Duke Vindicates Jehovah's Ways

by Justitia Themis 6 Replies latest social current

  • Justitia Themis
    Justitia Themis

    I found this on the "e-Watchman exposed" DB. The post speaks for (or against) itself. The Duke case is a tragedy, but is certainly does not argue for the "two-witness" rule. This was an isolated case in which the prosecutor crossed many moral and ethical lines, perhaps in an attempt to get re-elected. As a result, Mr. Nifong faces severe consequences. This was, however, the failure of Mr. Nifong in that he didn't follow the "system." It is not a condemnation of the "system."

    Justitia

    http://ewatchman-exposed.co.uk/research/read.php?t=2647&reply=3#msg3

    Duke vindicates Jehovah's ways

    Jehovah's direction is that at the mouth of two or three witnesses before a matter is settled.

    That Duke University case, is an example of man's system gone wrong where Jehovah's way would have worked.

    Apostates and Opposers state that abuse is a crime and it should be reported to the
    police, even without the requiste 2 or 3 witnesses to disfellowship someone.
    But without sufficient evidence, how does one know that a crime was even committed?

    That woman accused those 3 Duke boys of rape among other things. They were
    publically arrested and booked and their families spent 3-5 million dollars in lawyers for their defense. The Attorney General took over the case and declared that the DNA evidence did not implicate the boys, the other woman dancer
    contradicted the accuser, and the accuser even contradicted herself a dozen times.

    The attorney general declared the boys innocent and that a crime did not exist. But the damage had been done to those boys. Their reputations were ruined and their families were out all of that money.

    Jehovah's ways is that things are to be done privately, that avoids improperly or
    prematurely damaging someone.
    Jehovah's Ways is that the evidence or testimony be in agreement.

    Consider the case with Jesus, he was put through an improper trial and the
    testimony of witnesses did not agree. Then they turned him over to the secular authorities.

    It is so evident that those who make accusations against Jehovah's organization are not being fair and honest on matters.

    [edit] [delete] Posted at 16:51 - 15/04/2007

  • golf2
    golf2

    Can you cite some examples of unfairness? I give credit where credit is due, I apply this to organizations & individuals.


    Golf

  • Justitia Themis
    Justitia Themis

    Golf2:

    I don't understand your post.

    Justitia

  • crazyblondeb
    crazyblondeb
    Jehovah's ways is that things are to be done privately, that avoids improperly or
    prematurely damaging someone.
    Jehovah's Ways is that the evidence or testimony be in agreement.

    It is so evident that those who make accusations against Jehovah's organization are not being fair and honest on matters.

    Excuse me while I go puke!!!!!!

    How about all the sexual abuse, where there are not 2 witnesses?????????????????????

  • Mile 0
    Mile 0

    Bottom line - the cops have the expertise and resources to properly investigate. One can never discount the possibility of false claims by a "victim", but again, that's what investigators sort out.

    mile 0

  • Mile 0
    Mile 0

    "It is so evident that those who make accusations against Jehovah's organization are not being fair and honest on matters."

    I went over to "watchman exposed" and it's the same old JW twaddle. OUR WAYS ARE JEHOVAH"S WAYS...

    Those who make accusations against the WTS can clearly see the difference.

    Mile 0

  • Arthur
    Arthur

    The standard boilerplate argument of the Watchtower Society is:

    Quesion Watch Tower Doctrine = Question Jehovah

    Question Watch Tower Corporation = Question Jehovah

    Question Watch Tower Policies = Question Jehovah

    Exposing Watch Tower Wrongdoing = Touching Jehovah's Eyeball

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit