Could a JW lifer not know about theocratic warfare?

by RebelWife 17 Replies latest watchtower scandals

  • Casper
    Casper
    The first I ever saw the term was here

    Same for me. I was in for 13 years, starting in 1984. Actually I was shocked, guess I never

    really thought they would out right "LIE". I was so naive.

  • AlyMC
    AlyMC

    I was vaguely familiar with the concept while in (was in from birth)- but didn't really get to understand it until I was out.

  • VoidEater
    VoidEater

    As a child I heard the phrase debated about - it was considered rather shocking - if deceiving was OK in some cases, why not in others? When Malawi became an issue, I heard some debating whether purchasing a party card might not be OK as a variation on "theocratic warfare", and a couple people seemed surprised that the concept couldn't be applied in this situation.

    The thought was also expressed (in what must have been a very liberal congregation, I guess) that perhaps "theocratic warfare" might be employed to get young JWs out of the draft - to present false medical information that would get someone excused from the draft so that they could be out in the service instead. While that didn't quite fit the definition of "withholding information", it seemed to be in the service of the service, so to speak.

    So, yes, I grew up with the term. I just didn't understand the limited boundaries and the service to which it could or couldn't be employed. It didn't jibe with the need to be utterly honest in serious areas like the persectuion in Malawi or going to jail instead of being in service if drafted.

  • nomoreguilt
    nomoreguilt

    I was raised a JW since the age of 5, am now 58. The correct term used for lying in a jw way is "THEOCRATIC TACT". As some have commented, it was used as said when defending the where abouts of jw individuls during Nazi persecution, etc.

    It's simply a way of getting around the facts. Or in other words"LYING". The wts feels justified in encouraging jw's in the past of lying to avoid the truth about certain brothers or their activities.

    NMG

  • B_Deserter
    B_Deserter

    I don't think it comes up often enough for most JWs to think about it. Half of them can't even remember what the public talk was about 5 minutes after the watchtower study, let alone something that's in some obscure Watchtower article from the 70's

  • R.Crusoe
    R.Crusoe

    It is very possible!

    I have 4 children , the first 3 of who attended meetings for around 15 years and the eldest of whom went to uni on a demanding course but between all of them they have no clue as to what I know from purely 3 years research about 20 yrs ago!

    Just shows how WT meets switch off younger folks academically which comes as zero surprise to me since I was saying this early doors!

    Teach a child to sit and listen to stuff beyond its comprehension and it will do the same when old enoug to understand!

    What a load of idiots WT leadership are! Its unbelievable!!

    Godsent?

    Godspent!!!!

  • willyloman
    willyloman

    This expresses the words I was searching for:

    It's just another example of how brainwashed JW's are. They have no idea what they even believe! That's why apostates talk about it so much. All we can do is shake our heads at all the BS that JW's (including us when we were JW's) fell for.

    The term was in frequent use during the early and mid-1970s, at a time when dubs absolutely thought the end was coming at a specific time and they'd be rounded up during the Great Trib and might have to lie to protect the "friends" and/or cached supplies of Watchtowers and New World Translations. Exhibit A would be the 1974 or '75 yearbook which talked about dub life in Nazi Germany in the 1930's and 40's, when TW was often practiced in an attempt to foil the stormtroopers. So any dub from that period would remember the phrase, unless they developed amnesia (there was a widespread epidemic of it among JWs in late 1975, which has lasted down to this day).

  • WTWizard
    WTWizard

    I have heard of it on rare occasion, but usually in context with protecting someone in the organization from persecution or from unjust accusations. Never did it occur to me that it was used to protect the organization itself from deserved prosecutions.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit