2 witness rule

by punkofnice 72 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • DATA-DOG
    DATA-DOG

    As usual, Fishtard loves to come to the "legal" aid of the Org.

    I've shared this before, and I'll share it again... A CO gave an illustration about the superiority of Christian love and principles over laws. He mad the point that if everyone followed Xian principles, then we could toss out every law book and all the Courts would be out of business.

    Then he gives an illustration about driving through a neighborhood where children are present. The posted, legal speed limit is 25 mph. If you want to go 25, that is your legal right.

    Yet, you round the bend and see children playing. Now what? It's your right to go 25. It's not your fault that the children are unsupervised, and near the street! Say, where are the parents? This is their responsibility! Why should you slow down??

    I wonder if that CO had any clue about the systemic problem of sexual abuse and the failure to report such abuse within the Org?

    Here is a link to an excellent article about why the so-called adjustments concerning the reporting of allegations of sexual abuse are just a joke...

    http://jwsurvey.org/child-abuse-2/jehovahs-witnesses-release-new-child-abuse-reporting-policy-net-result-business-usual

    DD

  • konceptual99
    konceptual99
    That is arguable. Any accusation of wrong against the church is considered on a case by case basis.

    Fair point and the fact the elders put everything past Bethel does mean they could get specific instructions. It's also fair to say that the current guidelines do make statements about ensuring victims are not at further risk.

    The reality so far has been that this has not been the case and the WTS has been reticent to be pro-active in any positive sense for decades. I fear the culture is stronger than the words. You also still have a strong bias by elders to ignore their gut feelings and defer to whatever Bethel say. The people that should be determining if an individual poses a risk to an alleged victim or the wider community is not a drone at Bethel or even a local elder. It should be the proper, qualified local authorities.

  • Fisherman
    Fisherman
    "Fair point, on the other hand, again, as I said before...." --Konceptual

    Again, same point.

  • konceptual99
  • Half banana
    Half banana

    The two witness rule is an OT rule. Since when do they literally apply OT rules? Only when it suits them is the answer.

    We do know there have been practising homosexuals in the GB (nothing wrong with being homosexual except that the Bible and the Watchtower don’t approve). There might have been a heterosexual paedophile, we don’t know. So it could well be that to cover up some reprehensible incidents right there at or near the top of the organisation they had to come up with a story or a red herring. The OT laws gave them a loophole. Whether this is the case or not, “two witnesses” is a get off the hook ploy.

    @ Conceptual, I agree with you. The really shabby behaviour is from the GB themselves because of their total lack of genuine care for the abused. Normal considerate caring organisations would know that to try and help those who have suffered means extensive professional psychological help even if it cost millions.

    Of course they know that professional counsellors would strongly discourage anyone having anything to do with mind-bending cults like JWs—and quite rightly so.

  • dubstepped
    dubstepped

    @Fisherman - Do you personally have the opinion that Jehovah's Witnesses handle child sexual abuse allegations in a way that protects children to the best of human abilities? If not, where do you think they fall short? If you do, please highlight the ways in which they best serve children in these cases through their policies.

  • Diogenesister
    Diogenesister
    Banana Normal considerate caring organisations would know that to try and help those who have suffered means extensive professional psychological help even if it cost millions.
    Of course they know that professional counsellors would strongly discourage anyone having anything to do with mind-bending cults like JWs—and quite rightly so.

    The two witness rule and mandatory reporting ( because of the issues around victims coming forward) are both red herrings in a way. The real problems lay in the whole culture of Watchtower that NO individual's welfare - no matter how harrowing an experience they have been through - is ever put before the reputation of the org. Additionally untrained elders, who prioritise serving the org not caring for flock, have no business involving themselves in dealing with CSA. They are also fundamentally incapable of doing what's right because the org instills paranoia in handing over care because, as half banana says, they fear the real experts involvement for the reasons he lays out above.

    A fundamentally flawed organization that cripples it's shephards by incapacitating their own conscience is worse than useless in dealing with something like CSA.

  • StephaneLaliberte
    StephaneLaliberte
    Konceptual99: They will now accept the word of a different person or evidence from the authorities as a second witness.

    Accept evidence from the authorities? Could there be any other evidences that would be considered a second witness other than the witness of a credible human who saw the whole thing?

    As far as I know, the watchtower has never explained what other type of witness, if any, could be accepted. Could you please correct me if I am wrong?

  • Drearyweather
    Drearyweather
    The two witness rule is an OT rule. Since when do they literally apply OT rules?

    Matthew 18:16: on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be established

    2 Cor 13:1: This is the third time I am coming to you. “On the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter must be established

    1 Tim 5:19: Do not accept an accusation against an older man except on the evidence of two or three witnesses



  • StephaneLaliberte
    StephaneLaliberte

    Drearyweather: The two witness rule is reasonable if evidences (material proof, medical proof, etc) can also be considered as a second witness. In fact, in terms of proof, visual testimonies actually tend to be the least reliable one! Unfortunately, the Watchtower never wrote anything on the subject. As child abuse has been identified as a problem with them for several years, the fact that they never wrote anything on this aspect of their rule demonstrates a deliberate obfuscation.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit