Posts by Apognophos

17

2nd and 3rd Genners -- Did the passing of the 1st/2nd Gen. cause doubts for you?

by Apognophos in

i can't discuss my family history here in detail while i'm still fading, but suffice to say that i'm a third-generation witness.

my grandparents' generation of witnesses expected the end to come in the middle of the 20th century.

they led spartan lives and largely went without having kids, as they awaited the imminent new system.

Apognophos

Interesting, wildwildlife, thanks for the reply (and welcome!). It's interesting to note that the first Witnesses in your family weren't even called "Witnesses", and believed things that would get them DFed today.

Edit: And a poignant story there, NVR2L8, thanks for sharing it. Yes, it's amazing how all the old JWs we knew as kids have died and been replaced by another generation of white-haired people sitting in the infirm section, waiting to see the end come. What a human tragedy this religion is.

29

Could the allowance of blood fractions be curtailing the growth of the religion?

by Apognophos in

so, imagine that you're just a regular joe who's not familiar with the witnesses and is looking for the answers to life, the universe, and everything.

you hear a knock at your door.

before long, you are studying with a jehovah's witness.

Apognophos

Haha, amazing, Marvin Shilmer. I congratulate you on asking such a logical question, though you were bound to only get nonsense as a response.

54

How do you overcome this JW excuse?

by EdenOne in

during one of those meetings that took place before my jc, one of the elders, who was a good friend of mine back then and used to come up with a few outlandish personal views about some teachings, attempted to counter one of my arguments like this:.

eden - "well, if the truth doesn't change, why is it that what we teach as 'truth' has changed over the years (several examples given)?

how can we dogmatically claim at any given moment that we have 'the truth' if our teachings keep changing?".

Apognophos

This is not cognitive dissonance. It's not even an illogical argument. It's simply a statement that the present beliefs are always the "truth" in the sense that God wants JWs to have those beliefs at that point in time.

The counter-argument is flip-flops. Why would Jehovah direct, or allow the Society to direct, Witnesses to believe A, then change it to B, then back to A? Especially if the flip-flop led to lives being lost. This is true of the organ transplant flip-flop.

The counter-counter-argument to this is probably to say that Jehovah knew something that we didn't know, and people had to be steered away from organ transplants during those years. But it places the JW on shaky ground because they won't be able to point to anything we know now about transplants that made them dangerous from 1967 to 1980.

Another counter-argument is to ask where in the Bible God allowed his servants to have wrong beliefs for a period of time until he corrected them.

25

Stupid comment Witness made about the Exodus film.

by Trapped in JW land in

i was talking with two brothers at the kingdom hall the other day.

one of them suggested seeing the new exodus movie.

the other brother says, "i heard it's really violent"!

Apognophos

stuckinarut2, you are really asking for trouble Are you trying to see how much you can get away with before people start noticing what you're saying?

25

Re Hostage victims killed in Sydney: "dont worry, at least they will NOW get a ressurection"

by stuckinarut2 in

so most would now know of the vile act in sydney last week where a man held hostage over 17 people in the lindt cafe in the middle of sydney.. two people were murdered...a beautiful, educated lawyer,loving mother of three, and a brave, loving young man working as the cafe manager.. this senseless and cruel act has touched everyone deeply, especially in the communities of sydney.

the outpouring of grief and support for the victims and their families has been immense.. i was therefore outraged to have the following comment made by a witness in conversation at the kingdom hall:.

"well, we dont need to be sad, because at least now they (the two victims) will get a ressurection.

Apognophos

It's a torpedo through the whole belief system - whether someoneis 'saved' or not depends on circumstances and events many of which are outside of their control. Their boss gives them extra work ... bzzzz - now too busy to be saved.

Ha, nice point. I guess with this kind of brain-addled way of looking at things, the worldly boss giving out work is the villain of the story, and if a workplace shooter comes running through the office spraying people with an AK-47, he's the hero of the story. "Guaranteed resurrections for everybody!" *ratatatatat*

13

JW are naive

by bobld in

jw
friends

one dictionary defines naive as;generally speaking,to be naive means you do not think enough.people who are "naive" tend to beleive in whatever they are told,without questioning whether it is right or wrong.i think this defines jw because they accept whatever the group of 7 tells them.ex.the several definations of a generation.or the end is near see wt 2000 etc.. these people are naive,because they believe that people like himmler regret sending all jews to the gas chamber( quote from internet).

