Wife went to bed in tears again. Sept KM this time. Her response.. (page 4)

Terry

"The Brotherhood, and being able to have a close relationship with Jehovah, and knowing I will see my parents someday", came the reply as full blown sobs and tears followed her to bed."

It is a hostage situation plain and simple.

JW's have taken her deceased parents hostage (in her mind).

She'll not get them back ever unless she does what she is told.

Emotional blackmail.

It is tough, tough, tough.

What is it she doesn't see? It is the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses don't have the power to make God do anything or refrain from doing anything.

If JW's had this power the world would have ended in 1975!

God does as he pleases!

Here is how I put it when I was threatened this way back in 1978.

"I look at it this way. Jehovah's will is to do what is best. If it is best that I not see my family again; that is automatically the best thing. Otherwise, I am the one in control of that by my own power and actions. But, we don't control things; Jehovah does. So, I can't earn the New Order and I can't blow it for my parents. Plain and simple."

Same with your wife. She can't blow it and she can't earn it. She has been made to FEEL responsible and that is dead wrong.

mentalclearness

I think many JW's continue because of the hope they have of the resurrection....I guess it would just be too pianful for then to think that they would never lose their loved ones again. I know my mom is like this and I can relate to being called negative when I brought up some things that didn't seem right to me..I'm sorry taht in your case it's your wife who feels this way. Must be really tough...

oompa

Is there any chance this article is just saying the fds does not endore maerial from the groups that have published material and websites? I feel the statement goes beyond that by saying ANY literature that is not from the Society is not approved.

Your thoughs? .....oompa and my service meeting is tomorrow night!

tula

oompa, I feel so bad for you.

I wonder if anyone on this board has ever taken a spouse away to "little cabin the mountains" and had them de-programmed by a professional?

Wordly Andre

OOMPA, I feel so sorry for you and all the members here who are divided over the JW issue with their sposes, it puts to mind this special I saw on the Jim Jones/Peoples Temple, where members had family members who were non-believers, its so sad how some religions who claim to serve god make thier members separate from their families. It just isn't right.

oompa

sassFrass: So, you have contact with your son, right?

Dang straight I do! I have never agreed with the DF arragngement and have always disreguarded it. The only thing he cared about at 16 was how to get a girls bra off with one hand. I begged him not to get Baptized, but all his friends was doing it. Why is anybody under say 25 allowed to get baptized!!!!! I sure as hell hold no kids accountable when they did not have a serious thought in there head at that time. We can't date in the bloom of youth or get married cause we such hormoaning idiots, but we can make a decision that has eternal ramifications!?!?!?!?

Get out of here.....oompa

RollerDave

Oompa:

Is there any chance this article is just saying the fds does not endorse material from the groups that have published material and websites? I feel the statement goes beyond that by saying ANY literature that is not from the Society is not approved.

Oomps, what you are saying is "my wife wants to give them the benefit of a doubt, could she be right?" No?

First off, this is the same 0rg that made cagey statements up to '75, then blamed the R&F for catching the statements and believing them when the Big A did not arrive in 75.

In the insight book, they define "lie" as making an untrue statement to someone who has a right to the truth, thus redefining "lie"

Most JW's give the org the benefit of a doubt in these matters and will likely do so regarding the Sept KM QB, but I just don't think that's a safe bet.

Let's suppose tho, that they DO just mean info from these 'groups,' Let us suppose they aren't banning barney the dinosaur, archie and jughead, and online banking, which they probably aren't anyways.

Does that make it OK?

No.

They are still requiring members or potential members to get info about them ONLY from them! Would you buy a used car from a fellow who insisted that previous owners, consumer groups, even the better business bureau are all just liars?

As you walk around what was advertised as a Porsche, you wonder why it's a Yugo, but he blames you for misunderstanding and claims that in spite of your perceptions, it IS in fact, a Porsche.!

That's just an example, it's just a used car, but in real life the WTS wants to do the same to you with Life and death and even dictate who you can and cannot speak to.

Can you imagine? that kind of power? given to an organization that insists it doesn't need to be transparent in its dealings? Who says that to question it and its motives is to perish?

To sum up: It is NEVER a safe bet to grant the WTS the benefit of a doubt, but even if you did in this case, they are still overstepping their bounds.

RD

tula

Dang straight I do! I have never agreed with the DF arragngement and have always disreguarded it. The only thing he cared about at 16 was how to get a girls bra off with one hand. I begged him not to get Baptized, but all his friends was doing it. Why is anybody under say 25 allowed to get baptized!!!!! I sure as hell hold no kids accountable when they did not have a serious thought in there head at that time. We can't date in the bloom of youth or get married cause we such hormoaning idiots, but we can make a decision that has eternal ramifications!?!?!?!?
Get out of here.....oompa

http://corior.blogspot.com/ (this site has a lot of info you might find interesting)

Note that the above legalese says that once a person joins the Witnesses, he has only two choices if he wants to leave: disfellowshipping and disassociation. These two choices are enforced by American law. However, even if the Watchtower lawyer has correctly stated matters, he has neglected the case of the child who gets baptized and submits to "ecclesiastical law." By law minors cannot enter into legally binding contracts. Therefore by law, people who got baptized when they were children have a third legally enforceable option when they leave: to simply quit, without disassociating and without submitting to a judicial committee, or "ecclesiastical tribunal." Of course, the Society will not tell people about this.

rebel8

Tula, I totally do not get what you're saying???

Baptism is not a legally binding contract, for anyone. It is just a religious ritual, and religion is not regulated in the US.

Anyone, baptized at any age, can choose to just walk away w/o DAing or being DFd. I did. If the elders choose to conduct their own religious ritual afterwards, part of which is excommunicating you, they are practicing their legal right to freedom of religion.

For there to be this gigantic shift in American law--eliminating a freedom guaranteed in the country's fundamental documents--I would imagine someone would have had to pass a new federal law or a federal court would have had to rule in favor of a DFd person in a trial. I haven't heard of this happening. It would be big news!

Or is what you are speaking of a theory?

I clicked the link but don't see any info on this topic??

mind my own

I agree with Roller Dave. The religeon teaches that "worldly" people are bad, evil, mean, thoughtless etc. Show her thru what kind of man and husband you are that their opinion of worldly people isn't neccessarily correct. Maybe it is your actions that will show her the light. Mind you, I think you should instill some doubt in her when you can, just subtle comments are in order. Once she doubts a little, there is room to broaden on the subject matter some...

Regardless, I do feel for you, we all do! Our thoughts are with you!

MMO

Wife went to bed in tears again. Sept KM this time. Her response..

Share this