Elitism and the "Final Solution"

by Norm 8 Replies latest jw friends

  • Norm
    Norm

    Many of mankind’s most infamous leaders have had as their central idea that in order to ”solve” whatever they have perceived as mankind’s problems can be solved by genocide. One of the best know in our time is Adolf Hitler.

    He followed an old European/Biblical tradition of blaming the Jew’s for all the problems facing the German people and the world. Exterminating the Jew’s would bring on a “New Order” with a thousand year reign of prosperity cleaned of Jew’s and sub human people like the Slav’s of Eastern Europe.

    This thinking was based on the idea that there existed a superior race and in order for that race to get anywhere the other ones had to be exterminated or made slaves.

    Pol Pot, the Cambodian revolutionary had an another brand of elitism that was based on another concept, he proposed the idea that if you could wipe out all the educated people, life would be much better for the Cambodian people.

    Other’s have based their elitism along political lines, based on the concept that only one particular political view is acceptable and those not subscribing to it must be either converted or die.

    This latest one reminds us about the religious area where Christianity itself is based on the elitism of religious orthodoxy. Only those who belong to the Christian faith has the right to exist so you have to convert of die, which of course make’s the Christian religion into the basically evil force it is.

    As this isn’t enough that religion has been divided among itself by thousands of splinter group which all insist on possessing the ONLY “truth” and that everybody else has to conform or die. One such movement is the Watchtower Society. They have reached such an advanced stage of religious elitism that they already now can tell us who is unworthy of existence:

    *** w53 2/1 85 Deliverance to a Righteous World ***
    Jehovah uses his organization to effect deliverance, and one’s being delivered depends on his relationship to God and to God’s organization. To many this may seem a narrow view of matters, yet we cannot condemn as unthinkably narrow what Jehovah provides for our deliverance. (Matt. 7:13, 14) We must seek deliverance on God’s terms.

    Here we are told that the only chance any human being have for a future existence is to join the Watchtower organization. To make matters worse, being a member in this life saving organization isn’t quite enough, loafers and loiterers will be smoked out, so get out there and “place” Watchtower literature:

    *** w53 4/1 220 "Do Not Loiter at Your Business" ***
    20 Loafers, beware! There are still a few who associate with the organization who claim they are in the truth, yet they have no works to prove it. If they ever had any faith it is now dead. (Jas. 2:14-26) In their dedication vows to Jehovah they said they would go to work in his vineyard, but they never did. Now Jehovah blesses those that go, not the sluggards who say they will go to work but fail to do so. “As vinegar to the teeth, and as smoke to the eyes, so is the sluggard to those who send him on an errand.” Let such heed the warning: No loitering allowed in the theocratic organization! If you will not work you shall not eat.

    In such organization there is a strong longing back to the good old day’s where one could deal with such “elements” in a truly theocratic way and exterminate them forthwith after a brief “trial” in the city gate:

    *** w52 11/15 703 Questions from Readers ***
    We are not living today among theocratic nations where such members of our fleshly family relationship could be exterminated for apostasy from God and his theocratic organization, as was possible and was ordered in the nation of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai and in the land of Palestine. “Thou shalt surely kill him; thy hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him to death with stones, because he hath sought to draw thee away from Jehovah thy God, . . . And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is in the midst of thee.”—Deut. 13:6-11, AS.
    Being limited by the laws of the worldly nation in which we live and also by the laws of God through Jesus Christ, we can take action against apostates only to a certain extent, that is, consistent with both sets of laws. The law of the land and God’s law through Christ forbid us to kill apostates, even though they be members of our own flesh-and-blood family relationship. However, God’s law requires us to recognize their being disfellowshiped from his congregation, and this despite the fact that the law of the land in which we live requires us under some natural obligation to live with and have dealings with such apostates under the same roof.

    *** w61 10/1 597 Prophesying with the Loyal Organization ***
    In ancient theocratic Israel such false prophets were to be tried before witnesses, exposed and stoned to death. (Deut. 13:1-11) Today the true Christian congregation may not enforce such a death penalty for prophets of deception who try to induce disloyalty to God and his kingdom. But the congregation can give them a spiritual smiting or striking with the truth of God’s Word, even wounding them sorely at heart and in spirit.
    26 The very ones who have intensely loved them must strike and wound them in order to demonstrate their own principled loyalty to God and to his organization and to safeguard his loyal visible organization.

