Secretive "Judicial" Hearings Are Telling

Watchtower literature depicts the Jewish model of judicial hearings as one that involved public hearings.

Insight on the Scriptures Volume 1 page 475 under the subject City states[1]:

"On entering the gates, one found himself in a large open place, the city’s marketplace, the public square, where all kinds of selling and buying were carried on, and where contracts were made and sealed before witnesses. (Ge 23:10-18; 2Ki 7:1; Na 2:4) Here was the public forum where news was received and passed on (Ne 8:1, 3; Jer 17:19), where the elders held court (Ru 4:1-10), and where the traveler might spend the night if perchance private hospitality was not extended to him."[Underlining added]

The Watchtower organization teaches that the early Christian congregation was similar to the Jewish system of handling judicial matters. Insight on the Scriptures Volume 1 page 198 under the subject Assembly states:

"At times, the people of Israel were represented in gatherings by “chieftains of the assembly” (Ex 16:22; Nu 4:34; 31:13; 32:2; Jos 9:15, 18; 22:30), or “older men.” (Ex 12:21; 17:5; 24:1) When judicial matters required attention, a number of persons might assemble at the city gate. However, whether gathered there or elsewhere, they would not all vote on the case under consideration in a democratic fashion. Instead, theocratically, respected older men would weigh matters in the light of God’s law and then announce their decision. (De 16:18; 17:8-13) Similarly, the early Christian congregation was represented in such matters by those placed in positions of responsibility by the holy spirit. (Ac 20:28) In Israel, if the wrongdoing required the death sentence, the whole assembly might execute it.—Le 24:14; Nu 15:32-36; De 21:18-21." [Underlining added]

Highlighted in the above statement is the public nature of judicial proceedings and that the early Christian congregation was similar to the Jewish model. Elsewhere Watchtower literature underscores the benefit and good reason for public judicial hearings. For example,

The Watchtower journal of December 1, 1976 on page 732 under the title Giving Reproof "Before All Onlookers" states:

"The Bible regulations and accounts indicate that cases of wrongdoing came before the city elders at the gates primarily when controversies were involved, as in cases where an offender would not acknowledge having wronged another, and also when the community as a whole was seriously affected or endangered by the wrongdoing." [Underlining added]

Therefore one very important benefit of the public judicial hearings was to alert a community as a whole when it was seriously endangered by wrongdoing. Watchtower judicial proceedings today are not similar to the Jewish model in this instance. The Watchtower system maintains hearings of alleged pedophilia in complete secrecy, and pedophilia is wrongdoing that seriously endangers a whole community.

The Watchtower journal of November 15, 1995 on page 13 under the title Cities of Refuge-God's Merciful Provision states:

"Though you were received hospitably, you would have to state your case to the elders at the gate of the refuge city. After entering the city, you would be sent back to stand trial before the elders representing the congregation of Israel at the gates of the city having jurisdiction over the area where the killing occurred. There you would have an opportunity to prove your innocence."

Highlighted here is the benefit of public hearings to an accused person's reputation. Since serious allegations of wrongdoing are very seldom kept strictly confidential between the alleged transgressor and victim, a public hearing allows a person to defend their good name so they can retain it. Alleged pedophilia is a good example since victims will inevitably share their allegations in the form of gossip. Therefore persons falsely accused of pedophilia have every reason to request or demand a public hearing of allegations in order for whatever has merit to be made known. On the other hand, guilty persons have every reason to avoid public scrutiny for the very reason that they are guilty! So, guilty persons want secret hearings whereas innocent persons have every reason to want public scrutiny. Watchtower judicial procedures do not allow for public saving of reputation because innocent persons who want a public hearing are categorically denied. This leaves the innocent vulnerable to gossip that would have been easily refuted had there been a public hearing.

The Watchtower journal of March 15, 1980 on page 30 under the title Why Look to Jehovah in All You Undertake? States:

"Since the city elders judged in the open area near the gates, it would be there that the sons would speak with opponents in a legal case, successfully putting to silence baseless accusations and false testimony."

