johnnyc

Joined

• started 12 topics
• posted 124 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by johnnyc

• 
  91

  Disfellowshiped Last Night - Elder Question

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i know some of you know me by my posts...as someone very much on the "fence".

  recently, i had made an effort to start coming back to meetings after being inactive for 2+ years.

  during that time, i did have a prescription drug problem following an injury.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  Yes, a person can appeal saying they were repentant in the original committee hearing - and the original committee is there for the appeal, the whole time. I did ask to speak with the appeal committee separately, which they allowed for a segment of the appeal. You can appeal an appeal committee's decision, but only to the Society - which is your last appeal before they will announce the DFing. They say you can write the Society even after that if there is new information for them to consider, but once they announce, it is virtually impossible to reverse it. In fact, it may be virtually impossible to reverse it from the original committee - but I think the appeal committee did find reason to reverse my situation - as stated to my father by the CO. Now I wait because the original committee is not yielding to the new decision. My understanding is that if there is a split decision, the Society always goes with mercy - unless it involves child molestation. -Johnny
• 
  91

  Disfellowshiped Last Night - Elder Question

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i know some of you know me by my posts...as someone very much on the "fence".

  recently, i had made an effort to start coming back to meetings after being inactive for 2+ years.

  during that time, i did have a prescription drug problem following an injury.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  Mary: Again, I guess it is in the viewpoint. I did find some new info I just read (although from 1961) on Mind Control which supports your position. It stated (paraphrasing 2 sections):
  
  Sacred Science. The group's doctrine or ideology is considered to be the ultimate Truth, beyond all questioning or dispute. Truth is not to be found outside the group. The leader, as the spokesperson for God or for all humanity, is likewise above criticism.
  
  Doctrine over person. Member's personal experiences are subordinated to the sacred science and any contrary experiences must be denied or reinterpreted to fit the ideology of the group.
  
  These are used to identify "Mind Control" techniques - per Dr. Lifton MD. So based upon what you are saying, and the relationship the WTBTS has with its members - you would be right. Although, thinking about it further, I guess many (if not all) religions meet this criteria - don't they?? For that matter, could these be applied to Jesus - and the nation of Israel's theocratic arrangement? From these definitions of what "Mind Control" is, a great deal of religion is caught up in the same thing. Am I wrong???
• 
  91

  Disfellowshiped Last Night - Elder Question

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i know some of you know me by my posts...as someone very much on the "fence".

  recently, i had made an effort to start coming back to meetings after being inactive for 2+ years.

  during that time, i did have a prescription drug problem following an injury.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  isaacaustin: btw, thank you for wishing me the best in my appeal - i appreciate it. I think it is very hard to get things like this overturned, but I have a good feeling it will be.
• 
  91

  Disfellowshiped Last Night - Elder Question

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i know some of you know me by my posts...as someone very much on the "fence".

  recently, i had made an effort to start coming back to meetings after being inactive for 2+ years.

  during that time, i did have a prescription drug problem following an injury.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  Mary: I guess it all comes down to how you view mind control - I had a view that it was something needing to be purposefully and intently planned and executed, you view it as something that can happen passively without specific motive (as apposed to "implied motive"). The way you are viewing it then, I don't argue. But I do not believe they are having planning sessions to discuss the best way to implement mind control over the populous - like a country would implement a propaganda agenda (ie).
• 
  91

  Disfellowshiped Last Night - Elder Question

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i know some of you know me by my posts...as someone very much on the "fence".

  recently, i had made an effort to start coming back to meetings after being inactive for 2+ years.

  during that time, i did have a prescription drug problem following an injury.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  Vinny: Thanks for your thoughts. You know, I started the other thread to talk about one thing specifically, and that was whether or not the GB was deliberate in their mistakes or just wrong - thats it. I started from the point of stating that I realize the WTBTS has been wrong. I was not even meaning to talk about whether they were God's agent or not. I found myself arguing against unbridled rage (with a couple people only). In reality, many agreed that the GB was simply mistaken - but a couple people held firm to the fact they are exercising mind control. Which is fine if they want to have that opinion - but they seemed to be angered others agreed with me, and that I admittedly held my ground that if they had employed this "mind control", it would be truly known by now. Then, true to their stereotype, a couple members started making crazy claims of conspiracy and made misquotes of my statements trying to defame me. The reason I am saying all this, is because if they were making such good reasoning points, I doubt they would have resorted to such tactics. Regardless of your opinion, their actions show I struck a nerve.
• 
  91

  Disfellowshiped Last Night - Elder Question

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i know some of you know me by my posts...as someone very much on the "fence".

  recently, i had made an effort to start coming back to meetings after being inactive for 2+ years.

  during that time, i did have a prescription drug problem following an injury.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  isaacaustin: You are something else. You go to all this trouble to find some sort of "dirt" or inconstancy with that I said - yet, your problem is that I have been very consistent. In March, when I wrote that old post, I was completely inactive and did not consider myself a JW - as you probably know, someone inactive should not refer to themselves as a JW. In your accusation, you completely ignore that I said I had yet to cut all ties completely - WHAT DO YOU THINK THAT MEANS??? Recently, I started coming back to meetings and then decided to clear some things up with the elders, which resulted in their decision to DF me - though I have said I am appealing that decision. This is a perfect illustration of your method of trying to prove something - reading into things with only negative slants.
  
  For the record, I am not another person poising as johnnyc. I've even spoke to people here on the phone, and if you need further proof - I will provide.
• 
  4

  johnnyc exposed

  by isaacaustin in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  johnnyc posted this on 3/9:.

  johnnycre: about me 09-mar-08 19:48mar 9, 2008. .

  post 1 of 76. since 08-mar-08.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  What the H*ll is your problem man - what, oh what, do you think you have found? That I was once inactive back in March, but decided to go back to meetings and recently came forward to the elders to talk about a problem I have???? You are the worst sort of person out there - JW or apostate - you do both names discredit. Again, you need to go sell crazy somewhere else my A-hole friend.
• 
  193

  Deceptive or just wrong?

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.

  in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.

  however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  isaacaustin: WHAT??? When did I EVER say that Jonah or the Apostles falsely prophesied???? This just baits me into another word fight - but here i go again - false and wrong are different words.
  
  False: 1. uttering or declaring what is untrue: a false witness.
  2. not faithful or loyal; treacherous: a false friend.
  3. tending to deceive or mislead; deceptive: a false impression.
  4. not genuine; counterfeit.
  
  Wrong 1. deviating from fact; erroneous
  (wrong can be adjective, verb, or noun - this is adjective)
  
  The Apostles were not factual when they thought and believed/taught the end would come in their lifetime. They made a mistake.
  
  Jonah was not factual when he said Nineveh would be destroyed - since it Nineveh was not destroyed. Jonah did not say "repent or be destroyed", he said the City WOULD be destroyed. Nor did he say "God said" the City would be destroyed - he said it would be. Though he did not make a mistake in this statement, as God changed his mind - but Jonah was not pleased with how it all went at first. You know what it says - believe what you want. I was simply making a reference to how not EVERYTHING said by a channel of God happens exactly how it is pronounced. What if God decided not to bring the END in 1975 after considering all the people who would join the WT thereafter??? I am not being serious in that argument (so don't bother refuting me), but I will say that we don't know everything there is to know. "The person who knows he knows nothing, knows more than one who knows everything"
• 
  193

  Deceptive or just wrong?

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.

  in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.

  however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  You know, have any of you stopped to look in the mirror? I mean really, you may have left the JW organization, but do you realize that all you really have done is "changed sides"...? You attack the WTBTS for acting and teaching and arguing a certain way, but do you ever look at the way you now argue for the "dark side". YOU DO SO the same exact way! I get done arguing with my mother about the "truth", and I come here to argue the "flip" position, and I get the same sort of responses - read this book, read this scripture....all with the same sort of dogmatic viewpoints a witnesses has - just in reverse. You probably would like to think that you have all become so intellectually wise and understanding of people - but don't kid yourselves - you haven't changed(with certain exception of ones who have been sincere). You simply are on another team, but with the same tactics and argument sense you had as a witness. You condemn the very thing you are.
• 
  193

  Deceptive or just wrong?

  by johnnyc in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  i have been virtually non-stop studying everything i can get my hands on with regards the wtbts, and "apostate" literature and information.

  in all honesty, 80% at least is non-sense and over critical.

  however, i do find about 20% (if i have to create a percentage reference) is appropriate in its line of reasoning and questioning.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  johnnyc

  leavingwt: Your patronizing posts would indicate otherwise.