guys, even if honourstheisis has a political agenda or a right wing agenda or any other agenda and has never been a JW - we are up to arguing our own sides (whatever they may be) - aren't we? I think we are
Blind Allegiance to G.B. supported by scripture?
by honorsthesis 47 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Mad Sweeney
if those following had abandoned him because of Moses error and followed their own individual lead, they wouldn't have made it to the promised land
First, NO ONE who left Egypt except Joshua and Caleb made it to the promised land, ANYWAY. Fat lot of good following Moses out of Egypt did. THEY ALL DIED IN THE WILDERNESS except for two guys.
There is NO EVIDENCE that if a family or group had decided to leave Moses that they wouldn't have made it to the promised land. None. In fact, it probably would have only been a matter of weeks rather than 40 years to get there. Would they have been welcomed with open arms? Maybe not, but a small group could probably have integrated and found a nice niche for themselves in the area had they struck out on their own to make alliances in a local town or village. What evidence do the elders have that this is not so? None.
You're wasting your time reasoning with these guys. Ray Franz tried reasoning from the scriptures and it did absolutely no good. In fact it backfired in many negative ways (stricter rules on DF and DA, more counsel to trust the Borg, less counsel to trust and train the conscience, etc.). You're just going to get yourself kicked out. You might plant some seeds, so good luck with that, but you won't be around to see them sprouting.
-
ProdigalSon
I wonder what's worse.... rulership by committee or by a dictatorship as in the days of Rutherford or Knorr....
One of the biggest problems with the Bible is that you can make it say any damn thing you want. Donald C. Burney is one of the best examples of this I have ever seen. He made himself the scapegoat Messiah and it really reads convincingly the way he isolates scriptures. The Watchtower should really hire him to reinvent the religion at a time they desperately need it. If he had a GB backing up his crap the dubs would believe it hook line and sinker.
-
Listener
As others have mentioned how are they able to prove it? Moses was appointed by God and he knew this without a doubt, God's messages were clearly conveyed to him by what we would call miraculous ways. How is it that the GB sure they were appointed without them just saying so? How has Jesus conveyed this message to them?
-
TD
I agree with you than man should not be followed blindly. If there's one consistent lesson the Bible teaches, that would be it. Isn't that why Aaron was punished along with Moses at Meribah? Because he was complicit when Moses sinned even though Moses was God's anointed?
But in the scenario you give, I would side with your JW elders. But not for the reasons they give.
The idea that Matthew 24:34 has any meaning whatsoever beyond Jesus' original audience is an example of typology. It's method of Biblical interpretation that is extremely speculative and has a past track record of being 100% wrong. The "generation teaching" in all it's forms is therefore unproven and unprovable. The frequent reinterpretations should be evidence enough of that.
If you have a difference of interpretation on something so speculative that there is no possible way to prove that you are right and they are wrong and it bothers you to the point where you can't just adopt a "Wait and see" attitude, you probably should find a new church. Any church you belong to is going to want a certain amount of doctrinal conformity and JW's want more conformity than most. That's a prior condition for association.
I think a better scenario would be one where going along with a teaching would involve a clear violation of God's law if the teaching is wrong. You could have a field day with the "blood issue" for example, because it would be very, very easy to become "bloodguilty" (As JW's define the term) if something happens to be wrong. And in that regard, there are clear examples where people died remaining faithful to proscriptions that have since been reversed.
-
WontLeave
Personally, I love when they use Moses as an example of the GB. It demonstrates beyond any doubt how they can look right at Jesus' words and then spit on them. They love to apply Bible examples to everyone except themselves. Somehow, they are exempt from all lessons to be learned.
The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses. - Mat 23:2
The Pharisees tried the same thing, touting their position, invoking some other historical figure, but John the Baptist and Jesus dismissed that.
and do not presume to say to yourselves, "As a father we have Abraham." - John 3:9
The GB love to perform mental gymnastics to shoehorn in some Bible "evidence" of their unquestionable authority. But, when clear, point-for-point descriptions of the Pharisees fit them like a glove, suddenly they don't see any correlation. Lately, I've been thinking about how they use the doctrine of JWs to establish their authority (since the 607 BCE + Daniel's prophesy thing clearly doesn't work - see my timetable). I know many here have come to believe the Trinity and other "mainstream" church teachings and I'm not going to get into all that, because those arguments have been made for hundreds of years, already.
Personally, I believe JW doctrine to be the most sound of any denomination, but Jesus didn't argue doctrine with the Pharisees. The only mention of anything doctrinal, that I recall, was the Resurrection, with the Sadducees. Everything else was policy, which is exactly what the GB keeps failing on, over and over again. They set up hoops and draw lines in the sand, then demand we conform to the standards they set. Even the 1914 "generation" thing; what difference does it make? Being a Christian doesn't have an expiration date, so the GB can set up all the false dates they want and that shouldn't affect us.
But, they require it does! They demand we preach their falsehoods and believe their delusions. The back-room Inquisitions call "heresy" at anyone not towing the current party line. Therein lies the problem, because "The error of the inquirer will prove to be just the same as the error of the prophet" (Eze 14:10) and "If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit" (Mat 15:14). I refuse to share the blood guilt and will not preach things I know to be questionable or false.
