In England, most privately owned fields and meadows can be accessed by pedestrians and hikers (including their free running dogs, in America you can only let your dog run in a dog park) through a style or "kissing gate". Trails are made naturally by people frequently walking there, not by someone preparing them specially for that purpose. Farmers who drive tractors through a field leave a path, and people walk on those too. As long as you do not infringe on someones garden (yard) around the house (which is usually fenced anyway) you are not trespassing. Of course there is the odd grumpy farmer who puts up "do not trespass" signs in a field, but there are not many.... So in view of that, hiking trails are not really a planned thing in England in the same sense as in America. Of course there are nature reserves, where there are sign posted trails, but generally, in the rural countryside, (where John Buttler's house is) there is no need for them. The same goes for Scotland. In fact I think now you can also put a tent up anywhere, and you can fish and canoe on all the rivers, even if it cuts through someones land. In Switzerland, you can hike anywhere as well, and you don't have to stick to trails. The whole alpine region is completely and freely accessible to everyone. As for other European states, it's pretty much the same. Oh, and all the nature reserves are "free". They are paid for by the state. So apparently America is the land of the free. Not in my mind  The book "trespassing across America" sounds interesting.....  This almost looks identical to the field behind my mum's house. One year it was growing rapeseed and it was amazing walking through a field of pure yellow...   Â

Wow, it's fantastic! Looks like a lot of work on the pillars, will they be able to be restored to their original beauty?

Yes, I understood what you said. They had a fear. But it was unfounded because like I said; "going to the police was never a disfellowshipping matter". However, and I added a clause, if going to the police was part and parcel of gossiping and slandering, then they could be disfellowshipped for that. And as you say, you have experienced that yourself, even when unfounded! Yes, a bad elder could find another reason to disfellowship because if going to the police is not a disfellowshipping matter, and if there is no slander involved, then this elder has no grounds to act that way, and he has to make something up. Anyone who does that is dishonest. He would be acting on his own, and NOT because of any instructions from the GB. So remember John, if unfounded, then these are the actions of a bad elder, and not because of any instructions from the Bethel or the GB. My experience with elders has been very good for the most part, most elders have been loving and caring people. BUT I also have known a couple of bad elders. They do exist for sure. There were bad elders in the 1st century; "I wrote something to the congregation, but Di·otʹre·phes, who likes to have the first place among them, does not accept anything from us with respect. That is why if I come, I will call attention to the works he is doing in spreading malicious talk about us. Not being content with this, he refuses to welcome the brothers with respect; and those who want to welcome them, he tries to hinder and to throw out of the congregation". John 3:9 And yes, some congregation members could shun said person. But they would be acting on their own as well, and not from anything that was instructed by anyone. You cannot control how certain people will act, even if it's unfair or wrong. You cannot stop someone from "marking" someone else, even if unfounded. That is a personal thing unfortunately. But Jehovah sees the heart and will judge all.

I have heard that too, but it seems it wasn't many, but a few. Some elders were acting on a wrong interpretation of "one should not take another brother to court". Of course that was never talking about crime such as murder or sexual abuse. And some elders took it upon themselves to say that it should not to be taken outside the congregation so as not to sully Jehovah's name. Which was wrong, and was never an instruction from Bethel. Also, taking the matter to the police was NEVER a reason for disfellowshipping. If someone was disfellowshipped it was because of unrepentant gossip and slander.

Yes, I believe so too. I believe the PARENT should go to the police first thing, and then to the elders second. However, if the parent goes to the elders first, the elders are not always mandated reporters. Regardless, some parents do not wish to involve the police at all! (that goes for non JW parents too). It very much depends on who the perpetrator is and what the circumstances are. Not every parent wants to rush to the police or if their 9 year old daughter tells them senile grandpa was a little too touchy feely the other day. Some parents opt for keeping granddaughter out of reach of grandpa. I feel a parent who is well connected to their child, knows their child, communicates with their child and watches their child will instinctively know when to report someone. Unfortunately, not all parents are like that.

She looks a little scary

Kind of sucks doesn't it, if the accused is actually innocent. Until there is proof, I don't think the police can do anything either. The person can only be put on a sexual predator registry only if they are convicted, otherwise no. I think in a congregationally un-established case it would be good to hand the matter over to the police, since they have better means for investigation at their disposal. But I always say there is no smoke without a fire. And most children do not make things like this up. The problem is the victims tend to speak up when they are adults, and who knows what kind of ulterior motive can there be behind an accusation..... There is no doubt that false allegations do happen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_allegation_of_child_sexual_abuse

I don't see anything in those instructions that prohibit the elders from informing the new congregation. All it says is to inform the legal department first. The pertinent question is what kind of direction do the elders receive back from the legal department..... I just realised @Gone Away gave a similar answer....

Thanks. And here it is! And also, to add to your list, people NEVER close doors in the house, or the front door. And when they eat or write they are almost always left handed. @Space Merchant look out for it!

Me too! It detracts a little from the movie but it's fascinating. Even in the best movies there are sequence or continuity errors. Like you know, in one shot the character has her hair in a pony tail, and in the next shot its loose. It surprises me sometimes how script supervisors don't catch some of those things. My cousin is a film director and he tells me some interesting stories. And have you noticed, there is ALWAYS a green desk lamp in every movie (well almost).

You mean like they do in the movies?

Well at least it's popular

I suppose you think it should be a matter of conscience because you believe the scripture at Acts 15:29 is ambiguous?

IT was the librarian, he was punishing me for not sticking to a topic. Now it looks like I started this thread. I would never start a topic with a title like that.

I've not heard that, must be a butchers term or something. Bovine is usually another name for cow, or cattle

I like this reasoning.