Leaving RF

[Kapalika]

I kinda feel like everyone else didn't notice that the OP said part of why they were leaving was so they wouldn't talk to former JW's... some kind of excommunicated thing.

I don't know what to say. This is messed up in so many ways.

You could do what I do and chuckle at the whole thing.

You guys are ridiculous, imagine how Jehovah's Witnesses would be treated in Iran, have you heard of how the Bahai are treated, Kolobri is not making this up, there are definitely places in the world were professing to be a JW can get you locked up.

And look at how JW's would treat people if they were in charge... look how they treat people who even just leave their 'church'. It's just an exploitative cult that takes in millions of dollars in profits and is continually ignoring how unnhappy most of their members are. I don't recall the exact figures but I remember depression being much more common among them than many other denominations. The organization itself is pretty corrupt.

And of course Iran is messed up, they treat everyone badly. But their forum posts are not going to mean anything. They don't even live in Iran, do they?

 

[savagewind]

I think it is going to be a lot less fun around here. Farewell fellows!

 

[Curious George]

In light of this article Question Box — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY I will be leaving RF within the next few days. The direction given is put in bold print and the reasons given are solid ones.

I can reason that blocking from sight the posts from those disfellowshipped to protect their social vacuum (so as to not undermine Jehovah's loving discipline for them) as one way to comply w/o leaving RF. (1 Corinthians 5:5; 1 Timothy 1:20) I can also see blocking those determined to destroy my precious faith - especially those that left us because they were 'not of our sort' as a means to that end as well. (1 John 2:19)

However, If I died today, could my tombstone truthfully say:

He did not associate with deceitful men,
And he avoided those who hide what they are.
(Psalms 26:4)

We are reminded at 1 Corinthians 1:26 that among true Christians there are "not many wise by human standards". (footnote) Do I see myself above being duped by someone that sees themselves as the cat in a cat and mouse game? Have I ever felt like someone was stringing me along to see how long they can get me to talk with them when they know it would damage my relationship with Jehovah to do so?

I have also been considering 2 Timothy 2:23-26.

"Further, reject foolish and ignorant debates, knowing that they produce fights. For a slave of the Lord does not need to fight, but needs to be gentle toward all...."

Before considering the linked article I had already decided that I needed to further refine how and where I would post here. Some threads have lived too long and I had a share in keeping them alive.

Where there is no wood, the fire goes out,
And where there is no slanderer, quarreling ceases.
- Proverbs 26:20

[Avoid] the scornful man,
And contention will disappear;
Disputes and insults will cease.
- Proverbs 22:10

What brought me to the conclusion that I need to set a time limit and leave RF instead of just modifying my use of it was the part in the article just prior to the bold printed direction. The RF is not country specific. Can I say I am not seeking out people physically located in countries where online communication is monitored by hostile local authorities? Do I want to be responsible for those hostile authorities to use something I posted to fuel their hatred for Jehovah's pure worship and give them their excuse ramp up their acts of intolerance?

I've posted this in both under Religious Debate for everyone to see today, and in the Jehovah's Witnesses DIR so that it won't disappear quickly as not many new threads are opened there.

Doesn't that just mean not to discuss bible topics? You could for instance still discuss creationism without the bible, or philosophy, or morality, or science etc. Correct?

 

[Kolibri]

Doesn't that just mean not to discuss bible topics? You could for instance still discuss creationism without the bible, or philosophy, or morality, or science etc. Correct?

I could, but rarely have I dipped into the non-religious parts of the forum. For one, the Bible is my final authority. I could say that the Bible does not support creationism nor macro-evolution. But then how would I back it up? Morality - the Bible is very much a moral textbook. Philosophy - some philosophers say that since knowledge reaches us through our senses, which can be deceived, no knowledge is verifiably true. This runs counter to faith in a true and living God that has given us definite answers from a perspective of ultimate objectivity. I personally would feel trapped in unanswerable debates.

Science. Sure...where the bible does not touch on it. There is plenty of that. My personal concern there is time and relevancy to my life. I have an interest in vibrational medicine and quantum theory. My vocational training is in a field of subtle energy manipulation for promoting the health of the individuals I work with. Sometimes I will take time to educate myself further in how to be more effective. I recently bought this book on my mom's recommendation but have not gotten into it very far yet. http://www.amazon.com/Trigger-Point...8065169&sr=8-1&keywords=trigger+point+therapy

Still that is a matter of taking the time. and maybe running into someone that already has a bit more knowledge in that particular technique. (I am a book learner, but learning physical movement is a bit more challenging for me.) Where I need help in putting things into practice is not so much thru online discussions but with face-to-face situations.

Anyhow that is just my take on it personally. I would be too tempted to go to my textbook (the bible) when relevant and it would frustrate me to no end if I could not.

 

[Curious George]

I could, but rarely have I dipped into the non-religious parts of the forum. For one, the Bible is my final authority. I could say that the Bible does not support creationism nor macro-evolution. But then how would I back it up? Morality - the Bible is very much a moral textbook. Philosophy - some philosophers say that since knowledge reaches us through our senses, which can be deceived, no knowledge is verifiably true. This runs counter to faith in a true and living God that given us definite answers from a perspective of ultimate objectivity. I personally would feel trapped in unanswerable debates.

Science. Sure...where the bible does not touch on it. There is plenty of that. My personal concern there is time and relevancy to my life. I have an interest in vibrational medicine and quantum theory. My vocational training is in a field of subtle energy manipulation for promoting the health of the individuals I work with. Sometimes I will take time to educate myself further in how to be more effective. I recently bought this book on my mom's recommendation but have not gotten into it very far yet. http://www.amazon.com/Trigger-Point...8065169&sr=8-1&keywords=trigger+point+therapy

Still that is a matter of taking the time. and maybe running into someone that already has a bit more knowledge in that particular technique. (I am a book learner, but learning physical movement is a bit more challenging for me.) Where I need help in putting things into practice is not so much thru online discussions but with face-to-face situations.

Anyhow that is just my take on it personally. I would be too tempted to go to my textbook (the bible) when relevant and it would frustrate me to no end if I could not.

Tests can be frustrating. If your faith tells you not to hate, do you remove yourself from all situations that might tempt you to anger, or must you face your temptation and try your best to follow your faith?

I do not like the idea of all JW withdrawing from rf, because they are guided to not speak of the bible anymore. To me each person has more to offer than a particular facet. And even more so, I note that the publication indicated directing people to jw.org, would it be better for jws to have an online presence to do such when a curious person comes forth, or would it be better for non jw, some of whom you have encountered here to explain the faith? While the publication certainly suggested that discussion about the bible could lead to problems it did not say anything about noting a disagreement or correcting bad information with a direction towards jw.org.

I understand some faiths set aside time to testify, or study, or solicit, or proselytize or whatever verb they choose, but most people in day to day lives might stumble upon someone. This happenstance is surely a time to share even though it is not part of the set aside time. Now this publication seems to direct how one should act in such a circumstance when the internet is involved, but nothing in it suggests not to have a presence on the internet, correct?

 

[Kolibri]

Tests can be frustrating. If your faith tells you not to hate, do you remove yourself from all situations that might tempt you to anger, or must you face your temptation and try your best to follow your faith?

I do not like the idea of all JW withdrawing from rf, because they are guided to not speak of the bible anymore. To me each person has more to offer than a particular facet. And even more so, I note that the publication indicated directing people to jw.org, would it be better for jws to have an online presence to do such when a curious person comes forth, or would it be better for non jw, some of whom you have encountered here to explain the faith? While the publication certainly suggested that discussion about the bible could lead to problems it did not say anything about noting a disagreement or correcting bad information with a direction towards jw.org.

I understand some faiths set aside time to testify, or study, or solicit, or proselytize or whatever verb they choose, but most people in day to day lives might stumble upon someone. This happenstance is surely a time to share even though it is not part of the set aside time. Now this publication seems to direct how one should act in such a circumstance when the internet is involved, but nothing in it suggests not to have a presence on the internet, correct?

That is correct. I could have a blog. Or some other web presence. The direction given is very specific. Not using the internet to pursue religious discussions with "strangers that are currently residing in a different country." Each word there more strictly defines the situation talked about. And each word, once satisfied leaves possibilities.

I live in the United States. So, while there is still caution regarding people hiding who they are, this direction does not apply to me discussing religious topics with others here in the United States online.
I have friends in France that I know. They are not strangers to me. This direction does not apply to my discussions with them.
This direction is primarily focused on the fact that some lands are more hostile towards us than others, and discretion on how to help people spiritually can be better served by locals that know the lay of the land so to speak.
We expect the world to get more hostile towards religion in general, not less. It is rather prudent to act with shrewdness.

Regarding difficulties. Russia is the first government to put jw.org on a banned list. It is now illegal to direct anyone to that website while they are currently inside that country' borders.
http://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/by-region/russia/bans-jw-org-website-blocked/

If Russia is already upset enough to ban the website, do you think they will care if the promotion is coming from outside their national boundaries or not? Who will pay for their feeling like their sovereignty has been disregarded? It will be those that live under their umbrella, that's who.

 

[Kolibri]

If your faith tells you not to hate, do you remove yourself from all situations that might tempt you to anger, or must you face your temptation and try your best to follow your faith?

A bit of both actually. Regarding anger there are a number of Bible principles that come into play.

He has told you, O man, what is good.
And what is Jehovah requiring (or "asking back.") of you?
Only to exercise justice, (or "to be just; to be fair.") to cherish loyalty. (or "to be kind and loyal in your love." Lit., "to love loyal love.")
And to walk in modesty with your God.
- Micah 6:8

Modesty is recognizing our limitations.

Do not keep company with a hot-tempered man
Or get involved with one disposed to rage,
So that you never learn his ways
And ensnare yourself. (or "your soul.")
- Proverbs 22:24-25

"Be wrathful, but do not sin, do not let the sun set while you are still angry; do not give the Devil an opportunity."
- Ephesians 4:26-27

or as it was put in the Psalms

Be agitated, but do not sin.
Have your say in your heart, upon your bed, and keep silent.
- Psalms 4:4

I really like the last because I know bottled-up anger festers. The Bible actually tells us to get it out, to have our say, but in a safe environment and in a safe way.

There will be mistakes, but the key is to never give up in learning what is fine.

For the righteous one may fall seven times, and he will get up again,
But the wicked will be made to stumble by calamity.
- Proverbs 24:16

 

[dogfishparisi]

In light of this article Question Box — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY I will be leaving RF within the next few days. The direction given is put in bold print and the reasons given are solid ones.

I can reason that blocking from sight the posts from those disfellowshipped to protect their social vacuum (so as to not undermine Jehovah's loving discipline for them) as one way to comply w/o leaving RF. (1 Corinthians 5:5; 1 Timothy 1:20) I can also see blocking those determined to destroy my precious faith - especially those that left us because they were 'not of our sort' as a means to that end as well. (1 John 2:19)

However, If I died today, could my tombstone truthfully say:

He did not associate with deceitful men,
And he avoided those who hide what they are.
(Psalms 26:4)

We are reminded at 1 Corinthians 1:26 that among true Christians there are "not many wise by human standards". (footnote) Do I see myself above being duped by someone that sees themselves as the cat in a cat and mouse game? Have I ever felt like someone was stringing me along to see how long they can get me to talk with them when they know it would damage my relationship with Jehovah to do so?

I have also been considering 2 Timothy 2:23-26.

"Further, reject foolish and ignorant debates, knowing that they produce fights. For a slave of the Lord does not need to fight, but needs to be gentle toward all...."

Before considering the linked article I had already decided that I needed to further refine how and where I would post here. Some threads have lived too long and I had a share in keeping them alive.

Where there is no wood, the fire goes out,
And where there is no slanderer, quarreling ceases.
- Proverbs 26:20

[Avoid] the scornful man,
And contention will disappear;
Disputes and insults will cease.
- Proverbs 22:10

What brought me to the conclusion that I need to set a time limit and leave RF instead of just modifying my use of it was the part in the article just prior to the bold printed direction. The RF is not country specific. Can I say I am not seeking out people physically located in countries where online communication is monitored by hostile local authorities? Do I want to be responsible for those hostile authorities to use something I posted to fuel their hatred for Jehovah's pure worship and give them their excuse ramp up their acts of intolerance?

I've posted this in both under Religious Debate for everyone to see today, and in the Jehovah's Witnesses DIR so that it won't disappear quickly as not many new threads are opened there.

I understand your decision. I spend much of my time online in discussion / debate with individuals who seem to have an aggression aimed toward my faith. You cannot reconcile with those types of people. They are not listening to your communication they are dissecting it and trying to cleverly manipulate and confuse you. That's been my experience at least.

 

[JoStories]

There are many, many avenues of recommended ways of reaching people with "the good news of the kingdom". Besides the door-to-door canvasing there is airport witnessing, harbor witnessing, street witnessing, some of this is done with eye catching carts. Some are involved in group bible studies in nursing homes. Others respond to requests made by prison inmates. There is also letter writing or telephone witnessing - especially to those that live behind gated communities or are consistently not at home. Often there are foreign language communities within our locale including those limited to braille or using sign language to communicate.

There is plenty to keep us busy. For some of us the have been posting in these types of forums, our real-life situations have been somewhat limited. Both JayJayDee and myself are caregivers. We have a lot of time on our hands where we are only busy being available for the needs of those we care for. We want to speak about our hope, and it has been much easier for me to comment and respond here than it has been to organize myself to write letters and make phone calls. Being challenged here in some regards has also helped me do deeper research into how to explain why I believe as I do - the evidence that convinces me that what i have is based on reality.

So while this will be a change, it will cause me to break out of my laziness and working more closely with those who can preach extensively locally. I will suffer no loss by following direction. You may see me in and out of threads still for a few more days. I've set Friday as my cut-off date.

First, I think its sad that you and JayDee are leaving for this reason. That said, I am not clear on what type of caregiver you are but if it is in the realm of nursing or medical care, if you were to speak of your faith to someone, ou could be fired. No facility or hospital, outside of those afilliated with a faith, will allow this. But I wish you both the best. I would hope that you find peace.

 

[jeager106]

I think these J.W.'s bailed out of this forum is because J.W.'s are "encouraged"
to STAY OFF INTERNET RELIGIOUS FORUMS!!!! Period.
The reason is that you "people of the world" will influence them and corrupt their one
and only true Christian Faith.
Likewise J.W.'s are not supposed to read "worldly publications" like Sports Afield,
Time, News Week, or any other unapproved literature of any kind.
It might be o.k. to read the local newspaper but I'm not sure.
J.W.'s organization does NOT support higher education, other than that required
by law in most States and Countries. It's o.k. to graduate High School but NOT
to waist time, money and energy going to college. That is frowned upon.
Reasons? Time spend in college would be better spent in "service work"
witnessing and spreading Watchtowers and Awake magazines.
For the love of Pete WHY???? become a doctor and save lives??? Is that a heathen
thing?
If a J.W. gets sick what do they do? They go to a doctor who has a 10 year education
in medicine for help.
If they get falsely accused of a crime or get sued they hire a LAWYER who has a law degree.
I don't get the idea that an education is a bad thing.
I have friends that are J.W.'s though I doubt they tell other J.W.s that "I" am a friend.
I am friendly, kind, and caring when they come round and happily accept literature and
I actually READ it.
I like them as they are well meaning, caring, and generally harmless.
And "yes" they have for many decades been preaching that they will be attacked by
the "world" for their preaching work.
That may very well be true but it would take a huge paradigm shift in the United States.
We are a nation tolerant of religious views and a nation of laws that protect religious
views.
With the lawlessness committed by Muslims in other countries do we see any serious
overt acts against Mosques or Muslims in the U.S.?????

