How the Good work of Russell became the curse of the Watchtower today

by Terry 30 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Terry

  I can remember---actually CLEARLY REMEMBER---listening to some objection with one ear while formulating my rebuttal at the same instant.

  That makes me feel very ashamed.

  It means I was an intellectually dishonest person. I was pretending to be in a real conversation.

  I was actually disrespecting the other person as much as you can. Whatever they might say was granted no validity BEFORE they opened their mouth.

  If it didn't agree with Dogma it was hogwash.

  I wonder if I even existed as a person during my JW years?

  I was like a recording. Push my button and out came a canned speech.

  Disgusting.
• 

  Quentin

  There was a time I was VERY adept with dates. Like a zombie stumbling after fresh meat sinking my teeth in and gourging on whatever was shot down the fds pipe.

  We ALL had wt doctrine hammered into us by ministrey school rote, even to the point that some hh and co-workers were awed by our Bible knowledge, watchtower prince's led by king jehovah and holy sprit dumped willy-nilly onto the fds. Our days of Wine and Roses.
• 

  Aussie Oz

  good stuff

  glad it got btt

  oz
• 

  Kensho

  Terry

  Good stuff ! where do you locate this old info? They sure do not have this on the CD and the library at the Kh has been cleared of anything from around the 50's back.

  I am new here posting but have trolled for several months and must say without blowing your ego up to much, your posts along with a handful of people on here are very informative and seem to be well documented.

  I would like to read your story assuming it is on here someone. Thanks and keep it coming.

  Kensho Satori
• 

  QuitWastingTIME

  Kensho, I do believe that some KH libraries still have those old books and possibly bound volumes. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that there's probably some old books in your KH library. Like Quentin said, wine and "ROSES". May the "GRACE" of God be with you.

  Yes, there is a riddle here, it is solvable, and it will lead you to what you seek. I can't be any more candid that this because of the WT trollers. heh.

  Nothing is true. Everything is permissible.
• 

  Quentin

  Kensho, some posters have personel libraries that go back years into wt dogma. Also, the internet is filled to the brim with wt history. Then there are ths Bible Students who follow Russlle's teachings, and have, since they broke away from the jw's in Rutherfords day. They tell a different story about Russel and Rutherford than what the wt states.

  Hardcopy books and bound volumes can be found via grage sales, old bookstores , the local library and college libraries, even e-bay. Some of us can relate individual experence, easly docomented as well. It's out there, have to look for it.
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Hi Terry. Today I am reading your posts of this 11-year old topic (which I found by doing a search on certain words) and I am impressed by what you wrote in this topic. I am especially impressed by your first post of this topic. You make an excellent point of saying that the WT's (and governing body's) doctrine of the faithful and discreet slave (at least of the core element of it) can be traced to an idea of Maria Russell (and to promotion of that idea by her). [Or, perhaps others associated with the Watchtower thought it up first, but she heavily promoted it, at least according the Proclaimer's book (If I recall correctly what it said about it).]
  
• 

  Terry

  Disillusioned JW Thanks for your kind words. Without knowing it active and faithful Jehovah's Witnesses today
  are in a copycat organization of Catholic hierarchy rejiggered and jerry-built as wave after wave of wacky opinions come and go under the banner of WE SAY SO and WE ARE ALL YOU'VE GOT!
  
  Each iteration of Watchtower President (and eventual Governing Body leader) has a crack at the guessing game called NEW LIGHT.
  
  An investment counselor whose advice resulted in bankruptcy after bankruptcy would be fired. His suggestions prove themselves right or wrong by real-world results.
  Getting it wrong is the best proof there is of ERROR.
  
  However ...
  Religious dependency cultivated by a cult is a psychological problem and not a logical problem.
  Goebbels said it best on behalf of the Nazi Reich self-promotion:
  
  

  "Tell the masses a lie often enough and for long enough, sooner or later they will all believe it. "

  ~ Joseph Goebbels
  
  The strangest change to policy and doctrine is the GB setting themselves up as a substitute for Christ (i.e. like the Pope who is the vicar of Christ (i.e. "stand-in.).
  JW's have a POPE and do not realize it.
  
  The anointed GB are OUR MEDIATOR and not Jesus Christ!!
  
  Ask any JW the following question: "If our Mediator is the Faithful Slave (anointed), why do we not end our prayers in THEIR NAME instead of Jesus? Isn't that jumping the shark?"
  
  
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Terry, another excellent point you made is the following you said as the source of authority that the governing body relies upon.

  "IT ALL RESTS MERELY ON THEIR OWN ASSERTIONS.

  Mark this one fact and it all falls into place:

  The fragility of the bible as a source authority must NEVER be allowed to be discussed!

