It's not about theology - It's about character

by LennyinBluemont 23 Replies latest jw friends

  • LennyinBluemont

    I have come to understand that people who are Jehovah’s Witnesses are for the most part, good and honest people. Just like people in other religions or for that matter, people who don’t practice any religion. And, like those other people, they also have their minority of people who are selfish, deceptive and not very nice. I know for a fact that, at least for the good and honest people who are JWs, if they could truly open their minds for even ten minutes to see just the tip of the iceberg of irrefutable evidence as to the Society’s true character, they would never again have anything to do with the organization, because they are good and honest people. If they knew what’s been going on “behind the scenes”, the true character of the Society would be revealed to them and it’s just not in them to support something like that. That’s why the Society has done absolutely everything in it’s power to keep active witnesses from finding this information and judging it for themselves.

    What is the evidence that they have deliberately taken actions to keep their membership in the dark? To begin with, the founder of the religion, Charles Taze Russell, was a prolific writer, being the creator of the Watchtower magazine and organization, primary author of the Watchtower and many books espousing his theology. Does it not seem a bit odd to you that the organization he founded, the Watchtower Society, has 1.) deliberately let all of Russell’s writings go out of print; 2.) deliberately chosen not to provide any of Russell’s writings on it’s Watchtower Library CDs (which would be easy for them to do); and 3.) will harass with threat of legal action any who seek to make public his writings? Can you think of any other religion, including Mormons or Christian Scientists, who have taken such an action? By contrast, the Mormons revere the writings of Joseph Smith and would probably preserve them at any cost.

    A few years ago an X-JW in Canada set up a website, Watchtower Quotes, which did not contain any commentary, just quotes from older Watchtower publications so that these publications would be available for research by honest-hearted ones. The Society considered this such a threat, that someone would dare to publicize articles and statements earlier published by the Watchtower Society, that they filed a lawsuit against this person. Being financially unable to defend himself in the courts, he reluctantly shut down his website, and as part of the settlement was forced to assign ownership of his domain name to the Society. If this organization publishes only the “truth”, why such “worldly” tactics of intimidation and legal threats to keep away from the eyes of its members things it earlier published? The only answer can be, because they know the devastating effect this would have on their membership should they read what these publications said. Thankfully, but no thanks to the Society, you can still locate this material to view for yourself - and judge for yourself. In truth, if you believed even half of what Charles Russell believed, as evidenced by his writings, you would be considered by the Society today to be an apostate on several counts.

    What does it say about the character of an organization that condemns other religions for their “false teachings of pagan origin” whose own founder consulted the mysteries of pyramids in arriving at his theological chronologies regarding the end of the world, a practice now regarded by this organization as “pagan” and “demonic”? What does it say about the character of an organization that continues to use legal threats and intimidation to keep hidden their own writings that would expose their longstanding hypocrisy in this matter?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that would deliberately, through many articles, books and public lectures over a period of nine years, strongly urge its members to get ready for the end of the world in 1975, encouraging them to sell their homes and businesses, put off needed medical treatment and education, and then blame its members for the “misunderstanding” and consequent hardships when their prophecy went unfulfilled?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that sets forth a policy whereby members in one country (Malawi) are forbidden to obtain a political party card (basically a citizenship card) under penalty of disfellowshipping, resulting in thousands suffering either murder, rape and/or the destruction of their homes, while at the same time, allowing members in another country (Mexico) to practice a system of bribery of public officials for years for the purpose of fomenting a lie that they had fulfilled their military service? (There are photocopies of letters from the Mexico Branch Office on this matter available for anyone to see which the Society has never challenged because they are bona fide. See “Crisis of Conscience” and “In Search of Christian Freedom” both written by a former member of the Watchtower Society’s Governing Body for nine years, Ray Franz.)

    What does it say about the character of an organization that provides annual bound volumes of “reprints” of articles published in their magazines, purportedly for “honest-hearted ones” to do research, in which they, without any warning to the reader, make material changes to what was originally published?

    What does it say about the character of an organization, that for decades preaches to its members that the United Nations is a demonic organization operating in opposition to God’s Kingdom, that no true Christian would have anything to do with it, even condemning other religions who have made positive comments about it, who then turns around, secretly, and signs documents aligning itself with the U.N. as as Non-Governmental Organization (NGO), pledging acceptance and support of the United Nations’ charter and goals and then acts in harmony with that pledge?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that will routinely disfellowship members for joining the YMCA in order to use a community swimming pool as a matter of written policy because it violates their theology of maintaining political neutrality, while at the same time secretly pledging to support a political institution of no less a stature than the United Nations itself?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that preaches to its members to “beat their swords into plowshares”, presenting itself as an organization devoted to peace, and disfellowshipping any member who becomes aligned in any way with any military organization, who then secretly pledges support to an organization (U.N.) that has its own military and authorizes use of military force internationally?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that after a ten year affiliation with the U.N. in gross contradiction to its enforced theology upon members, then quietly ends such affiliation within 24 hours of this relationship being publicized in a London newspaper?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that then makes up excuses for this most serious offense against its own rules, which would bring swift disfellowshipping to a common member, when such excuses are found to be lies? (The Society offered to the newspaper in response that they needed such status in order to have access to the UN library. The UN head librarian and reference librarian have both testified that this was not the case. NGO status was not a requirement for access to their library. The Society further offered that the pledge of support for the UN charter was not a requirement for NGOs until shortly before their withdrawal. In fact, UN documents clearly show this had been a requirement for some time before the Society became involved. The requirement pre-dated their initial involvement, and the UN says the Society was made aware of it at the time of their first application.)

    What does it say about the character of an organization that after committing the grossest of hypocrisies by aligning itself with the U.N. as an NGO (see United Nations official website for confirmation of the above) then keeps the matter secret from its membership, not having published a word about it, much less an apology, for now close to 20 years?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that condemns other religions based on the fact that some of their ministers have committed pedophilia, but says nothing to their own members about the fact that they have secretly paid out millions of dollars in out-of-court settlements to victims of pedophilia, who were victimized by ministers appointed by the Watchtower Society, whom the Watchtower Society then protected by policies in place for years, allowing ministers to retain their positions, even after multiple crimes of pedophilia, because “two witnesses were not present” to observe their crimes?

    What does it say about the character of an organization when in jurisdictions where accusations of pedophilia are legally required to be reported to the police, that organization instructs its ministers to make such reports anonymously by payphone?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that directs its members not to give their own blood in order to help save the lives or improve the health of non-members, but allows its members to receive blood fractions to save their lives or improve their health, which fractions come entirely from the donated blood of non-members?

    What does it say about the character of an organization that, after promulgating policies such as the above, and enforcing them by threat of disfellowshipping, then holds itself forth as “the only true Christian organization on earth”?

    There are many more examples that could be given, and don’t doubt for a minute that there is more than ample evidence to support the questions and statements made above. Much of the evidence is found in the Society’s own publications. Other evidence can be found in places such as the official United Nations website. But the problem is, as long as you believe, unqualifiedly, that the Watchtower Society is God’s organization, it is highly unlikely you will ever even consider looking at that evidence. And the Watchtower has been very effective in doing everything within its power to be sure you do not.

    And so what is the sad result? This very uncertain, short life we have on planet earth, is never really lived. Our potential for a satisfying life, and one of truly helping others and making a difference is never realized. Instead, we are led to believe, that in fact that is what we are doing. How? By sitting through five hours of meetings every week and offering literature to others to encourage them to do the same thing. Of course, if you knew all of these things and still chose to remain one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, I would have to respect your choice, although I would never understand it. The problem is, the likelihood is you will never know about these things because you feel even to investigate them is traitorous and disloyal to God’s organization. But ask yourself: Why did God give you a power of reason? Was it not to protect yourself? Should it be something to fear? Or should it be something to cherish and be forever grateful for? And can our gratitude be shown in any manner other than our using that power of reason in the most serious issues of our lives?

