Posts by TheListener

91

Newly Exiting JW's ( Last 5 years ) How are you Doing in Life? Let Us Know

by flipper in

jw
friends

considering the fact we've had so many newbies here i thought it would be good to just open it up to you folks to see how life is going for you since you exited the witnesses ?

it's hard many times to move on- however with lots of ex-witnesses on the board here who have been through similar experiences - perhaps those of us who have been out awhile can give you someideas on how to move on in your post jw life to make it a little easier .

so fire away newbies and recently exited jw 's.

TheListener

I had a good JW life. Everything was just fine... then I realized it wasn't what I thought all along. I woke up rather quickly but faded for a very long time. I went to my last meeting and DC in 2005.

I am very happy now. I enjoy reading and studying my Bible and spending time doing things that I enjoy. It's great to have hobbies and not feel guilty about them.

However, my marriage has taken a direct hit. We seem to be more roommates than marriage mates. We discuss nothing spiritual (ok once in great while I use a biblical analogy or say something that I've learned).

We seem to have come to an unspoken agreement on how to deal with my not being a witness and her remaining one. But, now the kids are getting older and they continue to muddle up the demilitarized zone that we've set up. So far the kids have been left to make their own choice about their witness-ness. They are supported by us regardless of their choices but it still puts quite a strain on the family.

A point for others in a similar situation or someone who may be in this situation one day:

A mate who is super zealous is easier to stand against than one who is luke warm to the truth but stubborn in their belief. The lukewarm spouse gives in just enough to make you excited and not want to push more so as not to rock the cart. However, they are stubborn and will only bend so far thus giving the unbelieving mate false hope again and again. Picture the monkey grabbing for the nut only to get shocked again and again - never learning his lesson. As the unbelieving mate you feel like if you push your unbelieving agenda with yourself and with the kids - the believing wife will suddenly move into action and belief war will have begun.

hmmm.... just my thoughts.

36

Finally got CoC!!.....Not really what I had expected.

by JediMaster in

ok, so i finally picked up coc from my local library last night.

and started reading it like crazy.

i think i read about 70 pages which brought me close to the end of the second chapter: "governing body".

TheListener

I really enjoyed CoC. I also enjoyed ISoCF.

Having an extensive Wt library but not being a scholar Ray's books (and this website) helped me see how the WT society has contradicted itself and changed the light many times.

It was definitely a case of "I've always felt that way but didn't know how to express it" as I read the book.

18

wife awakening

by diamondiiz in

jw
friends

my wife was reading a few bits of coc and she read most of gentile times reconsidered and she says she's not buying the dates anymore and i can tell she knows it's not the truth.

she is starting to feel depressed about it and is feeling "hollow" on the inside.

she said that you can't argue all the evidence that points to 586/7bc for jerusalem's destruction and you can't separate dates from wts dogma - she finally is getting it :) historians are making stuff up to cover up 607bc.

TheListener

Fantastic! I also want to know how you got her to read it?

7

Could Facebook Defeat The Watchtower?

by metatron in

jw
friends

if you've been on boards such as this one for a long time, you may have noticed a profound change in what's posted.

on the old h2o board, you commonly had long, detailed debates concerning every aspect of watchtower doctrine and history.

while i thought i was very well informed in this area, i was often amazed at the stuff that came up that i'd never heard about.. and the discussions about 607 chronology were mind-numbingly extensive......... ...........but all that's over now!.

TheListener

Metatron,

You're Hari Seldon reference is spot on. Since I stopped being a witness I have thought that the Foundation series does have some parallels to the dubs and their theology.

65

Governing Body 2.0

by drew sagan in

i borrow the phrase gb 2.0 from alltimejeff, who used it yesterday in the post about theodore jaracz's death.. i was interested in starting a thread that addresses the new leadership regime that has emerged within the wts, especially in light of changes (albeit mundane) the organization has undertaken over the past 15 years or so.

while few of us have had close contact with the men in charge, changes they have made in recent years surly reflect a definable leadership style.

it also reveals a little bit about how they view the organization and its future.. from what i can put together, it seems that there a few obvious things to note.. - 1999 seems to be the sea change year in terms of gb appointment and might be seen sybolically as a turning point in terms of leadership for the group.

