Good for your friend and his friends - and yes - his story is all too familiar and true.
and thank you for the kind words - I’d like to think I help sometimes.
And it is an act of kindness you’re doing by keeping this information afloat because the newly disfellowshipped are reluctant to believe ex Witnesses because apostates. In my experience they were much more open to discussions with those who have never set foot in a Kingdom Hall and aren’t full of resentment and grinding axes. So thanks, simster, if I ever chance another meeting with a disenfranchised Witness I’ll have newer and better sources to refer to.
Now how would I know? :rolleyes: I never saw such a list outside of your posting. Therefore I would like to know the source.
So help me, the longer I read these threads the more arcane (and vindictive, despite my exhortation) the content gets…
Was that Watchtower issue with the dead kids on it a fabrication? I hardly consider that arcane. Frankly, that’s enough to turn my stomach right there.
The rule itself its beyond my belief (and runs contrary to every Jewish core value) but to then glorify these deaths by plastering them on a magazine cover?
According to the Psalmist all are god’s and sons of god. Jesus uses this to show why he calls God his father,(John 10).
Not ‘my’ posting - but I’ll let that slide - I do not know exactly where **Annie-Xmas ** got her list specifically, but that’s also irrelevant
- but you could answer as to if the list is accurate or not — why do you avoid it?
“you’re exhortation” I musta missed that in that random comment you made about your teacher telling you to document stuff -
and lets re-visit this second sentence - why don’t you deal with the ‘arcane or vindictive’ and educate us how its incorrect or doesn’t apply - just declaring it (without reference) does not make it so.
It looks like either
a) You realize the posts make you uncomfortable, so instead of dealing with them you retreat to ‘generic’ comments
b) that you have something to hide -
There was a couple of article in the Awake magazine in 2000 - about propaganda - here’s a couple of quotes you might want to consider -
[QUOTE=Awake! 2000 June 22 Do Not Be a Victim of Propaganda!]
THERE is a difference—a big difference—between education and propaganda. Education shows you how to think.** Propaganda tells you what to think. Good educators present all sides of an issue and encourage discussion. Propagandists relentlessly force you to hear their view and discourage discussion.** Often their real motives are not apparent. They sift the facts, exploiting the useful ones and concealing the others. They also distort and twist facts, specializing in lies and half-truths. Your emotions, not your logical thinking abilities, are their target.
The propagandist makes sure that his message appears to be the right and moral one and that it gives you a sense of importance and belonging if you follow it. You are one of the smart ones, you are not alone, you are comfortable and secure—so they say.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE= Awake! 2000 June 22 The Manipulation of Information]
The cunning propagandist loves such shortcuts—especially those that short-circuit rational thought. Propaganda encourages this by agitating the emotions, by exploiting insecurities, by capitalizing on the ambiguity of language, and by bending rules of logic. As history bears out, such tactics can prove all too effective.
[/QUOTE]
Would you agree that propaganda and the bolded sections (by me) are bad?
Would you want to associate with an organization that practices such activities?
My answers are yes and no, respectively, to your posted questions, after reading the quotes you posted.
Don’t add any corollaries, however. Especially with the second question. You were no more specific than “an organization” and I expect what you might call “court-worthy evidence” before you proceed from the general to the specific.
FWIW, I have read the Bible through five times, and in the process have compared readings with at least two other translations, including the King James Version and an Esperanto translation I’ve had since 1968.
(A gem I found in my reading: “If you can’t demonstrate solely from the Bible that your [religion’s] doctines should be heeded, what basis do you have to convince anyone outside of your religion?”)
Court worthy evidence? too funny - exactly what kind of evidence will you accept, ‘counsler’?
And to be clear - you would not want to associate with an organization - any organization - that used those tactics, correct?
Where in the KJV or the Esperanto translation (why in the world would you cop to this?) does it say anything about intimidating children into giving up promising, productive live in order to demonstrate their parents’ zealotry? Please lead me to those verses that compel you to sacrifice your children.
awaiting a response from dougie_monty on his ‘standards of evidence’ -
That’s a bit problematic, as it relies upon an assumption that your interlocutor accepts the Bible as authoritative.
A couple of statements in response:
- The “gem” I referred to was, in case anyone misunderstood, not from Bible text. It was made by a man named A. Hugh MacMillan; look the name up at your convenience.
- As far as the evidence reference is concerned, probably the best criteria are those used by lawyers or even logicians, maintaining a biblical context–and if you do so be sure to mention the specific translation you use.
All religions and their writings come from another human, that is a proven fact! Belief is a personal thing and that is one reason there are so many religions and many contradictory. One cannot prove God had anything to do with any writings and there is really no difference in believing Mohammed had an angel sent by God to write the Koran. It is a matter of personal choice!
You assume this is about the bible? that we’re going to discuss some fine point of biblical teaching?
I am prepared to show that the Watchtower Org uses propaganda to control its ‘flock’ in that they regularly
- Propagandists relentlessly force you to hear their view and discourage discussion
-They sift the facts, exploiting the useful ones and concealing the others. - They also distort and twist facts, specializing in lies and half-truths
and to sum up - that they fit this final sentence to a tee -
[QUOTE=Awake! 2000 June 22 Do Not Be a Victim of Propaganda!]
