The real danger of “independent thinking”…
…is the risk of thinking the WTS might be wrong.
"the dangers of independent thinking".
reading mary's thread regarding the july 15th wt, i began to really consider what the wbts' problem is with "independent thinking".. what exactly is "independent thinking" and what about its opposite, "dependent thinking"?
i think the following excerpt from an article here does a good job of defining them.
The real danger of “independent thinking”…
…is the risk of thinking the WTS might be wrong.
awhile ago i said on here i would like to show how wrong the jehovahs witness organisation is , in that they will not accept the testimony of a victim of sexual crime where the victim has no other witnesses to the crime.
i faced this with helping my ex wife for about 15 years in exposing her father , an elder, to the jw org.
his raping of her over years and they believed him.. so therefore the perpetrator knowing of the organisations stance can easily deny and therefore be free to pretend to serve as an innocent jw still mixing with the congregation ,and also i have witnessed an accused perpetrator of child molestation witnessing at my next door neighbors house in field service with a child of another family even though the elders knew of the accusations against him.
The reason for the downvotes is, like I said before, the deliberate weaponization of the rule.
That weaponization has done so much fucking harm that oftentimes the mere mention of the rule triggers anger and anxiety, let alone any perceived defense of it.
the english legal system's independent inquiry into child sexual abuse has issued its final report, and its recommendations.
to read the report in full just google iicsa report, if you search on the iicsa site you can find the specific investigation into j.w's.. but this recommendation from the final report is interesting, esp.
the first and last sentences.
NotFormer - “…When it comes to damage done to the organisation and its people, that bloke must be cellmates in Hell with da Judge.”
Fixed that for you. 😏
awhile ago i said on here i would like to show how wrong the jehovahs witness organisation is , in that they will not accept the testimony of a victim of sexual crime where the victim has no other witnesses to the crime.
i faced this with helping my ex wife for about 15 years in exposing her father , an elder, to the jw org.
his raping of her over years and they believed him.. so therefore the perpetrator knowing of the organisations stance can easily deny and therefore be free to pretend to serve as an innocent jw still mixing with the congregation ,and also i have witnessed an accused perpetrator of child molestation witnessing at my next door neighbors house in field service with a child of another family even though the elders knew of the accusations against him.
The fact that the two-witness rule was weaponized so heavily by Ted Jaracz specifically to make it as difficult as possible to expose the problem (and therefore conceal his own alleged offenses) pretty much invalidates it as a tool for justice at this point, anyway.
the english legal system's independent inquiry into child sexual abuse has issued its final report, and its recommendations.
to read the report in full just google iicsa report, if you search on the iicsa site you can find the specific investigation into j.w's.. but this recommendation from the final report is interesting, esp.
the first and last sentences.
NotFormer - “…Unless the CSA is established in the mouth of two or three witnesses, the elder doesn't KNOW anything, according to Ted Jaracz’s weaponization of that particular aspect of Mosaic Law.”
Fixed that for you.
the english legal system's independent inquiry into child sexual abuse has issued its final report, and its recommendations.
to read the report in full just google iicsa report, if you search on the iicsa site you can find the specific investigation into j.w's.. but this recommendation from the final report is interesting, esp.
the first and last sentences.
Elders that don’t comply will be charged…
…institutions that won’t comply will have their charity status threatened.
And that is as it should be.
w98 2/1 p. 22 par.
16 - "what of the dead who are resurrected on earth?...they also will have to love the name of jehovah, ministering to him, offering acceptable sacrifices......".
(daniel 9:26, 27) "and after the 62 weeks, mes·siʹah will be cut off, with nothing for himself.....and at the half of the week, he will cause sacrifice......to cease.
“Who's got it wrong - Daniel or the evil slave?”
YES.
namely, that the org & its elite group of "anointed" christians had usurped christ's role.
thank you so much, faithful evil slave!
by their fruits............... for lurking jw's: how many org "truths" have you seen reversed during your life?.
BLASPHEMY???
Shit, I wanna go back, now.
🤘😝🤘
jehovah’s witnesses have an official page for clarified beliefs they encourage elders, ministerial servants, regular pioneers, as well as all the rest of the elite, to keep up to date with:.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200277174.
2025 has a curious clarification:.
Seriously, though…
…Legal probably advised them that they need to stay the fuck out of peoples’ bedrooms a little more.
😏
jehovah’s witnesses have an official page for clarified beliefs they encourage elders, ministerial servants, regular pioneers, as well as all the rest of the elite, to keep up to date with:.
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200277174.
2025 has a curious clarification:.
WTF…
@ WTS…?
Maybe enough GB members finally clued in that BJs are awesome?
😏