re: Raindog - rebuttal post for GD thread

The BBQ Pit
1

My only point to putting this here is so that his baseless comments in his last post do not go unchallenged - I am not looking to continue the debate or argument - only to set the record straight - I will watch for replies but am not concerned with them.

here is the post I am reffering to - http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=16099048&postcount=126

which was after a mod warning to raindog for trolling in GD - based on his outright lies and slander

<rebuttal>

It should be noted raindog - in many of these threads where you ‘claim’ I am stalking you - the conversation is already in full force and I am already a poster in these threads - I have as much right to post here about these topics as anyone. I found that particular ‘meeting’ with the supreme court conversation - and you lost that argument as well, the ‘best’ you could do was try to take me to task for the speed of my reply - while ignoring all other comments - you could not - and never have - answered the points raised.

And in this thread - you’re first post is in response to my first post in that thread - and directly follows it - and calls me dishonest out the gate - so, who’s stalking and attacking who?

Do you realize that you have been modded in every thread that you have participated in that is related to the JW for your tactics? While I have been modded in exactly 1, and that particular modding had nothing to do with you?

And in fact - a search for “raindog simster” only presents 6 threads on this board where we have encountered each other - could be my searching is incorrect - but, wow - either I suck at stalking, or you really hate losing arguments so they stick with you longer.

Regardless, in ALL of our encounters to date on this board - you have yet to be able to show where my posts about the JW, their history or their teachings have been factually incorrect or even slightly misleading as to the ‘truth’ of it. Where in this thread did I “rant” about the JW? Where did I attack them or you?

The fact that I can respond to a post of interest with factual knowledge - backed up with cites when required or requested - that you cannot refute - in less time then it takes you to figure out your next attack - is not my failing - it is yours.

In ALL of these encounters, you have resorted to strawman tactics and name calling or other derisive posts and never actually debated or discussed what was being put in front of you. It is you that derail the threads, as you have done with this one.

In this particular thread - You made a comment about whether or not John 1:1 translation could be handled on this MB, arrogance at its finest - you have yet to ever deal with the information posted in the thread I linked to (and you were part of that thread as well) - so, it was YOU who opened that door not me.

So, if there is a one trick pony here - it is you - and these last few posts show you (again) for what that trick is.

Nice to see the admission that you and I did not date in college or have a bad breakup, that I have not, in fact, been stalking you “all over the internet” (or have any dealings outside of this message board) and making that previous post obvious for what it is.

</rebuttal>

Since this is the pit - I am free to say this - you are a liar and a hypocrite - and you know it.

Have a pleasant day.

2

simster, that guy’s routine is pretty predictable. He drops into discussions of religion to make a few smartass and misguided comments about atheism and disappears or goes on the attack when his contributions are dissected. But since he flounced off, will you answer a couple questions for me that don’t belong in the GD thread?

  1. Every JW I’ve encountered (quite a few; there are three Kingdom Halls within a 25 mile radius here) has been incredibly smug and patronizing. Just completely priggish, unlikable, and fucking smug. Argumentative, too. I’ve spotted several at work long before they whip out the pamphlets. Am I experiencing confirmation bias, are they encouraged to use this attitude on others in order to belittle their beliefs and plant doubt, or is it an accidental side effect of the persecuted “otherness” they suffer?

  2. Jesus performed feats of magic, healing, resurrection, and other tricks a mortal man is unable to do. So… He was a god by any definition, right? Whether half god, one of three gods, or an aspect of one God. Since JWs are so obsessive over the “pagan” rituals of other sects, shouldn’t they, too, subscribe to the triune god theory rather than admitting to worshipping more than one god? Why is it such a sticking point with them?

  3. I don’t understand the Jehovah’s Witness affinity for denigrating other Christian rituals or beliefs with the word “pagan”. Surely the fetishization of blood is only slightly less pagan than animal sacrifice. And the founder of the church is buried under a pyramid, right? Whence* pagan*?

3

1.) it may be confirmation bias - but when it comes to ‘the bible’ it is ingrained into them via their structure that they are the only ones that have it ‘right’ - it is pure cult mentality at that point - and reinforced to them via everything the Watchtower publishes - it is pure ‘us vs them’ mentality.

