Posts by rawe

186

Just out of curiosity, how many elders (current & ex) do we have here?

by mrquik in

jw
friends

me.

rawe

Hi Mrquick,

I served as an elder, resigning in 2005, then leaving the faith in 2007.

Cheers,

-Randy

139

Ever consider joining The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

by rawe in

has anyone here left jehovah's witnesses to join the churuch of jesus christ of latter-day saints?

what was your motivation for doing so and how has it worked out?.

if you haven't joined the lds or considered it, as an ex-jw, what is your general view of the lds faith?.

You'll notice I don't comment that much on LDS history. That aspect of the faith does not interest me. However, how the Bible has come into existence and been translated is of great interest to me. So, when you say this...

"Even when Isaiah is quoted in the Book of Mormon"

my comment is, this statement lacks precision. The Book of Mormon, contains, in copious amounts, text from the King James Version of the Bible. Never does the Book of Mormon "quote" Isaiah, which was written in Hebrew. Translating from Hebrew into English is a non-trivial exercise. Both word choice and syntax will result in a unique translation, even though others may equally convey the meaning. If translators are compelled to work with deficient manuscripts or are burdened with certain religious bias, that will show up, sometimes including mistakes, that only become obvious when older manuscripts are discovered.

The truth of this is easily available, all one has to do is invest a bit of time in reading how Bible translation is generally done, how the KJV of 1611 was specifically created and then just open the Book of Mormon side-by-side with a KJV Bible and compare. In previous posts, I've pointed to 2 Nephi 22 compared to KJV Isaiah 12 as an example.

Cheers,

-Randy

139

Ever consider joining The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

by rawe in

has anyone here left jehovah's witnesses to join the churuch of jesus christ of latter-day saints?

what was your motivation for doing so and how has it worked out?.

if you haven't joined the lds or considered it, as an ex-jw, what is your general view of the lds faith?.

rawe

Hi Cold Steel,

"There's no ritual shunning, Latter-day Saints can visit any church they want or read any religious materials they wish."

Compared to the Witnesses this is a point in favor for Latter-day Saints. As is this...

"They're actually encouraged to seek the highest education they can"

John Cedars is an Ex-JW who sometimes posts on this site and he is the author behind jwsurvey.org. He asked about shunning on exmormonforums.com. One response he got from "Rainfeather" was this:

From what I've heard about the way people are treated when they leave the JWs, yes I would say they are worse. With Mormonism, it's more of an individual thing. One family might tolerate a member who has left, while another family will shun entirely. It's a different experience for everyone. But the stories of shunning are just so sad and it's all so unnecessary.

"The Latter-day Saints are completely different, but there's no convincing some people."

I do not assert the Latter-day Saints are the same as Jehovah's Witnesses. Several aspects of those differences are exactly what you highlight in your post. What seems to be the case is this. For believers in either faith the focus is on doctrinal points and what supports those. The doctrine is all important, because it is correct and the truth, for reasons X, Y, Z. In the initial stages of doubting most disaffected members begin to examine the foundation of those doctrines and find them faulty. However, after awhile the focus shifts to aspects of how one was mislead, how wrong, but subtle arguments were presented and reinforced, etc. How control structures with the faith worked. In this Ex-Mormons and Ex-JWs often find common ground.

I doubt any believing member would find anything more the most superficial commonality between the faiths. Instead, if they did gaze over the fence it would be to laugh at how silly the other faith is in one regard or the other.

I believe almost no one on the outside can convince a believing member they are part of a faith the lacks a factual basis. Instead, something happens within the faith, that causes the member to question. Only then do such folks begin to take seriously what critics of the faith are saying.

"But what is death?"

The opposite of life.

"It's a separation. Spiritual death is a separation of man and God."

There is no evidence of this apart from a statement of belief.

"As for Ecclesiastes, it's clearly a philosophic book and not an eschatological book."

Says, who? Eccleiastes is part of the inspired word of God and truthful in all it's plain statements of fact!

I am of course being sarcastic, since again, either view amounts to a statement of belief. All we can say for certain is Ecclesiastes is an ancient book written in Hebrew that became part of the Bible canon. The writer certainly does seem to focus on the vanity of life, but I don't think there is any reason to believe he was merely being philosophical when he said the dead "know not anything." Rather, in context the writer is reflecting on the value of being alive in constrast to being dead. As he said, a live dog is better than a dead lion.

