Jehovah'S Witnesses In Chiang Mai

[kropotkin]

What is a "jehova"?

I've never seen one.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

What is a "jehova"?

I've never seen one.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah%27s_Witnesses :

Jehovah's Witnesses are best known for their door-to-door preaching, distributing literature such as The Watchtower and Awake!, and refusing military service and blood transfusions. They consider use of the name Jehovah vital for proper worship. They reject Trinitarianism, inherent immortality of the soul, and hellfire, which they consider to be unscriptural doctrines. They do not observe Christmas, Easter, birthdays, or other holidays and customs they consider to have pagan origins incompatible with Christianity. Adherents commonly refer to their body of beliefs as "the truth" and consider themselves to be "in the truth".^[15] Jehovah's Witnesses consider secular society to be morally corrupt and under the influence of Satan, and limit their social interaction with non-Witnesses.

[Eyjafjallajokull]

Read post 44 the point is only they do it which underlies the arrogance as most posters agree and they were farang not Thai (which I could slightly underrstand more).

So could you read post #52 and give us sort of guidelines on who can and cannot knock on your door?

Where does it say in post #1 those Jo'Jo's were farangs? I think I am pretty sure majority of JW's walking the streets here are Thais. Does that change the degree of arrogance?

[cmsally]

I'm pretty sure the people you are referring to are Mennonites. Somewhat similar to Quakers and an offshoot from their movement was the Amish. History wise the origins go back to Switzerland and Holland and I think some parts of Germany.

A search actually turned this up which I thought was interesting:

http://www.usmb.org/reedley-teachers-educate-thai-teachers

[udonguy]

Read post 44 the point is only they do it which underlies the arrogance as most posters agree and they were farang not Thai (which I could slightly underrstand more).

So could you read post #52 and give us sort of guidelines on who can and cannot knock on your door?

Where does it say in post #1 those Jo'Jo's were farangs? I think I am pretty sure majority of JW's walking the streets here are Thais. Does that change the degree of arrogance?

I believe ANY religious group knocking on doors proclaiming they hold the truth and are right are arrogant. I would have said the same of any religious group but these JW's are the ONLY ones that do it - that's my point!

[udonguy]

I'm pretty sure the people you are referring to are Mennonites. Somewhat similar to Quakers and an offshoot from their movement was the Amish. History wise the origins go back to Switzerland and Holland and I think some parts of Germany.

A search actually turned this up which I thought was interesting:

http://www.usmb.org/...e-thai-teachers

Must admit I thought they were Quakers but as long as they don't come and preach to me, uninvited, I bear them no ill-will.

It's the arrogance of the others who think they own the truth of the meaning of life and MUST share it with me to save my soul who I think are a menace.

[wedders]

How can you be anything at 4 years of age? That's when Santa, the Tooth Fairy and Mickey Mouse are all as real as anything else.

Teaching Buddhism is mostly about teaching morals, so hard to exclude anyone from that who's attending a school in Thailand. It's a moral frame of reference.

+1

Evangelising is what a sizeable number of the Xian sects are about, as well as that other monotheistic cult, Islam. The goal is to dominate, because other religions are 'false'. It's utterly astounding that in the modern world people are still taken in by all the different mythological variations on the religious theme, playing on people's weaknesses - the need for relevance, comfort, to believe in a hereafter. So while all religions are arrogant to an extent, laying claim to knowledge of 'truth', Xianity is in the forefront of the main offenders.

People can believe in the rain god if it makes them happy, so long as it doesn't affect me and mine. Trouble is, indirectly, other people's religions usually do have an effect. How easy is it to get a public job if you are an atheist in the US, these days? Still, within limits it's ok - but evangelising is wrong - because there are still a lot of naive, trusting, relatively uneducated people out there. And Xianity takes advantage of these people in so many ways.

[OldeBellPedr]

How can you be anything at 4 years of age? That's when Santa, the Tooth Fairy and Mickey Mouse are all as real as anything else.

Teaching Buddhism is mostly about teaching morals, so hard to exclude anyone from that who's attending a school in Thailand. It's a moral frame of reference.

exactly!!! sounds like he is brain washing at a very early age to me - typical Christian (you will go to hell) technique. Why not let the boy decide for himself later in life? 4 years old and already taught Christians are 'superior' to 'Buddhists'. Anyway Buddhism is NOT a religion.

My son will of course choose for himself eventually, but by bringing him up a Christian and with a knowledge of Buddhism, at least he can make an informed decision when he reaches that stage. All religions contain morals and those morals are remarkably similar from one religion to another. I want him to learn those morals in a Christian school here in Chiang Mai I'm a Christian so I'm bringing him up a Christian, but bringing him up in any religion would give his life a moral underpinning. Sure you can do that in an atheistic family, but I think the religious aspect adds authority to those morals.

Jehovah's Witnesses call themselves Christians but their cult contains many sentiments that mainstream Christians would find alien.

BTW my son loves Mickey Mouse and Santa. As yet his milk teeth are still intact so the tooth fairy is something to look forward to!

Edited December 30, 2011 by OldeBellPedr

[wedders]

When you bring up a child, conveying information with parental authority - such as passing on your Christianity - is a form of indoctrination that is hard to shake off in later years. We are programmed, as infants, to respect and believe our parents - and this programming is vital for survival. If your dad tells you to look both ways before crossing the road, and you are not inclined to believe him, then your chances of a long life are reduced considerably.

So I agree with Winnie that religious indoctrination is wrong, especially from early childhood. Giving kids the option to choose is significantly reduced by bringing them up within the confined belief structures of one religion or other. It takes a strong will to shake off such programming, no matter how ridiculous the belief system. This has been demonstrated over and over again, in studies.

[uptheos]

I think the late Christopher Hitchen's put the 'moral' argument to bed, when he offered a challenge:

"Name me an ethical statement or an action performed by a believer, that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer". He then made a zinger of a follow up with......."Now name me one non ethical statement or an action made because of religion?"...........you have probably already thought of one.

[binjalin]

How can you be anything at 4 years of age? That's when Santa, the Tooth Fairy and Mickey Mouse are all as real as anything else.

Teaching Buddhism is mostly about teaching morals, so hard to exclude anyone from that who's attending a school in Thailand. It's a moral frame of reference.

exactly!!! sounds like he is brain washing at a very early age to me - typical Christian (you will go to hell) technique. Why not let the boy decide for himself later in life? 4 years old and already taught Christians are 'superior' to 'Buddhists'. Anyway Buddhism is NOT a religion.

My son will of course choose for himself eventually, but by bringing him up a Christian and with a knowledge of Buddhism, at least he can make an informed decision when he reaches that stage. All religions contain morals and those morals are remarkably similar from one religion to another. I want him to learn those morals in a Christian school here in Chiang Mai I'm a Christian so I'm bringing him up a Christian, but bringing him up in any religion would give his life a moral underpinning. Sure you can do that in an atheistic family, but I think the religious aspect adds authority to those morals.

Jehovah's Witnesses call themselves Christians but their cult contains many sentiments that mainstream Christians would find alien.

BTW my son loves Mickey Mouse and Santa. As yet his milk teeth are still intact so the tooth fairy is something to look forward to!

Sounds fair enough - I call myself Buddhist because it is a way of life, a set of principals not based on a personal God. Anyway each to his own and no one has the right to impose upon another.

[uptheos]

Anyway each to his own and no one has the right to impose upon another.

No...but they do!!

[wedders]

I think the late Christopher Hitchen's put the 'moral' argument to bed, when he offered a challenge:

"Name me an ethical statement or an action performed by a believer, that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer". He then made a zinger of a follow up with......."Now name me one non ethical statement or an action made because of religion?"...........you have probably already thought of one.

Give me 20 years, and I would still be listing them.

Hitch - what a loss.

[uptheos]

I think the late Christopher Hitchen's put the 'moral' argument to bed, when he offered a challenge:

"Name me an ethical statement or an action performed by a believer, that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer". He then made a zinger of a follow up with......."Now name me one non ethical statement or an action made because of religion?"...........you have probably already thought of one.

Give me 20 years, and I would still be listing them.

Hitch - what a loss.

Totally agree - a brilliant mind snuffed out way too soon.

[menostay]

Would it not be that it takes a humble man to approach me and talk about his belief? When people come to my door, I listen. I think that I do not yet have it all figured out and maybe that man does know something that will help me. Several times I have politely said no thanks.

So what did I learn from them? Well, they have angered mainstream religions because they teach that there is no punishment after death or no fire in hell.

Further, the idea of 3 persons in a god is an adopted ancient form of belief of many middle eastern religions and beggars understanding.

They teach that they should not kill because a politician tells them it is their duty. Hitler, Stalin and Castro and many others objected and threw them in prisons or killed them. Mainstream religions saw a way to support people of their own faith on either side to kill each other. I could see why many religious organizations woud be angry over that...they would not want to be compared to people that do not get involved in the uselessness of war or see a justification for killing other people's kids.

Oh yes, a man told me that the earth is going to become a paradise and that people will be brought to perfection. I am still working on what could be wrong with that. I just can't seem to get angry over it.

[Fookhaht]

The ever-present, ever-strong, ThaiVisa anti-religion bigots out in full-force again!

These threads are so pitiful, old and overdone.

[wedders]

Bigots, for daring to give an opinion?

Oh well never mind, as Hitch once said, "my own opinion is enough for me, and I claim the right to have it defended against any consensus, any majority, anywhere, any place, any time. And anyone who disagrees with this can pick a number, get in line and kiss my ass."

[binjalin]

I think the late Christopher Hitchen's put the 'moral' argument to bed, when he offered a challenge:

"Name me an ethical statement or an action performed by a believer, that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer". He then made a zinger of a follow up with......."Now name me one non ethical statement or an action made because of religion?"...........you have probably already thought of one.

Give me 20 years, and I would still be listing them.

Hitch - what a loss.

Totally agree - a brilliant mind snuffed out way too soon.

There is no God - Hitch

There is no Hitch - God

A loss for sure of a very astute thinker

[binjalin]

Would it not be that it takes a humble man to approach me and talk about his belief? When people come to my door, I listen. I think that I do not yet have it all figured out and maybe that man does know something that will help me. Several times I have politely said no thanks.

So what did I learn from them? Well, they have angered mainstream religions because they teach that there is no punishment after death or no fire in hell.

Further, the idea of 3 persons in a god is an adopted ancient form of belief of many middle eastern religions and beggars understanding.

They teach that they should not kill because a politician tells them it is their duty. Hitler, Stalin and Castro and many others objected and threw them in prisons or killed them. Mainstream religions saw a way to support people of their own faith on either side to kill each other. I could see why many religious organizations woud be angry over that...they would not want to be compared to people that do not get involved in the uselessness of war or see a justification for killing other people's kids.

Oh yes, a man told me that the earth is going to become a paradise and that people will be brought to perfection. I am still working on what could be wrong with that. I just can't seem to get angry over it.

I believe not, quite the opposite. It takes a humble man to not wish to disturb and preach to others thinking 'he is right' and they would 'benefit' from his wisdom at having 'found the truth'. Each to his own but no need to share it with me UNLESS I seek it.

I suppose it would be true to say that I would be far less irritated if they were Thai but the thought of farang coming over here, to a Buddhist country, and then knocking on doors spreading the 'Word' i find disrespectful and arrogant.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

BTW my son loves Mickey Mouse and Santa. As yet his milk teeth are still intact so the tooth fairy is something to look forward to!

Hahahah, I was already worried that someone would catch on to that.. Kids only start changing their teeth aged 6-7 or so.

( "I would save your teeth, honey, and change them all in when there is a more favourable exchange rate." )

I do understand now though why there the need for a tooth fairy; losing teeth for a 6 year old is very troubling. If you can turn that into a good thing AND give them something to look forward to then it all becomes easier, so enter the tooth fairy. Similar concept actually to how adults deal with troubling or disturbing facts of life.

When you bring up a child, conveying information with parental authority - such as passing on your Christianity - is a form of indoctrination that is hard to shake off in later years. We are programmed, as infants, to respect and believe our parents - and this programming is vital for survival. If your dad tells you to look both ways before crossing the road, and you are not inclined to believe him, then your chances of a long life are reduced considerably.

So I agree with Winnie that religious indoctrination is wrong, especially from early childhood. Giving kids the option to choose is significantly reduced by bringing them up within the confined belief structures of one religion or other. It takes a strong will to shake off such programming, no matter how ridiculous the belief system. This has been demonstrated over and over again, in studies.

Right.. though developing that strong will is pretty much a goal in itself for me as a parent. And consider that bringing them up completely atheist is also very confining, not to mention troubling for kids because there are few comforting answers in atheism. And it even makes it more likely for kids to then challenge that and turn to some relation as they get older. So a little religion keeps people sane, that's what it's for. I'm okay with using it as such for children, just like using the tooth fairy to turn a troubling experience into a good one. Just don't overdo it, to the point where it interferes with daily life.

I mean, what do atheists do when a kid's dog gets run over by a truck.. put them on Prozac? "He's in doggie heaven now, it's a better place." Done.

Edited December 30, 2011 by WinnieTheKhwai

[wedders]

Right.. though developing that strong will is pretty much a goal in itself for me as a parent. And consider that bringing them up completely atheist is also very confining, not to mention troubling for kids because there are few comforting answers in atheism. And it even makes it more likely for kids to then challenge that and turn to some relation as they get older. So a little religion keeps people sane, that's what it's for. I'm okay with using it as such for children, just like using the tooth fairy to turn a troubling experience into a good one. Just don't overdo it, to the point where it interferes with daily life.

Mind you atheism claims to provide no answers - it's simply a lack of belief in god(s), rather than a belief in a lack of god(s). That definition is accepted by a majority of 'thinking' atheists, and it's one Dawkins subscribes to.

I made a lot of effort to introduce my kids to all manner of religions - and encouraged them from an early age to think about all the different beliefs and claims. I took them to Muslim, Orthodox Xian, Buddhist and mainstream Xian religious ceremonies, among others. If they made/make categorical statements about the nonexistence of deities, I dispute and argue this with them too. It's all about helping their critical thinking faculties to develop.

I agree bringing kids up to believe in the wholesale 'wrongness' of religion is not helpful, but that is not what atheism is about. But when the JWs come knocking on the door now, mine are well equipped for the debate. I hope I've taught them to respect the views of others too, no matter how apparently foolish they might be.

Fortunately in Europe, as opposed to the US, kids who are brought up to doubt (Voltaire or someone wrote "doubt is uncomfortable, but certainty is ridiculous"), even if they do turn to other relatives (not my experience, with four kids, three between 16 and 23), are more likely to find an infidel among their relations than a believer!

Edited December 30, 2011 by wedders

[udonguy]

why not just say to kids 'we don't know' because actually we don't! if I wake up after I die it will be a pleasant surprise (hopefully) if not - not! If I wake up and see the heaven and hell scenario I will be dumbfounded (and in trouble)

[Eyjafjallajokull]

I believe not, quite the opposite. It takes a humble man to not wish to disturb and preach to others thinking 'he is right' and they would 'benefit' from his wisdom at having 'found the truth'. Each to his own but no need to share it with me UNLESS I seek it.

I suppose it would be true to say that I would be far less irritated if they were Thai but the thought of farang coming over here, to a Buddhist country, and then knocking on doors spreading the 'Word' i find disrespectful and arrogant.

Would you equally find it arrogant of Thai Buddhists to visit European countries or the US to set up temples and places of worship, who might or might not disturb local believes? Does a shiny gold temple in middle of Sweden or Swiss perhaps "anger" and show "act of arrogance" towards entrenched believes, let alone the esthetics and established architecture of the local communities?

By the way.... the countries mentioned above have large Thai temples, with good number of worshipers and you won't find much in the news of people fretting about it.

[BookMan]

Would you equally find it arrogant of Thai Buddhists to visit European countries or the US to set up temples and places of worship, who might or might not disturb local believes? Does a shiny gold temple in middle of Sweden or Swiss perhaps "anger" and show "act of arrogance" towards entrenched believes, let alone the esthetics and established architecture of the local communities?

By the way.... the countries mentioned above have large Thai temples, with good number of worshipers and you won't find much in the news of people fretting about it.

Building a temple and knocking on doors are very different.

If you build a temple or church or place of worship people can make a choice to come visit it and participate.

Having an uninvited religious fanatic knock at your door with the purpose of recruitment/conversion is not the same. It is just an annoying sales pitch.

[Eyjafjallajokull]

Building a temple and knocking on doors are very different.

If you build a temple or church or place of worship people can make a choice to come visit it and participate.

Having an uninvited religious fanatic knock at your door with the purpose of recruitment/conversion is not the same. It is just an annoying sales pitch.

Yes, I agree knocking on doors or building a temple, church or a mosques is very different.

In your home you have a complete control to either invite or dismiss anyone who comes to it. To the point of where you could actually call the police. No other place does an individual exercise more rights, then his/her home. One could say, you have the high ground.

On the other hand, lets say your local building commission grants a permit to build a temple, church or a mosque next to your home. Chanting, bell ringing and morning, noon and evening prayers are what you get. You have absolutely NO say about it. End result, either accept it or move.

Yes indeed two very different things.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

why not just say to kids 'we don't know' because actually we don't! if I wake up after I die it will be a pleasant surprise (hopefully) if not - not! If I wake up and see the heaven and hell scenario I will be dumbfounded (and in trouble)

Not sure; I don't think there's ever been an objective account on what hell is like. We only hear one side of the story, all from people who are in God's camp.

