In Defense of Shunning

[Srecko Sostar]

10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

For example, the Bible allows for a husband to disfellowship his wife. (The Bible never allows for a wife to disfellowship (divorce) a husband, by the way.) But are we under Mosaic rules for divorce just because it is Biblical? In fact, Jesus said that even though it was Biblical, it wasn't what Jehovah really wanted.

 

10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Jesus doesn't say Moses wasn't inspired when he made the Biblical concession for divorce as one of the laws in the "perfect" Law covenant. But Jesus rejects this particular "jot and tittle" of the Law as a mere concession for human hard-heartedness, especially because it was being misused in practice.  "Hard-heartedness" is a form of having "no natural affection." (See my earlier post on this topic.)

I believe that You, who are deeply thinking person, are very aware of how strong, a tectonic power to break, has the content/context of this example and a message that stand inside.

 

[Srecko Sostar]

7 hours ago, Anna said:

Didn't Paul say we should treat ones who have left as tax collectors? 

Yes, he said what he said about tax collectors and religion rules. Old Law said too, how to use stones for example ....etc.

Question is: Do You, Me, and All Other have to do/to work, to think according to The Words? Or by Interpretations of The Words? Or by .... whatever?

In every Paradise (in all sort of Paradises) existing/there is The Snake.

[JW Insider]

7 hours ago, Anna said:

Didn't Paul say we should treat ones who have left as tax collectors? 

It was Jesus, but Paul's words were very consistent with this. It is more powerful coming from Jesus, anyway, because Jesus was known (notorious) for associating with tax collectors.

[JOHN BUTLER]

5 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

It was Jesus, but Paul's words were very consistent with this. It is more powerful coming from Jesus, anyway, because Jesus was known (notorious) for associating with tax collectors.

I've never looked into the 'tax collectors' thing.  Who were they collecting the taxes for ? Was it the Romans ? 

Wasn't it just a job ? So why were they considered so wicked ? 

[JW Insider]

39 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So why were they considered so wicked ? 

Because it was a job given to Jewish people to collect taxes from fellow Jews to hand over to the Romans so that they had enough money to be even more oppressive and so that the Romans could display their riches and opulence as a direct humiliation of the people they were oppressing and occupying. For nearly Jesus' entire life on earth up to the 70 C.E. and even as late as 130 C.E., there was a continuous state of revolution against Rome by the Jews from Judea to Galilee, especially Galilee.

Imagine the same situation in Gaza or West Bank today where the Israelis continually abuse and terrorize the Palestinians, hoping to provoke enough backlash so that they can excuse the tactics of bulldozing and exploding their homes to steal their land and squeeze them further into economic ruin. Now imagine a Palestinian who takes a job of collecting taxes from fellow Palestinians to give to the Israelis.

[Evacuated]

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Tell me what ounce / gram of proof do i have that i could present to the police or anyone else ?

The official line on this in the UK is:   "You don’t need to be sure that a child or young person has been abused - it’s OK to report a suspicion."  https://www.gov.uk/report-child-abuse

and this reassurance if you report to Childline on 0800 1111: "The ChildLine number won’t show up on your phone bill if you call from a landline or from most mobile networks."

Your reticence to get involved is understandable, but you have revealed such a lot about the matter in this, a public forum, along with your various allegations against "elders" whom, you say, have more responsibility than you do, that it would seem that the reticence "horse" has actually bolted.

As made clear, the UK police line on this matter is "there is a moral duty on everyone of us to report to the police any crime or anything we suspect may be a crime".

3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Tell me what ounce / gram of proof do i have that i could present to the police or anyone else ?

Your concern regarding evidence is unfounded, as the police have a duty to investigate any report of "suspicion". It is up to them to decide if there is evidence or not to substantiate it.

It is all so easy to do, and can even be done anonymously. I don't understand your shrinking back from what is your moral responsibility, regardless of that of anyone else.  I would have thought, given the tone of your allegations against others, that you would proudly proclaim your "doing the right thing" in the matter of reporting allegations of child sexual abuse.

But, so far, all these reasons and justifications you list seem like more of the mealy-mouthed excuses of others on non-reporting  to which you attribute your withdrawal from the Witnesses. I am sure that wasn't your intention?

To stay (rather tenuously ) on topic, this kind of discussion would seem to be a pretty good reason why  those who wish to debate such matters in a congregational setting would be better shunned.

