i’ve noticed a pattern where things don’t go the way i expect them to go and/or whenever i realise there is a trend and, i mentally adjust for the idea that the trend will continue, the trend stops in its tracks.
so on that basis, and given many people, including myself, and active jws, have been asking ‘what changes will the governing body make next?’ perhaps the (disappointing) answer is: ‘nothing much for a while to come’.
maybe they’ve made the changes they want for now, and will wait a while and see how it’s received.
The modus operandi to date seems to be: announce the big change, but hide it behind a little one, like beards or women's trousers. A big one like 1914 or dropping the blood doctrine entirely would have to be hidden behind something superficial, but important to the R&F, if the pattern holds up. Are there any more important frivolities that they can address?
Edited to add: would expanding roles for women be a frivolity or a major change?
so the wt society is going to contest the recent norway ruling.. jehovah’s witnesses to appeal unconstitutional ruling in norway (jw.org).
their true colours are shown in the statement: "the decision to deregister jehovah’s witnesses denies us the financial aid and other benefits that the government provides to over 700 registered religious communities in the country.
additional consequences include losing the right to appoint and authorize ministers of jehovah’s witnesses as officiants for weddings.".
That's a pretty good example, Beth Sarim. 👍👌🖖
As it is, WT is an accessory before and after the fact when they 1: Tell JWs not to report crimes and 2: Cover up said crimes.
the following is an excerpt from one of aesop's fables.. the boy who cried "wolf"!.
there once was a shepherd boy who was bored as he sat on the hillside watching the village sheep.
to amuse himself he took a great breath and sang out, "wolf!
"In my opinion a Bethelite cannot bring extraordinary proof otherwise he will be discovered by Bethel's spies and executioners."
No-one is asking any Bethelites to out themselves. Elapsed time will be proof enough, should the predicted changes occur.
A lot of the areas in which the WT is only now taking baby steps were hot topics and "imminent" changes 20 years ago.
In the late 90s I offered a $10 bet to a JW that the blood policy would be dropped in five years. He should have taken that bet. 🙄
i need help regarding a video where geoffrey jackson likened the governing body to a watch dog given false alarms to its owner just like they do regarding numerous false alarms about the world coming to an end.
here is why i need that video.
to make comparison with the words of geoffrey jackson (the false dog illustration) fully, the words of gerrit losch (who was reading out list of those who had given false predictions and alarms in times past before jehovah’s witnesses took over) .
It's interesting that in the 50s the WT was condemning mainstream Christianity for not making false predictions. Think about that for a minute and let it sink in...
so the wt society is going to contest the recent norway ruling.. jehovah’s witnesses to appeal unconstitutional ruling in norway (jw.org).
their true colours are shown in the statement: "the decision to deregister jehovah’s witnesses denies us the financial aid and other benefits that the government provides to over 700 registered religious communities in the country.
additional consequences include losing the right to appoint and authorize ministers of jehovah’s witnesses as officiants for weddings.".
At the end of the day, no matter how much the WT softens it's internal approaches to disfellowshipping and it's judicial processes, there is still an elephant in the room. UNTIL the WT comes out and outright states that elders and the WT has no dog in the fight where a crime has been committed, and that the police should be called up front, nothing substantial has changed. They are still acting like some sort of "government elect", rather than handing criminal matters to the correct authorities.
a few weeks later, the witness that i speak, family and friends are very happy with the recent changes .. no one mentions the df aproach change, fieldservice report and free entrance to the paradise for non jw.. only the clothing style and beard are mentioned.. the sisters are all in a halaluja happy modes.
they are feeling being respected and heard by the lovely leadership.. one brother told me he will never grow a beard because he lost his elder status in the early 90's because of his beard.
now it's allowed i will not grow a beard he sweared.. it seems jw.org has down a great change job.
It's a classic case of misdirection. In this instance, the GB have shown themselves to be way smoother than any prestidigitator. 🧙🧛🎩🪄
the latest study edition mentions hypothetical scenarios of jws who are no longer serving at bethel or no longer elders, etc.
and says we shouldn't speculate, as defaming them could border on slander.. we could unintentionally defame someone by spreading negative information.
..... would it be proper to speculate on the reasons why these adjustments were made and to share that opinion with others?.
A lot of time has passed since Tony became "No longer one of the GB", and we're still "not talking about it". That strategy really worked out for you, WT! 🙄
so the wt society is going to contest the recent norway ruling.. jehovah’s witnesses to appeal unconstitutional ruling in norway (jw.org).
their true colours are shown in the statement: "the decision to deregister jehovah’s witnesses denies us the financial aid and other benefits that the government provides to over 700 registered religious communities in the country.
additional consequences include losing the right to appoint and authorize ministers of jehovah’s witnesses as officiants for weddings.".
Of course, an appeal to the EHCR may be positive in the way that the ACR was positive, even if WT won. It would showcase everything to do with disfellowshipping to a broader audience.
so the wt society is going to contest the recent norway ruling.. jehovah’s witnesses to appeal unconstitutional ruling in norway (jw.org).
their true colours are shown in the statement: "the decision to deregister jehovah’s witnesses denies us the financial aid and other benefits that the government provides to over 700 registered religious communities in the country.
additional consequences include losing the right to appoint and authorize ministers of jehovah’s witnesses as officiants for weddings.".
I'm not so optimistic about the ECHR simply ratifying the Norwegian government's decision. Two points, courts are generally very conservative and this appeal will come from a position of freedom of religion, a basic human right. ECHR has "human rights" in its name.
Point two: Norway's decision is an outlier. No other European governments are showing any signs of doing what Norway did. A European Commission is more likely to reflect attitudes of the broader European community, rather than the one country that decided it had had enough of the WT's shenanigans.
One of my personal mottos is "Never go to law". Most court cases are a coin toss. Unless you are really sure you're going to win, don't take the chance. The WT should follow that advice and not appeal to the ECHR. They should take their medicine, take the "L" and keep softening their approach to disfellowshipping.
but i wonder: how many jw's went to prison during the years that the wt did not allow them to perform community service as an alternative to military service?.
anyone care to take a stab at the numbers?.
It is my understanding that in the USA conscientious objectors were offered non military service in lieu. Jobs working in civilian hospitals, national parks and other employment that couldn't be considered helpful towards any "war effort". Yet the WT powers-that-be of the time wanted their martyrs. Apparently they also wanted fear within the ranks of young JW men. Recruiting for Bethel was extremely easy when it was seen as a way out of almost certain imprisonment should a draftee follow the WT's secret instructions* on how to handle the draft.
*Terry's story gives the context behind this. Terry was told how to approach the issue by the congregational oversight, but was told that he was not to tell the court that he was following their instructions.
