“Just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them over to a disapproved mental state, to do the things not fitting.” (Romans 1:28 NWT)
It may seem like a bold statement even to suggest that the leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses has been given over to a disapproved mental state by God. However, before weighing in on one side or the other, let us look at how other versions of the Bible render this verse:
"God...abandoned them to their foolish thinking..." (New International Version)
"God...let their useless minds rule over them." (Contemporary English Version)
"God allowed their own immoral minds to control them." (God's Word Translation)
Now let's consider the context:
“And they were filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, and badness, being full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and malice, being whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, schemers of what is harmful, disobedient to parents, without understanding, false to agreements, having no natural affection, and merciless. Although these know full well the righteous decree of God—that those practicing such things are deserving of death—they not only keep on doing them but also approve of those practicing them.” (Romans 1:29-32)
A Jehovah's Witness reading this will surely object that none of the qualities listed above apply in any way whatsoever to those governing the Organization. Yet, before jumping to any conclusion, let us bear in mind that it is God who "abandons" these ones to this mental state, or as the New World Translation puts it, "gives them up". When Jehovah abandons someone, he does so by withdrawing his spirit. What happened when God withdrew his spirit from King Saul?
"Now the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD terrorized him." (1 Samuel 16:14 NASB)
Whether from Satan or whether from one's sinful inclination, without the positive influence of God's spirit, the mind goes into a downward spiral.
Has this now become the state of the Organization? Has Jehovah withdrawn his spirit. I know some will contend that His spirit was never there in the first place; but that's just fair to say? God does not pour out his spirit upon any institution, but on individuals. His spirit is very powerful, such that even if a small number of individuals have it, they can have a great effect on the whole. Remember, he was willing to spare the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah just for the sake of ten righteous men. Has the number of righteous men inhabiting Witness leadership dwindled to such a degree that we can now suggest they have been given up to a disapproved mental state? What evidence is there to even make such a suggestion?
Take, as but one example, this letter written in answer to a sincere question concerning whether forensic evidence could be considered as a second witness in cases where there is only one eyewitness to the sin of child rape, i.e., the child victim.
If this image is too small to read on your device, here is the text of the letter.
Dear Brother X:
We are pleased to respond to your letter of November 21, 2002, wherein you discuss the handling of child abuse cases in the Christian congregation and mention the reasoning you have used in answering those who have been critical of certain procedures followed that are based on the Scriptures.
The reasoning outlined in your letter is generally sound. Establishing the facts in some difficult situations is not easy, but Jehovah's Witnesses are making determined effort to protect Jehovah's people from sexual predators, at the same time holding to his standard and principles as set forth in the Bible. Commendably, you have thought matters through and are prepared to answer the charges of the critics, as this seems necessary and appropriate.
You observe that evidence from a medical examination may be quite convincing because of technology today that was not available in Bible times. You ask if, at times, this could not be so incriminating that it, in effect, amounts to a second "witness." It could be very strong evidence, depending, of course, on just what substance was produced as evidence and how reliable and conclusive the test was. But since the Bible specifically refers to eyewitnesses in establishing a matter, it would be best not to refer to such evidence as a second "witness." Nevertheless, the point you make that there often would be more to consider in investigating the charge against the accused than just the verbal witness of the alleged victim is certainly a valid one.
It is a pleasure to be associated with you and our brothers around the world in the Kingdom preaching work Jehovah is having done earth wide today. We all are eagerly looking forward with you to the momentous events just ahead when God will deliver his people into his new world.
Let us ignore the boilerplate platitude which ends all such correspondence and concentrate on the meat of the letter. This 17-year-old letter reveals that the thinking of the Organization regarding how to handle cases of child sexual abuse has not changed. If anything, it has become even more entrenched.
Let's start with this: "Jehovah's Witnesses are making determined efforts to protect Jehovah's people from sexual predators, at the same time holding to his standard and principles as set forth in the Bible."
This makes it sound like the protection of Jehovah's people from sexual predators and His "standard and principles as set forth in the Bible" are separate and not always compatible with each other. The idea conveyed is that by holding fast to the letter of the law, the Organization cannot always adequately protect children from sexual predators. God's law is to blame. These men are merely doing their duty in upholding divine law.
As we read the rest of the letter, we see that this is very much the case. However, is it God's law that is at fault, or is it the interpretation of men that has led to this mess?
If, after reading this letter, you feel a level of rage at the stupidity of it all, don't beat yourself up. That is quite a natural response when faced with the stupidity of men. The Bible condemns stupidity, but don't think that word is being applied to those with a low IQ. A person with a low IQ can be very wise. On the other hand, quite often those with a high IQ prove to be very stupid. When the Bible speaks of stupidity, it means moral stupidity, a distinct lack of the wisdom that benefits oneself and others.
Please, read and absorb this wisdom from Proverbs, then we'll come back to it, one by one, to analyze the letter and the policies of JW.org.
- “. . .[how long] will YOU stupid ones keep hating knowledge?” (Pr 1:22)
- “. . .YOU stupid ones, understand heart.” (Pr 8:5)
- “. . .but the heart of the stupid ones is one that calls out foolishness.” (Pr 12:23)
- “. . .Everyone shrewd will act with knowledge, but the one that is stupid will spread abroad foolishness.” (Pr 13:16)
- “. . .The wise one fears and is turning away from badness, but the stupid is becoming furious and self-confident.” (Pr 14:16)
- “. . .Why is it that there is in the hand of a stupid one the price to acquire wisdom, when he has no heart?” (Pr 17:16)
- “. . .Just like a dog returning to its vomit, the stupid one is repeating his foolishness.” (Pr 26:11)
Proverbs 17:16 tells us that the stupid one has the price to acquire wisdom right in his hand, but he will not pay that price because he lacks heart. He lacks the heart to pay the price. What would motivate a man to reexamine his understanding of Scripture with a view to protecting children? Love, obviously. It is a lack of love that we see in all the Organization's dealings relating to child sexual abuse—though that lack of love is hardly restricted to this one issue. Thus, they hate knowledge (Pr 1:22), do not understand or are blind to their own motivation (Pr 8:5) and so just dispense foolishness (Pr 12:23). Then when someone calls them on the mat for doing so, they became furious and haughty (Pr 14:16). (In regards to this last point, it is to protect the letter's recipient from such fury that we have blanked out the name.) And like a dog returning to its vomit, they keep repeating the same old foolishness again and again to their own detriment (Pr 26:11).
Am I being too hard on them to accuse them of hating knowledge and not being willing to pay the price for it, because they lack love?
I'll let you be the judge.
They admit that there may be very strong evidence to establish sexual abuse. For example, a rape kit can gather DNA evidence to establish the identity of an attacker. However, their interpretation of the "two-witness rule" requires that there be two "eyewitnesses" to an incident of child rape, so even with overwhelming forensic evidence, the elders cannot act if the only eyewitness testimony comes from the victim.
Now you see what they meant when they wrote that they "are making determined efforts to protect Jehovah's people from sexual predators, at the same time holding to his standard and principles as set forth in the Bible." In other words, they must hold to their interpretation of what the Bible says about the two-witness rule, even though that might result in a lack of protection for Jehovah's people.
Yet, they have the means to buy wisdom, so why do they lack the motivation to do so? (Pr 17:16) Why would they hate such knowledge? Remember, it is the stupid one who hates knowledge (Pr 1:22) .
A simple search on the word "witness" using the Organization's very own software program indicates that a witness can be something other than a human who happens to see an event.
"This mound is a witness, and this pillar is a witness, that I will not go past this mound to harm you, and you will not go past this mound and pillar to harm me." (Genesis 31:51)
“Taking this book of the law, YOU must place it at the side of the ark of the covenant of Jehovah YOUR God, and it must serve as a witness there against you.” (De 31:26)
In fact, the use of forensic evidence to bear witness in a case involving immoral sex is established in the Mosaic law code. Here's the account from the Bible:
“If a man takes a wife and has relations with her but then comes to hate her and he accuses her of misconduct and gives her a bad name by saying: ‘I have taken this woman, but when I had relations with her, I did not find evidence that she was a virgin,’ the father and mother of the girl should produce the evidence of the girl’s virginity for the elders at the gate of the city. The girl’s father must say to the elders, ‘I gave my daughter to this man as a wife, but he hates her and is accusing her of misconduct by saying: “I have found out that your daughter does not have evidence of virginity.” Now this is the evidence of my daughter’s virginity.’ They will then spread out the cloth before the elders of the city. The city elders will take the man and discipline him.” (De 22:13-18)
With reference to this passage, Insight on the Scriptures reads:
"Proof of Virginity.
