The real impact of "apostate" sites

by dozy 80 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • saki2fifty
    AuldSole: It is worded in the KM as a caution, but many JWs have been instructed by their local body of elders to remove their pro-JW sites. Including the owner of this forum, who was originally pro-JW and who was disassociated for leaving this forum up.

    If its worded in the KM as a caution, and then many elders are relaying this in a different way, then I cant (<- correction) see how it would be...

    AuldSole: I believe it is deceitful to imply that it is only a recommendation and then enforce it as a Christian requirement. Others may disagree.

    ... deceitful.

    "disassociated for leaving this forum up" Had no idea my comments started a new thread. Sorry MrsJones...

    (formatting keeps getting messed up... wonder why)

  • shadow

    sak, I'm a JW. What topics are you looking for the JW side on?

  • saki2fifty
    Shadow: sak, I'm a JW. What topics are you looking for the JW side on?

    I'm not "looking" for anything in particular. But, am now curious about:

    AuldSoul: However, nothing on their Web site gives the Scriptures that support their doctrine on pre-baptismal requirements. So, I need some enterprising JW to either provide the Scriptures here or design a Web site that answers the question and give me a link to it.
  • AuldSoul


    Hi! How are things? If it is okay with saki2fifty, would you mind posting your responses on this thread: Sophistry Lessons—JW Baptismal Prerequisites



  • shadow

    Deleted after seeing Brandon's post

  • TD

    Hi Saki,

    Although wrong in JW eyes, wish there were more JW's to debate arguments on this board... pretty much one sided.

    I share your sentiments. I wish there were more real JW's here also.

    10 years ago there was a discussion board just starting out called, "H20" It was hosted on an ISP that guaranteed anonymity and many real, JW's participated. There were some great debates that raged for months on end.

    On virtually every important issue, (e.g. 1914, 607, Sign of the End, Blood, JW History, etc.) the Pro-organization JW's had their heads handed to them (Figuratively speaking, of course) and many of them have since faded, or DA'd.

  • saki2fifty

    What category did you fall under? Ex or Pro? Or bystander?

  • TD


    What category did you fall under Ex or Pro? ; Or bystander?
    There was a group at the time, called "Reformers." These were JW's who thought the JW faith was at least 90% correct in what it taught, but wanted a kinder, gentler organization that did not usurp the role of Christ in the life of the believer. These regularly clashed with the hard-line brand of JW who believes the organization is actively directed by God and for all intents and purposes, speaks on His behalf. Even though not a JW, (My wife is) I was ideologically on the side of the "Reformers."
  • Seeker4

    I was still a JW when I first got on H2O. The discussions there just shredded what was left of my JW beliefs.
    And I agree with an earlier post that a lot of people listed by the WTS as being disfellowshipped or disassociatd for fornication, celebrating holidays, voting, etc, were actually DFed for living a normal life after they stopped believing in JW teachings.
    I think in tons of cases that the ex-JW had become a non-believer and it was just easier to get rid of them for living with a boyfriend etc than to chase them down for their apostate beliefs.
    Therefore the "DFed for fornication" looks like the major reason, when it may not really give the true piecture.
    S4 (PS - Welcome Saki!)

  • sf
    I KNEW letter-writing campaigns would annoy the heck out of them.


Share this