Posts by OneEyedJoe

64

one last step..Is being mentally out the same as being emotionally out?

by MissFit in

jw
friends

we talk here about the importance of being mentally and physically out to be really free.. what about being emotionally free?.

i realized for me, i had to be emotionally awake first.

i had been yo-young back and forth for years.

OneEyedJoe

I'm cold and dead inside so once it became obvious that "the truth" was a lie I no longer had any connection or desire to remain in the cult. I was indoctrinated as a youth during the tail end of the period of pseudo-rational analysis of the scriptures (and at that time didn't have the critical thinking skills to recognize the rampant fallacy) so I always believed that my religion should be based on sound evidence. In the last 10 or so years I began to notice the rampant fallacy, but just calked it up to them simplifying things because it seemed that many in the congregation were of below average intelligence (or "humble" as it was once rationalized to me). During this period I was in denial and was using my own logical fallacy (appeal to consequence) to tell myself that it had to be true because if it wasn't it'd mean that the WTS had been lying to me and everyone I know for decades.

Once I finally got pushed far enough to do my own research and found concrete proof of their lies, it was all over. I never had any emotionally tramatic experience in the cult, it was all a rational decision for me - if they're right, then it's worth it to stay. Once I knew they were wrong it wasn't worth it any more.

Your point is definitely well taken, though. My wife's attachment to the cult is purely emotional. I've shown her a few things that affected me the most, but she just sorta brushes it off. It's not important to her to understand everything....it's just about doing "what's right" (what she's told by the WTS is right) and gabbing with her few friends after meetings. The sad thing, though, is that all her "friends" are really terrible people and she knows it. All but one has pretty obvious emotional or mental problems (bi-polar, hypochondria, etc) and the one that doesn't is possibly the most selfish person on the planet. But it's all she knows and she's driven by guilt to be at meetings and she needs the socializing that she gets there. What wakes her up (if anything) will be completely different than what did it for me.

19

Has growing up as a JW affected my ability to forgive ?

by troubled mind in

jw
friends

i really don't understand the concept of forgiveness .

lately in my life several people have thrown that term around so easily ,and i am confused .

is it because we were taught to cut people off so easily as jws that i find it hard to forgive ?.

OneEyedJoe

BTW: Forgiving someone doesn't mean that you have to then welcome them with open arms. In the examples in the OP I think it would be quite reasonable for someone not to be angry and to forgive someone but still not want to have anything to do with them.

This is a good point. There are lots of different things that people might mean when they talk about forgiveness. In my case I'm quick to forgive in the sense that I don't harbor resentment, but I'm also very slow about giving someone additional oppurtunities to require my forgiveness. I guess it's more the restoration of trust that takes a very long time (if it happens at all) for me.

The phrase "forgive and forget" always seemed too simplistic to me. Sure, I'll "forget" someone's past trasngressions in the sense that I won't throw it in their face the next time I'm wronged, but I won't forget in the sense that I will recognize when there's a pattern and decide that it's no longer worth dealing with them.

19

Has growing up as a JW affected my ability to forgive ?

by troubled mind in

jw
friends

i really don't understand the concept of forgiveness .

lately in my life several people have thrown that term around so easily ,and i am confused .

is it because we were taught to cut people off so easily as jws that i find it hard to forgive ?.

OneEyedJoe

This is an interesting topic. I'm a born-in as well, and I think I'd agree with your feeling that there's no reason to forgive someone who's just going to keep being a terrible person. But then, I'm also an extreme introvert and I take pride in my self-sufficiency. Combining those two things means that I get very little from relationships (I don't connect well with people, and I almost never ask anyone for anything) and so I find it very easy to move on if people treat me poorly.

On the other hand, my mother-in-law (also born-in) is basically a doormat. Litterally all of her friends take advantage of her constantly, only to treat her poorly later. They're happy to ask her to host a party (and then assume that she's going to cater it as well) but then a week later they'll exclude her from something else. She continually forgives everyone only to have it happen again. She needs the social interaction, and is willing to put up with a lot to get it.

