Straw man anyone?
You have to expect for the WT to distort and rationalize things in a way that projects anyone leaving the witnesses as someone evil, confused, angry, and what not. I wouldn't expect an unbiased, fair view of "apostates."
Apostates part from 2011 DC Symposium
by baltar447 46 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Mad Sweeney
We didn't expect a balanced fair view of apostates but we were all kind of hoping for something new or original, I think.
But no. The current management of Borg Incorporated has absolutely no capacity for new thought, or apparently for following through on whatever new thoughts they thought they might have thunk. Dummies.
-
JonathanH
I remember reading old JW books when I was still in that actually taught witnesses how to debate with people on their beliefs. I wish I could remember the book, but it taught debating tactics, how to lure your opponent out and crush him with reasoning and show him his own contradictions. Decades and decades ago witnesses were taught to actually defend and teach what they believe. It was expected that you would debate your beliefs. Now they are taught that if somebody expresses a contradictory viewpoint, or says something that isn't in line with the watchtower cover your ears and run. Decades and decades and decades ago witnesses were taught that if somebody had twisted reasoning, untwist it. Now if somebody has so much as a misunderstanding of witness views, just tell an elder so he can record it in on a form. Witnesses have gotten soft, their unwillingness to engage in coversation anymore only shows their inability to do it.
-
sweet pea
Nugget and Sabastious nailed it!!
-
rebel8
They made the assertion that "Apostates" are 1-Prideful, 2-Ingrateful, 3-Impatient.
omg, that explains so much character assassination from my dubs. Thanks for sharing that.
I remember reading old JW books when I was still in that actually taught witnesses how to debate with people on their beliefs. I wish I could remember the book
Reasoning from the Scriptures?
I loved that book. Read it cover to cover. It was hysterical in its stupidity. I think that's the one that tells dubs to distract from trespassing claims with discussions of freedom of speech. lol
-
JonathanH
Actually in line with my previous comment it really makes their continued instruction to avoid places like this that seem all the more bizarre. We only get the dregs of believing witness society in here, ones that think over highly of themselves and can't take orders properly. Could you imagine in the 40s if there was a place where a bunch of people were hanging out raring to debate the witnesses and elders and COs and they tacitly refuse and say "sorry, we can only stand on the street corner wearing this sandwhich board. We're not supposed to actually discuss our beliefs with people unless they admit up front that they have no intention of contesting our beliefs. We only want people that will read the paragraph and then repeat it back to us." No, that would've been insane to them. They would have gotten their bibles and had a showdown. Now they would awkwardly skamper off and let an elder know about what happened. It's a depressing state they've been reduced to. Rendered impotent by the ignorance and uniformity forced on them.
-
cult classic
I wish I could remember the book, but it taught debating tactics, how to lure your opponent out and crush him with reasoning and show him his own contradictions.
Two that come to mind: Make Sure of the More Important Things and Reasoning from the Scriptures.
Interestingly enough, whenever we'd run into people who "knew their bible", even the arguments presented in those books were pretty useless.
-
JonathanH
I know it wasn't reasoning from the scriptures, I had that when I pioneered. It was something much much older.
-
St George of England
Two that come to mind: Make Sure of the More Important Things and Reasoning from the Scriptures.
The forerunner to the Reasoning book was in fact "Make sure of all things" a brown covered book same size and layout of Reasoning.
George
-
blondie
When I was a jw I always wondered why the WTS made general accusations against "apostates" without being specific about what their lies were. I even suggested to an elder that if the WTS detailed the lies of "Christendom" why not their lies. How were their lies any more dangerous than Christendom's? Of course, I got a non-answer.
I know when I started reading Ray Franz's book, that I was astonished about how much was about things I already wondered about and researched, he was a kindred spirit. I heard the ring of the real "truth." It did make me dig deeper.
It must be getting pretty bad as the internet provides more and more information if the WTS is putting a substantial segment of the DC program into the subject.