Why won't they announce the reason for disfellowshipping or disassociation?

[Space Merchant]

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So why didn't the Governing Body obey the law of the land, and hand over the documents asked for in the USA ?

It seems that the Org handed over similar documents in Australia and in the UK. So it seems there is a division in the Org's thinking and actions here. 

Um, yet I thought it was common knowledge that the GB had been compiling Child Abuse accusation documents since 1997. True or false ?  

Well the thing is religious law, and just like all religions they not only have their own set of rules, but are subjected to religious law and secular law depending on where they live. Now if said law of the land will somehow hinder religious law, the only time civil disobedience is applied as we can see in Acts 5:27-29, as well as Acts 5:40-42. But is is believed they had handed over some documents, if I am not mistaken, but they will take issue should the law of the land pressure them to change their rules that sit under religious law, there is a line that some Christians will not cross for it would break following Scripture - break Nazareth Vow they made with God. This was already address in the other thread.

Since 1997 prior to, before and then after?

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

As for it affecting other religions, that's not important. Obeying Jehovah is what is important. Confessional privilege = dishonesty. To withhold information is going against Jehovah, but then back to what I've already said. The GB say it's ok for them to tell lies or withhold info' as they call it 'spiritual warfare'. 

Actually it is important for all other groups and institutions also have children among them as well as obeying God. Again, Civil Disobedience, read upon the women of the bible and the account of David and Jonathan. For if it were not for Civil Disobedience, not only such persons would lose their faith, but would have been stoned to death and or executed, especially in Rehab's case for the King's men showed up to her doorstep, and it was problem tough for her to defend those spies.

I have already address that too, spiritual warfare is a real and serious thing, if you are forgetting what was said, read what was addressed:

 

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

You seem to be doing what the GB are doing, hiding behind laws which are not in line with Jehovah's instructions through Jesus Christ.

The thing is, what is by law of God and the laws of which was written in Moses day to now still applies present day, even though Christians are under the New Covenant.What is written cannot be broken - for God's law is above the law of men and should men do anything to change, alter or prohibit God's law, Christians will adhere to Civil Disobedience just as Rehab, Jael, Paul and others have in order to prevent such from happening - Spiritual Warfare.

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So to be a good JW it seems you need to be a liar and be deceitful. But you proved that with your misuse of the Matthew scriptures.

Read the women of the bible and read up on how Jonathan protected David, as well as what Paul and Peter had said. Spiritual Warfare and Civil Disobedience applies to Christians also. Yes, they have to obey the laws of the land, but at the same time there is a line that they will not and cannot cross for there is a biblical reason, as to what is said previously.

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you see what is happening to what is supposed to be the TRUTH ? God is being so insulted here. The scriptures are being misused regularly. OH dear, Jesus' words, I want mercy not sacrifice. But the Org shows no mercy.  

How is Scripture being misused, for if was, an example would have been provided. A Restorationist is a Christian (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restorationism) who follow scripture to its core, its primitive roots, literally, even in modern day and age and onward, only few among them would go far and beyond than others in terms of scripture, hence why the Jehovah's Witnesses are seen as the face of Non-Trinitarianism because literally going by the book - which is the bible, in addition to them being the main targets of mainstreamers and opponents to this day. Anyone who is in this position would not break God's law or change it for anyone, for in doing so, that angers God even more, and no one wants God's anger blazing upon them.

Romans 13:1- Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.

Acts 5:29 -  But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.

John 1:17 - For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

That being said, all Christians are obligated to adhere to the laws of the land and do so accordingly, there is no question about that, and should they have to, they can attempt to do things to the best of their ability to follow and take word of such laws and the people behind them, but again I will say, if the laws acquire said groups to change any religious laws, expect Civil Disobedience, for what angers God more is a man changing His word to fit the views of other men. As I recall, majority of those behind the law hates the bible also and cherry picks it if they have to, so if anyone is bible strict, they will try to do something in an attempt to break Christians, hence the reality of what mainstream Christianity is today, those that believe that the Son is the Father, for not only the blind leading the blind, but they break and change scripture in order to be part of the world's culture, ideology, their view over God's view, etc.

Lastly also, half of these things have been address in the other topic, there is not really a need to repeat what was responded to.

I'd also like to add this bit of information:

Quote

A Guardian investigation heard from 41 people who claimed they were victims of child sexual abuse and alleged a culture of cover-ups and lies, with senior members of the organisation, known as elders, discouraging victims from talking to the police.

A further 48 people said they experienced other forms of abuse, including physical violence when they were children, and 35 claimed they witnessed or heard about others who were victims of child grooming and abuse.

The Guardian was told that members of the community were taught to avoid interaction with outside authorities. It was also claimed that, according to rules set by the group, for child sexual abuse to be taken seriously there must be at least two witnesses to it. If that happened or a perpetrator admitted abuse, a judicial committee would be called and the case investigated.

Advertisement

So what we know are there is a number who claim sexual abuse and has alleged there is a cover-up, for no one knows if that is true or not as well as the church leaders being said to discourage contacting the police.

Some have suffered from violent abuse, physical, and others have claimed to be witnesses of it, and some, surprisingly, brought up child grooming and abuse, when in the UK that is rarely done by any religious group besides those in the political chain and refugees with ill intent who are in the UK.

The next one is evident, the act of shunning and or ignoring people, for anyone who is excommunicated from the group are to not interact with members of the church, but at the same time, what was not mentioned is the fact that those excommunicated can be counseled still by church leaders, I believe the JWs call this shepherd calls or something like that whereas they send brothers and or leaders to speak with the excommunicated individual, as for the family, it is up to them on how they interact with so and so, especially if so and so is not a fan of God - it is not as crazy as the He'rem whereas you have to be cut out from the community as in kicked out not only from the church, but the community itself.

Again, I read up on the whole two-witness thing, but they have seem to blow the whole rule of it out of proportion - for not only ARC addressed a better clarification of what it is, so has other sources.

I wish them good faith that they deal with child abusers, but more than likely they would not attempt to kill off a religion just because - for the UK is known for allowing refugees to commit child grooming, but no one seems to be attempting to stop so and so who are for these things, as with the case of a religious social experiment done to prove this fact a couple weeks ago.

[Space Merchant]

1 hour ago, AllenSmith said:

Because people like you, and critics of the Watchtower within, don’t understand procedures in the laws of the land. And until you do? You will realize what setting precedence means. If you want things clear cut, why didn’t the ARC accept Bro? Jackson’s recommendation of making ALL CLAIMS mandatory?

 

But, I’ll explain it for the 19 time. It affects the outcome for other religions, especially those that hold the confessional privilege.

 

If you did understand, you would notice the difference between New York laws versus California laws.

 

Now! At what point did YOU decide, the Watchtower has what that biased San Diego Superior Court Judge wants? That the California Appellate Court found that lower court in error?

 

Once again, I’ll tell you the same thing I have told everyone here, let true lawyers handle these legal matters. This is NOT an issue for flunkies and wannabes!  My previous citation for argument has been from Secular Authority and their OWN laws! So let's NOT veer off topic and LEARN the laws of the land if your that passionate, without injecting false claims. Now that's rubbish!

 

Another thing is today's society seems to be very open and accepts pedophilia, child grooming and marriage and all that sort of things to the point it is now legal for a young person in the US to be forced to marry their rapist - laws made by men of which many, many people oppose. It is good to be against such things for they are indeed bad, but the reality is people do not go for the individuals, they go for a whole group, and such will pose as a problem, smart people tend to deal with such the smart way and not condemn an entire group, an example, the police, for the actions of a few, for if one police officer shoots and kills an child, execution style in her sleep, only this police officer should be dealt with, not the entire force for that district. The same thing applies for any person being the cause of violence, murder, rape, child abuse, etc. But apparently, people nowadays are not going about things the right way compared to the few who do, those who know the laws of the land.

And yes, the laws vary from state to state on how some issues are handled and or dealt with, examples like sentencing and or the death penalty, but even with that in mind, not many people tend to be aware of what these laws are, in addition, not every American even knows even about the Constitution of United States of America, of which is the bread and butter of the land - for if anyone paid attention to the March for your lives event, majority of the individuals do not know what this is and even though their cause is just, it can prove far more damage to what will happen in the future. In short, they'll ignore it and expect things to go good as time progress, which is evidently wrong, but those who are aware tends to think otherwise.

