Jump to content

Srecko Sostar

Watchtower pays $4000 per day for disobeying Secular Authority

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Srecko Sostar -
Srecko Sostar -
193
6063

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

On June 23, 2016, San Diego, California, Superior Court Judge Richard Strauss grew tired of the Watchtower Society fighting his order to produce a 1997 letter sent to all elders worldwide, and decided to sanction the religion with a fine of $4000 per day until the Watchtower complied with that order. 

Today is  November 12 2017. Quick mathematical say that this Company payed almost $2 000 000 until today. Imagine how many ice creams children in JW congregations  would be able to enjoy after Sunday meetings in KH, with this fund. Imagine how many poor bro and sis in congregations worldwide would be helped and receive some comfort for daily life.

But as Bible say: Proverbs 22:2 -"The rich and poor have this in common: The Lord made them both." 28:6 - "Better to be poor and honest than to be dishonest and rich."

Source: JW Victims.org

    Hello guest!

    Hello guest!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gone Fishing said:

Have they paid?

Hehe, good question. But if WT is Company who obey civil law and secular authority and Judge decision as they teaching members that they must doing too, then it is to be expected that they pays fine every day or periodically in agreement to Court protocols.      :) 

Here is not question as in some Bible examples when King forbid you to pray to God, and you disobey. Here we have Bible principle as it stated in NT  "If someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well; and if someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two." Mat 5

BUT you are very cleverly put this to topic. Because WT is private company, and management of Company will doing everything possible and impossible to keep the money in own pocket..  GB would not IMITATE Jesus command and example as in chapter 5. WT love money and they not want to pay voluntarily. Only under the pressure from more powerful force.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

Have they paid?

I don't think the order ever went through because the WT appealed the decision. If I do enough digging around I may be able to find out what the final result was.

OK. Dug around a bit and found  out the appeal was heard 11th October 2017 and the appellate court has 90 days to issue its formal ruling. Watch this space :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The formal ruling according to the court of appeals document dated Nov. 9, 2017 page. 39 (the link to the document posted by Witness above)

"On the record before us, we are satisfied that the superior court's order was not arbitrary, capricious, or whimsical. To the contrary, the superior court has shown great patience and flexibility in dealing with a recalcitrant litigant who refuses to follow valid orders and merely reiterates losing arguments. We therefore affirm".

Therefore the fine stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Noble Berean said:

 It's concerning to me that more and more people are coming to associate the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses with child abuse.

I doubt this is true. In ex- JW circles definitely, but I have to this date never met anyone who mentions this issue door to door, or anywhere else. Just because ex- JW sites are full of this doesn't mean people in general associate us with this problem which is rife in every circle of society. In our neighborhood I counted 8 within a 3 mile radius, with one who has been convicted of sexual assault of the 1st degree on an 8 year old and he lives down the street from my house. Bare in mind these are convicted offenders, there are more who haven't been convicted, very much for the same reasons as some JWs are not convicted....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Anna said:

I doubt this is true. In ex- JW circles definitely, but I have to this date never met anyone who mentions this issue door to door, or anywhere else. Just because ex- JW sites are full of this doesn't mean people in general associate us with this problem which is rife in every circle of society. In our neighborhood I counted 8 within a 3 mile radius, with one who has been convicted of sexual assault of the 1st degree on an 8 year old and he lives down the street from my house. Bare in mind these are convicted offenders, there are more who haven't been convicted, very much for the same reasons as some JWs are not convicted....

I hope that is the case...for Jehovah's name to stay clean and unblemished from these sexual abuse cases. But I believe we have only scratched the surface of these child abuse cases. As these legal cases before more frequent, I worry the media will soon eat this up. I can't imagine having to explain these policies to someone in the door-to-door ministry. I would just say I have no control over the organization's legal policies and that I would always report to the police.

Surprisingly, a man did show up at my former kingdom hall asking about the child abuse to elders. They had to lock the doors after that. There is a rumor that Leah Remini may focus on Jehovah's Witnesses as a spinoff of her show on Scientology. And I also saw that Dr. Phil might include JWs in an episode on controlling religions/cults. It's all worrying to me, but it's just another brick in the wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

Not over yet.

Ok, but what will it prove? If they win, they've still acknowledged they have a secret list of alleged abusers in the congregation. If they lose, the courts get the namelist and it appears that the organization resisted complying with secular authorities. I don't see how any of this can be spun in a positive way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/12/2017 at 7:28 AM, Srecko Sostar said:

On June 23, 2016, San Diego, California, Superior Court Judge Richard Strauss grew tired of the Watchtower Society fighting his order to produce a 1997 letter sent to all elders worldwide, and decided to sanction the religion with a fine of $4000 per day until the Watchtower complied with that order. 

Today is  November 12 2017. Quick mathematical say that this Company payed almost $2 000 000 until today. Imagine how many ice creams children in JW congregations  would be able to enjoy after Sunday meetings in KH, with this fund. Imagine how many poor bro and sis in congregations worldwide would be helped and receive some comfort for daily life.

But as Bible say: Proverbs 22:2 -"The rich and poor have this in common: The Lord made them both." 28:6 - "Better to be poor and honest than to be dishonest and rich."

Source: JW Victims.org

    Hello guest!

    Hello guest!
 

@Srecko Sostar you are being personally downvoted for spreading the news about our organization and that's sad. This isn't an apostate fabrication. Does reality trigger JWs on here? Us JWs have to face the reality of what's happening instead of digging our heads in the sand. We may face these questions in the ministry. 

