by OldSoul 604 Replies latest members private
RS... I was at the TMS tonight too. Not one word about the clergy of Christendom concerning true religion and not one word about child abuse. Refresh me ... what part was it on.
You mean you believe every meeting is manuscripted? LOL, surely you are kidding! She said the brother giving the part said that, she didn't say that came from the material being considered. Do you really find well written English so difficult to parse?
no double standard ... not even close
How about bs, then, or sales crap, just fluff in order to sell mags, but not really meaning the words?
S
RS, since that brother isnt allowed to watch any 'worldly' programs regarding the witnesses or visit non Watchtower approved website theres a good chance he doesnt even know about all the child abuse shit going on behind closed doors in the Organization.
Probably thinks the cases he has sat on are the exception and that it is an abnormally prevalent problem in his Congregation.
:But are JWs really that self righteous (or naive) as to think that it doesn't happen within the walls of their organization??
RS... I was at the TMS tonight too. Not one word about the clergy of Christendom concerning true religion and not one word about child abuse. Refresh me ... what part was it on.
Were you paying attention?? It was in the #1 talk, BE book pp. 275-76 - "Bearing Witness to Jesus". Regarding the part in the book that said "Loyal servants of God in our day are described as those who ?have the work of bearing witness to Jesus.? (Rev. 12:17)" - the brother giving the talk referenced the scripture and proceeded to discuss why other religions are not approved for the work of bearing witness to Jesus, but JWs are. And as I said in my previous post, he used the example of child abuse cases in Christendom (particularly within the clergy), and how they are handled, to justify why they couldn't possibly be charged with bearing witness to Jesus. He also referenced that the religions of Christendom being involved in politics also negates them from being approved for such work by Jehovah. I then leaned over and asked my husband, "Doesn't being a member of the UN constitute being involved in politics??"
Heh - two for the price of one.
GBL: The reality barrior is real and it is scary as hell.
Well, that depends on whether you are predator or potential prey. To the predator that reality barrier makes a true present-day paradise. [ick!]
Honesty just kills them, eh RS?
You said:
: I then leaned over and asked my husband, "Doesn't being a member of the UN constitute being involved in politics??"
Indeed it does. I spoke with one JW about this shortly after the UN story broke. I pointed out that the Society had used its UN connection to help it lobby for religious freedom for JWs in various countries, and that such lobbying was being involved in politics. At first he argued that this was just trying to get freedom, and was not being involved in politics. I pointed out that Martin Luther King lobbied heavily for freedom for blacks, and no one would argue that this wasn't involvement in politics. Same goes for the Society's lobbying efforts. He had to agree, and he was definitely shaken.
AlanF
Big Tex ... I just reread the article I quoted earlier. The point of view was the justice dept. of Mexico City. I'm sorry ... I quoted it as the societies policy. By printing it I imagine they must give it credence though.
afin: Without quoting the whole piece I'll post a few things said "(1) Believe and support your child when he or she reports being sexually abused. (2) Explain to the child that he or she is not responsible for what happened. (3) INFORM THE CHILD THAT WHAT HAPPENED IS AGAINST THE LAW AND THAT IT IS NECESSARY TO REPORT IT TO THE POLICE SO THAT IT WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN."
afin: I just reread the article I quoted earlier. The point of view was the justice dept. of Mexico City. I'm sorry ... I quoted it as the societies policy. By printing it I imagine they must give it credence though.
An exact quote of such complexity in phrasing ... but you weren't reading from it? I am astonished. You must have a photographic memory. But then, why would you have to reread to make sure you got the context right? Could it be that you assumed (correctly) that I would post the correct text tomorrow morning for all to see, and that the strain of getting caught in an obvious attempt to mislead caused you to rethink your post?
In my opinion, it is much more likely that you intended to create the false impression that you created. That is akin to the sin committed by Ananias and Sapphira, an intentional deceit designed to create a flattering impression. (Acts 5:1-11) I was guilty of the same sort of thing, until I stopped lying even when that course was encouraged by others. I first had to learn that Jehovah expected different things from me than men expect.
Again, a false tongue seems to be wagging. Again, your neighbors are hearing not truth, but falsehoods and misimpressions. (Ephesians 4:20-4:30) I did not learn the Christ to be so. I do not mean to be offensive or self-righteous, but I do mean to shame you for your attitude and conduct thus far. It is the opposite of Godly. It is the opposite of Christian. The Bible records accounts of people being struck down on the spot for similar behavior.
I am fairly certain every person posting here invites you to abandon that way of life consisting entirely of hidden sin and public lies. You know, if you live a lie you are not due the reward they promise even if you do obey. I hope that you will look back over this thread and admit to yourself that you do not have Scriptures to prove the foundation of your confidence in the Organization?. I dare not hope you will admit this to us and I empathize mightily with your situation.
Peace,
OldSoul
You assume too much, young man. OS
My post was addressed to Big Tex ... it is only his feelings I'm concerned about ... and Chris, I do apologise ... I should have posted the whole article and there would be no problem now.