  Why?

  It is the bundling of their own peculiar interpretions (under the guise of "mouthpiece") with BIBLE that is the engine that drives the Governing Body's authority.

  If people ever really knew facts about the errancy of the Bible and started investigating on their on the house of cards would quickly tumble.

  THE BIBLE MUST BE PROPPED UP NO MATTER WHAT!

  The Governing Body presents itself as the champion of God's Word. In reality, they are the champions of their own crazy thinking."

  In short (and I paraphrase), you correctly said that for the WT and its governing body (whom they themselves now say is exclusively the faithful and discreet slave) that "THE BIBLE MUST BE PROPPED UP NO MATTER WHAT!" That is why the WT literature has so often (going at least as far back as a volume of Russell's Studies in the Scriptures) condemned atheism and the theory of biological evolution. It even claimed and continues to claim that those ideas are doctrines of Satan the Devil. [For example see the following: The box on the bottom of page 95 of the 1981 WT book called "Let your Kingdom come".] It is like I said in a post about six days ago - "The Bible is an enabler for the WT religion!"

  Likewise, the WT and the governing body need their readers and followers to believe in the existence of a literal Satan the Devil. That is so that the WT and the governing body can attribute ideas they dislike to Satan the Devil (and/or his demons) and thus scare away people from investigating those ideas with an open mind. Besides evolution and atheism, those ideas include higher criticism of the Bible, the idea that the best governments are those who derive their authority bottom up from the people (even the common people) instead of top down from God (allegedly) through a theocracy, and various other ideas which are taught in various colleges, and ideas taught by ex-JWs who criticize the WT.
  

  For example notice how the WT conveys a a very negative disparaging idea of governments which derive their authority (or some of it) from the common people. [This is in contrast to the idea of the authoritarian divine rule of kings (and of other monarchs).] It is stated on pages 61 - 62 of the 1977 WT book called Our Incoming WORLD GOVERNMENT ~ God's Kingdom. There it says the following.

  'Despite the fragile nature of "clay" of which the "offspring of mankind" are made, the trend of human rulership in these last decades of its existence has been in which direction? No, not to God the Creator of the animated "clay," but to the creatures of clay, to the common people, the "proletariat" as the ancient Romans called the lowest or poorest class of people who contributed nothing but offspring (proles) to the political State. The old traditional rulership has been obliged to listen more and more to the clamor of the common people for a share in governments over them.

  56 However, there can be no marriage between the old aristocratic, authoritarian style of government and the common people who favor radical, thoroughgoing changes in government. No more so than there can be an amalgamation of iron with clay! The making of governments democratic by revolutions or otherwise has led on to radical proletarian forms of government.'

  The book classifies the "American Republic, the United States of America" as an authoritarian government [and the book on pages 60-61 calls "the Anglo-American World Power ... the greatest world power of them all from a human standpoint."] That government (the U.S.A) came into existence as a democratic republic by a violent revolution (against Britain, a monarchy then ruled by a king), and in one of its founding documents it claims that its government derives its authority from the people, yet as quoted above the book disparages governments which come into existence that way! The book is trying to have it both ways and in so doing it contradicts itself.
  
• 

  Disillusioned JW

  Correction: In my prior post where I said "... on pages 61 - 62 ..." I should have said "... on pages 62 - 63 ...".
  

  The writer of page 63 of the Our Incoming WORLD GOVERNMENT ~ God's Kingdom seems to be confused (or intentionally misleading) as to the meaning of the word "democratic". I say that because right after the sentence of "The making of governments democratic by revolutions or otherwise has led on to radical proletarian forms of government" on page 63 the writer says the following.

  "And these latter stand in an uncompromising opposition to the ironlike Seventh World Power, the Anglo-American Dual World Power. Till now the two forms of rulership have managed to live alongside each other, but there has been no real marriage between them. The radical, proletarian governments and blocs may appear to be very strong and seemingly outmaneuvering the Anglo-American World Power in strength." The writer thus seems to be writing about the then communist block of countries, but the governments of those countries (though coming about by by violent revolution by the common people along with a leader of theirs) are not democratic. It should also be noted that shortly after the USA created their republic by having a violent revolution against Britain, France created their republic by having an even more violent revolution. That revolution largely came from the common people and though the revolution soon led to a reign of terror, its nation eventually became a stable democratic republic It did not become communist. During World War II the USA became an ally of it. Wikipedia says the following about it at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/France . "France is representative democracy organised as a unitary, semi-presidential republic.[133] As one of the earliest republics of the modern world, democratic traditions and values are deeply rooted in French culture, identity and politics.[134] "