Anna

Interesting, thanks! As regards Lloyd Evans, he used to be in my circuit. Just a bit of trivia . I read some very disparaging reviews about his book he just published. Remarks made by his fellow apostates, not Witnesses. I think many of them do not hold him in high regard, hence his paranoia...

You are relatively new on this forum, if I'm correct. So my advice is don't take anything personally, whatsoever. It's ideas that are being dissected and discussed, not so much the character of the person. Although I agree, ideas can speak of the character of the person, I think a good discussion forum steers away from "ad hominem" ( @TrueTomHarley most admired expression) remarks and tries to keep to the issue at hand. That is the only way a subject can be properly explored. I think anyway.

Yeah, they are behind the fashion times and don't know that tight pants is the way to go

Oh my, so much has gone on while I've been away. One thing that I noticed @JOHN BUTLERyou mentioned how Witness youths don't really want to go to meetings and assemblies. I agree, sometimes they would just rather do something else. But those who do it for the right reason, even though they don't really want to at the time, don't leave the minute they leave home. You can "suffer" anything if it's for the right reason. Conversely, if you do something for the wrong reason, then that usually has no staying power.

Yes, I know . I wasn't disputing that.

I find this a very interesting topic. I have often wondered that too. One definitely needs holy spirit to understand the Bible, and Jehovah does not give his spirit to just anyone. Then there is the FDS who is supposed to be feeding the flock at the proper time. To me this means that they distribute timely counsel from the Bible, that fits the needs of people living in the time of the end. I don't think it means that they get bogged down with complex Biblical explanations like it was done in the past with types and antitypes etc. and re invent the Bible. We have definitely gone away from that. And we (the FDS) really don't know everything. In fact Br. Herd admitted in one of his broadcasting talks "we are just scratching the surface". There is no "magic" to how the FDS decide on some scriptural interpretation. There is no direct special communication from Jesus. Jesus and Jehovah communicate trough the Bible. Br.Jackson gave insight into how the GB arrive at decision. I would write more but I am really busy now until next week, so I will try and pick up the thread then.

Really? What scripture is that in?

Yes, I did think about that too. But it was still John, as the last of the apostles, who was inspired . So no, the GB are not inspired obviously.

The last person who was inspired by God or Jesus was the apostle John, on the isle of Patmos, when he wrote Revelation.

That's just something between me and Tom

@JOHN BUTLER and @Srecko Sostar The Governing Body and the body of elders strive to keep the congregations morally clean. It is a fact that is acknowledged by other religions and even by opposers . A practiser of any kind of immorality is not tolerated, is thrown out of the congregation and can no longer be called one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. With one exception, yes, you’ve guessed it. Those who have sex with children are welcome. In fact the GB and elders just love to have these adorable pedophiles roaming in their congregations and molesting their children. Don’t ask me why, but perhaps they reason that these people obviously love children a lot, and who could argue against that being a bad thing? Didn’t Jesus say let the children come to me? Now it gets a little difficult sometimes because these lovable child molesters are generally NOT liked by the authorities and other members of society. So it has become necessary to employ clever ways, such as the two witness rule and deliberate obfuscation in courts to help keep these lovely child molesters safe and hidden inside the congregations so they can get on with their sexual preferences undisturbed. There is a rumor that one GB member suggested it might even be good for the children. So most elders agree as they don’t want to go against the words of the GB. Some enthusiastic (sometimes called brown nosers) elders even encourage their own children to sit in the laps of these affectionate molesters. It’s getting more and more difficult however to shield these friendly deviants because society is getting very hostile towards them and wants to throw them in jail. The GB and the elders are hoping that these poor misunderstood pedophile souls continue to find refuge in their congregations and get true satisfaction playing with their children.

I didn't notice that. Which magazine was that? Obviously it is both. The main objective of the WT is to prevent child sexual abuse. Interestingly, secular articles on this subject also take that as their main objective. Not only that, but they are aware that secular authorities are not the only solution. Read this secular article here: http://www.childmolestationprevention.org/pages/tell_others_the_facts.html That's not what I understood from that article at all. It was clearly talking about helping a victim of incest, it was not focusing on the perpetrator. And it is true, Jehovah can forgive ANY sin if the person turns around (unless it is a sin against the holy spirit). The article was merely pointing out that if the victim feels like they have done something bad, and it is their fault, (and many victims do feel this way) that they shouldn't feel like that, because if Jehovah can forgive an repentant perpetrator, how much more so will he understand and comfort the victim! What makes you think this is new? WT 1988 /4/15 page 11. par.6 "Distrust has increased because of another growing fear in our day: the fear of becoming a victim of crime. Many now do like the woman who said that she sleeps with a revolver under her pillow. Another fearful woman said: “I resent it. . . . My grandmother never locked her doors.” Thus, a newspaper editorial in Puerto Rico declared: “The ones who are imprisoned are us,” yes, in our own barred and locked homes. These fears are well founded. In the United States, for example, one woman in three is likely to be assaulted during her lifetime. The surgeon general there noted that “some four million Americans fall victim to serious violence every year—murder, rape, wife-beating, child-abuse, muggings.” Such crime is common in many lands, further damaging the trust that people have in others". I think it would be good if you got some facts from secular articles on child sexual abuse, like this one: https://www.d2l.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Statistics_6_Reporting.pdf I am sure if you Googled "child sexual abuse" in your own language you would come across similar articles. Don't read about the Witnesses, read about what is happening in your country: https://www.24sata.hr/news/u-hrvatskoj-je-lani-seksualno-zlostavljano-cak-848-djece-523418 WT has NEVER shielded or protected known perpetrators. The GB have not mishandled cases of child abuse, the elders have. Elders have apologized to victims where possible. The whole organization cannot be held responsible for every case that happens in congregations. Have you personally had experience of having to handle an accusation of child molestation by someone in the congregation? If not, then you cannot know what you are talking about. If yes, then please let us know what happened.

By the way John, @JOHN BUTLER I never created this topic. It was the Librarian @The Librarian I wish he would stop doing that without asking! And if he wants to create a topic he should put his own name to it.

@JOHN BUTLER First of all I want to say I am very sorry you had such terrible experiences as a child. I understand more now how this issue must affect you. Also I think we’ve had quite a bit of misunderstanding here as well. I am sorry I doubted the pedophilia problem was the only reason you left JW. You make a lot of accusatory statements but you don’t back them up with facts. I know, this would take a long time so here are just a few facts that I am familiar with; Yes, there is no doubt that some elders mishandled child molestation cases. I know of one personally in my old congregation in England which involved an influential elder. When his disgusting behaviour was found out (he actually never had sex with his victims, but he was a groper) he was merely removed from his position as Elder but remained a full time pioneer. This happened sometime in the late 80’s. I was a teenager busy with my teenage life so I didn’t pay much attention at the time. I just remember the notoriety and rumours surrounding this man. Even my mum told me some stuff about him. Anyway, a few months ago I got to talking to a friend on FB. I will call her Jane. She had faded about 25 years ago and is no longer attending meetings etc. The conversation turned to a mutual friend of ours from the same cong. and I said I had the feeling that her dad had abused her as a child and that is why she was messed up. Jane then proceeded to tell me that when she was in her early teens this elder would grope her inappropriately while having Bible study with her. She never said anything to anyone then. Some months later the same Elder made a big mistake by groping the breast of another friend of mine while she was breastfeeding her first child (at an assembly of all things!). When the father of that sister found out he went ballistic and said if he ever sees that elder he will kill him. (I remembered that). This got the attention of the elders in the hall and they began to handle the matter. In the meantime my friend Jane did a #metoo and I believe another sister came forward as well. Like I said, a judicial committee was held in another city, with the CO involved, but all that happened was the elder got stripped of his position. Jane told me that she had to sleep with the lights on for weeks in fear that this elder would get her because she ratted on him. I didn’t know anything about this at the time. She also told me that she holds no grudge against the org. That they did the best they could in those days as it wasn’t the custom in society ( I mean society in general) to deal with those things the same way as they are being dealt with now. She told me her parents weren’t discouraged from going to the police, but they never went. I guess because it didn’t involve rape. (The father was not a JW). Why I am telling you this real life story is because it highlights a few factors. 1. Child molestation (sexual or otherwise) was not discussed in society in general some decades ago. 2. What happened and how/if things were dealt with in the congregation was very much a matter of how much fuss there was made. This depended on: 3. People. The congregations are comprised of all kinds of people, some very shy and others very outspoken. The father of the sister who was breastfeeding was very outspoken. My mother, if anything like this would have happened to me, would have been very outspoken, no questions asked she would have caused an almighty fuss. And if she deemed it necessary she would have marched to the police, no questions asked. And she is a very spiritual and zealous JW and the elders respected her very much. I am sure you have heard of the Candace Conti case while you were doing your research. The Conti case was a classic example of a dysfunctional family that was not fully aware of what was happening in their own lives, never mind that of their child (Candace). My friend Jane’s parents were not bad, but they were different to my family. Had the elder groped me while having Bible study I would have gone straight to my mum and told her what happened. I know I would have done that because my mum and I have a very close and communicative relationship. In fact an uncle of mine (not a JW) groped me one day ( I was 14) and I went straight to my mum and told her about it. She went straight to her sister (my aunt, also not a JW) and told her what her husband did to me. So my aunt went straight to the uncle, furious. Needless to say my uncle never touched me again. You see it takes all kinds of people who make up a congregation, and that is why no single case is the same, and why some cases never come to the fore until decades later, and why some cases drag on and never seem to get resolved. What I take away from all this is that of course no elder or publisher or parent, or anyone in their right mind wants to shield child molesters. Of course the org. doesn’t want to shield child molesters. No one does. (Why would anyone want a pedophile running lose in their congregation?! The elders have children too!) The only people that are protective of child molesters are those who are in the child porn and human trafficking industry. And if you want to look at it from a very logical perspective, why would Jehovah’s Witnesses, with their ultra high moral standards, of all people, would want to willingly shield someone who was practicing the vilest of moral depravity? For decades JWs have been publishing magazines on the dangers of moral decline and the dangers of child sexual molestations and took it even further than “stranger danger” by drawing attention to the fact that this danger can come from people the child knows, and even from family members. I still remember that Awake magazine. Did the dysfunctional families that needed to read this information read it? Probably not.... There is no denying the child sexual molestation issue was not always dealt with in the correct way, but it seems none of the ideas (like not reporting to police) came from instructions from the org. but was decided on by the body of elders, or sometimes even just one dominant elder. In the past, the elders were not required to call the branch for advice like they are now, and they pretty much did their own thing. This is the reason why now elders have to call the branch as soon as anything like this comes to light, so that they get consistent instruction on what to do. And yes, I believe the ARC did us a good service. I believe it was because of them our child policies have become transparent across the board in the shape of the Child protection packet: https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/legal-resources/information/packet-jw-scripturally-based-position-child-protection As for the two witness rule, well that is not much different to secular authorities implementation of "innocent until proven guilty". But notice in par 10 of the document it mentions this: "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".—Romans 13:1-4. So in view of that, the two witness rule applies only in a congregational setting. If secular authorities find enough evidence to convict said perpetrator, and this is where it gets interesting, then even if elders have not gathered enough evidence to support their decision to disfellowship or not disfellowship, then the fact that said perpetrator has been charged with sexual molestation will automatically warrant a disfellowshipping. So either way, the perpetrator will not escape punishment.

@JOHN BUTLER I don't have time reply in any detail now (I will some time later) but I just want to let you know I am neither American, nor an elder, nor an elder's wife . The closest I come to an elder is my step dad is one.

Hmmm, I don't think it would go down well with the shoppers at Tesco if I went to the store in the buff.

Why you do not believe JB? Think he is not sincere or he not done his homework well enough...in compare to your research? If JB has more then one reason for leaving WTJW it is also ok. Perhaps he will tell us that also when he will be ready to tell. You Anna also doing research, i see that. Why you have different conclusion, it is up to you. :)) It's the English language again. When someone says in this context that they don't believe (or believe) something, doesn't mean they think the other person is lying, it merely means I am expressing my opinion on the matter. In this case I don't think the only reason for John's leaving was the child abuse problems, although John might think so. Perhaps when John really thinks about it he may realize that there were other things in the religion that he was unhappy about and this was just the last straw. I am sure our research is similar. But the difference is, although I am aware we have made mistakes, I am not prepared to "throw the baby out with the bath water". I sincerely believe Jehovah's Witnesses are the true religion, with all their faults. I have had quite a lot of experience in life and I have seen some bad stuff happen in congregations. And as you know, I do not agree with everything. I have experienced other religions, and seen how the "world" does things. So I think I have a pretty broad outlook. But @JOHN BUTLER has decided that the religion is not for him, and that is his right. Yes, we all reach different conclusions, because we understand things differently.

I think we may be understanding what "family unit" means differently. family unit - Collins English Dictionary. (ˈfæmlɪ ˈjuːnɪt) noun sociology a social group traditionally consisting of parents and children the traditional family unit of mother, father and two children ---------------------------------------- Once the children leave the home, usually they set up their own family unit when they marry and have children. They are no longer part of the original family unit. Of course that is not to say this always happens. There is a sister in our congregation who has her 32 year old unmarried and disfellowshipped son living back home with her after 5 years. In that case, it is up to her how much or how little she communicates with him, but no doubt she does communicate with him, except for spiritual things. Also, since he is living in her house, he has to abide by whatever house rules she imposes of course.

I guess you are assuming they had no other choice but to do full time service when they were young. And don't call me grasshopper or I will set my spider on you! ?

Come on, use your imagination, they weren't always old. They could have done anything, but they chose to do full time pioneering, and not always under the best circumstances.

I know who you were referring to. And I was saying there are easier ways to achieve the same. I mean would you really want to live your life knowing you are responsible for 8 million people? I certainly wouldn't. Not even for a Rolex watch.

I think there are easier ways to ensure you don't get your hands dirty, miss a meal, sleep cold and wear worn out clothes. We have quite a number of brothers in our hall that have done just that. (Done pretty well for themselves). Oh, and they can't get fired either as they are the owner of the business ?

I don't believe this was the only reason. I did an approximate 3 month research too, and I'm still here (one of Jehovah's Witnesses). And don't tell me I didn't do proper research, or that I was biased. Those who know me on here can verify that my research was pretty thorough and unbiased.

I won't deny that there are some congregants who do not think for themselves and prefer to have someone else think for them. But that is not the objective of the the GB. I can't see how that would be to their advantage. They want our trust and cooperation, yes, but what personal advantage is it to them if they have "power and control" over people? They believe they are going to leave the earth and live in heaven in the near future. They are just doing their job they feel they have been assigned by Christ, which is to get the kingdom message preached, and keep the congregations morally and spiritually clean. There is nothing sinister behind that.

I'm afraid not according to the "life and ministry meeting work book" 2017-06-08 Â