Searching for truth

[nPeace]

I know only “Confederate States of America.” (They’re defunct, now) lol.

I found “Climate-Smart Agriculture.”

Idk.

I just now read some of
courageousignition’s previous posts

I haven't got a clue.

“Disassociated”, eh?
He knows where to go.

I think he knows where he wants to go

Hope he comes back.

If he wants to.

 

[nPeace]

Ah, thanks. That makes sense. Child sexual abuse. CSA.

Ah. Thanks.
There goes the hospitals, schools, police stations...
@Hockeycowboy as far as you know, does JWs "have a problem" with child sexual abuse?
What does "have a problem with" mean exactly, do you think?

 

[Windwalker]

Ah. Thanks.
There goes the hospitals, schools, police stations...
@Hockeycowboy as far as you know, does JWs "have a problem" with child sexual abuse?
What does "have a problem with" mean exactly, do you think?

What I meant by have a problem with it, was that there was not only the reports of it happening, but that it was being covered up by leadership. That was what that investigative documentary was about that I linked to:

The Witnesses​

​

Episode 1 "After receiving leaked documents Reporter Trey Bundy sets out to expose a cover up of child sexual abuse among the Jehovah’s Witnesses."​

​

Episode 2 "Trey’s investigation leads him to a survivor whose own family helped hide her abuse."​

 

[Hockeycowboy]

@Hockeycowboy as far as you know, does JWs "have a problem" with child sexual abuse?
What does "have a problem with" mean exactly, do you think?

No.

Have there been corrupt people who hid what they were & became JW’s? Or even became corrupt after being baptized? Certainly.

There were Israelites who became wicked.

However, per the Apostle Paul’s instructions @ 1 Corinthians 5, we disfellowship those who are wicked & deviant.

But yet, we’re attacked for doing that. For keeping our organization clean.

Satan has always twisted the truth & used outright lies to attack Jehovah’s worshippers. John 8:44

It’s always been Jehovah’s enemies who ‘have the problem.’
Hopefully they’ll change.

 

[Audie]

No.

Have there been corrupt people who hid what they were & became JW’s? Or even became corrupt after being baptized? Certainly.

There were Israelites who became wicked.

However, per the Apostle Paul’s instructions @ 1 Corinthians 5, we disfellowship those who are wicked & deviant.

But yet, we’re attacked for doing that. For keeping our organization clean.

Satan has always twisted the truth & used outright lies to attack Jehovah’s worshippers. John 8:44

It’s always been Jehovah’s enemies who ‘have the problem.’
Hopefully they’ll change.

Hiding is now keeping clean.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Hope your day will be a pleasant one, @Audie .

 

[Audie]

Hope your day will be a pleasant one, @Audie .

As if.

Anyway it's night here.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I'm looking for a religion that teaches only from the bible. If anyone knows of anything, it would be much appreciated.

Welcome to the forum. Which Bible? The Christian one or the Jewish one, OT or NT?
If you are really searching for truth, then you should not limit your search just one book.
However, if you study Bible critically, then you would come to know that the truth is somewhere else.

I just dissasociated as a Jehovahs witness. The organization has a problem with CSA and the watchtower has many false teachings. So I left.

That means you do not want teachings from Bible.

 

[Viker]

I'm looking for a religion that teaches only from the bible. If anyone knows of anything, it would be much appreciated.

Try reading the Bible from start to finish. Pay no attention to any outside interpretation. Take a lot of notes. Underline a lot of passages. Refer to your studies and make a summary. Then decide for yourself if any known religion adds up to your summary or conclusion. That one thing that best matches will be the fruit of your own toil.

 

[zacariah88]

Hello and welcome.

 

[nPeace]

What I meant by have a problem with it, was that there was not only the reports of it happening, but that it was being covered up by leadership. That was what that investigative documentary was about that I linked to:

The Witnesses​

​

Episode 1 "After receiving leaked documents Reporter Trey Bundy sets out to expose a cover up of child sexual abuse among the Jehovah’s Witnesses."​

​

Episode 2 "Trey’s investigation leads him to a survivor whose own family helped hide her abuse."​

I certainly would not consider allegations of CSA that happened more than 25 years ago, to be "JWs having a problem with...".

As for the accusations of "covering up", I think that is a case of one's perspective, since, not everyone agrees that there was a cover up.
There are two sides to a story, but most people grab the sensational reports. Details don't matter.
Many persons have refered to "the policies" or "the way the JWs handle cases, based on their understanding of the Bible".

Some media and courts have reported that Jehovah's Witnesses employ organizational policies, which the group says are Bible-based that make the reporting of sexual abuse difficult for members.

According to the organization, members are told they have every right to report crimes to secular authorities, and that it is a separate matter to reporting sins to congregation elders.

In 2002, Jehovah's Witnesses' Office of Public Information published its policy for elders to report allegations of child abuse to the authorities where required by law, even if there was only one witness

Back in the early 1900s what was the law on CSA? I assume quite different from today.
The Church has to make decisions, like everyone else, on how to handle matters, especially when there is no stated governmental law... which of course JWs try to abide by, where possible. Romans 13:1-5

The Society maintains that this two-witness policy is applied solely to congregational discipline and has no bearing on whether a crime is reported to the authorities in countries where this is mandatory.​

Another reason I can say that CSA is not a problem JWs have, is that it's very rare, and actually by far, not anywhere near unrepentant sexually immortality, for which scores are disfellowshiped, each year.
There is also disassociation, which some choose, on occasion.

We have to remember that sexual predators would do anything to fulfill their perversion, so as @Hockeycowboy said, some do hid what they are and became JW’s.
We see that played out even today, in Russia, and other parts of the world. It happens, and is not new.

So, I would not say JWs have a problem with any of those things, but rather, people who don't live by Bible standards have the problem.

 

[Windwalker]

I certainly would not consider allegations of CSA that happened more than 25 years ago, to be "JWs having a problem with...".

This is not an isolated case. Rather this documentary looks at a systemic problem with the way the JW organization handles reports of CSA. The Wiki article you quoted from very directly outlines why this is a problem.

I do agree that sexual predators can find their way into any organization. But what makes it a problem is that if that organization's policies and practices make it easier for them to get away with what they are doing. You see the same problem with the Catholic church and its policies on handling its pedophile priests. Its policies make it a safer place for them to continue what they are doing.

So from the Wiki article you cited, let me highlight some things I just read that reinforce this:

Various individuals, courts and the media around the world have raised concerns about the manner in which cases of child sexual abuse are handled when they occur in congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses.[1] An independent 2009 study in Norway was critical of how Jehovah's Witnesses dealt with cases of child sexual abuse but stated there is no indication that the rate of sexual abuse among Jehovah's Witnesses is higher than found in general society...​

​

in 2015, it was disclosed that the Australia Branch of Jehovah's Witnesses had records of 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse, relating to more than 1,800 victims since 1950, none of which were reported to police by the group.[9]​

​

Some media and courts have reported that Jehovah's Witnesses employ organizational policies, which the group says are Bible-based,[7] that make the reporting of sexual abuse difficult for members.[10][11][12][13][14] Some victims of sexual abuse have said they were ordered by local elders to maintain silence to avoid embarrassment to both the accused and the organization.​

​

In 2016 a UK judge upheld a ruling against the Jehovah's Witnesses for failing to protect a victim of child sexual abuse, and the supreme court rejected an attempt by the Watch Tower Society to block a Charity Commission inquiry into how the organisation's charity handles allegations of abuse. This was the culmination of two years of legal proceedings in five different courts and tribunals. The commission's attorney said "WTBTS has at every stage relentlessly challenged the legal basis and scope of the Charity Commission's inquiry".[1]​

​

The UK Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse was critical of Jehovah's Witnesses' policy that there must be two witnesses to cases of abuse before elders would consider the allegation. IICSA maintained the policy overlooks the fact that "child sexual abuse is most often perpetrated in the absence of witnesses".[21]​

​

And so forth. So yes, I would say that is a problem. It's a systemic problem that has the effect of not protecting victims and not holding the predators accountable, to save face, to "follow the Bible" or whatever reason they offer. As I said, if it's harder to hold predators accountable, that's where they will end up find safe havens.

​

As for the accusations of "covering up", I think that is a case of one's perspective, since, not everyone agrees that there was a cover up.

Not according to all that I just quoted above. It is the perspective of multiple courts in multiple countries on multiple occasions. Hence, it is a systemic problem.

So, I would not say JWs have a problem with any of those things, but rather, people who don't live by Bible standards have the problem.

It is the people who are the predators, but if the system in effect ends up protecting them, which has been demonstrated in many instances, that is a problem with the organization, yes.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Some media and courts have reported that Jehovah's Witnesses employ organizational policies, which the group says are Bible-based,

The UK Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse was critical of Jehovah's Witnesses' policy that there must be two witnesses to cases of abuse before elders would consider the allegation.

….to "follow the Bible" or whatever reason they offer.

Deuteronomy 19:15;
Deuteronomy 17:6.

Jesus saw the value in that law….. Matthew 18:16;
John 8:17,18.

So did Paul….
2 Corinthians 13:1;
1 Timothy 5:19.

So yes, the source of the policy is the Bible.

However changes have been implemented. The “two-witness” rule, while useful in most cases, is ineffective in cases involving the young who can’t yet express themselves.

Who would’ve ever thought that the need would arise to protect children from sexual deviants?! Inflicting physical and emotional abuse on anyone is bad enough, but sexual abuse on young children?!!

It’s a sick world.

1 John 5:19 - Concluding Remarks

We know that we are of God, and that the whole world is under the power of the evil one.

biblehub.com

 

[nPeace]

This is not an isolated case. Rather this documentary looks at a systemic problem with the way the JW organization handles reports of CSA. The Wiki article you quoted from very directly outlines why this is a problem.

the way the JW organization handles reports of CSA

What I said... Many persons have refered to "the policies" or "the way the JWs handle cases, based on their understanding of the Bible".

I do agree that sexual predators can find their way into any organization. But what makes it a problem is that if that organization's policies and practices make it easier for them to get away with what they are doing.

