Is Watchtower Literature inspired?

by YoYoMama 62 Replies latest jw friends

  • YoYoMama

    The question. Is all Watchtower articles, books, etc. inspired by God as the Bible was? The answer is no. Think of how many articles have been published in the Watchtower and Awake. I don't have the total count, but I guess thousands. Many articles in these publications deal with daily news, and other needs that people encounter. But what about the articles with Bible topics?

    Witnesses use the Bible to decipher the Bible. A good example is the understanding of the book of Revelation. Many facets of this book can be understood by comparing with scriptures in Daniel and Ezequiel.

    If the Watchtower articles were inspired, then that means we would have an extension to the Bible and this is not possible. Jehovah made sure that we had the Bible as our guidance.

    Why do Witnesses then claim that the articles come from Jehovah?

    Well I will illustrate: What does the White House spokeperson do? Well he addresses the media on many issues concerning the President. He represents, at that point, President Bush. So what he says, is as the President were saying it. Can the spokeperson make a mistake and say something he shouldn't? Of course, then the President would ask "what did you say that for?, you should stick to what we've told you". Then the spokeperson would go in front of the media and make the correction of his statement.

    Similarily, the Faithful and Discreet Slave represents Jehovah here on earth. Their publications are based on the Bible, so it's as if Jehovah were saying it. Can that slave class make mistakes? Yes, and Jehovah is probably thinking to himself "Where did they get that from? Who told them to say that?", then he guides them back to the scriptures so that they can make the proper correction.

    In that sense, the Witnesses have the guidance of Jehovah by means of his holy spirit.

  • Will Power
    Will Power

    Does this presidential official just come out with a new slant totally denying what he had said previously? or does he apologize, retract, set the record straight, take the blame, etc.

    Whatever he does, I'm sure WT would take the opposite approach, since this pres.official is representing satans org.

    In all pubs. only once has the WT donned the sack cloth!

  • JT

    I have a whole truckload of Straws to sell you- since you have this great love of PULLING STRAWS

    I love post like this-- I tell you no former jw could make up stuff this good

    i love it

    i got to comment on his post after lunch

  • Lionel_P_Hartley


    So how do you know that the GB ** alone ** represents Jehovah? Go on, tell us? Prove it from the Bible.

    Also, how do you know that other religions don't speak for God.


  • Skeptic

    I wish that were how the WTBS operated. If you are correct, then why cannot any JW publicly disagree with a current teaching of the JWs. In fact, why should JWs follow the WTBS blindly? If the WTBS is just imperfect men, then why not make up you mind individually about each teaching of the JWs?

    Yet, what we see if that no JW is allowed to "think independently". When allowed to "think" at all, JWs must always come to the conclusion that a current teaching is correct. Even if that teaching is wrong.

    However, you are wrong, as proven by the current DFing policies.

    If the WTBS only believed themselves to be imperfect men who make mistakes, then why do they disfellowship people for apostacy when someone disagrees with any current teaching of the JWs? And when that person is found to be right, why is the DFing not automatically removed?

    JanH was DFed for not believing the 1914 generation doctrine. Six months later, the 1914 generation teaching was scrapped.

    By DFing people for not adhering to a "current teaching", the WTBS is in practice claiming to know exactly what Jehovah thinks. They claim to know what Jah thinks so well that they will have someone shunned by all their friends and relatives for not following the latest teaching. Even if they later find that that same teaching is completely wrong.

    Think of the demands the WTBS has put on its followers. JWs were asked to not have children because the end was coming in 1925, JWs were encouraged to sell their homes and all worldly possesions and pioneer before the end came in 1975. These are not the actions of an organization that thinks it can screw up. They are the actions of an organization arrogant enough to believe that it speaks directly for God Himself.


  • DB

    YoYo, I have been a jw for almost thiry years, and even I have to say that your illustration is found wanting, to say the least.

  • AlanF

    Your excuses are completely off the mark, YoYo. We all know perfectly well that JW literature is not inspired. The point is that JW leaders don't allow JWs to act accordingly, because they disfellowship any who try.

    The April 1, 1986 Watchtower contained a "Question from Readers" explaining why the Society disfellowships people for apostasy even though these people still profess complete confidence in Jehovah. The explanation amounts to a simple concept: JW leaders speak for God and so disagreeing with them is disagreeing with God, which is apostasy. There is no wiggle room here, YoYo.

    If JW leaders said, "We think that our opinions accurately reflect what's in the Bible", and they allowed others to hold differing opinions and remain JWs in good standing, your explanation would be valid. But they don't. They claim, "You should listen to us as you would God, because we speak for God." That is an implicit claim of inspiration because it implicitly claims infallibility.

    As for this claim of mere "guidance" rather than direct inspiration, this is blatant sophistry. Anyone -- you, me, Osama bin Ladin -- can claim to be guided by God by virtue of trying to tell others what's in the Bible. Put that way, the notion is obviously meaningless. You know that and so does the Society, since most every Christian religion claims similar guidance, and you and the Society reject those claims. So the Society's claim of "guidance" goes way beyond this. What they really mean is reflected in the dozens of quotations from WTS literature that have been posted the last few days, quotations that say things like, "Listen to us as you would God", and "Angels transmit information from God to us". The latter is a direct, blatant claim, not of mere guidance by reading the Bible, but of inspiration. That's obvious because according to the Bible itself, God used angels to inspire the Bible.

    What is so hard for you to understand here?


  • ThiChi

    The above posts are correct: Why does the WT then treat their writings as inspired? If you don’t “obey” the writings, you are disfellowshipped. However, when they have to make adjustments, then we are asked to understand. What a one way street.

    “We all fell down from the milky way, hanging around here for the judgement day, heaven only knows who’s in command.”- Jimmy Buffet

  • detective

    Yoyo: "Similarily, the Faithful and Discreet Slave represents Jehovah here on earth."

    Really? I'm well aware that they maintain this is true. However, I just haven't seen anything that supports this theory. Particularly when you consider that they posit they are the ONLY ones representing Jehovah here on earth. So, would you like to explain why someone should accept their assertion?

    By the way, I like the example of the elected official and his spokesman. I thought it was interesting but I'm not sure I can move past the image of voting for God, impeaching God or selecting Nadar as god.

  • dubla


    In that sense, the Witnesses have the guidance of Jehovah by means of his holy spirit.
    why do you feel the need to parrot yk? weve heard this same line of nonsense for a week now on yks "prophet" this simple coincidental timing on your part? why not just put this opinion of yours on the threads weve already started? after all, you havent given us anything new to ponder here, youve simply re-stated yks exact viewpoint, and just like yk, you cannot refute the arguments we posed to you in the other thread. ill leave a link here for you, in case youd like to revisit what you walked away from >>>


Share this