Leaving the Witness (Buddhist, prophecy, priest, Muslim)

[kjw47]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

Come on, you know full well that those old men you call your teachers were NOT alive when Jesus was and the bible writers wrote their claims about Jesus. So, who REALLY appointed those old guys as teachers????

Here in these last days when Jesus received the crown( Rev 6) Matt 24:45 occurred as well. Otherwise this could never be truth-Daniel 12:4-- Nor could one accomplish this super important daily life-John 4:22-24-- It took correcting 1750 years of error teachings as well as their own errors in front of the whole world, because it was not yet the proper time to know certain truths until God willed them known.

[TroutDude]

I'd like to thank kjw yet again for his tireless efforts in demonstrating the inner workings of the captivated JW mind.

I think they'll always be less than 1% of the population -- on merit.

[TRANSPONDER]

it's amazing -watching the faith -brain squirrelling around inside the Box of their own faith where the truth of their faith is propped up by quotes from the book of their faith. I am so thankful that I missed all that. And I leave you to deal with this as his preaching antics don't otherwise interest me.

[ImissThe90's]

Originally Posted by kjw47

Just the unrepentant baptized ones who are disfellowshipped get shunned. Its much better than in the OT, being stoned to death was law. Those alive can still repent. The dead cannot.

Oh, how gracious of you. So shunning is an act of mercy, huh?

I would say an act that lacks empathy, and an act born out of ignorance. Then again, that is what your religion thrives on. Ignorance.

[kjw47]

Originally Posted by ImissThe90's

Oh, how gracious of you. So shunning is an act of mercy, huh?

I would say an act that lacks empathy, and an act born out of ignorance. Then again, that is what your religion thrives on. Ignorance.

Very sad--obviously you do not know God or his will. God accepts 0 sin. This world better get it into their thick skulls. He told all of you at 1John 3. He said--Its impossible for a child of God to practice even one sin. Those that do are described as the children of the devil. Yet blind guides are telling them that they are saved or born again( for the tithe of course)

[ImissThe90's]

Originally Posted by kjw47

Very sad--obviously you do not know God or his will. God accepts 0 sin. This world better get it into their thick skulls. He told all of you at 1John 3. He said--Its impossible for a child of God to practice even one sin. Those that do are described as the children of the devil. Yet blind guides are telling them that they are saved or born again( for the tithe of course)

Then no one is a child of God, because according to that same God, we all sin. More than once, and more than one type of sin, too. There is one thing I do know though.... If your version of God can't see past what I believe in regards to religion/God, and see who I actually am, and what I actually do, then he is a mighty small and petty God. You would think such a being could see who I am, and judge based off of that, right? According to you, he cannot. A god like that is simply not worth the time and effort.

The only "sad" thing here, is how far you are down the rabbit hole of fundamentalist ignorance.

[jrpuff]

Originally Posted by kjw47

Just the unrepentant baptized ones who are disfellowshipped get shunned. Its much better than in the OT, being stoned to death was law. Those alive can still repent. The dead cannot.

So what happens when a child who got baptized grows up and learns they made a mistake and no longer wants to be a JW? Will they be shunned by their parents and family? If you can't expect a child to make such a lifelong devotion as getting married lets say, because they are still developing emotionally/mentally/etc., then how can you expect a child to devote their life to a god/religion in baptism?

In the summer of 1946, I was baptized at the international convention in Cleveland, Ohio. Although I was only six years of age, I was determined to fulfill my dedication to Jehovah. The Watchtower, 1992 3/1 p. 27

In 1934, Mom and Dad were baptized. I too wanted to get baptized, and I kept insisting until Mother asked an older Witness to talk with me about it. He asked many questions in a manner that I could understand. Then he told my parents that I should not be prevented from being baptized; it might harm my spiritual growth. So I was baptized the following summer, when I was still six. The Watchtower, 1996, 8/1, p. 21

A survey of the publishers in Ghana showed that 12 percent of the more than 50,000 publishers were between 6 and 20 years of age. Yearbook, 1998, p. 14

[jrpuff]

Originally Posted by hd4me

Here's a download available for anyone to access about JWs position on child abuse:
https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/leg...ld-protection/

Let's take a look at a few points:

Elders do not criticize anyone who chooses to make such a report.

