Posts by Confession

28

My Bible Study

by slimboyfat in

jw
friends

i was inactive more than 6 months.

to become a publisher again i need to have a bible study with one of the elders.

my third study was the other day.

Confession

Defd,

Nice to get your reply. You ask,

But what are you ACTUALLY saying to me? Leave the truth? Stop going to the Kingdom hall? What is your suggestion?

What I was actually saying was simple: that all of us deserve to know all of the information. I was not saying that you should be compelled to come to the same conclusions I did.

Your response surprised me just a bit. From some of the posts you'd left, I didn't imagine you'd be willing to admit that you found agreement in some of the things I'd written. If you are willing to keep your mind open to all of the information about the Watchtower Society, that's all any of us here can be glad for. Why? Because we feel that (in many cases) for long, long years (and even many generations) we have been misled and manipulated by the leadership of this organization.

God gave you the Bible; he also gave you a mind. Jesus' providing the sin-atoning sacrifice for your sins gives you every right to exercise your Christian freedom. Your conclusions should, of course, be your own.

If you conclude, as so many of us have, that the Watchtower Society can lay no claim to the position of "sole channel of communication from Almighty God," then I would hope you would not allow them to exercise authority over your mind and your life--nor over that of your family's. Some have decided to leave openly by disassociating themselves, some have "faded," and some have (for a few reasons) decided to stay inside.

You see, if it's true that the Watchtower Society is not what it purports to be, then it's horribly, horribly wrong for them to keep saying that they are. And it's even more reprehensible for them to manipulate those over whom they preside, telling them what they are allowed to believe and think under penalty of disfellowshipping and shunning, ripping them from their own families and the only community of friends they've been allowed to have.

Using God's Word as our guide, it has seemed to most of us that--given the foregoing--we are compelled to separate ourselves from such an organization. The Watchtower Society itself actually recommends this course...

[Is This Life All There Is?, 1974, p. 46]

Knowing these things, what will you do? It is obvious that the true God, who is himself “the God of truth” and who hates lies, will not look with favor on persons who cling to organizations that teach falsehood. (Psalm 31:5; Proverbs 6:16-19; Revelation 21:8) And, really, would you want to be even associated with a religion that had not been honest with you?

I know what thoughts and feelings I experienced as I went through this process less than a year ago. At first you hold out great hope that there will be reform within the organization. Then you start asking, "Where then shall we go?" as if leaving the Watchtower Society means leaving God or Christianity itself. It's hard to see yourself doing this, I know. But, despite what they taught us, I have found many, many kind, loving, wonderful Christian human beings not affiliated with them. I've found that my relationships with them can be even stronger given that they are not under the thumb of an oppressive organization that restricts their thoughts and expressions--and that they will be my friends despite the protests of any group of men who might have them shun me.

Getting out of the organization is not easy; I'm not fully out myself. But you can rest assured that many, many other righteous people have gone before in this exodus--and that you will have the full help and support of thousands of caring persons from around the globe.

If you conclude that there is still some reason to remain affiliated with the Watchtower Society, I would hope that you would at least retain your ability to use your mind yourself--rather than letting them have the strong control over it they think they've the right to have. I would also hope you would refuse to treat others who've come to differing conclusions in the way they would have you treat them.

My love and best wishes to you.

31

What do I tell my mother?

by Confession in

the facts.... -3rd generation of a 4-generation witness family.

30 members of my family are in--including my mother, father, 3 siblings and their mates and children.

(other relatives too.

Confession

Lowly one, just read your reply and wondered how on earth you came up with that after my last post...

My interest in communicating with them (in whatever way I do) is because I'd like them to know what I know. It's that simple really. I used to think that JWs had The Truth--and so I would tell people so. Now that I recognize it is not--and that it is actually in some ways destructive and fraudulent--I want people to know that too. Especially my own family. While sharing this information with them is no guarantee that they'll accept it (or indeed even listen to it,) it seems the only proper and loving thing to do. I recognize the ramifications that may come along with this. While I understand many of you have decided these ramifications are too great, personally I refuse to remain under the oppressive shackles of the Watchtower Society. Just won't live my life in fear of them--or how they may implore my family to treat me once I make things known to them.

