Greg Stafford says racial unity among JW's makes them God's people

by truthseeker 28 Replies latest jw friends

  • AuldSoul
    AuldSoul
    "They, by and large, promote a wholesome Christian morality."

    How can an organization that promotes lies as truth and encourages the spreading of lies be considered "moral"? Especially "moral" in any sense connected to Christ?

    1 Peter 2:21, 22
    In fact, to this [course] YOU were called, because even Christ suffered for YOU, leaving YOU a model for YOU to follow his steps closely. He committed no sin, nor was deception found in his mouth.

    Methinks Greg is another who has accepted the JW spin that molds morality into the shape of outward behavior. The organization DOES NOT promote morality. They promote behavior modification.

    As for racial unity, I know for sure it isn't present among Jehovah's Witnesses.

    Respectfully,
    AuldSoul

  • parakeet
    parakeet

    What a coincidence that in the early 20th century, when it was PC to be racist, the WTS/JWs were racist. But now that it's PC to promote racial unity, the WTS/JWs promote racial unity. It seems that Jehovah and his FDS are reacting to social change rather than taking the lead. That makes JWs slow-on-the-uptake people, not God's people.

  • chiddy
    chiddy

    When I read this stuff from G Stafford 1 phrase comes to mind , rose tinted spectacles

  • I quit!
    I quit!

    I must lead a sheltered life because I never heard of him before. My opinion is that he is either very gullible or putting spin on what he says. The whole Jehovah's name thing is quite silly because if he did a limited amount of research he would know it was an incorrectly translated name (a hybrid name) that many religious people feel the witnesses are welcome to.

    Anyone who has done any research on cults would know that it is common for cults to have 100% unity on their faulty beliefs.

    Since leaving the witnesses I have been to lots of churches of many denominations and I haven't seen one yet where race was an issue so they haven't cornered that market.

    If he believes in the Bible and undstands what it says about false prophets and has an understanding of the track record of the Watchtower and it prophecies then he would have to label them false prophets.

    I can't believe anyone would take this guy serious but I guess he feels very scholarly and important so let him have his fun.

  • Fleshybirdfodder
    Fleshybirdfodder
    Racism is rampant in that church and if you go to any congregation outside of any major city, it's friggin obvious. They just don't show it

    I agree one hundred per cent. I grew up in a small town and you wouldn't believe how bad it was. My JW mother was watching our Aunt who has Down Syndrome play in the pool with a neighbour who also has Down Syndrome. She said, "isn't it wonderful they way they have a certain way of playing? It must be like how black people feel when they get together!" I almost choked, and I know she didn't mean anything by it, but there is a definite general attitude and I found it offensive because it took on a tone of superiority over both my aunt, and people with darker skin. No matter how squeeky clean their image, a lot of "fine" young MS brothers were swapping rascist jokes and even calling their "friends" from the city the N word because "they don't mind, they think it is funny too." Whatever Greg....

    FBF

  • veradico
    veradico

    As I've read Stafford's work, I can't help but be impressed. He seems to be slowly working his way deeper and deeper into the underlying assumptions of the Jehovah's Witnesses. First, he addressed in his fair and honest fashion the teachings and practices of Jehovah's Witnesses that he felt could be defended. Then he went into that peculiarly entwined problem of a chronology (1914) being used to support a religious authority (The Faithful Slave) that then imposes all sorts of non-biblical beliefs (such as, ironically, 1914 and other dates) and practices (turning in time, ban on blood transfusions and holidays, etc.) on people.

    But he still has, as I alluded to in my earlier post, certain idols that he does not question because, as mentioned in the post on cognitive dissonance, they are cherished. He has yet to defend his conviction that God must be the personal deity called Jehovah. He has yet to defend his devotion to the particular writings he views as authoritative. If he maintains his objective interest in knowing and defending what is true, what is real, he may someday give us a work that speaks to questions of general and universal interest to people with a Western religious background. For example, can the idea of "sin" or "salvation" be defended by an honest apologist? Can an honest apologist defend the exclusive or even unique truth claims of Christianity? Can one even speak of some uniform thing called "Christianity" when one truly has a historical consciousness of all the diverse groups who have claimed that name? These are the sorts of things I'd like to see Greg move on to.

  • yaddayadda
    yaddayadda

    It seems rather bizarre that he defends so rigorously the JW's use of the name "Jehovah" as some kind of hallmark of their uniquely being true Christians, yet he also says that 'Jesus is Jehovah'????????????? To say that Jesus is Jehovah, in any sense, is anathema to JWs. But if he is actually correct that somehow Jesus became Jehovah, (despite rejecting the trinity) then surely that disproves his first point. In other words, if Jesus somehow absorbed and superceded the use of the name 'Jehovah', then surely it must be acceptable to Jehovah for persons to revere God and Jesus without any reference to Jehovah at all!!! That of course allows for true Christians to exist outside the organisation.

  • GermanXJW
    GermanXJW

    I understand from the QfR below that the Watchtower discourages interracial marriages. I also heard JW criticizing others who had spouses from other races of going against the Society's counsel:

    *** w60 7/15 pp. 447-448 Questions From Readers ***

    Is it wrong for a white person and a colored one to marry if they truly love each other? Does the Bible give any counsel in this regard?—W. M., U.S.A.

    God’s Word does not forbid marriage between the races. On the contrary, it shows that all races are related in that they all came from one man originally. (Acts 17:26) No one race is esteemed better in God’s sight than another. As the apostle Peter expressed it: "God is not partial, but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him."—Acts 10:34, 35.

    What God’s Word does command is that dedicated Christians should marry "only in the Lord." Should it happen that one or the other had been married before, it would be necessary that they be Scripturally free; either in that the mate is deceased or has been legally divorced because of adultery.—1 Cor. 7:39.

    Obviously, those who marry seek happiness. And the Scriptures indicate that a marriage or wedding should be a very happy occasion. The countless happily married couples give evidence that marriage can bring deep satisfactions, contentment and much joy. However, it also follows that due to human imperfection marriage does bring with it a certain amount of "tribulation in their flesh," as the apostle Paul terms it.—1 Cor. 7:28.

    It is quite likely that those who marry across racial lines will have more of this tribulation than will others. Christians cannot change prevailing human customs, prejudices and laws but must put up with them. They should therefore take a very realistic view of matters and recognize the added difficulties such a marriage will have to face. In many parts of the earth there is still much racial discrimination, and entering such a marriage may result in restricting the Christian’s opportunities for preaching the good news of God’s kingdom. Also, children born of such a marriage most likely will face similar added obstacles as soon as they are old enough to mingle with other children.

    Then again, the law in certain lands and states forbids interracial marriage. Since Christians must recognize Caesar’s right to regulate marriage, Christians residing in such states or lands and contemplating interracial marriage would have to move to a land or state where such marriages are legal, and it would be inadvisable for them to return to their own land or state or to go to any others having such laws.

    In view of these factors, those who contemplate such a marriage will do well to consider the step seriously. Is it truly love or chiefly physical attraction? Would it be in the best interests of both? Is this marriage the best possible solution to their problem or reason for wanting to marry? Before marriage the love between two persons may seem sufficiently strong, but is it strong enough to endure the added obstacles such a marriage brings with it? If two persons of different races decide to take such a step, no one should criticize them. The really important factors, it may not be forgotten, are those plainly stated in the Scriptures.

    *** w73 12/1 pp. 735-736 Questions From Readers ***

    What is the view of Jehovah’s witnesses toward interracial marriage?—France.

    Jehovah’s witnesses at all times seek to reflect the Biblical view of matters. The Bible does not specifically discuss interracial marriage. It does, however, show how Jehovah God views humankind and it provides guiding principles for those considering marriage.

    Superiority of race is nowhere taught or implied in the Bible. Jehovah God accepts as his approved servants people out of all races, without discrimination. The Bible tells us "[God] made out of one man every nation of men, to dwell upon the entire surface of the earth, and he decreed the appointed times and the set limits of the dwelling of men, for them to seek God, if they might grope for him and really find him." (Acts 17:26, 27) "God is not partial, but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him."—Acts 10:34, 35.

    So, the Bible nowhere implies that racial differences in themselves have anything to do with the properness of marriage. Of the remarriage of widows, the apostle Paul wrote: "A wife is bound during all the time her husband is alive. But if her husband should fall asleep in death, she is free to be married towhomshewants,onlyintheLord." (1 Cor. 7:39) Thus the Christian is free to marry anyone who is Scripturally and legally free to do so, as long as that one is truly a fellow believer.

    Are there any other factors, then, worth considering? Yes, for Christians seek to exercise good judgment and wisdom in all they do. Among other things, they are encouraged to "go on walking in wisdom toward those on the outside," those outside the Christian congregation.—Col. 4:5.

    In many areas interracial marriages are becoming increasingly common. People are traveling more, and often find the ways and customs of people of other lands attractive. War, too, has played a part, and many European and North American soldiers have married Asiatic wives. There is, then, a somewhat broadened viewpoint on the part of many toward interracial marriage.

    Nevertheless, not all persons share this broadened viewpoint, nor do all appreciate Bible standards. Many deep-seated prejudices remain in the world of mankind. A Christian, being realistic, must face life as it is—not as he wishes it might be.

    In a few places, there are even laws making interracial marriages illegal. When that is the case, Christians are under Scriptural obligation to obey them, as such laws do not make it impossible for them to worship God with "spirit and truth." (John 4:24; Rom. 13:1) Of course, if a Christian would prefer to move to a locality where such laws are not enforced, he is certainly free to do so.

    In other communities, local prejudices produce discrimination and unkind treatment toward those of certain races of mankind. These prejudices do not make interracial marriage wrong. For the discerning Christian, nonetheless, they may give cause for thought as to the advisability of such marriage. No matter what the racial backgrounds of the mates, marriage of itself requires much adjustment on the part of both persons to be successful and to bring happiness. Human imperfection causes all marriages to bring some measure of ‘tribulation in the flesh,’ as the apostle Paul wisely points out. (1 Cor. 7:28) In certain localities, where racial prejudices are strong, this could put added strain on the marital relationship and could be especially trying for any children resulting. So the Christian should give thoughtful consideration to the probable consequences before entertaining the prospect of interracial marriage.

    Persons of different races may have very similar backgrounds, culturally, socially and as to education. Or their backgrounds may be very different. Sometimes the varied habits, attitudes and customs that go with different backgrounds seem to add interest to the marriage union. Yet widely differing backgrounds, even among marriage mates of the same race, can and sometimes do give rise to problems, making marital adjustment more difficult. In making his decision, the Christian should also rightly weigh these factors—for the other person’s happiness as well as his own.

    The Christian is under obligation to proclaim the good news of the Kingdom to others. (Matt. 24:14; 28:19, 20) As a factor, then, he may consider whether or not interracial marriage is likely to create a seriously adverse effect on the attitude of the people in his community toward this Kingdom-announcement work. The examples of Christ Jesus and his apostles show that they were willing to forgo things to which they had a right rather than severely hinder persons from being receptive to the truth of God’s Word.—Rom. 15:3; 1 Cor. 10:32, 33.

    However, after weighing all these factors thoughtfully, each Christian must make his own decision—in good conscience and motivated by love for God and for his neighbor.

  • Justitia Themis
    Justitia Themis

    In Sacramento, California, during the 1970s, my sister-in-law's brother (who is white) proposed to a black sister in his congregation. They had been dating for about a year. She accepted. Her father, an elder in the congregation, refused to allow the marriage. He did not want his daughter to marry a "white boy."

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit