just to continue my theme about religious freedom and how we approach criticizing the wts, i've also been thinking about 'shunning'.. i think shunning is the most unifying complaint that most ex-members of religious groups that practice it have in common.
it is the layer that runs under every other complaint - whatever the reason for leaving it seems "... and i was shunned" can be added to it as the final rap on the charge sheet.. of course it seems like a no-brainer to many of us and we hardly ever stop to really think about it - shunning is bad, the watchtower believes in shunning therefore the watchtower is bad.
they need to stop it.
"As others stated, forced shunning is the issue. But, for the record, Paul NEVER said to shun. He said to "stop keeping company" or "stop associating". There's a BIG difference in shunning and avoiding."
You presume.
I have not cited the biblical incident as though it presents a model for shunning as Watchtower would have JWs shun.
Otherwise the distinction you attempt of shunning versus avoiding is amusing. Avoiding is an instance of shunning.
just to continue my theme about religious freedom and how we approach criticizing the wts, i've also been thinking about 'shunning'.. i think shunning is the most unifying complaint that most ex-members of religious groups that practice it have in common.
it is the layer that runs under every other complaint - whatever the reason for leaving it seems "... and i was shunned" can be added to it as the final rap on the charge sheet.. of course it seems like a no-brainer to many of us and we hardly ever stop to really think about it - shunning is bad, the watchtower believes in shunning therefore the watchtower is bad.
they need to stop it.
"Because they do fear the laws that they cannot win."
Yes. That is the thing that undermines a critical difference between Watchtower's shunning program versus the instance Watchtower leverages from scripture.
The biblical instance has the local church membership informed precisely the sin for which the subject should be shunned. It didn't matter what the local "judicial" ramification could have been. But that's not what Watchtower does, and has never even attempted.
Telling is all the time and money Watchtower has spent over the years with legal wrangling to let parents opt to let their children suffer premature death rather than acquiesce to blood transfusion, yet Watchtower has at no time spent the same time and money assert a right to inform local church members of the sin for which a particular person should be shunned. Watchtower has never fought legally for this right because Watchtower does not want to always inform local membership of the supposed sin for which a member is to be shunned for.
Watchtower likes the circumstance where it can orchestrate the shunning of a person who's sin is to demand answers to questions that deserve answer.
just to continue my theme about religious freedom and how we approach criticizing the wts, i've also been thinking about 'shunning'.. i think shunning is the most unifying complaint that most ex-members of religious groups that practice it have in common.
it is the layer that runs under every other complaint - whatever the reason for leaving it seems "... and i was shunned" can be added to it as the final rap on the charge sheet.. of course it seems like a no-brainer to many of us and we hardly ever stop to really think about it - shunning is bad, the watchtower believes in shunning therefore the watchtower is bad.
they need to stop it.
They didn't have libel / slander laws back in those days.
Laws haven't bothered Watchtower when it wants to practice something. Watchtower just does what it wants under a banner of freedom of religion and asserts it as a theological position untouchable by courts in lands that embrace religious freedom as an inalienable right.
Watchtower does this with military induction. If a JW wants to join the military Watchtower has local elders treat the person as disassociated. But at least everyone knows why the person is, in effect, disfellowshipped. Watchtower does the exact same thing with JWs who conscientiously accept transfusion of blood.
If Watchtower wanted to do this with other "sins" it could. But it does not want to enable this level of transparency across the board because it would let elders reveal to everyone that Johnny disassociated because he was demanding answers to questions that deserved answers.
And, by the way, the slander/libel law in ancient times was that community leadership would stone you to death if they didn't like what you were saying.
just to continue my theme about religious freedom and how we approach criticizing the wts, i've also been thinking about 'shunning'.. i think shunning is the most unifying complaint that most ex-members of religious groups that practice it have in common.
it is the layer that runs under every other complaint - whatever the reason for leaving it seems "... and i was shunned" can be added to it as the final rap on the charge sheet.. of course it seems like a no-brainer to many of us and we hardly ever stop to really think about it - shunning is bad, the watchtower believes in shunning therefore the watchtower is bad.
they need to stop it.
I think the average ex-JW or JW who dislikes Watchtower's shunning program is not because either objects to the notion of shunning but, rather, because the method used by Watchtower lacks transparency and employs star-chamber tactics.
By comparison, the biblical instance where Paul supposedly recommended a congregation shun an individual he went on to tell everyone the precise reason for his recommendation. Supposedly the man was immorally living with his own father's wife. Okay. So now members of that congregation knew the issue and could therefore decide whether they would shun the individual. Watchtower's program does not do this. The supposed "sin" for which a JW might be shunned for could be a completely moral act of demanding answer to a question that deserves an answer. On top of this we have the problem of star-chamber tactics.
i first heard of this a couple of years ago, i think it is nasa that is sending people to mars to begin a colony on the red planet.
they will never be allowed to return to earth.
i just saw on the morning news that they have 100 people narrowed down who have volunteered.
And the ratio of At-Homes to Not-At-Homes is expected to be nearly identical to what we find on earth, which is a sure sign that the same god who created earth also created mars, which means wasting time on mars is every bit as important as wasting time on earth, which means this wasted time is very important to report, which begs the question should the time it takes to get to the territory be counted?
Answer: If the publisher leaves a handbill in a laundromat on earth just before blasting off to mars the travel time to the planet should be included as part of the ministerial activity. If the publisher does not leave a handbill in a laundromat just prior to blast off then the travel time should not be included--(signed GB via Service Desk SKE)
please understand i have nothing against islam.
i have something against alpha muslim men.. i was walking my cute little chihuahua mix in the park the other day when darts off sniffing since i am using a retractable extension leash and i am not minding the fact that he comes up on a muslim family and gets within a foot of them.
the paterfamilias gives me a dirty look and then says something to his wife and i can make out the word "saif" which is arabic for "sword.
When a dog comes up to me sniffing it makes me feel like just another piece of $hit.
Otherwise the Islamic faith needs to grow up just like all other religious faiths need to grow up. They need to realize the world they live in is not what their ancient ancestors thought.
one of many things that led me to agnosticism after leaving the jw's was the cognitive dissonance i encountered with those in the mainstream churches, especially the really conservative ones.
these types would scream out in protest (rightly so) on all of the current atrocities going on in the world regarding islam and its radical extremists, but then justify the savage murders and slaughter perpetuated by israel in the old testament.. often i would take these passages and replace the names and places of these scriptures with current ones.
for example 1 samuel 15:3 reads "now go, attack the amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them.
They would abandon both in a New York minute if they had to choose between their riches and them.
For pragmatic purposes I usually go Republican. But I agree with what you write. I've often heard utterance of the "balanced" complaint "Democrats won't get out of my pocketbook and Republicans won't get out of my bedroom" or something to that effect. The reality is the mainstream in neither affiliation gives a damn about anyone's bedroom and both want more of the money in your pocketbook to be in their pocketbook. Frankly, I'd say it's a very small minority of Republicans that care what you do in your bedroom, but among these are some of the loudest blowhards on planet earth. But among these loud chest-thumping blowhards it never escapes my notice that they usually have found a way to put a lot of cash in their pockets over the years.
For most of earth's population, its about increasing their own personal economic circumstance. It's about the money.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/05/nato-rapid-reaction-force-counter-russia-ukraine.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2015/02/08/russia-investors-on-war-watch-wednesday/.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11397924/ukraine-crisis-europe-and-us-debate-how-to-handle-russia-live.html.
NATO should start flying planes all over his borders.
What planes? NATO's available air force is appallingly dismal.
If WW III started tomorrow Russian forces could overwhelm and devastate Eastern Europe before--and here it comes--the US stepped in and paid the bill with US blood and US taxpayer money.
Ukraine and weapons? If the US begins openly weaponizing Ukraine's military Putin will respond in kind and escalation will occur, and probably to a very bad end.
Putin is surrounded and kept in power by super wealthy oligarchs. These men are not interested in nationalism per se. They are interested in maintaining monopolies over the Russian citizenry they exploit to keep and grow their economic power. Controlling these men is controlling Putin.
How to best influence Russia's oligarchy is the quadrillion dollar question.
i have to thank tv.jw!!!
(im not putting the complete link, but you know what i mean).
after showing my wife the 'trolley song' as we now call it, she was rolling on the floor in embarrassment and shock.. she shook her head, and was clearly troubled by what we watched.. little by little, the org is actually helping more to wake up!
hello forum,.
i'm new here and not sure where to post.
so, i'm 21 years old and currently a baptized witness, however, i'm slowly making my mind up to leave and here's why.. first, there are certain things that make no sense to me in the organization.
Garrett,
Much of what you depict is a predictable outcome based on an admission Watchtower made years ago of the reason for all the time consuming activity. Most JWs have no idea Watchtower officials made this admission, and it's telling:
Why the unrelenting pressure for more and more organized religious activity?
