I've had several people ask me if I ever planned on writing my "story." Well, something came over me today. It might have had something to do with Kwin's interview, I don't know. My story isn't all that interesting. At least it didn't become interesting until I started to become more vocal a few years ago.
Silentlambs was gaining traction. More and more newscasts and primetime news specials were becoming commonplace. I felt the need to help out. Dirtclod.com was born. Silentlambs pointed to dirtclod for all of its multimedia hosting needs(to help offset bandwidth costs). It grew a little bit at a time. Eventually, a gallery of almost the entire collection of Body of Elder's letters was made available to the public. The WTS apparently did not like this information being made available on the www. So then came the legal threats. The WTS had its legal department issue a C&D letter to the host of dirtclod. This happened again later with an alleged phone call. [Jourles] and dirtclod were easily linked together through a simple search on the web. It doesn't take a genius to see where this was headed.
I have been df'd since Feb. 3, 2005 on the charge I believe was apostacy. I say "believe" because the elder informing me of the decision to df never specified the charge. And the elder informing me of the JC meeting was semi-vague too, but at least he mentioned "apostacy" in a sentence.
What I am now going to post is a description of events exactly the way they happened. The first two parts involve the initial elder's visits to my home. I wrote what happened the following day while the details were still fresh in my memory. Next will be the letter that I sent to the elders right after I was informed of the JC meeting. Following up is the letter that I sent to many friends and family members.
I was paranoid at first believing that I should keep these events confidential. But why? What purpose would that serve to me? Maybe, just maybe, a lurker out there somewhere will read what I have gone through and will recognize similar patterns that they themselves have gone through. It's possible that they can use my experiences to deal with their own fading. Call it therapy, whatever. Maybe this will help some of you who read this board regularly to understand why I left this board a couple years ago, registered again under a new nick(catchthis), and now have come back as Jourles. My wife is fine with my current status. There hasn't been any change in our living arrangements. Seeing that she is dealing with my df'ing fairly well, I no longer have any reason to stay in stealth mode. I don't care anymore what other JW's think. I'm df'd, what can man do to me?
Enjoy my coming out...
(First Meeting)
11/3/2003
For the past couple of weeks, the secretary has been trying to get together with my wife and I for a shepherding call. Finally as of last night, we met up in our home. The presiding overseer accompanied the secretary for the visit. It seems that the two elders had dropped by for a visit about four weeks ago while I was away in Atlanta. Curiously, my wife never mentioned to me their visit with her. I still do not know what was discussed between them. Up until a couple of weeks ago, the secretary simply asked me when would be a good time to meet up. Nothing specific was ever mentioned as to the purpose of the visit - it was simply referred to as a "shepherding call."
They arrived at our prearranged time of 8 p.m. For the first hour we discussed a 1984 Watchtower article which spoke about maintaining our spiritual balance. A few probing questions were asked of me relating to my belief in the FDS and if I believed they were indeed leading us today. I was expecting this question from the beginning, even before our visitors arrived. I neither admitted nor denied so much in my answer to them. They asked if anything else was holding me back from progressing further in the organization. At this point in the conversation I mentioned that I had a revised letter which I was sending to the Society. It included a few more items from my original letter that I was encouraged to write. Both elders skimmed the 9 page letter for a few minutes and briefly asked questions about some of the points I had made. One item that took them by surprise which they knew nothing about was the prior United Nations affiliation. The secretary tried his best to discount the association with the UN's DPI and the PO alluded to the fact that in 1991 when the Iron Curtain fell, it may have been in the Society's best interest to use this affiliation to gain access to these newly opened areas. I do not believe he was fully aware of the ramifications of his statement. We discussed a few other items such as blood, false religious practices being used by witnesses today, and alterations in the publications.
Neither elder could give a strong answer to any of my blood questions that I had outlined in my letter. They could not explain how blood does not become blood anymore once it is fractionated beyond the four primary components. For that matter, I asked the PO directly, "So you are saying that the four primary components are each individually equivalent to blood itself?" He looked up and started to say, "Yeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaas" in a long, drawn out "Yes." I then proceeded to ask him how do we know when those components are not blood anymore? Well, to make this story shorter and more understandable, both elders tried using examples that made no sense in relating to our discussion on blood and I actually felt they knew they were skirting the issue and could not admit that they did not know. They strictly stayed with the current understanding on blood as is defined by the Society. I knew deep down that they could not admit otherwise as that would constitute betraying their own position within the organization.
When speaking about false religious practices that witnesses participate in today, my letter specifically talked about the recent article in the Awake on piñatas. They told me how the Society is not rigid and provides much leeway in letting witnesses choose what they feel is acceptable to their consciences. The secretary brought up the pagan origin of wedding rings and I agreed wholeheartedly. I mentioned Thanksgiving, Mother's Day, Father's Day, birthdays, and Valentine's Day and asked them to compare the concluding statements in the Awake article to these customary traditions that are practiced here in the USA. To my great surprise, the PO said that all of these fall into a "gray area" and are really up to an individual's conscience. I never expected that answer from him. I was anticipating quite the opposite in fact. The secretary spoke up right after and went into the "giving undue honor to humans" speech in regards to these holidays. I feel this is one area where the two elders had differing opinions. The PO seemed much more lax in these "gray areas" and pretty much left it up to me if I wanted to participate in these special days. What can I say, I was speechless.
