by kj 25 Replies latest jw friends
I think rutherford said it best when he said ," Religion is a snare and a racket."
Obviously we are far more well informed of what the WTBTS did in reguard to the NGO , I seriously doubt they ever mentioned it in the publications ergo it must be apostate lies . It sickens me when I think that these people consider themselves to be in some sort of loving environment where
I think rutherford said it best when he said ," Religion is a snare and a racket."
Obviously we are far more well informed of what the WTBTS did in reguard to the NGO , I seriously doubt they ever mentioned it in the publications ergo it must be apostate lies . It sickens me when I think that these people consider themselves to be in some sort of loving environment where they
I think rutherford said it best when he said ," Religion is a snare and a racket."
Obviously we are far more well informed of what the WTBTS did in reguard to the NGO , I seriously doubt they ever mentioned it in the publications ergo it must be apostate lies . It sickens me when I think that these people consider themselves to be in some sort of loving environment where they can't be
I think rutherford said it best when he said ," Religion is a snare and a racket."
Obviously we are far more well informed of what the WTBTS did in reguard to the NGO , I seriously doubt they ever mentioned it in the publications ergo it must be apostate lies . It sickens me when I think that these people consider themselves to be in some sort of loving environment where they can't be misled
OOOOPPPPPPPPPSSSSSSS , sorry I don't know what happened there , may they can edit some of that .........
Hi unhappywife, and welcome to the board.
Yep, she's coming by herself. That's what I thought too, that it was frowned upon. I told her I was more comfortable talking one-on-one, mostly so I could get her to look at and talk about things that she might not want to with another JW present. I think she regrets agreeing to it now, as she asked if she could bring someone to "explain things better". I politely refused, saying that even if it took longer to understand her explanation, I'd still like to keep it one-on-one.
kj
For my best friend, Johnny, who is still with the organization, his key issue is "where would he go if he left?" You see, he believes he has to BE SOMEWHERE
I think this goes to the very heart of why it is so difficult to "reason" with JW's, why the wall goes up.
For somebody who is a Catholic, or a mainline protestant, or a liberal Jew, or a non-religious person, their religion or lack thereof is only a part of their identity as a person. The thought of losing that part of their identity, or to have it challenged, while it may be somewhat troubling, does not strike at the very core of their being.
For JW's and other cultists, it's totally different. To be a JW is to be part of a collective that is led by a nagging centralized authority that consistently discourages meaningful individuality, and that disparangingly refers to persons outside of the collective as being part of "Satan's world", an imaginary collective that for JW's becomes the archrival of their own precious group. The very nature of the religion demands that the adherent's individual identity becomes either secondary or non-existent. If you're dealing with a "secondary" you may have a shot, if you're dealing with a "non-existent", well, they're probably better off where they are.
So for a JW, the thought of leaving the org is something that creates a deep, visceral reaction. Because for them, to leave is to abandon the righteous collective in favor of the evil, doomed collective. To challenge a JW's beliefs is to cause their survival instincts to kick in. It is not the reasoning portion of the brain that you're dealing with. The reasoning part of the brain in this case is subservient to the survival brain, so any and all excuses will come out of a JW's mouth defending their precious group, and the most iron-clad reasoning used to demonstrate the utter preposterousness of JW beliefs will be met with deliberate obtuseness, anger, or both.
Dantheman--- That is what the bible has to say . The world is evil and leaving the collective was sure suicide . Other religions do not look at those scriptures but will still claim that leaving their way of thinking is bad for you in some way .
You may need to address the issue of "where to go."
If a person belief in God is intertwined with their faith in a religious organization, then any attack on the organization, becomes an attack on their faith in God. It may be first necessary to separate the individuals faith in God from their faith in the WT. If an individual realizes that they can still have faith in God and the Bible despite loosing faith in the WT, then you are no longer challenging their faith in God when counter Watchtower arguments are presented.
No one wants to loose their faith in God. The Watchtower has carefully intertwined individuals faith in God and the Bible with faith in the organization. Therefore witnesses are protecting their faith in God by refusing to look at or not carefully considering counter wathtower arguments.
If you can separate the two, and then provide an alternative, you will have gone a long way toward hepling someone out.
I will try to post some questions for doing this.
The following comes from freeminds:
http://www.freeminds.org/psych/openmind.htm
It is rare to find a Witness who has not seen or heard information exposing the dishonesty of the Watchtower. Why, then, do they not see a problem? Evidently, something else has prevented them from objectively analyzing factual information. Their minds are trained to stop short of doubting the organization - a wall has been erected which says, in effect, "This far you may go, and no further."
What kind of powerful motivation prevents the Witness from entering the "dangerous" waters of critical investigation? The motivation is fear; the underlying problem is misplaced securities. The Christian concept of trusting a supernatural God is replaced with a more visible and concrete symbol, namely, the organization; God's organization. The Witness learns that serving the organization is the same as serving God. The organization is the mother, God is the father, and the Witness is to obey his "parents." Since the Witness cannot see nor experience real interaction with God, his only tie with God is through the visible organization. It is, in effect, "God" to him (though he would not admit to or recognize it).
Convincing the Witness that the organization is deceptive is like trying to convince a 5-year-old child who loves his parents that his father is in jail for armed robbery - he simply doesn't believe his father is dishonest. In fact, he can't tolerate the thought, since he has placed all of his security and trust in his father and mother. The truth is too fearful and devastating to consider. Therefore, to protect his source of security, he rejects the factual information as being a lie.
The same is true of the Witness. He knows that if the organization is not really directed by God, he has no other tangible security to go to. He says, "Where else can I go?" So he remains within the system as years go by, continuing to ignore the barrage of factual information undermining the entire Watchtower structure. The more and more he ignores the facts, the more narrow-minded and adamant he becomes that he will never change, and he is more convinced than ever that he has the truth. He digs himself into a trench, erecting all sorts of mental barricades against his real enemy, which is doubt. While this seems incredible to the person trying to reach the Witness with the facts, it is just a simple protective mechanism, keeping the Witness from the trauma of losing his sense of security. In order to rationalize away the false prophecies and inconsistencies of the organization, the Witness must, in effect, deceive himself into thinking there is really no discrepancy in the organization. 1
While Christians have their security in a spiritual relationship with the person of Christ, Witnesses are taught to put faith in an organization. If they have faith in the organization, they have faith in God. The two are inseparable; so much so, that to lose faith in the organization means a corresponding loss of faith in God. This is precisely why the Witness must protect himself through the process of self-deception. He cannot bear the pain of losing his faith.
(the arcticle continues)
