by Shaolu 113 Replies latest jw experiences
So what was the result of the JC? Were you DF'd? If so, they never told you, and they didn't give you oppoutunity to appeal. They just told you that the meeting was over. That could mean many things, like we're hungry and need to go for pizza so the meeting is over and we're headed to pizza hut, or that they wanted to kick you out to have an orgy in the back room.
Depending on where you are, you can check with a lawyer about this. They have to follow their bylaws.
Kwin
As JW's we joined of our own free will. We agreed to the rules, of our own free will.
If by "rules" you mean policies. You know that isn't a truthful statement.
Core WTBTS policies do not become transparent until AFTER you have "dedicated your life to that of "jehovah and his book publishing corporation,that is very much a part of this wicked system of things" by baptism.
And as "once an elder" you know very well too that WATCHTOWER BAPTISM has nothing to do with dedicating your life to anything altruistic.
This organization and its LETHAL POLICIES need to be recorded. The public needs to WITNESS JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES enforcing these policies at the hands of these elders.
If you are an elder, enforcing lethal policies you must be exposed for your accessory to the crimes.
The longer you all keep waiting...the deeper the blood on your hands seeps into your pores.
Great thread. Welcome a-board.
sKally
Just to speak a little in my own defense here... If I were to have my friend John have the recorders on him instead, would it have been lying to say "No" to the basic question "Do you have any recorders?", because after all it would not have been *I* that had the recorders in that case, would it? What if the elder had simply asked "You know you can't record this, right?" and I answered in the affirmative, but recorded anyhow? Somehow I don't think either of these scenarios would be justifiable in your eyes, neither would any possible scenario where someone wished to record the proceedings covertly. I will freely admit I wasn't completely open with my responses. However, I believe there is a subtle but very distinct and important difference between openness and honesty. While I was not completely forthcoming, I believe I was technically honest. I was asked "Do you have a second one?" after handing over my one tape recorder. I responded "No I don't. That's the only tape recorder I have." And it was, in fact, the only tape recorder I had. What else would you have me say? No other technically honest response would have allowed me to continue recording the conversation discretely, as is my privilege in accordance with Arizona state law. Call it "word games" if you like, but I never have objected to that now have I? You might condemn the Watchtower for playing "word games" with regards to its UN association, for instance. I, on the other hand, would simply argue that it was completely hypocritical no matter what kind of excuse they might want to concoct. Additionally, there's a difference between playing "theocratic warfare" with the media or something, and it's another thing to do the same with your own "flock". Also, to explain a bit on why they were obviously so insistent... I informed them at least *twice* that I wished to record any conversation I had with them. Additionally, I gave a copy of my thesis to one of my brothers who is still a very active JW. In fact, I recorded the proceedings largely with him in mind, as it was he who urged me to speak with the elders to have them "help" me. Sadly, I have a feeling he may have informed Joseph (with whom he works) ahead of time about the last page of my thesis which states, in part... "If you're one of the three elders at my judicial committee and you're actually reading this right now, I'd just like to mention that in the state of Arizona it is legally permissible to record a conversation so long as one party is aware that it is being recorded. In this case, I would be that party." I had intended them to read that in the course of our discussion, but I think they may have been tipped off beforehand. In any case, they had plenty of reason to suspect that I would be recording the conversation, but they proceeded with the meeting anyhow. Now, on the point of the sincerity of my questions... Did I go into the meeting expecting that they would be able to convince me of anything? No, not really. Does that make my questions any less sincere? I don't think so. If an elder could honestly somehow convince me that the Watchtower had not joined the UN, that 607 B.C.E actually has any historical validity at all, and that everything I've learned in this past year about the organization's history and the falsity of their doctrine was somehow wrong, then yeah I would definitely want to know. Simply because you believe you already have the answer doesn't mean the question is any less sincere. If I wasn't open-minded, I wouldn't be writing on this forum in the first place now would I? I believed I already had the answer as to what constituted "God's Organization (TM)", but unlike many JW's I honestly was willing to test that claim (at least I was after a slow painful process of admitting my doubts to myself and slowly starting to examine the abundant material online). Whether you think what I did was completely ethical or not, the facts of the matter are irrefutable. The elders were not there to truly "readjust" my thinking. They weren't there to address my concerns at all. When I simply asked some basic questions I was completely shut down, and so I finally opened up and boldly stated my position. Rather than trying to correct my position (however offensive it may have been to them) they simply ended the inquisition and told my friend that they hate me and that God hates me. I went into the meeting not completely sure what to expect (although I had an idea), and my entire purpose in going was not to show how righteous I am or get some incredibly damning evidence or anything like that. I went to record my JC meeting most simply to have a relatively undeniable account of the proceedings. At the very least I believe I demonstrated that it was not the intent of these elders to assist me in any way. I was told by "Brother Russell" when he invited me to the meetings that they really desired to "resolve any spiritual disparity between us". The truth of the matter is that they did not want to "resolve" the "disparity" but really to *solidify* such disparity by cutting me off completely. Is this the greatest example of unloving treatment at the hands of authoritarian theocrats? Probably not. That wasn't my point, and I think you really presumed too much in your assertions, "Wasanelder Once". Whether or not you think I "failed" in whatever goal you surmised I must have had, you failed to realize the one goal I did actually have in recording the conversation: Namely, to have a record of the proceedings open to review. In that, I think I accomplished my goal quite effectively. Whether you agree with what I said or they said or neither, at least you're free to reach that conclusion based on what was actually said. If nothing had been recorded, that wouldn't exactly have been possible now would it?
Hey SF, haven't seen you for a while, good to hear from you!
"And as "once an elder" you know very well too that WATCHTOWER BAPTISM has nothing to do with dedicating your life to anything altruistic."
Once again I repeat, that was not the issue being discussed. I do not disagree that reality changes, or is restored, once we become aware of the truth.
While witnesses this was our reality and we bought into it. Once we became aware of the truth, then we saw that the WT system is a joke. But, to say that we weren't informed before our baptism of the extent of the loyalty which disfellowshipping requires of us, is just not realistic. The following quote reads like some Nazi loyalty oath to the enlightened one, but like heaven to those who want to live in a sanitized environment.This is typical of the crap we lapped up when we were studying.
w94 11/1 p. 21 Be Tenderly Compassionate
20 There are times, however, when a servant of Jehovah cannot show compassion. (Compare Deuteronomy 13:6-9.) For a Christian to “quit mixing in company” with a close friend or relative who has been disfellowshipped can be a real test. In such a case, it is important that one not give in to feelings of pity. (1 Corinthians 5:11-13)
I guess we never thought about how that would effect us if our family member needed help, (or us!) with an unwanted pregnancy, or a drug problem, or in fact mentally ill behavior,. Many of these, if not all, need pity most of all. Pity that moves to action. Especially because they are our family and because the jackass pharisee elders would show NONE. (bastards)
Look at this guy who expresses his appreciation for the disfellowhipping arrangement as being the REASON he decided to get dunked. Sheesh! What an idiot.
w97 12/15 pp. 9-10 They ‘Bought Truth’ !
“I also observed that Jehovah’s Witnesses require that all members live by the Bible’s standards and that they disfellowship all who unrepentantly practice sin. In view of all of this, I concluded that Jehovah’s Witnesses have the truth, and I made the personal decision to become one of them. I worked hard to qualify for baptism as a Witness.”—1 Corinthians 5:11-13.
He didn't care about any policy not to record a JC or if he could have a winess present with him. (As I've said, the presence of a witness is something I would agree is often needed and the secret nature of the JC always bothered me.) I maintain that we did know the rules of the truth as regards accountability to the borg for independent thought before baptism, we just lapped it up. In this way I think that Shalao (sp?) knew before he went that he would not be greeted with open arms. I couldn't get his manifesto to download, but the comments of others show that he was manifesting his independence from the thinking of the borg publicly before he met with them. In the TMS apparently. So to pretend that he was shocked at their response is just not honest.
