"Minor" Doctrines - A Loyalty Test ?

by AlphaOmega 9 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AlphaOmega

  It's just occured to me that JWs go "all out" to show that they are DIFFERENT from "Christendom".

  Obviously they say this because they claim "to be in the Truth", but could it be that these differences, these doctrines, make it easy to spot one who is doubting the organisation?

  Could it be that by displaying "fruits of faith" that differ from JW doctrine, it is the only way that the GB / ELDERS / WHOEVER have of being able to see into the hearts and minds of the Rank and File JWs?

  Could it be that : having a beard, not accepting the torture state thing, listening to certain music, reading certain literature, not attending so many meetings, not putting enough hours on the record card etc etc are just ways to see who is conforming ?
• 

  blondie

  The WTS will say that they only follow the Bible and do no impose their "conscience" on others.

  But they are masters of doublespeak. You might enjoy the book below.

  (actually the words Orwell crafted were "newspeak" and "doublethink")

  
• 

  AlphaOmega

  Thanks Blondie,

  I'd never heard of that book before, but yesterday I heard a talk by Grace Gough and she mentioned it and now you do to, so I'll track down a copy.

  Must be a sign.
• 

  Narkissos

  AW,

  You're certainly right in general, but petty as it seems I doubt JWs would regard the "torture stake vs. cross" issue (if this is what you meant) as "minor". Imo questioning this JW doctrine would get one df'd just like (or, perhaps, sooner than) mass murder.
• 

  AlphaOmega

  You're certainly right in general, but petty as it seems I doubt JWs would regard the "torture stake vs. cross" issue (if this is what you meant) as "minor". Imo questioning this JW doctrine would get one df'd just like (or, perhaps, sooner than) mass murder.

  Thanks for that.

  I guess that's the point - all things that are irrelevant / made up are made to be pivotal issues.

  I appreciate that the "torture stake vs cross" is a biggie though.
• 

  greendawn

  It's all about control they want to enforce conformity over a large number of issues to make sure the R&F understand they must give up all personal ideas on issues.

  They put a lot of emphasis on being different from "christendom" in the theoretical ie docrinal field often over very petty issues like the cross versus the stake but on practical matters which are the really important ones they do not really differ from the rest of society.
• 

  drew sagan

  I believe it has less to do with doubts within the group and more to do with defining themselves as a unique religion
  
  In the end I started to feel that if all other Christian religions taught that Jesus was a creature, the Witnesses would be making the case that he was God.
  
  They have always tried to put themselves on a level all their own, one that can appear to be higher than everybody else. That, I feel is what these doctrines are there for. I also don't think it was intentional, but rather a product of simply wanting everybody else to be wrong and having bad scholarship along the way.
• 

  WTWizard

  Notably they use the scripture about he who is faithful in least is also faithful in most. This means that the one who goes along with the white dress shirt, wears that suit coat in 100 degree weather in service, puts in every possible yoctosecond in service, listens only to the 225 pieces of s***, and would not even look at a strip club or porn shop is the one that is going to be faithful in most. What they don't say here is that this resembles the pharisee who scrupulously strains out a gnat but will gulp down the camel.

  Practically, why would someone who wears that suit coat when it's very hot be a better servant later? This is the person that is most likely to end up dead of heat stroke. And what good is it going to do then? And if they are screeching around at 160 MPH to make the most out of service, what good will it do if they have an accident and kill 50 or 60 innocent people while racing to the door? And aren't many of the pedophiles in the organization scrupulous about the music they listen to or the white dress shirt? Are they faithful in much?

  And who gives a &$&^ about being faithful in "much"? Most of the "crimes" are victimless. Doing fornication with a consenting partner is not inherently wrong. True, it has consequences that may be unpleasant. Smoking is not inherently wicked (it is stupid, since it will cost you much and give no benefits; however, that doesn't make it wicked). Drunkenness, however stupid it may be, is not wicked. Nor is it wicked to commit idolatry (and in many cases it isn't even stupid. Idolatry is not stupid if you get more benefit, or create more value, in doing so than it costs you). For sure, celebrating Christmas is not wrong whether you believe in it or not.

  The only thing that is truly wicked is any act that you intentionally and volitionally do that uses initiatory force, threat of force, or fraud against another person or their property. Doing that is truly wicked--and that goes for the initiatory fraud that the Witlesses' leaders use to hound people into doing ever more. Any act that doesn't involve using initiatory force, threat of force, or fraud, though it may be stupid, is not inherently wicked. And that holds true for a minor "sin" like listening to rock or disco music, or a major one like idolatry or fornication.
• 

  Mrs Smith

  AlphaOmega, I think what you say here is true. I can think back to a few examples of JWs that took up minor issues with the elders and are now free.

  One example is a lady that was a business woman (married) and part of her job was to take clients out to lunch. Someone saw her at a restaurant with a man and told the elders. The elders spoke to her but she told them to mind their own business and that it was part of her job. She also told them that only someone really stupid would go to a public place with a man she was having an affair with and that other witnesses should not be so quick to jump to the wrong conclusion. She also had a problem with the dress code for women, as she was often in pants suits at work and had to rush afterwork to put her borg clothes on, putting extra demands on her time. She is now no longer a JW and last time I saw her she was really happy.

  My husband is another example. He gets really bad barbers rash and grew a beard during a paticularly bad case of barbers rash. The elders had a fit about it, one even bought him some cream to put on his face. He asked them if they thought that Jehovah made a mistake when he gave men facial hair!

  I think in many cases it's the small things that get us thinking that the WBTS rules are just too much and not at all loving.
• 

  Bonnie_Clyde

  My husband is another example. He gets really bad barbers rash and grew a beard during a paticularly bad case of barbers rash. The elders had a fit about it, one even bought him some cream to put on his face. He asked them if they thought that Jehovah made a mistake when he gave men facial hair!

  Mrs. Smith - I love it - Clyde quite frequently lets his facial hair grow, keeps it trimmed, and really looks great. He also shaves it off quite often. The last time an elder spoke to him about it, he said, "You know, I keep shaving it off, but Jehovah keeps making it grow."