Posts by mustang

14

Question for the ExJW's

by ExmormonRobertson in

jw
friends

in mormonism, usually when someone leaves the church, the members give one of two reason for that person leaving.

1. they couldn't live the standards of the church.

or 2. someone in the church had hurt their feelings.. my question is: is this the usual reason the jw's give when this happens to someone who leaves?

mustang

XMR,

No one addressed your #2: Someone in the Church had hurt their feelings.

This does underlie many leavings, however. Someone w/in the last couple of months actually said that they told the Elders this on a "shepherding call". ("Shepherding calls" are when the Elders come to visit the "weak". Anything can happen here, from encouragement to return to meetings, etc. to an investigation. That could set the stage for a Judicial Committee meeting.)

Anyway, they indicated that they rightly were able to say that they had been avoided or snubbed by other members. This was before any real "weakness" was evident on their part. The Elders left "with their tails between their legs" so to speak.

I personally believe this should be pushed to the hilt. More people should proclaim this one, at least on the start of "the way out". Since the "guilt trip" is a major weapon here, strike back and strike first. (I have calculated that my father pulled the guilt trip over 600 times after I left home. My first resistances were met with 'not showing proper respect', again a chapter of the guilt trip. I have fulfilled the scriptural admonition to 'forgive 70 x 7'.)

It sounds like lots of people voice the opinion that someone
'stumbled them' in the Mormons, since you mentioned it. Right or wrong?

It sounds like you have the same shepherding calls and peer pressure from relatives.

Mustang

33

Why do elders come unnanounced.......

by ISP in

jw
friends

yeah, like these guys never make appointments.

just stroll up when it suits them and not you.

is it ignorance or simply a matter of discourtesy?

mustang

Individual,

Your experience and comments remind me of dealing with the police (cops).

There is no such thing as a 'friendly chat' with them. (That is, if they are a stranger; if you know them, it probably is different.)

Bear in mind, that they are on duty, and every conversation IS A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.

Same thing w/ Elders.

Mustang

1

TO LDH & JAYHAWK: ROOMMATES

by mustang in

jw
friends

ldh,.

should this one be added to that list you posted of do's, dont's & can'ts as a jw:.

cannot have an opposite sex roommate.

mustang

LDH,

Should this one be added to that list you posted of do's, dont's & can'ts as a JW:

CANNOT HAVE AN OPPOSITE SEX ROOMMATE

JayHawk was asking about this on a discussion titled, 'Answer me this' or such.

My recollection is that it is a very touchy subject.

Thanks for your list, as posted in the suicide thread. It seems to have answered GodRules question. That's my underhanded, understated way of saying that you shut him down. Way to go!!!

Mustang

22

Please answer this for me

by jayhawk1 in

jw
friends

i have a question, that i would love answered.

especially if you are a woman.

men can answer too, but a woman's opinion really matters to me.

mustang

Jayhawk,

Everybody has answered this on a personal level and treated it as such. That's cool.

But... I will go somewhere else with this one.

To pick-a-nit, technically, does the WTS permit roommates?

I have been meaning to add this to LDH's list of things that you can't do or that 'are added to one' when you become a Dub. (That seems to have taken the wind out of GodRules sails.)

It seems to have been established that Dubs can be brought to task (at a JC committee hearing) for immorality BASED ON spending the
night with one of the opposite sex.

It is not unheard of for two members of a JC to STAKE OUT a dwelling, observe the comings and goings, and WAIT FOR THE LIGHTS TO GO OUT.
They then conclude immorality. It doesn't matter if you slept on the couch, the living room floor or in a closet. People have been condemned over this one. The protestations of innocence are likely spilled on the floor as an unrepentant attitude. Case closed, you're toast!!

The practice of roommates (of the opposite sex) is well established now. I do recall that perhaps this wasn't generally established in the U.S. til perhaps the 60's???, though. But at the normal rate of progress, Dubs won't have this feature until 2060.

Innocence (presumption thereof) and circumstances, money features and convenience are not always allowed in the equation.

It makes me wonder about my sister-in-law. If she were a Dub, would she be in trouble? She is recently separated and the divorce is on the way. She kept the house and her sister bought into the house with her. It is a condition that she rents the 4 downstairs rooms out to local college students. They have turned this into a boarding-house business!!! That and the accounting that she takes in are her sole support.

Adding: I believe that this is considered a 'wordly' practice.
Just another thought
Mustang

16

This is so SAD!!!!!!!!!!!!

by JT in

jw
friends

http://www.greatcrowd.com/159ubb/forum22/html/000148.html .

you know it got to be pretty bad when your faith has so many rules you got to carry around a "cheatsheet" just to keep up.

and what do you do if something comes up and it ain't on the list?.

mustang

I remember doing this working on the mainframe computers: a Programmers Reference Card. They were 2 or 3 sheets of cardboard, printed both sides, folded over to slip in your pocket.

This is something that has bothered me with all the failed prophecies, backing-up ('tacking'), flip-flops and re-groupings over the years. Who remembers enough to keep out of hot water???

Fence-sitting is easier. 'Interesting, brother', 'good point, there',
'yup, gotta hand it too you', 'oops, gotta go, pulling a double shift...'

Mustang

4

Help me out with info about your religion

by Barbara in

jw
friends

i'm not a witness myself, but i used this site a couple of weeks back to try a trace my sister-in-law (who i knew was a witness).. i was actually trying to trace my husbands natural father( whom he has never met).

my enquiries had led me to discover that my sister-in-law has in her possession, the only known photo in existence of my husbands father and a previous address for him (although as she is only a half sister to my husband, she has no connection whatsoever with this man and no need of these items).

your people were very, very kind in helping me locate her, for which i'm very grateful, however, for reasons best known to herself, she is refusing to let us have access to the items we need to help us.

mustang

BARBARA,

I apologize if what I stated is strongly worded. I am merely stating the facts. I do not know an easy way to break this to anyone.

Please ask whatever questions you feel necessary. There are many very supportive people on this board. Many have faced similar dilemmas to yours. Yours does seem like a unique permutation and is certainly not often seen.

Welcome to the board; don't let the difficulty of the task deter you. It will pass and there will be better times. I will help if you wish.

Mustang

4

Help me out with info about your religion

by Barbara in

jw
friends

i'm not a witness myself, but i used this site a couple of weeks back to try a trace my sister-in-law (who i knew was a witness).. i was actually trying to trace my husbands natural father( whom he has never met).

my enquiries had led me to discover that my sister-in-law has in her possession, the only known photo in existence of my husbands father and a previous address for him (although as she is only a half sister to my husband, she has no connection whatsoever with this man and no need of these items).

your people were very, very kind in helping me locate her, for which i'm very grateful, however, for reasons best known to herself, she is refusing to let us have access to the items we need to help us.

mustang

"I know there had been no contact between my husband and his sister for many years, but what does your religion say about forgiveness?"

What is the reason for the non-contact? If you don't care to disclose it, that is fine. But, the "non-contact" is a sign of 'shunning', which would follow an OFFICIAL DISFELLOWSHIPPING or DISASSOCIATION or an UNOFFICIAL version of the same. These people are always so zealous that they will take it upon themselves to 'shun' (totally avoid, break off ALL contact) someone whose conduct is suspect. Suspect means nonconformance with the norms expected of a JW.

This could be based on either your husbands conduct or that of his father. It is important to know the last status of their standing with these people.

Once you know that status, the likely reason for this attitude will be obvious to those on this board. As for you, it will require someone explaining it to you. And be prepared for very serious culture shock.

As for forgiveness, that may not be forthcoming. That all depends on what is prompting the 'shunning'. It is up to the 'shunned one' to 'do penance' or whatever is required to be reinstated.

Do I approve of this tortuous state of affairs? Not really. There is a reason for this, and a chain of logic that is used to justify this doubtful practice. However, the administration of this nonsense is so full of mistakes that it is pathetic. I doubt that one-quarter of all cases are justifiable. Further, the recourse for a miscarriage of justice simply does not work. This practice is truly too onerous to be trusted to mere men. These people have taken on the role of God in administering justice.

"Onerous"? A term associated with the legal system. Legal? Yes, the courts of the land have upheld this practice.

Mustang

Disclaimer: nothing that I write or utter is to be considered legal advice. Consult proper counsel for such matters.

Further, all that I write or utter, is considered to be protected by religious freedom under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, as the "free exercise", as well as "freedom of speech" clauses.

16

Don't you agree?

by NinjaBen in

jw
friends

i find it weird that the jehovah witnesses disrespect other relegions by calling their's the "truth".

by saying this aren't the wt's saying that there is no other answer and all other relegions are wrong.

i also think it is disrespectfull the way they call house holders "prospects".

mustang

Yes, Jayhawk,

Reasoning From the Scriptures is the successor to the old 'Make Sure'.
(Showing my age.) I couldn't remember its title, even though my Dad gave me one when I asked for it, many inactive years later.

The 'reasoning' process is supposed to defuse a heated discussion by subtle manipulation. And yes, this failure to directly address a subject can be very irritating on the receiving end.

Mustang

16

Don't you agree?

by NinjaBen in

jw
friends

i find it weird that the jehovah witnesses disrespect other relegions by calling their's the "truth".

by saying this aren't the wt's saying that there is no other answer and all other relegions are wrong.

i also think it is disrespectfull the way they call house holders "prospects".

mustang

I pioneered also.

I remember extensive emphasis (from Service Meeting parts) on OVERCOMING OBJECTIONS. In some cases, the objection would be met 'head-on' and addressed directly. In other cases, a couple of slick sentences of diversion were in order.

Many had the 'Make Sure of All Things' (the dictionary of responses current back then) bound into their Bibles. This allowed a quick response that looked like it came from the Bible. A Dub bookbinder specialized in this.

Other sessions dealt with the diversion or deflection tactics, such as the 'counter-question'. It was all very subtle, but it was practiced and presented to the listening congregation.

In the later days, as I was drifting away, my father pulled all of these things on me. The bonus with family members is that you can use the 'guilt-trip' freely and extensively. (Talented dubs often mamaged some form of the 'guilt-trip' even in initial door-door activity, though.)

I realized that I was not a son to him, but just a 'preaching machine'. If I got out of line, I was an 'objection to be overcome'.

Mustang

PS. Welcome to the board.

12

Help!

by MoeJoJoJo in

jw
friends

those of you who have helped family and friends out of the org, what line of reasoning worked well for you?

what scriptures did you use?.

any help you can give, i would appreciate.. "plant your own garden and decorate your own soul, instead of waiting for someone to bring you flowers.

mustang

MoJo...,

'Anyways, I was hoping to use something with him that he can not just excuse away. Something that worked well for some of you.'

Good thought. Most of the advice the others have mentioned was using their own quotations against them. That goes along w/ your thinking. Take it slow, because you may find the answer here on the web (this DB or sites such as freeminds.org), but to 'make it your own', you will have to appear to be a real busy bee at the libraries, yourself. To make it easy, there are lists of such things as reversals (flip-flops), 'tacking' ( Venice posted this on her website, I believe), failed dates and so forth. Use those to prime your search.

I didn't really bring anybody out w/ me, although my brother came out about in parallel. I left in 1975. That's the main reason I posted. I actually left at the start of '75, for personal reasons, not the usual one for that time period.

But, it was in the literature, Brooklyn definitely started it. The real kicker was the speech that Franz made in Yankee Stadium. He was certain that this was it. Check some of Amazing's old posts. (Don't know if he posted it here, or on H2O, though.) He reported on several of a number of 'local' special 1-day meetings that the GB did to talk about just '75.

They seemed to backpedal in the latter half of their act, though. Having friends in close contact w/ Bethel, it was obvious that Brooklyn was abuzz & excited, too. So, it wasn't some local phenomenon.

'Some excited brothers' is such a joke that its pathetic. That revisionist history you just mentioned is another proof of their Teflon coated lack of integrity.

Mustang