The London branch office has sent a JWsurvey reader two replies to the same question
The London branch office has sent a JWsurvey reader two replies to the same question

A JWsurvey reader has been left scratching his head after receiving two separate and conflicting answers to his question from Watchtower’s London headquarters.

His initial letter, sent on November 6th, asked the simple question: “Could you please tell me if my contributions are being used to pay for the court cases that are currently taking place? This concerns me greatly.”

Watchtower’s first reply, dated November 18th under the letterhead “Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses,” was surprisingly candid. It stated: “We are not sure whether you have any particular court cases in mind. However, we can certainly confirm that donations to the worldwide work will be used from time to time to pay for legal representation in various courts.”

It is worth noting that Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain freely admits to sending millions of pounds worth of donations overseas “to assist with the running of administrative facilities and missionary activity.”

The November 18th letter went on to claim that legal battles being fought by Watchtower “on a number of fronts” are “entirely what we expect, in harmony with Bible prophecy,” citing Matthew 10:17,18 (a scripture that seems to have slipped Gerrit Lösch’s mind when he refused to give testimony in the Jose Lopez case) as its authority.

But in a further twist, Watchtower has since sent another reply to the letter, dated November 26th, with a different letterhead (“Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain”) and a far more formal tone.

“It was not clear from your correspondence exactly what you had in mind,” it states. “However, as a registered charity we are obliged to use all donations in furtherance of the Objects set out in our Memorandum of Association, which are summarised as: ‘…to administer the organization, assemblies, education, public religious worship, and activities in and from Britain of the body of Christian persons known as Jehovah’s Witnesses…’ and we are pleased to confirm that we do so. Our annual accounts are independently audited to ensure that we comply with our responsibilities and stated purposes. We trust that this will answer your enquiry.”

The trouble with this latest answer is that it conflicts with the previous one. Why? Because damages awarded against Watchtower in child sex abuse cases such as those of Candace Conti and Jose Lopez would appear to meet none of the criteria for spending donations that are outlined in Watchtower’s documents for the Charity Commission.

And yet in the previous letter, Watchtower conceded that it uses “donations to the worldwide work… for legal representation in various courts.”

My source tells me that he will be writing a further letter to Watchtower asking them which one of the two letters he is to take as their final answer. When, and if, such clarification is received, I will of course add it as an update to this article.

In the meantime, the fact that Watchtower cannot give a straight answer to such a simple question without backtracking is extremely telling, especially given the increasing exposure of child abuse mishandling and the scrutiny the organization is already receiving at present from the Charity Commission.

 

new-cedars-signature2

 

80 thoughts on “Which one is the answer? – Watchtower sends two replies to one letter

  • November 28, 2014 at 10:47 am
    Permalink

    Oh I Can’t Wait to hear how watchtower back-pedals their next answer! Contradictory answers? From the Watchtower? Lol, it is indeed telling to see these contradictory answers being given out from headquarters in so short a time frame, its not years in between contradicting itself, no! Now its all at once, just as Gerrit Losch refuses to appear in court, while the watchtower says, we must be obedient to the superior authorities!! Hypocritical much? But then, he had much inside knowledge of what is going on within the watchtower, there is no way he or the organization could let him be cross examined while on the stand! Just Think of all the information he might have told! It will be interesting to see the “official” watchtower response to these inquiries!

  • November 28, 2014 at 11:06 am
    Permalink

    The second letter does say that their accounts are audited ” to ensure that we comply with our responsibilities and stated purposes.”
    If money is being used to pay for court cases, it will be interesting to see if an auditor picks that up. May be something the charity commission can look at.
    Of course money has been used in the past for gaining rights for the organisation which allowed them to further their message. But paying donated money out to abuse victims is in a different ball game.

  • November 28, 2014 at 11:11 am
    Permalink

    I don’t think they are going to reply now that this website has revealed that their letters will be discussed here :)

  • November 28, 2014 at 11:37 am
    Permalink

    Why the two different letterheads? What would that mean/indicate? The service department vs the legal department or so?

