Posts by Consfearacy

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.

Consfearacy

Essan said, "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 article shows, this isn't a description of how things are, it's a command as to how they must be. As 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."

If you do not believe the Watchtower (the faithful and discreet slave's principle means of teaching) has backing from God, you don't have to agree with anything it says. This is not enforced with sanctions and there is no one that can or does force anyone to stay in the organization. If a person is in a corporation and they start doing things that are a conflict of interest, there will be immediate consequences, up to and including termination. Jehovah's Witnesses will take quite a bit of time and patience to reason with a person. Common sense 101: If you directly conflict with most organizations (profit or non-profit) as an active member and voice your dissent to other members, it will create problems. You'll likely be asked or forced to take your voice of dissent elsewhere unless others agree. If it's constructive criticism because something is broken and needs to be fixed, that's one thing. But, if millions of people in the organization disagree with what needs fixing, you should start your own private, public club elsewhere.

Anyone in the organization that was there for decades was there for a reason. There are many people who have a job(s) they do not enjoy. Some people are locked into a job they hate. But it is their means of income, so they have little choice in the matter. If someone doesn't enjoy attending the meetings and other theocratic activities, they will cease participating in them.

Even those in other religions, true or false like what they're doing and get some enjoyment out of it, or they wouldn't be there. If they do plummet into disbelief, the difference is they many times can't answer some of the most fundamental questions like, why does God permit suffering?

"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."

Again, a person doesn't have to do, anything they do not want to. A person can choose to reject the faithful and discreet slave as a channel of communication used by God. He has a choice as you've obviously made yours. You can also go to the meetings and think whatever you want, (no one can read your mind), although if you disagree with what you hear, why attend?

lv chap. 1 p. 10 par. 12 “This Is What the Love of God Means”

Jehovah created us as free moral agents. This means that we have freedom of choice; we can choose to obey God, or we can choose to disobey him.

"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!"

There's nothing in the society's publications that indicates a person is disfellowshipped for disagreeing. The criteria for getting disfellowshipped for apostasy has been clearly laid out in the articles I posted and there are many others that say the same thing: complete and consistent opposition to the organization. In twenty years, I have never witnessed anyone get disfellowshipped for disagreeing with something the society publishes or anything they hear at the Kingdom Hall. You have whatever stories you can tell on the internet and I have my own direct observation. I have never witnessed anyone do the right thing because of fear of being disfellowshipped. 70% of my family are Jehovah's Witnesses. Two have been disfellowshipped. It's well known, the family is of little importance to them. They know the door is always open if they choose to return.

31

My wife has asked me to tone it down

by JWinprotest in

jw
friends

lately i've been making a lot of negative comments about the wts at family gatherings, trying to plant seeds of doubt whenever i can.

but my wife thinks i'm going overboard and starting to raise suspicion.

we had a huge argument last night because i told her i'd rather not go to the gatherings at all than to stay quiet.

Consfearacy

A good salesman doesn't strictly downgrade his competition when promoting a product. It's important to stimulate the interest of others in whatever you're selling.

Would you buy a car from a car salesman who only told you how bad his competitor's car was, instead of telling you about all of the features of the car he was trying to sell you?

Interestingly enough, you're not selling anything, you're just downgrading something you are at odds with. That's a sure path to mental ruin. Most people of any value pursue a certain course of action because they find it enlightening. By taking a stand of protest you're are displaying self-destructive anger to others. If all you have to sell at family gatherings is mental ruin, well, they won't be interested. If you were in my family, you wouldn't be invited to family gatherings. In fact, you would be uninvited.

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.

Consfearacy

Essan wrote, "[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).

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. The faithful discreet slave is an instrument to help others progress to Christian maturity. When it comes to what is stated above, it's an individual choice whether a person agrees.

