Patiently waiting for Truth

Quite an appropriate lesson for this weekend:
https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-january-2021/Lessons-From-the-Disciple-Whom-Jesus-Loved/
 
 

There doesn’t appear to have been a need for the anointed and true believers in Christ down through the ages, to develop an organization…until Russel came along.  Jesus said God is looking for those who worship “in spirit and truth”.  Was Russel worshiping in “spirit and truth”?  How many untruths did that man, and all leaders who followed him, pronounce as truths?  Preaching untruths – lies – is evidence of the lack of Holy Spirit from the God of Truth.  (Num 23:19)
In order to 'gather together as the day draws near', an organization isn’t necessary.  I understand that there have been new regulations,  new warnings where no JW  can “gather” on zoom independently for Bible study, or even to pray together - nothing aside of outlined protocol approved by the GB or their helpers is acceptable.   Is that rule found in the scriptures?  Or, is this a necessary rule that ensures the life of and unity within, an organization? The GB is afraid of what these independent ones may learn from one another, who may realize they have been duped.  The encouraging attitude of the Bereans ends with the JW baptism. (Acts 17:11)
As an elder, are you enforcing these new decrees?
Announcements and Reminders March 2021
FOR ELDERS
7. Private Meetings Arranged via Video conference: “The faithful and discreet slave” has provided practical, Scriptural guidance that highlights principles for individuals to consider when deciding whether to organize or attend a social gathering. (Matt. 24:45-47) Rather than making rules, the emphasis should be on applying Bible principles. When Bible principles are applied, social gatherings can be refreshing and bring honor to Jehovah. —1 Cor. 10:23, 24, 31, 32. 8. While there is no objection to wholesome social gatherings, we have received reports that some have begun to arrange additional meetings and events for spiritual instruction, even beginning and ending such meetings with prayer. While the individuals organizing and participating in such meetings likely are well-intentioned, there is no provision for such arrangements. 9. Jehovah’s people receive ample spiritual instruction and encouragement at congregation meetings, assemblies, and conventions as well as through JW Broadcasting and our publications. Under the guidance of his holy spirit and on the basis of his Word of truth, Jehovah provides what is needed through the faithful and discreet slave. Care should be taken not to organize or promote meetings for spiritual feeding beyond what has been provided by the organization. Such meetings could detract from what Jesus Christ is accomplishing through his congregation on earth today. Adhering to this direction will help all of God’s people to “be completely united in the same mind and in the same line of thought” and to remain “stabilized in the faith.”—1 Cor. 1:10; Col. 2:6, 7.
Detract from what Jesus is accomplishing, or from what men are attempting to accomplish?  No, there is a need to remain in the same mind as the GB, who by the way, are not inspired.  There was no valid scripture given to support their case.  What rules are we to follow, those of men or those of Jesus Christ? If JWs proudly say they follow the teachings of Christ but choose to adhere to the laws of men, are they not hypocrites?
I do not sit with the deceitful,
    nor do I associate with hypocrites.
5 I abhor the assembly of evildoers
    and refuse to sit with the wicked.  Ps 26:4,5
It is wickedness to control the entire spirituality of another, when what is taught transgresses the laws of Christ.
So, what do JWs want,  a social life or truth?  Obviously, the organization only wants their gatherings to be on a social level, and to leave the scriptures out of it. 
About the angels are...
The Greek meaning for angel is “messenger”.   
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=kjv&strongs=g32
This Greek word is also used in relationship to John the Baptist. (Matt 11:10) Yes, Jesus referred to him as an “angel”/messenger. 
Jesus’ “angels” are his anointed servants.  (Mal 3:1-5; John 13:20; Matt 13:37-43; Rev 1:1; 11:1-3; Zech 4:1-5,14; Rev 18:4-8; 14:6-12,15-19)
By the exposure of truth in the presence of lies, the angel/servants/messengers sent by Christ are an integral part of the harvest –separating out the “sons of the kingdom” through the word of Truth instilled in them, by the spirit of God.  (Matt 13:38)
Satan also has his angel messengers who deceive the elect (anointed).  They speak lies and enforce their oppressive rules, to ensure their physical life, and that of their earthly organization.  (2 Cor 11: 13-15; Rev 13:11,12; 16:13-16; 20:7-10)  (Matt 24:24; Mark 13:19-23)
That's the deal? Jesus condemned the Pharisees for additional rules and burdens put upon the people.  (Matt 23:4; Mark 7:7)
God has never approved of His people listening to lies, and becoming liars themselves. (Jer 23:16)
No, that's not the deal.   We don’t put up with people who lock us away from investigating our beliefs, sharing what we feel with others, or from preventing us from knowing Truth...or seeking out our anointed brethren who are to follow one Master, Jesus Christ.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Loving the GB and the JW org is not going to make you into a living person either. And that has been clearly proven many times by many people.  
 
