Posts by Olin Moyles Ghost

49

Those raised as JWs-Do you recall the path of doubts that led you to leave?

by ithinkisee in

jw
friends

i posted a similar topic a year and a half ago.

i thought with all the new people it would be interesting to ask it again.

so i began to research ... and here i am.

Olin Moyles Ghost

My first doubt was as a six-year-old child. The subject was birthdays. I simply did not understand why the fact that two birthday celebrations in the Bible resulted in executions meant that I could not eat a cupcake with my class. My little mind could not make the logical leap. I never really understood why God would smite me if I ate a cupcake or signed a birthday card...and today I still don't. But I was a good little Witness and did what my parents told me to do.

During the teenage years, I didn't have any real doubts about the JW religion being "The Truth." If anything, the struggle that all teenagers experience in toeing the moral line reinforced the idea that it must be The Truth. Otherwise, why would it be so difficult to be good...right?

As I got older and saw more of the congregation politics, I developed a "fleshly view of the organization." But I always rationalized that the Old Testament patriarchs, Israelite kings, and even First Century Christians had lots of issues. Despite those issues, the rank and file were still expected to stay with the organization. An elder once gave the example of King Menassah who worshipped false gods and even sacrificed his children to them. That sort of reasoning kept me going--even if the elders/C.O./etc. had flaws and did bad things, they weren't as bad as Menassah, right?

As I continued to get older, I became increasingly skeptical of some of the direction coming from the WTS. It seemed like they were "going beyond what is written." Comparatively minor issues such as vasectomies (condemned in 1999 WT article), discouraging college, and the like started to pile up. The answer to my questions was always to "wait on Jehovah" or to trust the FDS, and of course the old canard "where else are you going to go...nobody else is right."

All of these unanswered questions finally became too much to sweep under the rug. I realized that my "answers" to these questions always hinged on an assumption that (1) the FDS was a sort of clergy class that we had to obey; and (2) the WTS leadership was appointed by Jesus to be that FDS. One day I realized that I had always simple accepted these two foundational facts as true. So, I decided to investigate those facts. The rest is history.

36

If there was no global flood - does this mean that the Bible is not inspired?

by Olin Moyles Ghost in

do you agree that if there was no global flood, then the bible is not inspired?

here are my thoughts.. it is pretty obvious that there was no global flood 4,000 years ago.

) that there were one or more large local floods in mesopotamia around the time of noah.

Olin Moyles Ghost

@Narkissos: Thanks for your discussion about "inspiration." When I say "inspired," I mean it in the way that I was taught by the Witnesses--i.e., that the Bible is the infallible, 100% true, unalterable word of God. I was taught that there were no scientific inaccuracies or contradictions in the Bible, and that this was evidence of its "inspired" nature. If the Bible is God's word, and God cannot lie, then God's word cannot contain any lies.

You can take that syllogism and apply it to the flood: If the global flood of Noah's day didn't happen, but the Bible says it did, then the Bible contains a lie and can't be God's word.

Of course, this is based on my viewpoint based on being raised to believe in a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible by the Witnesses. I recognize that there are more liberal schools of thought that rationalize some of the more embarrassing, outdated, and unscientific parts of the Bible. To me, a more reasonable response to these issues is to recognize that it is likely that no "God" had anything to do with the Bible and it's simply the work of men.

36

If there was no global flood - does this mean that the Bible is not inspired?

by Olin Moyles Ghost in

do you agree that if there was no global flood, then the bible is not inspired?

here are my thoughts.. it is pretty obvious that there was no global flood 4,000 years ago.

) that there were one or more large local floods in mesopotamia around the time of noah.

Olin Moyles Ghost

@Hamster: I agree that the Bible doesn't say "global flood" in its text. But as I discussed in the first post, Genesis says that the water covered "all the tall mountains that were under the whole heavens." It seems crystal-clear that the writer is describing a global flood. Any other interpretation of that scripture directly contradicts its plain language.

Thus, when Jesus refers to Noah's day and the flood, he is referring to the flood as described in Genesis--which, as explained above, is a global flood. To me, the only reasonable conclusion from this is that the Bible writer who penned Jesus' words believed in the global flood as described in Genesis.

As has been well-documented, there was no global flood at the time Noah was purported to live. Thus, Genesis and the other writings contain inaccuricies. This leads to the conclusion that the Bible is not inspired.

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.