Giving comments at meetings that cause cognitive dissonance while keeping yourself below elder radar for apostasy

by Brokeback Watchtower 21 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Brokeback Watchtower

  Well I'm sure we can come up with clever comments that make people feel uncomfortable by serving to decompartmentalize things that have been compartmentalized in the thinking of the average JW. Or comments that make the cognitive dissonance stand out plainly, these have to be said in innocent manner and with an apparent obliviousness to the contradiction. 

  
  

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compartmentalization_%28psychology%29

  Compartmentalization is an unconscious psychological defense mechanism used to avoid cognitive dissonance, or the mental discomfort and anxiety caused by a person's having conflicting values, cognitions, emotions, beliefs, etc. within themselves.
  Compartmentalization allows these conflicting ideas to co-exist by inhibiting direct or explicit acknowledgement and interaction between separate compartmentalized self states.[1] 

  
  

  sss
• 

  stuckinarut2

  Great post Brokeback!
• 

  OneEyedJoe

  There's two different ways that I've come up with to do this, though I can't say I've gotten any results to speak of.  

  The first method is to give a comment as if you're a complete hardliner.  An example of this is a comment I wanted to give during the book study a few weeks ago.  The paragraph said something about his God cleverly had the Bible written in such a way that it exposed those with a"critical heart" my comment was "many people take issue with the fact that the good of the Bible on several occasions ordered the Israelites to kill every man, woman, and child of other nations, not even giving them the chance to accept God.  But it is clear that anyone raising such objections simply have a critical heart." Basically the point is to apply the point of the paragraph in such a way that it becomes obvious to anyone with half a brain that it's wrong.

  Thee other method is to introduced information that the average jw does not have, then explain it away on an obviously flawed manner.  Maybe something like mentioning a doomsday predictor like Harold camping in a negative way, then saying something like "of course the Bible students expected the end to come in 1914 and again in 1925, but we know that they were mearly driven by their zeal in expectation of the great day of Jehovah."
• 

  Brokeback Watchtower

  Sound good Joe
• 

  OneFingerSalute

  Not sure if the comment I made last Tuesday would fit, but referring to Gideon's asking for two assurances of God's favor with the test of the fleece on the threshing floor I commented that the WT had in the past stated that was not an indication of Gideon's doubt, but rather simply wanting total assurance of God's direction. That WT continued to state that we today could benefit by making sure of all things. One of the most important ways would to be asking ourselves if what we are being told is directly provable from the Bible, and does it glorify God rather than the person saying it? Even Paul said that if he or an angel from heaven said something not in line with God's words they would be accursed, and so too today. If someone, even one of the anointed said something not directly from the Bible or bringing attention to themselves we should not listen to them as they would be accursed, in Paul's words.

  I saw many heads bobbing in agreement evidently not realizing exactly what I had just said. 
• 

  stuckinarut2

  Great comment one finger, but sadly, it would only be fellow awake people who would get the sarcastic point...

  its wasted on the average witness zombie
• 

  Island Man

  A good statement to have squeezed in while commenting on paragraph 9 of this week's Watchtower study is to say

  "... Jehovah has not always had an organization on earth...".

  This statement should induce some serious cognitive dissonance because it sounds very familiar, while sounding very wrong, while being very much correct and in harmony with paragraph 9. You see, JWs often make this statement to justify the existence of the organization and the need to be in association with it to have God's approval:

  "... Jehovah has always had an organization on earth..." 

  So when you make the former statement in the comment it induces ones memory of the latter statement while contradicting it. And in contradicting the latter common statement it also harmonizes with the point made at the end of paragraph 9. Thus it exposes JWs' foolish, contradicting, double-position about God always having an organization - did he or did he not? Watchtower dishonestly states both positions at different times depending on which is most expedient to their propagandistic objective at the given moment. But of course they always take care to word the two opposing statements with different language so as to make it less obvious that the two contradictory statements are actually contradicting views on the same point. 
• 

  Island Man

  Another method that I've mentioned on another thread is to nonchalantly restate Watchtower's extremist cult-like teachings or positions without any of the spin or euphemisms that Watchtower would usually employ to cover over its ugliness. But it has to be done very nonchalantly with an innocent tone of voice.

  For example, while commenting about the importance of not associating with disfellowshipped loved ones so that they will return, you could say something like:

  "This experience shows the importance of shunning our disfellowshipped loved ones so that they will be forced to return to the organization in order to have association with us once again. If we fail to shun them then we give them no good reason to return."
• 

  Finkelstein

   

  

   
• 

  Brokeback Watchtower

  Of course CD will not effect everyone the same and some it might help start their exodus as the mind seeks to adjust some of the contradiction others it will have little or no effect because their ability to think for themselves has been seriously diminished.