Posts by logansrun

17

The Governing Body's hidden agenda

by greendawn in

jw
friends

the gb have a manifest agenda that they present to the world regarding their intentions and policies.

however they also a have a hidden agenda which spells their real intentions and policies.

to mention an example they say that the jw kids should not attend university because it is pointless in view of the end soon, the risks of fleshly temptations and loss of eternal life, the god blessed pioneering work is a better way to spend their time etc.

logansrun

I hate to be blunt, but this is about as stupid as the anarchist down the block telling me what the "real" agenda of Bill Gates is. (To take over the world, of course).

Unless you have direct personal experience/conversation with the GB you have no proof of what they're "hidden" agenda is. You seem to be implying that "the real agenda" (your words) of the GB for not encouraging college is not that the "end is nigh" but simply to prevent JW kids from gaining the light about the JWs. That, in turn, implies that the GB does not actually believe that the end is close or that the JWs have the truth. That's quite an accusation and the burden of proof is on you to justify it. Of course, you have no proof. You only have speculation.

You miss the fact that, as psychologist Abe Maslow pointed out years ago, humans often have multiple motivations for taking the actions they do. We often "kill two birds with one stone" as the proverb goes. The motivation for discouraging college is both a belief in the close-at-hand Armageddon and that college will "dupe" innocent JW kids into rejecting what they believe is the "Truth." It's not just one or the other. I see no evidence that the GB are nothing but true believers in their apocalyptic belief system. I understand that former Governing Body member Ray Franz -- a man who has personal experience with the Gb -- has also stated as much.

It's an unfortunate by-product of a forum like this that the standard for what counts as factual or probable with regard the JWs is not that great. The bar is too low. Don't get me wrong. I feel the JW belief system is, ulitimately, gloriously wrong. But you'd better have some better reasoning than what is presented in this thread when you make accusations and speculations.

B.

18

Bitter, Better or Both?

by damselfly in

jw
friends

do you feel that you are still bitter towards jw's?

or do you feel that you are better off without them?

maybe you feel both bitter and better?.

logansrun

I think it's helpful to define, as best as possible, what is meant by "bitter." Personally, I don't believe that being a little sad or angry at the JW system is wrong or unhealthy as long as that anger and sadness is not out of control or beyond what one should feel. Bitter, to me, would be seeing the totality of our JW experience as being totally bad and/or useless. It means being overly preoccupied with being an "anti-Witness" in time and energy. It means blaming the JWs -- including the GB -- for everything wrong or inadequate about the JW system without seeing the possible underlying good intentions they have. (I know that is difficult for some here. Personally, I believe the vast majority of JWs, including the "higher up's" are operating out of a sense of what they, mistakenly, feel is right)

In short, "bitter" in my book is being overly angry/sad about the JWs without seeing the good and the underlying reasons as to why the organization exists as it does. (And this touches on human nature which is so incredibly far from ideal). It's essential, in my opinion, to think philosophically and magnanimously about the JWs and our past and present relation to them. Only then can we have a measure of equanimity and peace.

Overall, I'm not bitter -- although I do have my moments!

As for "better" I would say that it depends on the sphere of life we are talking about. I feel far, far more confident about myself and my life choices since leaving the JWs. I feel a tremendous amount of intellectual, emotional and situational freedom since leaving. Those areas are far better. On the other hand, I do miss the strong sense of community and unity of purpose. (These were carried to extremes in the JWs, of course). Humans evolved to be part of a community of between 20 and 100 people (think of a proto-hominid tribe living on the African savannah) and our modern world of hyperindividualism seems to be in conflict with this very human need. So, in that area of life, things are not better for me.

On the whole, though, I feel much better being a former JW than when I was inside the organization.

B.

22

Muslim Extremists & JWs----Living A Double Life

by minimus in

jw
friends

isn't it amazing to see how these people can mingle in society and in reality be living a double life?

they may be nice to your face but ultimately, they think we (those who do not conform to their beliefs) deserve death.

logansrun

Any comparison between JWs and extremist Muslims -- and of course there are some vague similarities -- should at least point out the fact that whereas the latter will murder, kill, torture and maim innocent people, the former will not (although their worldview believes that God will do this in due time).

I think that difference outweighs any similarities.

B.

22

Muslim Extremists & JWs----Living A Double Life

by minimus in

jw
friends

isn't it amazing to see how these people can mingle in society and in reality be living a double life?

they may be nice to your face but ultimately, they think we (those who do not conform to their beliefs) deserve death.

logansrun

Yeah..."those people." Have you ever considered that millions upon millions of people basically believe this, Minimus? That maybe this is a very unfortunate -- but very common -- aspect of human nature? In fact, MOST people throughout history have believed themselves to be part of a favored "in group" and everyone else part of an evil and/or undesireable "out group."

B.

41

How many of you consider yourselves Pagan?

by FreedomFrog in

jw
friends

i've started on a path that is very comfortable for me almost a year ago.

and now i'm wanting to see how many believe a similar way.. i looked into wiccan, celtic, eclectic and other forms of pagan.

i think that i've settled down into shamanism since that was the path my grandfather went.

logansrun

It seems to me that Paganism is extremely faddish and commercialized. What's the difference between having an unsubstantiated and proofless belief in "Mother Nature" and having an unsubstantiated and proofless belief in Jehovah? I understand the longing for some sense of "sprituality" but I also agree with Wittgenstein when he said: "That which we cannot speak we must consign to silence."

