Jump to content
The World News Media

All Eight Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses members are now individually named on two New York Child Victims Act case documents


Jack Ryan

Recommended Posts

  • Member
3 hours ago, Witness said:

Do I feel that they have a practice of protecting predators? Absolutely. Not a question," Zalkin said. "They have no clue about grooming. They have no training or understanding of how sexual predators work."

For you that are debating bylaws and secular law? This might shed some light on several points raised as a concern for the term grooming.

*** g04 12/8 p. 20 The Internet—How to Avoid the Dangers ***

Children are even more vulnerable to exploitation and harm by “computer-sex offenders.” Using “crookedness of speech” and “deviousness of lips,” pedophiles target inexperienced children. (Proverbs 4:24; 7:7) Engaging in a practice known as grooming, they shower the child with attention, affection, and kindness to make the youngster feel special. They seem to know everything a child is interested in

 

*** g 10/07 p. 6 How to Protect Your Children ***

  In time, the molester will begin grooming the child for abuse. He gradually becomes more physical with the child through innocent-looking displays of affection, playful wrestling, and tickling. He may give generous gifts and begin to separate the child from friends, siblings, and parents, in order to spend time alone with the child.

 

Officially, that term “grooming” has been attached to several circumstances. To that extent it was used in combination for the term “child abuse” as part of a legal argument that wasn’t used in the U.S. until 2009.

grooming.jpg

The consideration is with timeline. The Watchtower, without being obligated or forced by reform, mentions in earlier articles addressing the problem of “grooming” in 2004-2007 that became the extent of the law in 2009.

Any former member would then need to answer this fundamental question when this defense is offered, why wasn’t the child’s parents or close family member, didn't take precautions by reviewing prior Watchtower articles addressing such a danger?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 38.7k
  • Replies 636
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

When speaking with others of a different point of view, it is important to treat them with a modicum of respect. It is important not to taunt and ridicule and insult. Of course, if such is your only o

Good point Srecko. I don't think it's entirely fair to blame the GB for creating a "certain" environment inside congregations though. In fact, (we know everything passes through the GB's hands fo

@Arauna How do you actually know that the GB members  " never personally touched a child (actually too innocent  to comprehend how wicked people can be - too good for this world), " ?  There is i

Posted Images

  • Member

TrueTomHarley said:

Quote

Is this long comment what it looks like? Is this fellow really doing lengthy commentary on the greatest scholar that he can envision—himself?

Nope. You're simply too stupid to see that where the material has "... AlanF said:" it's inside a quotation of Anna. Thus my quotations of Anna's comments to me include my preceding comments to her. That's largely because this board's software is too limited to allow proper quotations within quotations without going to unreasonable lengths.

You're simply too dumb for words. If striving for stupidity were a baseball game, you've knocked the ball out of the park.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
2 hours ago, ASF-37 said:

For you that are debating bylaws and secular law? This might shed some light on several points raised as a concern for the term grooming.

I like that you included some of the articles from the Awake! and mentioned that persons associated with the WTS sometimes could and should have been more aware and more careful. This is often very true, and parents should be very alert to potential child abuse. On the front lines, as it were. Also they know the personality of the child, assuming they are involved with them, and communicating with them. If something is wrong a parent who is in close daily communication with their children will often sense when something is off. Of course, during the ages when children are often abused, they are often going through personality changes that are difficult for parents to navigate with them.

Also, I noticed you made a big point out of the specific term "grooming" as if the Awake! had used this term before it was ever used in "the law." You said:

2 hours ago, ASF-37 said:

Officially, that term “grooming” has been attached to several circumstances. To that extent it was used in combination for the term “child abuse” as part of a legal argument that wasn’t used in the U.S. until 2009.

And you highlighted the timeline where you indicated that the Awake! had been discussing this in 2004 and 2007, implying that the law didn't catch up to the Awake! until 2009.

2 hours ago, ASF-37 said:

The consideration is with timeline. The Watchtower, without being obligated or forced by reform, mentions in earlier articles addressing the problem of “grooming” in 2004-2007 that became the extent of the law in 2009.

There are a few points to consider:

1. The Watchtower publications are not using the term in a legal sense, they are only copying the way in which the word had recently been used in worldly news reports, publications and newspapers. 

2. There is nothing special about the term, since it's merely the equivalent of various descriptions of the way a predator might prepare a victim and make them feel more and more comfortable in a situation where they will be further victimized. A single term that involved a range of activities is a time-saver, and can help communicate the need for a law, or help to effectively communicate the guilt of a person who is involved in activities that might otherwise not be prosecuted on their own. It's only when they can be seen as part of a pattern that the predator uses to escalate opportunities to find and create victims that they are seen as prosecutable.

3. The argument that knowledge of the term should make parents and guardians more aware, can backfire back onto the elders or other leaders of congregation activities, when they, as leaders and teachers, should even be more aware of everything printed in the publications, even those publications like the Awake!, that are not studied in a congregational setting. You are potentially arguing that elders are potentially more guilty for creating and permitting situations when grooming can take place.

Going to point number one, we find a description of the grooming process in discussions of child sexual abuse going back to the 1970's and probably before. The actual term "grooming" shows up in the 1980's, about 20 years before the Awake! used it.

The Oxford English Dictionary includes this definition of grooming:

Of a paedophile: to befriend or influence (a child), now esp. via the Internet, in preparation for future sexual abuse.

   1985 Chicago Tribune 28 May v. 8/2 These ‘friendly molesters’ become acquainted with their targeted victim‥, gaining their trust while secretly grooming the child as a sexual partner.    1996 A. Mullender Rethinking Domest. Violence vii. 200 Children have been ‘groomed’ by their abusers to associate abuse with apparently harmless topics that can continue to be mentioned in letters and cards.    2005 Big Issue 3 Jan. 18/2 While ‘stranger danger’ does exist—like internet chat-rooms where abusers groom children—sexual abuse often involves people intimate to the family or even within the family.

Legally, you can also see that the "idea" of prosecuting for "preparation and influence" goes back to discussions of predators in the AOL chat rooms of 1999. The following site points to a legal precedent from 2011 in footnote 3. But that footnote looks at sets of precedents from before:

https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_interest/child_law/resources/child_law_practiceonline/child_law_practice/vol-34/november-2015/understanding-sexual-grooming-in-child-abuse-cases/

Footnote 3 points to https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/218946/united-states-v-chambers/

That 2011 precedent was based primarily on a 2006 ruling (over a much earlier precedent, see the end of the post), which already did everything except use the actual term "grooming":

18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), which makes it a crime to use interstate commerce to attempt or to knowingly persuade, induce, entice, or coerce any individual under the age of eighteen to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any individual can be charged with a criminal offense.

The idea that activities in these preparatory steps might seem not to be serious enough on their own for prosecution was taken care of with:

United States v. Rovetuso, 768 F.2d 809, 821 (7th Cir.1985)

And further research tying it all back to what was now called "grooming" went back to 1998:

Grooming refers to deliberate actions taken by a defendant to expose a child to sexual material; the ultimate goal of grooming is the formation of an emotional connection with the child and a reduction of the child's inhibitions in order to prepare the child for sexual activity. Doe v. Liberatore, 478 F. Supp. 2d 742, 749-50 (M.D.Pa.2007); Sana Loue, "Legal and Epidemiological Aspects of Child Maltreatment," 19 J. Legal Med. 471, 479 (1998).

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

United States v. Robert Owen Bailey, 228 F.3d 637 (6th Cir. 2000)

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Filed: October 3rd, 2000

Note that this very similar case from 2000 refers to 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), which has amendments but actually goes back to 1910. In the 1940s the version already had statements that could easily be applied to the Internet:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2422

Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

(b)

Whoever, using the mail or any facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce, or within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual who has not attained the age of 18 years, to engage in prostitution or any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title and imprisoned not less than 10 years or for life.
 
