by doublelife 30 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
"And of coarse he gives a list of what those deeds are: meetings, preaching work, conduct, dress and grooming, entertainment, speech, ect... "
It looks like they covered the basics, i.e. doing everything the WT says. That's basically what they mean. It's sad that they don't include helping the poor, taking care of the seniors, unless of course. To hell with all of them unless they can report 10 hours of field circus or more.
From time to time, among the plausibility found in the WT literature there are a few antiques and material worth reading. This was one of them. However, I’ve been reading the bible (not the NWT) and other non WT literature lately, so I had no desire to mark or study my WT.
Hi doublelifeI only whish that my wife would tell me that she doesn’t want to be so dedicated to the “Organization”. I don’t want to loose her and our beautiful marriage…but I know that if I leave the WT or fade into the background that’ll bring problems to our marriage.
Questions drove me to what one brother so colorfully called "the teats of Babylon." I read numerous Bible commentaries. When Aid to Bible Understanding was prepared a significant amount of material was derived from Lange's Commentary. You can see this in the sparse notes found in Insight. The Insight book does not specifically identify the commentaries as part of Lange's larger work, but that's where they're found. They also used Barnes' Notes on the New Testament. I read those. I read Robertson's Word Pictures, Vincent's Word Studies, Clarke’s Commentary and other works.
The results were mixed. Even though these commentaries are Trinitarian in outlook, they said enough about the key texts that I remained a non-Trinitarian. Other basic doctrines remain in place too. What affected me the most was the realization that Watchtower "scholarship" is very shallow. What is good is borrowed from others; what is bad is often their own. This wasn't a new thought, but my reading reinforced it. I was prodded toward that conclusion by the Watchtower itself. I remember sitting through a Watchtower study back in the 1950's sometime. It was about the Cities of Refuge, and it was interesting. There was, however, one paragraph in which the writer (It was in Franz's style) found prophetic fulfillments for things found only in Josephus. Even if one accepts the Watchtower's hyper-typical approach to Old Testament events, I could not find any justification for that. Watchtower writers have cooled that approach in the last few years. I hope they continue to do so.
In 1961 (as I recall) The Watchtower ran a middling-sized article on the culture and laws of the Old Testament era, focusing on the Patriarchal Age. It was footnoted. Fine. I know how to use and read footnotes! And I was interested. So, off I toddle to the public library and the interlibrary loan desk. I sent for one of the books. It turns out that all the footnotes were derived from the one book. They simply copied out, without verifying anything, the work of this one author and presented it as their own. If I found one of my students doing that, I'd fail them. This is one step away from plagiarism. It is unethical. It is fake research.
I was irritated but shrugged these things off. I was able to shrug it off because I trusted those who were responsible for The Watchtower. I liked Knorr, even if he was less than endearing personally. I found Fred Franz to be eternally ODD and vain, but likeable, I trusted him in ways that were unwise. He lost my affection and trust in the approach to 1975. He should have resigned from the Governing Body or he should have been relegated to menial tasks and the brotherhood should have been made aware of it.
My reading took me to other areas where Watchtower scholarship appeared questionable. The New World Translation had pleased me when it was first released. (Yes, I'm old enough to remember and was at the convention in New York.) The English grammar is odd, but I accepted the explanation that the intent was to give us the flavor of the Greek text. It's an incredibly poor effort. It's a school boy effort. The comment made by Goodspeed that grammar matters is spot on. The NW is full of reflexive verbs, possessives turned into clauses and the like. If you wish to see a translation that succeeds in doing what Franz failed to do, examine Kenneth Wuest's New Testament.
I already knew that students can argue about trivialities. Witnesses are no less affected. Are any of you old enough to remember the arguments and illustrations in The Watchtower back in the 1950's over whether snakes had legs before Eve sinned? Oh, My Loving Lord! It gave me an opportunity to tweak some gullible noses back then. (That's a fun memory)
If you're going to reject Watchtowerism, do it with your eyes and mind open. Do your homework. Much of what is written on boards like this one is good and helpful, but more is not. Become a student. Develop research skills. If you have doubts about a Watchtower teaching, hit the books, and I do not mean theirs. Get your butt off to the library. See what the standard commentaries say. Ask (develop the skill to ask non-threatening questions) your friends and elders to explain. This is a pass/fail test for them and you. If they can't clearly explain the doctrine you question, write to the little boys in Brooklyn. Give them a chance. Sometimes you'll be pleasantly surprised. Sometimes you'll see them wiggle in their chair.
If those producing The Watchtower fail as Bible scholars, you should not. It's your responsibility to KNOW and not just emote.
Excuse the old-guy rant. My point is that you need to have well founded objections. If your husband can’t answer them, so much the better. Let him take your questions off to the elders, or better yet, let him do his own research.
