Posts by Drearyweather

28

"No more than 40 years"

by dynamiterose77 in

in another corner of the internet someone stated that witnesses are proclaiming that this system will be no more than 40 years now... that "gog of magog" will start the great tribulation.

can anyone confirm this latest "prediction"?.

Drearyweather

I'm just trying to confirm if they have made an actual, current, "40 years" prediction. I'd just like to get it in writing somewhere

There is no such thing in writing anywhere in the publications of the JW's.

19

Active JW's - Does None of This Bother You?

by The Fall Guy in

thanks to atlantis and his sources, we are able to examine material from the alleged "faithful slave" which is intended only for the eyes of the shepherds wolves in the congregation.. information needed for visit of circuit overseer .

all congregation accounts records covering the period since the last visit, which would include any bankbook being used and the records for any additional accounts being kept by the congregation.

(do you have excess money which should have been given to us?).

Drearyweather

Why doesn't the CO, at the very least, review JCs?

If the CO's began to review all the JC's, there would be more disfellowhippings. There are many congregations where elders mishandle cases or don't handle them at all. CO's are hardlines and would ensure people don't get mercy.

A prime example of this is India, where hordes of elders are now being deleted for not handling cases.

8

"Do not make for yourself an image of God ..."

by stuckinarut2 in

a thought struck me regarding the biblical directive found in a few places including exodus 20:4.

"do not make a likeness of god in the form of any creature that is on the earth or heavens ".

it would seem disrespectful to use "dirty" creatures to describe perfect beings?.

Drearyweather

Regarding the Ark of the Covenant, no one worshipped it nor bowed down to it. Only the high priest entered the most holy once a year. Hence that in itself doesn't contradict the second commandment.

15

Governing Body of JW's - Bare-faced LIARS!

by The Fall Guy in

w11 8/15 p. 22 questions from readers - “we thus have no way of knowing the exact number of anointed ones on earth; nor do we need to know.

the governing body does not keep a list of all partakers.. see this - s-21-e congregation's publisher record (2018-12).pdf

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/6255453529964544/2019-elders-manual-whole-lot-more.

Drearyweather

Doesn't the org get its "anointed statistics" straight from a congregation's records and the annual "roll-call" count of partakers at the memorial?

The secretary forwards the total partakers figure to the Branch. No list is maintained in the congregation, nor at the branch level.

Hence the particular WT is right when it states that they don't have a list of partakers.

But with the "wordwide unique Watchtower Publisher ID" on their HUB they have a database with all JWs.

This is not yet implemented

224

How to sue the WT over shunning policy. It CAN happen!

by Bad_Wolf in

this is a very good document from a law school exploring religious freedom vs an individuals right to religious freedom without blackmail, pressure, etc, and also explores why certain lawsuits did not win and what it would take to win them.

https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3827&context=penn_law_review.

a person born in, and whose parents or family pressured to shun because they simply left the religion, who has evidence of damages, etc, would likely have a good case if they find a good lawyer.

Drearyweather

Does he therefore have the right to sue?

Yes, he can sue. He can sue his parents for throwing him out of the house. He can even sue the WT for defamation, emotional distress and/or privacy violations.

The problem here is not about the right to sue, anyone can sue anyone over anything. It's about how successful one can become in this path and how worthwhile that suit is.

Kindly encourage him to do so and let us know the outcome.

224

How to sue the WT over shunning policy. It CAN happen!

by Bad_Wolf in

this is a very good document from a law school exploring religious freedom vs an individuals right to religious freedom without blackmail, pressure, etc, and also explores why certain lawsuits did not win and what it would take to win them.

https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3827&context=penn_law_review.

a person born in, and whose parents or family pressured to shun because they simply left the religion, who has evidence of damages, etc, would likely have a good case if they find a good lawyer.

Drearyweather

No. The majority of them today did not as they were born in and baptized while they were minors, some as young as 8 years old.

Then their parents are to be blamed for the indoctrination. They took their child to the baptism pool.

And these children who continued going to meetings after they turned 18, proved that they still agreed with the WT rules. (One of these 8 year old made their way to the current Governing Body) They can leave anytime. Agreed that they will be shunned, but freedom from a cult has its own consequences.

A person can walk away from his cultic past and have a successful life. If he has lots of money, time and willingness to accept defeat, he can sue the WT.

224

How to sue the WT over shunning policy. It CAN happen!

by Bad_Wolf in

this is a very good document from a law school exploring religious freedom vs an individuals right to religious freedom without blackmail, pressure, etc, and also explores why certain lawsuits did not win and what it would take to win them.

https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3827&context=penn_law_review.

a person born in, and whose parents or family pressured to shun because they simply left the religion, who has evidence of damages, etc, would likely have a good case if they find a good lawyer.

Drearyweather

JWs actively threaten members who would not respect the shunning order.

But didn't these members voluntarily join the group with these rules?

That's precisely the problem with religions, children never get that chance.

Then the parents of these children are to blame. They took their children to the baptism pool knowing the full consequences.

49

Dilemma of Shunning Policy

by Drearyweather in

apologies if this topic has been discussed earlier.. i was thinking of whether demanding for a ban on shunning policy would be beneficial for the larger society.

following are some things that we need to remember while advocating the issue:.

1. shunning is not limited to jw's and for many americans, it is not that controversial as it seems.. 2. jw shunning is not a dark secret policy.

Drearyweather

Only cults MANDATE shunning of exmembers.

and this mandate is protected by the constitution.

Not true. I was assured only spiritual association was prohibited with family.

In such cases, you will have to sue or blame the ones who assured you of this. (your elders, parents or your Bible study conductor).

in fact I didn’t shun anyone.

Which all the more proves that JW's have a choice not to shun. Hence, you cannot prove that WT coerces or threatens you to shun.

If an individual randomly decides to shun because they want to no one is interested in stopping that.

In the similar manner, the government or the state is not interested in stopping organizational shunning, which is what we are discussing.

A government that takes away an organization's freedom, will one day crack down on individual freedom too.

For a case, in India, some states banned the slaughter and sale of beef due to religious reasons. Even though it was a crackdown on beef traders and slaughterhouses, eventually, it was the individual consumers and citizens who got impacted. It was indirectly a message that the government would decide what I was supposed to eat and what not.

49

Dilemma of Shunning Policy

by Drearyweather in

apologies if this topic has been discussed earlier.. i was thinking of whether demanding for a ban on shunning policy would be beneficial for the larger society.

following are some things that we need to remember while advocating the issue:.

1. shunning is not limited to jw's and for many americans, it is not that controversial as it seems.. 2. jw shunning is not a dark secret policy.

Drearyweather

john.prestor: I don't agree with the court in the Anderson case, Jehovah's Witnesses don't tell you that they're going to shun you until you're already an unbaptized publisher, that's when they give you the Organized book, and the Organized book explains that they shun people.

John.prestor,

The OD book is given before you are announced as an unbaptized publisher. Once you speak to the elders that you want to become an Unbaptized publisher, they discuss this with you and if you are qualified, they hand over the book to you. You then need to go to FS for a month, submit your report and you are announced as a publisher.

Even if he says that he didn't get time to go through the book, the court will dismiss it. The shunning teaching is splattered through and through the literature of JW's, which even Non-JW's have access to. In the information age today, it is ironic that JW's are known for their shunning and we still have people who claim that they didn't know about shunning even after attending their meetings twice a week for 6 months or more.

Eventually, it is the individual who needs to take an effort to know all the rules before signing up. For minor children who get baptized, it is the parents who take the blame of indoctrination. They are the ones who take their children to the baptism pool, not the WT.

49

Dilemma of Shunning Policy

by Drearyweather in

apologies if this topic has been discussed earlier.. i was thinking of whether demanding for a ban on shunning policy would be beneficial for the larger society.

following are some things that we need to remember while advocating the issue:.

1. shunning is not limited to jw's and for many americans, it is not that controversial as it seems.. 2. jw shunning is not a dark secret policy.

Drearyweather

Apologies if this topic has been discussed earlier.

I was thinking of whether demanding for a ban on shunning policy would be beneficial for the larger society. Following are some things that we need to remember while advocating the issue:

1. Shunning is not limited to JW's and for many Americans, it is not that controversial as it seems.

2. JW Shunning is not a dark secret policy. In the Anderson case, the court stated that people who become JW's voluntarily subject themselves to the shunning policy. Hence it is difficult to argue that you were unaware of the policy while getting baptized.

3. Some Ex-JW's who are shunned now, were active shunners themselves when JW's and chose to shun errant members. Even though told by the WT, many of us shunned others because we believed it to be the truth and chose to follow it. Many of us were grateful that we had that choice and our constitution protected our choice. Until the axe fell on us. Now that we are on the other side, all of a sudden we cannot blame the WT for our choices.

4. My freedom to believe something is shit for someone else. But that's what is the price we pay to live in a free society.

5. It is often good to warn others of this policy than to wish that a law be passed which prevents its exercise because when that happens a pandora's box of "lawful" control may descend upon us. Freedom of religion exists not to protect us from radical religion but from radical government.

6. A government that forces JWs to speak to ex-JW's will one day force Ex-JW's to attend JC hearings. It may even force you to invite a JW (who was a former child abuser) to your family dinner.