His original comment said that when a large group of people gather together they cause trouble / behave badly.  He didn't even mention them being a religious group of people. So my example fitted the bill.  It wasn't until his next comment that he mentioned both a 'group of people' and, a religion.  
I think it has been proven beyond doubt, to people that are realistic, that JWs are no better as individuals or as a group, than anyone else. @Witness shared a great link to a religion that gives very practical help to people at this time.  @JW Insider shared some information that puts the JW org on a parr with other religions, but no better.  And you yourself know of some details about the JW Org that you do not fully approve of.  (Things you have written a long time ago).  So, take off the 'rose tinted spectacles' and look at the Watchtower / GB / JW Org from a realistic, truthful perspective. 
 

You tried, but really this is comparing apples to oranges. When a group that shares a hobby gets together for a few hours or couple of days, sure it's all fun. But the real test comes when you remove that hobby, and that group has to get on with each other with love in normal day to day problems, despite cultural and personality differences, and not only that, but do this over months and years. Try that with your car enthusiasts. Loving cars, is not going to make you into a loving person.

 
Or it's never a problem if there isn't a problem.

Even an atheist recognizes the need for organization, however opposers who have lost their reason imagine that they would have knowledge of anything biblical w/o the organizations they carp and moan about. It's like they simply refuse to acknowledge Jesus when he's asked about uprooting the weeds, they want to uproot all of it. Jesus on the other hand said "knock it off, you presumptuous people, you have nothing to do with weeding, it's going to grow together until the harvest and the weeding won't be done by you and your mouth, it'll be done by angels".
So YOU as a professed Christian simply must choose an organization with which to associate. No you're not going to agree w/everything, but that's the deal.

I wonder if the Elders say this in answer to hiding Pedophiles in their congregations. 
JWs know that if they don't do as they are told then they will be 'killed' spiritually, by being disfellowshipped. And they will lose the immediate contact of around one hundred (or more ) people.  Tom knows this of course but pretends it isn't true. 
I do wonder what things you kept hidden in the Org when you were an elder, and if it bothers your conscience now. 

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2020/06/30/lds-church-says-pandemic/
I was raised as a Catholic and lived next door to a devout Mormon family, who were my extended family. I had basically two mothers, and learned from both.   I was guarded by their mutual love.  When I became a JW and my father died, I refused to attend his funeral in the Catholic Church.  My feelings were respected and my family's love for me never faded. 
While JWs reserve their love for each other, the Mormon Church reaches out into the community in massive ways.   Each religion, the Catholics, Mormons, Watchtower has its horrendous record of hidden child abuse; which proves that NO organization can boast that it is founded on love, no matter what it has accomplished. 
JWs instantly shut their brand of love off, when someone rejects the organization. For this, families are torn apart.   Is this love?  Victims of abuse are shunned for their outcry of injustice, committed by the elder body.  Is this love?  The organization’s lawyers fight to win court battles involving child abuse.  Is this love?  They don't stop once but keep at it, hoping to hold on to their riches.  This is so alien to the teachings of Jesus Christ.
The anointed Body of Christ is admonished not to bond together under their Head Jesus Christ and show love for one another. (1 Cor 12:15-27)
WHO has the authority to regulate love?  The governing body?
The love shown by JWs as an organization, is regulated by rules coming from these men, and enforced by the elders. 
This is not true love.
Yes he does.
The "mighty mountainlike organization" will fall.  The Temple/Zion/mountain of "living stones" that God established through His Son, will rise.  The anointed are bonding outside of this delusional mountain.(1 Pet 2:5,9; 1 Cor 3:16,17)
"What are you, mighty mountain? Before Zerubbabel you will become level ground. Then he will bring out the capstone to shouts of ‘God bless it! God bless it!’”
8 Then the word of the Lord came to me: 9 “The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this temple; his hands will also complete it. Then you will know that the Lord Almighty has sent me to you.
10 “Who dares despise the day of small things, since the seven eyes of the Lord that range throughout the earth will rejoice when they see the chosen capstone in the hand of Zerubbabel?”  Zech 4:7-1-10
The Rise of Mount Zion
 
