hello there.
this is my first thread here.i was wondering if anybody here could help me with a question that i have.my question is this: is it always applied the rule of the "two witnesses" in cases of apostasy?
i'll put an example:if a jw is working with another jw and one of them is continuously talking about teachings contrary to the bible truth as taught by jehovah's witnesses, would the testimony of the other jw be enough to form a judicial committee?thanks!
Judge Rochefort, ironically, the WTBTS loves having apostates. They need a bogeyman. Their entire "theology" falls apart without them. So every once in a while, they need a lamb to sacrifice publicly as an apostate to keep the "fear of God" going among the flock.
On the other hand, they really do NOT like having it widely known that there are pedophiles essentially running free in amongst the sheep. It conflicts with their self-image and their PR campaign.
hello there.
this is my first thread here.i was wondering if anybody here could help me with a question that i have.my question is this: is it always applied the rule of the "two witnesses" in cases of apostasy?
i'll put an example:if a jw is working with another jw and one of them is continuously talking about teachings contrary to the bible truth as taught by jehovah's witnesses, would the testimony of the other jw be enough to form a judicial committee?thanks!
jwleaks, funny story. I know it's fictional, but it makes good reading!
a word to jehovahs witnesses: what is the basis for the authority the seven members of the governing body can claim in controlling the lives of eight million followers?
the organisation they represent has never got one useful piece of information correct in one hundred and thirty five years... so why should they be believed?.
David Miscavige, the current leader of Scientology, supposedly said, "Power is seized."
In reference to the WTBTS, Rutherford did it back in 1916 and a chain of opportunists have taken over since his day until now.
when it comes to a simple matter of no longer believing the teachings of jw's, it appears to me that it's more common for the husband to make the first move to leave the religion.
OEJ: I feel like we're getting way off track, the point was that men are different than women
Yes and yes!
when it comes to a simple matter of no longer believing the teachings of jw's, it appears to me that it's more common for the husband to make the first move to leave the religion.
OEJ: On the topic of multitasking, I wasn't saying that anyone becomes more productive while juggling multiple tasks (this is the myth part of it)
I know you didn't say that. And being more productive is only part of the myth part of it. The fact is: no one can attempt to "multitask" without taking a huge hit in both productivity AND in cognitive performance.
OEJ: I was saying that women are better at it than men.
So women are better are engaging in mythical activity than men?!?
OEJ: It's a fruitless debate, though, if everyone's going to take offense and read things into it when they're not there.
I certainly did not take any offense.
what happens in cases of fornication between two jehovah's wintesses if one of them confesses but the other denies the facts?would there be a judicial committee to the one who confesses while the other individual would be left as if nothing had happened?i would love to know specially the opinions of elders or ex-elders.thank you!
It's sort of a reverse-variation of the Prisoner's Dilemma:
what happens in cases of fornication between two jehovah's wintesses if one of them confesses but the other denies the facts?would there be a judicial committee to the one who confesses while the other individual would be left as if nothing had happened?i would love to know specially the opinions of elders or ex-elders.thank you!
Interesting. I never saw it happen, all though I heard of it. (I was an elder for over 20 years).
The Two Witness Rule would absolutely apply. The denier would probably have to offer some explanation as to why the other person would "confess to something that never happened," but they could cite the case of the Amalekite that claimed he killed Saul as Biblical precedent for people lying about things they've done for selfish gain.
The motive in a situation like this would have to be something like some have mentioned above: obsession or insane desire to cause trouble.
If the denier stuck to their guns and there was no other witness, the elders would have no WT sanctioned policy upon which to proceed (notice I did NOT say scriptural).
All that being said, no one should ever admit anything to the elders. They are not your friends and what ever you do in private is none of their business! NONE!
when it comes to a simple matter of no longer believing the teachings of jw's, it appears to me that it's more common for the husband to make the first move to leave the religion.
OEJ: women, for instance, demonstrate a much greater ability to multitask
Multitasking is a myth:
hi readers and lurkers, .
i decided it was time to register to the site.
after all these years, it was just a matter of time.
Life is fun, yes it is!
Welcome here and welcome to the rest of your life.
You have a PM.
recently they announced at my hall that a large donation had been made to the local congregation-- nearly $100,000.
they then proposed a resolution that we continue our new(ish) practice of only keeping enough money on hand locally for monthly expenses, and send the entire amount of this large donation to the watchtower society.
aside from the fact that our congregation has already sent well over a half-million dollars to the wt in the last 12 months, i don't understand the motive of the person who made the donation.
That's insane.