After an hour discussing a few of these points, the PO asked my wife if she could leave the three of us alone so that we could "have a chat." When the two elders first arrived, the PO had a black notebook binder with some papers and an envelope in it. The papers turned out to be copies of the Watchtower article that we discussed. The envelope contained what I was afraid it contained. My initial suspicion was that the envelope held in it documents from the Society relating to my website, dirtclod.com and possibly printouts of my participation on jehovahs-witness.com. The two sites are easily linked by simply doing a search on the web. The PO jumped right in and said that they would like to talk with me about "your website, dirtclod.com." At the same time he was reaching for the envelope and opening it. The envelope was almost a half an inch thick. A cold chill shot across my body immediately and I knew I was 'busted.'
A couple of months ago, I had moved dirtclod from an old isp to a different one, only on a temporary basis. The reason for this move was because I needed a higher bandwidth server. The temporary server I moved it to was a reseller account that I have where I host sites for several friends and family members. When I first activated this reseller account, I made my personal family domain name the primary account placeholder. What this means is, if any of the sites that I host under this account are suspended by the ISP for any reason, people who try to reach the newly suspended domain are redirected to the primary domain where they see a "suspended account" page. Thanks to this ISP, they suspended dirtclod with a simple alleged phone call from the Society's legal department, contrary to normal DMCA procedural laws. Once this suspension was initiated, all requests to dirtclod.com were redirected to my personal domain name. I didn't catch this mishap until a few hours after it happened. Checking through my logs of visitors, I saw that "ns.watchtower.org" browsed through all of my pages on my personal website after being redirected from dirtclod. My stomach churned. I quickly moved dirtclod to another server the very next day. Too little too late.
Fast forward to last night. The elders wanted to talk to me about my website, dirtclod.com. Judging from the sizable amount of documentation contained in the envelope, I knew they must have had all online BBS communications made by me over the past few years. I admitted that the site was mine and that I had no real reason or motive in hosting it. They both agreed that it was as neutral as it could be from my viewpoint as I did not provide any sort of commentary on it. What they were most concerned with was the Body of Elder's letters. The secretary asked what would likely happen to me if I were in the military and posted some top secret General's letters on the web? I knew where this was leading but I did not want to provide them an answer to the question. I told him, "I really don't know what would happen as I am not nor was ever in the military." He answered his own question by saying that this lower ranked military person would probably be accused of treason or spying and would most likely be court marshaled. From here on the secretary came out with the guns blasting and the PO just sat there listening. He kept asking me how a witness would feel about my site if they visited it. Would they feel discouraged or upbuilt? I kept saying that the content on the site was there for anyone to draw their own conclusions and that there were a few items that witnesses would probably consider as positive. They agreed but kept pushing the issue about the BOE letters. That seemed to be their entire point of the visit. They also kept pushing for the name/location of the brother who supplied me with these letters. I firmly told them a few times that I could never give that information up to them. They continued by saying that this "elder" who supplied these BOE letters was probably working against the organization and that it would be best for me to cut off contact with him.
The elders, again surprisingly, tried to help show me the error of my ways. Both seemed to want to truly help me. Earlier in my mind, I felt that this night was going to be the night of my automatic disassociation. Surely with all of the documentation that they had from jehovahs-witness.com and dirtclod, they had enough to hang me by my own words. But I guess in some of my posts made I mention that I wasn't sure what to believe in anymore. Again, they asked me where do I stand in regards to the organization. I told them that I was standing on the fence and leaning in both directions. I could fall either way, I wasn't sure. The whole time I kept thinking about if I were automatically da'd, what would they suggest my wife do? Separate over spiritual endangerment? Maybe. This is something that I did not want to find out.
Towards the end of our conversation, I also made mention that in the two years that we have been in their congregation, no one, including the elders, has ever asked me to go out in service or sign up for the school. Both were taken back by this and apologized profusely. The PO said that normally they don't jump right on an inactive one and push them out in service but rather get them prepared for it. Well, what happened in my case? You could see the guilt dripping from their faces and body language. I was down 14-7 up to that point and felt like I just tied the game back up. And we will be going into overtime as next Monday we will have another meeting at the same place, same time. The PO said several times during our entire discussion that I should send this new letter off right away. They both wanted to see what the Society would say on the UN issue and some of my blood questions, particularly twin-to-twin transfusion syndrome. The PO told me that if the brothers were to research it, it just may lead to a new understanding on blood. Wouldn't that be something?
(Second meeting)
11/17/2003
Last night was the second visit made by the elder(s). But this time, the secretary couldn't make it so only the PO showed up, by himself. Hunting season opened up here in Michigan a few days ago and the secretary is an avid hunter. It seems that he was unable to make it back down south for our prearranged meeting time. Quite alright with me.
Leading up until 8 p.m., I kept wondering how many elders would walk in through my door. Would it be a JC meeting this time? Would I have to make seating arrangements for 3 of them and 1 for me? I was feeling pretty paranoid that a JC was already formed and would be advising me of my rights last night. So to my great surprise when I saw the PO was standing at my door, ALONE, a great wave of relief swept over me. I thought, "Woohoo! No JC tonight!"
This time, the PO didn't have his little black binder with thick sets of papers stuffed into it. He simply had his large monogrammed custom black reference bible with a few papers folded into the middle of it. "This is a good sign I think..." He opens with a prayer and then tells me that he would like to go over a Watchtower article dealing with some points on blood that we talked about a couple weeks ago. He asked me if I was familiar with the Society's current stance on blood fractions and at the same time he was reaching for his papers. I asked him if he was referring to the June 2000 Watchtower and said yes, I was extremely familiar with the article. He seemed a little surprised that I knew right off the bat the date of the article he brought with him. Like I told him, I am very familiar with ALL of the Society's articles dealing with blood, dates included.
He began the discussion talking about blood components in general. The four primary ones. He reiterated that the Slave teaches that whole blood and the four primaries are not to be taken in by transfusion. He asked if I understood that part and I said yes. He recalled that I had an issue with some of these primary components and why we could not accept them. I proceeded to give my explanation again.
I first touched on white blood cells and platelets, both banned components, and how they make up less of a percentage of whole blood than albumin does, an allowed substance taken from plasma. I asked him how does the Society or the bible determine when blood is not blood anymore once it is fractionalized. Is it based on the total percentage of the blood, or what the particular component does for the body? He didn't have a clear answer. Instead, I got the first of what would be around five of the same answer. He said that the Slave gives us the leeway to make our own conscientious decisions based on what our conscience will allow us to do. Of course, this is a very broad and general answer to almost every doctrinal question out there. But on the backside of this answer, all witnesses know that they must follow their conscience based on what is written in the publications regardless of what their conscience says, or else.
I also led him into organ transplants and how they compare to white blood cells. I mentioned that prior to 1967, organ transplants were a matter of conscience. Then in that year, they were banned and were equated to "cannibalism," "feeding upon human flesh." But when 1980 rolled around, they again became a matter of conscience. I asked him if it was allowable for us to accept an organ transplant, why not a white blood cell transfusion? Afterall, there is a higher concentration of white blood cells found in human tissue and organs than in the bloodstream. He said he was not familiar with the ratio of white blood cells in the bloodstream and in organs. He said he would research it and get a little more acquainted on it for future conversations. He wrote it down on the back of his Watchtower article.
I then brought up red blood cells and hemoglobin. I told him that I could not really discern a huge difference between the two, other than the shell that surrounds the hemoglobin. I said that the Society has never come out and said in the publications that hemoglobin was acceptable. But in a couple of news articles, members of the HLS and HLC were quoted regarding Polyheme and Hemopure that these hemoglobin-based products were acceptable, even if one of them was created from bovine blood. I mentioned that a red blood cell is composed of 97% hemoglobin, with the remaining 3% being the outer membrane. I could not see how red blood cells would be prohibited, but hemoglobin allowed. I understand that the membrane antigen typing could be a factor(A, B, AB, O), but then this would be a medical issue, not a biblical one. Again, he said he would have to research this issue also as he was not up to speed on some of these more detailed medical points. He wrote it down.
Next, I brought up the donating and receiving of blood. This was the longest of our conversation. From the beginning of this part, I tried to explain step by step, from the donating of blood to our receiving it in a fractionated form. I wanted for him to see it in his own mind and where I was coming from, my point of view. I asked him first off if it was allowable for a witness to donate his blood. He said no. I then asked him why it wasn't acceptable for us to donate blood. He brought up the Mosaic law found in Leviticus which I expected him to do. We both agreed that blood removed from the body should be poured out upon the ground. With these first two questions, he hesitated before answering them. I think he was feeling that I was about to lead him into a trap and so he had to think about his answers before giving them. But the answers were so straightforward and set in stone from the Society that an 8 year old could have answered them quickly. We both agreed that donating blood was a no-no and that the blood, if removed, should be poured out upon the ground, returning it to Jehovah. The foundation was now set.
I brought up apheresis donation. He did not know how this procedure worked exactly. This was a topic that I brought up in my letter to the Society. He said he would like to defer to them for an answer. Ok, that's understandable seeing that the Society has never commented on it before in the publications. I then asked him if the principle found in Leviticus on the pouring out of blood was in effect for all of mankind. Another answer that he took a while to give. Again, I think he knew in the back of his mind where this might be going, but he tried his best to give a vague answer. He said that the law was in effect for Christians, but as for others in different faiths, they may not view it the same way. That was a good answer but I asked him if the bible was written for all of mankind, not just people of differing faiths. He said yes, but we couldn't control what people of other faiths would do with their own bodies these days. You can see where this was going. I moved on since this could go in circles for a while.
I asked him that if the principle of Leviticus was still in effect today, should not worldly people who donate their blood have it poured out upon the ground? That principle should extend to everyone on earth, not just witnesses right? He said again that we cannot enforce any spiritual laws upon worldly people. What they do is up to them. He knew where I was going with this and pre-empted me by saying that if a witness' conscience felt that ALL blood which is taken out from the body should be poured out upon the ground, he may feel that he would not accept any product which is derived from blood. Some individuals may feel differently. I said this would be inconsistent with what the Society teaches. If the principle found in Leviticus was a firm law that was not flexible and that if the bible was for all of mankind, in this case, ALL BLOOD PRODUCTS should be banned based on this principle. "I know what you're saying [Jourles]. It might be best to have the Society answer your question. I know you touched on this matter in your letter." Fair enough.
He asked me if there was anything else I wanted to discuss on blood. I had a few other items I had in mind, but I already knew the answers he would give so I told him "not right now." We then chatted a little about my inactivity. As I was planning to do beforehand, I wanted to inflict guilt upon the elders for not looking after my spirituality. It seemed to have worked. I told him about when I became inactive, a few of the issues that led to my inactivity, and how easy it was to stay inactive. I said that in the past four or five years of my inactiveness, not one elder had ever checked up on me personally asking me if I needed help. He said that he was pretty sure that I received a visit within the last two years of being in his congregation. I told him no I did not. Other than the forced visit of the elders made at the request of the service committee back in April, not one brother has ever offered help to me. He still seemed positive that I had been offered help, but I let him know again that no, I had not. He apologized a couple times and said that in the old days the elders would approach an inactive one and try to get them right out in service. But these days, they tried to help out in any way that they could without service being the main priority. He asked if I would like to get some help in the area of service. He could talk to my bookstudy overseer and arrange for me to work with some of the brothers. I wouldn't have to say anything, I could just come along and listen. "Would you like for me to arrange this so we can get you out here in the near future?" I told him I would like to think about it right now. I just need a little time to get things together.
He now veered into my website. He asked about some pictures which were on my site - ones that showed Bart Simpson on a Watchtower cover and some others? I told him that a while back I offered to folks some free space to store their pictures and such. Several people took up my offer. Whatever they uploaded was unknown to me. I did not police what they put up on my server. I simply gave them a login area and they did what they wanted with the space. There could very well have been Bart Simpson characters on a Watchtower cover, I didn't know. He said that in our next visit he and the secretary would like to "run through quick" some other pictures that were on the site "just to get them out of the way." He made a brief mention of technology today - FTP, web servers, etc. I'm not sure what he was getting at, but I feel that he might have thought that I was the only one to upload any pictures to my website, which wasn't the case. This is what I think they might be insinuating - if those pictures existed on MY website, then I must have known about them since I MUST have uploaded them. For the record, I merely created the folders for the people who expressed interest in having free space to store their photos. Again, I did not have anything to do with the uploading of their pictures.
Our visit basically ended there and we didn't nail down a time to meet again. I can only assume that we will get together next Monday night. Oh, how could I have forgotten this part! -- He told me that when they first were made aware of my website, they received a letter from the service desk with the care package of copied posts from jwd and screenshots of my website. He didn't say what was written in the letter, but he did say that he called the service desk to clarify some points. He said(paraphrasing), "[Jourles], I am going to be straight up with you. When I asked the service desk the first step we should take in resolving this matter, they said to first try and help brother [Jourles]. That was the primary concern with them. They wanted us to see if there was anything we could help you with. They understood that you had serious doubts, but they also wanted us to help you with them if possible. I want you to know that we are not out to get you, but rather trying to offer you help if you want it." If I hadn't recorded this, I wouldn't have believed it. For one, it would prove whether or not the PO was just giving me a line. Secondly, if I was to get df'd after showing sincere "repentance," it would show that either the service desk lied or the PO did. I can guarantee that I will bring this up to the PO if the axe falls. Anyways, that's about it. The entire visit lasted exactly an hour.
(Letter to elders)
To whom it may concern,
The intent of this letter is to inform the judicial committee that will be meeting on Sunday January 23rd at 6:00 p.m. at the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses on XXXXX Rd., that I will not be attending said planned meeting. XXXXXX XXXXXX informed me verbally over the phone that this meeting will go on as planned with or without my physical presence. XXXXXX also informed me that there was enough evidence, through either written or verbal statements, which would allow the committee to make a decision without my presence.
The outcome of this meeting has already been pre-determined, in my opinion. I see no valid reason to expend either my time or of the three members of the committee. Please refrain from contacting me to try and reverse my decision regarding this meeting. My decision stands as final.
Once the committee’s verdict is agreed upon, you may contact me via phone with the result of your decision. Please do not “drop by” to inform me of your decision. I understand that if your judgment is to disfellowship, I will have an automatic seven day window to appeal. Please bear in mind that I have no intention of doing so. Assuming that once the decision is verbally given to me and the timeframe of the appeal passes, I imagine that the announcement will be read from the platform at the following Service Meeting on February 3 rd .
Also, please keep in mind that the details of the judicial hearing and all prior discussions are highly confidential. I, and the three brothers forming the committee, would regret having to hear from someone, outside the members of this committee, speaking of the details of my case. I understand rumors will circulate quickly and people will make wild assumptions, which is why I have already begun writing a very lengthy letter to friends and family members to clarify my beliefs and the stand I am taking. The contents of this letter are not for general public consumption, but rather, only for ones I have deemed as necessary to receive it.
In closing, I hold no ill will against anyone in the XXXX congregation, or towards the elders. I understand that you must follow the Society’s instructions. I cannot fault you for doing so. I am sorry that questioning the Society is equivalent to questioning God himself. As I once said to XXXXX and XXXXX, witnesses look to the organization as the Catholics look to the Pope. I feel that to place such high trust in men goes against what the bible really says. And for an organization to place itself as the mediator between the “other sheep” and God, is to deny Jesus as being the only mediator between God and all of mankind, and not just the 144,000 as the Society teaches.
