we have read threads where statistics show that 2 out of every 3 people raised as jehovah's witnesses eventually leave once they get in their 20's to 30's and out on their own.
my children and my nieces and nephews are between the ages of 21 to 35 .
out of those 8 people - 4 of them have completely stopped attending meetings .
Not much. They get marginalized as leaving for selfish or weakness reasons. Few young people have the maturity to leave in a powerful way.
I DA'd myself at 24 in a direct in a straightforward manner sighting
-poor research on the part of the organization
-unwarranted criticism of science and other religions
-unwarranted claims of excessive authority
I was in good standing at the time.
this is perfect religion with imperfect people.
the elders are imperfect that is why there are problems.
we just need to endure because jehovah is allowing this as a test to see if we will still love him.
A "perfect religion" is a non-sense idea. The fact that Jehovah's witnesses aren't "perfect" means they don't deliver the following expectations:
1. The things they say will happen do not actually transpire.
2. The qualities they claim are cultivated by the study of their publications do not develop at a greater rate than they otherwise do in the general public.
3. The effort to control one's behaviour, ideas and thoughts does not produce happiness. Rather, it produces the opposite of its intended consequences.
These imperfections serve as evidence which negates the claim that Jehovah's Witnesses teach true things. I have a lengthy philosophical argument which argues this, but here's the quick elevator version:
The governing body, if they were a channel of divine communication, would have to be perfect about information which came from Jehovah. God, were he to exist, would know exactly what he had to do to accurately convey information through a human channel. If he wanted people to have information, he would do so. This leads one to conclude either:
1. This God Jehovah does not exist.
2. This God may exist, but has nothing to do with the governing body.
3. This God may exist and may use the governing body, but is relatively unconcerned with the spread of true knowledge about him.
4. This God may exist and may use the governing body and is purposefully causing them to teach false things about him.
#3 is unlikely because it contradicts the theology in which the "governing body" exists. In other words, for #3 to be true, other things would have to be false which make the question pointless.
#4 Has been argued before, the most common version being a "testing defense." This has never held water for me. If you want to believe that God is testing your obedience to humans who he is purpusefully deceiving - enjoy.
That leaves us with #1 or #2. There are no other options.
i'm not, and i thought this was interesting:.
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcadkv_8_5q&feature=player_embedded.
Sigh.
I had a lengthy post about this at the first notice of H1N1
For starters, all diseases are either:
1. Endemic.
2. Epidemic
3. Pandemic
Swine flu is pandemic, from the "pan" and "demos" meaning in general among all peoples (or having crossed international boundaries). The science on vaccines is clear cut and there is nothing to worry about. I will get it if I'm able.
well, not just angel eyes but also for those like her.
i genuinely had no issue with her, and it seemed she was starting to realise just what the watchtower was, but backed out due to fear of the unknown.
'tis sad, she almost got her life back!.
She was a shill.
i haven't been on the board for several weeks until yesterday.
there was a guy that was a regular poster that was starting some kind of email campaign that he claimed was going to bring down the wtbts.
i can't remember his name.
You can't bring them down because unlike other corporations they are supported from within and from the bottom.
This religion is supported by people who, overall, love it more than anything else in the world. What you think doesn't matter. The truth doesn't matter. They are in love with their extended family.
it's always seemed a bit odd to me that ray franz is the only gb member to have ever resigned, particularly for such a controversial religion.. we know from ray franz's books that there is often debate amongst the gb about new ideas sometimes introduced and often they are quite divided in their opinions.. i am not sure when the "governing body" officially began (wikipedia's explanation is messy) but it was quite a few decades ago.
there have been dozens of members of the gb since it's creation (does anyone know the exact total number?).
one would think that there would have been a few more disgruntled gb members over the years who would have resigned if the gb voted against some proposal they felt very strongly about.
How many Popes have resigned?
and then, immediately after babylon the great is destroyed, almost without a break, look at matt 24 :29 -immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened and the moon will not give its light and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.. now in what sense will the sun be destroyed and the moon not give its light?
are you ready for that?.
and you'll fall across the finish line into the new world !
| Christ was not anywhere near the world; if Christ were here today do you imagine that he would be walking around in baggy pants or with earrings in his ear? |
He spent most of his life fishing and wore the clothing of the common workers of his time. He did not artificially emulate the wealthy merchant class (wearing suits) or focus on his outward appearance at all, ever, once in the slightest way. When were his apostles counseled about their garb? No - they picked up their things and followed, they didn't go home and change.
I could easily imagine him in baggy pants and an ear-ring. He seemed to freely give people easy reasons to irrationally dismiss him.
But I go on...if he ever existed he's never coming back.
Endless phobias and circular arguments. Does he judge your heart (character) or your actions? A mix of both? They seem to have no idea.
however it happened - here we are!
intelligent life exists in the universe in the form of humankind.
often brutal, commonly mediocre but occasionally brilliant and capable of incredible love and kindness.
Accepting the possibility of other intelligent life with some unique abilities is a natural proposition, not a supernatural one. Michael Shermer had some good comments on this in a debate - either against D'Souza or that Moonie from the Discovery Institute, can't recall.
Theists don't believe in a "god-like creature," they believe in a God.
We also may not be "intelligent" in the way that metaphysical mind folks think we are and defend in the likes of Victor Reppert, etc.
well, first a quick summary of who i am.
i'm 30 years old.
i was raised "in the truth" and fully embraced the faith when i was a teenager.
Any advice about good dates has a few pre-requisites. If you...
A. Have made an effort to make a wide variety of new friends, you have social skills.
B. Have developed new hobbies and interests, you have things to talk about....
then do something where you can talk that won't be too long. A good first internet date is a simple cocktail at a nicer bar. Have a martini or two. The bill is cheap, and it's more grown up than coffee.
If you feel like you have nothing to say, then work on A and B above, but for your date go somewhere with something going on that you can comment on and discuss. If you're near a city, grab some lunch and go window shopping in a hip part of the city.
But really, don't stress. If the mojo is there, the date doesn't matter. If it isn't, no amount of planning will help at all. I've had successful first dates of all types: morning, afternoon, late night - pubs, coffee, dancing, parks, parties, home cooked dinner, sports, the beach. My best first date was a cemetery on halloween followed by a costume party. Don't sweat it.
for those of you who doesn't care about my dating life can stop reading here...some of you knows a little bit since before and might want to have an update.
i've learned that there are a lot of players out there and that i may be one of those girls who easily fall for these types, unfortunately - not anymore though!i've learned that when a guy says, talk to you later, don't reply to your sms/text within 1-2 days, never calls you, doesn't suggest going to the movies or watching a football game together, only calls you drunk saturday nights, etc etc isn't interested in you, at all (except for perhaps one thing, and one thing only).i've learned that guys can be very cowardly when it comes to be honest abt their feelings and intentions (not all though) - mr. doe is perfect as we all knowi've learned that i'd rather stay single than being with the wrong personi've got to know myself better and know what i don't want!
!however, all in all, this year as a happy single and non jw has been a great experience for me.
Some thoughts:
I'd suggest you restrain your definition of "player" to one who actively decieves in a sociopathic manner. There is no one "correct" way for relatonships to proceed. There is an incorrect time to expect commitment, however. One can never hold in one's feelings - and often one's partner will mirror the effects. It's OK for people to want different things out of dating. In the absence of deceit or the violation of a spoken agreement, the pejorative does not reflect most men who simply have different goals. In your dating pool, there may be a sharp split of guys who (A) Are divorced and don't particularly want another serious relationship (B) May be overly needy and really want to get married soon.
Being attracted to unnavailable men is something that is natural in young women and those inexperienced in the dating world. If it persists and you "just aren't attracted to nice guys" I'd recommend some talk therapy to work through it.
I like fast paced party girls. I know they're crazy in the coconut. I restrain my expectations because I know I can't have it both ways. The problem lies with me doing the choosing - it isn't a problem with "women in general."
Yes, that's accurate and it's good to learn how to watch people's actions. JW's tend to put too much stock in what people say and have been trained to deaden and mistrust their own gut. Listen to your gut!
I've learned that guys can be very cowardly when it comes to be honest abt their feelings and intentions (not all though) - Mr. Doe is perfect as we all know, hehe |
I think you should try and embrace the view that relatively few people are being actively decietful. It's erroneous to think that people have a clear concept of their long term goals at any given moment. What is better - to be reserved about your current feelings (knowing they can change) or to be always expressive but frequently changing? In reality, what one feels is going to change based on the other persons behavior. Most people swing wildly throughout the day between thoughts of "I should get out of this!" to "Maybe I should make this work?" Try to have a balanced view of what information you are entitled to - what is necessary for you to make your decisions and be happy.
There are very few "terrible" people and very few "great" ones. Most of us are shades of grey - capable of good things and bad things in our choices and in need of a great deal of compromise, tolerance and understanding.
I've learned that I'd rather stay single than being with the wrong person |
Truer words have never been spoken! If you can't be happy alone, you probably can't be happy with others.
Every X-JW should spend a long period of time being single (casually dating) and forming their own strong identity, likes, dislikes and life experiences. Most leave the Org with the tendency to define themselves through their relationships with others. This is not healthy and it will destroy good relationships.
