Evacuated

I don't understand what this means.
Quite true. Although this goes for everyone in every congregation (and everyone else) unless some kind of controlled survey is done.
There is an element of truth in this because "once a JW always a JW" is a reality of life. However, there is nothing particular sinister or unusual about someone who enjoyed a privilege receiving a sanction from the community that bestowed it, if they behave in a way that demonstrates disrespect (in the eyes of that community) for that privilege. For some examples see here: Lost privilege 
"Having cake and eating it" is an unfortunate metaphor that is echoed here. At least John Lennon had integrity, even if you don't agree with all he stood for. (Notice a hook here).
On another note, I have even known of unbelieving partners or parents to suffer discriminatory treatment because of the association a relative may have or have had with Jehovah's Witnesses. And that not just under a Nazi type regime.
You haven't thought about this statement although I understand what you mean by it. There could very well be an issue of poor family management in connection with college attendance. It will depend entirely on the circumstances. What is wrong is to say that college attendance and poor family management are synonymous in all cases.
This is rubbish regardless of missapplied Soc letters to elders. All elders qualifications should be reviewed regularly. A negative review where "children" are seeking higher education will depend on the attitude and conduct of those "children", and the same as regards the father.
My son-in-law went to college and gained a BA in an academic disciplne with absolutely no problems depite severe dyslexia. He then pioneered, and got married to my daughter. Then able to gain reasonable employment, he sought further vocational qualifications with success
He now is able to provide well for his family and serves as an elder. There were no sanctions imposed on any part of his family during this period.
But then, my observations may not be representative of other people's personal experiences.
Perfectly valid pont here. I mean it's pretty clear that following in Jesus footseps just does not mean doing what he did. Otherwise there would be literally millions of people hanging on stakes everywhere if they wanted to be true Christians.
I think @Anna just meant that there are sacrifices involved if want wishes to follow a dedicated Christian course. This may well include the pursuit of a secular vocation and the academic path to that goal. Paul's estimation of such things as " refuse" was all very well for one who "wore the T-shirt" as it were, it is true. But, nevertheless, many have made that sacrifice willingly and have not regretted it. Likewise there are many (like my son-in-law) who have done otherwise, not regretted it, and more importantly, have not been sanctioned for it.
However, in respect of the original post, and given that my view may well be unrepresentative, personal obeservations, I still feel that to say that Jehovah's Witnesses are subjected to ‘total control’ is......."total baloney"!
 
 
 
 
 

That gives a few more shots. Excellent. Thanks!

@Eoin Joyce ......

Great, but is it only one shot of the Reception area?

In Haiti, even today .. the population is 85% Catholic, and believe in the Trinity, as an institution (individual results may vary ...) AND 85% or so of THAT group also practice Voodoo and worship their ancestors, and practice "magic".   The Church allows this.
During the Nicene Council, where assembled Catholic Bishops from all over the Roman Empire were assembled, by Emperor Constantine ..worshipper of the Sun .. a member of the cult of "Sol Invictus" and Mithras, the god of Tradesmen and warriors, until his death ... the controversy  even inspired fist-fights on the floor of the meeting place ... but Constantine, who was a comsumate politician, who thought Jesus was a FINE way to consolidate his Empire with a pacifistic god... ORDERED the Council, for political reasons, to adopt the concept of the Trinity.
As you can imagine... Roman Emperors had for a long time promulgated the very politically helpful idea that THEY could be both god and man at the same time ... and by commanding the doctrine of the Trinity, this would show the rubes that this idea had theological backing.
Divine right of Kings ......
The Bishops STILL bore the scars of the terrible persecutions ... and NOW .. they were the favorite religion of the Roman Emperor himself... WOW!  Constantine gave them privilege, power, money, and land ... and military protection.
I could go on for a hundred pages about this ... but OF COURSE, the "early Christians" ( a mislabeling..), or at least those officially honored by the Roman Empire ... believed in the Trinity. It was treason against the expressed will of Constantine to believe otherwise, and political suicide.
.To have a "Universal" Church .. you have to adopt EVERYTHING pagan, and rename it to appear holy ... like whitewashing a grave .. filled with bones and corruption.
Trinities were around a LONG time ( Egypt, Babylon, India, etc.) before Christendom adopted them.
 
 
 

I don't understand what this means.
Quite true. Although this goes for everyone in every congregation (and everyone else) unless some kind of controlled survey is done.
There is an element of truth in this because "once a JW always a JW" is a reality of life. However, there is nothing particular sinister or unusual about someone who enjoyed a privilege receiving a sanction from the community that bestowed it, if they behave in a way that demonstrates disrespect (in the eyes of that community) for that privilege. For some examples see here: Lost privilege 
"Having cake and eating it" is an unfortunate metaphor that is echoed here. At least John Lennon had integrity, even if you don't agree with all he stood for. (Notice a hook here).
On another note, I have even known of unbelieving partners or parents to suffer discriminatory treatment because of the association a relative may have or have had with Jehovah's Witnesses. And that not just under a Nazi type regime.
You haven't thought about this statement although I understand what you mean by it. There could very well be an issue of poor family management in connection with college attendance. It will depend entirely on the circumstances. What is wrong is to say that college attendance and poor family management are synonymous in all cases.
This is rubbish regardless of missapplied Soc letters to elders. All elders qualifications should be reviewed regularly. A negative review where "children" are seeking higher education will depend on the attitude and conduct of those "children", and the same as regards the father.
My son-in-law went to college and gained a BA in an academic disciplne with absolutely no problems depite severe dyslexia. He then pioneered, and got married to my daughter. Then able to gain reasonable employment, he sought further vocational qualifications with success
He now is able to provide well for his family and serves as an elder. There were no sanctions imposed on any part of his family during this period.
But then, my observations may not be representative of other people's personal experiences.
Perfectly valid pont here. I mean it's pretty clear that following in Jesus footseps just does not mean doing what he did. Otherwise there would be literally millions of people hanging on stakes everywhere if they wanted to be true Christians.
I think @Anna just meant that there are sacrifices involved if want wishes to follow a dedicated Christian course. This may well include the pursuit of a secular vocation and the academic path to that goal. Paul's estimation of such things as " refuse" was all very well for one who "wore the T-shirt" as it were, it is true. But, nevertheless, many have made that sacrifice willingly and have not regretted it. Likewise there are many (like my son-in-law) who have done otherwise, not regretted it, and more importantly, have not been sanctioned for it.
However, in respect of the original post, and given that my view may well be unrepresentative, personal obeservations, I still feel that to say that Jehovah's Witnesses are subjected to ‘total control’ is......."total baloney"!
 
 
 
 
 

Actually the focus on this sister was really your contribution (admittedly early on) to a discussion generated by an original post about a number of people claiming "total control" whilst being members of Jehovah's Witnesses in Russia. So it isn't really going off topic, yet.
I appreciate your concern regarding what you see as a dangerous line of reasoning however, but remember this is a public forum. We are all at liberty to stay clear of discussions that we feel stray across our personal boundaries for consideration.

Sorry you have feelings of resentment. "Amen" expresses my complete agreement with a view that Anna (not you) has posted. However, feeling resentment is an unpleasant experience for you, and not the intention of my comment. I can appreciate your own experiences as described above make this a sensitive area for you.
However, I feel there is absolutely no comparison possible between Joseph's experience of imprisonment in Egypt and the unthinkable horror a child must go through when subject to molestation by someone who, in some cases, they may well have looked to for protection and love. That is before we start to consider the inexcusable reproach that is heaped upon Jehovah's name and the reputation of all Jehovah's Witnesses, when someone claiming to be one of us perpetrates such a despicable crime.
Even a cursory examination of the factors involved in Joseph's case reveal that, despite the indisputable injustice he experienced over the course of many years, he was well aware of Jehovah sustaining him and intervening in his circumstance to enable him to enjoy privileged conditions, albeit a prisoner. Additionally he was also well aware that, overall, Jehovah had a specific purpose in allowing him to serve instrumentally for the salvation of the line of the promised seed. Gen.45:5-7.
This has no resemblance to the experience of abused children and quite frankly, I resent the association of Jehovah in anything which would contribute to some imagined purpose in Him allowing such depraved behaviour. This is the same Jehovah who referred to child abuse in His condemnation of the Israelites when speaking through Jeremiah the prophet:
"Furthermore, they built the high places of Baʹal in the Valley of the Son of Hinʹnom, in order to make their sons and their daughters pass through the fire to Moʹlech, something that I had not commanded them and that had never come into my heart to do such a detestable thing" Jer.32:35.
I know that an awareness of the bigger picture regarding the universal issues of Jehovah's sovereignty and the slur on the integrity of Jehovah's servants are factors in why Jehovah has allowed wickedness for a time. But we must remember that, even in the case of Job, limits were set by Jehovah as to how far Satan could go in his vain attempts to prove his lying claims (Job 1:12). Satan has far exceeded those limits in connection with imperfect humans. Child abuse is one example of this.
 

I can't see how Jehovah could be said to excercise long-suffering toward Satan on the basis of the definition given above??

I can't see how Jehovah could be said to excercise long-suffering toward Satan on the basis of the definition given above??

Sorry you have feelings of resentment. "Amen" expresses my complete agreement with a view that Anna (not you) has posted. However, feeling resentment is an unpleasant experience for you, and not the intention of my comment. I can appreciate your own experiences as described above make this a sensitive area for you.
However, I feel there is absolutely no comparison possible between Joseph's experience of imprisonment in Egypt and the unthinkable horror a child must go through when subject to molestation by someone who, in some cases, they may well have looked to for protection and love. That is before we start to consider the inexcusable reproach that is heaped upon Jehovah's name and the reputation of all Jehovah's Witnesses, when someone claiming to be one of us perpetrates such a despicable crime.
Even a cursory examination of the factors involved in Joseph's case reveal that, despite the indisputable injustice he experienced over the course of many years, he was well aware of Jehovah sustaining him and intervening in his circumstance to enable him to enjoy privileged conditions, albeit a prisoner. Additionally he was also well aware that, overall, Jehovah had a specific purpose in allowing him to serve instrumentally for the salvation of the line of the promised seed. Gen.45:5-7.
This has no resemblance to the experience of abused children and quite frankly, I resent the association of Jehovah in anything which would contribute to some imagined purpose in Him allowing such depraved behaviour. This is the same Jehovah who referred to child abuse in His condemnation of the Israelites when speaking through Jeremiah the prophet:
"Furthermore, they built the high places of Baʹal in the Valley of the Son of Hinʹnom, in order to make their sons and their daughters pass through the fire to Moʹlech, something that I had not commanded them and that had never come into my heart to do such a detestable thing" Jer.32:35.
I know that an awareness of the bigger picture regarding the universal issues of Jehovah's sovereignty and the slur on the integrity of Jehovah's servants are factors in why Jehovah has allowed wickedness for a time. But we must remember that, even in the case of Job, limits were set by Jehovah as to how far Satan could go in his vain attempts to prove his lying claims (Job 1:12). Satan has far exceeded those limits in connection with imperfect humans. Child abuse is one example of this.
 

Who is bringing the case against this extremist?

Amen to that! I don't know why we are bringing Jehovah into this at all!

Who is bringing the case against this extremist?

I really like this. Beautifully understated, unpretentious, focused on our mission to preach the good news and make disciples in all the nations.

NEW  WORLD  WARWICK  CENTER,  HEADQUARTERS,  USA 
The  beautiful  entrance  hall ❤

".... Moscow, May 2, Interfax - The Russian Orthodox Church sees Jehovah's Witnesses as a dangerous sect and has supported the ban imposed on it in Russia.

"This is a sect, totalitarian and harmful at that. I am well aware of this because I have had an opportunity to speak to former adepts of this sect more than once," Metropolitan Hilarion of Volokolamsk, head of the Synodal Department for External Church Relations, told a program shown on the Rossiya 24 (VGTRK) TV channel.

Jehovah's Witnesses members are dangerous because they approach people in the street and offer them their literature, introduce themselves as a Christian organization, while their activities are based "on manipulating consciousness, and they erode the psyche of people and the family," the metropolitan said.

In addition to that, adherents of Jehovah's Witnesses "warp the teachings of Christ and misinterpret the Gospel," he said.

"Their doctrine contains a lot of false teachings. They do not believe in Jesus Christ as the God and the Savior. They do not recognize the doctrine of the Trinity. Therefore, they cannot be called Christians," the metropolitan said. .
http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=13749
 

Which is not our remit as an organisation, but as members of the human race in these critical times.

Wow! Whatever happened to you? These are the only relevant parts of your response. I can understand your withdrawal. Sorry to have touched such a raw nerve! 

You are quoting me here and I apologise unreservedly for mistyping the reference. Especially as you have addressed the matter so comprehensively. Forgive me for not engaging on what you have responded with as it was to my mistaken reference.
Let me recap:
Compare 1Cor 8:2. 

I don't think it's in the Royal Commissions interests to "twist" things because their concern is to find the best possible solution for child protection and in order to do that they need facts. Their concern is not to malign the Witnesses, they are not Apostates. I don't know if you are aware that we were only one out of many other institutions that were investigated.
Very true, we don't have all the details. But the Commission had all details, both from the victims and the "society" and was therefor able to handle it within that framework. It has nothing to do with "speaking against the society", this involves facts.
I hasten to say, but I think that is exactly what may have happened in this case.
You must also remember that the situation with child sexual abuse is unlike any other - "eventually" may give enough time for another child to be abused, so I don't think  "Jehovah letting them know eventually" is really  applicable here. It is not like it concerns an adjustment in understanding prophesy, or even facts of immorality between two adults coming to light. We are talking about protecting innocent children.
So we may actually be helping the Australian government to get their act together as well.  I guess we should not view this as a battle between "us" and "them" but this should be a mutual effort with the ultimate aim of protecting children.

This is a rather old list isn't it. Being faithful is far more important than being famous.

If 'going beyond the law' is the new gold standard, why doesn't that become the law? Could any solution be more straightforward?

True statement. I would add "at home". Pretty difficult elsewhere. Parents must become computer savvy if they allow their children to use them....and they really have no choice in the modern world. Home network is the only really effective way to go.

http://www.snopes.com/jehovahs-witness-russia-trump-asylum/