by aboveusonlysky 41 Replies latest watchtower bible
One of the old-style elders in our cong was Jerry Decker
L&JD were very nice people and I agree with your views about JD -very compassionate and caring. He was in BB for a while and came back to do temp work but the man's character and temperament was as you describe. Fluent speaker too. Think he was in writing back in the 70's
Each case has to be heard but what would convince me is if the person came forward right away and confessed (given that the motive for his confession was good). If the person practiced sin for a period of time, that has to be adjudicated considering if the person was snagged or confessed; and the motive for his confession has to be decided; also to be considered is sadly regret vs, repentance because of hating the wrong done, applied to the case. But bottom line, the sinner receives some form of discipline once guilt is established.
Noting like personal opinions about what constitutes repentance. Only someone who has an simplistic knowledge of human behaviour could write let alone believe such judgemental nonsense. This is the very reason uneducated men should not be put in positions of assessment and judgement of fellow humans.
Noting like personal opinions about what constitutes repentance. Only someone who has an simplistic knowledge of human behaviour could write let alone believe such judgemental nonsense. This is the very reason uneducated men should not be put in positions of assessment and judgement of fellow humans.
You may not like this but in the JW org, sins are defined by the Bible as interpreted by the wt. The WT(governing body) governs the JW. When a JW member commits a sin categorized by wt as serious, such sinner is subject to a JC. The JC, like it or not, has power and authority over JW members granted to them by the wt to adjudicate cases involving wrongdoing by jw members. It does not make any difference how you feel about that. In a criminal case, a jury is given power and authority to decide guilt or innocence based on guidelines -not your feelings about juror's qualifications. Since, elders cannot read hearts, they have no way of knowing if a person in fact meets the requirements of biblical repentance but they also have guidelines from wt that they must follow. A judicial decision of a JC is not the personal opinion of an individual, there are 3 or more elders adjudicating the case and an appeals provision that will rehear and review the case if the decision is challenged. It is axiomatic -you don't have to be an elder judging a case- that if a person commits a wrong and confesses right away, it is an indication that the person has a desire to right the wrong, simple, and that is what repentance is all about. Also, this post asks for an opinion and mine is a s good as yours.
Imagine a court of law where they chose judges from window cleaners and painters, well that is where the lord is looking to recruit the wise men who have a predisposition against facial hair, tight pants and not enough publishing hours. Then they tell the poor person they need to know if they orgasmed during that sinful touch or you didn't scream when that man had a knife to your throat while he was raping you. So now our divine direction has revealed to us you won't burn in hell, you will only be in Gehenna w because of our decision is binding with god.
Then they reveal that they are the future princes of the earth. I can I live there please
Imagine a court of law where they chose judges from window cleaners and painters
and jurors too who decide guilt or innocence.
"You may not like this but in the JW org, sins are defined by the Bible as interpreted by the wt."
So where does the bible define smoking, gambling or talking to a df'd person as a sin?
Let's have a look at punishment as defined by the bible -
Prodical son - squandered a fortune living a debauched life, came home when the money ran out - thrown a banquet.
David - had an innocent man killed to cover adultery - kept his position as king but had his baby killed.
Achan - theft - fessed up and was stoned and burned along with his entire family.
So basically pick an example and be as forgiving or harsh as you want.
Prodical son - squandered a fortune living a debauched life, came home when the money ran out - thrown a banquet.
David - had an innocent man killed to cover adultery - kept his position as king but had his baby killed.
Achan - theft - fessed up and was stoned and burned along with his entire family.
So basically pick an example and be as forgiving or harsh as you want.
That's a pretty wide span of outcomes. No wonder Watchtower is all over the place with it's judgements.
Or what about Lot, who committed incest with his own daughters...yet that was not just forgiven, but he is actually held up as a biblical example and faithful man!
Obviously that conduct is disgusting and repulsive.....so what would happen if a judicial committe was formed back then?
I do remember that in revelation jesus said he would be coming to take care of the wicked congregations . The pagan influences must have been prevalent , I can only see in some cases removing people as elders or ex communicate ( technically that's what it is since they do ignore you ) until they are convinced that you are serious about changing . What I don't like is they will sneak around and follow you . In my case there were some that knew my ,"worldly", friends and would run to the elders and rat off what I was doing . Keep in mind I was never even a publisher ... GOOD GRIEF . They never admit anything either as I've asked on occasion for information regarding it .. lie is what they do
I don't know how a witch retires either ..LOL
Scenic Viewer wrote:
Many years ago an elder told me, after he had returned from an elder training school, that when in doubt elders should lean toward mercy in judicial matters.
I was going to add this thought as well. I well remember the elders school (In the U K it was handled by old Tom Maltby, a C/O whose gruff Yorkshire manner belied a compassionate heart) " If we are going to err, we err on the side of mercy" he said.
I have been out of the system a long time now but certainly in the nineties I saw examples where the benefit of the doubt was given to the wrongdoer. It all depends on who you get on the committee..........
