Thoughts about the two witness rule

by Sadie5 7 Replies latest jw friends

  • Sadie5

    I was thinking this morning about how I feel the two witness rule is not applied to every situation. Take a charge of adultery for example. I know of times when elders camped out in front of someone's house all night to see if two people spend the night together and this would be grounds for adultery, however, unless they peeked into the windows, or snuck in to be there, they were only witnesses to the fact that someone went in the place and came out the next morning. The have no proof, nor do they even really know what if any thing happened.

    I know one sister who obtained a scriptural divorce because her husband was seen by several people in the company of another woman. There were no two witnesses to each occurance, rather several single witnesses to separate events. Also just being in the company doesn't prove anything, but it satified the elders enough to allow the sister to get a divorce. The husband, by the way was an unbelieving mate, and they were both miserable with each other, so it was good they got divorced.

    Anyone else run into situations like this? Are there other offences you can think of where the two witness rule is not enforced?


  • freedom96

    A perfect example is my ex wife. She made tons of false statements about me to her new hall after we had divorced. She moved to another state, where no one knew what was really going on. She claimed that I beat her, and cheated on her.

    Anyone that knows me, knows that I could never do either. I found out that the local elders had ok'd her to get remarried, in the hall even.

    At this point, I really didn't care, but my name was being trashed, and I did not care for that. I called her elders, and told them the real story. I never beat her, I had never cheated, etc. Funny thing, in the hall we attended, people knew the real story. They knew she was a witch.

    But the elders in her new hall told me that they had no way to "really" know what had happened, and the fact that I was inactive, and she was making the effort, was good enough for them. They gave her a good standing in the hall, and gave the ok to one day get remarried in the hall. Usually, they would maybe say ok to marriage, but if there was a question about it, they would not let someone get married in the hall.

    This shocked me, for I remember the day when as mentioned above, unless someone confessed to having an affair, unless there was a direct sighting of it, no one could do anything.

    I guess this is another example of how "united" they really are. More like how screwed up they are.

  • Marcos

    Hi Sadie5,

    Don't know if this is relevant. I once knew a sister who was divorced. She had gotten a "scriptural" divorce from her husband on the grounds of infidelity based on the 2 witness rule. She told me that 2 brothers had observed through the window of her husband's apartment an act of fornication, thus freeing her from her marriage vows.

    But, like Columbo the tv detective, "Something bothers me."

    This appears to me to be an illegal act on the part of the witnesses. Isn't it illegal in most states in the US to peek through someone's window and "observe"? Isn't it shameful for these "christians" to watch a sex act? How much did they watch? I find this to be disgusting. I am disgusted by the people who participate in this spying.

    I may be wrong about it being illegal, I dont know. But it is, at the very least, reprehensable. I would love for some df'd person to sue his accusers for such an invasion of privacy.


  • Rick Aust
    Rick Aust

    what in the case if a brother see's another bro stabing someone to death! now if the witness sees this what does he do, since he hasn't got a second witness? Does he go to the elders and then the elders ask him "where is your second witness". or does he go to the police? one fool of a bro who was on the net and who also claimed to be an elder actually said to me that the bro should not go to the police but to the elders instead, i replyed that this means that the WTS is above the Law and he said "YES". I'm sure in this case this 'elder' is full of rubbish, but that is the way some view the WTS.

    The 2 witness rule is mainly applied to child abuse cases because they want to cover it up. If the thought is taken that there is a principal in the Old Law then why aren't women still removed from the main crowd for 7 days during there monthly period?

    I could go on and on...

    regards rick

  • JT

    while i fully understand the concept of the 2 witness rule under discussion- there is an issue that must be dealt with long before the 2 witness rule is even invoked-- and that revolves around the very men who will be enforcing this rule-

    an issue like child abuse is so emotional -so deep , that to put such an issue into the hands of men who are completely unqualifed must be the biggest joke of all,

    I look back at myself as an elder and it scares the hell out of me to think just how much power was put into my hands and to think that i had no training beyond 15hours of wt elders school every 4-5 yrs is frightening. We often speak of elders who are men form the West_--- so at LEAST we are for the most part talking about men who have at least a High School diploma, but can you imagine what the caliber of elders must be in some 3rd world country, or latin american country or eastern european country where most of the elders have never completed HS and they must be a source of knowledge, advice, and Legal Advisor for the congregation.

    can you imagine if your wife or any woman went to her OGBYN and is told the dr is out sick, but another dr will be subsituted-

    in the examining room is a maintance man who looks up on the back of the door and sees that WHITE COAT hanging there

    he decides to put it on and hang the "scope" around his neck, in walks your wife and he motions for her to get on the table and actually examines your wife-

    now how would you and your wife feel to find out that the damn maintence man examined your wife?-

    the point is the same as this man is completely UNQUALIFIED TO EXAMINE your wife , likewise with the elders they literally have no business doing what they do, esp the type of life and death issues that they involved themselves in

    i can't imagine the pain some posters must feel to know they followed the directions of a group of men that resulted in themselves or their child not being taken care of in a proper manner in the issue of molestation-

    we were seeking advice from the damn "Cheese Cracker Men"

    how sad



    The "2 witness rule",LOL!!..Two witness`s do not have an original thought between them..The only thought either of them have is what the WBTS has told them to think.Even that will change,as there is always new light..I mean a new lie,LOL!...OUTLAW

  • Seven

    i can't imagine the pain some posters must feel to know they followed the directions of a group of men that resulted in themselves or their child not being taken care of in a proper manner in the issue of molestation.

    Sad and true. Pain-anger-acceptance*trigger*pain-anger-acceptance*trigger*pain.....

    I ran across this in my readings- a 2 witness rule payed off to this gal's advantage:

    1850 BC: The Earliest Known Legal Decision

    A clay tablet reveals the case, in 1850BC, of the murder of a temple employee by three men. The victim's wife knew of the murder but remained silent. Eventually, the crime came to light and the men and woman were charged with murder. Nine witnesses testified against the men and woman and asked for the death penalty for all four. But the wife had two witnesses which told the court that she had been abused by her husband, that she was not part of the murder and that she was even worse off after her husband's death. The men were executed in front of the victim's house but the woman was spared.


  • AlanF

    In this, as in everything else, Watchtower does what's best for Watchtower.

    When the two-witnesses rule is convenient to cover up child molestation, it's invoked. When it can be extended to convict a smoker when two different witnesses see a person smoking on two different occasions, it's extended as necessary. When it's inconvenient and doesn't allow a possible fornicator to be convicted, they invent a new rule altogether and forget the old rule.


Share this