Jump to content

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

JOHN BUTLER -
James Thomas Rook Jr. -
225
5338

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

I've often thought of this point of reproof from the platform. It does nothing positive at all, it just leaves people wondering why the person was reproved.

And it certainly does not protect the congregation.  

    Hello guest!

by 
    Hello guest!

In January of 2019, elders in the congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses were issued a new version of their confidential handbook, "Shepherd the Flock of God." This handbook covers, among other topics, when a person should be "reproved."

For those unfamiliar with the their practices, Jehovah's Witness elders might determine that someone guilty of a serious sin is repentant and will be "reproved" rather than disfellowshipped [excommunicated]. This reproof might be administered privately, or it might include a very brief announcement to the congregation.

Public Reproofs Are Not a Protection

The "Shepherd" book makes the claim that a public reproof serves as a "protection" to the congregation against certain dangerous behaviors, such as child sexual abuse; note this statement from chapter 14, "Child Abuse::

    Hello guest!

However, this announcement of reproof includes no information about the person's "sinful" behavior, as instructed in chapter 16, "Procedure for Judicial Hearings":

    Hello guest!

The "Shepherd" book even outright instructs that a person's sinful acts should not be connected to their reproof, such as when a "warning" talk is given regarding their behavior; also from chapter 16:

    Hello guest!

This statement alone demonstrates that the entire "public reproof" arrangement protects no one from congregation members who might pose a danger to others, including children. Simply stating that someone has "been reproved" doesn't warn a congregant of that person's specific behavior, and especially when there is a long list of reasons why someone might be publicly reproved, including:

  • Smoking
  • Fornication, adultery
  • Theft
  • Lying, slander
  • Various forms of "apostasy"
  • Severe fits of temper, fighting
  • Drunkenness
  • Using narcotics
  • Taking up boxing

After hearing a rather generic announcement that someone has been "reproved," without knowing the actual reason for that reproof, how would congregants know to keep their children away from them? Another congregant might assume that a person being reproved was caught smoking or fornicating with an adult; child sexual abuse might be the last thing they would consider when they hear of someone having been reproved!

Your Conscience Shouldn't Be Clean

This begs the question of why Jehovah's Witnesses think that their consciences can be clean in these cases. Elders honestly think that making an announcement of so-and-so having been "reproved" protects the congregation and so they've done their job of keeping people and children safe?

Nothing can be further from the truth, especially when it comes to child sexual abuse. This "public reproof" arrangement purposely conceals the action that warranted the reproof, so it warns no one about a congregant who might be a danger to their children.

This announcement does not take away from an elder's complicity in hiding allegations of abuse. Any elder who hears of such a credible allegation and doesn't notify authorities, cooperate with their investigations fully, and then do everything possible to keep a potentially dangerous person away from children shares guilt and blame if that person goes on to molest another child.

    Hello guest!

The bottom line is that Jehovah's Witnesses and elders especially have no problem lying to themselves and to the general public about their supposed "protections" for congregants. They shield alleged molesters by purposely ensuring that no information about a particular act is associated with "reproved" persons, and then tell themselves that this passive-aggressive "hinting around" is going to somehow alert congregants to the need to keep their child away from him or her.

While the authors of these practices and the elders charged with enforcing them might go to bed with a clean conscience, remember it's not them who suffer the consequences of their actions; the elders are not being raped and abused, the men who wrote this "Shepherd" book are not the ones who will be the next victims of these "reproved" persons.

Their complicity in this horrific act is bad enough, but their smug self-righteousness in thinking that they've somehow done enough to protect children with a generic "reproof" is just another slap across the face of those same children.

Share this post


Link to post

All one need to do blow this silly thing out of the water is to read the relevant portion of the JW downloadable child abuse policy.

11. If it is determined that one guilty of child sexual abuse is repentant and will remain in the congregation, restrictions are imposed on the individual’s congregation activities. The individual will be specifically admonished by the elders not to be alone in the company of children, not to cultivate friendships with children, or display any affection for children. In addition, elders will inform parents of minors within the congregation of the need to monitor their children’s interaction with the individ- ual. {Bolded mine]

    Hello guest!

In the special case of child sexual abuse, these are the steps that go above and beyond handling other forms of wrongdoing.

Why doesn’t Alexandra James refer to this? Why doesn’t John know it? No one has been more prolific at leveling charges as he, and he swallows every word of her accusations. Why does Srecko give it a Gold Star Thank You? All he and John have to do is to read the JW published policy to see that she is wrong.

One would think the organization’s published child abuse policy would be the very first thing consulted. Instead, they never read it at all, or else they do and immediately seek to bury it.

Will Mr. Rook give himself a downvote for overlooking this most obvious proof that the complaint he slobbers all over is bogus?

It is clear that Ms James spends too much time pouring over confidential material that she has pilfered and insufficient time reading what is right under her nose.

 

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Why doesn’t Alexandra James refer to this? Why doesn’t John know it? No one has been more prolific at leveling charges as he, and he swallows every word of her accusations. Why does Srecko give it a Gold Star Thank You? All he and John have to do is to read the JW published policy to see that she is wrong.

One would think the organization’s published child abuse policy would be the very first thing consulted. Instead, they never read it at all, or else they do and immediately seek to bury it.

Will Mr. Rook give himself a downvote for overlooking this most obvious proof that the complaint he slobbers all over is bogus?

It is clear that Ms James spends too much time pouring over confidential material that she has pilfered and insufficient time reading what is right under her nose.

TTH:

I have no idea who Alexandra James is, but I believe you have me confused with her, as stated by you in the quoted text you wrote. Until this post I am (was) not even a part of this discussion thread.

Even if this was intended as an "ad-hominid" attack, it is a very poor one.

...and anyone that "upvotes", or "downvotes" their own writing has some serious mental issues, unless it is CLEARLY meant to be funny.

.... as an aside .... the Russian Federation Constitution is a model of religious freedom and liberty .... but ANY Constitution is dependent of honorable, competent, and far sighted administrators who will pursue Justice and common sense, as opposed to agenda driven central policy.

Having the very best of intentions, and being righteously inclined DOES NOT COUNT ... if the administrators are policy wonks who are also clueless and self-serving.

This is true about EVERY organization .... Nation States, Companies, and all manner of institutionalized groups of people, outside AND INSIDE of what we call "The Truth".

There are no exceptions.

EVER.

Wiley-cable-news.png

Since the Russian Federation POLICY makes them a model of religious Liberty ... howse dat working out for us?

Policy is one thing ..... reality is quite another.

2019-05-16_013954.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

@TrueTomHarley  I remember a case of a brother being reproved from the platform, and as it happens he had previously visited my wife and I, with his wife, to tell us that he was about to be reproved. He had been out with a group of brothers, one of them being an elder, they had gone into Exeter and he had got drunk and been sick on the train home, as he wasn't used to 'going out drinking'.

One almost funny point though not important, the elder was on holiday overseas when this brother was reproved, so the elder was well out of the way and not involved. But my point is that only a few of us in the congregation knew why this brother was being reproved. 

The point of that article is that, most people in a congregation DO NOT KNOW WHY THE PERSON IS REPROVED...

Therefore it is not a protection to those who do not know the 'sin committed'. 

I remember a tiny bit of scripture whereby the apostle Paul is counselling congregation because a member of said congregation was  having sex with his father's wife. 1 Corinthians 5 v1 & 2

Actually sexual immorality is reported among you, and such immorality as is not even found among the nations—of a man living with his father’s wife. And are you proud of it? Should you not rather mourn, so that the man who committed this deed should be taken away from your midst?  

If Paul wasn't frightened to mention the deed and the man then why should the Org be frightened of it ? 

I fully agree with @James Thomas Rook Jr. when he says :-

" Having the very best of intentions, and being righteously inclined DOES NOT COUNT if the administrators are policy wonks who are also clueless and self-serving.

and. "Policy is one thing ..... reality is quite another." 

I cannot understand why the GB /Org does not announce fully the reason for reproval and reason for disfellowshipping alongwith the person's name.. 

It would seem worse to me to reprove a person and not give a reason as then the congregants are left being suspicious of the person that was reproved. 

Tom, you and Space Merchant and a few others seem to believe that just because a 'policy' is written down, that it will always be adhered to. Let's hear it again JTR Jr

"Policy is one thing ..... reality is quite another."

Share this post


Link to post

Policy of the United States of America in the 1800's:

"All men are created equal, and are endowed by theit Creator with certain unalienable rights. Among these are Life, Liberty, and the persuit of happiness" - Thomas Jefferson

Reality in the United States of America in the 1880s:

"The only good Indian, is a dead Indian"

And half the nation was controlled by Democrats and had a whole race of men and women enslaved.

"Policy is one thing ..... reality is quite another."

In fact. Thomas Jefferson, the author of the first statement, was a slave owner.

It's always been about money.

It's about money now.

"Follow the Money!"

Money ..... always tells the TRUTH.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Policy is one thing ..... reality is quite another."

Missing the entire point is another, also.

