Monomaniacal Ex-JWs?

by dunsscot 44 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  unclebruce

  LOL Don, thanks for the reply. So a man can groap about in the dark and stumble on the truth eh? A bit like men in ages past locking themselves away in caves without food or light for set periods - apparently one sees angels after a few days. If ones lucky one might even hear God himself whispering instructions (as per the messianic habit of conversing with Satan half starved in wild places. ;)

  Covey had wisdom? That'd be a first for an American Evangalist. Please feel free to post some of his pearls (in my experience anyone can do one liners that sound good but to be truly wise one must start with a basis in fact .. then again for all I know you may think Venus hosts dinasaurs and earth ran out of useable oxygen in 1986.

  You're a funny bugger Dunnyman and should have a lot of fun here, don't let it interfere with yer placard preaching though .. the end is nigh, the days are last and Jesus appointed Judge Rutherford over all his truths. (as per watchtower doctrine)

  unclebruce who stumbled around for thirty years and sullenly found freedom.

  PS: Better to be monomaniacle (grammar is overated) and free than monosylabic and watchtower educated.
• 

  seven006

  Dan, you are correct in the assumption that I am not monomaniacal in my thinking. I try as much as I can to keep an open mind in just about any subject matter I choose to ponder. I also do not like to express my thoughts on subjects that might lead to repetitious banter on who's right or wrong. Since you dropped my name at the end of your post I guess I need to say a little bit about where I am coming from in regard to this subject.

  First of all I am surprised that you made a blanket statement about the assumed drinking habits of every EXJW that participates on this board. Come on man, you are much smarter than that. Why do you make such an amateurish statement when trying to make your point? It devaluates any further arguments you try and present. You are also too smart to insult your intellect by making such a statement without looking from where you speak. The JW's are in my opinion are only equaled by the Mormons as monomaniacal thinkers. They do indeed reach the level of mental illness in their one sided
  approach to life and what it's all about. You my friend are one of the few JW's that I have ever known that has taken a broader view of possible alternative thinking when trying to understand the possibilities of christian philosophy. You have to admit you are a rarity in such thinking in being a member of your religious group.

  I must also point out that no one from this board as far as I know gets up on a Sunday morning or Thursday evening and walks onto the stage of a kingdom hall and tries to tell the entire congregation that they are wrong. I also haven't heard of anyone on this board going door to door trying to convince the general public that the teachings of the JW are wrong. I see no exJW's on street corners handing out literature proclaiming their dislike for the watchtower organization either. A few have picketed JW conventions but their numbers are but a microbe in comparison to the JW's and their duped JW wannabes that fill the seats inside the convention. I can go on and on with comparisons to monomaniacal thinking in regard to JW's and non JW's but I think you get the idea. The Silent Lambs group is not bringing out the religious philosophy of the religion but rather the attempt by its leaders to hide a life damaging problem with the idea that they will come off looking squeaky clean to not only the rank and file but to the general public. Their practice is wrong Dan and if you can't see that then you have wasted all those years in trying to better yourself with a higher education. Wrong is wrong!

  As far as not having something to offer in return, you again insult you own intelligence with this comment. Just because most do not feel the need to replace black with white doesn't mean that we do not have a guide in our life or a goal to aspire to. I for one have a strong belief system. I believe in myself. I admit fault that I have and accept the consequences resulting in that fault without the need to side step my own responsibility by making the excuse "the devil made me do it." I equally accept the good that I do and use the positive cards I have been dealt to better my life and share the rewards with my family and friends. I do not need a god to praise for the good and a devil to excuse the bad. I take responsibility for my own actions. I also do not need an aging book of religious myth and philosophy to tell me I am not worth anything and it is a complete waste of my time to try and come to a few conclusions about life based upon my own ability to think and reason. I do indeed have an alternative to JW thinking. It is to live a life being as good of a person as I can without prejudging my fellow man based on his inability to think exactly as I do. I use this alternative way of thinking to remain open minded on subjects that the bible has no answers for. My favorite bible stumper is still the argument based on the "lifestyle unchoice" of those born as hermaphrodites. I have yet received a logical answer on this question and it has stumped many a so called Christian. But lets not get into that, I have lost my interest in ever getting a clear answer on that one.

  It would be interesting to see if you could get away with expressing your knowledge of religious philosophers to aid you in giving a talk at the kingdom hall. Have you quoted the many authors and philosophers in a talk to your local congregation that you so widely use on this board? Have you added the thoughts of any one of them when commenting during a watchtower study or book study? Do you go outside of the authorized material when giving your sermon at the door while in service on Saturday mornings? Do you have the freedom of expression based on your outside education when it comes to preaching the good news of the watchtower society? Can you say you have not compromised your real thinking or found yourself justifying one single thought to try and keep your mind on the prize? I don't need a truthful answer given to me Dan, but I think you might think about answering these questions honestly to yourself. I quit the JW religion 17 years ago because I could no longer lie to myself.

  Last but not least is the question of this board and the JW's that feel they need to ignore the orders of their religious leaders and continue to post here.
  I'll give you a little scenario to ponder. Lets say their is a group of physically battered and mentally abused women meeting in a support group situation. The place they have available to them is a social club with a sign outside that says "men only." A man just happens upon the club and enters the door immediately seeing that the room is full of battered woman. He stands at the door and listens to the women speak of the abuse laid out to them by men and the disgust they have for the male population. Within a few minutes the man realizes what he has happened upon and has to make a decision. Does he exit the room and let the women continue in their expression of mutual support or does he start telling them they are all a bunch of wieners and just don't understand the real love that men have for them? What would be the smart thing to do here Dan? What would be the compassionate thing to do? If the man lashed out at the women and told them that they owe their miserable lives to men don't you think he would get a fairly heavy dose of negative responses? Don't you think it would be futile on his part to try and convince them that they are not battered but only selfish stupid women who do not understand men at all? Use your brain and your heart and get back to me on this one.

  Yes, Dan, I do like you. I admire your intelligence. I just don't agree with your conclusions. I have no rule that says I cannot like you or talk to you. Can you honestly say you are free from a rule saying the same thing about me?

  Take care, and I still want that drink.

  Your buddy,

  Dave
• 

  unclebruce

  Outcast - DumbScott's pedantry (and therefore lack of breeding) has been noted but why should he fuck off? I know the sentiment well and those words remain dear to this iconoclasts heart but no one here has anything to fear from the myopic zombie class.

  Pleased to meet you .. I enjoy your posts.

  unclebruce, a good for nothing uneducated son of a half-breed abo from the arse end of the world
• 

  seven006

  Alan, did you call me a bad word? You bastard! See if I ever spend an entire week drinking expensive booze with you again!

  BTW, I was right about the orgin of fractal mathematics and you were wrong. So take your Mit degree and shove it up you left nostril.

  See you and the little woman this Christmas

  Your exbuddy,

  Dave
• 

  Mommie Dark

  "Creating one's own life purpose, devising one's personal system of mores and trying to guide one's own step might be a little problematic. I tried it before I became a Witness. And Duns does not want to return to his former way of life"

  So because YOU are too venal to figure out what's ethical and what isn't without some salvation package's canned guidelines, everyone must have the same moral failing as you? Even a child can see the illogic of THAT conclusion...

  You dubs ALWAYS end up whinging 'what replacement can you give me for my Watchtower conscience? What have you got to offer?'

  GROW A SMEGGING SPINE GREG! Do what's RIGHT because it's the RIGHT thing to do! Your cult is KILLING PEOPLE, body AND heart! You don't have to 'return' to anything. You could move FORWARD to honesty and genuine integrity. Of corse you'll have to learn what those words mean before you do, and that will require some actual work. You're used to having preprogrammed 'moral' responses fed to you via Crooklyn's hypnotic q&a indoctrination sessions.

  If you're so morally bankrupt that you can't live without some committee of rabbis telling you how many hairs you are permitted to grow on your 'nads, then by all means STAY with your cult. At least your fear of their vengeful God keeps you from indulging your baser natural tendencies. Some people really are better off in the cult straitjacket; perhaps you, who claim to have no innate moral compass, are one of those.
• 

  Abaddon

  YOU are accusing US of being monomaniacs?

  Okay; let's say five hours of meetings, five hours of pre and post meeting association, four hours of field service, say four hours travelling time, and six hours of study.

  That's 1/7th of your time mono-boy.

  Also, one of your supposed motivations for going in field service is to get people who are blindly pusuing a course of action that will destroy their lives to listen to the truth and have their lives saved.

  Those here who do try to;

  "help" JWs out of the "borg" or 'bring down the Tower.'

  are trying to get people who are blindly pusuing a course of action that will destroy their lives to listen to the truth so they have their lives saved.

  Does the motivation sound familiar? Are you a little slow on the uptake? You are criticising some of us for doing what you do.

  You speak of "freedom of worship", yet you come from an environment where questioning the doctrine of the Society can lead to expulsion, even if a good case is being made of the facts at hand, or if the point being made is one where there is no Biblical council. This contrasts starkly to the climate of debate that endured in the first century, where doctrine was debated openly (Jerusalem), and careful personal research praised (Boreans).

  You wouln't know freedom if it bit you on your fat complacent ass.

  You speak of "a life governed by hedonic utility that is devoid of God". WHAT GOD? Come on, bring it on. There is no proof of god; if you know differently, please lighten my darkness oh great one. As you have backed down from debating about the existence of god before I doubt if you will, but would I just point out that the lack of definitive proof is in itself the largest proof that there is no personified creator concerned with humans, as logically if there were and our lives depended on our conduct, he would make the manner of conduct that was desired patently evident, if he is indeed desirous that none are destroyed. If god wants his intelligent curious creation to use their brain and they then find evidence lacking, if he wants to turn human belief into a GAME of hide-and-seek, you go worship the asshole. If Book-of-the-month club can reach me with personalised correspondence, I think god can, if he exisited.

  Please try harder, your posts are geting more tedious.
• 

  Francois

  It requires prodigious balls for a JW to call anyone else monomaniacal.
• 

  dunsscot

  Commie:

  :I did not advocate an anthropocentric ethic, moral relativism, or simply arbitrarily devising one’s own life purpose or philosophy, did I? The ecology of freedom, or social ecology, is based on the scientific method.:

  So do you think we can formulate an adequate ethical theory employing the scientific method?

  :It looks for meaning and order in the natural world, of which humanity is very much a part, and always has been. Social ecology properly stresses the unique place of the human species in the planetary eco-system - it is irrational to simply assume that humans are not as much a part of nature as every other natural thing.:

  Mutatis mutandis, you may have a point. But it seems that your theoretical approach would not satisfy any Christian system of ethics since your modus operandi seems to exalt "the creation rather than the One who created, who is blessed forever. Amen" (Romans 1:24-25). I guess your theory may have some promise for those who do not choose the theistic way. However, I wonder how you differentiate between good and evil acts.

  :The ecology of freedom is grounded in evolutionary theory and critiques the destructive effects of the artificial development of hierarchies in human society. By creating hierarchies, the evolution of human society has become radically out of synch with nature, and humanity has suffered as a result.:

  I would like to hear you expound upon this notion of hierarchies a little more, if you could. What do you find objectionable about the idea of hierarchies? Additionally, while I am no biologist, I have a difficult time accepting a theory like evolution which seems to vitiate the qualitative distinction between man and every other non-human being (zoon).

  :According to social ecology, the idea that our fellow humans, or the natural world, can “belong” to certain classes of people, and therefore can be exploited by them, is a gross perversion of the non-hierarchical unity in diversity found in nature. In other words, it is contrary to nature, of which we humans are a part, and therefore, not surprisingly, gives rise to all sorts of societal and personal dysfunction.:

  I think that everything on earth has been subjected under the feet of humanity. But humans should not exploit the earth and all that is therein. God evidently placed Adam in the Garden of Eden to "dress it and keep it." Even from a philosophical perspective, however, it seems that man is the most exalted of all living things on this planet. Humans have been called metaphysical beings, self-trancendent beings, language animals, social beings, and religious as well as artistic creatures. Man is also a maker and capabale of immersing himself in technology. In the words of Sophocles:

  "Numberless wonders terrible wonders walk the world but none the match for man . . ."

  Of course, there is another side to Sophocles "high anthropology." Nevertheless, it appears that the ancient Greek tragedian aptly distinguished between man and other earthly wonders.

  :It is not difficult to see how an ethic emerges from this analysis. If we want to be fully functioning, healthy beings, in the way nature intended us to be, we must strive towards a free, non-hierarchical society, in harmony with nature. I find that this is a good starting point for an ethical system which is both rational and very functional and personally fulfilling.:

  I personally do not believe that nature (excluding man) can "intend" anything. If humans use the earth in the way Genesis directs, I think that they can also find fulfilmment and purpose in their lives.

  Duns the Scot
• 

  Tina

  (((((((seven)))))))))))
  I can't rememebr when I've seen what also reflects my personal philosophy so well and eloquently stated! I'm saving your post.
  Often,I seem to lack the writing skills to convey what I believe and feel. Then someone like you does it perfectly! With much appreciation for that post. Thank you so very much.luv,T
• 

  joelbear

  Duns says:

  what do they have to offer in return? Nothing, except believe what you want to or drink yourself half silly everyday and conduct a life governed by hedonic utility that is devoid of God.

  Joel says:

  I don't think I have ever told someone to stop being a Jehovah's Witness or to not become one. I have shared my experiences and thoughts. People's spirituality is up to them. I try to be very careful not to influence or coerce. I kind of view it like the Prime Directive on Star Trek except they never followed it themselves on the show or there would have been no show.

  I want people to be happy. If being a Jehovah's Witness makes them truly happy, who am I to question that. I was not happy as a Jehovah's Witness so I left. I think truth should make someone happy.
  I don't think Jehovah's Witnesses have the whole truth. I do believe they teach truths. I don't believe that "the truth" lies in one place. I think it must be gathered from many different sources.

  hugs

  Joel