So...my "brutal" interpretation of the Pagan fascination is that it's just a commercialized fad supported by (primarily) women who have good intentions but are pretty far off the charts in the rationality department. Pray to Jehovah or pray to trees -- what's the diff?

B.

15

Is there another motive behind the production of Knocking?

by kwintestal in

just a thought ... as i recall, in the early 90's the documentary "purple triangle" was made.

this was made independant of the wts and once it was shown to them, because it was very pro-jw, they purchased the rights to the video and started distributing it among jw's.. is it possible, that joel engardio knew of this prior to his producing "knocking" and his attempt is to sell the video rights to the wts?

any thoughts?.

logansrun

It seems to me that this film is just emotional hub-bub. Get a sad story about Nazi persecution, rejecting a blood transfusion, etc and people are bound to be engrossed. A reasoned, dispassionate analysis of the religion? Fah-get-about it.

To be fair, the Dateline and BBC shows about child molestation were also primarily emotional public "bleeding" if you ask me. There are outliers on every bell curve.

B.

82

Women, girls, ladies -- 5 biggest "turn on's" / "turn off's"

by logansrun in

ladies,.

in preperation for a class i'll be taking starting next month entitled "history of love, sex and marriage" i would like to probe your heart's desire to find out the 5 biggest turn on's and 5 biggest turn off's you find in men.

and well, hell, i also would just like to add to my general knowledge.

logansrun

Just for the hell of it, I'll list my five-and-five for women:

Five biggest turn-on's

1) Easy on the eyes...preferably petite and cute.

2) Intelligent...bookish, "librarian type"...not a follower of the latest fads

3) Flexible...can wear a classy black evening gown from Nordstrom, but is ready and willing to wear cheap stuff to garden in

4) Positive...not a complainer. Can see on the bright side of things

5) Humble, submissive, easily dominated. (hehe...j/k)

Five biggest turn-off's

1) I'll be honest...ugliness of either body or spirit

2) Smoking

3) Greedy bitchiness..."I've got to have these X because everyone else has X and I'm a stupid follower"

4) Dumbness...(although that can be cute too...at times)

5) Again, I'll be honest...overy religious/fundamentalistic

B.

19

Did Paul admit his writings are not infallible?

by logansrun in

notice this: 1 corinthians 7:25 -- "now concerning virgins i have no command from the lord, but i give my opinion as one who had mercy shown him by the lord to be faithful.".

does not paul here tell his readers flat out that what he is about to say is not inspired, at least not in the jw/fundamentalist idea of "the bible writers were only secretaries for god"?

later this: 1 corinthians 7:40 -- "but she is happier if she [a widower] remains as she is, according to my opinion.

logansrun

Notice this:

1 Corinthians 7:25 -- "Now concerning virgins I have no command from the Lord, but I give my opinion as one who had mercy shown him by the Lord to be faithful."

Does not Paul here tell his readers flat out that what he is about to say is not inspired, at least not in the JW/fundamentalist idea of "the Bible writers were only secretaries for God"?

Later this:

1 Corinthians 7:40 -- "But she is happier if she [a widower] remains as she is, according to my opinion. I certainly think I also have God's spirit."

Again, Pauls "opinion"? And, what does he mean he "thinks" he has God's spirit? You mean he's not sure about this? Is this his best guess?

Also:

2 Corinthians 8:10 -- "And in this I render an opinion...finish up also the doing of it..."

An opinion is just that, isn't it? Not the infallible word of God come down from on high.

Comments? What does this say about the notion of inspiration and/or supposed Biblical infallibility?

Bradley

82

Women, girls, ladies -- 5 biggest "turn on's" / "turn off's"

by logansrun in

ladies,.

in preperation for a class i'll be taking starting next month entitled "history of love, sex and marriage" i would like to probe your heart's desire to find out the 5 biggest turn on's and 5 biggest turn off's you find in men.

and well, hell, i also would just like to add to my general knowledge.

logansrun

damsel,

Evolutionarily, it doesn't matter if you are financially independent or not. Your brain might be genetically hard-wired to be attracted to men with lots of money, just as the male brain is hard-wired to be attracted to women with a certain waist-to-bust ratio. It's all subconscious.

I only offer this as a possibility. Of course, this particular aspect of our biology might be subsumed by our higher cognitive reasoning. But, the initial impulse towards men with money (for women) and sexy women (for men) is still there.

B.

82

Women, girls, ladies -- 5 biggest "turn on's" / "turn off's"

by logansrun in

ladies,.

in preperation for a class i'll be taking starting next month entitled "history of love, sex and marriage" i would like to probe your heart's desire to find out the 5 biggest turn on's and 5 biggest turn off's you find in men.

and well, hell, i also would just like to add to my general knowledge.

logansrun

I find it very interesting that so many women cite "materialistic" as being a turn-off. Among many men I know the general consensus is that women are attracted to men with lots of money -- and the things money can buy, which are shown off, of course.

From an evolutionary point of view it makes sense for women to save their egg for the sperm of a good provider. In our society this means men with lots of $$$.

I wonder if there is a dichotomy between what women say they like in men, and what they actually are attracted to. Perhaps they say they don't like "materialistic" men, but really, deep down, they are.

Just my hypothesis.

B.