Ok what happens then if the person who admitted the guilt states that they lied, and was temporarily insane maybe they were trying to get at the other person for something, was do the elders do then.
Two Witness Rule
by Stephanus 23 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Lady Lee
Just to answer this question
Now, what if the victim has multiple personalities, does that count as two witnesses? or maybe more!
I suspect the elders would think this was a case of demon possession rather then personalities
-
Undaunted Danny
Danny sez:The notorious,"TWO WITNESS TAKEDOWN" this absurdity,is an over extension of; 2 Corn. 13:1....It is a subterfuge, ruse so the cult charlatans can selectively ignore evidence at their whim.in their kangaroo courts
That's what it's all about,so that the bastard (lying) elders can play favorites,and it won't play in a court of law.
It's the sleazy lawyers who run the show at the Watchtower,anything for a buck...
When you lie in court it's called 'suborning perjury'.It's a felony with Jail Time.
-
Stephanus
...can selectively ignore evidence at their whim...
A very good take on this, Danny. I suppose when put like that, it gives them a whopping advantage and a chance to play the averages and use all sorts of subjective criteria when determining if their "clean" image is denigrated in any way. They are at liberty to allow or disregard whatever evidence tickles their fancy.
I came to a conclusion years ago that legalism was summed up in Matt 23:23
"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint, dill, and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. It is these you ought to have practiced without neglecting the others."
I summed it up this way: "If, in any way, you've found a THING (money, time, material object, etc.) so important that you have as a result acted either mercilessly, faithlessy, or unjustly (IOW, have treated PEOPLE badly), then, congratulations, you are a legalist!"
And it's pretty obvious how the JCs fall short of this when they, as Danny suggests, dispense justice according to whim.
-
ozziepost
G'day Steph,
The scenario you describe is not so hypothetical! There are cases of this in the files at the Australian bethel. Interesting, eh? Queensland always was a very colourful place!!
Seriously though, in the cases that I know of personally, the one who confessed could be reproved or even DF whilst the other party who claimed innocence maintains his/her standing in the congregation. Stupid, eh?
Cheers, Ozzie
-
ozziepost
I suspect the elders would think this was a case of demon possession rather then personalities
The WTS addressed this issue several years ago and No, they wouldn't consider such a case as demonism. Rather, they do accept the notion of MPD; so how are BOE to handle such a matter? The BOE have been instructed to deal with the personality who committed the "sin" and that personality alone.
-
Mary
If one confessed to the elders, but the other refused to admit anything, aren't they in the same boat as in child sexual abuse cases?
Yepper. I know of a case just like this. A brother started dating someone from another hall and he ends up banging her. He feels really guilty and goes running to the elders and confesses his sins. They privately reprove him. He bangs her again and is dumb enough to go and tell the elders again while the girl denies anything happened. So he gets DF'd and she got nothing.
Makes perfect sense to me.
-
Tuesday
That is truly amazing. You figure that they would either both be guilty, or both be innocent. No investigation, no trying to get to the bottom of this.
Poor overworked, overlooked, faithful, genuine Sister: "We fornicated together, he got me alone and things just went from there, I should have known better."
Group of Elders: "you're disfellowshipped, and you did this with which elder?"
Poor overworked, overlooked, faithful genuine Sister: "Classic Elder over there"
Group of Elders: "Well?"
Classic Elder: "Nope"
Group of Elders: "Good enough for us, now go finish up the Sunday talk."
-
Elsewhere
The WTS addressed this issue several years ago and No, they wouldn't consider such a case as demonism. Rather, they do accept the notion of MPD; so how are BOE to handle such a matter? The BOE have been instructed to deal with the personality who committed the "sin" and that personality alone.
*** Brother raises hand at WT study ***
Conductor: Br. Insane in the Membrane, are you Tom, Dick, or Harry?
Br. Insane in the Membrane: Oh, I'm Harry.
Conductor: I'm sorry, Br. Harry Insane in the Membrane, but you are on restrictions and I can't call on you. Only Tom or Dick can give answers at the meetings.
*** Five minutes later Br. Insane in the Membrane raises hand again ***
Conductor: Br. Insane in the Membrane, are you Tom, Dick, or Harry?
Br. Insane in the Membrane: Oh, I'm Tom.
Conductor: Oh, well, go right ahead...
-
FairMind
I actually believe that given the two witnesses rule (which is in most instances a very good rule) that ruling the confessing party as guilty and not taking action against the denying party is correct. The denying party may actually be innocent. Most likely the elders believe both parties are guilty but obviously the confessing party could be lying. Scripturally speaking, slander is spiritual murder so an unproven allegation must not be spread. Jehovah knows the guilt and/or innocnence of both parties and he knows motives since he can read hearts.
In the case of unproven child abuse/molestation (single instance) the correct action is to make it a police matter, not a congregation matter. When more than one child has stepped forward with accusations against an individual it should in my opinion be an indication of guilt and handled in the congreation as well as the courts.
FM
