Anna

”Amazon is no more! The Greatest Merchant on Earth. Lord Bezos was going to come and then he said No! The two witnesses—Bezos and Cook—who would decimate the Great City! Oh the profits we would have made! Too bad, too bad! Say....what town did Amazon settle on, anyway?”
You are a false prophetess! It is Bezos and Cook. Next to them, Adam is ....um....naked! Go, woman! Go far from here! Mislead not the fine folk at the World News Media Forum any longer!

You know, I’m starting to get into this.
Is not New York called the Big Apple? And if it truly was the same as Babylon the Great—the Great City, could it not be said that God’s wrath will take a substantial bite out of it?
Hmm.....Tim Cook is the anti-Christ!!!!!

Not so fast. I’m starting to come around
To Buffalo, of course!
I am ready. Teach me.
For crying out loud, Where’s the modesty? (a HUGE tell, in my book)

No. I don’t think so on account of the prophet Frank: 
“If I can’t make it, there, I can’t make it anywhere! I’m stuck with you, New York, New York!”
(New York State registered a decline of population last year and the governor famously said that it was on account of the weather. This led to loud guffaws from those who pointed out that the weather has always been the weather in New York. However, I agreed with him and tweeted that New York has some of the highest weather in the country—income weather, sales weather, and property weather.)

"...all the nations have fallen victim...Get out of her, my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins and do not want to receive part of her plagues..." So you are saying that means: "Get out of New York?" What about everyone else on this planet who is affected that doesn't live in New York? Or am I not understanding your thinking here?
I know you are convinced in your own mind about your interpretation, but if, after repeatedly writing the GB about your opinions to "correct" them and teach them (your) right interpretation and they didn't agree with you; the elders in your congregation didn't agree with you (although to be fair you said they weren't willing to entertain much that way); JWs in general don't agree with you; people on this website don't agree with you (and with good reasoning points); and even that other anti-JW posters have a different interpretation than you - you may want to humbly consider the possibility that you may need to rethink the direction you have taken over the last little while - and that you may be wrong. You are essentially asking us to believe that everyone else is wrong and you alone have a pipeline to the "real" truth from God. Most JW's have good reason for believing what they do and even when at times -as seen on this website - we may have questions about certain points we'd like to explore, we still respect the GB/JWs as being where we learned the basic truths we agree with and make JWs different from other religions. 
But for arguments' sake, even if someone accepted some or even all of what you (or other anti-JW posters) consider the truth, then what? What have you got to offer? Leave off being a JW - (which you and other posters here seem to despise and denigrate so much), to go where? To do what? Become part of what? It would be like a driver who picks up an unsuspecting hitchhiker who seems to be going the same way, and then drops them off in the middle of nowhere - with no food, no clothing or shelter. 

Yes, and if they do have a masters degree, it's most likely not a degree in theology

Wow-whee! Say, did you hear the one about the clergyman who started to sing the Beatles’ tune and got hung up on the first line?
You never give me your money
You never give me you mo-huh-huh-ney
You never give me you mo-huh-huh-huh-huh-huh-ney
Acquired at Divinity schools generally by professors who don’t believe it.
If they do, it makes them even worse qualified...see above

Yea, I am waiting for them to come to the meeting with some gold trimming on their long clothes swinging the incense holders, censer, carrying icons, kissing the cross in a laborate ceremony ..... yes .... sounds about the same....congregants kneeling on stools... lol.

:)))) I am slow in writing and more slower in English writing. My "weapon" and "tactic" is to be short and concise how much is possible. :)))
Anna, Arauna, TTH bombing me with responds. And i am alone, sole  :))) 
Your comment helps to redirect their thinking. Now you will be "target". :))

Yes, I agree. I think we may have got our lines crossed earlier. What I was trying to say before is that when it comes to secularism, we accept the designation "clergy" for our elders, because that is how the world sees the elders. But inside the congregation we do not view elders in that same way, in the same way as the world. (I don't know if I have explained what I meant it any better, but you explained it already). Sorry for the confusion.

Well yes, we don't say elder "so and so" or pioneer "so and so". We say brother or sister "so and so"
We don't use those words as titles. Only as descriptions of the tasks the brother or sister does.
Here is that article in Croatian
https://wol.jw.org/hr/wol/d/r19/lp-c/102009288
 

I can think of another word we don't use, but it is used regularly by those who are not JW, and that is the word church. In English speaking countries (especially the USA and Britain) our meeting places are called churches, and our organization is church. We don't argue with non JWs, we accept their terminology, and we understand it. (Sometimes we will explain to them our meeting places are called Kingdom Halls).
So it is the same with "clergy" and "rapture". As JWI implies, really, it is a non argument. It's just a case of semantics.
 

