Posts by Essan

12

Giving the Trinity Doctrine the Coup-De-Grace!

by wannabe in

it is the one that this world doesn't know, that must request of the father, to give the helper, the holy spirit; the spirit of the truth; then jesus tells us that the world cannot receive of the holy spirit, they neither see him or know him.

" {1 john 5:19 nlt}.

" {1 john 2:27 nlt}.

Essan

I'm agnostic about the Trinity. But even I can see that the OP obviously relies purely on circular reasoning. Their claims would easily be refuted by a Trinitarian. It's not at all the 'coup-de-grace' the author imagines it is but is very weak, logically unsound argument.

It starts with the unproven premise that Trinitarians are wrong, therefore they can't receive the Spirit, therefore they can't receive the teaching of the Spirit which would reveal the truth about it's nature, therefore Trinitarians 'must' be wrong. Circling right back to the start.

Circular reasoning. Elementary mistake.

128

"High-Control Groups"

by Consfearacy in

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .

"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.

it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.

Essan

Consfearacy said: Mature Christians do maintain unity and full harmony with fellow believers and are not necessarily dependent on the "the faithful and discreet slave" to maintain unity.

Bull. Do you sometimes forget that you are talking to people with decades of experience as JW's? Your lies won't fly here. The 'unity' you described it based on being required to accept without question the teachings of the Society. As the Watchtower says: "he has complete confidence in the truth as it is revealed by ..."the faithful and discreet slave.", and as the article shows, this isn't a description of how things are, it's a command as to how the Society insists they must be.

The Watchtower also says:

"If we have love for Jehovah and for the Organization of his people we shall not be suspicious, but shall, as the Bible says, "believe all things," all things that the Watchtower brings out"

So, belief in and agreement with all that the Society says is not optional. All Witnesses must agree with the Society. It is this slavish obedience to a Corporation which unites them. And this 'agreement' is enforced with sanctions.

You said: "When it comes to what is stated above, it's an individual choice whether a person agrees".

No it's not their choice, and the very Watchtower article you quoted proves you wrong:

"A mature Christian must be in unity [conformity of belief] and full harmony with fellow believers as far as faith and knowledge are concerned. He does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbour private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding."

He "must", he has no free choice. He is even forbidden from "harbouring PRIVATE ideas" and opinions! He is not even permitted freedom in his own mind! And you deny the JW's are "High Control"? You're insane.

You said: "If a person advocates or insists on personal opinions or harboring private ideas that are in disagreement with what the slave teaches, why is this person in association with Jehovah's Witnesses?..."

This is where your lie about "choice" is exposed. Why do those who disagree often remain? Because they don't want to be disfellowshipped and made an outcast in the Congregation and have their lifelong friends never speak to them again and have family members, even their children, shun them! Because they have no free choice because it has been denied them by this "high control" cult! If they disagree and this becomes known the price in terms of sanctions by the congregation and the terrible consequences thereof can be too much for many people to bear!

Have you faced the implications of the fact that there is no way for a JW to choose to openly and freely leave without being demonized and punished? The implications are that this means the JW's are a destructive cult.

You said: "As for ex-communication, a person doesn't get disfellowshipped for having doubts, disagreeing or being disillusioned. They get disfellowshipped for taking an active stand against the organization".

Rubbish. As I said, this is the wrong place to lie about what occurs among JW's because collectively there are probably thousands of years of experience among JW congregations here. We know the reality. You will be disfellowshipped for disagreeing and if you allow it to be known that you have "doubts" or are "disillusioned" you could well be disfellowshipped also, and there will certainly be negative consequences. You do not have to "proselytize" of "take an active stand" against the congregation before you will be disfellowshipped. That's absolute rubbish. The Watchtower quotes above make it clear that JW's are not permitted even private opinions or beliefs which differ from Society dogma, never mind public ones.

24

Major flaw in the Society's 1914-Gentile Times doctrine

by peacedog in

one of the major flaws (i say one because there are many) in the society's '1914-gentile times' doctrine is an oft-overlooked one.

very simply, the watchtower society predicted the end of the "gentile times" for autumn of 1914; yet the first world war began in the summer of 1914 (july 28) and really was triggered in june of 1914 with the assassination of archduke ferdinand.

as such, the first world war actually lends no support whatsoever to the watchtower society's 1914-gentile times doctrine despite the fact that the society has continuously offered it as support.. rutherford was very aware of this major discrepancy in the doctrine.

Essan

Hasn't the Society given a precise date in 1914 (other than August 1st), rather than just "autumn" for the end of the Gentile Times? I seem to recall they did at one time. Perhaps Russell did so.

Showing a date compared to a date is even more powerful than a date compared to "autumn", it highlights the problem even more. And if you can show that they once specifically had a date later in the year, then it shows that by now saying 'Autumn" they still accept the date given earlier, but they are trying to hide the discrepancy by being more vague in using "Autumn".

Great work Peacedog. For intelligent and logical JW's (the minority unfortunately) the information you present would certainly expose this doctrine as flawed.

8

Rate JW's out of 10 compared to other religions.

by Essan in

so most of us here have been jw's or have read enough to have a decent grasp of the religion.

while we were there we were told jw's were the happiest, most righteous, best dressed, most polite, helpful people and our religion the purest and most accurate for of christianity in the world.. most here now would say all that probably wasn't entirely true.

lol.. if you have had exposure to other religions before or since where do you rate jw's overall compared to these religions?

Essan

Any you have enough experience of to compare them to Blondie.

I only have experience of JW's so I rated them 2 out of 10 based on how well they actually lived up to their own boastful claims.

EDIT TO ADD - I just ran out of my 10 post allowance so can't reply again below Blondie. But if you feel you have enough experience to compare JW's to any another religion, then go for it. If not, just rate them how well you thought they lived up to their own claims such as listed in the OP.

128

"High-Control Groups"

by Consfearacy in

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .

"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.

it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.

Essan

Consfearacy said: "A person would be disfellowshipped for trying to proselytize inside the Kingdom Hall or using connections with witnesses that are not elders, relationships they formed after Baptism to proselytize or press counter doctrines for destructive purposes"

No, that's not true at all. I know this from personal experience.

You do not have to actively try to persuade anyone else of a differing view (proselytize), or even state that you hold another view for definite in order to be disfellowshipped. It just has to come to the Elders attention that you do not or may not fully agree with the Society and not be willing to recant this position.

If you merely say "I don't agree with that" openly, about any JW teaching and if the Elders get to hear of it, you will be rebuked by the them and if you continue to hold that position of disagreement under questioning, they will disfellowship you for Apostasy. You won't get away with claiming otherwise here Consfearcy because many have seen this firsthand themselves. Some more open-minded elders may be content with gagging you, letting you off with being warned or reproved as long as you promise never to voice your disagreement again and stay silent. But often JW's will not receive such magnanimous leniency.

But you certainly do not have to be "proselytizing" a different view in order to be disfellowshipped.

Even seeking answers too vigorously can lead to being 'reported' and rebuked. I had a friend who used to study very deeply. He was studying the Trinity brochure and could not understand a particular sentence in it. So he kept looking for answers. He was and is a sincere JW and totally believes in the Society. He kept asking others if they understood the sentence and could explain it to him. They could not, but whereas he wanted to understand, they were content to remain ignorant but trust that the sentence must make sense, even if they didn't know how, because the Society wrote it. Soon, the Elders called him into the "back room" and said "we hear you have been questioning the Society?". He was shocked because he had been doing nothing of the sort, but asking too many questions is a dangerous thing as a JW. They were angry and told him to keep his mouth shut and stop asking questions because, even if he was just a conscientious student, it "could be seen as if he was questioning the Society". They told him they would be keeping a close eye on him. As an obedient and now rather scared JW, he did exactly as he was told and kept quiet. He never did get an answer. He is still - silently - "waiting on Jehovah" for an answer, as instructed. He did not even express disagreement.

"[A] mature Christian must be in unity and full harmony with fellow believers as far as faith and knowledge are concerned. He does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbour private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding. Rather, he has complete confidence in the truth as it is revealed by Jehovah God through his Son, Jesus Christ, and "the faithful and discreet slave." (Watchtower, August 1st, 2001, p. 14) .

128

"High-Control Groups"

by Consfearacy in

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .

"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.

it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.

Essan

They are in agreement with everything when it comes to what the Bible teaches. If there are any disagreements with what they're being taught, they'll probably just leave.

Rubbish.

When I was a JW I knew many who had disagreements with many aspects of JW doctrine, they expressed these to me privately - very nervously and tentatively - because they knew I did too and that I would never "report" them to the Elders. But they were not allowed to express this openly without being rebuked by the Elders. If they openly admitted they disagreed and wouldn't back away from that position, they would be disfellowshiped for 'Apostasy" and friends and in many cases family members were required to shun them. So please don't pretend that people who disagree just "leave". People who disagree are thrown out and shunned with massively destructive consequences to their lives. Others don't dare express these disagreements openly for fear of losing lifelong friends and family.

No wonder JW's appear to "speak in agreement" on many matters. They dare not do otherwise.

This is the very definition of "High control".

128

"High-Control Groups"

by Consfearacy in

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .

"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.

it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.

Essan

"They are only in agreement about a few core doctrine"

Exactly, and even that is because disagreement with the Society is not allowed and this is enforced with disfellowshipping.

85

Im finally leaving my jw husband.

by littlebird in

jw
friends

some of you know i have struggled with this for awhile.

i really do believe in marriage and the committment, however, sometimes enough is enough.. his endless preaching at me and calling me and my (adult) children satan has me realizing that this situation is not going to get better.

the other day he kicked my son out of the house for wearing a cap, in his car, with a skull on it.

Essan

It's scary, I know, but nobody needs that in their life. Sounds like you are doing the right thing.

Live life, grab the opportunities and don't look back, would be my advice. :)

8

Rate JW's out of 10 compared to other religions.

by Essan in

so most of us here have been jw's or have read enough to have a decent grasp of the religion.

while we were there we were told jw's were the happiest, most righteous, best dressed, most polite, helpful people and our religion the purest and most accurate for of christianity in the world.. most here now would say all that probably wasn't entirely true.

lol.. if you have had exposure to other religions before or since where do you rate jw's overall compared to these religions?

Essan

So most of us here have been JW's or have read enough to have a decent grasp of the religion. While we were there we were told JW's were the happiest, most righteous, best dressed, most polite, helpful people and our religion the purest and most accurate for of Christianity in the world.

Most here now would say all that probably wasn't entirely true. LOL.

If you have had exposure to other religions before or since where do you rate JW's overall compared to these religions? If you were to do a top five, or top ten, where would the JW's come (and what are these religions you use as reference)

I have no experience of other religions, so I can just rate them out of ten based on their own claims.

Being perfectly honest, I think I'd rate then about a 2/10.

I score them at all because they do not engage in wars, which, while they infringe on personal choice in this, the motive seems to be good - the sanctity of life. They generally do not seem to contribute much to the crime rate, that's another point. After that I'm struggling to find good points which make a difference when compared to the bad.

What say you?

128

"High-Control Groups"

by Consfearacy in

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .

"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.

it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.

Essan

Consfearacy, all of your points here have already been addressed and debunked.

Both in this thread and the last you have been placed in 'checkmate' countless times in your arguments by various posters but your dishonesty allows you to simply pretend it hasn't happened and continue. Then you cherry pick the points and Scriptures you want to respond to, ignoring huge sections of their posts and undeniable Scriptural and historical evidence as it suits you.

Thankfully, it appears I'm not the only one who sees this.

I'd love to see the moderation here restrict you to a formal debate where you and the person debating you must adequately respond to each point made in turn, or otherwise concede the argument. I don't see why JWN should have to tolerate deliberate liars, and your present mode of 'argument' certainly amounts to that and, in fact, depends on it.

If you were forced to be honest by being forced to deal with and respond to all of the evidence presented then perhaps even you would see the errors in your apologetics.