Ah. That's good. If a government does not offer subsidies, what is the issue? JWs would not get subsidies in that country, amd would still function.
So, i am not seeing the issue.
There are prisons in every country.
JWs are in some of them. Not all, and certainly not in many countries... and for what - not child abuse, and child neglect, but having literature the state has labelled "Extremist"; for being conscientious objectors - refusing to take up military arms, and for being politically neutral.
JWs in those lands still function.
So what really id the issue.
If the government decides to take our socks because we don't vote... so what.
We have the right to object to infringements of our religious freedom.
Don't we?
This shunning, I've read can happen with children as young as 15.
As a parent, I would try to resolve any issues between you and your sibling that is causing non-communication. Would not do anything to encourage it.
I think the focus here, for the case in Norway is the shunning of minors under 18 by the community.
I do feel concern for minors who are ostracized by their community for "immoral" behavior. What you, I and the Elders of your community feels is immoral behavior may differ.
No minor needs to be made to feel rejected by their community IMO. Except maybe in extremely rare cases which would fall under the jurisdiction of civil laws anyway.
Hard for me not to feel a minor is not being abused by this kind of behavior.
I was kicked out as a minor. Wasn't even for religious reasons. I was the step-child in the family and I suppose they tolerated me as long as they could.
So the age of responsibility can be as young as 15? So this shunning or even kicking out of the family could potentially happen to minors. Yes, they are not ruling on actual occurrences of this, they are ruling on the potential of what can happen to minors with this religious doctrine in place.
I'd suspect changing the doctrine to limit shunning to adults of legal age, 18+ would quell Norway's concerns.
Do you think change being required by the government is reasonable?
The government... In fact, no one who respects "Religious Freedom" will ask any religion to change a belief which that group considers a command from God... if it is not a crime.
This is showing blatant disregard for the religion, and their God. It's a show of arrogance, and I think it's a show of power, where "we apply pressure, and see the result."
That way, they know what resistance to expect, when they set their plan in motion - rolling in the big guns.
No. That's not how Jehovah's organization works. All agree with the Bible.
This is not the churches you are accustomed to, that create their own doctrines and change them if ordered to.
The apostle of Jesus did not say, when commanded to stop preaching, "Okay. We will stop preaching, and find something else to do." What?
Sounds like you want JWs to be atheists.
(Acts 5:27-29) 27 So they brought them and stood them before the Sanhedrin. Then the high priest questioned them 28 and said: “We strictly ordered you not to keep teaching on the basis of this name, and yet look! you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you are determined to bring the blood of this man upon us.” 29 In answer Peter and the other apostles said: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.
It would not matter if they threatened to throw them to the lions, or burn them at the stake.
They don't do those things now, but nothing else has changed. The aim is the same. "Stop this worhip. Obey us. Forget God." Basically.
Communism may not be written all over the place, but discerning ones can see beneath the hood.
It shouldn't be hard to see, if one is paying attention though... imo.
We give authority over our children to others to allow the community to make feel unaccepted. Nope.
Maybe they have good intentions, maybe they don't. I don't have that much trust. Don't care if it is religious or governmental authority. I don't think anyone is going to have the same concern for their well being as I do.
I'll accept it is a trend that governments distrust religious authority. I don't think your Elders should have that kind of authority over minors. Of course, I'm biased against any kind of authority over my kids. Allowing the potential for the shunning of minors by any religious authority I suspect is going to be a hard sell in any secular society.
I doubt you can walk into any church and set the rules.
So why would you expect a minor who wants to be baptized, to tell the elders they can't decide anything.
Am I understanding you correctly, here?
Yes, governments makes laws which limit the behavior which religious communities can inflict on others, including minors.
The concern is the well being of the child, though you probably wouldn't agree. It's not done to be evil or against God.
If that is the case, then why are not all governments doing that worldwide?
Only Norway cares about minors?
Only Russians care about "extremists literature"?
Or are you missing something?
JW's are in 232 lands. The same policies, teachings - same everything, exists in all those lands.
I think the JW community would simply need to show their doctrine could not adversely affect the well being of minors.
If they did that and still were not allowed to register as a religious community, then I'd agree the government of Norway had it out for JW.
Maybe they do. Don't have a great deal of trust in government authority either but we all have to make compromises with civil authority.
How else can they show that?
If a woman said you harassed her in the park (maybe touched her buttocks), and other women who has it in for you said the same thing, how can you prove you didn't.
