Anna

I don't look at it that way. Blood fractions are left up to conscience because it is a grey area for some. And when something is a grey area then one shouldn't impose ones' views. Humans were not capable of separating blood into fractions when the prohibitive scripture was written. YES. This is also why many Witnesses won't accept blood fractions, their conscience tells them it is still blood, even if its a fractional part of it. Eating a bloody steak is also a conscience matter.

The problem with that is that sometimes in someone's eyes you're damned if you do and damned if you don't. And what someone calls being stumbled, someone else calls being strengthened, by exactly the same thing. I suppose it all boils down to attitude and : Colossians 3:13 "Continue putting up with one another and forgiving one another freely even if anyone has a cause for complaint against another. Just as Jehovah freely forgave you, you must also do the same. 14 But besides all these things, clothe yourselves with love, for it is a perfect bond of union."

....when there's no rhyme or reason

Nah, that washed away soil must have settled somewhere. You know, like drifts of snow I imagine a lot of mud everywhere

Probably because the soil was nicely softened from all that water. I like to wait for after some rain before I start weeding or digging in the garden. We have clay soil and it gets as hard as a rock! (Did you just come back from France?)

So you think the James commentary was dropped because it was written by Raymond Franz?

It's a good job some of us still have the WT CDs! And I think I have the actual books somewhere in the basement. I remember the James book, my mom used it as a second book to study with a Bible study. Believe it or not , I have NEVER read it. So now of course I will have to!

@JOHN BUTLER here is a recent case from the UK. It seem that the authorities were the ones that delayed. This is a good example of the fact that reporting to authorities does not automatically assure success. You can read the whole article here: https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/devious-righteous-christian-raped-two-15274172 An "arrogant" Jehovah's Witness subjected two girls under the age of 13 to years of systematic assaults and rapes. Roy Collins, 80, was branded as "devious, righteous and arrogant" by a judge at Swansea Crown Court. He had spent a decade systematically grooming, abusing and raping the two girls. At one point during his campaign of abuse, one of their mothers burst into the Jehovah's Witness church in Swansea and publicly accused him of being a paedophile only to receive a letter from his solicitors warning her not to harass him. Carline Rees QC, for the prosecution, read out impact statements from the two victims. One said she had lived with the abuse for years before telling her family. When she did so, the news had a "devastating effect" on her mother. She said the abuse had an "significant impact" on her life, adding: "Every day I am happy if I can just make it through". In her statement, the second victim said the abuse had led to her have trouble at school and to start taking drugs to try to "block out" what was happening. She said her suffering and pain continues to this day. The court heard that one of the victims made a complaint about Collins in the 1990s, but he was not prosecuted. The allegations were reported to the police again in 2013 - but it took five years for the matter to come to court. Judge Geraint Walters told the defendant that his actions during the 1980s and 90s had been "truly wicked". He described Collins as a "devious, arrogant and self-righteous man" who had lived behind veil of respectability partly through his contact with the Jehovah's Witness church. The judge said that an example of his deviousness was the fact that when the allegations against him started to be investigated, he went to his GP claiming that he had suffered erectile dysfunction for the last 30 years. Judge Walters said: "You are, in my judgement, a devious man, a self-righteous and arrogant man. You have shown no remorse what-so-ever towards your victims or anybody else. "You have lived the better part of you life, you have been able to do that - your victims have not. "There is no sentence I can pass that will restore the lives of the victims to what they might have been but for your behaviour." He added that the case showed that when allegations of sexual abuse were made they should be tested and investigated not disbelieved. He called the the five year delay in the case eventually coming to court "unforgivable". But he praised the officer who eventually took-over the case and saw it through to conviction, saying that for the first time the victims had been treated with the dignity they deserved.

It doesn't sound like it!

That is not my objective at all, to make someone better or worse. I already said that a lot of decisions are based on complex factors, such as personality, experience and perception...etc. Also different people process information differently. But that's not what I am talking about. What I am interested in is actual facts. Does one person have more facts than the other upon which they base their decision? And what are those facts?

I don't see why JW's wont believe this, as it's pretty much how many cases were handled, although a few words were a little loaded showing obvious bias. As far as I know @JW Insider is an active Witness. If so, perhaps he would like to explain why he didn't leave the org. Sorry JW Insider if I put you on the spot, but this goes back to my conversation with John Butler where I pointed out that I have probably read the same kind of information as him, but why is it that it made him leave, and why am I staying. I know it's a lot more complex than that. There are a lot of factors at play in including personality, experience, honesty, trust etc. Unfortunately our conversation trailed off, maybe it can be restarted again since the topic is "why John Butler left Jehovah's Witnesses" (the topic I never started, the librarian was at it again)

This is an illogical statement. There must be a proper investigation in the first place in order to find no solid proof or no witnesses or the telling of lies. Usually the elders take any report of child abuse very seriously. And in the Montana case under discussion, it is obvious the elders did find the perpetrator guilty. I think what you mean to say is that the elders are not as qualified as persons who are especially trained from a secular point of view. But the elders are qualified to handle this from a spiritual aspect. And as elders this is what they are concerned with. Problems have arisen because this situation needs also to be handled secularly, and if the perpetrator is found guilty, to be punished by secular law also, not just disfellowshipped.

I believe my point is proven by your illicit illustration. Only Allen would use the word "illicit" to describe JW Insider's illustration

I guess this could be interpreted two ways, depending on what your assumptions about the Witnesses are in the first place. Whether you believe the Witnesses' policy is not to report because they want to hide perpetrators, or whether you believe the policy is to disfellowship as soon as enough scriptural evidence is gathered, regardless of involvement of secular authorities. So looking at it from the second point of view this doesn't make much sense because what does disfellowshipping have to do with reporting to authorities? So it makes me wonder if the point that was being made was that there was sufficient scriptural evidence to disfellowship at a congregational level, without even needing evidence from the authorities (such as forensics etc.) And was the "good job" referring to good job for not reporting, or good job for gathering enough evidence to disfellowshipp? Thankfully now it has been made clear that a case of child sexual molestation is treated two separate ways. One is at a congregational level and the other is at the secular authorities' level, as stated in par 10 of the Child Protection packet: "If an alleged abuser is a member of the congregation, the elders conduct a Scriptural investigation. This is a purely religious proceeding handled by elders according to Scriptural instructions and is limited to the issue of membership as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. A member of the congregation who is an unrepentant child abuser is expelled from the congregation and is no longer considered one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. (1 Corinthians 5:13) The elders’ handling of an accusation of child abuse is not a replacement for the authorities’ handling of the matter" This was obviously not apparent in the Montana case.

Omg! Well, there are all kinds "in the truth"... As the saying goes, every village has its idiot.

Interesting. So are you saying there could be up to 6 drops of blood in a steak, which we eat no problem, so there shouldn't be a problem with us accepting synthetic blood, even though some blood was used to make it.

