Thought Control (A simple test for JW's)

by TD 143 Replies latest jw friends

  • Hecklerboy

    Maybe the WTB$ should put a disclaimer on all their literature: "All rules subject to change without notice"

  • serenitynow!

    "TD, I've never come across an unbelieving mate that knows all of this stuff, so to me your head-knowledge is mysterious."

    I found this statement to be interesting. How does "head-knowledge" differ from "accurate knowledge ™", and what about it do you find mysterious?

    intellectually hollow

    Alice you really should not start talking about the quality of arguments made by others here. You repeatedly steal the intellectual property of others by posting large blocks of text, whether it is from wikipedia, the WT & Awake, etc. You need to clearly differentiate between the text you have "borrowed" and your commentary on the text.


    “Nothing in Alice's cut-and-pasted comments changes (or really even relates to) the fact that the WTS claims that prior to 1914, they pointed forward to 1914 as the time for the second coming. In actuality, prior to 1914, they DID NOT point forward to 1914 as the time for the second coming; they claimed it had already happened, in 1874.

    This is a blatant lie made by the Watchtower Society. Alice knows it and she's playing the misdirection card...”

    “It's fun when the trolls "apologists" get pwned... “

    I clearly stated that, everything is clearly explained when conclusions are reached in information published by Jehovah's Witnesses. It takes the outworking of events for some matters to be firmly established.

    The early Bible students didn't know exactly what would happen in 1914 so they couldn't necessarily attribute an unknown event (the initiation of World War I) to God's adversary being permanently expelled from heaven and focusing all of his attention on earth: Satanic aggravation. They would also have to wait sometime for subsequent events to unfold to confirm that 1914 truly marked the beginning of the last days.

    w65 7/1 pp. 389-390 What Is Required to Understand the Bible?

    But we are not left merely to reason on the subject. God’s inspired Word plainly tells us that his holy spirit aids in understanding his Word: “‘Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, neither have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.’ For it is to us God has revealed them through his spirit, for the spirit searches into all things, even the deep things of God.” (1 Cor. 2:9, 10) Likewise Jesus, shortly before leaving his apostles, assured them: “The helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach you all things and bring back to your minds all the things I told you.” “The spirit of the truth . . . will guide you into all the truth.”—John 14:26; 16:13.

    I also stated that Holy Spirit isn't the equivalent of possessing supernatural powers as some possessed in certain parts of the Bible.

    it-2 p. 1160 Visionary

    A man who had or claimed to have visions from God regarding concealed or future matters. The Hebrew word for “visionary” is cho·zeh′, from cha·zah′, meaning “behold; vision.” Cha·zah′ and its derivatives are employed with reference to seeing visions.—Nu 24:4; Isa 1:1; 21:2; 22:1; Eze 13:7; Da 8:1; see SEER.

    I also stated, the restoration of true worship wasn't an easy task for Charles Taze Russel and his contemporaries. Critics of Jehovah's Witnesses often analyze the early development of Jehovah's Witnesses under a microscope for flaws without understanding the religions they were coming out of.

    You don't even have a system in your mind for interpreting God's Word, you have no understanding, you just know what you reject out of selfish motives. Me getting “pwned” is only in the mind of those with selective memories and reasoning abilities.

  • Mad Dawg
    Mad Dawg

    Intellectually hollow?

    Fall Off Chair Laughing

    Still waiting for that pre-1914 quote.

  • Mad Dawg
    Mad Dawg

    Alice said:

    The early Bible students didn't know exactly what would happen in 1914…

    Exactly? They had no clue! They got EVERYTHING wrong. Or are you going to finally provide the pre-1914 quote that shows they got something right. BTW, why are you blaming the students when it was Mr. Russel who wrote the WT?

    …so they couldn't necessarily attribute an unknown event (the initiation of World War I) to God's adversary being permanently expelled from heaven and focusing all of his attention on earth: Satanic aggravation. They would also have to wait sometime for subsequent events to unfold to confirm that 1914 truly marked the beginning of the last days.

    Beginning of the last days? Have you ever read Mr. Russels prognostications from their original sources? Are you saying that predictions can only be made after the event has happened?

  • TD

    Hypothetical question, Alice

    Let's say, twenty years from now (Don't laugh!) you're reading The Watchtower. You come across an article that says something like this:

    "Consider how Jehovah's organization progressed in the 20th century. In the 1920's it was discerned that the kingdom is a heavenly government with Jesus as king. In the 1930's a great crowd of other sheep were identified. In the 1940's a clearer understanding of Bible chronology was attained. In the 1950's it was realized that in the final part of the fulfillment of Matthew 24:34, the 'generation' are those anointed whose lives overlap during the time of the end. In the 1960's proper respect for blood was emphasized....."

    You think to yourself, "Wait a minute....That didn't happen in the 50's, it happend around 2010 or so.....I remember that assembly."

    --Is the issue here a problem with the "New light" or is it a problem with mistakenly reporting when that "New light" was attained?

  • SweetBabyCheezits

    Alice, all joking and insults aside, you've demonstrated TD's point. The results are pretty conclusive. You will not concede that the Society has shrouded your eyes with misinformation, whether intentionally or otherwise. You stand by the Society no matter what. And yet it intrigues me that you have also chosen to ignore their counsel and join in conversation with known "apostates". You are blatantly disregarding what JWs are instructed about loyalty. So why do you believe you are any different than those of us who ignore the rest of their decrees? Welcome to the club!

    At one time, I knew that the men running the organization were imperfect but thought, collectively, they could do no wrong. The difference is back then I wasn't aware of all these charges against WTB&TS. When I later became aware of the claims, I did my best to disprove them but I failed. I failed - not because I had less holy spirit than the next JW or because I lacked the ability to argue - but because the claims (many of them) were true. To soften the blow to my pride, I could very well say I was simply defending that which I'd been taught since infancy. But, thankfully, after a few years of researching additional perspectives, I followed the proddings of my conscience out the door, which I assure you was the more difficult path.

    Now with you it seems to be (though I could be wrong) a question of whether you are still truly blinded.... or if you're just too proud to admit you've been duped. Nobody wants to look like a fool. I'll be the first to say I find myself constantly having to ask (regarding ANYTHING): "If by some chance I was wrong.... would I have the humility and the courage to admit it now and turn around?" Sometimes I still ask myself that about this religion. But right now I have no doubt that I'm doing the right thing. If I had any doubt, I wouldn't be leaving. To me, it is much more impressive to be wrong and admit it... than to always be right. (Of course, I could be wrong about that, too.)

    I know nothing I've written will change your mind but I did want to share one last thought: “Reason obeys itself; ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.” (Thomas Paine) I believe cults exist because of those who allow some leader(s) to do too much of their reasoning for them. And yet nobody who is IN a cult thinks that they are. (I believe I read that somewhere before but don't remember who to credit.)

  • reslight2

    "Why then, do the nations not realize and accept the approach of this climax of judgment? It is because they have not heeded the world-wide advertising of Christ's return and his second presence. Since long before World War I Jehovah's witnesses pointed to 1914 as the time for this great event to occur." (The Watchtower June 15, 1954 p. 370)

    This is dated 1954, but just recently this claim was made in one the forums by one the JWs; so the effect of this kind of distortion of historical fact continues in the minds of the JWs, and often spills over even to others who are not associated with the JWs.

    There are at least two things wrong with this quotes.

    (1) There was no "Jehovah's Witnesses" organization, nor any members of any such organization in existence before World War I. The WTS represented no such controlling organization in the days of Russell. No "Jehovah's Witnesses" organization; "Jehovah's Witnesses" could not have been preaching anything at all before World War I.

    (2) There was no one at all associated with the Watch Tower Society that I know of before World War I who was pointing to 1914 as the time for "the great event", Christ's return and his second presence. Russell was certainly not pointing to 1914 as the time for Christ's return, since he believed Christ had already returned in 1874. Russell, however, was never associated with the Jehovah's Witnesses organization, and he actually preached against such an organization. Not only that, the Gospel (Good News) that Russell preached was almost the very opposite of that being preached by the JWs.

  • reslight2

    Juan Viejo2: The problem with the WT Society is that they equate "new light" with telling lies about the "old light." By saying that Russell and his followers "were looking forward to 1914," when in fact they were really looking to 1881, 1884, and back at 1799, is not "new light" - it's lying!

    I can say that Russell was looking forward to 1914 as the end of the Gentile Times and the beginning of the time of trouble (at least from 1904 on to 1914). He died believing that the time of trouble had indeed begun in 1914. He certainly was not looking forward to 1914 as Christ's return.

    On the other hand, there was no centralized controlling organization in the days of Russell, and many of Russell's associates had differing opinions about the times of the Gentiles. Some were claiming that the Gentiles Times would end in October of 1915, not October of 1914. Some others believed the Gentile Times would end in 1933. Russell, while he gave his reasons for disagreeing with those conclusions, allowed for such disagreements with him.

    Even the Edgars (John and Morton) disagreed with Russell in some respects, but Russell even allowed announcements of the Edgars publications to be presented in the Watch Tower.

    There were also many ideas being presented amongst the Bible Students before 1914 about how long the "time of trouble" would last after 1914, and what to expect in 1914 or thereafter. Many of the differrence opinions were published in the pages of the Watch Tower. Russell in 1904 mentioned the Edgars thought of one year but rejected that, stating that we have no scripture to support the one year conclusion. In 1905, in the pages of the Watch Tower, Russell presented two differring opinions about how long the "time of trouble" would last, that of the Edgars, who presented the parallet that would allow it one year, from October of 1914 to October of 1915, and another of U. G. Lee., who presented a parallelt that allowed for six years, thus ending the "time of trouble" in 1920. (At times after that, Russell seemed to favor the one year theory, but at the same time he allowed for other opinions.) Both of these opinions proved to be wrong, but the point is that Russell was not dogmatic about what to expect in 1914, or 1915, or 1920, or 1933, etc. He said that he allowed others to have their views, and admitted the possibility that he could be wrong in his calculations and expectations.

    Nevertheless, I along with many other Bible Students, do believe he was right in the expectation that "the time of trouble" was to begin in 1914, and that we are still in that "time of trouble" to this day. On the other hand, there are also many Bible Students who have many other opinions about 1914. A true Bible Student will be like Russell was, and not seek bind all other brothers and sisters in Christ to their own theories in this matter, for such is sectarianism. All things will be cleared up eventually in God's own due time.

  • reslight2

    The life story of Maxwell Friend appeared in The Watchtower of August 15, 1967. Friend recalls that in 1912 he obtained a copy of The Divine Plan Of The Ages and then:

    "...shared in spreading the good news of God's kingdom as well as in giving emphatic warning that the year 1914 would see the beginning of the world-shaking "time of the end" of the present evil disorder of things." (p. 507)

    Obviously, this is not true. It is projecting back the teaching of the JWs to the time before 1914 a teaching that did not exist before 1914. Russell was certainly not expecting the "time of the end" to begin in 1914, since he believed that the "time of the end" had already begun in 1799. Russell died believing that the "time of the end" had begun in 1799. Maxwell Friend may have thought he remembered that teaching before 1914, but in reality that teaching did not exist for many years after 1914. Or perhaps he was confusing "the time of the end" with the "time of trouble." Russell was indeed preaching that "time of trouble" was to begin in 1914, but he was not teaching that the "time of the end" was to begin in 1914.

Share this