Watchtower-Free
JoinedPosts by Watchtower-Free
-
24
Another Shocking clip From JW Australia Royal investigation Elder would not report MURDER
by Watchtower-Free inhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfj1ecde5fy.
-
-
-
24
Another Shocking clip From JW Australia Royal investigation Elder would not report MURDER
by Watchtower-Free inhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfj1ecde5fy.
-
-
Watchtower-Free
This is Dino
*** w12 2/1 pp. 10-12 The Bible Changes Lives ***
“I Love Being Part of This Large Family.”—DINO ALI
YEAR BORN: 1949
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN: AUSTRALIA
HISTORY: TOBACCO FARMER
MY PAST: My parents emigrated from Albania in 1939 and settled in Mareeba, a small town in Queensland, Australia. Many Bosnians, Greeks, Italians, and Serbians, among others, also settled in this area, bringing with them their values, customs, and cultures. Mareeba was a tobacco-farming area, and my parents began growing that crop.
Soon, my older sister was born, followed by my two older brothers and me. Sadly, Dad died of a heart attack when I was a year old. Mum remarried and had four more sons. We all grew up on my stepfather’s tobacco farm.
I left home in my teens. When I was in my early 20’s, I married my wife, Saime, in the local mosque, since we were both Muslims. All of my uncles, aunts, and cousins followed the Islamic faith. I read the Koran and a book about the prophet Muhammad’s history. At the same time, I also read a small Bible. The Koran speaks of the prophets mentioned in the Bible, and reading the Bible helped me to understand when they lived.
Jehovah’s Witnesses called at my house and regularly left magazines and books, which both Saime and I enjoyed reading. I remember having many stimulating debates with the Witnesses on various religious subjects. On each occasion, they answered my questions from the Bible, rather than giving their personal opinion. That made a real impression on me.
The Witnesses offered to study the Bible with me and invited me to their meetings, but I always refused. My immediate priority was to own my own farm and to have a large family. I never did own a farm, but I eventually did become the proud father of five children.
HOW THE BIBLE CHANGED MY LIFE: Nine years after my first contact with Jehovah’s Witnesses, I had still not changed my religious beliefs. However, I enjoyed receiving and reading all the publications that they produced. Every Sunday, Saime and I took time to read this literature. We kept all the magazines that we had received over the years. They proved to be a very helpful resource when others began to test the faith that was growing in my heart.
For example, I met an evangelical preacher who tried to pressure me to accept Jesus as my Savior. He had succeeded in convincing Saime’s brother and one of my half brothers to follow him. Soon, acquaintances from all sorts of religious backgrounds began trying to convince me to join their religious groups. Some gave me literature that attacked Jehovah’s Witnesses. I asked these critics to show me from the Bible the reasons for the doctrines that they taught, but they could not answer my questions.
All this opposition only made me dig deeper into the Bible and do more research, using the literature I had collected from the Witnesses. Finally, I realized that the time had come for me to act on what I was learning.
I didn’t have a personal Bible study with one of the Witnesses; I just began attending their meetings. At first, I was very nervous and shy, but I met many friendly people at those meetings, and I enjoyed what I learned. I made up my mind that I would become one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and in 1981, I symbolized my dedication to God by being baptized.
My wife did not oppose my decision, although she sometimes questioned whether I was being deceived. Still, she attended my baptism. I continued to share with her the many truths that I was learning. About a year after my baptism, as we were driving home from vacation, Saime expressed her desire to become a Witness. I was so surprised that I almost drove off the road! She was baptized in 1982.
Making the needed changes in our lifestyle was not easy. I had stopped growing tobacco because doing so conflicts with Bible principles. (2 Corinthians 7:1; James 2:8) It took some time before we found acceptable employment that provided a steady income. Also, for many years after that, some of our relatives refused to visit us. We tried to treat them according to Bible principles by showing them love. Eventually, the barriers came down, and now our close relatives no longer shun us.
HOW I HAVE BENEFITED: Going through various tests, whether overcoming my shyness, coping with financial anxieties, or dealing with family opposition, has taught me how patient Jehovah God is in helping me deal with my problems. For example, I now serve as a congregation elder and must often teach from the platform. This is still a challenge for me because I battle with stammering as a result of nervousness. But by means of constant prayer and with Jehovah’s help, I am able to care for this privilege.
My wife and I have grown closer, and the bond we now enjoy is beyond value. We made mistakes when raising our children but tried our best to inculcate in them the Bible truths that we learned. (Deuteronomy 6:6-9) In fact, my oldest son and his wife are serving as missionaries.
I remember one occasion shortly after we began attending the meetings of the Witnesses as a family. I parked the car and looked inside the hall at the crowd gathering there. I asked my family, “What do you see?” Inside were people of different cultures, backgrounds, and tongues—Aboriginals, Albanians, Australians, Croatians—yet they were happily mingling together. I love being part of this large family of spiritual brothers and sisters, which exists not only in Australia but all over the world.—1 Peter 5:9.
-
24
Another Shocking clip From JW Australia Royal investigation Elder would not report MURDER
by Watchtower-Free inhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfj1ecde5fy.
-
-
-
8
It's a great time to be alive: 'Star Trek Impulse Drive' works and could get us to the moon in 4 hours. Mars in 70 days.
by cappytan inyes, star trek impulse drive was click bait.
but this british designed engine has been compared to that.. interplanetary travel could be a step closer after scientists confirmed that an electromagnetic propulsion drive, which is fast enough to get to the moon in four hours, actually works.. .
the em drive was developed by the british inventor roger shawyer nearly 15 years ago but was ridiculed at the time as being scientifically impossible.. .
-
-
-
4
The Hypocrisy of Jehovah’s Witnesses “Discerning” if a Woman Has Been Raped, But Demanding Two Witnesses to Child Molestation
by Watchtower-Free ingood article .
http://jwvictims.org/2014/02/15/the-hypocrisy-of-jehovahs-witnesses-discerning-if-a-woman-has-been-raped-but-demanding-two-witnesses-to-child-molestation/.
the hypocrisy of jehovahs witnesses discerning if a woman has been raped, but demanding two witnesses to child molestation.
-
-
-
8
It's in the news. For those who think it may die down
by umbertoecho inchild sex abuse royal commission hears jehovah's witness church did not sanction self-confessed paedophile.
the world today.
posted about 6 hours ago.
-
-
-
15
Elder Exposed as a LIAR at the Australian Royal Commission
by The Searcher inthe 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.
-
-
-
4
The Hypocrisy of Jehovah’s Witnesses “Discerning” if a Woman Has Been Raped, But Demanding Two Witnesses to Child Molestation
by Watchtower-Free ingood article .
http://jwvictims.org/2014/02/15/the-hypocrisy-of-jehovahs-witnesses-discerning-if-a-woman-has-been-raped-but-demanding-two-witnesses-to-child-molestation/.
the hypocrisy of jehovahs witnesses discerning if a woman has been raped, but demanding two witnesses to child molestation.
-
-
Watchtower-Free
Good article
The Hypocrisy of Jehovah’s Witnesses “Discerning” if a Woman Has Been Raped, But Demanding Two Witnesses to Child Molestation
As I bring out in this post, Jehovah’s Witness elders are given instruction to “use discernment” if a woman makes a claim of being raped, based on her “mental disposition, circumstances leading up to the incident, and any delay in reporting.” It’s vital that people understand the gravity of these instructions, as elders who “discern” that a woman has not been raped and has committed fornication have absolute authority to disfellowship her, which involves complete and total shunning from the congregation and her own family. You can imagine how devastating this would be for a woman who has suffered such a horrific and brutal crime, now having to face the further punishment of being cut off from her friends and family.
In this post I note how Jehovah’s Witnesses demand “two witnesses” when it comes to accusations of child molestation in their congregations. There needs to be another witness to the crime or a second victim in order for them to remove the person from the congregation and warn other parents. They base this on 1 Timothy 5:19, which says, “Do not accept an accusation against an older man except on the evidence of two or three witnesses,” and Matthew 18:16, which says in part, “so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be established.”
This too is absolutely devastating for children, as there is rarely if ever a second witness to child molestation. This is a crime committed in secret and in many cases, involves molestation of children in their own home. Accusations without a second witness are also typically covered up and kept quiet so that parents do not know an accused child molester is sitting right next to them in their own congregation. Jehovah’s Witnesses are now facing many lawsuits from children who have been molested by men in their congregations because of this staunch “two witness” rule.
The Hypocrisy
The hypocrisy of these two situations is obvious; Jehovah’s Witnesses demand two witnesses to the crime of child molestation, but don’t demand two witnesses to decide that a woman has committed fornication versus having been raped. If elders are going to disfellowship a woman for fornication without her actually confessing to fornication, shouldn’t they need two witnesses to that sin? They should need someone who saw the woman willingly go into a man’s home after being out with him all night, or a witness who heard the woman confess that she lied to the elders when she said she was raped, or a witness to the actual sexual encounter itself.
