by slimboyfat 79 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
"Lying generally involves saying something false to a person who is ENTITLED to know the truth.... While malicious lying is definitely condemned in the Bible, this does not mean a person is under obligation to divulge truthful information to people who are not ENTITLED to it." --from the Aid to Bible Understanding book under the word 'lie'.
Wake and smell the coffee Slim. They lie all the time, the gb, the r & f and they use God's name to justify all their evil actions and behaviors.
sbf,
"Strategy" would have been less ambiguous than "warfare" imo.
I agree that it is a notion most rank-and-file JWs may well be unaware of. They really get in touch with it when they are confronted to legal issues (blood, custody cases etc.). Then they are quickly taught the basics of "theocratic strategy" by WT officials. And if they candidly ask "isn't that lying?" you can be sure the answer will still be in line with the 1957 Watchtower.
Btw you have not yet commented on the "Bulgarian case" which is fairly recent and amply documented (see my previous post).
But SlimBoyFat - good "Theocratic Strategy" would dictate the denial of a "Theocratic Strategy".
This means that you are in fact a "Theocratic Strategist".
As the Cretan once said - "Cretans always lie".
Far from lying over the Bulgarian case, didn't the Society actually change the policy worldwide on blood for the simple reason of complying with the wishes of the governement of that one country? This is how I read it.
They said there would be no action taken against members who accept blood. Up to that time Witnesses who accepted blood unrepentantly were disfellowshipped. After that agreement was made with the Bulgarian government it was announced that Witnesses who take blood are considered to have disassociated themselves.
It may be twisted logic (since the new policy is actually somewhat harsher in practice) but it does mean that they were frank about changing their policy to comply with the wishes of the Bulgarian government.
Slim
I agree that it is a notion most rank-and-file JWs may well be unaware of. They really get in touch with it when they are confronted to legal issues (blood, custody cases etc.). Then they are quickly taught the basics of "theocratic strategy" by WT officials. And if they candidly ask "isn't that lying?" you can be sure the answer will still be in line with the 1957 Watchtower.
Narkissos,
Have you personal experience of this actually being done? Such definite assertions as "they really get in touch with it" and "you can be sure" really need to be accompanied by some kind of indication and evaluation of your sources.
"But it patenetly is not used with the sense apostates attribute to it."
Wow SBF, quite a bold statement you have made. I wonder, have you personally interviewed EVERY SINGLE apostate on planet earth to determine precisely how each one of them defines the term "theocratic warfare"?? Which "apostates" are you referring to? And if "apostate A" defines it one way, does it logically follow that "apostate B" defines it the same way? Apparently YOU are defending your own PERSONAL definition of "theocratic warfare" by creating some unsubstantiated, strawman argument claiming that apostates represent some homogenous entity sharing the exact same opinion about this particular non sequitor. NEWSFLASH SBF, different "apostates" have "different opinions" on this issue and it appears the only person obsessed with it, is YOU, a fine and upstanding brother in the kingdumb hall.
At a more basic level, it is only in your imagination that this obsession with the concept of "theocratic warfare" as the causa prima of the ex-JW movement exists. The reality is, its a MINOR topic of discussion, hardly the tempest in a teapot you claim in your spurious assumptions.
Slim,
Far from lying over the Bulgarian case, didn't the Society actually change the policy worldwide on blood for the simple reason of complying with the wishes of the governement of that one country?
If you had read the page I linked to (http://www.ajwrb.org/basics/abandon.shtml) down to the end, you might have noticed that this is definitely not the case, since the 8/27, 1998 letter clearly maintains the arrangement of disfellowshipping in case of deliberate violation of the blood policy.
The shift from d'f' to d'a', if confirmed, came later -- note that all practical difference between the two procedures has now been suppressed by the most recent change which established one announcement formula for both cases ("X is no longer a JW").
I agree that it is a notion most rank-and-file JWs may well be unaware of. They really get in touch with it when they are confronted to legal issues (blood, custody cases etc.). Then they are quickly taught the basics of "theocratic strategy" by WT officials. And if they candidly ask "isn't that lying?" you can be sure the answer will still be in line with the 1957 Watchtower.Narkissos,
Have you personal experience of this actually being done? Such definite assertions as "they really get in touch with it" and "you can be sure" really ;need to ;be accompanied by some kind of indication and evaluation of your sources.
The excerpts of the "custody" brochure which both Unclebruce and Elsewhere quoted on this thread are an excellent example imo.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/6/109121/1901707/post.ashx#1901707
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/114754/2009281/post.ashx#2009281
When Jesus faced execution did he lie to the Roman and Jewish authorities to save his life?
Matt 25:11 NWT Jesus now stood before the governor; and the governor put the question to him: “Are you the king of the Jews?” Jesus replied: “You yourself say [it].” 12 But, while he was being accused by the chief priests and older men, he made no answer. 13 Then Pilate said to him: “Do you not hear how many things they are testifying against you?” 14 Yet he did not answer him, no, not a word, so that the governor wondered very much.
There is no excuse for being untruthful in any matter, unless you serve Satan the Father of Lies.
John 8:44 NWT YOU are from YOUR father the Devil, and YOU wish to do the desires of YOUR father. That one was a manslayer when he began, and he did not stand fast in the truth, because truth is not in him. When he speaks the lie, he speaks according to his own disposition, because he is a liar and the father of [the lie].
Opinions are never fair.
Since you are not a JW or associate how do you know this? If I start telling you the practices of Muslims based on the reading only of the Koran would you believe me to be an authority on Islam?