 

[TrueTomHarley]

Putting some final touches on the Pedophilia chapter, I managed to replace something bland with something more specific, resulting in this:

"It is similar today with the sexual abuse of children. Present protective policy has been extraordinarily long in coming. In 1987, Cleveland social workers and pediatricians removed over 100 children from their families suspected of sexual abuse. Public outcry was such, fueled by media alleging ‘overzealous’ and ‘intrusive’ agency overreach, that most were promptly returned, despite genuine evidence of abuse. Lucy Delap, writing for History and Policy, credits ‘feminist campaigners’ with making the protection of children a priorty, and states “clear guidelines for best practice were not established until the 1990s.”"

From:   http://www.historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/child-welfare-child-protection-and-sexual-abuse-1918-1990

It does not change the specifics here. But it does add context. Since "clear guidelines for best practice were not established until the 1990s” it seems one can only go so far in the criticism of any agency operating during that time. As late as 1987, public opinion was firmly against "breaking up families'" for sexual abuse allegations, even where creditable. Furthermore, "where evidence of sexual assault emerged, the reaction of welfare workers was to limit harm, often by removing a child from an abusive situation. Reporting of abuse and securing convictions was a secondary concern."
 

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley So are you making excuses for Child Abuse in the org then?  

I've noticed that most of my questions do not get answered on here. People come back to the same old excuses of 'it's happening everywhere'. 

Your book paragraph reminds me of the Org's 'policy' on smoking. They knew it was wrong in the late 1800's but didn't make it policy until 1970. And Christmas, they knew it was wrong. but didn't stop it until 1926 ish. Great policies, only do it when it's convenient. Seems to be the same now with Child Abuse 'policies'. 

[TrueTomHarley]

"Will the greater world really condemn the ones who prevented child sexual abuse ten times better than anyone else, but failed to prevent it completely, over allegations that they neglected to report instances to the authorities who oversaw a record ten times worse?

It makes no sense to me, and I cannot escape the suspicion that the overall intent is to thwart the preaching of the good news, for that is plainly the effect. How can it not be the intent? This is not to say that everyone so involved, or even most, is deliberately pursuing this agenda, for the flashpoint is not imaginary and it is easy to get caught up in a cause.

But as in the Russian ban itself where allegations of child sexual abuse played absolutely no role, there are entities desperate to stop the spread of Jesus’ message."

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley Tom it seems impossible to get through to you. Who cares what the 'greater world' thinks ? Jehovah does not care surely about the opinions of the greater word. 

And we get back to this point of the 'ten times better'. Let me give you an example. VW cars and now BMW also it seems, told lies about the amount of pollution their cars push out. BUT they would have given figures for how much pollution the cars pushed out, however the figures were lies. Now take that to the JW Org. The Governing Body / legal dept' / Organisation, would have given figures by the amount of Child Abuse cases it deemed to be 'real' and may have completely tossed out thousands of cases it deemed to be not worthy of actually making  a case out of. IF, the Org was using the 'two witness rule' then maybe thousands of cases were tossed out, because as it's been made clear before there was never two witnesses to sex abuse. And add to this, the fear of many congregation members to come forward, because of shame or not wanting to be disfellowshipped, then the numbers could easily treble.... As you know, in politics, figures are deliberately altered, so why should the GB be so different. As I've said before they call it 'spiritual warfare' to tell lies.

The problem is Earthwide and they seem to have hundreds, if not thousands of Victims willing to testify.  Will you say all of there victims are lying ? Will you say they all just want to stop the preaching work ?  Even if only half are telling the truth that is still much too many to have suffered this way... Will you silence all of them just so that the preaching work can continue ?  If so, then you will invite more people into an organisation that allows pedophiles the right to roam free and to abuse more children. 

Russia. A totally different story. Nothing to do with Child Abuse as far as i know. And yes to be persecuted for the sake of righteousness is a good thing. Jesus said it would happen. However Child Abuse is not righteous, so it is not persecution of the same type. It is demanding that the situation be made open to protect others from a similar fate.

[TrueTomHarley]

55 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

BUT they would have given figures for how much pollution the cars pushed out, however the figures were lies. Now take that to the JW Org.

Take it to anyone. You have decided that Witness figures are lies. That can be said of anyone's figures. You just don't like them. 

It actually cannot be said of any religious organization's figures because none kept any records. That is where you ought to direct your rage if your concern is primarily the safety of children. What - the Lutherans would have us believe there has never been a case of abuse among them? Drag their butts before the authorities and grill them!

55 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

the Org was using the 'two witness rule'

This is completely irrelevent. The figures reported and investigated are those of allegations, without regard for whether there were witnesses or not.

