Posts by LisaRose

45

Closest to the truth?

by punkofnice in

i know many jws that state that the watchtower corporation is the 'closest to the truth'.

thus they quiet their cognitive dissonance.. i don't have access to a corporation library any more.

is this a stance that the watchtower corporation has actually claimed?.

I don't remember if they used that specific term, but it sounds like reasoning they would use. It's sort of an all purpose thought stopper if a person sees issues or problems in the organization. No matter what happens that may cause them to doubt, they think "people are imperfect but it's still the organization that is the closest thing to the truth".

I remember a Watchtower article in the late nineties that basically said that even though mistakes may have been made by Jehovah's organization, they were the only ones to teach the truth about hell fire and the trinity, so they were still far better than false religion. I know now that about that time growth had slowed down quite a bit, perhaps they noticed an increase in people leaving over their failed date predictions or other issues. This line of reasoning actually worked on me for a short time and kept me stuck for a few years, not really in and not really out.

10

The Dead Generation (Monty Python Spoof)

by Scully in

the dead generation.

gbm: "no it isn't".

jw: "yes it is, look at it!

LisaRose

Very funny. MP stuff has a wide range of applicability... like the Bible does.
A photo of the GB in their suits brought the Lumberjack Song in my mind.

Welcome Malachi constant, I've not seen your posts before. Do you mean the Monty python Lumberjack song? I used to listen to a comedy radio station on the eighties in the Southern California area that played a lot of Monty Python, including this gem. My children tell me they actually remember this, I like to think it's part of the reason they are not currently Jehovahs Witnesses.

I'm a Lumberjack and I'm OK
I sleep all night and I work all day.
He's a lumberjack and he's OK

He sleeps all night and he works all day.

I cut down trees, I eat my lunch, I go to the lavatory. On Wednesdays I go shopping and have buttered scones for tea

He cut down trees, he eat his lunch, He go to the lavatory.

On Wednesdays he go shopping and has buttered scones for tea.

He's a lumberjack and he's OK

He sleeps all night and he works all day.
I cut down trees, I skip and jump, I like to press wild flowers

I put on women's clothing and hang around in bars.

He cuts down trees, he skips and jumps, He likes to press wild flowers

He puts on women's clothing and hangs around in bars.

He's a lumberjack and he's OK

He sleeps all night and he works all day.

I cut down trees, I wear high heels, Suspendies and a bra.I wish I'd been a girlie, just like my dear mamma.

He cuts down trees, he wears high heels? Suspendies... and a bra?
... He's a lumberjack and he's OK He sleeps all night and he works all day.
... He's/I'm a lumberjack and he's/I'm OKHe/I sleep all night and he/I work all day.

70

"Most women would prefer to be stay at home housewives. Women's lib did alot of damage to women!"

by purrpurr in

jw
friends

the above is a quote from a jw female relative.

this was in response to a discussion about the suffragette movement ( and the movie about it that's currently in cinemas).

she seemed to think that it would be so much better if women were just daughters/ wives/ mothers and didn't go out to work and have career's?

LisaRose

Crofty: The modern radical feminist movement is nothing more than misandry hiding behind a facade of of victimhood.
They make videos about "manspreading" and "microaggressions" while ignoring the real sources of female inequality in the world.

Which is what? I honestly don't know what you mean. What is the real source of female inequality in the world? I had to look up the meaning of misandry (the hatred of men or boys) but still do not know what you mean.

16

It's OK to be an Apostate ... but only if you're on the Governing Body

by Simon in

look at the governing body.

none of them believe now what the wts believed back when they were born and later baptized.. so why aren't they disfellowshipped for apostasy?.

simple - because the true beliefs are always taken to mean whatever they currently consider them to be.. think about it - they can never be apostates because whatever they decide to believe becomes "the truth" and anyone not believing it is then guilty of apostasy, even if they believe things the wts has taught them all their lives.. if you do believe in the bible and jesus story, do you think this is what he intended?

LisaRose

The current organization shares very little with the organization that existed in the 1914-1919 timeframe that was supposedly when Jehovah chose them to be his channel of communication to mankind. So what was it that God saw in this group that made him choose them? And if what they taught was so wonderful, why have they changed so much of it since then?

23

In the past we taught it, but now we teach other thing....

by opusdei1972 in

i have been reading the watchtower study edition of march 2016. here some deceptive statements so as to justify their new lights:.

when were gods people held captive by babylon the great?.

that spiritual captivity lasted from the second century c.e.

LisaRose

For a number of years, we explained that this captivity began in 1918...The Christian congregation, in effect, was held
captive by Babylon the Great. That captivity began sometime in the second century C.E. and continued until the cleansing of the spiritual temple in the time of the end...

So they have exchanged one ridiculous teaching for another ridiculous teaching, it's not new light but new dim. The keep trying to make events that happened in 1914-1918 somehow important and a fulfillment of bible prophecy, when there is really no evidence of any of it. They claim God looked down on the earth and approved of the international bible students, because they were the only group teaching truth, but they hardly teach anything now that was a doctrine back then, so what was so impressive about them as opposed to any other religion? At least most mainstream religions didn't make ridiculous and failed date predictions.

They based the 1914 date on an incorrect date for the fall of Jerusalem, so the only thing impressive about it was their luck that world war I started in that year. Nothing they actually predicted to happen actually did. They also still taught many things they now condemn, like Christmas and birthdays.

13

State lawsuit against Jehovah's Witnesses

by Coded Logic in

the first of many lawsuits?.

(edited).

november 09, 2015. wilmington, delaware the attorney general's office is suing elders of the sussex county congregation for not reporting an unlawful sexual relationship between a woman and a 14-year-old boy, both of whom were congregation members.. state law requires any person, agency, organization or entity who knows or in good faith suspects that a child is being abused or neglected to call a 24-hour hotline.

LisaRose

They have tried to claim clergy penitent privilege before, but I think they usually fail, because a confession usually involves one person and a priest, there is an expectation of confidentiality. A judicial committee is nothing like that, the person knows going in that there will be no confidentiality, there are all three elders involved, other elders in the congregation who may be told plus they always inform Bethel, and often an announcement that some action was taken is given to the congregation. there is nothing sacred or secret about. But they will do anything to avoid doing the right thing, which is to notify the police in cases of child sex abuse whether it's required by the law or not.

50

Are single sisters happier?

by Esmeralda001 in

this question is for the ladies out there, but if you are a man and you'd like to share your thoughts on the following topic you are welcomed to do so.

given the wt society's view on women, did any of you ladies gave up on the idea of getting married "in the truth".

in such case, did you sometimes feel that you were missing out?

LisaRose

Thank you for your answer. I am sorry that you were trapped in an unhappy marriage for so long! The WT society advises young people to wait until they are mature enough before making such a big life commitement. May I ask you why you married so young? Did your parents agree with your choice?

Many factors contributed. At the time we were told that Armageddon was imminent, I married in 1973, the big A was supposed to happen in 1975, and the religion taught at the time that after Armageddon people were going to not marry, so if you didn't get hitched before then, no sex for you. It was silly and I was very, very immature. Of course you should wait until you are mature to marry, but college was not permitted, so my options were to get a job and live at home (young, single women were discouraged from living on their own) or get married. I was painfully shy and still under eighteen and couldn't get a job at the time (McDonald's didn't hire women then) so I was desperate to get out of the house, my mom had terrible mood swings and was borderline abusive, she saw me as a failure and was hyper critical of everything I did. She once slapped me in the face she caused a severe nose bleed.

Like many young women, I saw marriage as a ticket to adult hood. Of course people act different when they are dating, but I admit I closed my eyes to some signs he was selfish and fairly immature himself. But the question is, do you let someone suffer for years because they made a foolish mistake? Did I have to be punished because I was a silly teen aged girl? Surprisingly my parents did not oppose it, although I am sure they had their reservations. My ex was newly baptized, he had a past and had done some horrible things, like dealing drugs, but was trying to shape up. But they were friends of his parents, and I think they thought it was my best option. Within six months my ex stopped going to meetings, in a few years he was disfellowshipped. I slogged on with the religion by myself. He also couldn't keep a job, he had probably twenty or thirty jobs in the twenty eight years we were married, I lost count, it might have been more. My mother confessed to me that she wanted to tell me to leave him "but of course I couldn't". That just made me mad, if I had had any sympathy or encouragement I would have left him in a heartbeat. I would have gladly lived celibate for the rest of my life, but by the time I did finally leave, the stupidity of the whole thing made me lose my faith in the religion. We don't live in bible times where a woman is stoned if she is raped (but only if she lives in the city, cause she should have screamed) or where it can be fixed by a forced marriage and twenty sheep given to the father. The bible reflected the morality of the time, not universal truly the that are the only way to be.

Divorce may not be the ideal, but it is a reality. You could even call it a sin, but why do you have to disfellowship people because they left an intolerable situation? I am not the only person forced out because of this. Others manage to manipulate the system and get a convenient divorce, but I couldn't lie and be that much of a hypocrite. I knew a man that claimed his invalid wife confessed to adultery, he got a divorce and married his wife's (much younger) caretaker and stayed an elder. It happens, and they get away with it, especially if it's the man who makes the claim. Others have their JW spouse leave them because they left the religion, even though it's technically not grounds for divorce.

50

Are single sisters happier?

by Esmeralda001 in

this question is for the ladies out there, but if you are a man and you'd like to share your thoughts on the following topic you are welcomed to do so.

given the wt society's view on women, did any of you ladies gave up on the idea of getting married "in the truth".

in such case, did you sometimes feel that you were missing out?

LisaRose

I was a classic example, rushed into an early marriage at 17, made a mistake in who I chose and had to live with that bad choice for 28 years, as divorce was not an option. I eventually left both the marriage and the religion, as my health began to suffer and I just could not tolerate the mental pain. It's a shame it had to come to that, if I had been allowed to divorce I would have had a very different life. I was told that it was always better to preserve the marriage no matter what, which is probably the worst advice I ever got in my life. All I did was give my children a bad example of what marriage is, my children are now paying the price for that in their own lives. My suffering was for nothing.

The Watchtower model of early marriages and no divorce is a failure. Rather than resulting in happy marriages and intact families, it results in failed marriages, unhappy marriages and people getting disfellowshipped because they see no other way out. Choosing to stay unmarried is fine if that's what you want, but it shouldn't be a decision you make because your choices are so limited.

They solution is to stop using a book written thousands of years ago as a guide to morality. Sex outside of marriage is not some horrible thing and pretending it is just make young people rush into marriage, because young people have a natural and normal desire to have sex. They shouldn't be made to feel guilty for doing what people have done for thousands of years. Instead they should focus on how to have a healthy relationship, and how to be responsible about sex.

If people do make a mistake in choosing a marriage partner they should be allowed to divorce, not forced to stay no matter what, that is just a recipe for disaster.

55

SHUNNING - Unchristian Psychological Torture

by EdenOne in

some time ago, i wrote an extensive article on shunning and published it on my website.

since that website had views on doctrinal matters that no longer reflect my current stand, i took the website down.

however, my views on this matter are still current, and for the benefit of everyone here, i'm going to post the article here.

LisaRose

My point is, you aren't making an effective argument. You're taking a book that can be interpreted countless different ways and interpreting it differently. That's all. From the perspective of a Jehovah's Witness the bible does justify shunning, and you cannot prove it doesn't.

As I said in my private message, this is my opinion, which as far as I know I am entitled to have. I gave my reasons, you are free to disagree, but I am not going to be drawn into a debate about it or argue the point, I have better things to do with my time.

But I am wondering why, if my argument was so weak, you sent me a private message and posted the exact same response here twice? It seems like what I said really bothers you, which makes me think that my argument wasn't actually weak at all. Just sayin' .

55

SHUNNING - Unchristian Psychological Torture

by EdenOne in

some time ago, i wrote an extensive article on shunning and published it on my website.

since that website had views on doctrinal matters that no longer reflect my current stand, i took the website down.

however, my views on this matter are still current, and for the benefit of everyone here, i'm going to post the article here.

LisaRose

ymore I generally try to stay out of bible debate because it's all interpretation. But you're factually wrong about the bible not encouraging shunning.

I didn't say the bible doesn't say to not talk to people for religious reasons, but it isn't done as the Jehovah's Witnesses practice it.

The old testament isn't really relevant. No Christian Church stones people for adultery, even the JWs.

As an atheist, the bible is not my guidebook anymore, but the point I am trying to make is that the Watchtower has very little biblical basis for the way they practice shunning.