Marvin Shilmer

Joined

• started 433 topics
• posted 4,004 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Marvin Shilmer

• 
  64

  Shutting down the Judicial Committee "invite".

  by kairos in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  judicial committee invitation comes, with be there or be square consequences.. ( come or we will df you ).

  what are the sure fire, tested and true tactics that will keep the elders off your back?

  ( for good ).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  
  Judicial Committee Preparation
• 
  18

  The art of defending Watchtower's lies

  by opusdei1972 in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  the following article, is one of the best efforts to defend one of the most absurd doctrines of the watchtower society:.

  http://www.truetheology.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=172.

  may be the writer was inspired in freddy's thoughts.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  ... if you are trying to defend the indefensible, what the hell can you really come up with?

  First, a person can avoid slathering fallacies all over the place like peanut-butter on a sandwich.

  Second, a person can present their argument for what it is rather than what it is not.

  In this case Watchtower's blood doctrine rests solidly on one thing and one thing only: a preferential conclusion of biblical text. What the doctrine does not rest on is a soundly deduced conclusion of the same biblical text. Arguing the latter is futile. Arguing the former is doable, but not very persuasive for a rational thinker.
• 
  18

  The art of defending Watchtower's lies

  by opusdei1972 in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  the following article, is one of the best efforts to defend one of the most absurd doctrines of the watchtower society:.

  http://www.truetheology.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=172.

  may be the writer was inspired in freddy's thoughts.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  "The following article, is one of the best efforts to defend one of the most absurd doctrines of the Watchtower Society..."

  I could not disagree more with that assessment.

  The article you cite is hopelessly littered with assumption and unevidenced assertion.
• 
  41

  Awake! Quotes a Well-Known ex-JW Apostate in Support of Their Beliefs!?!

  by Oubliette in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  konceptual99, referenced this article on another thread: .

  was it designed?

  the inverted retina.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Now that I have read Bergman's biography and a few of his articles that he has published, I will no longer be using Bergman as any kind of authority whatsoever...

  I offered that position as my own many years ago and caught a lot of flake from the ex-JW community for saying so. Didn't matter to me. The man attributes things to sources those sources do not say. Case closed in my book.
• 
  32

  Assembly Assessment increased 300%

  by James Jack in

  1. jw
  2. experiences

  while at the assembly, when reading the financial statement, i noticed our expenses went from $2500 to almost $9500 so i questioned an elder and said that the assessment per publisher is at $10.50 for all in the us branch territory.. he added this helps the society know how much is coming in and helps them plan out future projects!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  He added this helps the Society know how much is coming in and helps them plan out future projects!

  He should have kept it to "This helps the Society".

  The Watchtower organization is no more and no less than it has always been: A religion business.

  Any changes made by Watchtower are based on what's good for it's business. That's all there is to it. End of story.
• 
  114

  Why do religious people make claims and then refuse to back them up?

  by Viviane in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  several times over the past few months i have had conversations, both here and in real life, with religious people making all sorts of interesting and conflicting claims.

  i like to know how things work, so generally i will ask questions to net out what i am being told and see if it can be explained and make sense.. for instance, if someone said 2+2=4 and i asked how, there are a variety of ways that could be shown to me, a number line, physical objects being put together, counting on fingers and toes, etc.

  indeed, in my personal life, i often have to explain how certain technologies work, sometimes planned, sometimes off the cuff, from a variety of group sizes to a varying degree of technical expertise.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Why can't religious people simply say "I don't know"?

  The answer to that question lay in the level of capital a person has invested in a particular idea, and it reminds me of another thread of discussion started here yesterday of an elder who over a period of several years begged Watchtower to give reasons for distinctions held within its blood doctrine. His final letter of resignation bleeds disgust for a manifest unwillingness to say "We don't know" to enforced details of a doctrine for which it never gives reasons for when "We don't know" is actually leveraged by Watchtower as an excuse for what the same doctrine does not enforce. (See Dialogue regarding blood between an active elder and the governing body ) The Watchtower organization has too much religious capital invested in its blood doctrine to dump the whole thing with a frank and honest admission that "We don't know".
• 
  114

  Why do religious people make claims and then refuse to back them up?

  by Viviane in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  several times over the past few months i have had conversations, both here and in real life, with religious people making all sorts of interesting and conflicting claims.

  i like to know how things work, so generally i will ask questions to net out what i am being told and see if it can be explained and make sense.. for instance, if someone said 2+2=4 and i asked how, there are a variety of ways that could be shown to me, a number line, physical objects being put together, counting on fingers and toes, etc.

  indeed, in my personal life, i often have to explain how certain technologies work, sometimes planned, sometimes off the cuff, from a variety of group sizes to a varying degree of technical expertise.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  It is not just religion, but all forms of woo, that suffers from the avoidance of logic and evidence.

  That's so well stated, rebel8. So well stated!

  Voodoo does not just happen.
• 
  114

  Why do religious people make claims and then refuse to back them up?

  by Viviane in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  several times over the past few months i have had conversations, both here and in real life, with religious people making all sorts of interesting and conflicting claims.

  i like to know how things work, so generally i will ask questions to net out what i am being told and see if it can be explained and make sense.. for instance, if someone said 2+2=4 and i asked how, there are a variety of ways that could be shown to me, a number line, physical objects being put together, counting on fingers and toes, etc.

  indeed, in my personal life, i often have to explain how certain technologies work, sometimes planned, sometimes off the cuff, from a variety of group sizes to a varying degree of technical expertise.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Why can't religious people simply say "I don't know"? What is wrong with that level of honesty? Why all the claims to know stuff and, when caught NOT knowing any of that stuff, the insults, the subject changing, the pretend answers?

  What you observe is disorder and disruption of rational thought process.

  I've come to this conclusion: religion is a contagious disease.

  That said, and since most here have history with the Watchtower religion supposedly based on biblical text, I have an observation of my own: the biblical depiction of Jesus is not of a person who taught a religion but, rather, of a person who taught a way of living.
• 
  20

  What are the Witnesses Afraid Of ?

  by Sour Grapes in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  if the witnesses have the truth and have been going to meetings for many years and every week they learn how to be effective in the ministry and learn about the bible on sundays and every week have a family worship night, why are they afraid to talk to anyone who doesn't agree with them or question their beliefs?

  if they have the truth then nothing can refute it.

  the truth is the truth.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  - As asserted by the Watchtower organization “apostate” is constructed as a theology to protect those who follow Watchtower from exposure that would interfere with the religion’s dominance over its followers.

  
  - As accepted by active Jehovah’s Witnesses “apostate” is an excuse to disengage from reasoning that threatens preferential belief.
• 
  29

  Is there a Child Molester on the Governing Body?

  by TTATTelder in

  1. watchtower
  2. scandals

  great report by abc on the abuses in jw-dot-org land.... i hope it opens a "floodgate" of future news reports and exposes.

  if you ask yourself, "why hasn't the watchtower leadership changed their policy on the 2 witness rule?

  if one or more persons on the gb has victims out there that can't come forward because of the 2 witness rule, then that would explain the permanent road block to policy change that is obviously in place.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  I think the main issue is not the two-witness rule but, rather, Watchtower's failure to encourage that allegations of child molestation be reported to secular authorities by either the victim themselves or the victim's parent or guardian. It's one thing to tell victims/parents/guardians they have an absolute right to report allegations to secular authorities, and it's something else entirely to encourage that this be done.

  Otherwise the two-witness rule is essentially the same concept secular law uses for prosecution, only secular law does not ply the term "two witnesses" like Watchtower does. The two-witness rule is something used internally by Watchtower demanding that allegations must have corroboration over and beyond an allegation. Secular law requires corroboration too. Corroboration does not require two human beings be present for and observe an act of molestation, with the victim being one of the "witnesses". In Watchtower's case, the two-witness policy is one requiring corroboration, and corroboration should be required in order to convict a person (in JW speak: disfellowship) of such a crime. Potentially even circumstantial evidence could establish corroboration, but it would have to be precise so that no alternative was left other than guilt of the alleged molestation.

  That said, to me the primary issue at stake is Watchtower's failure to actually encourage that allegation of child molestation should be reported to secular law enforcement by anyone with reason to believe the report could be true. If Watchtower is concerned about breaching ecclesiastical privilege it could at least take the step of encouraging that victims/parents/guardians should report the matter to secular authorities. There is no excuse for failing to do the latter. None at all. This failure is, to me, at the very least immoral.