I spent years going to other elders and saying something like, “How would you answer this question?” or “If you were to explain this point, how would you do it?” Sometimes I received insightful answers. Sometimes I got blank stares. From “The Society” I got, stop writing to us with technical questions. You should wait on Jehovah. My reply was that my questions were Biblical, not technical. My unwritten reply was “wait on Jehovah? Why? It’s not he that does not know the answer, it’s you. You mean don’t bug us with questions we cannot comfortably answer.”
AMomentWeBothKnew: Here is the link to my story:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/members/private/183482/1/My-first-post-sorry-its-long
alanv: That was my point. I wasn't worried about turning in any time and I wasn't going to. My husband decided to do it for me and then told me after the fact.
Before finding jw.net I had thought abit of going back to see what it like, this site changed my mind, thank god, ops no thanks to you all LOL
Ditto... i thought maybe as an older adult i could look upon the teaching a little more subjectively...but All i have been seeing is how much of cult it really is.
Its funny, my grand mother has been a Dub all her life and she refuses to use the NWT. She collects bibles. She has some really old ones, 100 + yrs, and she chooses to use the ones from her collection. i remeber her taking two or three with her to meetings and reading the scripture form all three like a cross reference.
It throws up red flags to me (now) that you are being forced to use their bible. With the alterations that they have made. Conveying the info they want you to hear.
Hi Doublelife
alanv: That was my point. I wasn't worried about turning in any time and I wasn't going to. My husband decided to do it for me and then told me after the fact.
I know this was a side point to your original question but have you spoken with him about this? What he did wasn't for your benefit but for his own, he was trying to save face in front of the Cong secretary and show that he's still in charge. Well, don't let him save face at your expense.
By doing this he crossed a line he shouldn't have and took control of a matter he had no right to. Definately take back that control. If I were in your shoes my hubby would be told straight never to do that again.
If he thought he was helping you, then tell him he wasn't. If he wants to help you, tell him to let you control your situation, not the rules, the elders or his pride.
I am sorry for jumping in, but thought I would attempt to answer the original question: what do non-JW Christians believe about the second coming of Jesus?
There is not a consistant answer across all Christianity, but a popular view is:
Salvation, living with Christ and the Father on new Earth for eternity, depends only on whether one has believed on Jesus as Savior, not on the works they have done.
alanv: That was my point. I wasn't worried about turning in any time and I wasn't going to. My husband decided to do it for me and then told me after the fact. |
--------
The easiest way to mess this arrangement up is to put in a report yourself with time on it and they see one report with time and one with zero and the face saving goes out the window.
Love Thy Neighbor?
Do not Judge?
Help widows and orphans in their distress?
You mean the things that Jesus actually practiced? Perish the thought.
That your husband turned in a zero hour report probably is not an attempt to be controlling. He probably wants the elders to notice you. It was a poor way to accomplish that. But you might consider it as a motive. If that was his motive, as misplaced as the act may have been, the motive was loving.
I'm a really old guy, and I've been married longer than most of you have been alive. Alas, men are clueless. Our wives mystify us; functioning in life is beyond our ability; we don't notice what we should; we say things that come out differently than we intend. Okay, so not all of us are that clueless, but it's a close call.
Did you ask him why he did that? Ask him.
It's probably enough to just ask. I'm pretty sure you'd create trouble for you both if you asked what he thought the elders could DO. Elders often try to do right, but any of the former elders on this board can tell you that the training the Watchtower provides is poor. In their mind they see it as superior to college. It's not. Could be, but it's not. They address the wrong issues and focus on organizational relationships instead on personal needs. They prepare "practical" demonstrations that are not practical at all. So avoid that question, even if it seems to be an obvious one.
I'm a fence sitter. I believe many of the doctrines. I have a years-long love for those who attend Kingdom Halls. I reject the behavior of most of those in authority, and it seems to me that the higher one is in the hierarchy the less good judgment they seem to have. I have serious questions about the ecclesiastical structure the Watchtowerites have developed. I cannot find in the scriptures they cite the authority for the Episcopal structure they adopt.
I can sit in a Hall with considerable comfort. I cannot deal with "the society" with anything but considerable caution and some contempt. They hurt people. The hurt they caused isn't caused by maliciousness, or I don't believe it is. It's caused by an unquestioning view of themselves as the authoritarian voice of Jehovah. They forget that Jehovah's Word is the Christ. That it is through him that God speaks to us, and elders on any level are not an authoritative voice. They see us as obligated to listen to them and obey. Our obedience belongs to God and his Christ. You cannot substitute an authoritarian system for the basic congregationalism of the first century and not become minutely controlling and dictatorial.
Okay, so old guys can rant. Sorry about that. Just ask him why he did it. See what he says.