 
 

But, what group can keep doing it!? Not put on a show of love but live it, and even with imperfections,put up with one another with love? That love would identify this group above all others,we did not set the standard only do our very best to live up to it. And many tear us down for trying because they choose not to? Gather any one you want anybody and see after time what the results would be! I am a betting man, my money would be on the love,putting up based on TRYING not a sham but truly trying to live by that love!

If I'm wrong, name just one group that behaves better as it gets together in groups than Jehovah's Witnesses. I don't see this as true in any other denomination.

I guess this is a good statement for many aspects and situations in the lives of JW members as well?

I see them as sitting on three - one in court, one in the organization as "elders", and one as counterfeit priests "sitting" in the Temple of God.  (Mark 13:14)
 2 Thess 2:3,4 - Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God."  
(1 Pet 2:5,9; 1 Cor 3:16,17; Eph 2:20-22)

I don't fault other denominations for trying, but I think the mercenary nature of their clergy w/the emphasis on college over spiritual and scriptural qualities and the clergy/laity distinction where individuals can offload their moral responsibilities to others (yup, people in JW's try to pull that crap too at times and elders should NEVER reinforce that) but I just haven't seen anything like JW's anywhere.

I was an atheist visiting the KH w/my gf who was studying, and I observed them for months and also went to a day of a district convention when it struck me what was most different about JW's was that their behavior improved to the extent that they got together as a group. This I contrasted with every other group I'd been with. To the extent the group grew in size, to that extent it became unruly and more badly behaved.

"Jehovah's Witnesses did not voluntarily join because we object to the assertion that the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses assumes responsibility for children," the group said.
"Our objection is based on the fact that the religion of Jehovah's Witnesses does not and has not sponsored any activities that have resulted in children being under its care, custody, supervision, control or authority."
My problem with this is that it is so misleading. They had control and authority over my parent's so they got my parent's to do the dirty works with me by direction way of the leadership.
 
 

All baptized Witnesses are ordained ministers and share in the preaching and teaching work. - https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/no-paid-clergy/
In question about "representatives", as i am aware, "representatives" are those elders who are appointed by GB for some special service and/or task. Service as CO, for example. The task can be temporary, so the role of the "representative" in such case is only for a certain thing and for a certain time.
It would be interesting and useful to understand similarities and differences of these two concepts. I found this in short searching on internet.   http://www.hisholychurch.org/ministries/church/documents/ordained.pdf
1) Ordination by God is an unseen act of a calling, and acceptance of that calling.
2) Here in Acts 6:3, the appointment to administer this office took place after an ‘election’ by the people of men to carry out the daily ministration.
Perhaps you know what he meant with this. And perhaps TTH knows too. Maybe you will find time to explain. As for me, WTJWorg is Organization and  Institution (institution/noun -  an organization founded for a religious, educational, professional, or social purpose, ...... according to google search) 
I don't know what difference @TrueTomHarley have in mind. Perhaps he see "JWs" as people inside this particular Organization/Institution as some sort of "free people" which form a fraternity, and are somehow "outside" of Administration that, de facto, run the Church. 
But, answering on baptismal questions and that strict performed act, made by candidate, before witnesses, are in fact verbal contract with Organization, and supposedly with God.  Why i said supposedly? Because of the content of baptismal questions. And because of how baptism is performed.
Second baptismal question is pure administrative format. A format that automatically classifies a candidate, member, or follower into one of many religions. There is no Bible support for such question.
The act of immersion is not accompanied by the words of Jesus: "Then Jesus came to them and said: All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ...
 
Here exists interesting, or better to say, worrisome inconsistency and discrepancy over who is who in the Organization. Over doctrinal idea. Over internal and public identification who are JW people and how they functioning/operate. 
WTJWorg Publications explain that JWs do not have clerical and lay classes. And that is obviously not true. Because of claims made by WTJWorg Representatives before Public and before Courts. 
Next thing is this. Because WTJWorg claims how elders are not clergy ("we have no paid clergy" GB said,..... but you have unpaid clergy i would say this way),.... to continue: If in WTJWorg Clergy not exists, than there is no need to have, to call for "priest-penitent" ("elder-congregant") privilege at all.  If somebody in congregation come and tell to elder something, than elder is also in obligation to be in silence about it, to anyone inside and outside congregation. Or not? Perhaps he would be in obligation to report crime to secular authorities only, but not to other elders too.  
That idea of this sort of "clergy privilege" is very strained in WTJWorg. Sitting on two chairs.
 
 

Not necessarily. Perhaps 98 of the backlog of cases are rank-and-file and he has had trouble arguing that all JWs are "ordained ministers" and representatives of the WTS. But perhaps the case of 1 ministerial servant and 1 elder he knows will be easy to argue. Therefore, he will only take on new cases of ministerial servants and elders since he has too many rank and file cases.
That's a purposeful exaggeration to make a point. I actually don't know anything about the make-up of his backlog except that a reliable Witness told me that his backlog is about 100 cases and he is now very selective in the new cases he will take. And that this is supposedly something that new attorneys know, who are anxious to pick up cases that Zalkin can no longer take on.
@TrueTomHarley does not say it's only rank-and-file Witnesses who commit CSA, he says that it is probably a lot more rank-and-file than appointed servants. I would agree with him on this. His main point is that you can't usually make a comparison between JWs and Catholics by looking at the raw numbers in the statistics. For example if the ARC had reported that there were 5,000 perpetrators of Catholic CSA, he says this was mostly "appointed priests" whereas if you also saw a parallel report of 1,000 perpetrators of JW CSA, this would have been "appointed servants" along with a large percentage of "rank-and-file" JWs.
I think that there could be a bit of wishful thinking in TTH's view, but I can't say he is wrong. My view, after looking at several collections of evidence and statistics, is that most rank-and-file cases still go unreported, and under-reported. This is just one anecdote, but I was at a Witness funeral/memorial a couple years ago where the brother "eulogized" the late elder, and this resulted in some whispers, hushes, and then escalated into a real disturbance and then several sisters "took it outside" to keep the disturbance down. It turns out that the elder, from 20 to 30 years prior, had been incestuous with his own daughter, and perhaps another of his daughters starting well before becoming an elder, but it had evidently continued for years.
Most CSA cases are "familial" and the experience told me that most cases don't ever get reported, much less prosecuted. And why would an attorney take on such a case unless the family had a lot of money and could afford to sue themselves, basically?
The case I mentioned was an elder, well respected all his life by the congregation, but with notable exceptions within the congregation as I discovered.
The spreadsheet that the ARC provided for the JW cases, had a high percentage of elders and ministerial servants. (And at least one, probably more, were not listed as elders at the time of the crime, but became elders later -- this is something I wanted to look into as a problem outcome of not reporting cases.) But a friend in Australia has told me that if you look at the breakdown among Catholics: priests, nuns, brothers, school teachers, volunteers, etc., then it seems that they did have records on more than just appointed priests. And the breakdown was apparently similar to that of the JW breakdown. But you can't make too many conclusions about what it means overall if we realize that so many cases are never reported, or were thought to fall under "elder-congregant" or "priest-penitent" privilege. It also turns out that some of the other churches somehow did have a breakdown that included rank-and-file members. The media tends to report on those cases where the church authorities were perpetrators and victimizers, and this gives everyone the impression that it is just the higher-ups.
I remember from the US reports after the ARC, and preliminary discussions of investigations elsewhere in the world, that there was a lot of talk and interviews about treating some of the Catholic entities, even the church itself (in Australia) as a criminal organization. This type of talk reminds me of when TTH speaks of the ARC as going after the others as institutions but going after the JWs as a religion. I know what he means, but I can't say that I agree. In the media outlets, I saw/heard some talk about JWs not reporting any of these 1000 abusers of 1,500 victims, and how terrible it was. But I heard and read much more talk that made it appear that that made it appear they were going after the Catholics as a "criminal" institution, because, it ran so many entities that had such high rates of CSA crime.
My overall impression that it's going to about the same for JWs, Catholics, Mormons, Hasidic Jews, Boy Scouts, Government employees, etc. Namely that most CSA will be familial, and therefore it will be underreported and not make statistical lists. But OUTSIDE of familial CSA, the perpetrators will tend toward those with some level of presumed authority over rank-and-file members, and will therefore tend toward priests, Catholic brothers, JW elders, JW ministerial servants, Scout leaders, bosses, etc. 

Of course! Why would any advertiser make any exaggeration at all? It is the most reliable bedrock indicators of truth there is—almost up there with propoganda.
And when the TV news anchorperson looks you in the eye, you just know you’re getting truth and nothing but the truth!

I can't tell what you mean here. Seems like some words got smashed?

You are trying to put yourself in the place of Jesus Christ.
All authority was given to Christ, not to you. 
The GB seem to have trained you well. They have no authority either but they want to rule over the True Anointed and over millions of the Earthly class.   If your GB were ever anointed then it is they who have blasphemed against the Holy Spirit. But of course the GB will pay for their spiritual and physical crimes and sins. 

It seems that Tom has turned apostate here and now Tom believes the Devil will become good. it looks as if tom no longer believes in Armageddon, because tom thinks Armageddon is no longer necessary due to Tom's idea that the Devil will be good and evryone will have peace. Poor old tom, unless this is his new Book. 
 

Confusing idea. You want "separation" of church and state aka separation between ARC and WTYWorg and now suggesting me I have to to apply same measure for secular and religious entity. 
About what is ARC ignorant? ..... after whole ARC process and Study case 29? 
Before beginning in 2015 ARC wasn't aware how WTJWorg Australia , as Institution, handling with CSA inside Institution aka Church. Now, they are no longer in ignorance, and not many of us are ignorant anymore.  

It’s an advertisement from a law firm, you dodo.
Even an accident attorney crows about verdicts he has won, not just the bluster he hopes will carry the day in the event that he finds a client.
WRITTEN BY:
Robins Kaplan LLP

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/robins-kaplan-justice-report-winter-4640478/?
ESTABLISHING DUTY IN CHILD SEX ABUSE CASES AGAINST THE JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES -
In 2019, 13 states and the District of Columbia amended civil statutes to enlarge statutes of limitations for child sex abuse claims. Eight of these jurisdictions enacted revival statutes allowing previously time-barred child sex abuse claims to proceed: New York, the District of Columbia, Montana, New Jersey, Arizona, Vermont, Rhode Island, and North Carolina.
In 2019, 13 states and the District of Columbia amended civil statutes to enlarge statutes of limitations for child sex abuse claims. Eight of these jurisdictions enacted revival statutes allowing previously time-barred child sex abuse claims to proceed: New York, the District of Columbia, Montana, New Jersey, Arizona, Vermont, Rhode Island, and North Carolina. Since implementation of these statutes, survivors of child sex abuse have filed complaints against many different institutions—not just against individual perpetrators of abuse—including, the Roman Catholic Church, various independent schools, the Boy Scouts of America, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses parent-organization, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. (“Watchtower”). Institutions may be directly liable for sex abuse committed by their agents through negligencebased claims, such as, negligent supervision, hiring/ retention, and failure to warn. In Jehovah’s Witnesses cases, perpetrators of sex abuse commonly hold the position of church “elder” or “ministerial servant.” In those cases, attorneys for the Jehovah’s Witnesses typically argue that elders and ministerial servants are unpaid volunteers, not employees or agents of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and, thus, the organization has no duty to protect one congregant from abuse by another congregant, especially if the abuse occurred off congregation premises. Below are some examples of evidence that Plaintiffs’ attorneys have successfully marshaled to counter this argument. First, the Jehovah’s Witnesses organizational structure shows that elders and ministerial servants are indeed agents of the Church. In J.W. v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., California’s appeals court provides a generally accurate description of the Jehovah’s Witnesses hierarchy. The relevant upshot is that, “[e]lders are the highest authority at the congregational level,” and, thus, are the Jehovah’s Witnesses equivalent of Roman Catholic priests.5 In order to be appointed an elder, a person must first be a Minsterial Servant in good standing. Top-down, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, or, “Watchtower,” as the parent-organization is known, is controlled by the Governing Body of eight elders, essentially the board of directors for Watchtower.  Below the Governing Body are circuits generally comprised of 20 to 22 congregations.  Below the circuit-level are local congregations, each managed by a body of elders, who select candidates for becoming elders and ministerial servants. Watchtower’s own documents and policies elucidate the institution’s agency relationship with its elders and ministerial servants, and reveal the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ own perception that a duty arises from those relationships. For example, in another California child sex abuse case, Watchtower produced a July 20, 1998 letter in which the organization admonishes All Bodies of Elders against appointing child sex abusers as elders or ministerial servants because, “this could result in costly lawsuits. . . . [C]ourt officials and lawyers will hold responsible any organization that knowingly appoints former child abusers to positions of trust, if one of these, thereafter, commits a further act of child abuse.” The letter concedes, “[t]hose who are appointed to privileges of services, such as elders and ministerial servants, are put in a position of trust. . . .this includes being more liberal in leaving children in their care and oversight.” As for any attempt to mitigate the role of ministerial servants as compared to elders, the Watchtower policy manual, “Organized to do Jehovah’s Will,” instructs that ministerial servants are authorized to perform tasks otherwise reserved for elders, when an elder is unavailable, such as: (1) conduct Congregation Book Study; (2) handle Service Meetings; (3) handle parts of the Theocratic Ministry School; and (4) deliver public talks in the local congregation. Based on the above, courts have been persuaded that Jehovah’s Witnesses congregations are liable for “violat[ing] [a] duty,” when a clergy sex abuse victim’s parents were “congregants, who in deciding to permit [the perpetrator] into their home reasonably relied on his status as an appointed ministerial servant as well as on his good standing and reputation within the congregation. . . .”13 In addition to the above, the California Court of Appeal rejected the notion that a plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege proximate cause when the sexual abuse had occurred off congregation premises, mainly relying on a respondeat superior discussion in Comment C to the Restatement (3d) of Agency § 7.05: “causation may not be present when the harm occurs outside the work environment. It does not reflect that causation cannot be found when the harm occurs outside the work environment.” Understanding the structure, history, and policies of the Jehovah’s Witnesses is important for proving the parentinstitution’s liability in a child sex abuse case; but this is just a start.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/robins-kaplan-justice-report-winter-4640478/?
ESTABLISHING DUTY IN CHILD SEX ABUSE CASES AGAINST THE JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES -
In 2019, 13 states and the District of Columbia amended civil statutes to enlarge statutes of limitations for child sex abuse claims. Eight of these jurisdictions enacted revival statutes allowing previously time-barred child sex abuse claims to proceed: New York, the District of Columbia, Montana, New Jersey, Arizona, Vermont, Rhode Island, and North Carolina.
In 2019, 13 states and the District of Columbia amended civil statutes to enlarge statutes of limitations for child sex abuse claims. Eight of these jurisdictions enacted revival statutes allowing previously time-barred child sex abuse claims to proceed: New York, the District of Columbia, Montana, New Jersey, Arizona, Vermont, Rhode Island, and North Carolina. Since implementation of these statutes, survivors of child sex abuse have filed complaints against many different institutions—not just against individual perpetrators of abuse—including, the Roman Catholic Church, various independent schools, the Boy Scouts of America, and the Jehovah’s Witnesses parent-organization, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. (“Watchtower”). Institutions may be directly liable for sex abuse committed by their agents through negligencebased claims, such as, negligent supervision, hiring/ retention, and failure to warn. In Jehovah’s Witnesses cases, perpetrators of sex abuse commonly hold the position of church “elder” or “ministerial servant.” In those cases, attorneys for the Jehovah’s Witnesses typically argue that elders and ministerial servants are unpaid volunteers, not employees or agents of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and, thus, the organization has no duty to protect one congregant from abuse by another congregant, especially if the abuse occurred off congregation premises. Below are some examples of evidence that Plaintiffs’ attorneys have successfully marshaled to counter this argument. First, the Jehovah’s Witnesses organizational structure shows that elders and ministerial servants are indeed agents of the Church. In J.W. v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., California’s appeals court provides a generally accurate description of the Jehovah’s Witnesses hierarchy. The relevant upshot is that, “[e]lders are the highest authority at the congregational level,” and, thus, are the Jehovah’s Witnesses equivalent of Roman Catholic priests.5 In order to be appointed an elder, a person must first be a Minsterial Servant in good standing. Top-down, the Jehovah’s Witnesses, or, “Watchtower,” as the parent-organization is known, is controlled by the Governing Body of eight elders, essentially the board of directors for Watchtower.  Below the Governing Body are circuits generally comprised of 20 to 22 congregations.  Below the circuit-level are local congregations, each managed by a body of elders, who select candidates for becoming elders and ministerial servants. Watchtower’s own documents and policies elucidate the institution’s agency relationship with its elders and ministerial servants, and reveal the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ own perception that a duty arises from those relationships. For example, in another California child sex abuse case, Watchtower produced a July 20, 1998 letter in which the organization admonishes All Bodies of Elders against appointing child sex abusers as elders or ministerial servants because, “this could result in costly lawsuits. . . . [C]ourt officials and lawyers will hold responsible any organization that knowingly appoints former child abusers to positions of trust, if one of these, thereafter, commits a further act of child abuse.” The letter concedes, “[t]hose who are appointed to privileges of services, such as elders and ministerial servants, are put in a position of trust. . . .this includes being more liberal in leaving children in their care and oversight.” As for any attempt to mitigate the role of ministerial servants as compared to elders, the Watchtower policy manual, “Organized to do Jehovah’s Will,” instructs that ministerial servants are authorized to perform tasks otherwise reserved for elders, when an elder is unavailable, such as: (1) conduct Congregation Book Study; (2) handle Service Meetings; (3) handle parts of the Theocratic Ministry School; and (4) deliver public talks in the local congregation. Based on the above, courts have been persuaded that Jehovah’s Witnesses congregations are liable for “violat[ing] [a] duty,” when a clergy sex abuse victim’s parents were “congregants, who in deciding to permit [the perpetrator] into their home reasonably relied on his status as an appointed ministerial servant as well as on his good standing and reputation within the congregation. . . .”13 In addition to the above, the California Court of Appeal rejected the notion that a plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege proximate cause when the sexual abuse had occurred off congregation premises, mainly relying on a respondeat superior discussion in Comment C to the Restatement (3d) of Agency § 7.05: “causation may not be present when the harm occurs outside the work environment. It does not reflect that causation cannot be found when the harm occurs outside the work environment.” Understanding the structure, history, and policies of the Jehovah’s Witnesses is important for proving the parentinstitution’s liability in a child sex abuse case; but this is just a start.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I would say that God rejected Israel as a nation, but not as individuals. 
Why would he have Jerusalem destroyed in he did not reject it. It wasn't just the place destroyed but the people and the records of their inheritance. I'm sure I've read somewhere that after the destruction in 70C.E. none of the Jews could prove their birth line / family tree.  God replaced physical Israel with Spiritual Israel.