As God Is My Witness....

by MidwichCuckoo 12 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  MidwichCuckoo

  God is all knowing, God is all seeing, there is even a precedent that God is 'De Facto' Editor of The Watchtower. Is there therefore any reason why God could not be the default second witness in the case of an abuse claim within the JW community?

  For this to stand up in an enquiry, the second witness (Jehovah) would have to give evidence. But as God can only speak via the FDS, the FDS would then be called upon to either support or refute the victim's claim - or to admit that God refused to tell them.

  As the claim would no doubt be refuted, if there was then a subsequent action proving the abuse, then the FDS would be guilty of perjury.

  An interesting case.
• 

  luna2

  If the FDS was required to participate in every abuse case, they'd be doing nothing else. What a can of worms that would be. They also must be aware that they don't have that kind of close communication with the Almighty. From what I've been reading, they can't even get the majority needed for important doctrinal changes...sometimes for years. Can you imagine them having to review, debate and rule on child abuse cases? They might as well flip a coin. Ugh.
• 

  MidwichCuckoo

  The point is the possibility of God being called as a second witness. The options the FDS would have in such a case are;- 1) To support the claim, 2) To admit they have NO communication with God or 3) To refute the claim....thus potentially risking perjury in the case of a LATER successful Law Suit.
• 

  kwintestal

  That's so crazy ... it just may work!

  Kwin
• 

  Happy Guy :)

  Thnx 4 the laugh on a Sunday morning MC.
• 

  ArtfulDodger

  Good point Midwich . . . and under oath, I wonder how many of the FDS would be prepared to perjure themselves ? . . .Oh . . all of them ? . . Or am I being too cynical ?
• 

  ArtfulDodger

  As the FDS are supposed to abide by the commandment "not to bear false witness" I suppose that they would HAVE to say that God hadn't confided in them to the point of being able to refute or back up the claim of abuse. But then again - a normal dub (the abused one) would not either . . and God certianly wouldn't (as He set the rules in the first place)

  The point - as you say, Midwich - is that the FDS and indeed the Org would be on a sticky wicket if God was cited as the second witness.

  Hmm
• 

  MidwichCuckoo

  Am not sure where this '2 witness' rule originated (and am too cream crackered and lazy to find out). A victim IS a witness under ANY Law. Under Biblical Law, he cannot bear 'false witness'. The FDS represent God's Word on Earth. As HE is the second witness (required), the FDS have to speak FOR Him - as God KNOWS the truth of the matter. The FDS are liable.
• 

  Ticker

  Two witness rule is an adaptation from Deuteronomy 19:15 "No single witness should rise up against a man respecting any error or any sin, in the case of any sin that he may commit at the mouth of two wintnesses or at the mouth of three witnesses the matter should stand good."

  That is thier backing for the two witnesse rule doctrine and can also be found on www.jwmedia.org under their media alert films where they discuss the child abuse issue.

  Ticker
• 

  Ticker

  The only other problem being is they dont admit to having direct vocal communication with God but rather they claim to communicate through holy spirit and prayer, and in being guided in their actions by God's spirit and Jesus direction.

  Ticker