I was in Zurich making my way home from a series of Jehovah’s Witness-related gatherings in Europe when I first heard news of the terrible events in Paris on January 7th.
On that awful day masked gunmen burst into the offices of the Charlie Hebdo French satirical newspaper and slaughtered 12 people in what appear to have been reprisals for the publishing of depictions of the prophet Muhammad.
A further five were killed in the days that followed as the suspects tried and failed to evade the authorities by taking hostages.
At this point you are probably wondering “yes, but what does this have to do with Jehovah’s Witnesses?”
Simply put, the events in Paris teach us two chilling lessons, (1) that religious bullies will always try to silence those who criticize them, just as Watchtower repeatedly tries to silence its critics through slander, misrepresentation and threats of ostracism, and (2) that society in general offers little or no protection against harmful cults, because it ultimately fails to recognize the immense threat posed by undue influence underpinned by religious dogma.
Silencing the critics
I was recently myself accused of trying to silence people when I made a stand against “aggressive activism” in a recent YouTube video and accompanying JWsurvey article. Those leveling this accusation at me seemed to confuse the offering of an honest opinion in a persuasive way with some form of censorship.
I can only hope such people have witnessed the chilling events in Paris and have found the opportunity to reflect on what genuine denial of the democratic right to free speech really looks like.
If I really wanted to set about silencing people who disagree with me, I could do far worse than to take a few pages from Watchtower’s book. A good start would be to get any websites taken down that use my material in a way that fails to serve my agenda, just as Watchtower did in January of 2013 when JWsurvey was taken offline for 24 hours for the heinous crime of making a secret elder’s letter on child abuse available.
I could also lobby YouTube to take down any videos from critics that happen to reproduce my words in a manner of which I disapprove, just as Watchtower did only last month when they had one of my videos removed from YouTube simply because it featured the un-embellished words of Tony Morris.
If I were feeling especially malicious, I might find a way of violating the basic human rights of my accusers by somehow coercing their family members to ostracize them – perhaps based on specious public claims about their mental state, just as Watchtower does through its shunning policy (so recently underscored in the following sickly piece of propaganda in the April 15th Watchtower)…
To download the full magazine, click here.
I do not suggest for one moment that Watchtower’s shunning policy is somehow on a par with violent Islamic extremism, but the truth is there are some very concerning parallels that must be addressed.
A common denominator
If there is one thing all cults are good at, it is silencing their critics and stripping them of their basic rights. Islam does this through overt threats of violence and slaughter toward any who oppose or insult its prophet and teachings, while other cults like Watchtower find more subtle, insidious means of gagging their opponents, as mentioned above.
At this point you might be screaming “but Islam isn’t a cult, it’s a religion of peace!” And I wouldn’t blame you for assimilating the default position of almost all politicians and journalists, who have a vested interest in keeping everyone happy by making appeasing “one size fits all” statements about a religion they apparently know nothing about.
But the simple truth is, the most cursory study of the Quran and its accompanying Hadith reveals a religion brimming with hatred and intolerance of any who refuse to subject themselves to it.
Non-believers (“infidels”) and apostates are not to be accommodated in any form other than as slaves. They are to be subjugated or destroyed, just as any who reject the message of Jehovah’s Witnesses can expect a feathery annihilation once Armageddon arrives and hungry birds summoned by angels begin to circle.
The only explanation I have so far heard from Muslim apologists is that the numerous incitements to jihad in Islamic texts are to be taken figuratively, or refer to some form of “inner jihad” – a battle within oneself. But this explanation, at least from the perspective of this jaded cult survivor, simply doesn’t cut it – especially when you consider that the earliest mass conversions made by followers of Muhammad during the birth of the religion in Arabia were made, not by administering hugs and being nice to people, but by the sword.
Knowing your enemy
Islam is not a religion of peace, just as Jehovah’s Witnesses is not a religion of love. To say otherwise is to disregard the written teachings and commands of either or both religions.
Yes, the majority of Muslims are peaceful, and we should be thankful that this is so. Civilization as we know it depends on this being the case. But the fact that the innate humanity of most Muslims can cause them to ignore or re-invent passages in their sacred texts that summon them to “make war on the infidels who dwell around you” (Quran 9:123) in no way lets their religion (specifically its holy book) off the hook.
By the same token I know for a fact that there are Jehovah’s Witnesses who refuse to shun their disfellowshipped family members (albeit secretly in many cases), but this does not represent a “get out of jail free” card for the Governing Body, or excuse them for their grotesquely immoral prohibitions on so much as emailing Witness family members who have left. (see w13 1/15 p.16 par.19)
As much as many refuse to accept it, the events in Paris were not the product of a few mindless psychopaths who would have found some other excuse to gun down cartoonists if they weren’t Muslims. We have all just witnessed the inevitable result of a lethal cocktail of harmful, absolutist ideology and traditions coupled with extremely potent and persuasive undue influence techniques – and not for the first time.
Unwilling to intervene
Once you allow yourself to fully grasp this realization there is something even more chilling to consider, and that is the total impotence of society in general to even recognize the problem, let alone deal with it.
Governments that mobilize and devote huge resources around a mantra as abstract as “the war on terror” without acknowledging their real enemy, Islamic fundamentalism, hardly seem equipped to grapple with the complexities of cult mind control and the damage it inflicts.
This is why authorities in countries that pride themselves on democracy and adherence to human rights flounder at almost every opportunity to deal appropriately with cults like Jehovah’s Witnesses when they mishandle child abuse, or tear families apart through mandated shunning.
At the very least such behavior should be met with the withdrawal of tax exempt and (it should go without saying) charitable status. If there is one area in which you CAN slap a cult’s wrist, it is on their balance sheet.
Instead, time and again intolerant organizations such as Watchtower are allowed to thrive as those in power look the other way, so terrified are political leaders of being perceived as (you guessed it)… intolerant.
It is for the same reason that bright young girls and boys continue to be radicalized into Islamic extremists: because governments refuse to accept the true, horrifying scope of religious indoctrination through undue influence.
Without even a willingness to address the problem of cult mind control (or whatever name you wish to assign it), there is little hope of authorities exploring means of inoculating young ones against these vile techniques, or reprimanding groups that utilize them to such deadly effect.
This merry-go-round of ignorance, ineptitude and injustice was one of the most depressing discoveries for me when I first awakened from cult indoctrination, and the events in Paris and the way they are being spun by the mainstream media are an unwelcome reminder of the broken world I live in – a world where the violent silencing of an opinion is followed by whining calls to “respect” the very thing responsible for pulling the trigger.
Related video…
***I understand many of you will object to the tone of this article by saying that it contravenes the religious neutrality policy of this website. However, I have never been against people holding their own private beliefs, merely against these being inflicted on others. I feel recent events are an important reminder of what happens when we allow people free license to bully and intimidate people whether for religious or political imperatives, and I wanted to use this opportunity to explain why it is that we live in a society where groups that engage in such behavior are allowed to thrive.***
One other thing about this Disfellowshipping article: Does anyone notice how they go to great lengths to say how this is like a gift from Jehovah? To disagree with the verbiage in the article would be tantamount to disagreeing with God himself. These WT writers are shameless!!!
Ooh! I stand corrected! :)
Interesting passages from the Quran.
I didn’t say you were stupid, and I don’t think that’s true. I think your a very intelligent person.
Having said that, your quotations of the Quran there work against your argument and not for it. In nearly all of them, the “they” being referred to are people who do not believe in God or in the resurrection. This has a parallel with the bible, where Paul stated the prerequisite for salvation as confessing faith in Christ as lord and having been raised while demonstrating works of love. People who do not do this find themselves in a never ending fire of torment in revelation. There’s no difference in expression here, and (admittedly arguably) no difference in meaning.
You quoted 2:90, which again condemns people. But who? Starting in 2:87 you’ll se its people who do not put faith in the messages and works by God through Moses (named) and other messengers, as well as Jesus (named, “son of mary”). So while people such as your quoted Sam Harris, as well as others, try to paint this as talking about westerners or people designated by heritage it is in fact demonstratebly not doing any such thing. It is doing no different than the bible in condemning those who have no faith in God or the resurrection – that’s all. And that is in fact what all those scriptures from the Quran you stated there are doing. I think your argument is trying to say it’s talking about people like us as infidels, but your wrong. I mean no offense by that, it’s just factually, demonstratably proven by the context of the very quotations you have provided.
I would urge you to examine your quote of 5:80-82. It states that Muhammed is sure to find those most hostile to Muslims are the Jews and unbelievers. This is a fact for that time in history. The Jewish people back then would not accept any other religion, they HATED other religions or sects. Judiasm did not allow for it, it was blaspheme which for a very long time in their culture was punishable by death. That is why Jesus died, they accused him of blasphemy and calling himself a king. So yes, they opposed Muslims as well. The unbelievers referred to are pagans with many gods or those who do not believe in any of the messengers or the bible or scripture. Then what does it say about Christians? It says, “you are sure to find that the closest in affection towards the believers are those who say, ‘we are christians,’ for there are among them people devoted to learning and ascetics. These people are not given to arrogance, and when they listen to what has been sent down to the Messemger, you will see their eyes overflowing with tears because they recognize the truth in it.” How is that direction to hate Christians (western culture)? It’s not even direction to hate Judiasm, it’s only a statement of fact for that time.
Again I don’t think you are a stupid person, I would never say that. But this is a subject about which you are most certainly ignorant. And I am too, but I’ve read it cover to cover and I’ve TRIED to prove your viewpoint because I shared it – but I can’t because it’s just not there.
The cultural context of the Quran I’ve already addressed but I will provide a quote from M.A.S Abdel Haleem which is backed up by historical accuracy:
“An important feature of the Quranic style is that it alludes to events without giving their historical background. Those who heard the Quran at the time of its revelation were fully aware of the circumstances.” Pausing there for a moment, here is an allusion to the original oral teaching of the Quran during a time it was not written down. He goes on explaining this and giving examples, “some examples will illustrate this feature, for instance the verse ‘slay them wherever you find them’ (2:191), this translated by Dawood and taken out of context, has been interpreted to mean that Muslims may kill non Muslims wherever they find them. In fact the only situations where Quran allows Muslims to fight are in self defense and to defend the oppressed who call for help(4:75), but even in the latter case this is restricted to those with whom the Muslims do not have treaty obligations(8:72). The pronoun ‘them’ here refers to the words ‘those who attack you’ at the beginning of the previous verse.”
And in particulars it was the Meccans who he was talking about.
I am not saying what happened in France was not a tragedy, or making excuses for the people who did it. But since when has it been our nature to hold an entire group guilty for the action of one or a few? If you were mugged by an African American in the ghetto would that then prove the racial stereotype? No, and to insist otherwise is to be racist. This is no different. Just like you shouldn’t have to apologize to me for the unkind comments of the extremely rude British man I met a few weeks back at a local store, the Muslims round the world should not need to apologize for these people. Nor should they be viewed in any way as like them.
“Your quotations of the Quran there work against your argument and not for it” – I fail to see how any intelligent person could reach that conclusion.
The premise on the table (since you seem to need reminding) is that Islam is not a religion of peace and tolerance but a religion with martyrdom and violence at its core, where non-believers are to be subjugated and killed. Whether or not there are parallels with the Bible is a non-argument, because (1) I am not here to defend the bible, and (2) though you can find multiple violent passages in the bible at least it is concluded by the exploits of the hippy-like Jesus with his “those who live by the sword will perish by the sword” mantras. No such verses can be found in the Quran to satisfactorily stem the tsunami of hatred and loathing of non-believers.
