Say You're a Bethelite & Monitoring JWD - How Would You Feel About THESE??

by Seeker4 356 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Quandry
• 

  AuldSoul

  Quandry, I keep checking back for the edit that fills in your thoughts.
• 

  parakeet

  zarco: ***I encourage young ones to get a marketable skill. Those with excellent academic skills I encourage torward University, those with more practical skills in other directions such as the trades or health care. But without a marketable skills one can not plan to serve Jah for a lifetime as they will move from one struggle to another through out life robbing them of time for more important pursuits.***
  
  I wish you had been an elder in my old cong! But I wonder, how much help can you be to the r&f when your hands are tied by the WTS? When my brother (who is extremely smart) was in his teens, he began asking elders questions about evolution vs. the creation account to the point of becoming an embarrassment to the elders because they couldn't answer without admitting flaws in JW reasoning. How do you answer such questions? Do you encourage young people to do their own research, using nonJW resources, regarding evolution and other topics that conflict with JW beliefs? The elders in my cong told my brother to shut up or else.
  
  Do you enforce or help enforce the no-blood policy when the issue comes up? How do you advise your cong members when they ask about blood or blood fractions? Do you believe that a loving god would value a symbol of life over life itself? If you disagree with the blood policy, how do you help those in your cong when they are faced with a life-or-death crisis?
  
  If any of your cong members suffer from depression, do you tell them to immerse themselves even more deeply in WTS literature and field service? Or do you advise them to seek qualified medical and psychiatric help? If they express doubts about the JW teachings, do you encourage them to explore those doubts and find answers for themselves? Or do you encourage them to "hang on" until the reforms you're hoping for are made (assuming reform comes about)?
  
  If a JW starts dating a nonJW, do you advise him/her to end it so as not to become yoked with "unbelievers"? When I started dating a nonJW (now my husband for 30+ years), I was put on the platform before the entire cong and publicly humiliated. How would you handle a similar situation?
  
  I'm glad to hear that your desire to stay within the org is motivated by a desire to help others, but I'm having trouble visualizing the extent of the help you're able to offer. It would seem that, as an elder with serious reservations about some of the WTS doctrine and policies, you're severely limited by the WTS on one hand and by your doubts on the other. I'd like to understand how you reconcile this conflict you must face on a daily basis.
• 

  opr83

  Auldsoul,

  No, not defending. And, you are absolutely correct, the authority from that body is only in the minds of those that believe them to be that mouthpiece. I may not have been as clear in the previous as I thought. Or, perhaps my desire to BE identified as a JW is too strong to speak clearly. I have great difficulty in thinking/believing that there is a group in NY that is the only path to God, and that they must be followed as most JW's need to believe.

  However, the proof you seek will never be forth-coming to you, or to others that seek it. Although the WTS would tell you there is no such thing as "blind faith", there does come a point where there is no proof that can be offered for a belief in a path, or a group. Thirdwitness (I believe) tried to make an argument about 607 BCE, yet the basis of the argument was that (and I apologize for the generalization) "only the scriptural outcomes and how the WTS framed the date(s) can be used to prove 607 is the right date, no matter what historians and archeologists tell us". He was really saying, "it is a matter of faith and belief in how it has been explained by the WTS." That's a pretty big leap.

  I wish I could tell you how your dad stays so strong in his thinking. I wish I could share with you my turmoil more clearly. It is not that I support or defend. It is a matter of ambiguitousness that puzzles me so.
• 

  AuldSoul

  I wish I could tell you how your dad stays so strong in his thinking. I wish I could share with you my turmoil more clearly. It is not that I support or defend. It is a matter of ambiguitousness that puzzles me so.

  (((opr83))),

  Thank you for trying to help me understand. It seems you intellectually know that the problem with the inability to demonstrate a choosing eliminates the possibility of a choosing by God, which would logically remove any necessity to heed the direction of the GB as though it was God's directions. The desire for it to be the true religion seems to hold you to it, which I can fully understand.

  When I first discovered what it wasn't, I so very badly wanted for it to turn out to be "The Truth" after all. I had been baptized for 20 years, but I had no position of authority and only my wife as a spiritual dependent. I didn't want authority. I just wanted to be the sort of person the Bible described Jesus as.

  According to the Bible, Jesus had no authority at all. He was from Galilee, the least likely source for anything good. Yet he had integrity and spoke as one having authority. He studied and understood the principles of the law backward and forward, as well as the conditional nature of the exceptions and the basis for the exceptions to the rule. He knew the nature of the law as well as the letter, and could show anyone the what, why, and how of the strict application as well as allowance for compassion despite the law. That's what I wanted to be like. I didn't see where that could be helped by position in the congregation. Like I said before, I just didn't know I wasn't ever really a JW.

  I'm sure you would tell me how my dad does it if you could. I wish he was at least ambiguous. He is certain of their choosing, and will brook not a shred of discussion otherwise.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Quandry

  Auld Soul,

  I clicked the enter button earlier by mistake.

  I have read all of the posts to my husband, who was an elder for over twenty years. He does not look for himself because he is not disfellowshipped and does not want to be accused of looking on this board, if asked. A technical point, perhaps.

  He was struck by the insightful posts of many new ones. He particularly was moved by the posts of some who hoped that they never caused harm by any actions they took in JC settings. He feels the same way.

  Becca, welcome, also. Your post was wonderful. Thank you for allowing us to get to know you.

  I appreciate the thought that was made that we should be able to have discussions of what is on our minds without worrying if we will be accused of apostacy by thought police. Why must every pronouncement by the FDS be accepted without question or discussion?

  Ultimately, as my husband and I agree, the mistreatment of people outweighs the doctrinal flip flops.

  I also wanted to point out (again) that I am Quandry and not the Quandary that posts here. I did not realize that there was a poster with this name already on the board when I started. Quandary, if you are reading this and wish for me to change my posting name, I could do that.

  Welcome to the many new ones. Wish we could all get together to have real discusssions.
• 

  Big Tex

  What an interesting thread. There's a good vibe here and something to be said for the old adage mild answers. I appreciate the contributions of lurkers taking the plunge. I remember myself over 4 years ago posting for the first time. Good for you.

  I am very curious, however, and I would be interested in hearing from any active JW on this. When I left, kicking and screaming from the rooftops in the late 80's, I left over the issue of child abuse. I was shocked to discover the Society's position. As a result, I did research and asked honest, tough, but legitimate questions of the elders in my congregation, my wife's congregation, 3 CO's, the DO and eventually Bethel. The fact that no one was able to answer my questions forced me to leave. Although I received responses (many times angry), no one could really give an answer, if you take my meaning.

  For perspective, my best friend is still a Witness; he's a full-throttle elder, district convention (assembly?) talks, memorial, etc. He and I have agreed on a don't-ask-don't-tell policy as neither of us want to lose the friendship.

  Here are some of my questions:

  Jehovah's Witnesses say they have the best child abuse policy of any religion.They base this boast on the 'two witness rule' which basically decrees a child abuse victim must have two eyewitnesses to 'prove' their rape actually happened.

  I have several questions regarding this rule.

  (1) Please name one scripture in the Bible in which Jehovah, one of his prophets, the Mosaic law, Jesus, or one of the apostles, dictates that a child abuse victim must present two eyewitnesses to prove their abuse. Just one scripture is all I ask. Realize I'm not talking about a dispute between brothers, I'm referring specifically to the assault and/or rape of an innocent child.

  (2) Why did Jehovah made very specific provision for a woman who was raped , working in the field and away from any eyewitnesses, and yet not make the same provision for a child? Jesus said that anyone who harmed a child would be better off having a millstone tied around their neck and thrown into the sea. Surely Jehovah, the One who sees all (even things hidden behind closed doors), and Jesus' Father and Creator, would know that children are not sexually abused in front of other adults who can bear witness. Why then did Jehovah give an adult woman, who does not have an eyewitness, a provision and understanding, but did not do the same for a defenseless and innocent child?

  (3) Why do Jehovah's Witnesses not recognize the courts of law as a second witness? When one of Jehovah's Witnesses is convicted of child abuse, the elders will not disfellowship that one if the victim cannot present 2 eyewitnesses. If, however, the offender is tried in a court of law, and convicted, why is that conviction not considered a second witness?

  (4) In the "Flock" book, elders are instructed that they may accept the testimony of unbelievers. Please show me the scriptural basis whereby Jehovah puts conditions on the two witnesses to child abuse. Please also show the scripture whereby Jehovah gives his followers leeway to accept or deny testimony based on acceptance of Jehovah alone (i.e., whether a member of Israel or a Christian).

  (5) In the "Flock" book, elders are instructed that they may accept the testimony of minor children. Please show me the scriptural basis whereby Jehovah puts conditions on the two witnesses to child abuse. Please also show the scripture whereby Jehvovah gives his followers leeway to accept or deny testimony based on age alone.

  (6) Do you believe every single account of child abuse amongst Jehovah's Witnesses is false? If not, then do you believe one of Jehovah's Witnesses has molested a child? If you believe so, then please explain what Jehovah's Witnesses are doing, or have done, to correct these errors? Realize of course, that Jehovah again and again provided correction for the nation of Israel when that spirit inspired organization made errors. Therefore, what is the current spirit directed organization doing, or has done, to correct errors made regarding child abuse?

  I used to live in Borea.
• 

  opr83

  Auldsoul,

  As strange as this comment may seem, I wish we would have served together. That, I suppose, comes from the feeling that we still can do some good for ones in pain, for ones crying out to understand, for ones only wanting to be like Jesus - not in a boastful, proud position, but in a way that gives love and expects nothing else in return.
• 

  AuldSoul

  opr83,

  You know what's silly? I have never met you except through photons on a computer screen and yet I am welling up ... hm, a question suddenly arises ... can you still call it "welling up" after one escapes down your cheek?

  opr83: As strange as this comment may seem, I wish we would have served together.

  I don't think that seems strange at all. I wish we had been in the same congregation, but I am glad I was never an elder.

  Another elder wanted me to reach out to become an elder because he felt that I "could do so much good." I think his hope was also that the organization would reform. I told him that people will talk about things with a fellow "nobody publisher" that they would never talk with an elder about, and that I didn't feel like I was missing anything by not being an elder. I didn't want to be an authority over anyone else. I still don't want to be.

  Incidentally, that elder is now a Forum Assistant here (jst2laws), and he seems to be kind of glad he wasn't able to talk me into trying for prominence.

  opr83: we still can do some good for ones in pain, for ones crying out to understand, for ones only wanting to be like Jesus...

  As long as that is the goal, what part of it requires working through an organization? Jesus didn't. People were being expelled from the synagogue for confessing him as Christ. The young man born blind was thrown out even though he never stated that Jesus was the Christ. He only said he used to be blind and now he wasn't. Out he went. And as soon as he was disfellowshipped, Jesus found him and asked him to be his follower. What brave compassion that showed. It is staggering when taken in context of the fervently Pharisaical order of the day.

  I can't lead anyone anywhere. I wouldn't want to. Wherever I am in my development, I don't intend to stay very long, so why would I try to get someone to join me? They'd soon be lonely if I don't disappoint myself severely and get myself stuck. But, I know the one I've chosen to follow.

  While you were writing your post, I was writing you a private message. We probably posted them simultaneously.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  Arthur

  AuldSoul, I deeply appreciate your posts in this thread. They have been very helpful to me in my development. However, I always appreciate your posts.

  I'm sure that many of you will be able to relate to my own experience. While I was a JW, the scriptures (particularly the NT) seemed to have somewhat of a sterile feeling to them; as we were always to read and meditate on these scriptures through the pre-established paradigm of the "Organization". I never truly felt as though any of the verses were really speaking to me; but were merely speaking about "the organization" and how we as robotic minions must fit into this monolithic structure called the "Spirit-directed organization".

  When I bought a NIV translation of the Bible, and began to read the New Testament without any regard to Watchtower publications, the scriptures felt pleasantly unfamiliar. Many verses that I had read a hundred times; seemed as if I was being introduced to them for the first time. It was an amazing experience. It was particularly amazing to begin to read the books of Romans and Galatians without looking at them through the interpretative lenses of WTS publications. Reading these scriptures through the interpretative lenses of the WTS was like watching a black and white television. When I began to read other translations without WTS publications; it was like watching a color TV. For the first time; I really began to feel as if Paul was speaking to me personally. The scriptures took on such a richer, and deeper meaning.

  This made me particualrly interested even further as to why the Watchtower Society discourages private Bible study without the use of their publications to suppliment it. I began to think about the concept of Biblical suppliments. Why does something need suppliments unless it is deficient in some way? Why does truth need to be supplimented with a magazine that has changed it's teachings over and over again with the whims of it's writers? I have reached the conclusion that the Watchtower's sole purpose has been a tool for indoctrination. It has been the hammer that pounds the collective thinking of JWs into one unanimous script that can be parroted back to people through cliche-laden talking points.

  As Randall Watters has pointed out; it is not really unity that the WTS is seeking; it is unanimity. True unity is something achieved through true love and spirit. Unanimity is reached through brute force. In the case of JWs, unanimity is manifested through a process of indoctrination that uses guilt and fear as it's tools of manipulation. Why else would they print children's books with graphic illustrations of people dying at Armageddon? (i.e. latest Great Teacher book)

  AuldSoul, I share so many of your thoughts and feelings. As for me, my days are numbered. It is only a matter of time before I am disfellowshipped for Apostacy. It will be very painful losing my family; but it will also be somewhat of a relief; as I will be able to close this chapter of my life for good.