Posts by garyneal

35

Ever been the victim of gossip from JW's?

by highdose in

i was many times, the final bout was what drove me out of the borg altogether..... .

garyneal

Only when I attend a meeting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xBydH93eDY

160

Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink in

i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.

she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!

lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.

garyneal

scholar:

Post 1829

Evading the question by reflecting it back on me, I see. That is fine, I will answer the question.

If the Society is truly correct and the 607 B.C.E. date can be truly justified, I will adjust my beliefs accordingly. That is the mark of a reasonable individual. We should all be willing to adjust our beliefs to the evidence. Scholar, I nearly accepted the WT theology because I was beginning to believe that they indeed had the truth. But deep research, the kind that died in the wool JW's are forbidden to consider, told me otherwise. If there is any truth in the WT teachings, they are not alone.

So, I re-ask the question, what will you do when the Society drops 1914?

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!.

garyneal

I think All Time Jeff made an excellent point.

I, personally, was never a JW and my parents largely never went to church. Therefore, I wasn't raised to believe in anything like God even though my mom believed in Him. I was, however, exposed to it early in my life and by the time I became a young adult, I immersed myself into Christianity at an Independent Fundamental Baptist church because I always knew that I was a 'spiritual' person and I was looking for answers.

To Jeff's point, I latched onto Christianity because I live in a Judeo-Christian country and I particularly live in the 'Bible-belt' southern part of Virginia, the home of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson and the like. Frankly, after truly examining myself, I can just as easily see myself becoming a Hindu or a Muslim or a Buddhist had I have been raised in a different part of the world.

As for me, I am still a Christian as I believe it is the best religion for me spiritually. However, I do not like the idea that I have to follow a bunch of rules thinking that by doing so, I will have everlasting life. Never-the-less, I think rules are important in a civilized society and as long as they line up with the Golden Rule, it makes perfect sense. Dumb rules like "Thou Shalt Not Dance," "Thou Shalt Not Salute The Flag," "Thou Shalt Not Live At Home Past 18," etc. serve only the rule makers (men) and not God.

160

Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink in

i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.

she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!

lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.

garyneal

oracle:

I asked Scholar the same question a few posts ago. What will he do when the Society stops teaching 1914 C.E.? If 1975 is any indication, the society is going to spin it to make it look like it is the fault of overzealous witnesses (like scholar perhaps). Billy has already pointed out that the society used this method to dropped the 'this generation' link with 1914. It is only a matter of time before 1914 is dropped completely.

I predict that within the next 20 years, there will be witnesses who has never heard of 1914.

3

Very Interesting- about JW's (prob already been posted)

by Butterflyleia85 in

jw
friends

"did you know that jws are encouraged to report on other jws who break a medical doctrine such as the ban on blood?

jws will do this to attain status with both jehovah and with peers.

they will tattle-tail even if it breaks medical or legal confidentiality laws.".....

garyneal

While they are attaining status amongst the Jehovah's Witnesses, they are breaking the golden rule. (Matthew 7:12) For who amongst the Jehovah's Witnesses if confronted with similar circumstances might not do the same thing? And would it be right if they were 'tattle tailed' on.

But if it truly is against God's law to accept blood, how many laws has the 'snitch' broken? If the 'snitch' truly wants to serve God, why not see if there is anything to do that could actually help the one faced with the tough choice (if possible)?

46

Ladies: How do I get her to stop flirting without being mean?

by Elsewhere in

jw
friends

there is this girl at work who has been making it painfully obvious that she's interested, however i'm not interested in her.

so far i'm just acting as though i'm not seeing any of the "making of eyes", "any excuse to talk" or other general flirting.

ladies, how do i make her stop without being mean?

garyneal

True story:

I had just gotten out of a relationship with a girl after being with her for four years. I was a bit down and my mom suggested I try the local singles line to maybe find someone to hang out with, etc.. I relunctantly tried it and wound up connecting with some real needy, clingy girl. Never met her face to face before but she seemed to be VERY interested in meeting with me. She just seemed so off somehow and I knew that I would not even want to meet this chick at all, let alone date her.

So I tried telling her how ugly I was. I told her that my face was full of zits and I had these thick thick pop bottle like glasses, thinking it would turn her off. Instead, she recommended I get some face cream and contacts. Seriously, I tried ignoring her calls and this chick tried calling me between 10 to 20 times on the phone in one hour. I had to do something.

Since I never met her in person, I decided to go up the road to a pay phone. I called her, put on my best gay sounding voice, and told her that my name was Michael and that I was Gary's gay lover. I asked her why was she phoning my man and politely told her to stop calling him because I loved him and wanted to work things out with him. Etc....

This chick tried to befriend 'Michael.' No lie. She even asked if 'Michael' had the operation and I told her yes. She asked Michael to explain what it was like. Quoting from the talk shows of transexuals, I told her how I (Michael) had to take hormone pills and live life for a year as a woman. This to ensure that I really wanted to go through with it. Finally, I politely ended the conversation and wished her well.

The phone calls from this chick ceased.

160

Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink in

i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.

she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!

lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.

garyneal

scholar

Post 1811

It is not surprising that the churches of Christendom have no interest in such matters because they have no belief or interest in Bible prophecy.

Eh, WRONG! In my own personal experiences, I have seen the pastor at my old IFB church give many sermons concerning Bible prophecies with an emphasis on the events spoken of in Revelations. At a Church of God that I attended a few year ago, the pastor had a series of Wednesday night sermons covering the entire book of Revelations chapter by chapter. Not only do they believe and have great interest in Bible prophecy, they also try to interpret (guess) what the symbolism might be referring to. Some of them, just like the WT, even go as far as setting dates. Like 1948 and 'this generation,' sounds a lot like the WT's own 1914 and 'this generation.' Of course, they're both wrong because Jesus clearly stated that it 'was not for us to know.'

Watch an episode of Jack Van Impe Presents and you will see "Christendom's" clergy concerning itself with Bible prophecy. Of course, he too made a mistake and estimated the time of the end to be around 2000. Which I believe the WT is guilty of doing also.

How can you call yourself a 'scholar' and make such an errorneous statement like that?

The dropping of 1914 CE is merely a product of your fanciful imagination, the date marks an event grounded in Scripture revolving around the reality of God's Kingdom.

While I don't see the WTS officially dropping the 1914 date, I can certainly see them 'quietly' drop it by mentioning it less and less. This is certainly the case if 1975 is any indication.

6

It's November 5th again - what happened to V?

by Mickey mouse in

jw
friends

someone must know?

i'm kind of thinking the worst now.

has he died?

garyneal

Yeah, I am waiting on him to post another WT Comments video. (This is the same V right?)

160

Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink in

i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.

she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!

lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.

garyneal

Billy,

You made an excellent point that I was going to touch on myself when I had a chance to get back online. Why the whole debate over 607 B.C.E. to start with? I've never been to a church that spoke of or even cared whether or not Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians in 586, 587, or 607 B.C.E. so it is obviously not important to them. To them, it is just an event in the Bible and its date is of no real significance.

However, to the WTS this date is extremely important because it ties into all of their doctrines concerning 1914 C.E. and 1919 C.E.. Without 607, 1914 is false and their proclaimation of them being the only true religion falls apart. They need it, plain and simple.

Scholar,

With all of your efforts to support this date on this message board and in your own mind, what are you going to do when the Society quietly drops the whole 1914 teaching altogether?

160

Need help disproving 607BCE

by 2pink in

i hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.

she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!

lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.

garyneal

scholar

Post 1791

2pink

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but there is no evidence either biblical or secular that has disproved the validity of 607 BCE. I have been studying this subject for nearly forty years and have read all published attempts to dissprove 607 BCE only to find that on a critical analysis none of these attempts have succeeded. The most recent attempt has been by Carl Jonsson who has acquired a reputation of being a competent chronologist has claimed in his most recent work that there are at least seventeen lines of evidence that disprove 607 BCE. However, competent biblical scholars have shown that such a claim is fanciful and is not supported by either the biblical or secular evidence.

This does not mean that 607 BCE or any other date is not capable of being falsified but at this point in time there is simply no evidence that disproves the validity of 607 BCE for the Fall of Jerusalem.

scholar JW

It appears here that you are looking for proof of a negative. Nothing seems to disprove 607 B.C.E., so you will keep believing that 607 B.C.E. must be correct. Thank you for your logical analysis and showing me that people will just simply believe what they want to believe.

Let me put in some more examples of this way of thinking:

No one has proven that Jesus did not come to power and began ruling invisibly in 1914 C.E., therefore Jesus must have come to power and began ruling invisibly.
No one has proven that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society and its Faithful and Discreet Slave are not the ones appointed by Jesus to care for His sheep in 1919 C.E.. Therefore, Jesus must have approved of the Faithful and Discreet Slave and the WTS in 1919 C.E..
No one has proven that the WTS and the Jehovah's Witnesses do not have the truth. Therefore, the Society and the Jehovah's Witnesses must have the truth.

I can see now that I will never be able to reach a diehard JW with the truth about the 'truth.' The spiritual blindness is really strong indeed.

Perhaps you can explain to me why the 1914 teaching as it is taught today wasn't taught in this way prior to the 1920's. Perhaps you can explain to me how come Jesus approved of some of the bizarre teachings of its found CT Russell.

But I guess I already know your answer, "New Light." Keep believing, keep believing....