TrueTomHarley

A Montana court is now hearing some of these cases. The pattern is familiar. They are civil matters, not criminal matters, because almost always no crime has been committed. The ‘crime’ charged is ‘failing to go beyond the law’ in reporting allegations or actual instances of child sexual abuse. If it is so crucial to go beyond the law, MAKE that the law everywhere. It is what Geoffrey Jackson pleaded for before the ARC. What could be simpler? Make universal mandatory reporting laws that allow for no exceptions. JWs will be delighted at that development. The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle reported (November 20, 2011) that two thirds of professionals who ARE required to report suspected child abuse fail to do it. “Studies over the past two decades nationally have consistently shown that nearly two-thirds of professionals who are required to report all cases of suspected abuse fail to do so.....‘I think that we fail miserably in mandated reporting,’ said Monroe County Assistant District Attorney Kristina Karle.” Why do the two thirds of professionals required by law to report child abuse fail to do it? Is it that two thirds of professionals are wicked and don't give a hoot about children? Few would say that. Most would say that there must be other factors involved to account for such a lapse. Have the two thirds all been sued or fired? Yet here we have congregation elders, who were NOT required to report, on trial for not reporting. Penalizing people for ‘not going beyond the law’ simply allows for Monday-morning quarterbacking to assign motives, invariably bad ones, to people unpopular. The purpose of law is to codify what is right and to make an involved situation simple. That is why Brother Jackson asked for such a change. That way both parties, secular and congregation, can pursue their investigations into wrongdoing without hampering the other. It is a dilemma that Jehovah’s Witnesses face almost alone. Few others feel the need to look into their own wrongdoing. ‘Preach to them on Sunday and let that be the end of it,’ most say. ‘Whether they do it or not is not our concern.’ Only a religion determined to remain as clean as possible in God's eyes investigates such matters itself. Since our last engagement I have taken to kicking back at some of these articles. Sometimes I place the responses on this site as well. Such as here: https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/59889-a-reply-to-three-philadelphia-inquirer-incendiary-articles-about-child-sexual-abuse-and-jehovahs-witnesses/ and here: https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/70092-the-serena-williams-child-doesnt-do-birthdays-parts-25-and-3/

If you keep on knocking through regular prayer and continued reading of the Bible and yet are still not moving forward, apparently that is not enough. Put aside for a moment the question of whether or not the GB is doing a good job; the point is that there needs be some organized human component of the divine/human interface to move God's work forward in a practical way. Otherwise, individual Christians end up merely flailing away ineffectively, and in time, are absorbed into the popular culture.

It is because you are kicking against the goads, like Saul was when he was told he was just making it hard on himself. Stop doing that and you will recover and again move forward.

Even Serena Williams, smashing her racket, cussing out the officials, putting it all on display, and saying she will one day practice the faith, has managed to cobble together 145 mil. https://coed.com/2016/06/04/serena-williams-net-worth-how-much-is-serena-worth-net-worth-tennis-french-open/

Hard to fault the old pork chop here, much as I like to do it. Still, it's hard to picture the ancient Israelites carrying on this way.

"I hate these guys." Indiana Jones

That is true, though if I see any ads for Ivanka's line of clothing, I am reassessing. Especially if she introduces fashion with a new 'Armegeddon survival look.'

He should wipe that grin off his face if he only has $100 million. Why such a pauper, compared to Gates or Buffett?

I have commented before that strict avoidance of all earthy language (which if I recall correctly, reliably triggers your outrage, so that I have sometimes employed it just to get you going) is more a Victorian relic than a biblical one. When Elijah taunts that maybe Baal has excrement, I somehow can't picture him using that clinical word. That said, there is one of the 'Church fathers,' I forget who, who rails against masturbation, painting it as a huge sin. Of course, that is not to say that we must follow the church fathers. It is to say, though, that condemnation of masturbation is not a product of the Victorian age.

