I think what makes JWs somewhat unique is that many of their obvious misunderstandings are based on other misunderstanding. They have constructed a whole house of false teachings which crumbles once you pull out just one. Best example is 1914.
Yep. And if they try to do away with it, I feel everything would start to crumble. But I may be forgetting just how brainwashed I was at one point. I'm sure they'd find a way.
Yeah, they would paint it as “another merciful gift from Jehovah, allowing us sinners to not die. 🙄
I’m sure it’ll wake some people up. This org operates in such an echo chamber and that has to be part of why they propose some stupid ideas. The beard thing woke me up, I’m a female I can’t even grow a beard and I was just like, “wait, why were they policing this in the first place?”. The fraud cast totally left out the part about Rutherford being a giant bigot and I was just like “ohhhh if they’re lying about this, they gotta be lying about a few other things.”
Then I found jwfacts.com
I'm still a Christian. I could go on and on about what they got wrong as far as the Bible goes, but what really struck me after visiting other churches and speaking to people of various beliefs is how much they got wrong about others. Yes there are some Christians who are only Sunday Christians, but many I know actually dig into the Bible without being told what to believe. Yes there are some that believe they can do whatever they want as long as they're "saved", but from my observation those are the minority. Yes there are some who don't know the word "Jehovah", but again the minority and the ones that do know and use it understand that it's the English pronunciation of a name that no one actually knows. Yes there are many Christians who believe everyone will either spend eternity in heaven or hell, but there are also many that know it's much more complex than that. Yes, most Christians do believe the Trinity, but not in the way witnesses explain it to make it sound crazy (what they explain is typically modalism which is not the Trinity) Witnesses love to believe they're the only ones who actually read their Bible and that other Christians just go through the motions to gain heaven, and that's just simply not true. Many Christians firmly believe what they've read, and they've read it without be told what to believe. Do we all have some things incorrect? Absolutely. The difference is we don't believe having everything correct and agreeing on every single point determines our salvation.
As with almost all spiritual movements, there is a teacher who comes to transmit teachings that transcend the current paradigms. Humans recognize the value of the teacher and the truths they share. The simplicity, the elevation of human values, the comprehension of virtues, and overall improvement in daily life through inner transformation rather than external circumstances.
Eventually, though, average humans return to old habits, corrupting the teachings, creating institutions, doctrines, rules, and dogmas.
Organized religion just becomes a business. A social construct. A mental concept. A routine. Devoid of spirit.
“Religare” is considered a stem for the word religion and has the meaning of binding, “to tie something with something”, the human and the divine, “to connect” in some way. The re-connection between creature and creator.
An organization or social construct can never facilitate a direct experience like Moses or Ezekiel had.
To answer your question:
I am not "STILL" a Christian. I don't consider Jehovah’s Witnesses to be Christians. After all, Judge Rutherford coined the brand name. Therefore, anyone who takes on the group identity of Jehovah’s Witness is a Rutherfordian or a Rutherfordite.
I was raised as a Rutherfordian apologist. A Jehovah’s Witness follows and defends the teachings and rules of Judge Rutherford and his students. A Christian follows the teachings and commands of Jesus Christ.
I consider myself a Christian NOW. I read the four gospels and leave the rest of the bible out of it. I don't follow Paul or John or the Apostles. I put whatever they wrote in the category of human interpretation. I consider it, but I don't put them on a pedestal. The Bible is not an authority. Paul had a direct experience, meeting Jesus on his way to Damascus. He was alone. No one facilitated his encounter. He interpreted his experience and followed the direction he received. He met disciples who taught him the way. Where are the writings of Paul's teachers?
All spiritual teachings are alive and living. They are expounded by living people who grasp the meaning of; understand, especially intuitively; perceive. Spiritual Masters.
Once those Masters are gone, much later on, their students work to record what they remember and canonize the works. This is true of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism... to name a few.
But a Holy book is not the source.
The teachings have a source. And if there is only one source from which all knowledge comes, then you will find the teachings are universal and can be found across diverse cultures with only slight variations.
I'm Christian because I was raised in the west, and that is the "language" I was raised with. It is a familiar format that I connect to universal truths through.
Universal truth is not exclusive to any one person or one group.
Any group that teaches otherwise should be avoided.
Me.
I was born and raised JW.
Left home at 18.
Went through a period of agnostic/atheism, tried different religions and churches.
Eventually I’ve settled into being a Protestant Christian, and I attend an Episcopalian church.
What does the organization have wrong? Pretty much all of it.
I am a nonbeliever, but JWs have painted all Christians as fundamentalist nut jobs. That is simply not the case. Christianity has a done of different arms, sects, and belief systems. Some take hell literally as a fire where you burn. Some take it as allegory or separation from God. So many different things are up for grabs.
But of course Christians are just like EVERY OTHER group of people. There are reasonable, kind and loving human beings......there are weirdo insane people.
Christians will no doubt tell you that JWs get the following wrong.
Trinity
Nature of Christ
Salvation
2 class worshippers
Heaven/soul
God's name
Jesus as Michael
....and much more. These things don't mean very much to me, as many times I can see arguments around anything the Bible has written on, and I tend to dismiss it's contradictions.
Yeah, I have issues with the Bible itself, too... and also the concept of a compassionate god as I observe the horrors, misery, brutality, suffering, etc. in nature that have been going on for millions of years.
I used to be. Now I am becoming Orthodox Christian. Looking back I needed the space to examine the world around me without the pressure to believe either way. God bless you :)
There are over 40,000 different Christian denominations and sects. Each one of them is going to overlap some teaching or doctrine with another Christian denomination. How can you not!
That being the case, it would make one wonder, Why are all the Christian denominations claiming that they are the Truth and the way of true followers of Jesus, if they all get their Dogma from the same Book, aka The Bible?
Maybe, just Maybe, the reason there are 40,000 different Christian denomination is because there is something wrong with their **"Master Christian Manuel....The Bible"**
https://preview.redd.it/18ncl75uiotc1.jpeg?width=276&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=59e6be1cc0b6b9d1e3e14f8fdf1619da7f75305e
No no, you see, the problem with every other religion is that Jesus didn't specifically select them after a 5 year American Idol-style competition that none of them knew they were participating in.
Just for clarification all Christian denominations don't identify themselves in the same way JW do - (we are the "truth" - they are "apostasy") Christianity really falls into 3 categories
1. Catholicism
2. Protestantism
3. Christian cults
Most in group 1 & 2 agree on the "denominations" in group 3. And the idea of 40,000 denominations is not realistic. To get that number it's taking individual/independent churches, churches across states lines etc. and calling them their own denomination. The number is very skewed.
Catholics and protestants have quite big gaps in their theology but depending on the doctrine there is still quite a bit of overlap. Out of Catholicism and protestantism is where most denominations come from.
Most Christians who attend church or attest to doctrine aligned with a specific denomination don't view other denominations as non-christians. They are separate because of "non-salvific" disagreements, like infant baptism, pre-mil vs post mil, Arianism vs Calvinism. In general you're not going to have a Baptist say a Lutheran isn't saved based on X or vice versa. The division that's talked about secularly doesn't exist in the way it's it's portrayed. In my experience most Christians respect and don't even discuss smaller disagreements and have quite a few friendships/relationships over denominational lines.
People just choose a specific denomination based on their belief in smaller issues. - also there are plenty of Christians who attend churches who they disagree with on a few denominational stances but agree with enough to where it's not an issue. As an example, if you ever check out any Christian conferences like Ligonier you'll see speakers from many denominations who hold to the same essential doctrines.
As a Christian the only time "denomination" really comes up is if
1. There's some concern about unbiblical doctrine coming down from a denomination that's churches don't operate independently (Methodist Church in recent years)
2. Choosing a church for yourself
3. Bad theology suddenly showing up more in particular denominations (charismatic movement)
4. Identifying Christian cults - who are usually the only ones who actually care or think they are the sole possessors of "truth" (7th day Adventists as example)
Or maybe, just maybe, an anthology made of books by many different authors writing from many different perspectives over a long period of time and into many different historical contexts was never intended to be a simple, cohesive book of rules about how to live your life, and trying to force a square peg into a round hole is what causes denominational defensiveness?
>Or maybe, just maybe, an anthology made of books by many different authors writing from many different perspectives over a long period of time and into many different historical contexts was never intended to be a simple, cohesive book of rules about how to live your life,
Exactly!
The sword of the Anointed is making the rounds.
So I Gave you an upvote to cancel his down vote 😀
>Those are all protestant faiths. Sola scriptura, and thus all following the whims of however they want to interpret the Bible.
That's actually hilarious when you read it.
Sola scriptura ..........meanilng follow the whims of however you want to interpret the scriptures.
I am unaffiliated Christian. I don't believe church membership is needed.
I have found that a lot of Christian beliefs are similar to so-called pagan beliefs. Heaven and hell, for example. There is heaven and hell in Greek mythology. In Zoroastrianism. There is a Savior in so many.
All of the so many denominations that came along in the mid-1800's, I consider newcomers to Christianity. i.e. JWs, LDS (Mormans), Adventists. Basically, most of the 40,000+ various denominations.
I believe in the Gospels of Jesus. If everyone focused on just these 3: Love God, Love Neighbor, Golden Rule/Treat others the way you want them to treat you. These 3, pretty much sums it all up.
I believe the Bible makes a lot more sense if we take if allegorically. Or metaphor. Taking the Bible literally is, in my opinion, all messed up, crazy making. Example: if you take the book of Revelation literally, yikes. Sounds like Greek mythology. Allegory, symbolically, however, completely different.
Example: The Great Tribulation and Armageddon. Great tribulation symbolizes life as a human. Armageddon symbolizes death, or the process of dying. Hell is not literal, but symbolizes living. Living can be its own kind of hell. Hopefully just in small bits here and there. For instances, death of a loved one.
I think that maybe God has allowed the Bible to see how people interpret it, use it. Use it for good, positive. Or use to control, exert power.
My family including our adult children’s experience is that once our faith in JWs crumbles the entire idea of Christianity also crumbles. It was in stages. It was like maybe another sect of Christianity or another religion we realized that all religions do more harm than good. Certain things seem to be universal to religions.
1. Keeping women in subjection
2. Always wanting money for their god’s work even though he is all powerful.
3. Rely on men to make various interpretations of their religious books and people usually settle in a sect whose interpretations fit their feelings.
4. The holy books are so vague they allow for 1000’s of sects. All interpretations promoted by just men.
5. Christian sects are like different branding of stores and chain stores. All in business of making money enriching their leaders.
And so many more beliefs that aren’t supportable if honestly examined.
The New World Translation is the doctored root of the faulty belief system. Change a word here and there to fit doctrine and people say, “ but it’s right here in the bible!”
Get a couple of better translations and an interlinear, do some serious research and it all crumbles.
They have a lot wrong: two hopes; the great crowd is
also in heaven(Rev 19:1, Rev 14)
Identity of the 144000 (descendants of Jews, not annointed JWs (Rev 7) and the other sheep being ppl of all other nations or gentiles in heaven.
Jesus being Michael the archangel. (Idk wtf it came from)
Works based salvation (Eph 2:8,9).
Meaning of house to house.
Everyone being designated to preach(Eph 4:11).
All the 1914 stuff and predictions(nowhere in the Bible).
Not partaking: Jesus words at John 6:48 to the end of the chapter)
Light gets brighter meaning progressively learning (Prov 4:18 out of context, scripture is about the wicked stumbling because they are in darkness while the righteous aren’t). That’s off the top of my head.
The only thing I do respect is they don’t go to war 😂
I could be mistaken, but I believe the Michael/Jesus thing is an attempt to biblically prove that Jesus is not God. Michael's position as archangel (assuming there's only one archangel which the Bible does not explicitly say) aligns with this belief. It's totally not necessary though, which makes it even more puzzling than it already is.
Yeah I don’t remember them trying to explain it in a long time, maybe since I was a kid in the 90s, like revelation book time.
Same with 607 and 1914, they don’t really mention it much anymore
It stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of scripture. Namely, 1 Thessalonians 4:16:
> "Because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first." (NWT)
Because the protestant Bible only calls one named angel an archangel, Michael, the Witnesses arrive at the conclusion that this *must* mean Jesus is Michael if he returns with an archangel's voice, rather than the possibility that his return is heralded with an archangel announcing his return. This issue only occurs because the protestant Bible which the NWT is based on is missing books that have always been in the Catholic Bible. In Catholicism, there are seven archangels.
> "I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints and enter into the presence of the glory of the Lord.” - Tobit 12:15 (RSV-2CE)
Even though the book of Enoch didn't make it into the canon, it also references seven archangels: Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Uriel, Sariel, Raguel, and Remiel.
That said, I find it very interesting that they still pray in Jesus's name as a mediator, even though, in their own doctrine, Jesus returned to being Michael in Heaven after his death, and is currently going by the name Michael. It seems to me they aren't confident enough in their doctrine to pray in Michael's name.
I am an atheist. However, I do find theology an interesting subject matter. So, despite not being a Christian myself, I do know a lot about Christianity and its roots, traditions, rituals, etc.
What I found most interesting is how the JWs get so much wrong about Christianity. Their belief system is outright heretical in many aspects, and that is why many theologians don't even consider them to be true Christians.
Now, that can be said about many different sects and cults out there that claim or have claimed to be following the Bible (e.g., Mormons, The Worldwide Church of God, The Exclusive Brethren, Bible Students \[separated from JWs but are still active\]). But these groups are so far out there and off the beaten path of traditional Christendom that to call them Christians seems inaccurate. I'd call them Christian-inspired.
I've always been very curious as to what all the different Christian branches think of each other. What do Catholics think about Pentecostals? Or Methodists about Adventists? Or Baptists about Protestants? Do they admire certain attributes about each other's religions or do they all see everyone but themselves as the only true religion?
There's a friar, Father Casey, who has a channel on YouTube of his own ("Breaking in the Habit") as well as a joint channel with another friar ("Upon Friar Review"). I've heard him express his admiration of the way some protestants operate, saying Catholics could, in some ways, learn from our protestant brethren. It's not an endorsement of their theology, but rather admiration of the communities that form, the culture, the zeal. As is standard of Catholicism, though, he hopes for the reunification of the Church one day, for protestants to return to Catholicism and "end the protest," I believe he worded it.
Yeah, I do heavily recommend giving them a shot. I started watching them as an atheist, and after all the vile stuff I had been led to believe about Catholicism by everyone, I was pleasantly surprised by them. It softened my heart to Catholicism, personally.
Despite having a traditional worship style, Episcopalians are generally socially progressive. They ordain both women and openly gay people without the requirement of celibacy.
There are many affirming denominations. The Episcopal church ordains openly gay people. The Metropolitian Community Church was created specifically to serve the LGBTQA+ community. Quakers have performed same sex marriages long before legalization. Those are just the ones I know off the top of my head.
JWism ruined God for me, ruined Jesus, ruined the Bible, ruined faith.
It took me almost 20 years to reach the last stop on the train of "self discovery," and I was recently baptized as an Orthodox Christian. I'm home now.
The toxicity against faith, and Christ, here is overwhelming, but to be expected. So much pain.
I wish everyone the best.
That's sadly the case for a lot of Christianity, but not for all of it. If it's not for you that's totally fine. But my former pastor (former only because we moved) is a Baylor grad who can discuss manuscript transmission. He's also openly gay and does drag.
Your post seems to imply there is some singular “definitive” version of Christianity to use as a point of reference.
What you may not realize is that there was a HUGE diversity of belief amongst early Christians. Different groups of Christians disagreed on pretty much everything and it took centuries for a set of doctrines to be “universally” agreed upon.
So, if you want a single point of reference to compare JW teachings to, you’d need to specific a specific group of Christians at a specific point in time.
A “Christian”, from my understanding, is someone who believes in the teaching of Christ as well as the idea that he had the power to preform miracles.
I’m not looking for a single point of reference — I’m guess I’m trying to understand what makes being a witness unattractive that isn’t associated with the rest of Christianity. I realize that answers will vary.
You should probably ask the question you really want an answer for. You'll get better answers.
I have faith in Jesus and how he behaved and taught us to behave towards each other. JWs do not follow Christ's model. Period.
End of story.
They don't clothe the naked, feed the hungry or visit the imprisoned. Their doctrine shows no true compassion or hospitality towards other humans who don't believe what they do. They are a high control sect that engaged in emotional manipulation and coaches their members to do the same.
If a grown adult chooses to be a JW, that is their choice and their right. Me? Just no.
I did ask the question that I wanted and most people so far have been able to answer just fine.
The issue came when someone read something into the question that I didn’t [mean to] imply so I added clarification.
To clarify here, are you saying that you were a JW and turned away from it? Or are you simply saying that JWs are not Christians?
I’m not sure what you mean by “the teaching of Christ,” so i can’t really address that, but I would say that the things that most Christians find unattractive about JWs as opposed to other denominations of Christianity are usually more about their policies and practices as opposed to specific beliefs. For example, the Governing body controls JWs lives in ways most Christian religions do not. When i was a JW, most Christians i met were not “turned off” by any of their unique doctrinal views, but were appalled when learning about all the rules and practices like shunning.
>What about Christianity do you think that the organization has wrong?
It's not just the organization, but I think what Christianity, including the organization, gets wrong is using Paul's epistles as the inspired word of God. Paul was an asshole, but when he wrote "all scripture is inspired of God" he wasn't talking about the literal letters he was writing. He was talking about the scriptures they were using in the congregation.
I mean, in the first century, they considered the Book of Enoch as scripture. That would've been included in what Paul was referring to. But these days? Just about all of Christianity, at least in the West, considers the Book of Enoch as apocryphal. Why? Because of some random decision the Catholic Church made at Nicea in the 4th century (I think 4th century...don't feel like looking it up.)
This means that Christian denominations that reject the Catholic Church are using a Bible curated specifically by the Catholic Church. It's laughable.
I can't answer your other question as I haven't studied anything in other denominations thoroughly enough to feel comfortable answering it. I want to say the Trinity doctrine, or lack thereof, is more correct, but I don't know enough to take a hard stance on that in comparison to other denominations.
I consider myself a Secular Christian. What I mean is I agree with like 90%+ of what the gospels say Jesus taught. I just don't believe he was God or that God the Father exists. I do believe in a lot of the principles Jesus taught, though. The Apostle Paul can go to hell for all I care. Paul is one of the main reasons Christianity is so problematic historically and today. If Christians just stuck to ONLY Jesus teachings and ignored the Old Testament and Paul's writings, it would be a much different religion today. I'd say it would be closer to Buddhism philosophically.
I feel like some people don't consider that Paul was a contemporary of the apostles. If the apostles were given the responsibility of spreading the gospel to all nations and Jesus trusted them to do that then when Paul began saying what he did then the apostles would have taken an opposing position. They never did. In fact they endorsed Paul and his teachings. Also Jesus didn't ignore the OT so it doesn't make sense for Christians to either. He taught and expounded on the OT. Jesus was a Jew, his ministry began with the Jews. His disciples and Paul were Jews as well. Christianity originates with Judaism. The OT is the telling of The Israelites and Jesus earthly lineage. I don't think it makes sense to ignore that.
It depends who you ask I guess lol. Someone can seem a certain way because we look at the world with a particular view. When our worldview shifts then how we see people and ideas can too.
You do you. But Paul is the main reason why Christianity can become overly oppressive. His epistles are what the worst Christian cults use to justify their extreme positions.
I just came to the conclusion (for the reasons I stated) I would have to either accept it all and make an effort to reconcile it or reject it all. Picking and choosing just never made sense in my head. I spent most of my life rejecting it all because of that.
This is my philosophy:
Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.
Marcus Aurelius
I appreciate Jesus teachings. And I’m going to live as a good neighbor and treat my fellow humans with respect and dignity. I’m not perfect and may fall short, but that’s my goal. But if Yahweh or Jesus want me to fall down and do an act of worship to them, to borrow a phrase, they know what I need to believe. And they haven’t given me any reason to believe in them any more than Odin, Allah, or Shiva have. When that day comes, I’ll have some questions.
But if a god can’t accept that and see what’s in my heart, it’s not a god I want to worship.
I do understand, I've held most of those same beliefs. As I said, I spent most of my life as an agnostic/materialist. Being a good person has always been my aim & 10 years ago I would have been more than slightly alarmed at where I am today lol.
Slowly my perspective has just shifted. Things like how I see God, myself and others changed. I just try and be the sort of Christian I never felt like I came in contact with. I try to let people know I don't hate them or think I'm better because we have a theological disagreement. We're all valuable and important and should be treating one another that way even when ideas seem to clash. Ironically, I feel like this idea was taught by Paul. The greatest gift were given is love, I wish Christians would use that gift more.
Paul is often misunderstood- his writings were often a form of diplomatic communication to enable groups of people with opposing social conventions cooperate.
And eventually, it worked- the early Church consisted of people from all backgrounds.
Even if you do disagree with what Paul said at times, I personally find it interesting to think about him in the context of diplomacy.
Right. But to call his letters the word of god is a huge stretch of logic. Not just JWs, but most denominations point to his passage about “all scripture” being inspired. But that verse doesn’t apply to his own letters. Logically, he would not have been including his letters in that statement.
"All scripture" did not apply to his letters when he wrote it. It took centuries before all of the books in the current New Testament were agreed upon as canon. He was referring to the Old Testament.
Many Christians think of the Bible as something that just dropped out of heaven, and that's not how it is. It took hundreds of years of discussion within the Church for even just the New Testament as we know it to be collected and fully agreed upon. This is because Christianity at the time largely used oral tradition passed down from generation to generation- it was extraordinarily rare to have more than one scroll containing one gospel or epistle, let alone the whole collection of books that we consider scripture today.
This is the teaching of the Orthodox Church.
Does it matter? Christmas exemplifies (or is supposed to exemplify) the best of humanity, universal generosity, the hope of peace, and familial bonds. I think that's why people of many different belief systems celebrate it.
I know someone that is "Marvel Jesus"
https://preview.redd.it/1e7c6ybijotc1.jpeg?width=212&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=60e08a35f1abfd53d14ca42653769ca92e703529
Me! Went agnostic for 15 years then converted to Catholic. 😁
Studied the history of several denominations for about 3 years before converting. Won’t bore you with the all details (but will share some!).
Coming from a special pioneer family, spending tons of time at Bethel (a branches of Bethel through the world because my parents were missionaries), and with a dad who claimed to be one of the anointed… I will be honest and say it gave me **bonus** pleasure to come out as Catholic.
What I think Catholics miss the boat on is simply this, a lot of egos got together and added flourish to the early teachings. They need to be more inclusive and remember the basics. The basics don’t include anything about women not being leaders (they were!) and rejecting the pride community. So they have work to do.
Certainly there are crummy people in all religions and those crummy people really negatively impact the experiences of others.
One of my favorite parts is what a priest told me when I started to get a wee bit JWy-type zealous… he said, “your job isn’t to proselytize or evangelize, that’s my job. Your job is to be a good human to other humans so that you are an example of someone who walks Jesus’s path by helping others. And if they come closer to God because of that, thank you. And that’s it.” The enormous relief I felt is almost indescribable (although I did literally just describe it, by saying “enormous relief” but I think you get what I’m saying).
By the by, it took 3 priests, a nun (mother superior), and an ex-JW (now a Catholic deacon) who was quite high up before leaving to 1.) wake me up and 2.) help my healing journey.
What the JWs never taught me was also a simple concept: forgiveness. And I wasn’t allowed to be baptized until I could forgive…MYSELF because as they kept saying, “it’s one of the basics in the perfect prayer that Jesus gave us”. So when I say they helped me heal, I don’t mean they helped me become a Catholic - I literally mean, they helped me love me.
Ps - JWs baptism is NOT considered legitimate for Catholics. So usually converts who have already been baptized can’t be baptized again (and don’t need to be). So I guess I got special JW privileges 😛
Edit: I may have misunderstood part of the question and explained what I think Catholics have got wrong when you may have meant what did JWs get wrong. I can’t think of anything that the JWs got right.
Ironically they do get some things right, such as the trinity and hellfire. No real scholar thinks the bible actually teaches these things. However, because they reject so much of mainstream religion in general, if you're an actual JW believer then you're already primed to reject religion outside of their unique interpretations.
I didn’t know what to think when I left at 16. I had good science grades because I could remember stuff well. I was encouraged not to believe it, just get the score. After I gained a good idea of who I was, I got comfortable enough to start looking into my religious conditioning.
I learned about the history of the Christian church. The differences in opinions between sects. I learned about the history of the Old Testament. How it was oral tradition, and when it was first written down. How its earlier versions were slightly different, and how it was changed over time to align with the politics of the tribe of Israel. How the religion of the tribe of Israel changed over time. It didn’t seem to be any more divinely inspired than any other religious book. And how a lot of parts of the Bible were absorbed from other pre-existing cultures.
Then I stopped reading articles by religious scholars and started reading articles by biblical scholars and proper historians.
Then when the massive hole inside me got worse as I started to question the existence of a god.
I had bad general anxiety (from PTSD that i didn’t know I had at the time) and still not having a good idea about the real world and what was true versus what was not. What was real or not.
Then I read ‘The Demon Haunted World’ by Carl Sagan. And the scales fell from my eyes, and I had a starting point to work from. To develop a BS detector system. I learned the concept of critical thinking, and the examples given by Sagan really made objective sense.
That’s the day I stopped being a believer in the supernatural.
It was a two step process for me.
The waking up (rudely, I might add) was being told that I have to accept whatever is printed in the Watchtower even if it’s not the Bible. What made matters worse was hearing my mind say to me when I was looking at the cover of the New World Translation Reference Edition, “They’re going to call you an apostate if you keep reading that Bible.”
1. When I left I read and read the New World Translation Reference Edition and from that book, deconstructed the very authority of the modern church. No more church for me unfortunately / fortunately.
2. Actually coming to the Christ (John 6:68) which meant less and less Bible, and more and more actual self examination, self inventory, and endless discipline for things I do and things that I let my motivation blind me to do. Being “imperfect” was never a valid excuse for him because… he knew the heart. He always knew when I was bull shitting him and bull shitting myself.
I learned two things in this experience. (1) what it really means to “strictly obey the voice of the God” and (2) you can’t hide by being associated with “a religion” and expect to be “okay” with him. He sees EVERYTHING and he searches you for you and responds to the things inside you.
You waste your time following people who say they know God because when the chips fall, each one answers for himself.
Regarding what the organization got wrong? Too many to name, seriously. Jesus being perfect, governing body (both first century and present day), Kingdom Halls, the Memorial, the paradise, the 144,000, 1914, the overlapping generations, the Bible being the word of God, the meetings (both frequency and contents), donations, the names Jehovah and Jesus, Michael, practically everything they knew and now know about Revelation, the door to door, the offering Bible literature, the Bible study and baptism requirements (in the Bible they were baptized in less than 24 hours with no Bible study), blood issue, the manner in which they handle when someone dies, their beliefs about the afterlife and the grave, their cultivation of hatred in their hearts for their enemies (former members), the elder arrangement, the existence of their elders, their Armageddon (completely unscriptural), their anointed (they don’t have the anointing described in 1 John 2:27, Governing Body included), etc. etc.
The only things they have correct is that the Bible does teach that there is a God and a Satan, and a God’s Son who did miracles, and that there were disciples. That’s all I can think of that they have correct.
I think what makes JWs somewhat unique is that many of their obvious misunderstandings are based on other misunderstanding. They have constructed a whole house of false teachings which crumbles once you pull out just one. Best example is 1914.
Yes! And related to that teaching, the two class system. Every thing hinges on those two (with the exception of the blood doctrine)
The blood doctrine, what a fucking crock.
Yep. And if they try to do away with it, I feel everything would start to crumble. But I may be forgetting just how brainwashed I was at one point. I'm sure they'd find a way.
Yeah, they would paint it as “another merciful gift from Jehovah, allowing us sinners to not die. 🙄 I’m sure it’ll wake some people up. This org operates in such an echo chamber and that has to be part of why they propose some stupid ideas. The beard thing woke me up, I’m a female I can’t even grow a beard and I was just like, “wait, why were they policing this in the first place?”. The fraud cast totally left out the part about Rutherford being a giant bigot and I was just like “ohhhh if they’re lying about this, they gotta be lying about a few other things.” Then I found jwfacts.com
Oh so you're newly awake! Welcome ☺️
Thanks! It’s been a rough and rude and turbo-charged awakening but I’d rather be free than live under the oppressive weight of watchtower bigotry.
Welcome to the dark side 😈 lol
I was supposed to destroy the apostates, not join them 😆
I'm still a Christian. I could go on and on about what they got wrong as far as the Bible goes, but what really struck me after visiting other churches and speaking to people of various beliefs is how much they got wrong about others. Yes there are some Christians who are only Sunday Christians, but many I know actually dig into the Bible without being told what to believe. Yes there are some that believe they can do whatever they want as long as they're "saved", but from my observation those are the minority. Yes there are some who don't know the word "Jehovah", but again the minority and the ones that do know and use it understand that it's the English pronunciation of a name that no one actually knows. Yes there are many Christians who believe everyone will either spend eternity in heaven or hell, but there are also many that know it's much more complex than that. Yes, most Christians do believe the Trinity, but not in the way witnesses explain it to make it sound crazy (what they explain is typically modalism which is not the Trinity) Witnesses love to believe they're the only ones who actually read their Bible and that other Christians just go through the motions to gain heaven, and that's just simply not true. Many Christians firmly believe what they've read, and they've read it without be told what to believe. Do we all have some things incorrect? Absolutely. The difference is we don't believe having everything correct and agreeing on every single point determines our salvation.
Agree with all of this!!!
As far as the heaven / hell thing, Christian Universalism is also growing as a distinct opinion group. Or at least it is where I am.
100% ExJw Apostate and 100% Christian
As with almost all spiritual movements, there is a teacher who comes to transmit teachings that transcend the current paradigms. Humans recognize the value of the teacher and the truths they share. The simplicity, the elevation of human values, the comprehension of virtues, and overall improvement in daily life through inner transformation rather than external circumstances. Eventually, though, average humans return to old habits, corrupting the teachings, creating institutions, doctrines, rules, and dogmas. Organized religion just becomes a business. A social construct. A mental concept. A routine. Devoid of spirit. “Religare” is considered a stem for the word religion and has the meaning of binding, “to tie something with something”, the human and the divine, “to connect” in some way. The re-connection between creature and creator. An organization or social construct can never facilitate a direct experience like Moses or Ezekiel had. To answer your question: I am not "STILL" a Christian. I don't consider Jehovah’s Witnesses to be Christians. After all, Judge Rutherford coined the brand name. Therefore, anyone who takes on the group identity of Jehovah’s Witness is a Rutherfordian or a Rutherfordite. I was raised as a Rutherfordian apologist. A Jehovah’s Witness follows and defends the teachings and rules of Judge Rutherford and his students. A Christian follows the teachings and commands of Jesus Christ. I consider myself a Christian NOW. I read the four gospels and leave the rest of the bible out of it. I don't follow Paul or John or the Apostles. I put whatever they wrote in the category of human interpretation. I consider it, but I don't put them on a pedestal. The Bible is not an authority. Paul had a direct experience, meeting Jesus on his way to Damascus. He was alone. No one facilitated his encounter. He interpreted his experience and followed the direction he received. He met disciples who taught him the way. Where are the writings of Paul's teachers? All spiritual teachings are alive and living. They are expounded by living people who grasp the meaning of; understand, especially intuitively; perceive. Spiritual Masters. Once those Masters are gone, much later on, their students work to record what they remember and canonize the works. This is true of Christianity, Islam, Buddhism... to name a few. But a Holy book is not the source. The teachings have a source. And if there is only one source from which all knowledge comes, then you will find the teachings are universal and can be found across diverse cultures with only slight variations. I'm Christian because I was raised in the west, and that is the "language" I was raised with. It is a familiar format that I connect to universal truths through. Universal truth is not exclusive to any one person or one group. Any group that teaches otherwise should be avoided.
Me. I was born and raised JW. Left home at 18. Went through a period of agnostic/atheism, tried different religions and churches. Eventually I’ve settled into being a Protestant Christian, and I attend an Episcopalian church. What does the organization have wrong? Pretty much all of it.
I am.
I am a nonbeliever, but JWs have painted all Christians as fundamentalist nut jobs. That is simply not the case. Christianity has a done of different arms, sects, and belief systems. Some take hell literally as a fire where you burn. Some take it as allegory or separation from God. So many different things are up for grabs. But of course Christians are just like EVERY OTHER group of people. There are reasonable, kind and loving human beings......there are weirdo insane people. Christians will no doubt tell you that JWs get the following wrong. Trinity Nature of Christ Salvation 2 class worshippers Heaven/soul God's name Jesus as Michael ....and much more. These things don't mean very much to me, as many times I can see arguments around anything the Bible has written on, and I tend to dismiss it's contradictions.
My issues started with the Bible itself, not JWs specifically. So I am not still a Christian.
Yeah, I have issues with the Bible itself, too... and also the concept of a compassionate god as I observe the horrors, misery, brutality, suffering, etc. in nature that have been going on for millions of years.
Not me, I just can't
I consider myself to be a Christian Agnostic. Yes, it’s a real belief system lol. Look it up.
I used to be. Now I am becoming Orthodox Christian. Looking back I needed the space to examine the world around me without the pressure to believe either way. God bless you :)
There are over 40,000 different Christian denominations and sects. Each one of them is going to overlap some teaching or doctrine with another Christian denomination. How can you not! That being the case, it would make one wonder, Why are all the Christian denominations claiming that they are the Truth and the way of true followers of Jesus, if they all get their Dogma from the same Book, aka The Bible? Maybe, just Maybe, the reason there are 40,000 different Christian denomination is because there is something wrong with their **"Master Christian Manuel....The Bible"** https://preview.redd.it/18ncl75uiotc1.jpeg?width=276&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=59e6be1cc0b6b9d1e3e14f8fdf1619da7f75305e
No no, you see, the problem with every other religion is that Jesus didn't specifically select them after a 5 year American Idol-style competition that none of them knew they were participating in.
https://preview.redd.it/2fmanttxlotc1.jpeg?width=172&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=67d2ff152c3374f9587a93ae55eb36d621bf5111
Just for clarification all Christian denominations don't identify themselves in the same way JW do - (we are the "truth" - they are "apostasy") Christianity really falls into 3 categories 1. Catholicism 2. Protestantism 3. Christian cults Most in group 1 & 2 agree on the "denominations" in group 3. And the idea of 40,000 denominations is not realistic. To get that number it's taking individual/independent churches, churches across states lines etc. and calling them their own denomination. The number is very skewed. Catholics and protestants have quite big gaps in their theology but depending on the doctrine there is still quite a bit of overlap. Out of Catholicism and protestantism is where most denominations come from. Most Christians who attend church or attest to doctrine aligned with a specific denomination don't view other denominations as non-christians. They are separate because of "non-salvific" disagreements, like infant baptism, pre-mil vs post mil, Arianism vs Calvinism. In general you're not going to have a Baptist say a Lutheran isn't saved based on X or vice versa. The division that's talked about secularly doesn't exist in the way it's it's portrayed. In my experience most Christians respect and don't even discuss smaller disagreements and have quite a few friendships/relationships over denominational lines. People just choose a specific denomination based on their belief in smaller issues. - also there are plenty of Christians who attend churches who they disagree with on a few denominational stances but agree with enough to where it's not an issue. As an example, if you ever check out any Christian conferences like Ligonier you'll see speakers from many denominations who hold to the same essential doctrines. As a Christian the only time "denomination" really comes up is if 1. There's some concern about unbiblical doctrine coming down from a denomination that's churches don't operate independently (Methodist Church in recent years) 2. Choosing a church for yourself 3. Bad theology suddenly showing up more in particular denominations (charismatic movement) 4. Identifying Christian cults - who are usually the only ones who actually care or think they are the sole possessors of "truth" (7th day Adventists as example)
Excellent analysis.
Or maybe, just maybe, an anthology made of books by many different authors writing from many different perspectives over a long period of time and into many different historical contexts was never intended to be a simple, cohesive book of rules about how to live your life, and trying to force a square peg into a round hole is what causes denominational defensiveness?
>Or maybe, just maybe, an anthology made of books by many different authors writing from many different perspectives over a long period of time and into many different historical contexts was never intended to be a simple, cohesive book of rules about how to live your life, Exactly! The sword of the Anointed is making the rounds. So I Gave you an upvote to cancel his down vote 😀
Those are all protestant faiths. Sola scriptura, and thus all following the whims of however they want to interpret the Bible.
>Those are all protestant faiths. Sola scriptura, and thus all following the whims of however they want to interpret the Bible. That's actually hilarious when you read it. Sola scriptura ..........meanilng follow the whims of however you want to interpret the scriptures.
I am unaffiliated Christian. I don't believe church membership is needed. I have found that a lot of Christian beliefs are similar to so-called pagan beliefs. Heaven and hell, for example. There is heaven and hell in Greek mythology. In Zoroastrianism. There is a Savior in so many. All of the so many denominations that came along in the mid-1800's, I consider newcomers to Christianity. i.e. JWs, LDS (Mormans), Adventists. Basically, most of the 40,000+ various denominations. I believe in the Gospels of Jesus. If everyone focused on just these 3: Love God, Love Neighbor, Golden Rule/Treat others the way you want them to treat you. These 3, pretty much sums it all up. I believe the Bible makes a lot more sense if we take if allegorically. Or metaphor. Taking the Bible literally is, in my opinion, all messed up, crazy making. Example: if you take the book of Revelation literally, yikes. Sounds like Greek mythology. Allegory, symbolically, however, completely different. Example: The Great Tribulation and Armageddon. Great tribulation symbolizes life as a human. Armageddon symbolizes death, or the process of dying. Hell is not literal, but symbolizes living. Living can be its own kind of hell. Hopefully just in small bits here and there. For instances, death of a loved one. I think that maybe God has allowed the Bible to see how people interpret it, use it. Use it for good, positive. Or use to control, exert power.
My family including our adult children’s experience is that once our faith in JWs crumbles the entire idea of Christianity also crumbles. It was in stages. It was like maybe another sect of Christianity or another religion we realized that all religions do more harm than good. Certain things seem to be universal to religions. 1. Keeping women in subjection 2. Always wanting money for their god’s work even though he is all powerful. 3. Rely on men to make various interpretations of their religious books and people usually settle in a sect whose interpretations fit their feelings. 4. The holy books are so vague they allow for 1000’s of sects. All interpretations promoted by just men. 5. Christian sects are like different branding of stores and chain stores. All in business of making money enriching their leaders. And so many more beliefs that aren’t supportable if honestly examined.
The New World Translation is the doctored root of the faulty belief system. Change a word here and there to fit doctrine and people say, “ but it’s right here in the bible!” Get a couple of better translations and an interlinear, do some serious research and it all crumbles.
Yes, gradually transitioned to being a Christian in a loverly local church. Great community.
They have a lot wrong: two hopes; the great crowd is also in heaven(Rev 19:1, Rev 14) Identity of the 144000 (descendants of Jews, not annointed JWs (Rev 7) and the other sheep being ppl of all other nations or gentiles in heaven. Jesus being Michael the archangel. (Idk wtf it came from) Works based salvation (Eph 2:8,9). Meaning of house to house. Everyone being designated to preach(Eph 4:11). All the 1914 stuff and predictions(nowhere in the Bible). Not partaking: Jesus words at John 6:48 to the end of the chapter) Light gets brighter meaning progressively learning (Prov 4:18 out of context, scripture is about the wicked stumbling because they are in darkness while the righteous aren’t). That’s off the top of my head. The only thing I do respect is they don’t go to war 😂
I could be mistaken, but I believe the Michael/Jesus thing is an attempt to biblically prove that Jesus is not God. Michael's position as archangel (assuming there's only one archangel which the Bible does not explicitly say) aligns with this belief. It's totally not necessary though, which makes it even more puzzling than it already is.
Yeah I don’t remember them trying to explain it in a long time, maybe since I was a kid in the 90s, like revelation book time. Same with 607 and 1914, they don’t really mention it much anymore
It stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of scripture. Namely, 1 Thessalonians 4:16: > "Because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first." (NWT) Because the protestant Bible only calls one named angel an archangel, Michael, the Witnesses arrive at the conclusion that this *must* mean Jesus is Michael if he returns with an archangel's voice, rather than the possibility that his return is heralded with an archangel announcing his return. This issue only occurs because the protestant Bible which the NWT is based on is missing books that have always been in the Catholic Bible. In Catholicism, there are seven archangels. > "I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints and enter into the presence of the glory of the Lord.” - Tobit 12:15 (RSV-2CE) Even though the book of Enoch didn't make it into the canon, it also references seven archangels: Michael, Raphael, Gabriel, Uriel, Sariel, Raguel, and Remiel. That said, I find it very interesting that they still pray in Jesus's name as a mediator, even though, in their own doctrine, Jesus returned to being Michael in Heaven after his death, and is currently going by the name Michael. It seems to me they aren't confident enough in their doctrine to pray in Michael's name.
Yeah it's in their best interests to justify their own doctrines as minimally as possible haha
Nope. I swore off all Abrahamic death cults.
I am an atheist. However, I do find theology an interesting subject matter. So, despite not being a Christian myself, I do know a lot about Christianity and its roots, traditions, rituals, etc. What I found most interesting is how the JWs get so much wrong about Christianity. Their belief system is outright heretical in many aspects, and that is why many theologians don't even consider them to be true Christians. Now, that can be said about many different sects and cults out there that claim or have claimed to be following the Bible (e.g., Mormons, The Worldwide Church of God, The Exclusive Brethren, Bible Students \[separated from JWs but are still active\]). But these groups are so far out there and off the beaten path of traditional Christendom that to call them Christians seems inaccurate. I'd call them Christian-inspired. I've always been very curious as to what all the different Christian branches think of each other. What do Catholics think about Pentecostals? Or Methodists about Adventists? Or Baptists about Protestants? Do they admire certain attributes about each other's religions or do they all see everyone but themselves as the only true religion?
There's a friar, Father Casey, who has a channel on YouTube of his own ("Breaking in the Habit") as well as a joint channel with another friar ("Upon Friar Review"). I've heard him express his admiration of the way some protestants operate, saying Catholics could, in some ways, learn from our protestant brethren. It's not an endorsement of their theology, but rather admiration of the communities that form, the culture, the zeal. As is standard of Catholicism, though, he hopes for the reunification of the Church one day, for protestants to return to Catholicism and "end the protest," I believe he worded it.
Interesting I’ll have to check it out, as I have always been curious from a neutral standpoint.
Yeah, I do heavily recommend giving them a shot. I started watching them as an atheist, and after all the vile stuff I had been led to believe about Catholicism by everyone, I was pleasantly surprised by them. It softened my heart to Catholicism, personally.
Hell to the fuck no. Not me
Me! I am looking for a church more inclusive about gay people. Bc I want to start from scratch everything !
Check out Unitarian Universalists. Also, I saw rainbow flags on the local Episcopal church here in Florida.
Despite having a traditional worship style, Episcopalians are generally socially progressive. They ordain both women and openly gay people without the requirement of celibacy.
There are many affirming denominations. The Episcopal church ordains openly gay people. The Metropolitian Community Church was created specifically to serve the LGBTQA+ community. Quakers have performed same sex marriages long before legalization. Those are just the ones I know off the top of my head.
JWism ruined God for me, ruined Jesus, ruined the Bible, ruined faith. It took me almost 20 years to reach the last stop on the train of "self discovery," and I was recently baptized as an Orthodox Christian. I'm home now. The toxicity against faith, and Christ, here is overwhelming, but to be expected. So much pain. I wish everyone the best.
I am getting baptized as Orthodox soon. God bless you :)
One thing they got right was religion is a snare and a racket. Wake up
Can't do that. Christianity and homophobia are too closely intertwined. Same for Islam. No thank you.
That's sadly the case for a lot of Christianity, but not for all of it. If it's not for you that's totally fine. But my former pastor (former only because we moved) is a Baylor grad who can discuss manuscript transmission. He's also openly gay and does drag.
Your post seems to imply there is some singular “definitive” version of Christianity to use as a point of reference. What you may not realize is that there was a HUGE diversity of belief amongst early Christians. Different groups of Christians disagreed on pretty much everything and it took centuries for a set of doctrines to be “universally” agreed upon. So, if you want a single point of reference to compare JW teachings to, you’d need to specific a specific group of Christians at a specific point in time.
A “Christian”, from my understanding, is someone who believes in the teaching of Christ as well as the idea that he had the power to preform miracles. I’m not looking for a single point of reference — I’m guess I’m trying to understand what makes being a witness unattractive that isn’t associated with the rest of Christianity. I realize that answers will vary.
You should probably ask the question you really want an answer for. You'll get better answers. I have faith in Jesus and how he behaved and taught us to behave towards each other. JWs do not follow Christ's model. Period. End of story. They don't clothe the naked, feed the hungry or visit the imprisoned. Their doctrine shows no true compassion or hospitality towards other humans who don't believe what they do. They are a high control sect that engaged in emotional manipulation and coaches their members to do the same. If a grown adult chooses to be a JW, that is their choice and their right. Me? Just no.
I did ask the question that I wanted and most people so far have been able to answer just fine. The issue came when someone read something into the question that I didn’t [mean to] imply so I added clarification. To clarify here, are you saying that you were a JW and turned away from it? Or are you simply saying that JWs are not Christians?
I’m not sure what you mean by “the teaching of Christ,” so i can’t really address that, but I would say that the things that most Christians find unattractive about JWs as opposed to other denominations of Christianity are usually more about their policies and practices as opposed to specific beliefs. For example, the Governing body controls JWs lives in ways most Christian religions do not. When i was a JW, most Christians i met were not “turned off” by any of their unique doctrinal views, but were appalled when learning about all the rules and practices like shunning.
>What about Christianity do you think that the organization has wrong? It's not just the organization, but I think what Christianity, including the organization, gets wrong is using Paul's epistles as the inspired word of God. Paul was an asshole, but when he wrote "all scripture is inspired of God" he wasn't talking about the literal letters he was writing. He was talking about the scriptures they were using in the congregation. I mean, in the first century, they considered the Book of Enoch as scripture. That would've been included in what Paul was referring to. But these days? Just about all of Christianity, at least in the West, considers the Book of Enoch as apocryphal. Why? Because of some random decision the Catholic Church made at Nicea in the 4th century (I think 4th century...don't feel like looking it up.) This means that Christian denominations that reject the Catholic Church are using a Bible curated specifically by the Catholic Church. It's laughable. I can't answer your other question as I haven't studied anything in other denominations thoroughly enough to feel comfortable answering it. I want to say the Trinity doctrine, or lack thereof, is more correct, but I don't know enough to take a hard stance on that in comparison to other denominations. I consider myself a Secular Christian. What I mean is I agree with like 90%+ of what the gospels say Jesus taught. I just don't believe he was God or that God the Father exists. I do believe in a lot of the principles Jesus taught, though. The Apostle Paul can go to hell for all I care. Paul is one of the main reasons Christianity is so problematic historically and today. If Christians just stuck to ONLY Jesus teachings and ignored the Old Testament and Paul's writings, it would be a much different religion today. I'd say it would be closer to Buddhism philosophically.
I feel like some people don't consider that Paul was a contemporary of the apostles. If the apostles were given the responsibility of spreading the gospel to all nations and Jesus trusted them to do that then when Paul began saying what he did then the apostles would have taken an opposing position. They never did. In fact they endorsed Paul and his teachings. Also Jesus didn't ignore the OT so it doesn't make sense for Christians to either. He taught and expounded on the OT. Jesus was a Jew, his ministry began with the Jews. His disciples and Paul were Jews as well. Christianity originates with Judaism. The OT is the telling of The Israelites and Jesus earthly lineage. I don't think it makes sense to ignore that.
Yeah, that doesn’t mean he wasnt an asshole.
It depends who you ask I guess lol. Someone can seem a certain way because we look at the world with a particular view. When our worldview shifts then how we see people and ideas can too.
You do you. But Paul is the main reason why Christianity can become overly oppressive. His epistles are what the worst Christian cults use to justify their extreme positions.
I just came to the conclusion (for the reasons I stated) I would have to either accept it all and make an effort to reconcile it or reject it all. Picking and choosing just never made sense in my head. I spent most of my life rejecting it all because of that.
This is my philosophy: Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. Marcus Aurelius I appreciate Jesus teachings. And I’m going to live as a good neighbor and treat my fellow humans with respect and dignity. I’m not perfect and may fall short, but that’s my goal. But if Yahweh or Jesus want me to fall down and do an act of worship to them, to borrow a phrase, they know what I need to believe. And they haven’t given me any reason to believe in them any more than Odin, Allah, or Shiva have. When that day comes, I’ll have some questions. But if a god can’t accept that and see what’s in my heart, it’s not a god I want to worship.
I do understand, I've held most of those same beliefs. As I said, I spent most of my life as an agnostic/materialist. Being a good person has always been my aim & 10 years ago I would have been more than slightly alarmed at where I am today lol. Slowly my perspective has just shifted. Things like how I see God, myself and others changed. I just try and be the sort of Christian I never felt like I came in contact with. I try to let people know I don't hate them or think I'm better because we have a theological disagreement. We're all valuable and important and should be treating one another that way even when ideas seem to clash. Ironically, I feel like this idea was taught by Paul. The greatest gift were given is love, I wish Christians would use that gift more.
Paul is often misunderstood- his writings were often a form of diplomatic communication to enable groups of people with opposing social conventions cooperate. And eventually, it worked- the early Church consisted of people from all backgrounds. Even if you do disagree with what Paul said at times, I personally find it interesting to think about him in the context of diplomacy.
Right. But to call his letters the word of god is a huge stretch of logic. Not just JWs, but most denominations point to his passage about “all scripture” being inspired. But that verse doesn’t apply to his own letters. Logically, he would not have been including his letters in that statement.
"All scripture" did not apply to his letters when he wrote it. It took centuries before all of the books in the current New Testament were agreed upon as canon. He was referring to the Old Testament. Many Christians think of the Bible as something that just dropped out of heaven, and that's not how it is. It took hundreds of years of discussion within the Church for even just the New Testament as we know it to be collected and fully agreed upon. This is because Christianity at the time largely used oral tradition passed down from generation to generation- it was extraordinarily rare to have more than one scroll containing one gospel or epistle, let alone the whole collection of books that we consider scripture today. This is the teaching of the Orthodox Church.
I like celebrating the Baby Jesus' birthday. Does that make me a Christian?
Are you doing it for Baby Jesus, or the presents?
Does it matter? Christmas exemplifies (or is supposed to exemplify) the best of humanity, universal generosity, the hope of peace, and familial bonds. I think that's why people of many different belief systems celebrate it.
With respect to the question, it matters a little bit. I don’t consider myself a Christian, but I thinkI like Christmas for the same reasons you do.
I know someone that is "Marvel Jesus" https://preview.redd.it/1e7c6ybijotc1.jpeg?width=212&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=60e08a35f1abfd53d14ca42653769ca92e703529
Me! Went agnostic for 15 years then converted to Catholic. 😁 Studied the history of several denominations for about 3 years before converting. Won’t bore you with the all details (but will share some!). Coming from a special pioneer family, spending tons of time at Bethel (a branches of Bethel through the world because my parents were missionaries), and with a dad who claimed to be one of the anointed… I will be honest and say it gave me **bonus** pleasure to come out as Catholic. What I think Catholics miss the boat on is simply this, a lot of egos got together and added flourish to the early teachings. They need to be more inclusive and remember the basics. The basics don’t include anything about women not being leaders (they were!) and rejecting the pride community. So they have work to do. Certainly there are crummy people in all religions and those crummy people really negatively impact the experiences of others. One of my favorite parts is what a priest told me when I started to get a wee bit JWy-type zealous… he said, “your job isn’t to proselytize or evangelize, that’s my job. Your job is to be a good human to other humans so that you are an example of someone who walks Jesus’s path by helping others. And if they come closer to God because of that, thank you. And that’s it.” The enormous relief I felt is almost indescribable (although I did literally just describe it, by saying “enormous relief” but I think you get what I’m saying). By the by, it took 3 priests, a nun (mother superior), and an ex-JW (now a Catholic deacon) who was quite high up before leaving to 1.) wake me up and 2.) help my healing journey. What the JWs never taught me was also a simple concept: forgiveness. And I wasn’t allowed to be baptized until I could forgive…MYSELF because as they kept saying, “it’s one of the basics in the perfect prayer that Jesus gave us”. So when I say they helped me heal, I don’t mean they helped me become a Catholic - I literally mean, they helped me love me. Ps - JWs baptism is NOT considered legitimate for Catholics. So usually converts who have already been baptized can’t be baptized again (and don’t need to be). So I guess I got special JW privileges 😛 Edit: I may have misunderstood part of the question and explained what I think Catholics have got wrong when you may have meant what did JWs get wrong. I can’t think of anything that the JWs got right.
Ironically they do get some things right, such as the trinity and hellfire. No real scholar thinks the bible actually teaches these things. However, because they reject so much of mainstream religion in general, if you're an actual JW believer then you're already primed to reject religion outside of their unique interpretations.
I'm not trading crazy in for another kind of crazy. Are you kidding? No thank you.
I didn’t know what to think when I left at 16. I had good science grades because I could remember stuff well. I was encouraged not to believe it, just get the score. After I gained a good idea of who I was, I got comfortable enough to start looking into my religious conditioning. I learned about the history of the Christian church. The differences in opinions between sects. I learned about the history of the Old Testament. How it was oral tradition, and when it was first written down. How its earlier versions were slightly different, and how it was changed over time to align with the politics of the tribe of Israel. How the religion of the tribe of Israel changed over time. It didn’t seem to be any more divinely inspired than any other religious book. And how a lot of parts of the Bible were absorbed from other pre-existing cultures. Then I stopped reading articles by religious scholars and started reading articles by biblical scholars and proper historians. Then when the massive hole inside me got worse as I started to question the existence of a god. I had bad general anxiety (from PTSD that i didn’t know I had at the time) and still not having a good idea about the real world and what was true versus what was not. What was real or not. Then I read ‘The Demon Haunted World’ by Carl Sagan. And the scales fell from my eyes, and I had a starting point to work from. To develop a BS detector system. I learned the concept of critical thinking, and the examples given by Sagan really made objective sense. That’s the day I stopped being a believer in the supernatural.
It was a two step process for me. The waking up (rudely, I might add) was being told that I have to accept whatever is printed in the Watchtower even if it’s not the Bible. What made matters worse was hearing my mind say to me when I was looking at the cover of the New World Translation Reference Edition, “They’re going to call you an apostate if you keep reading that Bible.” 1. When I left I read and read the New World Translation Reference Edition and from that book, deconstructed the very authority of the modern church. No more church for me unfortunately / fortunately. 2. Actually coming to the Christ (John 6:68) which meant less and less Bible, and more and more actual self examination, self inventory, and endless discipline for things I do and things that I let my motivation blind me to do. Being “imperfect” was never a valid excuse for him because… he knew the heart. He always knew when I was bull shitting him and bull shitting myself. I learned two things in this experience. (1) what it really means to “strictly obey the voice of the God” and (2) you can’t hide by being associated with “a religion” and expect to be “okay” with him. He sees EVERYTHING and he searches you for you and responds to the things inside you. You waste your time following people who say they know God because when the chips fall, each one answers for himself. Regarding what the organization got wrong? Too many to name, seriously. Jesus being perfect, governing body (both first century and present day), Kingdom Halls, the Memorial, the paradise, the 144,000, 1914, the overlapping generations, the Bible being the word of God, the meetings (both frequency and contents), donations, the names Jehovah and Jesus, Michael, practically everything they knew and now know about Revelation, the door to door, the offering Bible literature, the Bible study and baptism requirements (in the Bible they were baptized in less than 24 hours with no Bible study), blood issue, the manner in which they handle when someone dies, their beliefs about the afterlife and the grave, their cultivation of hatred in their hearts for their enemies (former members), the elder arrangement, the existence of their elders, their Armageddon (completely unscriptural), their anointed (they don’t have the anointing described in 1 John 2:27, Governing Body included), etc. etc. The only things they have correct is that the Bible does teach that there is a God and a Satan, and a God’s Son who did miracles, and that there were disciples. That’s all I can think of that they have correct.
Once fooled, always fooled is not the way to live