by nvrgnbk 42 Replies latest jw friends
Hi Never,
I've enjoyed all these comments and have nothing to add other than the
salient fact that I have never been so happy. Why, you might ask?
January 1, 2008 will mark two years of official inactivity for me.
No need to explain, I'm sure, how WT inactivity = happiness!
CoCo
It is true that all religion imposes a standard of righteousness and wickedness that has nothing to do with practicality. You see this when they waste the time to meet every week just to bemoan the world and what God is going to do about it. They also have doctrines that prohibit premarital sex and certain other acts, and use guilt and the threat of hell to keep people in line. However, they usually have mild sanctions and do not totally cut off people that break the rules from family and friends. They are often more inclined to help, as misguided as they are, than to punish.
Jehovah's Witlesses are more inclined to punish. Instead of reasoning with someone that is inclined to question, they suppress it and threaten. Additionally, their rules are more out of line with reality: any child brought up totally without fun and festive events is going to get depressed, and any that are continually threatened with demons for ordinary activities like listening to rock music are going to be afraid to do anything except the Big Five (Watchtower study, meditation on the Watchtower, prayer in the Watchtower format, go to boasting sessions, and go out in field circus). And the Witlesses are more aggressive: most religions rely on people coming forward. The Witlesses, however, will go after errant members.
When answering whether a religion is at least slightly abusive, ask this: Are there any rules that create problems where none needed to exist? What would happen if the religion would strike certain rules? Are there rules that, if they would strike them, would not cause any problems? Do they use threats of hellfire or a horrible death at Armageddon to keep people in line? Do they expect people to forgo something now for something in an afterworld, when they have absolutely no proof that it's going to do any good? Does the religion in any way inhibit freedom without also inhibiting the kind of anarchy that would result in people destroying each other?
As I see it, there is one criterium for all rules. No rule should exist unless violating it would result in the violator initiating the use of force, threat of force, coercion, or fraud against some innocent person or their property. Any rule imposed on others that does not meet this criterium shall be stricken. Any religion that does not follow that lone criterium is in some way inhibiting people for no good reason. Notably, the Watchtower Society is outstanding in oppressing people with rules that themselves initiate threats and fraud on people and in no way prevent initiatory force and threats on others. The Watchtower Society's rules just about always create problems where none need to exist (even they can't do it perfectly, but I would say that they are about 99.8% perfect in this department).
WTWizard,
It seems that your post is primarily pointing out the flaws in the JW religion. For the sake of accuracy, and for the benefit of lurkers and newly escaped jws, as a non-denominational Christian (my religion) I'm in absolute agreement with most of your post, with these exceptions:
It is true that all religion imposes a standard of righteousness and wickedness that has nothing to do with practicality. You see this when they waste the time to meet every week just to bemoan the world and what God is going to do about it.
In fact, not all religions meet once a week, and when they do meet, it isn't just to "bemoan the world and what God is going to do about it", nor do all religions "imposes a standard of righteousness and wickedness that has nothing to do with practicality". The standards of righteousness and wickedness taught by true Christians is nothing if not practical, ie, mindful of the results, usefulness, advantages or disadvantages, etc., of actions or procedures.
They also have doctrines that prohibit premarital sex and certain other acts, and use guilt and the threat of hell to keep people in line.
Again, not true. Not all religions use guilt, some use love. Not all religions use the threat of hell, rather, the reward of obedience is stressed, while the inevitable consequence of disobedience is made known, it isn't what is of primary importance. Also, (nit-picking here) Biblically, there is no such thing as "premarital sex", as once sexual intercourse occurs, marriage has occurred in God's eyes, as the "two have become one flesh". If the couple then seperate and engage in sexual intercourse with another without scriptural grounds, adultery has occured. If one engages regularly in sex with multiple partners, whether at once or serially, this is the practice of fornication.
Do they expect people to forgo something now for something in an afterworld, when they have absolutely no proof that it's going to do any good?
We can argue about the meaning of "proof", I'd say I and others who believe as I do have plenty of proof, otherwise we wouldn't believe as we do. I'm sure there are others who feel likewise. "Faith makes us sure of what we hope for and gives us proof of what we cannot see." Hebrews 11:1
Other than those few things, I think you hit the nail on the head as far as what is wrong and abusive in the JWs, as well as many other religions.
BA- Purist.
Religous systems don't have to be abusive, but people sure do try hard to make them that way it seems!
Cog
religion - I personally stay away from them. You see I know what's best for me not some religion.
We may argue all we like for and against but those that are stuck in religions clutches don't realise it and wouldn't see it as abuse - unless they choose to see it.
Asking the question 'Is all religion abusive in some way?' is the same as asking the question 'Is all atheism abusive in some way?'. A lot of people here are atheists and the question was brought up and answered by a lot of atheists, so there you go. You can answer your own question.
Thank you for that one, onacruse!
Burn
We all know young minds can be manipulated - just look at the terrible atrocities meted out by young children on other children and adults in certain African countries. They were encouraged to do it by adults and told it was the right thing to do.
Religion is no different in the sense that it can manipulate the young, impressionable mind. As Dawkins said: "There is no such thing as a child Christian or child Muslim or child Jew, etc. They are the children of Christians, Muslims and Jews, etc."
Take a young Muslim or Jewish child and place them in a Christian family and they'll grow up to become Christians and vice versa.
So, of course all religions are abusive in that they manipulate young minds (and adult minds, too) - but, of course, such manipulation, e.g. the African situation above, proves it's not exclusive to religion. Hitler's regime did a "great" job in manipulating the minds of virtually an entire nation.
Ian