Of course any policy can not be implemented. But that is not Alexandra’s statement. Her statement is that there is no policy to specifically warn parents in the event of child sexual abuse. 

Had she just read the easily available online JW policy, she would have known that the whole thrust of her point is bogus.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

In fact. Thomas Jefferson, the author of the first statement, was a slave owner.

It's always been about money.

You are sort of right and sort of wrong. TJ did own slaves. He also wrote at length that slavery destroys both blacks and whites. This is substantially different from men like John C Calhoun, who wrote that it is an arrangement that benefits both groups.

Share this post


Link to post

2019-05-16_112514.jpg

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No... my statement was EXACTLY correct.

You are, as you do with defending the indefensible about Watchtower Policy, making excuses as to why Thomas Jefferson is NOT a hypocrite.

He was.

PERIOD.

.  <----------- (period)

The reason BOTH are hypocrites, is that Thomas Jefferson wanted to keep his money and status, and the Watchtower wants to keep its money and status, and BOTH have twisted what they knew to be true to keep their money and status.

Accountants and lawyers are now running the WTB&TS, and creating "theocratic policy" ... and their life blood, and mother's milk ......

.....   is money and status.

I did give that some thought as I dropped a check into the Kingdom Hall contribution box last weekend .... but I marked it "for local needs".

The difference is that I am fully aware I am rationalizing .... but I don't know what else to do.

2019-05-16_012807.jpg

 

I guess that makes THREE hypocrites ... Thomas Jefferson, the WTB&TS .... and me.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Missing the entire point is another, also.

Of course any policy can not be implemented. But that is not Alexandra’s statement. Her statement is that there is no policy to specifically warn parents in the event of child sexual abuse. 

Had she just read the easily available online JW policy, she would have known that the whole thrust of her point is bogus.

And if the GB and Org did their job properly they would announce name of person and sin committed directly from the platform.  Why hide it ? 

Is it just parents that need to know these things ? No. Quite often grandparents, carers and other congregants take children to the meetings. No longer is the rule that children must sit with their parents at the meetings. Children sit with lots of different people. The  whole congregation should be told directly from the platform. 

It's because things are kept hidden that the Org now has such a serious problem concerning Child Sex Abuse accusations. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

No... my statement was EXACTLY correct.

Your statement regarding the overall premise of this thread is EXACTLY incorrect.

Alexandra’s entire complaint is based upon something that is factually incorrect—and you have hailed it as though it were the commandments brought down from Sinai. Whether or not the policy addresses every conceivable scenario or whether it is always adhered to is another matter entirely. She has stated that there is none

She states that there is no policy to warn parents should a person guilty of CSA be retained in the congregation. There is. And it would be hard to put it in a more obvious place—the online and downloadable. WT policy on child sexual abuse.

Moreover, had she come by the book honestly, rather than pilfering it off the internet from Jack or one of his chums, she would have been there to hear the “Brothers, make sure you consult the online CSA policy, for the special circumstance of when the wrong repented over involves child abuse.”

There are enough legitimate things to be concerned about without you fanning the flames of charges that are undeniably bogus. By doing so, you contribute to the hysteria of anticultism that less freedom-loving nations use as a pretext for physically assaulting upright people and putting a stop to that dissemination of Bible truths that you have said is important.

Share this post


Link to post

My Statement was ONLY about Thomas Jefferson being a hypocritical slave owner.

It was EXACTLY correct!

I do not even know who Alexandra is, and was not talking about her, or about anything she may have said.

You SERIOUSLY need to get more sleep!

For your convenience, I am posting what I said and what you replied.

 

2019-05-16_112514.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I do not even know who Alexandra is, and was not talking about her, or about anything she may have said.

That sounds like an excellent reason for you to upvote her thread the minute after it is posted.

Look, just say this about all the other threads you weigh in on and we will all be happy. 

“I don’t know who this person is. I am not speaking about anything that she has brought up, and I am only here to insert some crass cartoons and insult people.” There. What is so hard about that?

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

And if the GB and Org did their job properly they would announce name of person and sin committed directly from the platform. 

In GDPR atmosphere law, perhaps elders need to have sinner's  written consent, to made his name publicly known and what matter is about ??

I think how publishers in many countries (EU) signed such paper or are in process to sign it.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

That sounds like an excellent reason for you to upvote her thread the minute after it is posted.

Look, just say this about all the other threads you weigh in on and we will all be happy.

I did not "upvote" her thread ... I upvoted John Butler's posting a coherent essay ... which started this thread.  It's not HER thread ... it's John Butler's thread.

There is a difference.

I am amazed you can tie your shoes, without doing a front-flip.

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Are you sure that it is not you and sanity that are two ENTIRELY different things?

I am merely eccentric .... generally because most people are as dull as a cardboard knife.

... but you may have a point.  In my younger years I repeatedly jumped out of perfectly functional airplanes.

Share this post


Link to post
56 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

but you may have a point.  In my younger years I repeatedly jumped out of perfectly functional airplanes.

Ah. There lies the problem. Had you used a parachute you would not have landed on your head.

(Okay, TrueTom, don’t be mean. You must admit that the ol pork chop has given a good answer.)

Share this post


Link to post

@JOHN BUTLER Perhaps because the fact that they are not trying to be or emulate that of modern Christendom in the mainstream, they are bounded by such that is on par with a Nazareth Vow, something that cannot be broken, in conjunction with the commandments of the Christ which he gave.

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/17/2019 at 5:15 PM, TrueTomHarley said:

Well, I do. I tracked her down and addressed her post, both on her forum and mine.

    Hello guest!

The difference is, SHE is saying CONGREGANTS are not told, the Org is saying PARENTS are told. 

So she is not telling lies or misleading anyone, you are TTH. 

As I've mentioned before, grandparents and others are quite often responsible for children in the congregation. I've known people bring other people's children to meetings. There was even a mother in my ex congregation that would drop her children at the front door of the KH, because the mother was Dis/fed but she still wanted her children at the meetings. She was obviously there to pick the children up at the end of the meetings. But her three children were there without parents, being looked after by other congregants. Yes a strange arrangement, but the mum is now back in the Org. 

So i still ask, why are the GB and Elders still protecting Pedophile  ?  The Apostle Paul wasn't frightened to make things known about people. 

Why do the Elders not announce it directly from the platform. After all it seems they do a 'talk' about it weeks later.

It is all too obvious that the GB and it's JW Org do not follow Bile principles. 

The GB and it's Org are actually frightened of reality.

When you look at the Bible accounts of the early Christians, what they did, what happened to them, how they 'obeyed God  as ruler rather than men', it shows that they had complete trust in God through Christ. 

The GB are just old men living a comfortable lifestyle, not prepared to go to the limits that early Christians did. 

I do sometimes wonder if God looks down and thinks that no one on this earth is taking Him seriously enough. 

Reminds me of when the Nation of Israel was frightened to go into the Promised Land, so God gave them 40 years in the wilderness.

It certainly seems like the GB and it's Org is in a wilderness, but totally lost with no guidance. 

Unfortunately it is all run from America. It's all about business and legality. Americans love to sue each other. Big money earner. Hence the GB / Org is frightened to be totally honest about those who are 'members'.  

If you cannot see how far away from true Christianity the GB and it's Org is, that is because you are not a true Christian.   

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

As I've mentioned before, grandparents and others are quite often responsible for children in the congregation

Maybe, just maybe, juusssstttttt maybe,.....the parents will tell the grandparents.

At any rate, I cannot run these things by Alexandra. After a furious exchange, in which she was more shrill even than you, she blocked me. 

That makes three. Four, if you count Lloyd, who did not block me on Twitter, but did ban me on his website. These people do not like dissent. I have never been rude to any of them.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

WDS

 

Right the internet gives lots of different meanings to this WDS idea.

So please explain what exactly you mean by it as it could be one of many things. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Maybe, just maybe, juusssstttttt maybe,.....the parents will tell the grandparents.

At any rate, I cannot run these things by Alexandra. After a furious exchange, in which she was more shrill even than you, she blocked me. 

That makes three. Four, if you count Lloyd, who did not block me on Twitter, but did ban me on his website. These people do not like dissent. I have never been rude to any of them.

TTH, you do come across as, A.sarcastic, and B. thinking of yourself as someone special.... You are an author, and deny it as you might, being an author serves you two purposes, it earns you money and gets you recognition. 

Now maybe, just maybe, those people that you disagree with know exactly you reasons for disagreeing with them, and maybe they don't 'take the bait' that you want them to. You do tend to make it known that you use most of your interactions for content in your books. Doing so also makes you seem less honest, or at least have less honest intentions. It's like saying, "the only reason I'm talking to you is to use you in my book to earn me money". For my part, if you use me in any of your books I think it's funny, but to some people that have a more serious outlook they may find it offensive. (I think Billy child finds it offensive that you use comments off here in your books :) ). 

As for your idea of 'parents telling grandparents' yes but that could be seen as gossip and that can be seen as 'causing a division in the congregation'. Surely you can understand that if people in the congregation start accusing others of being a pedophile, that would cause upset. You still haven't answered my question of 'Why can't it be announced directly from the platform ?  Or is it because of the problem of being sued. If the pedophile knows that the parents in their  congregation have been told then said pedophile will be aware that it will be spread around anyway, even though according to JW 'rules' it shouldn't be spread around. It really makes a comedy show of all of it.  The Org needs people like the Apostle Paul in every congregation. Get everything out in the open. Wash the inside of the dish or bowl before trying to clean the outside, as Jesus said.

Probably nothing new here for your book sorry :) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

You do tend to make it known that you use most of your interactions for content in your books. Doing so also makes you seem less honest, or at least have less honest intentions. 

Most of the New Testament is in the form of letters written to someone else. Those recipients, too, could have voiced similar complaints. I just find I write better when I am responding to a specific person or group of persons. I don’t deliberately set them up. I just write after the fact. Paul did too, apparently.

As for money, I haven’t make enough yet to offset the outgoing expenses. Maybe that will change someday—I too, have a light bill—but I have resolved that the two most recent ebooks of opposition in Russia and in the West will always be free in some electronic format. That does not mean that other formats will be, or even that every ebook format will be, though it is so now. I would be surprised if I ever make any serious money, though if I do I will buy me a Cadillac-ac-ac-ac-ac.

As for recognition, no matter how many people read these books, it is not enough. To my knowledge, both are the largest (and perhaps only) significant compilations of relevant subject matters.

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

I think Billy child finds it offensive that you use comments off here in your books 

Billy finds everything offensive. Anyone who makes any comment on social media meant to be public is fair game for rebuttal.

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

You still haven't answered my question of 'Why can't it be announced directly from the platform ?  

Until the late 70s, it was standard practice that anyone reproved would have that fact announced publicly—the reproof, not the wrongdoing that triggered it. At that time it was reasoned, that since a reproved person is such because he has been seen to be repentant, and the goal therefore become his healing, will he really be helped to recover by being exposed to everyone as a “practicer of sin?” 

(“Reprove before all onlookers those who practice sin, as a warning to the rest.” 1 Timothy 5:20)

The “onlookers” was taken to mean not the whole congregation but those who knew of the wrongdoing, which might be just two or three. Only in cases where the wrongdoing was known or would soon be known to everyone would the reproof be made public. I think the policy you object to is just an application of the above, with the added caution that those who would truly need to know, parents of minors, would be notified. They could be trusted to pass it along to anyone who might need to know, such as a guardian.

Don’t forget that this only is for those deemed repentant—cut to the heart and with expressed resolve to turn around. Rarely, if ever, are we speaking of forcible rape here, but some lesser form of molestation.

Any degree of premeditation or grooming would cast serious doubt on any claim of repentance. This would almost certainly be the case with rape, and these ones are generally disfellowshipped, not reproved. When that happens, the same ones here that claim disfellowshipping is horribly cruel and excessive claim, in this case, that it is only a slap on the wrist and means nothing at all.

 

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

WDS

Right off the bat, she demanded a retraction and apology. She had not charged that we have no policy, she said. She had a point. She had not said it, but the implication was plain as day.

However, she shot back that she had not implied it, either. I responded that had she but included the online paragraph, even to criticize it, her vows of pure honesty would be more believable, for it is clearly the most relevant writing on her topic.

At that, she fired off a couple of zingers and then blocked me. If you want to block, just block. From my point of view, that is the sure sign of a desperation—to throw a new charge and then block any reply. 

Of course, JWs have mechanisms that amount to blocking, too. The difference is that we don’t pretend otherwise. There comes a time when you simply have to muzzle some people:

(“It is necessary to shut their mouths, because these very men keep on subverting entire households by teaching things they should not for the sake of dishonest gain.” Titus 1:11)

These folks, on the other hand, are constantly on the prowl for JWs to engage with.

Share this post


Link to post

@TrueTomHarley Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?  Do you actually believe that this did happen in some cases ?  Or are you saying that the JW Org is so so so clean and so well organised that those things would / could never happen ? 

Honest reply in as few words as possible please. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Most of the New Testament is in the form of letters written to someone else. ........ I just write after the fact. Paul did too, apparently.

I found this interesting. Did they, (Bible) Writers of Private Letters to someone, were Inspired to wrote text about something, or did they just made Description (Fact, Advice, Lesson, Judgement etc.)  about something what people of those time has done? ..... Just as you TTH doing today. Do you find yourself Inspired for writing books? 

 

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

will he really be helped to recover by being exposed to everyone as a “practicer of sin?” 

Question has their place, of course.  But then, we can ask in similar manner - If exposing the name of a sinner to public is not pedagogically  sustainable,  in same logic somebody can argue how excommunication is also questionable method to bring someone back to right path.

 

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

the added caution that those who would truly need to know, parents of minors, would be notified. They could be trusted to pass it along to anyone who might need to know, such as a guardian.

This is something strange. Elders, as legal body, are authorized to tell to particular individual or few of them, The Confidential Information. After that this individual or few of them, according to my understanding of your words, could be trusted  to pass it along to anyone... Strange thing again.

How does non authorized individuals ( rank and file members) can be in same category, in such Delicate issue, as Elders who, supposedly, have all important information about case and was faced with matter in wider range? 

 How is possible that congregants have to believe and trust HearSay information from second hand, from Brother (or Sister :)))) aka Parents who are not The Elder/Elderessa . 

 

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Rarely, if ever, are we speaking of forcible rape here, but some lesser form of molestation.

? ....confused about meaning.

 

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

ones here that claim disfellowshipping is horribly cruel

Crime we talking about (sexual crimes and child molestation) are cruel. To put such one in hand of Justice is not cruel. If that including Report to police, DFD from church or Fired from job looks as normal reaction of society.

Share this post


Link to post

Wikipedia source:

Etymology[
    Hello guest!
]

Coined in 2003 by 

    Hello guest!
 as Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) in 
    Hello guest!
 article "The Delusional Dean".
    Hello guest!

Noun[
    Hello guest!
]

    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 (plural 
    Hello guest!
)

  1. (
      Hello guest!
    , 
      Hello guest!
    ) The acute onset of 
      Hello guest!
     in otherwise normal and balanced people triggered by the mention of a specific topic

:)))  in otherwise normal and balanced people  :)))))

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/21/2019 at 11:33 AM, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?

I noticed this question, and I know you were asking TTH, but I would like to say no, I do not believe that this has ever been the case. Now if Jehovah's Witnesses were a child porn ring in disguise, then I might believe it. You, as a reasonable person, and I am assuming you are reasonable, has to see that no human organization (unless it is what I mentioned) will knowingly and purposefully condone child molestation.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Oh, is THAT what he was implying? Sorry. I missed that.

No Tom it was not what i was implying at all. Anna seems to to have a vivid imagination.

Maybe my wording wasn't as it should have been or maybe English English is different to American English, or different to the American way of thinking. 

I was not suggesting that JW Org was a porn ring in disguise, though it is possible that there could be small porn rings within the JW Org Earthwide.  After all it has been suggested that some people join the JW Org for just that reason, to abuse young children.

However back to what I was saying originally. I will reword it.

Original comment

Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?

Revised comment : Do you believe any of the cases of child abuse within the JW Org, from any country in this earth ? Do you believe that any of the Elders that did continuously abuse children in the JW Org were known to be doing so ?  Do you think it was possible for those Elders to continue to abuse children because they were allowed to keep their position as Elder even though it was known they had abused children in the past ?  OR do you think that every complaint against every Elder concerning child abuse, is a lie by apostates ? 

TTH I don't expect you to answer any of these questions, but Anna might :) as she seems to think it involves her. 

As for Anna's comment : " You, as a reasonable person, and I am assuming you are reasonable, has to see that no human organization (unless it is what I mentioned) will knowingly and purposefully condone child molestation."

2 Kings 16 v2.

Aʹhaz was 20 years old when he became king, and he reigned for 16 years in Jerusalem. He did not do what was right in the eyes of Jehovah his God as David his forefather had done. Instead, he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and he even made his own son pass through the fire, following the detestable practices of the nations that Jehovah had driven out from before the Israelites. 

2 Kings 21 v 6 concerning Manassah 

  And he made his own son pass through the fire; he practiced magic, looked for omens,

    Hello guest!
 and appointed spirit mediums and fortune-tellers.
    Hello guest!
 He did on a grand scale what was bad in Jehovah’s eyes, to offend him.

But of course JW Org is much better than the Nation of Israel :) :) :) isn't it.  Or maybe not .................

 

Share this post


Link to post
21 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?

Accusations against elders are very rare—the rotter in San Diego being a notable exception, as is brought out in the following post.

    Hello guest!

Share this post


Link to post
On 5/21/2019 at 11:33 AM, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you believe ANY of the cases, from ANY country in this earth, that say an Elder was allowed to keep his position and status and his conduct was kept hidden, so he was able to abuse more children or abuse the same child on a regular basis ?

Yes, I believe there have been a few. I don't want to give the impression that I think this happens often, or as much as so many ex-JWs and previously abused Witnesses seem to imagine. I have just recently read a couple of statements by activist ex-elders who have sat on judicial committees for several years in their congregations and never personally encountered a case or accusation of child sexual abuse. (I'm responding as if you said "on a repeated basis" rather than "on a regular basis" since the term "regular" is open to interpretation.)

I answer your question to the best of my ability however because I believe this is one of those terrible things that, if true, MUST be exposed so that more of us are alert to the potential extent of the problem. Things done in darkness must be brought to light, no matter the pain and embarrassment to the organization. After all, it's not the organization's fault that these men exist; they bring reproach upon themselves. It's this old belief that they are bringing reproach upon the organization that has led to *a few* amazing cover-ups by "organization men" who thought they were doing the right thing.

However, before responding, I just recently read through a private discussion from a person who says he is now ready to go to the police, now that he has completed collecting a lot of evidence and speaking with corroborating witnesses. (Not to his own abuse, but to other persons abused by the same elder.) He knows his case is strong, but he believes the status of the accused will make it difficult to get very far based on the way that other victims of the same accused have been treated. He already brought his case to the elders a few years ago, before the most recent reporting arrangements were consistent. So he wants to have done all the due-diligence before presenting his accusation to authorities.

Also, in general, I think the evidence is strong that the higher up a person is in the organization, the more he has been protected from scandal, because that scandal was thought to reflect so badly when it is someone known by all the Witnesses of a specific country or, at least once in the past, even internationally. That said, I only know about three cases, in three different countries, that would fit this criterion. Two of the accused brothers are now dead. I have been told about a few others that I am too skeptical to believe, although I might be ready to add a fourth name to my list. (A circuit overseer who was finally disfellowshipped for homosexual behaviour with JW and non-JW "young men" and who, according to his wife, continued with non-JW "young men" after he was DF'd.) The length of time it has taken for several elders' cases to finally be settled, after other accusers come forward, over a several-year period, is also circumstantial evidence that most elders never really knew how to handle such cases in years past. This lack of consistency can easily allow for "abuse-of-power" cases to be swept under the rug. But it doesn't prove that these types of cases were rampant.

Of course, there is a wide range of activity that has been lumped into the term child sexual abuse and some of this activity on the more violent end of the spectrum would be expected to produce immediate discipline. What were considered lesser crimes were more easily dismissed or rationalized away. But, of course, as this thread has pointed out, (in the past especially) many of the vulnerable persons in the congregation were never warned if the elders were assured that true repentance had taken place after a disciplinary period, no matter how bad the crime was.

I am very happy for the more explicit correction in the recent Watchtower that can help change the "culture" about where the reproach really lies.

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Accusations against elders are very rare—the rotter in San Diego being a notable exception, as is brought out in the following post.

    Hello guest!

Ah but why in the past have accusations against elders been very rare ? Maybe because congregants were told to keep their mouths shut and not report it. Maybe because victims were disfellowshipped for 'slander' even though what they said was true. Maybe because of the two witness rule, where victims were not taken seriously.

But I think there have been proven cases here in the UK too. 

    Hello guest!

7th November 2018.

A Jehovah's Witness elder has been jailed for five years for sexually assaulting a "terrified" schoolgirl.

Brian Jenkins, who is now 75, groped the girl when she was aged between 12 and 14, while she was part of his congregation in Brecon, Powys.

Jenkins, from Redditch, Worcestershire, was found guilty of six charges of indecent assault dating back to the 1970s at Merthyr Tydfil Crown Court.

The court heard Jenkins was jailed for 21 months at Worcester Crown Court in 1991 for a series of similar sex offences.

Rare is it Tom ? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Ah but why in the past have accusations against elders been very rare ? Maybe because congregants were told to keep their mouths shut and not report it.

It hasn’t stopped any accusations of the rank and file and allegations that elders are trying to “cover it up” has it? If they are not hesitant to accuse of cover-up, why not accuse them of doing it, which is juicier? No, John, you are reaching for straws, trying to manufacture a “reality” that does not exist.

Why do we hear nothing about bestiality of members, or of elders? Hmm? What sort of shenanigans is that?

Possibly because it doesn’t happen. Duh

Share this post


Link to post

Quote  JW Insider  "Also, in general, I think the evidence is strong that the higher up a person is in the organization, the more he has been protected from scandal, because that scandal was thought to reflect so badly when it is someone known by all the Witnesses of a specific country or, at least once in the past, even internationally..... " 

@JW Insider Thank you for a very well thought out and sensible comment. Very balanced. 

I particularly liked, and laughed at, this quote above. You are not really''fanning the flames' of my thoughts though as I've felt that it was that situation for a long time. Even the GB may have skeletons in their closets. 

Share this post


Link to post

@TrueTomHarley  "No, John, you are reaching for straws, trying to manufacture a “reality” that does not exist. "

Um, well I've just given an example that it does exist Tom. 

And investigations are now going on in many countries so it may show that it has existed even more than you like to think. 

Cases have been going to court for a few years now, it's not exactly new news.

And if you read @JW Insider comment you may notice why the higher ups 'appear' squeaky clean.  But it seems you need to serve your GB and it's Org so you are blinding yourself to reality. So be it Tom but I think you will have to face the truth one day. 

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Even the GB may have skeletons in their closets. 

I have not heard the slightest hint of scandal about any current members of the GB. I can't say I know any of them on a personal level, either. But surely with all the attention being given this topic, and with thousands of vocal ex-JWs, you'd expect some smoke if there was fire. Yet no one has made a claim (or "made up" a claim) about any of the GB members, as far as I know.

Share this post


Link to post
15 minutes ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Um, well I've just given an example that it does exist Tom. 

“An example” is not a tidal wave. And JWI says he knows of...what...three or four? (Billy is choking on his coffee right now) Also hardly a tidal wave.

In an ever-replenishing group currently at 8 million, you are going to find many examples of anything.

You think in such absolutes, John. You cannot do that with people. Any mental health professional will tell you that it only makes trouble for you.

You hone in like a laser on any report of CSA among JWs and publicly say that you care not a whit when it is reported anywhere else. How balanced is that? What is your interest here?

When the world you have chosen gets a handle on CSA, then come screaming at everyone here. As it is, it is the most common thing in the world to hear of this or that perpetrator picked up who already went though the system that you think is so foolproof—he was already on the sex offender registry, living just down the street and nobody knew it. 

Meanwhile, nearly ALL of the attention given to CSA in the greater world is about punishing after the fact. Little is about prevention. Consider that the JW worldwide convention in 2017 gathered every member in the world to spell out detailed scenarios in which CSA might occur, so that parents, the obvious first line of defense, might be vigilant. NOBODY else has done that. 

I do allow that a ‘culture’ should change in which some, although free to report CSA, declined to do it. I agree with JWI that the May Wt goes a long way in clarifying that. I have allowed here that the ones so zealous to “keep the congregation clean” have in some respects made the situation worse:

    Hello guest!

 

Share this post


Link to post

As it is, it is the most common thing in the world to hear of this or that perpetrator picked up who already went though the system that you think is so foolproof—he was already on the sex offender registry, living just down the street and nobody knew it.“

The Economist Magazine tells of one proposed law in Georgia that said no convicted child abuser could live within 1000 yards of a school. It was discarded when someone with a compass did some work and determined that it meant they couldn’t live anywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

The Economist Magazine tells of one proposed law in Georgia that said no convicted child abuser could live within 1000 yards of a school.

I think it's 1000 FEET, but it wasn't just schools, it was to apply to anywhere where children congregate, including schools.

Note:

"Registered sex offenders in Georgia are barred from living within 1,000 feet of anywhere children may congregate, such as a school . . ."

    Hello guest!

    Hello guest!

The problem is that children may congregate at a school, park, library, bus stop, playground, mall, etc.

Share this post


Link to post

@TrueTomHarley  Quote "You hone in like a laser on any report of CSA among JWs and publicly say that you care not a whit when it is reported anywhere else. How balanced is that? What is your interest here?"

It's not that i don't care about the children that are being abused elsewhere, it's that the JW Org is totally different in it's way of 'gathering together to upbuild one another'. 

The JW Org pretends to be so clean and inviting. So we are back to the scripture where Jesus says about cleaning the inside of the bowl or dish, then the outside will also be clean. 

JW's go out into the ministry to invite families into Kingdom Halls. JW's go into people private houses / dwellings. JW's give private bible studies to children and take them out on the ministry.  Most other religions do none of those things and if people visit churches as a family it would be most likely that the children would stay with their parents all the time. 

Of course in clubs such as football training, swimming lessons etc there is also a great danger as has been found out, but I'm concentrating on the one religion that goes out to the public and tell the public that they are the one and only way to gain salvation. The JW religion that puts on a front of cleanliness and goodness so as to entice people in, like the spider to the fly. 

The religion that uses a personal name for God, then brings shame on that name. 

Oh and I see you haven't forgotten your training from your superiors,, mentioning a person's mental health once again. It seems to be a JW thing now, a sort of regular dig at anyone that should dare speak the truth about JW Org. 

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

A'haz ....and he reigned for 16 years in Jerusalem.

Well, this Bible example and report of past events show us how his "regime" was "legal" or legal for 16 years. And AFTER 16 years things started to change.