In view of last weeks WT study "Do you have the facts" (August 2018, page 3) and thanks to @Gone Away for highlighting the following reports, I thought I would put this in a separate and concise topic to show an actual and recent example of misinformation. NEWS REPORT: (I cut it a little short because the article went on about the ban in general. You van read the whole thing here: https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/five-jehovah-s-witnesses-detained-in-russia-investigators-10812938) MOSCOW: Five Jehovah's Witnesses have been detained in Russia and charged with possessing weapons and running an extremist group, investigators said Wednesday (Oct 10, 2018), in the latest case targeting the banned religious movement. They were arrested in the Kirov region northeast of Moscow, where authorities said they found two grenades and a landmine in searches of their homes. The Jehovah's Witnesses are a Christian denomination that originated in the United States in the late 19th century. The Russian authorities consider the movement a totalitarian sect and last year the country's supreme court banned the Jehovah's Witnesses from operating in Russia. "They had been conducting meetings and called on others to join their organisation," Yevgenia Vorozhtsova, a spokeswoman for regional investigators, said. She said officials were investigating how the members of the Jehovah's Witnesses had obtained the ammunition, but declined to provide further details. Yaroslav Sivulskiy, a member of the European Association of Jehovah's Christian Witnesses, said it was the first time the Russian authorities had accused members of the movement of possessing ammunition. "We were shocked," he said from the Latvian capital Riga. "It is both funny and strange. Why mines?" One of those detained was a Polish national residing in Russia, he said. THE FACTS: (here I took the liberty of slightly adjusting the translation by Google, so it made more sense) On October 9, 2018, in the city of Kirov, during a search of the house of retired Vladimir Bogomolov, a collector of artifacts from the Great Patriotic War (1941-1945), investigators seized fragments of obviously unusable rusty shells. The man was searched because his 69-year-old spouse (the only one of her entire family) professes the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses. The woman does not share her husband's fascination with antiques. Thus, the report that the ammunition was seized allegedly from Jehovah's Witnesses is not true. Jehovah's Witnesses do not take weapons for conscience reasons. For this position they appeared before tribunals of different countries and went to concentration camps. They will be grateful to the media for clarifying the misunderstanding . Vladimir Bogomolov, from whom the relics were confiscated, was in the past an active participant in a search movement (aimed at burying the remains of the soldiers who died in World War II), he was the brigadier of the search party. The activities of his squad were written about in newspapers. On October 9, 2018, upon the discovery of the artifacts, a criminal case on the illegal possession of weapons was instituted, it was allocated in a separate proceeding. The items were sent for examination. Source: https://jw-russia.org/news

Really?

Yes, of course there are documents, no one has ever denied that. A report is written after any judicial committee, there has to be order. Correspondence and all other pertinent communication is saved, that is a normal procedure with ANY establishment. I really do not understand why you would think otherwise..... Both of course. Yes, that is your opinion. But the opinion of many others is that JW org. are a threat to children. That children get molested at every KH and that those molesters get away scot free, and therefore pose a threat to the rest of society. I would say that is a pretty serious threat! If you looked at that link, the FBI got involved in a much less serious case, and a single case at that! If the FBI thought the organization held important secret documents involving a ring of pedophilia, they would try and get them. Child sexual molestation is a crime, and surely those who protect pedophiles are criminals are they not? Yes, I understand that and agree. So could you be a little more specific about where they are failing to serve God properly? I have read about this before. I have a why question for you too. The report says.........."....the WTBTS had shared some of the documents it had been seeking and the commission had since cancelled the production order. WHY do you think that is? Why would a commission cancel an order? Think about it logically. It can't be because they are giving up on the children surely? So there must be another reason. I know what it is. But I would like you to figure it out. As far as I know they have cooperated with every investigation, such as the ARC including the charity commission you mention in the link: A spokesman for the WTBTS said: “In light of the progress of the inquiry and the information obtained by the commission from Watch Tower and other sources, the commission has agreed to revoke the production order. Watch Tower has therefore agreed to withdraw its application for judicial review of the production order and a consent order has been filed with the high court to conclude the proceedings. “Watch Tower will now work with the commission to explore the issues that are the subject of the statutory inquiry and to address the commission’s regulatory concerns.” As for those documents Zalkin wanted WT to produce, he had no right to them whatsoever. He only wanted them because of $$$$ for himself. You are being little naive if you think otherwise. Why don’t you email Zalkin and ask him what percentage of the litigation money did poor Jose Lopez get after the settlement? He can’t divulge the amount, but he can surely give you a percentage. That’s if he will even reply to a small fry like you. You’ve got to know corporate America where they charge you for every fart. I’ve lived here for 12 years and I was shocked that you can’t even hold your own baby after giving birth without being charged. Lawyers and doctors are the biggest money makers. You probably wouldn’t understand until you lived here. Zalkin makes the best use of the media to his benefit, to make money of course. Interestingly on Zalkin’s website he makes this statement under the FA&Q section: Q: If I tell my story of what happened as child abuse I suffered, does the lawyer have to report it? A: I'm often asked the question "If I tell my story of what happened as child abuse I suffered, does the lawyer have to report it?" And the answer is No. Lawyers are not mandated reporters. In fact there are very strict laws in all states that require lawyers to maintain confidential information that is communicated to them by a client or a potential client. Without the permission of that client, the lawyer cannot make any revelation of any of those communications. There's a strict confidentiality requirement. So telling a lawyer your story does not mean that the lawyer will then go and report that story. That lawyer cannot do that. ---------------------- That means a Lawyer cannot report a child molester unless the victim agrees to it. Not so long ago, members of the clergy were not mandated reporters either. This has changed in most states of the USA now. In view of that, elders, (who are considered clergy by the outside world), were not mandated reporters and as such were under no obligation to report a child molester or give any information to anyone, just like the lawyers. Disclosures by child molestation victims were held confidential, just like with the lawyers. Many of these cases are 10, 20, 30 years old when elders were not mandated reporters.....

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-33982267 I think most Jehovah's Witnesses are aware that this is the case. But there are still some opposers who like to deny this.

I feel you are being genuine, that is why I am sorry that you are totally misinformed about the pedophile issue. It must be because you have been looking at the issue from one angle only, and believed every report you hear by those who are obviously biased, and you genuinely believe that Jehovah's Witnesses (GB) have purposefully protected pedophiles. Well you are sincerely wrong. You, and most of us have little in actual personal experiences of how real cases were handled. All we have is court transcripts of cases that were mishandled, and then sensational media coverage, not forgetting those who have an agenda against the Witnesses. I am not denying that elders did mishandle cases, and bodged them up. But we also know that there are cases that were handled correctly, or at least as correctly as possible at the time (please see your inbox). Trust me, the GB are not too frightened to cooperate with police and official bodies. They have no reason to be. The demand for those documents by Zalkin was a farce and was eventually overturned. No lawyer, or court for that matter, has the right to demand more documents than those that are pertaining to the case. That is what Zalkin was trying to do, and that is why the demand was overturned, and the $4000 fine per day cancelled. Think logically too, do you really think that in America, if the organization was deemed a special haven for pedophiles, that the FBI wouldn't have been involved by now, and raided Headquarters for any documents or proof so that they could take action and protect all those innocent children?? One of the activists against Jehovah's Witnesses with regard to child abuse has written to the FBI twice in the last 5 years (that I know of), asking them to investigate. The FBI has not done so. Why? The activist thinks it's because the FBI does not want to get involved with religious institutions. That is baloney. The FBI will do anything to protect the citizens of America if it deems it necessary. Here is a recent example: https://www.kyma.com/news/fbi-raids-imperial-valley-ministries/744990452 Religious institutions in America don’t have special permission to harbor criminals or protect them from the government.

Now look what you've done! You got JTR started. I hope you two meet in flesh one day. (no pun intended!)

I think you misunderstood. John Butler is saying that Jesus' true disciples were not pedophiles.

At least we get more exposure. The part "Jehovah's Witnesses at a glance - A brief guide to the Jehovah's Witnesses movement" isn't bad. I'm still wondering how many people are actually familiar with Jehovah's Witnesses, or even want to be. We probably think surely EVERYONE in the western world knows who we are, at least to some extent, but we moved into a house in the late 80's where our neighbour had never heard of us! She started a study and got baptized a few years later.

Good article. My mother in law endured an abusive relationship for 35 years until he died. Does she regret it? No, she says it made her stronger. However, she did allow at a certain point in her life to be side tracked by the thought that the "brothers never did anything". It stumbled her for a short period of time until it was brought to her attention (by one of her sons) that there is nothing the brothers could have done. In those days, no one went to the police over family abuse. The police did not want to get involved in family matters. The brothers did come to the house on a number of occasions to talk to her husband, but he locked himself in his room and wouldn't come out. Short of breaking the door down, manhandling him out of there, binding him hand and foot and interrogating him under a bright light.....there is nothing they could have done. She recognized that a few years later, and has never looked back since. I think @JW Insider has a different story though.