by DATA-DOG 95 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
What is wrong is for Watchtower to be in the business of law enforcement and justice.
That is not necessarily wrong but what is a fact is that Watchtower is not authorized to enforce secular law and it is also a fact that Watchtower does not have the power or authority to administer secular justice.
That is not necessarily wrong but what is a fact is that Watchtower is not authorized to enforce secular law and it is also a fact that Watchtower does not have the power or authority to administer secular justice.
No one expects them to be so, There is zero problem with letting the WTS handle it's own pastoral and internal disciplinary processes any way they like within the law. They could make it so much easier if they simply told, even helped, anyone coming to them with a potential crime to go to the right authorities to get the secular, legal and criminal aspects handled properly. They can handle any internal matters themselves anyway they like then.
The problem, as has been repeated ad infinitum, is that there is an historical issue with reported incidents getting to the attention of the authorities and still a matter of debate if changes to policy really makes a material difference to this.
Nobody wants them to be policemen. They simply need to get the real ones involved as required and feck off back to their back rooms to run their little JCs.
Deut 16:7.........It says nothing about establishing guilt. OC
That is correct and the context of verses 8-11 show that cases involving law trangressions in ancient Israel were adjudicated and decisions were reached.
fisherman:...what is a fact is that Watchtower is not authorized to enforce secular law and it is also a fact that Watchtower does not have the power or authority to administer secular justice.
You finally said something valuable Fisherperson. You have pointed out exactly what the problem is with the WT. They are not authorized to enforce secular law. It is for exactly that reason that they are deficient in their policies - they are not authorized to administer secular justice.
Because of that, their policies need to reflect that they will not obstruct justice being carried out. And, they need to back off and stop trying to determine if the secular law has been broken - they need to let the ones who do have secular authority do their job.
As it stands, the WT policies interfere with the administration of justice - the WT obstructs justice.
No one expects them to be so,
What does what "one" expects from the wachtower have anything to do with what may not be necessarily wrong. And who is the "one" that you implicate in your statement?
fisherman: That is correct and the context of verses 8-11 show that cases involving law trangressions in ancient Israel were adjudicated and decisions were reached
That is right. And when the two witness rule is spoken about - it is referencing the death penalty. That is when the two witnesses are required - if the punishment is death.
Nowhere in there does it say that two witnesses are required to establish guilt in all cases - it only speaks about it being required when the offender is going to be put to death.
the WT policies interfere with the administration of justice - the WT obstructs justice.
That is only your opinion. That is how I see it. Obstruction of justice is crime. Are you accusing watchtower of obstructing justice?
What does what "one" expects from the wachtower have anything to do with what may not be necessarily wrong.
What does this mean?
And who is the "one" that you implicate in your statement?
For goodness sake FM.... what a stupid question.
Are you accusing watchtower of obstructing justice?
Yes
YES
YES
That is only your opinion. That is how I see it. Obstruction of justice is crime. Are you accusing watchtower of obstructing justice?
I would suggest that in some cases, probably a small minority historically, this could well have been the case if you were able to look at every example worldwide through the last 100+ years.
More realistically, I think that the evidence demonstrates time and time again that the culture of deference to organisational hierarchy, coupled with some mistaken view of protecting Jehovah's name publicly has repeatedly led to allegations of sexual abuse not making it to the authorities.
Where the WTS interpretation of how to handle the two witness biblical principle has prevented further internal investigation and action, the allegation still has not made it to the secular authorities.
In all of these cases justice has been obstructed to some extent even if not by wilful and criminal intent.