 

[Nietzsche]

For the love of Pete WHY???? become a doctor and save lives??? Is that a heathen
thing?

Technically speaking, yes. Medicine has been 'round longer than Jesus or Abraham.

 

[savagewind]

I have not seen anyone yet who tries to lure a JW to another way of thinking.

Luring people to their way of thinking is what the Jehovah's Witnesses do. Matthew 4:19

I have seen former JWs try to reason with them about certain points. Isaiah 1:18

They are being taught to not listen.
Proverbs 1:5
Proverbs 25:12
Romans 1: 10-21
James 1:19
Matthew 11:15
Proverbs 1:33

The Bible teaches that we should listen to God's Spirit.
The Jehovah's Witnesses teach that we should listen to the faithful and discreet slave.

Jesus said, John 12:48
But they say it is the words of their governing body that we must hear and obey or be judged. Hebrews 13:17

 

[David1967]

Unfortunately some groups very existence depends on isolation from anyone that may challenge their thinking. Gotta keep inside the compound walls so to speak.

 

[outhouse]

Not using the internet to pursue religious discussions with "strangers that are currently residing in a different country." Each word there more strictly defines the situation talked about.

Sucks that fanaticism is so deep, a religion seems scared of knowledge.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I have not seen anyone yet who tries to lure a JW to another way of thinking.

Well...I do.
I mean, I wouldn't describe it as 'lure', since I'm hardly hiding my beliefs, but if a topic came up, the JW doctrine sat on one side, and my belief on the other, then I'm trying to form what I hope are rational and reasoned arguments, both to test my own understanding of the world around me, and to help others develop their own thoughts.

That could be described as luring someone to another way of thinking.

 

[savagewind]

Well...I do.
I mean, I wouldn't describe it as 'lure', since I'm hardly hiding my beliefs, but if a topic came up, the JW doctrine sat on one side, and my belief on the other, then I'm trying to form what I hope are rational and reasoned arguments, both to test my own understanding of the world around me, and to help others develop their own thoughts.

That could be described as luring someone to another way of thinking.

Another WAY. It is about conversion. Whenever you argue to draw someone to understand you you don't do it to change what they do, only what they think about a certain thing. There is a difference between changing one's opinion and changing one's way of life. When I argue with JWs it is not so they will stop being Jehovah's Witnesses. But when they argue with us it is for changing us into them.

I wouldn't wish me on anyone. But they are wishing the JW way on EVERYONE.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Another WAY. It is about conversion. Whenever you argue to draw someone to understand you you don't do it to change what they do, only what they think about a certain thing. There is a difference between changing one's opinion and changing one's way of life. When I argue with JWs it is not so they will stop being Jehovah's Witnesses. But when they argue with us it is for changing us into them.

I wouldn't wish me on anyone. But they are wishing the JW way on EVERYONE.

I know. But I guess I'm just stating it from their perspective. My view is that open and honest conversation helps develop ideas.

 

[savagewind]

I know. But I guess I'm just stating it from their perspective. My view is that open and honest conversation helps develop ideas.

I agree with you! They are not allowed any ideas that their governing body say are not from the Bible. That is (probably) the reason the gb say they should not go on the internet.

 

[Katzpur]

Yes, I also see this as a response to what is to come. The reasons are real and I will join my brother in saying farewell to RF. Being obedient to the direction of those taking the lead, is a Christian obligation. (Heb 13:7, 17)

Hmmm. I wonder why Deeje hasn't figured this out yet. The two of you need to get on the same page. Maybe you could have a chat with her the next time you look in the mirror.

 

[savagewind]

Hmmm. I wonder why Deeje hasn't figured this out yet. The two of you need to get on the same page. Maybe you could have a chat with her the next time you look in the mirror.

It is positively amazing how similar they are! I am not easily amazed.