Anna

Just in case anyone is interested here are the 'closed club' rules:
This club is intended for active publishers associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses only. Anyone who does not fall into this category will be denied membership. Members should keep in mind that an opinion on something of a doctrinal nature that is not in line with current understanding does not mean that the current understanding is wrong. Therefore it’s not necessary to take offense, or start defending current understanding just for the sake of it, without actually presenting a reasonable counter argument.   Members must realize that one of the objectives of this club is that members should feel comfortable expressing their ideas and discussing things which can be viewed as controversial, as long as these do not become dogmatic and/or are aggressively promoted. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and it works both ways. Biblical principles to keep in mind: (2 Timothy 2:23-25) Further, reject foolish and ignorant debates, knowing that they produce fights. For a slave of the Lord does not need to fight, but needs to be gentle toward all, qualified to teach, showing restraint when wronged,  instructing with mildness those not favorably disposed.. (Titus 3:9, 10)  But have nothing to do with foolish arguments and genealogies and disputes and fights over the Law, for they are unprofitable and futile. As for a man who promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition (1 Peter 3:15) . . .always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect. (1 Thessalonians 5:21) Make sure of all things, hold fast to what is fine. (1 John 4:1) Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired statement, but test the inspired statements to see whether they originate with God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. Not allowed: obscene, vulgar, and/or hateful talk, racist remarks, ad hominem attacks (against anyone, which includes the GB), trolling, and links to apostate websites.

Just in case anyone is interested here are the 'closed club' rules:
This club is intended for active publishers associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses only. Anyone who does not fall into this category will be denied membership. Members should keep in mind that an opinion on something of a doctrinal nature that is not in line with current understanding does not mean that the current understanding is wrong. Therefore it’s not necessary to take offense, or start defending current understanding just for the sake of it, without actually presenting a reasonable counter argument.   Members must realize that one of the objectives of this club is that members should feel comfortable expressing their ideas and discussing things which can be viewed as controversial, as long as these do not become dogmatic and/or are aggressively promoted. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and it works both ways. Biblical principles to keep in mind: (2 Timothy 2:23-25) Further, reject foolish and ignorant debates, knowing that they produce fights. For a slave of the Lord does not need to fight, but needs to be gentle toward all, qualified to teach, showing restraint when wronged,  instructing with mildness those not favorably disposed.. (Titus 3:9, 10)  But have nothing to do with foolish arguments and genealogies and disputes and fights over the Law, for they are unprofitable and futile. As for a man who promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition (1 Peter 3:15) . . .always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect. (1 Thessalonians 5:21) Make sure of all things, hold fast to what is fine. (1 John 4:1) Beloved ones, do not believe every inspired statement, but test the inspired statements to see whether they originate with God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. Not allowed: obscene, vulgar, and/or hateful talk, racist remarks, ad hominem attacks (against anyone, which includes the GB), trolling, and links to apostate websites.

I really miss AllenSmith34. For reasons I've explained before, there should be no such thing as "permanent" disfellowshipping on a forum such as this one. The rebuke of the majority should be sufficient.
I miss the comments that he often put a lot of thought into, and that honestly revealed what he was thinking. One thing I don't miss about him was his constant habit of taking serious posts and tacking a "HaHa" emoticon on them. It seemed like a lazy person's mischievous way of showing derision and scorn, and trying to stir up contention instead of taking time to explain his view in a mature manner. Many days AllenSmith would produce more "HaHa" responses than actual posts.
(Proverbs 22:10) . . .Drive away the scornful man, And contention will disappear; Disputes and insults will cease. Fortunately, we don't have as much of that any more. Oh...wait, sorry...what's this:

 

In the past, God let people know what he is doing and when. Jesus said that this time would be different. He said we would be warned about WHAT he was doing, but not WHEN.
*** w03 1/1 p. 18 par. 2 “Keep on the Watch”! ***
On this account you too prove yourselves ready, because at an hour that you do not think to be it, the Son of man is coming.” (Matthew 24:42-44) A thief does not announce in advance when he is coming. One person cannot produce a teaching that gets advertised to the entire world. Even if the rocks had to cry out, it would not have been just one rock. An organization provides the efficiency to get a message out in such a way that it is generally appealing, or understood. The members of the organization are willing to explain it if it is not understood. We all stand on our own in the end. The organization is a tool or means to declare that message in an efficient and consistent manner, to help people understand it and therefore accept or reject it.
(Romans 10:14-18) 14 However, how will they call on him if they have not put faith in him? How, in turn, will they put faith in him about whom they have not heard? How, in turn, will they hear without someone to preach? 15 How, in turn, will they preach unless they have been sent out? Just as it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who declare good news of good things!” . . .  Why, in fact, “into all the earth their sound went out, and to the ends of the inhabited earth their message.” I think Paul speaks in general terms here that the message has gone out through God's actions toward Israel, and God's obvious backing of the early Christians, so that Gamaliel would say:
(Acts 5:38, 39) . . .For if this scheme or this work is from men, it will be overthrown; 39 but if it is from God, you will not be able to overthrow them. Otherwise, you may even be found fighters against God himself.” Like you, and like Brother Jackson of the GB, I would also not be so presumptuous as to claim that God is using only one group of 8 men as his mouthpiece or channel. But you'll notice that the important thing is not the so-called "inspiration" or "perfection" of those who preach. It's the message.
What would those rocks be saying if they were needed to cry out, instead of Christians?
 
 

Perhaps, but it's not obvious yet to me.
You haven't been clear about what "it" is that active JWs understand, and do not minimize or dismiss.
Perhaps there are, and perhaps the current understanding of what 1914 represented is 100 percent correct. But the Watchtower does not speak of a first group of the this generation who merely "have understood what 1914 represents and what has always represented" does it? No, the Watchtower speaks of those who understood the sign that they were seeing in 1914, at the time they were seeing it.
*** ws14 1/15 p. 30 par. 15 “Let Your Kingdom Come”—But When? ***
When Jesus mentioned “this generation,” we understand that he was speaking about two groups of anointed Christians. The first group was present in 1914 and understood that Christ began ruling as King in that year. Those who made up this group were not only alive in 1914, but they had also been anointed by holy spirit in or before that year. This doesn't fit the current Watchtower explanation that they had it wrong at the time. They didn't even teach that this supposed sign in 1914 meant that Jesus had begun his presence. (His presence had begun in 1874, and this was still the official teaching until 1943/1944. No one we know recognized this in 1914.) So it would be difficult to claim that anyone saw the sign and understood it in 1914, unless you happen to know of someone who understood it that way. Fred Franz admits that he misunderstood it until 1943, and he is used as a primary example of a person in the first group.

For what it's worth, I noticed that you did bring up several other issues besides child abuse. Child sexual abuse (CSA) seemed to be the issue that remains most unresolved for you, and it spilled over into discussions of elders, GB, the congregation fear of elders, two-witness rule inconsistency, clergy privilege, etc. To be fair these other topics were often already related to the CSA issue.
Jehovah can use any of us, and any government, ruler or organization to accomplish his will. He can use our mistakes to accomplish his will, and he can use our feeble and foibled attempts to minister to him, too, of course. I think Jehovah continues to cleanse "JW Org" every time we show humility as an organization and show ourselves malleable to his will. (Like the potter's vessel illustration from @Bible Speaks you commented on.) You made a comment under that topic to the effect that Jehovah does not "mold" us to his will through congregation elders. This made no sense to me, because the utilization of congregation elders is very much a part of Jehovah's will as we can see in the Biblical direction given to congregations. Of course, if there are specific things elders do, you could address those things, but the generalization is not scriptural.
On the issue of Armageddon, there is a range of belief among Witnesses, so I assume you mean the standard idea that Jehovah destroys all the wicked, especially the wicked organizations, and only Jehovah's people survive. That range of belief might include questions about who really get counted as "wicked," who really get counted as Jehovah's people, or whether a large number of JWs actually do not survive, too. What happens with children and those who remain innocent by lack of hearing, or inability to comprehend? What happens with those who would gladly have joined us, but who were stumbled at haughty elders, or false prophecies, or issues of child abuse that seemed to them to be the fault of an organization, rather than just the perpetrators?
Also on the issue of Armageddon, you know that while it might not be dangerous to think that it might be a long way off, it is dangerous to live our lives according to the idea that it might be a long way off. The point is to keep it close in mind because it could come at any time, without further warning. We are warned that it will arrive, but we have absolutely no warning as to the times and seasons. This makes me wonder about what several members have done on this forum by speculating about what things are "obviously" going to happen in the near future that will prove this or that scripture to have been accomplished. I think this is also a mistake, because even if we think a certain action on the part of a government, a person, the UN, or anything else must happen first to fulfill some Bible prophecy before the end, then I think we have failed to understand that Armageddon can actually arrive 5 minutes after you fall asleep tonight. And it must be just as wrong to speculate that it must happen before the deaths of the entire second group of anointed who overlapped with an earlier group of anointed who would later admit that they misunderstood what they saw happening in 1914. This is just as un-Biblical and therefore un-Christian because it claims we know something about the times and seasons with respect to the time of the end.
An organization is not a person with motives you can judge. Yes, many JWs are blind to the faults of the Organization. But you should know members of the "Private" club for JWs as opposed to the "Public" club for JWs (now called "Open") is just as apt to discuss faults of the Organization as it is in the Open Club. As TTH pointed out, it has actually become easier to discuss these criticisms without people changing the subject at will, or asking people to defend their choices on some barely related topic.

