Judaism...Islam...Christianity...and now the Watchtower religion

by Terry 19 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Terry
    Terry

    Judaism, Islam and Christianity all have faced the same problems.

    Their total devotion to the supernatural eventually conflicts with everyday life and makes for failure, despondency and conflict.

    Each of the 3 religions has reacted to the modern world by the same process. Schism followed by anti-mainstream rhetoric.

    For Judaism, in the 1st Century, Jews either clung to the sacrificial system of Priests or formed Messianic apocalyptic cults or went off into the desert away from everybody and everything.

    For Muslims, when Muhammed died without naming a successor, schisms led to internal wars and the rise of Shiaa and Sunni struggling for dominance. When swallowed by the Turkish empire, Muslims tried combining politics with religion and failed. They became reactionary against the West and sunk deep into Fundamentalism.

    For Christians, after the Roman Empire accepted them and enforced a solidarity through Theological Orthodoxy, they split into an East/West dichotomy. The Catholic alliance with kings for theocracy eventually failed and the Protestant wars began.

    Under Luther, "the bible alone" (sola scriptura), denominations split off warring with each other over interpretations of orthodoxy.

    The New World filled with religious misfits.

    The Puritans tried to become a "shining City on a Hill" and failed.

    The Civil War drove a stake into the heart of christian "love" and along came cynical secularity until the GREAT AWAKENING.

    From that point forward, radical Christians split off from the main branches of Baptist, Methodist, Congregational, etc and sought finality in END TIMES preoccupations.

    William Miller started the ball rolling with actual PREDICTIONS of definite 2nd coming dates.

    After two embarassing failures the 7th Day Adventist crackpots rose up totally unwilling to melt back into Mainstream Churches.

    THIS IS THE POINT WHERE ANTI-MAINSTREAM wackos began creating a New Myth of Christ's Return in defiance of regular Christianity.

    Pastor Russell was wealthy enough to cherry pick the most exciting ideas from the buffet table of weirdo craziness and start his own movement.

    Pyramidology, Chart of the Ages, the Divine Plan, Chronology, Dispensationalism---all cut and pasted into Bible Student/Russellism with a target date of 1914.

    With the failure of yet another prediction Russell backtracked and died.

    Judge Rutherford merely picked up the pieces and kept the Anti-Mainstream ball rolling into a juggernaut of MILITANT ideas.

    Rutherford welded the weirdos, bible students, Russellites, Adventists and antii-social misfits into a fighting army of know-it-alls eager to

    insult every church member they could find.

    Supreme Court cases came one right after another because JW's were challenging the authority of the State to have a say over the Church (mythos vs Logos).

    When the smoke cleared, what Jehovah's Witnesses became was the ANTI-EVERYTHING religion. They were defined by what they DID NOT do and what they did NOT believe.

    Knorr tried to turn this angry mob into an educational religious society and failed because Freddy Franz was whipping up emotions by returning to the Adventist roots of END TIMES speculations.

    After the recent failure of 1975 as Armageddon, JW's are left without any identity at all.

    They can't jump back into defininte chronological predictions and they can't attack Muslim fanaticism or Catholic child molestation as issues.

    They are too vulnerable!

    They feast on the flesh of their own!

    Ex-JW's are the new target and weak members the new prey.

    In-fighting, censure, policing policies and mind control have replaced Christendom as the preoccupation of the rank and file.

    All the can do now is consolidate themselves into mindless robots who follow the whims of their Governing Body ulema and mullas.

    Stay and follow orders.....or...get out and die at Armageddon: this is the message of Love from the One True Religion!

    The Watchtower is nothing but a dysfunctional religous cult that failed in everything it predicted and has nothing left to pursue but total obedience in its membership.

  • skeeter1
    skeeter1

    For Muslims, when Muhammed died without naming a successor, schisms led to internal wars and the rise of Shiaa and Sunni struggling for dominance. When swallowed by the Turkish empire, Muslims tried combining politics with religion and failed. They became reactionary against the West and sunk deep into Fundamentalism.

    At its core, Islam is a cult and uses the same playbook that Steve Hassan and other cult psychologists have wrote on. http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina50218.htm is a website of ex-muslims and is like a "freeminds" for them.

    Information exchange is what brings down cults. From the KKK's griphold being destroyed by a few newspaper reporters who exposed the group, to the JW apostates who have put their stories on the Internet . . . eventually radical Islam will fall too. Problem is, Muslim TV and media carefully discern wha the masses can learn. But, the genie, if you will, has been let out of the bottle. To bring down Islam, we must not be afraid to speak against it. If it is the "Truth", it will survive the apostates.

  • beksbks
  • sabastious
    sabastious

    snare and a racket.

    wat do i win

    -Sab

  • Terry
    Terry

    All insular groups resort to the Last Stand as a framework.

    Armageddon is a Last Stand.

    Disfellowshipping is a Last Stand.

    Labeling Apostates is a Last Stand.

    Rejecting science almost wrecked the Catholic Church, but, they finally adapted and embraced as much of the modern world as they could.

    Islam totally rejects logic, technology, separation of church and state and is in total denial.

    Christianity has split into "feel good" mega-churches like Rick Warren, Joel Osteen, and Joyce Meyer ministries on the one hand or doomsday fundamentalist LEFT BEHIND evangelicals.

    Jehovah's Witnesses are in a battle ----not against Internet Apostates so much as with THEIR VERY OWN HISTORY in their VERY OWN WORDS!

    Their main task now is to convince people that what they USE TO SAY was not really said at all!!

    Total renunciation of their own TRUTH is their undoing!

    They are the inverse implosion of their most prolific days of burgeoning growth!!

  • beksbks
    beksbks

    You're obsessed today Skeeter.

    Problem is, Muslim TV and media carefully discern wha the masses can learn.

    You do realize there are millions of muslims living in the western world, where this is not true? This is what will eventually modify islam. The modern world, and the youth that are immersed in it.

  • Terry
    Terry

    Do you know where the term "New Light" came from?

    Very interesting when you read about it and apply the thinking to JW's own use:

    The terms Old Lights and New Lights (among others) are used in Christian circles to distinguish between two groups who were initially the same, but have come to a disagreement. These terms have been applied in a wide variety of ways, and the meaning must be determined from context. Typically, if a denomination is changing, and some refuse to change, and the denomination splits, those who did not change are referred to as the "Old Lights", and the ones who changed are referred to as the "New Lights".

    [edit] History

    The terms were first used during the First Great Awakening, which spread through the British North American colonies in the middle of the 18th century. In A Faithful Narrative of the Surprising Work of God (1737), Jonathan Edwards, a leader in the Awakening, describes his congregants vivid experiences with grace as causing a "new light" in their perspective on sin and atonement. [ 1 ] Old Lights and New Lights generally referred to Congregationalists and Baptists in New England who took different positions on the Awakening than the traditional branches of their denominations. New Lights embraced the revivals that spread through the colonies, while Old Lights, suspicious of the revivals (and their seeming threat to authority), wanted to suppress them. Historian Richard Bushman credits the division between Old Lights and New Lights for the creation of political factionalism in Connecticut in the mid-eighteenth century. [ 2 ] Often "many "new light" Congregationalists who had been converted under the preaching of George Whitefield left that connection to become "new light" Baptists when they found no evidence of infant baptism in the apostolic church. When told of this development, Whitefield famously quipped that he was glad to hear about the fervent faith of his followers but regretted that "so many of his chickens had become ducks." [ 3 ] The Presbyterian Church in Pennsylvania would experience a division during the Great Awakening, with those elements of the denomination embracing the revivals called "New Sides" and those opposed to the revivals called "Old Sides." [ 4 ]

    The terms were also used during the Second Great Awakening in America, in the early 19th century. New Lights were distinctive from the Old Lights in that they were more evangelical and, as historian Patricia Bonomi describes, carried "ferocity peculiar to zealots...with extravagant doctinal and moral enormities." [ 5 ]

    The terms were also used in 1833, with "Old Lights" referring to the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, when the "New Lights" were the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod (now part of the Presbyterian Church in America).

  • Terry
    Terry

    You do realize there are millions of muslims living in the western world, where this is not true? This is what will eventually modify islam. The modern world, and the youth that are immersed in it.

    What actually IS a "moderate" religion person?

    How many of these "moderates" speak out against the militant versions of themselves?

    Stop and think. Non-moderates are angry, militant, dangerous and effective. What does a moderate achieve?

    A "moderate" person is a fence-sitter who doesn't get involved in controversy. This renders them ineffective at combatting any evils interior or exterior.

    A moderate Jehovah's Witness keeps their mouth shut for fear of reprisal just as a moderate Muslim does.

    They don't count for anything as a force for renewal or change.

    Just my two cents.

  • skeeter1
    skeeter1

    A moderate Jehovah's Witness keeps their mouth shut for fear of reprisal just as a moderate Muslim does. They don't count for anything as a force for renewal or change.

    My two cents too! Where are the throngs of moderate Muslims? I'm ready to stand up with them.

  • Terry
    Terry

    We encounter a similar phenomenon here on JW-net.

    Those without strong opinions merely lurk and leave the rest of us know-it-alls to stew in our own juice of ignorance.

    It is the radical who gets things done and changes the world.

    So afraid are the fundamentalist Muslims of the progress, wealth and power of Enlightenment secularization, they must destroy

    it with physical violence lest they become convinced Islam is a backward superstition with nothing to offer modern believers.

    A well-reasoned argument will not emerge from their lips to refute the weak ideas of science and technology---no! Instead, white-hot rants full of polemic and rabid rhetoric spew forth to rally radicals to their cause of extinction for the Great Satan (America.)

    Jehovah's Witnesses are made to see any criticism as an attack upon the Truth itself (Jehovah's word) and a target is painted on former members as Apostate wicked slaves hellbent on making war upon righteous faith.

    Reactionary impulse is the leading indicator of a failed philosophy or belief!

    The Catholic Church plunged into the INQUISITION not because it had the Truth--but, because it could not summon a reasoned rebuttal.

    The Sicarii in the 1st Century could not form a political party and create social improvements for faithful Jews to enable a flourishing community under Roman rule---no! They drew swords and shouted slogans which brought doom upon their religious world in Jerusalem.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit