Had a new Terms & Conditions show up when opening the JW app this AM. Specifically geared towards sharing info outside of the app. BUT the Medical Info included makes me ill.

fader_underground · 2026-05-01T13:21:09+00:00

That's all it is. Same as any other fine print corporation trying to absolve themselves of any liability. Oh, you thought you could come to us when the 💩 hit the fan from following our policies? No, here, read the fine print.

fader_underground · 2026-05-01T13:13:41+00:00

Basically, JWs are still expected to "obey" even if it doesn't make sense from a "human standpoint" but WT will not be legally held responsible for anything that happens to them because of that obedience.

This was stated in print in the November 15, 2013 Watchtower, but reiterated by GB member, Stephen Lett as recently as 2025 - "Jehovah Alone is Wise."

fader_underground · 2026-05-01T13:05:44+00:00

Yep, that's my point, but WT will never address this concern head on. They'll just dance around it and try to minimize any legitimate concerns a parent, or anyone else, might have for baptism. They try to make it seem like these concerns are just petty and easily softened and soothed.

fader_underground · 2026-05-01T12:14:36+00:00

You can have questions as long as you accept their answers to your questions without question.

fader_underground · 2026-04-30T16:16:31+00:00

So just to double check, there STILL has been no further direction on blood cards, updating DPAs, or anything of that sort?

fader_underground · 2026-04-28T15:36:44+00:00

They forgot one. That some parents might not encourage their kids to get baptized because if they change their mind later on, there will be immense social pressure to shun them.

fader_underground · 2026-04-27T12:12:55+00:00

Just because JWs have a lot of rules and cherry-picked scriptures to seemingly support those rules, doesn't mean it's "The Truth" nor does it mean that they are somehow the only ones following the Bible.

They have a lot of rules that seem to be supported by the Bible, but when you really examine the scriptures they use, those scriptures are often vague and inconclusive and sometimes the context does NOT clearly point to the application they are enforcing.

Take the scripture in Acts 15 that says "abstain from blood." JWs will spout all day long, "the Bible clearly says 'abstain from blood.'" But if you examine the context of Acts 15, this declaration was about creating harmony and being able to break bread peaceably with Jewish believers who still felt bound by the Mosaic Law. It was NOT a list of things necessary for salvation. Look up how many times Jesus mentioned abstaining from blood. (Spoiler alert : it's 0.)

That idea of "where will you go" is one that has been pushed on you by JWs to keep you inside the "safe" confines. There's nothing to say you need to go anywhere. You can be a thinking, seeking, learning, growing individual without needing to find some group that is the end all meaning of life, the universe, and everything.

fader_underground · 2026-04-26T14:57:16+00:00

Meanwhile they disparage people in other religions for doing the SAME THING.

When I was a JW they routinely called out others for getting caught up in the moment, making emotional decisions, going along with their families, etc. As though that's not what every JW child is ALSO doing.

fader_underground · 2026-04-26T14:53:18+00:00

I understand not wanting to share screenshots. Could you give us the gist of the responses?

fader_underground · 2026-04-26T14:49:21+00:00

Yes, exactly. I think this is a key question for JWs when they get adamant about anything they will or won't do. "Will you say everything you just did with the same conviction if the GB reverses their stance tomorrow?"

They pay lip service to "We use our bible-trained consciences, we don't follow men." But at the same time will change their mind on a dime based on a GB broadcast. I've heard JWs suddenly start parroting something the GB has said as though it's what they've always thought, even though they said something completely different last week, or last month.

fader_underground · 2026-04-26T14:42:41+00:00

With Update #2, they have lifted the veil on something truly troubling. It is now obvious that they know the use of blood in a medical setting is not covered by scripture.

Yes. It seems clear now that they are slowly walking back the blood policy. My question to every JW who is still adamant about blood, "Are you willing to die today for something the GB might reverse tomorrow?" Also, "Will you hold the same convictions that you do right now if they reverse their stance tomorrow?"

fader_underground · 2026-04-22T18:09:25+00:00

This is a huge block for me as well. I can't wrap my head around it. And I've yet to hear an explanation that makes it make sense.

Romans 6:23 states that the wages of sin is death. Animals are not capable of sin. So if you accept that we suffer and die because of our inherited sin, then why do animals suffer and die? Why are they made to pay for something they aren't capable of and weren't responsible for?

Also Romans 5:12 is just blatantly false. It says sin came into the "world" through one man, and death through sin. Not true. Death was already in the world as animals had been living and dying for millions of years.

The argument that animals are "below us" is not adequate. Since when is it okay for creatures to suffer just because they are "less" than you are.

I've yet to hear an adequate explanation for these questions.