You and I and anyone else who has been a JW know that was it written here is not the reality. JWs are all about not ruining their "reputation". Here is an excerpt from one of the publications on taking a brother or sister to court over money matters....while it's a different topic, it can be applied to any other issue that arises in a congregation. It's all about appearances with JWs : "they should take their difficulty to mature brothers of the congregation for a judgment between them rather than go to a worldly court and let the world see them squabbling over money matters. That would hurt the reputation of the Christian organization, publicly airing such matters and indicating to the world that the Christian spirit is not present. Rather than bring such reproach upon the organization, Paul argues that it would be better to be defrauded.....To have to go out into the world and get such men to judge matters instead of settling it within the congregation would certainly be a mocking defeat for the congregation. Better to be defrauded than let that happen!

or this little gem from a November 15, 1973 Watchtower article: ""And by dragging fellow believers before pagan judges, they would bring great reproach upon God’s name. As outsiders would be led to believe that Christians were no different from other people in being unable to settle differences, the interests of true worship would be injured. It would have been far better for individual Christians to take personal loss rather than to injure the entire congregation by bringing their disputes to public notice."

5. When elders learn of an accusation of child abuse, they immediately consult with the branch
office of Jehovah’s Witnesses to ensure compliance with child abuse reporting laws. (Romans 13:1)
Even if the elders have no legal duty to report an accusation to the authorities, the branch office of Jehovah’s Witnesses will instruct the elders to report the matter if a minor is still in danger of abuse or
there is some other valid reason.

Why would they consult the branch first? Why not automatically report it to local authorities??? And the elders are instructed to report the matter IF a minor is still in danger? So....a pedophile can repent or pretend to be repentant, and if the elders believe that pedophile, they can be reinstated and allowed back in to the congregation potentially and most likely re-harming other children again.

A member of the congregation who is an unrepentant child abuser is expelled from the congregation and is no longer considered one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

That's all well and good, except for all the ones who pretend to be sorry and repentant and then get reinstated and go on to continue to violate other children.

11. If it is determined that one guilty of child sexual abuse is repentant and will remain in the
congregation, restrictions are imposed on the individual’s congregation activities. The individual will
be specifically admonished by the elders not to be alone in the company of children, not to cultivate
friendships with children, or display any affection for children. In addition, elders will inform parents
of minors within the congregation of the need to monitor their children’s interaction with the individual.

here's just 2 accounts that show otherwise:

"Conti asked the elders to consider a plan she had devised for tracking child molesters within the organization. When they refused, she sued Watchtower, her former congregation, and Kendrick. During depositions, the elders admitted that they’d long known Kendrick had a history of child molestation—they knew before they paired him with Conti for door-to-door ministry, and before they rejected her story about the abuse. In 2012, a jury awarded Conti $28 million, believed to be the largest jury verdict ever for a single victim in a child-abuse case against a religious organization. (On appeal, judges reduced the damages to less than $3 million. Kendrick has always denied Conti’s allegations.)"


"José Lopez was 7 years old when he was molested by Gonzalo Campos, a fellow Witness whom the local elders had recommended as a mentor, despite knowing that Campos allegedly had a history of molesting young boys. When Campos assaulted Lopez in a La Jolla, California, home in 1986, the boy told his mother, who immediately reported Campos to the elders. They said they would handle the situation, and told her not to call the police. Yet Campos continued to rise in the organization, eventually becoming an elder. In 2010, he fled to Mexico, where he later confessed in a deposition to molesting Lopez and several other young boys."

12. A person who has engaged in child sexual abuse does not qualify to receive any congregation
privileges or to serve in a position of responsibility in the congregation for decades, if ever

This is either a flat out lie or it must be a brand new policy. Because I can dig up several personal accounts from people for you if you like that show otherwise. See the above account for one.

--------
Furthermore, how many accused pedophiles in the congregation do you think get off scott free because of the 2 Witness Rule would you say? Because we all know....the when someone molests a child, they always do so with another witness there in the room with them.

[303Guy]

Originally Posted by kjw47

Very sad--obviously you do not know God or his will. God accepts 0 sin. ...

You don't consider killing all the first borns of Egypt a sin?

[Harry Diogenes]

Originally Posted by kjw47

Very sad--obviously you do not know God or his will.

You do? You know what your god thinks? Is that not the definition of arrogance?

Originally Posted by kjw47

He told all of you at 1John 3.

I do not think your god wrote 1 John.