Rodney Spinks Lies...

by iwasblind 23 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

• 

  iwasblind

  Hi Guys

  I actually have had dealings with Rod and found him to be a very reasonable and "non-robotic" man in the past.

  I know it should not surprise me, but I was disappointed to hear his lies and half-truths.

  They know their stuff and are not easily led, but he tried to lead the Royal Commission to believe that 2 people could be involved in investigating a claim - which is wrong.

  His lack of memory on what parts of the judicial process are biblical - hello - NONE are. There are no scriptures that backup the use of 3 men, a body of elders, cutting people off from family and friends, restrictions, etc.

  He also lied about the GB being involved in policy creation and changes.

  His statement that in ALL cases, elders are told to inform parents that they can go to the authorities and get the full support of the congregation is not verifiable. I asked some of the elders I know and they were not under that impression at all.
  

  At least they are exposing at the higher levels that they are not Christ's brothers.

  It would be great to have in that commission a person well versed in scripture to debunk their twisted reasonings.
  
• 

  sir82

  Are the guys testifying here under oath? Could they be charged with perjury if their statements can be proven false? Would that result in prison time or fines?
  
• 

  Vidiot

  Once again, for the newbies, lurkers, and trolls...

  x

  ...if you have to cheat to defend your beliefs, your beliefs don't deserve to be defended.
• 

  cappytan

  They know their stuff and are not easily led, but he tried to lead the Royal Commission to believe that 2 people could be involved in investigating a claim - which is wrong.

  For the record, Spinks is correct on this point. It is routine for a body of elders to form an investigating committee, usually comprised of 2 elders, to investigate a claim of wrongdoing and determine if a Judicial Committee needs to be formed.
• 

  Vidiot

  That being said, a pair of blue-collar workers with zero credentials and training are not qualified to investigate a sexual assault.
• 

  sparrowdown

  You said it yourself "you found him to be very reasonable."

  Maybe because you weren't asking him questions about how the WT handles child abuse.

  These guys suffer from multiple personality disorder.

  Or maybe that is "becoming all things to all people."
• 

  iwasblind

  Hi Cappy

  Thank you, I understand my wording above was confusing. The commission was asking about 2 people as an investigative committee, but the brothers were saying 2 people (even women - "heaven forbid!") could investigate - however that brothers were talking about 2 people being witnesses - they did not clarify it a matter needs 2 elders to investigate.
  
• 

  iwasblind

  Hi Sparrow,

  What I meant was dealing with bethel is a robotic, bank teller like experience most times as an elder.

  You feel like a stupid kid approaching an older kid to ask for your shoelaces to be tied. They don't tell you their name or give you anything personal however Rod was always human.

  My comment did not mean he is not a victim of this brainwashing cult - I just meant he "appeared" to be quite a normal guy.
  
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Iwasblind: Hi Cappy
  Thank you, I understand my wording above was confusing. The commission was asking about 2 people as an investigative committee, but the brothers were saying 2 people (even women - "heaven forbid!") could investigate - however that brothers were talking about 2 people being witnesses - they did not clarify it a matter needs 2 elders to investigate.

  Is there not an element of the two witness rule in the way that judicial investigations involve, whenever possible, at least two elders? Are not the two elders viewed as filling the two witness rule for the branch? Is that not why they have a provision for an "observer" elder to watch the collection of evidence when the child accuser is compelled to give them their story? To provide that "second witness" to the testimony itself?

  I have understood, correct me if I am wrong, that testimony has to be given to at least two elders because the branch requires that for the report to have standing with them. A single elder's report/witness to the testimony itself is not considered valid.

  The micromanagement of this organization is making my head spin!
• 

  johnamos

  he tried to lead the Royal Commission to believe that 2 people could be involved in investigating a claim - which is wrong.
  
  There are no scriptures that backup the use of 3 men, a body of elders, cutting people off from family and friends, restrictions, etc.

  Matthew 18:16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established.

  1 Corinthians 5:11 But now I am writing YOU to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man… “Remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves.”

  2 John 10 If anyone comes to YOU and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into YOUR homes or say a greeting to him.

  2 Thessalonians 3:6 Now we are giving YOU orders, brothers, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition YOU received from us.

  2 Thessalonians 3:14 But if anyone is not obedient to our word through this letter, keep this one marked, stop associating with him, that he may become ashamed.

  Romans 16:17 Now I exhort YOU, brothers, to keep your eye on those who cause divisions and occasions for stumbling contrary to the teaching that YOU have learned, and avoid them.