Posts by Olin Moyles Ghost

16

Republican Witnesses and Democrat Witnesses

by inkling in

it seems to me that witnesses are political in .

much the same way they are racist: i.e.

but not out loud.. i recall a conversation during a coffee break.

Olin Moyles Ghost

This is not surprising. Everyone (even JWs) has an opinion about the news, politics, etc. I know several JWs who are as partisan as any "worldly" person. Of course, whenever they have political discussions, they insert the required disclaimers such as "of course, The Kingdom is the only real hope" and "I look forward to the time when we won't have to worry about this stuff," etc.

I noticed an odd phenomenon over the last couple years during the Obama ascendancy. Lots of JWs (like the rest of the country) were impressed with his soaring oratory and progressive ideas, especially after 8 years of GW Bush. This created cognitive dissonance, and I heard multiple Witnesses talk about how great Obama's speech was...and how that was "scary." The idea was that Obama was so smooth and politically attractive that Satan had to be playing a big role in his success.

Another odd reaction I've seen by some Witnesses is this. They speak in favor of a particular candidate for president--and explain that they hope this person wins because they expect that Armageddon will come during his/her administration.

I see techniques such as those described above simply as ways to get around the JW "neutrality" issue and express a political opinion.

52

Did The Witnesses Predict the United Nations in Advance?

by TD in

jw
friends

it's been reported on this forum that bethel speakers at this summer's conventions are asserting that the establishment of the united nations in 1945 was predicted in advance by the witnesses.

this is being presented as validation of the claim that the witnesses are god's one true organization directed by holy spirit.. .

the basis for this claim originates with a public address entitled, peace - can it last given by n.h. knorr at the new world theocratic assembly, on september 20 of 1942. .

Olin Moyles Ghost

This is an excellent, but underappreciated thread. Glad I caught it on the second time around.

As a young JW, this piece of WT history was very faith-strengthening to me. But I also knew about some of the failures and wrong expectations. of the WTS. And somewhere in the dark recesses of my mind I had a hard time reconciling the fact that we should use this WWII/UN experience as a proof that the WTS is used by God, but we should not use the Society's failed expectations as a proof that the WTS is not used by God. It seemed like a double standard.

165

Is this really smoking gun of Obama's Kenyan birth?

by What-A-Coincidence in

time to spicy up this joint wid sum conspiracy, been too boring around here... here u go.... http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=page.view&pageid=105764.

.

Olin Moyles Ghost

This "birther" debate is a gift for Democrats and the administration. It makes the right look like a bunch of looney conspiracy theorists. The more airtime that is given to the "birthers" is less airtime that is available to criticize the administration's policies (e.g., health care, tax policy).

3

why...for you or me is it so hard to move on?...i know not all have this prob

by oompa in

jw
friends

funny how i really miss my friends....i grew up with them......now i have new friends.....just a few.......but i miss my old friends........i sooo hate how if you happen to change you mind on something....have your own opinion....... you are so kicked to the curb........oompa.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Oompa: For folks like you who have invested decades of their lives in the organization, it's not the least bit surprising that it's hard to move on. If your long-time friends suddenly abandon you, how could you not feel hurt?

Of course, they're probably hurt and confused too. They probably blame you for "turning your back on Jehovah" or something similar. I know that I had those feelings years ago when, as a believing JW, some people close to me left the organization. These individuals didn't leave because of doctrinal issues. Rather, they were DF'd for "immorality" and were enjoying their "worldly lifestyle" and not making an effort to get reinstated. I recall telling one of these folks that it hurt me that he was choosing this lifestyle over our friendship.

Have you reached out to your JW friends in a social way? If not, perhaps they think that you've abandoned them? Who knows, if you reach out to them you might be pleasantly surprised.

Of course, this is all assuming that you want to hang onto your JW relationships. As is well-documented on this site, maintaining relationships with JWs can make it more difficult to fade (if you don't keep your mouth shut, you could end up in a committee). But if you want to try to keep these relationships, perhaps you should be pro-active.

13

Chaplinsky: a Fine Example of "Christian Conduct"

by Farkel in

if the wts likes to brag about anything other than themselves and how great they are, it is their boasts about their triumphs in the united states supreme court.

they brag about how much the people of the united states owes them and their god jehovah for their part in championing freedom of speech and religion in america.. we've seen all of those supreme court cases paraded about in various wts publications, haven't we?.

i recently found one of them that is nowhere to be found on my wt cd rom.

Olin Moyles Ghost

The Chaplinsky case was also discussed on this thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/166078/1/Judge-Rutherford-its-OK-to-say-God-damn-Chaplinsky-v-New-Hampshire

If you're able to find a copy of the Society's briefs to the Supreme Court (submitted by Rutherford and Covington), you'll see the argument that it's ok to say God-Damn.

24

Could the WTS be sued for slander for DF'ing?

by avishai in

Olin Moyles Ghost

Not in the USA, anyway. Simply announcing that 'XYZ is no longer one of JWs' is not slander. Truth is an absolute defense to a defamation claim (libel or slander). Since XYZ was DF'd or DA'd, then XYZ is no longer a member of the religious organization known as JWs. Thus, the statement is true and there is no slander.

And to answer the question whether anyone has tried to sue the WTS for defamation--yes, they have. Olin Moyle won a libel lawsuit against the WTS for publishing defamatory things about him in the WT magazine.

In the 1980s, a DA'd witness sued the WTS for defamation. The 9th circuit court of appeals shot her down. The case is Paul v. Watchtower. A copy of the opinion is available on Barbara Anderson's excellent Watchtowerdocuments.com website: http://www.watchtowerdocuments.com/downloads/1987%20Paul%20Decision%209th%20Circuit%20Court%20Appeals.pdf

This case dealt with a DA'd person who was shunned by her former fellow Witnesses, so it's not exactly the same as the issue raised in this thread. But cases like this show that U.S. courts are unlikely to allow a plaintiff to succeed against a religious organization when the suit is based on religious practices--such as shunning and disfellowshiping.

59

The Generation That Will Not Pass Away...

by undercover in

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534804,00.html?test=latestnews.

britain's last living world war i veteran dies at 111. .

how's that watchower prophecy working out?.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Sometimes it's helpful to see an example of exactly who made up "the generation that would not pass away." It puts a human face on it.

For example, below is a portrait of a family taken in 1910. You can tell by looking at the picture that these folks belonged to a time that has long passed. These people pictured below are long gone, along with millions upon millions of others who supposedly 'would never die.'

Sure, there are still some folks living who were babies and toddlers in 1914--but practically everyone who was an adult in 1914 is now dead. Before too many years, everyone who was an adult in 1920 when Judge Rutherford proclaimed "Millions Now Living Will Never Die" will also be dead.

And before too many more years, we'll all be dead too. Just like these folks.

59

The Generation That Will Not Pass Away...

by undercover in

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,534804,00.html?test=latestnews.

britain's last living world war i veteran dies at 111. .

how's that watchower prophecy working out?.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Undercover, that's exactly what I thought when I saw the news report this weekend. I even made a post about it: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/179260/1/UK-Prime-Minister-the-1914-generation-has-left-us

I found UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown's statement particularly interesting: "The noblest of all the generations has left us, but they will never be forgotten. We say today with still greater force, we will remember them."

And regarding the 1984 WT cover photo--I would not be surprised if all these folks are now dead. If I recall correctly, the WT doctrine at the time was that the "generation" only included people old enough to recognize what was going on in 1914. If that's the case, then I suspect that the WT chose people who were at least 10 years old in 1914 for that photo. That would put the youngest at age 80 at the time the photo was taken. Fast-forward to today, and that person would be 105. Thus, I suspect they're all dead.

39

Birthday Celebrations & other shenanigans

by homeschool in

well, here's my latest "thing"...i plan on speaking with my siblings & their mates in the near future.

i have told them that i have questions regarding some doctrines, mainly stuff like birthdays, mother's day, father's day, etc.

my hubby has some questions for them regarding their wacky blood doctrine (but i wont cover that in this thread).

Olin Moyles Ghost

Those are some good points. I know for a fact that lots of active, faithful Witnesses do not think celebrating birthdays is a big deal. Nonetheless, they don't celebrate birthdays because they're instructed not to. It's similar to the old "alternative service" prohibition. Nobody really understood why it was sinful to work in a civilian hospital in order to get out of going to war--but they did what they were told.

Here are my favorite points about why there's nothing wrong with celebrating a birthday:

God does not forbid it in the Bible--even in the Old Testament. Obviously, celebrating birthdays was known back then (you cited the account of Pharoah's birthday in Genesis). So, why didn't God forbid it in the Law? He forbade all sorts of nit-picky, specific acts such as 'boiling a kid in its mother's milk.' It stands to reason that if he didn't want his people to celebrate birthdays, he would have told them not to.
There is a recorded example of God's faithful angels celebrating a birthday--the birth of Christ. In Luke, the angels are in the fields rejoicing on the night Christ was born. They were celebrating his birth on the day he was born. If that isn't celebrating a birthday...what is?
Some JWs argue that there's no evidence of God's servants in Bible times celebrating birthdays and that some birthday observances have 'pagan' origins. Even if that is so, does that necessarily mean that we are forbidden to do so? That doesn't make sense. For example, there is no recorded scriptural passage showing that God's servants (Israelite or Christian) went to the theater and saw a play. In fact, the Roman theater of the First Century was a haven of debauchery, showing bawdy and violent performances, including ones in which Christians were killed. If anything has a false-religious background, it would be the theater. So, fast-forward to today. Modern JWs have no problem attending theatrical performances and movies as long as they are not too racy. Why not apply the same standard to birthday celebrations?

Finally, did you know that JWs are allowed to have one celebration of a birth in their lifetime? They call it a baby shower. Think about what a baby shower is--it's a party that celebrates the birth of a child in which the child is given presents. Now a baby shower is not held on the day the child is born (usually a few weeks/months before), but I submit that it doesn't matter. It's still a birthday party called by another name.

48

Lurkers Please Read

by IWillBeDubbedNoMore in

jw
friends

the definition of an apostate is one who has abandoned his religious faith.

i was baptized in 1974. the religion i joined believed that jesus selected the bible students in 1919 to do a separating work.

we had to preach to find the sheep like ones.

Olin Moyles Ghost

There certainly have been tremendous changes in teachings over the past few decades. These changes have not simply been academic changes in understanding of some obscure scripture. Rather, they have been real changes that have dramatically affected peoples' lives.

Take the "1914 generation" doctrine for an example. Before 1995 (when 1914 ceased to have any real meaning), did you see many JW children going to college? I didn't. Why would you...since The End couldn't be more than a few years away?

But since 1995, it's increasingly common, even though the society discourages it. I know plenty of children of "strong" JWs, including elders, who graduated high school post-1995 and went to college right after high school. This is increasingly common in the organization. But it was almost unheard-of in the 70s and 80s.