It may be that God's human organization should be condemned for being human. If that is your position, say it. Ten times the prevention record of anyone else is not adequate for you? You expect perfection? Say it. 

Say 'I will not abide by any earthly organization unless its human leadership is perfect.'

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley you seem to have contradicted yourself. If no one kept records then how could the JW Org's records be ten times better. That becomes ten times better than nothing. Ten times better than no records at all. 

Quote 'the Lutherans would have us believe there has never been a case of abuse among them? Drag their butts before the authorities and grill them!'......  Well the JW Org wanted to pretend there was no Child Abuse within the Org obviously, because they told every member not to report it to the police or any outside authority. the Elders were not allowed to mention if there was a pedophile within it's congregation. If congregation members hadn't started to report it then no one would have known would they. The Watchtower mags may have talked about abuse, but it didn't tell people that the abuse was inside the Org did it ? 

As for the Witness figures being lies, well the investigations in many countries are only just beginning so we have no idea yet what the figures are. This could take another five years to show true figures. 

Quote, 'This is completely irrelevent. The figures reported and investigated are those of allegations, without regard for whether there were witnesses or not.'      Are but only if those 'allegations' were taken seriously. Otherwise the conversations could have been conveniently forgotten. Do you forget that i was threatened with being disfellowshipped on the grounds of slander ? I know personally what an investigation is like. It's a one sided, decision made, farce. Elders sticking together like glue. Because as you keep on telling me, they are only MEN. They make mistakes, yes, but they also act deliberately against Jehovah's will and against scriptural advice.

Tom, this has been proven to be true. Unless as I've said you call all victims liers. 

Anyway Romans 8 v 38 & 39 38. For I am convinced that neither death nor life nor angels nor governments nor things now here nor things to come nor powers ³⁹  nor height nor depth nor any other creation will be able to separate us from God’s love that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Paul's words are so true. Even the GB or JW org will not keep me from God's love. If Jehovah God sees goodness in me then he will upbuild me through Jesus Christ, either within or outside the JW Org. 

 

[TrueTomHarley]

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

If no one kept records then how could the JW Org's records be ten times better. That becomes ten times better than nothing.

Come on, John! 

Not only have you not read the ARC info that you make such heated claims about, but you also haven't read my prior posts that explain it in detail.

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley ARC, Australia. One country. What about UK, Canada, USA, and Netherlands ? and even more worrying what about all the other countries which are not doing investigations because Child Abuse is just part of 'normal' life to them. 

Bottom line - Jehovah's Witness children 10 times less likely to be sexually molested than the rest of the Australian population.  Wow, how unimpressive. 

Hany on in there Tom. Keep worshipping your Governing Body. Keep writing your book. Keep putting your head in the sand.  

It actually cannot be said of any religious organization's figures because none kept any records. Your words not mine. So how do you make the comparison ? You simply cannot compare if there are no other records. 

And please stop harping on about the ARC. that was old news and there are plenty more investigations going on now. 

[JOHN BUTLER]

@TrueTomHarley Something else I've been looking into slightly, but not yet deeply is this :-

The Jews practised 'pikuach nefesh' and possibly still do. It means that life is more valuable than obedience to the Law. So in many cases the Jews were / are allowed to break the Mosaic Law to help someone to stay alive. 

Jesus said at Matthew 12 v 9 -12,  After departing from that place, he went into their synagogue, ¹⁰  and look! there was a man with a withered hand! So they asked him, “Is it lawful to cure on the Sabbath?” so that they might accuse him.¹¹  He said to them: “If you have one sheep and that sheep falls into a pit on the Sabbath, is there a man among you who will not grab hold of it and lift it out?¹²  How much more valuable is a man than a sheep So it is lawful to do a fine thing on the Sabbath.” 

Jesus also said 'I want mercy not sacrifice'.  Jesus was quoting Hosea 6 v6. 

But it got me thinking about Blood transfusions to save life. If Jesus himself said 'So it is lawful to do a fine thing on the Sabbath. 

Was he saying it is right to go against Bible law and principles if it means saving a person's life ? 

[TrueTomHarley]

6 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Bottom line - Jehovah's Witness children 10 times less likely to be sexually molested than the rest of the Australian population.  Wow, how unimpressive. 

 

This could only be said by someone who would enable child sexual abuse.

There is a solution that cuts occurances by 90%. He finds that "unimpressive."