No one in Jew nation made real opposition to king Ahaz, no Judicial Commission, no dfd, no shunning. He continue with bad ruling and evil work. How similar it is to today. Governing Structures continues to work on their own way, even longer than 16 years.     

Share this post


Link to post

Quite funny how Billy is comparing the JW Org to the nations, when the JW Org is supposed to be 'no part of this world'. 

I've said it before but it seems that JW's are tooooo blind or deaf or stupid to understand. 

If you want to compare the JW Org to something, do not use the world or the nations or 'on the streets' etc....

USE ONLY GOD'S STANDARDS TO COMPARE TO. 

We all know the world / nations / streets et al are all controlled by the devil and therefor disgusting places and well below God's standards. So why oh why do JW's even think about comparing JW Org to those devil controlled things. Is it because the JW Org is also controlled by the devil ? 

Actually Billy, i think i would chop off some of the fingers of proven Pedophiles. The last two fingers on each hand, so that their hands could not grip as well, and so that they would be recognised for what they are. God had people stoned to death so chopping off a few fingers is not so bad in comparison. :) 

Can we get one thing straight. This is a JW forum. This forum is about JW Org and how it is run / controlled. 

This is not a world topic forum. 

Hence I keep to the topic of this forum, JW's.   

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

mentioning a person's mental health once again.

Perhaps it is appropriate here. When you single-mindedly hone in on one and one thing only,  time and time and time again, and you ignore much greater examples of that evil in any other place, I think it becomes an appropriate possibility to float.

That does not mean that there is any shame in it, necessarily, any more than in any other type of health woe—unless you actively aggravate it, like the fellow with bad arteries who stuffs himself full of chips.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Perhaps it is appropriate here. When you single-mindedly hone in on one and one thing only,  time and time and time again, and you ignore much greater examples of that evil in any other place, I think it becomes an appropriate possibility to float.

That does not mean that there is any shame in it, necessarily, any more than in any other type of health woe—unless you actively aggravate it, like the fellow with bad arteries who stuffs himself full of chips.

Well i actually have broadened out on things quite often. There is the misuse of scriptures, such as the two witness rule. 

There is the stupid excuse for changing the meanings of scriptures, calling it 'new light'. 

There is the shunning of people that either have left the Org of their own choice or were disfellowshipped in an unChristian way. 

And it looks like i have to repeat this again. This is a JW forum, not a Catholic one, not a Protestant one, not a Muslim one, not a worldly one, hence i talk about the JW Org and it's boses. 

The JW Org that pretends to be the only hope of salvation from this wicked world. 

Two important things. God's will being done and God's purposes being fulfilled.

The JW Org, at this time is not doing either. The Org is full of disgusting things, and it teaches lies or deceptions. 

How will people come to know the truth about God and God's purposes ?  The JW org is no different to any other religion spouting lies, so how can you boast about it ?

Share this post


Link to post

Oh dear poor billy is throwing his rattles out of his pram again, poor boy is having another tantrum.

Go to the top of the page billy and read what it says and stop making yourself look so stupid. 

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES OPEN CLUB. 

Can we get one thing straight. This is a JW forum. This forum is about JW Org and how it is run / controlled. 

Get a life billy, go and have a coffee or something. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you believe any of the cases of child abuse within the JW Org, from any country in this earth ?

Yes, I do, and so do elders and others I have spoken with.

17 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you believe that any of the Elders that did continuously abuse children in the JW Org were known to be doing so

This may have been a reality, but not because the elders were known to be doing so, but rather because no one believed they really were doing it. If it was a victims word against an elder, the elder's denial may have been believed over the victim. Big difference.

 

17 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you think it was possible for those Elders to continue to abuse children because they were allowed to keep their position as Elder even though it was known they had abused children in the past

Yes, it was possible because of same answer as above.

17 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

OR do you think that every complaint against every Elder concerning child abuse, is a lie by apostates ? 

You have already forgotten that no one ever said that cases of child abuse were lies by apostates. What has been said is that apostates say that we do not care about child abuse, and that is a lie. Again, big difference.

17 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

But of course JW Org is much better than the Nation of Israel :) :) :) isn't it.

What I actually said was that no organization purposefully condones child abuse.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Also, in general, I think the evidence is strong that the higher up a person is in the organization, the more he has been protected from scandal, because that scandal was thought to reflect so badly when it is someone known by all the Witnesses of a specific country or, at least once in the past, even internationally.

Being protected from scandal surely does not include remaining an Elder despite clear evidence that they have been guilty of child abuse,  since that is what John was mainly talking about. I cannot see that happening in view of 1Timothy 3:2. A person like that would clearly not qualify, even if the accusation was not true, but there was notoriety. 

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

JW's give private bible studies to children and take them out on the ministry. 

 No one gives private bible studies to children anymore unless they are the parents. Same with the ministry.

11 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

 if people visit churches as a family it would be most likely that the children would stay with their parents all the time.

Most churches separate kids from the parents. It is JW kids who stay with their parents all the time.

Share this post


Link to post

Do you believe that any of the Elders that did continuously abuse children in the JW Org were known to be doing so

This may have been a reality, but not because the elders were known to be doing so, but rather because no one believed they really were doing it. If it was a victims word against an elder, the elder's denial may have been believed over the victim. Big difference.

Thank you @Anna  I rest my case. 

Share this post


Link to post

Quote @Anna Most churches separate kids from the parents. It is JW kids who stay with their parents all the time.

Your JW 'world' must be totally different to the JW 'world' I knew.  Children were always sitting with different people, in fact if a family had lots of children then their children could be spread all round the KH, each child with a different person. It was seen as being helpful to the parents, so that the parents 'could actually get some spiritual food from the meeting'.  The parents had to gather up their children at the end of the meeting, which was never easy as the children used to 'go a bit wild' in the hall after the meeting was finished. Must have been around 30 to 40 children in my ex congregation. One family had seven children and they never all sat with their parents through public talk and W/t.   

 

  •  

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, Anna said:

No one gives private bible studies to children anymore unless they are the parents.

Hate to say it, but there are a lot of single parents, especially sisters, who ask for elders/ms to study with their young children for them. And it still ends up as part of the process for making sure a youngster is ready for baptism. The "rule" is to always have a second person along or have the parent sit in. But this doesn't always happen. But it doesn't even raise the slightest concern for most brothers and parents because we trust one another and can't imagine that anything wrong might be going on. So the sister/parent who is supposed to sit in will go off to the kitchen and make dinner or take an important phone call. (Seen it happen personally.) The adult brother (or sister) who was supposed to join the study will cancel at the last minute. (Seen it happen personally.)

But the perpetrators of these crimes end up being people we would trust with our lives, persons we could never imagine doing anything like this. In fact, TRUST and confidence is a necessary part of the equation. This is one of the reasons I don't think any of us should hold back in letting parents and other children know the horror stories that have happened in the next congregation in our circuit, or among persons at some of the highest levels of organizational responsibility. We don't censor "adult" parts of the Bible for our young ones, so why should we "censor" practical warnings of real lurking dangers that could be around them?

9 hours ago, Anna said:

Being protected from scandal surely does not include remaining an Elder despite clear evidence that they have been guilty of child abuse,  since that is what John was mainly talking about. I cannot see that happening in view of 1Timothy 3:2. A person like that would clearly not qualify, even if the accusation was not true, but there was notoriety.

I know of no current cases, but you would evidently be surprised at some of the terrible things that have been known to happen. In the past, where the "notoriety" had been thought to be limited to the victim, victim's immediate family, and fellow elders (or fellow circuit overseers, or higher) there have been cases (I now know of two, but wouldn't be surprised at greater numbers) where the perpetrator was simply moved to a place, new circuit, or new country, where that elder was no long in contact with the victim or victim's family. Elders in the new congregation were sometimes not told at all. In fact, the person might have simply risen in the ranks again from circuit to district overseer, for example.

I believe that it is now extremely unlikely for this to happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Anna said:

Most churches separate kids from the parents. It is JW kids who stay with their parents all the time.

It is true, that there are churches with "Sunday school" for children, happening while the parents are attending services.  Although, as a Catholic that was never the case for my years growing up in the religion.  However, even though children remain with their parents in the kingdom hall, abuse has taken place during the meeting, in the restroom.  

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But the perpetrators of these crimes end up being people we would trust with our lives, persons we could never imagine doing anything like this. In fact, TRUST and confidence is a necessary part of the equation. This is one of the reasons I don't think any of us should hold back in letting parents and other children know the horror stories that have happened in the next congregation in our circuit, or among persons at some of the highest levels of organizational responsibility. We don't censor "adult" parts of the Bible for our young ones, so why should we "censor" practical warnings of real lurking dangers that could be around them?

This is really a profound statement.  All JWs should read it.  There is an appropriate way for a parent to relate "horror stories", as is already accomplished in a loving way by responsible parents or in a structured school setting.  Yet, as you brought out, the parent needs to be aware of the story in order to relate it in the right way.    

But...We don't censor "adult" parts of the Bible for our young ones, so why should we "censor" practical warnings of real lurking dangers that could be around them?  

Anyone blatantly magnifying violence and evil before such little ones, is hiding the evil within themselves.    Luke 6:45

502013170_univ_lsr_lg.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Your statement is giving the impression that all Elders or MS are a danger to children.

You were probably the only one to create that assumption from what I said. And I don't actually believe that even you really got that impression from what I said.

8 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Meanwhile, how dare you make such a sick and provoking statement.

Strangely (or perhaps not so strangely) you were the only one to make such a sick and provoking statement out of what I said.

Share this post


Link to post

Billy showing true colours i see. He says he's the 'only one in a den of thieves to speak out' yet he still hides behind his cowboy image. I thought Billy the Kid was a thief actually :) 

But more importantly it seems that after twelve months (well it seems that long) I'm actually reading some sensible balanced comments about 'my main issue' (as TTH loves to call it) .

Thank you @JW Insider for opening up the can of worms that most JW's want to keep shut. 

And if anyone thinks I'm rubbing my hands with glee, no I'm just a little relieved that some truth is now coming out. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Hate to say it, but there are a lot of single parents, especially sisters, who ask for elders/ms to study with their young children for them.

I've had different experience. I know it was definitely like that in the past, I agree, but in recent years I've noticed that elders are very reluctant to step in, even when asked, and if they do, then as you say, they ask the parent to sit in.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

In the past, where the "notoriety" had been thought to be limited to the victim, victim's immediate family, and fellow elders (or fellow circuit overseers, or higher) there have been cases (I now know of two, but wouldn't be surprised at greater numbers) where the perpetrator was simply moved to a place, new circuit, or new country, where that elder was no long in contact with the victim or victim's family.

I don't know of any cases like that, but I do know (personally) of one prominent, influential elder (no longer living) who was removed as elder because of notoriety, but remained a pioneer. I don't think today he would be pioneering.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Witness said:

We don't censor "adult" parts of the Bible for our young ones, so why should we "censor" practical warnings of real lurking dangers that could be around them?

I don't think we do that anymore do we?

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

I've always shown my true colors here.

Not unless you use your REAL name .... you have not.

Hiding behind a Billy the KId avatar is, when you brag about showing "true colors", is flying a false flag.

The HYPOCRISY is why you get called on it, and others do not.

I am interested in WHY you chose such a despicable character as your Avatar?

Unless of course you really ARE like Henry McCarty, AKA William H. Bonney,  who was a murderer and a thief, and an amoral person.

... and the false flag you fly hides the "Jolly Roger".

(?)

Jolly Roger.jpg

JW.org flags.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Keep in mind JAMES THOMAS ROOK JR and remember you insulted me first in the other thread when you called my commentary delusional when I made NO direct connection toward anyone.

You are correct BillyTheKid46 anonymous avatar, whoever you REALLY are:

You did not make a direct connection of your insults to me, immediately preceding that delusional commentary, which was not intended as a direct connection by insult to you.  

I was responding to a well established pattern of you calling people and their concerns garbage, fools, and cowards, etc., and your generalized sanctimonious condemnation of those posting here that think differently than you, that you consider spiritual dullards.

However, it was not my intent to insult you ........  merely highlight your delusional commentary.

I apologize for any insult.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Do you honestly believe Jesus started to organize a Body of Christ? What perception do you understand the role each individual has within that Body?

Scripture states there would be false prophets. Therefore, false religion. Your stance in this matter is, the Watchtower is a false religion, even though by far, the Watchtower has embedded itself and adhered to the original teaching of Christ. All the magazines, books, publications center around that ideology, through scripture and it's interpretation. So, why haven't you asked yourself, why haven't other religions followed the Watchtower to become a faithful part of the body of Christ?

.... let somebody please remind me how has ended One and Only True organized/institutional Religion started in 1513 B.C.E. under Mt. Sion? (corr at 11.59 SINAI) ......... type and anti type example? or mere, simple, reality fact and evidence of .... something?:))

...or we can go by this road too: Jew religion existing until today. And by this Observation that Institutional Religion not ended by Jesus Death as some interpretations of NT verses implied. What this talks to us? That this religion is still One and Only True because JHVH was (and still He is) source and origin of It?

Share this post


Link to post

Quote @BillyTheKid46 However, I do find it strange that John and James hone in on the same thing, my avatar. Can you explain, John why you haven't mentioned or call out the avatar of JWinsider, and Anna? or is it just another dense thought coming out of your head. I can see the true mental state your in. 😁

I see that Billy and TTH take their lead from the GB of JW Org. It's a bit strange how the GB, pretending to be the 'Faithful and discreet slave', yet accuse people of being mentally ill. However we can see here that some JW's act like parrots and use the same type of speech. The GB have obviously, deliberately used this idea of saying people are mentally ill, if such ones do not worship the GB and it's Org. And it can be seen to have worked well for the GB, as those that do worship the GB and it's Org are now using the same expressions. What does this show ?  Well it seems to have shown that the GB and it's Org have misled and twisted the minds of a lot of JW's. These JW's will now say and do anything that the GB and it's Org tell them to do. This is obviously not serving God or Christ, it is serving the GB and it's Org. 

Back to one of Billy's points, that i hone in on his avatar. Billy may not want to remember but I have said previously that I cannot fully understand why anyone would want to hide behind an avatar. I've also said that i do not give serious attention to the comments of people that use avatars. However, when i upvote a comment, that is what i am doing, I am upvoting that particular comment, and when I thank a person for a particular comment, that is what I am doing, i am thanking a person for that particular comment. If Billy said something that I thought was right and sensible i would upvote it, in fact I think I have done so in the past. It matters not to me if a person should want my upvote, I do it anyway if I find the comment makes sense.

Regarding @Anna I have said that I do not understand her as she seems to comment from 'both sides of the fence', but that is good I suppose as she is viewing both sides, whereas I am only viewing for the outside now. 

@JW Insider is just that i suppose. A JW that is prepared to give true information to us.  So i can see a reason for the avatar. 

But the funny  thing is when i think of all of you. I do not know who is male and who is female due to avatars. I suppose it should not matter really :) 

But to me Billy's and TTH's main problems seem to be that they do basically worship the GB / JW Org / Watchtower, and therefore will not have anything bad said against those things, even if the criticism is constructive and true. 

They seem not to believe that those Soc/ Orgs have dictated to the congregants that the congregants must believe everything the GB says, without question. And therefore the congregants are led along by false teachings some of the time. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Do you think God abolished organized religion because ancient Israel broke God's laws time and time again? If he had, don't you think the Temple of David would not have been built.

It seems how He was "abolished" ( in several different ways) religion, made by Him alone, repeatedly, as you noticed too. One of the reason for that was  the manner of how The Representatives of god aka Priesthood and Nation aka People practiced religion. He also made practical moves to abolished any other Organized Religion in the Jew's  neighbourhood. 

For second part about Temple, it was very clear from The Very First Reaction made by god, (and in my opinion, the very first reaction or gut, first response, is in most cases true and authentic)  that He is NOT Interested for Temple aka Church aka Fixed Place for HIM ...... or, as my opinion, for Institutional  gathering of people inside such Structure - Building. God was felt happy to be with Israelite in the Tent (as Theirs and His Home). 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

TTH's main problems seem to be that they do basically worship the GB / JW Org / Watchtower, and therefore will not have anything bad said against those things, even if the criticism is constructive and true. 

This is so silly. It is so infantile. 

Every project needs leadership. Once you grant persons that leadership, you refrain from undercutting them at every step. Why in the world should that be so hard to understand?

You don’t set 15 rows back and swipe at the bus driver, “you missed that turn, you could have avoided that pothole, you hit the brakes too hard, why didn’t you know there was a roadblock ahead?” You know that the roads are poorly maintained, that the route is unfamiliar, and that the weather is terrible.”

There are any number of things I am not crazy about with regard to the theocratic organization. If you read with any sort of critical skills you would know that. That does not mean that when I appear on a forum where the majority seek its destruction and level one attack on it after another, I will say “you know, you’ve raise a good point there.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Anna said:

I don't think we do that anymore do we?

I think it bears asking, why has the organization EVER practiced it.  If the children's activity page that I attached is any barometer of the present climate, I would say, yes they are still practicing it .  Can you imagine your child's face as he connects the dots of the agonizing  picture of Lot's wife  turning into a pillar of salt?  "Mommy, look!  I finished it!" , he beamed.  

Jesus must be appalled.  

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. 2 Pet 3:9

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

@JW Insider is just that i suppose. A JW that is prepared to give true information to us.  So i can see a reason for the avatar

My avatar was just a quick frame grab from one of the Society's videos. It's of interest to me, because the video is about the attitudes of various Christians who were considering whether and when to get out of Jerusalem in the time just leading up to its destruction in 70 C.E. Some were concerned about keeping their businesses going, or other mundane interests, and some were ready to leave it all immediately upon first indication of the Roman siege.

