"High-Control Groups"

by Consfearacy 128 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Consfearacy


    "It is important to understand that in most Bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group. It is the sense that the group is God's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control. Thus, to engage the cult member in a Biblical argument or discussion is often futile." Releasing the Bonds p.145 Stephen Hassan

    "Where else would I go?" is a question that holds huge power over the mind of a Jehovah's Witnesses. However, this question is not unique to followers of the Watchtower Society; it is common amongst members of high control religions. A key to moving on is for the member to understand that there are many groups that similar to their own. This article presents information on several religions remarkably similar to Jehovah's Witnesses;


    Mormonism comprises the religious, institutional, and cultural elements of the most populous branch of the Latter Day Saint movement.

    The term Mormonism is derived from the Book of Mormon, a sacred text of the Latter Day Saint movement. It was first published in March 1830 by Joseph Smith, Jr. According to Smith's account, and also according to the book's narrative, the Book of Mormon was originally written in otherwise unknown characters referred to as "reformed Egyptian" engraved on golden plates. Smith said that he received these plates in 1827 from an angel named Moroni. Here's a photo:

    Question for Mormons: Why can't all Mormons receive a visit from the angel Moroni?

    Answer: Because Moroni is an inanimate apparition imagined in the mind of Joseph Smith.

    Seventh-day Adventists

    The Seventh-day Adventist Church is a Christian denomination which is distinguished by its observance of Saturday the original seventh day of the Judeo-Christian week, as the Sabbath, and by its emphasis is on the imminent second coming of Jesus Christ. Among its founders was William Miller and Ellen G. White, whose extensive writings are still held in high regard by the church today. Much of the theology of the Seventh-day Adventist Church corresponds to Protestant Christian teachings such as the Trinity and the infallibility of Scripture. The denomination grew out of the Millerite movement in the United States during the middle part of the 19th century and was formally established in 1863. The Millerites were the followers of the teachings of William Miller who, in 1833 first shared publicly his belief in the coming Second Advent of Jesus Christ.

    William Miller claimed a prophetic dream from God bestowed him with the power of prophecy. In Daniel 2:29-45 the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar received a dream vision from God as interpreted by Daniel. Daniel himself had a dream from God in which he beheld four huge beasts coming up out of the sea, these creatures representing human governments. (Da 7:1, 3, 17)

    William Miller’s Prophetic Dream: The Scattering and Gathering of Adventism (pdf)

    The interpretation of William Miller's dream as quoted in the early writings of Ellen G. White:

    Page: 229: “God sent His angel to move upon the heart of a farmer who had not believed the Bible, to lead him to search the prophecies. Angels of God repeatedly visited that chosen one, to guide his mind and open to his understanding prophecies which had ever been dark to God’s people. The commencement of the chain of truth was given to him, and he was led on to search for link after link, until he looked with wonder and admiration upon the Word of God. He saw there a perfect chain of truth. That Word which he had regarded as uninspired now opened before his vision in its beauty and glory. ... He regarded the sacred Word of God with joy and with the deepest respect and awe.

    “As he followed down the prophecies, he saw that the inhabitants of the earth were living in the closing scenes of this world’s history, yet they knew it not. He looked at the churches and saw that they were corrupt; they had taken their affections from Jesus and placed them on the world; they were seeking for worldly honor, instead of that honor which cometh from above; grasping for worldly riches, instead of laying up their treasure in heaven. He could see hypocrisy, darkness, and death everywhere. His spirit was stirred within him. God called him to leave his farm, as He called Elisha to leave his oxen and the field of his labor to follow Elijah. With trembling, William Miller began to unfold to the people the mysteries of the kingdom of God, carrying his hearers down through the prophecies to the second advent of Christ.”

    In September 1822, Miller formally stated his conclusions in a twenty-point document; “I believe that the second coming of Jesus Christ is near, even at the door, even within twenty-one years,—on or before 1843.” This was reaffirmed in the Jewish year 1843, stating: “My principles in brief, are, that Jesus Christ will come again to this earth, cleanse, purify, and take possession of the same, with all the saints, sometime between March 21, 1843 and March 21, 1844.”

    On October 22, 1844, that day of great hope and promise, ended like any other day to the disappointment of the Millerites. Both Millerite leaders and followers were left generally bewildered and disillusioned.

    The Seventh-day Adventist, Ellen G White that followed the work of William Miller likewise claimed to have visions and prophetic dreams as recorded in “A Word to the Little Flock” distributed in 1847, in which her first vision in 1844 was described. Ellen continued to have alleged visions and divinely inspired dreams from then on until her death in 1915. The frequency of these was much greater in the early years, however. According to her grandson Arthur White, she had visions until 1884, and mostly "prophetic dreams" at night from then on. Arthur has estimated that she had approximately 2000 visions over her lifetime.

    The principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses from the inception of organization's history up to now has never claimed infallibility or divine inspiration. They have also left the results of candid Bible research open to the possibility of unfulfillment.

    Indeed, as respects the date 1914, which we have emphasized, and respecting which we have repeatedly expressed our faith, our conviction--even respecting this date we have never knowingly spoken in infallible terms. June 1, 1913 Watchtower

    We are waiting for the time to come when the government of the world will be turned over to the Messiah. We cannot say that it may not be either October 1914, or October 1915. It is possible that we might be out of the correct reckoning on the subject a number of years. We cannot say with certainty. October 15, 1913 Watchtower

    Using this same measuring line, beginning with the entry of the children of Israel into Canaan, and counting the full 70 cycles of 50 years each, as clearly indicated by Jehovah’s sending of the Jews into Babylon for the full 70 years, it is an easy matter to locate 1925, probably the fall, for the beginning of the antitypical jubilee................Thus it was in 1844, in 1874, in 1878 as well as in 1914 and 1918. Looking back we can now easily see that those dates were clearly indicated in Scripture and doubtlessly intended by the Lord to encourage his people, as they did, as well as to be a means of testing and sifting when all that some expected did not come to pass. That all that some expect to see in 1925 may not transpire that year will not alter the date anymore than in the other cases. May 15, 1922 Watchtower

    The faithful and discreet slave identified in Matthew 24:45-47 doesn't claim a special relationship with God that is inaccessible to any and all members or claim its means of teaching is limited to a select few.

    w08 9/15 p. 21 pars. 5-6 Resist “the Spirit of the World”

    The provision of holy spirit was not limited to the first century. It is readily available today, and God’s spirit can give us the strength to do what is right as well as energize us in his service. (Rom. 12:11; Phil. 4:13) It can also produce in us tender qualities, such as love, kindness, and goodness, which are aspects of “the fruitage of the spirit.” (Gal. 5:22, 23) However, Jehovah God does not force his holy spirit upon unwilling recipients.

    It would be reasonable, then, for us to ask, ‘What can I do to receive holy spirit?’ Well, the Bible shows that there are a number of things we can do. An important step is quite straightforward—ask God for it. (Read Luke 11:13.) Another useful step is to study and apply the counsel in God’s spirit-inspired Word. (2 Tim. 3:16) Of course, not everyone who simply reads the Bible receives God’s spirit. But when a sincere Christian studies God’s Word, he can absorb the sentiments and outlook reflected in the inspired Word. It is also vital that we accept that Jehovah has appointed Jesus as His representative and the one through whom God has provided his spirit. (Col. 2:6) Accordingly, we want to model our lives on Jesus’ example and teachings. (1 Pet. 2:21) The more we strive to be like Christ, the more we will receive holy spirit.

    I'll address the other religious groups a bit later, but the conclusion so far is there is no true association between any of these groups and Jehovah's Witnesses are not a cult or “high-control group” as some love to think of them as.

  • zoiks


    It would be helpful if you were to make a better differentiation in font size or color between the cited/pasted material and your comments.

    And... I'm digging the new avatar

  • cantleave


    Glad you haven't forgotten how to cut n paste.

  • zoiks

    Ah, better! Thank you.

  • Essan

    Some of these exact arguments by Consfearacy have just recently been thoroughly debunked by a number of posters in a thread here so Consfearacy obviously he feels it's necessary to start another thread where those troublesome decisive counter-arguments can't be read. I've learned that there is little point talking to Consfearacy directly, as he's incapable of reason, so I'm just going to talk to myself in this post LOL:

    Consfearacy said: "The principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses from the inception of organization's history up to now has never claimed infallibility or divine inspiration."

    But what do the facts show?


    [in-fal-uh-buhl] –adjective

    1. absolutely trustworthy or sure: an infallible rule.

    2. unfailing in effectiveness or operation; certain: an infallible remedy."