Honestly, the organization needs to be 100% transparent right now about their child abuse policies, because we act as representatives for them when we go out. I shouldn't have to view some weird PDF of the Shepherd's Flock book to get a grasp of the org's policies (which I still don't get). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Noble Berean said:

I would just say I have no control over the organization's legal policies and that I would always report to the police.

Good answer.

1 hour ago, Noble Berean said:

Surprisingly, a man did show up at my former kingdom hall asking about the child abuse to elders. They had to lock the doors after that.

Sounds suspiciously like an ex-member I'm afraid..

1 hour ago, Noble Berean said:

There is a rumor that Leah Remini may focus on Jehovah's Witnesses as a spinoff of her show on Scientology.

I heard about that, but I haven't heard about Dr. Phil. It's good to remember that these shows are there to attract an audience and to make money. I am not saying this because I don't believe there is a problem. You probably know by now that I have delved into this area quite extensively already.

There are two faces to the reporting on child abuse. The one we see mostly is the one presented to us by the media which as we know only has limited time and space to cover everything, and sensationalism is what sells. Then there are the facts. Facts are extremely hard to come by because often such information is not easily available. The best kind of facts regarding a particular case are those we can obtain through court transcripts some of which are thousands of pages long, but even then, there are some facts that are inadmissible in court.

Just as an example, here is an extract from a court transcript dealing with two proposed witnesses to testify against the WT. Note how the judge ascertains their value in this particular case (Victoria Boer vs WT 2003). Bare in mind that these two witnesses are two of the "go to" people used by ex-witnesses in cases against JW child sexual abuse, and what they say on their websites or books is considered to be accurate information regarding the policies of JWs:

<During the course of the trial, the plaintiff sought leave to present evidence from two witnesses about certain characteristics or practices of the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization in situations similar to this one. I ruled such evidence to be inadmissable, with reasons to follow.

[27] The first witness, Professor James Penton, is an historian and the author of a book entitled Apocalypse Delayed . Mr. Mark, on behalf of the plaintiff, intended to elicit evidence from Mr. Penton with respect to his conclusions about various characteristics of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the way women are treated within that faith and the functioning of Judicial Committees. Professor Penton’s evidence would be based on his research and would constitute opinion. He does not have first-hand evidence. However, Mr Mark did not deliver notice of his intention to call an expert on this topic and did not serve an expert report on the defense as required under the Evidence Act , R.S.O 1990, c E23. That alone is fatal to the plaintiff’s request to call this evidence. The defence would have been caught by surprise with no opportunity to prepare, nor to call its own evidence to rebut the evidence of Mr. Penton.

[28] In any event, I am by no means satisfied that expert evidence of this nature would have been admissable in respect of these matters. It seems to me that I am in a position to determine the relevant facts to the particular matters before me without the assistance of an expert on these matters.

[29] The second witness proposed by the plaintiff is Barbara Anderson, who was a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses in New York from 1954 until her recent disfellowship (ejection from the faith). The plaintiff proposed to elicit evidence from Ms. Anderson as to her knowledge of how sexual abuse of children is dealt with within that religion and of cover-ups of abuse within that society. Most of Ms. Anderson’s proposed testimony would be hearsay. The plaintiff argued it would be admissable as similar fact evidence that the actions of the defendants in this case was part of a design, rather than negligence.

[30] The general test for the admissibility of similar fact evidence in a civil trial is derived from Mood Music Publishing Co. v DeWolf Ltd .; [1976] Ch 19, 1 ALL E.R. 763 (C.A.) In that case, Lord Denning stated, at page 127 (Ch)

…in civil cases the court will admit evidence of similar facts if it is logically probative, that is if it is logically relevant in determining the matter which is in issue; provided that it is not oppressive or unfair to the other side; and also that the other side has fair notice of it and is able to deal with it.

[31] The proposed evidence from Ms. Anderson fails this test on every front. First, it is not logically probative of any issue before me. Whatever may have been Ms. Anderson’s personal experience with the Jehovah’s Witness faith, and whatever information she may have gleaned about how child abuse cases were dealt with elsewhere, she has no evidence whatsoever about the Toronto or Shelburne congregations or any of the individuals in this case. Further, even her information about Watch Tower generally relates to that organization in the United States. There is nothing about her evidence that would assist in the very specific findings of fact I am required to make about what happened in the case before me.>

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Noble Berean said:

Honestly, the organization needs to be 100% transparent right now about their child abuse policies, because we act as representatives for them when we go out

One thing we need to remember is to stay objective. Just because ex-witnesses whip up countless cases and horror stories does not mean the situation is as extreme as it sounds. I can afford to say this because I am a nobody. It doesn't matter if someone accuses me of cover ups  etc. I am not the Org. However the org. cannot said anything like this even if it is true.  Of course one abused child is one too many, and of course even one case should not be minimized. But I can afford to say that in my whole time as a JW, in many congregations in several countries I have not come across this problem, and believe me this problem does not stay hidden, Witnesses do talk and gossip and word gets around pretty quickly. Not only that, but I have seen elders and ex-elders who would have information admit they have not come across one case. Even one ex- member of the GB admitted that the problem is not extreme and that he himself was not personally aware of a single case. Evidently there have been and are cases. There is such a plethora of people from all kinds of social backgrounds and levels of spiritual maturity in the worldwide brotherhood that it makes it statistically impossible not to have cases of child sexual abuse, sad as it sounds. The other thing is acquiring facts about these cases. As I already mentioned above, these are extremely hard to come by, and without knowing facts, we cannot really make a fair judgement...

Apparently, there is a  handbook on child abuse guidelines which are made available to any publisher who asks for one. Has anyone done this? I haven't since I no longer have small children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

Ok, but what will it prove?

Whatever the courts say is proved. If crimes are committed, they will be uncovered. Where's your faith?

2 hours ago, Anna said:

Apparently, there is a  handbook on child abuse guidelines which are made available to any publisher who asks for one. Has anyone done this?

Published on this forum wasn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

the organization needs to be 100% transparent right now about their child abuse policies

The same is also with Australian Royal Commission in 2015. No single word on JW broadcasting or publications. Because of the the fact that WT never mentioned nothing officially, for JW public - officially, for  members looks as nothing was happened at all. No pedophiles, no victims, no Court or Commissions investigations, decisions, out of Court settlements ...

JW members are trained to not believe nothing that come from secular source what have any connections about WT and JW Church. 

Cognitive dissonance is very strong and go to direction of full trust to WT leaders. Trust to men. Sad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Anna said:

He does not have first-hand evidence.

Hi. I would like to make little digression. I spent hours and hours listening official video records from ARC in 2015. Here/There all viewer are been, and today also can be able, to hear and see (to hear and see, audio-visual is very important) "first-hand evidence" from all involved and called to present their testimony in front Commission and public as well.

Victims, elders, witnesses on this and that, GB member, all of them were in witness chair, and for us who followed program,  we been able to get impressions on what we saw and heard. Is my personal view after that, wrong or right, that is my problem. But words was been told and facts are here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

I can't imagine having to explain these policies to someone in the door-to-door ministry.

You say that it is fallout from doing what no one else has attempted to do: monitor wrongdoing (of all sorts, but here specifically child abuse) so as to accomplish two things, which actually collapse into one. 1.) discover abusers so as to administer discipline, up to and including disfellowshipping, so as so follow God's command to keep congregation as clean as possible, and 2.) keep track of any abusers, so that they cannot slip out of one congregation and into another - as they can anywhere else.

You acknowledge missteps have probably occurred. Nonetheless, instances of abuse would never be associated with the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses were that organization like the general world of religion - which takes no interest in the conduct of its members and considers their conduct none of its business. 

Having said that, the brother who first proposed keeping track of such accused abusers has been assigned to permanent potato-peeling duty in the Bethel basement for upwards of 40 years now, and may be the inspiration for the book: "Forty Years a Watchtower Slave."

9 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

They had to lock the doors after that.

This is a common response to guard against crazies, not directed towards anyone in particular, to my knowledge. The disciples even locked their doors for a time. Jesus found a way to get around that, but anyone else would have had a hard time. Who knows - maybe even the Texas shooter in the Baptist church would have been dissuaded if he had had to first blast into the building from the outside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

because we act as representatives for them when we go out.

Hi Noble! About "representatives" as word, expression, lexem in official WT terminology. 

Representative for Watch Tower, Jehovah Witnesses congregation or any other legal entity can be only person who have WT appointed, officially setting to be in position to represent WT or some other entity in/for one particular job, work or for some duty inside company.

All other members, all baptised members, male or female are JUST MEMBERS and NOTHING MORE. You as member of your congregation are not in position to represent either your own congregation. You  and your bro and sis in congregation  have not legality to be representatives for congregation or for WTBTS or any entity of WT. Because WT Company policy only few can be representative for them.

Make peace with the fact that you are just, only member, not representative.  :) 

P.S. if you like i can present you Court document where Legal Department said so before Court. So that must be the truth, i think ))))) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

Whatever the courts say is proved. If crimes are committed, they will be uncovered. Where's your faith?

Not really. The organization admitting wrongdoing is unlikely. They're too proud to do that. No matter what the outcome, the organization will spin itself as a victim. The organization will never say it has committed a crime even if the courts rule against them. They will spin at as spiritual warfare. That's just the way it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

I spent hours and hours listening official video records from ARC in 2015. Here/There all viewer are been, and today also can be able, to hear and see (to hear and see, audio-visual is very important) "first-hand evidence" from all involved and called to present their testimony in front Commission and public as well.

I too watched the ARC hearing and read the transcripts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

 you are being personally downvoted for spreading the news

......what if downvoting is some kind of persecution...i wonder... while sleeping..... 

.....but then i waked up and smile :))))))))  everything is at it is  ...“There's nothing new under the sun.” 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

That’s hilarious coming up with the Australian Royal Commission when it was refusing to investigate its own, AUSTRALIAN Government, run detention centers that were “accused” of “hiding” child sexual abuse, along with sexual assaults of detainees or asylum seekers. The Australian Government went one step further to “enact” a law that would prosecute whistleblowers, including doctors, nurses, and staff members with prison if they divulged such conditions, UNTIL, the media became aware of the situation and started reporting it. The, enacted law was not changed, but at least, the ARC was shown its hypocrisy!!!! :DxDB|

 

 

If there is a silver lining in this mess it is that soon every fifth person in the world will be on the pedophile list.

If there is another, it is that allegations of sexual impropriety involving prominent persons are a staple of life today. If you hate the person, you agree with the allegation. If you love the person, you disagree with it. James Carville, Bill Clinton's campaign manager, said: "Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you'll find." 

Does one believe him? For the most part, it depends upon whether one likes Bill Clinton or not. The same can be said for almost any high-profile figure.

