- 1Doctrinal criticisms
- 2Social criticisms
- 3Biblical criticisms
A well written Article with a host of references that are checkable, how unlike the JW Org itself !
I wonder how many times this Article will be edited by JW's ?
A couple of Elders I spoke to last year said Wiki was O.K for JW's to read, I do hope a good few find this Article !
Very comprehensive article. You can't argue with the FACTS!
JW's spend a lifetime arguing with the facts, they think that beliefs trump facts, and if they are told to believe something by the G.B, that trumps anything from anywhere else,regardless of the FACTS !
As I said above, this Article could do a lot of good with any honest-hearted JW who reads it.
What I find interesting about that list is how secular the criticisms are. Online opposition to JWs sure has changed. When I first arrived on the Internet the most discussed topics about JWs tended to be: is Jesus your mediator, Trinity, John 1:1, Jehovah in the NT, Greber Bible, faith or works and so on. Sure blood and shunning were discussed too, but mediator and Trinty topics were more prominent. Now these theological disputes are relegated almost to an afterthought. I think it's indicative of change both in JWs and society in general. We are more secular as a whole and JWs concentrate a lot less on doctrine themselves these days.
A glaring omission from the list is Watchtower treatment of gay people. No doubt this will be added to the list as the issue gains salience.
Watchtower treatment and view of gay people is not much different than other Christian religions.
Historically that's true. However, the Watchtower stance rapidly becoming pretty isolated. A decade ago Church of Scotland stigmatised gay people. Last month they voted to allow gay ministers to get married. Watch the Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, you name it, fall in line.
As churches become more and more accepting of gay people JWs may be among the last ones standing. At that point it will become a huge issue.
JW Org only changes when it hits their $$$.
They often change years old doctrines quick enough when their coffers are under threat, but will remain intransigent on things to the last until that point is reached.
Sometimes even the threat of lost $$$ doesn't really do it, look at the Candace Conti case, that poor victim of abuse would have accepted hardly any money, as long as she got a change in their woeful policy for protecting children and the vulnerable.
They did not apologize, or change their ways, so paid out $Millions.
The last I heard about "the gay issue" is one of our elders coming back from an Elders school saying "we've got nothing against gays, as long as they dont act upon it there's no reason why they cant go far like any other member".
Well that's generous of them.