From: corey@sdf.lonestar.org (Corey Carroll)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: [This is what Corey and Tim says] This is what the Jehovah's Witnesses do.
Date: 26 Jul 92 05:32:59 GMT
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access

In article <LAURAF.92Jul23142629@wolf.eecs.umich.edu> lauraf@eecs.umich.edu (Laura Falk) writes:
>References: <1992Jul22.001419.12399@sdf.lonestar.org>
>	<1992Jul22.184137.12369@e2big.mko.dec.com>
>	<1992Jul22.232752.5755@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
>Distribution: 
>
>   > >I don't care if this breaks all the rules of Internet etiquette.  This
>   > >must be posted to show what the JW's do when they encounter arguments
>   > >they cannot rebutt.  According to Andrea, I am an 'apostate', apparently
>   > >because I had the "truth" and I rejected it.  
>   > 
>   >         You are right that what you've done breaks all the rules of net
>   >     etiquette.  I suppose you feel that the ends justify the means, but
>   >     posting private mail without permission is still a dishonorable
>   >     activity, regardless of your reason.
>
>   Don't sweat about it for a second Corey, I, for one, was very interested to
>   read Andreas' comment. Hell hath no fury like a fundamentalist religion scorned.
>
>Actually Corey, I was very interested to read Andreas' comment as well.  I never
>got that information from Andrea.  It is too bad that you feel that way about
>the truth.  What are you going to do when world events unfold as foretold in the
>bible?  What will you believe when the cry of "peace and security" goes out?
>Would you not rather live forever than to die?  Does this system have sayings of
>everlasting life as what Jehovah does?  I for one being one of Jehovah's Witnesses want to
>see you remain a spiritual brother!

Hmm.  thank you for your open-mindedness.  What about my posts about
the Bible...did you read that Laura?



>
>   >         I understand why Andreas wrote what he did, and he's probably right
>   >     that with your current attitude, many, if not all Witnesses on the net
>   >     probably won't have much, if anything, to say to you; but you have to
>   >     admit that up to this point there HAVE been at least a few Witnesses
>   >     who've been willing to talk to you (in public and perhaps in private as
>   >     well), perhaps because they felt that they might regain you back as a
>   >     spiritual brother [since by your own admission, you haven't been
>   >     'kicked out' yet, and you evidently haven't had the nerve to formally
>   >     submit a written resignation of your own, which would save the elders
>   >     in your congregation the anguish of having to disfellowship you,
>   >     assuming, that is, that you really *want* to be disfellowshipped].
>
>   If your religion is so bloody fantastic why don't you try to convince him to
>   come back? Where's all your loving-christian-niceness now? 
>
>Tim, that is what Mark was trying to do.
>
>   >         The dictionary I have handy defines apostacy as:
>   > 
>   >                 "renunciation of one's religion, principles,
>   >                 political party, etc."
>   > 
>   >     Regardless of the fact that Andreas as labelled you as an apostate, I'd
>   >     say, after having read a few of your postings, that you've made it
>   >     pretty clear that you've done precisely what an apostate does, namely
>   >     you've renounced your religion, and have done so publicly, at least
>   >     as far as the net is concerned.
>   And many of us applaud you for it Corey. It's called being intellectually
>   honest and true to your convinctions, and it takes GUTS.
>
>It takes GUTS to be **different** and be true to your convictions.  As the book
>of Matthew states broad and spacious is the road leading off to destruction but narrow and
>cramped is the road leading off to life and few are the ones finding it.  

Oh, Laura, that's just such a REAL argument for the Witnesses.  You could
also apply that to the Mormons, Christian Scientists, or any one of
numerous cults.  After all, some cults have fewer members than the JWs do!
If we go by this scripture, only, then the church with the fewest members
is the truth.  Well, how about my churcH?  HAhaha.... Jeez...

>
>   >         No, Corey ... that sums up Andreas alone; or perhaps only provides
>   >     the basis which *you* consider valid for summing up all Witnesses.  
>   >     Andreas is reminding you of a truth which you are already aware of,
>   >     that we don't waste our time arguing with people who apostasize from
>   >     our faith; but you clearly are ignoring (perhaps because it's
>   >     convenient) the fact that we'd MUCH rather see you remain our spiritual
>   >     brother, so that you live forever in God's 'new system' as a fellow
>   >     servant of Jehovah. 
>
>   Which is why we're not going to talk to you anymore, or listen to anything
>   you have to say. Hey, I can see the logic there.
>
>How much time would you spent listening to someones belief on a matter than is
>conflicting with yours?

Well, Laura, I wouldn't just not listen at all.  I would listen enough
to make a rational decision based upon the evidence they presented me.
Would you be willing to do the same?  I'm willing.  Show me your
evidence that the Bible is true.  Show me the evidence that man is
6000 years old.  Show me the evidence for the flood.  Show me the
evidence that Jerusalem fell to Babylon in 607B.C.E.  Show me the
evidence that life is not related via common descent.  I'm giving you
a chance.  I doubt you'll show me much I haven't already heard from the
Witnesses, though.  I've read most of their major books.

>
>   Well I don't know about Corey, old son, but the book he mentions happens
>   to have been the very publication which fell into my hands about ten years
>   ago. It was my first encounter with creationist propaganda and, since my
>   field is the humanities, I found many of the anti-evolution arguments in it
>   pretty convincing. Luckily I went to a library and checked up as many of the
>   quotes and footnotes in the book as I could and did a bit of reading on 
>   evolution and anti-evolutionism (this is called looking at both sides of the
>   story). I found that your sweet little book is a bizarre collection of
>   out-of-context quotations, misquotations, misleading quotations, non sequiturs,
>   errrors of fact and just about every other dirty intellectual trick known
>   to man. (I'll substantiate this statement in long and glorious detail if you 
>
>Please do!!!!  I keep an open mind just as long as what is being said agrees 
>with the bible.
>
>   I recently had two JW's turn up on my doorstep brandishing this same
>   book. I invited them in and went went through it page by page. It took
>   several hours, but in the end they were reduced to silence and admitted that
>   'perhaps there's a bit more to it than we thought'. They probably went back
>   to their kingdom hall to be re-brainwashed, but I like to think that perhaps
>   they went home and thought about what they believe and why. I don't care what
>   they concluded so long as they THOUGHT ABOUT IT. And if I sound angry that's
>   because I am.
>
>I have not only thought about what I believe but have pondered it.  I too have
>researched to the best of my ability the publications and have found something
>far different then you.

Yeah, rigght.  Whatever.  Why don't you go read _Evolution and the Myth
of Creationism_ by Tim Berra.  Don't be afraid because it has a text 
dealing with a "Satanic theory".  Don't let that stupid reason keep you
from looking at that book, at the evidence.  I bet that you probably
won't read it, because you're too scared.  I have read many other
creationist books, and I was convinced temporarily by their arguments,
but after reading talk.origins, I see how they make similar mistakes.


>
>   Chin up Corey, it takes courage to say "I was wrong, what I used to believe
>   seemed to make sense but now it doesn't and I was wrong". Not very many 
>   people have that courage, but that's the only way anyone learns anything.
>   And if your dear sweet JW brothers don't want to listen to you, that's
>   their loss as far as I'm concerned.
>   Tim O'Neill
>
>You are right, Tim, it does take courage to admit when one is wrong!!  However,
>I have a question: why is it JW's loss if Corey gives up everlasting life for
>Satan's system, which as he well knows will be destroyed very soon?  None of us
>or Jehovah wants to see anyone destroyed!!!
>
>Laura

Oh, Laura, Laura.  We'll just see what happens.  According to Witness
philosophy, the end of the system MUST come within the next ten years.
By that time, the generation of 1914 will probably be dead, unless
(2002-1914= 88 years...) you propose that some of the annointed
are centerrians....which you probably will..find some poor old geezer
that's over 90....oh well..

I don't believe that this system will be destroyed very soon.  I
will bet my life that it doesn't.  If I lose, I die, and you win.  You
can talk about and harass me after Armageddon for eternity...what
a wonderful future




-- 
"All religions make me wanna throw up!"
"All religions make me sick!" - Dead Kennedys, Religious Vomit

corey@sdf.lonestar.org                       ..!uunet!convex!egsner!sdf!corey