Forscher

Joined

• started 33 topics
• posted 1,825 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Forscher

• 
  23

  If you knew....

  by BlackSwan of Memphis in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  that your jw family were lurking here, either to specifically to pinpoint you or just to well, lurk.

  would that change the way you post?.

  what if you knew for a fact they knew who you were and they were tracking you, would it change the way you post now?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  If any Dub family outside my immeadiate family knows, I'd be screwed. So why bother? As it is, my immeadiate family already knows and don't care.
  Forscher
• 
  16

  How the irrational argue

  by Vormek2.8 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  conservative: what about puerto rico?

  all im saying is that the usa has fifty states!

  conservative: and washington!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  I'll second that one CYP!
  Forscher
• 
  8

  JW Ben: Judicial Committees

  by AuldSoul in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  jw ben,.

  you said you will answer questions a long as no one becomes rude.

  i can't really guarantee that no one on the forum will become rude in this thread, but i can guarantee that i won't, so long as i am treated with respect.. from my research, i have found no scriptural basis for the following aspects of judicial committees:elders acting in place of or on behalf of the individual members congregation in determining who is guilty and what the punishment should be.conducting secret hearings, without allowing witnesses to the proceedings or allowing the proceedings to be recorded.making a statement of the outcome (sentencing) and expecting congregants to abide by the elder's decision whether they know the facts of the matter or not.ruling in favor of shunning anyone who voluntarily leaves, i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  Here is an essay which appeared on another forum a few years back. It is short, but interesting.
  Disfellowshipping
  
  Disfellowshipping! Wow, finally one of my hot-button issues! Since you asked for scriptural references as well Galileo, let me see what I can do for you.
  
  Since sound doctrine must be compatible with the whole Bible, let's take a little look at how things were handled under the Jewish system. First off, Israel was a sovereign nation, which means that it had a law code with criminal penalties, including capital punishment. How matters were adjudicated reveals much about our god and, consequently, how he wants his servants to handle matters of wrong doing.
  
  Under the Mosaic Law, all matters were adjudicated openly, for all the people to see. So much was this so, that one of the principle objections that Jewish leaders have today to the Gospel stories of the trial of Jesus is that the secretive nature of his trial, as recorded in the Gospel, was impossible under Jewish law and could not have possibly taken place that way. Trials usually took place at the city gates with the older men of the city sitting in judgment (De. 21:19-21.). The book of Ruth confirms that legal disputes were handled in that manner (4:1.). Two or more witnesses were required to establish guilt (Nu. 35:30, De. 17:6.). So, as we can see, everything was open and above board.
  
  By the time of Christ, the Jews had added expulsion, or disfellowshipping, to their justice toolbox. It would appear that the Romans had placed certain restrictions on the religious leaders to invoke capital punishment for some offenses that merited it under the Mosaic Law (Joh. 18:31). As a number of studies by social scientists have confirmed, expulsion from a group is a potent punishment that can have lasting consequences. So it would appear that the Jewish leaders had found a powerful weapon to use to insure conformity. The Bible has an example of expulsion being invoked in the case of a man who spoke well of Jesus (Joh 9:8-34.). As you read that, please note that the trial of the man was conducted publicly, as required by Jewish Law, even if the judgment and punishment were unjust.
  
  So what about the Christian congregation? How did they do it in the first century? It would appear that they adopted the Jewish penalty of expulsion for certain cases. How was it done? Well, we know that in several cases The Apostle Paul ordered it done himself (1Cor. 5:5, 11; 1Tim 1:19-20.). Since Paul was led by Holy Spirit in his actions, we can assume that he had the authority to do so. Note here as well, that Paul was open about what he did. We have recorded for all time just why he ordered the expulsions. It can't get more public than that!
  
  Paul also chided the congregation of Corinth for not having judged and expelled the malefactor themselves (1 Cor. 5:12:13). As late as the beginning of the second century, it appears that expulsion was still practiced by the Christian congregation since John mentions an abuse of the authority (3 Joh. 9-10.). The standard of two or three witnesses still applied (1 Tim 5:19-20.). Apparently all things were done open and above board the same as had been required of Israel.
  
  In modern times, expulsion has been used from the beginning. Under Russell, expulsion was only invoked for those who practiced (not guilty of one or two acts) the things for which the Bible clearly mandates such an extreme action. The trail was apparently conducted in front of the whole congregation with them involved in the decision. And , to this day, that is how I understand the Bible Students to handle the matter (If I am wrong, I will welcome correction in the matter.).
  
  After Russell's death, things changed. Presently, judicial matters are handled by Star Chambers. Three elders meet secretly, interview the accused and the witnesses separately, and make their decision in secret. They are guided by a manual that they will usually refuse to allow defendants access to in making their decisions. And I am not at all impressed with the arraignment.
  
  I've personally been involved with several hearings. On one occasion, a witness was DF'd on the strength of rumors of wrong doing. In another, a rape victim was DF'd despite denials that the intercourse was consensual. These defendants were never allowed to confront any of the witnesses against them. (So much for the "two witnesses" rule that the society proclaims to the world to be sacrosanct.) And in one case, the defendant was not even informed of the decision, or right to appeal it, before the decision was announced to the congregation! To say that many of these star chamber tribunals are rife with corruption, I think, is an understatement.
  
  You asked! So there it is.
• 
  38

  Society's recall of older books

  by rekless in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  does anybody remember when the wtbts ask all the congregations to bring back all the old outdated books.

  i think it was in the late eighties.

  there was an announcement from the podium, return old books so they could be returned to new york.. i was too lazy to go through my books and take them in.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  Yes, I remember the anouncement. The reason given was so that newly formed congregations could get copies of older literature for their libraries. There is a site somewhere by an ex-JW who went up to the hewadquarters to help out with something. While he was there, he found out that most of the books recieved were burned by the WTBTS. I don't have a record of the address, maybe somebody else may have it. Maybe somebody here who was with at Bethel/watchower farm at the time can confirm or deny it.
  Forscher
• 
  10

  What names have you been called?

  by onesong in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  for those of you who are out (or going that way) are there any names or terms that dubs have used to describe you that you make you laugh?.

  my personal favorite (out of many) is that i'm an "enemy of everlasting life" .

  by a former elder and friend.. yup, that's me...i want to see everyone die!!!!!!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  I was called a"fighter against Jehovah" while still in, though it was behind my back. None of the elders who called me that had the balls to say it to my face. I've no idea what is being said now.
  Forscher
• 
  29

  Are we starting to 'Come out'?

  by Honesty in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  during the past few weeks i have noticed a lot of people sign off their posts with their names.. does this mean that we have no fear of the evil wt empire?.

  bob evans.

  walland, tn..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  Many are. I've already given my reason for the anonymity elsewhere. If things change, we'll just have to see. There is one person here who doesn't live all that far from me. He'd find out before the rest of you if it does!
  Forscher
• 
  16

  Loyalty and betrayal

  by Narkissos in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  those are serious issues in the mind of any (future) xjw.. actually we're on an exceptional spot in life to ponder on the pitfalls of "loyalty" and the heartbreaking necessity of some "betrayal".. we can rationalise it by saying we are loyal to a higher instance (god, the "truth" or whatever).

  yet the feeling (and sometimes guilt) of betrayal may be lingering in our minds.. may i remind those few lines from friedrich nietzsche (thus spake zarathustra):.

  when zarathustra had spoken these words, he paused, like one who had not yet said his last word; and long did he balance the staff doubtfully in his hand.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  Let me do an imitation of Kant here,
  To the disloyal, who have betrayed us, no loyalty is Due!
  Cheers!
  Forscher
• 
  22

  Lurkers:How To Leave The Organization Quietly And Discreetly

  by metatron in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  an ever growing number of witnesses would like to leave the organization - but how?

  you may have an extended family "in the truth".. all your "friends" ( and that word "friends" deserves to be put in quotes ) may be "in the truth".

  you may not be in any position to make.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  I think the key to a successful exit, whether by fade or DA, is to make plenty of good friends outside the organization before one makes the move. That way one has a good network of friends to takes the place of much of what one leaves behind. That is one reason why groups like the JWs and the Amish actively discourage friendshids outside of the cult community. By isolating the individual and leaving him/her without a support network outside the group, they make shunning a very effective club to beat members into submission with.
  Friends won't nesessarily replace family, but they can weaken the blow. It would appear that when family members realise that one has enough friends out there to make the shunning relatively ineffective, some will start stretching the "family business" rule as much as they can get away with, and thus, the isolation from family is not complete. We've seen enough stories on this forum lately to know that is happening to some extent. So I think that is an important step.
  Forscher
• 
  20

  What happens at 1000?

  by xjwms in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  i just hit 1000. posts that is.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  Look at your standing. You are now a Jedi Master! So I add my
  Congratulations
  Forscher
• 
  19

  If...

  by Narkissos in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i was thinking of an approximate reversal of force's thread (http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/14/105552/1.ashx):.

  if something happened which proved beyond any doubt that god (or gods) cannot exist, silencing forever all claims for realistic belief in an objective divinity, shattering even the uncertainty of agnosticism, would you start being interested in theology?.

  i don't mean to discuss the probability of the assumption: it is very unlikely.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Forscher

  Okay, I'll give you folks a little teaser here.
  If some race of creatures showed up in their spaceships in such a public manner that their existence is undeniable, all of us believers would have to reexamine our beliefs, period. some wouldn't, just the same if the opposite, which many Atheists demand were to occur. I, however, would be compelled to rethink some things. I have no trouble admitting that.
  By the same token, if I were alive when a space probe from earth discovered sentient life on another planet, then I would be forced to rethink a few things as well. I think that is just as reasonable as what many materialists demand in the way of evidence concerning the existence of a supreme being.
  Forscher