[JOHN BUTLER]

10 minutes ago, Outta Here said:

The official line on this in the UK is:   "You don’t need to be sure that a child or young person has been abused - it’s OK to report a suspicion."  https://www.gov.uk/report-child-abuse

and this reassurance if you report to Childline on 0800 1111: "The ChildLine number won’t show up on your phone bill if you call from a landline or from most mobile networks."

Your reticence to get involved is understandable, but you have revealed such a lot about the matter in this, a public forum, along with your various allegations against "elders" whom, you say, have more responsibility than you do, that it would seem that the reticence "horse" has actually bolted.

As made clear, the UK police line on this matter is "there is a moral duty on everyone of us to report to the police any crime or anything we suspect may be a crime".

Your concern regarding evidence is unfounded, as the police have a duty to investigate any report of "suspicion". It is up to them to decide if there is evidence or not to substantiate it.

It is all so easy to do, and can even be done anonymously. I don't understand your shrinking back from what is your moral responsibility, regardless of that of anyone else.  I would have thought, given the tone of your allegations against others, that you would proudly proclaim your "doing the right thing" in the matter of reporting allegations of child sexual abuse.

But, so far, all these reasons and justifications you list seem like more of the mealy-mouthed excuses of others on non-reporting  to which you attribute your withdrawal from the Witnesses. I am sure that wasn't your intention?

To stay (rather tenuously ) on topic, this kind of discussion would seem to be a pretty good reason why  those who wish to debate such matters in a congregational setting would be better shunned.

So condemn me, but not the Elders that have ALL THE INFORMATION. Hypocrite. 

If you read all the comments on that topic you would know that some told me to mind my own business. 

Quote "But, so far, all these reasons and justifications you list seem like more of the mealy-mouthed excuses of others on non-reporting"    

What others ? Do tell. What info do you have ? 

[Evacuated]

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

What info do you have ?

?? The info you have provided???

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

condemn me

You feel condemned? The problem is that you are presenting the same charcteristics as those you condemn others within the congregation for having. You may not actually intend this, but you seem to be doing the same thing as those you yourself condemn . So, that would lead to the conclusion that you are self-condemning. But I don't think that is what you are aiming at, is it?

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

If you read all the comments on that topic you would know that some told me to mind my own business.

??? I thought you said:

5 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

i am my own man, I need no approval from men.

 

[TrueTomHarley]

19 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

I think some on here are brothers of 'high rank' in the JW Org. 

What in the world would make you think that? With the possible exception of @Anna, who may be a high-ranking brother in drag, I think it is most unlikely that anyone is UNLESS they are malcontents working for the other side.

One can never know for sure, because the Internet is the land of the liars.

All comments that I have seen, the ones that have stayed on-topic, that is, have been focused on human matters, if not individual rights. I’ve not seen any that have addressed God’s stated insistence on preserving a clean people for his name.

[Anna]

6 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

I don't need excuses as i have true reasons, as i mentioned but you chose to ignore. 

Tell me what ounce / gram of proof do i have that i could present to the police or anyone else ?  Especially as I am in BAD standing with the congregation. It would just look like slander. 

And tell me, WHOSE duty was it to report it to the police in the FIRST PLACE ?  Maybe not legal duty but moral duty. 

As for 'apostate forums', who really cares from that viewpoint. Anna i am my own man, I need no approval from men. 

However, i have a wife that i love dearly, and she still attends meetings at that Kingdom Hall. Life is hard enough for her as it is. Why should i make more problems for her ? 

And as I said, on here, some were telling me do and some were telling me don't. So if i had, then it would be the other side nagging me on here instead of you ...

Of course, as I've mentioned earlier, if someone on here wishes to grass me up, then i might just get a police officer knocking on my door asking me questions. Then i would have to tell them wouldn't I ?  

So it snowballs. You now know, so is it your duty to report me for not reporting it ?  Have a good day. 

 

It seems like you are getting a taste of your own medicine

 

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

23 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

What in the world would make you think that? With the possible exception of @Anna, who may be a high-ranking brother in drag, I think it is most unlikely that anyone is UNLESS they are malcontents working for the other side.

One can never know for sure, because the Internet is the land of the liars.

All comments that I have seen, the ones that have stayed on-topic, that is, have been focused on human matters, if not individual rights. I’ve not seen any that have addressed God’s stated insistence on preserving a clean people for his name.

It seems that there are those that are or have been in one of the bethels or another, which i would assume they see as a privilege. And some seem to have more info on specific things than others. I could be wrong of course. They could all be bluffing. 

[Anna]

27 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

With the possible exception of @Anna, who may be a high-ranking brother in drag,

Hey, stop "dragging" me into this!