News has emerged within the last week of a judge in Maryland being forced to toss out a manslaughter trial after a Witness juror declared she could no longer participate due to her religious beliefs.
Officer Adrian Morris (pictured) was killed on August 20, 2012, after his cruiser crashed while chasing the defendant, 24-year-old Kevon Neal, following an attempted break-in at a gas station.
The court had already heard three days of testimony when the juror sent a note to Circuit Court Judge Michael R. Pearson at about 1am declaring that her religious beliefs did not allow her to “sit in judgment of another human being.”
According to the Prince George’s State’s Attorney Angela Alsobrooks, the juror told the judge that “she didn’t have a dog in this fight,” that she wasn’t sure whether there was enough evidence, and she didn’t want to be involved. She is also said to have explained that she didn’t alert the court sooner because she needed to “do research about her beliefs to discover what her beliefs are.”
“I think this was disgraceful on the part of this juror,” Alsobrooks told the Washington Post. “We expended tremendous resources presenting this case.”
The case will now have to be retried, with fresh dates yet to be set. The unnamed juror will also need to appear before the judge at a hearing on February 24, and will be found in contempt of court unless she can prove there was no deliberate attempt to be uncooperative.
In addition to the waste of resources, the mistrial will also prolong the anguish of Officer Morris’ family, who were in attendance throughout the proceedings.
“It’s been a painful three days, not only for the police department but also for Adrian’s family,” Police Chief Mark Magaw commented, before adding that if a retrial “is what we need to do to uphold his memory and honor him, that’s what we’ll do.”
Unable to think for herself
Three alternative jurors are said to have been released before the proceedings began, and yet the Witness juror’s note suggests she was unable to let any one of these stand in for her. Why? Because she was uncertain at that stage of precisely what her beliefs were.
Only after days of research, presumably in Watchtower publications, was this woman able to figure out her own beliefs, and conclude that these required her to sabotage a manslaughter trial at considerable public expense, causing added trauma to the family of the young man who was killed.
This should tell us everything we need to know about what it means to be a Jehovah’s Witness. The Governing Body now micromanages the lives of Witnesses to such an extent that even a call to jury duty prompts individuals such as this woman to do “research” – in other words, to seek the permission of Watchtower as to whether they can get involved or not.
It cannot be known for sure, but likely the woman will have consulted the 1997 Questions From Readers article, entitled “What should a Christian do when called for jury duty?” It reads, in part…
“What if a Christian does not feel that his conscience permits him to serve on a particular jury? The Bible does not mention jury duty, so he cannot say, ‘It is against my religion to serve on any jury.’ Depending on the case, he might state that serving on the jury for a particular case is against his personal conscience. That might be so if a case involves sexual immorality, abortion, manslaughter, or another issue on which his thinking is shaped by Bible knowledge, not by mere secular law. In reality, though, it is quite possible that the trial he is selected for does not involve such issues.
A mature Christian would also reflect on whether he would share any responsibility for the sentence rendered by judges. (Compare Genesis 39:17-20; 1 Timothy 5:22.) If a guilty verdict is in error and the death penalty is imposed, would a Christian on the jury share bloodguilt? (Exodus 22:2; Deuteronomy 21:8; 22:8; Jeremiah 2:34; Matthew 23:35; Acts 18:6) At Jesus’ trial Pilate wanted to be ‘innocent of the blood of this man.’ The Jews readily said: ‘His blood come upon us and upon our children.’—Matthew 27:24, 25.” (w97 4/1 p.27)
Considering Watchtower’s admission that “the Bible does not mention jury duty,” the writers of the above article nevertheless find an impressive number of scriptures with which to bombard the reader.
It would come as no surprise to me if certain more weak-minded Witnesses decided to take the easy option by bailing out of jury duty just to be on the safe side, especially if it is absurdly suggested that a juror might “share any responsibility for the sentence rendered by judges.”
And so we find that the Governing Body’s constant tinkering not only robs Witnesses of the ability to think for themselves. In this case, it also impacts on a grieving family of non-Witnesses who must suffer the anguish of a retrial that should never have been necessary.
