the city in which i work is flooded with those witnessing carts.
today im going to approach one of them and pretend i dont know what they believe.
gonna try and record it if i can.
ME: Im not trying to argue sir, im just asking questions. I know shunnng isnt in the bible.
Not sure I can agree with that,
They then just ignored me and pretended i wasn't there. Both holding the Watchtower out to... no one. I took my leave.
Ha! That's pathetic. They'd probably clocked you were a JW. They've not got any ethical justifications for shunning, but that doesn't stop them. Apparently they provided a demonstration.
i am agnostic.
i will count how many agnostics, atheists and christians that are reading this forum regularly.
please answer my question.
As people who have moved from a faith position to another or to none at all, we migjt be especially aware of the many shades between belief and non-belief.
Believers themselves experience doubt all the time. Faith and doubt are so closely connected they simply cannot be separated, like two sides of a coin. In some ways doubt is an expression of deep faith. In the sense that the anxiety that surrounds the very concept of "doubt" can only really visit those who take their faith very seriously in the first place.
I have moved beyond having mere doubts. I have become skeptical about human knowledge itself. More than simply having the wrong answers, it is not clear that humans are able to ask the right questions.
A dog can't do calculus and a cat can't budget for his cat food. How do we even know whether we are asking the right questions regarding "God"? If we are the products of a blind evolutionary processes, then what possible suvival function would be provided by being able to ask and offer answers for ultimate questions?
How do we know our mutteeings about God or not-God make any more sense than a wolf howling at the moon?
This is what I mean by calling myself agnostic.
i am agnostic.
i will count how many agnostics, atheists and christians that are reading this forum regularly.
please answer my question.
Agnostic
[this is what happens when the semester ends.
idle hands.
so i was thinking of how you would categorize the presidents of the wt, and i came up with this:.
I don't think Russell was necessarily crazy. He was a man of his time, and his beliefs and actions were not terribly out of the norm for his time and place in history. He was successful on many levels, as a businessman, author, and charismatic preacher.
Frederick Franz on the other hand was a bit of an oddball character. Whereas Russell was successful because he could appeal sufficiently to society in general to generate a following, Franz could only thrive among the captive audience of pre-existing believers. The general public flocked to hear Russell in many places. Thousands of the flock were wowed by Franz too, but not including many who were not already JWs.
if jws want to inflict shunning on members who want to remain -- knock yourselves out.
but if someone wants to leave - dont believe in an evil almighty god, bible ...or just dont agree with the rules- they should be free to leave- even after being 'disfellowshipped'.
i think it was pre 1980 that you could disassociate yourself without shunning repercussions.
Simon is right you can't make people not shun or make them associate with people they don't want to. That's pretty obvious.
What the state can perhaps do is deny privileges and benefits to religious or other organisations that promote shunning family members. It is then up to the organisation to either reform their policies or suffer consequences. This might include loss of charitable status, and denial of privileges, legal status or avenues of influence accorded to religious bodies generally. This does not curtail anyone's rights but nudges organisations in the right direction. In the case of JWs it would be no more than an invitation to live up to their own statement that:
No one should be forced to worship in a way that he finds unacceptable or be made to choose between his beliefs and his family.
jws like to think they have found the one true religion.
but like so many other religious people, it's usually the religion they were born into, the only religion they know because it's the first one they found or, at the most, one of two or three (typically the second one after they left their first / born-in faith).. the trouble is, there simply isn't enough time to explore and investigate each and everyone of the many thousands of belief systems, religions and sects around the world.. think of it this way: which is the best neighbourhood to live in where you would be most happy and most successful?
not just in the city or even the country you are in, but the entire world.. how would you ever know?
It's not impossible. I'm joining one religion a week until I got all my bases covered.
i was reading the book 'five stages of collapse' by dmitry orlov, which discussed in part, people's attitudes toward the probability of societal collapse.
one group of people, those who dispassionately examine facts, like scientists, engineers and accountants ultimately become diametrically opposed to the group of people with vested emotional interests, like politicians, businessmen and economists.
and he made some interesting comments that parallel our situation when we consider how people are polarized over the future of the organization..
i personally think the truth which the jws are missing all together is that the wts has devised and constructed a doctrinal gospel (1914) specifically to assist toward the proliferation of the literature of which this organization publishes itself.
they allure people with them then exploit these ones further in the distribution of those pieces of literature all while stamping the information as bible truths.
i see jws as well controlled robotic sales representatives for this unscrupulous religious publishing house.
JWs were a phenomenally successful religious publishing company for much of their history.
Now that they are getting out of print books I wonder what kind of future they have got.
from their history, it is evident that jehovah's witnesses are just another doomsday cult.. cults are run by autocrats.
on purpose they are ideologically fixated and they demand that their devotees hold the same absolute certainty of belief without regard for evidence.
the suspension of critical thought is encouraged and by focussing on the objectives of the cult belief in a like minded community, it gives both a sense of direction within a sort of ‘family’ and a hope of paradise perfection.. the leaders have everything to gain by controlling their followers; all the income goes in their direction.. democracy has strictly no part in a running cult.
I didn't understand the OP question to mean banning JWs. I thought we were simply voting on its demise, maybe due to financial crisis, or under the weight of its own contradictions.
from their history, it is evident that jehovah's witnesses are just another doomsday cult.. cults are run by autocrats.
on purpose they are ideologically fixated and they demand that their devotees hold the same absolute certainty of belief without regard for evidence.
the suspension of critical thought is encouraged and by focussing on the objectives of the cult belief in a like minded community, it gives both a sense of direction within a sort of ‘family’ and a hope of paradise perfection.. the leaders have everything to gain by controlling their followers; all the income goes in their direction.. democracy has strictly no part in a running cult.
I would rather if they reformed. They would need to abandon shunning and make blood, education and so on conscience issues. Accept gay people, reform abuse policy, and have women elders and on the GB. If they did that they'd be fine. Not asking much.
