Cedars: knowledge is power in all aspects. Very thought provoking points you brought out. Like CANTLEAVE said " it's a shame j-dubs don't use their minds."
Kojack
My nine grievances against the Society from BEFORE I had ever visited a single apostate website...
by cedars 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
GeneM
"It's also hypocritical to use quotes from scholars/professors but dissuade people from becoming them."
Cedars you are my hero.
-
Fernando
Personally, I reject religion/ists' definition of apostasy, which unsurprisingly favours their particular religion and labels dissenters or "conscientious objectors" (like Ray Franz and many more).
The dictionary, being unaware of other sources, also references religion/ists' views.
Apostasy is claiming a relationship with God, whilst spiritually fornicating with the "god of religion", as the WBTS GB so frequently and lustfully do.
Even a (sentence scope) search in the (electronic) wt library will bear this out:
aposta* unfaithful*
(Whilst of lesser importance to me personally, than the WBTS' false and apostate "good news", I agree with most of Cedars' points)
-
sseveninches
Very good list. It's nice to see what can happen when a JW starts thinking, as they rightly should. It makes sense that the WTS doesn't want people to go to college.
-
Finkelstein
Honest and analytical critical thinking, is not appreciated by the WTS.
-
jemba
I think its a great idea to make a list of your own grievances with the WTBTS.
It helps cement your decision to leave, helps in your arguments with family and just to reaffirm that you have definetely made a good decision.
Thanks Cedars, I totally agree with all of these points, Im off to make my own list.
-
cedars
Thanks for the responses everyone!
Bobcat - I agree with your Wizard of Oz analogy - that is precisely how I see the FDS now too. I recently read an interesting passage in Ray Franz's In Search Of Christian Freedom where he dissected the mythology of the "Slave Class". It's remarkable how the Governing Body relies so heavily on the false and hazy assumptions of the publishers as to the role of the FDS in enforcing their control over the organization.
cantleave, kojack57, sseveninches, jemba and finkelstein - yes, as the latest DVD illustrates, critical thinking is hardly encouraged within the organization. My only regret is that I didn't write down the list sooner. Most of these issues had been stirring around at the back of my brain for years, but the Society encourages you to bury them deep in the recesses of your mind. Only when you sit down and decide to write them all out do you realize that these are BIG issues, and to give devoted servitude to an organization whilst harboring such serious doubts makes no sense at all. To write them down tends to crystallize them somewhat, and makes them more real. Only a year after writing this list, I had declared myself inactive - so it clearly played an important role in my awakening. I only wish more thinking publishers could follow suit.
MidwichCuckoo - interestingly, one of the excuses given by the Governing Body as to why all the anointed ones don't get together and decide on doctrine etc is because "this didn't happen in the first century" (or words to that effect). I can't remember the article reference, but believe me, it's out there. The article obviously neglects to consider that at least one possible reason why anointed ones didn't meet together in the first century was because there was no frigging communications or transport network!! Today, the possibilities for communication are almost limitless. If the Governing Body wanted to arrange a meeting with all 12,000 or so anointed ones, they could do so in no time at all. Hell, most district conventions are held for crowds of 12,000 upwards! Why go to all the bother of bringing together ordinary publishers from every city on an annual basis, but then completely neglect to do anything similar solely for anointed ones EVER?! When I read the "first century" excuse, I couldn't help but laugh. I can't believe people buy that rubbish.
snowbird - yes, you don't need internet to realize that the "Faithful and Discreet Slave" scripture is just a parable!
John_Mann - "confusion" is probably too strong a word for my current state of mind regarding the origins of the universe. It's simply not something I choose to think about in too much detail, although I am re-reading a book on the subject as we speak. Here's one very simple way of explaining my current "on the fence" approach... Even scientists agree that it is almost uncanny how all of the nuclear forces and gravity etc are so finely calibrated as to allow life to flourish, and molecules/stars to form etc. The only explanation that can be offered to explain how we just so happen to be living in a universe where all of these things are "just right" (i.e. a "goldilocks universe") is that there are many universes (as part of a multiverse), and we happen to live in the one universe that lends itself to our existence. I'm not saying that this ISN'T the right explanation, because we have no way of knowing. However, it seems to me that the idea of a multiverse is no more or less plausible than the idea of some intelligence being behind the formation of our universe. We simply have no way of knowing, because scientists can only figure out with any degree of certainty what happened milliseconds AFTER the big bang, and not what happened before. In the absence of any final word on the matter, I would rather remain "on the fence" so to speak, in a mild but not intolerable state of 'confusion' until evidence emerges either way that explains everything, even if this never happens in my lifetime. There's certainly no rush for me to embrace either an atheist or theist point of view, so it really makes no difference. I do have a hunch that the universe had an intelligent beginning, but it's only a hunch, and not something I would force down someone else's throat.
Londo111 - it's interesting how you had similar doubts, although not the exact same ones. I'm glad you find the plate tectonics explanation useful. I once tried using that line of reasoning on my Dad, but he wasn't open to considering it. The simple fact is the bible writers clearly assumed that the earth was settled in its "final" state as regards mountains and oceans etc. Since then, plate tectonics has revealed that the earth is in a constant state of flux. Therefore, "creation" is an ongoing process, at least as far as our planet is concerned. It seems implausible that the same would not be true of life forms, especially when there is evidence to support natural selection.
simon17 - I loved your "always win" reasoning, very interesting! It's entirely true, of course. WHATEVER happens to the membership figures of our religion or other religions will always be hailed as evidence of the outworking of God's purpose - even when the figures start to go into decline.
dreamgolfer - thanks for asking me to publish the information, I found it very therapeutic to do so!
GeneM - lol, it's true though isn't it? Why quote from scholars/professors (in the "spiritual food" prepared by the Slave Class, no less) because these ones have received the benefits of higher learning, but then dissuade people from pursuing the exact same course as such ones?
Cedars
-
Finkelstein
The WTS. has always been a work of pretentious bullshitting to draw attention to its published goods.
Self proclaiming this and that was part of the indentured marketing scam.
Don't want to be apart of this scam and not recognize the self imposed identity which they established for themselves,
then they will screw you and if you have any family members in the organization, they will break apart your relationship
with them to protect their own psychological exploitive hold they have .
-
John_Mann
John_Mann - "confusion" is probably too strong a word for my current state of mind regarding the origins of the universe. It's simply not something I choose to think about in too much detail, although I am re-reading a book on the subject as we speak. Here's one very simple way of explaining my current "on the fence" approach... Even scientists agree that it is almost uncanny how all of the nuclear forces and gravity etc are so finely calibrated as to allow life to flourish, and molecules/stars to form etc. The only explanation that can be offered to explain how we just so happen to be living in a universe where all of these things are "just right" (i.e. a "goldilocks universe") is that there are many universes (as part of a multiverse), and we happen to live in the one universe that lends itself to our existence. I'm not saying that this ISN'T the right explanation, because we have no way of knowing. However, it seems to me that the idea of a multiverse is no more or less plausible than the idea of some intelligence being behind the formation of our universe. We simply have no way of knowing, because scientists can only figure out with any degree of certainty what happened milliseconds AFTER the big bang, and not what happened before. In the absence of any final word on the matter, I would rather remain "on the fence" so to speak, in a mild but not intolerable state of 'confusion' until evidence emerges either way that explains everything, even if this never happens in my lifetime. There's certainly no rush for me to embrace either an atheist or theist point of view, so it really makes no difference. I do have a hunch that the universe had an intelligent beginning, but it's only a hunch, and not something I would force down someone else's throat.
Cedars, do you know about the sentient puddle fallacy?
Nothing makes me think in an intelligent beginning to the universe or an universal super manager. But I have a hunch too about non human intelligence through the universe, perhaps we just are a kind of experiment of them.
-
sd-7
I think you may be absolutely right about Point #2. I always got kind of bored and also a little weirded out by these black-and-white photos and discussions of WT articles, talks, etc. from the '20s that were supposedly fulfillments of Bible prophecy. Just that kind of...looking off to the side whenever it was studied.
Hmm. Revelation 11--the two witnesses. The seven bowls of anger--wasn't that a bunch of Watchtower pamphlets denouncing Christendom, or talks or conventions from the early 20th century? Prophecies in Isaiah--many of those, also 1919. Hmm. Wow, that is scary.
My main grievance with the Society BEFORE I had ever visited a single apostate website? Well, they seemed like old folks sitting in an ivory tower who were out of touch with reality, paranoid, and fear-mongering about basic stuff that a little maturity would've removed the need for. They were always talking about how we should be 'balanced' but always making it seem like you were less than spiritual if you actually wanted to enjoy something other than a nature hike in a plaid shirt and khakis. (Who doesn't remember that picture at the top of a WT study article about recreation, that showed people CLEANING THE KINGDOM HALL as a form of recreation? )
And the elders were supposed to be a sort of miniature reflection of them. I think in observing them, I noticed they were always busy but rarely busy with actual concern for people who maybe, you know, weren't committing some sin. It was always writing talks, preparing parts, handling some 'congregation business', elders' meetings, that sort of thing.
Things just pile up, and I think for me, the investigation was almost an afterthought; I gave them the benefit of the doubt, but I strongly suspected I'd find out it was all a load o' crap. Man, I had noooo idea....
--sd-7