It's each person's responsibility to educate him/herself, so as not to be someone else's blind follower (Eph 4:15-15). If we ignore the repeated warnings from the Bible to not allow our consciences to be enslaved to men, there will be no sympathy for us (Jer 17:5). Even the GB itself has pointed out all the evidence we need, to avoid submitting to human rule of the congregation, in their own literature. They've brought up the subject of the Pharisees many times. Even in recent WT articles where they promote idolatry - worship of the WTBTS and unquestioning devotion to the GB - they begin the articles with sound Scriptural instruction to reject human leadership. It's as though, somehow (by Jehovah's Holy Spirit, perhaps) they are compelled to tell the truth, even when they're about to lie. And their blinded minds don't even realize they give themselves away to anyone who is willing to see it.
-
Quendi
I had an interesting discussion about the role of a "Governing Body" with some JW friends a few months ago. The WTS says that the Governing Body of today are successors to the original Governing Body set up in the first century. However, a close examination of the role of the Twelve Apostles and older men in the Jerusalem congregation shows they had nothing to do with administrative matters in the early Church. Neither did they issue any doctrinal decrees for all congregations to follow with the exception of the circumcision question. Nowhere do we see them making appointments except the seven men who oversaw food distribution to Christian widows in Jerusalem in the days immediately following the founding of the Church at Pentecost.
None of the epistles, gospels, and other New Testament writings talk about a governing body or group of men charged with oversight and administration in the Christian Church. And it is interesting that of the Twelve Apostles, only John, Matthew, and Peter were inspired to write anything of importance. Paul, who wrote fourteen epistles to early Christians, was not a member of the Jerusalem congregation even though he was accounted an "apostle"--though not one of the Twelve.
Acts 1:20-22 says that a replacement for Judas was needed so that there would be Twelve witnesses of Jesus' resurrection. And when the question of food distribution arose, Acts 6:1-6 shows that the Twelve Apostles, while acknowledging the importance of this "necessary business", saw themselves as preachers first. They handed off the administration of the food distribution problem to others and devoted themselves "to prayer and the ministry of the word."
I believe the New Testament shows there was no "governing body" that acted as administrators of the first century church. Rather, individual congregations chose their own officers and occupied themselves with the preaching work. They didn't send back reports to Jerusalem. They did not ask the apostles and older men there to oversee any aspect of the preaching work. They certainly cooperated together, but that was for the sole purpose of preaching the gospel and winning converts to their religion. The New Testament writings were certainly circulated among the various congregations and these inspired works did help Christians understand many things, but those were directly inspired by God's holy spirit and weren't issued as a result of discussions by some self-apponted body of elitists. In my view, no allegiance is owed to some "Governing Body" for such an arrangement is unscriptural. The WTS's reasoning is specious at best and should not be relied upon. A Christian's Bible-trained conscience, created by reading the Bible for oneself, should guide him. Also we can take the disciple James' inspired counsel and ask for divine wisdom when confronted with puzzling situations. --James 1: 5-8
Quendi
-
yesidid
Thank you WontLeave and Quendi for your well thought out posts.
y
-
Band on the Run
Based on a thread I posted, I suspect Curtains is HonorsThesis. I do hesitate b/c I can't believe anyone would do it so obviously.
Of course, I agree with the points. Here, you preach to the choir. The Witnesses never came close to hinting they would accept debate. It is a cult. From my reading of the historical Jesus, I believe he had much in common with the Pharisees. He believed in local worship in daily life as opposed to the Temple cult (cult with a different sense). He dined with them. The anger with the Pharisees appears to stem from the martyrdoms and other persecutions when Stephen preached at the Temple. Jesus died a good Jewish boy. His followers evidently thought they were part of Judaism. They are surprised by the vehemence to Stephen. The Jewish authorities wanted nothing to do with this movement, and, more importantly they wanted Rome to know that Jesus followers were NOT Jews. This antiJewish spirit from the time of New Testament authorship colors the narrative of Jesus in the Gospels.
The Witnesses are not the Oxford Debating Club. They never promised freedom of thought. Rather, from day one, they insisted on rigid control over thought, time, education, marriage, work -- every sphere of human life. Being a Witness does not mean showing up for KH once a week. It is a total commitment of mind and body. The merest shred of scientific evidence trouncing Witness teachings caused my aunt to be borderline nuts. It challenged her worldview. She retreated further into the borg. Most Witnesses lead very narrow lives.
I argued with them when I fled. Now, though, I feel my reasoning and facts are so much better than what they have access to that it like arguing with a small child. The advantage is all mine so I try to have grace. Besides, individual Witnesses, while annoying, are generally nice, wholesome people. Somehow I was provided opportunities they were not. The GB is not nice and wholesome, though. Arguing often makes them go deeper into the cluthes of Bethel. Rather, I believe the best remedy is that God will work on them in his own timeframe, not mine.
-
Listener
Quendi and Wontleave, as someone already mentioned, thanks your thoughts are particularly well said.
Wontleave said - It's as though, somehow (by Jehovah's Holy Spirit, perhaps) they are compelled to tell the truth, even when they're about to lie. And their blinded minds don't even realize they give themselves away to anyone who is willing to see it.
I would appreciate it if you could expand on this. Do you think that even though they are stuck with some old beliefs and it limits them in being more accurate with bible teachings that somehow they get it fairly close to the truth?