The propagandist makes sure that his message appears to be the right and moral one and that it gives you a sense of importance and belonging if you follow it. You are one of the smart ones, you are not alone, you are comfortable and secure—so they say.
[/QUOTE]
The bible isn’t even needed and is irrelevant to the fact that the Watchtower organization fits that criteria -
Shall I continue ?
From** Annie Xmas** list:
Wait, what? I thought that was the whole point of the thing.
I mean, let’s say it’s all true. You die and you stand before a portal and beyond the portal you see true perfect peace and enlightenment, eternal contentment and ulltimate truth. And beyond that you can see the source of all things, and it knows you and loves you and you will ascend to a state which cannot be imagined or even hinted at.
Now through the portal steps a kindly, vaguely middle-eastern looking man. He says, “Welcome, child. I am Simon Peter, and am here to greet you to eternity.”
“Sorry, man, can’t do it. Against my religion.”
For the first time in 2000 years Peter is dumbfounded. “What?”
“Sorry, I can’t do it. Thank you though.”
“Really? Are you sure? Because I have to tell you, the alternatives suck.”
So what’s up with that?
OK, I wish people would get this straight when they report it.
JW’s believe the 144,000 Heavenly Court are the Upper Management of Jehovah’s Kingdom, running things with Jesus. The rest of Redeemed Humanity live forever on Paradise Earth. The incorrigibly unrepentant are destroyed (not eternally tormented)
in the Lake of Fire.
I guess that’s a thing a person could believe. I just think it’s funny that going to heaven is forbidden in the same way that wearing immodest clothes or joining the military are. No heaven for you!
Not ‘forbidden’ - just that the average JW will never see heaven.
Keep in mind that the 144,000 was considered sealed originally by Russsel in 1881
[QUOTE= The Time Is At Hand 1916 ed. p.235]
“And the three and a half years following the Spring of A.D. 1878, which ended October, A.D. 1881, correspond to the three and a half years of continued favor to individual Jews in the last half of their seventieth week of favor. As in the type that date-three and a half years after the death of Christ-marked the end of all special favor to the Jew and the beginning of favor to the Gentiles, so we recognize A.D. 1881 as marking the close of the special favor to Gentiles-the close of the “high calling,” or invitation to the blessings peculiar to this age-to become joint-heirs with Christ and partakers of the divine nature.”
[/QUOTE]
and Rutherford ‘re-sealed’ it in 1931 -
[QUOTE=“Let God be True” 1946 ed. p.298 ]
"God having a fixed time for every purpose (Ecclesiastes 3:1), his time to give creatures on earth the opportunity to get in line for a heavenly reward has been from A .D. 29 until, chiefly, 1931, called the “day of salvation”.
[/QUOTE]
and the Watchtower later claimed that was in 1935 -
[QUOTE=Watchtower 2007 May 1 p.30]
“Hence, especially after 1966 it was believed that the heavenly call ceased in 1935.”
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE= Revelation, Its Grand Climax Now at Hand p.125]
“Their being identified in 1935 as the great crowd of other sheep was an indication that the choosing of the 144,000 was then about complete.”
[/QUOTE]
and since then it is now no longer ‘sealed’,
[QUOTE=Watchtower 2007 May 1 p.31 ]
“As time has gone by, some Christians baptized after 1935 have had witness borne to them that they have the heavenly hope. Thus we cannot set a specific date for when the heavenly hope ends.”
[/QUOTE]
And only the 144,000 are supposed to take of the bread/wine during the memorial -
[QUOTE=Watchtower 2006 Feb 15 p. 24 ]
Since sharing in the bread and wine passed during the Memorial involves all of this, it would obviously be inappropriate for those having an earthly hope to partake. **Those with an earthly hope discern that they themselves are not anointed members of the body of Christ, nor are they in the new covenant that Jehovah made with those who will rule with Jesus Christ. **Since “the cup” represents the new covenant, only those in the new covenant partake of the emblems. Those looking forward to everlasting life in human perfection on earth under the Kingdom are neither baptized into Jesus’ death nor called to rule with him in heaven. Were they to partake of the emblems, it would signify something that is not true with respect to them. Thus, they do not partake, though they do attend the Memorial as respectful observers.
[/QUOTE]
They even look down on those ‘newly baptized’ that claim to be part of the 144,000 - basically making the claim that if they ‘thought’ they were, they were ‘mentally strained’ or ‘emotional’.
[QUOTE= Watchtower 1996 Aug 15 p.31]
Over the years some, even ones newly baptized, have suddenly begun to partake. In a number of cases, after a while they acknowledged that this was an error. Some have recognized that they partook as an emotional response to perhaps physical or mental strain. But they came to see that they really were not called to heavenly life. They asked for God’s merciful understanding.
[/QUOTE]
Seems these ‘Bible Students’ forgot to read the actual Bible -
[QUOTE=Jesus @ Matthew 23:13]
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to
[/QUOTE]
Well, Annie-Xmas’s article was not the most objective & skewed the phrasing to make it sound like that. That is not how any JW would phrase it. If they even thought about it, they’d say you “can’t” as in you were “not able”, not as in you “may not”.