I'm thinking about going back (page 7)

Jeffro

1009:

I cared much about doctrines, but I made for myself a difference between major and minor doctrines, and I did agree with the (in my eyes) important ones.

You're just reinforcing my point.

Laika

Wow. There's a lot of angry people in here.

You're right Corby, there is a lot of angry people here, but people are angry because they've lost friends and family over their beliefs, because children have been abused due to Watchtower cover ups and people have died or spent years in prison because of shifting doctrines.

We are not who the Watchtower Society says we are, if you stick around you'll learn this for yourself.

besty

@1009

I'm with jeffro on this - in a cult you have to be 100% all in with everything, otherwise you are not a true believer. (and you can't continue to discuss these issues with the leadership - they will give you a pass 1 time, but not if you keep harping on about them)

Now factor in some cognitive dissonance and I can see why you and many others have a shelf on which you store issues for later.

When that shelf gets too heavy, thats the beginning of the end.

In JW theory 'wait on jehovah for increasing light from an imperfect organisation' should counterbalance the heaviest shelf.

Fernando

Corboy101 , then I am afraid the Watchtower has got you playing their game, on their field, and on their terms. You haven't a chance of winning.

At Nicaea it was agreed that all agreeing on doctrine was the way to go.

This is ethnocentrism.

Due to this misdirected focus it is near impossible to find a Christian that even knows what the gospel is.

Ask any Christian to explain what the gospel is in one word.

What would you think of a would-be car salesman that had no idea a Ford was a motorcar?

When did Paul or Jesus go banging on about the trinity, hellfire or immortality of the soul?

Wasn't their focus the unabridged gospel instead?

Please reconsider the perilous notion of playing by Watchtower rules.

"Unity in doctrine" by design does not bring "unity in Christ".

There is a better way - the unabridged gospel.

“Can I claim to be ‘in the truth’ or to ‘love the truth’ if the ‘Good News’ according to Paul, Isaiah, Psalms and Moses is not in my heart or on my lips?”
(2 Cor 3:16; 4:4; Gal 2:5,14; Eph 1:13; 6:14,15; Col 1:5,6)

(Why does the "true religion" secretly blind its followers to the "Good News" according to Paul, Moses, Isaiah and Psalms?)

(Why do followers of the Watchtower religion call themselves “publishers of the Good News” whilst unfamiliar with the “Good News” according to Paul, Moses, Isaiah and Psalms?)

gingerbread

I think some of the ideas expressed here - through Corboy and 1009 - are the 'new' jehovah's witness.

They're still involved because of family and friends. They pick and choose what they want to participate in. They are selective about their associates in the congregation. They have doubts and questions and know it's better to keep this to themselves. They stick with the big 'doctrines' and rules ( blood, neutrality, meeting attendance, regular field service, etc.) but ignore the 'little' stuff. It's no biggie to drink too much, watch 'bad' movies or listen to 'debasing' music, have a 'worldly' girl or boy friend (secret), etc. Just so you show up for service the next morning. They pose as ones 'reaching out' for congregational responsibility. They pioneer (and live at home) so they don't have to get a job. They volunteer for building and remodelling projects. They always have their Watchtower and Jeremiah book underlined.

The 'new' Jehovah's Witness is about appearances. Looking good. Looking right.

Corboy101

And I agree with you Punk. What's the point of this tread. Most of you (not all) just want to argue and be angry to anyone who "disagrees" with them. Sound familiar? Dumbasses!!!

Jeffro

gingerbread:

They stick with the big 'doctrines' and rules ( blood, neutrality, meeting attendance, regular field service, etc.) but ignore the 'little' stuff.

Kind of. But do they really? I'd like to see the average 'new' JW defend core doctrines about 607 in support of the Governing Body's delusional self-appointed claim of authority. That's big stuff. It's the entire basis for all beliefs unique to JWs.

Jeffro

Corboy101:

Most of you (not all) just want to argue and be angry to anyone who "disagrees" with them.

So... does doctrine really matter to you, or not? That's the point of the thread.

1009

besty
I'm with jeffro on this - in a cult you have to be 100% all in with everything, otherwise you are not a true believer. (and you can't continue to discuss these issues with the leadership - they will give you a pass 1 time, but not if you keep harping on about them)

Now factor in some cognitive dissonance and I can see why you and many others have a shelf on which you store issues for later.

When that shelf gets too heavy, thats the beginning of the end.

In JW theory 'wait on jehovah for increasing light from an imperfect organisation' should counterbalance the heaviest shelf.

Why store the issue 'for later'? What do you want to do with it 'later'? Most things just aren't important enough to make an issue out of it. I don't care very much if Paul was a tentmaker or not (but I find the topic really interesting!). And there many, many of those topics. I think 'sword' in Heb 4:12 is a bad translation (should be scalpel). And 'faith' in Gal. 5:22-23 too (should be reliable). Etc. Etc. I loved discussing these points with some elders. And they had similar points too. But these are non-issues. And heck, even 1914 didn't bother me much.

Now, when you have a problem with major doctrines, it is indeed another story. There the 'wait on Jehovah' plays a role. As well as the statement that the apostles too didn't understand everything. But yes, there comes a point where one can draw the conclusion that this isn't the true religion.

Jeffro

1009:

Now, when you have a problem with major doctrines, it is indeed another story.

You mean, major doctrines, like the fact that the entire basis for their self-presumed claim of authority is a lie.

I'm thinking about going back

Share this