----------
A 2002 book discusses "Grooming" in excruciating details in its many stages:
Front Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 

Protecting Your Children From Sexual Predators By Leigh Baker

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

JW Insider said:
     

Quote

 

    1 hour ago, AlanF said:

    The fact is that no critics of the JWs expect that there ought to be inspired people at the helm.

On this forum, we have seen this critique a few times. It was clearly claimed by @JOHN BUTLER, who sadly was "DF'd" from the forum. It is similar to what has been said by @4Jah2me more recently, and @Witness, too.

The idea is that if Jesus had in mind an ongoing feeding program from an appointed "faithful and discreet slave" where these teachers of the kingdom would teach things both old and new,

 

The fact that virtually no JW critics give credence to that nonsense makes everything else moot.

Quote

then they should be inspired in the sense of having something like a "double portion of Jehovah's spirit." This does not mean "inspired" in the same sense as "apostolic succession"

There are two senses of "inspired": 'God-breathed' and the metaphorical sense, as in "that painting inspires me". The two should not be confused, although Watchtower writers often dishonestly take advantage of the ambiguity of the two meanings.

The Society likes to use "direction" rather than "inspiration" because it allows them -- they think -- some wiggle room when their "spirit-directed" policies and teachings go wrong. But in the minds of average JWs, there is no difference, because the result is the same: "Obey the Governing Body's commands as you would God's."

The Society has long been talking out of both sides of its collective mouth on this.

Quote

but aliases associated with @AllenSmith-38 have argued for something very close to "apostolic succession" or at least "apostolic precedence."

Completely missing the point. No surprise.

Quote

I think that TTH's blog was actually dealing with a real question about an idea that the GB should really be inspired, even infallible, and that they should produce "perfect" food, which of course, they don't claim to do.

What his blog post clumsily and inaccurately alluded to was, rather, the argument that if the Governing Body demands obedience as if to God himself, and disfellowships for 'apostasy' -- rebelling against God -- any who willingly disobey or dispute the GB, then they are implicitly claiming inspiration. Why? Because if they acted in accord with the fact that they themselves are well aware of -- that they are in no sense inspired -- they would have to stop pretending that their words are God's words, and stop disfellowshipping people for apostasy.

Of course, most everyone understands that, after all this time and irreparable damage to families by these disgusting teachings, if they changed their policy and quit disfellowshipping for 'apostasy', their membership roles would drop immediately and drastically. And of course, a very large number of JWs would sue the Watchtower Society for various abuses, probably forcing it out of business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
54 minutes ago, AlanF said:

the argument that if the Governing Body demands obedience as if to God himself, and disfellowships for 'apostasy' -- rebelling against God -- any who willingly disobey or dispute the GB, then they are implicitly claiming inspiration.

I think you know that past WT articles have used a sense of apostasy that is not the equivalent of "rebellion against God." I could point to a post here where I discussed an "apostasy spectrum." But you are already aware that the WTS has stated that the "apostate" need not have specifically tried to turn away from God, but they are expressing a desire to leave the organization. (This is enough, and it is even reflected in the new way of announcing those who leave.)

@Arauna even made a point I've heard before that any organization has a right to expel persons for conduct or representation that the organization deems to be detrimental to its interests. A "Golf Course" can expel persons for its own reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 11/18/2019 at 9:17 PM, Bogdan11 said:

What is wrong about a bride price or lobola is the abuse that is made of it. It is wrong, unchristian, untheocratic, to treat it, not as a compensation, but as

Totally agree. I come from Africa and know all about this.  I also preach to Muslims (arabic) and they sell their daughters to old men, the highest bidder.... or when they need cash.  My bible study was sold at age nine because her father needed the money for her older brother.  She had 4 children by age 17. .... and later 4 more.

On 11/18/2019 at 10:20 PM, Witness said:

world is full of atrocities and horrors, but the world does not offer eternal life

I do not take you seriously because you are NOT a wise person. You cite tons of  scriptures but cannot apply them in a practical way.  It seems to be only knowledge and very little practical love.  A lot of judgment ..... too with no good suggestions..... just poison.

I do preach eternal life NOT hate like you do.  I am always aware that I am a sinner even though I do not commit gross sins.   I understand from scripture that I must be preaching (it is a duty for a true Christian) and I need to help a person to have a 'group of people'  - a body of people, with practical infrastucture for meetings and preaching ,  where they can incite each other to fine works and receive encouragement. 

I cannot take interested ones to a church because they teach a dogma of immortality of the soul - they teach that jesus did not really die.  I read in the bible that in last days there will be a "slave" providing spiritual food. Matt 24:45.  I also read in Isaiah 2:2-4 that there will be one nation in the world comprised of all nations that do not do war....... so OK - JWs fit these bible descriptions.

So now,  I expect to have spiritual association - BUT to still be the master of my own faith.  Do I expect some of thesepeople to deviate and become apostates - yes the bible warns against this.  Do i expect a measure of protection - maybe a little .... but how much - this the real question? 

If I expect perfect protection from everything that can go wrong...... then I must also expect the group leaders to mix in my private life to find out everything about me (past and present) and make everything known about me...... so others can be protected from my bad inclinations.  This sounds like the scientologists..... 

So obviously, there needs to be balance regarding the protection given...... and what about the parent's responsibility?  Must elders take this over too?  

So.... where there is freedom with personal responsibility - there will always be those who expect perfection and personal accountability from other individuals for their own mishaps..... or their own parent's oversight.

A call for perfect protection because an organization is religious is claptrap and based on a naive conception of the world.  When a person has been convicted in court or enough evidence collected for shunning then this is a different matter.  But as I said before - even professionals struggle to get the evidence..... So now they accuse the GB of being too unprofessional in their protection policies.  I guess these people should have joined the scientologists who have a better surveillance system. 

I do believe the GB should have reviewed their policies sooner - in line with the new government laws as they improved in each country - but they cannot protect every person from every danger.  It is the parent's duty to give that protection so the child is never in a compromising situation. 

The one law which governments have not yet changed is the law relating to confessional protection.  Lawyers and clergy have this.   The catholic church has refused to use confessions from people against them as well - as in JWs.    

What is WRONG in the catholic practice is this: the Catholics have moved clergy AFTER legal convictions were obtained or evidence was given and payouts made ....it is  pattern or practice in the organization.   Child molestation is everywhere where there are children..... and escalating by law right now as a legal blind eye is held when children are married against their will at age nine.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
58 minutes ago, AlanF said:

if they changed their policy and quit disfellowshipping for 'apostasy', their membership roles would drop immediately and drastically.

I think you are wrong here. I think that there are fewer apostasy disfellowshippings than you think, so the net effect can't be determined. Also, among JWs, there is a great appreciation for the good that comes out of association with others of like faith in the brotherhood. I'm sure you think this is irrelevant, but it would override any effect a few more or a few less disfellowshippings. 

In fact, I think the effect could be opposite. Membership roles might even increase as persons who had been pushed away would feel more comfortable associating again where they can now feel more supported, even if it weaknesses in their faith that caused their doctrinal deviations. It does not mean that less DFings would necessarily be right, because there are many who are only interested in disruption, chaos, contentions, and causing trouble and discomfort. These ones are not conducive to the comfort and encouragement of the brotherhood, and they should go.

It might produce a more flexible theology as it sounds like there would be less enforcement of deviations. But it would take a while for most JWs to be comfortable with the idea of any kind of deviations, anyway. For the most part we already have a high appreciation of what has been given to us through the organization. This is even true of those of us who recognize the GB as elders handling some specific necessary ministries, and do not think of them as the "governors of our faith" or the exact equivalent of the FDS.

When it comes to deviations of current doctrine, even "overlapping generations" would probably take some time to go, because no one has offered a consistent acceptable replacement yet. Witnesses are generally very comfortable with their leadership. We actually appreciate the humility it takes to remind us that they are imperfect and will make mistakes and that not all the food will be perfect. It would be considered even more discreet to stop DFing for certain kinds of apostasy.

Of course, the Bible already gives us a guide that shows there are also very serious kinds of apostasy, and therefore we would always expect nearly complete and unanimous approval about some disfellowshipping for apostasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 hours ago, AlanF said:

He/she seems to be in-between. I really can't tell, and these days it's impolite to ask.

Ha ha. You are funny. I love it that you are making mincemeat of these horrible people here.

4 hours ago, AlanF said:

It's never too late to fix all that.

I don’t know. Maybe. Please be patient with me. I want to expose these hypocrites, but I am afraid. I worry that, even now, someone may come after me.

There was a pervert who I should not name. Maybe later just his initials. But believe me, he is a brother who is way way up there today. This perv used to copulate with car tailpipes in the parking lot at night when he thought no one could see him. I never thought that anyone could do this and that is just for starters!

My roommate couldn’t believe it until I told him when and where to look out. He had a hobby of photography and owned some really expensive cameras with telephoto lens. We had to wait a long time, but we did, and he finally caught a good picture of this sick man doing his sick act. It is off-center, but you can see his face clearly, and it is someone that you will KNOW.

My roommate gave the picture to me before he left. He didn’t want to get anyone in trouble. I didn’t either. But now with all that has happened, I think now is the time to RELEASE IT TO THE WORLD!!!

I hope that you can help me. I am not a very brave person. I am afraid of what may happen. Please don’t make fun of me. I really do get shy speaking to women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
42 minutes ago, AlanF said:

Obey the Governing Body's commands as you would God's."

You remind me of the guy who wrote Thirty years a WT slave.  He was a slave....  You really believe the claptrap you talk.  I have been a Witness for 45 years.  I have never been in awe of anyone...... not you either.....

Some witnesses are inclined this way..... but they would be like sheeple even if they were not JWs.   I think JWs teach them to be less useful to governments who use the sheeple to fight their wars and they are less pliable to their political agendas and propaganda because they obey the GB suggestions. They are also less pliable to scholarly  deceit and amorality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
24 minutes ago, Vic Vomidog said:

My roommate gave the picture to me before he left. He didn’t want to get anyone in trouble. I didn’t either.

Now that sentence tells me you were a witness in name only - a counterfeit.  You were totally complicit in a cover up....  have you ever contemplated that?  What I see and hear from you is not mature.  

People are people and get up to all kinds of things.  Sometimes the elders open a can of worms where they wonder what the person has NOT done.  You see when a person starts going beyond their conscience there is nothing they cannot do.... and the hidden things are usually the last things to be revealed.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

JW Insider said:
     

Quote

 

    20 minutes ago, AlanF said:

    the argument that if the Governing Body demands obedience as if to God himself, and disfellowships for 'apostasy' -- rebelling against God -- any who willingly disobey or dispute the GB, then they are implicitly claiming inspiration.

I think you know that past WT articles have used a sense of apostasy that is not the equivalent of "rebellion against God."

 

Of course. One such was in the April 1, 1986 Watchtower, which considered the question, "Why have Jehovah’s Witnesses disfellowshipped (excommunicated) for apostasy some who still profess belief in God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ?" The article never clearly defines "apostasy", but weasels around by saying that a true Christian must accept "the entire range of the true teachings of the Bible, including those Scriptural beliefs that are unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses." But this is another instance of the Society talking out of both sides of its mouth, because the Insight book, under "Apostasy", clearly states that apostasy "constitutes a rebellion against God and a rejection of his Word of truth." Combining the two concepts results in something like this: "Since the Governing Body speaks for God, rejecting its teachings is rebellion against God." And we know that this idea has been clearly enunciated or implied hundreds of times in JW literature.

Of course, in the most general sense, "apostasy" means "leaving a previous loyalty", but that is far too broad a definition because it would mean that a loyal employee who quits his job is an apostate, which is an absurd use of the word. So the Society's many rantings against "apostates" essentially equate disagreement with its teachings with rebellion against God. How convenient!

Much more accurate words to describe dissent from Watchtower teaching are "heterodoxy" and "heresy". But heresy has dire associations, such as "Inquisition" and so forth, so the Society will not use it.

Catholic scholar Jeffrey Burton Russell, writing in Dissent and Order in the Middle Ages: The Search for Legitimate Authority (Twayne Publishers, 1992), gave an excellent account of these and related words and how they have been used in the Catholic world (pp. 2-3):

<< Ideas acceptable to the bishops and to approved theologians were defined as orthodox (correct teaching) and catholic (universally held)... Dissenting ideas were considered heterodox (divergent). Heterodox ideas, when defined and condemned by the bishops, were deemed heretical. A heretic was a dissenter formally condemned by an accepted ecclesiastical authority... The term heretic is distinguished from infidel, one who is not Christian at all; apostate, one who abandons Christianity; and schismatic, one who has true doctrine but does not submit to ecclesiastical order. >>

Most of these concepts are found in the April 1, 1986 Watchtower.

Quote

I could point to a post here where I discussed an "apostasy spectrum." But you are already aware that the WTS has stated that the "apostate" need not have specifically turned away from God, but they are expressing a desire to leave the organization.

Yes, as I said above.

Quote

@Arauna even made a point I've heard before that any organization has a right to expel persons for conduct or representation that the organization deems to be detrimental to its interests. A "Golf Course" can expel persons for its own reasons.

That's right, but no administrators in their right minds would call such an expelled person an apostate.

And of course, expelling for clearly stated organizational reasons has nothing to do with equating those reasons with rebellion against God. It is this unchristian attitude, among other things, that defines Jehovah's Witnesses as a destructive cult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
4 hours ago, AlanF said:

So you don't think that God appoints any GB members

I did not say that. I said God obviously didn't appoint Greenlees.

4 hours ago, AlanF said:
Quote

Anna quote: The appointment, as all appointments are, was based on qualifications outlined in 1Timothy 3:1-7.

The process by which holy spirit "appoints" is through that scripture.

 

But that all depends on whether the men applying the scriptures do so perfectly. If they do not, then holy spirit could not have appointed the man.

No it does not, it does not depend on that. No man can apply the scriptures perfectly. If they could, then there would be no need for Jesus to die. Also, man judges only by what he can see. So if someone appears to qualify according to the requirements in Timothy, then they are appointed.

4 hours ago, AlanF said:
Quote

Anna Quote: Since JWS believe the Bible is inspired of God by means of holy spirit, then if one works along with the scriptures, one is working along with the holy spirit. Obviously in the case under discussion, holy spirit could not have appointed this man because unbeknown to those making the decision, he did not qualify. Which also answers your other question

It does not. All your rationalizations are mere special pleading.

It does, because you asked :

4 hours ago, AlanF said:

And what about God's viewing his heart? Was God ever fooled by an outward appearance of repentance?

To which I replied, no God was not fooled but man was. Connect the dots please.

4 hours ago, AlanF said:

And things like obvious homosexuality are not things easily ignored.
And of course, according to Watchtower doctrine, anyone not fully qualified to be a proper elder would not be appointed, because holy spirit would see to it.

There are a few people that I met in my life who I suspect may be that way inclined. But I have no proof.

Holy spirit can be ignored, because we all have free will.

4 hours ago, AlanF said:
Quote

JWs only pretend that the Bible is such a template. When push comes to shove, most JWs will push the Bible aside when Watchtower tradition or practice gets in the way. Do you want examples from my personal dealings with them?

Sure

 

Ok, here's a good one.