Instead, they base their decision on some vague instructions about her “mental disposition,” if she delayed reporting the incident, and the circumstances surrounding the incident, or in other words, on their own opinions alone. However, they don’t “discern” if a man has molested children based on his “mental disposition” when accused of the crime, or any “circumstances” leading up to or surrounding the accused crime. They decide for themselves and all by themselves that a woman has committed fornication without any real proof or credible evidence and without “two witnesses,” but won’t decide that a man has molested a child with anything less than that second witness.
I don’t know to whom this is more insulting, the children who have credible accusations of being molested or the women who are told that it’s been decided that their rape was actually fornication, and who are then punished and shunned by everyone.
Further Hypocrisy
To further demonstrate their hypocrisy in this matter, recently some top-secret “elder training” videos were leaked online; I’ll be commenting on them in another post but you can view them onthis site. The first videos show the scenario of a young man, “Robbie,” confessing to fornication and getting a girl pregnant. The elders need to decide if Robbie should be disfellowshipped, and late in the video they determine that they don’t think Robbie, despite his tears and confession, is remorseful. They say that he isn’t concerned enough about how he’s violated Jehovah’s law and doesn’t seem cut to the heart.
It’s also noteworthy that in the video, one elder points out that Robbie says the girl contacted him “a few weeks” after their sexual encounter and told him she was pregnant, but the elder says that’s not possible since she wouldn’t know she’s pregnant until “six weeks” after having sex. The ignorance of this statement is blinding; this is not the 1800s where women needed to rely on a calendar to find out they’re pregnant; a doctor’s blood test can tell you that you’re pregnant within days of conceiving. The “six weeks” formula also works only if a woman has sex the day after her last period, then waits four weeks for her next period, then waits another two weeks after her period is late to start putting the pieces together. What if she had sex with Robbie on Friday the 1st, and was expecting her period the next Friday, the 8th? She might wait another few days after the 8th to become suspicious, but a pregnancy test at that time could confirm her condition, and yes it would then be “a few weeks” after their sexual encounter.
My point is not to give a lesson in female anatomy; my point is that the elders “discern” that Robbie isn’t repentant based on gross ignorance of conception. Apparently they’re also ignorant of at-home pregnancy tests and how soon a woman can use one accurately. However, rather than finding out those facts or even trying to confirm Robbie’s statement with the girl herself, they simply decide among themselves that he’s lying.
In Robbie’s case, as in the case of a woman claiming to be raped, they don’t use “two witnesses” to determine that a serious sin has been committed but instead, feel that they can make that decision on their own. In the elders’ video, they “discern” not just the truthfulness of Robbie’s word but also his own heart condition! Yet, despite this, they feel they have no place “discerning” if a child has been raped no matter the credibility of that child’s statements, no matter the reaction of the accused, no matter anything else but those needed “two witnesses.”
I would ask Jehovah’s Witnesses why they have this double standard when it comes to child molestation versus so-called fornication committed by adults in other situations. Either the “two witness” rule should be applied equally to everyone, or it should be applied to no one. Remember too that a rape victim and men like Robbie are not a danger to anyone in the congregation the way child molesters are, so it would seem they should be given the extra consideration, if you’re going to give preference to any group. However, if you won’t disfellowship men accused of pedophilia based on your own “discernment,” what gives you the right to disfellowship men and women accused of fornication based on that same so-called “discernment”? Why are you so bold so as to disfellowship one group, but hide behind this “two witness” rule when you need to protect children from another group?
Do you think you might owe an apology to those children, to rape victims, and to poor blubbering Robbie?
-
40
Is the two-witness rule really unreasonable?
by stillin ini'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?
-
-
Watchtower-Free
The Hypocrisy of Jehovah’s Witnesses “Discerning” if a Woman Has Been Raped, But Demanding Two Witnesses to Child Molestation
As I bring out in this post, Jehovah’s Witness elders are given instruction to “use discernment” if a woman makes a claim of being raped, based on her “mental disposition, circumstances leading up to the incident, and any delay in reporting.” It’s vital that people understand the gravity of these instructions, as elders who “discern” that a woman has not been raped and has committed fornication have absolute authority to disfellowship her, which involves complete and total shunning from the congregation and her own family. You can imagine how devastating this would be for a woman who has suffered such a horrific and brutal crime, now having to face the further punishment of being cut off from her friends and family.
In this post I note how Jehovah’s Witnesses demand “two witnesses” when it comes to accusations of child molestation in their congregations. There needs to be another witness to the crime or a second victim in order for them to remove the person from the congregation and warn other parents. They base this on 1 Timothy 5:19, which says, “Do not accept an accusation against an older man except on the evidence of two or three witnesses,” and Matthew 18:16, which says in part, “so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be established.”
This too is absolutely devastating for children, as there is rarely if ever a second witness to child molestation. This is a crime committed in secret and in many cases, involves molestation of children in their own home. Accusations without a second witness are also typically covered up and kept quiet so that parents do not know an accused child molester is sitting right next to them in their own congregation. Jehovah’s Witnesses are now facing many lawsuits from children who have been molested by men in their congregations because of this staunch “two witness” rule.
The Hypocrisy
The hypocrisy of these two situations is obvious; Jehovah’s Witnesses demand two witnesses to the crime of child molestation, but don’t demand two witnesses to decide that a woman has committed fornication versus having been raped. If elders are going to disfellowship a woman for fornication without her actually confessing to fornication, shouldn’t they need two witnesses to that sin? They should need someone who saw the woman willingly go into a man’s home after being out with him all night, or a witness who heard the woman confess that she lied to the elders when she said she was raped, or a witness to the actual sexual encounter itself.
Instead, they base their decision on some vague instructions about her “mental disposition,” if she delayed reporting the incident, and the circumstances surrounding the incident, or in other words, on their own opinions alone. However, they don’t “discern” if a man has molested children based on his “mental disposition” when accused of the crime, or any “circumstances” leading up to or surrounding the accused crime. They decide for themselves and all by themselves that a woman has committed fornication without any real proof or credible evidence and without “two witnesses,” but won’t decide that a man has molested a child with anything less than that second witness.
I don’t know to whom this is more insulting, the children who have credible accusations of being molested or the women who are told that it’s been decided that their rape was actually fornication, and who are then punished and shunned by everyone.
Further Hypocrisy
To further demonstrate their hypocrisy in this matter, recently some top-secret “elder training” videos were leaked online; I’ll be commenting on them in another post but you can view them onthis site. The first videos show the scenario of a young man, “Robbie,” confessing to fornication and getting a girl pregnant. The elders need to decide if Robbie should be disfellowshipped, and late in the video they determine that they don’t think Robbie, despite his tears and confession, is remorseful. They say that he isn’t concerned enough about how he’s violated Jehovah’s law and doesn’t seem cut to the heart.
It’s also noteworthy that in the video, one elder points out that Robbie says the girl contacted him “a few weeks” after their sexual encounter and told him she was pregnant, but the elder says that’s not possible since she wouldn’t know she’s pregnant until “six weeks” after having sex. The ignorance of this statement is blinding; this is not the 1800s where women needed to rely on a calendar to find out they’re pregnant; a doctor’s blood test can tell you that you’re pregnant within days of conceiving. The “six weeks” formula also works only if a woman has sex the day after her last period, then waits four weeks for her next period, then waits another two weeks after her period is late to start putting the pieces together. What if she had sex with Robbie on Friday the 1st, and was expecting her period the next Friday, the 8th? She might wait another few days after the 8th to become suspicious, but a pregnancy test at that time could confirm her condition, and yes it would then be “a few weeks” after their sexual encounter.
My point is not to give a lesson in female anatomy; my point is that the elders “discern” that Robbie isn’t repentant based on gross ignorance of conception. Apparently they’re also ignorant of at-home pregnancy tests and how soon a woman can use one accurately. However, rather than finding out those facts or even trying to confirm Robbie’s statement with the girl herself, they simply decide among themselves that he’s lying.
In Robbie’s case, as in the case of a woman claiming to be raped, they don’t use “two witnesses” to determine that a serious sin has been committed but instead, feel that they can make that decision on their own. In the elders’ video, they “discern” not just the truthfulness of Robbie’s word but also his own heart condition! Yet, despite this, they feel they have no place “discerning” if a child has been raped no matter the credibility of that child’s statements, no matter the reaction of the accused, no matter anything else but those needed “two witnesses.”
I would ask Jehovah’s Witnesses why they have this double standard when it comes to child molestation versus so-called fornication committed by adults in other situations. Either the “two witness” rule should be applied equally to everyone, or it should be applied to no one. Remember too that a rape victim and men like Robbie are not a danger to anyone in the congregation the way child molesters are, so it would seem they should be given the extra consideration, if you’re going to give preference to any group. However, if you won’t disfellowship men accused of pedophilia based on your own “discernment,” what gives you the right to disfellowship men and women accused of fornication based on that same so-called “discernment”? Why are you so bold so as to disfellowship one group, but hide behind this “two witness” rule when you need to protect children from another group?
Do you think you might owe an apology to those children, to rape victims, and to poor blubbering Robbie?
-
22
Australian hearings on JW.org child abuse featured on CNN
by Simon injust about to start on next segment ...
-
-
