Posts by OnTheWayOut

It really is the same-old same-old arguments. Christians insist on personal anecdotes as evidence for their God and they, along with others, insist on hardcore evidence from nonbelievers that God doesn't exist. This is because they know such evidence couldn't possibly exist.

There is at least an equal amount of anecdotal evidence that the god of Christianity doesn't exist as there are personal anecdotes that "He" does exist - the inaction in many circumstances and allowing of evil upon his worshippers. And believers know good and well that fantastical stories about Superman, Santa Claus, other gods, etc. allow them to dismiss belief without the same type of evidence they demand from nonbelievers in their fantastical God.

"Belief" or "believing in" someone or something is just as the opening post said. Also, "faith/faith-in". And it varies a bit from person to person. Having been on the other side of "belief in God," I get that many will continue to have belief. I might debate on the forum, but I really know that people are on their own journey and I won't browbeat those that don't insist on their beliefs being put upon others.

But as former JW's, we need to understand the passion of those who are sure they are right. I have occasionally not reminded myself of that and I will try harder.

Certainly, belief in some kind of creator is vastly different than the fire-and-brimstone preaching of hard core Christians or Muslims. Most "believers" are closing the gaps on the god-of-the-gaps and accepting what science offers, but just not letting go of an intelligence behind it all. I admire their optimism.

I never look at things the way the opening post asks.
Example: The World Trade Center buildings came crashing down on Sept. 11, 2001, but a NYC firefighter/paramedic dragged a victim out and had to stay with the victim all the way to the emergency room. That same firefighter/paramedic met a nurse that day and they fell in love and married and have a ten and an eight year old child today.
I don't see that as a reason to say "It wasn't all bad." I could also have put my example in the Nazi prison camps.

Any good that came of it was "IN SPITE OF IT," not credited to the cult. The price overall for any good was too high.

I am stunned!
They sent a known pedophile to a new congregation with a commendation for his work with children.
They are criminally negligent.

Other things about the letter. They basically say:
Brother Kendricks is a fine brother. He was placed on restrictions for bursts of anger during his divorce, but HEY- She didn't submit well to his headship, allowed her daughter to date a worldly person and the daughter got pregnant. Wouldn't any good brother have outbursts when such violations of (Watchtower's) Jehovah's will take place? She's gone from his life and she is inactive now, so he was justified in all that- just blame it all on the woman. After-all, Adam did it.

Brother Kendricks has been away from Watchtower drones for months, so any other problems you see with him will clear up if he hangs out with JW's, especially children. He loves children. He plays the violin. Such a great brother. Any problems at all with him are due to that witch he was married to and discouragement from proper counsel he received only because we had to. He'll be fine, I would let him babysit my kids.

This was all I had to read from the news summary of the story:

It had emerged that victims of sexual abuse by a former trustee of that congregation had been required to meet and answer questions from their abuser, who had just been released from the prison he was given for abusing them, a tribunal documentshows.

That has the ring of truth to it. Watchtower thinks it is more important to establish whether or not a member has violated some rules and needs judicial matters to proceed than it is to protect sexual abuse victims from further psychological damage, so it forces them to face questions from their abuser.

Here's Don Adams getting instructions from the Legal Dept.

I am sorry. When I hear that name (Don Adams), all I can think of is a bumbling fool named Maxwell Smart.

While the Governing Body stepped down in 2000 as a way to protect them and/or the organization from lawsuits, keeping this guy in office up until he's too old to do the job pretty much seals it for me that he isn't really running Watchtower. I imagine it's the lawyers doing most of the decision making. I do think a room full of Maxwell Smart-type Governing Body members decide doctrinal matters but have to run it by Legal and the Board of Directors (for financial reasons) before ultimately deciding anything.

Edited to add:
I actually think of new light occurring similarly to Maxwell Smart bluffing when faced with the enemy.
GB member suggests: Would you believe...

Why I state that it is not in our head is because there have been numerous examples of people knowing what others were doing around or near them while they were unconscious or otherwise not privy to someone else's conversations or situations. Yet many of these people wake up knowing things that they could not have known.

This anecdotal evidence has been suggested many times. WHAT PROOF that such experiences are actual and not fabricated or mistold? Site an actual case where some kind of actual affidavits are available that would be acceptable in a court of law as eyewitness accounts.

I read where people knew what was in the room while they were unconscious or what people were saying. I have never read where that was properly documented and it wasn't just some vague testimony. Without better documentation, it is no different than making bold ties to current events from vague things written by Nostradamus.

Even one of the most widely known/documented cases of a NDE does not offer solid testimony and there is controversy over whether the patient's experiences were caused during a time while she was alive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pam_Reynolds_case

I challenge that most other cases are totally bull crap made up based on the above or similar stories.

Some people get exposed to the ugly side of JW's more than others when it comes to shunning or marking or cliques or double standards with favoritism for the "in" crowd and harsh treatment for the "out" crowd.

In other cases, a person is kicked out for breaking various rules and that leads to them investigating the religion. Or similarly, a person who is in may be disturbed by a particular change in the teachings because the way it was understood was ingrained in him or very important to him. Many others don't pay attention to the details and just figure that smarter/more spiritual people than them have it all figured out.

Did you know the Elders under the older regimes would have a young child crossed examined by the pedophile who molested her/him?

I think they still have the rule that if there is one witness, the victim only, and no confession, that the victim should have to make his/her accusation in the presence of the accused along with "some" elders. They do this to apply some obscure part of a scripture that has more to do with an adult stealing donkeys or harvesting your neighbor's olive tree. They don't even worry that making a child face a pedophile and openly accusing him might be such a bad idea for that child's state of mind.