Horrible and plain disturbing!!
The watchtowers view on Rape!!! must see
by Khaleesi 56 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
clarity
I feel your pain & fear of being out on the street & alone LITS. You did need that damn job & that alone is heartbreaking!
How many young jw girls believe this atrocity, that is aimed directly at them?
How many will make the mistake to follow this total nonsense ....how many will live in the guilt & the fear directly caused by this watchtower rot ..... & how many will lose their lives because of it?
Some do wonder why we don't just leave wt & shut-up about it .... this is why!
clarity
-
Vidiot
All I can conclude is that the guys at the top writing the rules are simply so far removed from reality that they would be hopelessly unable to function if they had to return to it. -
ToesUp
The entire thing is disgusting. I have never seen the article where they put the blame on the Mothers of these rapists. They also mention aunts (I guess anyone female). This has really bothered me all day. It is the biggest line of BS I have ever heard. So let me get this straight, a male figure can't screw up the kids, only the female? Unbelievable!
My spouse's Father was abusive and did more damage to the children in the family. His mother was one of the sweetest people I have EVER met in my lifetime. So I guess it must have been her fault if one of the kids goes off the rails? BS!
Like I have said before...you just can't make this sh*t up!
So glad to be FREE!
-
Khaleesi
@toesup, it has bothered me since last night when I first saw it & was horrified that they printed this stuff blaming woman.... So happy I am fading & will completely be free from this org soon -
Finkelstein
In biblical Hebrew times if a woman was raped, the man who raped her could escape judgment and penalties by simply making a dowry to the father of the woman and officially marry her.
She wouldn't have the choice to refuse this arranged marriage.
Aren't gods chosen people wonderful , we should try even to this day emulate the social moral standards established by the ancient Hebrews. ........ in an effort to appease Jah of course
-
Vidiot
Finkelstein - "...we should try even to this day emulate the social moral standards established by the ancient Hebrews..."
Wait... didn't God use the pagan nations of "Satan's World" to punish the ancient Hebrews when they got out of line...?
-
Finkelstein
Who knows why God used those pagan nations to punish the Hebrews, the high priests said it was to do with the worship and idolatry of other gods.
God Yahweh is a very jealous god as it is known, woman on the other hand have lower less significant status to men, more like servants to men or bought for chattel as livestock as it were.
The WTS doesn't even think a woman can hold a microphone during a congregation Watchtower study.
We must always remember to use the word of god the bible to arrange are social behavior and conduct.
Using the two witness rule for example in investigating a possible rape., its these kinds of directions and guidance that would make all humanity live and cooperate better, at the same time appease Jah for being obedient to this guidance.
Therefore the WTS leaders are surely on the right path to righteousness !
-
JW GoneBad
The Watchtower's view on rape....and that's what it is..."Watchtower's view"! Watchtower's view sucks and is disgusting!
Thank you Khaleesi for this thread.
-
blondie
No one in Israel was put to death for fornication...adultery yes, fornication no.
If you note that the scripture in Deuteronomy has 3 cases. The marital status of the man does not matter since Jewish men could have more than one wife. The marital status only of the woman mattered, married or engaged (considered legally the same as being married....owned by a man) but a single woman was not treated the same legally under the law.
1) man (single or married) rapes woman married to another man--adultery because the woman is married and is not a virgin.
(Deuteronomy 22:22) “In case a man is found lying down with a woman owned by an owner, both of them must then die together, the man lying down with the woman and the woman. So you must clear away what is bad out of Israel.
2a) man (single or married) rapes a virgin woman engaged to another man...woman does not scream....not rape...unless done in a place where there is no one to hear her scream. (evidently divorced women don't count)
(Deuteronomy 22:23, 24) 23 “In case there happened to be a virgin girl engaged to a man, and a man actually found her in the city and lay down with her, 24 YOU must also bring them both out to the gate of that city and pelt them with stones, and they must die, the girl for the reason that she did not scream in the city, and the man for the reason that he humiliated the wife of his fellowman. So you must clear away what is evil from your midst.
2b) and what if she screamed and no one heard her? How do they know she screamed if no one was there to hear her? Where are the 2 witnesses in the case.
(Deuteronomy 22:25-27) 25 “If, however, it is in the field that the man found the girl who was engaged, and the man grabbed hold of her and lay down with her, the man who lay down with her must also die by himself, 26 and to the girl you must do nothing. The girl has no sin deserving of death, because just as when a man rises up against his fellowman and indeed murders him, even a soul, so it is with this case. 27 For it was in the field that he found her. The girl who was engaged screamed, but there was no one to rescue her.
Side thought by WTS (I don't agree)
*** g73 4/22 p. 17 Protect Yourself from Crime ***
Interestingly, in God’s law to Israel the primary distinction between rape and consent was whether a woman screamed for help. In modern cities onlookers have been known to watch as a woman was raped, assuming she was consenting to an act of exhibitionism since she did not scream or otherwise resist her attacker.—Read the Biblical law at Deuteronomy 22:23-29
3) A man (single or married) rapped a single virgin woman
No screaming required, no one put to death, but rapist required to pay a fine (buying daughter from father because women are property), and she was forced to stay married to her rapist the rest of her life and continue to let him have sex with her.
The only way a man was put to death was if he raped a married or engaged women, owned by a man.
Joseph is held up as an example of one who ran from adultery, the pressure from his employer/owner wife to have sex with her. (no law against it yet)
But at the same time back with the rest of Joseph's family, his half-brother Judah had sex with a temple prostitute (which the WTS says was okay because there was no law against) who turned out to be his daughter-in-law Tamar engaged to Judah's son Shelah. So that was definitely adultery and perhaps incest.
Notice that an unmarried divorced woman never becomes part of the scenario.
*** w62 6/15 p. 372 par. 54 Foretelling Him to Whom All People’s Obedience Belongs ***
As the fourth son of Jacob by his first wife Leah, the next one naturally in line for attention by his dying father was Judah. He too may have been expecting a rebuke, for he had unknowingly had an affair with his former daughter-in-law Tamar. But instead of Judah’s committing adultery with a harlot or temple prostitute, he was skillfully tricked into performing what he had been negligent about, namely, levirate marriage toward widow Tamar. Hence in this case Judah took the place of his son Shelah, the brother of Er, the dead husband of Tamar. So Judah’s twin sons by Tamar were not children of adultery nor do the Scriptures mention them with dishonor; in fact, one of them became an ancestor of Jesus Christ. When Boaz, an ancestor of Christ, took Ruth as his wife, the people said to Boaz: “May your house become like the house of Perez, whom Tamar bore to Judah, from the offspring that Jehovah will give you out of this young woman [Ruth].”—Ruth 4:12; Gen. 38:6-30.
-------Seems like they forget another ancestor of Jesus, Rahab the prostitute.
****and since men could have more than one wife, it was not a sin for a married man to have sex with a single woman, only a married woman or a woman engaged to another man
*** w73 6/15 pp. 383-384 Questions From Readers ***
Since Tamar was being held in reserve for brother-in-law marriage with his third son Shelah, when Judah learned that Tamar was pregnant he pronounced the judgment of death on her for having prostituted herself. When it came to light that Judah himself had unknowingly made her pregnant, Judah exclaimed: “She is more righteous than I am, [why?] for the reason that I did not give her to Shelah my son.” Judah was not married at the time; he was a widower, and so he was not sinning against a wife of his. And the disguised Tamar he mistook to be an unmarried prostitute, in no sacred bonds of marriage. When the woman whom he assumed to be a prostitute could not be located, he realized that he could fall into contempt, that is, for claiming to have had relations with a temple prostitute, when no such prostitute was known to be thereabouts.—Gen. 38:20-26.
As for Tamar, her course was not an adulterous one. Her twin sons were not considered to be the dishonorable sons of sin, sons of fornication. For, when Boaz of Bethlehem took the Moabitess Ruth in brother-in-law marriage, the elders of Bethlehem said to Boaz: “May your house become like the house of Perez, whom Tamar bore to Judah, from the offspring that Jehovah will give you out of this young woman.” (Ruth 4:11, 12) And so Perez is listed among the respectable ancestors of Jesus Christ. (Matt. 1:1-3; Luke 3:23-33) Perez’ mother, Tamar, was like Ruth in not going sexually after a young man.—Ruth 3:10.
As far as Judah was concerned, he thought he was having relations with a prostitute. In this he was not acting right, for it was God’s original purpose for a man to have relations with his wife and not for the earth to be filled with prostitutes. Still, Judah did not sin in the sense of transgressing a specific command of God’s law, for the Mosaic law was not given until much later.—Gen. 2:24; compare Leviticus 19:29.
.