Posts by problemaddict

17

Wanted - A 'Reverse Witness'

so the want-to-be-jw wife is getting harder to keep from believing all the nonsense that the wt spouts.

it is really getting me down as it simply does not compute from my perspective (and many on here i suppose) how and why rational and sane individuals would swallow all the garbage... the phrase i hate the most is "imperfect men", it gets me so wound up when i point out the flip-flops and flaws, and then i ask how anyone would follow 'imperfect men'... up next is "but i truely believe they are god's chosen organisation", but i cannot find any basis for that belief whatsoever... arrgghhh.

she went to some big meeting last weekend and came back all happyified.

problemaddict

I like searches idea. Ask her to ask her study that wuestion, without prompt. Then have the research already in hand when he dances.

Also regarding your "reverse witness" hypothesis, I think that person would be found out way to easily.

17

Wanted - A 'Reverse Witness'

by The Song Remains The Same in

so the want-to-be-jw wife is getting harder to keep from believing all the nonsense that the wt spouts.

it is really getting me down as it simply does not compute from my perspective (and many on here i suppose) how and why rational and sane individuals would swallow all the garbage... the phrase i hate the most is "imperfect men", it gets me so wound up when i point out the flip-flops and flaws, and then i ask how anyone would follow 'imperfect men'... up next is "but i truely believe they are god's chosen organisation", but i cannot find any basis for that belief whatsoever... arrgghhh.

she went to some big meeting last weekend and came back all happyified.

problemaddict

Hey same song. A few things to think about in order to adjust your approach.

First ding is right, since she has already affirmed to you that she believes they are "God's chosen organization". Ask her questions like why does she believe that? What sealed it for her? When did they become so? Etc...

These are important things to talk to her about. Not just flip flops. Flip flops are explained away exactly as she has done so. Most are minor, and quite frankly, all religions make minor flip flops on certain things. This is too easily explained away. You have to focus on the indefensible. Blood doctrine is a good place to start. Bloodguilt, the inconsistancies of the blood fraction allowance, and the fact it is enforced through communal shunning. Its like the mafia. Once you in, you can never get our without taking a bullit. Because of that you just want her to take her time.

Talking to her about wether the people are really happy or not is another losing battle. Yes there are actuall happy JW's, and many are fantastic stand out people. You don't know all of these people and their belief system seems odd to you, but she is developing friendships that she didn't have before, and that is a powerful motivator. Lastly, the religion does NOT BAN organized sports. So when you make comments that are not true, or are embelished (they certainly say they are a bad idea), you look like the unreasonable one.

Deal with facts not fiction or eaggeration. With reality this strange you don't need it anyways.

130

How many former Jehovah's Witnesses bury their head in the sand when it comes to reasoning about the NGO "conspiracy"?

by Change Name in

hi all - sure sure, you can call me a troll or brainwashed cult member.

i am totally interested in how your answers to these questions.. .

do you find yourself ignoring anything that jehovah's witnesses bring out in regards to their former status as an ngo?.

problemaddict

Bump for Change name.

NOTE: You are saying people are deflecting from your original question, but your original question is begging. It assumes certain things while asking. Get it?

32

Jehovahs Witnesses An Organization?

by Marvin Shilmer in

jw
friends

jehovahs witnesses an organization?.

today i added a new article to my blog addressing a particularly dirty trick played on jehovahs witnesses.

it has to do with watchtowers legal maneuvering to place and keep its harsh religious shunning practice beyond reach of secular law enforcement.

problemaddict

So Marvin if that is the case, why has nobody been succesfully able to deter their disfellowshipping through threat of lawsuit, or better yet, been able to sue after the fact based on the work you have found?

No doubt in addition we are talking about the "watchtower definition" of organization, not the illustrious webster so much.

35

Candace Conti: WTS Opening Appellate Brief Due Tomorrow

by DNCall in

jw
friends

.

unless they get another extension, or armageddon comes first..

problemaddict

They have until the 26th, it is doubtful there is a penalty.

They are most likely also reaching out to try to make a settlement, but that is clearly not the route this is going.

25

Don't e-mail DF'd family members - Congregation Reaction (WT 1/15/2013)

by 00DAD in

do not look for excuses to associate with a disfellowshipped family member, for example, through e-mail.

- w2013 1/15, p. 16, para.

in the congregation i attend, no one--and i mean no one--commented on the directive to not communicate with df'd family members by email.

problemaddict

Well since they didn't say carrier pigeon was off limits I think I am in the clear.

18

DA'd vs. DF'd

by Suraj Khan in

sunday's wt study really opened some old wounds in my family.

by age 13 i was faking illnesses just to get out of thursday and sunday meetings.

i stopped attending altogether at age 17 and headed to college, never really looking back.

problemaddict

Hey SK,

Officially, the branch cannot DA or DF someone who was never baptized. If they actually did do this, than they were terribly wrong to do so even by their own methods. In addition, even among JW's, going to college while frustrated, is NOT grounds for being DF'd.

The elders comment makes no sense in this regard. May I ask what country you are in?

20

Is the new King of the North rising? Will the GB spin this event in their favor?

by suavojr in

will the current gb of jw's be bold enogh to identify n. korea as the new king of north?

the wt let this important component of their prophecies vanish.. .

http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/11/world/asia/north-korea-armistice/index.html?hpt=hp_t1.

problemaddict

I think the unofficial king of the north in the mind of JW's is either China, or the rise of the Muslim world countries. Although I could see them coming out with some existential nonsense about the king of the north being "a collective of the secular cultures movement forward" or something like that.

Affects Gods people? check. Hard to prove or nail down? check. its just the way new light works now a days.

138

A question about lying and the Jehovah's Witnesses

by Change Name in

i have seen questions regarding how much jehovah's witnesses lie all the time on yahoo answers.

here is the latest question:.

jehovah's witnesses, is lying at any time something jehovah approves of?.

problemaddict

Hello Change name,

Thank you for the response, and lets try to stay on track shall we? First of all I will take you for your word on you say you are, and unbaptized JW who apologizes for their viewpoint. Were you raised as one of Jehovah's Witnesses?

1) We agree here. There is a time in extreme circumstances that anyone would be better off lying and could seemingly be justified in doing so. Especially in protecting someones life.

NOTE: I am not suggesting that there is a JW policy of trying to tell people honesty is not important. Please stop this red herring.

2) The statement you wrote perfectly illustrates the issue. Who determines who is entitled to the truth? Is it you? Is it someone else? Is it the branch? We already agree under extreme circumstances such as the one I mentioned, it would be ok to outright lie. With this open ended statement from the branch about those deserving of the truth, too much is left in the wind. You have already seen examples of it here in the responses. Think of it like this. Truth is singular, versions of truth, are untruths. Pure and simple. In extreme cases, it could be jusified, when left up to a vague interpretation of who "deserves" it according to the branch, it is not. None of what JW's teach in this regard escapes me. I was babtized at 13, served as a pioneer an MS as well as in foreign assignments. I have done nearly anything a JW can do in the organization. So your left handed comment regarding something escaping my notice is not appreciated.

If your child for example did something you told them not to, but didn't tell you about it, would it be any less of a deception or "hiding of the truth"? What is the child thought you didn't "deserve" the truth because you were mean to her or didn't understand what they wee going through? None of this would make it any less deceptive.

You avoided my very direct question that I will re-state below.

The society is saying that when it comes to preaching or dealing with those opposing you, untruths are all good. You can withhold information (omission is not looked favorably in a court of law), and you are still just fine because of the REASON you do it. So if not outright lying, can we at least agree it is at best disingenuous and not true to the spirit of the bibles command to not have a "false tongue"?

I am not being dogmatic in accusing the branch, why are you being dogmatic if defending them? In also wanted to address your comment below.

Most people, after hearing about the "secret elder guidebook", want to know why it is intended just for the elders. Its those people who have it out for the JW's that take this information and twist it to make the JW's look bad.

What is this comment based on? Most people according to whom? How have their words been twisted to make JW's look bad? This comment begs further explanation. If anything, the books supposed confidentiality that isn't based on any sound scriptural principle is enough to warrant suspicion as to why it would remain so. Beyond that, the fact elders would deny it exists on camera only strenghtens my point regarding who is "not entitled" to having the tuth. I will await your response above. I would say using their own in context words, how could it be "twisted to make them look bad"? The fact you have read part of it must mean in some part you agree. After all, why would you hold others to a different standard than yourself?

Your comment regarding my PS is very interesting. You have made several mistakes.

People who leave the morals, teachings and standards of the Jehovah's Witnesses do so with the full understanding of what the Jehovah's Witnesses believe the Bible tells them to do.

Nobody is told when they are baptized or going through the questions, that if they later develop through their conscience an aversion to any of the societies teachings, that they can be disfellowshipped for doing do. It simply is not discussed. You are also assuming anyone who leaves is dong so because they reject Christianity, and moral aptitude. I have been inactive for only 5 months. I am no worse a person, nor do I now engage in weekend orgies, disavow God, or hate my fellowman. Other religions do not enforce communal shunning simply for thinking differently, or exercising ones conscience to the contrary of leadership. Scientology does. The Amish do. So where does that put this policy?

The choice is with the one who leaves them.

This is simply not true. The one that leaves the organization, has not left their family. it is their family that decides this is the case. Even in situations where somone is not disfellowshipped, but simply fades away, the family is inclined to cut off their family member. Shame on them. They will certianly answer to their creator for standing behind this policy that throws love, and everything jesus taught out the window. once again, since you stated you didn't know anyone who left the organization, we can possibly chalk this up to ignorance on your part. I am not ignorant, having been in this religion my entire life. You should attempt to understand others before painting with such broad strokes.

24

The Apostate Boogeyman--a figment of JW imagination

by Londo111 in

apostates are a figment of the jw imagination.

not necessarily the dictionary definition of the word apostate, which simply means a person who leaves their religion, for by that definition everyone who leaves a religion to become a jw is an apostate--but the jw conception of the apostate, both as an individual and as a 'group' is imaginary.. .

for starters, the watchtower goes beyond the definition of merely leaving the religion, if a person disagrees with a doctrine or practice of the organization, even if they dont voice it, that is a thoughtcrime called apostasy.

problemaddict

Hey Londo,

I think this is close to publication on JW struggle. Maybe just some refferences to assertions such as "the thoughtcrime of apostacy".

Use this as a rough draft and you and Raypub can throw this on JW struggle. Its well done.