There's a lot of truth there.
"True educators present all sides of an issue and encourage discussion . Propagandists hammer hard on their view and discourage discussion."
Indeed.
education teaches you how to think.propagandists tell you what to think.true educators present all sides of an issue and encourage discussion.
propagandists hammer hard on their view and discourage discussion.many times their true motives are hidden.
they sift the facts, tell the favorable ones and conceal the others.
There's a lot of truth there.
"True educators present all sides of an issue and encourage discussion . Propagandists hammer hard on their view and discourage discussion."
Indeed.
i'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
Acknowledge the mistake? For supporting someone who wanted to carry on a fight when the state wouldn't?
Barbara is not accountable for everything Steven does. She supports his campaign and thinks he's a pretty courageous guy. So do I. Do I agree with everything he says or does? No.
i'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
Unkind, slimboy. Unthank has stuck his neck out for the good of all. His judgment may not be the best on some things, but he is well intentioned and has achieved much in drawing the attention of authorities to the WTS's contempt for the law.
i'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
Barbara, you are not the enemy. This thread shows that many people are concerned about what Steven has done in the last day or so, but I don't see anyone calling him an enemy. Stop being so melodramatic.
i'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
James Woods, the Director of Public Prosecutions did take it seriously. My reading of his final letter is that, as with any criminal case, they have make an assessment of whether a case is worth proceeding with on the basis of the likelihood of gaining a conviction.
This case hinged on religious ministers failing to get WWC checks if they were legally obliged to do so. The DPP must have believed it would be too hard to prove that some individuals regularly work with unrelated minors. Who would give evidence if they denied those charges? And who can prove that the Governing Body gave a direction to the local elders to defy the law?
The Justice Department has already said they have been in regular contact with the WTS in Australia reminding them of their obligations. The letter to Victorian congregations may be seen as a reasonable result. Tying up the courts with a case that was unlikely to be won was probably seen as a waste of public money.
i'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
I have no doubt at all that Steven is well-intentioned. Various government departments have been very patient and co-operative throughout this saga. But could it be that his tendancy to embroider these issues is what has prompted those government officials to back away from him?
I've said it before on this forum: by the time a JW gets to the point of leaving, they are often damaged goods. I know I was: consumed by anger and bitterness and a sense of betrayal, as well as a feeling of humilation at having been conned and manipulated. It may be that Steven's excesses (if they are such) are a manifestation of that. We have all dealt with it in different ways.
a few weeks back i came home from work and found the latest copies of the watchtower (armageddon fearmongering) and awake!
(social media site nonsense) lying on the counter.
it was obvious witnesses had stopped by the house.
Terry:
1. Jehovah's Witnesses? Hmmmm, isn't that the religion that predicted Armageddon in 1975? Oh? Are you SURE? Could you find out for me why so many people tell me that? Something must have happened or I wouldn't have heard it.
(Witness pulls out Reasoning From the Scriptures, thumbs to pg 136, and reads, "Jehovah's Witnesses do not claim to be inspired prophets. They have made mistakes. Like the apostles of Jesus Christ, they have at times had some wrong expectations." Closes book, continues, "Do you have an alarm clock? Then let me give you an illustration ...")
Throwing the 1975 prediction at a JW zombie wouldn't faze them a bit. They may be aware of it (though it was almost 40 years ago. How old is your average doorknocker?) They are probably not aware of the 1925 "expectations", or what Russell said were the reliable promises about 1914 and 1988. And really, they just don't care. They are not interested in finding out more, because to them the Watch Tower Society IS Jehovah.
This is a religion that keeps using the analogy of a weather forecaster who keeps getting predictions right (using biblical examples of "correct" predictions but also sweeping the nutty WTS date calculations into that basket as if that's one God just got wrong). They keep using Matthew 7:15-20 about the good fruit vs rotten fruit, ignoring the fact that their predictions are ALL rotten and their manipulation and control and emotional blackmail of their followers is a perfect example of rotten fruit, nothing like the way Jesus dealt with his followers.
i'm gonna play the skeptic today on a topic that is painful for a lot of people on this forum.
my intent is not to stir anything up but to make sure facts are confirmed.
bear in mind, i'm sickened by the wt's role (and the heirarchy down to elders) in child molestation cover-ups.
Mind Blown, I don't think you're getting the point. No one fails to appreciate the seriousness of child rape. Steven has done very well to take his case where he did. It is terrible that the Victorian government has now terminated the prosecution. But it does Steven more harm than good to post images such as this while claiming they are something they are not.
There are already people dubious about his motives and his bona fides. Doing this, apparently trying to milk emotions through misrepresentation, is a very bad move.
a few weeks back i came home from work and found the latest copies of the watchtower (armageddon fearmongering) and awake!
(social media site nonsense) lying on the counter.
it was obvious witnesses had stopped by the house.
Excellent thoughts, Maksym. If God has always had a faithful slave class, who each pass the baton of knowledge to another generation, with which members of the faithful slave class did CT Russell consult when he created his new and unique set of beliefs? Isn't it true, then, that the doctrines of JW, which evolved from his teachings, are based on the thoughts of one man? (and what does their bible say about putting faith in man?)
Furthermore, in 1917 Russell's successor, JF Rutherford, removed four of the seven members of the Watch Tower Society board of directors because they tried to stop him publishing an article with a doctrine that contradicted the religion's doctrine. By overriding the wishes of the majority, wasn't he again forcing on the organisation his own personal view? Wasn't he challenging the governing body of the time .... and if so, what does that mean about all those doctrines he introduced (Armageddon, the "torture stake", a birthday ban, the concept of God's "organisation", the requirement for all JWs to go witnessing, the blood ban ....) maybe they are all doctrines God disapproves of?
Here are a few more lines of thought if a Witness calls.
1. "You must meet a lot of people from different religions when you call door to door. Do you find many people remain in a religion only because they have never really examined it?" (they'll say yes.) "That must be so frustrating for you! Those people are just blinkered. But what about you? Would you ever read a book or website that criticised or analysed your religion ... or do you restrict your reading to just what your leaders tell you?"
2. "What would I have to do to become a JW?" (you study, attend meetings, get baptised.) "If I went through that process and later decided for whatever reason -- growing knowledge, for example -- that I had made the wrong decision and resigned, what would be the consequences?" (they'll say you can just leave freely.) "But say you and I had become close friends, or my relatives also joined, but stayed in the religion when I left. Would you still talk to me ...or would you be prevented from talking to me? If I still believed in God and Christ, wouldn't I still be a Christian? Why would I be shunned? Isn;t that just a cult control tactic?"
3. "Where do JWs get their doctrines? I've heard there's a faithful slave. What's that? Who is he?" (they'll explain). "Ah, so someone in your own congregation could be a member of the slave class? If God's using him or her, and that person thought very deeply and decided a JW doctrine was wrong, would the Governing Body listen to them and consider changing the doctrine? What if 10 or 100 anointed JWs all wrote to the Governing Body and said this doctrine is wrong; that the teaching of the 144,000 being a literal number is wrong; that the prohibition on blood transfusions is wrong; that when Jesus spoke about the other sheep he just meant Gentiles? Would the Governing Body listen to them?"
Have another go, Rover. I'm interested in hearing what article it was.