You ask me to zero in on 5:80-82 as though this proves that the violent passages in the Quran were written exclusively to rally Muslims to self-defense against the cruel and oppressive Jews, but this is not what it says….
“You see many among them making friends with unbelievers. Evil is that to which their souls prompt them. They have incurred the wrath of God and shall endure eternal torment. . . . You will find that the most implacable of men in their enmity to the faithful are the Jews and the pagans, and that the nearest in affection to them are those who say: ‘We are Christians’” (5:80–82).
The passage clearly speaks about unbelievers generally, and then focuses on Jews, pagans and Christians as elements of said unbelievers, yet you write as though all references to unbelievers are almost exclusively about evil Jewish overlords.
The passage later on in the same verse commending Christians only commends them for their supposed ability to embrace Islam (with “eyes overflowing with tears because they recognize the truth in it”). If these ones fail to tearfully embrace Islam, it’s fairly obvious that all the other passages about unbelievers being fit for destruction should apply. This is not a passage promoting tolerance, no matter how you try to spin it.
Your final comment proves to me that you are not interested in a genuine dialogue on this subject, but rather on defeating a straw man of your own making by misrepresenting my words. At no point have I suggested that all Muslims as a group should be held to account for events in France. Only the most narrow-minded or willfully ignorant reader could extrapolate such an argument from what I have written. What I have observed is that Islam, as borne out by numerous quotes I have provided (which you would have us believe are all abstract references to hell or calls to self-defense against marauding Jews), is that Islam is a principally violent religion with hatred and intolerance of unbelievers at its core, and that Muslims are just as much victims of religious dogma coupled with undue influence as Jehovah’s Witnesses are. I have quite clearly differentiated between ordinary muslims and the hate-filled religious dogma that they are victims of. Yet you try to put words in my mouth by suggesting that I am holding a group of people accountable for a single act of violence. You even hint that I might be racist, when this issue is a religious matter, not a racial one.
Out of context.
I continue to be amazed that some deeply-troubled individual–with profound grievances against the Governing Body–hasn’t perpetrated a similar act of terror on the WTS.
Why should ‘personal religious beliefs’ be protected by pussyfooting quasi respect? We do not do that with political views.
It is this ‘respect’ nonsense as soon as the word ‘religion’ is associated with a system of thought that encourages a ridiculous response to an atrocity such as ‘But this is not the true Islam’.
This takes any attention away from the intrinsically hate filled and destructive nature of much of the Koran (or Bible , or whatever the inspirational sacred text).
Well all I can say is, between the two of us one of us has behaved respectfully and prefessionally toward the other.
Also per your own words in a later comment, your argument was that Islam is inherently violent via the direction proscribed in the Quran. All I have said, addressing that which you made a part of the discussion and not me, is that the context of the verses you have quoted here prove that the opposite is the case, especially taken in their historical and cultural context.
I would argue that your words toward myself alone discredit your entire position. So it becomes unnecessary for there to be a further discussion, especially since you, as a supporter of freedom of expression, took efforts to hinder my expression evidently. Changing my ip and email is much easier than a click.
But this is all I wanted to say. I look forward to your article on JW broadcasting.
Blocking you from making comments after you quite clearly misrepresented my arguments is not a freedom of speech issue. Nobody is stopping you from setting up your own blog, making your specious, anti-semitic claims about the Quran (a book that says “Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it”) being a book of peace and tolerance, and seeing how much support you can garner. Your expulsion from this website had nothing to do with removing your right to free speech and everything to do with keeping this website free of trolls and liars.
And the fact that you are adept at changing your IP to avoid blocking tells me everything I need to know about your reasons for being here.
If a book is paraded and vaunted as holy, God issued and infallible, then its context has, by definition, to be transcendent. THe word of the almighty overrides human frailties, fashions and trends. It is for all time.
