Posts by Olin Moyles Ghost

16

Validation and defense mechanisms, or why it's ok for billions to die

by zoiks in

more and more i have been thinking about the mindset that considers the idea that billions are to be destroyed at armageddon as perfectly ok. farkel's articles on freeminds.org really helped to bring it home for me.

as jws, we do (or did) think it was perfectly reasonable that billions will have earned a death sentence simply for not accepting religious literature from an uninvited person at their doorstep.

how do otherwise good people (for the most part) come to accept genocide as an acceptible, even good, solution to the problems they see and experience?.

Olin Moyles Ghost

Well-put, Zoiks. Reminds me of the Kingdom Melody song called "Then They Will Know"--a nice little ditty preemptively gloating over the destruction of God's perceived enemies.

I think most JWs don't really believe that God is going to kill all non-Witnesses. I know that I didn't believe that. Most of my JW acquaintances don't, either. They say things like "he will read hearts at Armageddon." When I started thinking about this, it cemented the idea of how pointless the JW "preaching work" really is. I've had Witnesses admit to me that the preaching work is really no more than busy-work. It's how we prove to God that we're obedient and want to serve him.

So, yes, the doctrine about who is going to survive Armageddon (which is "imminent," by the way ;) is definitely one of the soft spots in WT/JW theology. While the WT almost never comes out directly and states that you must be a JW to have a chance at surviving Armageddon, they constantly talk about the "life saving" nature of the JW preaching work. Pick up any Kingdom Ministry and you're guaranteed to see at least one reference to the "life saving" work.

So, if it's truly a life-saving work, doesn't it logically follow that the lives of people who don't respond to (or aren't reached by) the preaching work are not saved? I don't see any other explanation. And then doesn't it follow that those whose lives are not saved will die? Otherwise, what does it mean to have your life saved?

21

All You Apostates are EVIL READ!! (LONG RESPONSE)

by tjlibre in

this is in response to dubr post.

welcome to the board dubr.

i whish you and your wife success and happiness in your new path.

Olin Moyles Ghost

A couple thoughts:

First, taking the Bible literally requires a belief that man has been on this planet for only 6,000 or so years. One poster advanced the theory that whole generations were left out of the Bible. If so, how do you explain Matthew 1 (genealogy of Jesus back to Abraham) and Luke 3 (genealogy all the way back to Adam)? Setting aside the fact that these two genealogies contradict each other--if there are generations missing in the Bible, then that proves that the Bible is inaccurate which calls the Christian God (alleged "author" of the Bible--2 Tim. 3:16) into question.

Second, there were undoubtedly large local floods in ancient Mesopotamia. But the problem is that the Bible describes a global flood. Genesis 7:19says "all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered." (NIV). It would take some linguistic gymnastics to read that passage and argue that it's not describing a global flood. Sure, some people do this--but I think they're disregarding the plain language of the Bible.

72

Public Defamation = DF'd ???

by Lillith26 in

this is probably too simple and perhaps to good to be true but the wtbts practice of officially announcing a person by name at a meeting to be "no longer one of jehovah's witnesses", combined with the wtb literature that clearly states how to 'treat' such named person is a clear act of public defamation of the named person... an act that one would maybe have legal grounds on which to take out a lawsuit???.

i suspect this is an angle that may have been over looked from a legal perspective.... it's just a thought.... do we have any lawyers in the house???.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/defamation .

Olin Moyles Ghost

Jonathan Dough:

But that's all right, I don't always read other people's comments as closely as I should either. And I knew better than to have assumed you actually meant the Tennessee State Court of Appeals. I must add that until I read the case itself I doubt that it covers any and all issues related to the disfellowshipping.

Me: No worries. Note that the Anderson v. WTS case doesn't cover any and all issues related to disfellowshiping. But the opinion does include what appears to be a fairly thorough analysis of establishment clause case law as it relates to the ecclesiastical abstention doctrine.

72

Public Defamation = DF'd ???

by Lillith26 in

this is probably too simple and perhaps to good to be true but the wtbts practice of officially announcing a person by name at a meeting to be "no longer one of jehovah's witnesses", combined with the wtb literature that clearly states how to 'treat' such named person is a clear act of public defamation of the named person... an act that one would maybe have legal grounds on which to take out a lawsuit???.

i suspect this is an angle that may have been over looked from a legal perspective.... it's just a thought.... do we have any lawyers in the house???.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/defamation .

Olin Moyles Ghost

Me: For example Barbara and Joe Anderson tried several novel tort theories against the Society, but all were dismissed by the Tennessee Court of Appeals.

Jonathan Dough: That is just one circuit. States have different laws. You can't go by that.

Me again: I hate to be pedantic about this (but I can't help myself). It's not technically a "circuit." It was the Tennessee Court of Appeals, which is part of the Tennessee state court system--separate from the U.S. Federal court system.

And, yes, states have different laws. The decision of the Tennessee Court of Appeals is only binding upon the trial courts in the Tennessee state court system. But that decision is in harmony with other cases (such as the Paul v. Watchtower case--which was a federal court matter). This indicates that there is a general hostility toward such claims in the state and federal courts.

Now, don't get me wrong, I would love to see someone succeed in court against the WTS. But you need to be realistic and learn from the experiences of others who came before you. And that experience indicates that it is difficult if not impossible to succeed in a suit against the WTS related to disfellowshiping.

72

Public Defamation = DF'd ???

by Lillith26 in

this is probably too simple and perhaps to good to be true but the wtbts practice of officially announcing a person by name at a meeting to be "no longer one of jehovah's witnesses", combined with the wtb literature that clearly states how to 'treat' such named person is a clear act of public defamation of the named person... an act that one would maybe have legal grounds on which to take out a lawsuit???.

i suspect this is an angle that may have been over looked from a legal perspective.... it's just a thought.... do we have any lawyers in the house???.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/defamation .

Olin Moyles Ghost

Every few weeks, someone starts a topic about suing the WTS based on disfelowshiping. As others have stated, this has been tried and failed several times. For example Barbara and Joe Anderson tried several novel tort theories against the Society, but all were dismissed by the Tennessee Court of Appeals. (see http://www.tsc.state.tn.us/OPINIONS/Tca/PDF/071/WatchtowerOpn.pdf). Another case is Paul v. Watchtower, where the Federal 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the Society's right to engage in shunning (see http://openjurist.org/819/f2d/875/paul-v-watchtower-bible-and-tract-society-of-new-york-inc).

As far as I know, the only person who successfully sued the WTS for libel/slander is Olin Moyle. He had a pretty good case because Rutherford publicly slandered him in front of the Bethel family, then authored two WT articles further defaming Moyle. If the Society prints a WT article defaming you, then you will have no problem finding a lawyer willing to take your case in exchange for a piece of the action (33 - 40%). Perhaps that's why the WTS has never mentioned Ray Franz in print since the 1980 Kingdom Service announcement that he was no longer a GB member...

24

Your Opinion Please: Do GB members believe what they say?

by EverAStudent in

jw
friends

in your own opinion: do the governing board members believe their own prophecies, stories, and articles?

.

do you think they are true believers in the core religion or fakers simply behaving as profiteers?.

Olin Moyles Ghost

I think the GB consists of believers--as the OP put it--in the "core religion." I take the term "core religion" to mean things like no Trinity, no hellfire, paradise earth, and the faithful and discreet slave doctrine (which is the most important JW doctrine). Under that standard, I think the GB consists of true believers.

But they don't believe that every current doctrine/prophecy is correct...I daresay that most JWs fall into that category.

64

Extra Extra read all about it. Study Article PDF to be posted on www.jw.org

by jah1914 in

jw
friends

just got this excerpt from a friend who is an elder all excited about how jah's people are using technology.

guess we won't have to provide links anymore.. excerpt:.

we are pleased to inform you that the study articles in the english edition of the watch-tower will be made available as pdf files in the public area of the jw.org web site.

Olin Moyles Ghost

"So much for the accusation of 'members-only' and 'secret' watchtower."

The whole idea of the study WT being "secret" is a bit overblown in my opinion. There's nothing secret in there, it's just got more WT/JW mumbo-jumbo and cuts to the chase more quickly than the public WT. Anyone visiting a KH on Sunday can get a study WT. When the study WT was first announced, I recall reading JWD threads stating that visitors to Sunday meetings would be allowed to use a study WT but would be required to return it before leaving. Of course, this is complete B.S.

"The file will in-clude a cover sheet with the publishers’ information in the header."

This is probably referring to the copyright info that's present in print versions of the WT and Awake. But the statement is ambiguous and I could be wrong...

81

Are there ANY Bible prophecies that indisputably came true?

by nicolaou in

.

i mean a prophecy made before the event, with specific detail that can be verified in history books.

nothing vague like 'reports of wars'.. .

Olin Moyles Ghost

There are some issues with the OT prophecies about the Messiah. There are no contemporary recorded accounts of Jesus' birth, life, and death. The closest we have are the Gospels, and the oldest copies date to the second century--100+ years after he allegedly died. This is plenty of time for the authors to write about his birth, life, and death in such a way that made him appear to fulfill the OT prophecies.

The fact that there are contradictions among the various Gospels adds to the likelihood that they were embellished stories.

Following Ockham's razor, it is much more likely that something like this happened.

36

What do most ex-JWs "believe" after leaving?

by EverAStudent in

has anyone done a survey to determine what faith system, religion, or set of religious beliefs ex-jws tend to settle into after leaving the organization?

if not, would you care to post what you presently consider to be your own personal religion (e.g.

protestant, catholic, baptist, jw but not in the organization, agnostic, atheist, ...) and especially what you presently believe about jesus (was he a real historical human, is he god, is he an angel, ...).. thank you!.

Olin Moyles Ghost

By "ex-JWs" I assume you mean people who no longer believe the JW doctrine (there are lots of disfellowshiped "ex-JWs" who still believe). With that caveat, I'd venture that most ex-JWs fall into 3 categories mentioned below. It would not surprise me if a slight majority, or at least a plurality fall into #1. The next-largest group is probably #2, followed by #3. (Of course, this is all wild conjecture based on people I know in real life and on these boards.)

Non-religious. They may be atheist, agnostic, deist, whatever, but they're not convinced that there's a God who wants to be worshiped.
The Ray Franz model. These folks are still Christians, still believe the Bible, and still retain many WTS beliefs (no hell, no Trinity, no immortal soul). But they reject the idea of "God's organization" and focus on a simple type of Christianity.
Evangelical. Some portion of former Witnesses join up with another religious group--often evangelical protestants--and embrace traditional doctrines of Christendom such as the Trinity, etc.

151

There's A Ghost At My Place Of Employment

by finallysomepride in

ok some of you will laugh at this, but it's true, there is a spirit that haunts the premises where i work.. it has spoken to me once when i was locking up, it was 1 single word "hello", i looked around and saw nothing, i ignored it, set the alarm locked the door & went home.

other times i have felt something brush passed me as i have entered the building early in the morning.

the experience that got to me most happened the other nite when i was called back to the store by security, as i pulled into the drive way there was a man standing at the rear of the building, in the split second of looking away he dissapeared, there's no way that he could have run off the property in that split second.. what do you think?.

Olin Moyles Ghost

If someone really had verifiable evidence of paranormal activity--why wouldn't they just take the Randi Foundation up on its offer and collect the million dollars? See http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge.html

To me, it's pretty telling that the million bucks are still there.