Posts by TimDrake1914

152

If YOU had to make the decision, would you respect a JW relatives wish to refuse a blood transfusion?

by nicolaou in

a few years after i quit the meetings my mum needed her medical directive signed and witnessed and she asked if i'd do it.

i was surprised to say the least!.

i think she was just angling to include me and maybe find some lever to get me involved again.

TimDrake1914

I'm dissapointed that, so far, the majority would actually violate another person's choice as to their own medical wishes. How is that any different than someone else violating our own choice to take a blood transfusion on the basis that they do not share our belief? We may not like it, but it is still the other person's choice to choose their own medical treatment, even if it means them possibly dying from it. Free will includes the ability to choose how we live or die, and to take that away from some one is the same as taking away their right to be disconnected from a life-prolonging machine if they so choose.

But going back to the original scenario, if one is uncomfortable signing someone's no blood document, then they shouldn't. Simple as that. If one were to have signed and then later changed their mind about carrying out the other person's wishes, that one should inform the other person involved so that they can sign a new version of the form in order to take you out of the equation. It's about mutual respect.

24

Money Grab started in India

by cognitivedizzy in

jw
friends

i don't know how the fellow who made the resolution from stage to send 80% of the congregation funds to the indian branch as an outright donation made it with a straight face.

and all the sheeples nodded like they understood the shit he were spewing.

i'm so mad at this cult .

TimDrake1914

You have no idea how powerful group pressure can be. Once you see a few heads nodding affirmatively, it's hard to go against it, even if you feel uncomfortable doing so. It takes a lot of mental strength and discipline to go against the wave.

5

Gilead was built to be Bethelite tribulation Bombshelter 1940!!!

by Witness 007 in

rutherford believed the "great tribulation" would begin during world war 2. his book "enemies" explained america and britain would turn into a fascist/catholic state so...... watchtower 82 8/15 p.10 "for the saftey of the bethel family a place of refuge was built at south landsing new york.

it was never needed for that purpose...later transformed into gilead missionary school...".

watch.

TimDrake1914

I think Rutherford was way more deluded than any on the current GB....well, maybe all except for Tomo III. If this were Star Wars, I could totally see a movie where Darth Rutherford reveals to Tony Skywalker the horrible truth: "I am your father."

19

Request for BOE Translation!

by Atlantis in

if we could get this letter translated we would appreciate it.

we will then send the translation back to barbara anderson.. .

http://postimg.org/image/o1y62yr2b/.

TimDrake1914

@Khaleesi Of course they need more money. Don't you know that that $1 Billion will only cover about a month of WT expenditures? At least I'm sure that's what they will say/spin it on the next JW Broadcasting.

9

NWT 2013

by truthlover in

the old nwt contained a byline that indicated westcott and hort was used in the translation of this bible.

(they are not mentioned in the 2013 release) but you and i both know that their wordings in scripture remain in the new release.. if you check their background, you will find some serious issues with these translators which the society used.

has anyone googled wh for their spiritual qualifications to include them in the nwt??

TimDrake1914

AFAIK, Westcott and Hort's text of the NT is very well respected work in the field of textual criticism. Their groundbreaking work set the stage for further studies in textual criticism, and is a highly valued work, even to this day, for the precedent it set. Having said that, more recent work in textual criticism has added to the body of work that they started. If anything, I commend WT for consulting this highly respected work, but I fault them for ignoring some of the bigger questions that arise from the study of textual criticism of the Bible, such as the many contradictions in the Bible that they don't acknowledge. Instead they try to "explain" them away.

155

Survey: How long were you in the cult vs what year you were baptized

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

hi people,.

i want as much data as possible on the effect of the internet on the time captured by the cult.. please answer the three following questions about yourself or about someone you know (for example, if your parents or grandparents were jw's and left).

1) were you raised as a jw, or did you convert?.

TimDrake1914

1) Raised

2) 1995

3) 2014

19 years

Looking back at things, it amazes me that it will barely be 2 years since I woke up next. It feels like it's been at least twice that, but probably because I've suffered so much and grown so much since then.

40

Two Year Delay in Building New KHs - What Is the Real Impact?

by committeechairman in

where are all these kingdom halls that were going to start being built?

the rbc arrangement was officially announced as an arrangement that was ending in the united states branch territory in a letter on january 24, 2014 (although this letter is no longer listed on jw.org).

this means that 23 months have passed since the announcement of the ldc taking over and "acceleration" of kingdom hall builds.. what has happened in the meantime with kh construction?

TimDrake1914

Actually, in regards to number 3, I have actually heard cases where that happened. Some people spent so much time away from their families that their family life did in fact deteriorate, to the point of divorce in some cases. Very sad cases indeed.

60

Watchtower's response to Royal Commission shows they have learned nothing and will do nothing

by wannaexit in

jw
friends

i've quickly read through watchtower's submission to the royal commission.

seems like they aren't planning to change policy anytime soon.

they are critical of how the royal commission handled the situation.. the tone is of the submission is shear arrogance.

TimDrake1914

@LUHE - Do you work for WT? Cause you quoted me out-of-context like a WT Pro. HAHAHAHA! But seriously, my post was not intended to defend WT actions. We all know that it is pretty f***ed up not to report a single case of child abuse over that time, no matter the reasons. But there are many other factors involved in the systemic failure of WT, many of which were not even understood at the time, such as the dynamics and consequences of group-think mentality, that we are now more aware of and can help us, as a society in general, to better understand why we failed to do more in the past. Acknowledging the reality of that one good point doesn't mean that WT is off the hook for their past mistakes, though. However, following up on that thought, and something that I forgot to mention in my previous post, was that in light of how most organizations in general would probably fail if we examined their child abuse procedures from the past, perhaps it would have been better to use case studies that were more recent than those they examined. That way, the commission could've shown definitively, without a doubt, that WT continues to fail in regards to their child abuse handling procedures. I think it's fair to say that they did show that anyway. But in the minds of current, mentally in JW's who are aware of what occurred during the royal commission, they cling to the fact that these were old cases to excuse WT in order to reduce their cognitive dissonance and make themselves think that those were just mistakes of the past that no longer occur.

60

Watchtower's response to Royal Commission shows they have learned nothing and will do nothing

by wannaexit in

jw
friends

i've quickly read through watchtower's submission to the royal commission.

seems like they aren't planning to change policy anytime soon.

they are critical of how the royal commission handled the situation.. the tone is of the submission is shear arrogance.

TimDrake1914

Another point where I thought WT was right, and a point that I think many of us forget, is how the understanding and handling of child abuse really has changed drastically over the years, and one can not totally fault them for their lack of understanding the best way to handle it in the past. Especially considering how society in general has also had to learn how to better help victims, right alongside WT.

However, on the flip side, with all the new insights we have gained, one would expect them to be more willing to change their policies and procedures where needed, or at least, be more humble about their shortcomings and show that they genuinely want to improve things. Reading their rebuttal, though, doesn't really give you the sense that that is their genuine desire. To me, they just come accross as "not at fault", rather than coming accross as desirous of helping those who have suffered.

Because of that, it makes one of their better points (the one I initially mentioned) sound as if it lacks substance, and only really comes accross as an "excuse" due to the overall tone of the rebuttal. Like everyone else has stated, they just make themselves look worse, and if they were in a judicial committee, one could argue that their response lacks "repentance", and they would be deserving of being DF'd. LOL!

60

Watchtower's response to Royal Commission shows they have learned nothing and will do nothing

by wannaexit in

jw
friends

i've quickly read through watchtower's submission to the royal commission.

seems like they aren't planning to change policy anytime soon.

they are critical of how the royal commission handled the situation.. the tone is of the submission is shear arrogance.

TimDrake1914

Reading the WT response was really difficult in many ways. I feel a bit conflicted. On one hand, trying to be fair and unbiased, I understand their need to "fight for their rights" and use/take advantage of whatever leverage the law provides them and allows them to have in regards to their legal right to fight for their religious freedom. Like they stated in their rebuttal, there is a difference between what the law "permits" and what the law "forbids", and they have a right to do everything they want, as long as the law doesn't "forbid" it. But that right there is the problem this commission has brought to light. I agree with WT that governments must pass laws to make them do more than what they are doing, since that seems to be the only way we will ever get mandatory reporting.

However, on the flip side, most of what I read from the rebuttal seems to go against the principals that JW's are told to live by. In other words, it's just more double-speak from WT. So even though I am totally with them on the whole "religious freedom" argument, I just can't help but feel that them trying to even make that argument betrays the principles they are supposed to be live by. As one poster previously commented, if they really did try and live by Christ's example, they wouldn't focus on what the law allows them to do or not do, but instead would be guided by the principle of true "justice". Their responses to the allegations mostly come accross as pharasiacal, and in many places, just lack empathy and understanding.

None of this is surprising, of course. As someone who pretty much lost all faith in religion thanks to WT, I would love to see a world in which rationality, reasonableness and human kindness based on empirical evidence and scientific findings and not religious belief was the norm. But I also believe in the law and taking advantage of what the law allows, and for now, the law allows religion and its crazy reasonings. So good on you WT for fighting for what you believe. But I still think your policies and beliefs are crap, and that they prohibit you and your adherents from being the very people you purport and actually strive to be, and that to me is just amazing. But again, that's religion for you.