Williams sisters

by Phil 90 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Jourles

  Aside from all of the attacks going back and forth, has anyone ever called or written the Society to ask if the Williams' sisters are truly baptized witnesses? Wouldn't that solve the mystery once and for all?

  C'mon folks. There are four pages on this one topic alone which hasn't gone ANYWHERE. All it has done is brought LDH and Teejay into a semantics match. This thread would have taken an entirely different path if we knew for sure if the two of them were baptized witnesses. Instead, we get four pages of people attacking each other about two people they do not know.

  Can I give one example that may be compared with the Williams' sisters? We know for a fact that the two of them say they are indeed Jehovah's Witnesses. The media interviews confirm that. We must also establish that the Society cannot do anything judicially against the sisters if they are not baptized.

  OK, now let me use the example of my brother-in-law. He is 15 years old and is an unbaptized publisher. In school he does not salute the flag or participate in extracurricular school activities. He makes his stand known at school that he is a Jehovah's Witness. His parents are proud of him because he is known in school as being a good JW by his classmates and teachers. He has also been into motorcross since he was very young. He has entered several races and has won a few of them for his age class. He really is good and can kick my butt on the track anyday. Someday he would like to turn pro and get paid from the manufacturers to race. His parents are totally behind him which is surprising since they were pretty strict with my wife when she was growing up. If he does turn pro one day but never gets baptized, what can the congregation do to him? What if he continues to go to the meetings and in his heart he feels that he is still that good little witness that he was raised to be? What if he gets interviewed after turning pro and says that he is a JW?

  That is exactly how I view the Williams' sisters. They were brought up as good little JW's and were encouraged to play tennis. If they were never baptized, but yet turned into pro-tennis players, they may still feel attached to their parents religion. Many adults today profess to be affiliated with their parents religion in which they were raised. But that does not mean they are practicing members of that religion and agree to all its tenets.

  Without written confimation from the Society saying that they are/are not baptized witnesses, we may never know their true status. That is what would settle this years' long overdue debate once and for all.
• 

  dedalus

  Instead, we get four pages of people attacking each other about two people they do not know.

  I haven't attacked anyone. I don't know why I've gotten so little response from people who disagree with me, and I've been pretty invested in this thread. I agree that the bickering between TJ and LDH is tedious, unproductive, and distracting. And all the guy who started this thread can do is offer some pathetic affront to my tennis skills.

  What I've written here is what I believe whether they are Witnesses or not. Someone has claimed, however, that they are not baptised.

  Having said that, I appreciate your insight, Jourles.

  Dedalus
• 

  hurt

  Jourles, let's see how the Society gets out of this clean.

  It's not really about Venus and Serena, it's about the Society and hipocrisy. That, I believe, those locking horns on this thread clearly understand. If we assume that the sisters have been baptised and are still in good standing, their continuing to be baptized witnesses in good standing exposes a stance of favouritism byt the Society. They have done things ordinary Witnesses cannot do and get away with. If we assume they are not baptized witnesses, then the Society is still guilty of keeping quiet. The flag incident would have been enough, according to JW standards, for the Society to have distanced themselves from them. Jehovah's Witnesses have been instructed, and encouraged to die rather than have anything to do with the flags of nations. Many have died for issues surrounding the flag. So if anyone claims to be a Witness, and wraps the flag around themselves, and comments in an interview that they're Jehovah's Witnesses, it is negligence on the Society's part to overlook such. A deliberate kiind of negligence. Does the Society fear a public reprisal (which they shouldn't, they've always taught Jehovah's Witnesses to stand up for what is true), or using the girls, or getting something from them too precious to forgo (favourable publicity; and, well, the rumoured 10% cut...)? In either case (baptized or not), the Society's position appears shaky, and beneath standards Jehovah's Witnesses are expected to adhere to.
• 

  Jourles

  You didn't even come to mind Ded when I wrote that response...
• 

  dedalus

  How depressing, Jourles! I'm so unnoticed on this thread!

  Dedalus
• 

  Jourles

  Hi hurt. You said:

  It's not really about Venus and Serena, it's about the Society and hipocrisy. That, I believe, those locking horns on this thread clearly understand.

  I completely understand this issue also. Playing the Devil's advocate, I cannot say the Society is guilty by omission simply because they have not issued a press release on jw-media.org stating that the sisters are not baptized jw's. Did you call yourself a witness in school before you were baptized? I know I did. All of my schoolmates knew I was a witness, even though I wasn't baptized until later. The sisters could still be locked into this mindset, we do not know.

  If we assume that the sisters have been baptised and are still in good standing, their continuing to be baptized witnesses in good standing exposes a stance of favouritism byt the Society.

  The only way to expose this favoritism is by getting an official response from the Society regarding their status in the congregation. Has the media ever contacted the Society about the sisters? I have never read that they have. Maybe someone with ties could get the media to ask them about the Williams'.

  All in all, I see the blatant hypocrisy with the flag draping, Olympics, etc. and then continuing to call yourself a witness. Reminds me of The Practice episode when Bobby Donnell explains to the judge that Rebecca(needed a blood transfusion) couldn't be a JW because she saluted the flag to be accepted to the bar, had pre-marital sex and an abortion, did not condemn homosexuals, and assisted in divorce cases that were not always about adultery. He argued that since she did all of these things, she could not have been a true Jehovah's Witness and therefore would probably also accept a blood transfusion. Even though her mother vehemently said she was a witness. But there again, THE SHOW NEVER STATED IF SHE WAS BAPTIZED OR NOT. It would have made a huge difference in the show if she was baptized. But I guess we will never know.

  At least with the Williams' sisters, they are non-fictional people and should be quite easy to find out what their status is.
• 

  dubla

  i really dont see what the big difference is, baptized or not. they are actively and publicly using "jehovahs name"....isnt that reason enough (from a witness standpoint) for the sisters to be making sure their lives are above reproach (and within chritian guidelines) in every way possible? otherwise, wouldnt they be bringing reproach on jehovahs name? someone from the "it only matters if they are baptized" side please correct me if im wrong in that line of thinking.

  also, i remember a while back the sisters were showcased on the back of an awake (i think) magazine as jehovahs witnesses.......it seems that would throw them out there as being publicly jehovahs witnesses, baptized or not. if anyone has access to that article, it might even shed light on the baptism debate....but i dont remember if that was included in it or not, just guessing.

  aa
• 

  hurt

  they are actively and publicly using "jehovahs name"....isnt that reason enough (from a witness standpoint) for the sisters to be making sure their lives are above reproach (and within chritian guidelines) in every way possible? otherwise, wouldnt they be bringing reproach on jehovahs name?

  Well, it's a real possibility that the sisters are baptized Jehovah's witnesses, and still believe that they're living a life above reproach, despite that JW rules and other JWs may not agree with them. What happens is that the Congregation does something about it, especially as the acts referred to are public.

  a while back the sisters were showcased on the back of an awake (i think) magazine as jehovahs witnesses

  It'll be interesting to see this. But unless it's explicity stated, the Society can't be hanged on that. They use pictures of unbaptized people on the back and front of Awake! all the time, with a caption that goes like "they do what is right" or sth of that hue. The Awake issue about Youths who Do what is Right (by choosing to dies rather than accept blood) contains pictures branded in one's memory.

  Jourles,

  it's probably best to ask the Society. But I see the PR boys saying something like "each congregation knows the standing of each individual witness", and upon going to the congregation, the Secretary saying something like "you go ask the girls", or "Jehovah knows the standing of each individual witness", or sth like those...

  Interesting The Practice episode. I didn't see it. But you don't tell whether she got the blood or not, or if she carried a valid, current Blood Card.
• 

  Jourles

  Interesting The Practice episode. I didn't see it. But you don't tell whether she got the blood or not, or if she carried a valid, current Blood Card.

  Interesting indeed. But I cannot tell what was not shown. The judge ruled in favor of the mother deciding her fate, no blood of course. Bobby Donnell also argued that "she did not have a blood card, which every real witness carries," hence she would probably take it if needed.

  I really do not see how carrying a "current" card would make any difference. Is there a time limit on the blood cards that you know of? A year and a half ago, the Society recalled all of the January 2002 blood cards and instructed the witnesses to keep their cards from 2001. Prior to 2002, all witnesses understood that the blood cards needed to be "renewed" every year. We didn't know the reason for this - it was just an unwritten rule that we abided by. Afterall, for years that was the routine every January, to get our new cards filled out and have two witnesses watch us sign them.
• 

  asleif_dufansdottir

  OK, now let me use the example of my brother-in-law. He is 15 years old and is an unbaptized publisher.

  I do see your point, however, I think the society has been pretty clear about the status of unbaptised children of JWs, especially once they reach adulthood...heck, most are pressured to get baptised wayyy before then. That's why I made the earlier comment about being too old to hide behind their non-JW dad. It's my understanding you can call yourself anything you want, but you should be living in accordance with the rules of the religion (if your religion is as big on following the rules as the JW). What doesn't make sense to me, is that they are willing to be identified as JWs...apparently go out in service and preach to the other players (even if they're not baptised they have to be "approved" to go in service, no? Why is their behavior not an issue with this?)...talk about being a JW...yet they do things that a JW should not be doing. I don't really care, I just don't understand why, if they want to act that way, why they don't just dump the religion completely. I guess because being JWs has evidently not had unpleasant consequences and kept them from doing what they wanted (unlike some of us).

  At a minimum, the society should be doing what it usually does when it wants to get the point across to the rank and file without actually coming out and saying something: including talks on the District Conventions which make vague reference to 'sports figures and other celebrities who claim to be JWs but are clearly not following Jehovah's guidelines for approved behavior' or some such claptrap...especially since the Williams' are in the news so much.

  So, do they like the publicity? Do they like the $$ they're getting? Are the local elders chickensh*t? (the flag incident on international tv should have been enough to get the attention of somebody at Bethel regardless) Does Daddy Williams have lawyers who have the society by the nuts and telling them if they go after the girls there'll be consequences?? (there's a pleasant thought)