In reference to your deprogramming test.
There is a problem that I have with your explanation of "truth". I believe that Truth in the absolute sense is a possession of Jehovah alone. The scriptures say about the truth becoming "abundant" in the last days according to Daniel Chapter 12. I interpret this as saying that more and more knowledge of the truth is what will become abundant. What I got from your attacking of the Watchtower is that decades ago their view and position changed based on their knowledge. I totally agree with that. The truth becoming abundant means that as more truth gets known, logic would have it that changes would have to be made in your former viewpoint to conform to your new knowledge. If you never got behind the wheel of a car, you may knowledge by observing how others how to drive a car, but you viewpoint would have to change as your knowledge of driving increases in order to be able to successfully drive a car yourself. This mean that the knowledge of absolute truth "which I think no man has" is something that we as humans can forever gain more of. The bible indicated that more knowledge of truth is something that will constantly be realized by those who sincerely study and strive for insight into god's word. I believe the Watchtower has clearly shown that that is the main aim of their magazine. I do not think the Watchtower had at any time nor has at this time the total absolute truth, nor do any other religious organization. However, what I learned from reading it has given me more insight into the scriptures, (not absolute truth) than any religious magazines by far.
I think decades ago they really thought they had more absolute truths than they actually had. I think that is probably the case today as well. By applying themselves to the teaching of god's word and getting more of an abundant amount of truth, they realized that changes in their opinions had to happen, however, I concur that they need to . This is the case with everyone who receives an increasing amount of knowledge about anything.
Therefore, even though the watchtower has contradicted themselves with their teaching, in my opinion, they were still at the forefront of abundant of truth during their time period just as the apostles and older men of the 1st century was in theirs. (By the way, they made mistakes and contradictions too). This does not mean they were not used by god because according the the SCRIPTURES the ones who are DECLARING ABROAD (TO ALL THE NATIONS) THE EXCELLENCIES OF GOD based on his word, the bible and giving us a measure of spiritual food at the proper time. If I find out about any group that can prove itself to be doing this to the extent of the Watchtower Society I will indeed listen.
P.
Hi P.,
Thanks for writing and sharing your thoughts on the
Deprogramming Course.
I applaud you for taking the course, and not allowing the Watchtower to dictate to you what is forbidden for you to read.
You said:
There is a problem that I have with your explanation of "truth".
The thing is, it wasn't MY definition of the truth: it was the Watchtower's. I have problems with it too, but then I'm entitled; I'm not a Jehovah's Witness any more.
You said:
What I got from your attacking of the Watchtower is that decades ago their view
and position changed based on their knowledge. I totally agree with that.
I was not "attacking" the Watchtower:
I was quoting it.
The point is: if "the light gets
brighter" how could the Watchtower go BACK to a previously held view?
That would not be a case of the light getting brighter, but of the light flickering
on and off. Do you know of any Scripture that states that in the
"last days" the light would flicker on and off? I don't.
Nor is that the way that "any learning" takes place. Let's say that I'm studying to be a doctor. On the first day of school my teacher tells me that the sole purpose of the kidney is to clean the blood. The second day he tells me that the sole purpose of the kidney is to pump adrenaline into the bloodstream when it is needed. On the third day he tells me that the sole purpose of the kidney is to clean the blood.
On the second day (if I was dumb enough to believe what he said without checking the facts and seeking a second opinion) I might have said, "the light got brighter".
On the third day I'd better start looking for a new medical school.
Let's say that in my exit interview from the medical school, they say this to me:
"At times explanations given by the school have shown adjustments,
seemingly to previous points of view. But this has not actually been the case.
This might be compared to what is known in navigational circles as
"tacking." By maneuvering the sails the sailors can cause a ship to go
from right to left, back and forth, but all the time making progress toward their destination... "
Before continuing to read this email, please stop and think about what your reaction
would be to the above "explanation" in that situation.
Here's my reaction: first of all, they said that the "adjustment" to
the point of view was really not an adjustment at all; it just SEEMED that way.
In reality, they tell me, these things which I wrongly perceived as adjustments
were in fact ways of getting closer to the truth! But how could telling me
that the kidney pumps adrenaline be a move closer to the truth when they went back
to the original explanation the next day? If what they taught on the third day
was true, and it was the same thing they taught on the first day, then it simply
cannot be the case that the second day was a movement towards the truth. It
was not a "movement towards the truth" it was a reversal from the truth:
a falsehood.
To me, it is obvious that the doctors in this medical
school are stumbling blindly in total darkness and don't know what they're talking about.
The quote from the exit interview is simply double-talk; they're trying to save
face via desperate rationalizations which are easily seen through.
The "exit interview" quote, of course, comes from the
Watchtower (12/1/1981, p. 27) (I took the liberty of substituting "the school"
for "Jehovah's visible organization" in order to make a point).
When a society which claims to be God's organization on earth makes
similar reversals of its doctrines, what are we to conclude? Is it really
a sign that it is being somehow "led" by an unchanging God, or does it
reveal that it is it in actuality running on the wild imaginations of men?
According to an early Watchtower, such events point to a clear conclusion:
"If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us;
undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one
or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now; But with God there
is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any
knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth
never can contradict a former truth. "New light" never extinguishes
older "light," but adds to it... "
(Watch Tower, Feb, 1881, p.3)
If Russell had had the hindsight of today's GB, he never would've admitted the above.
Another important point is that the Watchtower has published at least
3 contradictory versions of its own history! Even if the "poor lighting"
excuse could somehow "save face" in regards to their mistakes on Biblical
interpretation, it could never excuse the lies they have told about their own
history! Does the "light getting brighter" allow them to rewrite
their own recent history in a more favorable light?
I once held in my hands an original printing of Rutherford's
"Millions Now Living Will Never Die" booklet. I also held
original bound volumes of old Watchtowers in my hands (in the Bethel library).
With my own eyes I saw where the Watchtower printed that it was a certainty
that the "ancient worthies" would be resurrected in 1925.
"We may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old ...
1925 shall mark the resurrection of the faithful worthies of old and the
beginning of the reconstruction... "
Millions Now Living May Never Die, pp. 89, 90, 97
"We have no doubt whatever in regard to the chronology relating to the
dates of 1874, 1914, 1918, and 1925. "
Watchtower 1922 p. 147
Okay, so we pull out our old reliable excuse about the light being
dim back then. That's what I did when I first read the above quotes.
Okay, case closed...
But wait a minute... when you read one of
the Watchtower's books on its own history they state:
"1925 was a sad year for many brothers, some of them were stumbled; their
hopes were dashed. They had hoped to see some of the ancient worthies resurrected.
Instead of being a "probability" they read into it that it was a
"certainty." "
1975 Yearbook, p. 146
The above quote from the 1975 yearbook was supposedly written by a
"spirit led" member of the Governing Body of Jehovah's earthly
organization (the one that dispenses "truth" to the faithful) who had
been charged with the duty of writing about the organization's history. Did he
check his facts? Did he at least walk into the Bethel library and sit down
and read what was actually written back then regarding 1925? Or did he just
make it up as he went along? If he checked his facts, then he deliberately lied.
If he didn't check his facts, then he inadvertently lied through carelessness
and neglect. Either way, the "household of faith" was fed a lie:
poison instead of "meat in due season". Either way, it makes all
of the Watchtower publications suspect.
A similar case exists on the issue of whether Russell thought
himself to be the "faithful & wise servant". Today the
rewritten history says No. But, if you investigate earlier publications
you will find that, according to the Watchtower, Russell DID believe it:
Pastor Russell... admitted in private to being that "Faithful and Wise
Servant."
Watchtower 1/12/1916
Russell never claimed to be the faithful and wise servant.
God's Kingdom of a Thousand Years has Approached, 1973:346
Now, please understand that it makes no difference whether he did
or didn't believe it. What's important is that the Watchtower has lied
about it.
It is bad enough to make mistakes when you claim to be
"God's prophet", but to try in every way to cover up your mistakes by
lying, (and then covering up the lies) is much worse. The former is human
nature, the latter reveals a character flaw. And remember: we're not
talking about Joe Average on the street here. No, we're talking about an
organization that claims to be God's sole mouthpiece on earth! Our
expectations should be a little bit higher for the sort of character such an
organization displays. If they cannot tell the truth or get their facts
straight about their own 125 year history, how foolish it would be to trust them
to tell the truth and get the facts straight on the 2,000+ year old
Bible books!
I presented these facts, in person, to the Governing Body when I was serving at
Bethel. They did not issue a correction. They did not offer an
apology. They did nothing to set the record straight. Instead, they
called me evil and asked me to leave and never speak about these facts to
anyone. Is that the action of a faithful and discreet slave dispensing
truth? Is it the action of an organization trying to get "ever
closer" to the truth? Or is it the action of an organization trying
to perpetuate itself through lies and cover-ups?
You said that no other organization is preaching to the same extent
as the Watchtower. That is debatable. The Mormons reach more in one
airing of one of their commercials than entire JW congregations ever will.
The Catholic church drums its catechism into millions of captive children's
minds on a daily basis. Televangelists reach countless dupes every Sunday
morning... And these organizations actually succeed in getting their message
across (whereas very few people have a clue what the Witnesses believe).
But I don't think the religion that reaches the most people
necessarily "wins" the honor of being the "right"
religion. We must take into account the QUALITY of the message they are
delivering. The Watchtower publishes literature with falsehoods in it
(euphemistically called "truth for its time"). The Watchtower
publishes literature which contains deliberate lies. The Watchtower
publishes literature with illustrations of children falling to their deaths in
chasms opened up in the earth by their "loving God Jehovah", and they
call this the "good news of the kingdom". The Watchtower
publishes literature with false prophecies in it...
If they take pride in publishing a lot of this literature, does that
mean something? Does it fulfill some Biblical role? Possibly,
but definitely not the one they claim to fulfill (Deut. 18:20-22).
P., don't just sit down and try to come up with some Watchtower-inspired
rationalizations for all of these facts. I know that's what you've been
programmed to do; so was I. But stop and think for yourself. Do you
REALLY want to slave your life away for such an organization? Can you
really trust them to do the right thing? Is that all you want out of your
life: to be a robot, programmed by the Watchtower as to what to think, do, and
say? Do you want all of your friendships to be contingent on your
continuing obedience to an organization?
Do you go back far enough to where you can remember when they said
organ transplants were cannibalism, and were against God's law
(Watchtower 11/15/1967:702)? I know someone whose wife died for want of a
transplant. Shortly after that, the Watchtower got "new light"
and lifted the ban on organ transplants. But it was too late for this
man's wife. He is now an ex-Jehovah's Witness. Can you put yourself
in his shoes for a moment? The love of his life died for nothing --
absolutely nothing. All because some old men in Brooklyn were playing
God. What would you do: continue to attend meetings and give thanks for
the blessed "meat in due season"?
If this were truly God's
earthly organization, and it was being led by the Holy Spirit, do you REALLY
think they would have issued such a ban as "God's law"? This is
not some little doctrinal mistake caused by dim light. We are talking
about peoples LIVES here! Would Jehovah allow his "earthly
organization" to make such a grave mistake that it actually cost his
"name people" their lives? Don't rationalize that this was some
sort of test where they could prove loyal to Jehovah. They could've been
tested with REAL laws if that's what God wanted. People died for a mistake
perpetrated by the Watchtower. The ban against organ transplants was a
mistake, pure and simple. It was NOT against "God's law" and the
people who should've known that best were those claiming to be "God's
earthly organization led by Jehovah's spirit". Unless, of course,
they were mistaken about that as well (which is the only explanation that makes
any sense when you think about it).
Since the ban against organ
transplants was not from God, where did it come from? The Governing Body's
own collective imagination. The fact that they cannot tell their
imagination from God's guidance is glaringly revealing!
P., don't waste another minute of your precious life in this
cult. Get out while you can still think and feel. Real life
awaits you. Freedom is too great of a gift to surrender to some old men in
Brooklyn who long ago lost all touch with reality.
I wish you all the best in your journey. Please feel free to
contact me again if I can be of any help.
Sincerely,
--Steve
Thank You for responding to my E-Mail. I love to
conversate with anyone on the scriptures and I really
value everyones opinion. I would like to respond to
your responses. Remember in my explanation of truth,
I was talking about "absolute truth" The watchtower
explanation of truth was based on their sincere belief
of what they thought was "true" for the time. In
their search they did go back and forth. I am not
disputing that. That is why I said that what they say
is true or truth today is not absolute truth. I
explain the reason why I believe this in my first
reply, only almighty god Jehovah has absolute truth
and he has not revealed this to even the angels.
Because of this, I do not believe all things that
anyone says. However, my knowledge of the bible tells
me that the Watchtower literature comes closest to
understanding the bible and for that reason I still
read it. I do not understand why you think even
people used by god are not prone to error. Sometimes
very serious error. Many of god's prophets in the
past made serious mistakes from Noah on down to the
apostles of Jesus. Still they were used by god to
expound on his purpose. By the way, what do you think
god's purpose for man is according to the scriptures?
I am curious to know what you thought is on this. I
can really say that by reading the Watchtower
literature and studying the BIBLE! It has really made
me a much more happier person with myself and others.
Now if that is enslavement I'll take it. I can walk
away from what I have learned anytime I want to
because I am the only one in my family that is a JW so
the shunning will not have that big an effect on me.
However, I choose not to. I really like what I read.
If you like reading a very good novel, you like the
novel because of the content, knowledge of the person
writing the novel has no bearing on how you like the
actual novel.
The statement:
> But with God there is no variableness, neither
> shadow of turning,
> and so it is with truth;
> any knowledge or light coming from God must be like
> its author. A new view of
> truth never can contradict a former truth. "New
> light" never extinguishes
> older "light," but adds to it... "
> (Watch Tower, Feb, 1881, p.3)
>
I agree with this if it is talking about "absolute
truth" Again we are trying to get a better
understanding of truth, absolute truth is something
neither you, me, or the Watchtower has. In obtaining
this, Jehovah has always seemed to be P.ient and
merciful with all of us if our hearts are sincere.
Even if we error or stumble trying to obtain it.
Again, I do not believe everything the Watchtower says
about everything. There have been many contradictions
that you have pointed out and I am not disputing them.
I just don't believe for one moment that the Catholic
faith (which I grew up in), the Mormon-s or any other
religious group conforms to the bible the way Jehovah
Witnesses do. However, I am willing to debate this.
Compared to the history of the religions you
mentioned, their plague on mankind has been more
lethal to humans than the contradictions you
mentioned. There is badness in all men, religious
men as well as atheists. But the really joy in life
comes from finding out and discerning for yourself
what is true and what is false. This is what brings
me joy, even writing this response to your response
brings me joy. Until I find a viable alternate for me
I will stick to what I have learned so far about
"truth", knowing I will always find this road
interesting to say the least. Please feel free to
respond if you would like.
P.
So. let me get this straight: you're saying that the GB was unable to write the truth about their own organization's history because "only Jehovah has absolute truth"?
I'll have to remember that if I'm ever caught in a lie: "Sorry; I couldn't help lying because only Jehovah has absolute truth."
Something is either true or it isn't. I don't understand your distinguishing "truth" from "absolute truth". Does "regular" truth allow for falsehoods within it, whereas "absolute" truth does not? I don't think so. If something contains falsehoods it is not true, period.
The statement: "the kidney's sole purpose is to pump adrenaline" is false. You cannot pretend it is "true" by saying that only Jehovah has absolute truth. That's just trying to prove black is white by argument. It doesn't wash. It's not even close to being sensible.
If I tell lies, but I say that they are really true, just not absolutely true, I hope you would have enough sense not to ever trust anything I said.
It isn't just that the writers of the Watchtower made mistakes because they're human. No, they have deliberately lied and covered up those lies, and refused to acknowledge this fact. In fact, they have had the audacity to call their lies "truth"! That makes them despicable liars who take advantage of their followers' trust.
If, after knowing all of this, you remain happy reading their writings "like a good novel," then further discussion with you will be a waste of time for both of us.
You said:
I do not understand why you think even people used by god are not prone to error.
The Bible you claim to follow states that you must test anyone who claims to be "God's prophet" (as the Watchtower has claimed repeatedly). How do you test them? By noting whether their prophecies come true. If their prophecies fail to come true, then they are false prophets and liars, and you are not supposed to listen to them:
"But the prophet, which shall
presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak,
or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath
not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing
follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken,
but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."
(Deut. 18:20-22 KJV)
"If he is a false prophet, his prophecy will fail to come to pass."
(Watchtower, 5/15/30)
"The difference between a true and a false prophet is that one
is speaking the word of the Lord and the other is speaking his own dreams and
guesses. "
(Watchtower, May 15, 1930, p. 45)
"Jehovah, the God of the true prophets, will put all false
prophets to shame either by not fulfilling the false prediction of such
self-assuming prophets or by having His own predictions fulfilled in a way
opposite to that predicted by the false prophets."
(Paradise Restored to Mankind - by Theocracy, p. 47- WBTS 1972)
The Watchtower ("God's prophet") prophesied that the resurrection of Abraham would take place in 1925.
Did that prophecy come true or not?
It did not come true. Therefore, using the Bible you claim to follow (and the Watchtower's own interpretation of Deut. 18:20-22), the Watchtower organization is proven to be a false prophet. False prophets mislead people in God's name by telling lies. We have already proven that they have deliberately lied. What more proof do you need?
Are you so in love with the lie that you can no longer see straight? Listen, P.: truth is true, and lies are false. There is no truth which consists of lies. There are no true prophets giving false prophesies.
You say you are happy as a Jehovah's Witness. So was I -- at first. Then I got to thinking about how Jehovah was supposedly going to kill everyone who wasn't a Witness. That's very sad when you stop to really think about it. Little children, and innocent babies, and good people who have tried to live good lives and never harmed anyone: all to be killed just because they didn't join an organization! Where does it tell such lies in the Bible? What verse says you must join an organization in order for God not to kill you? There is no such verse. It is all a cruel, outrageous lie which makes Jehovah out to be a monster. The message you are bringing to people's doors is not that of a God of love: it is that of a cruel, wicked god.
Once I realized that, I began to see how they had taken over my life, and how there was no real love in the organization. Shunning people who disagree with you is not a loving act. Letting children die for want of a blood transfusion or an organ transplant (man-made, erroneous rules) is not a loving act. It is just like what Jesus accused the Pharisees of: putting self-imposed rules ahead of love.
When I got free of them, I came to experience REAL, unconditional love. What a difference! That's what's waiting for you as soon as you get out from under their heavy yoke.
To answer your questions on the Bible, please visit my website. I've said it all there much better than I can say it in an email. On my site there is an article entitled
"Why Not be a Jehovah's Witness". This article addresses your issue of the society teaching the Bible more accurately than any other group (see especially part 2).
When you are done with that, you can find out what I think of the Bible's message by reading my book
"Can the Bible be God's Word?" This is a complete commentary on the entire Bible and gives a clear answer to the question it poses. It's something you owe to yourself if you're going to devote your life to trying to follow the Bible.
The main point I would like to get across to you is this:
"No one knows more about the unknowable than anyone else."
The Governing Body has no more clue as to what "God" wants you to do or doesn't want you to do than I do. No one knows what happens to you after you die. No one knows whether there's a heaven or an afterlife, or a superhuman spirit being watching over us, or what such a being wants of us (if anything). It's all just what other men have thought. Don't be duped by liars whose track record shows that every one of their prophecies has failed.
If you enjoy reading their writings as if they were a novel, then you might try some really great literature instead: like Dickens, Shakespeare, or Tolstoy. You don't know what you're missing: living off the pitiful (and poisonous) crumbs that fall from the GB's table when you could be feasting at the table of really great writers.
There's a whole other world out there (the real one) just waiting for you to discover. Then you will experience what real joy is.
Sincerely,
--Steve
It seems to me that your real issue is not only with
the Watchtower organization but also with the bible
and god himself. On that note I will just say that
you have your views of life and I have mine. You have
chosen a path that works great with you. I have
chosen a path that works great with me. I never said
that the Watchtower has never lied about anything. I
am pretty sure everyone has. My belief is not totally
in juncture with any organization but with an ever
growing knowledge of god's word. It is this knowledge
I call truth and it what I am continue to apply myself
to. You wrote:
> If, after knowing all of this, you remain happy
> reading their writings "like
> a good novel," then further discussion with you will
> be a waste of time for
> both of us.
I never said I read the literature like a novel. The
novel only illustrates how something can bring you joy
even though you know nothing about the author. I am
not equating it to the Bible. However, I do think
that if you are trying to have me change from a course
that has brought me great joy, further discussions
will be a waste of time. I never set out to change
your beliefs. (Your views on the bible and god is
your belief). If you want to just dialog on your view
of life and be willing to take in other view points,
then we can continue this discussion.
You said:
> No one knows what
> happens to you after you
> die. No one knows whether there's a heaven or an
> afterlife, or a superhuman
> spirit being watching over us, or what such a being
> wants of us (if
> anything). It's all just what other men have
> thought. Don't be duped by
> liars whose track record shows that every one of
> their
These are just you opinion on god. They have no more
or less credible than what these "other men" have said
about god.
The difference between you and me is that I would
never try to tear down your beliefs. That is not why
I am writing you. However, that seems to be your
agenda. (Please correct me if I am wrong).
If you hate the watchtower (I think I am safe to
assume this) then so be it. I got married and
divorced over lies and cover-ups that my first spouse
has done. I am not going to criticize marriage
because of that. That was my experience. I am sorry
your experiences with JW was not pleasant. And I am
glad that you found something that makes your life
have meaning. I only wish the same for myself and my
family.
P.S. Nothing I read on you web sight has changed what
I have learned and appreciate about god. Thanks for
the discussion though. You may respond if you like.
I will always answer you.
P.,
You said that you are not trying to change my belief, so I shouldn't try to change yours. But, assuming you "go out in service", what are you trying to do at the doors? Are you not, as a Jehovah's Witness, trying to bring "the Truth" to people so that they will (hopefully) change their belief system to yours? That is what most Jehovah's Witnesses do.
I am not trying to tear down your beliefs. My purpose is the same as yours (in your door-to-door work): to let the truth be known. Then, you get to decide what to do about it.
I know that this organization which claims to have a monopoly on "Truth" has lied, and hence is not to be trusted as a source of truth. I feel I owe it to let this fact be known to others. Once you are fully aware of the extent and depth of their lies and cover-ups, I have essentially discharged my duty, and what you do with the information is entirely up to you.
If I seem to persist in driving home these points, it is for the following reasons:
1. I know something about how cults work. A person who has been brainwashed is not going to be able to fully comprehend any criticism against the cult. They are going to automatically resort to the rationalizations provided by the cult. It takes a great effort of the will and a genuine longing for "absolute" truth to break the mind free of such hard chains. Sometimes it is simply impossible to break the mind free without an accompanying traumatic event (such as having someone close to you disfellowshipped).
2. This is one of the most dangerous cults because it causes the deaths of its members when they are in need of blood transfusions. If you have children, I'd hate to think what you might allow to happen to them if they needed a transfusion. I once needed one, and I would be dead right now if I'd followed the Watchtower's rules.
3. I don't like to see people throwing their lives away on a lie.
I think it is very important to know the credibility of the authors of the Watchtower publications. They are not writing novels: they are writing non-fiction. That's a very important distinction. If someone is representing themselves as God's "Faithful and discreet slave" whom I must listen to and follow if I want to please God and survive his wrath, then it becomes critically important to learn of the character of that person. If he is a chronic liar, that fact should have a great bearing on whether or not I believe his claim. It should also influence my decision whether to go door-to-door and distribute his literature. Once I discovered how the Watchtower lied, I could no longer in good conscience spread its lying word.
You said:
My belief is not totally in juncture with any organization
I am happy to hear that!
But, please be aware that, according to the Watchtower, you are not a Jehovah's Witness then:
"If we are to walk in the light of truth we must recognize not
only Jehovah God as our Father but his organization as our mother. Today, also,
God requires and exacts from his children obedience honor and respect. These must
be rendered not only to the living God himself, but to his wifely organization as well"
(Watchtower, 1 May 1957, p. 274).
"We resolve that we shall obey all instruction received from the
Watch Tower, knowing that such proceed from the higher powers, Jehovah God and
Christ Jesus. We resolve to be completely obedient to the Society as the visible
part of the Great Theocracy."
(Watchtower, Feb. 1, 1940 p.47)
"Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the
Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how
sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible. For this reason
the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovah's visible organization
in mind.. Since 1879 the Watch Tower magazine has been used by this collective
group to dispense spiritual food regularly to those of this 'little flock' of
true Christians.. Jehovah poured out his spirit upon them and assigned them the
responsibility of serving as his sole visible channel, through whom alone
spiritual instruction was to come. Those who recognize Jehovah's visible
theocratic organization, therefore, must recognize and accept this appointment
of the 'faithful and discreet slave' and be submissive to it.. Make haste to
identify the visible theocratic organization of God that represents his king,
Jesus Christ. It is essential for life.. in submitting to Jehovah's visible
theocratic organization, we must be in full and complete agreement with every
feature of its apostolic procedure and requirements."
(Watchtower, Oct. 1 1967 pp. 587-92)
"That they [Jehovah's Witness] must adhere absolutely to the
decisions and scriptural understandings of the Society because God has given it
this authority over his people."
(Watchtower, May 1, 1972, p. 272)
"Avoid independent thinking...questioning the counsel that is
provided by God's visible organization."
(Watchtower, Jan. 15, 1983 pg. 22)
I am having trouble reconciling your views with the door-to-door preaching work. I can't imagine you standing at the door saying something like:
"Good morning, my name is P., and I'm here today to talk to you about God's kingdom… I have some literature that I'd like to place with you, so you can read more about God's wonderful new order. This literature is the Truth (although it is written by a pack of deliberate liars who have never been right about any prophecy they've ever made in this magazine). And by the way: if it says in it anywhere that you must join their organization and adhere strictly to whatever they say, you can just ignore that part: I do. And, if any member of your family is likely to need a blood transfusion at any time, well you might just want to chuck this magazine in the trash right now and save yourself a lot of heartache."
[P.'s reply to the above has been lost. Here is the gist of it from excerpts and my memory.]
I recently attended a medical conference.
The head of surgery stated that modern studies has proven
that there are less risk of death and of side-effects from having bloodless
surgery than from having surgery with blood.
Do not be offended by I would rather listen to a
head surgeon than to you when it comes to blood. The question in you case you
cannot really answer is if you were not given blood, would you or would you not
have died.
I know the Watchtower made mistakes decades ago. But the men who wrote those things are all dead now. Only Jehovah has the absolute truth (the total aspect of knowing all that is true). Again I reiterate that no man has this truth.
Can you tell me what it is that the Watchtower teaches today that you disagree with?
P.:
You said:
..the total aspect of knowing all that is true). Again I
reiterate that no man has this "truth".
I understand what you're saying: only God knows
everything. But I don't see that as an excuse for men (especially those who
claim to be the sole channel of truth) to deliberately lie.
You said:
The head of surgery stated that modern studies has proven that there are less
risk of death and of side-effects from having bloodless surgery than from having
surgery with blood.
Do not be offended by I would rather listen to a head
surgeon than to you when it comes to blood. The question in you case you cannot
really answer is if you were not given blood, would you or would you not have
died.
Well, of course WHEN bloodless surgery is possible, then that is safer. The point is: it often is not possible. There are times when massive amounts of blood are lost during surgery, and the only way to prevent death in those instances is by a transfusion. This was the case with my surgery. There is no question that I would have died from blood loss without a transfusion, and I wouldn't trust any doctor who denied that (though I don't think there are any doctors who would deny that).
I prefer to listen to medical experts rather than the bogus medical "advice" given in the Watchtower. Remember: they once held that vaccinations were "pus" that would transmit all sorts of vile diseases including syphilis and leprosy!
Yes, it would be very convenient if everyone would just forget about the horrible past record of the Watchtower. It was soooo long ago that they printed such stupid stuff after all! The people who wrote such garbage are long dead, as you say. Of course, when it comes to other religions, the Watchtower is quick to point out their failings of centuries ago! You alluded to these yourself. So, there's the old double standard again. Witnesses are free to point out the Crusades and the Inquisitions, but they don't want anyone pointing out their errors of a few decades ago.
But, the Watchtower continues to proudly boast of its past, and claim that the Watchtower has been "reliable" since its inception. One of their important doctrines is that Jesus judged them back in 1919 as the "Faithful & Discreet Slave". This judgment, they tell us, was based on what they were teaching back then as opposed to the "false" doctrines of Christendom. Given that claim, it becomes very important to know what exactly they were teaching back then. If what they teach today contradicts what they taught back then, it leaves a lot of room for doubt about their claim.
Furthermore: since the Watchtower has gone to the trouble of producing at least 3 books about its own history, they must think it's important. And, since it has pointed to its own history as the fulfillment of Scripture, then the facts about its history become crucially important.
There are many things that the Watchtower teaches that no one would ever come up with by just reading and studying the Bible itself. If you had just read Revelation on your own, would you honestly have ever concluded that the seven great plagues were a series of book-drives ("conventions") Rutherford held back in the 20's to sell his books (the books which no one thinks are true anymore, and which Witnesses are discouraged from even reading)? I don't think so.
You want me to tell you what it is the Watchtower teaches today that I don't like? Well, I haven't read a Watchtower in many years, and since the religion is in a constant state of flux, I'm not certain what all they teach today (nor do I particularly care). So I will stick to the basics (which I assume they still teach).
1. That the Bible is the inerrant word of God.
2. That God doesn't want people to have blood transfusions.
3. That God is going to kill everyone who is not a Jehovah's Witness.
4. That it is a requirement to "hate" and "shun" those Witnesses who have come to disagree with one or more of the Watchtower doctrines (i.e. "apostates").
5. That it could ever be the "loving" thing to disfellowship a woman for having been raped and having failed to scream.
6. That women are inferior to men and must be "submissive" and "subject" to men.
7. That only Watchtower publications should be read. (And, along the same lines: that the Internet should be avoided for fear of finding sites such as mine.)
8. That there is a special group of men who know more about the unknowable than anyone else.
9. That telling lies is okay if it furthers what they call "truth".
10. That Witnesses are obligated to "obey" the Watchtower organization and accept what they teach without question.
11. That pedophiles should not be reported to the authorities unless there are two or more witnesses.
I could go on, but that should do it for now. What would YOUR list look like?
--Steve
From everything I heard and read, the Watchtower has
alway wrote that some of their earlier views were
incorrect, so I just cannot get with the notion that
they deliberately lied
You said:
>
> Well, of course WHEN bloodless surgery is possible,
> then that is safer. The
> point is: it often is not possible. There are times
> when massive amounts of
> blood are lost during surgery, and the only way to
> prevent death in those
> instances is by a transfusion. This was the case
> with my surgery. There is
> no question that I would have died from blood loss
> without a transfusion, and
> I wouldn't trust any doctor who denied that (though
> I don't think there are
> any doctors who would deny that).
It is alway possible to get alternate blood surgery if
you are not already dead. This was explained at the
seminar (by doctors who are not Jehovah's Witnesses).
This information did not come from the Watchtower and
the fact that it is bogus is again YOUR OPINION.
The thing is to get with informed doctors who know
that giving blood in surgery is risky. i.e.
heP.itis, aids, and other diseases. The medical
studies themselves show it is more risky to take in
someone's else's blood than to use non-blood surgery.
You know what Acts 15:25 says. Abstain does not mean
take it into your body.
Only people who are unwilling to follow this
scripture have a hard time with it.
I have never heard of the pus thing but what was the
belief about this at the time it was written. I need
more information on this one.
You Said:
> when it comes to
> other religions, the
> Watchtower is quick to point out their failings of
> centuries ago! You
> alluded to these yourself. So, there's the old
> double-standard again.
> Witnesses are free to point out the Crusades and the
> Inquisitions, but they
> don't want anyone pointing out their errors of a few
> decades ago.
>
Again, from what I have read. They have pointed out
past error in reasoning.
You said:
> One of their
> important doctrines is that Jesus judged them back
> in 1919 as the "Faithful &
> Discreet Slave". This judgment, they tell us, was
> based on what they were
> teaching back then as opposed to the "false"
> doctrines of Christendom. Given
> that claim, it becomes very important to know what
> exactly they were teaching
> back then. If what they teach today contradicts
> what they taught back then,
> it leaves a lot of room for doubt about their claim.
>
If you know the scriptures, they received that title
because of their having studied the scriptures closely
and determining that it was the time of Christ's
presence and that they tried to make this known to
mankind. The scriptures also tells us that a
refinement period would take place. If everything
they taught would have been correct. Would they need
to be refined? If you really want to make headway
with me, inform me who YOU think the Faithful and
Discreet Class is today and discuss your reasons why.
You already know mine.
You said,
> I haven't read a Watchtower in many
> years, and since the
> religion is in a constant state of flux, I'm not
> certain what all they teach
> today (nor do I particularly care). So I will stick
> to the basics (which I
> assume they still teach).
Here lies the reason why you and I have totally
different mind sets on spiritual matters. You have
not kept up with progressive knowledge of Jehovah, how
he works and how the Christian Congregation is
supposed to operate in this day and time. It is this
progressive knowledge that I have come to love about
Jehovah.
I will address your points one at a time using
scriptures only
>
> 1. That the Bible is the inerrant word of God.
2 Tim 3:14, Isaiah 55:10,11; John 17:17
>
> 2. That God doesn't want people to have blood
> transfusions.
Acts 15:19 and 20 and 29; (Abstain does not mean take
into body); Lev 11:17,18
>
> 3. That God is going to kill everyone who is not a
> Jehovah's Witness.
This question really cannot be answered absolutely yet
since the event that does this has not happened yet.
Let me just refer to 2 Thes 1:6-8; I believe that
Jehovah determines who knows him and who does not.
>
> 4. That it is a requirement to "hate" and "shun"
> those Witnesses who have come to disagree with one
> or more of the Watchtower doctrines (i.e.
> "apostates").
Hate is not the correct word to use here. We do not
hate anyone (at least I do not). However, shun is
correct 2 Tim 2:16-19, ESPECIALLY 19; Deut 29:18; 1
John 2:18,19; 2 Pet 2:1-3, 15-22
>
> 5. That it could ever be the "loving" thing to
> Disfellowship a woman for having been raped and
> having failed to scream.
I know absolutely nothing about this case. Send me
some proof of this
>
> 6. That women are inferior to men and must be
> "submissive" and "subject" to men.
1 Pet 3:5 and 6 and let us not forget 7; Eph 5:22,23
>
> 7. That only Watchtower publications should be read.
> (And, along the same
> lines: that the Internet should be avoided for fear
> of finding sites such as
> mine.)
I read other magazines as well depending on their
content. That the Internet be avoided is ridiculous.
However, again depending on the content, bad Internet
sites (and we know there are many) should be avoided
if you are a Christian
>
> 8. That there is a special group of men who know
> more about the unknowable than anyone else.
I do not understand this statement. I'll just refer
to Matt 24:45; Dan 12:3; Rev 14:3 What does these
scriptures mean to you?
>
> 9. That telling lies is okay if it furthers what
> they call "truth".
Telling lies OK? Of course not. I am not going to bother to even
address this
>
> 10. That Witnesses are obligated to "obey" the
> Watchtower organization and accept what they teach
> without question.
I do not because of Acts 17:10 and 11
>
> 11. That pedophiles should not be reported to the
> authorities unless there are two or more witnesses.
This is also ridiculous, you always have the
authorities INVESTIGATE any CLAIM of pedophilia to see
if the claim is valid. If it is the person SHOULD BE
PROSECUTED. The congregation will not take action
unless there is 2 or more witnesses or if the person
get convicted and/or prosecuted. (You do realize that
there are sometimes false accusation) therefore, you
cannot disfellowship anyone just because of one
person's claim with no evidence to back it up. This
does not minimize the act however, and people who
engage in this do have to answer to god for what they
have done. Again, a person is disfellowshipped if the
person get investigated and prosecuted. Any other
statement about this is completely false.
I will close with your words.
> I could go on, but that should do it for now. What
> would YOUR list look like?
>
P.S. Let me know your opinion on my questions.
However know that IF you do not believe in god or the
bible, we will have a difficult time agreeing because
our viewpoint is totally different.
P.,
You said:
"From everything I heard and read, the Watchtower
has alway wrote that some of their earlier views were incorrect, so I just
cannot get with the notion that they deliberately lied"
P., in a past email to me you already admitted that they lied (go back and read it if you don't believe me). I guess, then, you're now saying that their lying was not "deliberate". Well, motive is difficult to prove. But, if it wasn't deliberate, then they are incredibly stupid (not being able to read their own history from their own publications). (Either way, I wouldn't trust them with Biblical interpretation.)
When I pointed out the lies to them, they did nothing to correct them (they definitely did NOT state that they were "incorrect".) They just told me to keep quiet about them. The cover-up itself is a deliberate lie.
I'm not going to go back and repeat over and over again the evidence of their lying. Just look back in my previous emails. This point has been made and is irrefutable. I won't waste any more time on it. If you can't see that they have deliberately lied then it must be due to the brainwashing, and I don't know any way of breaking through that.
I have also already quoted to you where they said that there have not been adjustments to their previous views: only "tacking". So, I'm not going to bother quoting it again.
You said: "It is alway possible to get alternate blood surgery if you are not already dead."
It may be theoretically possible (I doubt it), but it is not always practically possible. Unless there have been major recent medical advances I am unaware of (doubtful; my wife is in the medical field), there are times when only whole blood will do. Also, in many places in the world the latest medical breakthroughs are not available (or affordable), there blood is the only option, and will be the only option for a long time to come.
When I had my transfusion there certainly was no alternative (other the dying). Yet even back then the Watchtower would've condemned my life-saving action. What good would my dying have accomplished?
Yes, there are risks involved with any medical procedure. One weighs those risks against the alternative of not taking them. A reasonable person does not dismiss such procedures out of hand due to the risks. If I had not had the operation, I would be in agony today. If I were still a true-blue Witness, I wouldn't have had the operation, and I would have lived my life in constant pain. This is what you are asking me to accept as "truth": that pain and suffering are good, and saving life is evil. That is a skewed view of life if there ever was one.
If you want to read where the WT said smallpox vaccinations were "poisonous pus" please take the
"Blood Course" on my website. It should prove enlightening. It also explains the real meaning of "abstain from blood".
You said: "You know what Acts 15:25 says. Abstain does not mean take it into your body. Only people who are unwilling to follow this scripture have a hard time with it."
Well, the WT also has a hard time with it.
Why do they allow Witnesses to have fractionated human blood and whole cow's
blood transfused? Those actions are certainly
'taking blood into your body'.
For more on this, see the
Jehovah's Witnesses For Blood Reform site.
If the WT ever figures out a way to pass the blame for the blood transfusion ban onto their trusting followers (to prevent law suits), they will lift the ban and make it "a matter of conscience". Then we won't have to argue about it anymore because you'll say, "The light got brighter". But isn't it just too bad for all the children who died due to their parent's stupid loyalty to the WT? Don't tell me this will never happen. It happened with vaccinations and organ transplants. The WT's "truth for its time" kills its members. And you are out there trying to rope other unsuspecting dupes into this same trap. I couldn't live with that. How can you live with that?
You said: If you know the scriptures, they received that title because of their having studied the scriptures closely and determining that it was the time of Christ's presence and that they tried to make this known to mankind.
I have read the Bible cover-to-cover twice, and studied it for years. I never came across any Scripture stating that some organization would be judged in 1919 for determining that Christ's presence would start in 1914. Where is that Scripture again?
Conversely, if you study the WTs from that period (between 1914-1919) you will be embarrassed by the ludicrous things they palmed off as "meat in due season"! It is incredible that anyone would've believed that garbage (such as the distance traveled by one of their publications being a fulfillment of Scripture!)
You said: If you really want to make headway with me, inform me who YOU think the Faithful and Discreet Class is today and discuss your reasons why.
There is no such thing as a "faithful and discreet slave class". The reason: the WT made it up. The Bible does not speak of such a "class". It doesn't say it was a prophecy, but rather a parable. You could make it mean anything you wanted (as the WT has done). If there were such a class, the GB would be amongst the last people in the world who would fill that role: they have not been faithful to the truth, or discreet about putting forth half-baked ideas which have proven fatal to their trusting followers. They have not served up "meat" but rather deadly poison (just ask any of the parents of the 26 victims of the blood-transfusion doctrine which were celebrated in the May 22, 1994 Awake! article "Youths Who Put God First".)
You said: Here lies the reason why you and I have totally different mind sets on spiritual matters. You have not kept up with progressive knowledge of Jehovah, how he works and how the Christian Congregation is supposed to operate in this day and time. It is this progressive knowledge that I have come to love about Jehovah.
Yes, we have different mindsets on spiritual matters: you hang on the words of a lying organization and false prophet as your source of your spiritual truth, while I do not.
Who says that the Christian Congregation is supposed to operate in semi-darkness, gullibly swallowing every new half-baked notion shoved down its throat by an organization that has proven totally unreliable and deadly? Where is that written in the Bible?
Why would you "love" the idea that your god only provides you with a little information at a time? Why can't he just give it to you straight the first time? You love the fact that people died because (due to this gradually revealing process) your leaders thought organ transplants were against God's law? Imagine if this were 35 years ago: you would be telling me about some doctor who claimed that there is always an alternative to such transplants. That's how mind control works: it paints the world in its own hues. The organization can never be wrong: when it cannot rewrite its history, it always falls back on the "truth for its time" excuse. How is it then, that the wicked "satan-controlled" world knew -- at that time -- that vaccinations were not disease-carrying "pus" and that organ transplants were not "cannibalism"? It would seem that there has been more real truth OUTSIDE the organization (where people who had vaccinations and organ transplants and blood transfusions are still alive today). That should tell you something. Try to think of what it might be.
1. That the Bible is the inerrant word of God.
2 Tim 3:14, Isaiah 55:10,11; John 17:17
These verses from the Bible cannot begin to address the question. If I tell you that the Book of Mormon was dictated by an angel of God, and I "prove" it to you by quoting from the Book of Mormon where it says so, would you see the flaw in my argument? The flaw is known as "circular reasoning" or "assuming one's own argument". If you don't believe the Book of Mormon, you're not going to believe what it says about itself.
You'll have to do a lot better than that. Please read my online book "Can the Bible be God's Word?" Then we can start to have a meaningful discussion. I really feel that you owe it to yourself to read this anyway before you waste away any more of your life slaving away for the Watchtower.
2. That God doesn't want people to have blood transfusions.
Acts 15:19 and 20 and 29; (Abstain does not mean take into body); Lev 11:17,18
Please see my online Blood course on this before any of your loved ones (or you yourself) should ever need a transfusion.
3. That God is going to kill everyone who is not a Jehovah's Witness.
This question really cannot be answered absolutely yet since the event that does this has not happened yet. Let me just refer to 2 Thes 1:6-8; I believe that Jehovah determines who knows him and who does not.
Again, you are at odds with the WT. They have stated unequivocally that "it is SOLELY in association with God's earthly organization that we can possibly survive into the coming New Order." That is what this point is discussing. Any day now some Moslem child in Bangladesh (which had 1 Witness going to 72 million Moslem doors last time I checked) who has never heard of the Watchtower organization will be killed by your "god of love" for not being a member. And you, as a Jehovah's Witness are expected to look forward to this day with joy!
4. That it is a requirement to "hate" and "shun" those Witnesses who have come to disagree with one or more of the Watchtower doctrines (i.e. "apostates").
Hate is not the correct word to use here. We do not hate anyone (at least I do not). However, shun is correct 2 Tim 2:16-19, ESPECIALLY 19; Deut 29:18; 1John 2:18,19; 2 Pet 2:1-3, 15-22
Again, you are at odds with the WT, which orders its followers to "HATE" apostates (see my
online Love Course for proof).
So, why aren't you shunning me, then? I'm an apostate (and damn proud of it). The WT says you're not supposed to speak to me, doesn't that cover writing to me as well?
5. That it could ever be the "loving" thing to Disfellowship a woman for having been raped and having failed to scream.
I know absolutely nothing about this case. Send me some proof of this
See my online Love Course where this is detailed.
6. That women are inferior to men and must be "submissive" and "subject" to men.
1 Pet 3:5 and 6 and let us not forget 7; Eph 5:22,23
Quoting these verses only proves that the men who wrote them were narrow-minded idiots. Today, we know that women are superior to men in every way (see my online novel
Falling in Truth on this).
7. That only Watchtower publications should be read. (And, along the same lines: that the Internet should be avoided for fear of finding sites such as mine.)
I read other magazines as well depending on their content. That the Internet be avoided is ridiculous. However, again depending on the content, bad Internet sites (and we know there are many) should be avoided if you are a Christian
Once again, you are at odds with the WT. I'm glad that you are, but it's ironic that you go around distributing the WT when there is so much you fundamentally disagree with in its contents.
8. That there is a special group of men who know more about the unknowable than anyone else.
I do not understand this statement. I'll just refer to Matt 24:45; Dan 12:3; Rev 14:3 What does these
scriptures mean to you?
My statement is referring to the Governing Body which claims to have the sole pipeline of truth from God. Spiritual matters cannot be sensed by any of our five senses (the only way we have of perceiving, and hence knowing anything). Therefore spiritual matters are unknowable by definition. We merely accept what others have told us about life after death, and heaven, for instance (since you have to die, according to the beliefs, in order to obtain first-hand "experience" of them). It is ridiculous to contend that anyone knows more about the unknowable than anyone else (since it is unknowable). Yet, this is a fundamental WT doctrine: they know more than anyone else, and we're supposed to "avoid independent thinking", believing whatever they make up.
What do I think those Scriptures mean? Jesus reputedly told a parable. The interpretation is not recorded. You could take it to mean anything you wanted. Unscrupulous individuals have tried to persuade the gullible that the parable is about themselves.
If you add up 12 groups of ORANGES, do you end up with a total number of APPLES?
Revelation is a "book of symbols". The 144,000 are made up of 12,000 from each "tribe of Israel". Are these tribes literal tribes of Israel, or are they symbolic of "spiritual Israel"?
If you add up 12 SYMBOLIC groups do you arrive at a LITERAL sum? (Recall your answer about the apples and oranges, above).
I go into more details on the 144,000 in my online article
"Why Not be a Jehovah's Witness" to which I would refer you.
As for Daniel, it sounds to me like the ranting of a lunatic (similar to Revelation). I wouldn't base my life around it without first finding out where the Bible came from, who wrote it and why, and how its individual books came to be voted as "God's Word". The truth is: no one knows who the writers were (other than that they weren't written by their claimed authors), and the various books were voted on by anonymous Catholics in the fourth century (amidst an abundance of political bickering and physical violence). This is the same Catholic Church which the WT says is a false religion, yet they base their religion on its cannon (minus the Apocrypha -- which was voted out by another false religion: the Protestants).
But, here are some Scriptures for you: Mt. 7:15-20; 24:11. Please tell me what you would expect to see in an organization which fulfilled this Scripture. Would it make prophecies that turned out to be false? Would it mislead many by harmful doctrines ("evil fruit") which would cost its members their very lives? Does this sound like any organization you've ever heard of???
9. That telling lies is okay if it furthers what they call "truth".
Telling lies OK? Of course not. I am not going to bother to even address this.
Well, you don't get off that easy; the WT has addressed it. They say that "pious lies" which further the truth are strategically acceptable. They even have a Biblical precedent in Jehovah (who sent a "lying spirit" to lie to Ahab 1 Ki. 22:20-23) and in Paul who admitted to lying in order to further his message (Rom. 3:7). Of course, even if they hadn't addressed it, their actions have spoken loudly on this subject. They let lies stand in the 1975 Yearbook without correction after I pointed them out. They told me to keep quiet about them in order not to interfere with their spreading of "the truth"!!!
So, once again, you disagree with a fundamental operating principle of the WT, and you are on my side. You are an "apostate" without realizing it! Welcome to the club!
10. That Witnesses are obligated to "obey" the Watchtower organization and accept what they teach without question.
I do not because of Acts 17:10 and 11
Good for you! Score another one for us apostates!
11. That pedophiles should not be reported to the authorities unless there are two or more witnesses.
This is also ridiculous, you always have the authorities INVESTIGATE any CLAIM of pedophilia to see if the claim is valid. If it is the person SHOULD BE PROSECUTED. The congregation will not take action unless there is 2 or more witnesses or if the person get convicted and/or prosecuted. (You do realize that there are sometimes false accusation) therefore, you cannot disfellowship anyone just because of one person's claim with no evidence to back it up. This does not minimize the act however, and people who
engage in this do have to answer to god for what they have done. Again, a person is disfellowshipped if the person get investigated and prosecuted. Any other statement about this is completely false.
You say it is ridiculous, but then you skirt around the issue. You say the elders will only act if the person is prosecuted (or there are 2 or more witnesses). The point at issue is exactly that! The elders do not act when a single child reports abuse. That is the issue. It should be a crime. I would like to see such "elders" thrown into prison for not reporting such claims to the authorities. Their sin of omission could allow the abuse to continue. Yes, there are false accusations, but that is for the authorities to determine, not the mindless robots in a Kingdom Hall (who are discouraged from "independent thinking" you'll recall).
P., please wake up, or I'm not going to waste any more of my time on you. Sorry to be so blunt, but I gave up this nonsense long ago, and I don't want to devote my life to repeating the same points over and over to people who just can't get it. Even when I was at Bethel, in the midst of the constant brainwashing, I was able to break free once I saw the facts that I have already presented to you. Granted, I had a traumatic emotional experience at the same time (my sister was unjustly disfellowshipped). As I've said before, I think it may take such an experience to jar the brainwashed mind. When and if you have that experience, hopefully some of what I've written to you will come to mind and you will find solace in knowing that the organization never was what it claimed to be. You won't have to feel the sense of loss and desperation I felt when I left (still believing the organization was what it claimed to be.) At that time, please feel free to write to me again if I can help you integrate back into the real world in any way.
Best regards,
Steve
You said:
> I guess, then,
> you're now saying that
> their lying was not "deliberate". Well, motive is
> difficult to prove.
What I said is that they have always pointed out past
error. In you mind they are deliberate lies. Let's
just agree to disagree on that because as you said,
Motive is difficult to prove.
You said:
> (Either way, I wouldn't
> trust them with Biblical interpretation.)
>
Well, I do. We just have to agree to disagree on this
as well.
You said:
>
> If I had not had the operation, I would be in agony today.
Before you said you would have died, now you said that
you would be in agony. Never mind the watchtower,
YOUR credibility is in question now.
You Said:
> This is what you are asking me to
> accept as "truth": that
> pain and suffering are good, and saving life is
> evil. That is a skewed view
> of life if there ever was one.
I made no such claim, again read the scriptures.
>
> You said: please take the "Blood Course" on my website.
> It should prove enlightening. It also explains the real meaning of "abstain from blood".
Now here we are playing with words, I would rather
believe what is in the "English dictionary" than
believe what is on your website.
You said:
>"Why do they allow Witnesses to have fractionated human blood and whole cow's blood
> transfused? Those actions are certainly 'taking blood into your body'.
To me abstain mean abstain, again the bible is what I go by.
You said:
> The WT's "truth for its time" kills its
> members. And you are out there trying to rope other
> unsuspecting dupes into this same trap. I couldn't
> live with that. How can you live with that?
>
Easily, you have a very limited perception of things,
that is why I believe you "thinking ability" is very
off. (Again, this is my opinion). Everyday we humans
do, say, and promote things that COULD lead to our
deaths, from driving a car to what we eat. Unless you
are willing to explore with me everything that
everyone says (including the things you say) that can
lead to one's death, I would be more willing to trust
the things you say. You still do not want to discuss
your beliefs with me other than what the Watchtower is
or is not doing.
Now, I have answered your points one by one using
scriptures. Now if you do not believe the scriptures,
be honest and let me know.
You said:
> I have read the Bible cover-to-cover twice,
> and studied it for years. I never came across any
> Scripture stating that some organization would be
> judged in 1919 for determining that Christ's
> presence would start in 1914. Where is that Scripture again?
Matt 24:45, and 46. You have yet to tell me who you
think these scripture apply to, nor have you given me
any of you interpretations of any of the scriptures I
brought out in my last e-mail. Now, I have told you I
am about what God's word says. I have shown you
scriptures to back up what I BELIEVE! Let me know
where you stand or the Bible or God himself for that
matter.
You said:
> There is no such thing as a "faithful
> and discreet slave class". The reason: the WT made it
> up. The Bible does not speak of such
> a "class". It doesn't say it was a prophecy, but
> rather a parable. You could make it mean anything you wanted
Of course you can make any scripture mean anything. I
base my belief on what I believe the scriptures say.
Using this line of reasoning that you use can disprove
anything but the bottom line is that it is that what i
have been taught make perfectly good sense to me. If
you have your own way of rationalizing what you
believe that fine with me. But I will continue to put
my faith in the knowledge that I have received from
the bible.
You said:
> Yes, we have different mindsets on
> spiritual matters: you hang on the words of a lying
> organization and false prophet as your source of your
> spiritual truth, while I do not.
>
Again, I have stated scripturally my beliefs. If you
do not want to accept that, then so be it. I do not
view you or your beliefs with the hatefulness you
believe in mine. Just know that I have made a sound
decision. No one as forced me to become a witness and
no one if forcing me to stay one. I am very happy and
content about where I am in life. These CLAIMS that
you make I hear all the time. Know one thing, I will
keep on reading my bible and pray that my
understanding of it will indeed increase.
You are entitled to your viewpoint on the bible, god,
and the watchtower. But you have to give the same
respect from those who do not believe what YOU
believe.
You said:
> Who says that the Christian Congregation is
> supposed to operate in semi-darkness, gullibly
> swallowing every new half-baked notion shoved down
> its throat by an organization that has proven
> totally unreliable and deadly?
> Where is that written in the Bible?
Again, chrisian congregation operating in
"Semi-Darkness?, swallowing what? I do not phathom any
of this.
As soon as you start to reason on the scriptures, we
really part ways not only in our beliefs but also our
thinking. Again, I am totally happy and content in
the things I believe and the way I think. If you are
the same. I am will to accept that.
If you want to make headway with me, we really need to
talk scriptures only and leave religious organizations
alone. I see that you are happy and content in
tearing down the watchtower and if you feel that is
you god-given mission in life. "Go for it". Just
understand I do not share in that mission and only
time will tell which one of our views is closest to
the "absolute truth" because as another one of my
beliefs, the bible teaches us that one day the whole
earth will be filled with the knowledge of Jehovah as
the sands cover the sea. I think it will be a very
interesting conversation then (Hope you and I will be
there). Until then I think that our goals and
interests are very different. So keep writing me and
I will keep writing you. To put our thoughts down on
writing is a great gift that Jehovah has given us.
PS I am still waiting to here your thoughts on the
scriptures in my last e-mail. Write me with you
thoughts on all the ones you have not done so already.
I still cannot gauge you belief in god or his word.
Please use scriptures to expound on your belief and I
will do the same since I rely on that form of
knowledge. HAVE A GREAT DAY STEVE!
P.,
You said:
"Before you said you would have died, now you
said that you would be in agony. Never mind the watchtower, YOUR credibility is
in question now."
Wow, is this ironic! You swallow lies from the Watchtower without blinking, but you comb my writing for any apparent contradictions! Please re-read and try not to deliberately misunderstand. What I said was if I hadn't had a transfusion with the operation I would be dead now (due to loss of blood during the operation). If I hadn't had the operation at all, I wouldn't have died from that: I would just be in pain.
Is this how well you listened at your medical conference?
"Never mind the Watchtower's credibility" just because you misunderstood me?? I don't think we can let them off that easily. We haven't misunderstood them: we have their words in black and white, and we can see the contradictions and how they later said that there were no adjustments at all! Can this be reconciled? No, it cannot.
"Russell claimed to be the Faithful & Wise Servant."
"Russell never claimed to be the Faithful & Wise Servant."
Are both of the above statements true? According to the Watchtower (which has "never had an adjustment" in its viewpoint) they are both true. According to REALITY they cannot POSSIBLY both be true, and whoever wrote the second statement was either an idiot or a deliberate liar. Take your pick, but I think any sensible person would want nothing to do with either possibility.
If you didn't want to talk about the Watchtower, then why did you write to me in the first place, claiming that their definition of "truth" was wrong?
You say I haven't addressed your Scriptures. I beg to disagree. I have commented on your Scriptures. Haven't you been paying attention? You're the one who has failed to address the Scriptures I alluded to dealing with false prophets.
You said I have a very limited perception of things and my thinking ability is off. That is another ironic statement coming from a person who has dedicated his life to a lying organization whose lies have killed its members. Can we excuse this by saying "every day we do, say, and promote things that COULD lead to our deaths"? Of course not! If I yell, "Fire!" in a crowded theater (as a prank when there is no fire) and in the panicked rush for the exits a child is trampled to death, can I excuse it by nonchalantly saying, "Oh, well: everyday people say things that could lead to our deaths"? Can't you see how totally absurd such a defense is? This is sheer sophistry, the kind the WT pumps out in buckets. They have a multi-million dollar publishing empire flooding the world with their propaganda, and for those in need of certain types of medical care, it has been just as deadly as my yelling "fire!" Their lies have caused people to die. Think about that, and then think about that again. They are accountable, and so are you, if you distribute their literature.
I look back now at when I was a Witness, and believe me, I am astonished at how narrow-minded I was. "Limited perception"? That's what I left behind at Bethel, and I've been expanding my perception ever since. To imagine that I once thought a particular group of old men in Brooklyn were going to rule over the earth, and had a monopoly on truth! P., if you only knew: one of us does indeed have a limited perception. I feel for you because I know you are suffering from mind control.
I said the same thing back in my Witness days: "I'm not brainwashed, I'm here of my own volition, and I only accept what is true and verifiable from the Bible". You cannot see that you're brainwashed while you're in that condition. People can prove that the cult is lying to you and has dangerous life-threatening beliefs, and you will still come up with the programmed response in their defense.
The Scriptures you quoted do not say anything about 1914 or 1919. They do not say anything about an organization being judged. The Bible does not say anything about Rutherford's conventions (not even in the symbolism of Revelations). It doesn't say a word about celebrating birthdays, organ transplants, vaccinations, or masturbation. Not one word. Even back 100 years ago, Biblical scholars knew this. But the Watchtower created its own laws about these things, some of which carry (or did carry) disfellowshipping consequences. On what authority did they do this? The Bible says not to add any laws to it (Deuteronomy 4:2) yet they have added plenty of laws. They have behaved just like the Pharisees whom Jesus condemned for the "making of many laws" while totally missing the spirit of love.
You said: "Of course you can make any scripture mean anything." Now you're starting to get it! You can even make a parable about an individual into a prophecy about your group (if you have a group that you want people to think is foretold in the Bible).
In regards to "abstain from blood", you said: "Now here we are playing with words,I would rather believe what is in the "English dictionary" than believe what is on your website." So you are answering my argument without even hearing it, and so you are missing the point. The Bible says to abstain from lots of things that I'll bet you don't abstain from. It doesn't matter what the dictionary definition of the word "abstain" is in those cases, does it? This is a case of "Limited perception" at work again.
You said: "Now if you do not believe the scriptures, be honest and let me know." It's obvious you haven't been paying attention again, and you have not visited my website (where I have referred you many times in our discussion for a complete representation of my views on these matters).
You said: "I do not view you or your beliefs with the hatefulness you believe in mine. Just know that I have made a sound decision."
Well, my "beliefs" don't cause anyone to die. I do hate beliefs which do.
P., you have NOT made a "sound decision"; you have been roped into a mind-controlling, dangerous cult. And I know that I have been beating my head against a brick wall because of that. I know exactly where you're at: I was once there myself. I am not mad at you. I am just frustrated, because I have done all I can to show you the truth about this organization, and I know you cannot see it, and you'll go on wasting your life and possibly roping others into the narrow confines of the Watchtower religion, when there is so much more to life.
I already know all of your programmed responses. I don't need to hear them again; and it's clear that you are not able to hear the truth yet. I wish you all the best, but please don't write to me again unless you have a change of heart.
--Steve
|
|