Essan

Joined

• started 16 topics
• posted 624 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Essan

• 
  33

  What's the thinking behind calling yourself 'Apostate'?

  by Essan in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  seems to me that we're playing into the society's hands here.. 'apostate' is the most evil and vile word for jw's.

  i suspect it's even more of a terrifying trigger word than 'satan' or "demons", for them.. the society gives us that label which they have negatively loaded in order to make it impossible for jw's to hear us or have anything to do with us.

  the word is associated with other words like "poison" and "toxic", "disease" and "filth".. so what sense does it make to use it and allow the society to have it's way?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  So, would you say JWN is more of a...... rest and recuperation spot for traumatized Ex-JWs, and use of 'Apostate' is part of their therapy? LOL
• 
  52

  Maximum Damage to the WT.

  by Essan in

  1. forum
  2. tech-support

  i have to hand it to the society.

  they understand the power of organization.

  they demonstrate that no matter how ridiculous your message and how much the facts don't support your position you can still accomplish a lot if you are organized.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  Yeah, I do think that there is lots happening and a lot of great ideas. But, as you said, there isn't the awareness or the orchestraton to put real numbers and resources behind these efferts, of the kind that could make them spectacularly effective.

  There are those with the ideas and those willing to get behind and support the ideas, in various ways. But if the they don't have a place to collaborate, hear about what is happening, read about what has already happened and focus future efforts then they may always remain relatively scattered and small time. I liked what you said here:

  What seems to be missing is an information clearinghouse where ex-JWs can reach a wide audience of like-minded people who are doing similar projects, who would be interested in participating in or aiding those projects, or who would benefit from those projects.

  That's what we need then.
• 
  33

  What's the thinking behind calling yourself 'Apostate'?

  by Essan in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  seems to me that we're playing into the society's hands here.. 'apostate' is the most evil and vile word for jw's.

  i suspect it's even more of a terrifying trigger word than 'satan' or "demons", for them.. the society gives us that label which they have negatively loaded in order to make it impossible for jw's to hear us or have anything to do with us.

  the word is associated with other words like "poison" and "toxic", "disease" and "filth".. so what sense does it make to use it and allow the society to have it's way?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  I understand Cantleave, but by using it we also make ourselves the enemy of all JW's. People who are deceived. People we could help. But who are too afraid to listen to us because we are 'Apostates'.
• 
  33

  What's the thinking behind calling yourself 'Apostate'?

  by Essan in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  seems to me that we're playing into the society's hands here.. 'apostate' is the most evil and vile word for jw's.

  i suspect it's even more of a terrifying trigger word than 'satan' or "demons", for them.. the society gives us that label which they have negatively loaded in order to make it impossible for jw's to hear us or have anything to do with us.

  the word is associated with other words like "poison" and "toxic", "disease" and "filth".. so what sense does it make to use it and allow the society to have it's way?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  It might cause cognitive dissonance Mad, if it ever got that far. But I suspect most JW's would click on JWN, see people openly calling themselves 'Apostates' (they might as well call themselves 'Servants of Satan', as far as a JW is concerned) and immediately leave.

  The Society created a psychological trigger, a strong 'mind-control' conditioning tool in the label 'Apostate'. By using it we pull that trigger on JW's fearfully peeking at JWN for the first time. Or that's my concern.

  For instance, I know I'd never feel able to recommend a believing JW go to JWN. Not in a million years. Primarily because of the liberal use of 'Apostate' here. I could never use this site as a tool to help someone exit, largely for that reason.
• 
  33

  What's the thinking behind calling yourself 'Apostate'?

  by Essan in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  seems to me that we're playing into the society's hands here.. 'apostate' is the most evil and vile word for jw's.

  i suspect it's even more of a terrifying trigger word than 'satan' or "demons", for them.. the society gives us that label which they have negatively loaded in order to make it impossible for jw's to hear us or have anything to do with us.

  the word is associated with other words like "poison" and "toxic", "disease" and "filth".. so what sense does it make to use it and allow the society to have it's way?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  NC, The word does have power over you because you feel compelled to use it, as a response. The Society must be having a good belly laugh at that choice. It's like a really good magician forcing a card on you, that you think was a free choice. But they made you do it. Masterful.