Sure, others can step forward and say, "He has never done that to us, and he doesn't do that", but it's their word against yours.
If ex-JWs spread misinformation, we can't stop that.
Has there been any trial regarding this? I don't know. I haven't checked.
Have they been questioning children, or adults? I don't know.
Or have they been looking into our publications, and deciding what they think should change? Hmm. Maybe they learned something from Russia.
You seem also to not approve the shunning of minors by the religious community. If this is the complaint by Norway, you seem to be in agreement with them.
I am in full agreement with the scriptures, and when anyone makes the choice to become one of JWs, they do so willingly and knowing what's involve.
The two elders questioning the candidate are not persons who just walked off the street into a Kingdom Hall. they are not going to allow any person - especially a minor to get in that water, unless that person can demonstrate that they are doing this because they want to... without force or coercion.
So when one get's baptized, but then wants to live by the world's standards, and not the Bible's standards - Jehovah's standards, they do not belong in the congregation... no matter what age. 1 Corinthians 5
Of course if they change their mind again, we gladly welcome them.
Ah. That's good. If a government does not offer subsidies, what is the issue? JWs would not get subsidies in that country, amd would still function.
So, i am not seeing the issue.
Minors seldom know what they really want or understand the full consequences of their choices. Even 18 is a bit young IMO, but it is generally accept that by that age, for better of worse they can make decisions for themselves.
The government... In fact, no one who respects "Religious Freedom" will ask any religion to change a belief which that group considers a command from God... if it is not a crime.
This is showing blatant disregard for the religion, and their God. It's a show of arrogance, and I think it's a show of power, where "we apply pressure, and see the result."
That way, they know what resistance to expect, when they set their plan in motion - rolling in the big guns.
No. That's not how Jehovah's organization works. All agree with the Bible.
This is not the churches you are accustomed to, that create their own doctrines and change them if ordered to.
The apostle of Jesus did not say, when commanded to stop preaching, "Okay. We will stop preaching, and find something else to do." What?
Sounds like you want JWs to be atheists.
(Acts 5:27-29) 27 So they brought them and stood them before the Sanhedrin. Then the high priest questioned them 28 and said: “We strictly ordered you not to keep teaching on the basis of this name, and yet look! you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you are determined to bring the blood of this man upon us.” 29 In answer Peter and the other apostles said: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men.
It would not matter if they threatened to throw them to the lions, or burn them at the stake.
They don't do those things now, but nothing else has changed. The aim is the same. "Stop this worhip. Obey us. Forget God." Basically.
Communism may not be written all over the place, but discerning ones can see beneath the hood.
It shouldn't be hard to see, if one is paying attention though... imo.
No one is being stopped, in Norway, from worshiping. In though perhaps in other countries.
However yes, everyone is equally restricted by civic laws.
In a secular government there is no requirement to uphold any religious laws.
Arguments from religious authority doesn't have any weight in a secular government.
I doubt you can walk into any church and set the rules.
Me, no but governments commonly do. They set limits on acceptable behavior which sometimes makes certain religious behavior illegal.
Nothing new about that.
So why would you expect a minor who wants to be baptized, to tell the elders they can't decide anything.
Am I understanding you correctly, here?
It's not the minor. Minors could even agree with the behavior. It's the governments determining what behavior is acceptable.
If that is the case, then why are not all governments doing that worldwide?
Only Norway cares about minors?
Only Russians care about "extremists literature"?
Or are you missing something?
JW's are in 232 lands. The same policies, teachings - same everything, exists in all those lands.
Governments have stepped in restricting religious behavior. Isn't this the point of your OP. That governments around the world are failing to recognize God's authority?
I thought I was agreeing with you. I just don't see it as a sinister plan of Satan's.
Or maybe I misunderstood and it is only an isolated event it Norway that concerns you.
I bwlieve they have.
How else can they show that?
If a woman said you harassed her in the park (maybe touched her buttocks), and other women who has it in for you said the same thing, how can you prove you didn't.
Sure, others can step forward and say, "He has never done that to us, and he doesn't do that", but it's their word against yours.
If ex-JWs spread misinformation, we can't stop that.
Has there been any trial regarding this? I don't know. I haven't checked.
Have they been questioning children, or adults? I don't know.
Or have they been looking into our publications, and deciding what they think should change? Hmm. Maybe they learned something from Russia.
So you also have a issue with Russian? So not isolated to Norway. Just trying to understand your point, the world governments are against God or they are not.