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 if no one can tell him/her anything? 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.

it-2 p. 310 Man of Lawlessness

An expression used by the apostle Paul at 2 Thessalonians 2:2, 3 in warning of the great anti-Christian apostasy that would develop before “the day of Jehovah.” The Greek word for “apostasy” here used, a·po·sta·si′a, denotes more than a mere falling away, an indifferent sliding back. It means a defection, a revolt, a planned, deliberate rebellion. In ancient papyrus documents a·po·sta·si′a was used politically of rebels.

w92 7/1 p. 19 par. 18 Elders, Judge With Righteousness

On the other hand, when members of a judicial committee are confronted with a clear case of remorseless apostasy, willful rebellion against Jehovah’s laws, or sheer wickedness, their duty is to protect the other members of the congregation by disfellowshipping the unrepentant offender.

In all fairness, if I were to become a member of a Catholic or Baptist church, later revolt and take an active stand against their church, there might not be a formal discharge, but I'd be systematically pushed out the door.

Essan wrote, "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."

Specifically, what sentence are you referring to?

52

Great refutation of Watchtower's "Origin of Life" and "Was Life Created?" brochures

by Third Eye Open in

link: http://www.mediafire.com/?fzjmfambyro0fof.

the essay linked above was written specifically to address the new creationist brochures that were put out by the watchtower at this year's district convention.

the goals of the essay are the following:.

Consfearacy

Weighed and Found Wanting

A critical analysis of The Origin of Life - Five Questions Worth Asking and Was Life Created?

Vivid and pragmatic examples of evolution innovating and creating “well designed" biological structures can be found in the constantly changing worlds of viruses and bacteria. Viruses are relatively simple, they are just pieces of DNA or RNA with a protein coat. Viruses latch onto cells, inject their genetic code, and utilize the machinery of the cell to replicate themselves. Viruses are constantly mutating and thereby stumbling upon new ways to infect other cells. This is the reason that a new flu vaccine is required every season; the virus has changed so significantly that the old antibodies cannot recognize it. Similarly, the rapid evolution of HIV has biological systems are very well “designed" by evolution to evade immune systems and multiply themselves.

2.8 Different Perspectives

Some object that these examples are merely 'microevolution' and are hardly comparable to the 'macroevolution' that leads to new species. However, this is a false distinction. Mutation and natural selection only work at one scale, the scale of the genome. To a strand of DNA, the only difference between gaining resistance to a drug and developing some other novel trait is a pattern of nucleotides. Humans are able to view the resulting changes on difference scales, micro and macro, but the distinction is arbitrary. Just as someone is able to walk across a room, using the same method they could walk down the street or even across town. The scale of the observation is different, but the salient action, putting one foot in front of the other, is identical. There is no magical point where walking ceases to become effective for movement. There is similarly no mysterious barrier that mutation and natural selection cannot pass. Whether evolution is shaping a novel virus or a new species, the process is exactly the same.

Though not obvious, it can be understood how a slow, undirected process can create complex and well adapted biological structures. “Creativity" comes from the random mutations. These changes are selected based upon their ability to confer a reproductive advantage to the genome of which they are a part. Over long periods of time, this natural process “feels" out the figurative 'landscape' of survival, snaking around and discovering new genetic patterns that lead to increased survival rates. Complex biology does not just pop into existence by chance, but slowly builds through generations of natural selection. The various parts of a cell work well together because they have developed side by side over billions of years. No scientist claims that these systems appeared out of nowhere by "accident." There is a demonstrable natural process creating these biological synergies. Pages 13, 14 and 15.

Something very different takes in the real world. We have degree regarding complexity. Viruses are wildly mutational. However, that is not true of more complex species. The more complex the species, the more static the genome. Things we learn, about the genetic variability of viruses in reality aren't valid for more complex species. The empirical evidence speaks for itself.

Popular evidence for evolution in a complex species:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/05/2/l_052_05.html

Ring Species: Salamanders:

Some critics of the theory of evolution argue that it doesn't convincingly explain the origin of new species. They say that members of one species couldn't become so different from other individuals through natural variation that they would become two separate non-interbreeding species.

One of the most powerful counters to that argument is the rare but fascinating phenomenon known as "ring species." This occurs when a single species becomes geographically distributed in a circular pattern over a large area. Immediately adjacent or neighboring populations of the species vary slightly but can interbreed. But at the extremes of the distribution -- the opposite ends of the pattern that link to form a circle -- natural variation has produced so much difference between the populations that they function as though they were two separate, non-interbreeding species.

A well-studied example of a ring species is the salamander Ensatina escholtzii of the Pacific Coast region of the United States. In Southern California, naturalists have found what look like two distinct species scrabbling across the ground. One is marked with strong, dark blotches in a cryptic pattern that camouflages it well. The other is more uniform and brighter, with bright yellow eyes, apparently in mimicry of the deadly poisonous western newt. These two populations coexist in some areas but do not interbreed -- and evidently cannot do so.

By the time the salamanders reached the southernmost part of California, the separation had caused the two groups to evolve enough differences that they had become reproductively isolated. In some areas the two populations coexist, closing the "ring," but do not interbreed. They are as distinct as though they were two separate species. Yet the entire complex of populations belongs to a single taxonomic species, Ensatina escholtzii.

http://godlessliberal.xanga.com/693669753/the-fallacy-of-the-discontinuous-mindset-and-ring-species/

The Fallacy of the Discontinuous Mindset and Ring Species

These ring species are easy to explain through evolution, but difficult to explain via ID (unless we're assuming the designer wanted to design evidence of evolution).

The ring species is excellent evidence for evolution. It's the kind of thing we expect to find if we think species are evolving. However, assuming a static history of life (as we'd see if life was designed to not evolve), this is completely illogical and antithetical to the concept (unless we counter for some sort of whimsy and mischief on the part of the designer). Of course, if someone has an explanation for this, I'd be more than willing to hear it.

Ring species are easy to explain explain via ID using a substitution model. DNA replication, for biological inheritance, is a process occurring in all living organisms to copy their DNA. This process is "replication" in that each strand of the original double-stranded DNA molecule serves as a template for the reproduction of the complementary strand. Hence, following DNA replication, two identical DNA molecules have been produced from a single double-stranded DNA molecule. Cellular proofreading and error toe-checking mechanisms ensure near perfect fidelity for DNA replication. In phylogenetics, sequences are often obtained by firstly obtaining a nucleotide or protein sequence alignment, and then taking the bases or amino acids at corresponding positions in the alignment as the characters. Sequences achieved by this might look like AGCGGAGCTTA and GCCGTAGACGC.

Assuming AGCGGAGCTTA is a DNA code necessary for reproduction (the complete substitution model would be much longer). If environmental adaptation has impacted the species at the DNA level and the DNA sequence AGCGGAGCTTA has mutated to ATCGGAACTTA, making the Ensatina escholtzii incapable of interbreeding with its common ancestor at the other end of the ring (genetically unidentical), the mutation for all practical purposes was destructive as macroevolution never progresses beyond this point. It would evidently take an intelligent designer to complete the process.

Basically, we are still looking for an adequate demonstration of evolution in terms of being able to produce some sort of novel complex phenotype structure with function based on changes at the cellular level (genetic or epigenetic) from simpler lifeforms. Any test would have to show that the genetic structure wasn't the result of a minor genetic mutation. There are several challenges of degree regarding complexity.

We have degree regarding adaptation. Creationists expect species to adapt to their environments just as evolutionists do. Are there limits to the degree of adaptation? Is the salamander going to develop new structures based on complex cellular changes so that we will no longer recognize it as a salamander (showing progressive complexity)? Or is this example of a ring species the limit of adaptation and genetic drift? If you answer the questions you will have no empirical evidence.

The theory of common ancestry has to show a mechanism to derive complexity from simpler organisms. The superficial explanation in the pdf document is in no way sufficient. Vertebrates are extraordinarily complex at all levels of organization. How did they achieve this? What are the cellular mechanisms?

A whole sequence of mutations would have to be identified and determined along these lines. You can apply any and all scientific methods to this salamander outside its natural habitat and it will still remain a salamander. Species are static and they stay that way.

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.

Consfearacy

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.

However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you. These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. 2 Peter 2:1

I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves. Acts 20:29-30

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.

Consfearacy

When it comes to witnesses that frequent nightclubs, these are generally ones that were brought up in the Truth but are somewhat undecided. It also depends on the nightclub, whether it's a hedonistic designer-drug rave or a place where people sit down and watch live music. 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. Christendom is good at maintaining church membership even though they disagree on major issues like homosexuality and abortion because of rich religious traditions and visual arts in worship.

http://www.calvin.edu/worship/stories/visual_worship.php

What defines you? Is it what you know and do...or what you see and love? Must you choose? Your answer likely affects how you see the role of visual arts in worship.

Light and dark. Apple, fig leaf, ark, rainbow. Star, cross, 153 fish.

Taste and see that God is good. Abram, Jacob, Samuel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Paul, and John—all vision struck. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory.

Linen garments, branched candlesticks, curtains embroidered with cherubim. Stone, cedar, cypress, gold.

Soaring arches, stained glass, mosaic floors. Icons, robes, vestments, candles. Stencils on rice paper, catechetical posters, Holy Week processionals, images flickering across big screens.

Christians around the world have different ways of using visual arts in worship. Yet we worship the same Potter, who through the indwelling Spirit shapes us to become more like Christ Incarnate.

And as lush or austere as your own visual tradition may be, you can worship more deeply by considering why and how other Christians receive God’s revelation through what they see.

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.

Consfearacy

He doesn't sound like anyone that attends my congregation. He sounds like a fanatical nutjob that dances around an alter waving a holy grail around. If the dude's a freak, tell me what congregation he goes to so I can ask what his deal is.

116

Definition of Atheist

by ZeusRocks in

jw
friends

i've noticed on so many threads people misrepresenting what and atheist is.

so hopefully anyone who is so inclined can view this clip to get it a bit of clarity on the definition, so others don't have to constantly repeat themselves and correct uneducated assertions on what atheism is.. enjoy.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt1wdnrkllq.

Consfearacy

Atheist's arguments make more sense than Christendom's creationists.

Without God, there's no way to figure out which religions, if any, are true and false.
Without God, the beliefs of people within the same religion frequently come into disagreement.
Without God, believers find ways to explain why God appears invisible and why God doesn't do anything.
Without God, believers come to rely on an idea called "faith" instead of relying on their innate ability to separate non-fiction and fiction.

No one can prove there is no God, just as no one can prove there are no purple elephants on Neptune. On the other hand, no one can prove God exists either. But that doesn't make it a coin-toss, because if God existed, things would be very different around here. If a God existed, he wouldn't have been so bad at directing scriptures. He probably wouldn't have created so many different religions. He would not have made his believers so morally confused. He would not have directed his flocks to wage war on one another.

Everything makes sense if you don't assume God. If you assume God, virtually nothing about our modern understanding of the universe makes any good sense.

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.

Consfearacy

Hebrews 10:24-25 had relative application during the foretold apostasy because of state-sponsored religions.

One frequently asked question about medieval history is, "When did the Dark Ages start and end?" The answer to this simple question is more complicated than one might think.

There is currently no true consensus among historians, authors, and educators for the precise dates -- or even the general dates -- that mark the beginning and end of the medieval era. The most common time frame is approximately 500-1500 C.E., but you will often see different dates of significance marking the era's parameters.

The Protestantism reformation began in 1517. During the Dark Ages no one could teach anything outside what was official church doctrine without being burned at the stake or tortured by the Inquisition.

Biblical truth couldn't be revived until sometime after the Church was stripped of its power. For example:

sh chap. 13 pp. 310-313 The Reformation—The Search Took a New Turn

Often referred to as “the morning star of the Reformation,” John Wycliffe (1324 - December 1384) was a Catholic priest and a professor of theology at Oxford, England. Well aware of the abuses in the church, he wrote and preached against such matters as corruption in the monastic orders, papal taxation, the doctrine of transubstantiation (the claim that the bread and wine used in the Mass literally change into the body and blood of Jesus Christ), the confession, and church involvement in temporal affairs.

Wycliffe was particularly outspoken when it came to the church’s neglect in teaching the Bible. Once he declared:“Would to God that every parish church in this land had a good Bible and good expositions on the gospel, and that the priests studied them well, and taught truly the gospel and God’s commands to the people!” To this end, Wycliffe, in the last years of his life, undertook the task of translating the Latin Vulgate Bible into English. With the help of his associates, particularly Nicholas of Hereford, he produced the first complete Bible in the English language.

All of this, of course, did not go unnoticed by the church. The Council of Constance declared Wycliffe (on 4 May 1415) a stiff-necked heretic and under the ban of the Church. Because of his prominence among the ruling and scholarly classes, Wycliffe was allowed to die in peace on the last day of 1384. It was decreed that his books be burned and his remains be exhumed. His followers were less fortunate. During the reign of Henry IV of England, they were branded as heretics, and many of them were imprisoned, tortured, or burned to death.

Most of the early colonies in the United States, which were in part founded as a result of religious persecution, were generally not tolerant of dissident forms of worship with Maryland being the only exception. The modern legal concept of religious freedom as the union of freedom of belief and freedom of worship with the absence of any state-sponsored religion, originated in the US on September 17, 1787. The United States Constitution addresses the issue of religion in two places: in the First Amendment, and the Article VI prohibition on religious tests as a condition for holding public office.

After freedom of religion was established, apostasy is a conscious choice. Jehovah's Witnesses have maintained integrity and met in undisclosed groups even in places where there was no religious freedom, the Soviet Union for example.

“Sigh, if you stopped thinking in such a fleshly way your confusion might dissipate. God's people do exist. They are the wheat AMONG the weeds. They exist as a spiritual 'body', not a visible, organizational one, they are true Christians within many denominations who are willing to associate with upbuild and encourage each other, even across denominational lines.”

Now I exhort you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you should all speak in agreement, and that there should not be divisions among you, but that you may be fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought. 1 Corinthians 1:10

Or rendered:

http://nlt.scripturetext.com/1_corinthians/1.htm

Divisions in the Church

I appeal to you, dear brothers and sisters, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, to live in harmony with each other. Let there be no divisions in the church. Rather, be of one mind, united in thought and purpose.

So the “true Christians” that all speak in agreement, and are not divided, fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought are within many denominations even though they disagree with their apostate brothers and sisters. The fact of the matter is the first century Christians didn't think along these lines and wouldn't pursue this coarse of action unless they didn't have any choice.

Until these unidentified “true Christians” reform the "weeds," reform these apostate religions from within they are ineffective and nothing they say really means anything. Specific denominations of Christendom are divided on numerous issues. Jehovah's Witnesses as a worldwide organization are fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought. There's no logical reason to hang out in these different religions make-believing you're accomplishing any good. Whenever you do start trying to proselytize inside these churches or use church connections to proselytize, you'll likely be barred from the premises.

26

A Fond Farewell

by 5thGeneration in

jw
friends

i want to take this opportunity to say goodbye to all of the members on jwn and thank you for your support over the years.. circumstances have arisen that make it impossible for me to continue posting here.. i have truly appreciated your love and support during some hard times when i had no one else to talk to.. you showed compassion and a non-judgmental, christlike attitude for thoughts and feelings that could not be openly expressed to any of the brothers in the congregation for fear of reprisal.

for that, i am so grateful!.

thanks to the many of you that could relate to the pain and worthlessness that i have felt about myself for so many years because of my experiences and upbringing in the truth.

Consfearacy

This traumatic exit is a sobering reminder of the dead end street: Apostate Blvd. I wouldn't be surprised if 5thGeneration ends up back at the meetings. He obviously didn't receive any adequate help here.