Sudden Rash of JW Apologists (page 3)

TheOldHippie

Sorry if I have misunderstood, but I feel I have to ask: Since I am currently a Witness, does that mean all of you guys want me off this board? If so, I of course will leave at once, to restore peace and harmony to this board and its posters - but somehow the idea that Witnesses were to be shunned form the board was not one I had when I first started visiting this site?

dungbeetle

What the H**l are you on about now?

Please come back and talk to us when you sober up. I've been giving you hugs for weeks.

Idiot.

UADNA-US (Unseen Apostate Directorate of North America-United States)

TheOldHippie

Was that to me?
I get so confused - must be the language barriers. When the words "hugs" and "idiot" are combined in the same sentence, or at least in to sentences strung together, I get problems.
Must be the Atlantic Ocean and the European Continent dividing us, which create cultural or language barriers.
OK, I leave for vacation, one week and a half - maybe I understand more when I return. Although I seriously doubt that I will have sobered up the days away, as they will be spent on the Mediterranean shores, where lots of things are cheap.

NeonMadman

OK, let me jump back in now, and say in response to several of the comments that have been made on this thread, that I am not saying that we should ban all active JW's from this board - far from it! I know what a source of information and encouragement can be had here for one who is uncomfortable with life in the Watchtower. I am also aware that some have learned the truth about the Truth (TM) after they started out posting here in defense of the Watchtower. Those are wonderful results, and they are the main reason I hang around here - with a view to helping doubters and lurkers to see the light. It's also (usually) fun and therapeutic for me, but those are fringe benefits.

Nor am I suggesting that we should not respond to sincere questions or engage in discussion when the other party is actually willing to discuss the issues. Again, without that, we might as well eliminate everything but the fluff posts.

My concern is that there are at least three individuals, none of whom has posted on this thread to this point, who are out there, primarily on the silentlambs-related threads, stirring up the mud. They do not engage in any meaningful discussion, but hurl accusations and innuendo. They have no compunctions about lying outright when it suits their purpose. When reasonable challenges to their accusations are presented, they simply sidestep or ignore them, and either point fingers or cite meaningless statistics to buttress their non-arguments.

Not that I care if people want to do this, except that I am keenly aware of the lurkers who hang around here, many of whom are active JW's seeking information about what is going on inside their organization. They come here because the Watchtower does not tell them about scandals and organizational problems, for the most part. Instead of getting a clear picture of what is going on, these lurkers are now seeing what appears to be a whirlwind of controversy over this subject fueled by the voluminous rantings of these few posters.

Remember that active JW's are likely to want to give the benefit of the doubt to the Society. That being the case, if these few apologists can make the subject appear highly controversial, the JW lurkers reading this thread will be more inclined to simply "go along" with the Watchtower's position on the matter, rather than become outraged, as we have, over the real evil being done by the organization.

That is the reason for my concern. I appreciate all your comments, and think that some excellent points have been made thus far.

Tom

"Gentlemen, he said, I don't need your organization, I've shined your shoes, I've moved your mountains and marked your cards. But Eden is burning"
--Bob Dylan

SYN

NeonMadman: You make some excellent points. After responding to these "apologists" a few times, I've realized I would get more intelligent responses from your average brick wall, so I'm either A) going to hijack their threads in future or B) just ignore them. I think old Hilda has responded to me once, incoherently. This is not censorship, it's just a prevention of time-wastage, really. Maybe if these doctrinal freaks had something intelligent to say and could actually debate properly they would be welcomed here, Dub or not.

"If men were like their personal ads, they wouldn't need personal ads."

dungbeetle

>When the words "hugs" and "idiot" are combined in the same sentence, or at least in to sentences strung together, I get problems. <

It's a dungbeetle thing. Just ask 'ring'.

(((( ingrate )))))

UADNA-US (Unseen Apostate Directorate of North America-United States)

amac

amac:
Are you defending the Watchtower, or defending JW's? There is a big difference. They are not interchangeable.

They are to the average JW...but that is really beside the point. The only group that I am 100% devoted to is my family and God (I do believe in a God/Jehovah/YHWH.)

I try to keep a balnced viewpoint between Pro and Con of the society and of JWs as a whole. I do take offence when I believe viewpoints that are unfounded, unbalanced or biased are being spread and even expounded on through a group mentality, no matter what the topic.

If this was an NG about Microsoft and filled with Microsoft haters, I would no doubt defend Microsoft if a thread was started that I thought was unfounded or biased in a negative way.

I am here because I was raised as a JW, I am intimately involved with the organization to this day, and I like to hear both sides to every argument.

I think an essential to wisdom is to entertain ideas you do not agree with and accept their possibility. I try to do that by being here and reading posts, and I try to help others do the same.

I am not here to "enlighten" anyone, and that is one of the few mindsets of both JWs and anti-JWs that really chaps my hide, so I may snap back from time to time when spoken to in this manner.

Cheers,
amac

dungbeetle

>How exactly do you "try not to turn in time"? LOL<

The newest thing now is for the bookstudy conductors to fill out slips FOR YOU if you don't do it yourself. Watchtower has become aware that JW's are refusing to turn in their time as a form of protest, and they circumvent it this way.

Just think what the elder's school audio has to say: "It is now the bookstudy conducter's responsibilty to collect field service reports"

translation --"They are filling out time slips for us". It goes like this...

"Hey, sister dungbeetle, didn't I see you out in service last Saturday? Didn't I see you talking to so-and-so (interested one) at the Hall twice this month?"

And off goes a report to Watchtower for two hours with my name on it.

That and the 15 minute rule is going to get their numbers up, and I believe it's working in England already.

The quiet dissident Witness are just going to find another way to 'vote'...bless them.

UADNA-US (Unseen Apostate Directorate of North America-United States)

jerome

Gee syn

We seem to think alike.

jerome

blondie

The average JW has not had direct experiece with abuse cases in the congregation unless, they are a parent or close relative of a victim, are the victim, elders or people called in as witnesses (very rare). The idea is to keep knowledge limited. So many JWs that come here have no real knowledge of what is going on behind the scenes. Those directly involved are proscribed (?) from telling anyone in the congregation. They are also lulled into thinking that the judicial system in the congregation can adequately address the issues involved so they do not go to the police. Or by implied or direct threat of official or unofficial shunning, they are afraid to go to the police.

Unfortunately, many JWs are expressing an opinion based only the verbal and written statements of what the WTS would like to see happen but what does not happen.

It's like saying:

I'm a woman
Woman don't kill their children
Thus I didn't kill my child

Of course, recent news events in Texas show the second statement not to be true. Women do kill their children. May be a lower percentage do than say a man killing children. But it does happen with enough frequency to make the above 3 statements ridiculous.

So I caution any JWS who think just because individuals in their religion claim to be servants of God, it does not mean that these stories of abuse can't be probably true. The real issue is not just that the abuse happened, but that it was not handled in a manner to help the victim but to protect the reputation of a religious group.

I personally don't see how this is any different than the Israelites offering up their children to the fire of Molech.

So be careful about commenting on something you don't know much about personally.

Proverbs 18:13

He who gives an answer before he hears,
It is folly and shame to him.

Sudden Rash of JW Apologists

Share this