Posts by crownboy

5

Islamic errors?

by crownboy in

jw
friends

over the history of its existence, the bible has had its critics and detracters.

going into a bookstore, i was able to find a flood of information that is critical of the bible.

however, the same was not true of the koran.

I've finally found a critical book about Islam. Actually, they are several books written by Ibn Warraq, the most famous being "Why I am not a Muslim". I'm certain, that like in JW land, such critical books are probably banned from the general public in very fundamentalist Islamic countries.

One point he brings out in one of his books has to do with the Muslim belief that the exact words of Mohamed were remembered perfectly by his followers until they were put into the Koran (which actually was compiled about 200 years later than is usually claimed, thus making the perfect retention of the message even more unlikely). I've often ask my Muslim friends how they could be so confident that not a single sylable could have been mispoken, and the answer, at its essence usually is that "God made sure of it" (they'll initally say that the Arabs back then had great memories, but will be forced to concede that they weren't perfect, hence the reason for the appeal to God).

I think eventually Islam will be secularized, but that may not really happen soon. Most Islamic scholars are scared to death (or do not desire to) critize a book that allegedly are the exact words of the Almighty himself. Warraq (who's a Muslim turned atheist) lives in the U.S., and no doubt if he lived in an Islamic country, he would be killed. If enough people like Warraq come foward, and enough is written about Islam, positive change can be made. Unfortunately, most of Warraq's western counterparts (who are in a position to effect change) are too busy saying "Islam is peace, we're misunderstood", instead of condemning militancy as verbosely as they condemned wrong acts against Muslims. I'm not asking Muslims to drop their religion (as Warriq wants), but once the whole inerrancy issue is settled, maybe they can follow in the footsteps of contemporary Jews and Christains. Quit saying Islamic militants are misinterpreting valid scriptures and hadiths and just recognize that God never said them toi begin with.

Any other books skeptical of Islam available?

Go therefore and baptize the people in the name of the father and of the son... what the hell, we just need to bring up the yearbook numbers!

13

Errors in the Creation book

by crownboy in

jw
friends

hi there, and happy new year to all!

recently, there have been great debates between people on this forum on the whole "evolution vs. creation" matter.

while i'm not an expert on evolution, i do understand it to an extent, and while it may not be a perfect answer, it's a bilion times better than the literal explanation given in the bible for the origin of life (which i have so far not seen evidence for).

crownboy

Hi there, and happy New Year to all!

Recently, there have been great debates between people on this forum on the whole "evolution vs. creation" matter. While I'm not an expert on evolution, I do understand it to an extent, and while it may not be a perfect answer, it's a bilion times better than the literal explanation given in the bible for the origin of life (which I have so far not seen evidence for). Since I was very young when the Creation book came out, I never really read it, so I gave it an overview a few days ago (given how the Society can botch basic Christain theology, I was interested in how much better/worse they would do in science).

In my view, at some times they seemed ignorant of evolution (like when they didn't realize that when the peppered moth changed colors that was evolution. They seemed to think evolution would predict it to turn into a cow or something), and though they said they were being unbiased, using terms like "blind chance" to describe evolution clearly showed their predujice. My favourite part was when they implied that the theory of evolution ORIGINATED WITH THE DEVIL!. That's right, old Beelzebub got to Darwin! They also seem unaware that you can reconcile belief in evolution with belief in God and even the bible. They also said that the carbon 14 dating system used by scientist is so inaccurate, that they can be millions of years off. However, for the carbon 14 dating to be that much off would have required earth's conditions to be very unhospitable to humans, i.e. Adam& Eve could not have lived here 6,000 years ago. They did, however, quote from many sources, so I would like to know:
1. Are any of the quotes taken out of context? (something the society has done before). 2. If the quotes are real, how credible are the sources?

They made a big deal about the lack of "transitional fossils", which is probably my biggest gripe with evolution, but they also said later in the book that the bible is "historically accurate" and the "perfect word of God"(or words to that effect), so apparently their scrutiny only goes one way . Any other comments about the Creation book for those who have read it?

Go therefore and baptize the people in the name of the father and of the son... what the hell, we just need to bring up the yearbook numbers!

23

A WOMAN'S PLACE IS AT HOME!!!!!!

by crownboy in

jw
friends

all of us know how patricharcial the watchtower society (and most fundamentalist religions) is.

men pretty much "run the show", there probably are things a two year old "brother" would probably get to do before a poineer sister can.

because the sister is a female(maybe .

crownboy

All of us know how patricharcial the Watchtower Society (and most fundamentalist religions) is. Men pretty much "run the show", there probably are things a two year old "brother" would probably get to do before a poineer sister can. Why? Because the sister is a female(maybe ), and the Society gives sisters next to no level of responsiblity. This despite the fact that females do the bulk of the preaching work (you know, "God's commision"), and quite frankly a lot of sisters are far more capable of handling certain responsibilities than some brothers.

A prime example of the "theocratic arrangement" at work was the first time I ever took a group out for service. There were seven poineer sisters, all of whom had been in the "full time ministry" long before I was even born, but since I was the only brother present, I had to take the group out. I was all of 12 years old then, barely two months since I was baptized. Yet, despite the presence of seven more qualified women, there I was reading the text, saying a prayer (a fairly short one), and assigning sisters to work together. I was a little bit shy and embarrassed to be doing what I was doing, but the sisters were very good sports about the whole thing, they all commended me for my analysis of the text (thank god I had read it that morning ), and said I handled myself very well. One even commented "See, you've only been baptized 2 months and Jehovah has already found ways to use you". (As if using me as a pawn in his bet with Satan wasn't enough ) Even though I thought it was the right and "theocratic" thing to do back then, I always wondered why God would want me, a 12 year old, "ordering around" women who were far more mature than me, both physically and "spiritually". I couldn't understand how simply being a woman should prevent you from having a voice, as if women are cursed (or as if men are all born with leadership skills).

How many of you have had similiar experiences (both brothers and sisters)? Did any of you guys ever feel that it was silly to have a very underqualified man do a job despite the presence of more qualified women, or were you the type who saw things "theocratically"? Just how off is the JW view of women?

Go therefore and baptize the people in the name of the father and of the son... what the hell, we just need to bring up the yearbook numbers!

61

A New Guy from Chicago with a Story to Tell

by Reborn2002 in

first of all id like to say hello to everyone on this website, and to thank and acknowledge each and every one of you for your individuality, personal experience, and in some cases, commitment to truth.. having read some of the heartfelt topics and posts here have served to be a great encouragement to me, more than some could imagine.

my name is jason, and i am a recovering ex-jw.. i guess this would be an ideal time to tell my life story as an abbreviated version, so here goes.. i was "born into, or raised" in the organization.

my grandfather was an elder for 45 years, and served as one of the very first jw in the south chicagoland suburbs.

crownboy

Hi Reborn, welcome to the board.

I enjoyed your story, it seems quite plausible. The "inconsistencies" COMF pointed out did occur to me (the fact that you spent the night despite being accused of attempted rape), but I figured you simply edited the story. Seems rather obvious: spend the night, get found out, in an attempt for poineer sister to "cover her butt" she had to come up with a story that both explained your presence as well as made her look innocent. Didn't the elders do anything to her, though? She did allow you into her house. Didn't you ever feel something wrong could happen if you two spent time together in the same room? I'll assume there was a sexual attraction, so chances were that sooner or later you two whould have started "getting it on". It doesn't say much about the pioneer sister that she would allow the possibility of such a situation to exist, so she should have been punished.

I think COMF's main problem is that he came off as too abrasive. The exact words of his original post didn't actually contain accusations, but it sure sounded like one! To pretend that the way you word a post is not important is to be imprudent. COMF did not "season is words with salt" (to take a JWism). His posts seem like a sort of Inquisition. Such a style is appropriate (and indeed appreciated) on certain topics, but in this case COMF should have used better judgement. Sounding accusatory on someones first post (even if your not trying to be) just isn't nice.