.

Apognophos

How do you bring out the critical thinking when it has been conditioned to the back of your brain?

I think the main thing keeping the critical thinking in the back of their brain is that they stand to lose too much if they question the teachings. If the religion announced today that the new understanding was that non-Witnesses could survive Armageddon, and there was be no more shunning of those who leave, people would start thinking critically about the religion tomorrow!

Now, some would stay in because they would be afraid of others' disapproval, or of losing the paradise hope, or of losing a belief in God, but many JWs who didn't seem capable of thinking would suddenly seem to get a lot smarter overnight. That's my prediction, anyway.

16

crazy analogy question regarding Jesus' divinity [or lack of]

by TTWSYF in

i heard a preist pose this question and i'll admit, it made me think.. if your neighbor had a dog and a monkey and his dog bite you.

would you accept an apology from the neighbors monkey?.

just asking.

Apognophos

That seems like a flawed analogy. If "you" in this analogy is God, then the neighbor is... who? Who owns the dog and monkey and is therefore responsible for them if one of them bites someone?

50

Governing Body at Bethel and their daily routine

by Tenacious in

i never had the privilege to serve at bethel .. therefore, community help is greatly appreciated friends.. do the gb members have their own living quarters separate from the average jw?.

does their "busy" schedule permit field service, if yes, how many hours a month?.

how long are their weekly wednesday meetings?.

Apognophos

DATA-DOG, you are bouncing all over the place in your position. First you tell us to look at their suits and gold rings, which as Fulano pointed out, are not actually impressive or a sign of wealth. Then you ask me if I deny that the GB live comfortable lives, but of course I don't deny that. You were asserting they were wealthy, weren't you? If not, I have no idea what you are arguing about. In your last post you seem to be backing down to "Well, they have their needs met." Okay? They don't live what anyone could call a luxurious lifestyle by first-world standards. It's a very vanilla, basic-cable life for them in their little apartments. You probably live better than they do, even if you do have to pay a few bills that they don't.

21

Did you know about the organ transplant ban when you were a believer?

by Apognophos in

back when i was learning ttatt, i was shocked to read on jwfacts about the organ transplant ban from 1967 to 1980. this was a large piece of evidence for me that the society could not be god's organization.

growing up as an earnest witness, and living near the headquarters, i knew a lot of the organization's embarrassing history, and it didn't faze me, but i'd never heard of this ban before, and it shocked me.

it's gotten me wondering why no one i know ever talks about it, when it must have affected many witnesses during that time (or were they getting transplants on the sly?

Apognophos

Thanks for all the answers so far. I hadn't counted on so many of you remembering when the teaching was in effect, including from when the "ban" was first instituted. I'm just a whippersnapper by comparison; the whole flip-flop was done with by the time I was old enough to really know my religion's beliefs.

But like ADCMS, I thought I was knowledgeable about my religion. I listened to the oldsters talk about the changes in doctrines over the years. I enjoyed reading the Proclaimers book when it came out. Some of the embarrassing history was in there, but needless to say, no mention of the organ transplant debacle.

29

Could the allowance of blood fractions be curtailing the growth of the religion?

by Apognophos in

so, imagine that you're just a regular joe who's not familiar with the witnesses and is looking for the answers to life, the universe, and everything.

you hear a knock at your door.

before long, you are studying with a jehovah's witness.

Apognophos

I appreciate what OEJ and _Morpheus are saying -- I suppose most of us expect that we'll never probably need blood. I would still think that a student would be pretty wary of the whole blood teaching, though, and that's the point where I imagine that hypothetical conversation is almost inevitable. It just seems like it leads down a road to realizing that the JW you're studying with doesn't know why he believes what he does about blood and fractions, and is just following orders like a muppet.

Last night I read over the section of the Bible Teach book that discusses blood. It was published in 2006, after the new light on fractions, but it says nothing about them. It's just a straight "abstain from blood" message. Holding back on details in order to allow room for changes in the fractions allowances, perhaps?