“Finally, Moses cried out to Jehovah: “What should I do with this people? A little longer and they will stone me!” as the Israelites went online and complained 24/7 over everything under the sun. It is an update Exodus 17:4 into the present. Though the July 2018 Watchtower article entitled ‘Where are Your Eyes Looking?Â’ nowhere makes the connection, beyond a vague reference to those having ‘a measure of responsibility in GodÂ’s organization,Â’ which everyone took as a reference to congregation elders, I couldnÂ’t help but think the ones of the Governing Body had themselves foremost in mind as beneficiaries of the counsel offered. It is not as though I have any special insight. It is just that I hang out on the internet a lot and I hear all the grousing going on. It is not necessarily to my credit that I do this. It may be like the impression you get from hearing Trump and Obama people scream online at each other day and night but then you go into the real world and you find that people get along with each other tolerably well despite differences, and it is just the internet that gives a skewed picture. Much was made of the instance in which Moses produced water from the rock at GodÂ’s direction. He did it twice, something that I had forgotten, if I ever knew it in the first place. The first was months after crossing the Red Sea, during a time when there was so much muttering over lack of water that Moses in frustration cried out the words above. It didnÂ’t occur to them that the God who slammed Egypt with ten plagues and parted the waters, closing them upon the army in pursuit, could solve the problem of a drought. Jehovah told Moses to strike a rock. Moses did, and water gushed out. (Exodus 17) The next instance was almost 40 years later, and the people seem to have worn Moses down, what with constant bellyaching and occasional rebellion throughout the interim. This time when they started complaining over the same thing, Moses lost it. “Hear, now, you rebels! Must we bring water for you from this crag?” and struck the rock twice, after which water again gushed out. But God didnÂ’t like what Moses had shouted. Much later Psalm 106: 32-33 says, ‘They provoked him at the waters of Meribah, and it went badly for Moses because of them. They embittered his spirit, and he spoke rashly with his lips.” Look, if you approach the speaker after a good talk and tell him it was a good talk, he will as often as not say something to the effect that it is not really him who should get the credit, but Jehovah. He says that even though people are capable of speaking all by themselves without any help at all from Jehovah. So what about someone who takes full credit for doing what no human in a thousand years could do? It is what Moses did. Yet thatÂ’s what can happen when the scoundrels are nipping at your heels day and night for forty years. This last bit of correction from God, that Moses as a result of his outburst would not be the one to take his countrymen into the promised land, strikes the average reader as pretty harsh. Yet it is entirely in harmony with ‘to whom more is given, more will be expected,Â’ and ‘he will finish your training; he will make you firm.Â’ Moses, like everybody else, is being trained for the real life, not this transitory one. Notwithstanding that the internet is the perfect breeding ground for complainers, one has to ask. ‘What is it with all these malcontents?Â’ It is as though kicking against the goads is the order of the day, seen everywhere. Acquiescence to the authority of the parent, the teacher, the counselor, the coach, the boss, the consulted advisor, the party leader, the union steward, and those taking the lead in the congregation was once an entirely unremarkable fact of life; today it is selling out oneÂ’s soul. I begin to imagine the GB posting GodÂ’s rebuke to Moses as their own personal yeartext, in hopes that they do not also lose it one day kicking back at the grumblers. God counted that complaining about Moses as complaining about Him. “When your forefathers tested me; They challenged me, though they had seen my works,” reads Psalm 96:6. ‘Yeah, well, theyÂ’re no Moses,Â’ I can hear the retorts already, ‘Where are their comparable works? What Red Sea did they lead anyone though?Â’ No, I think people should think very hard before they go there. The human component of the divine-human interface is always the sticking point. It is even so with Judas. He and God were tight; there were absolutely no problems there. But that fraud that claimed to be the Messiah! That was just too much for Judas. Observing that literal food and drink prefigures the greater spiritual food and drink, the accomplishments of the Witness organization today are nothing short of amazing, The average person of a developing nation is stuck with some 200 year-old turkey of a translation that he can neither afford nor understand because those in the church world think it only natural that Big Business be entrusted with the distribution of GodÂ’s word. Only JehovahÂ’s Witnesses devise an entirely separate channel to place a modern understandable translation in his hands at minimal cost, even free. The Bible satisfactorily answers questions that are answered nowhere else, the deeper questions of life such as ‘Why would God permit suffering, why do people die and what is the hope afterward, and what is the ultimate purpose of life?Â’ Although this fellow may not have a nickel to his name, he has access to the answers no less than someone in more affluent lands, some of whom count it as nothing, as they grouse about matters of personal inconvenience. It is not nothing. However, when people become obsessed with their own immediate needs and wants, it can become as nothing. I donÂ’t dare do it: simply become a whiner over present inconveniences. There are some inconveniences, of course, in pursuing a united service to God today, but to carry on excessively about them seems to me a reality not too far off from Moses in Sinai. In any organization there is a chance that a given decision will not go your way. Should organization be jettisoned on that account? It is exactly what opposers would wish. That way individuals flail away, accomplish little, and can likely be absorbed in time by the popular cause. Obviously if you take away the upside there become nothing left other than to bitch about the downside. The rage today of the young is to go atheist. Who smoothed that path for them? However, when they come around complaining about the ‘restrictionsÂ’ they have broken free from, always ask them what they have found that is better. What is it that they have to offer? Are they not just ‘promising them freedomÂ’ while existing as ‘slaves of corruptionÂ’? What do they have to offer? Simply the freedom to do whatever one wants without check? History shows that freedom has not worked out particularly well for humankind.  Â

I admit to a prejudice against anything having the suffix 'gate' attached to it. It strikes me as too stupid of a word device, a sure sign of running with the herd. I haven't seen the videos, not being part of the intended audience. One way that the internet can lie, even while telling the truth, is through endless repetition of something meant to be heard once, giving the impression that they talk of nothing else over there. JTR (amazingly) is right. The Bible nowhere mentions masturbation. That said, it pretty clearly is an unclean habit, covered under the topic of gaining self-control, and when one becomes enslaved to it, it can warp one's personality. I'd say the organization's coverage of it is just about right: occasional discussion in articles geared mostly for young people, with the caveat that it is not the end of the world should one suffer a relapse. The video JTR titillates over was never on the website. Ten years of conventions contain but one mention of it that I can recall. Adultery and fornication, on the other hand, is mentioned all the time. The degree of repetition is meaningful, yet that measure is completely lost of the internet, the perfect forum where persons can assert themselves wise while proving themselves foolish, turning down all matters of context as 'strawmen.'

This winter when I see reporters shivering in the frigid cold despite being dressed like polar bears I will look for two guys in the background strolling by in their shirtsleeves.

Look, just accept that I am right and save both of us a lot of trouble. Don’t let this be another Sarah and the Terminator where you showed me a brief clip and I asked ‘Did the Terminator help Sarah and take out the bad attendants?’ and you fussed and fumed and lectured me on how it was my duty to mankind to watch all movies such as this and you finally after much righteous prodding on my part uttered the unsportsmanlike ‘I confess you could worry the horns off a billy goat’ and you showed the complete segment that you could have shown in the first place and it was exactly as I said: the Terminator came to the rescue of Sarah and took out the bad attendants. Harrison Ford believes with all his heart in global warming and he dismisses as junk science anything that would discredit it.

You actually do not believe exactly the opposite. You believe exactly the same. (which worries me) The junk science Ford rails at is the sort of science that is not funded by big business and government. It is the sort of science whose backers do all they can to discredit, even sending sending in an advocate of ‘The Force’

Sometimes I think ‘junk science’ means nothing more than science not funded by big business or government

She didn’t stomp on it. She smashed it after a bad shot, an action common among tennis pros.

Normally the progression is from Part 2 directly to Part 3. It should be here as well, except that Serena Williams reached a landmine of her career in the interim and it cannot be passed over. At the U.S Open she made headlines for converting a physical loss into a moral win. But it depends on who you talk to. If you didn’t like her before, you will dislike her more. If you liked her before you will like her more. IÂ’ll take the latter. Part 2.5: The U.S. Open ref with the poofy hair penalized her three times, only the second of which was a slam-dunk for real. When youÂ’re hot, youÂ’re hot, and she blew up at him. Not at first when she said: “We donÂ’t have any code and I know you donÂ’t know that and I understand why you may have thought that was coaching but IÂ’m telling you itÂ’s not. I donÂ’t cheat to win, IÂ’d rather lose. IÂ’m just letting you know.” (The coach said later that he was coaching, but that it happens all the time, and he does it less than most, a point on which sportswriters agreed.) But she sure did blast him after missing a shot and mashing her racket (which also is common): “You owe me an apology,” she shouted. “I have never cheated in my life, I have a daughter and I stand whatÂ’s right for her.” See what motivates her these days? See what she had been stewing about? Her daughter and the example set for her. The same daughter that does not do birthdays. She called the ref a ‘thiefÂ’ for taking away the point that presaged her meltdown and that also counted against her. Men say “F**k you!” to the umpire all the time without consequence, so most agreed that she did catch it on account of being a woman, as she heatedly charged. Her opponent Osaka won the match, but everyone booed. As soon as Serena noticed her upset and tears, she ran and embraced her and told the crowd not to boo, even though her own tears: “I donÂ’t want to be rude. i don't want to interrupt and I don't want to do questions. I just want to tell you guys she played well and this is her first grand slam,” at which point everyone cheered. It is so like the Bible admonition to “keep an eye, not on your own interests, but on those of the other personÂ’s” that one wonders if she did not absorb it from her Witness upbringing. Or maybe it is just her and has nothing to do with the Bible. Either way, it means she will make a fine JehovahÂ’s Witness should she get everything together. She has high reputation. “…people who hate on Serena Williams' "character" obviously don't follower her off the court. She's a competitor between the lines, but a role model off the court as a person and a celebrity,” tweeted sports commentator Jeff Eisenband. One can even picture Serena retiring at this point. Not that I would will it, necessarily, but it could happen. She is now a mom with suddenly another life to care for, a common turning point in a womanÂ’s life. There are things about JehovahÂ’s Witnesses and pro sports that are not entirely compatible, such as providing opportunities to blow oneÂ’s top. The two courses are not absolutely incompatible, but they pose a challenge. Part 3: Part 2 ended with the suggestion that Serena might succeed in showing up the anti-JW Reddit group for what they are. It is a chickenÂ’s way out—say something like that and then close the post, thank you very much, take your beefs to the curb. It is better to take a square look at just what they are. ‘What are they,Â’ anyway, that Reddit group? They are a motley assortment of people of varying talents, with the common denominator of distaste for discipline and a determination to kick over the traces. ItÂ’s regarding the Witness organization here, but the trend is seen everywhere. Despite abundant evidence that unbridled self-determination does not work out particularly well for people, they nonetheless want to go that route. It is the order of the day. People do not want to be ‘told what to doÂ’ by anyone and they are very touchy on what constitutes being ‘told what to do.Â’ Thwart their definition and you are toast. If they are to be called ‘apostates,Â’ they mirror apostates of the first century. Of them, Peter says they “revel in their deceits while carousing with you,” have “eyes full of adultery,” “are insatiable for sin.” How does that become a problem unless there is someone who would tell them they canÂ’t? The governing arrangement back then cannot have been too different from what it is today, given that it oversaw a much smaller field. Plainly, there was discipline then, and the ‘apostasyÂ’ came from those who didnÂ’t like it. The Reddit grousers carry a range of beefs against the Witness organization, many quite tiny and pumped up, but some more substantial. Of the latter, there are those aggrieved at suffering child sexual abuse, rarely from someone in authority, but occasionally so. They now want a day of reckoning if it turns out that the molester was not turned over to police, regardless of how they were handled through congregational investigation. It is not the same as the Church, where abuse appears common among clergy. With JehovahÂ’s Witnesses, even after adjusting for size differences, if you want a similar ‘catch,Â’ you must broaden your nets to include, not just ‘clergy,Â’ but everybody. An aggrieved victim of child sexual abuse is proving the most powerful force in the universe these days. Who would ever have thought that the greater world would attempt to ‘out-righteousÂ’ the Christian congregation on this one? It has happened nowhere else. Moreover, the ‘out-righteousingÂ’ is illusory. Despite 30 years combatting pedophiles, there is precious little to show for it. We constantly hear of crimes committed by ones already tagged as abusers—why, they lived right down the street. While reporting abusers is certainly a good thing, decades of doing so has made little dent in the pandemic. Better to focus on prevention, and here there is reason to feel that the Witness regimen and teachings are effective to a greater degree than those of the overall world. The ‘crimeÂ’ alleged of the JehovahÂ’s Witness organization is rarely an actual crime. It is generally ‘failing to go beyond the lawÂ’ in years past, to report abusers, unless members themselves chose to do it. They could have, but often they did not because the Witness religion is ‘insular,Â’ the charge goes. Being ‘insularÂ’ is but a tiny misstep away from being ‘separate.Â’ The latter is a biblical requirement of those who would serve God. You almost wish there would be a statement someday from the Witness organization: “Look, hereÂ’s what happened. We extended 1 Corinthians 6:7 into non-financial matters. We did it because we were insular, an unintended byproduct of being separate. We believe that saying separate from the world is a biblical necessity, the only position from which to help distressed ones in it. “Really, it is already a defeat for you when you have lawsuits with one another. Why not rather let yourselves be wronged? Why do you not rather let yourselves be defrauded,” is the verse we extended. We tried to root out child abuse in our midst at a time few others looked into it, and we did the best we could. Sorry.” Yes, frame it as an apology, if need be. People love apologies and forgive much for it. Determined opposers will not, of course. They will say it is an admission of guilt and/or incompetence and proves you must be fired, but this is par for the course and happens everywhere. Might such a statement stumble some of the ‘sheepÂ’? Possibly, particularly ones who know nothing of it. But it will be more than offset by new persons who admire the candor and can well understand that real Christianity must be separate from a decaying world. And the stumbled ones are not lost. Another mea culpa may do the trick, such as with a 1975 date that didnÂ’t turn out as hoped: “Um, sorry. We never outright said it, really, but we came close enough to stoke up the hopes of people who hoped to see it that way. At the drop of a pin, JesusÂ’ followers thought The End was tomorrow. In hindsight, maybe we should have reckoned more on how easy it is to get people going. Still, we did not want to ignore the LordÂ’s command to ‘keep on the watchÂ’ and the trigger that prompted the excitement was not nothing.” The former announcement will not make people happy on the Reddit forum; they still have 50 more beefs. But it will many others. Not all victims of injustice within the congregation go the outside legal system and sue their brothers. Most will say: ‘Congregation justice may not be perfect, but it sure is head and shoulders over the justice of the outside world.Â’ It is a lawyerÂ’s playground out there, with massive transfers of funds in all directions for every conceivable wrong with the barristers netting a third Some congregation members, even wronged ones, will prefer to put their trust in 1 Timothy: “The sins of some men are publicly known, leading directly to judgment, but those of other men become evident later.” ItÂ’s not perfect. But it beats the greater worldÂ’s justice which so frequently falls down of the job. Â

Bullseye

Come to think of it, you and he are both from the same relatively obscure part of the world, where Witnesses are not exactly a dime a dozen. Moreover, it is also an economically unwell part of the world, which is not prime breeding grounds for 'apostates.' And you are hawking his gripes. You don't suppose.....

Just giving my ‘testimony,’ always welcome on a religious forum.

Say, wasn’t that JTR who just walked by in his spanking shiny new Nike’s?

I know this guy well. He blocked me from his sight and then carried on as though I had been ordered off by the Org. http://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2018/09/banned-at-the-apostate-website.html

No. It is Methuselah who lived the longest. :)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) Ooh. I just read Sreck’s prior response, which humanizes him. Alright, I’ll take back some of the )s, about 20 ot them.

Okay. Point taken. I think it was him that called out the Watchtower for misrepresenting his views (in a letters from readers) and the Watchtower responded that they unintentionally had. I was always impressed with that exchange.

The reason much criticism of churchmen is worthless is that their beliefs dictate their scholarship, not the reverse.