I Have a New Method for Dealing With Ridiculous Assumptions

by AllTimeJeff 37 Replies latest jw friends

  • AllTimeJeff
    AllTimeJeff

    My one disclaimer is this: To my theistic friends, I am not saying the following to be disrespectful of your beliefs. However, since I don't believe as you all do, it is only honest of me to present this.

    I bring this up because I have been caught up lately in debates that I normally don't involve myself in. I have been left a little drained and confused as to why I allowed myself to argue a point till its beaten to a bloody pulp. And I also realize, I must allow everyone here their personal views. (hey, no one ever really changed their mind EVER after talking to me.... for the most part...)

    So this new method is one that I actually learned as a JW, going door to door. Let me give you some examples of this new/time tested method.

    ME: "Hello there, I am returning to show you from the bible that there are 144,000 who go to heaven, and only a remnant remain on earth. These guys are represented by a Governing Body and rule over all that Christ gave them in 1919. Isn't that good news?!"

    THEM using time/tested method: "Uh, I'm not interested." *closes door*

    ME: "Hello there! I would like to show you that God's name is Jehovah, as clearly shown in the New Testament, and that he wants us live forever in a cleansed paradise earth, playing with formerly dangerous wild animals. We will spend eternity worshiping him. Isn't that good news?!"

    THEM using time/tested method: "Uh, I'm not interested." *closes door*

    ME: "Hello there! I would like to show you how by using calculations involving scriptures found in Ezekial, Daniel, and Revelation, along with the clearly established fact that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BCE, shows that Jesus came to rule invisibly from the heavens in 1914. Isn't that good news?!"

    THEM: But Jerusalem was destroyed in 587/586 BCE, and you JW's didn't teach the 1914 date until close to 1930, after efforts to tie other previous dates to Jesus invisble return failed.

    ME: "Well, some believe that 607 is the correct date. Also, we JW's get lied a lot about by those evil apostates who only leave because they are demonized haters of god, who have nothing better to do then hate their former brothers.....

    THEM using time/tested method: "Uh, I'm not interested." *closes door*

    It seems that most people in the "world", (gotta love that terminology, don't ya?) have the best method for figuring out how to deal with the hopelessly stupid. They did it to me while I was a JW, and they continue to do it to JW's today. I even got to do it once since I left. It felt real good....

    So from now on, if someone insists on trying to shove some unproveable, weird, psuedo spiritual exegesis down my throat, or if they want to try and spin matters involving gods clear "taking his hands off the wheel" approach to ruling us, my response will be to learn a great lesson from those gusts of wind caused by doors heading in my direction as I was spewing intellectual poo....

    "Uh, I'm not interested." *closes door*

  • SixofNine
    SixofNine

    good

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    Jeff - I love you man!

  • lovelylil2
    lovelylil2

    I agree with you on this.

    I've been caught up in the same debates it seems and just have to realize that not many on this forum ask a Q looking for an honest anwer from someone else's perspective. What they really want is someone to support thier own perspectives whether that be agnostic,athiest or christian. If someone of another view disagrees, they are immediately ridiculed, called names or told they are not intelligent enough to respond, etc. I've seen this go both ways with believers and nonbelievers.

    So I am also shutting the door on certain threads saying "no thanks I am not interested"

    This is going to save me lots of time. So thanks for the good advice. Peace, Lilly

  • believingxjw
    believingxjw

    So from now on, if someone insists on trying to shove some unproveable, weird, psuedo spiritual exegesis down my throat, or if they want to try and spin matters involving gods clear "taking his hands off the wheel" approach to ruling us, my response will be to learn a great lesson from those gusts of wind caused by doors heading in my direction as I was spewing intellectual poo....

    "Uh, I'm not interested." *closes door*

    I may try that myself.

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    Cookie Monster..

    Was killed by the Mafia..

    ....................

  • AllTimeJeff
    AllTimeJeff
    Cookie Monster.. Was killed by the Mafia..

    Actually Outlaw, I am interested in that. Won't you come in and share what you know?

    I have Molson!

  • Scully
    Scully

    Where sensitive issues such as religion and politics are involved, I try to gracefully bow out by saying something like

    "Rather than allow differences in personal opinions to derail our professional relationship, I prefer not to go there."
    "I worry that offering my opinion will open up a debate that will leave both of us frustrated and angry, so let's not go there, in the interest of our friendship."

  • AllTimeJeff
    AllTimeJeff

    Scully, that means that I aspire to reach your level of maturity.

    Believe me, I am trying!

  • Scully
    Scully

    Jeff,

    Maturity has nothing to do with it. It's all packaging. The underlying message is still "I'm not interested" or "Fark off!"

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit