Deceptive or just wrong?

by johnnyc 193 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  isaacaustin

  The Apostles were not factual when they thought and believed/taught the end would come in their lifetime. They made a mistake.

  Did they prophecy in the name of God? By your own admission, no. Has the Wt? Absolutely.
  
  Jonah was not factual when he said Nineveh would be destroyed - since it Nineveh was not destroyed. Jonah did not say "repent or be destroyed", he said the City WOULD be destroyed.

  That is always inherent in God's warnings. In fact, Joanh himself admitted that is why he ran. He did not want Ninenah to repent. He wanted them to be destroyed. Why? Ninevah is the capital of Assyria...the same people who dispossessed Israel of their land. No love lost between the Jews and the Assyrians.

  Nor did he say "God said" the City would be destroyed - he said it would be. Though he did not make a mistake in this statement, as God changed his mind - but Jonah was not pleased with how it all went at first. You know what it says - believe what you want. I was simply making a reference to how not EVERYTHING said by a channel of God happens exactly how it is pronounced.

  Again, God's warnings always come with a way out. This was no different.

  What if God decided not to bring the END in 1975 after considering all the people who would join the WT thereafter??? I am not being serious in that argument (so don't bother refuting me), but I will say that we don't know everything there is to know. "The person who knows he knows nothing, knows more than one who knows everything"
• 

  isaacaustin

  exactly LT. DId the apostles print up their predictions? Did they enforce beleif of them on all Christians, labeling as weak or apostate those who saw things differently?
• 

  isaacaustin

  Jonah was not factual when he said Nineveh would be destroyed - since it Nineveh was not destroyed. Jonah did not say "repent or be destroyed", he said the City WOULD be destroyed. Nor did he say "God said" the City would be destroyed - he said it would be. Though he did not make a mistake in this statement, as God changed his mind - but Jonah was not pleased with how it all went at first. You know what it says - believe what you want. I was simply making a reference to how not EVERYTHING said by a channel of God happens exactly how it is pronounced

  Ok Johnnyc...in case you are about to claim 'it doesn't say aynywhere that this destruction won't happen if Ninevah reprts..."....God already covered his bases.

  “At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.” [Jeremiah 18:7-10]

  Fits well with Jonah doesn't it?

  “Who can tell if God will turn and relent, and turn away from His fierce anger, so that we may not perish? Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.” [Jonah 3:9-10]

  So no word spoken by a prophet of God regarding destruction it untrue if the disaster is averted due to repentance. Case closed.
• 

  AuldSoul

  You probably would like to think that you have all become so intellectually wise and understanding of people - but don't kid yourselves - you haven't changed(with certain exception of ones who have been sincere). You simply are on another team, but with the same tactics and argument sense you had as a witness. You condemn the very thing you are.

  The only real difference, johnnyc, if we ever had true integrity, is we were PLAYING for a team and now we aren't.

  We are all healing, too. We are all working OUT the poison that the religion spent DECADES insinuating into our minds. You have somehow let it get in your mind that we are holding ourselves UP because that is what you are USED TO, johnnyc, not because that is what we are doing or even who we are. You have been conditioned for years to perceive everything through a hierarchical lens, and you've been taught defense is the "go to" position; we were ALL trained to use defense at the first sign of controversy.

  But out here in the real world, as you will hopefully soon discover, there is a constant fray of ideas being proposed, considered, shredded, dismissed, supported, promoted, and demeaned. Especially will you see this play out in discussion forums.

  I am not your enemy just because I don't agree with you about case law being the end all "decider" of meaning and proper usage of terms out here in workaday REALITY. I disagree with you. I have been out of a high-control religion (or, at least, borderline cult) since 2005, whereas you are just now finding your way out. I am now used to the ever present need to stand up for my own beliefs and opinions, whereas you are still getting used to the notion of HAVING your own beliefs and opinions to stand up for.

  You have the added stress of being in a relationship that likely would not survive your departure from JWs, which sucks massively. And to top it off you are alienating a group of people who can EMPATHIZE with where you have been and who KNOW FIRSTHAND where you are headed by making them suspect you are nothing more than a JW apologist in doubter's clothing (which I do not believe, by the way).

  As you said in your profile, "Wow, this is starting to sound sad . . ." Well put. And it is not looking like you are doing very much to make it sound less that way. Which I understand completely, having been down that road myself a time or two. Your confusion and frustration is totally understandable, but you are misdirecting it out of convenience. You would irreparably burn bridges if you railed at your family and mother like you have done to us, and I get that. You have to work out the frustration SOMEHOW, and I get that. But we are not your enemy. You need to get THAT, okay?

  Please, calm down, for your own sake. No one has attacked you here, yet, even though you have attacked others.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  AuldSoul

  johnnyc: The Apostles were not factual when they thought and believed/taught the end would come in their lifetime. They made a mistake.

  'Thought' and 'taught' are distinctive verbs. Thinking things that turn out to be wrong is not ungodly or unscriptural. Teaching things that turn out be wrong is both ungodly and unscriptural.

  johnnyc: Jonah was not factual when he said Nineveh would be destroyed

  All destruction and devastation prophecies have an automatic "unless you repent" clause, including the one against the world of Noah's day, the one against Sodom and Gommorah, the one against Jerusalem . . . that last one is cool to me because at the last minute Jeremiah was still telling Zedekiah that if he would go out to the princes of Babylon then he and his family would live and Jerusalem would not be destroyed.

  While it is true that Nineveh repented, that is NOT true of 1914 and the prophesied decline of all the world's institutions and governments into wholesale anarchy. The whole world did not repent as did the whole of Nineveh. Not even a significant fraction did so.

  these are moot comparisons to what occurred with the history of Jehovah's Witnesses.

  

  That was the Circuit Assembly badge for 1967 Circuit Assembly. The REAL answer? No one. And not due to repentance.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Awakened at Gilead

  I would like to add to this discussion, seconding some points that IsaacA, Mary, and AuldSould are trying to make.

  The WTS can dish it out but can't take it. Consider this review of the 2006 CD-ROM:

  Search terms apearing in the WT and Awake:

  "Church*" appears 23671 times

  "Catholic*" appears 12989 times

  "Christendom*" appears 10623 times

  "Aposta*" appears 1785 times

  I am sure that you will note that these terms are always placed in a negative light. "The Church did this or that" "The Catholic Pope did this or that", "Apostates are dangerous", etc... The WTS feels that they have every right to criticize these other organizations and individuals, yet teh WTS feels that it is abocve criticism from members or former members.

  Here's a sample quote:

  *** w52 2/1 p. 86 Testing the Chain of Papal Successors ***

  A CHAIN OF DISGRACE AND SHAME!

  If all the wicked characters who have worn the pope’s crown were removed from the list of legitimate successors as they should be, seeing that Scripturally they are wholly disqualified even to be called Christians, surely there would be a great section of the papal chain missing. The history of some of those monsters is shocking.

  So how is it unjustified if Ray Franz (or anyone else for that matter) mentions some factual information criticizing Jehovah's Witnesses?
• 

  halcyon

  >bennyk: I was simply making the point that there are examples in the bible of God's channel not always acting correctly or doing the right thing - but in each example God still requires others to keep in line with their authority. In those cases however, it usually means a very bad punishment for the party in authority who makes that error.
  
  
  Yes, we must submit to the authority of some even when they are wrong. BUT, the question is, do we submit to ALL who claim authority? Many religions claim authority, but it is our personal responsibility to identify who is deserving of that authority. We should reject the authority of those who falsely claim it, correct? (Christendom, et. al.)
  
  I have come to the decision that the WT is just one more part of Christendom, deserving of no more authority than any other religion. God does not require me to "keep in line with their authority" inasmuch as he does not require me to keep in line with any other religion's authority.
  
  It STILL means a very bad punishment for the party in authority who makes that error. But it doesn't let the followers off the hook of their own personal responsibility, does it? If you say "yes, it does," then it doesn't matter if people leave "Babylon the Great". If you say, "no, it doesn't", then you have some serious thinking to do.
• 

  isaacaustin

  like Reniaa johnnyc has run. I don;t think they have both posted on the same day...and both screen names were opened a couple of days apart.
• 

  isaacaustin

  Johnnyc posted this om 3/9:

  johnnyc	Re: About me
  Post 1 of 76 since 08-Mar-08	Just tell them the problems you have with JW's...and perhaps they have some answers. Don't get caught up with everything you see here. I am not a JW, yet I know there does not exist great truth somewhere else. Sure, I have some major problems with certain things about JW's, but I just can't help looking at the little things they do. You have to make the decision on your own though, and if its not for you, its not for you. Its not for me now either - but yet there is something that keeps me from cutting all connections.

  Here he says he is not a JW. Yes now he is saying in his recent post that he is appealing disfellowshipping action against him. Care to do some explaining johnnyc?
• 

  Mary

  Ya....anyone else think it's sort of strange that in one post 'johnnyc' claims he's not a JW, yet several months later, he claims that he was raised as a Dub:

  johnnyc	Re: What prompts one to become a Jehovah's Witness?
  Post 38 of 76 since 08-Mar-08	I was raised a JW, yet, upon personal study found that much of what JW teach is supported by first and second century Christian wrings - such as Clement of Alexandria, Justin Martyr, Clement of Rome, Ignatius. It is odd how the Catholic Church views them as their "Church Fathers", yet they do not believe many things stated by them in their extensive writings. Doing a study on the early church is very supportive of JW doctrine