Jump to content
JWTalk - Jehovah's Witnesses Discussion Forum


Full Access Users
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Bob last won the day on May 7 2016

Bob had the most liked content!


About Bob

  • Rank
    Platinum Member

Personal Details

  • Gender
  • First Name Only
  • Displayed Location
  • Publisher
  • Baptized

Recent Profile Visitors

2,783 profile views
  1. Exactly. We did one lesson for our family worship, and even as advanced students (of course) I can see the learning power behind these lessons. Apparently, the organization had this in the works for some time, as evidence by the videos produced a year or so ago they're using.
  2. Agreed. It was a great JWB. To me, it really demonstrates further our reliance on the Bible, and the ability to use critical thinking when reading the Bible.
  3. Helper hosting for sure, but I am happy that since this Sunday is the first, we don't have to wait a week!!
  4. This goes a long way to dispel the myths that we are some strange, secretive, cult. The public, again, is cordially invited. I also like how the brother said there is no expectation that visitors must join. And no donations are taken. I really appreciated how the practical value of the program is emphasized, showing how Witnesses aren't "special" in the sense they live in a bubble. They are like everyone else, and have to deal with the same problems.
  5. I hope Jehovah doesn't strike me down, but how do I much prefer the traditional JWB's over the Gilead programs. Its like someone is taking the desert off of my plate!!
  6. Nice! I’ve read some of one of the Studies in the Scriptures books myself. I have a copy in my library. But I think my point was that there has never been an effort to hide anything (I don’t see how that is possible). We share ALL of our beliefs freely with the public, no matter how unpopular a certain belief is. Even so, our organized book has been on the public website since it’s revision (and it’s on the JWLIB app which anyone can download for free). I don’t see the point in “releasing” Rutherford’s or even Russell’s books. Their histories and beliefs are detailed in the proclaimers book. Perhaps one day they may see a reason to make those officially available.
  7. 100 likes!! We do not qualify for the scheme based on that reason, that we do not have children in our care, but a reporter did name us as an institution that hasn't opted in yet. I guess that if there is a will to throw shade on us, there is a way.
  8. I don't believe this redress scheme gives justice or relief to anyone, personally. They are doing the same thing courts in the US do -- throw money at the issue in hopes that it goes away. This is a lose-lose for innocent organizations. If they take part in the scheme, they are admitting guilt (offering money means YOU are at fault for the child abuse). If they refuse to join (maintain their innocence) or come up with their own scheme, it means they are trying to hide their guilt. This doesn't help anyone. Guilt is predetermined. Look at this quote from the link: This is nonsense. What they are basically saying with this quote is that "you are guilty, period, and need to pay up". The standard of evidence to qualify for this scheme is low. All what is needed is a verified case of abuse. It doesn't matter if the organization didn't know about it, or didn't cover it up. How is this justice at all? Another thing, organizations have lined up to pay out this money. Why is that? Because by the survivor accepting the cash, that says that they will not take the organization to court. So guilty organizations and guilty people WILL NOT be prosecuted. So if my understanding is correct, (1) its unjust in that innocent people are being forced to admit guilt they do not carry, (2) guilty people are basically paying off victims, and (3) this does nothing to address child abuse. It simply throws money at people and tells them to have a good life.
  9. Why do apostates ALWAYS resort to these subjective, and emotional arguments when they have been justly disfellowshipped? What is "natural justice" other than some catch-all phrase that can be interpreted based on who you ask? How was his case not handled fairly when his appeal was granted and heard? This is precisely why issues like this are taken to court, because Courts of laws deal only with hard facts and law, not emotional and subjective reasoning.
  10. Court Docs made available from JW(dot)org https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/17101/index.do
  11. Wall's apostasy was on full display. He even publicly blamed the congregation for his verbal abuse and drunkenness. If courts are allowed to review judicial matters, then that means that they are allowed to determine the rules. That's an overt violation of separation of church and State. Like the article said, there was no violation of rights here. Wall's association with the congregation was voluntary, not contractual.
  12. http://www.trurodaily.com/news/regional/jehovahs-witness-cannot-appeal-expulsion-to-a-judge-supreme-court-214505/#.WxAuxt9sIiA.facebook Good news. Had he simply accepted his wrongdoing, repented, and remained humble, it would have never went this far. On a positive note, the issue of us determining our membership is settled.
  13. I don't doubt it has. The brothers expected interest to increase after last July anyway.
  14. A friend of mines told me he couldn't even find more than 6 guilty elders worldwide after researching this. This is probably the closest thing any organization gets to preventing abuse, especially when it relates to just how widespread it is.

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

JWTalk 18.5.26 by Robert Angle (changelog)