JW things thereby become a tiny drop in the bucket, for it is exceedingly rare for an elder to be the accused perpetrator - when an abuse settlement was reached in 2007, the number given was nine in the span of 100 years. Usually they are accused of simply coming across the knowledge of abuse.It is not good, perhaps, but it is a far cry from being perpetrators themselves - and it would not happen if they had kept their noses out of the conduct of congregation members - as do other religions. 

God would be cheated that way, for he says keep the congregation clean. But it would be safer from a liability point of view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

when it was refusing to investigate its own,

I am glad that something like this came from another person's mouth, not mine.

GB refusing to investigate its own and put it to be publicly known. No matter of outcome. And to show that WT is not covered with corruption, hiding and minimizing inside problems, unlawful  and injustice  as it is in Australia secular government or in some other part of this secular World :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Noble Berean said:

I'm sure there's some element of pride when you have total confidence you are backed by God almighty?

Can't see a problem with being proud of one's faithfulness to God's requirements and of success in fulfilling his commission? 

Jer 9:24: "“But let the one boasting boast about this:That he has insight and knowledge of me, that I am Jehovah, the One showing loyal love, justice, and righteousness in the earth,"

2 Cor 7:4: "I have great freeness of speech toward you. I have great boasting in regard to you. I am filled with comfort; I am overflowing with joy in all our affliction."

etc...etc...

Do you believe you are backed by God Almighty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gone Fishing said:

Do you believe you are backed by God Almighty?

I assume that God will back me on the condition that I make choices that honor him. But I'm not infallible. I can make mistakes and Jehovah God can remove his backing. Can the same be said for this organization?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

12 minutes ago, Noble Berean said:

Can the same be said for this organization?

Well, I would say that he will continue to treat this organisation in the same way he treated David: 

1 Sam 16:13: "And the spirit of Jehovah began to empower David from that day forward"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

I'm sure there's some element of pride when you have total confidence you are backed by God almighty?

Minimal. Someone will be the successor of the Acts 15 older men setting policy in the first century and even issuing "decrees." I see no one with a better claim to that role than they.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

All in all, look at the laws that were on the books at the time of the circumstance, NOT TODAYS LAWS!!!!

It has long been common knowledge that Hollywood was a cesspool but no insider would rat on anyone else. At last the dam has broken and these guys are falling all over themselves to swear, like Sergeant Shultz, that they knew nothiiiinnnnggggg! (some are wetting themselves thinking that they are up next)

When the world at last wakes up to a problem, it swings wildly the other way. In this case rapists are lumped together with harassers, who are lumped together with those whose misdeeds were once called "getting fresh." Few women ever appreciated men getting fresh, I think, but they did not mistake that for rape.

It is similar with widespread condemnation of the founding fathers. Revered for centuries, they are now reviled because they kept slaves, notwithstanding that every agricultural person of means kept slaves at that time - and with no regard for whether they were kindly or vicious administrators.

It is the same with the world's outrage over child sexual abuse, now at full boil. Whenever zealots catch the wave, they invariably apply today's enlightenment to criminalize those of the past, as Alan points out. Sodomizers are the same as those too free with their hands who are the same as those who learned of it but practiced nothing themselves. Notwithstanding that back in my day child protective agencies sent abused children right back into the homes of the parents who abused them, in the naive belief that the abuser could be rehabilitated. It is naive by today's standards, but it was enlightened at the time.

The world's record of protecting children is absolutely dismal. News reports indicate a breathtaking percentage of adults have abused children. That is why the education of children on how to protect themselves is essential, as is the education of parents on how to protect their children. Nobody does that better than Jehovah's Witnesses, who trained every member in the world via last summer's convention. That addresses 95% of the problem. All that remains is to take out the sodomizers. If the world was serious about justice, it would apply capital punishment to such ones, for the common wisdom is that these persons cannot be rehabilitated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

Well, I would say that he will continue to treat this organisation in the same way he treated David: 

1 Sam 16:13: "And the spirit of Jehovah began to empower David from that day forward"

The organization is a man-made creation, not an anointed individual. David gave full reverence to God.  JWs are unable to do this, since they believe the organization is, as you made the comparison to David – empowered.  Rev 13:5,15

David's words:

“Praise be to you, Lord,
    the God of our father Israel,
    from everlasting to everlasting.
 Yours, Lord, is the greatness and the power
    and the glory and the majesty and the splendor,
    for everything in heaven and earth is yours.
Yours, Lord, is the kingdom;
    you are exalted as head over all.
 Wealth and honor come from you;
    you are the ruler of all things.
In your hands are strength and power
    to exalt and give strength to all.
Now, our God, we give you thanks,
    and praise your glorious name. 1 Chron 29:10-13

“When you cry out,
Let your collection of idols deliver you.
But the wind will carry them all away,
A breath will take them.
But he who puts his trust in Me shall possess the land,
And shall inherit My holy mountain.”  Isa 57:13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Witness said:

The organization is a man-made creation,

This is just a generally stated, and basically irrelevant, opinion. 

The repentant, murderous, adulterer, David, was still the anointed of Jehovah through his difficulties, and, despite his error, was still spoken of by Jehovah as having a complete heart. 1 Ki.11:4. As a result, he was not abandoned by Jehovah.

This principle holds good at all times for individual servants of Jehovah, and in any endeavour they might seek to engage in collectively at the direction of that same God, Jehovah.

