Please comment on my latest com with my JW friend who thinks every apostate left because they were doing wrong things themselves: It seems that every time we have a theological discussion or I comment on books written by ex-JWs, you resort to extreme finger-pointing and judgmentalism against any church or organization that is NOT part of the Watchtower Movement . I can understand why after a childhood of being informed by the WT you should do this. Firstly, the JW line is every 'apostate' is evil and has left the WT because he was sinning and couldn't live up to the 'high standards' of 'God's Organisation on Earth'. You do not read their work because you have been told NOT to as the leadership of the WT are afraid that you will listen to reason and see how wrong they are. You refuse to believe some of the ex-JWs may have left because they could not agree with JW edicts and scriptural interpretation. Ray Franz is one such case as he holds the JWs responsible for much suffering in Malawi , a one party state when they forbade JWs to carry Malawi Congress cards. The party was the state and the GB are guilty of being unscriptural and unreasonable in their demands. Much blood is on their hands. Frederick Franz is also a 'apostate' from the RCs so does that mean I won't listen to him. No, it doesn't as I am free to read anything I want. The WT has gleefully revelled in any scandal in the RC church as they think it proves their point that other churches are satanic and only they, the JWs are the 'faithful remnant'. When I point that that the WT has had its fair share of paedophile scandals, you are quick to simplify that offenders in the WT are disfellowhipped and that the Catholic Church has just moved its offenders from parish to parish. The Church has been guilty of being too lenient on offenders and this has now changed. However, not all paedophiles among JWs have been d'fed as you so tidily put it. The system in place in the WT makes it possible for paedophiles to get away with it. The JW rule of 'two witnesses' favours molesters see Wikipedia passage below: Jehovah's Witnesses ' congregational judicial policies require the testimony of two eyewitnesses to establish a perpetrator's guilt in the absence of confession, [ 6 ] based on their interpretation of scriptures such as Deuteronomy 17:6 and 1 Timothy 5:19. This policy is felt to be a protection against malicious accusation of sexual assault. The Watch Tower Society's Public Information Department specifies that this two-eyewitness policy is applied solely to congregational discipline and has no bearing on whether a crime is reported to the authorities. To establish proof by two eyewitnesses, it is not necessary that both have been present at the same instance of child molestation. As of 2002, statements by two victims of separate incidents by the same perpetrator may be deemed sufficient to take action and impose internal sanctions. [ 2 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] DNA evidence, medical reports, or information from forensic experts or police that proves sexual abuse is also accepted as a valid "second witness". In cases where there is only one eyewitness—the victim—to an allegation of child abuse, elders are instructed to monitor the accused individual closely. If there is evidence to suggest that the alleged perpetrator did abuse children , a warning is given to the congregation for its protection. [ 9 ] The Society has also been accused of covering up sexual abuse in their midst or of having poor policies viz-a-viz paedos which leave young ones vulnerable.Trying to protect their fantasy that they are God's force on Earth, they often refuse to admit that proportionally, child abuse in Kingdom Halls matches or exceeds that found in the much larger Catholic Church. I am ashamed of abuse that has happened in the Catholic Church, can you say the same about abuse in the WT.
Please Comment on My Com to My JW Friend
by maputo95 3 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
jamiebowers
There is no point in arguing with your jw friend, because he is brainwashed. Until he sees the truth about the "truth" for himself, he will continue to think that all apostates are sinners.
As for the Wikipedia article, I have a few omments.
Jehovah's Witnesses' congregational judicial policies require the testimony of two eyewitnesses to establish a perpetrator's guilt in the absence of confession,[6] based on their interpretation of scriptures such as Deuteronomy 17:6 and 1 Timothy 5:19. This policy is felt to be a protection against malicious accusation of sexual assault.
Yet experts say that the vast majority of children do not lie about sexual assault. As a matter of fact, it proves the Watchtower's warped viewpoint that victims, who are usually women and children, are not to be trusted.
The Watch Tower Society's Public Information Department specifies that this two-eyewitness policy is applied solely to congregational discipline and has no bearing on whether a crime is
reported to the authorities.
Then, why doesn't the Watchtower instruct all elders to report suspected child moletation, whether or not they live in states where reporting is mandatory by law?
To establish proof by two eyewitnesses, it is not necessary that both have been present at the same instance of child molestation. As of 2002, statements by two victims of separate incidents by the same perpetrator may be deemed sufficient to take action and impose internal sanctions.[2][7][8] DNA evidence, medical reports, or information from forensic experts or police that proves sexual abuse is also accepted as a valid "second witness".
Funny that started when Bill Bowen and Barbara Anderson ent public with the Watchtower's dirty little secrets. And there ae statements made on this site quite regularly that bears out the exact opposite of what this article claims.
-
jordan12
There is no point in arguing with your jw friend, because he is brainwashed. Until he sees the truth about the "truth" for himself, he will continue to think that all apostates are sinners.
Just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean they are brainwashed.
Yet experts say that the vast majority of children do not lie about sexual assault.
Indeed. So does Awake!: "Under normal circumstances children lack the experience or sophistication in sexual matters to invent explicit claims of abuse" (October 8, 1993)
As a matter of fact, it proves the Watchtower's warped viewpoint that victims, who are usually women and children, are not to be trusted.
False and ridiculous. The Watchtower has never said any such thing. Allegations that are not proved by two witnesses are not viewed as false or as true. They are viewed as what they are - unproven allegations.
I suspect you'd change your tune pretty quickly about required standards of evidence if it were you who were accused of rape.
Then, why doesn't the Watchtower instruct all elders to report suspected child moletation, whether or not they live in states where reporting is mandatory by law?
For any number of common-sense and legal reasons. Other religious organizations, child protection agencies, professional counselors' associations have exactly the same policy.
Funny that started when Bill Bowen and Barbara Anderson ent public with the Watchtower's dirty little secrets. And there ae statements made on this site quite regularly that bears out the exact opposite of what this article claims.
Demonstrably false. The elders' manual, published in 1991, says exactly the same thing. Witnesses to separate incidents are acceptable as proof. This was long before Bowen started his pathetic website telling obviously preposterous and stupid lies about Jehovah's Witnesses.
-
jordan12
they often refuse to admit that proportionally, child abuse in Kingdom Halls matches or exceeds that found in the much larger Catholic Church.
It isn't true. That's quite a good reason to refuse to admit it.
If you have any solid proof at all, I want to see it.