Is the rule of the "two witnesses" always applied in cases of apostasy?

by Judge Rochefort 16 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Judge Rochefort

  Hello there. This is my first thread here.
  
  I was wondering if anybody here could help me with a question that I have.
  
  My question is this: Is it always applied the rule of the "two witnesses" in cases of apostasy?
  
  I'll put an example:
  If a JW is working with another JW and one of them is continuously talking about «teachings contrary to the Bible truth as taught by Jehovah's Witnesses», would the testimony of the other JW be enough to form a judicial committee?
  
  Thanks!
• 

  _Morpheus

  Really good question and the answer.... Is yes technically speaking the two witness rule ALWAYS applies for the formation of a judicial committee.

  However The aligation alone would likely lead to a shepherding call where the issue would be brought up. For many the idea of lying and expressing full confidance in the governing body would be distastefull once they awoken and thus the mere aligation would lead to a committee indirectly.

  but the short answer is no you would not directly emd up before a JC for things said one on one
• 

  cappytan

  In addition, if the elders couldn't pin anything on the apostate because of a lack of two witnesses, a body of elders might imply to the publisher, though not outright tell them, that a recording would be sufficient evidence to overcome the two-witness rule.

  Not all Elders would do that, though. But the ones that are desperate to put an apostate notch in their belt might.
• 

  Giordano

  Welcome JR

  The policy is based on Jesus' sermon on the mount that basically you need at least two witnesses.

  Otherwise it would be a he said she said and easy to deny.

  The JW's are stupid serious enough in this two witness rule that they refuse to accept the testimony of a child who has been abused by a pedophile JW nor warn the congregation or inform the police.

  All of this is coming out now in the news media and public trials. If you weren't aware of that aspect of the two witness rule Google it and see for yourself.
• 

  Judge Rochefort

  Exactly, Giordano. I asked my question keeping in mind the cases of child abuse. I was wondering if JWs leadership would use their double standards also here.
  
  Thanks for the answers!
  
  I've got another question (elders or ex-elders answers would be great) though. It's related to this one somehow so I don't know if post it here or start a new thread with it.
• 

  The Searcher

  Welcome Judge - good to have you join us.

  Start a new thread!
• 

  Vidiot

  Judge Rochefort - "Is the rule of the 'two witnesses' always applied in cases of apostasy?"

  Technically.

  If I had to guess, though, I'd say that in their zeal to "keep the congregation clean" (i.e. pants-shitting terror), most would be willing to bend that rule pretty damn far.

  It's for accusations of child abuse that they rigidly follow it.

  x

  Which suggests that in their eyes, apostates are worse than child abusers (gosh; never saw that coming).
• 

  DATA-DOG

  Let me tell you how it works. You say something true the Eldubs don't like. They don't have "a case" or "two-witnesses", so they try to build one and get some.

  Any attempt to interfere with their "shepherding" is strong circumstantial evidence of your guilt. You need to be "re-adjusted" because of you "apostate" leanings. They remove your "privileges" on suspicion of guilt. This causes untold stress on a "spiritual" family.

  They can accomplish what they want without two witnesses if necessary. So they use it when it's convenient. If they can use it as a weapon or a shield, they will.

  DD
• 

  Judge Rochefort

  If they are going to put pressure —as I understand your comment, Data-Dog— to alleged apostates, they could do the same to alleged pedophiles, don't they?
  
  That's what concerns me
• 

  Judge Rochefort

  By the way, thanks for the welcome :)