WTS contradicts themselves on Light

still_in74

Hey all, I posted this in another thread but thought it deserved its own.

here is a perfect example of the blatant disregard WT writers show towards previously written articles. They just write what sounds good at the time without considering the fact that they just might be actually contradicting themselves.
So here it is:

FLIP-FLOP ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(August 15, 1950, page 263) "The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers. (2 Tim. 3:16) And so, at times, it has been necessary, as understanding became clearer, to correct views. (Prov. 4:18)"

First (above) quote: Paul and bible writers are inspired...

*** w95 5/15 p. 12 Flashes of Light in Apostolic Times ***
No More Circumcision

8 A further bright flash of truth appeared in connection with the question of circumcision...............
9 **************This time, it was not by means of an obvious miracle that those early Christians received the light that circumcision was no longer a requirement for Jehovah’s servants. Rather, they **received that increased light by searching the Scriptures,** looking to the holy spirit for guidance, and hearing the experiences ofPeter and Paul regardingthe conversion of uncircumcised Gentiles. (Acts 15:6-21) The decision was issued in a letter that read in part: **********“The holy spirit and we ourselves********* have favored adding no further burden to you, except these necessary things, to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication.” (Acts 15:28, 29) The early Christians were thus set free from the command to practice circumcision and from the other requirements of the Mosaic Law. Hence, Paul could tell the Galatian Christians: “For such freedom Christ set us free.”—Galatians 5:1.

Second quote: THESE bible writers are not inspired, but rather look to the HS for guidance and search the scriptures reading the experiences of Paul.

So what is the WTS/GB saying here? Why would they state this? Because this implies that bible teachings were revealed in the same manner as WTS "Light".

Thus drawing a parallel between the "first century GB" and the "modern day GB"

logic&reason

A couple of years ago, I dug up some of the old references stating that the GB was not infallible. I looked it up because another JW relative and I were arguing about whether or not they were. When I pointed to the WT references, they said "Be careful... that's apostate thinking"

!!!!!!!!!!!!

I said, "BUT IT's RIGHT THERE IN THE WATCH TOWER!!!!"

I guess it's too late now. They have brainwashed everyone into thinking that they are speaking for God...

Alwayshere

I said 'BUT IT'S RIGHT THERE IN THE WATCH TOWER ! ! ! ! "

When two elders called on me,[to see what my problem was] I handed them several sheets that quoted from WTS and they said the same,"That's Apostate material." I said "And it came from the WTS." That was about 5 years ago and I haven't heard from them since.

distazo

If that about inspiration and central 'theocratic government' all were true, the first century had a 'GB' and Paul was subordinate to the apostles in Jerusalem :)

However, his own letter to Galatians strongly suggests otherwise!

1:15 But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, [even] from my mother's womb, and called me through his grace,

16 to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles; straightway I conferred not with flesh and blood:

17 neither went I up to Jerusalem to them that were apostles before me: but I went away into Arabia; and again I returned unto Damascus.

19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

2:6 But from those who were reputed to be somewhat (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth not man's person)-- they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me:

So, to the GB guidelines, is anyone who does not _first_ be in line with the GB, an apostate. Paul must have been an apostate then :).

lost-in-time

So, to the GB guidelines, is anyone who does not _first_ be in line with the GB, an apostate. Paul must have been an apostate then :).

Nooo, check this! WT 2008 05 15 page 24:

ldrnomo

JWD ROCKS

Like Bill O'Rielly says

"THE SPIN STOPS HERE"

IT Support

still_in74,

(August 15, 1950, page 263) "The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers. (2 Tim. 3:16) And so, at times, it has been necessary, as understanding became clearer, to correct views. (Prov. 4:18)"

I hope you don't mind me mentioning that the above quote is not from the 1950 Watchtower, but from The Watchtower, 15 February 1981, p 19.

Interestingly, however, along similar lines, The Watchtower, August 15, 1950, page 263 does make an interesting comment:

However, The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances, nor is it dogmatic. It invites careful and critical examination of its contents in the light of the Scriptures.

Not "dogmatic" ... ? Ha, who are they trying to fool?!

And are they perhaps telling little 'porky pies' when they say they 'invite critical examination' of their publications ... ?

WTWizard

The Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger doesn't really know what they are talking about. So they make things up as they go, reacting to events that fail to take place. Then they have to make up new ones, and when those go bust, they continually have to make up more lies. No wonder they are not inspired by anything but the desire to get more people in, and to start the Second Dark Ages.

Terry

About the circumcision issue..........

Gentiles were never required to be circumcised to be viewed as righteous.

Gentiles were only required to follow the Laws of the Sons of Noah (aka Noahide Laws.)

Gentiles who wished to convert to Judaism--were required to become circumcised.

See the difference?

Christianity---at one point in time---was simply a continuation of Judaism.

Next, it was something ELSE.

When Jersualem was destroyed by the Romans because of the uprisings of Jewish rebels---it became very important to DISAMBIGUATE the differences between Judaism and Christianity.

The tone of the later Gospels took on a decidedly anti-Jewish rhetoric.

Paul didn't really care about requiring Gentiles to be circumcised because he was not propagating JUDAISM!

To blur the factors involved in his consultations with Jersalem's "elite" is destructive to the honest evaluation of his purposes.