Thanks so much for your comments! I appreciate the feedback. I do realize this may end up being an exercise in futility as far as my "believing" mother is concerned but I have to try...(1) she is putting pressure on me to return to meetings and bring my 3 year old daughter with me (no way in hell is that going to happen!) and (2) she wants me to start leaving my innocent babe at her house for longer and longer periods of time (which I know is partly a grandmother's love but also the desire to start indoctinating her in the religion) so I need to have clearly defined reasons as to why I will not allow it and why I want her to start questioning and reconsidering her own stand on the various doctrines and policies I so detest. So here's what I have come up with so far...(quotes from the articles found under Is There a Sound Basis for Your Beliefs? in the Watchtower 2001 August 1 are in italics and are obviously directed to non-JWs, but I think it is important to apply them to the source from whence they came...)
Some beliefs are not only different but dangerous....How many people have met untimely deaths doing something they believed was right?
"In former times thousands of youths died for putting God first. They are still doing it, only today the drama is played out in the hospials and courtrooms, with blood transfusions the issue." [Awake! 1994 May 22 p.2 "Youths Who Put God First"] Apparently this issue has arisen due to the unique interpretation of Leviticus 3:17 (among others): "You must not eat any fat or any blood at all." [NWT] They prohibit potentially life-saving tranfusions of blood drawn from a person who was not killed to get it by equating it with eating the blood of birds and animals that were either killed and offered as a sacrifice to God (Lev. 17:10-12) or killed for food (Lev. 17:13-14). Why was the original prohibition believed to be so important? By careful study of the context in which it was given, it appears to have to do with the issue of being blood-guilty by taking the life of (i.e. killing) a living creature. Even though Noah and his descendents were given permission to do this according to Genesis 9:3-6, God required that the blood of the dead be returned to him by pouring it out on the ground or the altar "because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul in it", and the fat was to be burned because he liked the smell. (see Leviticus chapters 3 and 17) If the issue is the soul or life in the blood of a dead person or animal, how does that apply to the blood of someone yet living when the blood is drawn? Is it not far more blood-guilty to pursuade people to give up their own lives rather share their life-giving blood with each other when there is no murder or sacrificial death involved?
And then there is also the issue of neutrality: According to C.J. Maurer's incredibly moving Disassociation Letter of July 16, 2001 ( www.freeminds.org/women/disassociation.htm ) "Shortly after I was baptized [March 14, 1970], the brothers in Malawi started having trouble because they would not purchase a political party card. The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society had admonished them not to as it would break their Christian neutrality. The results were horrific; thousands died at the hands of maniacs, sisters were raped, young and old, and others were severely beaten....at the time our brothers were dying in Malawai, Mexican brothers were bribing officials at the sanction of the WTB&TS to obtain an 'Identity Cartilla for Military Service'." ( www.freeminds.org/women/disassociation.htm )
At times we just misread things....
"Ever since the 1870's, Bible Students have been serving with a date in mind-- first 1914, then 1925. Now they realize they must serve for as long as Jehovah wishes." [1993 Watchtower November 1 p.12] ( www.freeminds.org/history/part 2.htm )
"We cannot be blamed for presenting from the scriptures such evidence as they afford which leads us to believe that a certain event will take place at a given time. Sometimes the Lord has let his people look for the right thing at the wrong time, and more frequently they have looked for the wrong things at the right time." [The Golden Age 1924 February 14]
for in depth information on 607 B.C.E. being the faulty foundation on which the 1914 teachings were built see www.607v587.com and also refer to www.freeminds.org/history/part2.htm
So how can they say "The resolutions...booklets, magazines, and books...contain the message of God's truth and are from the Almighty God, Jehovah, and provided by him through Jesus Christ and his underofficers....It is his truth and not man's..."? [Watchtower 1938 May 1]
Well, it is true that religious leaders who claim to follow the Bible have produced many confusing and conflicting ideas. This is because they have not, in fact, based their beliefs on the Bible. The apostle Peter describes them as "false prophets" and "false teachers" who would create "destructive sects."...(2 Peter 2:1,2)....Unthinking adherence to what previous generations believed and did can, in fact, be dangerous....A wise person, therefore, does not blindly believe that something is true simply because some authoritative teacher says it is....Building on the ideas and philosophies of men is like building on sand.
see www.freeminds.org/history/activfor.htm
www.freeminds.org/history/timeheal.htm
For a list of shifting policies see www.freeminds.org/history/dates.htm .
In conclusion:
Is it not the course of wisdom, then, to make sure that what you believe actually is true and not simply what you want to believe?