2.) Its a sticking point as I indicated in the thread - they are trying to differentiate themselves with ‘christendom’ (their word for all ‘other’ christian orgs) - it started with Rutherford (2nd President of the WTBS and writer of pubs after the org split when Russel died) - It is ingrained in them that they are the only ‘true’ organization.

3.) ‘Pagan’ is a buzzword for them - it is ingrained as ‘evil’ in thier teachings, so if they tell the flock that something has ‘pagan’ origins, its meant to immediately set off there ‘oh my god it must be evil’ buzzers.

WRT, Russel - the founder of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society - orginally billed as “Bible Students” - they took on the name of “Jehovah’s Witnesses” under Rutherford - is not buried under a pyramid - there is a Pyramid monument nearby.

The early Watchtower magazines were heavy with “Cross and Crown” imagery - leading many to believe that he was a Mason (no direct evidence correlates this) - Russell was very into the Pyramids - and the early “Studies in Scriptures” series showed how the pyramids were a guide to the second coming - so, its no surprise that at some point the Pyramid thing was erected.

More information on Russell - Charles Taze Russell - Wikipedia

4

How do they figure that a reverence for blood that exceeds a reverance for life is anything but pagan? (And damned ungrateful I might add, assuming that modern medicine is a God-given gift)

5

I’m sort of impressed you’re Pitting him for this and not for making up a story about you being a bitter ex-boyfriend who is stalking him online.

6

(I assume you are referring to the no blood transfusion stuff).

If you reviewed the blood stance over the years - its changed quite a bit - it used to be a wholesale ‘all blood products’ and then it became ‘which parts of it are accptable and fractions’ -

  • basically, their reverence is based on their (relatively) unique interpretation of Acts and the blood stuff from the mosaic law - I’ve read they’ve ‘softened’ there stance lately - which likely means they no longer disfellowship if the transfusion is ‘forced’ upon them - I have not kept up with it recently.

In the end - this has less to do with the bible and more to do with it being a ‘matter of faith’ - going thru older publications show they have had alot of ideas vs science that could never hold up to any real scrutiny - but there in lies the rub - the members are taught 2 things

a) the only true information comes from the watchtower which was chosen by God to be his mouthpiece
b) if it disagrees with the watchtower - it is from the devil

They actively misquote scientists, medical professionals, etc - to prove there points. (There are many articles out there that talk about these tactics -

But now, this is beginning to sound like an attack - and maybe it is - they are a cult - plain and simple - information control with punishment of disfellowshipping for questioning any of the teachings - they see any disagreement or being told of the WT failings as from the devil and as proof they are right.

I hope I’ve answered your question.

7

I do my best not to stoop to his level - I have no specific axe to grind with him (beyond what led to this thread) or the JW - but I do think the JW are among the worst of the cults for particular things they believe in (and the affects on the followers).

8

You have, thanks simster. Agree that shunning/disfellowshipping is a heinous treatment of a human being and in my mind is the ugliest feature of the sect. The Biblical lepers were treated better. I’m always kind* to JWs even when they are condescending because I fear what will happen to the individual who decides to leave. No one should ever be so despised and alone.

*But I’m not tolerant of their witnessing. No one with such a capacity for cruelty should busy themselves telling others how to behave.

9

That was a weird freakin’ post of his.

The only way I can understand it is to think of times I’ve got what I imagine in my head is a super-clever riposte to someone annoying me, and I type it out. More than half the time, I read it, think, “is that nearly as clever as I think it is?”, decide there’s a chance it’s not, and delete it.

I should probably do that about 95% of the time instead of just 50% or whatever. Raindog should be doing it 100% of the time. What was intended to be clever just came across as nasty, unhinged, and stupid.

10

It’s his way of casting any seed of doubt on his opponents credibility - especially when he can’t handle the arguement, as that is all he has left.

Im the JW viewpoint, they call this “Theocratic WarFare” - they use it to lie in court among other things - they feel that non-believers or opponents have no ‘right’ to the truth.

It deflects the argument - causes the conversation to end - and the JW walks away feeling like the ‘won’ the day.

His final(?) post - the one that this is a rebuttal to- again trys to say he can “handle any discussion” but his posting history makes it clear that he cannot - he instead pulls these tactics. And he says my posts are nothing but ‘drivel and tapioca’ - yet he can never actually prove or refute what I post as incorrect?