by freemindfade 21 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Thought I would put this in its own thread. It another embarrassing statement from the RC (Royal Commission not Regional Convention LOL). It's not even one about abuse, its about the jw's stance on science and the bible. I find it to be a pretty strong statement to have in print.
Mr Spinks also said where there was a conflict between the Bible and science, the Bible would prevail, because all scripture is "inspired by God"
12 MR STEWART: Q. Does it have to be an elder who
13 undertakes the investigation? Let me put that differently:
14 does it have to be an elder to whom an allegation of child
15 sexual abuse is made? In other words, you have said it
16 might be an elder with someone else, perhaps a sister from
17 the congregation or whomever, but does it have to be an
18 elder at all?
19 A. I think, again, if you re‐read the case studies, you
20 will find numerous examples of where the parents or
21 guardians have provided the statement without intervention
22 from the elders, so that the clear answer to that is, no,
23 that doesn't have to ‐‐
24
25 Q. Well, they have provided it to the elder?
26 A. So, if you are saying, then, at some point are the
27 elders involved in the investigation process, the answer is
28 yes.
29
30 THE CHAIR: QWhy is it necessary to have elders from
31 that particular church carry out this function, as opposed
32 to going outside, to people who aren't known?
33 A. I think it's a very ‐ I think it is an excellent
34 suggestion and one that has been discussed at length by us
35 over the last couple of weeks when that has been raised.
36 I think we've taken one step towards it. We've got a lot
37 of other steps to take, as you have highlighted, but one
38 step is, at least when it gets to the judicial stage, to
39 make sure that that has outside involvement. But I think,
40 again, it's a very good point, your Honour.
41
42 Q. Is there any possibility of having women join in the
43 decision‐making process?
44 A. Scripturally ‐ I appreciate that's the pivotal
45 question and that comes to the question of is it likely
46 that women will take on the role of elders in the
47 congregation, and, scripturally, that's not the
1 arrangement.
2
3 Q. Your answer to my question is: there is no
4 possibility of women being involved in the decision‐making
5 process; is that right?
6 A. I'm happy to say a clear yes. Will Jehovah's
7 Witnesses find a way to adjust the scriptural process of
8 the elders being men in the congregation, and my answer to
9 that is no.
10
11 Q. You understand the Bible, I assume, in its social and
12 political context, when it was written?
13 A. I do.
14
15 Q. And social and political contexts change over time,
16 don't they?
17 A. They do.
18
19 Q. Does the approach of Jehovahs to the application of
20 the Bible, as a consequence, change as society changes?
21 A. If you are referring to Jehovah's Witnesses, I ‐ we
22 won't change what is a clear scriptural arrangement. So
23 are there things that we would all do ‐ that we do
24 differently now that are based on Bible principles?
25 I think your Honour has highlighted a very clear one, in
26 that do Jehovah's Witnesses apply the Mosaic law from an
27 ancient civilisation that dealt with the theocratic, the
28 civil and the criminal all as one code? No, we don't,
29 because, as Mr de Rooy said, Christ ended the law. A clear
30 distinction between theocratic and the law. So have things
31 changed over the time? Yes. Will some of those clear
32 instructions in the scriptures change from the Christian
33 era? I don't believe they will for Jehovah's Witnesses,
34 because of the application of the arrangements in the
35 Bible.
36
37 And so I have reasoned through this myself,
38 your Honour, that ‐ will Jehovah's Witnesses adjust what we
39 see as clear instructions in the scriptures? Will Muslim
40 people change what they believe in the Koran? Will
41 Aboriginal people change what they believe is in their
42 culture? I think there are just some things that are so
43 deeply a part of their faith and belief system, that what
44 we need to do is make sure that we conform with the law,
45 that we do our best to harmonise with the culture. But do
46 some of those things fit neatly into 21st Century
47 Australia ‐ I understand the point that you are making.
1
2 Q. I take it that if it was the case that there was
3 a conflict between what science might tell us about human
4 behaviour and the way these things should be dealt with and
5 your understanding of the Bible, then the Bible would still
6 prevail?
7 A. All scripture is inspired of God. We ‐ like many
8 Christians, we are not fanatically trying to find
9 references to make life difficult; we are applying
10 scripture as we read it, in the best way we can, to
11 sensitively integrate with modern society.
12
13 Q. But you understand the point: there may well be
14 areas, and we're in one such area, where science has taught
15 us a lot in recent years about sexual abuse and how to
16 appropriately respond to it, but if that science was in
17 conflict with your understanding of the Bible, then the
18 Bible would prevail; is that correct?
19 A. Absolutely the Bible will prevail. And if I could,
20 your Honour, that's why hundreds of Jehovah's Witnesses are
21 in prison in South Korea; in Taganrog, Russia; Azerbaijan;
22 Eritrea, because they won't budge on a clear Bible
23 principle that will endure forever.
24
25 Q. So if the law of the country was to prescribe a mode
26 of behaviour which was in conflict with your understanding
27 of the Bible, what would happen then?
28 A. We would apply the words in the book of Acts, 5:29, to
29 obey God as ruler rather than man, and as we did here
30 during the Second World War, as thousands of Jehovah's
31 Witnesses did when they refused to comply with the Nazi
32 regime. The fact that the government at the time makes
33 a law, Jehovah's Witnesses will always obey scripture, and
34 that's why we have 28 successful outcomes in the European
35 Court of Human Rights, because we won't budge where there
36 is a clear Bible principle that happens to be in conflict
37 with a government of the day.
38
39 THE CHAIR: We might take lunch.
Can someone clarify?
Who is Mr. Spinks?
What day of transcripts is this from?
Thanks in advance.
"...they won't budge on a clear Bible principle that will endure forever..."
Pretentious, much?
x
Wait...
...slavery was clearly condoned in the Bible; does that mean that that "principle" should endure forever?
