Who Will Cry For the Babies?

by Farkel 19 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Loki

  Hi Farkel

  As you can see, I'm a newbie so I haven't had chance to read your posts before. That's my loss, your argumentation is gorgeous. It also strikes at what is a key issue for a lot of exJWs.

  Like most good little JWs I had my doubts about this one since a child, but just shoved it into the box. You know the box, the one that lurkes in the corner, full of your doubts and questions. Trouble is, that box is only so big, then one day the pressure becomes too great and its contents fly out, leaving you with a huge mess and a lot of intense emotion. Thank you for putting it so well. Keep posting Farkekl.

  Loki
  Not crying so much for the innocents
• 

  DannyBear

  Farkel,

  The average jw (former self) really never allow themselves to ruminate, long enough or critical enough, to see the logical conclusions their teachings lead to. Instead they pacify their minds with expressions like 'gods will', 'gods purpose', 'his will', 'jealous god', all of which stop cold the thinking processes.

  That is why your writing style is so benefical. You are able to strip the mantras and fall back spin words...before they get a chance to slip into 'nervana' or outright denial. You already used it and threw it back at em.

  They may umph and moan, but the words ring true. Who knows, you may get a completely unused brain cell or two, to start firing again on all eight cylinders.

  Nice work again.

  Danny
• 

  hawkaw

  Farkel or anyone else,

  I am having a slight brain cramp.

  How does the GB's 1994(5?) change in the sheep and goats doctrine of Matt. 25 affect what you are saying?

  hawk
• 

  somebody

  sheesh...this thread has made me cry for the babies, and for all of us! thanks again Farkel and thank everyone who contributed. Had Enough, we all weep with you! Anyone got any kleenex?

  hi,hawkaw

  I'm not sure what you're asking. what is the "doctrine" about the sheep and goats that the GB teach, or changed in 94/95? If you state the doctrine. I'll add my opinion. ( assuming you mean the whole chapter 25 of Matthew. I don't see that as having anything to do with babies, or any other group of innocent people that Farkel was asking JW's to explain )
• 

  Had Enough

  Hi Tina:

  So many have wept also over the futility of it all,the frustration,the anger

  That's one of the strongest drawing cards that brings so many of us here and keeps us here....knowing that we are not alone in what we experienced, have felt and are now feeling...just knowing that others understand. That's what makes the tears flow and then helps to dry them up too.

  Facing reality is tough for all of us but the helping of each other that I see here, is more than I've seen in my lifetime with the borg. So thanks for your kind words to me and all the others you encourage too.

  I now have many more happy days than I've had for a long while...and I know I'll have many more when I see what so many others have gone through and are getting stronger. Reading posts like Farkel's is tough for us new ones and for many longtime outers too, but it's so needed to cut through the sludge in our minds that's been caused by the time we've spent in "robot mode".

  Hey somebody:
  Maybe we've all wept enough for today. I'm all out of kleenex. Ahhhh...feel better now. At least I think we're alert enough now not to get lulled into being "stepford wives" again.

  luv to you guys....Had Enough
• 

  Maximus

  :: I was forced to study that masterpiece of child-abuse known as “From Paradise to Paradise Regained”

  Right on, Farkel, as usual--although that pinches.

  For the record, Nathan Knorr wanted to release a book with illustrations (he had an attractive, talented new in-house female artist) for the huge double assembly in Yankee Stadium and the Polo Grounds, along with other literature--a "release" a day. It was to be a book for the Far East in particular, with no negative doctrines like Trinity to be discussed, analyzed and then "right" teaching presented. But the President vacillated and could not really make up his mind. His right-hand man Freddy Franz was, of course, too busy with the other publications, the Daniel book and the NW translation volume, and tepid to the project.

  The then-editor of the publications told NHK that time did not permit what it would take to get the book through the factory, including writing the MS. Knorr the businessman decided to divvy up the book between several different writers! (If you have four writers, you can do it in 25% of the time, right? Groan.) Not all got the message. Some thought it was for children. If you have a copy, glance through it and you will see the differences in style, not to mention approach. Cf. the fire and damnation from heaven stuff.

  When the final product was read from Chapter 1 onward in MS form, it was an obvious mess which a few thoughtful ones saw clearly. It was too late to do anything about it--a rewrite impossible; Colin gritted his teeth, and the book was mindlessly used as a children's book, despite "official" comments noting that was not its purpose.

  It sure did influence young minds. And for many persons I've talked to over the decades, it elicited many nightmares.

  Take-home thought to ponder: was this "food at the proper time"? A product from God himself? The r&f have this vision of saintly men praying and the holy spirit prompting their pens--the faithful slave dispensing food via the anointed-remnant GB. Hardly.

  I enjoyed the thoughtfulness of your post, Farkel. The cauldron of pain has produced in you a unique combination of head and heart. You've helped so many.

  Maximus
• 

  hawkaw

  Hi somebody,

  I am going stupid - I thought the GB changed the sheep & goat stuff. I thought if you were on the outside you are now "goatlike" and not a goat? I am sorry for being stupid but.. I thought this meant that the GB was saying they were not sure who Jesus was going to choose as sheep and goats but if you belong to the WT you would definitely be a sheep. So my question is if the GB ain't so sure who is a goat then does this mean the GB is also saying they don't know who is going to bite it during the big A?

  hawk
• 

  Farkel

  Francoise,

  : You don't have to do anything to copyright your stuff, at least not with any gummint agency. Copyright automatically inheres in the fact that you wrote something.

  I don't want to copyright anything I've written. I want it freely distributed, freely copied and freely available. I might be a little pissed if someone changed some of my stuff so that my original intent was altered, though. I'm not in this for glory or money. AlanF who has spent massive amounts of time doing incredibile research and written stuff that could easily be coalesced into a book feels the same way.

  Given that, one must question why the mighty Watchtower Printing Corporation INSISTS on a copyright for EVERYTHING they produce. "You received free, give free." - Jesus. Not in WatchtowerWorld.

  The irony of that is that they hold copyrights on shit that was outdated months or a few years after they published that crap. Keep in mind that when they publish crap, they publish crap in the hundreds of millions of copies and distribute that crap in 100+ countries. Quantity and crap are not mutually exclusive, by the way. A hundred million pieces of crap is still crap. One piece of solid stuff is still solid stuff. WT goes for volume. I'll do my stuff one-at-a-time. I have no "donation arrangement," either. I think freely. I speak freely. I give freely. I expect no reward other than to stimulate folks to think about stuff.

  Farkel
• 

  Big Tex

  Farkel

  Powerful and moving essay. You reach out and force the reader to stare intensely at some very uncomfortable sights. Certainly the idea of God destroying helpless babies, mentally challenged people and other innocents does not jibe with the God of love as taught by Christ. You bring out points that most JWs do not allow themselves to consider deeply else they would begin to ask questions. Truly, none so blind as those who will not see.

  I'm embarrassed to admit that I had no idea the writing and editing at Bethel, even back in the "good old days" were so half-assed. I saw myself as one of those who pictured the GB and writing staff as being a bit more, shall we say, spiritual. How many Witnesses today would question the organization if they knew that factors in the "food at the proper time" included a shapley female illustrator? Did God commission 4 different men to take down the 10 Commandments because he had an artificial deadline? What a stupid idiotic ass I am to have been sucked in by these people!
• 

  LogCon

  m