Posts by OnTheWayOut

I won't be reading Tony's story because I made a 2011 New Year's Resolution to not read Watchtower garbage. I am not so ridged that I won't look at a thing or two, but reading their articles or viewing their videos in their entirety just makes me upset, so I don't do it.

So those who children leave the "truth" look bad?

I am sure that statement is intentional. It is a way to belittle anyone they wish to whose children did not stay in the religion, and it further emphasizes the need to make your children follow the rules and to break their spirit of "independence."

I was told that I SHOULD NEVER HAVE KIDS in this worldly system, Woe the pregnant women and yad, yad, yad. I was only about 12 years old in 1975 but I clearly remember the warning about not having kids.

You were correct in your understanding, but they must embrace those that didn't obey as fully as you because children are the only recruits they seem to get these days.

You are experiencing the two-faced speaking of Jehovah's Witnesses and their leaders. They can elevate themselves with the same actions that demote others. You and your husband were low-level members. Perhaps, at the congregation level, you could have experienced double standard blessings if you remained seemingly in line with the leaders, but you must not question them for even that to happen.

He writes stuff like a child throwing a tantrum:

I immediately thought of what Perry writes when I read that.

If it were said that baptism or taking life's water from Jehovah's Witnesses is comparable to a drink whose slogan is "gives you wings," then it was a horrible illustration that will confuse all those converted Catholics that it is part of the path to heaven- getting your angel wings. It will contribute (in some small way) in that area to partakers at the Memorial.

Either that, or it's just something that was said and 99% weren't really listening.

The real question is...will they give him a memorial talk and will it be in the Kingdom Hall?

Actually, that is the real question. He snapped. His mental illness can be blamed. He was faithful to the blood doctrine, and we all know that's the real test when some JW is dying in the hospital.

I don't know enough about this guy to say anything about his beliefs contributing to his illness or lack of treatment, but I do know enough about the religion to know that Watchtower would have hoped he took blood so they could kick him out. But he blew that for them.

You are on to something. We debate this ourselves because some feel more strongly than others one way or the other. It does seem that somewhere back in the early days, "Bible Students" were free to disagree with certain things and as time went on, there was less tolerance for that.

I don't think that everyone among the presidents of Watchtower to the Governing Body all got up every morning and said they were ready for another day of mind-controlling the members. But when the writers of the strange doctrines said that God "spirit-directs" them (leaving room for error as compared to "inspires") they have to kind of insist that members go along without questioning it.

To me, the biggest factor in Watchtower going further and further down the path of dangerous mind-control was some kind of paranoia that members could not be trusted and would not do the right thing unless they were told what that right thing was. That, and always always always putting the preservation of the organization ahead of anything that might benefit individuals has gotten them where they are today.

There might possibly be some ancient article on confessing to Jehovah and maybe just ironing out a problem with a brother by going to that brother, but in the latter case I don't think it was about sin. It was about a difference between two "brothers." Heck, there might be an actual quote about confessing to another "person." But I just cannot imagine that it included serious sins such as the sexual ones or lighting a cigarette.

YES, that last one (smoking) is considered a serious sin- way more serious than beating your wife, lying on your taxes, getting a bit drunk. I could imagine that if it were "just" beating your wife, then they might say that there is no need to report it.

Many of these lawsuits are the result of the misuse of the tongue.

Man, don't even get me started on how that double entendre is SO TRUE IN THE CASE OF PEDOPHILES. It's not a laughing matter, but I only wish they could stop and laugh at their own past misstatements.

"The legal consequences of a breach of confidentiality by elders can be substantial . If the elders fail to follow the Society's direction carefully in handling confidential matters, such mistakes could result in successful litigation by those offended."

And sometimes, just contacting the Society (as YOU ARE ALWAYS DIRECTED TO DO) can be a breach of confidentiality. This smacks of insisting on telling Headquarters about a crime, but also insisting on not warning the congregation.