If you spend enough time on this board, you'll see that COMF is a good guy to makes many sage posts, but indeed his manner in which he comes accross can be blunt sometimes. But once again, welcome.

28

Divorce? Help please.

by Mulan in

jw
friends

we have a close relative who has left her jw husband.

he is extremely controlling, and emotionally abusive.

their children are grown.

crownboy

When I read the title, I intially thought it was about you, Mulan.

JoelBear pretty much wrote my thoughts. If he's(the husband) so bent on following "scriptural priniciples" perhaps he should look in the mirror first. An emotionally abusive and controlling husband is not a biblically compatible one, so if he insist that she is breaking God's laws by leaving him, she should show him her reaction is only due to his own lack of bible morals (of course, the JW religion generally tolerates the type of facist behaviour here exhibited by your relatives husband. If he can rationalize his behaviour within the context of "being family head" and having his wife "subject" to him, then this is an uphill battle, and certainly the JW elders can't be counted on in this situation).

Of course, my opinion is that she should not let the bible rule her life. However, she seems to be a full believer, so that's probably not advisable. Help her find a "nice" Christain church were she can get the emotional support she needs around people who share her same belief system. Of course, family members like yourself can offer much comfort, and if you are familiar with her husband try to talk some sense into him. Your relative seems like a nice woman, and as bone headed as the husband seems, he probably no doubt loves her. As stated before, he may believe he is doing the "christain" thing due to the way JW's can portray marriage, but help him see that not only his he wrong in his view, but that that view will never help him regain his wife. If all comes to worse, and God(if he exist) forbid they divorce, be there for support. If at the same time you can manage to knock some sense into the kids (as they at least seem somewhat open, seeing how they approve of her leaving her husband), then that would obviously be a boon for your relative.

Go therefore and baptize the people in the name of the father and of the son... what the hell, we just need to bring up the yearbook numbers!

39

What made you a JW?

by radar in

why did you become a dub?.

a hope for something better?.

an acceptance that your parents religion was the truth?.

crownboy

RAW too Harmony.

Thirdson said:

When you are raised in it you think it is the truth, you believe everything you are told and think yourself lucky. I remember when I was about 11 my mom asking us (during family study...yawn) whether we thought we'd have become Witnesses if it wasn't for her and dad. She then reinforced how fortunate we were to be raised in the "Truth". It disturbed me and I imagined growing up in a non-Witness family, living in ignorance.

My sentiments exactly. Especially when you're very young. You feel fortunate that God allowed you to be born in "the truth". Talks always stressed that children who are raised "in the truth" aren't missing out on life, but have gained it. I always honestly knew that there was no way I would have voluntarily converted to the JW religion, so I truly felt blessed to have been born into it. Of course, my opinion on this has changed greatly.

Go therefore and baptize the people in the name of the father and of the son... what the hell, we just need to bring up the yearbook numbers!

5

Ben-Laden tells USA to surrender ... lol

by RR in

jw
friends

i thought this was hilarious, here is the link to the article.

of course take everything this paper offers with a grain of salt.. .

http://www.theonion.com/onion3745/bandaged_bin_laden.html.

crownboy

. http://www.theonion.com/onion3745/bandaged_bin_laden.html

42

Did Crisis of Conscience damage you?

by Mulan in

jw
friends

it has been suggested, by a man we know, that those who read crisis of conscience, are left with a feeling of despair and are "cast adrift" after reading it.

it is his opinion that the book shouldn't have been written, because it does harm to people.

i do not agree, and would like to hear from anyone who has an opinion to share, so i can print all this out and show it to him.. comments, everyone, please????

crownboy

I've read CoC, and while I was quite surprised at what I read, I did not feel any deep despair. Maybe it has something to do with the fact I'm only 19 and therefore I still have my entire life ahead of me (if I had found this out at 50 something, with presumably most of my life gone, I'd be so pissed!). However, I think the main reason I took it in stride is because I wasn't concerned with what the book would do to my belief system, but whether it was telling the truth or not. Ray's book is so copiusly documented, its veracity can only be denied by the most brain dead JW. The problem with most JW's is that, despite the fact they bellow about wanting to spread "the truth" and being representatives of "the truth", they really don't want to hear the truth, especially when it contradicts what they hold dear. CoC obviously kills alot of things sacred to JW's, so if they are in a typical JW mindset when reading the book, indeed it will upset them immensly. However, since most people who read the book have to some extent disassociated themselves (pun intended ) from the JW minset, it shouldn't be too much of a problem. It will usually move the person from feeling : "The JW's are good but misguided" to "the JW leaders are real a**holes, and the regular witnesses too dim witted to see it". However, since I think every Witness has the right to know "the truth about the truth", I would recommend it to any Witness at any stage of "spirituality" or age group (except maybe someone whose death is close).

SmokeEater said:

In all honesty it seemed that if Ray Franz had his way, he'd still be in the Org. That bothered me.

I had the same feeling too. Seems like if the Watchtower had simply let Ray Franz be, he would have remained a Witness and all the information he had would probably have stayed with him. They probably made a mistake by dissfellowshipping him, or maybe he would have eventually come to his senses. Others with much less knowledge had, so I suspect he might have left eventually anyway.

Go therefore and baptize the people in the name of the father and of the son... what the hell, we just need to bring up the yearbook numbers!

34

Why the bible does'nt make sense to me

by Leander in

jw
friends

for some odd reason this morning when i woke up the first thing that came into my mind was the suffering and pain that humans deal with on a daily basis.

again i'm not really sure what made me think about that so early in the morning.

(maybe it was a dream i had).

crownboy

Hi penn, good to hear from you again.

What you are saying is like 'criminals don't have much of a choice when they are caught stealing because the only alternative they have is going to jail or not stealing anymore. It's like if jail is the only choice, then that's not much of a choice.

No, I'm not saying that. There stealing is not a choice of "free will". There are rules against it. So you risk stealing at your own risk. My argument isn't against people being punished for being criminals, but for not believing in God. If you truly had "free will" in that arena, you could choose not to believe in God (based on the dearth of evidence for his existence), and not be destroyed. However, according to the bible, that simply cannot be. You must either believe in God or die. If God decides to destroy you, that is a manifestation of punishment, which means you made a wrong choice, which means you didn't have a real choice, which means you really had no free will to begin with (because free will implies choice, and choice in the context of free will implies no punishment. Since you are punished you're not really free to make a choice, just allowed to mess up if you're dumb enough to make a choice that you weren't allowed to make in the first place since you weren't free to do so anyway). I don't argue with your analysis of what the bible presents as "free will". I've read the book before, so I know that. Just don't tell me what God gives me is free will, because I'm not actually free to make my own choice (since that would mean both choices were equal, and therefore unbiased).

What you fail to realize is that people that reject God in this life will not be forced to spend eternity with God. Should God force Himself on those that rejected Him in this life?

People don't reject God because they think that spending an eternity with an all-loving, all-caring deity would be a terrible thing. They reject God because he has failed to prove to us that He exist! (Once again, I'm not talking about morally corrupt people who are condemned even by people who've never heard of YHWH, but those who have intellectual problems with YHWH). If God truly wishes for "all to be saved", perhaps an apearance on Dateline or an unequivocal sign of divine providence (such as lifting Everest of the ground at a time that is specifically requested) would do great. I would have absolutely zero qualms about worshipping a deity that provided undesputable evidence of his existence. His destroying me simply because I did not believe in Him (due to His lack of providing me evidence), seems rather unjust. If he could speak to Abraham, and if Jesus could personally assuage the doubts of Thomas, why can't I have just a taste of that?

Everyone that has ever been born in the world knows that murder is wrong.

Agree. But killing isn't always wrong (e.g. in self defense). The wrong isn't in taking a life, but in taking an innocent life. Tim Mc. Veigh got what he deserved. The terrorist had no qualms about what they did because they didn't believe they were killing innocents. They or a Nazi officer wouldn't kill someone they perceived as innocent. Is their concept of justice good? Of course not (and nothing to do with the bible, either). But their killing of people who they thought were bad is the equivalent of the U.S. killing Mc. Veigh (once again, I'm not a sympathizer, just showing you that "deep down" they still felt justified because their entire premise for killing hinged on it being morally acceptable).

Let's say your wife or sister or mother were taking a bath and they noticed that someone was in their tree outside watching them. Did the person in the tree do anything wrong? He wasn't hurting anybody.

Depends. Is my wife an exibitionist and totally apathetic to someone staring at her naked body while she bathed? (I'd rather my wife not be so open, though ) Did this boy get her permission before he engaged in this activity? (why did I never have neighbors like that? ) If my wife is not offended by the boy staring, then no one is hurt, and in my mind it's totally acceptable (of course there's the whole issue of whether the boy is under aged or not, but let's assume his parents are ok with it). Of course, if he has invaded her privacy he has hurt her emotionally (even if she doesn't know he's there this is still wrong as it's still an invasion of privacy).

In the second instance, the couple is only legally obligated to their children. If they leave orphaned children then it is wrong, as it is their responsibity (not free will ) to take care of them. Tough luck for the rest of the family. If you came from a family of Muslims and you decided to convert to Christanity, would that hurt them? Probably. But what obligation do you have to their feelings? Would you go back to Islam to please them?

Hopefully I've provided something for you to think about, Penn.

Go therefore and baptize the people in the name of the father and of the son... what the hell, we just need to bring up the yearbook numbers!

21

How sure were you that it was the truth?

by sleepy in

jw
friends

when you were a witness how sure were you that it was the truth?.

were you totally convinced or did you think it was just the best way to serve a god but not perfect.. it amazes me when i think of how vigourusly i defended the witness and my ideals when on the minisrty and in talking to friends.. what worries me is that if i was so covinced then about what i belive then should i be so convinced now.. back then i was at the pinnacle of understanding or at least i belived i was , do i feel the same now?.

well i try to not be so dogmatic about thing now.

crownboy

Ages 0-16: A solid 2. Always had questions about the faithful and discret slave, the "true religion" before Russell, the plausibility of a deity simply being there forever and the reasons God would have to kill as many people as he did in the OT (I know the reasons why, but I just didn't see the logic). I probably had more doubts about the bible than I did the Society, but I would have unequivocally given myself as a martyr to God or the Societies interpretation of Him. I wasn't a kid who simply went to meeting "because I had to". While they were obviously boring, I felt the spiritual payoff of being in "Jehovah's house" was well worth it.

Ages 16-18: 2-6 in a very precipitous manner, though my faith in God went up to a 1. Found the net, read the Ray Franz, Jim Penton and Carl Olof Jonsson books. Couldn't believe what I was finding out about the Society, but they pushed me to it since it began to bother me that they were against Witnesses reading literature that they did not sanction. If there was nothing to hide, then why the secrecy? I determined that I didn't really need religion as much I needed a relationship with God.

Ages 18-present: Began investigating the bible and my actual belief system. Up to that time had only used the net to investigate JW theology, but began looking into Christanity as well. Now I'm in the process of redefining my belief system, as I don't think Christanity is "special" anymore. Since I still live home with my parents, I still make appearances at meetings, but they both know I'm not very enthusiatic about it. They probably think I'm just going through some late adolescence "worldly phase", but are quite oblivious to the facts. Once I leave their house, there's no way I'm setting foot in a Kingdom Hall again, though.

Go therefore and baptize the people in the name of the father and of the son... what the hell, we just need to bring up the yearbook numbers!