TheListener

Flipper is right, and AuldSoul years ago, when they say not to expect a softening with new GB members.

-my initial thoughts were that with one less meeting, shorter Sunday talk and a few other changes that a softening was on the horizon. Now I see that in reality the mental control is tighter. The WTS controls less physical time of the dubs but more mental control.

The newer members that make up GB2.0 were COs and DOs. Who controlled that department? Jaracz.

65

Governing Body 2.0

by drew sagan in

i borrow the phrase gb 2.0 from alltimejeff, who used it yesterday in the post about theodore jaracz's death.. i was interested in starting a thread that addresses the new leadership regime that has emerged within the wts, especially in light of changes (albeit mundane) the organization has undertaken over the past 15 years or so.

while few of us have had close contact with the men in charge, changes they have made in recent years surly reflect a definable leadership style.

it also reveals a little bit about how they view the organization and its future.. from what i can put together, it seems that there a few obvious things to note.. - 1999 seems to be the sea change year in terms of gb appointment and might be seen sybolically as a turning point in terms of leadership for the group.

TheListener

Thank you for that link Betsy,

I didn't want to cut/paste Barbara's article (or even portions thereof), however, Barbara's footnote #17 sums up my feelings about the Nethinim. It is/was used as a proving ground for new GB members.

Instead of helping the GB grow and expand mentally it has actually made them more insular. Only those individuals who fit the already created GB mold get sifted through and eventually join the GB. The rest are consigned to OS prospects and Nethinim status forever...

65

Governing Body 2.0

by drew sagan in

i borrow the phrase gb 2.0 from alltimejeff, who used it yesterday in the post about theodore jaracz's death.. i was interested in starting a thread that addresses the new leadership regime that has emerged within the wts, especially in light of changes (albeit mundane) the organization has undertaken over the past 15 years or so.

while few of us have had close contact with the men in charge, changes they have made in recent years surly reflect a definable leadership style.

it also reveals a little bit about how they view the organization and its future.. from what i can put together, it seems that there a few obvious things to note.. - 1999 seems to be the sea change year in terms of gb appointment and might be seen sybolically as a turning point in terms of leadership for the group.

TheListener

Neverendingjourney,

I'm not sure I agree with you on this point for two reasons.

1. The Nethinim article essentially created a third class of non-anointed Christians who would assist the governing body but who would not formally be a part of the body. It did not, contrary to the impression that many Witnesses and former Witnesses hold, pave the way for non-anointed to sit on the governing body.
2. The article was essentially ignored after its publication. I read somewhere (perhaps from Barbara Anderson?) that this particular article was an embarrassment to the governing body due to the strained parallel used, which only served the purpose of giving a few Bethel-heavies bragging rights. If I'm not mistaken, the concept as laid out in the Nethinim article has never resurfaced.
I think the real catalyst for adding members on the GB, as mentioned above, was the generation change and a realization that more members needed to be added to the body simply because the original members were getting too old and feeble. The old timers probably realized it was better for them to add new members and leave their mark on the direction of the organization for years to come.
I believe, as you, that the catalyst for adding more members was the realization that the end wasn't as near as it was once thought. I just think that the GB1.0 was too nervous to add a bunch of new guys to the GB without "introducing" them first. The Nethinim article served as the introduction. Who knows, maybe the GB1.0 wasn't sure which of the butt-kissers to actually appoint so the Nethinim position allowed them to openly test the candidates.
I also agree that the Nethinim parallel has not been reiterated or discussed since its inception. But, I think it served its purpose. It allowed the GB time to select specific members for addition to the GB and it did so without upsetting the JW applecart.
I believe the doctrinal changes show us one thing for sure. The GB1.0 truly believed that the end was near until the mid-90s; and once it dawned on them that it wasn't they put doctrines in place that allowed for date pushing and body enlargement. They still seem to be in that same mode. Which means the GB2.0 may not feel the end is imminent either.

65

Governing Body 2.0

by drew sagan in

i borrow the phrase gb 2.0 from alltimejeff, who used it yesterday in the post about theodore jaracz's death.. i was interested in starting a thread that addresses the new leadership regime that has emerged within the wts, especially in light of changes (albeit mundane) the organization has undertaken over the past 15 years or so.

while few of us have had close contact with the men in charge, changes they have made in recent years surly reflect a definable leadership style.

it also reveals a little bit about how they view the organization and its future.. from what i can put together, it seems that there a few obvious things to note.. - 1999 seems to be the sea change year in terms of gb appointment and might be seen sybolically as a turning point in terms of leadership for the group.

TheListener

1994	Losch added to GB
1995	Generation change (WT 11/1/1995)
1997	Nethinim program officially instituted (WT 5/15/1997)
2000	Herd,Lett,Pierce,Splane added to GB

65

Governing Body 2.0

by drew sagan in

i borrow the phrase gb 2.0 from alltimejeff, who used it yesterday in the post about theodore jaracz's death.. i was interested in starting a thread that addresses the new leadership regime that has emerged within the wts, especially in light of changes (albeit mundane) the organization has undertaken over the past 15 years or so.

while few of us have had close contact with the men in charge, changes they have made in recent years surly reflect a definable leadership style.

it also reveals a little bit about how they view the organization and its future.. from what i can put together, it seems that there a few obvious things to note.. - 1999 seems to be the sea change year in terms of gb appointment and might be seen sybolically as a turning point in terms of leadership for the group.

TheListener

As far as the GB2.0 is concerned. I never thought about the enlargement of the body not occurring until the mid-90s and beyond. It does seem that the GB1.0 felt that they could man the helm until the system finally ended. It must have made for some interesting discussions once they started to see themselves physically and mentally deteriorate and knew something had to be done before too long.

As I recall the first step in the process for creating the GB2.0 was the Nethinim article (WT 5/15/1997 p.15-20). Others may be able to correct me.

What would be interesting to see in a timeline is the GB appointments, generation changes, and doctrinal shifts like the Nethinim. It may show an interesting pattern...

65

Governing Body 2.0

by drew sagan in

i borrow the phrase gb 2.0 from alltimejeff, who used it yesterday in the post about theodore jaracz's death.. i was interested in starting a thread that addresses the new leadership regime that has emerged within the wts, especially in light of changes (albeit mundane) the organization has undertaken over the past 15 years or so.

while few of us have had close contact with the men in charge, changes they have made in recent years surly reflect a definable leadership style.

it also reveals a little bit about how they view the organization and its future.. from what i can put together, it seems that there a few obvious things to note.. - 1999 seems to be the sea change year in terms of gb appointment and might be seen sybolically as a turning point in terms of leadership for the group.

TheListener

TD, after reading your post I must say I agree completely. Overall I like the direction of this thread.

In the "old days" the congregation bookstudies didn't have specific numbers of paragraphs to cover and much was left up to the individual study conductor. In the "old days" the "friends" would discuss deep prophecies and in general felt superior to other christians because they had such meat provided to them for study.

I remember being in field service car groups and playing bible stump games. The one who could come up with some obscure fact which was usually based on some deep prophecy would win.

It seemed that there was a time when open discussion occurred about the doctrines and the understandings. Make no mistake, you did have to tow the line; outright disagreement wasn't acceptable.

Nowadays the witnesses seem to be slowly losing end times urgency. I know we've discussed it on the boards a million times, but it's true. The old timers feel the younger ones aren't spiritual enough to survive the persecution that they feel is sure to come. The young ones don't know the deep spiritual prophecies and truths because they aren't really discussed much. There is a real (to borrow a term used by someone earlier) bifurcation of the membership.

One possibility is that a new visionary will emerge and either reinvigorate the entire membership or cause a schism.

The more I watch my witness family members and their friends the more I see them seem tired and unenergetic. The average witness seems very much to just be going through the motions without giving much thought to anything except the end coming so they will be vindicated and not stricken with odd illnesses any longer.

Actually, that last sentence made a thought pop into my head. It seems we've discussed many times the odd illnesses that witnesses have. The witnesses of the 30s-70s weren't afflicted with so many maladies. I believe it is all part of the wearing out of the message, machinery and membership.