After the supper the husband took his bride into the nuptial chamber. (Ps 19:5; Joe 2:16) On the wedding night a cloth or garment was used and then kept or given to the wife’s parents so that the marks of the blood of the girl’s virginity would constitute legal protection for her in the event she was later charged with lack of virginity or of having been a prostitute prior to her marriage. Otherwise, she could be stoned to death for having presented herself in marriage as a spotless virgin and for bringing great reproach on her father’s house. (De 22:13-21) This practice of keeping the cloth has continued among some peoples in the Middle East until recent times."
(it-2 p. 341 Marriage)
There you have it, Bible proof that forensic evidence can serve as a second witness. Yet, they refuse to apply it and "just like a dog returning to its vomit, the stupid one is repeating his foolishness” (Pr 26:11).
It is easy to blame the organization for all the tragedy that thousands have suffered due to their aversion to report the crime of child rape to the appropriate governmental authorities charged by God as his minister to handle such things. (See Romans 13:1-6.) I never had children of my own, so I can only imagine how I would react at learning that some brother in the congregation had molested my little boy or my little girl. I'd probably want to tear him limb from limb. I'm sure many a parent with an abused child has felt that way. That being said, I'd like us all to look at this in a new light. If your child is raped, who would you turn to for justice? I can't imagine you saying: "I know this fellow who is a janitor, and another who washes windows for a living, and a third who is an automobile repairman. I think they would be just the people to contact, who would know how to handle this situation. I can count on them to punish the evildoer and help restore my child to mental and emotional health."
I know that sounds ridiculous, but isn't that exactly what thousands have done by contacting the elders instead of educated and trained professionals?
True, the leadership of the Organization certainly seems to be acting stupidly in the Biblical sense by "hating knowledge" and "spreading abroad their foolishness" (Pr 1:22; 13:16) The elders are also stupidly "self-confident" (Pr 14:16) in not recognizing their own inadequacy and inability to properly deal with this complex issue. They have frequently shown an unwillingness to act out of love and report these crimes to the authorities so as to protect Jehovah's people. Nevertheless, it is easy to blame others for our own shortcomings. God judges all people. He will ask an accounting from each one. We cannot change our past, but we can affect our present. I wish I had realized all this before, but I do recognize it now. Therefore, I implore all Jehovah's Witnesses who are aware of the crime of child abuse to not report it to the elders. Don't even involve them. You are just setting them up for failure. Instead, obey God's command at Romans 13:1-6 and make your report to the superior authorities who are equipped to investigate and interrogate and ferret out the evidence. They are the ones who are appointed by God to protect us in such cases.
I have no illusion that the Organization will ever change its policies. So why even bother with them? Leave them out of it. If you are aware of a crime, obey God and contact the authorities. The elders and the branch will likely be upset, but what of it? What matters is that you are good with God.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by rusticshore on 2020-02-26 21:13:25
The letter is also misleading. Notice when it states, "But since the Bible specifically refers to eyewitnesses in establishing a matter." The word "eyewitnesses" does not appear in either Deuteronomy 19, nor in Matthew 18. Only the word, "witness," or "witnesses." In fact, I could not locate "eyewitnesses" anywhere.
The Greek word Martyron can also be used in a "figurative" sense, by analogy.
An expert in a field of specific academia may be called to testify as a "witness," or as a "RECORD" of their forensic analysis.
Notice 2 Corinthians 1:23 using Grk "Martyra" in the same tense ( "But I call God to witness against me—it was to spare you that I refrained from coming again to Corinth")
Bishops bible: " I call God for a (recorde) vnto my soule, that to spare you I came not as yet vnto Corinthus"
Geneva bible: "Nowe, I call God for a (recorde) vnto my soule, that to spare you, I came not as yet vnto Corinthus."
The Great bible: "I call God for a (recorde) vnto my soule that for to fauer you with all I came not eny more vnto Corynthum"
Tyndale bible: I call God for a (recorde) vnto my soule that forto faver you with all I came not enymoare vnto Corinthum.
(parenthesis mine)
The point? As "witnesses" of God, we have never seen Him, nor spoken directly with Him, nor have had any personal or intimate dealing with Him, person to person. Yet we go on "record" as testifying His greatness by the things we see, tangibly, by observing his marks of creation!!! Can not the same be said of a forensic doctor who specializes in interviewing, examining the "marks" of fear, word stressors, and much more on a child who has been molested?
Comment by Beroeans Creed on 2020-02-27 13:14:39
Eric,
Thanks for keeping this in the forefront of what the current mindset of the Governing Body. I now consider these men not to be the “faithful slave” but the “ evil slave” (which conveniently they have not identified)
The takeaway you outlined is the parents or those who have knowledge of any abuse or even accusations should be the frontline in this battle and immediately report to the authorities.
Sadly, due to the strong indoctrination to not EVER bring reproach on Jehovah’s name or his so called organization, this is not a reality in almost all cases.
When we examine this indoctrination we see for example in the recent Oxygen documentary where one victim’s own family sat behind the abusers defense team during trial in support of the abuser instead of their own shunned flesh and blood daughter!
Hard to comprehend this unless you have been a Jehovah’s Witness.
When abuse cases are brought to the attention of unqualified Elders to handle and the families decide to keep it quite (even with a confession) the individual brothers do not feel obligated to report it to the authorities out of innate common sense to protect the child, congregation and the public.
How can this be you ask?
Simply because of the idolatrous loyalty to the organization and unwarranted fear of bringing reproach on God’s name.(Rom.13 Lev 5:1 ) We can compare this to much in the same way the Nazi soldiers all stated they were “just following orders” in loyalty to Hitler and the third Reich ignoring all moral sense and carried out all manner of atrocities!
Thus in similar fashion the Elders blindly follow the instructions from the Organization’s legal dept. to quote an Elder “if the parents decide (coerced in truth) not to report, elders should not feel it’s their obligation too.” When asked how he felt about that he stated “I trust the organizations direction” Just think about that for a moment.
So parents should immediately follow their instincts and report even the suspicion of abuse and as you state bypass the elders completely!
That only leaves the problem of abuse from immediate family members where often the spouse for reasons unknown tend to ignore or cover over the abuse and it is only exposed when the victim comes forth often decades later.
As I have mentioned on previous discussions here, the new policy of informing parents in the congregation to “watch their children “ around certain individuals soon runs through the congregation grapevine and that if as a PIMO you become aware of a case in your hall you may choose to inform authorities in your state anonymously and do so with a clean conscience. Keep in mind you may be protecting not only some in the congregation but the community as well.
Comment by Chet on 2020-02-27 22:54:28
"I implore all Jehovah’s Witnesses who are aware of the crime of child abuse to not report it to the elders. Don’t even involve them. You are just setting them up for failure. Instead, obey God’s command at Romans 13:1-6 and make your report to the superior authorities who are equipped to investigate and interrogate and ferret out the evidence. They are the ones who are appointed by God to protect us in such cases."
I think this cuts to the heart of the matter. Many Witnesses see no legitimacy in the secular governments and cooperate with them begrudgingly, if at all. The Elder arrangement, which came into being in 1972, brought with it some profound changes in the Organization. It was broadly hinted that the elders and ministerial servants would become the governmental authorities in the New System. The notion that such were literally appointed by God's Holy Spirit lent authority to these men and indeed, people of very modest background suddenly found themselves in a position of authority among the congregation members.
The problem is this; they were not given gifts of the spirit and just because someone was an elder that did not qualify them to deal with every problem that came up. I'll elaborate by means of an illustration.
Physicians spend most of their practice treating relatively routine matters. I'm certain that almost anyone who is literate could learn to prescribe medications for minor illnesses or how to deal with routine matters. But that does not qualify someone to be a physician. A physician has the background to recognize when there are serous root causes. So while the family doc' might spend a lot of time treating minor respiratory infections and ordinary problems, they also have the background to ask the right questions and eliminate other possibilities before settling on a course of treatment.
Psychotherapists do something similar. They start by having patients fill out assessments and possibly some simple tests to evaluate a prospective patient's mental state before they do any treatment. If there are serious psychosis present, they may refer the patient to someone that specializes in such problems.
Most, if not all, elders, do not have such tools to work with. They may have life experience and perhaps have earned some wisdom by means of this experience, but they are not qualified to recognize serious problems. A person coming to them for assistance may simply need a listening ear and a bit of advice, but they might be dealing with depression, anxiety-related problems or some other condition which is treatable, but requires the skill of a true professional.
One example comes to mind of a depressed teen-ager who was frustrated and lashing out when her parents involved the elders. The elders decided to play tough and alienated this child away from the congregation and her family. I observed this from a distance and wasn't even slightly surprised by any of it. This was an emotional child whom required understanding and patience. When faced with bullying and intolerance from the elders, it was like pouring gas on a fire. A little bit of love, kindness and understanding would have done wonders for this youngster, but the elders apparently lacked the ability to do anything except play hardball. Lives were ruined and the effects are long-lasting.
This case is interesting because it illustrates the problem of reducing everything to being a sin, or not a sin. Children go through adjustments while growing up and there are almost always points where they are at odds with their parents. In my humble opinion, this is hardly a matter of sin, but simply part of the process of growing up. Thinking of my various cousins, most had a time when they chafed against their parent's authority, but for most of them, this was a phase. If every teen going through a rebellious phase is kicked out of the congregation, there would be a lot of DF'd kids. If the leadership of the Organization wonders why they are not retaining young people raised as Witnesses, perhaps they should realize that treating them harshly only makes the problem worse.
But the reality of the situation is that the Witnesses have chosen to support their own internal justice system and they are reaping as they've sewn. When you choose to put matters of justice into the hands of people with few qualifications and great authority, there should be no surprise if things go poorly.
What I would advise any active Witness whose child has been abused by another Witness to go directly to the authorities. What will the elders do; put you on trial for doing so? If that were to happen, the publicity ramifications would be immense. If they interfered with your legal rights in such a matter, they would leave themselves open to all sorts of legal consequences. Let it happen and see how it comes out.
Some years back, after bemoaning the injustice within the organization, I realized that my participation was voluntary. That they abused their authority was beyond my control, but placing myself under their authority was well within my control. No one tells me to whom I may, or may not, speak. No one! No one questions my day to day actions and my responsibility is to God, not men. My life is much better this way.
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2020-02-25 12:14:11
Excellent consideration Eric. All needed saying.
My initial thoughts were that Deuteronomy 19:18 simply says that the judges will thoroughly investigate. That principle arises when there is only one witness. There is no cop out because there were not two witnesses. If they did all they could, then justice would be done and justice would be seen to be done. Justice comes first and is more important than the letter of the law. There is plenty in Bible to support that line of thought.
And, there were procedures at 17:6 onward which show what to do in difficult cases.
May I also add a little bit regarding Jehovah's spirit. you mentioned it a few times. Often the Bible refers to holy spirit, but invariably when it does it means his active force or something similar. However, Hebrews 4:12 reminds us that God's word is alive etc. It means that it is full of holy spirit., so if we apply the Bible, we are acting in accordance with the leanings of God's spirit. To do that we must get to the nitty gritty or essence of God's word.
Ephesians 5:18 for example says to "keep getting filled with the spirit, in other words to let the Bible live in you. At Mark 14:18 Jesus reminded us that spirit is eager but the flesh is weak, namely that we do not always do what is right. If we judge properly, we would display the "spirit of wisdom". If we act mildly we display "the spirit of mildness". Romans 8:6 speaks of setting the mind on the spirit means, among other things, getting Jehovah's view on the matter, working it out, and then doing it. thus working with the spirit has many applications.
Unfortunately I see not a lot of effort in doing this in the congregations, where men prefer to be guided by what the (shepherding) book says , rather than what God intended. In cases of law one task of the Judge is to direct the Jury to ensure justice is done. If justice is not done, then he is to blame in part for that.
Are the GB to blame for certain injustices ?. They may not have done the crime. I'll let the reader answer that question.
Just my view, brothers.
Comment by Domine Ivimus on 2020-02-26 16:39:32
Doesn’t Jesus make it clear in Matthew 18:16that the two witnesses are not witnesses to the crime or sin, but witnesses to the establishment of the sin/crime?
Comment by Alithia on 2020-03-01 01:15:47
With regards to a wrongdoing and the requirement of eye witnesses to establish guilt; both cases mentioned in the Old Testament discuss the application of God's Holy Spirit where matters could grind to a halt if it was a case of your word against mine etc., In the one case the matter would be referred to the High Priest who would use the Urim and the thummim and in the other case the priest would take dust from upon the Ark of the Covenant and make the woman drink a potion. In either case they had access to supernatural power from God to determine if wrongdoing had occurred.
The local elders do not have any such abilities or access to special powers as in the time of the early Israelites when they had Gods favour. And hey? the elephant in the room is of the need to report to the authorities allegations of a crime being committed.
For a long time I would agonise if JWs were really O.K people as a group, albeit misguided because I was also at one time an ardent supporter as anyone else for the policies and procedures around investigations and judicial matters and all things JWish.
However with the knowledge of the ARC and the reaction of the Org, it is apparent to me that the leadership is far from being Christian and there being no mitigating circumstances or reason to think they are any different to the religious leaders in Jesus time who were prepared to kill Jesus and Lazarus because it undermined their position of authority.
Also I have revised my views of any in the Org who still cling to it for any reason despite knowing about the child abuse scandal. For the reasons above and others I have personally concluded that you need to be an unloving person with little to no spiritual appreciation, and certainly in jeopardy of losing the Holy Spirit if not having lost Gods favour already, to continue to make excuses and not just bolt away from the Org in a great hurry so as to not "share in the sins of Babylon"!!!
In principle I still love the individuals in the Org however I conclude that it is a demonic cult. And as many have also concluded people ultimately believe what they want to believe. And so if anyone wants to believe that it is O.K to leave innocent and vulnerable children adrift with no advocacy, support or defence that may be available as with the superior authorities as appointed by God, then I rest my case.
Tell me anything that could change an everyday sane person's mind!
Thanks for the summary Eric, I do not think this topic should ever stray into the archives completely without an occasional re-run. I think it is pivotal and captures the essence of what the problem is with the Org in general.
Love to all from John Contrary/Alithia.
Comment by chicho on 2020-02-24 22:03:12
La Organizacion JW esta claramente fuera del arreglo de Dios, incluso me atreveria a decir que la JW se opone a Jesus Cristo, nunca le da importancia, pocas veces es mencionado, y siempre denuncian a la religion falsa coml la Cristiandad, pero jamas atacan al Islam, budismo, sintoismo y etc etc de religiones. Creo que estoy en una religion JW que es anticristo
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2020-02-25 08:09:43
De acuerdo, chicho
Comment by truthrooster on 2020-02-24 23:12:06
I agree with your advice to avoid the elders/window cleaners’ advice altogether. They will only slow down the process on these time sensitive matters. The main issue is seeing assault as a sin and not a CRIME.
I have heard similar advice from those in the organization that know how to use the system: “ Better to ask for forgiveness than permission”. For any crime swift action is needed for the victim and to document evidence. And I doubt with all these legal cases pending in the public eye lately that the service committee would want on record that someone is to be disciplined because they went to register a crime with the authorities.
Jehovah’s backing is only when we or our goal is in unity with Him. Not blanketed generally over an organization/corporation . THAT is why they are losing a lot of court cases and appeals. When I watch things like the Australian Royal Commission, it feels like Holy Spirt is more with the government representatives as they seem kinder and more reasonable than the WT lawyers and Jackson.
Rom 1:28 Yes, because they don’t approve of coming to an accurate knowledge of The God, He has given them depraved minds, which make them do these wrong things -2001 American English Bible
Comment by Diane on 2020-02-25 07:28:58
Wow! This article blew me away. Irrefutable proof the WT is not backed by god. I am going to point this out to my PIMI parents.
Comment by Ad_Lang on 2020-12-10 04:43:42
Brilliant article!
I'm so, so sad that this organisation has indeed become like the Israelites taken over by Korah, who wanted the same privileges Moses had. Difference is that our Greater Moses has earned the status of Leader, and yet others considering themselves "humble" have reached out to take a share for themselves. As Romans 12:17-13:7 says, the authorities have their position to deal with these things.
It is my desire to make clear this distinction, because it cannot be ignored that there has been going on this global preaching of the good news of the Kingdom (Matthew 24:14). In my own case: if these people had not approached me, I may never have looked at the Bible again (which I had decided when leaving the church for the hypocrisy I saw there). Thus I may never have even considered looking around here and other places of similar interest.
I think you've given excellent advice here to not get the organisation involved when it comes to child sexual abuse. Quite frankly, this is one important way in which one can "get away" from around those individuals (Num. 16:25-27), without leaving the entire group behind. For those who did, I'm thinking of many examples like David and Elijah, who also left the nation of Israel out of necessity. Sometimes that was even directed by Jehovah, notably also in the case of Joseph and Mary, to save Jesus from being killed.
Additionally, the Scriptures do not say that divine retribution came to those who stayed, but they often did suffer some consequences. In Elijah's case, there were some thousands of loyal ones still remaining. One of them is named: Obadiah (1 Kings 18:2-4,7,16). Similar with Saul chasing David: the Scriptures do not condemn the men obedient to Saul, but they must have suffered some consequences. In the very least, many may have died in the battle when also Jonathan was killed; yet another loyal one who did not get away, with David in this case.
Finally, good point in making that distinction between IQ and wisdom. One might see IQ as referring to tools, where wisdom (being smart) is a matter of ability to use these tools effectively at the appropriate times.