AuldSoul: What you said is nonsense. You almost have to have a law background here, not to be a stickler, but if the Court decides a specific matter relating to a word definition, that word definition is carried forward as law until specifically challenged/heard otherwise by a higher court. That is why either the Plaintiff or Defendant could have appealed the one specific point of that definition all the way to the Supreme Court, and then they could have come back to their case to have an answer/decision made - to which that answer/decision is only good for the specific case at hand and merely a "guide" for other cases (in reference). But the specific definition made by the court can be separate from the greater decision (describing it as basic as possible here)
johnnyc
JoinedPosts by johnnyc
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
leavingwt: Now you really will think I sound like an attorney - but - "Mind Control" has been legally defined, and it does not include something that can be passive. (hearst v. new religious movements) That case defines: unless a religion purposely employed mind control techniques, their actions cannot be considered "Mind Control" per a legal term. Since there is no other case which has overturned this, this is what we call "Case Law", and gives the best clarity we have on the subject. Don't argue with me, but since Law governs us, that is just the way it is. Sorry, but this trumps your book.
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
Deputy Dog: Nice Ronald Regan quip...but that has been done. Have you ever worked for a big company? You cannot effectively do anything in a publishing house of hundreds of employees (including different departments) without having a serious plan to do such. Whereas I agree that a person can be controlling without purposefully planning such, you can't get that across in an atmosphere like Bethel without large scale planning. So again, if you want the society to be guilty of "Mind Control" efforts, you'd better have more than just an accusation. I do agree they have been severely wrong.....much more wrong than they even admit to....but mind control - nope. Someone from Bethel would have said something by now, and I am sure we would have heard that from Franz. Im just trying to keep a "real" sense about everything. In truth, I think many of you have traveled too far left, and it shows. You should try to remain more balanced, and you will have far greater appeal to people "looking" outside the org. You guys turn many off who might venture out to look at "WT alternatives" based on fanatic reasonings.
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
Mary: I did not say he (R. Franz) attacked the WTBTS in his book, but don't you know he has had many speaking engagements and other documents where he has...?
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
See, you know a comment like "Mind Control" is very specific. It means that you all believe the WTBTS has actual meetings and plans surrounding this "Mind Control" effort. If they did, don't you think Raymond Franz would be saying that right now...? Do you know what sort of planning would be required to purposefully place "Mind Controlling" statements into the WT. There are a lot here who were in Bethel and part of the whole operation - Please enlighten us - IS THERE actually "Mind Control" efforts being made in the printed WT???? There may be truth in the middle of all this, but I tell you one thing - you, who believe the private mission statement of the GB is to perpetuate a "Mind Control" agenda upon its readership to "fool" them....are sadly mistaken and so far to the left that you cant see straight.
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
1914 comments: You know there is another way of looking at all this. If the GB were only men content with greed for power, why hold on to a date such as 1914 for this long? Surely they could have changed it a while back, and most everyone would have cheered - or had a sigh of relief. Membership may have suffered at first, like in 1975, but you and I know the JW engine would keep memberships growing. I guess I am pointing to the fact that holding onto this date is causing havoc, yet they STILL proclaim it. We are only a couple years away from that date being 100% obsolete - yet, recently, they only made it more specific to only anointed who had to have been alive in 1914 (and don't show me the article where you all THINK they changed "generation", there is no specific statement changing such other than going back and forth as to if it means everyone or just the anointed). Comments about the GB being so controlling in peoples lives, makes me think about a boat full of holes, and them trying to keep it together just a bit longer – all the while people in the water are jumping into the boat making it worse – yet they keep holding that ship together any way they can. Then certain people keep trying to purposefully sink the ship – so they start knocking them off to save the rest. They may inadvertently knock someone off the boat back into the water who didn’t deserve it, but they are there to offer a helping hand back into the boat – as nothing is permanent, and they truly desire everyone to be saved. See it may be God’s boat, but like it or not it comes with holes (caused by Satan, but allowed by God). If you are mad about the holes, it is not the Stewart who is trying (again TRYING) to temporarily plug them that you should be mad at, is it? But then again, cant you be mad at God – he gave you at least a boat. Just because the Stewart does not fix the boat, does not invalidate the fact he is the Stewart. This analogy could go on forever, but I get what all of you are saying in return – LEARN TO SWIM on your own. Im not agreeing that is the answer, but I do hear what you are saying. (and please, no need to berate this illustration to death)
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
happy2bfree: "Blaspheme" is a relative term, since the GB would say you saying that is "Blaspheme". The Jews said Jesus was guilty of "Blaspheme". Everyone in religion says everyone else is committing "Blaspheme".
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
oompa: Here is your response. To the 1st part: The WTBTS has explained their "prophet" position, and why the quotes - no need for me to grab this from thin air. The 2nd part: What the WTBTS teaches on specifically the issues you point out in your post are all things clearly found in the bible - keeping your life simple, perhaps no marriage, suffer for Christ, etc etc. There are things the GB have specified which seem to go beyond what Jesus said, but again, the reason for this thread was to establish the reason - are they just mistaken, or are they purposefully deceitful. I believe there is a huge difference between the two. Your last example does not apply since that person would have intended to hurt you. The question I present is: Does the GB purposefully set out to hurt people? - or are they trying to help, and make mistakes along the way.
-
91
Disfellowshiped Last Night - Elder Question
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
I can see being agnostic, but an atheist??? You must be one of the smartest people on earth - usually not even evolutionists (scientists) are true atheist, since they feel there is too much they can't explain. I can follow most biological arguments for evolution (i said follow, not agree with), but predisposition theory pertaining to matters of physics is beyond comprehension. As you probably know, there are only 4 actual elements in the universe, and yet every sub element is derivative of those 4 elements. How, for instance, those elements morphed into beneficial conglomerate sub elements without "self-serving" motives (as can be argued in biology) is so beyond my comprehension that I am either too stupid, or too smart. Only time with tell of course. "If for every answer there is a thousand questions - how can that lead to truth"
-
193
Deceptive or just wrong?
by johnnyc ini 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.
-
-
johnnyc
The only thing I really meant to do in the thread was deal with if people actually thought the WTBTS was malicious in their bad information, or just wrong. I realize they were at least wrong, and that people did suffer with the fallout of 1975. However, if you were doing that for Jesus (and God) then why not embrace all that you did for the right reasons, and you are now made to suffer for Christ...as the bible says to. Imagine if the "Rich Man" actually gave all his possessions up to follow Jesus, but then got upset when he realized Jesus would not come back in his lifetime...? Many people have died for their beliefs in Jesus and God - even though they may not have been right in their worship. Dont you think Jesus will remember his promise about "whoever loses his life" on his behalf, will save it..?...even for all of them to at least have a chance to know God in truth. The whole point of this is to say that you should not view giving up everything in your worship to God could ever be a bad thing - and if you begrudgingly view it that way, then you are right - you should not have done it - cause it doesn't matter anymore.