    Unfortunately because of the Satanic sissy democracies and humanist wimps the wonderful rule of God cannot be acted out as ordained by the almighty. That severely hampers the theocratic organization in Brooklyn to limit their sanctions to hating and shunning those who disagree with their views. This is what happens when people are in such a grip of religious delusion:

    *** w81 5/1 17 If God Has an Organization, What Is It? ***
    3 Let the honest-hearted person compare the kind of preaching of the gospel of the Kingdom done by the religious systems of Christendom during all the centuries with that done by Jehovah’s Witnesses since the end of World War I in 1918. They are not one and the same kind. That of Jehovah’s Witnesses is really “gospel,” or “good news,” as of God’s heavenly kingdom that was established by the enthronement of his Son Jesus Christ at the end of the Gentile Times in 1914.

    Any “honest hearted” person who has actually bothered to make such an investigation has of course quite soon discovered what a complete sham and house of cards both the Watchtower Society and the Christian religion are. But this doesn’t stop superstitious and delusional people from making condemnations and judgements upon people who do not share their own particular superstition and insanity:

    *** w85 9/1 24 God's Ministers Prove Their Qualification ***
    13 Since the end of World War I, Jehovah’s Witnesses have asked Christendom’s clergy: ‘Are the catastrophic events that have afflicted our earth from 1914 onward a fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy at Matthew 24:3-13?’ If those clerics honestly said yes, they would have to admit that Jesus Christ came into his heavenly Kingdom in 1914.

    *** w85 9/1 25 God's Ministers Prove Their Qualification ***
    15 So Christendom’s clergy refuse to take a stand for Jehovah’s Kingdom by Jesus Christ. For failing to support it, they will be destroyed in the “great tribulation” just ahead.



    What do such supremely hypocritical “true believers” say when they are confronted with their bigoted “holier than thou” attitudes? Then we get the tolerant “window dressing” version which is aimed at making their raving lunacy a little bit more edible, at least of the surface:
    "It is good for all of us to resist any inclination to act as judges, recognizing that in the final analysis, Jehovah’s judgment by means of Jesus Christ is what counts."—Questions From Readers,
    The Watchtower, 1993 5/15: 31

    Don’t be fooled by such mealy mouthed phrases. According to the Bible, Jesus wasn’t a very tolerant man at all, he was just as much a “true believer” as his adherents. If you didn’t buy his version of reality, you aren’t qualified to exist anyway. So what’s new?

    Norm.

  • patio34
    patio34

    Thanks Norm,
    I always benefit from your posts. As someone posted lately, who needs to read 'apostate' stuff? They hang themselves with their own rope.

    Pat

  • mommy
    mommy

    Norm,
    That was great, thank you for posting. I really have nothing to add to this You always say it all. I wanted to bring this back up so others can read.
    wendy

  • GinnyTosken
    GinnyTosken

    Norm,

    Reading your post about the "theocratic way," I couldn't help but think of something I read in a book about the utopian community founded at Oneida, New York by John Humphrey Noyes in the 1840s. This sounded very familiar:

    Acknowledging that the Community was not to be a democracy, its members voted unanimously for the "theocratic" government of John Noyes. He allowed no opposition to his doctrines or to his organization of the three households.

    Any in the community who acted without the approval of John Noyes were expelled.

    You Know unwittingly echoed sentiments similar to John Noyes when in the "Where do you go to die?" thread, he said, "That's the beauty of the Bible, that people can read it from cover to cover, many times over, and still not get the sense of it." John Noyes put it this way:

    "There is an expungable propensity to stick to the letter and come short of the spirit. What better way, then, would there be than [for God] to give men a Bible full of real inspiration, but very imperfect in externals?" The Bible is not "in itself a revelation to men," but needs the interpretation of inspired men to reveal the truth. Noyes saw this as his function. By the exercise of his own intelligence, with God's inspiration, he sought to discover the Bible's meaning for his generation.

    John Noyes was mild compared to "inspired" leaders who advocated genocide--he only advocated what he called "complex marriage," in which Christians truly shared everything, including sexual partners.

    One theocracy will disfellowship you if you have sex with someone who is not your spouse; another theocracy will expel you if you don't have sex with someone who is not your spouse. Each provide scriptural reasons. I'm so confused. :)

    Ginny

  • MacHislopp
    MacHislopp

    Hello Norm,

    as usual a very good research.

    The best way to deal with those who do not accept " your words,
    your statements " is to present what they themselves have said,
    written and published all over.

    Thanks again, agape J.C.MacHislopp

    P.S. My favorite:

    "It is good for all of us to resist any inclination to act as judges, recognizing that in the final analysis, Jehovah’s judgment by means of Jesus Christ is what counts."—Questions From Readers,
    The Watchtower, 1993 5/15: 31
  • Tina
    Tina

    Great post Norm! Thanks,hugs,Tina

    Carl Sagan on balancing openness to new ideas with skeptical scrutiny...."if you are open to the point of gullibility and have not an ounce of skeptical sense,you cannot distinguish useful ideas from worthless ones."

  • GinnyTosken
    GinnyTosken

    I’ve been sorting through my old JW books and found one published in 1951, What Has Religion Done for Mankind?. Skimming through it, a few sections caught my eye.

    The Society’s comments about the dangers of the totalitarian “red religion” of communism are hilarious, since they apply to the Society itself. Substitute Russell, Rutherford, Knorr, and Franz for Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, and Brooklyn for Moscow, and voila! From the chapter, “Red Religion and the Lawless Man”:

    One totalitarian system fears another such. One modern development that has thoroughly frightened the totalitarian religious system of the pope, yes, and all Christendom too, has been the rise of totalitarian political power in Eastern Europe. . . .

    Because they deny his existence, the Reds may deny they worship the Devil. But they have set up a state religion by requiring the people to give their unquestioning obedience to the political state as their highest counselor, guide, provider and protector. In this they attribute to the state what really belongs to the living and true God, Jehovah. For him they have substituted a man-made visible organization. . . . As its Holy Scriptures Communism has the writings of Marx, Engels, Lenin, and Stalin, who are spoken of as inspired writers. “Inspired” by whom?

    Carrying our comparison farther, we note that Communism has its missionaries . . . It has its priesthood or hierarchy, that Politburo with all its lesser orders of functionaries for the guidance of the people in Communist orthodoxy and with power to demand and hear confessions and to issue excommunications, to forbid heretical literature and to censor and expurgate books, magazines, movies, stage plays, poetic and musical compositions. It has its shrines and pilgrimages. Moscow parallels the Mohammedan Mecca.
    [bolding mine]
    pp. 317-318

    I was also rather shocked to discover that the Society evidently still believed in 1951 that African-Americans were a race cursed by God:

    The infant Krishna, or black god, is represented in India at the breast of the goddess Devaki and is shown with woolly hair and marked Negro features. How well this matches Nimrod who was the son of Cush, whose name means “black”!
    p. 194

    In a chapter called, “Compromise with Demonism a Snare,” the Society explains that when you know you have the truth, killing those who don’t believe as you do is not genocide or intolerance:

    [Previous paragraph quotes Deuteronomy 7:1-5, about how the Israelites shall utterly destroy the Canaanites.]

    But was this not the rankest kind of religious intolerance as well as genocide? Is this not the kind of intolerance that is practiced in lands today under totalitarian and dictatorial rule? Not at all! This was the divine command and it was in favor of keeping the pure religion alive in the land God gave. The pure and the false could not exist side by side without hurt to his people and danger to their opportunity for eternal life in the new world. They had agreed to worship only Jehovah as God, and he was giving them the Promised Land to possess. Hence he had the sovereign right to determine what should be done to demon religion in the land. . . .

    Hence the extermination of the demon worshipers in the Promised Land was no case of religious intolerance. It was not an authorizing of them to go outside the God-given land and invade the outside worldly nations and destroy their idols and wipe out their false religion and all those who practiced it. Neither is this any Scriptural basis for the Roman Catholic religion to torture and kill so-called “heretics” in lands where it dominates and to forbid other religious sects to carry on there. In doing so Catholics are not copying the Israelites example. History shows that in the lands they have invaded they have not obeyed God’s commands to the Israelites to smash the idolatrous images there and to destroy the demon worshipers.
    pp. 155-157

    I was aghast that they fault the Catholics for not being harsh enough!

    Ginny

  • LDH
    LDH

    Norm, as usual brilliant piece of work.

    Ginny, your response deserves it's own thread. I can not believe I read that quote about 'some' creating a man-made organization in place of Jehovah.

    That just makes me sick to the stomach.

  • XJWBill
    XJWBill
    This latest one reminds us about the religious area where Christianity itself is based on the elitism of religious orthodoxy. Only those who belong to the Christian faith has the right to exist so you have to convert of die, which of course make’s the Christian religion into the basically evil force it is.

    You make some good points about WT hypocrisy, Norm, but Christianity as an "evil force"? I was hurt by the JW's, too, and I spent a long time afterwards as an atheist/agnostic, so I can understand your feeling bitter towards religion, any religion.

    But here you are making the same colossal error of judgement that the WT does--painting everything you don't like black, deep black, wickedly and hopelessly black.

    Nope. I'm not buying it from the GB--or anyone else. Like everything else in this mortal life, the Christian religion has an admixture of good and bad, but to call it "evil" is way short of truth, good sense, or even good manners.

    Bill

    "If we all loved one another as much as we say we love God, I reckon there wouldn't be as much meanness in the world as there is."--from the movie Resurrection (1979)

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit