Here is an interesting link http://www.tjdefendidos.org/ and here is an English translation of the article on that site about apostates testimony.
=====================
Is the testimony of apostates reliable?
Sometimes, the mass media offer testimonies of people who used to be Jehovah's Witnesses as a means of finding out more about our religion. On almost every occasion, these testimonies are very negative. However, are such representatives impartial?
Who are apostates?
Jehovah's Witnesses usually designate these people who make attacks via the mass media “apostates”. Some of the people classed as apostates complan that the word does not correctly describe them, that is merely a contemptuous term. For that reason, it is appropriate for us to ask: who are apostates?
Sociologist Lonnie D. Kliever, a university professor from the Southern Methodist University, explains: “The word “apostasía” is a transliteration of the Greek apostasia, that originally denoted insurrection or secession. Its religious use denotes the deliberate abandonment of one's own religion”. Along the same lines, the Professor of Sociology at Oxford University, Bryan Ronald Wilson, wrote: “Apostasía can simply be considered as the time when an old believer resigns their lot in their previous religious affiliation.” Therefore, any person who leaves her religion voluntarily, can correctly be considered an apostate from the point of view of their religion.
Nevertheless, Jehovah’s Witnesses are usually more restrictive in their describing somebody as an apostate, because they do not give this name to someone who merely leaves his religion, but only to those whom, after leaving it, attacks it publicly. In fact, some dictionaries also include this publicity factor in their definition; for example, the Larousse Manual Dictionary of the Spanish Language defines it thus: “Public Abandonment of a religion or its doctrines”. Also professor Kliever, mentioned earlier, added when defining apostasía: “He must be understood to be more like as a public phenomenon. Apostasía is not a question of private religious doubts or the abandonment of one’s religious practices. Apostasía is a resignation and public condemnation of the previous beliefs and religious practices of that one.”
Every year, thousands of people all across the world stop being Jehovah’s Witnesses. Many of them are expelled, others decide to disassociate themselves voluntarily, and others leaving the activities of the Witnesses simply from gradually losing interest. Many of these ex-Witnesses maintain a neutral or even favorable opinion of their previous religion; in fact, many who are expelled take steps to be reinstated after a time. Between those who have a negative opinion (either by personal differences with other Witnesses or have dissenting views on subjects of doctrine or organization), only a few develop a spiteful attitude which motivates them to make public criticisms, and it is these persons whom Jehovah’s Witnesses correctly designate as apostates.
Are their testimonies trustworthy?
In recent decades, new religious movements have appeared that demand a high degree of loyalty from their members, meanwhile others religions not as recent as Jehovah’s Witnesses have experienced a resurgence, which has provoked much curiosity about the Society. Cases of apostasía have especially attracted the mass media;s attention, who see the stories related by apostates as a good news article, especially if this is offered “to expose” aspects or secrets of the movement to whom they belonged. Consequently, the apostates receive unjustified attention compared to average stories, - as we shall see - and their stories usually become the most widely available information for the great public about such minority religions. Indeed for that reason, the apostate becomes a central figure in the formation -- or deformation, according to professor Wilson -- of public opinion about such movements. According to Prof. Kliever (in his book entitled The Reliability of Apostate Testimony About New Religious Movements, 1995): “the apostate does not have to be examined before critical mass media, the community of investigators, the legal system nor the governmental agencies to see if he is a reliable source of information on new religious movements; One should always consider him as a prearranged individual put there to give a prejudiced viewpoint”. Why?
Many of the minority religious confessions, like the witnesses of Jehovah, require a strict adherence of their members to their moral and doctrinal norms, which differ from those of the traditional religions and the general morality of society. This creates certain tension with the surrounding world, that can produce, in some, a desire of social acceptance. It isn’t surprising, therefore, that some members end up deciding that certain religious movement is not for them and they leave it, or there are those who no longer feel sufficiently motivated to maintain the norms of the group, and for that reason are expelled. As we said earlier, the majority considers their experience to be a positive one, as another step on their spiritual journey, but between that they leave or they are expelled, are some adopt a resentful attitude and become detractors that publicly attack their previous religion through the press and the courts.
Professor Kliever compares the dynamics of separation of the apostate of a religious group which before he loved with a full divorce of bitterness. As much the marriage as the religion requires a high degree of commitment and implication; whichever greater it is the implication, more traumatic the rupture; the more the commitment, the more urgent has lasted is the necessity to blame to the other of the failure of the relation. Those that have been members of new religious movements during long time and been very have implied but that later they feel disillusioned with his religion, usually throw all the fault to their previous coreligionists or the religious organization in general. As Gordon explains the investigator of religious subjects Melton (in his Brainwashing book and the Cults: The Rise and Fall of to Theory [the washing of brain and the sects: the ascent and fall of the theory], 1999), magnify small lack until turning them enormous badnesses, they turn personal deceptions malicious treasons, and they will even count incredible falsifications with so damaging to its previous religion.
(By all means, any person can feel until certain point shocked after leaving a religion which she loved, just as a person after a divorce she can feel emotionally destabilized during a time. This in itself does not disqualify to the religion, just as it does not disqualify to the institution of the marriage; in addition, investigators like Lewis Carter, David G. Bromley or Gordon Melton consider that the cases in that somebody needs psychological aid after leaving its religion are little and more attributable to the influence of the groups anti-sects that to the abandonment in himself of its religion. However, in this article we talked about rather to that takes that bitterness to the end to become a despechado enemy of its previous religion).
The apostate generally feels a great necessity to justify himself. He tries to reconstruct his own past, to excuse his previous affiliation to a religion that now hates so much, and to blame to that before were his next associate. This explains its frontal rejection before any information or argument that refutes the position that as much has cost to him to create or to assume. The North American sociologist David Bromley (in its book The Politics of Religious Apostasy: The Role of Apostates in the Transformation of Religious Movements (the policy of apostasía religious: the paper of the apostates in the transformation of religious movements) CT, Praeger Publishers, 199
Numerous social scientists have indicated that these autobiographies of “survival to a sect” are stories with a highly conventional style, to everything a stereotyped sort. It is what some sociologists denominate the “atrocious history”, that as much pleases to the press sensationalist, and who some investigators have even gotten to consider a category of phenomena (sees A.D. Shupe, Jr, and D.G. Bromley, “Apostates and Atrocity Stories” [“the atrocious apostates and histories”], in B. Wilson (ed.), Social The Impact of New Religious Movements [the social impact of the new religious movements], New York, Rose of Sharon Press, 1981, pages. 179-215.). The apostate needs to as much settle down his credibility with respect to his conversion to his previous religion as to his later resignation to such commitment, she needs a convincing explanation as much his adhesion to his previous faith as to his abandonment and condemns of he himself, and the sort of “atrocious history” allows him to obtain this until certain point. Thanks to this history, the apostate imagines itself like a person who was introduced in her previous religious confession in a while in which he was specially vulnerable. Their previous companions now are represented like people who convinced to him with falsifications, deceits, promises of love, support, better perspective, greater well-being, etc. In fact, according to their history, were false friends that single they looked for to operate his good will and to free obtain of him long working hours or all the money or properties that he had. Thus, one imagines like a person who is not responsible for her actions when she was caught by his previous religion, and that returned to recover the judgment when it left it. Its message comes to be: “In these circumstances, him it could have happened to anyone. They are totally the people in charge and they acted with malice”. The apostate evades therefore the responsibility of his actions and tries to perhaps return in the society to which now she wants to influence, and until mobilizing, against the religious group that he has left.
According to the Prof. Wilson, the apostates, thanks to the sensationalism of the press, sometimes they have decided to remove to gain from the stories of its experiences selling history to some newspaper or shaping it in books, sometimes written by “black” (Bryan Wilson, Social The Dimensions of Sectarianism (the social dimensions of the sectarianism), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990, pág.19).
Mentioning professor Kliever: “He is undeniable that these tenacious and staunch opponents of the new religions present/display a vision distorted of the new religions before the public, the investigators and the courts. They always represent a scene that it justifies to them to them by means of transferring the responsibility of its actions to the religious group. In fact, the diverse scenes of brain-washing so often invoked against the new religious movements have been overwhelmingly repudiated by expert social scientists in religion like nothing else that calculated efforts to discredit before the public opinion and the governmental agencies. Such apostates can hardly be considered as informing can reliable by responsible journalists, investigators and jurists. The stories of voluntary deserters without resentment even must be used with precaution, because they interpret his last religious experience to the light of his present efforts to restore his own identity and self-esteem.” The Prof. also agrees with him Wilson when writing: “The apostates usually are ready informants very, but the sociologists generally have great caution with this source of intelligence. The informants who are mere contacts and that do not have personal reasons reason why they say, prefer before those that wish to use to the investigator for their own aims. The indifference and the apostate in individual are informants whose evidence must be used wisely.”
In conclusion, we see that the term apostate is a correct term and not necessarily contemptuous, that it talks about a single small fraction of ex-Jehovah’s Witnesses, concretely to whom they become involved actively in trying to discredit to its previous religion, sometimes working under the influence of “anti-sect” religious groups. The animosity of these people and their necessity to justify their contradictory decisions makes their viewpoint of their previous religion remarkably distorted, and this is a reason why we can seriously doubt the credibility of their testimonies.
Who is an Apostate?
by thirdwitness 49 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
thirdwitness
-
serendipity
In the very last post I read, BigTex used the word chutzpah. It might apply here too. I just have to laugh at this tactic.
-
Arthur
It's funny how the Unification Church said many of the same things about their former members (including Steven Hassan) who went public with some of the Moonies dirty laundry. Steven Hassan was demonized by the Unification Church as a wicked apostate, and a Satanic influence for his public testimony regarding U.C. practices and policies.
-
Finally-Free
Is the testimony of apostates reliable?
If you are referring to those who apostosized from mainstream Christianity and formed the cult of Jehovah's Witnesses I would have to say no. They have been proven to be liars using public sources, the bible, and their own literature. Jehovah's Witnesses are the last people on earth I'd believe or rely on for anything.
And no, I didn't read any of your post beyond the above quoted sentence. I read the lies, twisted reasoning, and cult propaganda of the Watchtower for 20 years. There's no reason to examine any more such tripe.
W
-
anewme
I believe the word apostate is not in the Holy Bible, but then neither is the term "time waster"
-
dilaceratus
An easy way to enjoy the ridiculousness of the above article is to remove the terms "Jehovah's Witnesses" and "apostates" and replace it with the terms "Communists" and "counter-revolutionaries," and envision it as having appeared in Pravda.
Since this is a cut-and-paste job and will likely be removed, there seems to be no reason to delve into the dozens of blatant exaggerations and misleading claims presented, which nearly scream out to any normally-intelligenced reader.
-
jgnat
I find that most Jehovah's Witnesses are confused over the term, so I am not surprised you asked the question. An apostate is someone who abandons a previous loyalty (to a faith, movement, politcal party, etcetera). By definition, then, I am not apostate. Yet, my JW husband often accuses me of "apostate thinking". Why is that?
Interestingly, this link asserts that former members are more accurate than even neutral observers. The article cites recent examples.
-
Kenneson
The Bible Students had their origin with Pastor Russell; Jehovah's Witnesses with Judge Rutherford. Who, therefore, apostasized from whom? And who vilified the Bible Students as "evil slave"? Your article fits the origin of Jehovah's Witnesses equally well.
-
bebu
The animosity of these people and their necessity to justify their contradictory decisions makes their viewpoint of their previous religion remarkably distorted, and this is a reason why we can seriously doubt the credibility of their testimonies.
Why not answer the issues that are raised by apostates instead of some lame article that defends a silly ad hominem attack?
I don't have an ax to grind; I just have some questions for my friend that want answering. I'm not an JW apostate, but I can (and do) seriously raise the same kinds of questions and issues that 'apostates' raise. A JW will have permission to talk to me and answer my honest questions, but they may not talk to any 'apostate' or opposer with the same questions!
This article defends running and hiding, whereas the Bible says we must be ready to give an answer to those who ask us why we have faith. Even apostates.
bebu
-
hillary_step
ThirdWitness,
The apostate generally feels a great necessity to justify himself. He tries to reconstruct his own past, to excuse his previous affiliation to a religion that now hates so much, and to blame to that before were his next associate.
Ahh....Yes. This would explain the vitrioloc hatred that the WTS has for the Catholics and Protestants who make up the two largest denominations from which most of their adherents have previously apostasized.
HS