Again, from what I've read from the Norway complaint, it is based on JW publications. Their argument is they shouldn't wait until they've discovered children harmed by this behavior.
That's their argument.
I was pointing out that I don't myself accept religious authority, so my view is going to be biased towards preventing any harm to minors. Same bias when it comes to blood transfusions. So probably no common ground there.
Again, the issue per Norway is the harm that could be caused to minors by the practice of shunning.
Do you think it is ok shun minors purely for religious reasons.
If yes, then we disagree. If no, then on this point we are in agreement.
I am in full agreement with the scriptures, and when anyone makes the choice to become one of JWs, they do so willingly and knowing what's involve.
The two elders questioning the candidate are not persons who just walked off the street into a Kingdom Hall. they are not going to allow any person - especially a minor to get in that water, unless that person can demonstrate that they are doing this because they want to... without force or coercion.
So when one get's baptized, but then wants to live by the world's standards, and not the Bible's standards - Jehovah's standards, they do not belong in the congregation... no matter what age. 1 Corinthians 5
Of course if they change their mind again, we gladly welcome them.
So, you find it reasonable to for the community to shun minors purely for religious reasons?
Yes or no?
That is the issue in Norway. If you see this as reasonable, ok fine. You disagree with Norway forcing this issue.
For reasons already stated, I'm ok with it.
And that is immoral and abusive. Such religions should be outlawed that ostracizes people for merely leaving the faith. I hope all countries make such religions criminally liable for such actions.
I don't have an issue with the UK government. UK Income Tax does not fund JWs. (Although organisations can claim tax relief if they gain charitable status).
I suppose that means that the JWs all over the world shun minors when considered appropriate.
But of course the family of the minor would not be able to do that completely without the law coming down on them would they.
Do you think that would be persecution and that what Norway is doing is persecution for no good reason except that the religion is Jehovah's Witnesses?
"The results of the investigation was a complete condemnation regarding the policies of Jehovah’s Witnesses with regard to protecting children. Over the last twenty years Jehovah’s Witnesses spokesman have stated numerous times that they “abhor” child abuse. Apparently this is now proven to be a complete lie. In fact they not only condone child molestation but openly encourage the molestations by creating a “pedophile paradise” to protect deviants by requiring “two eye-witnesses to the actual violation of a child. Victims are routinely expelled for trying to report or even warn others of the crimes against children committed and protected by elders in the congregations."
Minors seldom know what they really want or understand the full consequences of their choices. Even 18 is a bit young IMO, but it is generally accept that by that age, for better of worse they can make decisions for themselves.
Well, you did say you were biased in that regard, so that would explain why you have that opinion regardless of what you are shown.
Millions of minors were baptized as JWs, and they are still JWs as adults, and would tell you, they knew what they were doing, and have no regrets.
I could arrange for you to talk to some, but I know that wouldn't change any biased opinion.
Hopefully, it does help you to think twice about using 0.1% minors who chose to do what they want, contrary to keeping a vow they made, to make a case against 99.9% minors being able to make informed choices regarding faith,
Would you also admit to having a bias against religion, or religious groups?
No. Forcing minor to undergo humiliating treatment.
If you are able to prove it was life-saving treatment, you would have a case.
However, since you can't, I take it you are just offering another biased opinion.
Doctor defends 'bloodless surgery' for babies
Dr. Shander, interviewed yesterday in the wake of a Quebec court decision that ordered transfusions for premature twins despite objections from their Jehovah's Witnesses parents, said that even tiny babies can be treated safely with techniques commonly called bloodless surgery, or more correctly, blood conservation.
...and there are thousands of similar cases.
Thanks to the overseers of JWs, they are able to rescue minors from the clutches of governmental officials who are just as ignorant as people who would rather not be informed against their opinions... who care nothing about Religious Freedom of certain groups... or their dignity.
No one is being stopped, in Norway, from worshiping. In though perhaps in other countries.
However yes, everyone is equally restricted by civic laws.
In a secular government there is no requirement to uphold any religious laws.
Arguments from religious authority doesn't have any weight in a secular government.
Evidently, you don't understand what I said.
You apply the brakes of a vehicle, in order to get it to stop.
If you never apply the brakes, but keep your foot on the gas pedal, the vehicle keeps right on going.
The actions of the government is to apply pressure to cause pure worship to cease.
Have I not explained this.
Many may be unaware, but this is quite a common pattern that has been around for centuries, where authorities criminalize a religious practice, in order to presure persons to stop their worship.
Hitler, Stalin, and others tried. They are all dead, and the very practices they were pressuring God's people to do, or not do, hasn't changed.
For one thing, JWs are still politically neutral. For another, they still preach.
All those rulers are dead, and the very things they were concerned about have not changed for God's people.
Did they think any kind of pressure could stop God's people from carrying out sacred servive as outlined by their God? That would be the joke of the season.
In fact, it is a joke. (Psalm 2:4) The One enthroned in the heavens will laugh; Jehovah will scoff at them.
To set the sovereign one laughing like that, it has to be a joke.
Why, even in prison, they preached.
Is there a lesson here?
Yes. In all these cases, there is one common pattern.
At that time the high officials and the satraps were seeking to find some grounds for accusation against Daniel respecting matters of state, but they could find no grounds for accusation or anything corrupt, for he was trustworthy and no negligence or corruption could be found in him. These men then said: “We will find in this Daniel no grounds for accusation at all, unless we find it against him in the law of his God.”
(Daniel 6:4-5)
Me, no but governments commonly do. They set limits on acceptable behavior which sometimes makes certain religious behavior illegal.
Nothing new about that.
Did I misunderstand you?
Were you not saying that elders should not have the authority to expel minors from the congregation?
The government can do what it likes, because it has been allowed that authority. John 19:11
However, the authority in the Christian congregation comes from God.
So while the government exercises its authority, it is still subordinate to God's authority.
Meaning that while they do what they want, “We must obey God as ruler rather than men. (Acts 5:29)
Respectfully, we will try to help the governmental authorities understand the situation.
(Daniel 3:13-18) 13 Then Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, in a furious rage, ordered Shaʹdrach, Meʹshach, and A·bedʹne·go to be brought in.... “Is it really true, Shaʹdrach, Meʹshach, and A·bedʹne·go, that you are not serving my gods and that you refuse to worship the image of gold that I have set up? 15 ... if you are ready to fall down and worship the image that I have made, fine. But if you refuse to worship, you will immediately be thrown into the burning fiery furnace. And who is the god who can rescue you out of my hands?” 16 Shaʹdrach, Meʹshach, and A·bedʹne·go answered the king: “O Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter.17If it must be, our God whom we serve is able to rescue us from the burning fiery furnace, O king, and to rescue us from your hand. 18But even if he does not, let it be known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold that you have set up.”
It's shunning minors today. It will be something else tomorrow.
I didn't expound on it, but the Bible refers to a coming great tribulation, and JWs have been mentioning its nearness.
We expect it to begin shortly.
How it will start is interesting, but we do know that it will result in the destruction of all false religion. Revelation 17:15-18
Am I saying JWs are in that category? Not at all.
However, we won't be off the radar... as is actually evident.
I know the true religion won't be destroyed though. God's people will be rescued.
Governments have stepped in restricting religious behavior. Isn't this the point of your OP. That governments around the world are failing to recognize God's authority?
That was not the point of the OP. No.
The point of the OP, is to clear up misunderstandings, and allow persons to express their anger, and address those. In your case, address your concerns and skepticism.
The OP's title, includes government role - whether good or bad. It does not need to be restricted to one thing. ...but yes it does include government's role in Satan's mission.
I thought I was agreeing with you. I just don't see it as a sinister plan of Satan's.
Or maybe I misunderstood and it is only an isolated event it Norway that concerns you.
So you also have a issue with Russian? So not isolated to Norway. Just trying to understand your point, the world governments are against God or they are not.
The world governments are going to be against God.
When will that happen exactly? I can't say... other than soon. For the most part, they are against God though... not necessarily in a deliberately direct way... although at heart they are... if you understood anything I said.
Again, from what I've read from the Norway complaint, it is based on JW publications. Their argument is they shouldn't wait until they've discovered children harmed by this behavior.
That's their argument.
I was pointing out that I don't myself accept religious authority, so my view is going to be biased towards preventing any harm to minors. Same bias when it comes to blood transfusions. So probably no common ground there.
Again, the issue per Norway is the harm that could be caused to minors by the practice of shunning.
Do you think it is ok shun minors purely for religious reasons.
If yes, then we disagree. If no, then on this point we are in agreement.
The "purely for religious reasons" part got me.
If you are asking if I think it is okay to shun minors - who while a part of the Christian congregation, made a vow to obey God, based on God's, word - the Bible, but then unrepentantly breaks that vow, and those laws, thus resulting in their being removed from the Christian congregation.... Yes.
I know that's a mouthful, but one has to be careful that they are not answering a question with a different interpretation than one thinks.
That is the issue in Norway. If you see this as reasonable, ok fine. You disagree with Norway forcing this issue.
For reasons already stated, I'm ok with it.
And that is immoral and abusive. Such religions should be outlawed that ostracizes people for merely leaving the faith. I hope all countries make such religions criminally liable for such actions.
I don't have an issue with the UK government. UK Income Tax does not fund JWs. (Although organisations can claim tax relief if they gain charitable status).
"State subsidies"? So this means religious organisations getting funding through the public purse? The general public pay taxes to the state and some of that goes to religious organisations. Norway has a population of 5,400,000. Should the working adults of this population in effect make payments to the 12,000 Norwegians who identify as JW? Why or why not? Personally I believe no religious organisation should receive state subsidies.
A Church and its administrators may be tax exempt, but if you are one of the flocks who still has to work for a living, when not at church, you will pay taxes. Your religion should not be used as an excuse for the state to rip you off.
You should have some say where your tax money will go. If not, you should be exempt from state taxes like the Church, so the state has no influence on your religion; pro or con, via taxation without representation. This is what the English Monarchy was doing to the Colonists, who decided to rebel and form a new country. They wanted the tax revenue but they did not wish to share power.
True.
Relatives would come under scrutiny.
However, I am looking through the lens of outsiders, and here is what I see.
Child gets ridiculed by teacher, and ostracized and treated badly - even bullied, because the child does not take part in holidays, such as Christmas and Birthday celebrations, or school activities.
Government has not looked into that. Nor have they targeted the religion with the claim that they are depriving the child of "normal life" or socializing.
Maybe that's on their "todo" list.
Child is shunned by relatives, while at home, and being cared for physically and spiritually.
Government targets the religion, as the cause of the family not interacting with a member (minor) in the family... claiming child abuse.
I guess the child must have been locked in its room and told not to come out, or given cat food.
How many families have members (minor) who aren't treated as part of the family? Millions.
The parent plays the role in teaching the child to understand these things.
Do you think that would be persecution and that what Norway is doing is persecution for no good reason except that the religion is Jehovah's Witnesses?
I think I covered that... I though, quite nicely.
The governmental authorities, for centuries have been playing a role, in a script that has been written by a director.
Is this not something all Christians would know?
I refered to Daniel; Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, Jesus' apostles, and Jesus himself.
I referred to Daniel 6:4-5 At that time the high officials and the satraps were seeking to find some grounds for accusation against Daniel respecting matters of state, but they could find no grounds for accusation or anything corrupt, for he was trustworthy and no negligence or corruption could be found in him. These men then said: “We will find in this Daniel no grounds for accusation at all, unless we find it against him in the law of his God.”
Consider Psalms 2
Of course I do not expect Brian to say, "Oh yeah", since Brian thinks that JWs are false worshippers and directed by the demons.
I think you will have to show me where they are wrong. I'm opened to that.
What are your thoughts on 1 Corinthians 5:11, for example?
"The results of the investigation was a complete condemnation regarding the policies of Jehovah’s Witnesses with regard to protecting children. Over the last twenty years Jehovah’s Witnesses spokesman have stated numerous times that they “abhor” child abuse. Apparently this is now proven to be a complete lie. In fact they not only condone child molestation but openly encourage the molestations by creating a “pedophile paradise” to protect deviants by requiring “two eye-witnesses to the actual violation of a child. Victims are routinely expelled for trying to report or even warn others of the crimes against children committed and protected by elders in the congregations."
It should be 2 witnesses that say the person was involved in the same type of offence. It should not be 2 witnesses to the one particular offense.
Or if it is going to be 2 witnesses to the one offense, one of those witnesses should be the victim.
But yes I have for many years heard of the sexual abuse inside the JW religion and it's protection to a much higher degree than other Christian Churches who have responded positively to those accusations about their own group and who want to protect the children in their care more than the people involved in the crimes.
True.
Relatives would come under scrutiny.
However, I am looking through the lens of outsiders, and here is what I see.
Child gets ridiculed by teacher, and ostracized and treated badly - even bullied, because the child does not take part in holidays, such as Christmas and Birthday celebrations, or school activities.
Government has not looked into that. Nor have they targeted the religion with the claim that they are depriving the child of "normal life" or socializing.
Maybe that's on their "todo" list.
Child is shunned by relatives, while at home, and being cared for physically and spiritually.
Government targets the religion, as the cause of the family not interacting with a member (minor) in the family... claiming child abuse.
I guess the child must have been locked in its room and told not to come out, or given cat food.
How many families have members (minor) who aren't treated as part of the family? Millions.
The parent plays the role in teaching the child to understand these things.
So JWs see shunning of minors in a family as the same as normal discipline.
And if the shunning is because the child does not believe the teachings of the Watch Tower any more? Should a child be disciplined for that?
I think I covered that... I though, quite nicely.
The governmental authorities, for centuries have been playing a role, in a script that has been written by a director.
Is this not something all Christians would know?
I refered to Daniel; Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, Jesus' apostles, and Jesus himself.
I referred to Daniel 6:4-5 At that time the high officials and the satraps were seeking to find some grounds for accusation against Daniel respecting matters of state, but they could find no grounds for accusation or anything corrupt, for he was trustworthy and no negligence or corruption could be found in him. These men then said: “We will find in this Daniel no grounds for accusation at all, unless we find it against him in the law of his God.”
Consider Psalms 2
Of course I do not expect Brian to say, "Oh yeah", since Brian thinks that JWs are false worshippers and directed by the demons.
I think you will have to show me where they are wrong. I'm opened to that.
What are your thoughts on 1 Corinthians 5:11, for example?
1Cor 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.
I would say that we all fall under those categories at times and especially so when we are youthful. For you and I and the rest of the congregation who sin at times still and for minors who are involved in the sins of their youth more than older members, I would say that shunning was not designed for these cases and probably comes into the area of controlling the lives of the congregation and causing fear and anger than in the area of protecting the rest of the congregation from bad examples and allowing immoral people to think that ongoing sin is acceptable.
What rules are you talking about?
Don't forget. You think that anal and oral sex are okay because the Bible does not say, "Don't put your penis in the anus or the mouth.
We believe Bible principles are part of God's laws.
Bear in mind it's those whom are past all moral sense, that engage in uncleanness and loose conduct.
(Ephesians 4:19) . . .Having gone past all moral sense, they gave themselves over to brazen conduct to practice every sort of uncleanness with greediness.
Galatians 5:19-21
So JWs see shunning of minors in a family as the same as normal discipline.
And if the shunning is because the child does not believe the teachings of the Watch Tower any more? Should a child be disciplined for that?
Does not believe in the teachings of the Watchtower?
How does a child become a JWs if they do not "believe in the teachings of the Watchtower"?
I understand that each baptized member has said they not only believe the Bible's teachings, but they believe that what they have been taught by JWs is what the Bible teaches.
They also have said they want to be one of JWs, and have shared what they learned with others. They understand that their baptism makes them one of JWs, and that means living up to God's moral standards .
So if you think a child is being shunned and disciplined because that child "does not believe the teachings of the Watch Tower any more", I think you are mistaken.
Could it be the child no longer wants to live up to Bible standards any more, because they want to live a different life?
That seems more like it.
Each year, many are disfellowshipped... and guess for what. Sexual immorality.
It's a strong vice. One the Devil only needs to reel out the bait, and wait. See who bites.
One needs self control, but if one isn't strong spiritually, and does not work hard to strengthen their relationship with God, there are a goner.
Many fall to this vice, but unlike dis-fellowshipped ones, they are repentant, and work to get back in good standing with their heavenly father.
1Cor 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.
I would say that we all fall under those categories at times and especially so when we are youthful. For you and I and the rest of the congregation who sin at times still and for minors who are involved in the sins of their youth more than older members, I would say that shunning was not designed for these cases and probably comes into the area of controlling the lives of the congregation and causing fear and anger than in the area of protecting the rest of the congregation from bad examples and allowing immoral people to think that ongoing sin is acceptable.
Well I sure am glad you guys don't go to people's doors saying you are sharing the good news.
What you said there, clearly is not what we read.
In fact, you haven't even used a scripture to answer the question. Rather, you expressed your feelings... with obvious bias.
That's one very significant difference between JWs, and those of Christendom.
But yes I have for many years heard of the sexual abuse inside the JW religion and it's protection to a much higher degree than other Christian Churches who have responded positively to those accusations about their own group and who want to protect the children in their care more than the people involved in the crimes.
That's interesting.
Can you share your data with me?
I mean the statistics regarding where JWs protection is to a much higher degree than other Christian Churches who have responded positively.