"And the apostles asked Jesus, "Master, who did sin, this man or his parents that he was born blind?" (John 9:2) How could that man sin before his birth if he did not exist? Jesus made no attempt to correct them."

Hmm... I don't think the account demands that conclusion. The answer Jesus is said to have given here is this: "Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him."

The parents were of course alive while the child was in the womb, so they could have "sinned" then. Likewise, it may have been the belief of Jews then, that an unborn child could "sin" while in the womb. In any case Jesus said neither had sinned.

But, there is little point for me to go into great detail on these points. I don't believe in God or that Jesus was anything more than a man who long ago died along with everyone else in his time period. Likewise, I don't believe Jehovah's Witnesses have the "truth", so all I can do is share what I know about the faith, but I have no interest in defending their doctrines.

"You're also correct that death ends animated life. If you've ever lost a family member or friend, or if you've ever had an animal as a pet, once dead, the body looks different. It's clearly a shell in which the spirit, an eternal being, resides."

Again, this is just an assertive statement of belief. To say the body "looks different" is obvious enough, why would we expect any different, given the physical actions of respiration have ended?

"Injustice? How? The Lord has stated that children who die return to the Lord and will inherit eternal life, without the necessity of going through the pain and suffering of human life."

Hmm..., okay...

"I wish I could have died that young, though if I had, I don't think I would have appreciated death and a return to God as much."

I'm trying to imagine how the parent of the 5-year-old would react if you told them, no injustice had befallen them and in fact you wish you could have died at that age too. Not to be too hash, but this is just contempt for life now, we know we have. All such talk of after-life is, at best, wishful thinking. Jehovah's Witnesses routinely talk about the wonders of paradise earth without seemingly giving a thought to the genocide that must proceed it.

"On the other hand, many of those who live selfish, hedonistic lifestyles or reject the existence of God experience fear and for that reason refuse to move on."

What though of atheists who are not selfish and hedonistic? Who have not so much "rejected the existence of God" but instead accepted life for what it really is? Could it be they neither live in fear and have "moved on" from superstitious belief, that is?

"Indeed they do [claim ordination as ministers]. But from whence do they get their authority?"

The same place as any who make such claims. It is a faith claim. Each particular faith dictates these rules -- that is their proragative. Saying they aren't ordained, but I am, because of this or that, is, again just another statement of belief.

"They may surmise such, but do the JW Governing Body members see visions, have angelic ministrations?"

Jehovah's Witnesses do not make such claims, but again, they would view with suspicious any who do. In any regards Latter-day Saints are not alone in these claims. TV Evangelist Oral Roberts claimed to have several visions, including one in 1977 from a 900-foot-tall Jesus who told him to build City of Faith Medical and Research Center (see Wikipedia for more details).

Cheers,
-Randy

139

Ever consider joining The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

by rawe in

has anyone here left jehovah's witnesses to join the churuch of jesus christ of latter-day saints?

what was your motivation for doing so and how has it worked out?.

if you haven't joined the lds or considered it, as an ex-jw, what is your general view of the lds faith?.

rawe

Hi Cold Steel,

You've posted a fair bit of material. If I get more time, I'll read it and respond. Here is a couple off the cuff comments...

"And I understand why. Any person leaving any church in bitterness feels that they’ve been manipulated, deceived, and that they’ve wasted a lot of time for nothing. That’s why many become atheists."

Indeed is not a nice feeling to make the awful discovery that a trusted source has in fact been less than honest. However, for what is worth, in my own case, I generally felt fairly positive about my involvement with the Witnesses, especially during my younger years, where I was adopted by the congregation as a "fatherless boy." Since both my parents were disfellowshipped, I went to meetings alone, even as an 8-year-old. I also remained in the faith for several years, after admitting to myself I was an atheist. At the time, I would have not expressed it so bluntly -- probably more of "I have doubts about the existence of God."

One Ex-Mormon in particular impressed me with how he expressed his feelings. His story convinced me there is kinship between Mormons and Witnesses who eventually come face to face with their doubts about the veracity of their faith. I found his story on exmormon.org and recall his concerns about DNA vs faith claims regarding American Indians. My point here is not the focus on his concern, but instead how he expressed feelings that were akin to my own. It has been a long while since I read his story, but I just skimmed through it again for this post.

