The Central Problem with Christianity

[Diogenes]

Jesus (and Paul) thought the world was going to end soon. This is why Jesus told people to give away their possessions, and Paul taught people should not marry. Jesus spoke very specifically about the world ending in the lifetime of those he preached to. [I won't go into the verses, because it will spawn the usual verbal gymnastics about how he did not mean what he said]

Christians, for the most part, ignore the idea of not attaining wealth. They also ignore the admonition not to marry. They ignore these basic Christian teachings because they don't like them. Instead, they claim Jesus didn't really mean what he said about the end coming soon. This provides cover for getting married and accumulating wealth.

The question for debate is, "Why do most Christians marry and try to accumulate wealth despite the very clear New Testament admonitions to do the opposite?

Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth
and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal.
But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor
rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal.

__ Matthew 6:19-20

[Purple Knight]

Rooted in Deuteronomy 19:15"No single witness may convict another for any error or any sin that he may commit"the two-witness rule states that, barring a confession, no member of the organization can be officially accused of committing a sin without two credible eyewitnesses who are willing to corroborate the accusation. Critics say this rule has helped turn Witness communities into havens for child molesters, who rarely commit crimes in the presence of bystanders.

This reminds me of money scams, actually. There are shady services like cashapp that offer no refunds period and sellers usually use them to scam buyers. Paypal pretty much always favours the buyer and buyers often scam sellers, getting the item and then a refund too.

So what do you do when both parties can potentially be scamming? Favour the victim and give the benefit of the doubt, or insist upon evidence when paedophiles are very good at not leaving any?

Whichever side you choose, the side you did not favour will essentially run amok.

Now you can certainly say that because children are especially vulnerable, they need the benefit of the doubt more. But it's still ugly. Believe always is ugly. You're doing an ugly thing when you deliberately send a certain amount of innocent people to jail so other people can be safe.

It's not as if I'm on the religious side here. Their problem is worse. The fact that paedophiles go into religious organisations, attracted there because they know they can operate relatively unimpeded, is worse, no question. I just don't think the alternative is acceptable either. Since the more you try to adjudicate each situation individually, the more you just favour the clever deceivers, that's not the solution either. The best thing I've got is all kids need bodycams, and that's far from a good solution.

[Miles]

... the JW's don't report unless their criminal member confesses. This directly violates the statutory obligation to report abuse when the victim alone reports it.

Are you claiming that it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained ?

Seems to be the case. [...]

Seems? Why do you say "seems"? Do you not know what their policy is?

Who am I, a mere outsider, to judge the policy of the vaunted Watchtower Bible and Tract Society? However, I do note your lack of denial of what is said, but instead deflect the issue to me. Hmmmm, another Watchtower ploy perhaps? Let the tap dancing begin.

.

[JehovahsWitness]

Who am I, a mere outsider, to judge the policy of the vaunted Watchtower Bible and Tract Society?

I did not ask you to "judge the policy" I asked..

Are you claiming that it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained ?

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS




FURTHER READING : What are the Jehovah's Witnesse Child Protection Policies ?
https://www.jw.org/finder?docid=1013165 ... wtlocale=E

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES , CHILD ABUSE and ...SEXUAL IMMORALITY,

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus at no time is recorded as telling /instructing/commanding anyone but the rich young ruler to give away their belongings.

You're not just 'twisting' the point, you are changing it AND attempting to change scripture. The OP gives an example where Jesus is preaching to many, not just the 'rich young ruler':

"Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth
and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal.
But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor
rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal.

__ Matthew 6:19-20"

Are you suggesting that "Lay not up for yourselves treasures" means "give all your material possessions away"?

MATTHEW 6:19



Christian Standard Bible
"Dont store up for yourselves treasures on earth ...

Holman Christian Standard Bible
"Dont collect for yourselves treasures on earth ...

[Miles]

Who am I, a mere outsider, to judge the policy of the vaunted Watchtower Bible and Tract Society?

I did not ask you to "judge the policy" I asked..

Are you claiming that it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained ?

To which I said: "Seems to be the case." >>that:

"it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained"

for which I presented an article from the Atlantic web site as evidence of what I feel is corroboration of just such official Jehovahs Witness policy.


But lest we get off track here, let me again note "your lack of denial of what is said, but instead deflect the issue to me." So how about it, do you deny "it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained


.

[Eloi]

Who am I, a mere outsider, to judge the policy of the vaunted Watchtower Bible and Tract Society?

I did not ask you to "judge the policy" I asked..

Are you claiming that it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained ?

To which I said: "Seems to be the case." >>that:

"it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained"

for which I presented an article from the Atlantic web site as evidence of what I feel is corroboration of just such official Jehovahs Witness policy.


.

