Samael_Khan
Goosebender
Hi Hockeycowboy,
It actually isn't a contradiction since I didn't state the reason why people will only learn many of the teachings while they are in the group. It is not because the Witnesses do not have all information available. It is the way people are taught and what information people are out rightly exposed to before baptism. I am implying that people shouldn't think that the Witnesses have the truth once they get baptised because they don't know the organisation's whole history with doctrine and their current doctrine.
Example, the Bible Teach book is very simplistic compared to the Insight book. And Witness doctrine is so extensive that one will have to read many Watchtower's, Books and the Insight books to stumble across certain understandings and fully understand them. The basic approach to teaching is that students are fed "milk" and eventually progress to "solid food" as they gain a better understanding. Which means that one only needs to know the bare basics in order to get baptised. Complex teachings are not pushed forward from the beginning. One doesn't even need to have read the whole bible, understanding verses in context, in order to qualify for baptism. So there is a great chance that after baptism a person will stumble on teachings that they completely disagree with and have to promote. For me it was that Christ is only the mediator for the anointed, which was a deal breaker and which wasn't explained to me from the outset. I specifically had to study that topic in the insight book and a Question from readers article written years ago to check it out. Back then I was arrogant, young and stupid so I thought I knew everything in order to make life altering decisions. Now I am wiser (I hope). So me joining was completely my fault.
What I stated above should be understandable. Obviously one has to start with the basics and progress to more complex understanding of doctrine. I have no problem with that. The issue is that the organisation should not be disfellowshipping and shunning people for eventually disagreeing with doctrines that they were not taught when studying before baptism, therefore were not taking into account when making the decision. Simple. If one can only understand complex doctrine later on, after baptism, when they have full access to prayer, then they shouldn't be punished for wanting to leave later when stumbling onto a fundamental deal breaker. I had no problem with leaving. But I know that others have too many deep connections with people on the inside and leaving the group is incredibly difficult and traumatising for some. If they have family in the group and they leave, the family will shun them, so many do not leave the group because they have a figurative bullet held to their head and end up living a lie. It is actually crazy that people, even young teenagers are encouraged to commit to the organisation when they do not have the mental faculties or life experience to make such a choice, knowing the consequences if they eventually disagree with it.