IMO.
I think that when these things are recorded by antagonistic individuals who want to expose the evil elders for doing the very thing they expected, and crying foul, hurts the cause. People can hear in the situation that it is a confrontation on both sides from the start. I think the testimony of people like yourself about the bullshit you have gone through, carry a hell of a lot more weight.
That's all.
I'm not being a smartass when I say its good to hear from you. I sincerely mean it. Hope you are avoiding this killer flu, Dad and I are just getting over it.
Peace,
W.Once
*sigh* Sorry about forgetting the breakline tags...
Shaolu,
Thank you for addressing me directly, I respect that. It would help me to understand you better if I could read your manifesto. Is it in PDF format? I can't get it to download. I am sincerely interested.
Yes, I understand what you are saying about wanting answers. I think I understand what you mean about them shutting you down as it were. I understand now why they said they "thought so" when you said you recorded it. But honestly, someone who threatens to record a conversation because they have the "legal" right and assert that the law of "Caeser" makes it permissable when Jehovah's appointed authority says no, is rebelling. NO, I DONT AGREE WITH THEM. But you knew that the insistance on recording set the tone for the meeting, ergo, you got what you expected, (not what you deserved.) This is why I say it was dishonest. To present this proceeding as being the meeting of two parties coming together to have a peaceful discussion is a fraud, by your own admission. This is why I took issue with the result. I can hear it in the voices of everyone involved, yourself included.
Ultimately, if this helps someone not join the borg, great. I still think its a bigger moral victory if a person doesn't play word games and pass it off as a failure when it was set up for failure at the start.
Congrats on a clean escape. (and by the way, that's one of the cleanest recordings I've ever heard, hell, you deserve a badge just for that!)
Again, I really would love to read your manifesto. Can you pm it to me? Maybe pasting it into that would make it readable for me?
W.Once
Actually, my daughter and I both have colds. Your concern is appreciated.
Respectfully, in reality, no one knows the devastating effects of WTBTS policy until they're are confronted and/ or threatened that these said policies will be enforced. And THAT happens only after "baptism" contract to ultimately teach and enforce WT policy to others.
Look, I've said it for years and I will keep saying it...
The longer this corrupt, deceptive, manipulative, DEADLY fraud of a religion keeps in business, by jws who are waiting for god knows what to end this sham, children will continue to be at risk. Bottom line. Nothing else concerns me more. The WTBTS gets what it gives. That's how the cycle works as far as I see it. It's imparative these shitsessions get recorded and DISTRIBUTED TO THE PUBLIC. This way the householder knows what the policies are before even starting a bible study. What sane person, after researching material and listening to tapes like this, would ever even think of going near a jw? Let alone inviting them in to sit down and enter your Core. That's spiritual suicide friend.
The world needs to know how this organization rapes its most innocent members when it comes to their spirits.
HOW MUCH LONGER DO ANY OF YOU TRULY NEED OR WANT TO STAY CONNECTED TO SOMETHING THIS DYABOLICAL?
With even more respect, since you've shown me the same WAS, adults that still cling to the faintest notion that there is ANY good in this abomination of a farce called jw/ wtbts simply grate on my nervousations something bad. Many times, I don't even want to reply to any of you. I'm extremely ambivalent. All this waiting just doesn't make sense to me. It never will.
At any rate, I appreciate your time.
Good day.
sKally
I never had a JC but I can relate a little. I had been going to college for a few years, and had ample opportunity to do a lot of research on the Bible and the Society to figure things out for myself. One day during the meeting I was approached by an elder who told me that the elders would like to meet with me in the library after the meeting. I went to the library and after a few minutes a bunch of the elders came in and sat down, and the P.O. asked me the following question, "Are you doing research to disprove the Society?" I know what they were asking, or what they really meant, and I was indeed conducting research that convinced me that the Society's teachings were wrong, and that the Society itself had been dishonest. But I answered "No," because the intent of the research was not "to disprove the Society," as if that was I was trying to do. I was simply trying to find out the truth. So I took advantage of the way they phrased the question and answered "No." Was that dishonest of me? I felt I answered correctly, but at the same time I knew it wasn't "the whole truth". But they put me on the spot so suddenly, and I really wasn't prepared to explain to them what my thoughts were on the matter. The truth was that I had my research there with me ... in that very room ... in my tote bag that held the Bible, song book, and Watchtower. There in the bag was my carefully written thesis on the matter. But I wasn't ready to share it with them or anyone yet.
Had it ever come to a JC, I would have asked my attorney uncle for advice, and he may well have insisted that I record the proceedings for my own defense -- or perhaps decline from participating. But I never had the opportunity to face that dilemma. I think that grey areas can be found throughout ethics...think of whistleblowers who must break a lesser ethical principle in order to do a greater good. If one is in a situation where individual rights are not respected (a kangaroo court setting comes to mind, for instance), I can see why one would opt to not abide strictly to the rules of the proceeding in order to grant oneself some small measure of protection. At the same time, I think I would have taken a quite different approach myself.
I agree totally with "SF". The WT is killing people each and every day. They are worse than Nazis because they lie and deny it, then a recording is available that proves the whole thing. At least Hitler told the world what he was going to do.
Every day another child gets molested/raped. Every day marriages break up because one spouse can't take the WT anymore without puking and the other spouse loves the WT. This CULT must be destroyed. I won't advocate anything illegal, but if a gas main blew up in Bethel, I'd give a party. These animals MUST be eliminated as much as the Muslim idiots in the MidEast.
Most of us did NOT know ANYTHING near to what we should have when we got baptized. I studied on and off for 6 years before I got baptized. No one had the old books and there was NO internet in the 1970's. It's time for people to realize that they are responsible for belonging to the WT and WILL pay for this if they continue to support it, defend it, or stay in it.
To Jonathan: You didn't lie about recording the session, you used theocratic warfare. If it's fine for THEM to do it, then it's fine for YOU.
WT: You want it both ways. You don't get to have that. Keep trying and you will soon find out.
Wasanelder Once, you said "To present this proceeding as being the meeting of two parties coming together to have a peaceful discussion is a fraud, by your own admission." I agree, and I don't believe I presented it in that light. If that's the impression you got, I apologize. I actually started this thread with the following statement: "About a week ago I had my little meeting with 'the Bobs' (yuk yuk), and I got the whole thing digitally recorded." I'm guessing you've never seen Office Space. In the film the "Bobs" are two "consultants" who everyone in the office knows are really there to find people to fire. With that reference alone I was attempting to imply that the elders were calling me in to drop the axe. They definitely had foreknowledge of my disposition and viewpoint, and I wasn't attempting to say otherwise. My socratic approach to the conversation wasn't intended to convey that I was a poor innocent victim, but was really an attempt on my part to keep them talking, keep the meeting going as long as possible, and just see what would happen. I also really felt a lot of pity for poor Joseph. If you could have seen his face, he really looked ashamed to even be there (the only time he said anything was in the opening prayer). It was to him I offered my thesis, and perhaps the unreasonableness he witnessed from his fellow elders might give him pause to think (probably not, but I can hope). So anyhow, yeah, I think both the elders and I had a general idea of what the meeting was going to be. It was not my intent to assert it was otherwise. Hopefully my committee record was of some use nonetheless. Oh, and my thesis is in PDF format as you asked. You should be able to download it here. It's probably not anything you haven't read before, but I wrote it with the idea of possibly helping people I know and love still in the organization.
