The Witnesses often claim that they are the true religion. That there existence has fulfilled bible prophesy and bible chronology. Obviously then, there version of the bible (the NWT) and how they defend the bible is important to their claims. In our modern times, living in the “information age” as we do, the bible has been under close scrutiny and investigation. Logical questions have been asked, inconsistencies have been identified, contradictions exposed. But for most theistic believers, they continue to exercise their faith. How do JW’s show that the bible is the literal word of god?
One argument is the “honesty of the bible writers.” Instead of trying to cover up mistakes and wrongdoing, the bible is 100% honest and forthcoming. Consider the following WT quotes:
Quote:
*** w98 4/1 p. 14 par. 17 A Book for All People *** 17 Honest writers would record not just successes but also failures, not just strengths but also weaknesses. The Bible writers displayed such refreshing candor. Consider, for example, the forthrightness of Moses. Among the things he frankly reported were his own lack of eloquence, which in his view made him unfit to be Israel’s leader (Exodus 4:10); the serious mistake he made that prevented his entering the Promised Land (Numbers 20:9-12; 27:12-14); the deflection of his brother, Aaron, who cooperated with rebellious Israelites in making a statue of a golden calf (Exodus 32:1-6); the rebellion of his sister, Miriam, and her humiliating punishment (Numbers 12:1-3, 10); the profaneness of his nephews Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10:1, 2); and the repeated complaining and murmuring of God’s own people. (Exodus 14:11, 12; Numbers 14:1-10) Does not such frank, open reporting indicate a sincere concern for truth? Since the Bible writers were willing to report unfavorable information about their loved ones, their people, and even themselves, is there not good reason to trust their writings?
And this one:
Quote:
*** ba pp. 15-16 Can This Book Be Trusted? *** ) The serious mistakes of King David were not covered over but were committed to writing—and that while David was still ruling as king. (2 Samuel, chapters 11 and 24) Matthew, writer of the book bearing his name, tells how the apostles (of which he was one) disputed over their personal importance and how they abandoned Jesus on the night of his arrest. (Matthew 20:20-24; 26:56) The writers of the letters of the Christian Greek Scriptures freely acknowledged the problems, including sexual immorality and dissensions, in some of the early Christian congregations. And they did not mince words in addressing those problems.—1 Corinthians 1:10-13; 5:1-13.
Surely then, the true religion that claims the bible is 100% inspired would be obligated to follow the example of the bible in this way. They should then deal with their own shortcomings and acknowledge their specific mistakes, and to quote their own words "freely acknowledged the problems, including sexual immorality and dissensions." Do they do this? Or do they cover up and whitewash their history?
There are many unpleasant personal episodes regarding the first 2 Presidents of the WTBTS, CT Russell, and JF Rutherford. Russells divorce is glossed over, even though there is a lot of evidence that he was at the very least a flirt, if not an outright adulterer. The "miracle wheat" controversy, where he made through the pages of the WT wild claims regarding some hybrid wheat that out of the goodness of his heart he was willing to sell to the brethern below cost is certainly embarassing for a man that supposedly Jehovah saw fit to entrust the revivial of true worship in our day.
Rutherford was even worse. Putting aside the "hostile takeover" of the Society in 1917 that he pulled, he was without a doubt a one man dictator, a verbally abusive despot. No governing body was around or even sniffed power while he was alive. He was against prohibition because he drank heavily as an alcoholic. He had illegal booze smuggled into Bethel. He built a San Diego mansion during the Great Depression where he lived and ruled Bethel from. He was in constant attendance by younger women. It was well known but covered over fact that he was a fornicator. He slept around, had sex, etc etc etc.
In an little publicized event, the Society's lawyer during the 1930's was a man named Olin Moyle. He wrote a private letter to Rutherford in 1939 expressing his displeasure at Rutherfords drinking and verbal abuse. Rutherfords response was to kick Moyle out and through the pages of the WT, warn the brethern that Moyle was essentially a trouble making apostate. (*** dx30-85 Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania *** warning letter from board of directors regarding O. R. Moyle: w39 316-17) Moyle rightly filed a libel suit against the Society that was settled in 1943.
My question: Does the governing body today, or at any time in their existence, acknowledge these problems, mistakes, sins, and dissensions as they claim the bible does?
Most troubling are the sexual sins of the GB. Two of their number, Ewart Chitty and Leo Greenlees were both found to be homosexuals. Chitty was sent back to his native Britain in 1979 and not disfellowshipped. His needs were payed and cared for by the Society until his death. Greenlees in late 1983 was found to have for decades seduced new boy bethelites into homosexual relationships. Surely he should have been disfellowshipped. But he wasn't. He was sent to New Orleans where he was made a Special Pioneer on the infirmed list. His basic needs were still payed and cared for by the Society until his death in 1989.
My question: Does the governing body today, or at any time in their existence, acknowledge these problems, mistakes, sins, and dissensions as they claim the bible does?
The pedophile issue? Barabara Anderson knows of their database file with over 20,000 sexual predators within their midst. The Society's answer? Instead of turning these sicko's over to the authorities, they disfellowship her and Bruce Bowen. They are apostates because they didn't play by the rules the governing body sent. No bible law or principle was broken. They were disfellowshipped to limit their ability to expose the pedophile problem within the Witness organization.
My question: Does the governing body today, or at any time in their existence, acknowledge these problems, mistakes, sins, and dissensions as they claim the bible does?
There are other things, and this post is too long as it is. But one thing is certain. The Witnesses own arguement that they use to show that the bible is true smacks them in their own face as to their claim of being the true religion. Because the true religion should (in their own words) imitate exactly the candor of the bible writers who....
Quote:
*** ba p. 16 Can This Book Be Trusted? *** The writers of the letters of the Christian Greek Scriptures freely acknowledged the problems, including sexual immorality and dissensions, in some of the early Christian congregations. And they did not mince words in addressing those problems.
Jeff