Is there anything they can't spin?

InterestedOne

I've been finding that JW's use clever words to slip out of anything. Case in point, the shunning statement from the interview. As another example, I tried to ask my study conductor the following: "if a person accepts a whole blood transfusion, will they be disfellowshipped?" He responded by saying disfellowshipping is a matter of the heart, and it is handled on a case by case basis by the elders, so he can't say who would be disfellowshipped in a hypothetical situation. His wife then chimed in saying, "we don't have a list of disfellowshipping offences." So, I was wondering, is there anything you can really point out to a JW that is just wrong, whether it's clearly a wrong Bible interpretation or if the Bible doesn't speak on it, is wrong logically, scientifically, emotionally, psychologically, etc.? Something that just doesn't make sense no matter how you slice it?

InterestedOne

To clarify, I mean anything in their -current- teaching. When I bring up past problems, they just say, "see how humble and flexible we are to change & be corrected?"

leavingwt

Never discuss doctrine, if you're trying to awaken a JW. This triggers the cult personality.

There are plenty of things 'wrong' with being a JW, but when you attempt to point these out, they will view it as an attack.

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/wrong-with-being-jehovahs-witness.php

OnTheWayOut

The book, CAPTIVES OF A CONCEPT, does a good job of pointing out that their being chosen in 1918-19 as the faithful and discreet slave just doesn't make sense by using their own accepted history to point out the problem.

But even if some JW sat through a thorough explanation like that, he would spin it with the simple STOPTHOUGHT phrases like, "The light gets brighter" or "They were spirit-directed and not inspired."

Heck, even agreeable people on this forum won't all agree that WTS is a dangerous mind-control cult. NO, everything can be spun.

Oh, the only thing you can be disfellowshipped for is being unrepentant of a WT-defined sin. There is a list of those sins in the elders' manual, but there's plenty of room for spin with "Brazen Conduct."

wasblind

All I can say is that if a loved one of mine had of been harmed, because of their past teachings

only for them to change it later, I would not be so humble. They can change any teaching

they like, but it can never change the fact that a loved one died needlessly. Or that someone

gave up a chance for an education and a family.

agonus

Not really... but at least the spin they put on everything is largely bereft of panache, intelligence, common sense, and lemony-fresh patented WeaselFree scent.

InterestedOne

Thank you agonus. The spin itself is a glaring 'wrong.' If they undid that wrong & stopped spinning, the other wrongs would be more clear. They're messed-up either way. During my entire interaction with them, I have taken a relatively non-argumentative attitude because the very nature of their responses to my questions speaks volumes to me.

Thank you wasblind. The negative impact of their policies cannot be undone because they cannot go back in time. Plus they amplify their overall 'wrongness' by not apologizing. These realities cannot by spun in any way that I can imagine. Who knows maybe they can find a way, but it would take a sick genius to do so.

wasblind

" Plus they amplify their overall 'wrongness' by not apologizing."

I hear you loud and clear Interested one,

they feel that they don't have to apologize because "Jehovah"

only gave them a little light at the time, so it's not their fault

for their wrong interpretations. So it looks like the blame is on Jehovah

Ha Ha

OUTLAW

Jehovah`s Witness`s are Not Allowed to Question Anything about the WBT$..

JW`s will Accept Anything the WBT$ Says..

The WBT$ can Make-Up,any Wacked out Bullshit they Want..

And

Jehovah`s Witness`s will say .."OK!!". .

.................. ...OUTLAW

doofdaddy

Even as a jw I could see that doctrine was changed on a needs basis. When I first became interested in jws there was a doctrine change around heart transplants. Originally the heart was the seat of the soul. One magazine article and whammo the heart is just a pump. I had no doubt that aging governing body members required the surgery, so made it legit. The same goes for higher education being OK at different times when the gb requires doctors nurses lawyers. When satisfied, education is a no no again. They are spin masters.

Is there anything they can't spin?

Share this