  If it had no power over you, you wouldn't feel it necessary to try to weaken it's power by - ironically - constantly using it.

  And even if this tactic works to make yourself feel better, it doesn't work for any JW's you encounter, who are terrified by your willing choice of label. It's like you are volunteering to be the bogeyman the Society claims you are. They really must be in hysterics over this at the Headquarters, IMO.
• 
  33

  What's the thinking behind calling yourself 'Apostate'?

  by Essan in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  seems to me that we're playing into the society's hands here.. 'apostate' is the most evil and vile word for jw's.

  i suspect it's even more of a terrifying trigger word than 'satan' or "demons", for them.. the society gives us that label which they have negatively loaded in order to make it impossible for jw's to hear us or have anything to do with us.

  the word is associated with other words like "poison" and "toxic", "disease" and "filth".. so what sense does it make to use it and allow the society to have it's way?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  Hi Broken Promises,

  Allow me to play devils advocate here.

  So the use of the term 'Apostate' is, as you said, to lesson the effect of the word on you. Meaning, the more you call yourself the abusive and false word that someone who hates you has called you, the more you will become immune to it's effect?

  I can see some kind of vaguely logical reasoning to that, but it still means that people who are doing this are allowing the Society to control the game. They are playing by the Society's rules and definitions and allowing them to define them. They are simply reacting, letting the Society be a cause and their response it's effect. This still gives the Society the power position. At the end of the day, they called us something abusive, and we accepted it.

  And while it may lessen the effect on us to repeated use a negative term, it doesn't do that for any JW's who encounter us using it. The Society wants them to be afraid when they hear the term, and they are.
• 
  33

  What's the thinking behind calling yourself 'Apostate'?

  by Essan in

  1. social
  2. entertainment

  seems to me that we're playing into the society's hands here.. 'apostate' is the most evil and vile word for jw's.

  i suspect it's even more of a terrifying trigger word than 'satan' or "demons", for them.. the society gives us that label which they have negatively loaded in order to make it impossible for jw's to hear us or have anything to do with us.

  the word is associated with other words like "poison" and "toxic", "disease" and "filth".. so what sense does it make to use it and allow the society to have it's way?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  Seems to me that we're playing into the Society's hands here.

  'Apostate' is the most evil and vile word for JW's. I suspect it's even more of a terrifying trigger word than 'Satan' or "Demons", for them.

  The Society gives us that label which they have negatively loaded in order to make it impossible for JW's to hear us or have anything to do with us. The word is associated with other words like "poison" and "toxic", "disease" and "filth".

  So what sense does it make to use it and allow the Society to have it's way?

  The truth is the vast majority of us are or were not ever "apostates" as the Scriptures define it, nor even as the Society defines it. Neither the literal and Scriptural nor the Society's fabricated hateful definitions apply. So why do we accept this label?

  I can imagine that by using it here we often cause shudders of fear and revulsion to go through inquisitive JW's who read it, perhaps driving some away? That's what bothers me.
• 
  52

  Maximum Damage to the WT.

  by Essan in

  1. forum
  2. tech-support

  i have to hand it to the society.

  they understand the power of organization.

  they demonstrate that no matter how ridiculous your message and how much the facts don't support your position you can still accomplish a lot if you are organized.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  I have to hand it to the Society. They understand the power of organization. They demonstrate that no matter how ridiculous your message and how much the facts don't support your position you can still accomplish a lot if you are organized. I think we could learn a lot from them.

  We have the truth and the evidence on our side. We have considerable numbers. We are making an impact but nowhere near the limits of our potential IMO. Even those with a very broad and nebulous anti-establishment agenda, even those doing it primarily for a laugh, groups like Anonymous, have proven to be more effective with a minimum of organization.

  Surely we can do more damage?

  By damage I mean causing the WT to lose members and prevent them gaining new ones. I also mean giving them the maximum amount of bad publicity and exposure.

  How can we do this? Obviously I'm only speaking to those who want to do this. I know and understand the position of those who don't really care or don't feel any more can be accomplished. I'm speaking to those who feel more can be accomplished and who are eager to get stuck in.

  Would a kind of loose knit 'Anti-Org' give people more a sense of community and direction in the fight against the WT? Would it lead to more action effective action being taken against the WT? I believe so. People are strong when they group together for a common cause and agree to a common course of action, or series of them ('Operations' as Anonymous refers to their actions).

  What about a brainstorming session? Ideas? How could we use our numbers to make use of he media, for instance?

  What about a series of orchestrated public debates, in which those from our numbers who have the knowledge and confidence to take on the Society over various issues (their failed predictions, changed dates, blood policy, the UN hypocrisy etc - anything that would expose their hidden history and dirty laundry) publicly challenge local elders or Society reps to public debates in cities all around the country, or even in many countries, inviting members of the public, JW's and local journalists etc to attend (funding for venues etc. by supporters of these ventures)? Then, when the JW reps don't attend, as is likely, a presentation of the facts goes ahead and the point is made that the JW's are too scared and secretive to face debate. People could post flyers advertising it, and newspaper and radio adverts. It could serve as a massive warning anti-witnessing campaign.

  What about doing this online? Challenges and invitations offered to attend Skype type video or audio conference/debates, advertised through facebook and email lists? The JW's can be destroyed in open debate by someone armed with the facts and their own literature.

  Just thinking out loud. Any other ideas?
• 
  328

  Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

  by snowbird in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  http://www.str.org/site/news2?page=newsarticle&id=5725.

  i fought against this with all my wts-trained power, but truth prevailed.. any way you cut it, it comes out the same.. peace and strength in your search.. sylvia.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  Podo, what I'm saying is that if when weighing all the Scriptures together the weight leans to that conclusion that they are the same in being, if not in function, then yes, there isn't really any problem presented by Psalms 2...unless you just can't stop thinking in human terms or aren't willing to harmonize all the Scriptures, in which case there does appear to be a problem. But it's only an appearance.

  Yeah, we just have to agree to disagree. My basic position is that the Trinity doctrine is more than possible and reasonable as a Scriptural understanding if all the the Scriptures are weighed together. I can fully understand how people reach a non-trinitarian position based on their understanding of the Scriptures and being human, used to human concepts. I neither judge them or imagine that, if wrong, they will be punished for it. But I do wish that non-Trinitarians and JWs and exJW's particularly, would at least allow for the idea that the Trinity doctrine may be possible and that it arose out of an attempt to harmonize Scripture and that the scholarship behind it is pretty damn good (infinitely better than the non-Trinitarian position, in fact.)

  I'm not prepared to make a definite call about what the truth may be, because I think I'd be making an unwarranted leap either way. But I must say, if I were forced to leap (As some may insist I am, although I disagree) then I'd probably have to chose the Trinity as a sincere attempt to harmonize Scripture as best as is humanly possible. The non-trintarian view is more comfortable, simple and familiar - more human - but I just don't see the same basis in Scripture for it. And God isn't human.
• 
  328

  Jesus Is Jehovah/Jehovah Is Jesus

  by snowbird in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  http://www.str.org/site/news2?page=newsarticle&id=5725.

  i fought against this with all my wts-trained power, but truth prevailed.. any way you cut it, it comes out the same.. peace and strength in your search.. sylvia.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Essan

  Hi Podo,

  Agreed, a 1st century Christianized Jew wouldn't have 2000 years of the trinity doctrine to reflect on or influence their thinking. But they would have an anointing and spiritual revelation, they would also have some of the new Christian writings and they would have the preaching of those who converted them. So, there's no reason that they would not understand Psalms 2 in the light of those things, rather than in isolation based on Jewish misperceptions and false expectations (as discussed by Paul).

  Thus, what this Jew may have thought and expected prior to being preached to, baptized, anointed and taught by the Spirit and the NT writers, isn't relevant. It won't help you to interpret Psalms 2 accurately.

  You said: "Psalm 2, surely refers to the Almighty addressing his "Son..."

  Yes. You continued.

  "...as a separate being".

  Well, no. It doesn't say that, does it? You added that. That is your interpretation. It's a reasonable interpretation, based on human reasoning. But it doesn't hold up up when compared to all that the Bible says on this matter. It may be a "simple" understanding, but the true nature of Spirit may not be simple from a human standpoint.