Victoria, Australia: Report on Sept. 13th hearing involving Steven Unthank (page 2)

sizemik

"As cold water upon a tired soul, so is a good report from a distant land"

It's in the Bible.

I believe that technically Barbara, and the Australian XJW are absolutely right, that anyone in a position of responsibility is no longer irreprehensible if they have been charged with a serious crime, and this should include members of the Governing Body.

If one single member of the GB was charged, he might be viewed as not being irreprehensible. But this isn't just one GB member, it is all of them. Who in the organization makes up the rules? It is the Governing Body, is it not? As a group they can make the rules, change the rules, spin the rules, twist the rules, and if the entire Governing Body was ever in a really serious situation, you can be assured there would be "new light" on whatever topic suited their needs.

After all, isn't the GB already going against the rules it gives to Jehovah's Witnesses on a day to day basis? Consider some of these references regarding obedience to Ceaser's laws.

(Emphasis added to all quotes)

(W 12-15-73 p741) They ‘pay back Caesar’s things to Caesar’ by complying with registration and tax laws and by obeying all the laws of the land that are not contrary to God’s laws as stated in the Bible. It is only when “Caesar” demands what belongs to God, namely, worship, devotion or anything that detracts from their acknowledgment of Jehovah’s sovereignty, that they must refuse, choosing to “obey God as ruler rather than men.”—Matt. 22:21; Acts 5:29.

(Awake 7-22-93, box on p17) [Regarding the flag] It is their belief that one shows true respect for the flag by obeying the laws of the land it represents.

(W 9-15-75 p549, 550) All of Jehovah’s witnesses are taught to respect civil authority, since Romans 13:1 says: “Let every soul be in subjection to the superior authorities,” that is, the civil governments. Hence, Jehovah’s witnesses obey all the laws of the land that do not conflict with the laws of God.

(Road to Life (book) Ch7 'Who Practice True Religion', Subheading 'Identifying True Worshipers') Likewise, the Witnesses take no part in the politics, nationalism, and class struggles of this world. However, they do pay their taxes and obey the laws of the land in which they live.—John 15:19; Romans 13:1, 7.

(W 5-15-80 p5) "Hence, it follows that there must be willingness, or at least a yielding, on the part of the governed for such governments to accomplish their purpose. That is why God’s Word commands Christians to “be in subjection . . . for there is no authority except by God.” So Christians are to obey the laws of the land, being conscientious in the paying of taxes, in heeding traffic regulations and in carrying out other obligations. All of this is in the interest of peace and order.—Rom. 13:1-7."

The Society and Bodies of Elders everywhere will quickly apply these references to individual Witnesses, but the Society itself, including the Governing Body, goes by it's own impulses and needs, and often violates the very principals it pretends to stand for, with seeming impunity.

That is the organizational attitued. Maybe one day the Watchtower will will be made to answer for it's hipocrasy. Maybe Steven Unthank will make a dent.

ABibleStudent

Thanks Barbara and the XJW in Australia for this update. Does anyone know how Mr Unthank felt about the proceedings? I am curious why Mr Unthank also named the FDS in those suits.

Peace be with you and everyone, who you love,

ABibleStudent

shepherd

"I believe that technically Barbara, and the Australian XJW are absolutely right, that anyone in a position of responsibility is no longer irreprehensible if they have been charged with a serious crime, and this should include members of the Governing Body."

The GB itself determines what constitutes irreprehensible behaviour. If they decide that they are not being prosecuted for a legitimate reason but because they are being 'persecuted' then it does not matter what the opinion of the world is or what they get charged with, they remain irreprehensible, as far as they are concerned.

Even if they lose this case they will never accept they were to blame in any way. They will just shut down the Australian Bethel and run away like they did in France.

Gayle

Does anyone know how Mr Unthank felt about the proceedings?

He doesn't have this latest hearing transcript up yet on his site: jwnews.net

But he has the transcript of the hearing June 8, 2011 up there. Quite interesting.

EntirelyPossible

The GB itself determines what constitutes irreprehensible behaviour. If they decide that they are not being prosecuted for a legitimate reason but because they are being 'persecuted' then it does not matter what the opinion of the world is or what they get charged with, they remain irreprehensible, as far as they are concerned.

Winner winner chicken dinner.

A couple of things may happen. 99% of JWs around the world probably won't hear of this, so they don't care. If they do, it will just be viewed as the governments turning on true religion and not valid by the ranke and file. Either way, for the flock and them keeping their jobs, problem solved. Whatever happens in Australia is a different story.

sizemik

The GB itself determines what constitutes irreprehensible behaviour. If they decide that they are not being prosecuted for a legitimate reason but because they are being 'persecuted' then it does not matter what the opinion of the world is or what they get charged with, they remain irreprehensible, as far as they are concerned.

Aye . . . the Golden Rule.

Anybody who suggests otherwise will be before a JC quick smart.

Doug Mason

This is an area I am not across. I don't understand the reason the WTS would not permit background checks on JWs who are in charge of children? What do they know? Are they protecting certain individuals?

Have I misunderstood the situation?

Doug

ScenicViewer

@Doug Mason

You are not misunderstanding. The Mormons, Catholics, Anglicans, and other churches have complied with this law, but for some reason that they are not saying, the Watchtower has refused. The original excuse was that they don't have Sunday School, so the law does not apply to them. Nobody seems to believe that will hold up.

You would think that a religion that claims to be the sole source and caretaker of 'truth' on earth would be open, transparent, hiding nothing, and should have been the first to comply.

Certainly the Watchtower tells it's followers they must be scrupulously honest in obeying all laws that don't conflict with God's law. It's a shame the organization doesn't do the same.

fresia

Post 329 of 340
Since 8/5/2010

Thanks Barbara and the XJW in Australia for this update. Does anyone know how Mr Unthank felt about the proceedings? I am curious why Mr Unthank also named the FDS in those suits.

probably because it is the FDS that gives out the rules and orders that must be obeyed. GB/FDS. And seeing that the GB say they REPRESENT all the remnant anointed, then they are accountable.

Victoria, Australia: Report on Sept. 13th hearing involving Steven Unthank

Share this