re: holly (page 2)

JamesThomas

Whoever holly was, it is far more likely we rubbed-off on her/he, than visa-versa.

In other words: seeds were planted, now we can only wait to see if they sprout.

j

frankiespeakin

To me it seems that Holly definitely had an agenda.

Her thread about "Who is who on here"

Started with the questions:

I know there are mostly ex jw's on here. i just wondered how many of you are ex jws, left or df'd, how many are still in but have lost heart?
are there any jws on here who still believe its all the truth, go to meetings and trust the organisation?
who has left and gone to another religion, or who is from another religion?
who is an athiest.
anyone left the jw's changed their mind and gone back?
anyone, like me, had a study but not been a jw?
holly

Could have been asked for the purpose to let the GB see how this this site is effecting the flock and what type of people are leaving in order to plan a certain stratagy. Her last thread in my estimation was designed take some of the wind out of our sails in our fight against the GB.

It is reasonable to conclude that GB may try to disrupt our little forum by joining it,,through posters that pretend to be a person favorable to the Organization but not yet made a dedication, this would give them a little more room for manipulation in trying to steer the forum in a direction that may be less harmful to them.

I'm not 100% certain that this so called "Holly" was of this nature but she certainly raised a few red flags in my mind that she was.

Athanasius

Excellent post Fairchild.

hillary_step

Fairchild,

Unfortunately, I can very much identify with Holly. Should you look at my own posts, you'd see that I too swing back and forth between bashing the JW's and defending at least a few things about them. Why? It is called doubt and uncertainty.

My own feeling is that you know that you are emerging from the blinkered view of cultic thinking when you are able to 'bash' what is clearly ant-social behavior and defend that which is not, but one must be able to this from a position of rationality, not emotionalism.

This all or nothing attitude that many XJW's have is merely the other side of the face of the JW who believes that everything in the 'World' is demonic, but Holly did not fall into this catagory. She believes that she has researched her way *into* the WTS not out of it. This is not possible unless a person is either living in profound denial, or is deceiving themselves as to the depth of their research.

Best regards - HS

AlmostAtheist

She believes that she has researched her way *into* the WTS not out of it. This is not possible unless a person is either living in profound denial, or is deceiving themselves as to the depth of their research.

If she keeps up her "prove it to me" attitude, it will eventually be her undoing. She *wants* to believe in the paradise, no hell, DF'ing when "appropriate". But she's going to come up on something that she doesn't "want", but is forced to accept. When they can't prove it to her, she'll have to make a call. Either she'll drink the Kool-aid with the rest of the good dubs, or she'll jump ship. She's jumped ship on religions before, but never from a high-control one. If it happens, I hope she remembers all the invitations to return here where she can recover.

Dave

fairchild

(Hillary step) She believes that she has researched her way *into* the WTS not out of it. This is not possible unless a person is either living in profound denial, or is deceiving themselves as to the depth of their research.

I really think that she stumbled on the scripture in Matthew where it says that the good news will be preached all over the world, and then the end will come. She seemed to think that this was a certain sign that the JW's were right. Sometimes, one single detail can be sufficient to make someone choose one side or the other.

hillary_step

Fairchild,

.............one single detail can be sufficient to make someone choose one side or the other.

Exactly and this illustrates my point. She could not have researched the WTS in any depth at all if their interpretation of one scripture sent her in their direction.

HS

fairchild

.............one single detail can be sufficient to make someone choose one side or the other.

Exactly and this illustrates my point. She could not have researched the WTS in any depth at all if their interpretation of one scripture sent her in their direction.

True enough, and perhaps this will turn out to be in her favor in the long run. Once she DOES research more, she might still come to understand that the WBTS is not from God.

People have repeatedly urged her to read CoC, and I don't think she did. 'Research' is a rather subjective concept. I do quite a bit of research for my work as a writer. Read: I usually 'research' a certain topic until I have enough information to get me by. As soon as I have found what I was looking for, I stop looking into the matter. For example, just this morning I needed to know how and if a piece of canvas can reach from the foremast to the mizzenmast of a vessel. As soon as I found what I was looking for, I stopped reading, and did not engage in further 'research' regarding a vessel's structure. You know what I mean? Holly probably found the stronghold she was looking for (the raft which will keep her floating), and she stopped her research, thinking she had searched sufficiently.

LoverOfTruth

The Phrase Jehovah's Witnesses use for people like Holly is "Sitting On The Fence" - My husband has another phrase "S..t" or Get off the Pot; I tend to agree with him in this situation.

NewLight2

Fairchild,
Nice post! I always like reading your posts.

AlmostAtheist -

"If she keeps up her "prove it to me" attitude, it will eventually be her undoing."

I could not have said it better myself.

My own observations on Holly's posts:

She claims to have been part of the 'born-again' churches for 17 years, yet I find many things missing when she refers to her experiences with this group. 'Born-againers' use many catch phrases that belong to that group only. (Much as dubs do - 'in service' is an example.) I found this 'in jargarn' missing from Holly's posts. Instead her posts sounded way too much like she was ALREADY a dub! I just wonder what type of churches she had attended in the past. It would be really nice to know. I guess that we on JWD may never really know for sure exactly why she came here.

NewLight2

re: holly

Share this