Their united and prophetic declaration of intent is still as worded by Micah:

"For all the peoples will walk, each in the name of its god, but we will walk in the name of Jehovah our God forever and ever." Mic.4:5

This joint declaration is reinforced by their individual determination as described in the words of Habbakuk:

"But I quietly wait for the day of distress, for it is coming upon the people who attack us. Although the fig tree may not blossom, and there may be no fruit on the vines; although the olive crop may fail, and the fields may produce no food; although the flock may disappear from the pen, and there may be no cattle in the stalls; yet, as for me, I will exult in Jehovah; I will be joyful in the God of my salvation" Hab. 3:16-18.

Individually and collectively, all those who serve Jehovah in the manner described above can expect to be treated "In harmony with the expressions of loyal love to David, which are faithful." Is.55:3.

This is an amplified answer to your question raised  @Noble Berean,

10 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

I assume that God will back me on the condition that I make choices that honor him. But I'm not infallible. I can make mistakes and Jehovah God can remove his backing. Can the same be said for this organization?

And I think it could also be said, in summary, that although Jehovah's servants can make mistakes, Jehovah God may not remove his backing, as long as they respond to His disciplene and correction (as experienced by David).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

success in fulfilling his commission

Only "success" that WT accomplished is "advertise" Gods Kingdom and "publishing" publications on this subject. This are called quantity.

Quality   is another topic. If never ending changes of doctrines, instructions, interpretations some of us want to call as "success" - let it be. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

They’re suggesting, the Watchtower is hiding things

:)))) suggestion or not, if Court aka Secular government aka Gods Servant (look at Bible terminology) ask you, order you to give documents and you respond in manner; "No i have not that documents, but my neighbor (some other sister Company) have it, go to them and ask." - is not that plays calls  "ping-pong" or for observers like we are, disrespect? In fact this is WT lawyers theocratic warfare.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

“Priests operating in areas involving children – such as in schools or medical institutions – may be covered by the legislative requirements of mandatory reporting, however it is unlikely that at this point all theoretical instances involving the confessional seal would be covered by the current legal requirements of mandatory reporting.”

PRIESTS?? 

Jehovah's  Witnesses have priests?? Since when? :)))))))))) JW org say to public little contrary - JW have no priests or clergy.

Why you using Catholic priesthood privileges according to Catholic Church canon law, doctrines and want to apply false Babylon the Great measures and instructions and doctrines to "only true JW religion"?       :))) funny and sad at same time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Opposers, want the Watchtower to overstep its legal boundaries just to satisfy their own arrogance.

legal boundaries????

I thought that WT and elders are in BIBLE BOUNDARIES as FIRST TO OBEY, and then IF God give permission to "legal boundaries", because "We have to obey God more than men" :)  BIBLE is two-edged sword !  One edge is Secularly Legal and other edge is Godly Legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

The repentant, murderous, adulterer, David, was still the anointed of Jehovah through his difficulties, and, despite his error, was still spoken of by Jehovah as having a complete heart. 1 Ki.11:4. As a result, he was not abandoned by Jehovah.

2 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

This is just a generally stated, and basically irrelevant, opinion. 

I just dare to spin two off your quotations and put in these context above :)))

About David. He is interesting character for sure. And his servants also who was participated in all bad things David have done. Uriah and Bathsheba is famous example. Perhaps while talking about his servants who make things easier for David to took Bathsheba, we can talk about "COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY" AND "PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY". And in his last days he took young virgin girl to warming his bed. And his servants had important role in that arrange.

Put this events and main points of this illustrations to modern day David, servants and other characters inside WT JWorg, and start to mediate about also two sort of Responsibility - Personal and Collective in WT Society.     

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

PRIESTS?? 

Jehovah's  Witnesses have priests?? Since when? :)))))))))) JW org say to public little contrary - JW have no priests or clergy.

Why you using Catholic priesthood privileges according to Catholic Church canon law, doctrines and want to apply false Babylon the Great measures and instructions and doctrines to "only true JW religion"?       :))) funny and sad at same time!

    Hello guest!

Check page 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Anna said:

 

2864_1067109513178_62_n.jpg

you are witty :) 

WT representatives were told many times that they would not change what is "proved by Bible" or what is "supported by Bible". And we all know how that was ended many times.

 One of this statement told by Gary Breaux  is;  GB WILL NEVER CHANGE TWO WITNESS RULE.

Would you, dear Anna, apply these Proverb also for Gary and his colleagues? :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Witness said:

Check page 4

Yes Witness, i know that, thanks for excellent link.

I just made irony with Allen Smith comments. He connected "Priest Confidence" as justification for JW elders. But for rank and file members it would be confusing to hear how he compare gods shepherds aka elders with Catholic priesthood. WT denied existence of priest-laity distinction among JW members. But this is exactly what they have. Distinction.  

For public everyday using JWorg say, "we don't have priests, clergy, hierarchy" - but in Courts WT lawyers claims opposite. Hypocrites!   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

WT representatives were told many times that they would not change what is "proved by Bible" or what is "supported by Bible". And we all know how that was ended many times.

Well that's an easy one :) What they changed must have not been proved or supported by the Bible then, even when they thought so at the time. The great thing about changing your mind is it can happen even when you say you will NEVER change it :D

By the way, the two witness rule does not necessarily mean you have to have two literal eye witnesses to the same instance. The two witness rule can be translated to mean reliable evidence. You will agree that most secular judicial authorities require reliable evidence. Innocent until proved guilty.

Also, there is confusion when it comes to child sexual abuse. In that case there are two judgements, one a spiritual/congregational one and the other a criminal/secular one. It is logical that if a supposed perpetrator is convicted by secular authorities, then that will immediately affect his standing in the congregation even if the congregation felt there wasn't enough evidence prior to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Anna said:

Well that's an easy one :)

Yes it is easy for those Bethel Princes in WT who sitting in comfortable offices and deeply meditates about some stuff, would it be this or that and then get in is some kind of trans and find some really bright ideas about issue. Put that in publications and JW org and conventions. Drilling JW members with ideas and dfd those if they do not agree. And after few years or few decades decide to change that doctrine with "new light" mantra. For WT "bible scholars" it is easy, i agree.

For rest of members? - that depends on various personal factors :)))) live to your imagination what would this factors be.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

get in is some kind of trans

Really? Is that what you really believe? :D

11 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

For WT "bible scholars" it is easy, i agree.

I wasn't taking about that, I meant that it was easy for me to reply.

WT "Bible scholars" also have to personally apply what they say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not all anointed ones are uninspired.  Some actually, are guided by Holy Spirit.  

This is a comment I found by an anointed one, very much inspired:

“The Bible makes clear, that there are cases which DO NOT require two witnesses, such as murder and rape (Deut.22:25-27). In both crimes, there was no witness at all. IN FACT, a child is not capable of resistance toward a crafty adult, despite the useless advice for the prevention of child abuse which is given in the Awake's futile magazine article. It places blame on the incapable victim, should they be molested, by depicting an image of a child with her hand up, to her would-be rapist.


Jesus also let us know, that God Himself can be considered a witness (John8:18). If "elders" believe that they are appointed by the action of that very spirit of God, can it not also testify to guilt or innocence, in response to a prayerful petition?

Of course, God will not respond to the prayer of the wicked, just as He refuses to respond to the prayers of the GB, as they themselves admitted, about their decision to build at Warwick.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Witness said:

The Bible makes clear, that there are cases which DO NOT require two witnesses

Yes Bible talking about that, but "sheep" not using own mental power, powered by holy spirit, to make conclusions. They, generally, let to GB to made conclusion for them.

About possible future changing on "two witness rule", the rule GB defends with body and mind hahha. Perhaps WT decide to accept criminal forensic as "second witness". Not just another human witness :))))))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

CALIFORNIA CODE

1030. Member of the clergy. As used in this article, a “member of the clergy” means a priest, minister, religious practitioner, or similar functionary of a church or of a religious denomination or religious organization.

BIBLE CODE

"You are all brothers"

P.S. All You Are Brothers”.NWT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

And in his last days he took young virgin girl to warming his bed. And his servants had important role in that arrange.

And your point regarding this???

7 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

two sort of Responsibility - Personal and Collective in WT Society.

Good to be reminded thank you very much. Yes, we are very well aware of these personal and "collective", (think I understand this term), areas of responsibility which is why we, for example  1. obey 1 Pet.3:21, and 2. obey Rev 18:4. 

42 minutes ago, Witness said:

The Bible makes clear, that there are cases which DO NOT require two witnesses, such as murder and rape (Deut.22:25-27)

Great examples, but in the case of unwitnessed alleged murder, the city of refuge arrangement has relevance.

The unwitnessed rape incident is also intriguing. Was Jehovah ever called as a witness additional to the victim?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Gone Fishing said:

"collective", (think I understand this term),

What is COLLECTIVE RESPONSIBILITY?

Every member's 

    Hello guest!
 regardless of an 
    Hello guest!
 member's involvement in decisions or the member's position or rank. Refer also to consensus and doctrine of individual responsibility.



Law Dictionary: 

    Hello guest!
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

Look up the word "precedence" to understand what the San Diego judge is attempting to achieve by overstepping his legal authority.

... and God have done some precedent action too, so why would not San Diego judge set his precedent too? He have God's permission for such action. God put him to that position according to JHVH words in Bible. 

If some worldly Judge make favor decision for WT, you would praise God for that, don't you?

So praise God also, when Judge made decision that is not for WT benefit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gone Fishing said:

The unwitnessed rape incident is also intriguing. Was Jehovah ever called as a witness additional to the victim?

Yes, when Jesus was a victim of false accusations against him.

So the Pharisees said to him, “You are testifying about yourself. Your testimony is not valid.”

 “Even if I testify about myself,” Jesus replied, “My testimony is true, because I know where I came from and where I’m going. But you don’t know where I come from or where I’m going.  You judge by human standards. I judge no one. And if I do judge, my judgment is true, because it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me. Even in your law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is true.  I am the one who testifies about myself, and the Father who sent me testifies about me.”  John 8:13-18

The authentic priesthood becomes one with Christ as members of his Body.  1 Cor 12:7-11,12; Rom 15:6; 1 Cor 2:16   The Holy Spirit resides in their heart (if faithful) and through their anointing, God’s laws are written on the heart. 2 Cor 3:3; Heb 8:10; God’s judgments can be made through the power of Holy Spirit,  who reads each heart, including the victim’s.  In the case of the adulterous woman whom the Pharisees wanted to stone, she was “caught in the act”, but Jesus’ wisdom still allowed the woman her freedom. John 8:2-11  Solomon also used wisdom God had given him through Holy Spirit, when dealing with the woman who stole the other woman’s baby.  There were not two witnesses in that case, but the baby was restored to its real mother.  1 Chron 1:11,12

Today, the elder body, the false priesthood, cannot reside over such cases with any success, since the Holy Spirit from God does not dwell within their hearts. (Eph 2:22)  It never will, since they are not anointed, (1 John 2:27) and have replaced the authentic priesthood, which is an abomination. Dan 11:31; Matt 24:15; Ezek 44:7; Luke 21:24; Rev 11:1,2

Within the anointed Body,

 “A manifestation of the Spirit is given to each person for the common good:  to one is given a message of wisdom through the Spirit, to another, a message of knowledge by the same Spirit” 1 Cor 12:7,8

Eph 4:1-6

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Witness said:

It places blame on the incapable victim, should they be molested, by depicting an image of a child with her hand up, to her would-be rapist

I have to disagree with this.  Just because you are a child, doesn't mean you are incapable, talk to parents everywhere and they will tell you children can be very capable! When that child has a strong emotional bond with their parent, and knows they can trust a parent, even if they do not fully understand something, then they will be more than eager to listen to that parent. Especially small children (as they get older they have their own ideas). It's interesting to see that worldly attitudes tend to focus on the cure rather than prevention. How much better is it when a child does not even have to experience such a traumatic event, rather than having to spend years in psychological counseling. How much better is it when people prevent diseases by living a healthy lifestyle, rather than spend the rest of their life visiting doctors and taking pills.  A child who is taught that certain actions that some people do are wrong, they tend to run and tell their parent on them if they identify it. That, coupled with vigilant parents who do not leave their children unattended and who recognize the signs of suspicious behavior on the part of someone who is interacting with their child, then that child's safety is almost guaranteed. But of course you can't expect that sort of discipline from everyone, especially not when they are dysfunctional in some way, or if they do not value God's laws. Regardless of anything though, blame is never put on the victim.

You can't rely on training a rapist not to be one, but you can train yourself not to be a victim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Anna said:

When that child has a strong emotional bond with their parent, and knows they can trust a parent, even if they do not fully understand something, then they will be more than eager to listen to that parent.

I agree with most all that you are saying, except many children are abused by a parent; a parent they thought they could trust.  Also, I was abused as a girl by someone in the extended family. Because my parents thought so highly of the individual, I never had the heart to tell them of my abuse that lasted years, even though I had an especially close bond with my father.  They died not knowing the sordid truth about my abuser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Witness said:

Yes, when Jesus was a victim of false accusations against him.

Quite true there. Jesus and Jehovah were two witnesses as to the genuineness of his Messianic role. Now, that is an excellent debunking of the Trinity myth.

But I was actually referring to the unwitnessed crime at De.21:26-27? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Every member's 

    Hello guest!
 regardless of an 
    Hello guest!
 member's involvement in decisions or the member's position or rank. Refer also to consensus and doctrine of individual responsibility.

Yeah thanks for the reference. I think I understood it correctly. I covered it with Rev.18:4.

Bit like the suspected reasons for the targeting of Andrey Gosht's family?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

The unwitnessed rape incident is also intriguing. Was Jehovah ever called as a witness additional to the victim?

I’m not sure what you’re getting at.  This was God’s decree, an incident where two witnesses were not needed to accuse the guilty.   Aren’t God’s decrees enough of a “witness”? The Wt. refuses to acknowledge these scriptures; and correct me if I am wrong, but I seem to remember  G. Jackson said they didn’t apply.  If he had spiritual wisdom, he could see how they would apply to the child abuse issue today.  Ps 119:1-4,18,27,32-34,66 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Witness said:

Aren’t GodÂ’s decrees enough of a “witness”?

Well the statement at De.19:15 is pretty explicit.

If we read De. 22:25-27, it says the sexual crime is the same as a murder (presumably also unwitnessed by an independent party). Now I know a corpse is a silent witness of a sort, but the testimony is a little obscure, and without clarity, it would be difficult to convict, so there were a number of arrangements in place to deal with that situation.

However,  leaving that to one side, in the case of a sexual crime, the victim is one witness who might be able to testify; the circumstance seems to provide some circumstantial evdence. Is there any suggestion of how Jehovah could serve as a witness (which he surely could)? In Jesus case he did actually testify verbally from the heavens. In the case of David and Bathsheeba, he served as a witness sending Nathan. Just wondering, as Deuteronomy is rather sparse? There is some danger of a false accusation which presumably is a reason for the 2-witness rule in the first place. Any records or ideas shedding light here?

But please forgive me. This is veering off topic again. i will withdraw until the subject is discussed separately.

I have posted it here in case some constructive information can be contributed:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Witness said:

I agree with most all that you are saying, except many children are abused by a parent; a parent they thought they could trust.  Also, I was abused as a girl by someone in the extended family. Because my parents thought so highly of the individual, I never had the heart to tell them of my abuse that lasted years, even though I had an especially close bond with my father.  They died not knowing the sordid truth about my abuser.

I am very sorry to hear that :(.  I did not dismiss the possibility of a parent being the abuser. It is the saddest of all the abuse cases and unfortunately the most common. It is a betrayal of trust of the worst kind. Only the God of justice will put things right.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

So, what you are saying, The Roman government had the right to kill Jesus, Good to know your mentality. I believe you have just answered the Deuteronomist question of "Thou shall NOT steal" that can be applied to the outrageous court daily sanction. Now you can add the double-edged sword!!!

    Hello guest!

According to you!!! the Watchtower. I'll ask you again, do you believe the Watchtower is doing the devils work? you didn't answer the question on another thread!!!!

Dear Allen! 

You are not born yesterday. And you are very well aware of one fact - Justice and Law are not always in harmony. Romans government in 1 century was secular authority and ....  

 "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God." - good or bad.