It can "seems to be the case" and you can present any article that makes you "feel" something.
In short words: it is false; that is not our official policy. Now you know.

[Miles]

Who am I, a mere outsider, to judge the policy of the vaunted Watchtower Bible and Tract Society?

I did not ask you to "judge the policy" I asked..

Are you claiming that it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained ?

To which I said: "Seems to be the case." >>that:

"it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained"

for which I presented an article from the Atlantic web site as evidence of what I feel is corroboration of just such official Jehovahs Witness policy.


.

It can "seems to be the case" and you can present any article that makes you "feel" something.
In short words: it is false; that is not our official policy. Now you know.

After having read

" Rooted in Deuteronomy 19:15"No single witness may convict another for any error or any sin that he may commit"the two-witness rule states that, barring a confession, no member of the organization can be officially accused of committing a sin without two credible eyewitnesses who are willing to corroborate the accusation."

AND

"In addition to the 1997 "special blue envelope" letter, these suits have cited a 1989 letter in which Watchtower discouraged elders from reporting wrongdoing to civil authorities. "There is a time to keep quiet, when your words should prove to be few (Ecclesiastes 3:7; 5:2)," it read. "Improper use of the tongue by an elder can result in serious legal problems for the individual, the congregation, and even the Society.""

I see no reason to believe you.


.

[JehovahsWitness]

Who am I, a mere outsider, to judge the policy of the vaunted Watchtower Bible and Tract Society?

I did not ask you to "judge the policy" I asked..

Are you claiming that it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained ?

To which I said: "Seems to be the case." >>that:

"it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained"

for which I presented an article from the Atlantic web site as evidence ...

Are you suggesting the Jehovah's Witnesses publish their official policy via the Atlantic post?

[Eloi]

(...) I see no reason to believe you.

And what makes you think I care?

[Diogenes]

... the JW's don't report unless their criminal member confesses. This directly violates the statutory obligation to report abuse when the victim alone reports it.

Are you claiming that it is official Jehovahs Witness policy that their members NOT report allegations or suspicions of child sexual abuse to the proper authorities unless the abuse is personally witnessed by two individuals or a confession obtained ?

It is not my claim. It was the claim of an independent inquiry. And it's not just JW's that have failed to report. It's an endemic problem in various 'Christian' organizations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independe ... xual_Abuse

I was careful to only write what the independent report concluded; I even pointed out that this 2 witness requirement was true in the past, since I did not know whether it had changed since 2021.

The report indicated that the JW's get this 2 witness requirement from the Bible.
[" Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses." (I Timothy 5:19)]

The inquiry took more evidence about the Jehovah's Witnesses, which has 131,700 members in England and Wales, than any other group.

The organisation has repeatedly been accused of covering up child abuse and told the inquiry allegations concerning 67 individuals had been reported to its branch office within 10 years.

A particular concern in the report was that, while some organisations did have "effective" child protection policies, in some settings "not even basic child protection procedures" were in place.

"Religious believers can find it difficult to accept that members of their congregation or religious leaders could perpetrate abuse. As a result, some consider that it is not necessary to have specific child protection procedures or to adhere strictly to them," the inquiry concluded.

In the case of the Jehovah's Witnesses, IICSA was particularly critical of a biblical rule applied by the group requiring two witnesses before an allegation of abuse is considered by elders.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58420270

"Jehovah's Witnesses' congregational judicial policies require the testimony of two material witnesses to establish a perpetrator's serious sin in the absence of confession. The organization considers this policy to be a protection against malicious accusations of sexual assault."
"Jehovah's Witnesses and Child Protection". Jehovah's Witnesses Official Media Web Site. Office of Public Information of Jehovahs Witnesses. 2010. Archived from the original on June 12, 2010. Retrieved March 13, 2010.See also 1st version of 2002, or parent page to verify year, and 2nd version of 2009

For more than 30 years, Jehovahs Witnesses leaders have instructed elders across the U.S. to keep cases of child sexual abuse secret from law enforcement and members of their own congregations, according to court documents and written directives from the religions global headquarters in New York.

https://www.oxygen.com/the-witnesses/cr ... rom-police

Let us see what the current position is, by consulting the Watchtower itself on JW.org

If the person does not report to the elders within a reasonable period of time, then you should. One or two elders will then discuss the matter with the accused. The elders need to "search and investigate and inquire thoroughly" to see if wrong has been done. If it has, they will handle the case according to Scriptural guidelines.Deuteronomy 13:12-14.

At least two witnesses are required to establish a charge of wrongdoing. (John 8:17; Hebrews 10:28) If the person denies the charge and your testimony is the only one, the matter will be left in Jehovahs hands. (1 Timothy 5:19, 24, 25)

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1997607