# My DA letter, part 2

[ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by jimmyjames [jimmyjames] on November 27, 1999 at 14:55:11 {nwG7wj0NI.0hi4VK0MIQijuk77B9Xg}:

I also want to comment on apostasy. I do not accept the Watchtower’s definition of apostasy inasmuch as it does not agree with the Bible’s. Simon Peter asked Jesus “Whom shall we go away to?”, not, “Where shall we go away to?”. He was referring to a person, Jesus Christ, not an organization that claims to follow him. And when the disciples approached Jesus saying “Instructor, we saw a certain man expelling demons in your name and we tried to prevent him, because he is not following with us”, Jesus replied, “Do not you men try to prevent him, for he that is not against you is for you.” Every Biblical passage dealing with leaving the “truth” deals with leaving Jesus himself, not a particular organization which claims to follow him.

I made a decision not to read “apostate” literature until I was absolutely sure this was not God’s organization. What I found surprised me. It is true that some internet sites are run by people who are bitter against the Society, and I don’t want to read this garbage even after I have formally disassociated. I am only interested in intelligent information based in facts. I hardly think that constitutes “spiritual pornography”, “gangrene”, or “Satan’s demonic junk food”, as the Watchtower labels it (w3/15/86 p.13 and w7/1/94 p.10). Most of these sites provide nothing but supportable, fully verifiable information. Far from resorting to half-truths and lies as the Society purports, these sites are factual and provide plenty of outside references for the reader to check the information. How can the Society claim that they offer only lies if they have not read and evaluated it themselves? They must have examined many of such sources to make such a sweeping claim. If they didn’t do so, they logically cannot say they are full of lies, can they? Does a double standard exist for the Governing Body and the rest of the brothers in regards to associating with “apostates”? If so, on what scriptural basis?

It is said that apostates use cleverly designed arguments to “seduce” people. Often scriptures are quoted that talk about “complimentary speech” and “counterfeit words”. However, the normal way to determine if something is counterfeit is to closely examine it, not avoid looking at it. What these scriptures are really telling us is to “make sure of all things” rather than be seduced. To closely examine things to see if they are true, not avoid the information altogether.

The Society claims that this is for the Witness’ “protection”. But what is really happening here is an extreme type of information control. This is a common aspect of many controlling religions such as the Church of Scientology, Mormonism, and various cults. Steven Hassan’s book “Combating Cult Mind Control” lists the identifying marks of a mind control cult. Hassan, a cult expert and leading exit-counselor is not, nor has he ever been, a Jehovah’s Witness. Yet the detail to which JWs fit these criteria, which are shared in common by all cults from the Moonies to Mormons, is frightening. Here is an overview, along with quotes from his book and Robert J. Lifton’s 8 criteria for thought reform:

1. Milieu Control: This is control of communication and information within a member’s enviornment

Information is the very best weapon against a cult. That is why such information is so strongly banned, and those who can provide it to be avoided like the plague. Anything critical of the group or anything published by former members of the group is banned. No talking to former members either. What this does is prevent members access to information that will help them make a level-headed decision. The sources that can provide the most information are the ones most to be avoided. All information about Witnesses is to be gained only through Witness-approved sources. It is a fully documented fact that all cults demonize former members, making them out to be “agents of Satan”, regardless of the reason for their departure. This is, again, to prevent current members from interacting with those that can provide them with critical information. Whenever a member is away from the group atmosphere long enough to discover revealing books, testimonials, etc. of former members, they almost always break away. The Society is correct- such information is dangerous. But to the organization, not the Witness.

Witnesses are trained to instantly reject any criticism of the group or the doctrine, even before the information is considered. If something is interpreted as going against Watchtower doctrine, instantly a wall of disbelief goes up. Even all negative thoughts are to be strongly suppressed in order to avoid “independent thinking” or “doubts” which basically amount to challenges to the Watchtower’s authority or their monopoly on “Truth™”. This makes it very easy for the Watchtower to achieve instant acceptance of beliefs or changes in doctrine by discouraging anything but positive thoughts on it. All negative thoughts or “doubts” are to be reported to the elders for “spiritual correction”.

Such thought-controlling policies are reminiscent of the early centuries of Christianity where all those who favored something defying orthodox church dogma were labeled “heretics”. Not based on whether the information the alleged “heretic” had was or was not the truth, but simply and solely because he contradicted the leaders. The bottom line in any judicial committee meeting on apostasy is whether or not the individual agrees with the Society. The truthfulness of the information itself is of no consequence, of no concern at all. And rather than being beheaded as was the custom in those times, today they are simply punished by being disfellowshipped. Cut off from lifetime family members and lifelong friends, treated as an outcast and scorned, which, as some former Witnesses who were raised in the organization will tell you, is much worse than being beheaded.

Nothing I have said in this letter is particularly extraordinary. It’s really just common sense. The problem is, however, that Witnesses don’t know about this information because they aredenied access to it and trained to instantly reject it. That, sadly, is the fruitage of mind control. This is what prompted one overseer, Mr. Bart Thompson, to say (while he held up a green publication), “If the Society told me that this book was black instead of green, I’d say, ‘You know, I could have sworn it was green, but if the Society says it’s black, it’s black!”

2. Mystical Manipulation: Items that are planned from the top of the group appear to have arisen spontaneously from the enviornment, reinforcing the member’s belief that this group is being directed by God.

> “Members are made to feel part of an elite corps of mankind. This feeling of being special, of participating in the most important acts of human history with a vanguard of committed believers, is strong emotional glue to keep people sacrificing and working hard…As a community, they feel they have been chosen (by God, history, or some other supernatural force) to lead mankind out of darkness into a new age of enlightenment…Ironically, members of cults look down on anyone involved in any other cult groups. They are very quick to acknowledge that “Those people are in a cult” or “They are the ones who are brainwashed.” They are unable to step out of their own situations and look at themselves objectively.” (Combating Cult Mind Control, p.80)

3. and 4. Demand for Purity and Cult of Confession: These two are closely related. The group cannot tolerate any dissent. If any member deviates from the doctrine or “falls out of line” with the group’s many rules, they are “marked” and treated differently and eventually kicked out if they don’t conform. One must conform completely, or else face consequences (including shunning, “marking”, taking away of “priveleges”, etc.)

> “In all destructive cults the self must submit to the group. The “whole purpose” must be the focus; the “self-purpose” must be subordinated…Absolute obedience to superiors is one of the most universal themes in cults. Individuality is bad. Conformity is good.” (CCMC p.80)

Any group (religious or otherwise) can have the same type of “unity” that JWs have if they simply disfellowship everyone who doesn’t agree with them. Unfortunately, what JWs have is not unity, but conformity.

Along with this, other members must spy on each other and report to the leaders if someone is deviating so that steps can be taken to “encourage” the individual conform.

5. The Sacred Science: Self-explanatory. Something must be sceintific as well as spiritual for it to have a substantial effect on people. The doctrine is explained to believers as sceintific. If a contradiction between science and the group’s doctrine occurs, the doctrine is right and science is wrong.

6. Loading the Language: with thought-stopping clichés or phrases. Complex ideas are condensed into a single positively or negatively connotative phrase or term. Watchtower literature is literally packed with such clichés. These may be terms borrowed from the Bible or entirely made up. “The truth”, “worldly”, “independent thinking”, “new light”, “new system”, “lovers of truth”, etc. Perversely, the Watchtower is actually proud of this, calling it the “pure language”.

One particularly blatant example is the term “false teacher”. Common sense indicates that a false teacher is someone who teaches something false. But according to the Watchtower Society, it simply indicates any Witness who disagrees with the Society, regardless of whether the information is true or false. This way, all “independent thinking” is quickly squelched because Witness A will immediately think “false teacher” if Witness B says something contrary to standard Watchtower doctrine. This eliminates any possible consideration of what Witness B says, regardless of its validity. Yes, the most important lesson for any Witness to learn is that the Society is always right, despite the fact that Watchtower history is filled with mistakes and changes.

Such terms are designed to stop all debate, to silence any further consideration, to produce black and white thinking.(I know this next part isn’t going to line up correctly, and I’m too lazy to fix it.  )

Term Real definition Watchtower definition

Truth Items that are valid, real, above criticism Whatever the Society teaches

Worldly People that are materialistic, greedy, etc. Any non-JW

Independent Thinking Having thoughts independent of God Having thoughts independent
of the Governing Body

Lovers of truth People that always seek the truth Only Jehovah’s Witnesses

Apostates People that deny Jesus Christ People that deny the
Governing Body

False Teacher People that teach false things Heretics

Going beyond the truth Leaving truth and accepting falsehoods Contradicting the leaders

And on and on and on.

7. Doctrine over person:

> “The pattern of doctrine over person occurs when there is a conflict between what one feels onself experiencing and what the doctrine or dogma says one should experience…There is no room in a mind control environment for regarding the group’s beliefs as mere theory, or as a way to interpret reality or to seek reality. The doctrine is reality…cult doctrine requires that a person distrust his own self. The doctrine becomes the “master program” for all thoughts, feelings and actions. Since it is the TRUTH, perfect and absolute, any flaw in it is viewed as only a reflection of the believer’s own imperfection. He is taught that he must follow the prescribed formula even if he doesn’t really understand it. At the same time he is told that he should try to work harder and have more faith so he will come to understand the truth more clearly…

> “In totalistic cults, the ideology is internalized as “the truth”, the only “map” of reality. The doctrine not only serves to filter incoming information but also regulates how the information can be thought about. Usually, the doctrine is absolutist, dividing everything into “black versus white,” “us versus them.” All that is good is embodied in the leader and the group. All that is bad is on the outside…The doctrine claims to answer all questions to all problems and situations…A member need not think for himself because the doctrine does the thinking for him.” (CCMC pp.61, 78, 80, 204)

8. Dispensing of Existence: The group determines who gets life and who is doomed to destruction. Those within the group and conforming to its standards are to receive life, and all those not part of the group are to be destroyed.

I challenge you and any Witness to read up on this. In addition to Hassan’s book, George Orwell’s “1984” well describes the JW mindset, although it is not about Jehovah’s Witnesses.

I apologize if this letter sounded overly harsh or blunt. But I can’t sugarcoat reality just to spare people from inconvenient facts or unpleasant realizations. Any sarcasm was directed at the belief system, not the people within it who are just victims. But we all have to face reality as adults, and the sad fact is that reality hurts sometimes, especially for those who have given much of their lives and have many friends and family in the organization. But all of this pain is the fault of the Watchtower Society and its shunning policy. The deception and control of the WTS no longer have any place in my life.

In conclusion, I want to say that I have no bitterness toward the Society or any individual Witness. I want to thank each and every one of you for the many things you have done for me over the years and it hasn’t gone unnoticed or unappreciated. I will miss the many good people in the congregation, and I’m sorry they are being misled. There’s really nothing I can do about it, given the rules about associating with former Witnesses. In regard to my sister, she has free choice to remain a Witness and if she decides not to discuss this with me, I will cooperate. But if she requests the information, I will give it to her. This quote from the Watchtower is very appropriate:

> “When persons are in great danger from a source that they do not suspect or are bieng misled by those they consider their friends, is it an unkindness to warn them? They may prefer not to believe the warning. They may even resent it. But does that free one from the moral responsibility to give that warning?” (w1/15/74 p.35)

I do encourage you to investigate these matters. Those that choose to just ignore it will continue to allow the Society to do their thinking for them. Those that investigate will eventually come to the same conclusions as I have. I realize the truth is hard to swallow, but it is always better than living in ignorant bliss.

Although my reasons for leaving were doctrinally and ethically motivated, I am glad that I am now free to go to college and pursue a career in writing. I feel sorry for those that have chosen to forego this to spend each morning knocking on empty houses relaying an empty message, living their lives out just to serve the interests of a mind control cult. I’m also glad that I am now able to use the mind that God gave me without everything I do monitored by the Thought Police.

At this point I have a few requests. I request that I not be contacted periodically by the elders to provide “help” by means of shepherding calls. I request that all announcements and records reflect that I have disassociated myself.

I am well aware that cults do not accept any reason for a member leaving, no matter what it is. I am sure those in the congregation will believe I left because of weakness, sin, pride, etc. They will, in fact, be willing to believe any reason except the truth- that I left for a legitimate reason. However, I sincerely hope that things are not said or implied to others that call into question my honesty or character.

I wish you success in your search for truth.

James ******

Questions for those who accept the Society’s position These are just a few of the many contradictions and problems with the Society’s blood doctrine. More questions can be found on the AJWRB website. These are serious questions that cannot be ignored by anyone who is really concerned with the truth. If a Witness cannot find real answers then it must be asked: On what is your belief in this doctrine based? For what important reason are you supporting a death-dealing doctrine that you cannot defend? Those who choose to simply ignore the inconsistencies and refuse to think about the matter are just deluding themselves. I have not found answers to these questions, and I never will simply because there aren’t any.

1. The Society’s explanations of Acts 15:29 ignore the context. Why have they not addressed it?

2. People accepting the Society’s position must either ignore the context or explain it away. Just how can this be done, exactly?

3. Why does the Society never defend or even discuss the NWT’s curious double-rendering of eudolothutos in Acts 15 and 1 Cor. 8? Why indeed, since it’s crucial to their explanation in the October 15th, 1978 Watchtower, pages 30-31?

4. Why did the Society resort to doctors that had been dead for hundreds of years to support their position that a blood transfusion is an eating of blood? Don’t modern doctors agree?

5. How could the blood doctrine be considered “light” from Jehovah when it was born during a time of such medical paranoia that transfusions were believed to cause homicidal tendencies and mental instability? Indeed, during a time when they felt that in the case of vaccines, the streets were being overrun by evil doctors trying to corner children to inject them with poisonous dog pus? (g7/24/29)

6. Why does the Society reword the Bible’s forbidding of eating blood by saying that it is wrong to “sustain life” by means of “taking in” blood? Are taking eyedrops considered eating them? Is accepting an organ transplant considered eating it?

7. How can Witnesses be allowed to accept ANY fractions or blood treatments since they all obviously involve “taking in blood to sustain life”?

8. Why do all Christian faiths, and even the most orthodox Jews, who are dependent on the Law, read it daily, philosophize to its context, read it in the original Hebrew (so as to understand the traditional context), and love the Law of God more than their own souls, not forbid the medical use of blood? Is it reasonable that JWs are the only ones who believe this way?

9. Why are red and white cell transfusions forbidden since they come well within the criteria stated in the June 1st, 1990 Watchtower, pages 30-31?

10. If the argument is that the allowed components are simply small fractions, why are white cells forbidden since they constitute a smaller percentage of total blood volume than albumin, which is acceptable?

11. If the doctrine is solidly grounded in the scriptures, and if the Society has provided clear proof that it is, why are many Hospital Liaison Committee members, publishers and elders secretly members of AJWRB?

12. Why is the literal fluid (blood) placed on a higher plane than what it symbolizes (life)? Since blood is only sacred in that it symbolizes life, how are you showing respect for the sacredness of life by letting someone for yourself die? Isn’t that showing respect for the symbol rather than what it symbolizes? Isn’t that idolatry?

13. If this stance on blood is firm and non-negotiable, why has the policy noticeably loosened over the years and why has the Society reached a compromise by negotiating with the government of Bulgaria?

14. Jesus was willing to perform miracles on the Sabbath in order to save lives, or simply heal the sick, and he did not condemn the woman with the flow of blood for touching him and making him ceremonially unclean. Rather, he condemned the Pharisees for their legalistic view. Wouldn’t Jesus make a similar exception to a dietary rule to save a human life?

15. Since it has been reasoned that food offered to idols may be eaten, and that some blood components may be used, would a little fornication also be ok? If not, why not since the prohibition on both fornication and blood occurs in the same verse? Wouldn’t we need to take just as strict a view on blood as we do on fornication?

Of course, it’s very easy to simply dismiss these questions with a wave of the hand, but those who are really concerned with the truth will want to find answers. Anyone can simply ignore them, but it will never change the fact that they are there. Those who are morbidly scared of experiencing “doubt” with the doctrine are just deluding themselves with the idea that this “MUST be God’s organization”, without taking the Society’s own advice about testing your religion in the light of the Bible.

Follow Ups:

- *My DA letter, part 2 Amazing 12:59:14 11/28/99 (0)
- *My DA letter, part 2 FRED HALL 07:28:59 11/28/99 (0)
- *My DA letter, part 2 jimmyjames 15:02:35 11/27/99 (3)
  - **My DA letter, part 2 LetMeTryThis 15:08:46 11/27/99 (2)
    - ***My DA letter, part 2 Sunspot 18:51:44 11/27/99 (1)
      - ****My DA letter, part 2 jimmyjames 11:18:33 11/28/99 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject: *My DA letter, part 2

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ FAQ ]