Consider the Bible passage at Luke 21:5-8:

<< 5 Later, when some were speaking about the temple, how it was adorned with fine stones and dedicated things, 6 he said: “As for these things that you now see, the days will come when not a stone will be left upon a stone and not be thrown down.” 7 Then they questioned him, saying: “Teacher, when will these things actually be, and what will be the sign when these things are to occur?” 8 He said: “Look out that you are not misled, for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am he,’ and, ‘The due time is near.’ Do not go after them. >>

The important part here is verse 8. According to most Bible commentaries, and the Society itself, the phrase 'I am he' means "I am someone important, someone to be listened to, someone with authority from Jesus and God to represent them". That obviously includes JW leaders since they directly claim to be Jehovah's representatives. The next part of the verse mentions such people as saying ‘The due time is near’ which obviously refers back to the time when "these things are to occur". Jesus, then, was warning his listeners that if they hear such persons claiming to represent God, and claiming that the due time for 'the end' is near, they should not go after them. Since this perfectly describes what JW leaders have done throughout their history and continue to do, it is obvious that Jesus himself said not to follow them.

In 1994 I had a phone conversation with GB member Albert Schroeder about his failure to follow up on some things he had promised to do. After he said he was reneging on his promise, I decided to challenge him with a question about Luke 21:5-8. I asked him, "What do you think that passage means?" He got out his NWT and read it out loud. After finishing verse 8, he was unable to speak. After a minute or so, I said, "Well? What does this mean with respect to applying it to JW teaching about the end?" After another two minutes or so of dead silence, he said, "It can't apply to us, because we're God's people!" Of course, you can imagine my reaction.

In 2009 I found myself living temporarily in Utah, in Mormon country. One Saturday morning a lone JW, a man of about 70, came to our door. After some pleasantries where we identified ourselves as ex-JWs, I challenged him with Luke 21:5-8 and asked him the same thing I did with Schroeder. He was silent for a bit, and then said that he understood what the passage meant, so I asked him if he intended to remain a JW, given that his Lord Jesus Christ specifically said "do not follow them". He said that he had been a JW all his life and was too old to change. Perfectly understandable, of course, but also perfectly unchristian.

 I think this part should be put under a different topic heading. Perhaps JWI can do that? And then I will reply to it there.

4 hours ago, AlanF said:

Shows like those are not intended to be scholarly documentaries but to motivate people to act. And that's what they did.

You mean people like Bowen?

4 hours ago, AlanF said:
Quote

However, the ARC was a different kettle of fish.

Yes, and the people who helped spark all that were partly motivated by those TV presentations.

I doubt that.

4 hours ago, AlanF said:

Your point? Complexity is irrelevant to the criminal coverups.

My point was that if we really know the details, discoverable by reading detailed transcripts and unravel the complexity, then we can see that often there was no cover up, it merely appeared that way on the surface. I am sure you know about two sides to a story. With CSA there are multiple complex sides, its not easy to get the facts unless you hear all the sides. For example you find out that a disfellowshiped man molested an 8 year old girl, and that the elders knew about him molesting another girl years prior to this one. Those are the bare bones. Then you find out that the mother (of the child) took the child to the perpetrators house (who happened to be the mothers step dad) for baby sitting, knowing that he had previously molested her (the mother's) sister when they were young.  "The first to state his case seems right,Until the other party comes and cross-examines him". Prov 18:17

 

5 hours ago, AlanF said:
Quote

Anna quote: No, I did not say it was a lie. It's you, you are not comprehending the process.

 

I perfectly well understand the process. God and holy spirit have nothing to do with it. JWs merely pretend they do.

Ummm....., that tells me merely your opinion.

5 hours ago, AlanF said:

Merely that their predecessors read the Bible and decided to appoint them? I could appoint myself by that process, but would it be a valid appointment? Of course not, and by the same token JW leaders appointing other JW leaders is NOT in any sense "appointment by holy spirit".

It is a process that is outlined in the Bible for the appointment of elder men. How else do you want me to understand it?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.