Answer is in this verse/verses in Romans 13. Please, do not drag me into your mental muddy water. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, AllenSmith said:

Is, the Court Judge, our brethren, and the courthouse a Kingdom Hall? :D

Why not? Matt chapter 5 

"And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even Gentiles do the same?"

If JW congregants would organizing some bible public talk or convention in such space - it would be KH :))))) as sports stadium or other worldly object that JW using for similar activity, ahahhahaa  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Anna said:

I have to disagree with this.  Just because you are a child, doesn't mean you are incapable, talk to parents everywhere and they will tell you children can be very capable! When that child has a strong emotional bond with their parent, and knows they can trust a parent, even if they do not fully understand something, then they will be more than eager to listen to that parent. Especially small children (as they get older they have their own ideas). It's interesting to see that worldly attitudes tend to focus on the cure rather than prevention. How much better is it when a child does not even have to experience such a traumatic event, rather than having to spend years in psychological counseling. How much better is it when people prevent diseases by living a healthy lifestyle, rather than spend the rest of their life visiting doctors and taking pills.  A child who is taught that certain actions that some people do are wrong, they tend to run and tell their parent on them if they identify it. That, coupled with vigilant parents who do not leave their children unattended and who recognize the signs of suspicious behavior on the part of someone who is interacting with their child, then that child's safety is almost guaranteed. But of course you can't expect that sort of discipline from everyone, especially not when they are dysfunctional in some way, or if they do not value God's laws. Regardless of anything though, blame is never put on the victim.

You can't rely on training a rapist not to be one, but you can train yourself not to be a victim.

This is just one facet, one side of looking to problem that exist. :)  i see your trying, thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Gone Fishing said:

Bit like the suspected reasons for the targeting of Andrey Gosht's family?

Please Fisher, help me with this, i am not sure what you wish to tell me. I went on google about this Andrey, terrible crime. :( Are whole family are responsible for Andreys job as policeman? Or they just pay price for his family member acting, deeds?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gone Fishing said:

Do not you see the parallel of a member of the group?

Andrey was chief police. And he chased bad guys. Bad guys aka mafia made revenge for that he was acting according to law. They killed all his family because they was Andrey family members. Members of this family payed price for only one reason, they are blood related, have same surname.  ---- This is crime, terror act.

JW members around the world  have same "surname" and are "blood related" to WT GB- their Mother. WT GB acting according to God's law (and WT GB is good guys:))) but in a manner they think is lawful and justifiable. Then Worldly Court "mafia" in California attack WT, break their home and stealing  $4000 per day. One other Worldly Court "mafia" in Russia went one step further. Members of WT family are in distress. They are in fear for they life. Any moment Court "mafia" will fine them also with money punishment or by putting them in jail or by killing them.  

Is this what you try to tell me? 

Yes, it can be in this way too. But my point on "private and collective responsibility" is in relation: human and God , and Rev 18:4 as you point out. Would punishment of any sort come from God directly or through human and human organization or by nature catastrophe or by .... it is difficult to say, for me difficult :)  

 

 

 

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Witness said:

I was abused as a girl by someone in the extended family. Because my parents thought so highly of the individual, I never had the heart to tell them of my abuse

It explains (to me) many things, or at least puts them in a different light. You are rather bold to share it, even anonymously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I like about @AllenSmithis that he does not yield the moral high ground. Why should he?

I will concede that for one brief instant of time it may be that this or that advocate seems more a protector of a child than its congregation organization. But not too long after his or her back is turned, that child is tossed right back into an unprotected cesspool. The world has compiled a list of abusers that is so long it is absolutely worthless to enforcement. Consequently, being put on 'the list' is largely a matter of revenge or public shamimg - not undeserved, but it does nothing to solve the problem of protecting children. To some extent, it has devolved into a job machine and a platform for grandstanding politicians to declare how they are tough on pedophiles.

England's top cop recently recommended all men found with pedophilia on their computers not be prosecuted. It pained him to say it, he said, but the simple fact is that there is so many that police cannot possibly keep up and are distracted from monitoring the real nasty ones - the ones who they say are like Medusa - look at it once, and your heart turns to stone.

All the time, we hear of children abused by persons who were already on the list  - why - they were right down the street! The world chokes on its abusers. For that matter - the world is so nuts - it ought to put every victim on the list as well, or at least on a watch list, for it is common knowledge that an abused one readily becomes an abuser. Completely unfair - but it makes perfect sense for a world that thinks it can snuff out abuse through pedophile registries.

Rapists are the ones who should be aggressively punished. No punishment is too great. As to the rest - look, even someone who recently confessed to being a victim of an extended family member - it probably would not have happened in these days of Caleb and Sophia, who are told: "If anybody tries to touch you - even if it is someone you know and trust ...  and then tell mommy or daddy." An extended family member doing abuse is common. A parent doing it is very uncommon, except in the case of a step-parent. The training of every Witness in the world via the Regional convention would also have gone a long way to prevent her calamity.

Allen is right to never yield the high ground. It is a huge court mess the brothers dealing with and I don't know how it will resolve, but Allen will not allow others to pull the 'righteous' card. Even with this mess, we are more righteous than they. The court cases are a classic example of getting slammed for doing the right thing: monitoring any abuser so that they can  be punished and any other congregations protected by their slipping in and feigning innocence. Nobody else even tries it. Do they have 1 abuser per hundred, or 50 per 100? Nobody knows or wants to know. Only Jehovah's Witnesses have the courage to stand up to a moral outrage and they should not be maligned for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites