Is this their arguement?

by problemaddict 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  problemaddict

  ....or at least one of them?

  I have had some "friendly" conversations with people on my coninuing fade journey. I realize that isn't always wise, but they are all non-related to each other, and we keep it light. Even my brother got in the mix.

  In a nutshell, I explain I think we are dead wrong on blood, "straining the gnat" (IVF is now fornication etc...), while constantly changing teaching under the guise of holy spirit while never admitting holy spirit never had anything to do with the previous teaching and yadda yadda yadda. You guys know the deal.

  So what comes next is the debate over Gods "chosen people". The justification seems to go like this. "If you obey the GB but they are wrong, they are accountable and have a weightier judgement, if you disobey them, you have gone against the annointed of jehovah and it doesn't mattter if you are right." This is almost word for word, and I find variations of it in each conversation. My question goes back to the times of Jesus. The Pharisees were the religious leaders, but following their lead would have put you at odds with Jehovah and his son. So should you have just gone along to get along?

  Essentially I get the same answer. YES!

  Is this really their arguement?
• 

  Oubliette

  The truly bizarre aspect of this line of "reasoning" is that it takes personal responsibility for knowing and doing what is right, true and correct away from the individual and supposedly makes the GB accountable while reducing this individual, personal responsibility down to a simple slogan, "Listen, Obey and Be Blessed!" (Sound familiar?) Listen to us even when we are wrong; obey us even when our directions are capriciously changeable and damaging to yourself and your personal relationships.

  Where are these promised blessings? Oh, I know! Evidently, they are coming .... "soon!"

  BTW, have you noticed? The GB are NEVER held accountable for teaching wrong/incorrect/false doctrines. Why aren't they disfellowshipped for apostasy? Or at least removed?

  An elder once said, "There can never be a good reason for doing a wrong thing." If that is true, then there can never be a "good reason" for blindly following a teaching that one knows or even suspects is wrong.
• 

  LostGeneration

  I got into it once with my father as I was leaving, explaining that following the GB would be like the Israelites who were following the bad kings. The prophets who did not follow the kings are always held out as the good example, because they just didn't go along with everyone else who was participating in the bad things that the Kings did.

  I gave him the point up front that the GB were not participating in "Baal worship" though I wanted to throw the UN thing in his face but held back (I have no idea why I didn't use that). He still held that "obedience" was the most important thing, so I tried to illustrate that SS officers in Nazi Germany were accountable, so JWs would certainly be held accountable if they were simply blind followers, and were going beyond the things written.

  It didn't matter to him.

  Its just plain easier on the brain for them to go along with whatever the GB says. No thinking, just follow. And give the GB credit, they have assembled a masterful program which continually stresses "obedience" over "thinking" every day of the week.
• 

  Oubliette

  The "Nuremberg Defense" - "Befehl ist Befehl"

  I was just following orders!

  Sieg Heil, baby!
• 

  CADSkin

  Another scenario. What if you were loyally following the WT and Awake in a banned country and only had older mags. If you escaped to a country and were no longer under govt. thumb, would you be an apostate for not believing the newest teachings?
• 

  problemaddict

  The "Nuremberg Defense"

  Its funny you guys brought this up. Are you familair with the studies done at Yale after these trials to consider why people listened to authority figures even if it is against their human instinct. Say like you would shun a son or daughter, and overide your natural instincts as a parent. It was amazing how many people just did what they were told, and none of them were JW's.

  I forgot the name of the experiments....... Heidleburg sound familiar?
• 

  wha happened?

  Did u say reasoning and JW's in the same sentance? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA!
• 

  prologos

  Oubliette , while we are at it, lest we forget (oublie') with rule 8 liberty:

  "Ein Volk, ein Reich*, ein Fuehrer," shouted at that rally * (tausend jaehriges) transliteration:

  1 Folk = JW rank and file,

  1 Kingdom of 1000 years (started in 1914,19, or in overlapping generations) you pick one. (not the kingdom of the Sons Love Col 1:13, in force since P33.)

  1 Leader = the GB when speaking as one . formerly R--, R--,F--.

  "Fuehrer befehl, wir folgen Dir". song sung at that rally = ( GB give the marching orders, new direction, new light, we will unquestioningly follw you)

  Kadavergehorsam = absolute obedience and be blessed.

  arbeit macht frei = hollow, deceiving message for slaves that will be worked to death.

  the resemblance is uncanny, so are the preliminary results.

  but the internet might be the stalingrad or normandy that has already happened.

  jws: read the surrender leaflets.

  ps: joke in these quarters: "that was the shortest 1000 years (Hitlers promise)-- thankfully, lasted only 12 years" 1933-45
• 

  bennyk

  I forgot the name of the experiments...

  Stanley Milgram.

  An Elder I had once respected and known for a number of years told me that he does not agree with everything the Society teaches. I asked what he does when he studies with someone and discusses a subject on which he and the Society are at odds. He said: "I tell the person what the Society teaches. I am only an individual and could be wrong; but if the Society is wrong, they 'pay the freight'."

  I said: "You tell them they must believe something you personally believe is false?!? Don't you feel that bruises your integrity?"

  Our relationship rapidly went downhill...
• 

  Oubliette

  problemaddict: Are you familair with the studies done at Yale after these trials to consider why people listened to authority figures even if it is against their human instinct.

  You are referring to the Milgram experiment:

  The Milgram experiment on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologistStanley Milgram, which measured the willingness of study participants to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that conflicted with their personal conscience. Milgram first described his research in 1963 in an article published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.

  The experiments began in July 1961, three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to answer the question: "Was it that Eichmann and his accomplices in the Holocaust had mutual intent, in at least with regard to the goals of the Holocaust?" In other words, "Was there a mutual sense of morality among those involved?" Milgram's testing suggested that it could have been that the millions of accomplices were merely following orders, despite violating their deepest moral beliefs. The experiments have been repeated many times, with consistent results within societies, but different percentages across the globe. The experiments were also controversial, and considered by some scientists to be unethical and physically or psychologically abusive. Psychologist Diana Baumrind considered the experiment "harmful because it may cause permanent psychological damage and cause people to be less trusting in the future." Such criticism motivated more thorough review boards and committee reviews for working with human subjects.

  A similar phenomenon was observed in the Asch conformity experiments.