by slimboyfat 89 Replies latest jw friends
In the pre-Internet age apostates would engage much more with their ‘brothers’ in the faith about the doubts they were having and dissention spread more productively.
This is totally off. A Witness will, by far, be more likely to sit in his own dark, quiet room reading truths about the Tower on the internet than to stand there and listen to brother who has doubts.
Bryan
Most Witnesses are too busy to look up apostate sites; many who do come upon them casually make fun of them and, most importantly, those Witnesses who are very active online have been effective in recent years at creating protected online communities
So why was it at our recent circuit assembly, the DO and CO went on and on about the Internet and the dangers it poses and gave experiences of the trouble it had landed people in. The WTBTS are very concerned
So why was it at our recent circuit assembly, the DO and CO went on and on about the Internet and the dangers it poses and gave experiences of the trouble it had landed people in. The WTBTS are very concerned
Not only did they warn about the dangers of the internet (or so I'm told) but the whole theme or year text is about "Godly Obedience". They're really emphisizing the fact that the rank and file needs to heed their warnings.
The WT CD-ROM is the apostate's best friend.
When I mentioned that to a couple of elders they had a hissy fit.
I see SBF is still taking all of his meals at the WT table of lies and deception.
Dare I say that Mr. Slimboyfat has been contradicted by 100% of his repliers?
Just the response alone should convince our lurking friends that the internet has rung the death knell for the Organisation.
Thank you Slim for providing the catalysis that proves you wrong!
I don't think the fact that the Society is clearly concerned about the power of the internet is what invalidates Slimboyfat's premise, and I'm not mad at him for trying to make the case he did. I just don't think it withstands honest-hearted scrutiny.
The only thing the internet has reduced... or put a halt to... is the amount of pornagraphic literature you find in parks or under park benches. Personally I feel this is a great shame, every now and then I like to purchase something off the 'top shelf' and leave some of the pages lying about in our local park.
Down with the internet, up with the top shelf.
Thank you all for your responses. I wish I had time to respond to everyone, but I don't. I just want to make a couple of points.
Someone asked about my reference to Norway. I was talking about the stir Carl Olof Jonsson created up there. Apparently he succeeded bringing friends from local congregations with him out of the society over the issue he raised in relation to 1914 and had a major region effect. This is in contrast to later apostate leaders (such as the Liberal Elder - and(?) "Marvin Shilmer" - for example) who preferred to keep their anonymity, which the Internet allowed them to do, and reach a faceless hyperspace audience rather than openly talk about their concerns in their local congregations and cause real trouble for the society on a local level. Had the "Liberal Elder" been around in the pre-Internet era he may have caused severe problems for the society, since his powerful propaganda would have had to spread through real Jehovah's Witness communities by means of real personal contacts, rather than merely in etherial and ineffectual hyperspace. But the Internet offered Lee Elder the easy apostate option of hiding behind the computer screen instead: and he took it. This comparison is eloquent testimomy to how the Internet has dramatically dampened the efficacy of the apostate cause.
The other big thing to address is this fallacy that most posters have been promoting: I must be wrong or else why is the Society so patently afraid of the Internet? This compeltely misses the point. I know the Society *thinks* that the Internet is doing them great harm, but my argument is that they are wrong in thinking that, just as apostates are wrong in agreeing with them. So please let's have the debate on whether the Internet means the end of the apostate cause or not, not over what the Society's view is, since I actually happen to agree with all of you that they are quite paranoid about the Internet. The whole point of my initial post, however, is that they need not be.
*Currently having thoughts of printing said bumber sticker and sneak around the KH's parking lot during a meeting, sticking them away.lol Or maybe just on the back of an elder's car...for more subtil effect.*
SBF, here is a point you might not have considered.
In the old days, before the Internet apostate community, when an apostate was raging mad over a point he or she would vent publicly and loudly on a local level. The pressure would build up until it burst. That apostate woud be disfellowshipped and only those already disloyal to the org would listen after that happened.
Now, the Internet apostate can vent in anonymity and preserve their ability to quietly work on the local level. Going out with a bang limits the amount of local damage that can be done and scares Witnesses into digging their heels in deeper. Going out quietly increases the amount of damage that can be done to the bOrg and the length of time over which such damage can be done. It sharply increases the liklihood of getting some family members to start thinking deeply for themselves.
I have to disagree on the basis that you are only looking at damage done at point of exit. A fader can doo much more damage over a much longer period of time because anyone with questions and doubts will feel more comfortable discussing such with...a fader who is not disfellowshipped. Among my former circle of friends and acquaintances I have already helped keep one person from getting baptized—no longer even goes to the meetings, have helped two people know that this can't be the truth, and have helped one person to leave entirely. I strongly disagree that the fade is less effective than the big-bang.
AuldSoul
