Posts by TonusOH

2

Breaking News: JW's lose 1st round of Norway appeal!

by BoogerMan in

they are still officially deregistered in norway - and have to pay all the legal costs.

.

share the good news.. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/130cwcm/we_won_first_round_verdict_is_out_norway_vs_wt_10/.

TonusOH

I assume that by "first round" he is indicating that they expect the WTS to appeal. I wonder how the court system is in Norway. Will this drag out for years, or do they normally get it done quickly?

42

Why did you leave the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses?

by Vanderhoven7 in

i've never been a witness so i never left.

graeme hammond writes:.

for some years i’d had a growing irritation and disillusionment with the religion: i was getting tired of the pompousness, the arrogance and the control, i felt increasingly choked by their restrictions and i was drained by their demands on my time.

TonusOH

I wanted to believe that they were telling the truth, which is why I avoided any exJW or anti-JW info until I came to the realization that I didn't believe in god. But by the time that happened, I was well into a very long and gradual fade.

So I don't know what specifically would be the teaching that made me start to distance myself. I do recall that some of the statements bugged me, in that the implication was often that loyalty and obedience to the organization was more important than being correct. If you disagreed with an interpretation, you had to accept the organization's explanation or you could be df'ed for apostasy. If, later, the organization changed their interpretation to mirror yours, you could not be reinstated. Being right didn't matter. Being obedient did.

11530

It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

by Newly Enlightened in

original reddit post (removed).

TonusOH

Indeed, feel free to skip the anti-Lloyd videos. All you need to know is in his 97 minute livestream, and in his letters to his wife, and in his book (okay, I won't advise anyone to read his book, that would be mean), and in his forum posts here and other posts he has made over the past 10-12 years.

If his own words don't make it clear what kind of person he really is, then by all means help him keep his "wife-is-not-enough" jar full of coin. Otherwise he might threaten to stop making videos... again!

16

Opening doors, putting your foot in the door and other dangerous activities

by Anony Mous in

i was listening to the news and there is this big brouhaha about someone shooting someone through their front door.

apparently the person tried to open the door of an elderly person, scaring the homeowner and they shot a gun injuring the person.

obvious castle doctrine case.. which made me remember a rather overzealous old pioneer that used the same tactics when he knew the homeowners were home but didn’t want to come to the door, he would start opening the storm doors and try to see if the door was unlocked so he could yell inside.

TonusOH

I recall we had one or two brothers who were notorious for placing a foot in the doorway to prevent the homeowner from closing the door. But we lived in a fairly rough area and that is not something that was recommended!

There were some apartment complexes where the lobby entrance doors were always locked, and the only way in was with a key or to get "buzzed in" by a tenant. Some brothers would buzz apartments at random, because many people would unlock the doors without checking to see who was there (no, it doesn't make sense, but they did it).

9

When Did the Watchtower Introduce the "Generation of 1914" Teaching?

by Ding in

i'm looking for help to track down the development of the "generation" doctrine, starting with when the wt first specifically tied the end to the generation of 1914.. russell taught that 1914 would be the end of this system of things.

when that failed, rutherford started touting 1925.. no need to talk about generations then; it was just specific dates.. when did they first tie the end in to a "generation of 1914" time frame?.

i also know that they changed the meaning of generation several times.. first, a person had to have been at least 15 in order to have seen the events of 1914 with understanding of what was happening.. i think they lowered that to 10 and then finally it was anyone who was alive in 1914.. of course, now the generation overlaps.. does anyone know someone where all these wt teachings are set out chronologically (preferably with citations to the literature)?.

TonusOH

In Crisis of Conscience, Ray Franz claims that WT publications had been using the 'generations' teaching since the 1940s, though he does not present any specific examples.

He does mention an issue that arose in 1978, when it appears that GB member Albert Schroeder had suggested to people that Mattew 24:34 applied to the generation of anointed JWs, and that as long as any of them were alive the "generation" would not technically have "passed away." It's interesting, in light of the recent change which introduced the concept of 'overlapping generations.' Looks like it may have been an old idea that was finally made official.

11530

It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars

by Newly Enlightened in

original reddit post (removed).

TonusOH

Diamondfrog: Wow. Back in 2014.

As far as anyone can tell, he's always been like this. There is plenty of evidence on this forum, which he was a part of for a time around ten years ago. He has not changed, based on the experiences of so many people who have crossed paths with him.

The big difference is that people know a lot more about him now, because he let his guard down. Perhaps he felt it was safe to do so, perhaps he was distracted and foundering. But he gave up the game, and now it's out there, and it's no longer so easy for people to shut down his critics when they point out that it's not only his sexual hang-ups that are a problem.

This will follow him. The number of people he's trampled (or attempted to trample) over the past decade means that there are plenty of them out there waiting for an opportunity to twist the knife. He can't trust his wife or even Tibor, IMO. At some point, they'll be free enough from him that they might decide to spill the beans. Being a terrible human being will follow him for a very long time. It may ease up occasionally, but it won't go away.

98

Better off PIMA than POMA or POMO.

by ExBethelitenowPIMA in

the situation is many of us are pima and all putting on a front, sometimes saying something we don’t fully believe.

or at least are actually agnostic about but a hope that it’s true.. but it can be useful if someone is really going through a hard time or has something they are very worried about, to say things like well let’s hope there is not much longer of this old system.. this can be useful in an awkward situation where you just don’t know what to do or say.

it’s a little bit of hope that can help when there is nothing else.. my agnosticism just means i won’t look back over decades thinking i wasted my life.

TonusOH

Poe's Law strikes again?

362

Just read that Carl Olof Jonsson died yesterday

by slimboyfat in

for newbies, who was carl olof jonsson?

he was a jw in sweden who was challenged by a householder in the 1960s, who pointed out to him that secular history books don’t agree with watchtower that jerusalem was destroyed in 607 bce, but instead place the event 20 years later.

the reason the date is important is because it is the starting date for jw chronology which leads to 1914 as the end of the gentile times, and the beginning of the last days, as jws understand it.

TonusOH

I didn't question the JW perspective on 607/587BC when I was in, and it didn't matter to me afterward. The back-and-forth I see here is similar to what I've seen elsewhere, and I don't have the understanding or the patience to work through it. I also think it is moot.

Russell used the 1914 date to indicate the end of the world. Not the start of the end times, but -as Stephen Lett might say- the end of the end times. I think that his belief was that Christ's heavenly reign had begun in 1799 or 1874, and that 1914 was when everything would be complete and the new system was to begin.

It took some time for Rutherford to update the teaching, so that 1914 was given new relevance. It was still a useful date, since WW1 had begun that year and it could be used as evidence that Russell was on to something. The date could also be used to keep the pressure on through the use of the 'generation' teaching. Now, it is more problematic than useful, and I don't see that the issue about the dates will matter much longer. I even wonder if, at some point in the not-too-distant future, the WTS will accept the 587/586 date and pretend that the debate never happened.

9

WHAT DO Jehovah's Witnesses believe?

by Vanderhoven7 in

please add or correct the following written by helge kare fauskanger.

"for starters, imagine a distinctly insular form of protestant fundamentalism minus the trinity (god and jesus are held to be separate beings, and the holy spirit is god's active power rather than a person).

note: since the witnesses want to think of their faith as something absolutely unique, they themselves will not agree that they are either protestant or fundamentalist.. * very important to call god by his proper name of jehovah, and as noted, you must not get him mixed up with jesus.

TonusOH

Wasn't there a moment in the gospels where Jesus organized the disciples in groups of two and sent them out in what could be described as door-to-door service? The part where he said they should stay in those homes where they were welcome, but kick the dust from their sandals as they left those places where they were not.

I think that is what they use as the model for their door-to-door ministry.

11

I do not understand the universal issue anymore

by psyco in

to explain the universal issue we are often referring to a teacher and his/her students.. let us imagine that a teacher (god) has an hour (everlasting) class to show his students (humans and angels) how to fix a broken clock (to reign).. one student (adam) says he is able to fix it better independently, without the teacher's help (universal issue).. the teacher let him demonstrate that in front of all the others, but instead of an hour lesson he gives him only 5 minutes (death after a limited period of time) and he blocks one of the student's hands behind his back (imperfection).. if i were one of the other students watching i could think: but those were not the initial conditions the student was in when he said he could, and what would have happened leaving him more time and both hands free?.

am i crazy?.

TonusOH

psyco: To explain the universal issue we are often referring to a teacher and his/her students.

I recall that they explained it this way: a young man, living in his parents' home, decides that he can make its own rules and live as he pleases. His parents explain that, if he wishes to do so, he should also go out into the world and make it on his own. Otherwise, he is using their resources and protection while shirking any responsibilities or discipline (ie, enjoying the benefits while others pay for it).

I can see the point you are making- the parable would imply that humanity wanted to show it could rule itself just fine, but God changed the parameters. So that seems unfair. But God could just as well say that His rulership comes with specific benefits (perfection, access to long life, a world that cooperates, etc), and even without those, humanity was using His resources (including the breath of life) to govern themselves 'without' Him.

And I guess this is also a point in His favor (sort of): If He couldn't make it work while giving humanity so many advantages, what chance did they have? Of course, there is a possible alternative- God decides to work with humanity to find a sort of behavioral sweet spot. The insistence that everything was perfect as-is not only was demonstrably wrong, but kept Him from making changes that might have made for a better world.