spanky1 posted...
thanosibe posted...
spanky1 posted...
thanosibe posted...
Holy s*** JW's really trigger CE.
I mean I was born into it I've be out for almost 20 years now and have healthy relationships with my folks and sister and brother in law. I have no animosity towards what my parents did. And I hope my children will forgive my mistakes as an adult too.
Edit: I may have discarded the religion. But the life I grew up around and the friends I had, and memories I have are all worth it. Religion is only as important as an individual makes it. When I realized I was just going through the motions as I reached my 20's I realized if I don't believe this is the truth than why stick with it?
Are your parents and sister and brother in law all in the religion?
Yes my folks for sure. My father is an elder (probably equivalent to a priest/father?) himself and my mother has been a pioneer (full time door to door service) since I was a teenager.
Not sure how often my sister and brother in law go to meetings and stuff, but I know they still go to some degree.
Were you 1)baptized and then 2)disfellowshipped?
Yes. I was around 16, I think. No I left voluntarily.
I think I need a drink. Almost everybody does only they don't know it. -- Charles Bukowski
|
Well then there you go. You were never disfellowshipped, so your family and friends in the organization aren't required to shun you. And if you were disfellowshipped, and your parents happened to continue talking to you and having a close relationship with you, they could be counseled by the elders, and if they continued to do so after that, your dad could lose his position as an elder, and if they still continued to do so and didn't stop, they could eventually be disfellowshipped themselves and then they would be shunned by all their JW friends. You do realize that, right? You're what they call a fader. It's the healthiest way to leave the organization. Not everyone is as lucky as you, or has it as easy as you.
|
tell him to get over it1 day ago#53
I would rather not follow a "religion" that mandates I die instead of receiving a blood transfusion.
|
I don't understand what this is?
|
lol, hearing people talk about Jehova's Witnesses reminds me of how people talk about Seventh Day Adventists, which is the religion I was born and raised in. People also fear it and call it a cult, just because it has more "rules" than your average religion. Yet SDA's is not only the fastest growing religion in the United States (google it), but members of SDA's, on average, live 10 years longer than the typical American due to its health-based doctrine. My point? Fearing religions and labeling them a certain way only serves to close your mind as much as those religions you claim to criticize. Actually talk to members of the religions rather than just make assumptions based on some article you read by a dissenter.
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
lol, hearing people talk about Jehova's Witnesses reminds me of how people talk about Seventh Day Adventists, which is the religion I was born and raised in. People also fear it and call it a cult, just because it has more "rules" than your average religion. Yet SDA's is not only the fastest growing religion in the United States (google it), but members of SDA's, on average, live 10 years longer than the typical American due to its health-based doctrine.
My point? Fearing religions and labeling them a certain way only serves to close your mind as much as those religions you claim to criticize. Actually talk to members of the religions rather than just make assumptions based on some article you read by a dissenter.
Fully indoctrinated cultist alert!
|
unpleasant_milk posted...
Fully indoctrinated cultist alert!
Bruh, I'm a pastor at a nondenominational church. Fear meh
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
lol, hearing people talk about Jehova's Witnesses reminds me of how people talk about Seventh Day Adventists, which is the religion I was born and raised in. People also fear it and call it a cult, just because it has more "rules" than your average religion. Yet SDA's is not only the fastest growing religion in the United States (google it), but members of SDA's, on average, live 10 years longer than the typical American due to its health-based doctrine.
My point? Fearing religions and labeling them a certain way only serves to close your mind as much as those religions you claim to criticize. Actually talk to members of the religions rather than just make assumptions based on some article you read by a dissenter.
I don't even know where to begin here.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
My point? Fearing religions and labeling them a certain way only serves to close your mind as much as those religions you claim to criticize. Actually talk to members of the religions rather than just make assumptions based on some article you read by a dissenter.
Apparently, a very certain group of people feel that they are too intellectually and morally superior and above religion to understand them. They also claim to be very tolerant.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
unpleasant_milk posted...
Fully indoctrinated cultist alert!
Bruh, I'm a pastor at a nondenominational church.
Fear meh
I feel sorry for you. And more so for those innocent minds you are filling with rubbish.
|
spanky1 posted...
Well then there you go. You were never disfellowshipped, so your family and friends in the organization aren't required to shun you.
And if you were disfellowshipped, and your parents happened to continue talking to you and having a close relationship with you, they could be counseled by the elders, and if they continued to do so after that, your dad could lose his position as an elder, and if they still continued to do so and didn't stop, they could eventually be disfellowshipped themselves and then they would be shunned by all their JW friends. You do realize that, right?
You're what they call a fader. It's the healthiest way to leave the organization. Not everyone is as lucky as you, or has it as easy as you.
I'm not sure what your point is. Yes, I realize all that, and no I never said everyone had the exact same experience if they left the religion. That still is a person's decision to make, to stay or leave or whatever. And with that decision comes the consequences thereof. You don't get to choose how other's live their lives either. If I did something I know would have disfellowshipped me, then I live with that decision. How do I bear ill will if my family choose to abide by the letter of the religion for the sake of what they believe is their eternal life? I'm not advocating it's a good practice but I am also not going to absolve my involvement in the situation when I knew from the get go what the consequences would have been. Just like anyone in the religion knows.
I think I need a drink. Almost everybody does only they don't know it. -- Charles Bukowski
|
thanosibe posted...
spanky1 posted...
Well then there you go. You were never disfellowshipped, so your family and friends in the organization aren't required to shun you.
And if you were disfellowshipped, and your parents happened to continue talking to you and having a close relationship with you, they could be counseled by the elders, and if they continued to do so after that, your dad could lose his position as an elder, and if they still continued to do so and didn't stop, they could eventually be disfellowshipped themselves and then they would be shunned by all their JW friends. You do realize that, right?
You're what they call a fader. It's the healthiest way to leave the organization. Not everyone is as lucky as you, or has it as easy as you.
I'm not sure what your point is. Yes, I realize all that, and no I never said everyone had the exact same experience if they left the religion. That still is a person's decision to make, to stay or leave or whatever. And with that decision comes the consequences thereof. You don't get to choose how other's live their lives either. If I did something I know would have disfellowshipped me, then I live with that decision. How do I bear ill will if my family choose to abide by the letter of the religion for the sake of what they believe is their eternal life? I'm not advocating it's a good practice but I am also not going to absolve my involvement in the situation when I knew from the get go what the consequences would have been. Just like anyone in the religion knows.
My point is an explanation of why people would be triggered by JWs.
|
unpleasant_milk posted...
I feel sorry for you. And more so for those innocent minds you are filling with rubbish.
No need to feel sorry. But thanks!
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
lol, hearing people talk about Jehova's Witnesses reminds me of how people talk about Seventh Day Adventists, which is the religion I was born and raised in. People also fear it and call it a cult, just because it has more "rules" than your average religion. Yet SDA's is not only the fastest growing religion in the United States (google it), but members of SDA's, on average, live 10 years longer than the typical American due to its health-based doctrine.
My point? Fearing religions and labeling them a certain way only serves to close your mind as much as those religions you claim to criticize. Actually talk to members of the religions rather than just make assumptions based on some article you read by a dissenter.
People would rather talk about me, than to me
|
To come closer to schizophrenia.
|
OrangeWizard posted...
People would rather talk about me, than to me
The weirdest part about the topic is the posters telling you how your religion is supposed to work. It's like the religion equivalent to a man "mansplaining" womanhood to a woman.
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
OrangeWizard posted...
People would rather talk about me, than to me
The weirdest part about the topic is the posters telling you how your religion is supposed to work.
It's like the religion equivalent to a man "mansplaining" womanhood to a woman.
I just see people asking him questions, not telling him how his religion is supposed to work.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
OrangeWizard posted...
People would rather talk about me, than to me
The weirdest part about the topic is the posters telling you how your religion is supposed to work.
It's like the religion equivalent to a man "mansplaining" womanhood to a woman.
A lot of this forum has a lot of hate for religion in general. Not surprised to see people insinuating to others their religion makes them a bad person.
I think I need a drink. Almost everybody does only they don't know it. -- Charles Bukowski
|
spanky1 posted...
I just see people asking him questions, not telling him how his religion is supposed to work.
I've only been asked two questions iirc. Have I missed any?
|
spanky1 posted...
Zanzenburger posted...
OrangeWizard posted...
People would rather talk about me, than to me
The weirdest part about the topic is the posters telling you how your religion is supposed to work.
It's like the religion equivalent to a man "mansplaining" womanhood to a woman.
I just see people asking him questions, not telling him how his religion is supposed to work.
|
OrangeWizard posted...
spanky1 posted...
I just see people asking him questions, not telling him how his religion is supposed to work.
I've only been asked two questions iirc. Have I missed any?
How could you sleep at night knowing you basically killed your child?
|
OrangeWizard posted...
spanky1 posted...
I just see people asking him questions, not telling him how his religion is supposed to work.
I've only been asked two questions iirc. Have I missed any?
My point is I don't really see people telling you how your religion is supposed to work in this topic. The only time people are interacting with you in this topic is when they're asking you a question. (Oh and I did ask how hold you were, btw)
|
smoliske posted...
How could you sleep at night knowing you basically killed your child?
What child? Oh and I'm 26
|
I've only met a couple JWs in my life and really only dealt with one. My coworker became one late in life. Was raised catholic. He'll bring in pamphlets or ask me Bible trivia or have a discussion about a certain topic. Probably inappropriate for the work place but I don't mind learning other people's beliefs. Anyways he's a nice guy. Also the way he described death/rapture/heaven etc to me was People have died and will die. We'll all be brought back before rapture, then we get a second chance to be good people. Then after Armageddon those that were good Christians are resurrected on earth which is made into paradise and those that aren't don't go to hell but merely cease to exist. Heaven is just for God and angels. Anyways in my experience Mormons are far more culty and judgemental that JWs. This guy might also just be more moderate.
The gamefaqs moderation team knows dogs capable of being offended, cant laugh at a joke, and like to punish jokes that are acceptable on prime time TV pg shows.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
lol, hearing people talk about Jehova's Witnesses reminds me of how people talk about Seventh Day Adventists, which is the religion I was born and raised in. People also fear it and call it a cult, just because it has more "rules" than your average religion. Yet SDA's is not only the fastest growing religion in the United States (google it), but members of SDA's, on average, live 10 years longer than the typical American due to its health-based doctrine.
My point? Fearing religions and labeling them a certain way only serves to close your mind as much as those religions you claim to criticize. Actually talk to members of the religions rather than just make assumptions based on some article you read by a dissenter.
Is it true that Seventh Day Adventist think that the Pope is the anti-christ and the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon?
"Yare yare daze" ~ Jotaro Kujo
"Children are pure, they know who's the strongest." ~ MaskDeSmith
|
I had no idea jehova's witnesses had similar practices to scientology... That is very scary...
Smash DS Code: 4554-0120-5368 SB4 Name: Roz
RIP: Orlando of the Axe Karma: 1642 --he delivered!
|
Lightsasori posted...
Zanzenburger posted...
lol, hearing people talk about Jehova's Witnesses reminds me of how people talk about Seventh Day Adventists, which is the religion I was born and raised in. People also fear it and call it a cult, just because it has more "rules" than your average religion. Yet SDA's is not only the fastest growing religion in the United States (google it), but members of SDA's, on average, live 10 years longer than the typical American due to its health-based doctrine.
My point? Fearing religions and labeling them a certain way only serves to close your mind as much as those religions you claim to criticize. Actually talk to members of the religions rather than just make assumptions based on some article you read by a dissenter.
Is it true that Seventh Day Adventist think that the Pope is the anti-christ and the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon?
This makes perfect sense as Peter was the pope and was told by Jesus to form the church.