Here is a snippet that captures his feelings: "I didn't leave the LDS Church and stop believing because it was easy. I desperately wanted the comforting teachings of the Church to be true. I don't have any brilliant insight to offer about the meaning of life, and I haven't found another true Church."

It is story #125 - Simon Southerton from Australia.

"But at the same time it’s foolish to put the Mormons in the same category as the WTBTS."

Some aspects are the similar, some are different. Naturally a believing Mormon will focus on the differences that seem to make the Mormon faith "correct." In the end, it is often a personal journey. You speculated on why many who leave the Witnesses become atheists. But of course, you don't know, right? Having never been a Witness or an atheist, all you can do is ask and draw conclusions on what may be the reasons. Likewise, although I can read The Book of Mormon and express critical vews about sections of the KJV being plagerized, this is not the same as being a Mormon. What the LDS faith means to you, would naturally go beyond such things.

Cheers,

-Randy

11

How do I edit my profile

by nonjwspouse in

such as addiing a quote, or place of origin, etc.

?.

rawe

Hi Everyone,

Hmm... I am not sure which email address I used for this site. So, here is a test post, to see if my picture appears via gravatar.com...

Cheers,

-Randy

28

Revelation, It's Grand Climax at Hand

by Cold Steel in

it's a rather large red book.. if i wanted to purchase one from a pioneer, how much would it cost?.

i'm reading a borrowed copy now.. thanks!.

.

rawe

Hi Cold Steel,

"So if the two trees and two candlesticks represent the two witnesses, how can any theologian worth his salt then turn around and say the two witnesses, in turn, represent all the JW missionaries doing missionary work today"

A lot has to do with what one chooses to emphasize. When Russell started with Zion's Watchtower part of the focus was on the belief Jesus had returned and was (invisibly) "present". Notice how RNWT renders Matthew 24:3 "sign of your presence." So to make you impressed with me, how much I have God's spirt, etc, I'll get you to focus on that. I'll blather on and on about the Greek word there and how other translations like the KJV which say "sign of thy coming" have it all wrong. Maybe, just maybe you won't notice the parallel accounts at Luke 21 and Mark 13 don't have the word "present" at all.

Same here, all we need to do is dive into forms of numerology. 6 means this, 7 means that, 10 means the other thing, etc. In this case 2 could indicate legally established, think "two witnesses" (Deut 17:6). So... there you go, two witnesses can now mean all the witnesses at the time.

Cheers,

-Randy

28

Revelation, It's Grand Climax at Hand

by Cold Steel in

it's a rather large red book.. if i wanted to purchase one from a pioneer, how much would it cost?.

i'm reading a borrowed copy now.. thanks!.

.

rawe

Hi Cold Steel,

"They take literal prophecies and turn them into figurative ones;"

A fair amount of weight is given to Rev 1:1 that mentions it was presented in "signs".

"Revelation 11, for example, John is told to measure the third temple with a rod. . .that the Jews or Jerusalem has any part of the latter days."

Jehovah's Witnesses developed a frustration in regards to literal Jews, since early attempts to bring them the "good news" did not succeed. Thus, nearly all Biblical references to Jews, especially in the NT have become part of a "replacement theology" where literal Jews are replaced by figurative ones. The literal destruction of the temple in 587 BCE was big event in the minds of OT writers. Not too surprisingly the repeat of this in 70 CE would be a big item in the mind of Jews and Christian of the NT era. What did it portend? Would it be restored in some form in the future? These thoughts show up in Revelation 11 which echos Ezekiel 40.

"And all the pioneers are the fulfillment of those two prophets. It's all complete fantasy."

Of course it is -- but what else would you expect? Jehovah's Wtinesses are going to interpret Revelation in terms of happenings to their organization, despite how insignificant the organization is in reality.

"If the members of the WTBTS knew what crap this red book is, they'd be embarrassed."

In my experience most Witnesses are not deeply interested in this material. They are sort of awed by how "deep" it is and feel a warmth about how significant all these happenings were in the past. How brave those little band of Witnesses who were slaughtered and left in the broad way (Rev 11:8) but where then brought back to life by the spirit of God.

"The copy I have actually has notes in it, as though the reader was taking it seriously."

This book have been covered several times during the congregation bookstudy. Members are expected to pre-study the material before the 1 hour lesson in the group. The range of pre-study can be from none at all to fairly complete. But there is no need to say "as though" it is very likely the person who wrote those notes did in fact take it seriously.

"If people would just read the Bible and spend less time reading the publications, it might dawn on them that they're being bamboozled."

Those invited to the Bible School of Gilead (training for Witness missionaries) are encouraged to read the Bible through before arriving. There are a number of youtube videos by an Ex-Gilead graduate who talks about this exact effect. What it was like to read the Bible apart of "studying" it with the publications. Yes, indeed, an entirely different message can come through.

"David Koresch [Vernon Howell] did the same thing. He'd take one of the great kingdoms symbolized..."

Vernon's background was Seventh Day Adventist, which in some ways has similar origins and beliefs as the Witnesses.

Cheers,

-Randy

28

Revelation, It's Grand Climax at Hand

by Cold Steel in

it's a rather large red book.. if i wanted to purchase one from a pioneer, how much would it cost?.

i'm reading a borrowed copy now.. thanks!.

.

rawe

Hi Cold Steel,

"If I wanted to purchase one [Revelation! It's Grand Climax at Hand!] from a Pioneer, how much would it cost?"

In most countries, no specific amount is suggested[1]. Instead the household is told they can make a small donation to cover the cost of printing and support the world wide work of Jehovah's Witnesses. In terms of obtaining literature, a full-time preacher (pioneer) or ordinary Witness (publish) can both bring you this book, if you ask when they visit. You can also go to a Kingdom Hall and ask the the literature counter and if they have one on hand, they'll give it to you.

Keep in mind, most Witnesses will see this as an indication of your interest in the faith and will designate you for a RV (return visit) with the hopes of starting a "Bible Study" (not really a study of the Bible, but instead a indoctrination process) with you.

Cheers,

-Randy

[1] Other JWN members may be able to confirm this, but the "donation arrangement" where no specific amount is asked, may have been triggered by a lawsuit again Jimmy Swaggart Mininstries, where in the Watchtower Society gave some support to JSM. I don't know for 100% if this is true or not, but have heard it from a few different sources.

23

The civil trial in Japan

by japanesegirl in

finally in japan, there happened a civil trial which is by a brother who was unfairly deleted his status by a body of elders of his congregation.

he has sued them for religious and power harassment.

although the brother's name and details are not told, the trial is progressing to the middle stage.

rawe

Hi Band on the Run,

"I believe religiious groups have every right to define who is a member or not."

I agree. I also think the case of Janice Paul v The Watchtower in 1987 shows how unlikely it would be to win a case. However, when Jehovah's Witnesses announce to the congregation "Name of individual is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses" the intent is to slander and cause alienation of affection between the individual and family and friends who are Jehovah's Witnesses. They do this by theologically linking the statement with 1 Corinthians 5, wherein a sexual deviant is declared "wicked" by the Bible writer Paul.

Can Jehovah's Witnesses appeal to freedom of religion to be protected from all charges of slander? Thus far apparently so. But I do think, they're well aware, they are close to the line. Three reason I believe this are: (a) They removed the "unbecoming a Christian" phrase from the announcement and (b) around the time of the Paul case they removed disfellowshipping action as possibility for non-baptized associates and (c) they changed the baptism vows to make it more clear one was entering into a contractual membership arrangement with the religion.

Finally I think WT lawyers may at times wonder about another couple possibilities. One is wrongful death, wherein a member in the process of being disfellowshipped commits suicide. Or alternatively, a member in fear of disfellowshipping refuses a life-saving blood transfusion and dies.

As the Candace Conti case appears to illustrate Jehovah's Witnesses want the full protection of the first amendment, full control over the minute details of members lives, yet be free of all responsibility for the negative outcomes of such assertive control.

Cheers,

-Randy

25

should christains own cats?

by unstopableravens in

is it appropriate for a christian to own a cat, in light of their past pagan religious affiliation and the medical information that is now coming to light?

it would be misleading to answer this question with either a simple yes or a no.

the scriptural answer of necessity must be a qualified one, and it is easy to see why.

rawe

Hi Everyone,

"since the Great Flood of Noah’s time (c2350 B.C.E.)."

That's a whoops - must add 20 and make that 2370 BCE for JWs. This happens of course due to the 607 BCE date -- i.e. push one, push all!

Cheers,

-Randy