Change Name,
I haven't been apart of this conversation until now, too many threads too little time, but about 607 BC and the Bible:
A question about lying and the Jehovah's Witnesses
by Change Name 138 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Dismissing servant
That's allright, Change! I wish you a nice weekend! Take care! C U!
-
DATA-DOG
Wow. You are cutting and pasting too much if you cannot remember what you have said in the past few days. Mybe that is the JW writing departments problem. I have notice many recycled areticles with a few tweaks, here and there. They have cranked out so many magazines that they can't even remember what they have written or said!
Just tell the truth, you work a Bethel on the writing dept. Or better yet, just remain silent or re-direct the conversation if you don't want to answer.
Lurking jw's who know the top brass are lying. PLEASE PAY ATTENTION THE WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE!
88JM No wonder JW's are so messed up. Their spiritual " Mother " says one thing and practices another. What a horrible parenting example!
-
problemaddict
Hello Change name,
Thank you for the response, and lets try to stay on track shall we? First of all I will take you for your word on you say you are, and unbaptized JW who apologizes for their viewpoint. Were you raised as one of Jehovah's Witnesses?
1) We agree here. There is a time in extreme circumstances that anyone would be better off lying and could seemingly be justified in doing so. Especially in protecting someones life.
NOTE: I am not suggesting that there is a JW policy of trying to tell people honesty is not important. Please stop this red herring.
2) The statement you wrote perfectly illustrates the issue. Who determines who is entitled to the truth? Is it you? Is it someone else? Is it the branch? We already agree under extreme circumstances such as the one I mentioned, it would be ok to outright lie. With this open ended statement from the branch about those deserving of the truth, too much is left in the wind. You have already seen examples of it here in the responses. Think of it like this. Truth is singular, versions of truth, are untruths. Pure and simple. In extreme cases, it could be jusified, when left up to a vague interpretation of who "deserves" it according to the branch, it is not. None of what JW's teach in this regard escapes me. I was babtized at 13, served as a pioneer an MS as well as in foreign assignments. I have done nearly anything a JW can do in the organization. So your left handed comment regarding something escaping my notice is not appreciated.
If your child for example did something you told them not to, but didn't tell you about it, would it be any less of a deception or "hiding of the truth"? What is the child thought you didn't "deserve" the truth because you were mean to her or didn't understand what they wee going through? None of this would make it any less deceptive.
You avoided my very direct question that I will re-state below.
The society is saying that when it comes to preaching or dealing with those opposing you, untruths are all good. You can withhold information (omission is not looked favorably in a court of law), and you are still just fine because of the REASON you do it. So if not outright lying, can we at least agree it is at best disingenuous and not true to the spirit of the bibles command to not have a "false tongue"?
I am not being dogmatic in accusing the branch, why are you being dogmatic if defending them? In also wanted to address your comment below.
Most people, after hearing about the "secret elder guidebook", want to know why it is intended just for the elders. Its those people who have it out for the JW's that take this information and twist it to make the JW's look bad.
What is this comment based on? Most people according to whom? How have their words been twisted to make JW's look bad? This comment begs further explanation. If anything, the books supposed confidentiality that isn't based on any sound scriptural principle is enough to warrant suspicion as to why it would remain so. Beyond that, the fact elders would deny it exists on camera only strenghtens my point regarding who is "not entitled" to having the tuth. I will await your response above. I would say using their own in context words, how could it be "twisted to make them look bad"? The fact you have read part of it must mean in some part you agree. After all, why would you hold others to a different standard than yourself?
Your comment regarding my PS is very interesting. You have made several mistakes.
People who leave the morals, teachings and standards of the Jehovah's Witnesses do so with the full understanding of what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe the Bible tells them to do.
Nobody is told when they are baptized or going through the questions, that if they later develop through their conscience an aversion to any of the societies teachings, that they can be disfellowshipped for doing do. It simply is not discussed. You are also assuming anyone who leaves is dong so because they reject Christianity, and moral aptitude. I have been inactive for only 5 months. I am no worse a person, nor do I now engage in weekend orgies, disavow God, or hate my fellowman. Other religions do not enforce communal shunning simply for thinking differently, or exercising ones conscience to the contrary of leadership. Scientology does. The Amish do. So where does that put this policy?
The choice is with the one who leaves them.
This is simply not true. The one that leaves the organization, has not left their family. it is their family that decides this is the case. Even in situations where somone is not disfellowshipped, but simply fades away, the family is inclined to cut off their family member. Shame on them. They will certianly answer to their creator for standing behind this policy that throws love, and everything jesus taught out the window. once again, since you stated you didn't know anyone who left the organization, we can possibly chalk this up to ignorance on your part. I am not ignorant, having been in this religion my entire life. You should attempt to understand others before painting with such broad strokes.
-
Dismissing servant
"The statement you wrote perfectly illustrates the issue. Who determines who is entitled to the truth?"
Yes! There you got it! Maybe the rank and file aren't entitled to the truth! Maybe noone outside bet-hell in Brooklyn is entitled to the real truth.
-
Finkelstein
Hi Finkelstein - Yeah, you cannot say anything positive about the people that threw you out and use them as a crutch in your defense of your truth. I can tell you that the JW's I know are not ignorant lazy minded people. All people who belong to a religion think they are special. Born again Christians believe they are the only Christians. Muslims believe they are chosen by God. The Jews believe they are also chosen by God. Which one "walks the walk and talks the talk"? Obviously you do not believe it is Jehovah's Witnesses.
What Fuckin drug are you on, just to correct another of your false statements, I left this bogus corrupt organization on my own after been brought in it all my life.
I'm a supporter of the truth, wisdom and knowledge thats why I don't belong to any bullshit decisive religion .
The point of me coming here is open people's eyes to the corruption, lies and deceit of this very dangerous religious publishing house.
If I can tear away the lies, ignorance and corruption of this pretentious and disingenuous religion, I might just save a few people's lives.
This insidiously corrupt religious organization has caused the deaths of thousands some were even children, hundreds of suicides and thousands of broken families.
I'm here for humanity and nothing else.
This religious organization is a prentous lie, set about to coerce and lure people into it by tactics of fear and exploitation to proliferate its published goods, plain and simple.
Exposing what the men behind this organization are doing and have been doing is a worthy personal cause .
Power is the vehicle that created this organization for men to languish themselves in, helped along by money. I'm here to take off that white sheet
which they placed over themselves and show who and what they really are.
Religion such as this one creates a crippling delusion that destroys people's minds and lives and really hurts humanity in general.
What side do you what to be on Change Name ?
-
Dismissing servant
". I can tell you that the JW's I know are not ignorant lazy minded people. "
They can be wrong anyhow!
-
LisaRose
LisaRose - You must understand that I do not have a full understanding of their past interpretation of Bible prophecies. I know what they teach today. From what I have read from the Jehovah's Witnesses, they have interpreted Bible prophesies and applied them to the time they lived in. They think that Jesus will bring the kingdom to Earth in their lifetime. There is nothing wrong with that. The 1st century Christians definately believed that Jesus would return to the Earth during their lifetime. It appears as if you believe that a Christian should not look forward to Jesus' return and anybody who does believe this are false prophets.
That is not what I was saying at all, as Christians we all should look forward to that. But as the bible says, no one know the day or the hour. What I object to is the WTBTS insistence that this end will come on a certain date, or even that it must come I our lifetime, when there is no evidence of that. I also object to the fact that they lied about Russell's predictions, they told me that he predicted That the last days would START in 1914, whiich is a lie. He predicted the END of the last days in 1914.
Again, it is not so much the failed date prediction (although that is bad enough), as it is the fact that they lied about it later, as they have about many things. I cannot abide lying.
I am now convinced you are a troll as others were saying. It is clear you are came here not to seek the truth, but to perpetuate the lies of the Watchtower. I will not respond to your posts again.
-
Dismissing servant
"I am now convinced you are a troll as others were saying."
I am sorry Lisa..but I don't like when people are beeng named trolls! I think Change Name is an apologist.....that's allright with me, but he/she has made a lot of effort to respont in the threads. Treat him/her with respect..we have all been JW-apologists! Well, at least most of us....including me.
-
sd-7
Why do opposers and apostates to Jehovah's Witnesses like to twist their teaching in regards to lying and claim that Jehovah's Witnesses lie through their teeth because they are allowed to because of something called "theocratic warfare"? The teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses are plain with the links above.
A key to understanding this issue is that Jehovah's Witnesses in general are not consciously lying about anything. They consider it as wrong to lie, it's that simple. But they generally repeat what they are told, and don't put two and two together to fully grasp that statement A cannot be true if statement B is true, yet both statements are being made as part of 'the truth'. Because the idea is to forget statement A while making statement B, while forgetting statement B while making statement A. This is the only way to reconcile certain key points or details being omitted in literature geared towards the public with opposite statements being made in literature geared towards JWs.
So I think the real issue here is, is anyone inside the organization aware of certain contradictions or that certain things are not really honest that are put in the literature? Yes and no. Depends on the moment. The Society says what needs to be said to potential recruits to get them interested or to dispel certain criticisms without going into too much detail about what such criticisms involve. Sometimes that does involve withholding information that is or would be vitally important to the subject matter at hand. More often, they are guilty of lying by omission than anything else. This is especially the case in situations where either the Bible itself or outside sources are quoted out of context to make a point. If you knowingly misrepresent the position of another by omitting critical details relevant to the subject, you are lying.
Not all of the lying is conscious or intentional, but there are specific cases when the phrasing used in the literature is crafted as if by a lawyer seeking a loophole to the position he takes. In those cases, I would say that intentional deception is kind of inevitable. Phrases like "it would be convenient if", "evidently, then, it is reasonable to conclude that", and so on--rather than stating it in precise, certain terms, the conclusion is stated as merely a reasonable one to draw, when of course, based on the long history of doctrinal change, any number of conclusions "would be reasonable to conclude" or "convenient". These things are telltale signs of an entity that knows it may have to abandon a particular teaching, and basically sets up its words a lot like an office that looks like it could be cleaned out overnight if anyone discovered it was a fake.
But in the end, most JWs are unaware of this. So they are not guilty of conscious, deliberate lying, but rather, the unconscious spread of things that, unknown to them, are either untrue or impossible to reconcile with other beliefs or historical events. This can be the case with any entity, but there are people at the top who do know, who do understand enough that this dishonest behavior/attitude could be stopped, and they simply choose to keep it as it is. It's a beast with many independently swinging tentacles. If one of them wraps around your neck, generally it doesn't matter whether it was the beast's idea or not, you still get strangled.
--sd-7