Ahh...brothers, isn’t it nice and peaceful now that the loudmouth @JOHN BUTLER is not around.  Boy, he sure could...YIKES!! I’ve posted in the wrong club! Abort, Librarian (you old hen) abort! Take this down!

I think it was formed specifically with you in mind, because if the discussion veered toward the UN, you would return it to your ONE AND ONLY TOPIC.
If it went towards the immortality of the soul, you would return it to your ONE AND ONLY TOPIC.
If a pleasant discussion of Mozart ensued, or Plato, you would return it to your ONE AND ONLY TOPIC.
Nobody could hear themselves think with your perpetual crying. What choice did anyone have?

There IS something strange going on. I think the Librarian (the old hen) is trying to separate warring factions for the sake of decorum. I had to “join” a club to confront the malcontents, in a forum where anything goes & so I suspect that anyone can join here.
You might find it harder to join the “loyal” JW forum, because you have proven that you can speak about only one thing, and, as often as not, you insert it where it is completely irrelevant.

What justice did you get?

I'm finding a lot of the poetry here:
The last link is this:
http://ww.delightfulpoetry.com/introduction-4.html
(which resolves with www  or the "ww" as the subdomain.)
There are many poems from both Cynthia Becker and Grace Straley. For example:
http://www.delightfulpoetry.com/broken_reed.html
The other links in the list might be resolved through the "waybackmachine" or "web archive." For example:
Life Everlasing is Promised
from the above list is not available: http://www.poetsbranch.com/PPT/LifeEverlasting/LifeEverlasting.html
But an earlier version of it is available here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20160327223513/http://www.poetsbranch.com/PPT/LifeEverlasting/LifeEverlasting.html
Didn't test any others.

If I remember right, I think it was @Srecko Sostar who I asked.

If I remember right, I think it was @Srecko Sostar who I asked.

I saw that you just accuse and accuse the GB and your knowledge is very little.... so I usually do not argue with people  who think they know it all and have so little knowledge.  You also seem very immature and your reasoning does not have much logic going on.....  .... well.  I think Anna has been patient with you and kind.....   I would not be so nice...   
 
What you want is a proper witch hunt of JWs to go after a person in public and persecute him.....maybe get a newspaper article?   You do not sound reasonable at all.   We do our duty in the congregation and we do it in the reporting to the police  (if there are legal laws in place).  What else do you suggest we do? I recall Anna asking you this question and you did not answer it.
If there are no legal laws for reporting  the crime in place then police are not obliged to follow it up - logic conclusion heh?   Does this compute?  Even if there are laws in place it seems the police are too busy to do anything regarding the matter these days.
The person involved must then file a civil law suit.... maybe the incentive to get a lot of money will get them to report it.... 
Mr Butler - It is easy to take the moral high ground and try to prove you are so righteous and justified to  criticize the GB and elders....... but I do not think you have any experience in running such a large organization and you cannot even imagine it.... if you could you would have shown more reasonableness.
You may find yourself one day being accused of a crime you did not commit - then you will be grateful for people showing caution to not just condemn you without proper evidence.  There is two sides to every case.

It is not a problem, it is exactly how it is. The jurisdictional system in a congregation deals with sin, the Jurisdictional system of the Government deals with crime and both can be applied to the same instance at the same time. In the case of child sexual molestation, it is both, a sin and a crime. So both jurisdictional systems are needed.
It might seem like that. But if you read the context, and other scriptures which talk about this subject, then it becomes clear that for Christians, God is to be obeyed above anyone: Acts 5:29: "In answer Peter and the other apostles said: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men". For example, secular law does not prohibit Adultery or fornication. However God does.
So, as you say, there are two parallel  jurisdictional systems. One is religious, based on sin (adultery and fornication are a sin), the other one is secular, based on crime (adultery and fornication are not a crime).  That is why Paul was able to say: "After all, it is none of my business to judge outsiders. God will judge them. But should you not judge the members of your own fellowship? As the scripture says, “Remove the evil person from your group.” (1 Corinthians 5:12-13).
These would have been personal disputes between two brothers (or sisters) that did not involve a sin or a crime.  It would be better if these brothers could handle this between themselves peacefully, rather than get "worldly" courts to judge who was right and who was wrong.
Possibly. But in any case, we can be sure that ultimately God will judge everyone (Romans 14:12)
If you were an elder, what decision would you make?

The problem with that reasoning is that what has to happen for time to tell? Another child is molested? Do we "sacrifice" another child so when that happens we then know for 'sure' this person is a danger and needs to be constrained in a more effective way? (i.e. prison and counseling etc.).
In cases of child sexual molestation, unlike other judicial cases (adultery, fornication etc.)  the congregation will be informed according to the new guidelines:
par. 11. If it is determined that one guilty of child sexual abuse is repentant and will remain in the congregation, restrictions are imposed on the individual’s congregation activities. The individual will be specifically admonished by the elders not to be alone in the company of children, not to cultivate friendships with children, or display any affection for children. In addition, elders will inform parents of minors within the congregation of the need to monitor their children’s interaction with the individual.
https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/legal-resources/information/packet-jw-scripturally-based-position-child-protection/
 

It's not a laughing matter and it's not that simple. It would be great if it was! By your comment I can see that you have never had any experience with something as complex as this. In fact it shows me you have absolutely no idea. Why don't you at least do some reading up on the subject, to educate yourself, before you make thoughtless sweeping statements like this.
Here are a few things to start you off:
https://www.socialworker.com/feature-articles/ethics-articles/To_Report_or_Not_To_Report%3A_That_Is_the_Ethical_Dilemma/
http://psycnet.apa.org/buy/1999-04243-002
https://www.mnpsych.org/index.php?option=com_dailyplanetblog&view=entry&category=industry news&id=172:the-importance-of-being-earnest-ethics-and-child-abuse-reporting
https://www.psychiatryadvisor.com/childadolescent-psychiatry/mandatory-reporting-of-child-abuse/article/802017/
Before you say that these articles apply to social workers, therapists only,  you need to realize that disclosures made to elders are no different, and that elders experience the same dilemmas because the information given to them may be the same as that given to social workers, therapists etc.
 
 

What nonsense. Has it not occurred to you that just as you are concerned about slander and defamation, then so are the elders. You know you cannot just nilly willy hand out confidential information about others. So you are not willing to do it yourself, to go that extra mile, why? You don't know anything about the information the elders have in your congregation at all. You don't even know whether they went to the police or not. Everything you say about your elders and the case are just assumptions.  And you just keep making one excuse after another for why you will not go to secular authorities. If you don't want to go to the police, or the elders, why don't you at least go to social services? I mean I am hoping you are worried about the perpetrator molesting someone else. Or are you not worried?

You are funny. This is what we have been talking about. When the law of the land "the authorities" obligate a person who has heard of an allegation of CSA to report to the authorities, then JWs will report to the authorities.

11. If it is determined that one guilty of child sexual abuse is repentant and will remain in the
congregation, restrictions are imposed on the individual’s congregation activities. The individual will
be specifically admonished by the elders not to be alone in the company of children, not to cultivate
friendships with children, or display any affection for children. In addition, elders will inform parents
of minors within the congregation of the need to monitor their children’s interaction with the individual
Yes John, I want all those little children in your congregation to be molested
Keep making excuses. Heck John, give me one of your elders emails and I will tell them myself!
 
Correct, they are not bound by scripture if there is no law to report to the police. They are only bound by scripture to deal with it in the congregation. It is not in their jurisdiction to go beyond what the survivor/victim wants. If the survivor/victim does not want it reported, and it is not the law for them to do so, then the elders have no obligation to report scripturally or secularly. HOWEVER if the elders discern that other children, or the victim is still in danger, then the elders will take it upon themselves to report to the police. But this is left to their discretion and their own conscience. In other instances they may actually be advised by the branch to report even if there is no legal duty to do so.
5. When elders learn of an accusation of child abuse, they immediately consult with the branch
office of Jehovah’s Witnesses to ensure compliance with child abuse reporting laws. (Romans 13:1)
Even if the elders have no legal duty to report an accusation to the authorities, the branch office of Jehovah’s
Witnesses will instruct the elders to report the matter if a minor is still in danger of abuse or
there is some other valid reason. Elders also ensure that the victim’s parents are informed of an accusation
of child abuse. If the alleged abuser is one of the victim’s parents, the elders will inform the
other parent.
Yes, of course, it is the elders obligation. But there is only so much they can reasonably do, as you say "if it is possible for them to do so".

Let’s put a few things into perspective:
1) A survivor of a sexual attack (JW or Non JW) is NEVER obligated to report the assault to the Police. Never.
2). A JW survivor of a sexual attack (if perpetrator is JW) is scripturally obligated to report this to the Elders in the same way that someone finding out about adultery is scripturally obligated to tell the elders so the wicked man can be removed:  1 Corinthians 5:9-12. And vs 5 “you must hand such a man over to Satan” and (Deutoronomy 17:7) “you must remove what is bad from your midst”. Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that if wrongdoing in a congregation was covered up, then Jehovah would remove his spirit from that congregation. A congregation must be kept morally clean.
3) If the law of the land does not obligate second parties to inform the Police, then the reporting can be left to the first party.
4) If the law of the land obligates second parties (or anyone who learns of merely an allegation) to report to the police, then they will and must report to the police. (John Butler!)
With this information, please use your intelligence to figure out the various scenarios possible in the case of child sexual molestation.
 

 

 
 

I did not read the comments above.  I did my own research on the history of the laws regarding this subject a few years back.  I just get so sick of those who always want to put the Organization in the bad light - they use the available information to twist the truth to look like the organization is full of pedophiles and condoners of it.
In Australia  there were records to the effect that Jw's had about a  thousand people since 1950 - which means , in the last 70 years - these were alleged child sex abusers.  Some of these were accused but there was not sufficient proof to put them out of the congregation.  In this time there were about 40 years that there were no proper laws in place to prosecute - and later when they could there were still not child services readily available and the laws were very bad.  It did not protect the child from a victimization via the court system.
Of all the organizations interviewed (almost 2000) - our organization was the only organization (of all the churches, youth organizations, sports organizations that work with children) which kept notes on these people because there were not laws in place to prosecute.  JWs kept notes on them so they could not go to another congregation and not be informed upon.
While it is a heinous crime and bad people can slip into the organization I think people are incredibly naive if they think that this number is high.  
In 2003 a law was passed in United States which made prosecution of sex offenders easier.  Before that the child could be cross-examined in court by the defender's hostile representatives.  They allowed for taped evidence etc. 
It is easy to look back with todays laws in place and judge the past on this.   I have mentioned it before on this forum and then the very same people after a while open up the same subject again - which means that they are not prepared to be reasonable and really weigh the evidence.
The purpose of the Australian inquiry was to address the gaps in the law and they were investigating the procedures various organizations were following to  find out where the gaps were so better legislation can be put in place.

Ye all harken! John Butler from a little town in the UK knows!
This has nothing to do with slander. You say the elders already know the whole case. You going to the elders would be to ask them if they have gone to the police, and if not, to tell them that as someone who has learned of an allegation, you are obliged by law to go. You are just giving them heads up.  This conversation doesn't have to be awkward or nasty, just polite and to the point. You don't have to tell them who told you or how you know. You need to call them, and set up an appointment to see them, or for them to come to your house. All you need to say is that you have something of a very serious matter to talk to them about. Why don't you give them a chance John, instead of accusing them of things you really have no proof of? 
Seriously? Of course if you started going into an emotional rant about how the org purposefully hides pedos in the congregations and that all JW teachings are false,  then maybe. But you will be talking to them very briefly, letting them know, because it's only fair, that you will be going to the Police with the information you have been given because it is your duty as a citizen of the country. That's all.  
I was clearly being sarcastic John. I think it's a real shame you are so reluctant to do your part in protecting children, considering you seem to be so concerned about it. I am beginning to wonder......
You can be certain that if I had got the information you did, I would have gone to the police and elders the next day! So who is more concerned?

11.25 pm Friday,  That's over 24 hours and NO reply from local Police on the matter. 

What about:
https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/legal-resources/information/packet-jw-scripturally-based-position-child-protection/
Isn't that clear enough?