So, while it's hard for me to be 100% objective as a born-in myself, I'd say that it's probably more to do with your individual personality type than anything else. If you have a strong inner need for social interaction, or if you're sentimental and place intrinsic value on relationships based on relatively arbitrary qualifications (i.e. you'd forgive your estranged father for something that would cause you to cut ties with a mere aquaintence) then you're more likely to see a high value in forgiving people. If you're already at or above capacity on social interaction, and you have no sentimentality (like me) you place a lower value on relationships and are therefore less likely to forgive. It's all about the comprimises that strike the right balance for you personally, do you often feel lonely or socially deprived? Then you need to lower your standards a bit. If you tend to always feel exhausted from the pressures of having to interact with too many people? Then you can afford to cut off the folks that treat you the worst.

Edit:

I should probably add that I mean none of this to say that I (nor should anyone) continue to harbor ill-will toward anyone. I tend to be quick to forgive in that sense, as there's no point in dwelling on anything that you're not going to act on. Since I know I'm not going to seek revenge, why dwell on it? I'm also not talking about cutting people off entirely like the JWs do when they shun someone. But I won't seek out association with someone if there's not a high likelyhood that it'll be a positive experience.

73

This weeks service meeting! More craziness.....

by stuckinarut2 in

so this weeks service meeting is so full of "crazy".

a whole 15 min part devoted to trying to indoctrinate everyone on how to "explain our beliefs on 1914".

then another 15 min part called "a tool to help us explain our beliefs about 1914".

OneEyedJoe

I can confirm that the video isn't available in the UK. I am actually meant to be doing the demo this thursday so I was hoping the video might make it here. If not I was planning on emphasizing the type/antitype nature of the chart (without using those terms of course) and generally making it seem as silly as I can get away with.

This sounds fun. Report back how it goes. I predict, though, that you will be sickened by the number of people that come up to congratulate you on how well you handled the part and how obvious it was to them after your explanation.

73

This weeks service meeting! More craziness.....

by stuckinarut2 in

so this weeks service meeting is so full of "crazy".

a whole 15 min part devoted to trying to indoctrinate everyone on how to "explain our beliefs on 1914".

then another 15 min part called "a tool to help us explain our beliefs about 1914".

OneEyedJoe

I remember trying to 'do the math' on the 1914 thing and it seems to me that the date also hung on an interpretation of humankind only being in existence since 4026 BCE, the 6,000 year thing but maybe that was just the one to explain 1975. I'm so confused

Yeah, you're thinking of 1975. 1914 is soooo simple:

1. take a random prophesy that clearly was talking only about the 7 years that Nebuchadnezzar was bat-s*** crazy and insist that it has greater meaning.

2. Obviously those 7 years are each made up of 360 days since they used a lunar callendar back then (also because some revelation scripture says something about 3.5 times = 1260 days)

3. Obviously each of those 2520 days are really 365.25 day long years (do try and keep up, it's 7 lunar years of days of solar years...this stuff is so simple a toddler could follow it)

4. Now, counting backwards from 1914 2520 years we get to 607 BC. This is sorta close to when Jerusalem was conqured by the babylonians, so all we have to do is assert that babylon did in fact conquer jerusalem in 607, then we can say that we counted from 607 to 1914!

If it's not clear to you that 1914 was a marked year, I don't know what to do for ya. These are god's timetables, not anything any men came up with. You must not have enough faith....probably need to pray, go to meetings more and get out in service at least 12 hours a month.

28

is the big show on 1914 at Service Meeting evidence of factions in the GB?

by Wasanelder Once in

sometimes the gb do end runs around each other, as when freddie franz didn't agree with the whole governing body concept and spoke against it at the gilead graduation.

could this video/demonstration at the service meeting tonight on why they believe in 1914 and how to explain it to others be an effort to bolster that belief because there is a challange coming against it by factions within?

i guess we can't really tell but i wouldn't put it past the boneheads running the society.

OneEyedJoe

If they don't keep pushing the 1914 or end of days message, what else is left? Then what reason do the average rank and file members have to keep going to the meetings and banging on doors? As an adventist religion it is very important to keep setting dates to keep the rank and file in line. Otherwise the religion (cult) will fall apart.

They don't necessarily need 1914 to set dates, though. 1975 had no basis on 1914 other than that it was "within a generation" of it. It was just the appropriate time for god to act. If they ever need a date, they'll just whip up some numerology and they'll have it. Personally, I think they're trying to emulate the mormons more where it's all about family and emotional appeal, and doctrine is just there to artificially seperate them from "the world." Of course armageddon will always be "soon" but I don't think they want the baggage that the old doctrines bring with them (i.e. easily disproven).

They've dropped the type/antitype nonsense, and that's what 1914 is based on. They seem to be headed in a direction towards easy to grasp doctrine, seperation from "the world," and unquestioning loyalty. The latter will be enforced by constant fear mongering on the soonness of armageddon (the stick). They'll throw in a little emotional appeal and lovey-dovey crap every now and again (the carrot) to keep people happy. Anything beyond that is superfluous.

28

is the big show on 1914 at Service Meeting evidence of factions in the GB?

by Wasanelder Once in

sometimes the gb do end runs around each other, as when freddie franz didn't agree with the whole governing body concept and spoke against it at the gilead graduation.

could this video/demonstration at the service meeting tonight on why they believe in 1914 and how to explain it to others be an effort to bolster that belief because there is a challange coming against it by factions within?

i guess we can't really tell but i wouldn't put it past the boneheads running the society.

OneEyedJoe

It seems possible, but my theory is that they're pushing 1914 (and the "100 year aniversary") so hard as a positive thing to keep people from realizing that it's been 100 years of nothing but failed predictions and bad medical advice.

I think after this they'll stop talking about 1914 for a while. Then they'll go one of two ways, either start to draw the parallel between Noah's 120 year preaching and the "last days" and start to imply that 2034 will be armageddon. If they don't do that, then they'll somehow shelve 1914 once all the people who remember the days of "1914: The generation that will not pass away" and the like have died off. I don't see them officially noo-liting it out of existance, they'll probably just go to a differernt definition of generation that gets rid of the deadlines, perhaps using other bible passages to imply certain future dates.

By the time they're rid of 1914, they'll have finished the transition to a fully emotion-based message. Gone will be the days of deep study and pseudo-logic. It'll all be about the love in the org and staying away from the evil worldlies.

32

HELP! Elder bombarded me with scripture...& I don't know what to do.

by Smoky in

i have been lurking on this site for many years.

i rarely post anything, because my english isnt the best and not sure if anyone understands.

i just recently had a run in with an elder, have not seen him in a few years.

OneEyedJoe

You might get better answers from others here who've gone through this situation before, but personally when it comes time for that I'm not going to try to refute anything they say. You don't need to prove anything to them, and the only thing that will come of it is more preaching and possibly a JC. Instead, I would go with something like "Right now I'm leaving things in Jehovah's hands. I've prayed about my situation and I have confidence that Jehovah understands why I do what I do since he is the only one who can read my heart condition."

Thank them for their time and concern and assure them that you'll let them know as soon as there's anything that they can help you with. That puts the ball in your court, and you're probably not planning on hitting it back.

8

November 1 1960 QFR

by hoser in

jw
friends

questions from readers.

please answer my question in the watchtower.unsigned.. among the many readers of the watchtower who write in for information are some who ask personal questions on which they want a scriptural answer, but who give no name or address.

others give an address but no name.

OneEyedJoe

In other words - if you have a question that betrays the fact that you've been thinking critically about whether this may actually be a cult, we want to know your name and address so we can send in our goons elders to take care of you shepard you and if necessary hold your family hostage lovingly shun you so that you can see the error of your ways.

What a loving provision!

23

What I really fear about JW.ORG

by StarTrekAngel in

much has been written, twitted and youtubed about the extent to which the wtbts may go in order to keep its members from peeking out of the box.

from name calling, constantly telling members about the dangers of apostasy, all the way to dfing anyone who dares to look outside.

many tools and theories have been brought forward.

OneEyedJoe

Personally, I want them to know my browsing history. I often go back and forth from here to jw.org, and I just love to think that there's someone getting whipped into a frenzy seeing how many page views are from appostates. Something tells me that appostates use jw.org more than most active witnesses, since most active witnesses seem to just be kinda floating along, whereas us appostates are the ones researching stuff.