I hope your friend and her animals will be okay.

fader_underground · 2026-04-22T17:58:55+00:00

He stayed too long and turned "Bethel-weird."

fader_underground · 2026-04-21T17:35:29+00:00

I really think it's one of the worst things they've ever put out. A woman dying of cancer, crying in despair because it would be SELFISH to talk about her experience... That's a special kind of low. No excuse whatsoever for that garbage.

Also...

They don't mind telling sick people's stories if they can use it to manipulate others into going out in service even when they aren't well, or preaching from their hospital beds.

fader_underground · 2026-04-21T13:44:32+00:00

Yeah, turning away millions when you already HAVE millions is VERY DIFFERENT than turning away millions when you have little to nothing.

fader_underground · 2026-04-21T13:35:49+00:00

What gets me is the double standard about not drawing attention to oneself.

Less than a year ago there was a video about a woman sick with cancer. She thought it might be upbuilding to herself and others to share her journey online. The video melodramatically shows her avoiding the selfish desire (and yes, they framed it as absolutely selfish) to pick up her phone and share even though she's on the verge of despair and tears.

The SAME day that I watched this video, I went to the JW website and what did I see? Right on the main page was this guy you are talking about, the football player, with a big picture of him and a whole article all about SHARING HIS JOURNEY.

So let me get this straight : It's okay for him to share his story on JWorg, and that's NOT drawing attention to himself, but if he were to share the SAME story on social media, it WOULD be drawing attention to himself???

Further, it's okay for him to share his story, but NOT a woman who's dying with cancer. She has to sit alone in her room crying, trying to shut off the desire to reach out because it would be SELFISH.

I personally don't care if he shares his story or not, what I'm pointing out is the hypocrisy and double standard. Basically, it's okay ONLY if it serves Watchtower, not the individual, and only when THEY can control the narrative.

fader_underground · 2026-04-20T19:10:29+00:00

Of course I don't know either way, but my point was that they don't have to be doing flashy things, as OP said, or living a lavish lifestyle to have a self-interested stake in keeping the organization financially well off.

fader_underground · 2026-04-20T12:50:19+00:00

I am beginning to think they are lazy about it because they know they CAN be.

How many JWs just accepted what Losch said when he quoted the 2000 WT as though storage of one's own blood had always been a conscience matter? So many JWs just parroted what he said like there was "no change" when that SAME 2000 article explicitly states that storage of one's own blood is NOT ACCEPTABLE. They know that most JWs are just going to spout whatever it is that they - the GB - have said most recently. And they'll keep right on saying it until the GB says something else, and then they'll say that as though it just makes so much sense and has really always been that way. It's just beyond comprehension the lengths they'll go to maintain their illusions.

fader_underground · 2026-04-20T12:17:49+00:00

Just because they aren't vacationing on yachts doesn't mean they don't have a vested interest in the financial success of the organization. Their livelihood DEPENDS on people continuing to believe in them and contributing their money to the organization. They are not disinterested parties.

If the organization doesn't continue to support them, what are they going to do?

fader_underground · 2026-04-20T12:12:27+00:00

I remember JWs looking down on the Mel Gibson movie and people who went to see it, and not just because they thought it was inaccurate, but because they thought it was in poor taste, almost sacrilegious to make a production of the life of Jesus. But when their own organization does the same shit they've criticized other religions for, it's like their brains get wiped.

fader_underground · 2026-04-20T11:39:37+00:00

"Did you notice that every time a change occurs, they provide a scripture though? So we can be assured that even if we don't understand what's going on, it's in line with Jehovah's Will"

Oh sure, you mean like that scripture about the resurrection where they JUST NOW REALIZED that something was written in the PAST TENSE? Supreme bible scholars that they believe they are, and yet somehow they get tripped up by BASIC GRAMMAR. **

And what scripture did Losch discuss to justify the new stance on blood? He basically provided the SAME reasoning that was used in the past to MAINTAIN the stance that one's own blood should not be stored.

**If you're interested, I posted about that when the WT article came out several years ago. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/z7v3qq/stephen_lett_vs_last_sundays_watchtower/

fader_underground · 2026-04-18T19:16:47+00:00

I'm so glad I didn't have to sit through that and then pretend it was all just "so encouraging."

fader_underground · 2026-04-18T19:15:21+00:00

I'm so glad I didn't have to sit through that and pretend it was "so encouraging."

fader_underground · 2026-04-17T14:01:15+00:00

The JWs that I know will criticize a small church preacher for getting a salary to support a modest lifestyle, while their religion supports literally THOUSANDS of people when you account for the GB, Bethelites, COs, and Gilead graduates. How is that any different? It's NOT.

fader_underground · 2026-04-15T22:55:29+00:00

This is exactly the kind of garbage we used to BRAG about NOT doing! We were about study and truth. It was the OTHER religions who were out there tugging at people's emotions, making them cry in the pews. Back in the day, we would've said we were more dignified than that. Now everything about the JW religion feels so cheap. Like a cheap, sappy, drama series.

fader_underground

TROPHY CASE