How so? Please explain.

You see the same problem with the Catholic church and its policies on handling its pedophile priests. Its policies make it a safer place for them to continue what they are doing.

By removing the alleged perpetrator? How is that similar to the Catholic church? Please explain.

So from the Wiki article you cited, let me highlight some things I just read that reinforce this:

Various individuals, courts and the media around the world have raised concerns about the manner in which cases of child sexual abuse are handled when they occur in congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses.[1] An independent 2009 study in Norway was critical of how Jehovah's Witnesses dealt with cases of child sexual abuse but stated there is no indication that the rate of sexual abuse among Jehovah's Witnesses is higher than found in general society...​

​

in 2015, it was disclosed that the Australia Branch of Jehovah's Witnesses had records of 1,006 alleged perpetrators of child sexual abuse, relating to more than 1,800 victims since 1950, none of which were reported to police by the group.[9]​

​

Some media and courts have reported that Jehovah's Witnesses employ organizational policies, which the group says are Bible-based,[7] that make the reporting of sexual abuse difficult for members.[10][11][12][13][14] Some victims of sexual abuse have said they were ordered by local elders to maintain silence to avoid embarrassment to both the accused and the organization.​

​

In 2016 a UK judge upheld a ruling against the Jehovah's Witnesses for failing to protect a victim of child sexual abuse, and the supreme court rejected an attempt by the Watch Tower Society to block a Charity Commission inquiry into how the organisation's charity handles allegations of abuse. This was the culmination of two years of legal proceedings in five different courts and tribunals. The commission's attorney said "WTBTS has at every stage relentlessly challenged the legal basis and scope of the Charity Commission's inquiry".[1]​

​

The UK Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse was critical of Jehovah's Witnesses' policy that there must be two witnesses to cases of abuse before elders would consider the allegation. IICSA maintained the policy overlooks the fact that "child sexual abuse is most often perpetrated in the absence of witnesses".[21]​

​

And so forth. So yes, I would say that is a problem. It's a systemic problem that has the effect of not protecting victims and not holding the predators accountable, to save face, to "follow the Bible" or whatever reason they offer. As I said, if it's harder to hold predators accountable, that's where they will end up find safe havens.

Yes, I read the reports.
Better yet, I watched the entire court proceedings, and heard the defense.
I don't see how it can be fair to blame JWs for the policies of this world's system.
As one brother said, 'You make reporting mandatory. You make it easier for JWs".

Not according to all that I just quoted above. It is the perspective of multiple courts in multiple countries on multiple occasions. Hence, it is a systemic problem.

Yes, according to all, you quoted, and did not quote. It's not a problem for JWs. They helped us out, you see.
That was the conclusion reach by the GB member that took the stand during the final proceedings.

In 2002, Jehovah's Witnesses' Office of Public Information published its policy for elders to report allegations of child abuse to the authorities where required by law, even if there was only one witness.​

So, no. It's not a problem for JWs.

It is the people who are the predators, but if the system in effect ends up protecting them, which has been demonstrated in many instances, that is a problem with the organization, yes.

JWs have not protected child sexually predators.
There are no facts supporting those allegations.

 

[Windwalker]

Deuteronomy 19:15;
Deuteronomy 17:6.

First, in CSA there are never, or extremely rarely any witnesses at all, other than the victim. So you've just given the predator carte blanche to rape any child he can isolate away from any witnesses. Does this sound like a proper application of the Law of Moses to you???

Secondly, we don't live under the Mosaic law. We live under American law, or the laws of whichever country someone finds themselves within. The OT law was for those living under the covenant, not for Christians today. We also live in a day and age with a great deal more insights into criminality, and we don't put everyone to death for things like lipping off to one's parents, and such.

Jesus saw the value in that law….. Matthew 18:16;
John 8:17,18.

Do you honestly believe that Jesus would have approved of applying what he said literally to a child who reported an adult raped them??? "I'm sorry little Brenda, unless you have another witness that your uncle touched you inappropriately, we're not going to take you seriously and protect you."

So did Paul….
2 Corinthians 13:1;
1 Timothy 5:19.

Again, do you think this applies to not listening to a child who said an adult raped them when there were no witnesses? How in the hell is that appropriate? Is the the spirit of the law? Is that it's intended application? "As long I there are no witnesses, I can get away with it."

That does not work in law at all. Nor does it work or is appropriate when someone accuses someone of sexual assault. Take Donald Trump being found guilty of raping that woman. Sorry, jury. It doesn't matter what the actual evidence was, there were no witnesses, so let the man go?

So yes, the source of the policy is the Bible.

It's a badly interpreted reading of the Bible that is the source of a bad policy that creates a shield for predators. Would Jesus really ignore a child who came to him accusing an adult of raping them because they didn't have 2 or 3 witnesses? Do you really believe that is Jesus' nature to not attempt to rescue and protect that child? The law comes before the victim?

However changes have been implemented. The “two-witness” rule, while useful in most cases, is ineffective in cases involving the young who can’t yet express themselves.

Well, hallelujah! The problem was created by a literal legalist reading of the Bible, and children got hurt. Point made.