Top STUPID criticisms of the WTS

by JanH 95 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hillary_step

  Hello Jan,

  I both agree and disagree with your second argument. Surely the main problem is that there is an organization that makes basically nice people do atrocities. But I cannot agree that this abstains them from responsibility for their own actions. We are all answering for what we do and did, no matter what context we are working in.

  I do agree that in the final event each of us, regardless of our motives will face the responsibility of our actions, this includes all JW's who only claim to be following orders and actually everybody in any socially contextual group.

  What makes this a little difficult to quantify, and slightly different from most of the more common social situations is that these people have been persuaded to believe that they are following commands from, something unseen, from God and not from men. Though their impulsion is most definitely human, they do not see it that way. They may say, "I am prepared to die for God", when actually what they mean is "I am prepared to die for the WTS". I do not believe that many practicing JWs understand this, though those who formulate the strategies and send out the soldiers do.

  I hate to drag the Nuremberg trials into this as the analogy has been thrashed to death on this Board before, but we must acknowledge that it was not the German people, or the German army that was indicted for the crimes of the nation, but its few dozen leaders. I do see this as a valid argument. Each German lived with the result of their beliefs, but the true criminals were identified as the NS leadership who cunningly controlled and manipulated the people. It was only when these were dealt with that the NS ideology crumbled.

  The point I was making is that many XJWs feel that they accomplish some high ideal by attacking individual JWs, by embarrassing them intellectually, divulging details of their failings publicly, sneering at the way they practice their faith. IMHO they accomplish nothing. In fact quite the contrary, they may even harden the resolve of those who are being attacked in such a manner. JWs are a symptom. Their leadership is the disease. While the JW's are much easier to target, they are often used as such because XJWs cannot get their hands around the throat of a GB member....lol

  A very difficult subject to analyze Jan, and frankly I am still working my way through this one.

  Best to you - HS
• 

  IslandWoman

  Jan,

  Thanks for starting this discussion.

  Following up on what HS posted. Some feel that to teach means to beat. This tactic may work for some who come here but I think many more people put up their defenses and close their mind to much of what is said afterwards, even to well reasoned arguments that expose a faulty Watchtower teaching.

  I really can't blame them. Mockery and humiliation are more likely to produce defiance not dialogue. IMO

  Thanks again,

  IW
• 

  morrisamb

  Jan, great thread! You sound like one reasonable guy!

  For two decades now, once someone knows I used to be a Witness, I get every criticism imaginable vented at me. I often find myself defending them!! ie. I had someone argue with me that Witnesses weren't allowed to play cards! I'm not sorry to say, I correct such ridiculous misconceptions.

  Some others I've heard:

  1. Witnesses ...aren't allowed to dance.

  2. can't drink

  3. don't believe in Jesus

  4. don't believe in God

  5. don't believe in the "real" Bible

  6. aren't allowed to go to the doctor

  AND SO ON, AND SO ON....

  Perception is relative but I have no doubt that I was brainwashed; that confessing sins to 3 men of God was not beneficial; that it is disgusting that women have to confess to "men" of God without another female present; that women and children are treated NOT EQUAL; and that a % of Witnesses are self-righteous and judgemental!
• 

  amac

  Great thread! It's also encouraging to see so many others discussing and validating these points. There is not much I can say without being redundant, but as far as the use of words "brainwash" and "cult", since these are common buzz words I agree with Jan's response to Alan about the functional definition.

  A reply to Alan's point about brainwashing...you stated:

  mean something more like "influenced by an outside authority to such an extent that the reasoning facilities are turned off".

  I agree with this. But I equate it to everyday "conclusions." Whenever the average person comes to a conclusion, they are usually influenced and upon reaching their conclusion, often turn off reasoning facilities and defend their conclusion. We have all done this at some time, so we have all been brainwashed to some degree. Using this as a negatory label is misleading. I do think that JW's use information control to help indoctrinate which some may call mind control, but I think brainwashing is a lazy term.

  Lastly, if anyone is confused by this thread, you may want to reconsider ever criticizing a JW for anything.

  BTTT!

  amac
• 

  Dutchie

  devotion or homage to a person or thing (the cult of aestheticism

  Until fairly recently this described Jehovah's Witnesses. Before the term "Governing Body" came into wide use, JW's for all intends and purposes "worshipped" or paid allegiance to one man,i.e., Brother Russell, Brother Rutherford, Brother Knorr, Brother Franz. Those were the people we knew and so became our "leaders".

  I like the word "cult". I think it sums up nice and succintly just what Jehovah's Witnesses are. Of course, they are trying t wander away from that image, but to me they will always be a cult.
• 

  julien

  It seems to me that the word 'cult' when used in connection with a religious group should properly refer to a group that adores (i.e. worships) an individual leader.

  But surely you would agree that and 'individual leader' does not necessarily have to be a single human being. Is there much difference between "we believe because [so and so] says x" or "we believe because [the society or GB] brought out point x"..

  (a) devotion or homage to a person or thing (the cult of aestheticism)

  The 'thing' in this case is the monolithic entity called 'the society'.

  That said I don't think cult is the best word to describe the JWs, simply because most people associate cult with Heaven's gate or Branch Davidian type groups, which are perceived (rightly so) as significantly farther 'out there'.. However JWs do share many many harmful characteristics with these groups. And I believe JWs 'worship' the society in the way other Christian groups worship Jesus.

  Edited by - julien on 26 June 2002 17:45:12
• 

  plmkrzy

  Once I was YELLED at: "Jehovah's Witnesses BELIEVE JESUS IS DEAD!!!!

  Of course my natural reaction was "snort..giggle..giggle..chuckel, Where did you hear THAT!?"

  The answer I was given: "I WENT TO ONE OF THIER KH'S AND ASKED! and a bunch of men in suits surrounded me and told me that Jesus was dead! THATS HOW I KNOW!"

  My response of course

  "BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...............OK whatever."

  rolls eyes and drops the subject.

  plum
• 

  Farkel

  Jan,

  I'm glad you took the time and thought to create this thread and I think you've reminded us to stick with the actual basics and facts rather than wasting our time trying to deal with superfluous and unproven assertions.

  It's certainly got me grounded again and from now on I'm going to spend my time and efforts to expose the WTS for what it really is: a communist-led conspiracy financed by the Illuminati and Tri-Lateral Commission with connections spread out to the Druid communities in Europe and the Voodoo communities in the Caribbean and an Unholy Alliance with the modern Knights Templar in the Vatican.

  Once again, here's a big "Thank you!"

  Farkel
• 

  Dutchie

  Laughing hysterically at Farkel!
• 

  Simon

  I've only skimmed the thread and not read it fully so apologies if this has been covered ...

  Russell was a Freemason (or, even worse, the WTS is part of some other large-scale conspiracy like the Illuminati). There is no evidence whatsoever that Russell was a freemason. Repeating such allegations only serves to portray JW critics as nutcase conspiracy theorists.

  I think this get's confused because of his dabbling with pyramidology. I agree, making the claim is silly and even if he was ... so what? Many police are (so I gather).

  The New World Translation is a horrible mistranslation. I have myself pointed out some serious flaws in the NWT, but it is patently ridiculous to assert as some do it is "the most dangerous book in the world". Many criticisms center around some questionable unorthodox renderings that are associated with Christology. You can argue John 1:1 until the end of the world; but like it or not, a decent case can be made that the NWT rendering represents the original Greek just as good as the orthodox version. It is to be expected, and certainly legitimate, that the WTS has chosen to let their own theology guide the way they have chosen to render key verses. There is no such thing as an unbiased translation. As the Italians say, "the translator is the traitor." Lots of meaning will get lost in any translation, and there is no such thing as a "one correct translation" of even a simple text.

  I have a copy of the bible that has 8 translations per page (same verses) and they all convey the meaning much better IMHO than the stilted, strained english of the NWT. I think they have shoe-horned it a bit to fit their doctrine but some of the arguments are semantic (arguing whether 'he' was god or a god when you may not believe he or god exist for example)

  The JW leaders are in it for the money. Let's face it, JW leaders live very simple lives compared to most religious leaders in the world. The corporation certainly need money to make their world go 'round, and have displayed greed in many cases that they well deserve to be called on, but anyone who asserts that the WTS leadership have money as their personal motivation overshoots the mark with a wide margin.

  I think they are in it becuse they like the power and because, like most large organisations, it has become an entity in it's own right and demands to thrive and grow (which usually means money) which is why a lot of the things it does is centered on this. It is tru though that they do not *worry* about money like most people do.

  The JWs use brainwashing. Real brainwashing doesn't work. There is a sliding scale between gentle coercion and heavy indoctrination, and certainly the JWs are closer to the latter. People convert to the JWs for the same reason they convert to other religions; they are socially attracted to the group and gradually come to accept their practices and doctrines. I certainly agree that JWs use unethical practices to isolate its members from contrary ideas and particularly former members, but it has little to do with "brainwashing" a term that tends to bring up ideas of some near-magical procedure to render people into helpless robots.

  True ... I think they have discovered much more effective methods! (and I doubt there is really any such thing)

  The JWs are a Cult. The word "cult" has so many meanings it is totally meaningless. Genereally it is used to refer to any religion you don't personally like. In some circles, it is used to portray a group not adhering to Christian orthodoxy. Among scholars, it refers to a subset of religious practices within a religion (e.g. the RCC "Mary cult"). If you mean a group with a high level of control of its members, I suggest you say so, instead of using a word that is so misleading.

  Again, spot on. They are a high-control group. However, most people see this as 'cult' or cult-like which is why they probably get the label. They certainly arent the most cultish group or the largest non-cult group but they are right in the middle in terms of size and cult-like-ish-ness (oh, there must be a word for that)

  Good points JanH ... it pays not to make false accusations that can be 'rubbished' as this just weakens the other, strong arguments: "oh, yes, they joined the UN ... right, like 'Russell was a mason' eh?"

  We don't have to exagerate or lie ... we have the facts and the truth after all.

  Edited by - Simon on 26 June 2002 18:8:59