much has been written, twitted and youtubed about the extent to which the wtbts may go in order to keep its members from peeking out of the box.
from name calling, constantly telling members about the dangers of apostasy, all the way to dfing anyone who dares to look outside.
many tools and theories have been brought forward.
I've seen previously quoted here extracts from old WT pubs which confirm how edifying it is to research old WT (and pre-WT) stuff. Someone will come along shortly with the references, I'm sure.
Coincidentally, I have occasion right now to look at some old Christadelphian stuff. They don't want that publicised, either.
"1984" Orwellian practices, for sure. Luckily, we can see behind the curtain - but we should never take it for granted.
the borg might not fall and disappear, but it's sure heading into the oblivion.
they predicted their future in last week's study.. last week during the cong book study they mentioned the following:.
15. to illustrate: a supertanker or a freight train might be awesome in terms of size and power.
(I never was a dub.)
I was raised as a small child in the (open) Plymouth Brethren. One of the things that most scared the 'faithful' was that the lack of potential dating partners could lead youngsters away to the 'evils' of more mainstream protestant non-conformist groups with bigger memberships (i.e. bigger dating pools). Heaven forbid that a good Brethren girl would end up marrying a Baptist (although few from either side could explain the differences between them).
You still see this today. For example, the Christadelphians (a relatively tiny sect) hold lots of 'summer camps' etc. so that their young can meet other CDs.
Attraction and lust are strong emotions (and not just for the young). If/as JW congs diminish I suspect that some might be tempted to move to larger, more mainstream sects (epecially in view of JW dating rules). It's only a further step to move away completely to all the potential delights that worldly partners may hold.
the borg might not fall and disappear, but it's sure heading into the oblivion.
they predicted their future in last week's study.. last week during the cong book study they mentioned the following:.
15. to illustrate: a supertanker or a freight train might be awesome in terms of size and power.
The OP explains something.
When I had my FS visit last week by the Younger Elder (45 years in) and the Older Newbie (5 months in) I raised a few issues. The YE trotted out (of course) 'New Light' (tm). ON made a comment that 'our perceptions change and we must adapt'. YE looked at him approvingly and said 'that's a good way to put it'.
Presumably the 'study' mentioned in OP is where ON got this from. He'll go far in the org probably, unless he wakes up.
i use to dream about designing a bathroom that was, well.
crazy.. today, i saw this photo and almost fell over.
obviously somebody else had the same dream!.
the definition of theft under the theft act 1968 is a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive the other of it.
(england & wales).
i was a cop (mainly a detective) for 30 years and thought of this after mentioning the sparlock video during the jw fs visit today.
I stand to be corrected on the 'facts' in the video but I think I remember it was borrowed.
So Caleb's worldly friend's worldly mum asks for it back, learns it's been trashed and (disliking Caleb's weird parents anyway) calls the Old Bill. She will not let this go. The worldly Old Bill tries to sort this out, but this is 2015, calls and progress are computer-logged. He needs to keep his job, so goes to see Caleb's mum. She denies all knowledge. Worldly Old Bill goes to Caleb's school and interviews Caleb in the presence of a social worker/appropriate adult. Oops!
Worldly Old Bill goes back to Caleb's mum and arrests her (quite lawfully). In interview (without a lawyer because she doesn't trust worldly lawyers and WTBTS won't send one of theirs) she explains that Jehovah made her do it. Pause for psychiatric assessment. Not quite mad enough to be sectioned but 15 minute observations ordered. Husband turns up at nick with a couple of elders asserting his rights as Theocratic Head of Household. Warned to behave or he'll be arrested too.
Caleb's mum is given official criminal caution for theft. Caleb is placed on 'At Risk' register.
At next convention, heart-warming demonstration of given of devotion to Jehovah in the face of persecution. Caleb's mum is, unfortunately, unable to attend. She suffers PTSD after sharing a cell with 'Big Bertha', a drunken bisexual regular arrestee who introduced Caleb's mum to a whole different world.
the definition of theft under the theft act 1968 is a person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with intention to permanently deprive the other of it.
(england & wales).
i was a cop (mainly a detective) for 30 years and thought of this after mentioning the sparlock video during the jw fs visit today.
The definition of theft under the Theft Act 1968 is ‘A person is guilty
of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another
with intention to permanently deprive the other of it’. (England & Wales)
I was a cop (mainly a detective) for 30 years and thought of this after mentioning the Sparlock video during the JW FS visit today. Criminal law is never straight forward but bear with me.
The facts in the video are, I think, that Caleb brings home the Sparlock toy which he has borrowed from a friend. His mother (or Caleb at her instruction) puts it into the trash from where (presumably) it will go for landfill/incineration/whatever.
So, to consider:
The Sparlock toy is real, physical, property.
It belongs to another - Caleb's friend - and there has been no transfer of ownership, just a 'borrowing'.
There has been an 'appropriation', which means assuming the rights of ownership, doing what you want with it, which includes destruction.
'Intent to permanently deprive' would certainly include sending it to landfill or incineration.
So those elements are adequately covered, I think We are left with 'dishonesty' which in case law and statute law is rather covered in the negative. Does she genuinely believe she has a lawful right to Sparlock? No, she knows it belongs to Caleb's friend. (It matters not that she may be prepared to pay for it.) Does she genuinely believe that the owner would consent to its appropriation (destruction)? There is no ground whatever for that belief (she could have asked him but didn't).
And so, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I put it to you that the elements of the offence are satisfied and that Caleb's mother is - at least prima facie - guilty of theft.
(To those who may think that this is trivial - read your local newspaper for reports of people who are convicted of stealing - shoplifting - items of small value.)
after my recent encounter at my door when i was declared by a self-described elder from the local cong as an 'apostate', i was surprised to get a visit this morning.
i would have thought that the records would have noted, but presumably not (or they hadn't been checked).. my callers were two middle-aged men.
the younger one said during the conversation that he was an elder in the local cong and had been baptised 45 years ago (obviously a born-in): the older one said he had been in for five months.
After my recent encounter at my door when I was declared by a self-described elder from the local cong as an 'apostate', I was surprised to get a visit this morning. I would have thought that the records would have noted, but presumably not (or they hadn't been checked).
My callers were two middle-aged men. The younger one said during the conversation that he was an elder in the local cong and had been baptised 45 years ago (obviously a born-in): the older one said he had been in for five months. The younger one tried to monopolise the conversation and wasn't keen when I spoke to the newbie - he was even less keen when the newbie answered me. If looks could kill ... No doubt there was some 'on the job training' given when they left my door. Both had fixed smiles and reminded me of Uriah Heap.
I really had no intention of having a conversation with them, and the younger Elder (IYSWIM) was holding out a 32 page flimsy 'Good News From God!'. I took it, said 'thank you' and was going to close the door when the YE said something to start a conversation (I can't remember what, it was something banal). Reader, I succumbed to temptation and I was glad I did when I found out that the newbie was a newbie. His smile remained fixed but his eyes were going from me to the YE as the conversation developed. His brain seemed to be fizzing a bit. The YE's smile turned into more of a rictus and I would have loved to have been able to read his mind. I would guess that he was more concerned about the effects of all this on the newbie than saving me from Armageddon and planning his exit strategy. I would also guess that - as JWs are at best a minor irrelevance in the bigger scheme of things and very few people have the slightest interest in them - the newbie (and possibly the YE) are not used to talking to anyone who knows much about them.
YE mentioned 'New Light' and D2D work. (He wasn't sure of the number of hours per convert but didn't disagree when I suggested 'thousands' - I couldn't remember the number). He claimed not to know about a lot of stuff. I commented that that couldn't be right - if he was an elder and had been baptised for 45 years he would have lived through the 1975 debacle, for example, and had access to the elders' manuals denied to the R&F.
YE got more and more strained, newbie got a bit more wild-eyed. Finally YE asked me if I thought there was anything good about the JWs. (Is this in the Ministry manual?). I considered the question honestly and told him that whilst I was sure that some individual JWs were good people I could find nothing to respect about the org. That was his cue to depart, trailing the newbie behind him. I noticed that they didn't knock on the doors next to mine.
I noticed that two middle-aged women were working the other side of my street. They called at four houses where I know for certain that people were at home but got no answer. A case of the 'pioneer knock'?
It wasn't my intention to have this conversation (what's the point - you can't argue with blind faith) and it would have been clear that I just wanted to take the mag and close the door. I wonder if YE was showing off to newbie a bit ('This how we do it'). Maybe I have provided some teaching points for the next TMS. Interestingly they both had tablets (not used) but both claimed to be computer illiterate. The best to be hoped for, I suppose, is that newbie goes home and uses google - but it's probably a vain hope.
Will this have been my last visit? Who knows. Lucky I had nothing better to do, and it's a bit like when you engage with scammers - at least when they're engaged with you they're not scamming innocent victims.
church leaders refused to co-operate with a police investigation into a sex attack by one of their congregation on a teenage girl.. jehovahs witness paul atkin has now been jailed for five years after he admitted sexual activity with a 15-year-old.. a court heard the south shields based branch of the church carried out their own investigation after the allegation came to light and atkin was booted out.. but when police came knocking, church officials refused to help what was then a rape allegation, on the grounds of confidentiality.. prosecutor deborah smith told newcastle crown court: it would appear there was some form of investigation by the church.. we know the defendant was disfellowshipped as a consequence of that investigation but there has been no disclosure of any minutes of meetings with the defendant and the elders have refused to provide statements to the police, despite the fact the defendant is no longer a member of their congregation, on the grounds of confidentiality.. atkin, of east moffat street, south shields, was initially accused of rape but the charge was dropped when he admitted sexual activity with a child.. the court heard his victim was 15-and-a-half when he had sex with her.. miss smith said: she did not wish to have sexual intercourse with him.. the crown accept, having discussed matters with her, the defendant may reasonably have believed that she did.. she did not fight back or shout out at the time of the incident.. the court heard the woman is still on anti-depressants and says her self confidence has been shattered by the ordeal.. in a statement read to the court, the victim, who is now an adult, said: this has had a major effect on me and i cannot trust men.. i bottled everything up and as a teenager i turned to drink and drugs.. i hope he gets sent to prison and gets what he deserves.. judge simon hickey jailed atkin for five years and said he must sign the sex offenders register for life and abide by the terms of a sexual offences prevention order for five years.. the judge told him: this has had a huge effect upon this young lady.. gavin doig, defending, said atkin has a good, supportive family and partner and said his family describe him as a hard working man with a job who will face devastating consequences if sent to jail.. he added that it was atkin himself who had brought the matter to the attention of police.. mr doig told the court: this defendant made a very bad mistake a number of years ago.
he has not made any further mistakes.. he is extremely sorry he committed this offence knowing, as he did, the complainant was under age.. http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/south-shields-jehovahs-witness-jailed-8567927.
"“Victims or their families are entirely free to report crimes to the police."
You may find this part of the official JW statement illuminating. Woohoo, dubs are allowed to report crimes! But I bet there could be repercussions if the offender holds a position.
I was a UK cop for 30 years, mainly as a detective, and I dealt with a lot, far too much, of child abuse cases. The WTBTS and/or local elders (and there's a whole can of worms there) may -just may - have a case under English law that their records are protected from judicial proceedings. But, in my former professional opinion, I doubt it very strongly.
And what impression does it give to the members of the public who read these reports as to the approach of WTBTS to these cases? Even the RC church is giving a better PR message than this!
In my occasional dealings with dubs (I never was one) I am usually only mildly confrontational and I try to be gentle. Reports of cases like this (and there are many) tend to make me feel that if I am lucky enough to get an elder at my door he deserves what he gets. Although, of course, elders are just as much poor saps in their way as the R&F.
"in lieu of flowers send money to the kingdom hall"..... wow.... this young woman's jw servant husband was caught cheating on her again with another jw "sister", but when she told her husband she wanted to forgive him again and continue with her marriage, he told her he didn't want that.
he wanted her to simply move on with her life.here is how she moved on: she put on her wedding dress, got into her car in the garage and started it.
do you think finding her this way spoke louder than any suicide note?
"You can't directly blame the Society for this tragedy"
Yes you can, for the reasons outlined in your post. The indoctrination took its toll.
november 15, 2014 wt study issue.
january 18, 2015 to be studied.
opening comments.
"Although we are not under the Mosaic Law, its requirements give us insight into what is acceptable or unacceptable in God’s sight."
(I never was a JW).
This quote is an excellent example of the problem that christians have in trying to maintain continuity from the OT god, bridge the gap between the god of vengeance and 'gentle Jesus, meek and mild'. (Especially the xians who relegate the books of the Maccabees, etc., to apocryphal status). It was a problem for me when I was, a long time ago, a BAC. The doctrine of a .'new covenant of grace' and the other explanations don't really cut it and don't square with the unchanging god teachings. There's a good reason, I think, why most don't like to ponder these points (they're in the 'too hard' box) and it's a really difficult point for JWs because (it seems to me) WTBTS is much keener on OT than NT. (Is it coincidence that Beth Sarim was designated for use by the OT 'princes'? - after Rutherford was finished with it, of course).
The logical problem is quite straightforward. A law is either in force or it is not. If a law is no longer in force it is because it has been repealed, and laws are repealed or superceded because they are no longer applicable or relevant or in accordance with current views. Their insights into what was acceptable is discarded. (Easy examples are laws concerning slavery, homosexuality, etc.)
Probably the most widely-known item under mosaic law is the prohibition of eating pork. Simple to understand, not much interpretation required. No great scholarship required to decipher the 'insight' into 'what is acceptable'. And yet, AFAIK, the GB, that almost-but-not-quite-divinely-inspired distributor of god's instructions, has rarely or ever issued a pronouncement on this vital subject.
One could make the point that a god who was at least as competent as an average legislator could make his laws at least as clear-cut as man-made laws (which is to say always open to interpretation on the finer points) and not rely on vague 'insights'.
Here's a topical example from the UK. The age of consent is 16, Until the 2003 Act, a teacher who had sex with a 17 or 18 year old pupil committed no criminal offence. Since that Act, a 'person in authority' who has sex with a person under 18 commits a crime. Straightforward, no 'insight' required.
Although, in my example it's not clear what the situation would be if the pupil was his/her wife (age for marriage is 16). Forget that.
My point is - by this quote the GB is strengthening their position that THEY are the ones who can interpret the insight into what is 'acceptable'. This is rubbish.
(PS - apologies for rambling.)
