Are you really an Apostate, according to the WT ?

by Phizzy 37 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  sarahsmile

  One Saturday morning, I had the publications spread out on my table. I was doing research on pre Jesus dates. I was trying to get the dates connected 200 years prior to Christ birth. Plus years after Pauls death. Anyhow an old elder came to the door. I showed him my loyal bible studying and how egar I was to connect the socities dates with the bible. This old elder got so mad at me me. He claimed I should know how to do that if I was really raised a JW. He said there was NO announcement about my reinstatement. Then he shuffled the dirt off his feet and ran out of my house leaving a young man standing by my side.

  I followed him and listen to him gossip with a couple of other men with this young man standing right next to me.

  I yelled at him and said your spreading lies and yes I was recently reinstated. What your saying about me is just awful. He was just spewing out hate.

  It amazed me that he hated me and called me a liar. I was shocked because I really did not know that there was a problem studying Daniels prophecy.

  That was about 15 years ago. Three old men talking about me in front of my house!

  I am tyinping this out with a one finger on my 7 inch Kindle.
• 

  Ucantnome

  i think it could be apostasy to change the good news and be wrong about it.
• 

  Wholly

  I dont' consider myself an apostate. I consider myself a survivor of the emotional, intellectual and mental abuse wreaked on me by some dedicated, baptized, pioneering Ones' interpretation of our Lord and his Promise.

  After a 20 year break from the "truth", the changes were so abrupt and "in your face" it was hard not to feel repelled. Especially when the talks and study materials seemed to intend to drill home the fact that you can't trust yourself to know God or do his will without (not Jesus) the GB.

  Also, considering the fact that the actual definition of the word has been subverted to fit an agenda doesn't sit well with me. I don't trust anyone who ascribes an ambiguous meaning to a well defined word.
• 

  Shador

  • Celebrating false religious holidays.

  Celebrated Thanksgiving with my "worldy" relatives a couple years back. Check.

  Participation in interfaith activities:... sharing in false religious songs and prayers.

  Went to my "worldly" cousin's wedding - at a church - some years back. Said "amen" to the preacher's prayer. Check.

  Deliberately spreading teachings contrary to Bible truth as taught by Jehovah's Witnesses

  Not that JWs teach bible truth or even that there is any such thing, but no, no *spreading* of contrary teachings... yet. Uncheck.

  Causing divisions and promoting sects

  No outright sectarianism, but whenever my JW parents have issues with being treated unkindly by the elders, I do my best to fan their resentment. - I'll give myself 1/2 point for that one. 1/2 check.

  Continuing in employment that makes one an accomplice to or a promoter of false worship

  Nope. Uncheck.

  The practice of spiritism

  Runecasting. Check.

  3-1/2 out of 6. I'd say that qualifies.
• 

  DATA-DOG

  " Apostasy: Apostasy is a standing away from true worship, a falling away, defection, rebellion, abandonment.

  Implicit in this definition is the premise that what JWs practice and what the WT teaches is in fact "true worship." If it is, then this would be an accurate and acceptable definition. But the problem is that what the WT teaches and what JWs practice is demonstrably NOT "true worship." Since the premise is false the conclusion is also false.

  But this doesn't matter if you're a JW, because the organization is based upon the premise that they, and they alone, are the one true religion, any disagreement is an act of apostasy. It's a fait accompli .

  The only way that anyone that questions or disagrees with any WT teaching or practice could prove that they are not an apostate is to prove that JWs are not practicing "true worship." But that can never happen (at least not to or with anyone in a position of authority within the religion) because they accept the premise that they do practice "true worship." According to the WT definition of "apostasy" even attempting to disprove their authority and status as the "one true religion" automatically defines the questioner as an apostate and the discussion is over before it even got started.

  It's a rigged game. The house always wins. "

  God's word is truth!! DC :

  What is truth? GOD's word is truth. Jesus' teachings are " truth ." The CO gave a definition of " the truth." One can only assume that it is sanctioned by the GB. " The truth " = Truthful understanding of GOD's word. Truth = verifiable facts. Truth does not change. Truth does not contradict other " truth." No prophet ever preach assumptions or speculations.

  By their own definition the WTBTS has not taught " truth " for over 100 years, they have merely expressed their opinions and interpretations, assumptions and speculations. As Oubliette said, the game is rigged, the house always wins.
• 

  SnakesInTheTower

  You might be a redneck... I mean apostate if...
• 

  Oubliette

  Data-Dog: Implicit in this definition is the premise that what JWs practice and what the WT teaches is in fact "true worship." If it is, then this would be an accurate and acceptable definition. But the problem is that what the WT teaches and what JWs practice is demonstrably NOT "true worship. " Since the premise is false the conclusion is also false.

  Exactly, except the OP question asks " Are you really an Apostate, according to the WT?"

  Since:

  1. According to the WT, only JW's practice " true worship," and
  2. We are " standing away" and/or " falling away" from it and are acting in ways they would classify as "defection, rebellion, and/or abandonment" of it, we are apostates

  They make the rules, they define the terms.
• 

  DATA-DOG

  I agree. He who controls the terms, controls the argument. If you could force the GB to be under oath in court, you could dismantle their claims. If you could force them to answer honestly, then they would have to admit that we are not " apostates." That is why they claim to only exist as a collective. They DO NOT want a " Walsh Trial " at this point on time. I believe going to court is their worst nightmare..

  Dubs act just like their leaders. The only difference is that we can pin down the subordinates. The rank and file will just get flustered and angry when they cannot defend their beliefs. Hence the convenient " Apostate " label. It frees them of any responsibility of thinking, or accepting actual responsibilty for their own lives.