Your reply...

Eventually, Your mother is going to find out, if she dosen't already know. And, if you are so concerned about her how will she be when it dawns on her or you that you are an unmitigated lier to her very face. So, are you going to keep 'compromising' in what you know to be right?

???

28

My Bible Study

by slimboyfat in

jw
friends

i was inactive more than 6 months.

to become a publisher again i need to have a bible study with one of the elders.

my third study was the other day.

Confession

defd,

I've seen several posts from you and thought I'd share my newfound discoveries with you. I'm sure you're open to at least reading them, since you're frequenting and even contributing here. I notice you've actually contributed more than three times the number of posts than I have.

I am a third generation Jehovah's Witness, with my daughter and her cousins being of the fourth generation. There are more than thirty members of my family who are Witnesses, my grandmother having started it all back in the early forties. Two of my family members (including my Father) profess to be of the anointed. I served the congregation as an elder for some time, giving public talks far and wide throughout my region. As an organization minded Witness, I was the one who would help other friends (including my fellow elders) when they began having doubts or speculated on things. I didn't appreciate opportunistic faultfinders--those who'd always be jumping at the chance to point fingers and accuse the organization of "not doing things right." Despite this, after finding a few very troubling things within the organization, I finally did something I never imagined doing: I gave the organization I'd been so dedicated to a fair-minded, objective investigation.

Although we may claim that we do this all the time as JWs, unless we are truly willing to be "objective," we may find ourselves adopting a policy that is neither helpful to us nor scriptural. Just as the Bible writer wrote, "Let God be true," we may come to believe we should, "Let the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society be true," always looking for some justification to find them correct--without truly having been "objective." I'm now convinced that I used to do this, and that this is a wholly wrong thing to do.

Would Jehovah have excused individuals of the nation of Israel who went right along with the evil kings of their time? What did Jesus have to say about so many of the people within the various congregations in the first century--the ones he spoke sharply to in Revelation? Just as the Watchtower Society itself teaches you that 'being a Witness does not mean you're automatically going to be swept right along into the new system,' it's also true that if the Watchtower Society is leading its followers in ways Jehovah would greatly disapprove of, those individuals have the responsibility not to let that happen to them or their families. Think of all of the faithful servants of Jehovah--not of an organization--who were used by Him to call attention to the false worship of their time. I invite you to read a few excerpts from "Does God Work Through an Organization," by Tom Cabeen.

After W.W.II the Nazi organization never went on trial for war crimes. Individuals did. An organization cannot commit nor be punished for crimes. It bears no accountability. People do. Jesus said that when he would return he would separate the goats from the sheep. He would base his judgment on personal conduct rather than loyalty to an organization or belief structure.

For example, Elijah thought that he was the only person left that did not bow down to Baal. God said that He had 7,000 in Israel that had not bowed down to him. Those faithful persons would doubtless have been considered disloyal to the anointed king that was in power. Yet they were obviously not organized into any type of group.

Throughout the entire pre-Christian period, the Bible mentions faithful individuals who were loyal to God, regardless of whether the nation's leaders were faithful. This was true right up until Jesus appeared. A righteous prophet named Simeon saw the young child Jesus, in fulfillment of a prophecy given him by the Holy Spirit. A faithful prophetess named Anna is also mentioned.

defd, after looking at all the evidence objectively--and praying earnestly, I came to a conclusion that is so obvious I can't believe I never saw it before. Whether you now realize it or not, the Watchtower Society has created a situation in which it is requiring its adherents to give the organization a more prominent position than Jehovah or Jesus Christ.

As you yourself showed from your post...

According to Hebrews 4:13 There is not a creation that is not manifest to his sight, but all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of him with whom we have an accounting.

This being the case, what do we have to fear in looking at all the information available about this organization of Jehovah's Witnesses? If we are truly "in the Truth," should we have to fear the light? Note what they've written in the The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life, 1968, p. 13...

"We need to examine, not only what we personally believe, but also what is taught by any religious organization with which we may be associated. Are its teachings in full harmony with God's Word, or are they based on the traditions of men? If we are lovers of the truth, there is nothing to fear from such an examination."

Yet you and I both know that the Society takes an entirely different stance on doing exactly the same thing when it has to do with its own teachings. Note the Watchtower 1986 March 15 pp.10-15 “Do Not Be Quickly Shaken From Your Reason”...

7 Now, what will you do if you are confronted with apostate teaching—subtle reasonings—claiming that what you believe as one of Jehovah's Witnesses is not the truth? For example, what will you do if you receive a letter or some literature, open it, and see right away that it is from an apostate? Will curiosity cause you to read it, just to see what he has to say? You may even reason: 'It won't affect me; I'm too strong in the truth. And, besides, if we have the truth, we have nothing to fear. The truth will stand the test.' In thinking this way, some have fed their minds upon apostate reasoning and have fallen prey to serious questioning and doubt.

So, although the WTS encourages a thorough and open-minded examination of the things taught by a religion, this only applies to religions other than their own. Any suggestion that “what you believe as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses is not the truth” MUST be considered—not an open minded examination—but instead the devious propaganda of apostates. The reasoning encouraged by the Watchtower Society requires the dogmatic rejection of any possibility that “what you believe as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses is not the truth.” I consider this out of harmony with the scriptures.

(2 Corinthians 13:5) Keep testing whether YOU are in the faith, keep proving what YOU yourselves are. Or do YOU not recognize that Jesus Christ is in union with YOU?

Sorry about the length of this post. (I tend to go long even when I don't want to!) But, defd, you owe it to yourself and to Almighty God to deeply consider all of the information, not just what the Watchtower Society tells you is okay. Placing your trust in an organization is a course entirely out of harmony with God's Word.

Best Wishes

63

Older men dating teenagers/Lolitas

by wanderlustguy in

lolitas older men with little girls.

i promised myself only 30 minutes on thisso the timer starts now.

my perspective on this is probably different than most, i am a male, 32 years old.

Confession

Wow, Lucky, quite an experience. What a piece of work that guy was.

5

Greendawn on vacations

by greendawn in

since the first of august i am on vacations so i won't be posting much, often i have no internet access there are no internet cafes in caves (on mountains) in the middle of nowhere but there are nice lakes and forests.

this trip will finish in mid september.

Confession

Yes, Greendawn, enjoy. And we'll be looking forward to all of those thought-provoking threads you start for us when you return.

16

Judge Rutherford, True Believer or Con Man?

by VM44 in

did "judge" rutherford really believe the doctrines he wrote and spoke about?

or was he a con man that bluffed his way through life?

as he once remarked to an associate.. if he was a true believer, how could he justify the land and house beth sarim, both of which were specifically bought for and built for his use?.

Confession

This is a great question; right up my alley. I think people are often accused of doing (or being) something intentionally--when in fact they're not. Yes, they may be horrible people--but convinced that they are correct. As for Rutherford, it's tempting to conclude that he was just a con-man, bluffing his way through. And he may well have been.

When you compare various powerful and/or charismatic leaders, you often find they share a certain understanding. They understand that if they are going to be successful in promoting their cause or movement they'd better demonstrate wholehearted conviction to their adherents. Any hesitation, concession or compromise is shunned for fear their leadership will be undermined.

Rutherford may well have been convinced that Russell had been used by God--and that he, as the successor, had a responsibility to carry the torch. The possibility that he may have occasionally questioned whether he was indeed being 'led by God', and the fact that he was a ruthless, power-hungry, profane drunkard doesn't mean he didn't think he was doing the right thing. "Didn't King David have certain luxuries not available to common Jews within the nation of Israel?" he might have reasoned.

63

Older men dating teenagers/Lolitas

by wanderlustguy in

lolitas older men with little girls.

i promised myself only 30 minutes on thisso the timer starts now.

my perspective on this is probably different than most, i am a male, 32 years old.

Confession

When a young man I was generally more attracted to women older than I. I married a 32 year old woman when I was 20. It was not a good marriage--although her being a wildly dysfunctional alcoholic foreshadowed any age difference problems that might have developed. I don't know for certain why I liked them older. It seemed to me that younger girls were so "flighty," didn't know what they wanted, etc. I liked the idea of being with a more experienced woman.

Now that I'm 39, it's amazing how open I now am to younger women. Truth is, I still like older women quite a bit. I occasionally see a woman who is 45. But the difference now is this: younger women seem so drawn to me now, and I see that they are to other older men as well. For any who like to disparage men for seeking younger women, please understand that (as a few well-written contributors here have attested to) this is not a one-way street. I've had two 21-year old young ladies make clear advances to me in the last year, and one who is 25. (The 21 year olds have been fun--but are painfully one-dimensional. The 25 year old is actually very intelligent and enjoyable to be with.)

But I know the idea behind the original post here is not specifically about older men and younger women. It's about a person who only seeks relationships with others he or she can dominate. And that seems sad--both for the dominator and particularly the dominated.

31

Were You A Liberal, Moderate or Conservative JW?

by minimus in

jw
friends

i would've called myself moderate leaning toward liberal.

Confession

Can someone try to provide a definition of Liberal and Conservative as it relates to JWs? I think it may differ from the usually-considered political understandings of those terms.

I think I'd go with Conservative, since I was all about doing things "the right way." Most of the time I favored close adherence to what was stated by the Society. Yet some you might consider conservative were staunch and rigid. In elder meetings, when faced with these types--perhaps in judicial situations, I would remind them that "the act" wasn't what got a person disfellowshiped, but rather the repentance shown. I did this--not because I was a liberal--but because I thought it was the right thing to do--straight from the Society.

I think the term "conservative" has come to mean something beyond what my understanding of it is. I was also very "open-minded." And this is no doubt what created the cognitive dissonance. I didn't blast friends I knew (even as an elder) for limited reading of what might be called "apostate material." Why? Because I was liberal hippy elder? No, but because I knew God's Word said we should "keep proving to ourselves what the will of God is." And I didn't think truth should have to fear the light.

As time went by--and the more I learned--the more I saw instances in which the Society was not doing things "right" even using their own definitions. For instance, I saw that while they often printed material that showed they knew confession was something to be made to God--and forgiveness only from Him--they also used lack of confession as a reason to disfellowship and shun people. This combined with the fact that they blasted the Catholic church for it's practice of confession--when theirs was really no different. When I broached the idea that an accused person might not be confessing because he didn't think confession to men was necessary, my fellow elders just looked at me like I was weird. No one would even look at the information I'd found from the Society's own writings--even though I was merely trying to get into the mind of one of our brothers in an attempt to help him. I was also occasionally shocked at some of the positions taken by the Society. I was in my thirties before I really saw in black and white what they used to write about oral and anal sex. The words were something to the effect of 'if it is not clear that these acts are something wholly disgusting to Jehovah then there's something wrong with you.' I thought this was wrong--again not because I was so liberal--but because there was NOTHING in the Bible about it--and they were clearly inserting their own personal opinions, making a gratuitous assertion part of their "law."

You might call me a Liberal. Maybe I am. Politically I think I side with Libertarians the most. I just think the government should keep out of our business as much as possible. Although things have changed a lot in the last 30 or 40 years, I think that is bascially a conservative position--apart from the liberal idea that government should be more involved in peoples' lives.

And I think this transferred to my life as a Witness. While I was mostly clear about what behavior was obviously wrong or right--I was just as clear about gray areas being none of anybody's business.

87

Parent sleeping with teenagers

by Fatfreek in

an ex brother and i were talking recently and he recounted a bizarre story.

he too left the witneys some years ago, got a divorce, and the two children (both boys) decided to stay with his wife since she was still a jw.. one of his boys (never baptized a jw) confided in him not long ago about the sleeping arrangements after he left.

she told the boys that she was feeling depressed and lonely because of the divorce and turmoil that their apostate father had caused her and asked them (ages 15 and 16) to each alternate and sleep with her every other night.. it took lots of courage for this son to talk to his father about it since he wanted it off his chest.

Confession

Thanks, six. And, yes, I knew she was; read her profile. Good to have her.

87

Parent sleeping with teenagers

by Fatfreek in

an ex brother and i were talking recently and he recounted a bizarre story.

he too left the witneys some years ago, got a divorce, and the two children (both boys) decided to stay with his wife since she was still a jw.. one of his boys (never baptized a jw) confided in him not long ago about the sleeping arrangements after he left.

she told the boys that she was feeling depressed and lonely because of the divorce and turmoil that their apostate father had caused her and asked them (ages 15 and 16) to each alternate and sleep with her every other night.. it took lots of courage for this son to talk to his father about it since he wanted it off his chest.

Confession

Thanks for your comments, stillconcerned. I certainly wish I had all of the original research I'd done. (Somehow in coming out of the organization, I didn't keep track of all of my personal notes.) It's true that people used to believe that the overwhelming majority of all sexual abuse was committed by males--but as more information comes to light--the discovery that it is so underreported by and on behalf of male children--particularly when a female initiator (predator) is involved--contributes to the more recent concern: that female predators are far more common than previously thought.

(As reported by University of Connecticut Health Center, from Bristol Press)
"News of men preying on girls is more common than cases of women molesting boys.
Trestman said psychologists had assumed that girls were the most frequent victims. But the Imre and other cases suggests that victimization of boys by women may be more prevalent, yet under-reported, he said."

During the time I was involved in this Judicial Committee, I was also creating a video presentation for a local home for abused children. I spent considerable time with the directors of this home, and a lot of information was covered. In meeting the children there I was surprised to find that the great majority of them were male. I commented on this to the primary director of the home, a female. (This was a wonderful, warm, older woman with huge, kind eyes. She'd dedicated so much of her life to helping these children. I remember--as a JW at the time--feeling how much God must have appreciated a person such as this. What makes it even more sad is that she was suffering from cancer at the time and going through chemo. Very weak.) She told me that, while more sexual abuse is directed at girls--much more abuse of all other kinds is directed at boys, and that in her many years at the home there were always more boys there than girls. For some reason, in our conversation, she made the comment...

"And we're finding out that a lot more of the sexual abuse is coming from women than we used to think."

Why she thought to bring this up, I don't know, but it was obviously something she'd been convinced was a problem. She was the one who told me how boys in general have a harder time coming forward about something like this. The social pressure is that boys are supposed to like attention from females. Confessing that it is disturbing to them is difficult. Furthermore boys receive all the social cues that males are supposed to be strong and dominant. Being willing to admit that a female took charge over him is also difficult--and just another reason why it isn't reported by so many of them.

She talked at length about this--far longer and with far more candor than I'd have imagined. I remember her saying how women are smarter than men about the way they go about it. An adult man with an exposed, erect penis is obviously initiating something sexual. As she said this, her eyes became slits. She said something to the effect of...

"But a woman? Ohhh no. She can just say, 'Come here, honey, why don't you just let me rub you a little? There doesn't that feel good? Good! Now you can rub me too.' "

The point is there is less hard evidence (pardon the pun) that she is being sexual. It is easier to believe later--and convince others--that it was just harmless or misunderstood.

In reading more about this, another source cited the fact that a certain amount of sexual abuse reported by girls ends up being false. I hate to even print something like this here; I don't EVER want to be like some of the elders we've heard of who, in Judicial Committees, act like they don't believe the young person--and who try to blame it on them. The unfounded guilt associated with these crimes is one of the biggest problems for some children--and contributing to it is evil. Of course, at the same time it's horrible for someone to accuse someone of sexual abuse of any kind when it isn't true, and we know that a percentage of it (perhaps small) does in fact turn out to be false.

Anyway, I certainly hope these boys DID in fact misinterpret what happened with their mother. Either way it does demonstrate why it's probably a bad idea to do this.