    Finally, what does it say about the character of an organization that urges prospective members to thoroughly investigate, in a critical manner, their current religion, and then after becoming a member threatens that same member with disfellowshipping if they decide to similarly investigate itself?

  • Gregor

    So, are you saying that the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society is NOT God's chosen channel of truth to warn people before the war of Armageddon?

  • Mary

    An excellent read Lenny. I don't think that Russell could have ever envisioned that he would be responsible for such a screwed up cult. I don't think that the GB members intended for it to turn out this way. But like Dr. Frankenstein, they were so fixated on the notion that, no matter how many people think they're crazy, they and they alone are "right"and perfectly justified to go to any lengths to prove it.

    They never stopped to consider what it was they were creating and now that the monster is 'on the loose' they have to decide what's more important: human lives or their reputation. Unlike Dr. Frankenstein though, they've never admitted that they were wrong in playing God and certainly are not willing to confront the nightmare that they created. No, it's best to blame everyone else and try to cover up any wrongdoing you were responsible for.

    "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"........Maybe that should be the slogan for the 2010 summer assembly.

  • leavingwt

    Thank you.

  • leftbelow

    WOW very well put!!

  • Dagney

    Well said Lenny.

    A big fat waste of time=life, they are.

  • designs


    Just a note for accuracy- Charles Russell was not the founder of Jehovah's Witnesses, Joseph Rutherford was.

    The Bible Student Associates of Charles Russell are a completely different religion than the Jehovah's Witnesses.

    The Bible Students are Dispensationalists and have Autonomous Fellowships and believe the New Covenant is for Israel. They believe in universal salvation and that this Dispensation is for collecting the Body of Christ members.

    Witnesses are conditional New Covenantists and believe in Central Church Authority. They believe in conditional and limited salvation and that this period is for collecting the literal 144,000 and the Great Crowd.

    They are as night and day theologically and ecclesiastically as Pentecostals are from Presbyterians.


  • LennyinBluemont

    My understanding is that Charles Russell was the founder of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, still the legal arm of Jehovah's Witnesses today. Rutherford was not the founder of anything. He hijacked the WTB&TS after Russell's death. In 1931 he re-named the Bible Students as Jehovah's Witnesses. The organization and magazine begun by Russell remains intact. Russell was in fact the founder of the organization known today variously as Watchtower, Jehovah's Witnesses, I.B.S.A., etc. In fact Jehovah's Witnesses view Russell as their founder.

  • mindmelda

    That's a very well written dissection of "what went very very wrong with Jehovah's Witnesses". I wish I'd written it! Even more so, I wish more of the rank and file would read something like this and believe it.

    I prefer not to judge anyone as having evil intent, but it sure has turned into something amazingly harmful to those involved.

    There are times when I wish it was all "good" and I believed it all again, just because in some small ways, life was so much easier when I was so certain everything was going to happen in a certain way, and I thought the Witnesses had it all figured out, and the New System of Things would just whisk away all my problems someday. Click your heels together three times, Dorothy and you can go home...Take the blue pill Nemo, and all will be as it was.

    "Remember, all I'm offering you is the truth, and nothing more."

    What is seen cannot be unseen, what is known cannot be unknown.

    I took the red pill. The symbolism of that movie gets to me every time I watch it. Once or twice a week for a few seconds, I wish I'd taken the blue pill. But, mostly not. I'm hoping that urge will fade more and more as time goes on.

  • designs


    The Witnesses do claim Russell as their founder but as I mentioned his beliefs and Witness beliefs are a different ends of the theological spectrum.

    He started the Watchtower corp. but his beliefs were abandoned by Rutherford.


Share this