Posts by Duncan

Unusually for a film about the Witnesses, it was all pretty accurate as far as beliefs, culture, and daily life was concerned. I think I read that the director was ex-JW, brought up in it, so that explains that.

But the overwhelming impression it left on me was the sheer flatness dullness boredom, the horribly colourless nature of day-to-day existence in the religion. Look at the picture at the top of the thread, a still from the movie. Everything is beige. All the sets are beige and pale, all the flats, houses, rooms, and kingdom hall are lit in a kind of shadowless no-contrast flat light. Deliberately so, I would have thought.

Even the acting is understated, quiet and flat. Low energy, low volume conversations throughout. The soundtrack is - far as I remember, still and music-less. everything, every dial is turned down to a low level.

I felt that watching it, it was all very repressed and quietly desperate - and I thought the production was spot-on.

Duncan

,

20

50 Years since the first moon landing

by eyeslice2 in

jw
friends

in july of 1969, i was 16 years old and was pretty excited by the prospect that the us would shortly land a man on the moon.

however, i remember, vividly and older brother at the time confidently stating that man would never walk on the moon, quoting psalms 115 - "as for the heavens, they belong to jehovah.

but the earth he has given to the sons of man.

Duncan

Can't belive it has been 10 years since I wrote this piece about the moon landings on the 40th anniversary...

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/176834/40-years-ago-moon-landing-part-played-whole-thing

Duncan.

1

Tweet from the HIGNFY people (BBC news satire)

by Duncan in

jw
friends

this was just tweeted.

picture looks familiar:.

Duncan

This was just tweeted. Picture looks familiar:

19

Amazing News!!

by The Rebel in

jw
friends

my boy is going to play for watford football club!

and whilst i didn't take his revelation to seriously, i am was glad his " goal" isn't to pioneer.

:-).

Duncan

Hey Rebel,

Hope his dream comes true. I saw my first game at Vicarage Road in 1968. Hopefully, I'll be there to cheer him on his debut.

Duncan.

8

Thankfully not many publishers remind " me" of Troy.

by The Rebel in

jw
friends

i took my son to the watford football club family day,-and the highlight- troy deeney.

he stayed until every last item was signed and every selfie was taken.

we left way after the end of the event and he left after us.

Duncan

Hello The rebel

Another Watford resident! Excellent!

You probably walked/drove right by my house to get to the Watford Open day. I live right nearby.

I didn't go this year, but could hear everything over the PA system.

Troy Deeney is an excellent example of a committed club man - the way he plays, and the way he conducts himself off the pitch too.

Duncan

8

Syllabus

by Duncan in

jw
friends

haven't posted in years, but thought i would today, since something reminded me of this story..

it's 1970 in our london-suburb congregation and it's the circuit overseer visit.

as part of his talk on the saturday night this co - john anderson, anyone remember him?

Duncan

Hello Everyone,

Haven't posted in years, but thought I would today, since something reminded me of this story.

It's 1970 in our London-suburb congregation and it's the Circuit Overseer visit. As part of his talk on the Saturday night this CO - John Anderson, anyone remember him? - pulls out the little leaflet which was then being used to promote the Truth book, and says "hands up, who knows what this is?"

"Leaflet!" No

"Tract?" No

“Brochure?” No

"Vital, life-saving information!" - I smile to think of it, but this was me, I said that. I figured that the earlier answers weren't nearly zealous or spiritual enough, but still - No.

Every answer was wrong. Eventually, he gets to the point he wants to make:

"Don't underestimate this. Because this, brothers, is a Syllabus. It's a program of Study. This is our message to the public: we offer a complete course in what the Bible truly teaches - everything you need to know in 24 hours!"

The 24 hours thing was big at the time - I think the Truth book was 24 chapters long, and consequently we would sometimes phrase it that we offered a “24-hour bible-study course".

His point was that any outline plan of study could be called a syllabus, and this little leaflet with its Truth-book contents listing constituted a syllabus of our life-saving teachings.

Fair enough. CO's were always looking for new ways to excite and fire up the brothers about getting the message out, and I could see his point about "the syllabus".

Of course, what happened next was that over the following six months in our congregation “syllabus” became the absolute top buzz-word - every brother putting it into his talk, every sister using it in her ministry-school demonstration, it was a word in constant use in every conversation down the hall.

It got a bit wearing after a while, particularly since – syllabus not really being a commonplace word - it was clear that some brothers had not quite understood the sense of it. There were a few who hadn’t twigged that the whole syllabus-thing arose from the sense in which that leaflet was a description of a course of study. Some came to view the word syllabus as simply meaning any piece of literature from the Society:

“Have you read the new “Awake!” magazine? - It’s a marvellous syllabus!” - and all that kind of thing.

And some folks (well, one at least, the star of my story here) thought it just meant “a piece of paper”.

One Friday evening, I was drinking tea in Brother Mick R’s kitchen, when he asked me to pass him that syllabus, pointing to his kitchen table.

On the table was a piece of paper – a handwritten shopping-list (him and Sister R were off to Tesco’s after). That was his “syllabus”. It was clear he was trying to impress me (a pioneer!) with him being all theocratic and on-point and up-to-date.

I was too polite to correct him, and I think I did a reasonable job in not overtly smirking at him - but, truth to tell, I guess I am doing exactly that now, from a distance of 40 years. So then, sorry, Mick.

Anyway, just another example of the way the Society conditioned its followers with buzz-words and cult-like catch-phrases. There’s probably something just like it going on right now.

Regards to all,

Duncan.

25

Listen to the Pilot Episode of JW Podcast

by God_Delusion in

jw
friends

hi guys,.

check out our first ever podcast here - http://www.jwpodcast.org/2014/10/19/s01e00-macclesfield-forest, or download this episode (right click and save).

it's finally here, our first ever jehovah's witness podcast!

Duncan

Just took a bit of a listen. well done to you all. Very enjoyable, very conversational.

well done.

Duncan.

13

The Humbling of Anthony

by Duncan in

jw
friends

i didn’t really care for anthony very much.

at the time of this story he was 13 or 14 years old, a clever and precocious kid down the hall.

he was extremely zealous about the truth and took it, and himself, very seriously.

Duncan

I didn’t really care for Anthony very much. At the time of this story he was 13 or 14 years old, a clever and precocious kid down the Hall. He was extremely zealous about The Truth and took it, and himself, very seriously. To be honest , I thought he was a bit of a prick.

I was in my early twenties, just recently married. I think now (even if I couldn’t see it then) one of the reasons I so disliked him was that I had been so very like him, so very recently. Four or five years of pioneering had cured me of all that nonsense, and I was pretty disenchanted with the Truth, and would be entirely out of it in just a couple of more years.

But this story isn’t about me, but about him. So, our cast of characters are: Anthony, Pat (a leading congregational Elder, and my new Father-in-law), and Anthony’s mother – a woman whose name I’ve forgotten, and about whom I know almost nothing – except for this one heart-breaking memory.

Anthony, then: Like I said, very studious and serious. He answered up at the meetings all the time; unfailingly he would conspicuously study up for every meeting, with all his highlights and underlinings highly visible on his Watchtower. He was very correct, very smug, holier-than-thou and superior. He had a lot of platform parts.

He cared very much about “correct grammar” - although he really wasn’t as smart as he thought he was. It used to drive me crazy the way he would always pronounce any phrase involving the word Jesus when used as a possessive noun ( i.e. phrases like “Jesus’ disciples” “Jesus’ teachings” etc) as :

“Jesu’s disciples” “Jesu’s teachings”. That’s what he said - Jee-zyooze

I would try and tell him that there was really no need to contort the language like that. You just needed to say Jesus disciples, just as if there were no apostrophe.

(Skip this digression If you’re not interested in these finer details of English Grammar: but as a general rule English has no problem with adding an s to a name ending in s. It’s perfectly okay to say: James’s cat; or Mrs Jones’s hat; or even Keats’s odes. But, by convention, when the name is from antiquity, adding an s to a name ending in s is never done. We never say Achilles’s heel, King Midas’s touch or Jesus’s disciples. The correct thing to say is just: Jesus’ disciples.)

But Anthony would not have it. “Look, if I just say Jesus, that’s just not right – because it has an apostrophe there. But , you know, sometimes Jesus is referred to as Jesu. So, the best thing to do when there’s an apostrophe is to say Jesu’s. I’m sorry, but I do think that I am right, not you.”

He just wouldn’t be told. So, alongside all his other fine, theocratic qualities we might add a streak of prideful stubbornness. I suspected that I wasn’t the only one down the Hall who found him tiresome.

A word or two about Pat: an Elder from the very beginning of the Elder arrangement, Pat had been a leading light in his congregation for many years. His congregation (and Anthony’s) wasn’t mine or my new wife’s, we lived a way away. But we spent a lot of time there, and knew everyone pretty well. Pat was – in the classic Elder tradition – all sweetness and light down the Hall, but rather a different animal at home. Away from the congregation, his default setting was “irritable”, which could flare up at any time into “furious” - he had a very short fuse.

The one thing, though, that brought out the very worst in him was driving. He would curse and shout at the other drivers all the time. Driving was a deadly serious competition, and everyone else was cheating! He couldn’t get through the shortest journey without, at some point, point winding down his window and screaming “Learn to drive, you stupid scrubber!” (woman driver) or “Just watch where you’re going, you wanker!” (if it was a man).

I’m not saying he was all bad. Clearly, he loved his wife and family above all else, and he could be very funny company when you went for a drink. I quite liked him. He was just a normal bloke, I suppose, in lots of ways. The point I’m making is that the “good, meek Christian” and “mature Elder” personality is , so often, just a sham, a suit of clothes worn only at meetings.

Anyway, Pat was the book-study conductor at the local group, and that’s where this story is set. You should know something about Pat’s style of public speaking, and the way he conducted the book-study:

He had quite a. Staccato and punctuated. Way of speaking. And it was full of. Lots of filler questions. What about that then? How do we feel about that? [and, looking at someone in particular] so, what do you say?

For those of us who knew him, and were accustomed to his way, we knew the drill. We’d get to the end of the paragraph, or whatever, and he would start filling with “So, how about that then? What do we think?”

To which the correct response (if it was you he was looking at) was always “Marvellous!” “Wonderful!” “So upbuilding!” and so on. It was just his way, he was the study conductor, and felt the need to keep the meeting moving, and when he couldn’t think of anything else, it was always “So, what about this? How do we feel?”

And one particular Tuesday evening, we had Anthony and his family at our study group. He wasn’t part of our study group – perhaps the family had been visiting someone, or something, but that evening there was Anthony, his mum and dad and younger sister swelling our numbers.

Now, Anthony’s family , I guess, was not accustomed so much to Pat’s constant questioning style. But they quickly seemed to get the hang of it. A lot of nodding, a lot of “yes, wonderful, such good counsel” - they seemed to be doing fine.

Until about half way through. At this point, Pat turns his gaze upon Anthony and he says

“So, what do you think of it so far?”

Now, those readers who grew up in the UK will know exactly where this is going, but I had better explain for the benefit of everyone else...

Back in those days, back in the seventies, the most popular entertainers in the country were a comedy double-act called Morecambe and Wise. They were huge. Their TV shows got top ratings and their Christmas specials still hold records even today for the highest- ever viewing figures. Everyone loved them, they were a National Institution.

And everyone knew their catch-phrases.

One of their most popular and enduring catch-phrases was where Morecambe would interrupt proceedings, turn to the audience and shout: “What do you think of it so far?”

To which the audience heartily shouted back “RUBBISH!” * huge laughter *

... and we’re back in the book-study now, where Anthony is about to make his colossal miscalculation.

Who knows why Pat phrased his question to Anthony in that particular way? He could not have been unaware of the catch-phrase. Why did he do it?

But, Anthony, seemingly believing that Pat was just joshing him along, well, his face lights up and he pipes back:

“RUBBISH! ha-ha-ha-ha ...”

His laughter dies on his lips as Pat simply sits staring at him, completely deadpan. The room goes quiet, and Anthony turns scarlet.

Pat lets the moment linger.

“Oh.” And he leaves another pause.

“Oh. I see.”

“So. You think it’s rubbish, do you?”

The room was still very quiet, and round about now, I’m thinking – okay Pat, that’s enough. Now move on.

But Pat hadn’t finished. Not by a long sight.

“You think. Jehovah’s word. Is a load of rubbish. Do you?”

“You think. All this material. The brothers prepare for us. Is just a load of rubbish?”

Anthony is – by this point - beyond mortified. He can’t even speak. He can’t answer back to even apologise, or explain. He just wants to disappear.

And Pat still hasn’t finished. He has the taste of blood, he’s like a dog with a rat in its jaws - he ‘s not going to stop shaking it until it is absolutely dead.

“Well. Let me tell you. If it’s okay with you, Anthony. I will continue to take. A rather different view.”

“ I. Do not think. It is rubbish.”

And finally, it is over. Pat says “okay, on to paragraph twelve...”

The rest of the book-study continues without incident. Anthony says not a word. Nor his family. Nobody even mentions anything after it has finished. I think everyone is simply too embarrassed.

I lost a lot of respect for Pat that day. Anthony was a holier-than-thou prick, but what Pat did was just brutal. And I’m pretty sure he knew what he was doing with the catch-phrase thing.

Driving home in the car, later that evening, the first one to mention it at all, is Pat’s wife (my mother-in-law) Alice.

The ever-loyal Alice says “Well, I simply don’t know WHAT got into Anthony tonight! Why would ANYONE say that?”

And Pat said simply: “Well, he needed bringing down a peg or two. Has done for ages.”

And now I’m sure about the catch phrase.

I don’t know whatever became of Anthony, did he stay in the Truth? Did he get out? Did Pat do him a sort-of favour? I don’t know.

My abiding memory of the whole thing is Anthony’s mother, sat next to me.

Just as Pat was saying “on to paragraph twelve..” I could just hear her say, almost under her breath, in the most anguished, heart-breaking whisper: “ Oh, Anthony....”