Well, former Catholics aren't former JWs, as a general matter, are they? So how would that matter to the testable hypothesis I outlined?
Or are you just talking about something else entirely?
I Believe Catholicism And Its Trappings Are Silly, Strange & Weird!!!
by minimus 306 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
still thinking
well, you seem to dismiss any objection to Catholicism by labelling it an ex JW attitude as though that is the only reason anyone would dislike catholicism. It seems like the classic way to dismiss what people are saying. Oh, you're just like that because you were a JW. I'd imagine Protestants in Ireland aren't too keen on Catholic religion too...and they aren't even ex JW's. Ex Catholics aren't keen on the Catholic religion, and they aren't ex JW's.
Well we can all use that argument...you just flopped into another religion...because you are an ex JW. There, does that make sense too?
-
NewChapter
Sulla,
In many ways, I don't think I was a typical JW, but I also don't think I'm unique. Just not typical. I actually had nothing against the many churches out there, in fact, I attended many of them. JW's started pointing out the hypocrisy, and it was then that I researched it and found they had a valid point. Unfortunately, I didn't go far enough---I should have scrutinized WT more closely. In my defense, this was before we all had internet, and there was much more information, history, and revelations about the other churches easily available. I only needed a history book, and did not need to depend on disgruntled exmembers as my source---because those are always suspect.
When I walked away, I was not 'anit-JW'. Not at all. I walked away from belief in general, but had not found a lot of fault with the JW's specifically----I just realized they were like all the rest. I didn't have some of the other negative experiences that others have had. I had my share, but they are topped by many other stories.
So the issue for me comes in when Christians pretend that they have better morals and were a force for good in the world. They don't, and they weren't. Individuals certainly did good things, but the institutions themselves drove a lot of dodgy stuff. Atheists have also done some pretty bad things, but they weren't driven by atheism, because atheism has no organization or rules. It's not a code of conduct, it is simply a description of how a person views gods. That doesn't prevent an atheist from picking up another ideology that drives them. But atheism has no pope or GB to direct them---they are on their own.
I think what we actually have here is not a left over JW thing, but people who've had to employ a great deal of critical thinking to escape a cult, but did not turn it off when it came to other religions. As I said, some people may come to different conclusions when they look at a religion's history, and they may be able to reconcile it all with their current belief. But I don't think dismissing valid criticism as just some left over JW thingy is legitimate. They have simply come to a different conclusion than you have when looking at your churche's long and bloody history.
And some of us find fault with their current behavior also. I have a real issue with them teaching that birth control is evil and condems bad in countries that are devastated by poverty and AIDS. It is dispicable. So I don't give them kudos for feeding the poor and caring for the sick. I also don't give them kudos for setting up schools where they teach this evil doctrine. To me it is more like they have created their own problems, and now they must clean it up, and they want patted on the back. Sorry, no. They would make a REAL impact on poverty and illness if they let go of this ridiculous teaching, and gave their followers a bit more self determination. Trusting them to make decisions based on economics and ability to care for children rather than forcing them to produce children they can't care for in stressed areas. They could teach THAT in their many schools.
NC
-
Diest
Granted,
Nearly every fundamentalist protestant group I know of dislikes, and mistrusts the catholics. They dont even seem to be on the edge of Atheism. Seems that most non catholics are rather anti-catholic. It is a giant group that painted a giant bullseye on itself. We know their history.
I am excited for the day that we get a Non-Euro Pope. Latin America, and Africa have much better participation on the local level, so it only seems fair that we get a non euro-pope. I will love to hear from some of the more racist elements around the world when we have an African or Latino Pope.
-
apostatethunder
Protestants would do well in looking at their own history before pointing the finger to anyone else.
A Pope shouldn’t be elected for racial reasons, or to make a point, or to keep detractors happy, just whoever happens to be more qualified for the position.
-
Sulla
Still Thinking, you are greatly over-loading my viewpoint. What I think is that several attitudes or viewpoints seem to remain (on average, or in higher than what would be expected against a random sample in the population) with JWs after they leave the religion. I have said before that some key attributes of JWs are a Manichean viewpoint and utopianism. JWs tend to see everything as a battle of evil against good and miss the (Catholic?) inisight that we all are sinners and, therefore, broken in profound ways. xJWs seem very often (in my anecdotal observation, which is why I have an hypothesis rather than the axioms I joke about) to hold these attitudes even after they have rejected the specific claims of the JWs.
So, here is sorta what I mean: JWs claim they are the True Church, chosen by God a hundred years ago. Why were they chosen? Not because they were teaching correctly, but because they alone of all the people of the world were attempting to break away from the evils of apostate Christianity. Apostate Christianity, for 2,000 years, had been teaching anti-Christianity because they were corrupt, selfish, greedy, or otherwise bad people. The only solution is to root it out completely, since there is nothing at all that can be salvaged.
Now, this attitude is not exclusive to JWs, it shows up in lots of other places. But I suggest that JW-ism pulls from people with these atitudes; converts to JW-ism are more likely than average to hold these viewpoints and find the JW solution to them to be compelling. When thay leave the JWs, these attitudes tend not to change, I think.
But, and to finally get to the point, this viewpoint is the opposite of most old ways of thinking about the human condition. A "tragic" or Catholic approach tends to think of corruption or selfishness as a thing that everyone is susceptible to. You, me, all of us are liable to act in bad ways when we get the chance; we are not better than anyone else. What we can hope to do is develop virtue, but that's an uneven process. There aren't any solutions, and there isn't really much difference between us and people who do bad things.
The JW viewpoint tends to break the world into two groups: JWs and assholes. XJWs tend to do the same thing, just with a different identification of the good guys.
-
Sulla
NC, I think we may view the sin of hypocricy in a different way. I think it is a very small sort of sin, one that everybody is guilty of -- especially those who claim to hate it most. So, sure, Christians are hypocrites. So is everybody else. I don't think it's a big deal.
So the issue for me comes in when Christians pretend that they have better morals and were a force for good in the world. They don't, and they weren't. Individuals certainly did good things, but the institutions themselves drove a lot of dodgy stuff.
The institutions certainly did some dodgy stuff, so did the people. Both also did some really positive stuff, which I think you are in the habit of undervaluing. Establishing hopsitals and schools is a pretty big deal, for example; these were things the religious institutions did long before any government figured it should bother with that sort of thing. Just an example.
Atheists have also done some pretty bad things, but they weren't driven by atheism, because atheism has no organization or rules. It's not a code of conduct, it is simply a description of how a person views gods. That doesn't prevent an atheist from picking up another ideology that drives them. But atheism has no pope or GB to direct them---they are on their own.
Weren't "driven" by atheism? Not sure I can agree. I certainly agree that atheism doesn't have a set of requirements requiring or prescribing various actions. But there is a philosophical core within atheism that is problematic for this idea.
I think what we actually have here is not a left over JW thing, but people who've had to employ a great deal of critical thinking to escape a cult, but did not turn it off when it came to other religions. As I said, some people may come to different conclusions when they look at a religion's history, and they may be able to reconcile it all with their current belief. But I don't think dismissing valid criticism as just some left over JW thingy is legitimate. They have simply come to a different conclusion than you have when looking at your churche's long and bloody history.
I hear ya. I disagree, sorta. For the following reasons:
Atheism's long and bloody history is longer and bloodier. The Cultural Revolution, the genocide in the Vendee, the starvation of the Ukranians, etc., etc., etc. Throw in National Socialism's paganism, and the score gets pretty lopsided. I've gotta own Bloody Mary, you gotta own Pol Pot. Fair's fair.
So, if you are really looking at long bloody history and choosing between atheism and Catholicism, it seems to me you only get one answer. Atheist's are, I suppose, not acting hypocritically; maybe that counts for something.
I think you may greatly overestimate the degree to which critical thinking plays a role in people leaving the JWs. If you look at the de-conversion stories, they almost always involve some mistreatment at the hands of the JWs. You and I are exceptions to this general rule, it seems. Even if we weren't exceptions to the rule, is it really a great analytical achievement to figure out the JWs are nonsense? I don't think it is.
-
Diest
How are you going to throw " National Socialism's paganism" into the mix with Atheists? Weren't Facists/Nazis and Communits enemies? Didn't the Catholics lend support toe the National Socialists? Quit reaching.
None of the Atheist you have met are supporting the ideas of a Central State Communism. If you include Pol Pot who was just was anti-science as he was anti-religion, then I can include any religious group that has ever appeared. In the end the theistic umbrella includes more than enough evil people to balance out that "score."
Prince Norodom Sihanouk was the former king of Cambodia from 1941 as well as Head of State from 1955 to 1970 before resigning in 1976. He once said of Pol Pot:
"Pol Pot does not believe in God but he thinks that heaven, destiny, wants him to guide Cambodia in the way he thinks it the best for Cambodia, that is to say, the worst. Pol Pot is mad, you know, like Hitler."
-
rather be in hades
"if they were REALLY faithful, they NEVER would have left the congregation and if they REALLY wanted to worship god, they would see this is the truth!!!"
-any jw still in and under the mind control
"exJWs have a hatred for the catholic church because they were taught to hate it from the JWs. if only they were open minded!"
-?
-
minimus
If you were to accept all of the Catholic Church's teachings and beliefs, you might not think JWs are all that different. STRICTLY speaking, the RCC has some pretty radical beliefs and their history is problematic for them, imho.