Well yes, we don't say elder "so and so" or pioneer "so and so". We say brother or sister "so and so"
We don't use those words as titles. Only as descriptions of the tasks the brother or sister does.
Here is that article in Croatian
https://wol.jw.org/hr/wol/d/r19/lp-c/102009288
 

Everybody knows it. It’s nothing more than common sense. Regardless of what elders are called, they come closest to fitting the role lawmakers have in mind for ‘clergy.’

What would be wrong, then, with just admitting that elders also come closest to fitting the role that nearly everyone, including most JWs, have in mind for clergy? It's a little bit like the word rapture, where many people have a wrong connotation of what all is implied with the word, so that we don't use it specifically for the Greek word "harpazo." But we still, according to the latest WT on the subject, believe in the "rapture" part of the word "rapture." To most people, clergy, refers to those who teach and take the lead in religious services, including those who "shepherd" the flock, take confessions, etc. Nothing to see here as far as I'm concerned.
This doesn't mean, of course, that we shouldn't also distinguish our use of terms from wrong connotations that these terms imply to others.

Sometimes I point out that most have spent decades serving in areas and in ways more humble than of those whom they will later lead. How different from the typical business or political leader, most of whom were born into privilege 

This formulation is the same as most businesses on Earth. You start at the bottom and work your way up, with the difference being they are volunteers. The GB members all gained spiritual and mental experience in the many years they were full time publishers alone with no other responsibilities. They were trained by older men, the older men suggest to a body of older men that they be considered to help a congregation or branch office while the continue their volunteer service as door to door ministers.
You don't start in the mail office one week then become president the next. The structure of Jehovah's Witnesses leadership weeds out those who have no desire to serve God. Many pioneers have spent 120 hours a month going door to door with the magazines,this is the expressed will of God preaching the Good News of God's Kingdom in all the Earth. They keep records before God who and where they spoke with someone, that they may reach every door, every person.
Have you ever spent 120 hours a month as a volunteer, spending your own money for all expenses? Previously they paid for the literature they lovingly gave to those who would read them. The GB are lowly servants of Jehovah. They respect that Jesus is the true head of the congregation. Having a body lead the organization spiritually is much better than having one man with unpredictability.
If the Apostles Paul and Peter were members, there would be complainers inside and out of the organization.The world is full of nonconstructive complainers.What will be their outcome? We leave that to the one who peers into such conversations from the heavens!
The GB are lowly men who are humble before God, searching the Bible for truth and direction, no different than a father who tries to care for his families spiritual needs.  

There is no way you can "suit yourself" in a secular  court of law - you fight to win....... to expect otherwise is unjust.  If you lose while innocent and obeying God (like brothers in Russia) one serves the penalty and then try to appeal within the secular law system they have created.
4jah2me, if your sense of justice is still outraged :  I understand..but do not forget, even if a guilty person gets away with something like murder, rape, etc. Jehovah sees everything and he will compensate in future when His system arrives - in the end there will be true justice for all.
Do you believe that God really exists and there is a future where he will compensate?   .... The 1000 years is called a day of judgment is it not?  This world is not all there is....
The GB will be judged as individuals and how they executed their responsibilities given to them. If you really believe God exists - then rest assured no-one will get away with something serious...  The elders too.  God is not partial. 
I have seen elders handle their responsibilities in good way.... and bad.  If their brand of justice is flawed, I have seen elders fall out or be removed...  but jehovah is a God of mercy...... he always gives people time to change or improve..........or repent....... no matter what their sin was.
In a secular court - we accept judgment - even if a mistake was made. We accept that human judgment is not perfect and then try to fight the verdict through legal channels. Many people on death row have been innocent.
In the congregation people's spiritual lives are at stake.... I can speak from experience..... I come across here as hard ... but I have been in truth since I was 21 - the first in my family.  The knocks I got from imperfect brothers and sisters in this time  did affect me....especially when I was young, stupid and fragile. .. but in the end it strengthened me and gave me "endurance". 
I stuck to jehovah (made Him my joy) and cultivated humility. I always tried to understand imperfection and only trust jehovah and stick to him..... this helped me to endure and grow in understanding.
This it is the crux of the matter...... trust that jehovah is the great compensator.  He is the only and absolute provider of true justice. He is righteous.
I read a lot of news .... when I read of the growing injustices against Christian's in north Africa...... the murders, rapes etc.  I just want to literally cry...... in this world run by satan behind the scenes, there is no true justice. 
JUSTICE really depends what kind of government is in power ..... and how corrupt it is or not.    We all will learn this soon when governments turn on religion.... we will see how just governments really are.  The bible does not say for nothing that those who accept Jesus' randsom will be persecuted before Armageddon. 
The law is usually the instrument by which they persecute people when the society is reasonably civil.  When society is in chaos, you are just executed or kangaroo court prevails.
Be glad you are living in a first world country - although things are deteriorating fast.  I cry for the young children being raped in Africa ...... all the time.... it is endemic....  law and order is only for those in power..... not the victims.
Jehovah loves the lowly, the victims..... and they do get a measure of comfort from Him in this world....... the full healing for them will only come in the new system.. ...but they must draw close to jehovah now to get this comfort.  Some do not appreciate this offer from jehovah..... and throw the opportunities away.
 

It doesn't matter what the JW version of confidentiality is or was. The question posed in the heading of this post is: "Did Jehovah's Witnesses lie to the Montana court about confidentiality"
The answer is no, the JWs did not lie about confidetiality. The court was fully aware of the JW's version of confidentiality before it made its decision to reverse the judgment. The court reversed its judgment on the basis of the JWs version of confidentiality.
Page13 of the Court's Decision: "the summary judgment record demonstrates that Jehovah’s Witnesses have an established process for receiving and investigating reports of child abuse within their congregations; that they consider this process confidential; and that the process necessarily involves multiple elders and congregation members, including the accused, CCJW elders who provide spiritual guidance, and local elders who conduct the investigation."
Not sure what you mean by that....but if you mean that this could be misused to intentionally falsely accuse someone, then yes, that is true. Trust is put in the good will of people, and it is assumed that they will not make things up. People like to believe in the general goodness of humanity.  And there are many “good” people out there. But yes, this trust can, and has been abused, no doubt about that. I even have know of an experience where that happened. The underage daughter in the custody of her dad, wanted to go and live with her mom, so she made up a story about her dad, that he was beating her. She called child abuse helpline. I don't think we should underestimate the training these people have in knowing how to recognize authentic reports. The authorities came and investigated, and found out the real truth. The authorities are usually not quick at condemning someone without due proof. (We are taking about civilised countries). Separating families merely because someone suspects foul play usually is not the procedure.

Money makes all sorts of pain magically go away, didn't you know that? 
Interestingly, in the Montana case (and I only know this because as I said, I read the court transcript, over 400 pages of it, in order to get a clear and unbiased view) one of the victims (the other sibling who also reported the abuse) did not want to become a part of the lawsuit. He said in his deposition that he just wants to get on with his life. In other words, he was not interested in money to "repair his trauma". This victim was the only one who is still in the truth. So it appears he was more interested in remaining one of Jehovah's Witnesses than in money. Now I am sure there will be malcontents (as you call them) who will claim that he must have been brainwashed into being loyal to the organization. All speculation of course. But the more realistic approach is; maybe he just liked being one of Jehovah's Witnesses, and therefor why would he want to claim damages from a community that he likes being a part of, especially when he knew they were not responsible for what his stepdad did to him. He knew his step dad was going to be prosecuted, and that was enough justice for him. Obviously, he felt that his spirituality helped him in overcoming his trauma. But if one doesn't have that kind of faith, then money is the next best thing.
Don't forget, this was never condoned. Anything can happen if done in secret.

Well no, that is not my personal opinion. That is the opinion of the Christian Congregation. How else could they claim clergy privilege unless they applied the worldly definition (legal definition) to the elders?

Update from IICSA today 14th January 2020 
https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/17283/view/preliminary-hearing-transcript-14-jan-2020.pdf
It's UK of course so may not be of interest to most of you. 
I've just read the full 70 pages and it looks like a whitewash.
 

I wish people knew what a dictator is.  When they live under one they will not use the word so freely. People call jehovah a dictator as well because he dares to tell them what is right and wrong!

Indeed. I agree with his opinion in that the law needs to be changed.
Page 15 of the Supreme Court's decision says this: "This Court’s task is to interpret what is contained in the reporting statute as written by the Legislature. We do not opine whether that body could have made a different policy choice that would afford greater protection to child victims. The Legislature is the appropriate body to entertain such policy arguments.
 
Its simple. From a worldly point of view the elders are clergy. From the Christian congregation's point of view, the worldly definition of clergy does apply to the elders. However, outside of a worldly situation (meaning a worldly situation like a court setting) a member of the Christian congregation will not view the elders as clergy, because they are not applying the worldly point of view.  No deceit or lying there.

Indeed. I agree with his opinion in that the law needs to be changed.
Page 15 of the Supreme Court's decision says this: "This Court’s task is to interpret what is contained in the reporting statute as written by the Legislature. We do not opine whether that body could have made a different policy choice that would afford greater protection to child victims. The Legislature is the appropriate body to entertain such policy arguments.
 
Its simple. From a worldly point of view the elders are clergy. From the Christian congregation's point of view, the worldly definition of clergy does apply to the elders. However, outside of a worldly situation (meaning a worldly situation like a court setting) a member of the Christian congregation will not view the elders as clergy, because they are not applying the worldly point of view.  No deceit or lying there.

Not all lawyers.
I know some who do it all the time.
They only “play dirty” in your eyes because they beat your side.
Exactly. Look, if someone offered me $20 million (or bought enough of my books to total that amount—hint, hint) I would take it in a heartbeat if there were no strings attached. But the “strings attached” in this instance is kicking the organization in the teeth which is likely more proactive than anyone in actually preventing child sexual abuse.