I like to imagine hell as something like Pattaya, but with casinos, and live sports at sane hours. It may very well turn out to be the best kept secret in the universe.

Edited December 30, 2011 by WinnieTheKhwai

[jaideeguy]

It's dam_n hard to be polite when someone is trying to steal your soul!! The way I used to handle them is to say before they got going was 'I'll give you 10 minutes of my ear if you give me 10 minutes of yours' and they usually backed down.

[BookMan]

Yes, I agree knocking on doors or building a temple, church or a mosques is very different.

In your home you have a complete control to either invite or dismiss anyone who comes to it. To the point of where you could actually call the police. No other place does an individual exercise more rights, then his/her home. One could say, you have the high ground.

On the other hand, lets say your local building commission grants a permit to build a temple, church or a mosque next to your home. Chanting, bell ringing and morning, noon and evening prayers are what you get. You have absolutely NO say about it. End result, either accept it or move.

Yes indeed two very different things.

Firstly, thank you for agreeing with me; So very few people do.

When zealots approach me anywhere i am annoyed. Their belief system is their own and by knocking at my front door, they are trying to overtly impose their belief on me. As for your example, I dislike thinking I 'have the high ground' at any time. It makes me feel as zealoty as the fanatics who might knock on my door, uninvited. Who am i to say my moral way is the best? It just suits me. And unlike someone coming to my door, I'm keeping to myself, unless asked.

And really...a place of worship builds next to me..? What is the likelihood of that? I have absolutely no say about it? Perhaps in Thailand, but most unlikely in America or the European countries you mention. Most likely the local authorities have long ago designated where places of worship can be built. ... But lets REALLY stretch it and say a place of worship is built next to me. The difference still is.... i choose to come to them... they are still not coming to me...

However! Should any place of worship decide to build next my home i will be first in line to see the daily miracle of the congregation walking on water.

[Eyjafjallajokull]

Firstly, thank you for agreeing with me; So very few people do.

When zealots approach me anywhere i am annoyed. Their belief system is their own and by knocking at my front door, they are trying to overtly impose their belief on me. As for your example, I dislike thinking I 'have the high ground' at any time. It makes me feel as zealoty as the fanatics who might knock on my door, uninvited. Who am i to say my moral way is the best? It just suits me. And unlike someone coming to my door, I'm keeping to myself, unless asked.

And really...a place of worship builds next to me..? What is the likelihood of that? I have absolutely no say about it? Perhaps in Thailand, but most unlikely in America or the European countries you mention. Most likely the local authorities have long ago designated where places of worship can be built. ... But lets REALLY stretch it and say a place of worship is built next to me. The difference still is.... i choose to come to them... they are still not coming to me...

However! Should any place of worship decide to build next my home i will be first in line to see the daily miracle of the congregation walking on water.

I think we are near some sad turning point in human interactions, when a person would need an "invitation" to knock on someones door. In post #52 I asked LarryBird what he would think about if he appeared naked in his doorway (as he suggested to deal with the Jo'Jo's) in front of 10 year old girl scout. A immigration official, a 65 year older Thai lady warning him about his bike being stolen, community workers doing a survey or locals asking for temple donation. He of course didn't reply.

I point my question to you, would these "fanatics" need to apply for your approval to knock on your door? When you would get annoyed about the "application" process, then what? A person needing to apply for an application to knock on your door? What next, people needing to apply for permission beforehand to speak to you on the street? Permission to look? Where would this end?

[BookMan]

I think we are near some sad turning point in human interactions, when a person would need an "invitation" to knock on someones door. In post #52 I asked LarryBird what he would think about if he appeared naked in his doorway (as he suggested to deal with the Jo'Jo's) in front of 10 year old girl scout. A immigration official, a 65 year older Thai lady warning him about his bike being stolen, community workers doing a survey or locals asking for temple donation. He of course didn't reply.

I point my question to you, would these "fanatics" need to apply for your approval to knock on your door? When you would get annoyed about the "application" process, then what? A person needing to apply for an application to knock on your door? What next, people needing to apply for permission beforehand to speak to you on the street? Permission to look? Where would this end?

What does your point have to do with religious fanatics knocking at my door?

Your examples are TOTALLY different. These types of people are not religious fanatics.

And as you say 'You point your question at me', then you put a 'closed' smiley option up.

Lucky for you i think for myself so can choose to answer! Hilarious!!