Posts by AllTimeJeff

60

How I survived being starved, beaten and tortured by my Jehovah's Witness..

by Dogpatch in

jw
friends

how i survived being starved, beaten and tortured by my jehovah's witness foster motherhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=510457&in_page_id=1879.

by alloma gilbert - more by this author last updated at 19:01pm on 25th january 2008. comments.

panic is bubbling up through my body.

AllTimeJeff

It goes without saying that this hideous witch was off her rocker.

Stories like this need to be publicized, not because this is the norm among JW's, but because it shows that JW's as a group are not immune from the problems that can come upon any group. It shows there is nothing magical about JW's, contrary to what they claim. It is also good as a reminder to those who are still JW's and believe the fairy tale that they have the greatest organization. Obviously they don't.

It is the mentality that "...we have the truth and don't have to worry about pedophiles and abusive parents" that totally prevents elders and others with knowledge from reporting these quacks earlier then what they do. It seems that only stories like these might change that. Lets hope so.

To those of you who have suffered similarly, I hope that you are finding the ability to cope with the painful memories. It can't be easy.

31

OK you scuz buckets... I'm mad now!

by dawg in

jw
friends

folks, surly one of you can tell me what the scriptual reasons the jws have that only the so called "annointed" should partake of the evening meal as the laughable jws call it?

have i pissed someone off?

did i not bathe this week?

AllTimeJeff

Yo Dawg!

I tried to explain the scriptural explanation for the JW reasons for having only a select few partake. As you no doubt noticed, the answer is so obvious that the govenring body only needed 8 scriptures from 10 books of the bible, taking up 3 study articles of one WT. See, its that simple.

JW's are full of crap

16

The Culability of Jehovah's Witnesses and Pedophilia

by AllTimeJeff in

the subject of pedophilia and the sexual abuse of children often is complicated.

by that i don't mean that it is complicated to know how to deal with pedophiles.

they have a despicable problem in their minds and need to be identified and controlled for all children's sake as well as for their own sake.

AllTimeJeff

Hi there Oracle. Please quote whatever you find useful, although the information Barbara Anderson has put out is so much more comprehensive then this, and documents specific examples of what i wrote here.

I would wager that there are many ex elders here who read Barbara's latest commentary on these settlements and just shook their heads in recognition. All the dumb letters to the branch, all the dumb responses, all the well meaning elders who are WAY over their heads and totally confused as to what to do. And worst of all, to know of the evil, scheming pedophile we had to deal with, who takes advantage of a system for their own pleasure. Do these guys care about "Jehovah"? Doubtful to me.

I wrote this because sometimes I get the feeling whenever someone says "JW's protect pedophiles" to the public at large, their really isn't a frame of reference for most people to understand. I think very few knows what really happens and what the GB policy is and how utterly callous it is towards the victims. I see a need to explain it in a way for the public at large to understand this better.

But lets face it, the small leaks in this boat exploded thanks to Bill Bowen and Barbara Anderson. JW's will never be the same after having to deal with this. I am grateful to them for that.

43

new BS assignment, new threats.

by inkling in

ok, so after about 2 months of straight absence from my bookstudy, the elders shuffled me off.

apparently my current (actually quite kind, if a bit clueless) bs overseer was.

not being enough of a nazi.. my newly assigned bs has a (aforementioned in another post) dimwitted, socially obtuse, and.

AllTimeJeff

Truthiness works! Try this one, it is nearly bulletproof. Go to a respected elder in the congregation who ISN'T this yahoo and tell him the following.

"I have been having such a hard time. I am so depressed. I am doing the best I can, but he is so discouraging. I don't feel loved..."

That should do the trick.

22

Cousin agrees, Questioning the FADS isn't wrong...now he wants more.

by dawg in

jw
friends

ok, so all of you know about my letter writing campaign; i've had several break throughs and just as many disappointments... about what i expected.

i'd say the response to my letters has been 50/50.. so, the last few weeks, i've been recieveing e-mail replies from one of my cousins.

he conseedes the fact that it isn't "apostacy" to question the fads.... this after much coaching on my part.. but i gave him three things to look into, one was why it is apostacy in this dumb assesd religion to question the men in the gb.

AllTimeJeff

I posted this on this thread several months ago. http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/140754/1.ashx

Here are my comments

I hope this won’t take me too long, as being concise isn’t my biggest talent. A recent thread on the 144,000 made me put a couple of things together about the governing body. These are the ones that claim to have authority from Jehovah, to tell the over 6,00,000 that “… although we aren’t masters over anyone’s faith, these 150 items are absolutely prohibited for you to do.” I was always curious how if they weren’t masters over our faith, how they could make so many rules? (oops, I asked a thinking question. I think that is prohibited to, due to the faith weakening nature of logical questions)

Did you know that the “faithful and discreet slave” of Mt 24:45-47 is charged with providing ‘food at the proper time?’ Although the context doesn’t make clear at all what feeding is entailed here, that is all the faithful slave is given: a commission to feed. No authority given here. Besides that, this reference is too cryptic and out of context with the rest of what Jesus said here to really say with any certainty that this “slave” refers to any group. Which is probably why a lot of religions keep silent on it.

The 144,000. Revelation 7 and 14. In Rev 7, we see them from the tribes of Israel, 12,000 each. (Different tribes from the ones in Exodus FYI) In Rev 14, we see them singing! If anything, Revelation shows this number to be a choir, not a code word for a governing body. Again, no where is their a direct or implied giving of authority to this 144,000. They are singers, not rulers.

Where does the authority come from? Answer: Rev 4:4, the 24 elders with crowns on their head. Crowns of authority. This is the only link to the “faithful slave” and the “144,000” being given authority. Do you realize what this means?

There is absolutely positively no bible reference for authority to be given to a “faithful slave” group, and esp for saying the 144,000 has authority. All this crap is simply a big game of biblical connect the dots. Here is the formula

Faithful slave = 144,000 = 24 elders = governing body. (oh yeah, no scripture anywhere in the bible or even a concept describes a governing body. That is a pure invention. Total scriptural fiction.)

That’s it! Total scriptures it takes to get that? FOUR. Four completely out of context scriptures that don’t in any way connect, other then that Freddie Franz said they do.

My only hope in posting this is that if you think that at some point you were disobedient to god because you broke a rule that this group of men made up, just remember that to invent rules, they had to invent themselves first. Scripturally, the governing body doesn’t exist.

I would add just for the sake of clarity that they only group other then Jesus with crowns of authority in Revelation are the 24 elders. If the GB didn't apply this to themselves, or more importantly, if this group was not found in Revelation, then there would be no authority at all found in the book of Revelation to give to any group.

The only way that authority can be claimed is for the GB to claim that the 24 elders represent the 144,000 and the governing body. Read Revelation without the "Climax" book a thousand times and you will never see a link between the 24 elders and the 144,000, let alone the FD Slave of Mt 24.

16

The Culability of Jehovah's Witnesses and Pedophilia

by AllTimeJeff in

the subject of pedophilia and the sexual abuse of children often is complicated.

by that i don't mean that it is complicated to know how to deal with pedophiles.

they have a despicable problem in their minds and need to be identified and controlled for all children's sake as well as for their own sake.

AllTimeJeff

Furthermore the sexually restrictive environment of not encouraging or aiding individuals to explore their own humanity (sexuality) ,save the ones 'game' enough to break JW rules, is likely to posit the most law abiding individuals into conflicts with their own human biology which could well result in opportunism or gradual moral decline and taking advantage of situations easiest concealed.

This is a great point. I agree that making the biological function of sex taboo, even though each of us carry "sexual" organs every where we go is nuts. This is due in large part to the superstitious and fanatical view that religions have put upon their followers.

I have often wondered if god exists, why he made us with such strong sexual impulses only to forbid their use except in the strictest of circumstances. There is much about such a view that is illogical.

However, kids are off limits. While social taboos and restrictions no doubt contribute to pedophilia, there is a major difference between sexual activity of consenting ADULTS and children. I am no expert at all on sexual biology. And given that many cultures have a wide variety of differences and viewpoints on sex, etc, I think the key is CONSENT.

I don't think a semantics word play is in the best interests of the problem. While you brought up some good points R.Crusoe, I think that finding CONSENTING ADULTS to go along with certain festish behavior is still healthier by far then pedophiles. Because in the end, to engage in any legal sexual activity is to have the consent of the other person. Otherwise, it is rape. In our world, we call child rape molestation and pedophilia. It is obviously the same as rape: The perpetrator takes advantage of his superior position and strength to force himself on the other person or child

JW's and their view towards sex certainly represses sexual behavior in an unhealthy way. But I don't think that it is the biggest contributer to those who CHOOSE to molest children. It has been noted that those who feel those impulses can actually go to therapy and address the underlying issues before they lose their inhibitions and hurt a child. That in itself shows that it is possible to get help and heal oneself. Seeking help is a form of control and restraint. I think it possible that through education and therapy, some pedophiles might be rehabilitated, but I don't think we are in an era yet where that can be determined safely. In the absence of this confirming data, the protection of children should be our first concern, and the rehabilitation of pedophiles a distant second.

16

The Culability of Jehovah's Witnesses and Pedophilia

by AllTimeJeff in

the subject of pedophilia and the sexual abuse of children often is complicated.

by that i don't mean that it is complicated to know how to deal with pedophiles.

they have a despicable problem in their minds and need to be identified and controlled for all children's sake as well as for their own sake.

AllTimeJeff

The subject of pedophilia and the sexual abuse of children often is complicated. By that I DON'T mean that it is complicated to know how to deal with pedophiles. They have a despicable problem in their minds and need to be identified and controlled for all children's sake as well as for their own sake. Most have difficulties rehabilitating and re-integrating into society, and thus merit a lifetime of supervision at least, or incarceration at the other end of that spectrum. But it gets complicated when it happens within religious communities, such as and especially Jehovah's Witnesses.

Pedophiles prey upon the innocence of children. Kids are easier to control and manipulate. Pedophiles operate in the shadows. They know that their behavior is criminal. They require an environment that protects them. RELIGIONS OF ALL STRIPES are ripe as a breeding ground for pedophiles. JW's, Mormons, Catholics all suffer from the same structural flaw. Whether they want to admit it or not, religions first ammendment rights of "ecclesiastical privelage" (i.e. All religions in America Constitutionally legislate themselves, the Governement is not allowed to do so) is often used to protect themselves from unwelcome publicity. Pedophiles know this and use it to their advantage. A pedophile can gain trust over time while expertly getting access to children for their own perverted pleasure. They realize that even if they are caught, that they can work the religious system they are in to avoid going to jail, and perhaps even to continue molesting children. Pedophiles become experts at appearing remorseful if caught. (that isn't just my opinion. In talking with forensic phsychologists who work in prisons, they often point out how manipulative pedophiles are. Many if not most have the goal of getting out to do their horrid deeds again.) Elders are so naieve and untrained to handle these insidious people that they have acually believed the pedophile over the victim and their families. Pedophiles have had little to worry about in these circumstances.

The Government depends on all religions to police themselves by ACTUALLY TURNING IN CRIMINALS OR REPORTING SUSPECTED CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. But they can't make religions do this.This is the structural flaw of almost all religions that pedophiles exploit. Religions, and JW's in this case specifically, believe they have the one "truth". This arrogance blinds them to the problems of pedophiles and it's real criminality. JW's feel that with Jehovah and the Bible, that they alone are in the best position to deal with pedophiles. So they deal with them judicially in their own traditional manner. Even if this means disfellowshipping, it doesn't mean the victims can talk about it. It isn't allowed STILL for a reinstated pedophile to be identified for the protection of the congregation. The GB uses "confidentiality" as a code word for "control." It must be kept secret, because the pedophile has a right to privacy according to the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. The GB believes this total bullshit because of their interpretation of the bible.

In this kind of environment, pedophiles thrive. As early as the 1990's, the GB sent letters to bodies of elders with instruction on how to handle pedophiles. These instructions were quite emphatic that such matters be kept strictly confidential. This still hasn't changed. The congregation still isn't warned if a pedophile is there.

The GB is so disingenuous when it claims that elders call the police "in states that require them to do so." Talk about a distinction without a difference!? Who cares if the state you live in hasn't yet legislated that religions report those suspected of pedophilia to the police. Isn't it common sense to do exactly that, esp these days? Isn't it scriptural to report criminal activity? ISN'T IT THE RIGHT THING TO DO? IF IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO, DOESN'T THAT ALSO MAKE IT THE MORAL THING TO DO?

This is exactly the kind of offense that shows the limited wisdom of the bible. (or at least the GB's ability to interpret it) because of their "two witnesses" rule. The Governing Body feels that because the bible says you can't take action against a person without two witnesses, you can't report suspected pedophilia either without two witnesses. Pedophiles don't exactly invite other people to watch them. Thats the point. You will never have two witnesses see a pedophile in action. Thus, you have no choice but to go by reports! If you are sincere and want to do the right thing, (as some elders bravely have done) you have to take what one person tells you seriously. You have to give the police the chance to do what the elders are obviously not trained to do, which is to INVESTIGATE POTENTIAL CRIMINAL ACTIVITY. The cops aren't as easily fooled as elders are by pedophiles. And yes, they are actually trained to identify pedophiles. The cops aren't usually going to hang someone without evidence. How does telling the police that you have a report of a possible pedophile in your midst go against the bible or otherwise prevent the congregation from running itself? Haven't JW's learned from their own horrible experience that this isn't their strong suit? But they stubbornly insist on doing things their own way. Even if you believe that the accussed is innocent, let the process happen.

This is why ex JW's get upset, (just in case their are any lurkers reading who may wonder why you read of the pain of many who post here). They never had a voice, and were never allowed to talk about what happened to them. They weren't even allowed to warn others in the congregation of a pedophile under pain of elder action against them. No matter what the PR Dept of Jehovah's Witnesses says today, thousands of people have been discouraged from reporting suspected pedophiles to the police because of what the elders told them. Sorry folks, that is the sad, cold truth of the matter.

I know most Jehovah's Witnesses (and most religous folk) hate pedophilia and pedophiles, and want to protect children. That is a given. That isn't the point. The culpability for allowing the environment and circumstances that allow pedophiles to exist belongs to the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses. It is through their own self serving interests that they refuse to change. Until the GB directs that all reports elders hear of pedophilia be instantly turned over to the police to verify, they will have more blood on their hands. We can accept nothing less then this concession. There is nothing unscriptural about this method of dealing with the problem.

2

SMOKING GUNS?

by BEROEAN in

i've visited this board often looking for hard evidence of a major story, but most of what's reported here is misdeamenor type stuff.

other reports are heresay or rumored.

does anyone have some real smoking gun facts?

AllTimeJeff

Borean

As a former elder, I dealt with one pedophile case where the victims totalled at least 6. One committed suicide. 2 are or were in jail. The others are all alcoholics.The offenses occurred in the 1970's. I hate to tell you this, but this is one of thousands of cases like this where the facts were concealed, those with knowledge were silenced through intimidation, and the pedophile merely received a congregation sanction, but rarely anything legal.

This is criminal activity, and these are criminals. I doubt the families and victims who survive and are grieving to this very day would say that there are no smoking guns. I doubt they would say these are misdemeanor crimes either. Please tell that to the "brothers" I visited in state prison who were convicted of felonies for child abuse, statutory rape, etc.

If you are looking for something "Watergate" like where the media is all over the story, you aren't going to find it.

There are two former Governing Body members who were known homosexuals. Ewart Chitty was kicked out in 1979. Leo Greenlees was dismissed in 1984. The "scandal" is that neither was disfellowshipped, both were given "special pioneer" status, meaning that they could have their basic material needs taken care of for the rest of their lives, which is what happened to both. The hypocrisy is that very often those who are elders in local congregations who make a mistake, or are homosexual are disfellowshipped and shunned without regard to the circumstances. The Governing Body is fond of saying that those in more responsible positions are more culpable. The fact that when one of their own committed gross sins according to their own standards, they took it easy on them, even continuing to pay for their way in life!

I will admit at time that some ex JW's love gossip and rumor and exaggerate often. But that isn't 100% and doesn't in any way negate the very real scandals that have happened and continue to exist.

I want mug shots, love children, and sex tapes!

And odd comment. It made you come accross as sensationalistic to me. If the only proof that will do is through the media, where have you been? Did you miss the recent settlement? The thousands of court papers released by Barbara Anderson? That not good enough for you?

88

Paul's Letters: Part of "All Scripture ..." ?

by compound complex in

greetings, friends:.

a friend - a former jw - gave me thomas paine's the age of reason: being an investigation of true and fabulous theology.

the mind boggles as i begin, haltingly, to fathom what many of you have already learned and shared here on jwd: the authenticity of the bible is seriously in question.

AllTimeJeff

So, Jeff, you would believe because the "entire world knows" that these individuals exist, regardless of the fact that you have never seen or spoken with them. So what you are saying is that you believe because you trust what the "entire world knows" even though you yourself have not experienced such knowledge. (Your logic might be a little skewed here in that at one point in time, the entire world believed the earth was flat. And you would believe it to be true too. Actually, there are some people even today who believe the world is flat.) So, pretty much, your belief is based on trust--trust in those who tell you something.

This is why I made the comment earlier about semantics and thiests. Inkie, I think most people who read my statements will admit that when I said "the entire world knows" certain world leaders, that I obviously can't answer for "the entire world." I hope you will forgive my statistical misstatement. Mea Culpa! If you can work with the semantics of my arguement, you will see that my comments were about the amount of evidence available as to who is alive and actually exisits and who is myth and is not in existence.

On to the substance; my belief is based on evidence. The fact that some people in the world don't have access to a video or a polaroid of Hillary or Obama doesn't mean they don't exist. The fact remains that there is no physical evidence of god. We have myths and the same amount of evidence that Jesus is god as there is that Zeus is god. In fact, Jesus has a lot in common with Zeus, especially with how involved he has been in the world today.

You state that "we have documented evidence" that these politicians exist. Do we not have "documented evidence" that various cartoon characters exist? that they life in Disneyland? and that you can even visit them there? It's documented evidence, yes?

Where to begin with this hum dinger! I want you to know Inkie that I am sitting here at my computer fighting the urge to be a smart ass. Suffice to say, in your comparison you have basically made my point, that the evidence for existence is the same between God and Cartoon Charecters. I would work with your metaphor if I could. May I suggest a stronger arguement next time.

Come on, Jeff. Really? We have the writings of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle--do you question their existence? According to your logic you do. We have the writings of those who were contemporaries of and who wrote about people like Marie Antoinette or William the Conqueror or Marco Polo or Julius Caesar, Cleopatra, Marc Antony or King David, etc., etc., etc.

Yes, I do question; not their existence but the total veracity and truthfulness of the facts known about them. Hell, what don't we know about Nixon? Public Firgures do lie about themselves. But there is evidence that these people lived. The gods they worshipped? Diferent story. Whats your point Inkie? Think about it. I am not questioning the existence of real people that have existed in history. Even these historical figures worshipped gods that were real to them, but we have no evidence for their god! That is the point.

You really seem hung up on me stating that photographic evidence would be nice. (please dont put a picture of a sunrise or a flower...) I will be plain for your benefit. A photograph is a metaphor for real evidence. A powerful person, a leader today is seen and quoted all the time. Their existence is not questioned by the sane. Yet the most powerful personage of all the universe can't do better then old scrolls thousands of years old? Or the occasional stranger who claims to hear the voice of god in their heads? But thiests get all upset because people like me say "Hey! There really isn't any evidence to support the idea of god.." NO EVIDENCE!

88

Paul's Letters: Part of "All Scripture ..." ?

by compound complex in

greetings, friends:.

a friend - a former jw - gave me thomas paine's the age of reason: being an investigation of true and fabulous theology.

the mind boggles as i begin, haltingly, to fathom what many of you have already learned and shared here on jwd: the authenticity of the bible is seriously in question.

AllTimeJeff

I don't call people too much on the internet, so please don't take me not calling as evidence of what you suggest AGuest. I can only credit you so much for good intentions before I have to pull the plug.

I want to know from god, not from an anonymous poster if god exists. AGuest, your presumption that you can succeed where SO MANY have failed to do so is not your fault. But consider that in the thiestic world of mediation that you have in effect offered to mediate a relationship between me and god. Does this mean Christ failed where you will succeed?

I used to wonder why this was, why folks would SAY they wanted to know... and then when presented with the opportunity, would... I dunno... backoff, backout... disappear...???? And then my Lord answered my question: it's not that they don't want to know - it's that their AFRAID of what they might come to know! About God, and Christ, yes... but also about themselves .

You said it. I will let your logic and your arguements stand for themselves. Suffice to say, I am afraid of nothing, but I can't take the offer of every god lover to tell me that god loves me and I can "listen". You are not the first to try this with me AGuest?

So has your god told you if I will die or not? Am I judged? You don't have to do the judging, I am just curious in your conversations with your Lord if you can tell me what's on his mind. I am truly curious what you are hearing.