    The second letter does say “… to administer … the activities in and from Britain of the body of ….” ‘Activities’ could perhaps be interpreted sufficiently broad to mean just about anything.

  • November 28, 2014 at 11:53 am
    Permalink

    My understanding of charity law is that if a case were brought against the charity itself (the WTSociety in this instance) they would be legally entitled to use charity funds to defend that case. If, on the other hand, a case were brought against any member of the charity as an individual the charity would not be legally entitled to offer any support paid for from charity funds. In the former instance, if the charity were to be found not guilty the matter would end there. But if they were found guilty it would be different. The Charities Commission would be able to investigate the running of the charity to determine whether the trustees had failed in their duty to protect charity funds.

  • November 28, 2014 at 11:54 am
    Permalink

    Nothing surprises me or has suprised me in so long about this two faced two ruled organization. It is a Bi-polar organization by its responses and actions. I guess that’s why they love the two witnesses rule since it has the word TWO in it. Lol
    In any event they have rules for you and rules for them and at any given time they can change them to suit their needs whenever they want regardless of right or wrong.
    It’s stuff like this that would throw up a Red Flag in any unindoctrinated mind.
    Unfortunately when your in a indoctrinated organization you can’t see anything clearly pass your nose.

  • November 28, 2014 at 12:56 pm
    Permalink

    Cornered rats jump every which way

  • November 28, 2014 at 1:04 pm
    Permalink

    John The Baptist

    Good point John. When I was a JW and indoctrinated I kept seeing such BIG contradictions in what they say and what they did. There were rules for them and rules for the rest of us. They contradicted themselves so bad. There were rules for the publishers and rules for Entertainers like Michael Jackson, Sports stars, Entertainers, that happened to be JW’s and they would let them slide but on a local level a publisher could be “punished” for doing the same thing. Also they can change the rules anytime in mid stream if they benefit from it like they did with the Malawi Brother’s and the Mexican Brothers several years ago after the Malawi Brothers lost their lives. So many Stupid Unchristian, unscriptural rules they make up as they go.

  • November 28, 2014 at 1:09 pm
    Permalink

    Another thought: When I was indoctrinated it bothered me very much the contradiction in the WT in what they say and do but being indoctrinated the “ELDERS” would say things like well If there is an error it will be known in time and leave it in Jehovah’s hands? I saw a lot of unjust things in the Body of elders. Even some stealing and ripping off insurance companies, favoritism for their friends and children, etc and the Body of elders would sweep it under the rug bc it was one of their own. The contradiction in their teachings also and how they would flip flop teachings on a regular basis was bothersome but being indoctrinated we are “TRAINED” to ignore it an put our thinking facilities away and not think for ourselves.

  • November 28, 2014 at 2:39 pm
    Permalink

    Interesting wording in the first letter. “legal representation in various courts” sounds like lawyers’ fees. Do legal fees normally include settlements reached out of court and judgments ruled against them?

    The second letter sounds like a typical legalese CYA letter.

    IMHO based on my Judge Judy Legal Degree.

  • November 28, 2014 at 3:22 pm
    Permalink

    Why not simply ask ” how was the money found for the continent and Lopez cases?

  • November 28, 2014 at 5:52 pm
    Permalink

    *sigh…how can a whole organization be mentally ill and unstable, and continue to thrive with so many members o_o? its like they have a slew of red and blue pill poppers on their roster lol. i mean, this isnt rocket science…their loyal blind followers walk around thinking they are the smartest ppl around, when in reality they are clearly the most nieve and ignorant. A-mazing to say the least.

    keep it up watchtower….you guys have your bamboozled flock all under control…that is one skill you have successfully achieved, smh.

  • November 28, 2014 at 7:53 pm
    Permalink

    Is it “new light” ?

  • November 28, 2014 at 8:00 pm
    Permalink

    Excellent information, John!

    Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

  • November 28, 2014 at 8:50 pm
    Permalink

    ONE QUESTION = ONE ANSWER……………

  • November 28, 2014 at 9:21 pm
    Permalink

    Each letter takes quite a different tone, for a different audience. In the first letter from “the Christian Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses,” it is closed, “Your brothers,” as if to a fellow believer. It refers to court cases “on the website” or the like, ie jw.org. The only court cases made mention of on the website are cases “legally establishing the good news,” ie JW’s right to preach in lands such as Georgia, Russia, etc. NO mention is made on jw.org of the Conti case or other abuse cases.
    In the second response sent from the “Watchtower,” the writer is addressed as “dear sir,” not “brother.” It is as if they have caught on to the tone of the writer and surmised the implication: that he is asking an open ended question designed to somehow “trip them up” in regard to the abuse cases and the row about the charity commission status in the UK.
    From airy-fairy fuzzy wuzzy feel good to stonewalling in the space of one letter!

  • November 29, 2014 at 1:43 am
    Permalink

    INTERESTING letter read out at meeting a few weeks ago that a new fund had been set up to say we could donate to a GAA FUND which is Global Assist Arrangement fund which in part read that part of it would be used for COURT CASES among other things like kingdom hall buildings abroad.BUT we had another letter read out a few months ago requesting all our congregation funds except for 3 months running expenses.our congregation transferred over £100,000 over to Brooklyn with a show of hands within a few seconds.No one dares to vote against because all eyes would view you as Divisive if not APOSTATE.we were told we would never have to find funds again for kingdom hall renovation as it would be handled from Brooklyn.But you won’t have control when & where on the list for renovation you are!!Plus now bethel want contributions for new London Bethel at Chelmsford which they want us to contribute a monthly amount for 5 YEARS!!!! Plus we put in monthly contributions for worldwide work for magazine & books and also still want monthly contributions for congregation expenses & then begging for contributions at assemblies.!!!! I SMELL RATS RATS!!! What did Russell say ‘when the watchtower has to BEG for money that’s when it should stop production ‘ WELL!!! HELLO!!!! What is the Watchtowers definition of BEGGING??????? I am English perhaps Americans have a different dictionary!!

  • November 29, 2014 at 2:24 am
    Permalink

    Hi Pickled Brain

    I hope you are one of my relatives!!!!

    So glad you are able to see through the spin. Good luck on your journey – tread carefully.

  • November 29, 2014 at 3:05 am
    Permalink

    Purestrongheart makes some very good points. However, although the WT reply mentions court cases as seen on the website, it does not say it has a separate fund for abuse victims payouts. It would have been a good opportunity for the writer to have penned that. The inquirer asks how are the contributions spent. Are his contributions being used for court cases? Now if that was written to me I would catch on immediately as to what was being asked. The WT response was “we can certainly confirm that donations to the worldwide work will be used from time to time to pay for legal representation in various courts” and They could have added “however we have an insurance, for other high profile cases” they could have assured the inquirer that their contributions were not being used in that way. The fact that they did not say that suggests to me that they haven’t any such insurance. They missed an opportunity to clarify a question albeit an open ended one.

  • November 29, 2014 at 5:52 am
    Permalink

    Rosie thank you for your comments.Kind of you.But I will tread carefully.

  • November 29, 2014 at 7:53 am
    Permalink

    Bipolar yes. This reminds me of the patient replying to his psychiatrist: -I am not schizofrenic…and neither am I…

  • November 29, 2014 at 3:31 pm
    Permalink

    All their assets come from unpaid labour, and contributions,
    and donations of property and cash left in wills etc,.
    It’s clear then, that any pay out’s awarded against them must
    come from these sources.

    Insurance companies avoid providing cover for sexual issues,
    due to increased risk of liability. So the Org, is faced with the
    problem of finding the millions themselves. Hence the squeeze
    on their only source, “The Brothers,”- congregations instructed
    to empty their bank accounts and send the money to them,
    the expression,”Fleecing the Sheep” doesn’t even cover it,

    The reason given,- “They need more Kingdom Halls,”- an obvious
    fiction, as they’ve closed down over 20. branches.
    Inventing fiction, they are good at, Rutherford showed them how.
    The ten room mansion in California, plus Cadillacs, and the
    preposterous tale that it was for the use of Abraham, Isaac, etc.

