So how many of us had guilt pangs because our WT was not highlighted? (page 3)

blondie

Blondie highlights the words and phrases in the WT study articles with a view to make future comments, but I don't treat it like a coloring book. I think the attendant would be shocked by my comments in the margins.

Oubliette

Blondie: I think the attendant would be shocked by my comments in the margins.

When I was trying to get reinstated to reuinite with family members, I would only highlight the points which I found controversial, contradictory, false or even outright lies, examples of manipulation or similar.

I would also write some pretty edgy comments in the margin. Interestingly, when I met with the elders to hear my reinstatement request one of them commented on how "well studied" my WT was!

I guess Holy Spirit didn't see the need to "adjust" his thinking to the contrary. So, ironically, one of the "bits of evidence" of my "repentence" was in fact my outright acts of apostasy done in the KH where they all could see it.

One of the benefits of understanding cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias is that, once you know how it works, you can say things that mean one thing knowing full well they will be understood differently by a "True Believing" JW still under the influence.

- -

Vidiot

Oubliette - "I guess Holy Spirit didn't see the need to 'adjust' his thinking to the contrary. So, ironically, one of the 'bits of evidence' of my 'repentence' was in fact my outright acts of apostasy done in the KH where they all could see it."

That one made me smile.

Oubliette

Vidiot, I'm glad I made you smile!

Maybe "outright" was a bit of an exaggeration, but they were there. Certainly if you were to have perused my highlighted and marked up WT you'd have understood the significance of the particular points I focused on.

It's telling that someone completely under the spell can't understand things for what they really mean!

Oubliette

FadeToBlack

I could never understand what the point was of highlighting something written at a 4th grade level that we were going to read together anyway and then recite the answer to straight from the paragraph. Often, the questions are longer than the paragraph. It is not like the paragraphs were several hundred words long and the point we wanted to make was buried somewhere in the text. To me, this was always the equivalent of a WT study:

1. The red fox saw the black dog and ran under the fence.

Questions for paragraph 1.

1a. What did the red fox do when it saw the black dog?

1b. What color was the red fox?

If the WT conductor was more progressive, he might also ask (preparing us for the material in paragraph 2) - why do you think the red fox ran under the fence? Of course, some friends would be incensed that he was acting so independently and asking questions not included in the material. Plus, he always ran the risk that the audience would not be prepared to go off-script, and could not formulate a spontaneous off the cuff response (or were afraid to) and he would encounter that awkward moment when nobody raises their hands.

piztjw

I feel no shame at all for not hi-liting. Of course some years ago when I wold actually underline I was chastised for not studying. The ASSumption was that I had not studied because the snoop could not see the pencil lines clearly. He said I must use at least two different colored hiliters, one for each part of the question so that they could visibly see I had studied. That was one of the many, many rules for "reaching out".

It is a pleasure now to openly hold the mag so that everyone can see that nothing is underlined, hilited, notes in the margins or any of that other crazy bullshit that is expected if one is serving God only to be seen by men.

NewYork44M

the watchtower is all about judgment. If you don't have sufficient markings, including margin notes, you are judged to be weak.

I always went through the process of "underlining" just so I would not be judged. My margin notes were what I wanted to eat for lunch.

piztjw

1. The red fox saw the black dog and ran under the fence.

Questions for paragraph 1.

1a. What did the red fox do when it saw the black dog?

1b. What color was the red fox?

Y'all got off easy. Here the conducter would then start the "secondary" questions.

1. So what was the first animal?

2. And what color was the first animal?

3 And the second animal was a ...... ?????

4 And again to review, what color was the second animal?

5 And what happened when the red fox saw the black dog, again? Perhaps one of our younsters knows the answer?

6 So to sum up What did the red fox do when it saw the black dog, and what might the fence represent?

Very good, friends! Isn't the food provided wonnerful? (That's the way he says it)

So how many of us had guilt pangs because our WT was not highlighted?

Share this