Watchtower Has Statute of Limitation on SIN?

by Nanoprobe 25 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  JT

  The Society's old policy was to ignore all and never reply to a charge or give an interview. It was really, really rare that they reacted to anything. Now they are almost spontaneous. A big change!

  ###########

  excellen point when i worked in the chairman office the guys in news service had very clear instruction from bethel on such things and you are correct they never commented on stuff like that--

  "Anyone have any ideas why the radical change?"

  mainly due to times are changing- with the advent of the net the wt has very little choice, when you consider that 20yrs ago it would take 6 months as it were to get info out on the wt, now in just seconds an elder can scan a BOE letter and it will circle the earth before the next service meeeting -

  some of you may recall MP Techonologies, it was a pro jw web site that carried the entire summer conventions talks , releases, etc

  wt shut that sucker down-

  they now have a dept dedicated to dealing with the press now and JR Brown is the spokesperson

  i like the way you stated that the old policy was NEVER TO DIGNIFY A COMMENT

  but now its more like open mouth insert foot

  when you consider that guys like JR-- life exp has always been to tell someone something and that be the end of the conversation, for as a former DO and Writing staff memeber no jw would dare with follow up with a WHY?????????

  FOR THE answer would be simple THE SOCIETY SAYS SO

  Well in the big world of the media they would laugh at his silly A$$ if he said something like that

  bascially wt men like you, myself and others who were elders never had to ANSWER any's question

  CONSIDER even the lowest pub is told if someone keeps asking alot of questions simply say:

  "I see that you are not really interested in the truth" and one would leave that door-

  we were always told never to debate or argue, regardless if their point was valid or not

  as jw we always had to be in control- rarely would a good bible teacher allow the student when conducting to get off the subject much-

  i have been with co on bible studies who would say upon leaving stick to the material

  so now they can;t write and control the script and they are loss
• 

  silentlambs

  Greetigs from UK, i just had to comment on this post, the article referenced was given to me when we discussed the local molester in my congregation it is the 1972 kingdom ministry october "question from readers" it states anything after 2-3 years is a no harm no foul situation. This article has been used countless times to allow elders to remain in their positions due to the passage of time and their way of life proving their repentance.

  silentlambs
• 

  ozziepost

  This needs greater 'airing'.

  Here it is:

  *** km 10/72 8 Question Box ***

  
  What is meant by "some years ago" on page 170, paragraph two, in the "Organization" book?

  This indicates more than a year or two. It may be noted that it did not say "many years ago." So it is not an exact number of years, but more like two or three years. It was not intended to have a brother go back into the distant past to bring up wrongs of which he repented years ago and that have evidently been forgiven by Jehovah and are not being practiced now. In many cases the wrongs occurred prior to the time when the "Watchtower" drew attention to what the Scriptures say on such misconduct.

  If a brother has been serving faithfully for some years and has seen evidence of Jehovahs blessings upon him, why should he now step down from office? If he has the right viewpoint now on conduct and will give good counsel he should be able to continue to serve. If the local body of elders see that he has the respect of the congregation and has shown the proper qualifications over the last two or three years, he may remain in his position of service.

  Must wrongdoing be brought to public attention after many years? The book (page 168) under "Public Reproof" quotes 1 Timothy 5:20 and mentions reproof of those who confess to committing more than one offense. But it really has to do with recent events. The "Interlinear" refers to those "sinning," something going on at the time. So if repentance occurred some years ago, three years ago or more, and sinning ceased, and he is respected by the congregation, it is not necessary now to publicly reprove one who committed more than one offense "some years ago."

  Thanks Bill and all who pursued this.

  Cheers, Ozzie

  Edited by - ozziepost on 13 September 2002 9:56:29
• 

  outnfree

  Is there anyone that can scan this October 1972 KM?
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  The full text of the 1972 Kingdom Ministry article is on this thread:

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=36530&page=1&site=3#493189
• 

  expatbrit

  Outnfree:

  I've emailed you a scan of the km. Strike9 is giving me trouble at the moment, so I can't upload it to the web.

  Expatbrit
• 

  wednesday

  I believe that bill is right, i have seen this sort of rule used to allow elders who commited gross sins stay in positions if it was and old sin. Case in pint i had a relative who had an affair with another relative-they kept it secret over 25 yers. Finally one persns conscience bothered them. (NOT HE ELDERS I MIGHT ADD) and one person confessed,. Meetins were held-it was laughted at-and all well that ends well. I should have done this when i was in my tens and ealry twenty's. just wait-not confess and eventually it would not matter.
• 

  wednesday

  My first post did not go through. bill is correct. After a nuber of years an sin cannot be use dagainst u if u have basically led an ok life since then. Case in point-An elder relative of mine sinned with another relative mnay years ago. Finally one confessed(NOT THE ELDER). It was generlly made light of and the perosn confessing was sort of looked at as a nut.
• 

  rocky220

  The sad thing is....there are good people [elders&rank-n-file alike] that have invested 20, 30, 40 & yes 50+ years like my mom, dont see that this Borganization, just makes up stuff as they go along and that their well planned mind control program efficiently facilitates members to accept anything with WT stamp of approval, and when the story is changed, they smoke screen it with the "New Light" ploy........and it works very well. And if your red flags go up, questioning WT's inconsistancies, well, they got plan [B], FEAR!........I'm glad I got out!!!!, but I will be there for my mom when WT's spell is broken....she's going to need me! rocky220
• 

  Nanoprobe

  WOW! Thanks, Silentlambs and everyone who explained that nonsense.

  We now have another secret rule revealed: Get away with sin/crime for three years and you're free and clear. While the congregation was sitting there studying the 1997 Watchtower on "Known Molesters" we did not know that the 1972 Kingdom Ministry superceded the information. There is a big gap between what we are taught and what the organization does. And this relates to WTS feeling of superiority ---as JT stated we don't have the right to question anything just do as they say.