by ChristianObserver 23 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse
: The numbers are way off beam and appear to have been exaggerated by someone. In the USA apparently the society are required by law to document any reports of child abuse.
:...However, the figure of 23,000 has no basis in fact and would appear to be of malicious origin."
Yeah, this clown is a veritable fountain of facts.
Farkel
Hawk (and others),
anyone know where I can view a scan of the 11/15/73 Q.F.R.?
thanks in advance!
Farkel Said:
Yeah, this clown is a veritable fountain of facts.
Couldn't have put it better myself!!!
You can just sense the intelligence ooozing from her words...
det,
I only have the CD version. Sorry I have not scaned that puppy. But if you do find a person willing to scan it make sure they scan the front page, the table on contents and the entire QFR - for referencing.
hawk
*** w73 11/15 703-4 Questions from Readers ***
Questions from ReadersDo
Pauls word sat 1Corinthians6:1-7 mean that under no circumstances should a Christian take to court a case involving a fellowbeliever? U.S.A.The apostle Pauls inspired admonition is: "Does anyone of you that has a case against the other dare to go to court before unrighteous men, and not before the holy ones? Or do you not know that the holy ones will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you unfit to try very trivial matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? Why, then, not matters of this life? If, then, you do have matters of this life to be tried, is it the men looked down upon in the congregation that you put in as judges? I am speaking to move you to shame. Is it true that there is not one wise man among you that will be able to judge between his brothers, but brother goes to court with brother, and that before unbelievers? Really, then, it means altogether a defeat for you that you are having lawsuits with one another. Why do you not rather let yourselves be wronged? Why do you not rather let yourselves be defrauded?"1 Cor. 6:1-7.
Here Paul was showing the Corinthian Christians the inconsistency of taking disputes between Christians before secular tribunals. The judges would be men who were not governed by the lofty principles of Gods law and whose consciences were not trained through a study of his Word. As many of the judges at that time were corrupt and accepted bribes, Christians had little reason to believe that their judgment would be just. Paul referred to them as "unrighteous men." Were Christians to take their disputes before such men, they would be putting in as judges men whom the congregation looked down upon as lacking integrity.
Then, too, in taking matters before unbelievers for judgment, they would, in effect, be saying that no one in the congregation had the wisdom to judge "matters of this life" among Christians. This was wholly inconsistent with the fact that spirit-anointed Christians as heavenly associate rulers of the Lord Jesus Christ would be judging, not only men, but also angels. And by dragging fellow believers before pagan judges, they would bring great reproach upon Gods name. As outsiders would be led to believe that Christians were no different from other people in being unable to settle differences, the interests of true worship would be injured. It would have been far better for individual Christians to take personal loss rather than to injure the entire congregation by bringing their disputes to public notice.
In view of the foregoing, would dedicated Christians today go before secular courts if that were to injure the advancement of true worship or misrepresent it in the eyes of outsiders? No. Of course, as all other people, true Christians are still imperfect humans. They make mistakes, and problems arise in connection with business matters and the like. But differences of this nature ought to be settled within the congregation, for Gods Word provides the needed guidelines and there are men in the congregation who are well grounded in the Bible.
However, if a Christian refuses to correct a serious wrong when it is made clear to him by elders serving in judicial capacity in the congregation, such a one would be expelled. This is in line with Jesus words: "If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector." (Matt. 18:17) Thus, for example, one who defrauded his Christian brother or who failed to provide materially for his wife and children would find himself outside the congregation if he did not repent.1 Tim. 5:8.
The injured party could thereafter decide whether legal action should be taken in an attempt to force the guilty one, now disfellowshiped, to rectify matters. Of course, the injured party would want to take into consideration whether it would be worth the time and expense as well as whether the congregation could still come into disrepute by bringing to public attention the actions of one of its former members. If the wronged Christian conscientiously felt that Gods name would not be reproached and legal action was definitely needed, he would not necessarily be acting contrary to the spirit of Pauls counsel if he were to take to court one who was no longer a part of the Christian congregation. Jehovah God has permitted secular authority to serve as his instrument in bringing lawbreakers to justice, and in this case the one wronged would be availing himself of legal help after exhausting the intracongregational means to have the wrong corrected.Rom. 13:3, 4.
There may even be times when Christian brothers conscientiously feel that they could go to court with fellow believers. This might be to obtain compensation from an insurance company. In some countries the law may specify that certain matters have to be handled in a court, such as wills that may have to be probated by courts. But this does not create adverse publicity or bring reproach upon the congregation. In handling such legal matters that would not affect the congregation adversely, Christians can be governed by what they consider to be best under the circumstances.
However, if any member of the Christian congregation, without regard for the effect of his action on the good name of the congregation, ignores the counsel from Gods Word on this matter, such one would not be "free from accusation" as a Christian. He would not be one who has "a fine testimony from people on the outside" of the congregation. (Titus 1:6; 1 Tim. 3:7) He surely would not be an example for others to imitate, so this would affect the privileges that he might have in the congregation
Edited by - hawkaw on 23 July 2002 10:22:57
Edited by - hawkaw on 23 July 2002 10:24:40
Gracias, Hawk!
det,
Remember that this has somewhat changed effective Feb, 2002. An official letter went out stating a JW victim can now go to the police and not be given sanctions. However, before this, the Nov 15, 1973 WT article applied. Also be advised that a victim can only go to the police or children services. If the victim talks to the family, member of the congregation and/or the press, there will still be sanctions as per the 1973 and other WT articles. Also the elders still conduct their insane investigations and will bring the victim infront of the accuser (yes a 6 year old to stand before a grown large male (accused)). This - no doubt destroys evidence that only the police should investigate.
hawk
Thus, for example, one who defrauded his Christian brother or who failed to provide materially for his wife and children would find himself outside the congregation if he did not repent.1 Tim. 5:8.The injured party could thereafter decide whether legal action should be taken in an attempt to force the guilty one, now disfellowshiped, to rectify matters.
Since when have courts asked for a person's religion?....wait til disfellowshipped?....the whole process could take months! ...
Jehovah God has permitted secular authority to serve as his instrument in bringing lawbreakers to justice, and in this case the one wronged would be availing himself of legal help after exhausting the intracongregational means to have the wrong corrected.Rom. 13:3, 4.
The scripture is true...."after exausting the intercongregational means" ....<----- I don't see that part anywhere in the noted scripture.
good point hawk:
Also the elders still conduct their insane investigations
i call them the "judicial kangaroo courtroom tribunals"
and will bring the victim infront of the accuser (yes a 6 year old to stand before a grown large male (accused)).
exactly what that letter by that meathead gillies was saying in that fax to panorama, and i just could NOT believe it when i saw it.
Edited by - zev on 23 July 2002 11:46:51
sorry, it was jr brown who signed that letter.
In the United States, when any one of Jehovahs Witnesses is accused of an act of child abuse,
the local elders are expected to investigate. The procedure is as follows. Two elders meet separately
with the accused and the accuser to see what each says on the matter. If the accused denies the charge,
the two elders may arrange for him to have the opportunity to confront the accuser in their presence. If
during that meeting the accused still denies the charges and there are no others who can substantiate
them, the elders cannot take action within the congregation at that time. Why not? As a Bible-based
organization, we must adhere to what the Scriptures say, namely, "No single witness should rise up
against a man respecting any error or any sin . . . at the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three
witnesses the matter should stand good." (Deuteronomy 19:15) Jesus reaffirmed this principle as
recorded at Matthew 18:15-17.
i've said enough.
give 'em 'nough rope, they'll hang theirselves.
Bill Bowen,
You brought up the LIE first and the WT responded to it. And their respond was that you lied about the number.