You cannot have it both ways. If a so called holy book is of its time, then the whole lot can virtually be dispensed with, save the occasional bit of wisdom which can still ring true across the boundaries of time and culture.
There is much yet to be learned about mental illness, for example, The New Testament, however, would have us believe that its cause is an infestation of demons, which demons, once extracted and transferred to pigs, will leave the original suffer cured and the pigs demented.
Is this an eternal, incontrovertible and absolute TRUTH? It is in the pages of a book which is revered as such.
Sounds to me as plausible as a guy rising from the dead and ascending to heaven.
Either the lot has to be taken on faith or skepticism universally exercised as with any bit of writing.
Thus bashing infidels because they do not accept your divinely revealed TRUTH and assuring them of everlasting hellfire and torment, is, if reported in a book word for word dictated by God, something that cannot be dsimissed simply because afew years have passed since God’s dictation.
You can not deal with criticism…that’s your greatest problem… To block criticism with agressive comments, is your speciality..not wise for a self proclaimed cult expert…
Like yoda said to Luke: There is where you fail…
On the contrary, I welcome criticism when it is coherent and logical and defines clearly what can be improved on. I fail to see how my observation that your comment about this article met none of those criteria was somehow “aggressive.”
@Zaza and Rich. You should reread the article. Why criticize Cedars for something he didn’t say? It seems you just like to criticize and why? What is the purpose? We here want to hear what Cedars has to say. If you don’t like it, then why are you here?
@E3. I am sorry if it seemed like I was disagreeing with you. I agree with everything you said. I was only adding my thoughts. When I first became a Witness, there were a lot of people in my old congregation who were highly educated and they were just as nice as those who were poor and not educated. If those educated had been haughty to me, I don’t think I would have been as impressed with the religion as I was, but they all treated me really nicely. Again, I am not making excuses for the religion. In the United States, people are impressed by people with high sounding names like doctors and lawyers or maybe “Prince” so it has an influence on people. That is all I was saying. Even in my congregation here, there are some who have college degrees, even a professor but you would never know it to talk to them. That is one of the reasons why I hate the Society so much is because the Society is selfish and greedy and care nothing about the rank and file, no matter how much of their lives they devote to the organization and no matter how nice most of them are.
@Strong Haiku. I believe that a lot of Witnesses would be afraid to ask that question as to whether their family member or friend would be willing to kill them if the Society asked them to do it, because they know what the answer would be.
It is coming soon. I am sure we will see should act against the GB in our life time. And I think they are expecting it to happen that is why they have bodyguards at convention.
JWs who have college degrees are hypocrites too. They sit there in silence and don’t speak out against the GB’s false preaching against higher education. They want to have their cake and eat it too. They enjoy the material benefits of their own education, but by their silence, tacitly nod in agreement with the GB who disdain such education.
That’s not only hypocrisy, it’s cowardice too. We know what the Bible says about cowards.
Found tobelies. I agree 100%. They sit there and don’t say a word but they have nice houses and high paying jobs and that is good enough for them but for the rest of us, we are supposed to be happy being janitors.
Most people espouse freedom, but freedom without limits
is a recipe for anarchy, this also applies to the freedom of
speech.. In countries such as Britain and the USA, right wing
propaganda that incites racial prejudice is banned, public
order and safety taking precedence over freedom of speech.
France has the highest population of muslim immigrants
In Europe and there’s a deal of racial tension, so Charlie
Hebdo’s comments, described as sometimes virulent, won’t
have helped ease the tension.
The actions of the fundamental religious terrorists however
we’re atrocious and inhuman.and this is where there’s a
parallel with the w,t,, If they had unrestricted freedom, I’m
convinced the G,B, would order all “Apostates to be stoned
to death, this is the mindset of fundamental religionists,
it’s been demonstrated for all to see.
@Gary so than you believe in the interpretation of Revelation passage where such a war between religions and political elements is prophesied ?
@ cedars This forum still can’t post direct reply under the intended comment which make it very inefficient as a tool to lead meaning full dialog with other members is there a way you can fix it Cedars ?thx
Sorry about that. I have my hands rather full at the moment, but I’ll raise this with the webmaster at the next opportunity. Please bear with us! :)
I had the same problem. Maybe only the webmaster can do that.
@ Thanks Cedars I know u are busy but hope you will able to fix this tech glitch asap because it’s really affects the quality if this forum in some cases may case frustration ,misunderstanding or “hot blood” among participants.best wishes
@man in the loins pit,
I have considered the book of Revelation. Nobody can prove that it is either false or true, it’s a matter of belief.
Will the state war against religion in the future?, quite possibly. Regardless of a person’s beliefs I believe the real problem is a lack of tolerance.
The Jehovah’s witnesses do not practice tolerance among its members. Obey or be destroyed is an old mantra.
The Bible does state that the political machine will destroy religion, whether that is true is a matter of belief. I am led to believe from the scriptures this is initiated by a religious attack on the holy place resulting in the great tribulation and ending in the state itself becoming religiously intolerant thereby taking on God as it were. Is it true?, that’s a matter of belief.
Intolerance breeds intolerance, it has to end somewhere.
@Thank you Gary ! Appreciate your perspective and time & effort to get to my question ! Agree with.I wish to react or comment more here but from the reasons stated in my previous comment I will abstain for now.Just quick thought to this.If all cults are dangerous and harmful therefore they should be eliminated or outlaw than if all religions are cults the same apply.Than this is reasonable ground how scene may be set for the notion alluded in Rev book.And social activism or society moods may aggregate this.
OK Gary. But how do you end it without killing people.
I wouldn’t kill anyone. The world is very careful to describe these people as “terrorists” in reality I believe a more accurate phase would be “religiously motivated terrorism”
The state is already at war with Isis, though it is careful in its description.
If a person is prepared to murder due to their belief system then it is up to the law and society to decide what to do with them.
As Lloyd commented before “those with the sword”, however, how many Muslims have been abused in the name of religion or state?
Religious indoctrination is a dangerous thing.
While Jehovah’s Witnesses have described themselves as being persecuted because of their beliefs, all one has to do is to access most of their literature published during the 1930s that presented cartoons and other artwork describing Catholic leaders and other significant preachers of the time in the most disagreeable ways. Besides the art work were the most unpleasant accusations directed to all other religions. The Watchtower does not dare to do that today as they have tried to fit within the mainstream as much as possible. But they have taken the opposite course by lashing out against anyone that would publish critical articles, videos, or books about their unsupportable policies and teachings. I guarantee that the Watchtower will remain silent on all of the latest Islamic terrorist versus the rest of the world. I think that their “shunning” policies are just a watered-down version of Islam’s constantly changing “sharia” laws that the imams make up along the way as they try to extend their personal power.
What if they’re willing to die, in order to kill you? Do you think any words or kind gestures will stop them?
@ John H.
You may be right, the WT is less vitrolic since the 80’s and 90’s when we studied the Revelation climax book. But a hypocrite is often blind to their own self contradiction. How long is the warranty with that gurantee?
JK, heh.
If a person, regardless of their beliefs, becomes abusive the law has a right to deal with them, rightly so.
For instance, if an atheist abuses another person due to their beliefs then that person, due to their beliefs, has become intolerant.
Off to bed now, & thanks for the debate:-)
@Gary things get sometimes even more complicated.The law itself may became “abusive – abuser” as faceless entity
A well written bit that many who grew up a JW can relate to.
http://time.com/3654731/grew-up-as-jehovahs-witness/
Keep up the good work, your site has helped me adjust after 50 yrs of guilt.
When I grew up in the 40,50,60’s, everybody had to belong to a religion. My family didn’t belong to a church and my brothers and I were ostracized for it. Now days, it seems that people aren’t as afraid to admit they don’t belong to a church. The more people come out about espousing a religion or church, the more people will admit to not belonging to a church and so on and I believe that churches have the most ability to turn out extremists simply because they can be led to believe that their religion is the only “true” religion. I was led to believe from Jehovah’s Witnesses that God created me, and so I had to obey him (even though the instructions came through the Society and not the Bible), no matter what it was.
Not all churches are cultic and controlling. At least I think that is so. I am only guessing. What is needed is for schools to teach how to recognize what is dangerous indoctrination but teachers are probably afraid to do that since most kids have parents that are indoctrinating their kids from early and even the teachers might belong to a church and parents who belong to a church or religion will take that to mean that schools are turning their kids into atheists.
And then there is freedom of speech. If teachers don’t recognize what is dangerous mind control, how can they teach it to kids. Most people are under some kind of mind control, whether they realize it or not. We grow up, under the mind control that our parents and grandparents instilled in us. We go to school and are impressed by others around us who can mold our minds. Our minds are controlled by what we read and what we watch on television and in the movies.
Here in the United States, there is a lot of talk that when you recognize in somebody that you may know, that they are speaking and acting radically, you need to take action but most people never think that it could happen in their own back yard, so to speak and nobody would ever think that getting involved with the Jehovah’s Witnesses could be radical but we all know who are involved in it, that those whom we know who are fully immersed in it, are not to be reasoned with. It is like they have their minds blocked by some “force”.
We know once we are out of it and can look at it from the outside looking in, that all those people we left behind in the religion are simply missing the ability to reason on anything we can say to them.
At first, I didn’t think that Jehovah’s Witnesses were capable of Jim Jones kind of stuff, but now I am not so sure anymore.
I’m not sure why my comments aren’t posting. maybe I’m saying the wrong thing. This is a hot topic.
Happens to me sometimes too. Just a technical glitch I guess. I use the mouse to mark and copy my text to the clipboard, before clicking the post comment button. If it gets “lost in the mail” I paste from the clipboard back into a new reply box, and try again.
@anonymous
to your earlier comment that JW are under compulsion & DS repercussion do not fight or kill than why don’t world governments impose the same in order to have that peace they eagerly strive for !?
if you say that there are churches that do not indoctrinate than we have to make list of them and these churches are “good” thus should be spare of “destruction – elimination” or there is possibility that this churches moved to another level of indoctrination and mind control so not only of their own flock but to the whole society ,state politicians -governments they support….
as I said before cult like behavior is everywhere in all level of society in any or country where u live as you said in your own words we are mind controlled by mass media etc… so the question is not IF but with WHAT are we controlled
@ Man from the lions
It’s all about acceptance. Most people want acceptance in some group or community, large or small. Very few people have the independence to stand alone, weathering criticism and rejection. Those who can, gain true freedom.
I’m not saying withdraw from all groups. But realize that truth is where you find it. Some in one place, more in another. When you put it all together, you have enlightenment.
@FTobelies
you right what you say.It’s individual right to choose from the “market of ideas” or start to buy or adopt other idea at some point of your right and no one should face excessive repercussions for that if that was ineffectually based decision.The different story is in cases were you joined some “club or group” and you deliberately and maliciously broke some rule an you have to face the consequences of your action.example :You drink & drive you will be punished and lost DL.
This forum is eclectic example of people who are EX JW and some of them join different religious groups or at least endorsed their ideas some became agnostic some are atheist.Some are still active JW.Doesn’t matter who we -they are we all struggle to coexist somehow in peace & love.Why we have to find our own answers which are again matter of choice.And choice could me matter or faith or could be not.
A very well thought out article, cedars. I personally can’t draw parallels between Islam and the witnesses. Although I was a victim of there childhood mental conditioning, I didn’t know any witnesses that would resort to violence. Unless something in their teachings have changed, ( which I notice happens frequently), for the most part they were pacifists. My father, (who is an elder), is one of the most gentle people I know. And even though I think he would drink the koolaid if told to, I don’t think he would harm another person. Given these points, I don’t think your article is valid. Radical Islamists teach and foster violence and violent people. They value recruits with the capability for violence.
Thank you for your website, it keeps me in the loop. Thirty odd years ago, when I was disfellowshipped, (without being baptized ever), I told my family that if they wanted to keep any kind of contact with me, I didn’t want to hear about the Society. I hope your awakening is not as damaging as mine was.
Third time lucky at trying to post my message.
Religion or ideology should not be given the power to feed extreme behaviour be it aggressive or passive aggressive. For some, the thought that their loved ones should view them as dead or disgraceful deserving of death when they are at their lowest point in life or having mental health issues is a very painful experience which is equivalent to the grieving process of death. I can say this as a person who has experienced both. I have experienced the pain of losing my daughter in a tragic accident but I also have 2 very close friends whose young daughters where committed to Psychiatric Hospitals for attempted suicide because they were disfellowshipped & felt unworthy & ashamed of living. Both came from single mother families(widows actually) with no father to defend them. One was df’d because the details had become known & she had to serve as an example. She was raped! She was given alcohol & raped by a boy of a very large prominent jw family with elders & ms’s. He was not even reproved. It turned out that both girls were suffering from mental health conditions that made them easy targets. They should not have been punished for their problems, they should have been helped! I sat with these mothers many times while they cried & said that they felt as though their child may as well have died & that each day they didn’t know if they would get the dreaded phone call that their child had ended it once & for all. The mental anguish that they felt was disturbing for me to watch as I could see the same grief stricken eyes that I had when my child died. But the saddest outcome was that they thought that this was the right thing to do because the Society said so.
Reply
Stephen-I continue to be amazed that some deeply-troubled individual–with profound grievances against the Governing Body–hasn’t perpetrated a similar act of terror on the WTS.
You said what I was thinking all along for the past 2 years since I’ve been doing my research..Why hasn’t someone gone down there and “cleaned house”
7 bullets
@Timothy smith. I enjoyed your comment I don’t deny your father is a gentle person & he probably would be even if he wasn’t a witness .JUST BECAUSE JWs Don’t PICK UP a GUN DOESN’T MEAN THEY ARE NOT VIOLENT.The ELDERS & the ORGANISATION COMMIT VIOLENCE!!! SUBTLE YES BUT STILL VIOLENCE!! Every time they DISFELLOWSHIPPED someone by following the Rules laid down by the GB (Smoking,Any little disagreement voiced in Watchtower Study,Disagreement on Blood Fractions which comes from DONATED BLOOD,Generation teaching,Meaning of F& D Slave,Oral Sex within Marriage…Yes you can be Disfellowshipped FOR THAT,Etc,Etc) The Elders & GB CONDEMN Every Witness to DEATH every time they Disfellowshipped some JW!! AM I BEING HARSH ?? NO, NO!! Because however gentle Elders are many JWS spiral into Depression once the STIGMA of the Disfellowshipped LABEL is put on them. MANY COMMIT SUICIDE!! I KNOW of THREE Friends who did that! Can you imagine the LONELINESS,Low SELF ESTEEM someone goes through after being CUT OFF from FAMILY & FRIENDS. One Elder hasn’t spoken to his Two SONS for 35 YEARS after they were Disfellowshipped at 17 YEARS of age after being BAPTISED at 13 & 15 years of age when they didn’t understand the consequences of what they were getting into so decided The LIGHT WAS NOT GETTING LIGHTER & they LOOKED into the HISTORY of The ORGANISATION. Read the FINISHED MYSTERYBOOK which was published in 1917. Jesus would NOT have chosen this Orgyin 1919 when you READ the RUBBISH this book PRINTS!!! It is NOT FOOD at The PROPER TIME.