Brother. Where art thou?

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Brother. Where art thou?

Post #1

Post by William »

Matt's Gospel
Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison. Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.


and;

Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.


Recently I had the misfortune of being accused of offending someone and someone else reported my offence to the authorities and without any further ado, I was penalized for it.

I cannot reveal the details of the case as it is soon to be under review [once I have finished documenting the details, and delivering these to the lawyers involved], but it got me to thinking about the alleged offence and the fact that I was not consulted because the evidence was accepted by the authority which received the complaint, as enough to warrant my being penalized.

Thus I simply had to pay the penalty [it was published and I first heard about it through the public domain] and now am lodging an appeal against the decision.

I have not been informed as to the identity of the complainant.

Based on the information re this situation and in relation to the script from Matts gospel;

QFD: Is it safe for me to assume, that it would not have been a Christian who lodged the complaint against me?

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #31

Post by William »

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #30]

Please correct me where I am off;

My understanding of the JWOrg is that its members do not vote, and this is because they recognize no political system which follows the - advice - of biblical Jesus.

Advice such as how to conduct oneself re the OPTopic.

Is this a fair assessment on my part re the JWOrg?

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 18068
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 430 times
Been thanked: 649 times
Contact:

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #32

Post by JehovahsWitness »

William wrote: Tue Nov 23, 2021 6:37 pm [Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #30]

Please correct me where I am off;

My understanding of the JWOrg is that its members do not vote, and this is because they recognize no political system which follows the - advice - of biblical Jesus.
It is true we do note take part in voting for political parties but this is not because Jehovahs Witnesses do not "recognize political systems". We *do* recognize acknowledge and submit to secular authorities (as long as they do not ask us to violate bible law and principle) but we believe Christians should remain neutral in political affairs.

I'm sorry I do not understand the second part of your post, so I cannot answer the question.





JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #33

Post by William »

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #32]
We *do* recognize acknowledge and submit to secular authorities (as long as they do not ask us to violate bible law and principle)
I am not sure why you wrote *do*?

So in relation to the advice given by Jesus re how one should conduct oneself, would a Jehovah's Witness attempt to engage with someone they felt offended them, [or offended someone else], if indeed there was no way in which they could be hurt by following such instructions?
I'm sorry I do not understand the second part of your post, so I cannot answer the question.
For example, as a Jehovah's Witness Christian, if you felt that I had offended someone, would you approach me privately in order to see if I could accept your reasoning on the matter, before going to the authorities with complaint, as per BJs instruction, quoted in the OP?

Or do you think that the instruction is not part of what you referred to as "bible law and principle"?

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3393
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 228 times

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #34

Post by 2timothy316 »

William wrote: Tue Nov 23, 2021 6:37 pm [Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #30]

Please correct me where I am off;

My understanding of the JWOrg is that its members do not vote, and this is because they recognize no political system which follows the - advice - of biblical Jesus.

Advice such as how to conduct oneself re the OPTopic.

Is this a fair assessment on my part re the JWOrg?
We do not vote because God's kingdom is no part of the world. (John 18:36)
Looking to Jesus as just an advisor is not enough. They'd have to look to him as God's appointed king and ruler. From what I've seen most governments are not lining up to hand over the keys to their kingdoms to Jesus Christ. We also see the number 666 to be the mark of the nations. Meaning they are morally corrupt and a complete failure when comes to rulership. This mark is put on those that support the world's governments. We as Jehovah's Witnesses want nothing to do with that.

https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/q ... -666-mean/

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #35

Post by William »

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #34]
Thank you for your comment Timothy.
We do not vote because God's kingdom is no part of the world. (John 18:36)
As JW mentioned;
We *do* recognize acknowledge and submit to secular authorities (as long as they do not ask us to violate bible law and principle)
As the thread has to do with secular judgements [what you might refer to as "no part of God Kingdom"] is it righteous strategy that Christians can have a boot in both camps and depending on what outcome the Christian wants, depends upon which camp the Christian seeks support from.

As an example, lets say that the situation was that I had the misfortune of being accused of offending someone and someone else reported my alleged offence to the authorities and the authorities put it to the people to vote whether they thought I was guilty and should be penalized or not.

Would you as a Christian [member of JWOrg in this case] think it proper to participate in the voting process or would you abstain?

Please state your reasons for your decision.

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3393
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 228 times

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #36

Post by 2timothy316 »

William wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 10:20 am [Replying to 2timothy316 in post #34]
Thank you for your comment Timothy.
We do not vote because God's kingdom is no part of the world. (John 18:36)
As JW mentioned;
We *do* recognize acknowledge and submit to secular authorities (as long as they do not ask us to violate bible law and principle)
As the thread has to do with secular judgements [what you might refer to as "no part of God Kingdom"] is it righteous strategy that Christians can have a boot in both camps and depending on what outcome the Christian wants, depends upon which camp the Christian seeks support from.

As an example, lets say that the situation was that I had the misfortune of being accused of offending someone and someone else reported my alleged offence to the authorities and the authorities put it to the people to vote whether they thought I was guilty and should be penalized or not.

Would you as a Christian [member of JWOrg in this case] think it proper to participate in the voting process or would you abstain?

Please state your reasons for your decision.
Depends on the accusation and what is local law concerning the offense? For example: Many states require that clergy, teachers, day care workers, dentists, nurses, and the list go on to include some dozens more professions to report suspected child abuse. It doesn't matter if there was abuse or not, it must be reported even if there is only suspected child abuse in any form. Meaning, the worker might not know for sure. But knowing for sure is not what the law states. It says even suspected abuse must be reported. To not report it would be breaking the law.

What is the law in your area? Is the person that reported you under an obligation by law to report you?

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #37

Post by William »

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #36]
What is the law in your area? Is the person that reported you under an obligation by law to report you?
The law hereabouts is that in matters which are 'grey areas' [such as civility], if one suspects uncivility is happening, one is not obligated to report it but can if they wish to, and can report it anonymously.

It will then be dealt with as a judge decides, based upon the evidence the judge receives re the complaint.

If the Judge decides in favor of the complainant, then the Judge will give a penalty against the alleged offender, based upon any evidence of offence [uncivility] having been committed.

Of course, if the alleged offender disagrees with the Judges decision, he/she can appeal and document the evidence in support of the appeal, and the appeal will be viewed by a team of Judges.

My interest and why I started this thread, is in how Christians view this type of process, and whether they think it is something they can support, or whether they think it contradicts the way in which biblical Jesus advised his followers to do things re compliant/accusation getting things sorted, attempting resolution without the use of Judges [re grey area dynamics - the big stuff - such as your example of child abuse - are not under examination re this thread]

And so to my question re Judges handing the decisions to the general public to vote on was another example of how such matters might be handled - and I am asking you whether you support such things as these, or whether you think these practices are secular in relation to what biblical Jesus advised.

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3393
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 228 times

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #38

Post by 2timothy316 »

William wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 11:15 am [Replying to 2timothy316 in post #36]
What is the law in your area? Is the person that reported you under an obligation by law to report you?
The law hereabouts is that in matters which are 'grey areas' [such as civility], if one suspects uncivility is happening, one is not obligated to report it but can if they wish to, and can report it anonymously.

It will then be dealt with as a judge decides, based upon the evidence the judge receives re the complaint.

If the Judge decides in favor of the complainant, then the Judge will give a penalty against the alleged offender, based upon any evidence of offence [uncivility] having been committed.

Of course, if the alleged offender disagrees with the Judges decision, he/she can appeal and document the evidence in support of the appeal, and the appeal will be viewed by a team of Judges.

My interest and why I started this thread, is in how Christians view this type of process, and whether they think it is something they can support, or whether they think it contradicts the way in which biblical Jesus advised his followers to do things re compliant/accusation getting things sorted, attempting resolution without the use of Judges [re grey area dynamics - the big stuff - such as your example of child abuse - are not under examination re this thread]

And so to my question re Judges handing the decisions to the general public to vote on was another example of how such matters might be handled - and I am asking you whether you support such things as these, or whether you think these practices are secular in relation to what biblical Jesus advised.
I can't speak for every Christian. For me, any offense that can be resolved justly without getting judges and juries involved is preferable. In the case of Christian brothers and sisters the Bible says to seek to settle the matter out of court for minor disputes. In dispute between two Christians both are required to 'leave their gift at the alter' and settle the dispute. Christians are also to get all the facts of the matter before making an accusation.

For me there are several factors to consider when it comes to a person that is not a Christian brother or sister. Because they do not consider the laws of the Bible as something they should follow, then that gives me much to think about. Does that person have the same values I have? Can I trust them to be fair in the matter? Can I trust they will admit that they are in the wrong? Will they lie? The problem with a non-Christian is that I don't know what I'm getting into. What kind of person am I dealing with? Can I safely talk to them about the matter? Have they reached out to me at all or have they already 'lawered up'?

With a true Christian that shares my values I have a lot more trust in them that they wish to please Jehovah. With a person that isn't a true Christian I have no idea what to expect. Thus I might choose to use the secular courts to bring my claim against them simply because it's my best chance at having justice served.

All that being said, I do know people that are not Christians and I have known them for years. If we were to have a minor dispute I would certainly seek to resolve the issue without courts first. Not because they are Christians but because I trust them. Still, that might end up biting me where the sun doesn't shine. But it's worth the risk to save the friendship.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10472
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1128 times
Contact:

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #39

Post by William »

[Replying to 2timothy316 in post #38]
All that being said,
I thank you sincerely for sharing it...
I do know people that are not Christians and I have known them for years. If we were to have a minor dispute I would certainly seek to resolve the issue without courts first. Not because they are Christians but because I trust them. Still, that might end up biting me where the sun doesn't shine. But it's worth the risk to save the friendship.
What you bring up here is a matter of trust.

If we are unsure as to what biblical Jesus meant re that trust, are there other words he might have said which can help us understand the aspect of trust?

Should we trust any involvement with secular activity based upon your reasoning that if it is not Christian-Based, it really cannot be trusted?

Or are there ways in which we can trust the process if we understand that The Father knows what is going on even if we don't, therefore, we can trust the process.

Specifically, this is only to do with lite-stuff [grey area] - as I mentioned in my last post. The crime of being uncivil to another [brother or other not being a central issue] - The issue is the accusation that offense was caused through a breaking a law, and the community tries to abide by that law.

So do you trust the Judges to make the right decision [that they will agree with you] that you would take your complaint to them rather than to the one you feel has breached the law, because the one you are accusing can't be trusted to agree with you?

To add an extra layer to that, do you think it is important that if you can, to FIRST take your grievance to The Father and do you trust that relationship enough that you will be open to being corrected on the matter through that connection, if The Father shows you that no actual offence was committed by the one you are complaining about?

Let's say that you did this and that was the verdict. Would you let go of your complaint and take it no further, or would you pursue it anyway, either by approaching the person you have the complaint against, or taking your complaint to the secular judges?

2timothy316
Prodigy
Posts: 3393
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 228 times

Re: Brother. Where art thou?

Post #40

Post by 2timothy316 »

William wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 1:52 pm [Replying to 2timothy316 in post #38]
All that being said,
I thank you sincerely for sharing it...
I do know people that are not Christians and I have known them for years. If we were to have a minor dispute I would certainly seek to resolve the issue without courts first. Not because they are Christians but because I trust them. Still, that might end up biting me where the sun doesn't shine. But it's worth the risk to save the friendship.
What you bring up here is a matter of trust.
Which is short supply these days. Can you trust strangers to do the right thing? If someone views you as a stranger can you be trusted?
If we are unsure as to what biblical Jesus meant re that trust, are there other words he might have said which can help us understand the aspect of trust?

Should we trust any involvement with secular activity based upon your reasoning that if it is not Christian-Based, it really cannot be trusted?

Or are there ways in which we can trust the process if we understand that The Father knows what is going on even if we don't, therefore, we can trust the process.

Specifically, this is only to do with lite-stuff [grey area] - as I mentioned in my last post. The crime of being uncivil to another [brother or other not being a central issue] - The issue is the accusation that offense was caused through a breaking a law, and the community tries to abide by that law.

So do you trust the Judges to make the right decision [that they will agree with you] that you would take your complaint to them rather than to the one you feel has breached the law, because the one you are accusing can't be trusted to agree with you?

To add an extra layer to that, do you think it is important that if you can, to FIRST take your grievance to The Father and do you trust that relationship enough that you will be open to being corrected on the matter through that connection, if The Father shows you that no actual offence was committed by the one you are complaining about?

Let's say that you did this and that was the verdict. Would you let go of your complaint and take it no further, or would you pursue it anyway, either by approaching the person you have the complaint against, or taking your complaint to the secular judges?
It seems you want to be treated like a Christian though you are not. I personally expect nothing fair from this world in the way of fair judgments or complaints from non-Christians or those that call themselves Christians but do not practice what it says in the Bible. To me they are no different from non-Christians. Only Jehovah can move the needles of justice in my favor in all cases.

Post Reply