konceptual99

Joined

• started 166 topics
• posted 3,618 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by konceptual99

• 
  47

  Article: Reveal News-California court guts child abuse ruling against Jehovah's Witnesses

  by AndersonsInfo in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  http://www.revealnews.org/article/california-court-guts-child-abuse-ruling-against-jehovahs-witnesses/.

  california court guts child abuse ruling against jehovahs witnesses.

  topics: religion / religion and government .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  The point about duty to warn the congregation is covered in the court documents:

  https://jwleaks.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/04-13-2015-appeals-court-final-decision-a136641.pdf

  Check page 12 onwards - there is several pages of legal reasoning.

  The punitive damages were based on the duty to warn the congregation. Since the ruling was there was no LEGAL duty to warn the congregation then the punitive damages were removed.

  When you real the documentation you can see why this was not upheld and what the broader implications are should this duty have been established as a legal responsibility.

  Of course, this does affect the MORAL responsibility to protect the congregation as far as is possible. It does not mean that some policy cannot be formulated that helps protect the congregation as much as possible from the risk of child molestation without exposing the congregation to the broader implications of a duty to protect from the risk of one congregation member committing a crime of any sort against another.

  It is bizarre that the WTS is so ready to spout on about when things, such as building projects, have been done to a standard way beyond that required by the law yet on this matter seem only too happy to go only as far as the law requires them to go and not implement the best practice that so many other organisations have adopted.
• 
  105

  LATEST NEWS: CANDANCE CONTI VERIDICT READY - WT LOST!!!!!!!

  by Viva la Vida in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm not an expert but that is my understanding of this: .

  opinion filed.. (signed published) the judgment against defendants on the negligence count is affirmed.

  the judgment against watchtower on the cause of action for punitive damages is reversed with directions to enter judgment for watchtower on punitive damages.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  Err... dislike on my post?

  I don't object to anyone's opinion but I posted straight out of WT publications. I'll happily discuss the disconnect between what the WTS says to it's publishers (the clue is in the name) and elders compared to how it presented the ministry to the courts.
• 
  23

  'great crowd' are in the temple (naos) but not in the new covenant???

  by fukitol in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  in one of the biggest about-faces in watchtower history, in a 2002 question from readers it was admitted that the great crowd is indeed in the temple itself (naos) in revelation 7. .

  but notice the statement bolded below from that article comparing the great crowd to the proselytes in ancient israel.

  the statement is made that the proselytes "submitted to the law covenant.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  Gotta agree with fukitol on the swallowing the spin.

  Most of the R&F have NO problem accepting the WTS view of the new covenant. It's not even that illogical as at least they can spin scriptures rather than pure rhetoric as with the overlapping generations.

  As for increasing numbers of partakers... no one seems that bothered. Many have forgotten or were never exposed to the buzz around looking at the decreasing numbers 20+ years ago and simply say we can't say who is and who isn't.

  I have tried over and over again to get through to my wife on these points and as open and liberal as she seems to be, all of this simply is water off a ducks back.
• 
  11

  Do Kingdom Hall congregations communicate with each other?

  by Faithful Witness in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  when asked, my mom denies that they do.... do local congregations pass along gossip or reports on householders in the area?

  specifically, i am wondering if they might report on (unbaptized) family members that live in other towns?.

  since the abrupt ending of my bs with miss k, i have not heard from the jw's at all.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  Communication exists at all levels.

  There is formal communication between elders such as when people move congregations and letters of recommendation (or not) are sent.

  If one is DF'ed/DA'ed and well known in an area then this will be communicated. It is not unknown for an announcement to be made in another congregation such as when an individual spends time or has lots of family/associates in another congregation

  There is informal communication on a semi-official basis - two elders discussing a situation over the phone for example. You can bet your life that the guys going into halls in Kent and disrupting the meetings (see YouTube) have been talked about between bodies of elders in the area, perhaps even with letters and announcements in the congregations.

  There is gossip between elders

  There is gossip and natural social chit chat about third parties between friends and acquaintances in congregations.

  You can be sure that if you are well known in an area and developing a reputation for some kind of lack of spirituality then your name will be coming up in conversation at some level.
• 
  105

  LATEST NEWS: CANDANCE CONTI VERIDICT READY - WT LOST!!!!!!!

  by Viva la Vida in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i'm not an expert but that is my understanding of this: .

  opinion filed.. (signed published) the judgment against defendants on the negligence count is affirmed.

  the judgment against watchtower on the cause of action for punitive damages is reversed with directions to enter judgment for watchtower on punitive damages.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  Twelve reasons to go out, including it is commanded...

  http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/202012205?q=reasons+for+preaching&p=par

  What happens if you do not preach? It has organisational implications. You become "inactive". You are no longer "approved". You no longer qualify for "privileges of service".

  Check out the Index on "Meeting for Field Service"

  http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200273747

  Not much of this is available on-line but I bet the list itself shows that there are activities for preaching arranged by the congregation. Indeed there is a "Service Overseer". Tools (publications, carts etc.) are provided. Territories are assigned. Records of activity are kept and used to gauge spirituality.

  According to the Shepherd book....

  - the responsibility of of the Group Overseer is to take an "active interest in the spirituality of each person in the field service group", "concentrating on those who are weak, irregular in...field activty, ... or inactive", "assists each one in the group to have a regular, meaningful and joyful share in the ministry". p23-24

  - signs of spiritual weakness includes neglecting "regular participation in field service (Acts 20:18-21)". p48

  - the Service Overseer "motivates others to have a full share", p20

  - he also has to arrange the meetings for field service and make sure there is plenty of literature and campaigns are resourced properly. p20-21

  - the Congregation Service Committee "assigns publishers to field service groups after consulting with group overseers involved". p22

  - a longtime inactive one is "invited to share again in the ministry" only after two elders have determined if he "meets the basic requirements to serve as a publisher", as outlined on pages 79-81 of the Organised book and km 11/00 QB. p52

  If you look at the articles associated with all congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses in the UK as charities you will see there is a statement about organising preaching activity.

  OK, no one is disfellowshipped for not going on the ministry but we all know that

  - it's highly organised

  - there is constant pushing to do as much as possible from the platform under the guise of it's a command from God and is reflection of our love for him

  - social pressure to conform and do as much as possible

  - social exclusion if you are perceived as weak through not doing field service

  - loss of status and privileges if field service activity is low

  - they might term it personal but that's not the same as independent
• 
  30

  Tear down the whole of South Africa

  by Louise in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  there was a statue outside the rhodes university.

  a 30 year old black student then threw his pooh on the statue and that got the ball rolling to pull the statue down.

  the board of this university built also gives out burseries and grants to previously disadvantaged black south africans and not disadvantaged black south africans.. there has been a huge debate in the country and now the statue has been removed.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  Pretty much all the developments to come out of the industrial revolution in Britain in the 1700s and then from the colonial powers in the 1800s, into the mid 1900s were made on the back of oppression.

  Of course the worst of these was the years of slavery endured by generations of black Africans. Without drawing a direct comparison, many working class people suffered as wealthy land owners and industrialists developed big businesses manufacturing goods and building infrastructure. People worked long hours for little pay in very dangerous conditions in mines, mills, building railways and so on. Many children were forced to work at very tender ages. Education was minimal. Health care all but non-existent. Many business owners ran their own shops and currencies, trapping people in a cycle of poverty and, in a broad sense, enslavement.

  There is still a legacy in the UK in terms of class, privilege, entitlement. It's not as distinct as it once was but it is woven into the fabric of the social structure. To suggest that the impact of slavery or apartheid will not permeate the culture of those whose past is directly wedded to this history is ridiculous.

  The questions are how and when do things move on? When does a society accept that whatever the reasons as to why one is where one is, what really matters is how the future is made better? When should the past be left in the past? Was everything that happened in times of oppression always bad? When does pragmatism and optimism trump indignation or justice over past grievances?

  I don't know the answer but I am sure that chucking a turd at a statue proves that some aspects of society are not prepared to move on. Should they?
• 
  30

  Tear down the whole of South Africa

  by Louise in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  there was a statue outside the rhodes university.

  a 30 year old black student then threw his pooh on the statue and that got the ball rolling to pull the statue down.

  the board of this university built also gives out burseries and grants to previously disadvantaged black south africans and not disadvantaged black south africans.. there has been a huge debate in the country and now the statue has been removed.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  Interesting OP. There will always be people adhering to polarised, even extreme, viewpoints. Militancy and confrontation will always be a driving force for some. I have been to South Africa and overall it was a very positive experience. From what I saw, however, there is still inequality and poverty that affects a disproportionate number of black citizens. My impression was within the government there is a significant minority of people prepared to focus blame on the legacy of the oppressive white regime for continued problems in the country.

  There is no doubt some truth in this - the impact of years of apartheid cannot be undone in even a couple of decades - but what better way to distract attention away from the failings of the government than by encouraging continued resentment of white authority and colonial history.

  Of course, all of this spoken by a middle class, reasonably educated, white male with absolutely no history of persecution (other than as a JW at school!), oppression, lack of opportunity etc... So what the hell do I know really?
• 
  9

  VERY IMPORTANT: UK JW CONGREGATION LOSES CASE!!!!

  by Viva la Vida in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i've tried to publish this several times but it doesn't work.

  you can check the ruling here: .

  http://www.charity.tribunals.gov.uk/documents/decisions/tayo-etc-decision-09apr15.pdf.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  Looks to me like the WTS and the local congregation were lucky that the Charities Commission cocked up a few times otherwise it could have been worst for them.

  It also really highlights how exposed local congregation elders are. They have no idea what their real obligations are as far as being trustees is concerned and how Bethel will squirm to get out of their responsibilities.
• 
  136

  List of UK Travelling Overseers in 2013

  by soiledumpling in

  1. social
  2. current

  hi pepeep am attempting to get a current list of uk travelling overseers.

  left 4 years ago and have heard rumours of many new ones.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  Someone worse than Philip Rose? Not possible ;-)
• 
  20

  "jehovah loves all sorts of people"

  by stuckinarut2 in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  ok, so if you haven't as yet watched the new cartoon clip on the website, be prepared to throw up!.

  it is called "jehovah loves all sorts of people", and features an awful song about how "jehovah loves everyone" even "different colors", etc....yep...they actually say that!.

  huh??????.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  konceptual99

  "Jehovah loves everyone , even different colors" , is not that a racist remark ? Implying that a person of one color is superior than a person of another color ?

  It's a bit of a clumsy way to phrase things but I don't think it's inherently racist. I think the reality of the world is that racism can be found in all societies from any group of people towards another. Children can be subjected to views that differentiate and prejudice one group against another wherever they are. I think the statement is a simplistic way of saying that the colour of your skin does not make a difference to God.

  I think the hypocrisy of the video as whole is far more insidious. Spouting on about equality, inclusion, acceptance and love for all whilst preaching a message of exclusion, division and judgement is a far stronger point than trying to take this statement about colour beyond what it really is (IMHO).