    So, infallible means "absolutely trustworthy or sure", and "certain".

    With that understanding let us see if we can perceive claims of infallibility for the predictions doctrines and interpretations of the "principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses":

    "Bible prophecy shows that the Lord was due to appear for the second time in the year 1874. Fulfilled prophecy shows beyond a doubt that he did appear in 1874. Fulfilled prophecy is otherwise designated the physical facts; and these facts are indisputable. All true watchers are familiar with these facts as set forth in the Scriptures and explained in the interpretation by the Lord's special servant... Do you believe it? Do you believe that the King of glory is present, and has been since 1874? - The WT, November 1, 1922, pp.332-337

    So, I’m sure you’ll agree that "beyond a doubt" and "indisputable" mean exactly the same as "certain", "sure" and "absolutely trustworthy" which, as we know from the dictionary entry quoted above is the very definition of "infallible". So "indisputable" and "beyond a doubt" = "Infallible".

    So has the Society claimed infallibility for it's doctrine? Yes, clearly they have. The claim of infallibility for an interpretative teaching necessarily indicates a claim of infallibility on the part of the teacher when giving it (and as in this case, when insisting on it's belief as fact). The two can't be separated. The statement "I'm not infallible, but there is no possibility of this teachings being wrong", is contradictory. It makes no sense. This is the doublespeak you are being asked to swallow.

    Another example of claiming infallibility on the part of the "principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses":

    "This chronology is not of man but of God. Being of divine origin and divinely corroborated, present-truth chronology stands in a class by itself, absolutely and unqualifiedly correct...." - Watchtower, July 15, 1922

    Obviously, "absolutely and unqualifiedly correct" means exactly the same thing as "absolutely trustworthy or sure", which is the dictionary definition of "infallible".

    There are, of course, dozens of other similar claims of infallibility by the "principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses", but these two should be sufficient to debunk the lie that they “never” claimed infallibility. As words have clear definitions and meanings which it is always possible to convey in other words, the idea that the Society never claimed infallibility just because they never used the word "infallible" is obviously absurd and highly deceptive.

    This brings us to the second claim made by Consfearacy, that "from the inception of the Organization's history up to now has never claimed... divine inspiration."

    Look again at the quote above. They are claiming that their chronology is "not of man but of God". Well, seeing as dates such as 1874 and 1925 are not given in the Bible and have since been ditched by JW's, where is the writer claiming these dates and the understanding of their significance came from and how is he indicating they were received? Remember: "Not of man but of God", "Divine Origin", "Divinely Corroborated". How did the writer get these predictions from God, how could he claim they were "Of Divine Origin" if they are nowhere to be found in the Bible? How could he be so sure that they were "absolutely and unqualifiedly correct", if he wasn't claiming they were from God?

    As with the word "infallible", one doesn't have to use the word "Inspiration" in order to attribute an original prediction, teaching or doctrine directly to God. These are clear implicit claims of inspiration, and they are common in the Society's literature. But there are quotes which are even clearer.




    1. aroused, animated, or imbued with the spirit to do something, by or as if by supernatural or divine influence: an inspired poet.


    5. Theology .

    a. a divine influence directly and immediately exerted upon the mind or soul.

    b. the divine quality of the writings or words of a person so influenced."

    So, if Inspired and Inspiration means “aroused, animated, or imbued with the spirit to do something" then clearly, inspiration means exactly the same thing as "spirit-led" and "spirit-directed", terms which the Society commonly uses. These terms are synonymous with "Inspired" and "Inspiration".

    Again, keeping the above two definitions in mind, let's look at another quote from the "principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses" which "from the inception of organization's history up to now" has apparently "never claimed... divine inspiration".

    "Today the children of Zion need no extraneous proof that the spiritual food and understanding of the prophecies they have comes from God. They know that no man or men could provide such food. No man or men on earth attempt to lay claim that lay of these truths proceed from man. (Watchtower, Oct. 1, 1931, p. 328)

    "The writer does not give his opinion. No human interpretation of scripture is advanced." (Reconciliation, 1928, p. 6)

    Russell, regarding his chronology predictions, now abandoned as false. said, “It is beyond the breadth and depth of human thought and therefore cannot be of human origin.” (Studies In The Scriptures, 1889, vol. 2, p. 15)

    "The Watchtower is not the instrument of any man or set of any of men, nor is it published according to the whims of men. No man's opinion is expressed in the Watchtower." (Watchtower, Nov. 1 1931 p. 327)

    So, if no man's opinion is ever published in the Watchtower, whose is? If the Watchtower isn't the instrument of men, then whose instrument is it? What are we supposed to conclude here? Obviously, that God's words are all you will ever read in the Watchtower, as it is his instrument. Just as they state, it all comes "from God", not from any man or men. It is beyond men's capabilities.

    If that is the case, how does God convey his word to the human writers of the Watchtower, especially when they are publishing highly speculative and original material, including various dates for Armageddon, which are not to be found in the Bible? Clearly, they must be inspired to do so, otherwise the Watchtower would be expressing the opinions of men - but as we have been assured, this is impossible!

    And again, Russell spoke of: "...the truths I present, as God's mouthpiece" and said that "this clear unfolding of truth" he proclaimed was NOT "due to any human ingenuity or acuteness of perception, but to the simple fact that God's due time has come." - WT7/15/06, p.229

    What does it mean to be 'God's Mouthpiece'? Can you preach original "truths" and make date predictions - which are not written in the Bible - as 'God's mouthpiece', present them as fact, and yet not be claiming to be "inspired" or under "divine influence"? Hardly. What does it mean that "God's time had come"? God's time had come to allow a few more brand new Bible verse to suddenly be discovered stating Armageddon would come in 1874, or 1914, or 1925? No, apparently "God's time had come to" exert "divine influence" on the mind - or "inspire" - "God's Mouthpiece", "The Lord's Special Servant".

    But such claims of inspiration become even more explicit:

    "In all his (Russell's) warnings he claimed no originality. He said that he could never have written his books himself. It all came from God, through the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit." (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 7, p. 387.)

    It all came from God.

    Russell was incapable of writing those books. He was inspired - his mind under "divine influence" - to write.

    So yes, it's undeniable that the Society both claimed "Inspiration" and "Infallibility" in it's teachings and predictions, because the meanings of both those words are necessarily defined using other words, words which blatantly all apply to the claims the Society made, and made explicitly. The idea that one one has to use certain words specifically is bogus, meaningless, deceptive.

    It's a bit like claiming that "I never said I was "male", I just said I had testicles and a penis."

    Finally, as for the claim that the Society, in regard to it's many failed predictions for Armageddon and other supernatural events, "also left the results of candid Bible research open to the possibility of unfulfillment." - well this is simply not true, and Consfearacy knows it. They never left their predictions open to unfulfillment, as even some of the quotes above show. They stated them, for years, as absolute fact, revealed by God which must be accepted as truth by their followers. However, as the predicted date grew very close or was passed - THEN they totally changed their tune, as they lost their nerve, and began contradicting former statements. That is something quite different, obviously, to what Consfearacy claims.

  • Essan

    Hard to format these posts

    They don't seem to post as they were written. Apologies everyone if it's incomprehensible but what is there looks nothing like what I submitted. When I hit submit the post goes all weird, bits go bold that weren't mean to be, gaps disappear, other gaps appear etc. Not sure how to control it and editing doesn't work, although I'll keep trying. Very glitchy.

    Oh well.

  • jwfacts

    You never seem to clarify what the point is you are trying to make.

    There is a great similarity between those three 19th century American groups, Mormons, SDA and WTS, as your post helps highlight.

    Your information about SDA and their roots in the teachings of Miller is very related to the WTS, since that is where the WTS took its teachings of 1874 and 1914 from.

    Mormons claim additional information was granted to their leader through golden tablets. WTS claims understanding of the Bible is granted directly through the GB, and only the GB. And just as Joseph Smith claimed he was spoken to by an angel, Rutherford also claim he was given his teachings by angels.

  • Consfearacy

    Essan, the purpose of this thread was to distinguish Jehovah's Witnesses from "mind-control cults" and false prophets.

    For starters, Russell and the early Bible students had to speak with some certainty if anyone was to take them at all seriously. If they did make direct statements in admission to fallibility and not receiving divine revelation from a supernatural source as in the case of the prophets recorded in the Bible, they are distinguishing themselves from men God directly communicated with. They didn't have to clarify this every time they spoke about the future.

    One again, the clear criteria for the division from prophets like Ezekiel, Isaiah, Daniel or apostles in the New Testament that were bestowed with the gift of prophecy like the apostle Paul;

    Prophets in God's word: Direct communication from God through supernatural means.

    The early Bible students: God's spirit as a helper, an aid to Bible understanding.

    “If you love me, you will observe my commandments; and I will request the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever, the spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive, because it neither beholds it nor knows it. John 14:15-17

    From the early Bible student's point of view:

    After the Age of Enlightenment and constitutional monarchies put an end to the Dark Ages and paved the way for the restoration of God's visible organization, Russell and the early Bible students were activated with God's spirit in the 19th century and outlined some specific dates to clarify to their teachings with others.


    1891 Thy Kingdom Come 1st Ed.

    This Time of the End, or day of Jehovah preparation beginning A. D. 1799 and closing A. D. 1914, though characterized by a great increase of knowledge over all past ages, is to culminate in the greatest time of trouble the world has ever known; but it is nevertheless preparing for and leading into that blessed time so long promised, when the true Kingdom of God, under the control of the true Christ, will fully establish an order of government the very reverse of that of Antichrist. Page 59

    1799 was mentioned because it historically marked the end of the first enlightenment era; 1688 to the 19th century and an increase in religious and scientific knowledge. The 19th century saw the birth of science as a profession; the term scientist was coined in 1833.

    A standard, intellectual definition of Enlightenment was a desire for human affairs to be guided by rationality rather than by faith, superstition, or revelation; a belief in the power of human reason to change society and liberate the individual from the restraints of custom or arbitrary authority; all backed up by a worldview increasingly validated by science rather than by religion or tradition.

    Freemasonry had direct ties to the Age of Enlightenment. Freemasons all across Europe made reference to Enlightenment in general in the eighteenth century. Charles Russel combined the best of both worlds by incorporating some masonic enlightenment into early Bible based publications. Charles Russel had some obvious ties to freemasonry as masonic symbolism can be found in 19th century Watchtower publications. Charles Russel thought highly of Freemasons, free-thinkers, not cultic stereotypes. Masonic ties were discarded when they no longer served any purpose.

    In 1877 Barbour and Russell jointly published Three Worlds, and the Harvest of This World. These books discussed the subjects of the restitution God's visible organization and Biblical time prophecies. Russell’s view in this book was “the first to combine the idea of restitution with time-prophecy.” It presented the view that Jesus Christ’s invisible presence dated from the autumn of 1874 to 1914.

    jv chap. 28 pp. 631-632 Testing and Sifting From Within

    It was only natural that they should wonder when and how these things would occur. Did the inspired Scriptures provide any clues?

    Using Bible chronology that had first been laid out by Christopher Bowen of England, they thought that 6,000 years of human history had ended in 1873, that thereafter they were in the seventh thousand-year period of human history, and that they had surely approached the dawn of the foretold Millennium. The series of books known as Millennial Dawn (and later called Studies in the Scriptures), which were penned by C. T. Russell, drew attention to the implications of this according to what the Bible Students understood from the Scriptures.

    Something else that was seen as a possible time indicator involved the arrangement that God instituted in ancient Israel for a Jubilee, a year of release, every 50th year. This came after a series of seven 7-year periods, each of which ended with a sabbath year. During the Jubilee year, Hebrew slaves were freed and hereditary land possessions that had been sold were restored. (Lev. 25:8-10) Calculations based on this cycle of years led to the conclusion that perhaps a greater Jubilee for all the earth had begun in the autumn of 1874, that evidently the Lord had returned in that year and was invisibly present, and that “the times of restitution of all things” had arrived.—Acts 3:19-21, KJ.

    Based on the premise that events of the first century might find parallels in related events later, they also concluded that if Jesus’ baptism and anointing in the autumn of 29 C.E. paralleled the beginning of an invisible presence in 1874.

    Using the Bible and secular resources the early Bible students pinpointed the end of the gentile times in 1914.

    The Brown University Studies, Vol. XIX, Babylonian Chronology 626 B.C.—A.D. 75, Parker and Dubberstein, p. 29 (and other chronological tables) along with the seventy years of desolation foretold by the prophet Jeremiah, pinpoints 607 B.C.E. as the date of Jerusalem's destruction and the 20th Century as the restoration of God's Kingdom.

    “It was in B.C. 606, that God’s kingdom ended, the diadem was removed, and all the earth given up to the Gentiles. 2520 years from B.C. 606, will end in A.D. 1914.” —The Three Worlds, published in 1877, page 83.

    1914 took on new prophetic meaning after the events that transpired on that date and clarified Bible prophecy for the early Bible students. A comprehensive historical worldview from the Mosaic era to the fulfillment of the 1914 prophecy speaks volumes about the authenticity of Russel's public statement in (the Three Worlds, published in 1877). Opponents of Jehovah's Witnesses tend to ignore the significance of this for no good reason. It's a bit of a gambit to bank on something catastrophic occurring in 1914 if the facts indicate otherwise.

  • wasblind

    "Essan, the purpose of this thread was to distinguish Jehovah's Witnesses from "mind-control cults" and false prophets"

    Then go back to the thread that Dogpatch started on false prophets, your not done there yet!!!

  • Essan

    Consfearacy said: Essan, the purpose of this thread was to distinguish Jehovah's Witnesses from "mind-control cults" and false prophets.

    I understand that. However, the JW's are "False Prophets" as was proven in the evidence laden thread you just abandoned for this one:


    So, of course I'm going to address your false claims in you make them anew here.

    You said: For starters, Russell and the early Bible students had to speak with some certainty if anyone was to take them at all seriously.

    Why, because God couldn't function in his purpose otherwise? Because His 'sheep' have to be scammed with bombastic and bold claims and predictions that can't be delivered upon? I think you underestimate Him. You are using human reasoning. Speaking with certainty that is not warranted in God's name is "False Prophesy". In any case, speaking with certainty about predictions which then fail - repeatedly - proves that no one should take them seriously.

    You said: If they did make direct statements in admission to fallibility and not receiving divine revelation from a supernatural source as in the case of the prophets recorded in the Bible, they are distinguishing themselves from men God directly communicated with. They didn't have to clarify this every time they spoke about the future.

    But as the quotes above show the Society and it's leaders certainly did speak of " receiving divine revelation from a supernatural source", in terms identical in meaning.

    And of course they "distinguished themselves" from TRUE Prophets in the Bible, because they are "False Prophets". You can't do much more to distinguish your self from a "True Prophet" than by acting as a false one! You are comparing them to the wrong prophets. If you compare them, their actions, words and particularly their failures to false prophets in the Bible, then you will find an exact match. You also need to account for the false prophets in the NT whom Jesus and the Bible writers specifically warned us of for what the JW's say is "our day": those who would falsely announce the arrival of Christ! - just as the Society did, several times. The Society perfectly match Jesus description. Few, if any others, match it quite so well.

    In fact, your criteria is not Scriptural but is invented to try to get the Society off the hook. I challenged Debator to find verses where false prophets were condemned in the Bible where they specifically claimed "Direct communication from God through supernatural means" or "Inspiration" etc. because she, like you, falsely claimed that this was the crucial identifying mark of a "False Prophet" and had to be explicitly stated by the False Prophet. She couldn't provide a single verse where these false prophets made such specific claims.

    Can you?

    But bear in mind, even a couple of examples in not enough. You would need to show that everyone identified as a false prophet in the Bible made such explicit claims to prove that the Society also had to make such claims in order to qualify as a "False Prophet".

    All a false prophet needed to do to be identified as false was to proclaim something, often a prediction, in God's name which was not true or did not come true. Deut. 18:20-22. The fact that anyone even attempts to predict something and proclaims it as certain and claims it as being of "Divine Origin" automatically shows they are attempting to fill the role of a prophet and everyone understood that to be the case. They didn't need to, and never did, explicitly say "Oh, I'm a prophet by the way and this prediction comes to your courtesy of God directly through inspiration!", they just predicted in God's name and their prediction failed. This the Society has done many times, as the few quoted examples in my first post and in the linked thread above show.

    God's Prophets in the Bible didn't claim infallibility in all they did and said. They were fallible and would acknowledge that. But when they spoke in God's name, with his authority, and predicted future events at specific they were not fallible, or else they would not dare to speak or make a prediction his name (unless they were "False Prophets"). So there is no difference with the Society here regarding fallibility, except that the Society did dare to speak out and predict in God's name when they were not authorized or equipped. When it suited the Society they occasionally said they were not infallible - but only after a prediction for which they had previously claimed infallibility had failed or was near enough to failure to scare them!

    Fear driven inconsistency, and swinging from "this is an infallible prediction!" to later lyingly protesting that "we didn't intend to claim infallibility", is no defense.

Share this