Thank you for your time in reading this,
(Letter to friends and family)
To my dear friends and family,
In the course of my thirty two years of life on this earth, this by far is the most difficult letter I will have ever written. Most of you, outside of my family, have known me for many, many of those years and we have been there to support each other for various reasons. I have always tried to be the best friend that I could to everyone that I met and eventually gained friendships with.
For those who are receiving this letter and are not aware, I was raised as a Jehovah’s Witness (JW) practically from birth. I do not recall ever having set foot into another church in my entire life, even for a wedding or funeral. Growing up as a witness, certain instructions are constantly embedded into your mind as to what are the right things to do and the wrong things. One of those wrong things is stepping into a “Church” rather than a Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses. With that mindset growing up and the “constant reminders”(common phrase used by witnesses) that we receive while at the Kingdom Hall regarding not to look into other religions, many normal people may experience a breaking point when their questions cannot be answered from within their own faith.
Many witnesses will tell you today that they left the Catholics or the Baptists or whoever because they didn’t get their questions answered by their own church. But when the witnesses came along and offered a study, all of their questions were answered. They felt it was “the truth.” The Truth is yet another phrase that is used by ALL witnesses to describe their own religion. Even when speaking about a friend or relative, many times they will ask another witness whether so-and-so is “still in the truth.” This term stems from the Jehovah’s Witnesses believing that they are the only group on earth that will be saved from destruction during the great day of Armageddon mentioned in the bible book of Revelation:
You Can Live Forever In Paradise On Earth - 1989 chap. 30 p. 255
Do not conclude that there are different roads, or ways, that you can follow to gain life in God’s new system. There is only one. There was just the one ark that survived the Flood, not a number of boats. And there will be only one organization—God’s visible organization—that will survive the fast-approaching “great tribulation.” It is simply not true that all religions lead to the same goal. (Matthew 7:21-23; 24:21) You must be part of Jehovah’s organization, doing God’s will, in order to receive his blessing of everlasting life.
The reason they believe they will be saved is because of the uniqueness of their message which is preached around the world. Witnesses feel that their organization, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society(WTBTS), is used by God directly and is the sole channel of communication to humans today from God:
Watchtower April 1, 1920 pg. 100
The whole question is, Are all those in the truth working together in harmony? We have no quarrel with any one who wants to seek truth through other channels. We would not refuse to treat one as a brother because he did not believe the Society is the Lord's channel.
Watchtower July 15, 1960 pg. 439
The facts show that during this time and up to the present hour the "slave" class has served as God's sole collective channel for the flow of Biblical truth to men on earth. Just as the early Christian congregation collectively served as the channel of communication from heaven to earth, so in our time.
Watchtower January 15, 1959 pgs. 40-41
Whom has God actually used as his prophet?
14 By the historical facts of the case Christendom is beaten back in defeat. Jehovah’s witnesses are deeply grateful today that the plain facts show that God has been pleased to use them. All the preaching and all the Bible educational work that they have done till now in 175 countries and islands of the sea they confess has been, not by help of a military army, nor by human power, but by God’s spirit, his invisible active force. (Zech. 4:6, AV) It has been because Jehovah thrust out his hand of power and touched their lips and put his words in their mouths.
They also believe that all other religions are under the control of Satan the Devil, no exceptions. Some of you who are reading this are probably feeling upset that I am disclosing this information which is generally not known to those outside of the JW’s. I understand how you feel. I once felt the same way. But I feel that it is important to let those who know little about the witnesses to understand why I am writing this letter.
Many years ago, 1995 to be exact, there was a major change in doctrine within the JW organization. For decades upon decades prior to 1995, the organization espoused “God’s promise” that some of the generation of witnesses living during the time of 1914 would live to see the end of the world at God’s hand at Armageddon. This “promise” from God was even removed from the masthead of the Awake! magazine in 1995, a companion to The Watchtower magazine printed by the WTBTS. The Watchtower followed up toward the end of 1995 with an article basically removing the timeframe associated with how many years a generation consists of and replaced it with an unknown amount of time, essentially extending the end of the world indefinitely. For anyone with any amount of knowledge of the witnesses and their past, you would know that the WTBTS tends to make use of dates for setting up a timeframe of when the end of the world may come. 1878, 1914, 1925, and 1975 are examples of such. I will not quote an entire list of JW literature which marks these dates, as that could take up too much space, but will leave that to YOU to find for yourself if interested. But to give you an idea of the timeframe surrounding 1975, here are a couple of quotes for you to ponder…
Awake! May 22, 1969 pg. 15:
If you are a young person, you also need to face the fact that you will never grow old in this present system of things. Why not? Because all the evidence in fulfillment of Bible prophecy indicates that this corrupt system is due to end in a few years. Of the generation that observed the beginning of the 'last days' in 1914, Jesus foretold: 'This generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.' Therefore, as a young person, you will never fulfill any career that this system offer s. If you are in high school and thinking about a college education, it means at least four, perhaps even six or eight more years to graduate into a specialized career. But where will this system of things be by that time? It will be well on the way towards its finish, if not actually gone!
Kingdom Ministry May 1974 p. 3:
Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world’s end.
When the change in meaning of the “generation” occurred in 1995, I recall that many witnesses in my old congregation were fairly split over the issue. Few seemed discouraged by this change, while other more zealous ones took hold of the ‘new light’ with great appreciation. Still, there were others I think that did not realize the severity of the change in doctrine. I also think to this day, there are quite a few witnesses that still do not understand what took place back then as some of them still mention “the generation is getting very old.” The younger generation of witnesses that grew up with me were told that we would not likely finish school and that secondary education would be a waste of time. Even though I attended secondary education, but did not complete it, I wish I had taken my schooling more seriously. When you are taught that the end of the world will be coming to an end “very shortly” and it is based solidly on “God’s promise,” you generally tend to slack off a little by not giving full attention to your schooling. With that said, I have no regrets today as my job provides my wife and I with a very comfortable living. It simply took a lot of hard work to get where I am and plenty of thinking outside of the box.
When asked who are Jehovah’s Witnesses, many people immediately think of their stances on no blood transfusions, refusing the flag salute or not standing for the national anthem, knocking on people’s doors, or possibly for their clean-cut looks. When it comes to blood transfusions, many witnesses themselves cannot explain or defend this doctrine when asked about it. I have to admit, I too used to be one of those people.
The difficulty in defending one of the primary doctrines of the JW’s, and the most deadly, comes from the organization’s inability to explain it fully themselves. Over the last several decades, hundreds and possibly thousands of misinformed witnesses have lost their lives by following a policy that is ever changing. For example, once considered “cannibalism” by the WTBTS, organ transplants were a disfellowshipping (excommunicate) offense. By 1980, it then became a “conscience matter.” If something is deemed as a conscience matter for a witness to accept or refuse, they are given the latitude to make their own decision without the risk of being cut-off from the organization by being disfellowshipped. How many witnesses lost their lives by foregoing a needed transplant for fear of being disfellowshipped? We may never know. The same can be said of blood transfusions.
I could write several pages here on every aspect of blood transfusions. But I won’t. The point is, ask yourself if this doctrine is based on solid scriptural backing or on current medical understanding. All witnesses will say it is a scripturally based doctrine. But is it really? Allow me to use an example here to make my point. Red blood cells. The WTBTS says that these are prohibited and that if you accept a transfusion of RBC’s, you can be disfellowshipped. The WTBTS says that you cannot have a transfusion of RBC’s, white blood cells, platelets, or plasma – or what they call the four primary components of blood, the “major” components. Outside of these components, a witness may accept a transfusion of any fraction which can be extracted from these four primary components, also referred to as “minor” components. Just until a few years ago, this wasn’t the case with RBC’s. Only fractions extracted from plasma were acceptable. The only fraction which can be extracted from RBC’s is hemoglobin. Hemoglobin IS an RBC minus the outside membrane. It comprises 97% of a red blood cell and is the protein tasked with carrying oxygen throughout the body. Where in the bible did this change in thinking take place? It didn’t. The bible has never changed. You decide whether or not if the change in the blood doctrine regarding red blood cells and hemoglobin was based on the bible or new medical products such as Polyheme and Hemopure coming into use.
The other prohibition on blood is for a witness not to pre-donate their own blood for a scheduled surgery, or to even donate to a blood bank. This ban is based on a passage from the Mosaic Law stating that blood removed from the body is to be poured out upon the ground. Well, the problem here is if a witness is willing to accept any of the allowed blood products on the WTBTS’s approved list, they are breaking this law they themselves follow. For any blood product that is used by a witness, the component or fraction must be donated, processed, and stored for use later on. Witnesses will also state that the principle involved with the pouring out of blood extends to all of mankind on earth today. To me, it is hypocritical for a witness to accept any fraction that can be derived from blood, and even noting their acceptance of such fractions on their Durable Power of Attorney, but then refuse donating their own blood for others to use. You see, by following this principle that witnesses must believe in, it is only logical for them also to refuse which must have been poured out in the first place, regardless of who it came from. But many do not.
Yet another example can be used with white blood cells. As was mentioned above, white blood cells are a forbidden, “major” component for a witness to accept. But once you realize that WBC’s make up a smaller total volume of whole blood than a certain fraction extracted from plasma, namely albumin(a “minor” component), which is approved by the WTBTS, the blood issue becomes a little more fuzzy to understand. And in going one step further, if you were to combine both WBC’s and platelets(also termed as a “major” banned component), you still wouldn’t reach the percentage that albumin occupies in the bloodstream. In all of my research, the WTBTS has never defined how a blood component is put into the two “major” and “minor” categories. One would get the impression that the overall percentage of blood volume would be the key factor. But with the WBC/platelet/albumin comparison, that appears not to be the case. The only other logical conclusion left is what the particular component does for the body. But can we really make this comparison medically, or even scripturally for that matter? No, we cannot. Every component of blood is necessary for the human body to survive. No one component can be fully removed from the bloodstream. When you look at it in this light, every extractible part of blood all of a sudden becomes a “major” component.
As was already pointed out earlier, undergoing an organ transplant was once considered “cannibalism” but now are widely acceptable to witnesses without the threat of being disfellowshipped. Something else many witnesses do not realize is that the majority of white blood cells in the body are located in the tissue and organs – more so than the blood. In fact, as many or more WBC’s are contained in a kidney transplant than the overall amount found in the bloodstream. How should a witness reconcile this contradiction? On one hand, it is forbidden to accept a transfusion of WBC’s. But on the other hand, by allowing an organ transplant you are introducing WBC’s into your body. Sure, the WTBTS says it is up to your conscience if you would allow a transplant, but wouldn’t you think they should also inform you that by doing so you are allowing WBC’s to be not just transfused, but implanted into your body?
While on the subject of WBC’s, it should also be noted that for any mothers who are JW’s and that have had children, did you breastfeed them? If you did, are you aware that you willingly let your child intentionally feed upon white blood cells for nourishment? During the first period of breastfeeding, colostrum is loaded with WBC’s. This is also known as the baby’s first immunization. If the scriptural admonition found in the book of Acts is to be followed to the letter regarding the eating of blood, then would it not also appear to be wrong for a mother to breastfeed her newborn child knowing that her breast milk contained WBC’s? You may be saying to yourself, No. Why? Because it is a natural part of bearing life. If God intended for humans to abstain from a “major” blood component such as white blood cells, he would not have given the ability to mothers to pass along these WBC’s in breast milk. With these questions posed, we need to ask ourselves – Is God’s reasoning wrong, or is it ours?
I suggest that for anyone wanting to say something about the components which are allowed and are basing the allowance of those fractions on the natural movement of blood particles which transfer from mother to child during pregnancy, you should take a look at this website and see if the same argument holds true:
http://www.tttsfoundation.org/what is ttts2.html
A few years ago, around October 2001, a chilling discovery was made by a news reporter in Britain. This news correspondent revealed in the columns of The Guardian, a UK newspaper, that the WTBTS was affiliated with the United Nation’s Department of Public Information(DPI) as a Non-Governmental Organization(NGO). This may not sound like a big deal to some. But to a JW, this news is earthshaking. To understand why this news would be distressing to a JW, you must first understand how the UN is viewed by the JW organization.
Ever since the formation of the League of Nations, the forerunner to the UN, the WTBTS has labeled the UN as the “wild beast” depicted in the book of Revelation. This “wild beast” is described as having a harlot riding upon its back. The WTBTS describes this harlot as being Babylon the Great, or in other words, the worldwide empire of false religion. What is false religion? The JW’s describe false religion as every other religion on earth, except for themselves, with no exceptions. So you can see why it would be upsetting for a JW to find out that their one true religion is in any way associated with this global political organization headquartered in New York. To be associated with the UN would be the same as committing bestiality with it, as some JW’s have said that the other religions of the world have done.
So what was the reason for the WTBTS becoming an NGO in the first place? If you ask the WTBTS, their official reply is that it was simply for a library card so that their researcher could access the main library located at the UN. Sounds reasonable, right? On the surface it does, but if you dig a little deeper into the forms, policies, and requirements of NGO’s from when they were first instituted, you will find a completely different story.
First of all, there are certain requirements that must be fulfilled before an organization can become an NGO. A few of these are:
- The NGO must support and respect the principles of the Charter of the United Nations
- The NGO must have the commitment and the means to conduct effective information programmes with its constituents and to a broader audience about UN activities by publishing newsletters, bulletins and pamphlets; organizing conferences, seminars and round tables; or enlisting the attention of the media
- The NGO should have a satisfactory record of collaboration with UN Information Centres/Services or other parts of the UN System prior to association
The first requirement is the most troubling one. Why is it troubling you ask? Well, to see why, you must first read what was written in The Watchtower about JW’s remaining neutral with regards to political entities:
Watchtower October 15, 1976 pgs. 633-635:
The “mark” of the beast would identify the one having it as belonging to that “wild beast,” giving it full support. Ellicott’s Bible Commentary notes that the mark ‘surely means the acquiescence to the principles of this tyrannical world-power.’
…
In modern times, the Christian body, known world wide as Jehovah’s Witnesses, has experienced from the “wild beast” the same things as first-century Christians. Take the African country of Malawi, for example. There all citizens have been required to become members of the country’s only existing political party, the “Malawi Congress Party.” A membership card costing about twenty-five cents (U.S.) identifies the bearer as ‘acquiescing to the principles of the ruling political party,’ especially to the Life President, Dr. H. Kamuzu Banda.
…
Many persons would probably say that it would surely be better just to buy the “Party Card” and thus avoid trouble. Jehovah’s Christian witnesses, of course, do not expect all people to understand their position nor are they interested in forcing their conscientious objections on others. In that respect, all they desire is to be allowed to live morally clean lives, to be able to demonstrate, by word and action, depth of concern for their fellowmen, and to have the freedom to give God exclusive devotion.
As Jehovah’s Witnesses they value their relationship to God and Christ above everything else. Were they to identify themselves as giving unquestioning support to any political arrangement, they would be acting contrary to the Bible’s teaching that all human governmental systems exist by God’s toleration only until such time as he chooses to replace them by his kingdom in the hands of Jesus Christ. (Dan. 2:44; 7:13, 14) Jehovah’s Witnesses have promised to give unqualified allegiance exclusively to God and Christ. Any act on their part that would indicate otherwise, therefore, would be an act of disloyalty. Such an act would be taking away from God and Christ their rightful due and so would be worship of the “wild beast.”
To acquiesce over an issue is to agree to or accept it without protest. The WTBTS acquiesced supporting the UN’s charter by becoming an NGO. In their official reply, the WTBTS said that they immediately requested the removal of their affiliation after they discovered that they had to support the ideals and charter of the UN and that these requirements were not in place when they first applied back in 1991 and were granted association in 1992. Again, this is their “official” reply to the matter. But what does the actual evidence show?
A February 14, 1992 press release from the UN’s DPI says this regarding 37 new organizations granted NGO status:
“The NGOs officially recognized by DPI cooperate with the United Nations to help build public understanding and support for United Nations programmes and goals. Over the past five years, the number of NGOs associated with DPI has nearly doubled, to more than 1,300.
To be granted association with DPI, NGOs must have national or international standing, support the Charter of the United Nations, have a broadly based membership and possess the resources necessary for effective outreach.”
Again, the WTBTS official response said that they were unaware of any wording that said they had to support the Charter of the UN. But in fact this wording had been devised and formulated back in 1968 and can be found here:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/ngos/ngo-un/info/res-1296.htm
A simple inquiry to the UN reveals that obtaining a library card is and has always been a separate procedure from obtaining NGO credentials. Organizations that obtain NGO status are automatically granted access to the main library at the UN. Organizations requesting a library pass to the UN are informed to first check with UN depository libraries in their area for materials that they may be looking for. In the New York City area alone, where the WTBTS is headquartered, there are several listed.
So what did the WTBTS do to fulfill its other requirements with the UN’s DPI? As you read above, it had to publish some sort of material to inform its readers about the activities of the UN. An example of this fulfilled requirement can be found here:
http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/materials/articles.htm
This particular Awake! article which is listed is based on the commemoration of the signing of the UDHR and the role of Eleanor Roosevelt. One can only assume that the WTBTS physically submitted this article as part of its requirement as an NGO. Is there another reason why it would be listed?
For any who still question the validity of the WTBTS involvement with the UN, you can find the official statement made by the UN regarding their association on the UN’s website here:
http://www.un.org/dpi/ngosection/doc.htm
To this day, the WTBTS refuses to release even a redacted version of their original application for becoming an NGO. If they were to release their original filing, it would serve a two-fold purpose. One, it would prove beyond a doubt to all questioning witnesses that the language contained in the application was truly trivial at best, and did not contain anything that a JW would object to. Secondly, it would prove to the world that the WTBTS is truly being persecuted by showing that the UN’s official statement on their website is an outright lie. If I personally were placed in such a position, I would release all documentation possible showing that I was telling the truth and that my detractors were the ones lying. But in this special instance, for the WTBTS to prove themselves innocent, many witnesses would find out about the association with the UN. Whereas now, it is possible that countless millions of JW’s still do not know about the prior affiliation with the UN. And I imagine that they would like to keep it that way.
There are so many things I want to say but I feel that I have gone too far for most readers. I’m sure many of you will likely delete this document or throw it away after reading it. I completely understand if you do. I never thought that I would have to write a letter such as this but felt it was necessary to totally erase any question as to why I will be disfellowshipped in the coming weeks. I told my mother once that before you are baptized into the JW organization, you are encouraged to ask many questions and to critically examine what you believe in. But after you are baptized, any critical questioning of the organization, and not of the bible, is considered borderline apostasy and is not to be tolerated. I am afraid I have crossed that border by speaking out with my true feelings and taking a stand for what I believe in. You may be asking why I didn’t just keep these feelings to myself. According to the WTBTS, it does not matter whether or not I hide these feelings or speak openly of them.
Watchtower August 1, 2001 pg. 14:
First, since “oneness” is to be observed, a mature Christian must be in unity and full harmony with fellow believers as far as faith and knowledge are concerned. He does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbor private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding.
And even though the WTBTS says that it welcomes critical examination, it is far from the truth in my case.
Watchtower August 15, 1950 pg. 263:
However, The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances, nor is it dogmatic. It invites careful and critical examination of its contents in the light of the Scriptures.
The Truth That Leads to Eternal Life 1968 p.13:
Since we do not want our worship to be in vain, it is important for each one of us to examine his religion.
We need to examine, not only what we personally believe, but also what is taught by any religious organization with which we may be associated. Are its teachings in full harmony with God's Word, or are they based on the traditions of men? If we are lovers of the truth, there is nothing to fear from such an examination. It should be the sincere desire of every one of us to learn what God's will is for us, and then to do it.
Unfortunately, following the advice above concerning the examination of your own religion does not apply to witnesses who have been baptized into the JW organization. I have followed that advice and am now being dealt with judiciously for questioning the organization. As all witnesses know and are constantly taught, questioning the organization is the same as questioning God himself.
So that’s it. I have said what I wanted to say. I am not sorry for the stand I have taken. I have done what I feel is right. If the organization wants to be rid of me for my actions, so be it. Revealing the truth about such matters discussed is not a crime. If showing the truth about what was taught to me as the truth is a punishable offense, then I am guilty. I can accept that. I also acknowledge that many of you(JW’s only) will now be forced to shun me. By shunning, I mean not speaking to me or even saying a “hello” in passing. All contact must be cutoff from me or else you could suffer the same fate as myself.
Just remember, if you were placed in the same situation and the shoe was on your foot instead of mine, I would not cease speaking to you. I know many of you very well and also your backgrounds. If you are receiving this letter directly from me either through email or postal mail, I consider you a very good friend. Anyone who decides to rebelliously contact me after Feb. 3(projected announcement date), is more than welcome and will be held in strictest confidence.
Sincerely,