daniel-p

Joined

• started 120 topics
• posted 4,509 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by daniel-p

• 
  15

  WHY DO ELDERS LABEL THOSE EXPOSING ERROR AS APOSTATES?

  by Fernando in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  first topic posted - sorry if it is a bit too long.. why do elders accept this absurd teaching of demons: "anyone rejecting what is not of god, is rejecting god"???.

  evidence that these elders - not their victims - are apostates (wolves, weeds, the man of lawlessness, the antichrist, practicers of spiritism).

  having gone through extreme adversity and consequently deep spiritual waters our family has come to understand apostasy to fundamentally mean the following:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  Welcome Fernando.

  It's a war of words. The Society labels whistleblowers as apostates in the same way as the Religious Right labels any dark skinned muslim a terrorist.
• 
  40

  Proof Jehovah's Witnesses have been declining for nearly 20 years? (At least in the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand)

  by slimboyfat in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  see the tables on pages 124 and 125 of this book:.

  http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=mtw90ykkb3gc&oi=fnd&pg=pa117&dq=scientology+jehovah%27s+stark&ots=0-yvd6jk_o&sig=vualoe-l3bxezaqktnbfhpsdj8u#v=onepage&q=scientology%20jehovah's%20stark&f=false.

  admittedly these statistics don't measure the same thing official watchtower statistics do (i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  The more that info. gets out about DF'ing and other looney stuff the harder it will be to find a convert.

  And I think this is one oftheir greatest conundrums. To get new converts they need to not look so wacky and irrelevant. But in stripping away their stricter doctrines and policies, they alienate long-timers.

  Basically, if they do it this way, they will be in a state of transition for a long time, where their old adherents die off and new ones redifine the religion itself. Of course, we don't know what Governing Body 2.0 will do... as others have mentioned, some of them are just as strict as the old timers.
• 
  40

  Proof Jehovah's Witnesses have been declining for nearly 20 years? (At least in the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand)

  by slimboyfat in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  see the tables on pages 124 and 125 of this book:.

  http://books.google.co.uk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=mtw90ykkb3gc&oi=fnd&pg=pa117&dq=scientology+jehovah%27s+stark&ots=0-yvd6jk_o&sig=vualoe-l3bxezaqktnbfhpsdj8u#v=onepage&q=scientology%20jehovah's%20stark&f=false.

  admittedly these statistics don't measure the same thing official watchtower statistics do (i.e.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  So basically, he is bringing out that his studies of the data out there concur with this guy Starks, in that JWs are in decline in US, Canada, Austrailia, and New Zealand. He theorizes that it could be due to certain stricter religious movements reaching "market penetration," and that there is only a certain small number of people in the population that will be itnerested in such strict religions in the first place. Also, he thinks that "new forms of Protestantism" offer more attractive options for people than the "straight-laced" religions of LDS and the Witnesses.

  He later goes on to explore the notion that strictness is necessary for the growth of a religion. This is something that has been discussed quite a bit on JWD over the years: whether the WTS is becoming less strict and more mainstream, and if they are, whether this is in their best interests. Some people here have explained that such leniency in church policy and doctrine can only reduce loyalty to the organization.
• 
  66

  The guy that claimed he was going to bring down the WTBTS

  by Scarred for life in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  This is a great thread and I hope to comment on it soon...
• 
  34

  Sisters crying in the kitchen/lobby

  by highdose in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  years ago i was at the revamp of a kingdom hall.

  one of the sisters told me that since they got rid of the kitchen it was so much better, becuase there were always sisters out there crying!

  and now they have no place to go, so they just have to stay in the hall and listen to the meeting!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  Women have so much to lose in the borg...independence, their children, confidence, etc.

  I agree. Being a JW sister is about complete subjugation, to the elders, dufus husbands, and even microphone handlers and literature servants. Doing most of the door to door work, and yet having no semblance of authority or management over their own ministry.

  Reminds me of Thoreau's saying about most people leading lives of quiet desperation.

  I have a feeling most JW women are in a continual state of cracking apart, being held together only by each other and their own savage guilt.
• 
  34

  Sisters crying in the kitchen/lobby

  by highdose in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  years ago i was at the revamp of a kingdom hall.

  one of the sisters told me that since they got rid of the kitchen it was so much better, becuase there were always sisters out there crying!

  and now they have no place to go, so they just have to stay in the hall and listen to the meeting!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  This thread is a perfect example of why women need religion more than men. So you can get together and be emotional. Of course, nothing wrong with that, it's just sort of gay. [im kidding, kidding]
• 
  20

  My 4-yr JWD Anniversary!!!!!

  by daniel-p in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  that's right, today marks 4 years.

  but seriously though, 4 years is a good long while!.

  i can remember the day i first posted on this site... i was at the cusp of a thoroughly shattered faith, and i was in complete despair.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  Thanks, big.

  Yeah, about my child, hopefully it wont be too hard to steer them into more productive directions and away from a lifetime of WTS slavery.
• 
  21

  Swine Flu Shot Is Good? Maybe Not

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  take a look.... tp://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/10/21/special-swine-flu-update.aspx#.

  don cameron.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  I personally no longer take flu shots (our company even offers them to employees for free) - simply because back when I used to take them I almost always got some kind of flu anyway.

  And that brings up another point. There are over 200 viruses and pathogens that cause flu symptoms. The flu vaccine tries to innoculate you against 3 of them. Even if it does any good (highly unlikely), there is no gaurantee that you won't get "the flu" from some other virus.
• 
  28

  Assembly Survival Techniques

  by KingAgag in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i told my wife some time back that i would fade, and i compronised that i'd still attend the memorials and assemblies (at least for now).

  november 1st is the 'special' assembly day.

  she said she doesn't care if i listen or not, it is more to help her with the baby.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  Best survival technique I know is not to go.
• 
  21

  Swine Flu Shot Is Good? Maybe Not

  by t33ap80c in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  take a look.... tp://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/10/21/special-swine-flu-update.aspx#.

  don cameron.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  daniel-p

  Here's an interesting tidbit from The Atlantic article:

  Such side effects might be worth risking if the antivirals prevented serious complications of flu, such as pneumonia, hospitalization, and death. Roche Laboratories, the company licensed to manufacture and market Tamiflu, says its drug does just that. In two September2006 press releases, the company announced, “Tamiflu significantly reduces the risk of death from influenza: New data shows treatment was associated with more than a two third reduction in deaths,” and “Children with influenza [are] 53 percent less likely to contract pneumonia when treated with Tamiflu.” Once again cohort studies (the same kind of potentially biased research that led to the conclusion that flu vaccine cuts mortality by 50 percent) are behind these claims. Tamiflu costs $10 a pill. It is possible that people who take it are more likely to be insured and affluent, or at least middle-class, than those who do not, and a large body of evidence shows that the well-off nearly always fare better than the poor when stricken with an infectious disease, including flu. In both 2003 and 2009, reviews of randomized placebo-controlled studies found that the study populations simply weren’t large enough to answer the question: Does Tamiflu prevent pneumonia?

  As late as this August, the company’s own Web site contained the following statement, which was written under the direction of the FDA: “Tamiflu has not been proven to have a positive impact on the potential consequences (such as hospitalizations, mortality, or economic impact) of seasonal, avian, or pandemic influenza.” An FDA spokesperson said recently that the agency is unaware of any data submitted by Roche that would support the claims in the company’s September 2006 news release about the drug’s reducing flu deaths.

  Perhaps we should not be so eager to accept falsely-reassuring claims when we first hear them.