In the UK, a sister I knew fell off scaffolding, and was so badly injured, she couldn't walk for months.
PP
http://www.globaltoronto.com/impaled+metal+after+victoria+crane+overturns/3329739/story.html.
.
bangalore.
In the UK, a sister I knew fell off scaffolding, and was so badly injured, she couldn't walk for months.
PP
mine's was, if your job interfere with the meetings you have to decide who you will choose,.
serving jehovah or serving man, if anyone knew my needs it most definitely was jehovah.
and he knew i needed my job to eat.
PEacedog,
sadly I did, and learnt that all the "commendation" from the brothers in the world does not make washing windows a fulfilling career choice!
Education - the enemy of the WT!
PP
this is my biggest dilema.
although mentally i really feel i could walk away from the org right now, i still have genuine love for the people i have come to know over the years.
i love people!.
Very painful to lose relationships that were so close for so long.
Yet liberating to be left with people who are your friends, no matter what.
PP
mine's was, if your job interfere with the meetings you have to decide who you will choose,.
serving jehovah or serving man, if anyone knew my needs it most definitely was jehovah.
and he knew i needed my job to eat.
"Don;t go to University, you are only going to be wasting your time. Pioneer and do a humble job instead, like window cleaning. "
i'm reading "captives of a concept", by don cameron.
cameron holds that the one thing that keeps jehovah's witnesses prisoners in the watchtower is the idea that they are in "god's organization", and, therefore, the right thing to do, in spite of what one sees, is to stay within it.
cameron also says that those jehovah's witnesses who become convinced that the watchtower is not god's organization eventually leave.
I know that at Bethel, it was often stated in Writing that the fact that Judge Rutherford and his cohorts were released from prison, and then were able to reorganise the preaching work was a direct fulfillment of the prophecy of the 2 witnesses resurrection in Revelation. It was said that this was the proof that Jesus had chosen them - the fulfillment of that specific prophecy.
PP
jw doctrine teaches that the 1,000 years of christ corresponds to "judgment day," and everyone who has not already been judged will be resurrected from the dead.
the exceptions would be those who died during the flood, the destruction of sodom and gomorrah, and a few odd individuals.
but that's only the people living today.
This is an excellent discussion, and has piqued my interest.
I think I am going to try and find out more about this idea of "paradise" in the Bible......
PP
interesting story.
this fellow needs encouragement to go to the police.
the co was later promoted to do .
<!-- @page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } -->
Hi TT,
thanks for your response. I totally understand the fact that your heart goes out to him, as does mine. As I said, I am not commenting on whether it happened or not. I don't know. But my point was actually more fundamental than that. Just before I re-iterate it, I want to make this clear – I don't accept that elders should be involved in investigating abuse cases at all. It should go to the authorities, to protect the victim and accused, and the elders too.
But the point is that in many cases, proof one way or another is difficult to ascertain. It's not black and white, not open and shut. Sometimes, charges are not brought, and the victim feels justice is not done. So, in the case where:
an elder is accused, and proof to convict him in a criminal case is not available, what should be done?
What of an elder who is accused on more than 1 occasion, sometimes years apart, but no criminal case can be brought?
In short, this is what I am asking – on this site, we are automatically and rightly on the side of the victim. Our natural concern means we often side with the person making accusations, even with lack of evidence. And so, we criticise the Society's policy on child abuse. So I ask : what should the abuse policy be, including handling the instances I mentioned above? That's not just directed at you, but all who are interested.
Love to all
PP
interesting story.
this fellow needs encouragement to go to the police.
the co was later promoted to do .
Hi, I thought I would throw in my ignorant twopence here. " <!-- @page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } -->Not believing this story is Rude at best. We should always believe victims until proven false."
Twinkletoes
I have to say that I find this statement a little difficult to square with the principles I was brought up with. Please don't get me wrong here - I'm not commenting on THIS particular case (I doubt very much he is lying). I'm not sure whether that was what Twinkletoes meant? If so then I apologise. But as a rule, even in child abuse cases, how can it ever be sound in practice to state that we should automatically believe the accuser? Is it not an underpinning tenet that a person is "innocent until proven guilty"? Is not the burden of proof actually upon the accuser? I understand of course that it is ridiculously hard for a child to provide evidence of abuse - the age of the child, the immaturity, the fact that these despicable acts take place in seclusion, and so on and so forth. I am absolutely sure that the experts on this board can enumerate these difficulties more fully, and in no way am I excusing this vile crime.
But I still do find it hard to understand how we can square our natural and rightful instinct to protect the vulnerable, with the demands of "justice". Is it not more true to say that the position of the law, and indeed people in general, should be expected to be"impartial" - an accuser should provide evidence and proof of the act/crime before any determination can be made?
I wonder if I might ask a question related to this. In cases where some brother, lets say an elder, is accused of abuse, and the elders cannot "prove it" (even though, in my opinion, they should automatically report it to the proper authorities, so an impartial and exacting investigation can be done), what should be done?
Should the elder be removed? Should he be left alone? What exactly would most people consider to be appropriate?
I am going to say this with gritted teeth, because I think everyone who knows my story knows my view of the organisation. But.........in the above situation, what would be the appropriate action for the organisation to take? Should action be taken, and if so, what? This is a genuine question.
And, I wonder, in the case of two separate cases, where the guilt of the person can not be established, what should the organisation do to the elder?
I ask because I wonder, and I hope no-one will take my questions as a ludicrious "defense" of the Society. I know some of you have been abused, or know of ones who have, so I want to ask your opinions. I hope no-one takes this post the wrong way - it is not a defense of the Society, nor am I trying to be insensitive to child abuse victims - I want justice for them too.
Love to all of you
PP
bring back the memories.
"Don't bring reproach on Jehovah's name".
It's pretty hard to do that of a person who says of himself:
"I am Jehovah....forming light and creating darkness, making peace and creating calamity, I Jehovah am doing all these things." and "If a calamity occurs in the city, is it not also Jehovah who has acted?"
PP
take this 72 yes/no question test to find out.. http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/jtypes2.asp.
Your Type is
ENFJ
Extraverted | Intuitive | Feeling | Judging |
Strength of the preferences % | |||
1 | 100 | 12 | 1 |