by slimboyfat 99 Replies latest members campaign
focus on core teachings, which I would consider to be:
preaching the good news ...
Then it would be possible, I believe, to make a reasonable, or in fact good defence of the religion - SBF
The 'good news' concerns the imminent annihilation of 6 billion men, women and children for the 'crime' of rejecting the ramblings of the cult leaders.
How the hell is that defensible?
If JWs are still around in 2100 do you really think they'll still be teaching creationism and anti-gay?
Yes.
1 - The fact that humans evolved from non-human ancestors over millions of years is irreconcilable with their unique version of soteriology. They can never get over that hurdle.
2 - They teach that it is not a sin to be gay but that gay sex is sinful. They cannot change that without first revising their understanding of what it means for the bible to be inspired.
The cult is built on rotten foundations. Reform is impossible. Fuck it to hell.
Well that's another teaching that needs reformed. Russell taught that most (if not all) humans would be saved. He was nearly a universalist. That's what we need to get back to. Because if Jehovah is real I think that is nearer the truth. And the truth will out.
That's what we need to get back to - SBF
'we'?
Still a JW apologist!
Stop trying to label me in order to halt discussion. That's exactly what some JWs do, they just use a different label to end the conversation: apostate.
Creationism is obviously wrong, and religion can easily survive without it.
Most religions can - fundamentalist religions (such as JWs) cannot.
No literal Adam = no "first Adam", thus no "last Adam", thus no "corresponding ransom sacrifice" as JWs teach it.
No literal garden of Eden = no "God's purpose is to restore the earth to the way he designed it".
No Satan & Eve & fruit = no "issue of universal sovereignty".
Those are also core teachings of JWs that would have to be abandoned.
A clever, insightful, intelligent, creative group of men might be able to work something up - but again - are such people promoted in the JW organization, or are they marginalized (at best) & expelled (most likely)?
So how does this work with your visits to other churches, slim? You have visted a lot of other denominations that dont shun and are shriveling up... why wouldn't the wt fold without their coercion? Im not totally disagreeing, mind you, just curious why people would stay. What would the hammer be? How would they push recruitment? Those things are the lifeblood of the jw cult. Shunning is the underlying hammer to it all.
JWs experienced some of their strongest growth in the 1940s before shunning was mandatory. You don't need to shun to grow.
What you do need is a distinctive message and enthusiastic messengers. I think that a no-war, divine name, paradise earth-type message is more than distinctive and compelling enough. All the blood, 1914, creationism, anti-gay, anti-higher education, and so on are not assets to the religion, they are burdens.
The religions that grow best are distinctive but not shunning. The Seventh Day Adventists may be closest to the ideal. They are a bit more open than JWs, shun a bit less, allow a little more dissent and higher education. Yet they have distinctive things to say about Sabbath and about health. They don't have the balance perfect, but they are closer than JWs. And it shows because they experience continued growth and are financially strong. Their organisation and structure is much more efficient than JWs. But they still teach creationism for example, with a vengeance. So they are not perfect. They have some way to go as well. But they do allow more dissent and open discussion than JWs and that is absolutely crucial.
SBF: What you do need is a distinctive message and enthusiastic messengers. I think that a no-war, divine name, paradise earth-type message is more than distinctive and compelling enough.
This is how to create/start a new movement. The trouble is it's not true. There is no God that is going to end wars and bring about a paradise earth; it doesn't matter what "divine name" we use.
It ain't gonna happen so why argue for it?
While I agree that those sort of changes would be necessary for a more humane Organization slimboyfat, the reality is though that the hardline Governing Body members, lead by Morris, Splane and Jackson, have clearly demonstrated by their past actions and personal comments, that they have no intention in bowing to popular opinion or logic. My impression is that they would rather watch their whole house burn down and blame it upon a lack of the brotherhood's appreciation, than do what is right.
no-zombie
