Why do apostates lie about where they get their information?

by slimboyfat 73 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Abandoned

  So why then the perennial insistence by so many apostates (such as is clearly the case with the Townsends) that all the problems in Watchtower history and chronology and history you spotted yourself, and never borrowed any of it from apostates or opposers?

  What does it matter where we get the information from as long as it's true? Are you suggesting that we are wrong when we say that the watchtower bible and tract society made claims about 1874, 1878, 1899, 1914, 1925, 1975, and others that turned out to be complete fabrication?

  Why not just admit you read Jonsson and that that is where you convinced that the Witness chronology is wrong for this or that reason?

  OK, I admit I've read from people that the watchtower society considers apostates. Does that make what they say lies? Why does the truth need to be protected from lies? Is the truth weaker than lies?

  Why not admit it was apostate literature that alerted you to the Kingdom Ministry that commened people for selling their homes before 1975. and so on?

  What's the point? Did the kingdom ministry commend people for taking an insanely reckless course and then blaim the people themselves for making this choice once the society's prediction about 1975 turned out to be false?

  I have seen it so often from apostates that they really want to hide the fact that they got their new ideas from apostate literature.

  It doesn't matter where the information comes from. If it's true it's true. If it's false, it's false. The bottom line is that the society has promoted many, many dates over their storied history and not one of the original prophecies for any of these dates have come true as they have been prophesied. The bottom line is that according to the standard set out in the bible regarding prophets, the watchtower bible and tract society are false prophets.

  They are desperate to pretend that every point against the Watchtower they thought up themselves, every damning quote from 1906 - no matter how incredible that they actually sourced it themselves - they are adamant they found it through their own "research"? Why is this?

  So you admit that there are a lot of damning quotes from, at least, 1906?

  Why not come clean and admit that you read some apostate literature and that is where you got the quotes and were alterted to the discrepancies? Where is the shame in that? I think it would be in the interest of all concerned.

  Once again, what does it matter whether the information came from someone visting my door through a door to door ministry, reading a piece of literature that the wt considers apostate, or an inspired dream? The information is either true or false. Either the watchtower proved themselves hypocrites by joining the UN while condemning other religions for doing the same of they didn't. Either they have instituted abuse policies that honor the abuser over the victim or they don't. Either the wt has made false claims about when things are going to happen of they didn't. Either the wt has attempted to replace the mediatorship of jesus with their own dysfunctional governing body or they didn't. The truth speaks for itself.
• 

  AK - Jeff

  I could not quote 'apostate' sources due to the well established fact that the Wtbts IS THE APOSTATE SOURCE.

  This satanic inspired cult did all the lying, hid the pedophilia, hijacked scripture to support unethical positions, re-translated the Bible to fit immoral doctrine, mislead millions to accept that salvation issues from a Brooklyn Book Publisher instead of the Lord Jesus, instructed people to 'love' by using a hateful method of 'shunning', allowed innocent people to be raped and killed in one case, while allowing the criminally guilty to bribe government agents in another.

  It was this APOSTATE ORGANIZATION that I rejected, not due to 'imperfection' but due to deliberate sin and blasphemy against God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, by telling us that it was honorable to die for refusing all blood, all organ transplants, all vacinations made from serums, then just the 'four primary components of blood', and now allowing even the infusion of 'fractionalized red blood cells' from cattle as acceptable.

  It was this perverted 'Christianity' that called upon us to believe that decent and wonderful people, who loved God and Christ, were indeed the spaun of Satan due to what religious edifice they entered to worship each week, and not based on a relationship or lack thereof with Jesus. The same ones that disfellowshipped untold numbers for using the pool at the YMCA, while she fornicated with the UN, the most hateful of all wild beasts depicted in the Bible.

  I think SBF that what you meant to ask was 'why did these persons attending these inquisitions not name the source of TRUTH they used to understand how satanic this cult is?' In that case you have a point. But then why would one really care what the Devil's advocates think of him?

  Jeff
• 

  steve2

  Slimboyfat, you've raised an excellent question.

  In answering, I dare not speak for others, but I have never lied about where I got my information from; in fact, I was astonished that others out there shared my views.

  In 1982, after years of struggling alone with doubts and concerns about 1914, 1975, the blood doctrine and the basis of the heavenly hope I discovered that other JWs also had their doubts about these teachings. I subsequently read Crisis of Conscience and concluded that, if brothers who are far more knowledgeable and experienced than me cannot reconcile Watchtower teachings with the Bible what hope have I of ever "silencing" my doubts. I never pretended to have acted alone, but at the same time I accepted full responsibility for my doubts and misgivings about the governing body being God's channel of earth.
• 

  sass_my_frass

  I have seen it so often from apostates that they really want to hide the fact that they got their new ideas from apostate literature. They are desperate to pretend that every point against the Watchtower they thought up themselves, every damning quote from 1906 - no matter how incredible that they actually sourced it themselves - they are adamant they found it through their own "research"? Why is this? Why not come clean and admit that you read some apostate literature and that is where you got the quotes and were alterted to the discrepancies? Where is the shame in that? I think it would be in the interest of all concerned.

  I think that in a JC situation it would be suicidal to mention that you'd been reading apostate literature. The shame in it would be the automatic disfellowshipping that would follow if more than one of the JC members is more than usually obtuse and decides that's all he needs to take your family away from you.
• 

  Stephanus

  Some people are just cringey, i guess. Or, maybe it's a fake cringe in order to look puritanical, or pharisaical.

  It's very hard to create an atmosphere of serious discussion, when the bait put out is so obviously loaded and emotive. Words like "apostates", "lie" and "cringe" hardly pave the road for a friendlydiscussion. Come on, SlimJim, you've implied "all" apostates are cowardly. Show them how it's done and bravely confront the Eldership at your local with the fact that you've been reading apostate sites. Show us whimpy ones what it is to be a "Real Man'!
• 

  diamondblue1974

  when the bait put out is so obviously loaded and emotive

  But lets be honest; if he was mealy mouthed about it and beat around the proverbial bush nobody would bother responding would they?

  In my view the question was well thought out and presented in a manner which makes people think- it might fall well outside of the normal JWD consensus but thats refreshing and what a discussion board is all about. Trolls by way of contrast make throwaway statements without ever or hardly justifying their position or listening to any other view- this doesnt appear to be the case with SBF.

  I know I have ranted a little on some of his previous threads but when you understand the thought behind the rhetoric, he makes a number of good points.

  Id buy him a beer if he ever got his arse to an apostafest....oh SBF? Do trolls drink beer?

  Gary
• 

  becca1

  Why? Because the second you say your source is "apostate" they will stop listening.

  Why? Because, no matter how logical the reasoning or compeling the evidence, if you heard it from an "apostate" it's automaticaly false.

  Why? Bacause some of us have too much to lose if we get disfellowshipped.

  Have I answered your question?
• 

  diamondblue1974

  Why? Because the second you say your source is "apostate" they will stop listening.

  Why? Because, no matter how logical the reasoning or compeling the evidence, if you heard it from an "apostate" it's automaticaly false.

  Why? Bacause some of us have too much to lose if we get disfellowshipped.

  Have I answered your question?

  Precisely Becca...well answered!

  Gary
• 

  thecarpenter

  hey becca, you are right on the money.
• 

  Terry

  I can't speak for others; I can only speak for myself.

  I didn't have a clue what went on in the so-called Apostate community until I had been out of the organization for 15 years.

  I could think for myself enough to do research and let the chips fall. But, what I clung to the longest was the addiction to my "absolute certainty" which came with my Watchtower indoctrination.

  It is a magnificent feeling of superiority you get when you think you know ALL THE ANSWERS!!

  That was hard to let go of.

  Now I remind myself I have to be willing to be wrong or else I'm intellectually dishonest.

  The question you raise in your main heading assumes something to be true without really presenting your evidence. What kind of foolish person would go before a judicial committee to present evidence known in advance to be unacceptable? Only naive people would even try.

  The consulting of so-called apostate writing and sites is a red herring leading away from the real issue. If Jehovah's Witnesses were imitators of Jesus they would ENGAGE in discussion with members of their own faith who heartedly disagree!! When did Jesus ever fail to take on a Saducee, Pharisee or questioner of even the most dubious credentials? When did Jesus turn away from persons of low repute (tax collectors, prostitutes, publicans, etc)???

  You see, the Jesus whom the JW's claim as their king is only a counterfeit disguise for what they really are. Jehovah's Witnesses are agents of intellectual tyrrany. They quash debate on a level playing field by attacking the character of their accusers and marginalizing them to silence the truth of their arguments.

  They are entirely unlike Jesus. They allow no freedom of expression. They allow no honest debate.

  Jesus welcomed dissent because he used it as a tool of teaching when he answered all queries (even clever trick questions) with straight answers of plain lucidity.

  JW's cannot do this. They stumble over their own history of False Prophecy which clearly identifies them as False prophets. They can't escape this identifier. They cannot pass God's test of the False Prophet. No wonder they run and hide and cry foul when the truth starts hitting the fan.