This Week's # 2

by FrankWTower 19 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  FrankWTower

  I've been noticing for a while now how the Watchtower sometimes seems to change the meanings of words in the English language in order to not label JW's as anything that has anything to do with the rest of the world.

  For example, this week's number 2 part in the theocratic ministry school dealt with: Are Jehovah's Witnesses a sect?

  When I look to dictionaries for the definition of this word they all have similar meanings, albeit with different wording. Here's an example:

  1. A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice.
  2. A religious body, especially one that has separated from a larger denomination.
  3. A faction united by common interests or beliefs.

  These are reasonable definitions and have no negative connotations whatsoever. If JW's are considered a sect, I see no reason to say otherwise, as it doesn't characterize us in a negative light. Moreover, the definitions apply to JW's, it would be unreasonable to say that we don't. But the society insists that we are not a sect. Why must they do this? I've also noticed this same issue when they write about, creationism, fundamentalism and other terms that don't come to mind or that I'm simply not aware of.

  I'm an active JW, but still "in the closet" about my actual views. Think Critically people.
• 

  brotherdan

  Tis true. Even the word "cult" is not a negative term, historically. Princeton.edu defines the word as: "followers of an exclusive system of religious beliefs and practices". Generally it means a group that follows a non-orthodox method of worship. This WOULD apply to JWs too, since they consider they type of worship exclusive to them.

  But the WT has tried to distance themselves from EVERYTHING religious. Rutherford was the main person to get this started. No longer were we going to a Church, but to a Kingdom Hall. No longer did we recognize the Cross, but the Torture Stake. No longer were we called "Bible Students" but "Jehovah's Witnesses". These along with hundreds of other minor changes to terminology, was a simple attempt to set this organization apart from all others.

  Many religions do this in one way or another. The problem with what the WT did, however, is that they created a lofty position for themselves, and condemned anyone that did not use their terminology. The word "Church" became known as a filthy word to JWs. And this attitude spread to the PEOPLE that went to the Church.
• 

  elder-schmelder

  "Disfellowshipped" is not a word.

  elder-schmelder
• 

  Open mind

  WELCOME TO BOARD FWT!!

  om
• 

  cantleave

  JW's do not isolate themselves physically in compounds like many of the most notorious sects / cults, (although the new facilities in up state NY, may be the start of this). JW's are isolated by a mental compound, by the behaviours and protocols imposed by the leadership. If the R & F members are alerted to these protocols they may recognise that they are being manipulated and bolt the compound. So how do you camouflage the compound? call it a different name, redefine what a compound is and keep telling your followers that they are not in it.
• 

  bohm

  Welcome!

  If you are interested in the subject, I would recommend you to see what scientology is doing to the language - its a really good example of why this "make up words" thing is a very bad idea!
• 

  Broken Promises

  Good point, FWT.

  And welcome.
• 

  wobble

  Welcome FWT !!!!

  if you get time, use the search facility on here and look at archived threads on thjs and subjects that interest you, or answer other questions you may have.

  I think the motivation for not wanting to be called a sect was the desire to be seen as the ONE true religion, hence the claim that people have joined it from all religions and none, as these poor dupes thought it was the true religion and not just a break-away extension of Adventism which it really is.

  Not wanting to be called a cult is obvious, this has become a pejorative word,and members may look up definitions of cult and realise they are in one, they might not like being called a cult, but they fit my definition of a cult.

  They are a high-control, mind-control cult. (they are also a sect as you rightly point out.)
• 

  WTWizard

  Technically, the witlesses are actually apostates, and they are a sect. Originally, they were part of the Adventists, which in 1872 predicted the end in 1874. When nothing happened, the witlesses split off from the Adventists and became the Bible Students. Complete with a new set of dates for the end.

  Now, you reach 1916. Boozerford seizes control of the sect, and leads them down an apostate direction. He got some nice jail time in 1918 for this, but got his sentence cut short in 1919 (I only wish the scumbag would have rotted in jail). After that, he started deleting Jesus and demanding field circus from everyone. He got the holidays banned--even though the Bible does not explicitly ban Christmas, and explicitly permits celebrating the festivities as you see fit (plus, Luke 2:10-14 details the first Christmas celebration, in heaven among perfect angels). Once all these things were imposed, the religion was technically apostate.

  At least those among us who are apostates from the original religion are not trying to seize control of a religion. Most of us simply want to enjoy freedom, some as atheists or unaffiliated and some as Christians. Effectively, we are apostates not from the true religion but from an apostate group of a sect.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  JW's don't want to be a sect because of their "us vs. the world" mentality. A sect would be a piece of a larger whole. They want Christianity to be only them and the rest of the Jesus-people are "Christendom," a group of groups all controlled by Satan. Brother Dan has it right about "cult" so I don't typically call them just a cult, but prefer the entire term, "dangerous mind-control cult." That way people know.

  They don't like "sect" or "cult." They don't like "church" and often don't like to be a "religion." They can't stand being called "Unitarians" (which they are) or "fundamentalists" (which they are). Imagine what their reaction would be to trying to call a convention a "revival."

  "Worldly" is typically a compliment, but not in the JW world. It is a "them" word that must be demonized. "Independent-thinking" is the same.