What was the "logical straw" that broke your camel's back?

by Pacopoolio 35 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Pacopoolio

  Pacopoolio, Sounds like you came across, independently perhaps, with the idea of determinism. You might enjoy reading this book: Freedom Evolves by Dannel Dennnet.

  Yes, I did start coming across determinism (as many thinking people often independently do) when young, which JWs ignore (because free-thinking is discouraged). Freedom evolves does not get around this, really - it just stresses the illusion of free-will that everyone has when making a decision and presents it as the actual definition of free will. It's basically a semantic change that doesn't really have an effect on much.
  
  From a Biblical/God/JW standpoint, however, the semantics don't mean anything, because the truth of the matter always puts the onus on Jehovah. JWs saying were only fleshly bodies and ignoring the "immortal soul" concepts of other religions -completely- destroys their teaching of a wise, perfect God, because he directly created fleshly bodies that would sin. It's a completely broken concept.
• 

  XBEHERE

  The paedophile scandals.I was horrified by the way the BOE treated victims.Bunch of sick bastards.

  This was it for me too. There is simply no way that a god that the WT promotes as loving and kind would impose a 2 witness rule on an activity that very seldom has any witness at all let alone 2 of them. The fact that these ignorant, cultish leaders would attempt to promote this is amoral and inexcuseable. Oh and illogical.
• 

  Pyramid God

  For me, there were a lot of straws and a lot of broken backs.

  The first pricking of conscious was learning about the flood and combinig it with what I knew about secular history, i.e. the Egyptians were building the pyramids at that time and show no evidence of catastrophe and reestablishment in their long, well documented history. Learning more about geology led me to cease believing in the worldwide flood for several years as a loyal JW. I started to get suspicious of the bible even though I still believed it was god's word.

  The first straw was learning about 607. Seeing that they were fundamentally wrong and then deliberately misquoting archeologists and hiding evidence burst the bubble. I still thought they were sincere though, if misguided.

  Learning about the UN was probably the biggest straw. I finally saw the incredible hypocrisy of the religion and abandoned any notion of them being decent and honest.

  Learning about Lifton's criteria convinced me they were a cult. Around this time others found out about my doubts and the overnight evaporation of my circle of friends confirmed this. Being bullied by the elders in meetings convinced me they weren't really there to help me.

  The contradictions in the bible convinced me it wasn't the word of god.

  Learning about the Ugaritic texts and local religion contemporary to the early Israelites led to me abandoning Jehovah as the true god.

  Examining all the arguments for the existence of a deity and finding them utterly vacuous, as well as really learning about evolution from reputable scientists led me to atheism.

  There is so much more, every time I tell someone the story of my deconversion it is slightly different, simply because there were so many facets and so many things going through my mind at the time.
• 

  baldeagle

  Everything already mentioned so far. Also this subject.

  According to COC by Ray Franz the GB was asked by many branch overseers in 1978 to reconsider their stand and allow our young brothers to participate in civilian service (non-military) and avoid going to jail. The GB read these letters and voted NO civilian or alternative service would be allowed. (Jesus Had Spoken)

  Fast forward 18 years later in the WT May 1, 1996 pp. 19-20, the Lord apparently had a change of heart and directed the GB to make “civilian service” a personal choice.

  Two years later in 1998 the ever so clever and self-righteous GB actually blamed the brothers themselves for having “suffered needlessly.”

  WT August 15, 1998 p. 17 Feelings of Having Suffered Needlessly

  6 In the past, some Witnesses have suffered for refusing to share in an activity that their conscience now might permit. For example, this might have been their choice years ago as to certain types of civilian service. A brother might now feel that he could conscientiously perform such without overstepping his Christian neutrality regarding the present system of things.

  7 Was it unrighteous on Jehovah’s part to allow him to suffer for rejecting what he now might do without consequences? Most who have had that experience would not think so. Rather, they rejoice that they had the opportunity of demonstrating publicly and clearly that they were determined to be firm on the issue of universal sovereignty. (Compare Job 27:5.) What reason could anyone have to regret having followed his conscience in taking a firm stand for Jehovah? By loyally upholding Christian principles as they understood them or by responding to the proddings of conscience, they proved worthy of Jehovah’s friendship. Certainly, it is wise to avoid a course that would disturb one’s conscience or that would likely cause others to be stumbled. We can think in this regard of the example that the apostle Paul set. 1 Corinthians 8:12, 13; 10:31-33.

  What a crock of........
• 

  Ugottabefresh

  The whole issue with murdering Job's children and David's firstborn. Innocent pawns in a situation they had no control over.

  Especially in the case of David where he specifically said "I have forgiven you"....but I'm gonna murder your baby? WTF???? Life is precious, my arse!
• 

  Vidiot

  Ugottabefresh - "The whole issue with murdering Job's children and David's firstborn. Innocent pawns in a situation they had no control over. Especially in the case of David where he specifically said "I have forgiven you"....but I'm gonna murder your baby? WTF???? Life is precious, my arse!"

  Par for the course in a book written by Bronze-age nomads whose culture predominantly viewed women and children as property/assets first, and as individuals a distant second.