My first name I chose for the forum was the "Bible's Advocate" (about 4+ years ago, now) and I was just about to create that name for participation here (originally jw-archive.org) when I realized that there were several people at the time who were making incorrect assumptions about what it was really like at Bethel in the 1970's and 1980's. I was surprised that anyone would just make up things about people at Bethel during that time period (or repeat things that others had obviously made up). So I thought perhaps I would just stick with talking about my own experiences and opinions based on working inside the JW headquarters (Brooklyn Bethel) during those years. So at the last minute I changed my name to "JW Insider" without really thinking through how it might sound to others.

I haven't really liked the name, but after leaving it for a few weeks, I decided it would be confusing to change it. I never wanted to use my real name because I knew that I would probably be giving details of certain experiences at Bethel and in congregations I have been in over the years. This would not only identify me, it could lead to identifying the persons I speak about or quote. Not all the persons I speak about would want to be identified. So, with some important exceptions, I don't usually identify a specific brother or sister I give details about, unless that person has died.

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

My first name I chose for the forum was the "Bible's Advocate" ....So at the last minute I changed my name to "JW Insider" without really thinking through how it might sound to other

In the spirit of full disclosure:

I wanted my online name to be just Tom Harley, but I found that it was already taken on various platforms. So I thought of RealTomHarley, but I didn’t want to be confused with Trump. So I settled on TrueTomHarley.

It has a certain ring to it that squares with us referring to the faith as “the truth,” but I did not choose it for that reason.

Share this post


Link to post
39 minutes ago, Witness said:

Jesus must be appalled....”The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” 2 Pet 3:9

“but, to you who suffer tribulation, relief along with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance upon those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus.” 2 Thess 1:7-8

I’m not one to pound verses like this to death, but there is something to be said for not misrepresenting scripture, particularly when you claim to own it, presume to explain it for everyone else’s benefit, and quote it more than everyone else here combined.

Share this post


Link to post

Quote @TrueTomHarley " Every project needs leadership. Once you grant persons that leadership, you refrain from undercutting them at every step. Why in the world should that be so hard to understand? "

So Tom, did you grant the GB leadership ? Did you make the GB into the 'Faithful and discreet slave' ? 

Being God's true representatives here on Earth is not just any old project. Surely it should never even be compared to worldly projects.

So, yes, some kind of organisation in needed. However you know me and how I go back over things soooo much. So I'm back to that scripture about the 10 men - Jew 

    Hello guest!

Z
    Hello guest!
Thus saith Jehovah of hosts: In those days [it shall come to pass], that ten men shall take hold, out of all the languages of the nations, they shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.
 
My personal opinion is that the GB are not that 'Jew' .  So i haven't 'granted those persons that leadership'. 
And I would suggest that they granted themselves that leadership. You didn't 'vote them in' did you ? :) 
 
Maybe you should consider what exactly a person is taught when they start having a 'Bible study' with JW's.
 
I would say that they are not taught the 'workings' of JW Org.  People believe that they will be studying God's word, but in fact they end up studying Man's word from a book, which only losely considers God's word. 
 
Many of the books that have been used as study books are now long gone and would cause embarrassment to 'modern day' JW's. The GB hide this by saying they have 'new light'.  
 
So whereas you may like to say I have mental illness and am infantile, I think I have reasonable thinking ability and at this point I have made a fair to good choice to not be part of the JW Org. 
 
Just a couple of points Tom before i go. To quote you 
That does not mean that when I appear on a forum where the majority seek its destruction and level one attack on it after another, I will say “you know, you’ve raise a good point there.”
 
First point. Do you really think it is the aim of most on here to totally destroy the JW Org  ?
2. Does that then mean that Jesus was seeking the destruction of the Pharisees when he criticized them ?
3. Why  then are you on this forum ?
4. Will you ever say on here, “you know, you’ve raise a good point there.” ? 
 
Have a great day Tom and all of you. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, TrueTomHarley said:

“but, to you who suffer tribulation, relief along with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance upon those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus.” 2 Thess 1:7-8

I’m not one to pound verses like this to death, but there is something to be said for not misrepresenting scripture, particularly when you claim to own it, presume to explain it for everyone else’s benefit, and quote it more than everyone else here combined.

Firstly, you totally missed the point.  A child is finding pleasure in revealing the face of one who is being destroyed.  He has connected the dots, combining pleasure with the image of death.  Who would devise such an activity for a child? Who would create such a sick joke, or jest , on children; God, or Satan?  Jesus, or Satan? 

God is the judge, Satan is the destroyer, not Jesus.  God gives plenty of warning when destruction upon His people is imminent; and for those who refuse to listen, He removes His protection from them, surrendering them to the Destroyer. 

Woe, you destroyer never destroyed, you traitor never betrayed! When you have finished destroying, you will be destroyed. When you have finished betraying, they will betray you.  Isa 33:1

When the Lord goes through the land to strike down the Egyptians, he will see the blood on the top and sides of the doorframe and will pass over that doorway, and he will not permit the destroyer to enter your houses and strike you down.  Exod 12:23

By faith he kept the Passover and the application of blood, so that the destroyer of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel.  Heb 11:23

They had as king over them the angel of the Abyss, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon and in Greek is Apollyon (that is, Destroyer).

Not one of these descriptions refer to Jesus.

2 Thess 1:5-10:  All this is evidence that God’s judgment is right, and as a result you will be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you are suffering.God is just: He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you and give relief to you who are troubled, and to us as well. This will happen when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven in blazing fire with his powerful angelsHe will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord JesusThey will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might 10 on the day he comes to be glorified in his holy people (the anointed faithful remnant) and to be marveled at among all those who have believed. This includes you, because you believed our testimony to you.

I don’t own scripture.  I don’t own the Word of God, which is “fire”, and how truth is revealed in the last days.  “Fire” represents God’s word and carries judgment with the sentence of punishment, voiced by Jesus and those whom he “sends”.  Jer 23:29; Matt 13:40-43; Mark 9:37

Satan, however,  will carry out the “destruction”, not God or Christ.  This will happen before Satan is then destroyed.   1 Cor 15:26

Woe, you destroyer never destroyed, you traitor never betrayed! When you have finished destroying, you will be destroyed. When you have finished betraying, they will betray you.  Isa 33:1

Jesus is life.  John 14:6  He does not relish destruction. Don't you remember when he wept over the coming destruction on his people?  He wept!  Luke 19:41-44

 On the other hand, one of your GB members cannot stop talking about death before hundreds, perhaps thousands of children.  Below is only one instance of his fascination with destruction and killing.  I am thinking about a recent talk he gave on WT's version of Armageddon and how "amazing" all of that destruction on mankind would appear.  Anyone amazed by death and suffering has no part in the the spirit of life coming from Christ.  John 15:4; Col 2:18,19; Heb 12:15,16; Rev 8:10,11   

 

 

So Jesus again said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not listen to them. I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy. I came that they may have life and have it abundantly. John 10:7-11

 Your leaders are thieves, preferring the darkness of destruction; while robbing all JWs from the light of life in Christ. 

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.  John 3:18-21

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So Tom, did you grant the GB leadership ?

Yes. When I signed on many years ago. They didn’t sneak up out of nowhere. Their role was known to me and everyone else from Day 1.

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

My personal opinion is that the GB are not that 'Jew' .  So i haven't 'granted those persons that leadership'. 

That is why you are not a Witness. Everything is exactly as it should be. Given how you feel, you have done exactly as you should. 

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Maybe you should consider what exactly a person is taught when they start having a 'Bible study' with JW's.

Yes. Every Witness takes about a year to do that, studying and trying things on for size. Throughout, they are in their familiar home environment and routine. Perhaps 5% of their time is spent in unfamiliar surroundings. 

College is far more “manipulative” than anything with a Witness connection. Students are typically separated 24/7 from their former stabilizing routine, environment, and family—a classic tool of those who would brainwash. Plus, if you study with Jehovah’s Witnesses, you know full well that you are going off the grid—the very opposite of what brainwashers do. Going to college, on the other hand, is no more controversial than seeking good healthcare.

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Many of the books that have been used as study books are now long gone and would cause embarrassment to 'modern day' JW's. The GB hide this by saying they have 'new light'.  

You keep playing this as though it were your trump card, the coup de grace—as though it was something meant to be hidden. They are very open about it. They have called it “tacking.” As you say, they have called it “new light.” Don’t you think that means there used to be “old light?”

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So whereas you may like to say I have mental illness and am infantile

Not usually. Maybe never. I said that your last bit of reasoning was infantile. I said that because it was. I didn’t say you were. 

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Do you really think it is the aim of most on here to totally destroy the JW Org  ?

Not totally, no. No one here, to my knowledge, is calling for anyone’s execution. It is what they stand for that is the target. Everyone knows that. 

1 hour ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

Will you ever say on here, “you know, you’ve raise a good point there.” 

Not everything that you say is silly. I have acknowledged that some points you have raised are valid.  Not always to your face, because you are such a pit bull. But I have put them in other writings.

Share this post


Link to post

So Tom, did you grant the GB leadership ?

Yes. When I signed on many years ago. They didn’t sneak up out of nowhere. Their role was known to me and everyone else from Day 1.

Well I've said many times that it is difficult to know truth from guesswork, but if I've read up on the history correctly there wasn't actually a 'Governing Body' until 1971.  Prior to this it seems it was a president and vice-president.  I do know that I was never told about a GB in the late 60's. 

Quote. 'Don’t you think that means there used to be “old light?” ' No I think it means there were old lies and now there are new lies. 

Share this post


Link to post
52 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Quomodo enim tu loqueris de vero Deo?

I gave an upvote here, and everyone knows that I am stingy with them. I don’t think I have ever given a downvote.

My upvote is conditional. I am assuming that little bit of Latin does not translate into “TrueTom is a fink.”

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So whereas you may like to say I have mental illness and am iinfantile

Having dispensed with the second part of this, let me go to the first.

I did not say that you were mentally ill. I have said that any mental health professional would say that the type of thinking that you were displaying at the moment (most typically “all or nothing” thinking) is unhealthy. That is not the same thing.

You also have to realize that I do not regard mentally ill as a pejorative label, and more than I would regard diabetic as one.

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

. . . if I've read up on the history correctly there wasn't actually a 'Governing Body' until 1971.  Prior to this it seems it was a president and vice-president.  I do know that I was never told about a GB in the late 60's.

As @BillyTheKid46 has pointed out, the term "governing body" had already been used prior to 1971, and it was usually used in the sense that certain types of corporations used the term. In fact, for the Watchtower Society it was primarily used to refer to the "legal" leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses through the legal entity of the Society itself.

This is why there was a difference in the way the term was used in the 1960's and even right up until 1970, the year before the change in meaning that the Watchtower Society gave to this term. For example, the 1970 Yearbook said very clearly:

*** yb70 p. 65 1970 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses ***
So really the governing body of Jehovah’s witnesses is the board of directors of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, all of whom are dedicated to Jehovah God and anointed by his holy spirit.

Technically, then it was the 7 members of the board of directors, not merely the President and Vice-President of the Pennsylvania corporation. In 1942, the Vice President, and therefore a member of the governing body was Hayden C Covington, a Watchtower Society attorney who claimed not to be one of the anointed. (He had also only been a JW for 5 years when he became VP.) In fact, a few years later the rule was changed so that only anointed persons could be on the board of directors, and Covington had to resign his position as Vice President and that position was handed over to Frederick W Franz. After 2001, members of the board of directors no longer need to claim to be one of the anointed, and most of them since 2001 have not claimed to be of the anointed.

The following (about Hayden Covington) is in small print because part of it's based on what was considered to be common knowledge, and part of it is based on the claims of a couple of Bethelites I have known, both still alive. And one is also a relative of the brother who played a key part in one of the incidents described:

Just a little bit of inside information on Covington is that he was a heavy drinker, and thought to be an alcoholic, and eventually dismissed and disfellowshipped after some run-ins with President Knorr. This is in the Wikipedia article, but what's not there is that just before his death he was working on a tell-all that was supposed to expose a lot of wrongdoings and embarrass Knorr and others. (I heard one Witness claim that it was supposed to "bring down the Watchtower.") The person who takes credit for talking him out of it says it was a hard-won battle and he was only convinced after a lot of begging and pleading, including more pleading from family members. Just after that incident, over the next few months in fact, he was reinstated, claimed to be of the anointed, and died. I'm not even sure he even got a chance to partake at the Memorial. But you can still find the funeral talk that Colin Quackenbush gave, posted somewhere on this forum. You can get a small sense of Covington's problems from the funeral talk, where Quackenbush almost has to apologize for giving it, but it's a good talk. Quackenbush himself was the Awake! magazine editor, who also got kicked out of Bethel after a run-in with Knorr, but who arrived back at Bethel upon Knorr's death in 1977. 

I should add that I don't think any of us should have a problem with an international organization of any kind having a governing body. It just means that it is organized to be guided by a committee or board instead of a "dictatorship" of one or two persons. That's a good thing. And the arrangement with GB helpers is even better, in my opinion.

In addition to just mentioning the board of directors as the governing body prior to the 1971 change, it was also used as a way to refer to the entire Watch Tower Society.

*** w50 8/15 p. 251 par. 8 Answering the Foes of His Government ***
The Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society, with main offices in Brooklyn, New York, acts advisorily as the governing body and servant of Jehovah’s witnesses in all lands. So what is true of Jehovah’s witnesses in America must be true of them throughout the earth.

*** w50 1/1 p. 10 par. 2 Reviewing the Past Year’s Work World-wide ***
The Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society, the governing body of Jehovah’s witnesses, has pointed out through its publications that the kingdom of heaven was established in 1914

*** w52 9/15 p. 567 par. 7 Loyalty the Test ***
After being fed and directed through the faithful legal governing body, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, for thirty years, many said, “Jehovah is also dealing through other agencies.” Thus they could advance their own selfish interests.

Of course, the Watch Tower Society, although considered to be the legal entity by which to lead and govern all Jehovah's Witnesses earth-wide, was still considered to be the near equivalent of the old council at Jerusalem where decisions were made with respect to the rules for the gentile converts, etc. Also, Paul is considered to have been included in the governing body since he told Timothy how to make appointments of overseers and servants. So this modern board of directors was considered to be something like a modern fulfillment of the council of apostles and older men at Jerusalem, and the extension of that authority as given to Paul.

*** w52 5/1 pp. 281-282 God’s Way of Financing His Work ***
Having received free, they gave free. Their unselfish course influenced others to show love, so that many early Christians sold all their possessions and turned over the proceeds to the governing body for them to use as they saw best for the advancement of the true worship and the benefit of the Christian community in general.

So even when the governing body, technically and legally meant something else, it was still very similarly applied as an adaption of the original governing body (apostolic council) at Jerusalem. Over the years, it was tied closer and closer to the faithful and discreet slave.

*** w52 11/15 p. 683 Timothy, the Youthful Minister ***
Because of Timothy’s devotion to Jehovah God and Christ Jesus, the apostle Paul, under the guiding influence of the holy spirit, appointed Timothy to serve as an agent of the governing body of the Christian congregation in his day; being authorized to appoint mature men as overseers and assistants in the various Christian congregations. (1 Tim. 1:3; 3:1-15, NW) In this capacity Timothy pictured or represented the instrument that Jehovah God is using today, the Society of footstep followers of Christ Jesus, which likewise appoints servants in the Christian congregation in keeping with Jesus’ promise that he would set his faithful and discreet slave over all his belongings.—Matt. 24:45, NW.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Therefore, just like God intended to have sinless humans on earth, so too is his intention to have faithful followers on earth. If it wasn’t the case, what you are saying, God is wasting his time.

 

I am not even sure how terminology, word - sin, sinless - existed in those time. Why? Because Bible reports; God see all this/that he has created was - GOOD. God has intention to have Followers? This is also terminology that was coined later.

I do not know more about god's "Intentions" out of those, except what is described in the first few words of Genesis.

13 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Why did Jesus enter a temple?

Because people of his time mostly living in solid houses and went to churches made of stones. :))) Temple in Jerusalem was standing there for few hundreds years already. But most of HIS sermons was in open-air. He has not showed "intentions" to building churches for His "new/modified religious movement". 

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Who knows the divine secrets except God himself ?

From an Engineer's or Detective's viewpoint, that is a VERY easy question to answer.

Just look at the TRACK RECORD of those who claim they have insight on the divine secrets, and tabulate how may times they have been right ... and how many times they have been wrong.

I does NOT get any simpler than THAT.

 

Share this post


Link to post
 
  9 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

So I'm not always silly and I'm not exactly mentally ill, but I am a bit of a dog then :) 

8 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

 Even Jesus used an expression for dogs, softening it to “little dogs”—puppies. That’s probably what I had in mind.

going deeper and deeper :))))))

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

As @BillyTheKid46 has pointed out, the term "governing body" had already been used prior to 1971, and it was usually used in the sense that certain types of corporations used the term. In fact, for the Watchtower Society it was primarily used to refer to the "legal" leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses through the legal entity of the Society itself.

 

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

*** yb70 p. 65 1970 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses ***
So really the governing body of Jehovah’s witnesses is the board of directors of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, all of whom are dedicated to Jehovah God and anointed by his holy spirit.

Merge, compose, amalgam.

How from secular terminology about Corporation policy and Management comes to Spiritual meaning for followers, covered with Interpretations  about meaning of some Bible verses. 

Share this post


Link to post

Following on from @Srecko Sostar this management / board of directors now say that are the 'Faithful and discreet slave'. 

Thank you Srecko. 

But i lost it a bit about if they are all supposed to be of the anointed or not now.  Either way it does seem a crafty move and i find it quite funny that the W/t changed their title to suit their own convenience. 

Board of Directors = Faithful and discreet slave,   I don't think so :)  

As the Board of Directors of course, it is much easier to understand how they try to hide the pedopphilia problem and try to stop victims claiming compensation. It's big business isn't it ? They don't want their business to lose money or status.

Um, Judas was the money handler wasn't he, and look what he did and how he ended up.

Share this post


Link to post