Jehovah’s Witnesses given €12,000 fine for incitement to hatred against ex-members

[Hockeycowboy]

Sure, but I have a sense if it weren’t for the courts parents and children would be cut off from each other by decree of your church.

you "have a sense"? You mean, a feeling? Why?
Where do you get that, if the courts didn't interfere, we would want "parents and children [to] be cut off from each other"?

Maybe I misunderstood?

 

[Dawnofhope]

you "have a sense"? You mean, a feeling? Why?
Where do you get that, if the courts didn't interfere, we would want "parents and children [to] be cut off from each other"?

Maybe I misunderstood?

Does your church not promote shunning based on your understanding of 1 Corinthians 5?

 

[Samael_Khan]

@JustGeorge , thank you for the informative rating, for being amiable in discussing these issues!

You seem to want to understand, instead of rashly jumping to conclusions!
Really, though, I think some on this thread, know the facts, but are intentionally twisting them.

Can you please provide evidence about which facts are being twisted and how "some" are doing it? Sounds like you are brushing off "some" people here simply because you don't like the criticism.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Good questions!
Yes, one must get baptized.

As far as age, I’m aware of some parents who were pushing their children into getting baptized. But then, the brothers make the call. Sometimes, they don’t approve their baptism, so the youth has to wait. I’ve even asked some parents to stop their urging, but just continue setting a good example.

I’ve known some 10-year-olds who’ve gotten baptized (they exhibited some very good qualities, and loved the ministry, i.e., going from door to door)....but that is rare.

So what you are admitting is that there are cases in which JW's allow children as young as the age of 10. Now, knowing that baptised JW's will get shunned if they commit a disfellowshipping offense, if they disagree with the JW lifestyle and if they end up not believing it, how could your organisation allow such young children to make such a major life decision with such consequences, considering that they aren't allowed to make major decisions that impact their life in any normal circumstance which is why their parents make those decisions for them? What if 2 years later they start doing things that cause them to be disfellowshipped or start believing another religion? Must everybody shun the 12 year old now since they got baptised at 10?

 

[Samael_Khan]

There’s a big difference, here:
When one is baptized as a JW, its because they understand what we teach, and have come to appreciate the depth of it. In fact, the brothers in their congregation lovingly meet with them, asking them heart-searching questions to make sure they do.

No one can just say, “l want to get baptized,” and then they do. That just can’t happen.

It requires a learning process, whereby they involve themselves in studying the Bible through the lens of those worshipping the One whom Jesus said ‘reveals’ His Word (Luke 10:21). And from what they’ve learned, they willingly make changes in their lifestyle, reflecting God’s standards of love, honesty, and moral chasteness in their conduct.

So there is every reason they should know full well, just what they are getting into before they dedicate their lives, and make a lifelong vow, to their Creator, Jehovah.

Their baptism symbolizes the dedication they’ve made. No one is considered a JW, until they are baptized.

So, no infant baptisms!!!!

I should point out, there have been millions who have studied the Bible w/ Jehovah’s Witnesses....attended meetings, even have gone out from door to door....that never got baptized. And They left.
We do not shun these ones.

Take care, my cousin.

Actually a lot of people do not know what they are getting into if they get baptised. Reason being is that they don't have a Bible study but a JW publication study with verses cherry picked from the Bible to validate their teachings. It isn't like these people are studying the Bible from beginning to end and you are teaching them the details. The Bible Teach book is basic and has become even more simplified as of late. A person would only know what they are getting into if they are well informed by being exposed to alternative viewpoints and opposing viewpoints too.

As for no infant baptism, you admitted that on the "rare" occasion your organisation allows children as young as 10 to get baptised which is no better than infant baptism.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Does your church not promote shunning based on your understanding of 1 Corinthians 5?

Did you not read my post on “head of house”?
I thought I explained it already.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

You’re twisting...

Now, knowing that baptised JW's will get shunned if they commit a disfellowshipping offense.....

Nope, that’s not accurate. It’s not the act. I’ve said that several times now.

....if they disagree with the JW lifestyle and if they end up not believing it....

First of all, it’s the Bible that provides the guidelines...and 10- yr-olds getting baptized rarely happen.

Must everybody shun the 12 year old now since they got baptised at 10?

Nope. Their parents still give them guidance.


Were you disfellowshipped? If so...What were you unrepentant about? Why did you end up hating the truth from Jehovah? Because you’re certainly not worshipping Him anymore. (What other religion does?)


(12 year olds, DF’d? Lol.
Obviously, your bias is blocking any rational discussion.)

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Does your church not promote shunning based on your understanding of 1 Corinthians 5?

Curious about your understanding of 1 Corinthians 5.
“Remove the wicked man from among yourselves”....
How would you apply it?

The following was recently brought to our attention. It is from the w19.11 21-22; it fits this discussion...

**When faced with tests, Jesus prayed “with strong outcries and tears.” (Heb. 5:7) His fervent prayers flowed from a loyal heart and strengthened his desire to remain obedient. To Jehovah, Jesus’ prayers were like the aroma of sweet-smelling incense. Jesus’ entire life course deeply pleased his Father and vindicated His sovereignty. We can imitate Jesus by doing our best to live a life of integrity and of loyalty to Jehovah’s ways and laws. When faced with tests, we pray fervently for Jehovah’s help because we want to please him. We realize that Jehovah will not accept our prayers if we are involved in conduct that he condemns. However, if we live according to Jehovah’s standards, we can be confident that our heartfelt prayers will be like sweet-smelling incense to Jehovah. And we can be sure that our integrity and loyal obedience please our heavenly Father.**

Source: JW.org


I firmly believe loyalty & obedience is what Jehovah wants. And that He wants the sheep in His Son’s congregation to be protected.

 

[Samael_Khan]

You’re twisting...
Nope, that’s not accurate. It’s not the act. I’ve said that several times now.

A disfellowshipping offense is when someone commits certain acts and are unrepentant about it. (unrepentance is also determined about what ones actions reveal about their attitude) What is not accurate about that?

First of all, it’s the Bible that provides the guidelines...and 10- yr-olds getting baptized rarely happen.

Not really hey. That is your interpretation of the Bible which is very much up for debate. Yeah, baptising a ten year old rarely happens, but it shows that your religion allows it to happen which is a problem.

Nope. Their parents still give them guidance.

Yeah, their parents would give them guidance until they aren't minors anymore. The impact remains.

Were you disfellowshipped?

No. I left.

Why did you end up hating the truth from Jehovah?

It isn't the truth from Jehovah so... especially since your organization admits to teaching falsehoods whenever they come up with "New Light".

Because you’re certainly not worshipping Him anymore. (What other religion does?)

I am an atheist. (also you do realise that your religion isn't the first to use the name Jehovah in worship right?)

(12

year olds, DF’d? Lol.
Obviously, your bias is blocking any rational discussion.)

Logical conclusion of your practices.

1. A child as young as 10 can be baptised.
2. A baptised JW will get disfellowshipped if they commit a disfellowshipping offense (unrepentant after committing serious sin).

Therefore if the child turns 12 and genuinely is convinced of doing something that is considered a gross sin then they will be disfellowshipped.

How is that not a rational conclusion? The possibility is there.

Seems like YOUR bias is showing here.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

A disfellowshipping offense is when someone commits certain acts and are unrepentant about it. (unrepentance is also determined about what ones actions reveal about their attitude) What is not accurate about that?

Oh grief! I really need to explain this?
Many people do many wrong things, and they are sorry for doing them. (We all make mistakes, in one way or another. We’re imperfect— Romans 3:23)

The problem comes when we’re not genuinely sorry for them, iow, unrepentant.

I can’t make it any clearer.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Oh grief! I really need to explain this?
Many people do many wrong things, and they are sorry for doing them. (We all make mistakes, in one way or another. We’re imperfect— Romans 3:23)

The problem comes when we’re not genuinely sorry for them, iow, unrepentant.

I can’t make it any clearer. I could write slower.

I mentioned that in the quote you are replying to. Notice that I mentioned the word "unrepentant" no less than twice. What are you getting upset about?

Let me explain my point another way:

When I say "disfellowshipping offense" I am not referring to someone committing a serious sin only, but that they are also unrepentant about that serious sin they committed.

Is there a miscommunication problem here?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Curious about your understanding of 1 Corinthians 5.
“Remove the wicked man from among yourselves”....
How would you apply it?

This may sound strange but we have never identified any members of our community as being ‘wicked’. Over the last twenty years that I have served on our communities local assembly we have never identified anyone as wicked nor removed them from our community. Without doubt if we identified a predator in our midst, someone who was preying on vulnerable members we would act decisively and wisely.

Excommunication and shunning isn’t a major criticism people have of the Baha’i Faith. Nor are we renowned for widespread sexual abuse that we’ve covered up.

 

[Samael_Khan]

This may sound strange but we have never identified any members of our community as being ‘wicked’. Over the last twenty years that I have served on our communities local assembly we have never identified anyone as wicked nor removed them from our community. Without doubt if we identified a predator in our midst, someone who was preying on vulnerable members we would act decisively and wisely.

Excommunication and shunning isn’t a major criticism people have of the Baha’i Faith. Nor are we renowned for widespread sexual abuse that we’ve covered up.

If I remember correctly, don't you guys have issues with people who leave and speak out against the group? Are those the ones you mentioned as preying on vulnerable members? (I think I had this conversation with Trailblazer but I can't remember the site she linked me to).

 

[Dawnofhope]

If I remember correctly, don't you guys have issues with people who leave and speak out against the group? Are those the ones you mentioned as preying on vulnerable members? (I think I had this conversation with Trailblazer but I can't remember the site she linked me to).

Like any group we’ll have people who are disaffected and leave. Some of those have started websites criticising their former faith. There’s even been one or two who has participated on this forum. However they haven’t been excommunicated and shunned, rather left of their own volition. They generally leave because we are seen as being a conservative religious community that doesn’t go far enough with embracing Western liberal ideals. Laws forbidding homosexual relationships are a major criticism. Our international governing body being male only is another.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

This may sound strange but we have never identified any members of our community as being ‘wicked’. Over the last twenty years that I have served on our communities local assembly we have never identified anyone as wicked nor removed them from our community

The Apostle Paul did so though, didn’t he? And he instructed the congregation on how to handle the situation.
But I recognize that the Bible isn’t the sole instrument of guidance that Bahai’s accept — y’all view pretty much all ‘sacred texts’ as worthy, right, Adrian? (That’s why I worded my question to you as, “How would you apply it”, not as ‘how do you...’)
But the Bible is the only Book we view as God’s Word, so we need to follow its guidance. That’s why I asked your opinion on Paul’s counsel. We really don’t see any other way. Paul provided no stipulations, excusing family members.
I noticed that you didn’t say how you would apply it....but, then, you don’t really have to. But we feel Christians .... at least, those claiming the entire Bible Canon solely as God’s Word .... should.

I’d like to bring to your attention that Paul, in 2 Corinthians, told the congregation to ‘bring the disfellowshipped man back into the fold’, so to speak, as he had exhibited repentance. So do we; many DF’d ones return, & we reinstate all of them.... quite a few each year.

Without doubt if we identified a predator in our midst, someone who was preying on vulnerable members we would act decisively and wisely.

So you’d ... disfellowship them? And inform the authorities? Yes, that would be proper. But as you said, “wisely”. Which would require not being rash In reacting to claims from just one person.
Jesus Himself reinforced the Mosaic Law’s requirement that “every matter be established at the mouth of two or three witnesses.” — Deuteronomy 19:15; Matthew 18:16. This law was intended to protect a person from false accusations. (Notice, not ‘2 or 3 hearsayers.’)

Unfortunately, this Bible-based procedure has been misused by some, even by the perpetrators themselves. Added procedures have been enacted, to stop heinous ongoing offenses.

Excommunication and shunning isn’t a major criticism people have of the Baha’i Faith.

And no reason it should be, as y’all don’t say the Bible is God’s only Word.

Nor are we renowned for widespread sexual abuse that we’ve covered up.

This always amazed me. It’s an oxymoron, of a sort. On the one hand, the JW Organization is unpopularly known for getting rid of purposeful wrongdoers, then, on the other, we’re “renowned” for allowing wrongdoing, of such an awful nature?

Something isn’t quite right with that. Do you think that, maybe, those are rare incidents, but have been blown out of proportion by the Organization’s enemies? (It seems we have quite a few enemies.) Of course, just one incident of child molestation is too many...

But I can honestly tell you that, in all my years, I’ve never been involved in a judicial matter respecting child molestation, thank goodness!
We have over 8.6 million Witnesses Earth wide....there are bound to be some who, over time, fail to stay close to Jehovah and develop a hard heart. Even Jesus....of his 12 Apostles, he got a bad one.
But, once this comes out in the open, if they refuse the spiritual help offered by the brothers...we disfellowship them.

I lived through a disfellowshiping in my own family. My first wife got DF’d. (Not for adultery the first time.) She got reinstated in about 6 mos. Then about 8 yrs. later, she was disfellowshipped again! By that time, we’d had a child. It was tough!
But I see Jehovah’s wisdom in His standards & requirements. It’s only living in this corrupt world that makes it difficult!

Eventually, after 4 years, she came back. I was glad for her! I had gotten remarried, so had she.
So I’ve had some — unwanted — experience on the OP subject.

Take care, my cousin.

 

[Dawnofhope]

The Apostle Paul did so though, didn’t he? And he instructed the congregation on how to handle the situation.

There is no doubt Paul played a pivotal role in the early development of Churches and provided wise counsel as to how to respond to many challenging behaviors and circumstances.

Moses also provided guidance to His community as they escaped captivity from the Egyptians and spent forty years in the desert as they prepared to invade and conquer the land of Canaan. Many of the laws were strict and needed to be for that period. For example when a man was caught collecting wood on the sabbath, Moses advised the man should be put to death according to the law. That would be extreme by today's standards but no compromise could be allowed in preparing the Hebrew people for the arduous mission that lay ahead.

It would be a mistake however to apply those same laws in the same manner today or even during Christ's time. The Apostles abrogated Mosaic law and were right to do so as the conditions and exigencies of that age was very different from when Moses received the law from God on Mount Sinai. Jesus had brought a New Covenant (Hebrews 8:13).

But I recognize that the Bible isn’t the sole instrument of guidance that Bahai’s accept — y’all view pretty much all ‘sacred texts’ as worthy, right, Adrian? (That’s why I worded my question to you as, “How would you apply it”, not as ‘how do you...’)

For Baha'is, Muhammad brought a New Covenant after Christ and the Twin Prophets of the Baha'i Faith brought Renewed Covenants after that. So Baha'is don't accept all texts as sacred but we do regard the Quran and Revelation brought by the Bab and Baha'u'llah as Sacred.

So the way I approach challenging behaviors within my Faith community is to turn towards the Baha'i writings for guidance. I am a Baha'i after all. Guidance based on Divine Revelations such as the Torah, Gospels and Quran were useful for the Mosaic, Christian and Islamic dispensations and much of that advice would be applicable today. Some of it clearly belongs to a bygone era.

But the Bible is the only Book we view as God’s Word, so we need to follow its guidance. That’s why I asked your opinion on Paul’s counsel. We really don’t see any other way. Paul provided no stipulations, excusing family members.
I noticed that you didn’t say how you would apply it....but, then, you don’t really have to. But we feel Christians .... at least, those claiming the entire Bible Canon solely as God’s Word .... should.

I’d like to bring to your attention that Paul, in 2 Corinthians, told the congregation to ‘bring the disfellowshipped man back into the fold’, so to speak, as he had exhibited repentance. So do we; many DF’d ones return, & we reinstate all of them.... quite a few each year.

So while I appreciate Paul and his advice nearly thousand years ago and how for you as a Christian see it ends with Christ and His Apostles, for Baha'is God has Revealed Himself further.

So you’d ... disfellowship them? And inform the authorities? Yes, that would be proper. But as you said, “wisely”. Which would require not being rash In reacting to claims from just one person.

That is correct that we would inform the appropriate authorities. We would certainly take steps to protect the community depending on the circumstances.

Jesus Himself reinforced the Mosaic Law’s requirement that “every matter be established at the mouth of two or three witnesses.” — Deuteronomy 19:15; Matthew 18:16. This law was intended to protect a person from false accusations. (Notice, not ‘2 or 3 hearsayers.’)

Unfortunately, this Bible-based procedure has been misused by some, even by the perpetrators themselves. Added procedures have been enacted, to stop heinous ongoing offenses.

Unfortunately with most cases of child abuse, the perpetrator commits his offence in private, so the only two people who are witnesses are the perpetrator and victim.

Applying Mosaic law from Deuteronomy to cases of child abuse as your community has done, appears to have empowered some of the perpetrators of sexual abuse and marginalized some of the victims.

And no reason it should be, as y’all don’t say the Bible is God’s only Word.

That's correct.

This always amazed me. It’s an oxymoron, of a sort. On the one hand, the JW Organization is unpopularly known for getting rid of purposeful wrongdoers, then, on the other, we’re “renowned” for allowing wrongdoing, of such an awful nature?

Something isn’t quite right with that. Do you think that, maybe, those are rare incidents, but have been blown out of proportion by the Organization’s enemies? (It seems we have quite a few enemies.) Of course, just one incident of child molestation is too many...

Although I'm not privy to all the facts, it would appear the JWs have failed to take the appropriate measures in some cases of childhood sexual abuse within its midst. As an institution its governing body appears unable or unwilling to accept responsibility and instead blames the victims.

But I can honestly tell you that, in all my years, I’ve never been involved in a judicial matter respecting child molestation, thank goodness!
We have over 8.6 million Witnesses Earth wide....there are bound to be some who, over time, fail to stay close to Jehovah and develop a hard heart. Even Jesus....of his 12 Apostles, he got a bad one.
But, once this comes out in the open, if they refuse the spiritual help offered by the brothers...we disfellowship them.

Anyone Baha'i or friend of the Faith involved with running, teaching or having anything to do with children's classes whatsoever must first complete a child protection workshop. Anyone who has successfully completed this course (takes 4 - 8 hours) will tell you that any suspected case of child abuse must be reported to 'both' the police and Baha'i Spiritual Assembly.

I have never had to deal with a reported case of childhood sexual abuse within my Baha'i community fortunately but it would be arrogant of me to imagine it won't happen at some stage.

I lived through a disfellowshiping in my own family. My first wife got DF’d. (Not for adultery the first time.) She got reinstated in about 6 mos. Then about 8 yrs. later, she was disfellowshipped again! By that time, we’d had a child. It was tough!
But I see Jehovah’s wisdom in His standards & requirements. It’s only living in this corrupt world that makes it difficult!

Eventually, after 4 years, she came back. I was glad for her! I had gotten remarried, so had she.
So I’ve had some — unwanted — experience on the OP subject.

Thanks for sharing your experience @Hockeycowboy . I really appreciate it.

I'm on my first marriage with two teenagers who are still at home. My wife isn't a Baha'i but she always feels welcome at Baha'i activities. Most of our community activities are open to all.

I agree there are major challenges living in a world whose moral compass is often at odds with what God asks of us.

Take care, my cousin.

You too.

 

[Samael_Khan]

This always amazed me. It’s an oxymoron, of a sort. On the one hand, the JW Organization is unpopularly known for getting rid of purposeful wrongdoers, then, on the other, we’re “renowned” for allowing wrongdoing, of such an awful nature?

Something isn’t quite right with that. Do you think that, maybe, those are rare incidents, but have been blown out of proportion by the Organization’s enemies? (It seems we have quite a few enemies.) Of course, just one incident of child molestation is too many...

In addition to @adrian009 reply, read the below:

Report into Jehovah’s Witness organisations released | Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au)

It is more that the organisation stubbornly keeps its head in the sand with regards to child molestation issues than anything else. Also its policies are incompetent regarding how to deal with the issue.

Yes, it is an oxymoron but more on the organisations part than anything else. Have you ever heard of doublespeak and doublethink?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Here is another article discussing this instance:

Excerpt:

"In their conclusions provided to the Court before the trial, they said that they do not segregate excluded or resigning members as these can always attend their religious services. They also point out that baptized Jehovah’s Witnesses who no longer actively associate with fellow believers, are not shunned.

Clarifying the relations between Jehovah’s Witnesses and disfellowshipped or disassociated family members, they say: “In the immediate household, although the ‘religious ties’ the expelled or disassociated person had with his family change, … blood ties remain. The marriage relationship and normal family affections and dealings continue.” In other words, normal family affection and association continues."

Source:
BELGIUM: The decision of the Court of Ghent against Jehovah’s Witnesses - Foref Europe

 

[Samael_Khan]

Here is another article discussing this instance:

Excerpt:

"In their conclusions provided to the Court before the trial, they said that they do not segregate excluded or resigning members as these can always attend their religious services. They also point out that baptized Jehovah’s Witnesses who no longer actively associate with fellow believers, are not shunned.

Clarifying the relations between Jehovah’s Witnesses and disfellowshipped or disassociated family members, they say: “In the immediate household, although the ‘religious ties’ the expelled or disassociated person had with his family change, … blood ties remain. The marriage relationship and normal family affections and dealings continue.” In other words, normal family affection and association continues."

Source:
BELGIUM: The decision of the Court of Ghent against Jehovah’s Witnesses - Foref Europe

This is misleading.

They say that they do segregate or exclude resigning members because they let attend the services. What is clearly excluded from this is that excluded (notice they use that word) or resigned members cannot communicate with anybody, besides the elders, who are in the faith, unless those are immediate family members. You know this. Don't mislead people.

Regarding the second point, when it mentions blood ties, that only applies to husband, wife and children who are minors. Normal family affections do not continue as a minor will be kicked out when they come of age and considering how you guys. I hope you remember the shunning video at the 2016 convention when it was shown that it is a good thing for parents to shun children who were disfellowshipped when they aren't minors. You should know this.

(14) "Shun Your Family!" 2016 Regional Convention Video - YouTube

The JW organisation's legal dept has been known to be misleading and deceptive in court. You have just shown a good example.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

This is misleading.

They say that they do segregate or exclude resigning members because they let attend the services. What is clearly excluded from this is that excluded (notice they use that word) or resigned members cannot communicate with anybody, besides the elders, who are in the faith, unless those are immediate family members. You know this. Don't mislead people.

Regarding the second point, when it mentions blood ties, that only applies to husband, wife and children who are minors. Normal family affections do not continue as a minor will be kicked out when they come of age and considering how you guys. I hope you remember the shunning video at the 2016 convention when it was shown that it is a good thing for parents to shun children who were disfellowshipped when they aren't minors. You should know this.

(14) "Shun Your Family!" 2016 Regional Convention Video - YouTube

The JW organisation's legal dept has been known to be misleading and deceptive in court. You have just shown a good example.

It was the article's writer who said it...I'm just reporting the news.
"Misleading"?
I think readers here have seen your trail of misleading comments, like the '10 year olds getting disfellowshipped' one.

So much misplaced anger you have.