Further reading…
- Washington post article “Pr. George’s trial in fatal police chase tossed because of juror’s religious beliefs“
- Washington post article “Prince George’s officer killed in I-95 crash“
- Washington post article “Trial begins for suspect in fatal Pr. George’s police chase; Off. Adrian Morris died“
- NBC news report
- Freethinker magazine article
I think I want to throw up. What a tragic consequence of G.B. self righteous micromanagement of peoples lives. They should face trial not the woman who tried to comply with their stupidity. I am so sorry for this young man’s family.
Well found. This sums up the average JW perfectly.
The WTS bangs on about “Bible-trained consciences” but they never let any JW use them.
So her “religious” belief do not allow her to sit in judgment of another human being but these nut cases will freely judge you should you do anything they perceive is wrong and not only that but the whole congregation will continue to judge you and shun you with out so much as knowing what evidence the elders used to cast you out. Im sorry but these people are a bunch of buffoons!
Obviously JWs alone cannot hold any beliefs in anything. The Gov. Bod. decides their beliefs in evey aspect of their lives.
The reference to ‘mere’ secular law in their guidance is utterly obscene. It is this law, to which they sniffily feel so superior, which enables them to spout their drivel, protects them from thieves, and enables them to deal in property and other assets in a non violent environment. (As opposed, say, to dealing in narcotics outside the ‘mere’ secular law where they could only operate in an atmosphere of threats and gang warfare.)
Really sad for the family involve in the case…
Thank you for sharing this Cedar.
It’s a little bit off subject but may i post a link of a petition i think is important to share for an Investigation to Determine If Jehovah’s Witnesses Have A Right to Use Coercion To Force Its Members Not to Leave: http://chn.ge/1dsqhzZ
Thank you!
Nuay, could you (or anyone else reading this) point me to resources about the suicide cases ?
As for the article, I’m not sure what really makes me upset : Is it a system with it’s judicial committees (yeah I’m a little stuck with this one) who actually “sit in judgment of another human being.”
Or is it the likes of this sister who have to “look up” their beliefs … All these years of intense study doesn’t seem to help to form a conscience. I could perfectly understand “reflection time” (I must very honestly say, I’m not sure what I’d do in case where there can be question of death sentence) but “find out what beliefs are” is a terrible thing to say …
And … someone who says about religious beliefs shouldn’t say “no dogs in this fight” … What if there was ?
I think the only question I have regarding this case, is does the jury vote need to be unanimous? If the result simply goes by a majority decision, I cannot see why a witness could not be on the jury. Obviously they should know their own mind and be fully able to make a decision based on their own conscience.
In the case of abortion the witness would be against it, but if the remaining members thought abortion was ok then that would be the majority vote.
But if a jury needed to be 100% in agreement then the witness should not be on the jury.
The governing body is all about controlling people. They tell you not to pursue higher education, yet the white governing body and lots of other white witnesses have degrees. Today, an associate’s, or a bachechelor’s degree is inadequate for employment in many, many jobs. Even a master’s is not enough for some jobs. So, do they expect you to eat dirt? Why don’t they share some of their billions with the poor and underprivileged. Jesus fed people, but the GB lets people go hungry and some witnesses have lost their homes to foreclosure. This is a cult. Note that this cult targets the urban and underprivileged more so than the upper class. There are more black and hispanic JWs than they are white ones. Why? Also, I understand that the GB does not engage in field service like the other slaves do.
As I understand it, the JW’s like to distance themselves from the earthly affairs of man by proclaiming themselves “Biblically correct” in being “not of this world.” That sounds very high and noble but it appears to be incorrect, misguided and hypocritical. They cheerfully proclaim that they “give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s….”, but that’s only a half statement. Here in the United States we have a democratic republican form of government in which citizens have certain rights, privileges and duties. Serving on a jury is one of them and excuses from such service is difficult to obtain. It must be granted by the presiding judge upon appeal. Judges are often very suspicious of such appeals. I find it exceedingly difficult to believe this woman juror sat through the jury selection process and then days of testimony to just suddenly awaken to her beliefs. I believe she probably consulted some elder and was “guided” toward her perjury.
One of the great faults with being entirely guided by and devoted to a tome written thousands of years ago is that the writers of that tome had no conception of the ideas that would change the face of humanity, human government or life in general in the interceding years. In my attendance at meetings with my JW wife, I bridle at the continual drumming against the “evil system of things”. Some day I will likely pinion some elder and ask some uncomfortable questions regarding his understanding of the “evil” nature of the advances in human rights, democratic freedoms, child protection and well-being principals, women’s eqality, racial equality and on and on that modern civilization has achieved and continues to strive to develop. If and when I get into such discussion, I doubt it will go very far and will likely make it sticky for me to ever set foot inside a Kingdom Hall again. I support my wife’s right to chose her religion based on her criteria and I do not wish to be seen as a problem for her. Right now I am seen as an anomaly: a husband who is not now, nor is interested in becoming a publisher, but one who supports his wife in her attendance. This is one of those benefits of this “evil system of things”. I have a duty I see as prescribed in the United States Constitution to protect my wife’s freedom to chose her religion and do so.
Recently the circuit overseer was here. I found myself sorely tempted to go to the meeting with my wife on Sunday and ask that particular “oberfueher” about the pedophile list in New York, but I restrained myself and skipped the meeting.
Another great article John..it really shows the extent of that mind control the org. has over its members. I served on a Grand jury for 6 months when I was a current JW, and there was nothing about that bothered my conscience. But yet there were several in our congregation who thought I was wrong by participating in that. Truly sad.
She was asked before the trial began if there was any reason she could not serve, including religion. She should have said right then, “I have no clue what my religion allows me to do and I need to look up an article in the Watchtower (not the Bible or anything because that would be silly) before I blow my nose…” or something. They could have dismissed her right there.
The elders are also told that they sit in judgment of others, in the “Shepherd” book. Why are they different? What gives them this privilege of condemning congregation members but suddenly it’s so questionable to condemn an accused criminal? After all, he’s just a worldly person so who cares, right?
I won’t rehash comments that already highlight the duplicity and doublethink (George Orwell, “Nineteen Eighty-Four”) regarding serving on a judging body. What I would contemplate as Cedars aptly does above is HOW the JW operates and is indoctrinated to stop-think by referencing viewpoints in WS pubs. What pops to mind is how did this jury research her viewpoints while sequestered or instructed not to view media, or reading materials, related to law, the case, current events? Therein lies a real cause for mistrial because it shows some external pressure / contact intimidated the juror.
Suppose the suspect had ties to JW’s–through parents or directly, elder-body could have pressured the juror to reflect on WS publication statements in attempt to reign the matter back under their influence.
But, the doublethink here is that JW/GB is “okay” with judgements by elders and passing judgements individually by participating in shunning and marking “unworthies” yet will give lip-praise to “Jehovah forgives” while enforcing earthly community rules, but not “okay” with these same style judgements in the greater community surrounding JW’s.
This should give pause to think whether the WS/GB would abide by any jury’s / judge’s verdict and penalties? It runs counter and conflicts their views on “the higher authorities/powers”. Thus, revealing more of the polychotomy within the belief structure and a lack of cohesive analysis before beliefs/statements that are “revealed” as “new light”.
Obviously JWs alone cannot hold any beliefs in anything. The Gov. Bod. decides their beliefs in evey aspect of their lives.
The reference to ‘mere’ secular law in their guidance is utterly obscene. It is this law, to which they sniffily feel so superior, which enables them to spout their drivel, protects them from thieves, and enables them to deal in property and other assets in a non violent environment. (As opposed, say, to dealing in narcotics outside the ‘mere’ secular law where they could only operate in an atmosphere of threats and gang warfare.)
Acadianlion,
I admire your attempt to “live in the camp of God” and respect your wife’s choice of religion.
I fear, though, that it is doomed to failure. The more love bombing and indoctrination she receives, the less your life together will mean. I’m sorry if that’s blunt, but it’s the truth.
Of course, your dear wife my just be going for a social experience and she doesn’t believe it all, but beware! They will try to take her from you, and they will pressure you to commit to their religion.
From your comments, you are already very cross with them. It will only get worse, it will never get better.
I strongly advise you to get her out of that religion while you still can. This is not an attack on Christianity, it is a plea to get away from a cult that has harmed and will harm many people.
You can’t reason with the witnesses. They will not live and let live. Please do your best to save your wife from this awful religion. They look forward to billions being killed at Armageddon, and everyone not following bible standards (everyone who is not a JW) is a bad association.
If you think I’m overreacting, watch the interview section of the prodigal son DVD.
I write this with all due respect for your unique circumstances, and in no way to be rude or prying.
Peace be with you
Excelsior!
I hope they send her the bill…
Well, I have no option in this. If my wife wants to practice a religion that does no overt harm to herself, others or our relationship, I have no cause for complaint. She was baptised years ago, then faded for quite a long time…more than thirty years. Only in the past couple of years has she returned and her participation is very limited although she does go in service occasionally. The elders in the congregation were very suspicious and didn’t recognize her “officially” for about a year. She had to ‘study’ the ridiculous “Bible Teach” book plus the follow on primer “satisfactorily” before they finally realized she probably knew more about the Bible than they did and officially recognized her as “one of Jehovah’s Witnesses”. Nevertheless, we both enjoy reading all sorts of material in this house and I recently “crossed swords” with the wife of one of the elders over who controlled what was read by whom in this house. My wife’s position in any and all of this is that HER relationship is with Jehovah and not anyone, the elders, governing body or anyone else in the Watchtower can take that away from her. In reality, she is a LONG way form being active in the congregation, in the best sense that the GB would like to demand. She’s done all of that years ago, and has a certain amount of knowledge and experience that guides her. As far as my involvement is concerned, I accompany her to evening meetings, I have been to assemblies and to Sunday meetings and last winter drove an elder to a neighboring congregation so he could deliver a talk and did so because the weather was bad enough that he should not have been driving. I count him as a friend and would have done the same for anyone in any religion had the need been there. I call it “neighborly kindness”, and if anyone wants to call it something else, they are free to do so. But as far as ME becoming closer to being a JW? No chance. If for no other reason, I am alive in this world today. The JW’s concentration is on a fantasy of what they think is going to happen after everyone is dead. I have quite a lot to take care of in this life, and when I am dead and if there are new rules to live by when I get to that point I’ll have to learn them then if they are a lot different from the ones I know today. As a writer, I don’t write nor care for fantasy, and see no reason at my age to begin now.
I feel no need nor interest in protecting myself or my wife from the JW’s. She was a JW-in-study before I met her in high school, and now, fifty years later she is older, wiser, and has a terrific perspective on it. As far as the others in the congregation are concerned, I don’t worry about them at all. I think most of them are weak in most ways compared to her.
Would the person share any responsibility for the sentence rendered by the judges? That’s such an unfair question. If a person honestly rendered a verdict based on the evidence presented and the laws of the land, that juror would have a clean conscience. It is not the jury’s fault if crucial evidence were thrown out or not discovered in time or if the crime lab made a mistake.
It’s also unfair that when it comes to a JW sitting on a jury there’s a question. But JWs always use the court system, to fight a ticket, to uphold freedom of religion rulings, to settle issues with “worldly” people. Can’t have it both ways.
If the case had to do with abortion, I would make sure I knew what the law was and if the law was being followed or broken. My personal views should have nothing to do with it.
Problem is Buddhagen loyal JWs go by what they are told by the organisation. If the case had to do with something the society were adamant was either right or wrong, then the good loyal witness would have to follow them, whatever they thought privately. So if a unanimous decision was needed, the witness could well be in an impossible situation, maybe voting against what the society demanded.
So rather than having to think too much about it, many witnesses refuse jury service on religious grounds.
Acadianlion,
I’m pleased to read your comments. I wish you and your wife a happy life together.
Peace be with you
Excelsior!
Well done, ‘Cedars,’ concise and to the point.
I have to agree with JoBass here. I was a witness for over 60 years and judgemental is their middle name. You do not have to be DF or fadded to be judged by them. Just the wrong tie or dress and you’re marked for judgement. This is disgraceful conduct by this so called christian. It makes me sick and embarassed to admit I was once one of them
He we go again. We can’t hold our beleifs in anything. Many jurors are excused from jury duty for alot or reasons. In many cases for GOOD reasons. Take for instance, a community can have a good amount of black people that lives in an area and not one can’t not serve as a juror over someone that is the same race of that one.
Fred Hall,
The woman did not have good reasons. As has been pointed out, the JWs will use the legal system if it is to their advantage, but pretend, nevertheless, not to be part of the world.
Anyway, if the woman had good reasons, she should have declared them in the first place, not waste time and money by changing her mind so late in the day.
And by the way, Fred, we have yet to hear why you look forward to the mythical day of Armageddon, that product of a warped imagination, when Jehovah will murder most of your fellow humans.
Please explain.
It is most encouraging that real, practising an believing JWs contribute to threads on this blog. How many other true JW readers there are, who do not contribute, it is impossible to say.
They must have noticed, albeit unwillingly, that their cult is indefensible on every front. Such JW spokespeople who have offered a defence of the Watchtower have had their pathetic arguments dismissed at a stroke.
None has given any evidence whatever to suggest that there might be any truth in JW TRUTH. The reason is simple. There is no evidence. Many of us older ones woke up to the idea that JW doctrine was cruel and poisonous nonsense long before the internet.
This blog and the many other JW exposure sites can only be having a positive effect. JW growth is slowing. An actual decline must soon be in prospect.
Should JWs, however, abandon their cruel and monstrous practices of anti-blood transfusion, shunning of those who leave, protection of paedophiles with their two witness rule and terrorising of children and others with their Armageddon nonsense, then there is nothing to stop anyone putting on a cheap neat suit and sitting through dreary meetings in drab little halls being exhorted, after a chorus of some of the most insipid music in Christendom, to spend more of their free time and money distributing mags whereby to increase the capital value of a New York based global property and publishing corporation.
Whether, without the delusion of a post Armageddon Paradise earth in prospect, anyone would be then persuaded to lead the hideously bland and empty JW lifestyle, is open to serious doubt.
Acandianlion,
It seems my approach to the religion is quite similar to your wife’s. I’m DF’ed long ago and attend meetings only to keep some sort of relationship with Jehovah (and because this has been the only religion I ever knew – you’ve got to start somewhere :-) ). It’s actually a comfortable position because, I’m free to take what I agree, and leave the rest :-)
A part of my family (with whom I still keep contact) are JW’s and I still appreciate many JW’s, but my long-ago suspicion about the organization is still there and recent years only added new elements to those. Getting back in touch with my spirituality through this “solution” helps me a lot, but the opinions I form are quite different. Among other points, I also have serious questions regarding the ancient “tome” people take as absolute truth about God’s Word. I believe in a “message” and “purpose” but I have developed different ideas about where to look for them. As for some WT doctrines, I simply disagree. You see, there is no real interest for me other than remaining DF’ed :-)
I don’t think I’ll ever define myself as in favor or against JW’s for a 100%, however, I can only concur with the opinions expressed – that it’s good to be careful so that you both keep safe from any potential pressure on yourselves. Having a relationship with Jehovah is my only need at this point and I make sure that He remains as the only focus point in the landscape. As soon as people step in in-between, there is a problem. That’s my approach, I can only recommend the same.
I think the more likely scenario, considering the fact that she sat for three days on the jury, is that some busybody in the congregation stirred things up by saying that she shouldn’t be on the jury in the first place, instead of recognizing that it is a matter for each individual to decide, according to their own conscience. In my old congregation there were several busybodies who took it upon themselves to decide good and bad for the whole congregation.
Karma is a you know what! Watch out Watchtower and all your brainwashed goonies!
I find it almost hilarious that someone does “not know what they believe!” If it wasn’t for the dire impact it has on others of course.
Pathetic cult.
The story is indeed pathic, and certainly illustrates the short circuited thinking of JWs in general. However, this individual certainly bears a modicum of personal responsibility towards the state. One should know what one believes, I don’t know how the jury summons works in her state, but certainly she wasn’t just hauled out of her kitchen to the courthouse one sunny Tuesday evening. The ethical burden falls more on the shoulders of the individual in this case, it seems to me. Without a doubt, the GB have more and more discouraged their followers awareness of their own free moral agency. Yet, this person was extremely lax in her execution of her responsiblities as a citizen and indeed as a volunteer publicist/fundraiser for the GB/WT/F&DS.
Yet another robot deprived of the ability to think for herself. This is a sad situation on a few levels. Many needlessly die in high-speed police pursuits, including innocent bystanders and civilians. Many times these chases are not necessary when one considers the danger that the public is subjected to. The JW in this case has done a monumental disservice to the family of the deceased.
Why did the JW refuse to sit on the Jury in the first place?
I agree the GB are wrong, and so is this stupid JW.
Usually one is excused from sitting on a jury if they give religious reasons in the first place, I have done this before as have other JW.
If the law in the JW land did not accept the reasons for not sitting on the jury, then the JW should pay the consequences themselves. Many JW go to jail for their stand on other issues such military, why didn’t this JW just refuse to sit on the jury in the first place. Its ok it pass the buck to the GB also, but the JW is the one that could have refused to sit on the jury in the first place.
Now look what has happened. And they will refuse to take any accountability for this.
The whole thing is a disgrace, so sorry for this man and his family. As time goes by and I becoming more disgusted with the self righteous pious religion that does more harm than good to eveyone.
sorry should say “why didn’t the JW refuse to sit on the jury in the first place”
In 1968 I was a 19 year old JW (since age 7) and I stepped on a nail. The Doctor wanted to give me a tetnus shot but the Watchtower doctrine imposed at the small Hall I attended said no, it has blood in it. I was so under their mind control that I declined the shot. A sister in our hall wouldn’t lick a postage stamp because she said the glue had blood in it. She also took a vow to stay in AAA “available AFTER Armageddon.” She eventually broke that vow and got married. Armageddon just didn’t get here soon enough I guess.
That is really too bad,can think forherself
That is so far out man,is really comical and I am laughing in my chair and see how far they go to extremes.
+Acadianlion – your perspective resonates the seasoned advice of time and wisdom of age. Seems the wife realized she wouldn’t be a fit for most contemporary churches, yet knew more about the pitfalls and false starts in JW’s, so she chose to socialize her religious aspects in a familiar community.
She will not be one to pressure you to sell the house so I can devote more time in ministry. She will not exhaust herself chasing the JW career ladder.
However as excel cautioned, the overwhelming tendency for JW’s is to recruit, and while your stated goal is never being involved, there are cases of “nay-sayers” who capitulated and did eventually join their spouses in the movement. But there were many cases of spouses living with a husband or wife who never joined them in JW’s BEFORE the new administration of interfering in lives and marriages.
@Terry – wow, a seasoned veteran on the forum. Vaccinations, glue, and not forget the infamous lecithin (an emulsifier found in everything from paints to hot dogs) aversions because “it has blood in it”. Did you get the “acid burn” to trick the school officials that you did have a vaccination?
I believe the vaccination/blood byproducts viewpoint had clarification a year or so afterward, but I do remember some JW’s refused to eat certain meat products long after because their conscience (“elder”) told them it contained blood components.
Did she consult this, too?
*** w05 5/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
Why were David and Bath-sheba not put to death for committing adultery, whereas their newborn son died?
The Mosaic Law stipulated: “In case a man is found lying down with a woman owned by an owner, both of them must then die together, the man lying down with the woman and the woman. So you must clear away what is bad out of Israel.” (Deuteronomy 22:22) If Jehovah God had allowed the judicial case of David and Bath-sheba’s sin to be handled by human judges under the Law, the adulterous couple would have been executed. Since the human judges could not read hearts, they were to render judgment on the basis of the conduct of the wrongdoers as established by the facts. An act of adultery called for the death sentence. The Israelite judges were not authorized to pardon that sin.
On the other hand, the true God can read hearts and forgive sins if he sees a basis for doing so. Since the case involved David, with whom He had made the Kingdom covenant, Jehovah chose to make an exception and deal with the matter himself. (2 Samuel 7:12-16) “The Judge of all the earth” has the right to make such a choice.—Genesis 18:25.
Note this:
1) If Jehovah God had allowed the judicial case of David and Bath-sheba’s sin to be handled by human judges under the Law; WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED?
2) Since the case involved David, with whom He had made the Kingdom covenant, Jehovah chose to make an exception and deal with the matter himself; WITHOUT THE EXCEPTION, HUMAN JUDGES WOULD HAVE SHARED BLOODGUILT!!
STUPIDITY = STUPIDITY and nothing else!! I am afraid it stems from a man made god; JEHOVAH. Human judges would have sentenced David to death and JESUS would have not come on earth!!!!!!!!!!
ROBOTS consult the GB through such stupid and confusing publications!!
Read the full answer to that question from this page: http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/l/r1/lp-e?q=w05+5%2F15+p.+31
It would also come down to say that Jehovah was wrong with His choice …
But didn’t David put Uriah in front of a battle so that he dies, and only after he took Bath-Sheba as wife ? Am I mistaken about how the events were reported to happen ? So basically David made a different kind of crime, even worse than adultery, so that his union with Bath-Sheba would appear legitimate, isn’t it true ?
Nonetheless, it’s such a poor explanation. I think this is what happens if all scriptures are taken litterally. I’m not sure if quite some part of the bible really carries any message or purpose, and I suspect their accuracy about the events, circumstances, and even ideas expressed …
I think the best answer to the question would be : “What do we know ? We didn’t live at that era to witness what really EXACTLY happened”. Why is it so difficult to admit we don’t have a clue about many many things written in the bible … The people at WT must have a third eye …
“You really messed it up David, you sent a man to die so that you can take away his wife ….. but come on, I’m making an exception for this time” …
To me it feels like it’s quite an insult, interpreting things this way.
What a SHAME to the GB!!! This woman should not research about her beliefs but about her value as a Jehovah’s Witnesses woman:
Some based their beliefs on the teachings of strong-minded women of the 19th century, such as Ellen White of the Seventh-Day Adventists and Mary Baker Eddy of the Christian Scientists, and more recently many women have been preaching from the pulpit. (Contrast 1 Timothy 2:11, 12.) Among the different forms of Catholicism, Mary is often honored ahead of God and Christ. Jesus did not so honor her. (John 2:4; 19:26) Could organizations that admit such unlawful female influence really be accepted as Christian? (*** re chap. 10 pp. 53-54 par. 20 Abhorring the “Deep Things of Satan” ***)!!
We should not expect a Jehovah’s Witnesses Woman to behave different. JWs women are psychologically diminished “In what situations is it appropriate for a Christian woman to wear a head covering for spiritual reasons?” (w02 7/15 p. 26)!
JWs are today’s Phariseans, what do they mean by Bloodguilt? Looking up her beliefs, did the woman skip (Numbers 25:7-9) . . .Phin′e·has …. took a lance in his hand… went after the man of Israel into the vaulted tent and pierced … the man of Israel and the woman through her genital parts.”
Ask that woman if Phineas is guilt of blood she will say NO as “Christian elders today do not resort to violence. But like Phinehas, elders must be ready to be decisive and courageous.” (http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/l/r1/lp-e?q=w11+9%2F15+pp.+30-32)
This policy of refusing jury duty strikes me as odd since the GB has no issue with using the court’s resources to defend their own policies. However when a member is asked to assist as a juror, this is seen as improper.
Um, shouldn’t she have just not done jury duty? Shouldn’t she have told them that at selection? Or written in beforehand? What a waste of time. What an idiot!
Cedars, When I was a Witness I sat on a jury that involved the use of a firearm. I had PLENTY of time to do research on jury duty!!! It’s not like they got the notice to appear in court on Saturday and then went to the court house on Monday and were sequestered at 8 A. M. I wonder how she will answer the question “Did you talk to anyone about the case while it was going on?” They tell you not to talk to the other jurors until ALL the evidence has been presented! Then only during deliberations can you talk to ANYONE about the case.
Cedars, last week I came up with an acronym for WATCHTOWER = With Authority They Continue Hurting Those Oppressed With Errors Repeatedly!