Crisis of Conscience, Apostacy and the Antichrist

by konceptual99 30 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • konceptual99
    konceptual99

    I've just finished reading CoC and it's truely a thought provoking book that's given me much to think about.

    One thing that has struck me is the way RF was disfellowshipped and how he tried to reason with the elders on the JC. A key point of reasoning was that how the elders could define the disassocated one he ate with as "the antichrist" or one practicing the things described in 1 Cor 9. Apparently the elders either remain silent on the matter or said it was not for them to judge.

    I thought the reasoning was really sound but I have been doing some checking on the definition of apostacy and the antichrist according to the society and it seems pretty clear to me that anyone guilt of apostacy becomes part of the antichrist. Characteristics of apostacy as defined in the it-1 book are described as follows:

    Among the varied causes of apostasy set forth in apostolic warnings were: lack of faith (Heb 3:12), lack of endurance in the face of persecution (Heb 10:32-39), abandonment of right moral standards (2Pe 2:15-22), the heeding of the “counterfeit words” of false teachers and “misleading inspired utterances” (2Pe 2:1-3; 1Ti 4:1-3; 2Ti 2:16-19; compare Pr 11:9), and trying “to be declared righteous by means of law” (Ga 5:2-4). While still making profession of faith in God’s Word, apostates may forsake his service by treating lightly the preaching and teaching work that he assigned to followers of Jesus Christ. (Lu 6:46; Mt 24:14; 28:19, 20) They may also claim to serve God but reject his representatives, his visible organization, and then turn to ‘beating’ their former associates to hinder their work. (Jude 8, 11; Nu 16:19-21; Mt 24:45-51) Apostates often seek to make others their followers. (Ac 20:30; 2Pe 2:1, 3)

    It then goes right on to say:

    Such ones willfully abandoning the Christian congregation thereby become part of the “antichrist.” (1Jo 2:18, 19)

    So that firmly lumps the two together thus any similar reasoning to that offered by RF can be easily rebuffed, especially since the 1 Jo 2:18 & 19 link the antichrist with those that "went out from us".

    Clearly the John scripture was there all the time so I am wondering if application of aposates and the antichrist has changed over the years or if it's just that the elders in RF's case were a bit slow to use the scriptures? I appreciate that the whole perspective of the antichrist, apostacy and so on will be different amongst people rigidly following the society's line as opposed to those seeking to follow a less judgemental path but since it's not actually that difficult to be branded an apostate it would be really interesting to know if there are any strategies for questioning things and expressing doubts that reduce the risk?
  • leavingwt
    leavingwt

    Reasoning with the elders = a fool's errand

  • EntirelyPossible
    EntirelyPossible

    Tell them to have big cup of shut the fuck up and go play golf. It will make you feel much better than trying to reason with elders and be much more productive.

  • ldrnomo
    ldrnomo

    Well I think I might be guilty of "abandoning the Christian congregation"

  • ldrnomo
    ldrnomo

    Well I think I might be guilty of "abandoning the Christian congregation"

  • King Solomon
    King Solomon

    Such ones willfully abandoning the Christian congregation thereby become part of the “antichrist.” (1Jo 2:18, 19)

    But what if I don't wanna serve the antichrist? Can they force me to join another cult, a false belief system? Those JWs are not content to let me out of their grip, which is weird, cuz' I will not believe in whatever imaginary being they care to dream up!

    It's funny how they think that since they can't shake their addiction to the mentally-stupifying beliefs in supernatural beings, then no one else can, either....

  • konceptual99
    konceptual99

    I can understand the logic of not even bothering trying to reason but I may have to.

    The underlying purpose of the question is that if I continue to question my faith then I am going to have to do something about it and that will eventually involve the elders. I want to keep them off my back for as long as possible, especially as I have to consider my wife and kids. I've always found that a combination of weak reasoning along with procedural naivety has meant previous encounters with the elders over things like my qualifications as an MS have never amounted to much but when it comes to the dreaded apostacy then the gloves very quickly come off.

    I am just interested to know if the magins of what the society has defined as apostacy and it's relationship to the antichrist has broaded over the past 20-30 years or if RF's experience was just down to some weaknesses on the part of the elders. The route I am going means I may full well have to answer a charge at some point and if it happened too soon then it would be really powerful to use arguments that would keep me on the "doubter to be helped" as opposed to "traitor" side of the line.

  • King Solomon
    King Solomon

    I dare say you're giving the organization too much credit, assuming there is a need to be consistent; local practices from congregation to congregation may differ. This is not the US Supreme Court we're talking about here, where prior precedent is considered.

    RF was eliminated from the organization, by hook or by crook: it didn't matter what he said, he'd still be shown the exit....

  • irondork
    irondork

    You quoted the Insight book, vol. 1, p. 127 and then referred to it's reasoning as "firm".

    "So that firmly lumps the two together thus any similar reasoning to that offered by RF can be easily rebuffed, especially since the 1 Jo 2:18 & 19 link the antichrist with those that "went out from us""

    The WTS makes this scripture out to mean "anyone who leaves the JW religion." But the bible gives it's own definition to it's own statement, "went out from us."

    1 John 2:22,23

    Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one that denies the Father and the Son. Everyone that denies the Son does not have the Father either. He that confesses the Son has the Father also.

    Leaving the WTS is not the definition of "going out from us." Leving Jesus is.

    Also -- 2 John 8:9,10

    Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to YOU and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into YOUR homes or say a greeting to him.

  • konceptual99
    konceptual99

    Ahha... good references @irondork - I've not gone through all the references on this so not looked at those ones yet.

    My point about "firm" is not so much that it makes it firm in my mind but that 1 Jo 2:18,19 when looked at in isolation does make a link that is hard to argue against.....until.....you look at other references such as the ones you've mentioned.

    These do show that it's recognising the Christ that is key. That's all well and good until you decide that you turn into an athiest ;-)

    Thanks for the info!

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit