i'm 36 yrs.
old and was a jw for 35.i did everything from pioneer to bethel to ms to elder, school overseer ect.
, ect.
Welcome.
I was officially announced as no longer a JW. I didn't dissassociate or get df'ed, they just announced it.
Unfortunately, you are disfellowshipped. That is the new procedure. Apparently for legal reasons, no one is allowed to say the word "disfellowshipped" with regard to a (former) JW from the platform.
At this point, that may not make much difference to you. But that is the official stance now.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but...
Wasn't there a thread a few years back indicating that Judah Ben Schroeder, son of Governing Body bigwig Bert Schroeder, married into the family that runs "Circuit Leasing"?
Follow the money!
i realize many here have (unfortunately) much more experience with this sort of thing than i do.
any personal insight, or direction to research material, would be appreciated.. there was a letter to all boes about 8-10 years ago, saying that if an appointed elder had any incidents of child abuse in his history, he had to step forward & admit such, so that his status as an elder could be reviewed.
none of the elders in this congregation said anything.. it was later (maybe 5 years ago) discovered that one of the elders had sexually abused his daughters some time in the 80's, before his appointment.
Thanks to all who replied. I now have a better (albeit scarier) understanding.
i realize many here have (unfortunately) much more experience with this sort of thing than i do.
any personal insight, or direction to research material, would be appreciated.. there was a letter to all boes about 8-10 years ago, saying that if an appointed elder had any incidents of child abuse in his history, he had to step forward & admit such, so that his status as an elder could be reviewed.
none of the elders in this congregation said anything.. it was later (maybe 5 years ago) discovered that one of the elders had sexually abused his daughters some time in the 80's, before his appointment.
I always thought that pedophile was a label given to child molesters, in other words all the same.....
Someone correct me if I'm wrong...
"Pedophile" - someone with a sexual attraction to children. He may or may not act on that attraction
"Child abuser" - Someone who perfroms a sexual act with a child. His predominent sexual attraction may be toward adults
I can understand a pedophile struggling to control his impulses and not abusing children--but is it possible that someone abuses children even though their primary sexual attraction is toward adults?
i realize many here have (unfortunately) much more experience with this sort of thing than i do.
any personal insight, or direction to research material, would be appreciated.. there was a letter to all boes about 8-10 years ago, saying that if an appointed elder had any incidents of child abuse in his history, he had to step forward & admit such, so that his status as an elder could be reviewed.
none of the elders in this congregation said anything.. it was later (maybe 5 years ago) discovered that one of the elders had sexually abused his daughters some time in the 80's, before his appointment.
I realize many here have (unfortunately) much more experience with this sort of thing than I do. Any personal insight, or direction to research material, would be appreciated.
There was a letter to all BOEs about 8-10 years ago, saying that if an appointed elder had any incidents of child abuse in his history, he had to step forward & admit such, so that his status as an elder could be reviewed. None of the elders in this congregation said anything.
It was later (maybe 5 years ago) discovered that one of the elders had sexually abused his daughters some time in the 80's, before his appointment. Since he did not volunteer this information when the Society had directed all elders to in that letter, he was removed as an elder (he had been d-f'ed and re-instated back in the 80's when the incidents took place).
The (now) ex-elder said he did not step forward out of shame for his previous course, and did not realize his actions would come to light. He claimed that the abuse of his daughters stemmed from an enormous amount of pressure he was going through. His wife was extremely emotionally abusive, and was in the process of filing for divorce. Of course, the brother had no outlet for his sexual impulses, was feeling pressure, and so got gratification from touching his daughters. He claimed that once the divorce was done, the pressure was gone and he never again did anything like that.
He has since re-married, but had no further children. He is a very emotional person, and has a strong attachment to his current wife. In my limited experience, he had no overt signs of being attracted to children.
My question is, is that possible? Is it possible that someone turns to a child for sexual gratification in a situation of extreme pressure, even though is not naturally a pedophile (i.e., normally has no sexual attraction for children)? If possible, is it also possible that once the source of pressure is removed, the child abuser would never again repeat his vile acts?
Any insight is appreciated, as there may be a similar situation (abuse of a child many years ago) near where I am currently.
we jsut found out that my step son is planning to apply to bethel when he turns 19. does anyone know what they currently require, what the current "salary" is, amount of time off per year, etc?
he hasn't turned 18 yet, but is already regular pioneering so he can qualify.
we are just curious.
Requirements for Bethel, 2005:
Applicant must meet all requirements in either (A) or (B) below.
(A) Male, baptized for numerous years, pioneer 1+ years, a glowing report from local body of elders, never met with judicial committee, virgin, never seen R-rated movie, studies for every meeting, comments at every meeting, never masturbates, in fact never touches willie unnecessarily, reads only Society-approved literature, drives 4-door car, works with regional building committee, carries microphones flawlessly, discusses spiritual topics only, avoids internet like the plague.
(B) Penis + pulse + law degree.
i know i've seen both sides of the house-to-house argument.
of course, jws say it is approved in the bible while non-jws say it is the opposite.
but on reading in another topic i happened upon a quote implying paul wrote in favor of house-to-house preaching so i looked it up in the american standard version bible.. the ones i usually see that speak against going house-to-house are the following:.
Leolaia or Peaceful Pete or some other scholarly sort can answer this better, with references, but here is a simplified version:
Of course Paul taught "from house to house". When not preaching in a synagogue or in the marketplace, he would use a particular house as his "base of operations". He would remain in that house, trying to convince people that Jesus is Lord, about the resurrection, etc. When he had been there a while, he would go to another house for a while & use it as his base of operations.
In a somewhat related topic--has anyone noticed the often hilarious lengths the WT artists go to, to try to put across the idea of 1st century Christians going "from house to house"? I remember illustrations of 2 disciples standing in a doorway conversing with a woman, apparently after knocking on her door. In a recent WT, there was a picture of Paul talking to someone in the street ("street witnessing", natch) and showing her a portion of a scroll he had been carrying under his arm.
Even the faintest, most rudimentary understanding of 1st century Palestinian life would reveal how utterly absurd these illustrations are. The WT illustrators (or their supervisors who tell them what to draw) are either appallingly ignorant or shockingly deceptive....can't quite figure out which is worse.
uncertainty's second wave hurricane katrina evacuees face life after the d.c. armory
by theola s. labbe
washington post staff writer.
Jeeprube,
Bingo! She is probably "inactive", or doesn't attend all the meetings, etc.
i have this theory.. someone once said to me.....' its no good coming into the truth if you are a sensitive person.'.
i have found in my experience as a former elder that a lot of elders have very large egos.
my theory is this:.
Perhaps your idea was true many years ago. However, nowadays "the pickings are getting slim", and a male will be appointed as a MS (& later an elder) if he meets the following (listed in order of importance):
1) He averages 10+ hours of service per month (completely irrelevant if he ever actually witnesses to anyone, or is an effective teacher-- the single important point is the number on his publisher card under the "hours" column)
2) His family is not an embarrassment. In particular, his children can't be "trouble-makers" and must be at least unbaptized regular publishers if over age 10, and his wife must get close to 10 hours per month (same point as above--preaching effectiveness is utterly irrelevant, just get the numbers). Bonus points if one or more family members are pioneering.
3) He sounds as if he had more than a 4th grade education when giving talks.
4) He is "visible" in the congregation. I.e., does he show up for field service arrangements (completely irrelevant if he actually does any service thereafter), does he comment at meetings (completely irrelevant if his answers have any substance whatsoever), does he show up to clean the Kingdom Hall.
5) He is generally viewed as a pretty decent person by most people. No obvious repulsive personal habits.
6) If there is time at the end of the elders meeting discussing who is "reaching out", a cursory, superficial consideration of the scriptural qualifications at 1 Timothy 3 & Titus 1 is done. Discussion not to last more than 5 minutes.
Here are some qualities completely irrelevant for being nominated as an elder (in fact these may be a hindrance). I have never ever heard any of these items being discussed in a "who is reaching out" discussion:
Generosity, kindness, empathy, mercy, intelligence, compassion, patience, reasonableness....you get the idea.
i've had this question is my mind for a while now, but has there been any skeletal remains discovered that could prove the existence of the nephilim?.
there's so many unanswered questions about these giants - first of all, were they really hybrids?.
secondly, if the demons could materialise and procreate, how do we not know that they gave their children the same reproductive powers?.
Is there anthropological evidence proving the Nephilim's existence?
Of course not, haven't you been reading the Watchtowers?
We all know of Satan's "machinations" (crafty acts, footnote). Satan undoubtedly caused all the brontosurus, sabre-toothed tiger etc. bones to fossilize just a few years after the flood, but evidently used antimatter to dissolve all the nephilim's bones before they could quick-fossilize.
Thus, the fossil record is apparently just another of his machinations (crafty acts, footnote) to confuse ones without real faith.
See how simple the explanation is?