The gamefaqs moderation team knows dogs capable of being offended, cant laugh at a joke, and like to punish jokes that are acceptable on prime time TV pg shows.
|
because it might be the one true religion
|
(Moderator)23 hours ago#79
spanky1 posted...
Zanzenburger posted...
OrangeWizard posted...
People would rather talk about me, than to me
The weirdest part about the topic is the posters telling you how your religion is supposed to work.
It's like the religion equivalent to a man "mansplaining" womanhood to a woman.
I just see people asking him questions, not telling him how his religion is supposed to work.
Really referring to posts like these: smoliske posted...
it's the one religion than makes no sense, since you are pretty much damned if you believe in it
8.3 million members who believe only 144,000 will ascend to heaven and the religion was founded in 1870.
I'm not a math person but
BlueMage279 posted...
unpleasant_milk posted...
Would you let your kid die if he/she needed a blood transfusion?
That seems to be a common desire amongst that cult
Yes they would typically let them die. Accepting a blood transfusion is grounds for disfellowshipment (excommunication).
unpleasant_milk posted...
Insane rantings of a demented cult > life of your child
Jehovah witness logic.
It sounds crazy but it's completely true.
Especially the last two where they asked that particular user and others answered the question for him. Yes, his answer ended up being the same but let the guy post, lol. It didn't need the added vitriol.
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
Dustin1280 posted...
I had no idea jehova's witnesses had similar practices to scientology...
That is very scary...
When it comes to ex members they're nowhere near as bad as scientoligists. Scientologists are on a whole other level, with the harassment and whatnot. With JWs, it's just a little shunning is all. JWs are worse in other ways, though, such as the blood doctrine.
|
(Moderator)23 hours ago#81
Lightsasori posted...
Is it true that Seventh Day Adventist think that the Pope is the anti-christ and the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon?
The hell? lol EDIT: No, I've never heard of that, in case my above comment wasn't clear.
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
@ZanzenburgerAu contraire, the vitriol is fully warranted. The poster literally said he wouldn't save the life of his child, if the life saving treatment involved blood transfusions. I can't be 'pleasant' to such a clearly deluded and let's face it, horribly neglectful viewpoint.
|
(Moderator)23 hours ago#83
unpleasant_milk posted...
Au contraire, the vitriol is fully warranted.
The poster literally said he wouldn't save the life of his child, if the life saving treatment involved blood transfusions.
I can't be 'pleasant' to such a clearly deluded and let's face it, horribly neglectful viewpoint.
I was just saying at least wait for him to respond before you start criticizing his viewpoints. That's all.
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
unpleasant_milk posted...
Au contraire, the vitriol is fully warranted.
The poster literally said he wouldn't save the life of his child, if the life saving treatment involved blood transfusions.
I can't be 'pleasant' to such a clearly deluded and let's face it, horribly neglectful viewpoint.
And that keeps you from understanding.
|
OrangeWizard posted...
unpleasant_milk posted...
Au contraire, the vitriol is fully warranted.
The poster literally said he wouldn't save the life of his child, if the life saving treatment involved blood transfusions.
I can't be 'pleasant' to such a clearly deluded and let's face it, horribly neglectful viewpoint.
And that keeps you from understanding.
Understanding the sensible, humane and rational argument in favour of letting your child die needlessly? Ok. I'm all ears. Do tell.
|
Zanzenburger posted...
Lightsasori posted...
Is it true that Seventh Day Adventist think that the Pope is the anti-christ and the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon?
The hell? lol
EDIT: No, I've never heard of that, in case my above comment wasn't clear.
I asked because a girl I was dating was also a Seventh Day Adventist and she explained that to me when we talked about my religious past (I was raised Southern Baptist). Though I learned now never to bring up religion and politics when dating lol.
"Yare yare daze" ~ Jotaro Kujo
"Children are pure, they know who's the strongest." ~ MaskDeSmith
|
(Moderator)23 hours ago#87
Lightsasori posted...
I asked because a girl I was dating was also a Seventh Day Adventist and she explained that to me when we talked about my religious past (I was raised Southern Baptist). Though I learned now never to bring up religion and politics when dating lol.
I can tell you that, based on the official viewpoints of SDA's as backed by the national conference, that is not a thing we believe. If she believed that, that may have been a teaching from that one particular church. Maybe they had a grudge or something. While SDA's aren't really too fond of Catholics, there is no animosity towards them. And any anti-Christ talk within the church is typically metaphorical, not literal.
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
It's kinda funny the Seventh Day Adventists are brought up in this topic. They share an origin with the JWs with the whole millerites and great disappointment stuff that happened way back in the 1800s. Bunch of different religions shot off from that.
|
(Moderator)23 hours ago#89
spanky1 posted...
It's kinda funny the Seventh Day Adventists are brought up in this topic. They share an origin with the JWs with the whole millerites and great disappointment stuff that happened way back in the 1800s. Bunch of different religions shot off from that.
That's why I brought it up. My family is SDA but I also have some family that are JW.
Congratulations! Your post was deemed response-worthy.
|
unpleasant_milk posted...
Understanding the sensible, humane and rational argument in favour of letting your child die needlessly?
Ok. I'm all ears. Do tell.
See, you're already making assumptions. You think it's "needless".
|
OrangeWizard posted...
unpleasant_milk posted...
Understanding the sensible, humane and rational argument in favour of letting your child die needlessly?
Ok. I'm all ears. Do tell.
See, you're already making assumptions. You think it's "needless".
If the child can be saved quite easily, then denying that life saving treatment makes the death needless. That isn't an assumption. That's a fact.
|
spanky1 posted...
Foppe posted...
OrangeWizard posted...
Foppe posted...
So you timetravel when you die?
In the sense that you are aware of nothing for the duration of the time which you are dead, yes.
Wait, as long as you are dead?
So we dont get access to heaven when we die, we have to stay dead for hundreds or thousands of years before we get into heaven?
What messed up religion is this?
It's a pretty simple setup, I think you're overthinking it.
Basically, Armaggedon is gonna come within about 50 years or so from now.
How can you be so sure of that? They predicted it to happen in 1798, 1799, 1844, 1873, 1874, 1878, 1910, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1932, 1940s, 1951, 1975, 1986 and before 2000. Heeey, 1878 was when the sealing of the 144K was supposed to happen, which means no more access to heaven for later people. This was moved to 1881, 1910, 1914, 1925, 1931 and finally 1935. Now it is admitted as unknown.
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC
|
unpleasant_milk posted...
If the child can be saved quite easily, then denying that life saving treatment makes the death needless.
That isn't an assumption. That's a fact.
And that keeps you from understanding
|
I think we all understand, even the harshest critics of the JWs, that they refuse blood transactions on the grounds that they will later be able to enjoy a future reward from god, because they view it as a commandment from god. I mean, it's obviously an act of sacrifice on their part, according to their interpretation of the bible. unpleasant_milk here is just frustrated at the fact that you believe this, OrangeWizard. Kind of like how we all know that parents who refuse vaccinations are doing that because they sincerely believe that's what's best for their children. And then the rest of the population is frustrated at that because we don't agree with the facts.
|
OrangeWizard posted...
unpleasant_milk posted...
If the child can be saved quite easily, then denying that life saving treatment makes the death needless.
That isn't an assumption. That's a fact.
And that keeps you from understanding
"You don't understand" THEN EXPLAIN IT.
I'm not very good at this...
|
OrangeWizard posted...
unpleasant_milk posted...
If the child can be saved quite easily, then denying that life saving treatment makes the death needless.
That isn't an assumption. That's a fact.
And that keeps you from understanding
I hope you never have children who need blood transfusions to save their lives. It's tragic that you think like this, it really is. Sorry for you.
|
Foppe posted...
spanky1 posted...
Foppe posted...
OrangeWizard posted...
Foppe posted...
So you timetravel when you die?
In the sense that you are aware of nothing for the duration of the time which you are dead, yes.
Wait, as long as you are dead?
So we dont get access to heaven when we die, we have to stay dead for hundreds or thousands of years before we get into heaven?
What messed up religion is this?
It's a pretty simple setup, I think you're overthinking it.
Basically, Armaggedon is gonna come within about 50 years or so from now.
How can you be so sure of that?
They predicted it to happen in 1798, 1799, 1844, 1873, 1874, 1878, 1910, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1932, 1940s, 1951, 1975, 1986 and before 2000.
Heeey, 1878 was when the sealing of the 144K was supposed to happen, which means no more access to heaven for later people. This was moved to 1881, 1910, 1914, 1925, 1931 and finally 1935. Now it is admitted as unknown.
Actually, the current understanding is the "overlapping generations" rule. People that were alive when the generation of 1914 were alive will see Armageddon. It's kinda complicated. :\ So anyway, about 50 years, give or take, that means. Edit: to clarify, like, my grandma was alive in 1914, and I was alive when my grand ma was still alive, so the end will come before people around my age die out.
|
And 1874 was that times 1914, the only "complicated" thing is to make up stuff that explains why nothing happened at the last predicted year.
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site. -CJayC
|
spanky1 posted...
Foppe posted...
spanky1 posted...
Foppe posted...
OrangeWizard posted...
Foppe posted...
So you timetravel when you die?
In the sense that you are aware of nothing for the duration of the time which you are dead, yes.
Wait, as long as you are dead?
So we dont get access to heaven when we die, we have to stay dead for hundreds or thousands of years before we get into heaven?
What messed up religion is this?
It's a pretty simple setup, I think you're overthinking it.
Basically, Armaggedon is gonna come within about 50 years or so from now.
How can you be so sure of that?
They predicted it to happen in 1798, 1799, 1844, 1873, 1874, 1878, 1910, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1932, 1940s, 1951, 1975, 1986 and before 2000.
Heeey, 1878 was when the sealing of the 144K was supposed to happen, which means no more access to heaven for later people. This was moved to 1881, 1910, 1914, 1925, 1931 and finally 1935. Now it is admitted as unknown.
Actually, the current understanding is the "overlapping generations" rule. People that were alive when the generation of 1914 were alive will see Armageddon. It's kinda complicated. :\ So anyway, about 50 years, give or take, that means. Edit: to clarify, like, my grandma was alive in 1914, and I was alive when my grand ma was still alive, so the end will come before people around my age die out.
And when I was in the religion the generation of 1914 would not pass away before Armageddon came. I was told it was near when I was young. It could happen any day. Now I'm 40, married with two kids of my own when I wasn't sure I'd even graduate high school before the end. So yes it will keep changing as time keeps going on. This is one of the major things that I could not agree with. If there is a god and Jesus second coming, it will be as the bible itself literally says, to no knowledge of man.
I think I need a drink. Almost everybody does only they don't know it. -- Charles Bukowski
|
MysticMismagius posted...
OrangeWizard posted...
unpleasant_milk posted...
If the child can be saved quite easily, then denying that life saving treatment makes the death needless.
That isn't an assumption. That's a fact.
And that keeps you from understanding
"You don't understand"
THEN EXPLAIN IT.
I know we just had the whole "don't mansplaine a religion" talk, but hell I was one of them so it's not mansplaining when I do it. :P There is a law in the old testament to not consume the blood of an animal. You'd have to first drain the animal of all blood after killing it before you eat it. This law was later made still in effect after Paul (was it Paul? One of them, I forget which one), wrote letters to other congregations in books that are included in the new testament, to keep obstaining from blood. So it's viewed as a direct commend from god, still. The JWs believe transfusions count as consuming the blood, so if a person, even a child, took a transfusion, he would lose everlasting life on earth. So to OrangeWizard here, it wouldn't be a needless death at all. Quite the opposite, it would HAVE to happen, because he would want his child to attain everlasting life in a paradise. It would be hard, but it would be an act of love and devotion to his god, and an act that would ensure the life and happiness of his theoretical child. That's the explaination, with no spin, no criticism, no bias.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment