Need clarification from someone who speaks JW: What is an "apostate" ...or... an "apostate website?"

by Faithful Witness 29 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Saintbertholdt
    What is an "apostate" ...or... an "apostate website?"

    If you are an ex-Jehovah's witness and you have publicly or in conversation disagreed with the Watchtower, you are an apostate.

    Websites that oppose or criticize the Watchtower are deemed apostate.


    To everyday Jehovah's Witnesses anyone (ex-witness or not) displaying too much knowledge of the organization, its workings and who is critical of it is deemed an apostate. Any site that criticizes the organization or its teachings in any way shape or form is apostate (if not a media outlet). If its a mainstream media outlet the article or segment is deemed apostate or Satan inspired.

    So although the technical definition is pretty narrow the practical application is pretty broad.

  • Splash

    As an appointed man, I once showed my mother Rev 20:12 and asked her "where does it say 'new scrolls?' "

    She read the verse and asked me "Are you an apostate?"

    This pretty much answers your question.


    Here's my question: Is Island Man correct?

    I'm not picking on you Island Man. The fact of the matter is that there was an official letter in the 80's that identified "apostates", and an Dub who does not believe current dogma is an "apostate."

    Here's the rub. I know some Elders who disagree. When I had my inquisitions, I gave examples of past WT doctrines that were wrong. I cited articles and WT reference materials. I asked, "Did I become an apostate in Jehovah's view when I knew the WTBTS was wrong, before the "adjustment" took place?" I used the "belongings" dogma because the "Organized Book" was so adamant in its assertion that God had appointed the GB over all the belongings. I then explained how I did personal study, with the Strong's Concordance and discerned that there was no possible way that the GB were appointed over any belongings.

    So did a phase in and out of "apostasy" for a while?? The Eldubs had no answer, of course. One very diplomatic Eldub, felt that my intent was what really counted. In other words, why was I researching, why would I tell anyone of my findings? Why cause dischord in the congregation??

    My answer: "You asked for these meetings. You questioned me. You said that had to show up. Let me ask you this: Why would speaking the truth cause problems in the congregation? Why is factual information dangerous? ( Crickets........)

    I wish that the RC in Australia would have discussed the issue of "apostasy" during thier inquiry. For now, "apostasy" is defined by the ever-changing cult-speak of the WTBTS, and the disposition of the local BOE and CO.


  • John Aquila
    John Aquila
    An apostate in every jdub's mind is someone who is going to be destroyed forever and ever.
  • DesirousOfChange

    In the paranoid JW World, the term "apostate" has become the blanket term for almost anything negative said or printed against the Borg.

    Is the Wash Post or CNN an "apostate site".. Obviously not, but if they print negative info, then most loyal JDubs will say that they were getting their info from "apostate" sources. You see, ALL negative info is "false" to a loyal Dub.

    What is really an apostate website is a site like this (JWN) or freeminds or jwfacts. These are all run by former JWs who have abandoned their "true worship" and now "work in opposition to The Troof (God's Organization)".

    Of course, if you just ask "embarrassing" questions, don't be surprised if you are questioned as to whether you got such from an "apostate source", or if you're told that what you are saying "sounds apostate". If it puts WTS/JWs in any kind of a negative light, then they'll conclude that it must be "apostate".

    I read a paragraph to my mother from the 1977 WT, to which she said: If I read that to Bro COBE, he'd say that was apostate. I said, then ask him at what time did the 1977 WT article cross over to "apostasy"? Despite still being a devout JW (where else shall I go?), she's learned you cannot ask embarrassing questions. Just STFU.


  • Beth Sarim
    Beth Sarim
    Pretty much everything is apostate if it is not 100% in agreement with the Borg. That's why there is so much information control to whatever you read, watch, or breathe,lol
  • Vidiot

    Dutiful JWs don't reject what "apostates" might say because they think it's all lies.

    They reject what "apostates" say because deep down, they're afraid it might be true.

    Know how I know?

    'Cause that was me.

  • Dumplin

    We're the one on the right side:

  • DesirousOfChange

    Dutiful JWs don't reject what "apostates" might say because they think it's all lies.

    They reject what "apostates" say because deep down, they're afraid it might be true.

    WOW! There is a lot of truth to that, Vidiot!

    That was me, too!


  • cha ching
    cha ching

    The term "Apostate" is used like a cross to keep evil spirits away.

    Having a problem understanding? Can't explain? Don't know how to answer?

    Call the source an 'apostate', and everything is all better again. You don't have to think about it anymore. Done..... Gone.....

Share this