Again we see highlighted one of the powerful benefits of public judicial hearings. The sheer publicity allows substantial silencing of baseless accusations and false testimony. Watchtower judicial proceedings do not allow this silencing precisely because of the lack of publicity.

Conclusion

Falsely accused persons among Jehovah's Witnesses are not afforded the time and God honored privilege of public hearings. When innocent ones request or demand a public hearing and are denied we can only wonder why the dissimilarity within the Jehovah's Witness paradigm? In light of God's honoring of public hearings throughout the biblical record, what scriptural backing supports this refusal?

Perhaps here the following words attributed to Jesus take on an ominous meaning.

"For he that practices vile things hates the light and does not come to the light, in order that his works may not be reproved. But he that does what is true comes to the light, in order that his works may be made manifest as having been worked in harmony with God.”--John 3:19-21

_____________
Endnotes

1. All references are to official publications of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania

Marv - well written. You most likely would NOT want the job, but you have my vote for chairman of the board GB!

Mak

jw.com Cheerleader

Some men worship rank, some worship heroes, some worship power, some worship God, & over these ideals they dispute & cannot unite--but they all worship money.
- Mark Twain

Great job Marvin,

Some years ago I covered exactly the same material with pretty much the same comments and challenged any JW to show me how in light of the scriptures, the modern-day JW judicial hearings can be justified.

The silence was deafening.

Farkel

Does this kind of logic and reasoning sound like the works of just a "sorehead" XJW as 'Dr' Robert Stark and other criticizers label those who oppose the WTS's policies?

I can understand why, when Farkel challenged the WTS with this logic, he found the silence was deafening. Logic and justice goes out the window when the WTS wants to "protect its image".

Had Enough

"Never doubt that a small group of citizens can change the world.
Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."...Margaret Mead

The Jewish Bet Din was the subject of a documentary on local TV about 2 months ago.

The modern version has evolved into a more private situation, like the JW judicial committees. However, they do permit the accused to present evidence and have witnesses speak on their behalf, and if the case is difficult, the three rabbis serving on the Bet Din will consult with other rabbis.

The goal of the Bet Din is not to establish guilt or innocence in civil matters, but to serve as mediators between the two parties, to air their differences before objective listeners, and to resolve the issue at hand without having to resort to the civil courts of the land. If I recall correctly, the Bet Din refers matters of a criminal nature to the proper authorities, rather than handling them internally.

Love, Scully

Marvin,

An excellent summation of the miserable WTS Judicial Committee machinery, and how it stands hands on hip, and whip in hand above its victims.

I am very much of the philosophy that *nothing* the WTS teaches and preaches is unique to them and on this basis I searched some while ago for a historical context for the 'three elder and one sinner' in a closed meeting scenario.

It actually bears a remarkable resemblance to the disciplinary procedures, now long since abandoned, adopted in the late C17th and early C18th by the Quaker's and the Methodists. These procedures came complete with disfellowshipping and remarkably enough, 'religious restrictions'.

The way disciplinary cases were to be handled was contained in their books of 'Disciplinary Procedures'. The Methodist books at least were publicly published, originally the 'Society Of Friends' procedures only fell into the hands of their elders ( sounds familiar). They were later available for public use.

The WTS is quite happy to snatch lonely doctrines from the theological bottom drawer of other religions and cleverly blend them together to bake a cake with a very strange taste indeed. It seems however, that more and more people are suffering from 'Theocratic' indigestion these days!

Best regards Marvin - HS

Notice how none of the Watchtower Apologists are touching this thread with the proverbial ten foot pole held in the mouth of a starving tiger wandering around in a field packed with fat sheep with steak stapled to their faces!

"Vaccination has never saved a human life. It does not prevent smallpox." The Golden Age, Feb 4 1931 p. 293-4 - The Sacredness of Human Blood (Reasons why vaccination is unscriptural)