MyJoe: You gotta be kidding me! A repudiation of an intention to de-convert equals a threat to do so?

There is a proverb nuclearboy used to relate about a tortoise that said he was going to disgrace himself. People pleaded with him to turn back but nothing would make him change his mind. So they let him go on to disgrace himself.



Maybe it’s not just reasoning challenges he has. Take your time to go through the conversation below and decide if this is simply a spiritually blind, small minded, confused, drunken and insane guy who will go to any extent in the hope of tarring someone, probably praying to Jehovah when posting, to blind everyone and make his lies stick or if there are mind problems involved.

****

Barristers


MyJoe


Barristers

Here:


***

Somebody once told someone that the Bible could be used to prove anything. To “demonstrate” that, he opened to a verse, covered a part of it with his finger and asked the other fellow to read. The fellow read the verse aloud, “There is no God.” That was some kind of joke, of course, because once he removed his finger, it said “The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God”. That is what Barristers does seriously here in his wretched efforts to sustain his campaign of lies against me, using the highlight function, and hoping and praying no one will notice.

After reading the above, my first thought was of his comprehension - perhaps his comprehension problems are just as bad as that those of Maximus85 who looks at text and sees what is inside his own head and Mr truthislight who doesn’t even take a good look before rushing off to click the reply button and type an unthinking response attacking you if you said what appear to be against the JW or praising you if you appeared to support them. But no. What we have here is deliberate, depraved, slimy lying. A repudiation of an intention to de-convert equals a threat to do so!

I asked him to reclaim his credibility but he sank it further.

But he came back with this:

I’m having second thoughts. Maybe he has serious comprehension problems, then. Or he’s too plastered from whatever he has been smoking.

Nimshi: Barristers: one man, barristers; lol. What passes for your brain has been fried by years of JW propaganda.
May be Satan the Devil (hehehe) made you a JW to give JWs a really, really bad name; just look at the nonsense oozing from all over you.
Barristers: Time registered: July 08, 2012 | Time spent online: 1 day & 12 hours | Last seen: 3:31pm

JWs don't take blood or what? Just say JWs don't donate blood. JWs who need human blood products use them all the time; like, a certain Haemoglobin Factor which JWs use ;-) The problem is that JWs like to reap where they've not sown: they deplete the supply but are not allowed to replenish it. Shame on you. That's not moral. It's not even Christian.

MyJoe:
You are getting knowledge of nothing. How can someone who lacks basic thinking skills acquire the right knowledge from a write-up, no matter how well-written?


Highlighted is a dumb question – Watchtower never admits anything. Poor Maximum85 thought they do about their predictions and got himself into trouble with Mr truthislight who has now accused him of misrepresentation. They have paid out millions yet they never admitted anything. And who’s talking about elder? You are the one making issues out of the fact priests were accused and only 11 elders were accused, and that they only abuse girls at JW while the Catholics abuse boys.

So it was only the “believed to run into” portion that you read? Again you cover a portion with your finger hoping and praying to Jehovah no one will notice. Why did you not comment on the portion where it said the church announced it in a conventions in US about the payouts running into millions it had been forced to make? I expected you to, at least, say it is “concocted”. Okay, so you admit the $788,000 case was in the article. Now, $788,000 is closer to $1m than half a mil. If that is the only case ever in which the church has paid out money, I would only be guilty of an exaggeration, not an outright lie. But the fact would remain that you ignored it in the Wiki article you lifted from, thus misleading the unwary reader into believing that only the Catholic Church has paid out money while the JW is clean. In any case, I am not exaggerating, as anyone will find when they research the matter.

@Hitler pictures
We get characters like you every now and then. There was one a couple of years back posting nude pictures and labeling a respected lady in the section. Mr truthislight, the ringside cheerleader who claps happily for anyone who supports a JW idea, still thinks you are good rep of his church. Pity.

truthislight:

Hmmm!

What is the value of this?

If i am "truth is light" why do you expect my to bend the truth?

You are a chamealeon.

truthislight:
Guy,
You are very slippery.
You are more dangerouse than you partners in crime.
You are very subtle.

truthislight:
You were once advising nimshi not to be two forward cus that will archive less or have less impact.

What impact do you expect to have?

To destroy people faith?
Who does such work if not satan?

Nimshi: Barristers: one man, barristers; lol. What passes for your brain has been fried by years of JW propaganda.
May be Satan the Devil (hehehe) made you a JW to give JWs a really, really bad name; just look at the nonsense oozing from all over you.
Barristers: Time registered: July 08, 2012 | Time spent online: 1 day & 12 hours | Last seen: 3:31pm

JWs don't take blood or what? Just say JWs don't donate blood. JWs who need human blood products use them all the time; like, a certain Haemoglobin Factor which JWs use ;-) The problem is that JWs like to reap where they've not sown: they deplete the supply but are not allowed to replenish it. Shame on you. That's not moral. It's not even Christian.

And, I don't have time to educate you about the years of fornication of the JW organisation with the wild beast.
Just like those pictures in your nonsense Revelation Climax (gasp!) book, you JWs rode the wild beast for years, until a journalist published your hypocrisy, and then you quickly dissociated. Here, in all its simple glory is the original article by Stephen Bates which exposed the JW sect for what it is:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2001/oct/08/religion.world

And, Hitler: yes, JWs supported Hitler when it was expedient. You want proof too? No, won't be casting pearls before hogs ;-)

truthislightisdarkness: why're you turning on warrior Maximus? Don't do that; he's one of you. You can't disfellowship him now! In any case, Yahweh is watching you. He will inform your elders that you're enjoying the secret pleasure of posting on the Internet. What will you do when they announce to your congregation that's you're walking in a 'disorderly manner', or charge you for 'loose conduct'?

.


.

Nimshi:

This is a cornerstone JW strategy

- execute payouts
- impose gag orders (this reinforces the JW org as amoral; fight for freedom of speech, but deny it to those you've raped).
- admit nothing (this, also, reinforces the JW org as amoral).

The most recent case of the award of more the USD 20 million was one exception.

Lol. Truthislieisdarkness was mad at the warrior for good reason: the JW org doesn't lie admitting they've been wrong, even f they've predicted the end of the world in 1914, 1925, and 2000; and even though they promised in the 1920s: 'millions now living will never die'; most people then living have now died. And even though they told people in the 60s: 'you will never grow old in this system of things'.

We're here in 2012, and our resident militant JWs can't see it. Except for Maximus, who is now being chastised for being somewhat human.

.



.

MyJoe:
To you, none, since I did not write it supporting some JW idea. You are too far gone. Too confused. It's far easier to slouch on than try to think things through.


The person you who gave you that word, the one you are licking his backside and saying people cannot talk to outside of here, doesn't even know what it means. But you really feel dazzled by any colours around here? By my guest.


Yeah. Except when I appear to support your JW ideas. Keep repeating the above, you hear?

truthislight:

How can you even imagine for once that i relied on you support?

I knew you the first time you came debating with

If you can remember, i told you that you came for a fight.

And here you are doing just that.
Lol

MyJoe:
You talk randomly, so you do say anything. Go back there and bring out the fight I fought. And what do you call fighting here if not what you and your beloved Barristers are doing? No, I don't imagine you relied on my support. You just stand at the ringside of threads cheering anyone that appears to support a JW idea and insulting anyone who appears not to. For you, it's automatic. You have neither break nor common sense.

Your church joined UN as an NGO. Write a constructive paragraph either defending or rationalising that.

Your church has paid out millions to victims of child s.exual abuse. Write an argument on that.

truthislight:

guy, which question are you answering here?

Please,

reduce it to when there is a question for you to answer.

There have been misrepesentation from you on this thread.

And you have not been able to handle certain issues here.

I dont wish to see you as not being a JW.
Peace

MyJoe: @Nimshi
1, 2 & 5. I guess we will disagree on that. But I suspect it’s our definitions of “dangerous” that differ. For example, I don’t go to bed worrying that my uncle and his entire family, or his married children and their entire families, will come to any danger as a result of being Witnesses. I am close to them and I believe they are fine. It is at this basic level that I am considering danger and asserting that the religion is not particularly dangerous. That is at the individual level. For societal danger, I don’t think any beliefs held by the JW pose any danger to the society the way some people’s beliefs have posed danger to babies across Africa. I cited the case of raped babies across Africa earlier. Now, I cited that case as an EXAMPLE of how BELIEFS HELD BY INDIVIDUALS can put a society in danger – nothing more. I still don’t get how you related it to the discussion about child abuse among the JW and concluded that I was sanitising the issue. There is a misunderstanding there, as the statement was not made in the context child abuse among the JW.

Your definition of danger probably differs and is more encompassing. Religious danger to me is Jim Jones and similar stuff. But for you, it’s probably temporary trauma resulting from disfellowshipping and shunning. For example, plaetton asserted in one thread that the religions pose a danger and should be ridiculed – or something like that. He cited the example of people who give 10% of their income to their churches even when their families are in dire financial straits. I think that is their choice and that is it. But that is not how plaetton sees it.

And, yeah, MyJoe’s familiarity with an issue does not impact on its level of danger. Ha.

Now about the new recruits you are concerned about. I agree many of them don’t fully realise what they are getting into. But if they did, what would change? You seriously think that telling someone who has just “found the truth” and has been subjected to the JW’s highly effective insulation techniques will give it up once you tell him that he is going to be disfellowshipped and shunned if he commits “fornication” or is sighted with a stick of cigarette? Or that she will listen when you walk up to her and “your religion is dangerous. You’ve been brainwashed?” You have mentioned that Watchtower invested money in arms and tobacco companies. That would cause outrage in normal people considering the dictates handed down on such matters to the rank and file, but have you seen anyone evince a slight angst here? A Witness reads all you have written here and he is happy that Witnesses are hated and persecuted just like Jesus said.

A couple of years or so back I saw your exchange with a new Witness recruit called Perrito4u. What reaction did you get from her? Once you start, she remembers all the talk about the fact people would try to discourage her and her faith in the religion (which has been sly substituted for God in her mind) is strengthened. She feels “vindicated”. She had been fortified for just the kind of things you were saying. Bear in mind that Perito4u was calm and had some capacity to follow arguments, even though she often gave pre-fabricated responses, unlike most of the ones in this thread who happen to represent the average JW who loses it once you display close knowledge of the church rather than stick to Trinity and heaven where they have verses lined up and love to, as you put it, “play ping pong”.

Look at the angry responses your comments have invited here. I know Witnesses tend to get angry once discussions take this turn. Still, there is no need to hand them just what the leadership of the church wants. The typical Witness reaction as seen here – disowning reason, refusing to consider anything unfamiliar or capable of showing the church in bad light, calling you the devil’s spawn, etc – can’t be prevented, considering what you are dealing with, but you can present your case in such a way that when any thinking person, including Witnesses, comes around he can relate to it. This reminds me of the words of Salvador that it takes a highly elevated spirit or intelligent mind to accept certain truths. I don’t take Witness hate sites seriously because of the manner they go about things. I have read Randy Waters and I think the sort of things he writes will hardly impress any sincere and active Witnesses. You’ve read Franz’s Crisis of Conscience or In Search of Christian Freedom? Now, that is how to present a case. I am not surprised that Randy Waters does not think much of Crisis of Conscience. If these acerbic methods work on anyone, I would be surprised and it would be an exceptional case.

Many new recruits are aware of these things and that has not stopped them. I seriously doubt anyone can “save” them. I’m not discouraging you, though. I may even be wrong. Just stating it the way I see it.

No, I don’t believe that Witnesses are in serious danger and I have a duty to safeguard them and help them get out. Even if they were in danger I doubt I can help them or that it’s a task I’d be hungry to undertake. All I do here is to point out inconsistencies and inaccuracies in arguments where I see them and have the inclination to do so. I then leave things at that. Well, that is all I try to do –opinionating is fine as long as it is not allowed to overshadow facts. I do the same with other faiths and religions since I treat them all alike. If my adult child or brother wants to become a JW, I would try to present facts in a non-judgemental manner and leave matters at that. At the end of the day, we all make our choices. But you do have a different approach – that is your prerogative.

3. Of course, I was talking about the balance of responsibility. Both the leadership and the rank and file are to blame for any folly, no doubt about that. I was making that post from a mobile phone and wasn’t explicating things sufficiently.

4. Ok. I was hearing it for the first time and have definitely read or heard it said that physical structures will not make it into “the new system”.

6. I can’t get the exact quotes right now, but I have a definite recollection of it. It was announced that these things done by some brothers had cost the church money as the society had had to make pay outs. This was at conventions throughout the US that year.

7. Well, that is sad. Anyway, it’s called “protecting the flock”. That individual had to “protect” himself from the danger posed by certain websites and books so he had to get clearance to read a book. Not following the society’s recommendations on the internet and on reading can lead him to leave the church – something worse than death. Why? Because “that is what the Society said!” I would personally not suggest such a book to a Witness or give him links to “anti-Witness” websites, though. Apart from the fact that I am generally respectful of people’s wishes, including those of people who have given up their fundamental right to read and meditate freely, there’s more than enough inside the church’s own publications for anyone who is prepared to pause, to think and to remember. The JW leadership is convicted by its own literature. I know the Watchtower Society’s censorship goes as far as its own publications as it routinely removes articles with the potential to do some damage from its own “comprehensive” library on CD ROMs. But there’s always enough left there.

Maximus85:
Satan is here on this thread to make the Jws here go against each other but it wont work. Truelight, you were the first poster to insult on this thread. At that point i doubt if you are a jw. And if you are, you should know better that no matter how angry they make us, we must remain respectful in our teachings/preaching.
I intentinaly left some issues unattended to because they'll only lead to more arguments. Lets not allow satan here. They know the truth but they dont want to accept it. The Bible said that in this situation, we should let them be and we should go in search for those that are ready to listen and accept the truth. Being a Jw is not easy but its a sacrifice we must make. Jesus gave his life, so why can't we endure the hatred and insults?

truthislight: @myjoe

^^^^
what system and style of approach to deconvert new convert were you suggesting here to nimshi?

Have you seen your life?

"Yes, nimshi should not say things in such away that will end up fortifying the faith of the new JW cus he will say that he had been warn that he will be pesecuted!"

"That the anti JW web sight uses that style and it is not effective"

in other words he should be more subtle in his approach.

Who does such if not satan?

MyJoe:
I'm certain you closed your eyes where I explained I neither saw a dire need or duty nor had the inclination to change anyone's views. Never mind, since you have problems reading and understanding what it says.

Please highlight the portion of that post where I suggested a system and approach to Nimshi and implied it would help to de-convert anyone or where I said hate sites were not effective and at what.

MyJoe:
I'm certain you closed your eyes where I explained I neither saw a dire need or duty nor had the inclination to change anyone's views. Never mind, since you have problems reading and understanding what it says.

Please highlight the portion of that post where I suggested a system and approach to Nimshi and implied it would help to de-convert anyone or where I said hate sites were not effective and at what.

firestar: Next question please...

1. On Monday October 8, 2001, Stephen Bates wrote an article in The Guardian of London exposing the membership as an associated NGO. Two days later, Watchtower’s applied to the UN to withdraw its membership. This withdrawal was done and is dated Tuesday October 9, 2001.

2. Access to UN Library was never at any time contingent upon any affiliation with the UN. There was no change requiring NGO's to become associated in order to gain a library card. There are hundreds of UN libraries worldwide and they can be accessed by anyone.

3. The criteria for association with the UN did not change between 1991, when Watchtower joined, and 2001, when they withdrew.

Note: The original Guardian article, the withdrawal materials, e-mail exchanges between Bates and Watchtower, and a UN document stating that there has been no changes in its membership requirements, are all in the public domain. This unthinking duo can equally go ahead and deny or simply leave the issue and reach into the gutters for more abuses. But again, anyone can research further and make up their own minds. No, I am not leaving the issue, and Barristers is wont to think. He denies, I paste the stuff on here.

Myjoe;[b]For anyone reading, I have never entertained the notion of converting or "de-converting" Barristers, any member of the JW, or any member of any religion or faith group and I have never expressed such around here. [/b]But since Barristers claims I wrote something in a thread, he should be able to find the thread and the post and reclaim some credibility.[b]

Barristers

now that you have denied this below, go to page 5 of the other tread! see where you said it again!:
Here:

MyJoe: ''And I hope you tone down your attacks after this post. Speculate all you like about imaginary motives I have to denigrate your wonderful religion and de-convert you and your co-travellers, but if you come back at me in that manner I will assume a change of tone is in order. Have a nice day''.

Been reading thru this thread and I have to say...BEWARE OF APOSTATES...Jehovah's witnesses have a very thorough method of spreading the good news and that is door to door...that's what Jesus ordered that's what they follow.
On this forum MANY lies are spread

Just a quick question.
JW teaches that there is no hell fire. Where then does Satan/the Devil live?

BARRISTERS: @queenesthr


Revelation 12:7-12
New King James Version (NKJV)

7 And war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought with the dragon; and the dragon and his angels fought, 8 but they did not prevail, nor was a place found for them[a] in heaven any longer. 9 So the great dragon was cast out, that serpent of old, called the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was cast to the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

10 Then I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, “Now salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ have come, for the accuser of our brethren, who accused them before our God day and night, has been cast down. 11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb and by the word of their testimony, and they did not love their lives to the death. 12 Therefore rejoice, O heavens, and you who dwell in them! Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and the sea! For the devil has come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time.”

from the bolded, i think you can descern where satan lives, definately not in the heavens again where souls of the dead are believed by some other christians that the hell was, as you can see,satan has been cast down along with his angels!

queenesthr: Hello Maximus85,

Just a quick question.
JW teaches that there is no hell fire. Where then does Satan/the Devil live?

frosbel:


I have to agree with you on this , plain scripture and yet many will form a theology of nonsense around these straightforward verses.

They will soon call me a JW cult supporter

frosbel:

Sorry for interrupting , but just to add my small and humble opinion , there is Hell Fire, but not in the way that many pentecostals describe it.

Hell Fire is a place of punishment and destruction of sinners at the end of this age.

"Then death and the grave were thrown into the lake of fire. This lake of fire is the second death." - Revelation 20:14