ex-JW Christians Suck!

by mikepence 66 Replies latest jw friends

NeonMadman

I guess the problem that I have with what I am reading from some in this thread is the presumption that, when one leaves a cult such as the JW's, one must necessarily abandon ALL religion, or he/she is just getting 'sucked out of one controlling cult into another.'
The bottom line to that, I guess, is that some of us left the JW's precisely because of the faith and respect we had for the Bible, and the growing realization that what the Watchtower was teaching and practicing was in no way consistent with what the Bible said.
I can understand that some of you were soured on religion entirely by your JW experience. I can respect that, because I can see how just such an attitude could have developed in me under other circumstances. But it didn't. I'm content with what I believe now, I'm still looking for a church to belong to, and believe me, one of the big qualifications is non-controlling. I have no desire to ever get involved again with anything remotely similar to the Watchtower. Yes, I'm a Christian, and that's strictly between me and Jesus. Organizations have nothing to do with it. If I can find a group of fellow Christians with whom to interact, great. If I can't, I'll continue to study and pray and wait for the Lord's leading.
But I am really disturbed by the mocking attitude that some ex-jw's here who have abandoned religion entirely take toward those who have not. You were deceived in that cult, too, remember? You are no more immune to false belief systems than any of the rest of us. And make no mistake, atheism is a belief system, based entirely upon faith in unprovable assertions, like these:
* The universe is rational and orderly, and given sufficient data, can be completely understood
* There is no God
* Matter arose from nothing, or, conversely,
* Matter has always existed
All of the above are unprovable statements based upon faith, yet dearly held by those who claim to be without faith. And that's fine. If that's the paradigm in which the universe makes sense to you, then you have every right to hold those views. I disagree with them, and I don't ridicule you; please don't mock me because my faith-based views are different than yours.
Of course, as a side note, there is one other benefit of becoming a Christian after leaving the JW's, and that is that it's exactly what the Society doesn't want to see. They would much rather see everyone abandon religion completely, because then they can impugn your motives: "See that? When people leave the Troooth, it's because they just can't live up to the standards, and they want a life of sin." It's a lot harder for them to explain when someone leaves and finds a better religion. This isn't a reason to make such a decision, of course; I just bring it up because I get so much pleasure out of irritating the Society...
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
Frenchy

The difference is, some Christians cannot see someone as nice unless they are a Christian, whereas athiests can almost always see someone's religion has precisely NOTHING to do with how nice they are. Thus, to an atheist, the lack of reasoning (from their viewpoint) displayed by some Christians, is frustrating.
There’s a lot of truth in the above. It has been my observation that, in general (I believe there are many exceptions), “Christians cannot see someone as nice unless they are Christian” and atheists regard Christians as unreasoning fanatics. People who hold such narrow views are, of course, wrong and as a result they remain very frustrated trying very hard to deny the truth that they see all about them but which they are unable to accept.
The following are my thoughts and they are presented as that and just as that. I do not mean to deride or criticize anyone’s beliefs and convictions. This is how I see most people’s view of both sides of the issue. I apologize in advance if this, in any way, offends anyone. I will do so again if you call it to my attention.
Christians (I use the term loosely) generally regard atheists as being ‘ungodly’ in the sense of being immoral, self-centered, haughty, without a smidgen of humility and totally resentful of even the concept of their being a superior being to whom all mankind must be responsible. They generally view atheists with contempt but that’s only to mask the fear they have of them, I believe. Why doesn’t God strike the unbelievers dead? When Christians see an atheist that leads a decent, clean, moral, honest life they usually think that this person is either 1) Hiding his bad conduct, or 2) Deep in his heart he’s really not an atheist at all. Christians cannot accept the concept that someone can be good without God being at the center of it. To a Christian, Jesus’ words, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.” (Lu 18:19; Mr 10:18 NRSV) are taken very seriously and means to them that all good things come from God. There are many Biblical passages that support that concept and when a person who professes total alienation from God practices what can only come from Him …well that sort of puts a branch in the wheel of Christian reasoning. I’m speaking of Christians (loose definition) in general.
Christians are prone to attribute to God virtually all occurrences, good and bad. The most trivial thing will be attributed to God as something that God has done for them. If it’s bad, it’s either punishment or a lesson. If it’s good, it was a reward for some good deed or just a manifestation for the re-affirmation of their faith.
Christians make up cute (to them) little phrases and slogans that they hold in great esteem and brandish about like magic charms as if these are sufficient to dispel any reasonable doubt that one may have ever had about the things in which they believe.
Atheists, on the other hand, generally hold Christians in contempt and regard them as unthinking, gullible fanatics that hold on to fantasies and fabrications as if these were indisputable facts. Atheists think that kindness, goodness, compassion, beauty, and even the love that they have for their mate and their children are all mechanical process that evolved out of primordial soup, all a series of accidents that led up to the complex universe of which we are a tiny part. He views loyalty, trust, friendship, moral values, hopes and dreams in the same light. An atheist sees a lonely child in need and feels a need to reach out and do something about it and ascribes that feeling as an evolutionary twist that exists for the perpetuation of the species. An atheist sees his firstborn child for the first time and attributes that feeling he has for the child and to his wife who is smiling at him through a tear stained face to the combination of electro-chemical process in the synapses of his brain. An atheist stands over the grave of a long dead brother and remembers when they ran together and played together and he can hear his brother’s voice and see his smile and the atheist realizes that this is just chemically stored data that has absolutely no relevance anymore. An atheist looks at a spellbinding sunrise and the awe that stirs within him, and that feeling that goes down to his very core at seeing this marvelous display is relegated electro-chemical reactions in his brain and it means nothing to him because it’s all an accident anyway. If his child or spouse dies, it means nothing to him because all life is meaningless anyway and without purpose. Sadness and grief, joy and ecstasy, hopes and aspirations, are all chemically induced, biologic functions that exist solely as evolutionary quirks that just happened along and were retained by the organism.
Of course an atheist has a few problems of his own, however. For example has trouble adequately explaining why a human would willingly sacrifice his life for that of another. He has trouble explaining how something that does not exist manages to inspire and move so many people. And when his work takes him far from home and he thinks about his family sitting in a semi-circle around the fire at home waiting for him to come back, it’s hard for him to think of this as just a chemical imbalance in his brain.
Atheists make up cute (to them) little phrases and slogans that they hold in great esteem and brandish about like magic charms as if these are sufficient to dispel the misconceptions of the ignorant believers.
One thing is for sure. We are all of us in this together, this world of ours. We can chide each other for believing one way or the other or we can allow each person his own reasoning and belief. I believe we can even attempt to explain to each other why we believe one way or the other while respecting the other person's position. One more thing that is for sure. Our time in this world is limited and time is precious. Kindness to one another can only make things better for whatever time we have left.
Seeker

Of course an atheist has a few problems of his own, however. For example has trouble adequately explaining why a human would willingly sacrifice his life for that of another.
Altruism helps the group.
He has trouble explaining how something that does not exist manages to inspire and move so many people.
Most people live fantasy lives. The ancient Greeks were inspired by their gods, yet you don't believe in them, so why is it hard to accept that people today believe in imaginary beings? Humans have been doing that for millenia.
And when his work takes him far from home and he thinks about his family sitting in a semi-circle around the fire at home waiting for him to come back, it’s hard for him to think of this as just a chemical imbalance in his brain.
Why? That's where emotions come from, on a physical level. You can make a person experience certain types of emotions simply by stimulating parts of their brain.
How are any of these questions hard to answer?
Abaddon

Hi Frenchy, I hope you are well.
I think if we both wrote stereotypical definitions of our own viewpoint and the contrasting viewpoint, people could tell which one was written by the theist and which was written by the atheist.
Seeker has already pointed out some things I would, but I am more worried about misconceptions theists have about atheists and spirituality.
Atheists think that kindness, goodness, compassion, beauty, and even the love that they have for their mate and their children are all mechanical process that evolved out of primordial soup, all a series of accidents that led up to the complex universe of which we are a tiny part. He views loyalty, trust, friendship, moral values, hopes and dreams in the same light.
The way an atheist feels about kindness, goodness, compassion, beauty, loyalty, trust, friendship, moral values, hopes, dreams and even the love that they have for their mate and their children is no different from the way a theist feels about them. Origins might be a matter of opinion, but anyone who diminishes by one iota what I feel for my children and the wonder of that feeling just because I don't believe in god is making unsupported assumptions.
If you disagree with the theory of the mechanisms whereby those things arrise, attack that, not the way we feel, as the experience of that feeling is the same regardless of origin.
An atheist sees a lonely child in need and feels a need to reach out and do something about it and ascribes that feeling as an evolutionary twist that exists for the perpetuation of the species. An atheist sees his firstborn child for the first time and attributes that feeling he has for the child and to his wife who is smiling at him through a tear stained face to the combination of electro-chemical process in the synapses of his brain.
Yes, but knowing we are reacting on a subconcious level to our evolutionary programming doesn't make it less wonderful, does it? And don't forget, not only do we know, we know we know, which gives us the power to transform and assign values completely removed from the mundane. That we know we know is simply a scalar function of our brains. There is no deus ex machina, no ghosts in the machine, it happens anyway.
An atheist stands over the grave of a long dead brother and remembers when they ran together and played together and he can hear his brother’s voice and see his smile and the atheist realizes that this is just chemically stored data that has absolutely no relevance anymore.
Ah, come on, you're a smart person, you got to know that one is on thin ice... 'no relevance'? So atheists are unfeeling brutes? I know that is not what you are saying, but your logic is at fault here. The fact someone is dead, as in dead, means that how we feel about them and remember them is of an even greater relevance than for theists, as it is the only way we can 'survive' after death. My eldest brother died when I was eleven. He was the other 'black sheep' of the family, and I keep his memory alive, and to know that a theist might even think for the remotest instant that it is of 'no relevance' is simultaenously upsetting and annoying. I know you have no ill intent in doing that, don't worry, but do you understand better now?
An atheist looks at a spellbinding sunrise and the awe that stirs within him, and that feeling that goes down to his very core at seeing this marvelous display is relegated electro-chemical reactions in his brain and it means nothing to him because it’s all an accident anyway.
Ah, I will have to inform my tearducts not to work when I have an emotional reaction to beauty, as I am an atheist. Perhaps my tearducts believe in god? Perhaps the fact we know we know changes all the rules and makes us something wonderful that can appreciate wonder, all without a god.
If his child or spouse dies, it means nothing to him because all life is meaningless anyway and without purpose. Sadness and grief, joy and ecstasy, hopes and aspirations, are all chemically induced, biologic functions that exist solely as evolutionary quirks that just happened along and were retained by the organism.
Told you the ice was thin... now you're all wet, and need to go home before you catch a cold...
ANIMALS grieve, why can't we? Or do animals have souls too? If so, why is it just the big brained ones that obviously show grief? Do you have to have a big brain to fit a soul in, or... maybe it's something to do with some animals sharing a degree of self-awareness due to the size of their brains... and as for "meaningless ... and without purpose", HA!
Life is meaningless if you let it be. To me, it's actually the big adventure. Turning what could be described as a cosmic joke into something meaningful.
Yeah, Bach wasted his life, just like Einstein did. No purpose in their life. And the guy that carved the chair in my parents living room wasted the years of training just to have someone sit on his chari everyday for two hundred years. Oh, the waste. And atheist dads and mums, are not mourned by their children, as they never did anything in their meaningless purposeful lives. Come on Frenchy, that arguement was no good when it was first made.
We probably will end up in the same place. I think it'll be in the corona of the expanding sun in about 4,000 million years, where our components element's atoms will rub electrons with each other. You might think it'll be sooner!
Quick aside; check out Teilhard de Chardin and his concepts of Unity; there's a thread by me with some URL's, I'm sure you'd find it interesting.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
nowaytess

I relook at the post, he was not clear in wanting a non-relgious person to take over. He just asked if someone would.
<A HREF= http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/christianexjehovahswitnesses </A>
nowaytess

Tina I have to disagree with you. I have found the peace I am searching for.
Many became Jehovah's Witness in the first place in their seach for serving God.
I am just finding it more disturbing how everyone want to appear toleratent, moderate, compassionate, except towrds one view. If you guys are claiming who yuo are, it is not showing up in the posting here.
Mike started this off post for his personal aganeda. He could have said, " Thank you for offering but I felt your goals and purpose would not match the person whom I lie to take over my board." Instead he ned to vent in a thread. I am just wondering why he did this instead of just saying, "Thanks, but no thanks." I did spare him but not post what he tried to do over in my club.
<A HREF= http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/christianexjehovahswitnesses </A>
Frenchy

Hello, Abaddon. I’m fine, thank you, how about yourself?
I am by no means trying to make definitive statements about either atheists or believers. If you look closely you’ll see that I qualified my descriptions with the words: “This is how I see most people’s view of both sides of the issue.” I do not mean to infer that this view is actually definitive of either or both sides here. Nor was it my intention that this be viewed as an objective view of both sides. Far from it. It is how I, as a believer, view the matter. Sorry if I did not make that clear.
“I am more worried about misconceptions theists have about atheists and spirituality.” --A.
I’m certain that there are misconceptions. I am somewhat confused by your use of the term ‘spirituality’. Could you please explain?
“If you disagree with the theory of the mechanisms whereby those things arrise, attack that, not the way we feel, as the experience of that feeling is the same regardless of origin.” --A.
No attack here, I was just presenting my view. I do not dispute the biological process involved in emotions or thought either. What I was hoping to express was that I find it very difficult to experience the full range of human emotions, especially those qualities that to me are so noble and, to use Seeker’s word, altruistic, so selfless and self-sacrificing, things like loyalty and friendship and love and attribute all of this to a series of accidents. That’s all I meant.
In regard to helping the child; “Yes, but knowing we are reacting on a subconcious level to our evolutionary programming doesn't make it less wonderful, does it? ” --A.
To me it does. It’s not mere instinct that makes us do this but we are moved by compassion. Compassion and loyalty, for example, are not the product of pure intellectual functions.
“The fact someone is dead, as in dead, means that how we feel about them and remember them is of an even greater relevance than for theists..” A.
I know that atheists hurt just as much as believers do just like I know that they are just as moral and just as compassionate as believers. I thank you for understanding that I know these things and I thank you for not imputing bad motives to what I am saying. I do not mean to deride or in any way imply that an atheist is anything less than a believer. What I am trying to say in this instance is that if we subscribe to the school of everything we have here is an accident, without purpose and direction other than ‘blind’ natural forces, there is no logical reason for us to mourn lost, loved ones. I too lost a brother so I know how you feel when you think about yours. There are paradoxes at work here, I believe. I mourn the loss of my brother even though I have hope that he will live (or is now living) again. I believe (not sure, mind you) I can understand how your grief would be greater than mine. You have no hope for him whatsoever, nor for yourself or anyone and everyone you have or ever will care for. Your pain has to be greater than mine.
” Ah, I will have to inform my tearducts not to work when I have an emotional reaction to beauty, “ --A.
Why is there a reaction to beauty? What triggers that biological function? Of what practical purpose is appreciation? Those are the things that I have a problem dealing with.
” Told you the ice was thin... now you're all wet, and need to go home before you catch a cold...” –A.
I did get wet and I do have a cold! But I’m getting better. Grief is present. Why?
Evolution is the concept that this is all mechanical and an accident and so is without purpose. You seem disturbed that I mentioned that. You seem to be making an argument that there is purpose to this life. What is the purpose of life, if I may ask? If there is a purpose it would mean that this is not an accident.
Thank you very much for your detailed reply. As always, I enjoy reading your comments.
Frenchy

Seeker:
Just some brief comments:
“Altruism helps the group.” --S.
Altruism is the term used to describe or label the action, not the explanation for the act itself.
“…why is it hard to accept that people today believe in imaginary beings? Humans have been doing that for millenia” --S.
So they were a bit confused about God. So are we to a large extent. The point is that the concept is and, as you well put it, been there for millennia.
“That's where emotions come from, on a physical level. You can make a person experience certain types of emotions simply by stimulating parts of their brain.”
I believe I mentioned this already. Anyone who has experienced the above mentioned usually has difficulty relating that feeling to a drug.
Thank you, Seeker for your comments.
Abaddon

No worries Frenchy, I'm just pulling at 'loose ends' with your threads, as you do with mine. It's a form of social grooming... when I said if we both did that (stereotypical views), people could tell who wrote what, I meant that we would both unavoidably give ourselves away by encoding our beliefs into a supposed expression of anothers beliefs. You did - you were far harder on athiests.
Well, as much as we have common ground elsewhere, I do disagree with this:
"... if we subscribe to the school of everything we have here is an accident, without purpose and direction other than ‘blind’ natural forces, there is no logical reason for us to mourn lost, loved ones."
Oh yes there is. We miss them. We are aware we won't see them again. We know that they no longer know. They're gone, no kisses, no hugs, nada. Plenty of reasons to mourn. Just because I believe in a naturalistic world doesn't mean I don't think nature's ways SUCK at times!!
I wouldn't dream of saying my grief (at a loved one's death) is greater than yours. My grief over my brother's death was assuaged by my Dub beliefs when it happened. When I realised the resurrection was just a nice idea as opposed to what would happen, there was no 'new' grief, as it was a long time ago, just a touch of melancholy that I didn't have a big brother to REALLY share my life with, in a way I can't share my life with my brothers who are JW's, as he was never baptised, spending his last ten years (he died at 27) as a 'normal' (worldy) person.
Now death, however horrid, is a natural process. My parents are in their seventies, and it is horrible to think they will be gone at some point.
But will I grieve more than you because I don't believe in an afterlife?
I don't think so. They can't 'die' in my lifetime, as they will be here *touches finger to side of head*, no matter what, just like my brother is here, and my grandmothers, and Pippa, and other people I knew who are now dead.
Immortality in your friends, family, and what you do... might not be permenant immortality, might fade after a few generations unless you're famous, but HELL, I'm a big head but I think the Universe will carry on without my memory! Knowing you'll be missed when you're gone is a way of the Universe telling you that you did a good job.
I suppose that (previously quoted) statement hangs on this understanding of yours;
"You seem to be making an argument that there is purpose to this life. What is the purpose of life, if I may ask? If there is a purpose it would mean that this is not an accident."
The purpose of life... is life. The begetting of. But that's boring and biological and not what either one of us means.
I mean that if there is no reason for being here, no god, no ineffable plan, we can make our lives have a purpose by leading useful lives suffused with as much happiness as we can cram in.
There may be no 'reason' why there is life, but that is different from life not having any purpose. It is there, and it can be used to good effect even if there's no 'reason' behind it. Thus the good job comment above.
As for my meaning when I use the word spirituality, this is very much work in progress.
'An appreciation of the wonder of being?'
Does that make sense? That's what I mean about hating theistic attempts to corner the spirituality market. This imagined depressive malaise we atheists live in because 'life is meaningless'. Bollocks! Life is as meaningless as you let it be NO MATTER WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN!!!
I suppose I say 'live life with passion', and many theists say 'live life in such a way that you will experience the passion'.
People living in glass paradigms shouldn't throw stones...
mikepence

Thanks for all of the feedback. I realize that I used an inflammatory post to start this thread, but I often tire of trying to be PC and not offend people.
I realize that people come in every color of viewpoint imaginable, ex-JW or not. I don't really believe that ex-JW Xtians suck as much as I believe that those who fall into restrictive belief systems after having escaped the Mother of all restrictive belief systems just have not fully grasped the point that *any* fabricated belief system is simply that, an invention of our collective minds.
Nowaytess, I apologize if I offended you unduly. Obviously, I don't know you, but you certainly remind me of the gossipy, controlling, women who made my life hell as a young JW, including my own mother. So, I am, no doubt, projecting my own shit on everyone else, probably undeservedly.
Then again, projecting our own shit on everyone else is what human interaction is almost always about, if you think about it.
Great dialog here. Thanks. Love you all.
Mike
XJW User Submitted News & Views at http://xjwnews.com

ex-JW Christians Suck!

Share this