What Doctrines or JW Views Did You Not Find Too Believable?

by minimus 80 Replies latest jw friends

  • Confession
    Confession

    That when Jesus said, "You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free," he was referring to things like, "freedom from Babylonish doctrines."

    (I deeply sensed there was a pathetic lack of any genuine "freedom" when submitting to the organization.)

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot

    That the "Creative Days" were 7,000 years each.

    That dinosaurs and humans were contemporaries.

    That tyrannosaurs and sabre-toothed tigers were actually herbiverous.

    That the continents were formed by the Noachian Deluge.

    That it was unwise to "speculate".

    That the Pildown Man hoax should be used to cast aspersions on the entire scientific community's honesty and integrity whenever any discovery, breakthrough, or advancement could cast doubt on WT ideology.

  • jws
    jws

    That the "seed of emotions" was the literal heart (blood pump). This one my brother and I recogized as BS and were strongly told by our parents to shut up about it. Within a year, it was changed to be figurative. This was an aha moment that they weren't always right.

    That people who never heard of JWs or never got the chance to accept their message would be killed.

  • drewcoul
    drewcoul

    The idea that we were engaged in a life saving work since anyone who dies before armageddon without being a witness gets resurrected anyway. If they are a witness and fall away before armageddon, and don't come back they will not be resurrected. If you used Pascal's wager theory, you are better off not being a witness than being a witness. It is completely inconceivable that anyone who has been a witness and died is better off than anyone who was never a witness and died. Even the Witnesses own theology proves this to be the case.

  • factfinder
    factfinder

    @drewcoul-

    I believe that the WTS teaches that any who serve God now and die before armageddon will be in a better position to adavance to perfection faster then those who died without being JWS and that certain blessings would therefore come to them. Because they were faithfully serving Jehovah before they died it would be easier for them to continue making needed adjustments during the thousand year regn of Christ. I think if I remember correctly they would recieve benefits that the non-witnesses would not get.

    Does anyone else remember this?

  • Lieu
    Lieu

    That Christ came back "invisibly"....

    The whole "love/brotherhood" thing.

    The 144k and the other sheep insanity. How is one supposed to eat with he patriarchs in the Kingdom of Heaven if they're supposed to come back and live in LA?

  • teel
    teel

    Funny, but the whole creation, not evolution thing didn't sit well with me. I read the Creator book, the Evolution book through and through, and all I could see were holes...

  • wobble
    wobble

    When I was about 10 or 11 , 1960/1 ish, I began to think how preposterous it was that what seemed to be important Bible prophecies, were fulfiled by some fart-arse Convention of a few Rutherfordian Bible Students lurking in the trees at Cedar Point Ohio. (I did not think of it exactly in those terms at that age, but you know what I mean)

    Surely a fulfillment of Bible prophecy would necessarily be an event that the World would notice ?

    I carried that scepticism with me ,until at age 58 I walked away, realising that as a work collegue, an ex-JW, had put it some years before:

    "It is all a load of bollocks"

  • Heaven
    Heaven

    When I was little, I was told JWs preached "to all the inhabitted Earth".

    I found it really hard to believe they were trekking their way into deserts, rain forests, or up remote mountainous regions to talk to indigenous peoples with the ragazines that weren't printed in the language these people spoke.

    edited to add: As I got older, I did the math. It is mathematically impossible for JWs to preach to all the inhabitted Earth.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    The blood own was obvious, even without studying the bible it was obvious it was a dietary restriction.

    Jesus being an angel with another, I found it strange that they criticized the trinity doctrine yet advocated Jesus being Michael with the some "thought process" that they criticized.

    Those two lead to questioning pretty much all the rest.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit