Double Standards

by thinker 5 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  thinker

  It seems to me that Witnesses and the WTBTS live by a number of double standards. For example: Witnesses are taught that they have a sacred duty to meet and talk to non-believers (field service). Yet if they meet and talk to a non-believer who happened to be a witness and disassociated themselves they face severe punishment (disfellowship). It is said that talking to THIS type of non-believer could "contaminate the congregation". But talking with thousands of other never-been-a-witness non-believers will not contaminate the congregation ?! How is one called "bad association" and the other is "God's work" ?
  
  If a Witness tells about the mistakes, errors, and falsehoods of another religion it's called "spreading the Truth". If a anyone talks about mistakes, errors, or false prophesies from the Watchtower Society's past it's called "apostasy" !

  If the Watchtower admits to a mistake in the past, it's because "Jehovah allowed it to happen and the reason will be revealed in time." If another religion has mistakes it proves they are ruled by Satan and his demons.

  If an elder is doing wrong he's "an imperfect human" and you should not judge the Organization by his actions. If a pastor, priest, or rabbi is doing wrong they are proof of the falseness of that religion.

  The many changes in the Watchtower writings are often attributed to "New Light", but one of the earliest quotes on New Light says:

  *** Zion's Watch Tower, Feb, 1881, p.3 ***
  
  "If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now; But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. "New light" never extinguishes older "light," but adds to it..."

  I believe it is very difficult to reason with a witness because there is no set standard by which to start a reasonable conversation.

  Comments anyone?
• 

  larc

  Thinker,

  I like your thinking, but you know that thinking can get you in trouble. It did me. Another double standard: they try to convince people that it is alright for the house holder to read literature that dissagrees with the house holder's religion, but the JW can't do the same. I would like to have a JW study with me. For the first 30 minutes we would study from their book and the next 30 minutes we would study from an apostate book of my choice; don't think they would do it.
• 

  TR

  Thinker,

  What you say is true as far as I can see.

  Personally, I find the WTS to be the epitome of Orwellianism. The WTS once enumerated the marks of a true religion in a WT article, and urged it's readers to research their religion to see if it met these criterion. Unfortunately, they weren't talking about themselves.

  Before a prospective JW convert is baptised, they can ask all the questions they want without fear of reprocussion. The JW study conductor can attempt to answer the questions to the new person's satisfaction, or the JW can drop the study as "not progressing" if the interested person keeps asking questions that can't be answered.

  If, after baptism the new JW comes up with questions that were put on hold prior to baptism, or comes up with new questions that are deemed troublesome by congregation elders, that new person can be subject to judicial action by the congregation, and eventually removed if the elders perceive a threat to the congregation. If a baptised JW wants to remain in good standing and has troublesome questions, that person should keep quiet.

  The WTS sees all people, institutions, religions, everything not JW, as under the control of Satan. A JW can perceive some non JW's as having a "good heart", but they are still under the devils influence. The WTS will not permit the same scrutiny they tell their members to give other religions. Oh, sure you can examine WT doctrine all you want, but you had better agree with it, no matter how many flip flops, failed predictions, changed life and death doctrines or "tacking" as the WTS puts it, that they do.

  TR

  Edited by - TR on 14 December 2000 3:25:17
• 

  thinker

  I'm very aware of the prohibition on "independent thinking" (that's where my screen name comes from). But, I still find it incredible that Witnesses could know about their past (pyramids, star clusters, astrology, many false predictions of the end of the world, organ transplants as canniblistic, appendicitis and typhoid fever as "worm diseases", chiropractors as being able to cure all diseases, etc...) and not see that something is strange about this organization. Either they don't know or they're very, very good at ignoring the facts.
  All of the above comes from past witness literature and can be found easily online. My collection of watchtower absurdities continues to grow. Perhaps thats why the WTBTS has issued warnings about using the internet. ?
• 

  larc

  Thinker,

  When I was in my late teens, I went to used book stores, purchased, and read the old books. I was appalled at what I found. In recent years, I have attended conferences sponored by BRCI and listened to their personal accounts. Almost all of them left because of what they found in the old books. The WT keeps people so busy in mundane actiivties that most people don't take time for historical research. What compounds the problem is that most people aren't interested in history.

  BTW, their own history book is full of errors, misleading statements, omissions and down-right lies.
• 

  RedhorseWoman

  A point I find very interesting, if not a little disconcerting, is that when most JW's are presented with quotes from the older publications on a discussion board, they will immediately declare that the quotes have been "doctored" in some way. They refuse to check any of the quotes out for themselves, but rather simply hide their heads in the sand declaring "it can't be....it can't be".