    The sad thing is, that the brothers are so conditioned, they can be
    conned into accepting anything they are told, no matter how
    absurd, and farcical.

    Regarding the Letters, The first one seems to be an honest but
    unguarded reply, the second letter is to neutralise the first,
    and leave the question up in the air. A bit too late though.!!

  • November 29, 2014 at 4:07 pm
    Permalink

    Holy Conolli. Your comments make a lot of sense at the hypocrisy of the organisation in regard to the latitude given to MICHAELJACKSON ,PRINCE& the Williams sisters.I wonder if MICHAELJACKSON will come back in the resurrection as a ZOMBIE ??or what FACE will he have when he is resurrected the one before plastic surgery or the one after plastic surgery.!!! ohh the hours I spend awake at night contemplating these possibilities!! I don’t think so.

  • November 29, 2014 at 4:34 pm
    Permalink

    Ted your comments about Rutherford are so true!! Under OLIN MOYLE in Wikipedia it states that OLIN MOYLE won $30,000 dollars in libel damages against Rutherford. OLIN MOYLE accused our Great President??? Of drunkeness ,abusive language but the most damaging was Rutherford living in a Lap of Luxury at properties he owned i.e. Bethel,Staten Island & the most shameful Da da da drumroll for BETH SARIM a picture appears in the Proclaimers book.Cant deny this 10 room mansion & 2 Cadillacs. This when U.S.A was suffering the greatest Economic Depression of all time in the 1930s when people were DYING of starvation & contracting all types of illnesses due to malnutrition & suffering abject poverty.EXCUSE ME! But Jesus didn’t have anywhere to lay his head.The apostle Paul was a tentmaker so he didn’t put a burden on anyone!! Today’s Governing Body why aren’t you following their example???

  • November 30, 2014 at 2:31 am
    Permalink

    Watchtower would crumble tomorrow if all the free slave labor of the Bethelites would abandon ship. Going on the assumption that people volunteer to go to Bethel because they think that they are doing God’s will and going on the assumption that they are all being good little boys and girls and not watching JW Podcast, I think it would be a good idea to draw their attention to the 2nd podcast where Irwin Zilkin is interviewed and I have a suggestion as to how to do it. This is how I think I am going to do it in a letter to Bethel.

    Dear Brothers.

    I heard on JW Podcast in an interview with Irwin Zilkin that the Society is paying out what could be hundreds of millions of dollars to victims of child abuse? Where is that money coming from?

    This is also a very simple question but it will draw attention to JW Podcast and hopefully get these Bethelites to listen to that show, even if it’s just out of curiosity. I think about 99.9% of all Witnesses have no idea what we would even be talking about and wouldn’t believe it if we told them but if they hear it straight out of the mouth of the lawyer, then maybe they’d sit up and take notice.

  • November 30, 2014 at 6:39 am
    Permalink

    I await with interest the third letter from the WTBTS. Either way, the Charity Commission need to see all three letters as soon as possible.

    This is a first class article, Lloyd. This is the kind of evidence that the CC need to see. I am sure they have received a slick, polished reponse from the WT solicitors and it is this kind of corresondence that will puncture it.

    I would like to thank the writer of the letter to the WTBTS. Your letter will be of great benefit.

    Peace be with you,

    Excelsior!

  • November 30, 2014 at 8:27 am
    Permalink

    @Pickled brain, The 30s, were desperate times for many people,
    dole queues round the block, I’ve stood in such queues here in
    England in the 50s, and the idea of imminent action by Gods Kingdom
    to sort things out was very appealing.

    People’s suffering, any crisis, or disaster, is callously exploited to
    to recruit ( numbers), purely for “Their own ends.”

    Some good advice I once read, was,– “Don’t wait for miracles,
    life is a miracle, don’t waste it, it’s not a rehearsal.”

  • November 30, 2014 at 10:10 am
    Permalink

    Ted’ couldn’t agree more basically its exploitation of the vulnerable,depressed & genuinely trusting people.Russell & Rutherford did it in the early 1900s with great social unrest&revolution i.e. The upsurge of the Unions,Communism &World War 1,Russian revolution ,Great Depression,World war 2.People were frightened.Desperate to hold onto HOPE any hope without any Real Analysis & deep research of the facts.ARMAGEDDONs coming followed by PARADISE is understandably appealing.Now we have Iraqi,Afghanistan,Syria,etc and divorce & depressed broken families on a vast scale.People cling to any hope for comfort which we all want.Karl Marx said ‘RELIGION is the OPIUM of the people ‘ so true.What is unforgivable is the Governing Body disfellowshipping anyone that disagrees with just one point of doctrine & commenting in the watchtower study about their point of view.You would soon be reprimanded.BUT the Governing Body can chop& change faster than you can say the word APOSTASY.i.e.’ Generation’meaning changed 5 times.’Faithful& discreet ‘slave changed 3 times ,Organ Transplants and vaccinations 3 times.Superior Authorities 3 times.Blood Fractions 3 time.Now it’s the FOOLISH & WISE VIRGINS!!!! Oh Holy Mother of Anthony Morris the Kurd.Please no more Light Getting Brighter.I am going to go blind!!!

  • November 30, 2014 at 4:52 pm
    Permalink

    Hi Ted, also Karl Marx said ‘Religion is the OPIUM of the people ‘ all man made religions play on people’s inner insecurities their desire for something better than their present condition.We all need hope for the future. in the early 1900s social unrest with Unions & Communism on the rise Russell played on people’s anxiety.So ARMAGEDDONs coming.!!World war One & the Wall St Crash of 1929& Great Depression of 1930s and ARMAGEDDONs coming again!! 1950s,1960s &1970s The Cold War -Nuclear missile buildup & tension Between Russia& USA .Fear of Nuclear Armageddon so once again religion plays on people’s anxieties & fears.Now we have Iraq,Afghanistan & Syria & Muslim fanatics beheadings ,crucifixion & burning & raping women & killing children.So ARMAGEDDONs coming .i forgot 9/11 twin towers over 10 years ago .Inactive ones rushing back to meetings!!Armageddons coming.So people become frightened & rush into the arms of Religion, I think the Governing Body is guessing,guessing & yes Guessing when & what & how to interpret the bible message and making A PIGS EAR of it which is fine to a point but it is arrogant to disfellowship brothers for disagreeing with them on certain points as they chop& change as quick as a Chinaman can chop a tail off a Rat.

  • December 1, 2014 at 1:33 am
    Permalink

    As much as I detest the GB of JWs, I have to say I think the first reply looks like a fake to me, and why would two different branches respond to the first letter? I am not convinced about this. JW officials are too cunning to make this kind of error. To my mind it’s very easy to make a fake letter heading, and I believe this first reply just does not ring true. It seems too short an answer – and too honest for this ‘spiritual warfare’ cult – for such an important question. I wonder if anyone else agrees with me. I detest the Watchtower but I’m also not gullible any longer since leaving this crass and disgusting cult. I want to see them brought down honestly. Can you, John, verify decisively the authenticity of the first letter? The second one looks more in keeping with Watchtower deviousness. I’d love to be wrong but I have a sneaking suspicion I’m not. If the first reply is a fake, the Witness community would love that to be the case and milk it to show apostates are at work!

    • December 1, 2014 at 1:51 am
      Permalink

      Hello Joseph – I have verified both letters as genuine to the extent possible. Obviously the only definitive way to confirm it is to ring Watchtower and ask if they will accept ownership of it, and given the recent difficulties in getting them to assume ownership of their own child safeguarding policy I would consider this a pointless pursuit. The envelope shown in the IMGUR feed is that of one of the letters (I don’t recall which) and there are date-stamped Watchtower envelopes for both. There is also obviously a desk reference on the first letter tying it to an individual or desk at Watchtower, which adds to its authenticity – as does the writing style of the letter. I do understand your concern, and you are not the first to wonder whether it might be a fake. I think the reason for this is that the blanked-out address leaves the rather terse paragraph looking fairly isolated from the letterhead. Obviously my contact has blanked out as much information that can identify him as possible. I hope this answers your question.

  • December 1, 2014 at 2:57 am
    Permalink

    John, thank you for your very swift reply. However, as much as I detest WTB&TS, I still believe this first reply from Bethel is a forgery. Why would the twit at the responding end say ‘the website’ rather than ‘our website?’ Come on, you’re intelligent, would you ever say that in response to someone with a legitimate question – and also, I do believe all responses are double checked by ‘controlling personnel,’ don’t you? They would never allow this; as much as I detest the WTS I know they are hugely intelligent in writing and in grammar, though this first response smacks of an idiot having been put in charge of responding to a serious question. This guy is obviously quite uneducated (OK, Watchtower doesn’t allow further education education, but the most intelligent people I’ve ever met are us ex-JWs) so it truly smacks to me of apostates going crazy and trying to bring WTS down with false claims. You know, as well as I do, that people are deeply misled and will resort to almost anything to bring down WTS if they have a grudge.

    Anyway, I love your blogs.

    • December 1, 2014 at 3:03 am
      Permalink

      You’re entitled to believe it’s a forgery if that’s the conclusion you insist on. I know my contact is extremely exasperated with people making these claims, because he knows it’s legit and doesn’t see why a letter from Watchtower together with its date-stamped envelope shouldn’t be evidence enough. He even filmed himself opening the second envelope when it came after the skepticism from the first when it was posted on Facebook. As far as the contents are concerned, I certainly don’t think “the website” versus “our website” is a strong enough basis for claiming it’s a forgery, and having read more Watchtower articles since awakening than is healthy for me, I think you over-estimate the writing skills of Watchtower personnel – especially when you consider that correspondence is not proofread as extensively as published material.

  • December 1, 2014 at 8:11 am
    Permalink

    Greetings to all,

    at first, it appeared to me that this is part of their “Theocratic Warfare”-strategy of throwing smoke grenades and pouring mud into the water by telling half-truths so nobody can see through and everybody is left confused. I have been “at the heart of the org” myself for too long to know that this could not just have been a simple mistake. Both letters seem to contain those typical ambiguous wishy-washy “tell it all and mean nothing at all”-style, stereotype used-car-salesman flowers of speech with which they sell dead horses to people who are paying for live ones. Letter # 1 says “Yes, we use them in connection with legal affairs”, but then, they seem to divert our attention by making it appear as if this is all related to prophesied persecutions, bec. they are the good ones (“This is what we expect, Jesus foretold it”) –child-abuse-related legal matters are simply not being mentioned. Letter # 2 (11/26) DOES NOT say they are NOT using donations in connection with paying for court cases – it says “we are using them TO ADMINISTER the org”. Now, THAT can mean a lot and nothing. Look into any dict or a Webster’s and see how many entries there are for “to administer”. This is one of THE MOST vacuous verbs I know. It can very well include shifting moneys around in connection legal matters – including for those “nasty” ones.

    In essence, both letters are utterly meaningless with regard to answering the question “Are donation funds being used to pay FOR CHILD ABUSE CASES?”

    However, here is the REAL problem: The querist’s question is totally vage to begin with, bec. he specifically IS NOT asking about CHILD ABUSE court cases, but about “court cases that are currently taking place”. Now, this is quite ambiguous – which court cases are being referred to? Child custody battles? Those about Russia classifying WTS-publications as being extremist? Armenia still imprisoning JW bec of the military service issue? Just asking about “court cases” in general is not going to cut it. This needs to be redone, lest the WTS can easily dodge the issue by simply answering what was asked, and keeping silent about what was not SPECIFICALLY being put on the table. A tough log needs a sharp axe.

  • December 1, 2014 at 9:06 am
    Permalink

    @ Criticus

    I think the fact they they felt the need to write to letters, one friendly and one formal says quite a lot really. Is this normal proceedure, to reply twice from two different departments?

  • December 1, 2014 at 12:00 pm
    Permalink

    Both letters express being a little puzzled regarding the specific
    answer that the questioner is looking for.
    This suggests they are both from the same source.

    Any further correspondence, on the same subject, ‘no matter how
    direct’, will only yield the same evasive reply, especially now-
    “The cats out of the bag”.

  • December 1, 2014 at 3:21 pm
    Permalink

    I have been giving a lot of thought to the letters from the WTBTS. Many are saying that the reply is a bit ambiguous. I think the answer in the first letter is very interesting. The question asked is “Could you please tell me if my contributions are being used to pay for the court cases that are currently taking place?.” The WT replied by saying “We are not sure whether you have any particular court cases in mind.” The fact that they did not then use this as an opportunity to say something like………..the worldwide fund is used in such cases as, defending the right to worship etc etc, they could have then said the worldwide fund is not used for …………and then they could have clarified with an answer that so obviously fit the question. They did not do this. They said instead “We are not sure whether you have any particular court cases in mind.” And then they give a blanket cover of court cases by saying “we can certainly confirm that donations to the worldwide work will be used from time to time to pay for legal representation in various courts.” It does NOT SAY ‘in certain cases! And it could have’ I think as one person said in their comment “Regarding the Letters, The first one seems to be an honest but UNGUARDED reply, the second letter is to neutralise the first, and leave the question up in the air. ” I have to agree with that comment.

  • December 1, 2014 at 6:18 pm
    Permalink

    Thanks for the clarification and the scanned envelope picture. Maybe I am wrong but I have never seen such a badly written letter come from Watchtower. Perhaps I am giving them too much credit for intelligence.

    [off-topic comments removed, see posting guidelines]

  • December 2, 2014 at 12:35 am
    Permalink

    Wow, a hundred thousand £/$ from one congregation?, that’s impressive.
    I wonder, bearing in mind the sale of Brooklyn and other branch facilities, how much interest that acquires?
    How many avenues, does anyone know, that a jw can contribute to? (A list would be useful)

    Two stones to kill one bird, interesting.
    I think I will ask the Watchtower…you have been ordered in a number of different cases and by different courts to pay settlements to the victims of child abuse due to your crass negligence . Will you be using money that has contributed to you from your members to pay for these settlements awarded against you?

  • December 2, 2014 at 3:33 am
    Permalink

    I have been doing some more thinking. . I wonder about contributions. I don’t go to meetings anymore but does anyone have current information as to what contribution boxes are laid out these days, and are they labelled. Once I get an answer to this I can think some more, lol. Any current info…..anyone.

  • December 2, 2014 at 5:23 am
    Permalink

    Wait a minute, their website doesn’t even suggest or hint at that possibility – “Any donations that are forwarded to the branch offices of Jehovah’s Witnesses are used to relieve victims of natural disasters, to support our missionaries and traveling ministers, to help construct our houses of worship in developing countries, and to print and ship Bibles and other Christian publications.” – http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/work-financed/

    In addition to that, at the meetings & in the publications, we are always told that our donations go towards the preaching work or RBC. I’m thinking this deception would not be taken lightly by the authorities. A non-profit in the U.S. cannot pull that trick, as they must be clear with their donors where the money is going.

    I’m thinking The Organization would claim that court cases are furthering the preaching work in some way or another, but that is stretching the truth a lot. I bet you that if a poll was taken among the 8,000,000 JW’s, less than 10% of them would guess or believe that their donations for the preaching work & RBC were also helpin’ court cases that didn’t directly affect their right to preach freely.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: