LeavingWT: Why Never Discuss Doctrine? (page 2)

Band on the Run

I've been exposed to some of George Herbert's works. Had no clue he was responsible for that adage. So true.

00DAD

I've read Hassan's first book, Combatting Cult Mind Control, and am about 1/3 of the way through the second one, Releasing the Bonds (RTB).

They're both good, but so far I'd have to say the 2nd is much better for a number of reasons. Mostly it's better because he is older, more experienced and has refined his understanding of the problem and his approach to helping yourself and others in a cult.

Also, RTB specifically deals with JWs as a religion and as well as reaching "born-ins" of any cult. The first book doesn't address either of these important issues.

My two cents.

Azazel

Having spent my first 40 years as a JW I believe within the JWs there are two types of JW.

The first are what you would call "spiritual" people who serve God out of love and trust him with their heart and believe the "truths" given to them from the FDS. This is the minority group you know the type the little old lady whos been a JW for 60 years and doesnt bother anybody, the old brother who was never ambitiuos to be in power but always faithfull.

The majority group ( and i was one) are Organizational people. Keeping in step with the WTS and following ever rule and regulation. Thinking as we were told to think, not following God just his "visible" organization the WTS.

The first group are open to seeing that what the bible really says so a bible principle approach works for them.

The second group will NEVER discuss doctrinal errors of the WTS, to them thats heretical practise. One approach for them is to confirm their belief in what the WTS say in regard to their published view of the UN and once they are convinced of the WTS view of the UN and Gods hatred of the UN you drop the bomb of what the WTS has been up to and Hopefully God willing their WTS foundation has just been blown and they begin to see the light.

I had always been a bit fringey even tho a MS but i wouldnt have spoken with apostates"real christians" on doctrine. Discovering the WTS bad conduct carried more weight for me personally.

All the above is just "my opinion".

Az

FatFreek 2005

When I left several years ago, doctrine would not have cut it with me. I agree, at least for me, that doctrine is a taboo topic.

With me it was covering up certain facts, dishonesty, and doctrinal flip-flops. Doctrines, on the other hand, are subject to interpretation -- therefore are subjective. I try to keep things objective -- doctrinal flip-flops to be specific. If Watchtower is guilty of these and the follower proceeds to accept the fact, I simply throw up my hands.

THE GREAT WATCHTOWER CONTRADICTION is designed for newly interested ones. This 11 minute read sticks to one simple premise.

curiouscynic

Azazel-- My family did accept WTS doctrine as it came down, but they put a great deal of pride in being able to "prove" their beliefs from the scripture. They do not believe that literature from the WTS is inspired and I was never taught that it was. Which is kinda funny because they think what they're reading comes right from the Bible... I mean... they just read it for themselves in black and white, right? But as I began to question the scriptures themselves and increased the intensity of my study in an attempt to prove myself wrong, I discovered that by using the WT as a "tool" to aid in Bible stud,y witnesses were inadvertantly putting all their faith in WTS interpretations.

Which makes me wonder... If all JWs participated in the weekly bible reading the way they're supposed to... would more of them realize that not everything the WTS teaches is scriptural?

It doesn't matter if what we are teaching today is wrong, God will correct it in time. Stay in union with the FDS or you will be lost.

It's not correct doctrine that saves but association with the FDS. --Bob1999

This is a common Mormon teaching as well. When a doctrine is proven wrong or MUST be overturned because of political pressures [like blacks getting the priesthood in 74-75] the prophet conveniently claims a new revelation. The R&F Mormons are told that the old understanding was a test of their faith. That it is not their job to interpret the teachings of the church and that they will be rewarded in heaven for blindly following church doctrine that they disagree with personally.

"With JWs, in particular, they've been slowly indoctrinated and constantly reminded that they cannot trust (1) their own thinking ability and (2) their hearts. Stop and ponder how dangerous such a state of mind really is. What is the end result? An army of robots, many quite intelligent, waiting for the next command. Further, the WT environment constantly prepares them to outside influences, such as apostates. They are warned that the Devil (which is anything outside WT) is trying to mislead and destroy them." --leavingWT

This is probably the most concise, informative and accurate statement I've read since I've been here. Thank you.

leavingwt

"is any sort of written or unwritten rule in JW culture that relates to doctrinal discussions with a non-JW such as myself and their impact on the relationship between the non-JW and the JW"

Another excellent question, and I hope that others here can also provide some feedback.

The answer, as you may have guessed, is Yes!

The JW views everyone outside the organization as simultaneously (1) bad associations and (2) a potential convert. The JW is therefore compelled to keep non-JWs at a distance, so as not to be viewed by other JWs as having close association with a 'wordly' person. Further, the JW must be very careful to avoid ever saying anything negative about the organization. The JW wouldn't want to 'stumble' a person, with the end result being the outsider not joining, because of their actions/speech.

sizemik

It's the taking away of free and critical thinking that renders discussion or criticism of doctrine redundant . . . as has been pointed out.

Even proving your point . . . winning the argument . . . will have no beneficial effect . . . on either the person or the relationship.

Imagine hypothetically . . .

You get a JW to concede that a particular doctrinal teaching is probably inaccurate. Even at that point they will bury their uncertainty. A few years down the track and an official doctrinal change occurs (as they do) which brings things into line with the critic . . .

The JW would simply reason . . . "so-and-so was right after all . . . if only he had stayed with Jehovah's Organisation and not run ahead . . . he would be here to enjoy it."

They're programmed to be loyal to the WTS . . . not to doctrine per se.

A doctrinal discussion is simply an opportunuity to show that loyalty.

InterestedOne

The JW wouldn't want to 'stumble' a person, with the end result being the outsider not joining, because of their actions/speech.

That reminds me of an experience I had at the KH. A woman talking to me was extremely worried about possibly offending me. She asked if I was a student at the local college (I've aged fairly gracefully), and I said no I'm 38. She was like Oh I'm so sorry, I didn't offend you did I? I said no of course not. She was like Are you sure? I'm so sorry if I offended you. I hope I didn't offend you. I was thinking to myself, "Chill out lady. It's not a big deal. I'm not offended in the slightest."

I can see how a doctrinal discussion that leads to a JW doctrine looking objectively nonsensical could upset the individual JW who is trying not to admit anything negative about the org for fear that the non-JW might not join.

mamalove

I don't think it works. As much as I fantasize about being able to come up with something to get my friends and family out of the organization, it probably won't happen. They are too loyal. The only thing IMO to break that loyalty, is for something to be missing, something life changing or tragic to shake things up to make them want to listen and be open minded.

InterestedOne

Sizemik wrote:

They're programmed to be loyal to the WTS . . . not to doctrine per se.

Now I'm reminded of Song #63 "Ever Loyal." I think it is a pretty good example of the programming you're talking about. The 2nd & 3rd verses especially which are:

Ever loyal to our brothers, Sticking close in times of need
Ever caring, always trusting, Ever kind in word and deed.
We show honor to our brothers And respect them from the heart.
Let the Bible draw us closer; From their side we'll never part.
Ever loyal to their guidance When our brothers take the lead.
When they give us clear direction, May our mind and heart give heed.
Then the blessing of Jehovah Will be ours to make us strong.
When we're loyal, ever faithful, To Jehovah we'll belong.

LeavingWT: Why Never Discuss Doctrine?

Share this