Posts by johnamos

34

If Disfellowshipping pedophiles protects the congregation, what does it do for "Those Outside" they are expelled to?

by Wasanelder Once in

we all know the wt basis for disfellowshipping, (1 corinthians 5:9-13) 9 12 for what do i have to do with judging those outside?

do you not judge those inside, 13 while god judges those outside?

remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves.. if removing "the man" is a protection for the congregation and no police are called, what does it say about the witnesses view of the world?

johnamos

Being that you bring up her wedding…why is it that he is asked what type of protection was offered to her as far as staying with different families and how soon she was able to do so and yet here she is suppose to have a fiancée during this time….where was he during this time???

34

If Disfellowshipping pedophiles protects the congregation, what does it do for "Those Outside" they are expelled to?

by Wasanelder Once in

we all know the wt basis for disfellowshipping, (1 corinthians 5:9-13) 9 12 for what do i have to do with judging those outside?

do you not judge those inside, 13 while god judges those outside?

remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves.. if removing "the man" is a protection for the congregation and no police are called, what does it say about the witnesses view of the world?

johnamos

Edit- I was writing this out after the post of the clip but by the time I now am sending it I see others have beat me to this. Anyway…

41:40 - 44:30 touches on the very point that you raise, however it is not accurate to view someone that gets disfellowshipped from the congregation and is then somehow sent out into the world and is then/now a threat. The risk was just the same to the worldly kids from this person while they were still part the congregation.

Also in this clip in that same time frame it touches on what I had mentioned on another thread. This lawyer (or whatever he is) makes the statement that it is not the practice of elder’s to inform the police/child protective services unless they are required by law.

So if they report cases when they are required by law and DO NOT report them when they are NOT required, they are not breaking any laws and should not be in a court of law. It can be said that they as the people they claim to be, that they have a moral responsibility to still report cases even thou they are not required by law, but as far as the law is concern in this matter (their policies) handling of child abuse cases, they are not breaking any laws and are not legally responsible. What needs to be addressed is why are there areas where it is not by law required to report such cases???

15

Elder Exposed as a LIAR at the Australian Royal Commission

by The Searcher in

the lawyer at the australian royal commission (arc) hangs the elder out to dry on his own statements!.

wonderful to see the org's little dictators being subjected to their very own personal judicial committee hearing - but in front of millions, and not in secret!.

from 43 minutes onward.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xv8ptogc6k0#t=2607.

johnamos

It is stated that where the law is to report such matters then the elders abide by and do so and where the law does not require to report such matters they (the elders) do not do so, then the question is asked as to why they (the elders) don’t report these matters when it is not mandatory by the law…my question is why are there places that do not make it mandatory law to report all such cases???

I am not aware of any case where the WTS/GB/elders are said to be guilty of not reporting such matters in areas where it is mandatory to do so…so in that regard they have a 100% compliance record for reporting these cases to the law when it is mandatory to do so. So why should there not be an equal amount of out rage directed toward states/cities/countries, etc… that do not currently require cases to be reported???

People who say they care about protecting the children but have a ax to grind with the WTS/GB only focus in their crosshairs the WTS/GB/elders when speaking of being responsible for policies for protecting children but where are all the voices and rants condemning states/cities/countries, etc… where cases are not reported due to them not being states/cities/countries, etc…that mandate such???

If that were the case and that were done (mandate all) then based on the WTS/GB/elders record for reporting these cases… then there would be 100% compliance record for reporting these cases across the board.

40

Is the two-witness rule really unreasonable?

by stillin in

i'm picturing a situation in which a savvy 12 year old doesn't like the house rules that mom's new husband has put into place.

or something along that line.

i can certainly agree that protection of children is paramount, but who protects the real victim in those cases?

johnamos

Mephis

And your point is???

I am well aware of who it involves. The point is about false allegations being made against someone that truly is innocent of such allegations…allegations made by anyone male or female adult or child. And BTW, a lot of the child abuse cases are made by victims that are adults at the time that they come forward with their claims.

45

Governing Body, painted in a corner, now what?

by Wasanelder Once in

the governing body have painted themselves in a corner, so to speak.

if they acknowledge their response to abuse claims was insensitive, unloving and inadequate they are denying the belief that "god's way" is best and risk losing abuse cases.

if they stick with it and say it is "god's way according to the bible" they will be seen as cult leaders and risk losing abuse cases.

johnamos

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9SUSBJbmao&list=PLPQ6KZ-AGhVQbadlzMQN26dvMPzddxlui&index=5

1:03:07 - 1:03:23

Straight from the victims mouth…

40

Is the two-witness rule really unreasonable?

by stillin in

i'm picturing a situation in which a savvy 12 year old doesn't like the house rules that mom's new husband has put into place.

or something along that line.

i can certainly agree that protection of children is paramount, but who protects the real victim in those cases?

johnamos

I am scared as a grown man to even tell/ask kids that are running around the pool area, etc… in my apartment complex to not run or drive/jump in the pool they way they do. If a kid now a day gets made at an adult all they have to do is make such a claim.

BTW, in the example above it is in regards to a step child but how about if your own sister and niece and brother in-law team up against you and claim you abused your niece in order to get money from you…this guy (Don Wallace) is a JW too.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/relatives-of-rv-king-don-wallace-plead-guilty-in-extortion-case/1022100

45

Governing Body, painted in a corner, now what?

by Wasanelder Once in

the governing body have painted themselves in a corner, so to speak.

if they acknowledge their response to abuse claims was insensitive, unloving and inadequate they are denying the belief that "god's way" is best and risk losing abuse cases.

if they stick with it and say it is "god's way according to the bible" they will be seen as cult leaders and risk losing abuse cases.

johnamos

Oneeyedjoe - cultbgone,

I am not going to dispute what you are saying, I DO NOT agree with the WTS/GB but my point is that regardless of how wrong they (elders/WTS/GB) are, if the victims (if old enough) and or parents reported these cases to the police to begin with, then there would not be any cases that are said to be unreported cases to the authorities.

If the claim is made that the parents are not just as responsible for not reporting these cases as the elders, etc…are due to being influenced my cultish influences then that means that none of Charles Manson’s followers should have been jailed. Nor should anyone that kills/attacks due to influence from ISIS, Islam, etc… should not be held responsible for his or her actions either………

45

Governing Body, painted in a corner, now what?

by Wasanelder Once in

the governing body have painted themselves in a corner, so to speak.

if they acknowledge their response to abuse claims was insensitive, unloving and inadequate they are denying the belief that "god's way" is best and risk losing abuse cases.

if they stick with it and say it is "god's way according to the bible" they will be seen as cult leaders and risk losing abuse cases.

johnamos

I have been unable to understand why it is that many all say that the WTS/GB are responsible for the child abuse among JW’s…I guess it is just because you are angry with them (or really angry with yourselves) because you once believed the things that they taught were true.

In all the years that they have had their current policies in regards to child abuse in place they have had many claims in regards to and have paid out much money and have been criticized relentlessly over their policies…so there has been nothing but headaches and financially costly as a whole. So of what benefit has it been to them to keep their current policies in place all this time??? Do those that commit the abuse pay the WTS/GB huge amounts of $$$ that as a whole covers all the financial cost and them so???

This is the bottom line…for every abuse case that gets reported to the elders/WTS/GB but goes unreported to authorities, the ones responsible for it not being reported to the authorities are the very ones that reported it to the elders/WTS/GB in the first place!!!

The Jehovah’s Witnesses (WTS/GB) are a religion, a false one, but still a religion so it is no surprise that they make the claim that they are following:

Deuteronomy 19:15 “No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin, in the case of any sin that he may commit. At the mouth of two witnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good.

2 Corinthians 13:1 This is the third time I am coming to YOU. “At the mouth of two witnesses or of three every matter must be established.”

John 8:17 Also, in YOUR own Law it is written, ‘The witness of two men is true.’

The elders/WTS/GB are not the police they are religious leaders, again false, but still so. If child abuse is a crime then the victims or parents (or other ones that are knowledgeable of such) of the victims should go to the ones (POLICE) that view it that way and who are in authority to deal with it…PERIOD!

Why is it that JW’s can get their car stolen or house broken into, etc… and have sense enough to go to the police but if they get sexual assaulted they go to the elders???

Being that that is what they do instead of going straight to the police, then when the religious leaders handle it like they do instead of how the police would, why is there such a fuss and blame on them for them not reporting it to the proper authorities???

We could argue all day long on rather the two-witness rule is valid and if the WTS/GB policies are right…wrong…need to be changed, that does not matter…it is THOSE that are being abused or the parents (or other ones that are knowledgeable of such) of the victims that need to change their policy!!!!!!!!!!

Why are there lawsuits against the WTS/GB but not lawsuits against the parents of the victims??? What is the difference between the WTS/GB claiming that they handle things the way they do based on their understanding of the bible and parents claiming that they are doing things the way they are by not going to the police on behalf of their own child whom they are responsible for because they believe that they should follow the WTS/GB based on their understanding of the bible???

35

Where did Jesus get the Idea of an After-life in Heaven?

by John Aquila in

the ancient jews did not believe in an after-life as far as i can tell, correct me if i'm wrong.

the watchtower says yes.

they say all the prophets believed in a paradise earth..

johnamos

Where did Jesus get the idea of a heavenly afterlife? It wasn't from the Hebrew Canon.

Mark 1:9 In the course of those days Jesus came from Naz´a·reth of Gal´i·lee and was baptized in the Jordan by John. 10 And immediately on coming up out of the water he saw the heavens being parted, and, like a dove, the spirit coming down upon him; 11 and a voice came out of the heavens: “You are my Son, the beloved; I have approved you.” 12 And immediately the spirit impelled him to go into the wilderness. 13 So he continued in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan, and he was with the wild beasts, but the angels were ministering to him.

John 7:16 Jesus, in turn, answered them and said: “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me.

John 8:28 Therefore Jesus said: “When once YOU have lifted up the Son of man, then YOU will know that I am [he], and that I do nothing of my own initiative; but just as the Father taught me I speak these things.

John 12:49 because I have not spoken out of my own impulse, but the Father himself who sent me has given me a commandment as to what to tell and what to speak.

The idea of a resurrection was an absurd idea for the Hebrews.

John 11:21 Martha therefore said to Jesus: “Lord, if you had been here my brother would not have died. 22 And yet at present I know that as many things as you ask God for, God will give you.” 23 Jesus said to her: “Your brother will rise.” 24 Martha said to him: “I know he will rise in the resurrection on the last day.

Where did Martha get that idea???

34

Babylon the Great and the Anti Christ

by Perry in

similar views as those presented here are gaining in popularity in christian circles.

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgmrfatdvtm.

johnamos

Perry…1 Corinthians 2:14, Matt 7:6