Revisiting the two witness rule, new light.
It’s already been disgusted how Mathew 18: verses 18 on showing that there’s not a cut and dry way to enforce a rule or law in another thread I started. But let’s look at verse 16 the verse they like to quote. The verse isn’t talking about having two witnesses to a crime or a wrong doing , it’s saying if you have a problem with a brother and he’s not willing to listen to your side off the issue to take some witnesses with you that agree with you to help establish that your point of view is in fact correct.
This has nothing to do with witnesses to a crime!!
It's not only been discussed we are all disgusted by it.
They could change this rule where it applies to child abuse allegations or any crime for that matter in a heartbeat, call it "new light" and everyone would be better off for it - everyone except WT that is.
If they changed this policy now would it be in effect admitting the policy was wrong? Would this open them up to even more historical liability? Would it open the floodgates to lawsuits from all the people that the rule adversely affected over the years?
I believe it would cost them more in reputation and money to change the rule than to keep insisting it''s their religion and it stands.
Same goes for blood and shunning they've painted themselves into a corner on these isssues and them and their legal team knows it. The best they can do is keep the wolves at the door by using the protections that religious freedom affords them.
Funny I don’t know how I missed that I used the word “disgusted” instead of “discussed” . Maybe it was a freudian slip because these GB guys are really disgusting!!!
Exactly! It was incredibly stupid of them to make that recent morning worship video about the two witness rule, because up until that point most R&F JWs didn't even know about it in this context. They could've changed it and been a little easier. But now just like the blood doctrine, the more time that passes the more casualties add up, and the greater the probability of liability.
The question remains is how people/JWS exploited that policy in knowing that when they sexual abused a child there would only be the child as a witness.
I think Johnathan Kendrick knew the answer when he attack Candice Conti, even when he had been previously charged was child sexual abuse.
In essence the WTS enabled him to re-attack or search for another victim in the new Hall he transferred to.
This archaically old law with all its faults and impracticality makes Jehovah look stupid as the WTS emulates it as they, do but all we know it wasn't him (god) that made up this judicial law, it was the ancient Hebrews