Jehovah's Witnesses Find Young Boy Tied to a Pole in Miami Beach

May 13, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Miami New Times

A 12-year-old boy in Miami Beach might have been the happiest person ever to spot Jehovah's Witnesses.

Comments
41 - 60 of 61 Comments Last updated May 18, 2013

“ALLEZ MONTREAL!”

Since: Dec 06

Where pretty lies perish, QC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

El cacique wrote:
Some parents will talk to their df'd kids. Some witnesses may even have a very brief conversation with Df ones in the street if they happen to run into one. Especially, if they knew them quite well at one time.
I have seen both instances happen.
==========
Again..Not always written in stone.
In fact, it's not written in stone AT ALL.

But you better stop before you cause one of Satan's Brigade of Spiritual Prostitutes and Whorshipers to engage in a little critical thinking and veer off-script.

On second thought, look at the person you're addressing; that one's head would explode.

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
May 14, 2013
 
FH Chandler wrote:
<quoted text>
In fact, it's not written in stone AT ALL.
But you better stop before you cause one of Satan's Brigade of Spiritual Prostitutes and Whorshipers to engage in a little critical thinking and veer off-script.
On second thought, look at the person you're addressing; that one's head would explode.
Thanks. Yes. They fight you point for point. It is exhausting.

==========

The reality is that i haven't seen publishers outside of the KH always doing things by the line on this particular point.

People are human and should be given room to to be human.
BUDGIE

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
May 14, 2013
 
FH Chandler wrote:
The facts of this situation will shortly be misrepresented, most likely by HmmmWhorshipingMomster, to make this somehow a crime committed by a JW and, thus, representative of each and every JW on the planet - like the situation with Ariel Castro, a man who was not a JW.
Paranoid
The definition of paranoid is:
Psychosis characterized by systematized DELUSIONS OF PERSECUTION or grandeur usually
without hallucinations.. Or a tendency on the part of an individual or GROUP toward excessive or
IRRATIONAL SUSPICIOUSNESS and distrustfulness of others

“ALLEZ MONTREAL!”

Since: Dec 06

Where pretty lies perish, QC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

El cacique wrote:
People are human and should be given room to to be human.
Such is not a luxury rabid ex/antiJWs like our friends here and elsewhere on the Internet typically extend to anyone who disagrees with them in any way, shape or form.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
May 14, 2013
 
miseracord wrote:
<quoted text>So would you say that the Witnesses did the right thing to call the police? What would YOU have done if you saw such a thing? Just keep walking -- or wait there until his father came back and size up the situation?
.
. If.. the father..was in fact..mistreating his son..for the sake of mistreating.. his son.. I'm betting he wouldn't have put him on public display .. Like I said..it may not have been the wisest idea.. but ..if he had spanked his ass..you'd have had a hang up with that also... Do you know what Juvenile Hall is?? Any idea how the children that wind up there are treated by the powers that be??? Hmm!

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

El cacique wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks. Yes. They fight you point for point. It is exhausting.
==========
The reality is that i haven't seen publishers outside of the KH always doing things by the line on this particular point.
People are human and should be given room to to be human.
.
. Reflect back on what you said about this kids father.. And he was also only human..

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

El cacique wrote:
<quoted text>And the true Hollie emerges.
Congratulations, Hollie!
Where do YOU get off speaking to ME this way? If you are just going to post stupid things, please just don't post to me.

THANKS!

And blessings.

p.s. AGAIN....YOU don't know me....lol...

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

eagleeye2 wrote:
<quoted text>
So not true. We help each other to stay on the narrow road. If we see our brother taking a wrong path, we let him know. When someone shows they are set on doing bad, we refuse to have anything to do with that person. And we get criticized for what the world calls "shunning" them. If someone repents and determines to get back on the narrow path, we welcome them back and help them again.
Did Jesus shun ones that 'took the wrong path'?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

hollieberry wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Jesus shun ones that 'took the wrong path'?
.
. No he did not.. he illustrated that a person.. who is sick.. needs a doctor ..and a person.. spiritually ill ..is in need of spiritual uplifting.. Not in those words.exactly..but that was ..what he was saying..
El Cacique

New York, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

hollieberry wrote:
<quoted text>Where do YOU get off speaking to ME this way? If you are just going to post stupid things, please just don't post to me.
THANKS!
And blessings.
p.s. AGAIN....YOU don't know me....lol...
Your cancer must be cured, Hollie.

I see you're back in fighting form.

Hurray!

Since: Feb 07

RI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

El cacique wrote:
<quoted text>I did not state that.
EE was correct. She was faithfully going along with the society line for line as she always does.
I just simply stated that it is not always written in stone. Nor did i raise that point to EE. I raised it with you.
EX: Some parents will talk to their df'd kids. Some witnesses may even have a very brief conversation with Df ones in the street if they happen to run into one. Especially, if they knew them quite well at one time.
I have seen both instances happen.
==========
Again..Not always written in stone.
You did not state what? I never said that you stated anything at all. I said that your post went off on a tangent...and it did. I was not referring to the rules of the WTS, but rather to EE's disingenuous post implying that "sinners" are guided back to the right path by individual JWs, and that individual JWs decide on their own to avoid the sinner who refuses to change.

I asked her about her comment since she was implying that the "rules" as you so conveniently pointed out, were NOT the organization's rules but that individual JWs actually made these decisions and offered the guidance on their own.

They don't. Elders decide whether or not a sinner is repentant and elders lay down the law concerning shunning according to what the WTS tells them to do. Individual JWs have no input on the decision nor do they have a choice concerning shunning unless they wish to face a judicial committee themselves.

Any interaction that a JW has with a disfellowshipped person (relative or not) must conform to the current "rules" set out by the organization, which may or may not "allow" limited contact, or they could face judicial action against themselves if they are reported to the elders for breaking those rules.

My comment to EE was concerning her implication that these were decisions and actions carried out by individual JWs, but they are NOT. They are ruled by what the WTS tells them to do.
UNchained

Loudon, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#55
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FH Chandler wrote:
<quoted text>
In fact, it's not written in stone AT ALL.
But you better stop before you cause one of Satan's Brigade of Spiritual Prostitutes and Whorshipers to engage in a little critical thinking and veer off-script.
On second thought, look at the person you're addressing; that one's head would explode.
*** km 8/02 p. 3 par. 4 Display Christian Loyalty When a Relative Is Disfellowshipped ***

What about speaking with a disfellowshipped person? While the Bible does not cover every possible situation, 2 John 10 helps us to get Jehovah’s view of matters:“If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him.” Commenting on this, The Watchtower of September 15, 1981, page 25, says:“A simple ‘Hello’ to someone can be the first step that develops into a conversation and maybe even a friendship. Would we want to take that first step with a disfellowshiped person?”

Since: Dec 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#56
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RedhorseWoman wrote:
<quoted text>
You did not state what? I never said that you stated anything at all. I said that your post went off on a tangent...and it did. I was not referring to the rules of the WTS, but rather to EE's disingenuous post implying that "sinners" are guided back to the right path by individual JWs, and that individual JWs decide on their own to avoid the sinner who refuses to change.
I asked her about her comment since she was implying that the "rules" as you so conveniently pointed out, were NOT the organization's rules but that individual JWs actually made these decisions and offered the guidance on their own.
They don't. Elders decide whether or not a sinner is repentant and elders lay down the law concerning shunning according to what the WTS tells them to do. Individual JWs have no input on the decision nor do they have a choice concerning shunning unless they wish to face a judicial committee themselves.
Any interaction that a JW has with a disfellowshipped person (relative or not) must conform to the current "rules" set out by the organization, which may or may not "allow" limited contact, or they could face judicial action against themselves if they are reported to the elders for breaking those rules.
My comment to EE was concerning her implication that these were decisions and actions carried out by individual JWs, but they are NOT. They are ruled by what the WTS tells them to do.
You sound as legalistic as you purport the Jw's to be.

Lighten up.

I know plenty of the friends who talk to df'd relatives.

Why do you think so many admonishments are in the WT?. The society knows it too.

Let's move on.

Since: Feb 07

RI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#57
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

El cacique wrote:
<quoted text>You sound as legalistic as you purport the Jw's to be.
Lighten up.
I know plenty of the friends who talk to df'd relatives.
Why do you think so many admonishments are in the WT?. The society knows it too.
Let's move on.
We're not discussing "df'd relatives" exclusively, though, are we? As a matter of fact, the questions I asked EE concerning her post, which made absolutely NO mention of the "sinner" in question being a relative, and I, therefore, was not referring to relatives, were concerning whether or not INDIVIDUAL JWs were the ones to (1) counsel someone who was sinning in order to lead them back to the right path, and (2) decide on their own (individually) to avoid contact with said sinner if their previous counsel proved to be ineffective.

You are trying desperately to cover for her, but it isn't working.

Let's try again, since you seem so intent on supporting your mentor...

Do INDIVIDUAL JWs counsel sinners on their own in order to aid those sinners get back on the right path, or is this something that is handled by a judicial committee of elders?

Do INDIVIDUAL JWs, when observing another JW (not a relative...you seem to be stuck on the "relative" thing, and that was never the issue) committing gross sins, go to that person privately to counsel them, or do those INDIVIDUAL JWs report the matter to the elders and let THEM handle it?

Do INDIVIDUAL JWs decide individually and all on their own, to avoid contact with the gross sinner whom they individually counseled when the INDIVIDUAL JWs determine that the sinner is not going to change, or is an announcement made from the platform informing the congregation that this person is now disfellowshipped and should be avoided?

If an INDIVIDUAL JW should decide, based on their own conscience, that they do NOT want to avoid contact with the df'd person (not a relative,) will they be able to do so without fear that they could possibly end up being df'd themselves if they were seen openly associating with the df'd person (not a relative)?

Now...dismount from your really tall tangent and address the questions presented. Or are you too afraid to tell the truth about this?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#58
May 14, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

El Cacique wrote:
<quoted text>Your cancer must be cured, Hollie.
I see you're back in fighting form.
Hurray!
.
. The guy is brain dead.. totally.

“ALLEZ MONTREAL!”

Since: Dec 06

Where pretty lies perish, QC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#59
May 15, 2013
 
Kiddie Diddler Bob wrote:
*** km 8/02 p. 3 par. 4 Display Christian Loyalty When a Relative Is Disfellowshipped ***
What about speaking with a disfellowshipped person? While the Bible does not cover every possible situation, 2 John 10 helps us to get Jehovah’s view of matters:“If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him.” Commenting on this, The Watchtower of September 15, 1981, page 25, says:“A simple ‘Hello’ to someone can be the first step that develops into a conversation and maybe even a friendship. Would we want to take that first step with a disfellowshiped person?”
And?

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#60
May 15, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

El Cacique wrote:
<quoted text>Your cancer must be cured, Hollie.
I see you're back in fighting form.
Hurray!
Are you a stalker?

Since: Mar 09

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#61
May 17, 2013
 
Neither would I Karen(talk back to adults). We used to get what some would call "Hickory T". And sometimes it would leave some welts, on the legs. I do believe in discipline...but I don't believe in cruelty.

Since: Nov 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#62
May 18, 2013
 
Nomi wrote:
Neither would I Karen(talk back to adults). We used to get what some would call "Hickory T". And sometimes it would leave some welts, on the legs. I do believe in discipline...but I don't believe in cruelty.
Oh Nomi, I got the willow switch, and believe me, those things sting! If I ever backed talked my mother, I was in for it. What exactly is the Hickory T? Kids today just do not have the respect that we as kids had for our parents. If Jehovah allows this old world to continue for 100's of years, no telling what kind of world it will be.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#64
May 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

miseracord wrote:
<quoted text>Do you really think?
.
. Yes..do you?? Could have been worse .. he could have been stripped down and beaten until he had bloody welts all over his body.. Personally , I'd a perfered to be chained up outside...
but sadistic people like to inflict their crueltys out of sight of others..

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••