Do Jehovah's Witnesses know what happened to them in 1954?

by Terry 60 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • kepler
    kepler

    Terry,

    Your topic here gives more definition to a fuzzy picture I had been wondering about. I couldn't put my finger on it.

    In initially addressing issues on line here, I have used the pamphlet "What the Bible Really Teaches" as a jumping off point, a book that to an outsider like myself throws a whole lot of Biblical references at the reader. If a dream in Daniel can trump a Gospel in doctrine, well what could I say? But I would ask "What does this all mean?"

    In the midst of this I was doing some independent research - and I located the transcripts of the 1954 (!!) Walsh trial where Franz and other officers testified in a court in Scotland. To my surprise I had discovered that the Brooklyn crew testified to their belief that Jesus was the Archangel Michael. It was news to me. And here I was taking all of this instruction ( on behalf of my ex) where no expense was spared to point out the error of thinking that Jesus was part of the Trinitiy ( whether I personally believed it or not).

    But where did it say what they believed?

    In an Appendix of the book.

    Why?

    Because it fit into the concept of corporate organization in heaven - or an army - or a corporation - and a battle was coming up with Satan. There had to be a chain of command. Besides, in an epistle it was suggested that Jesus or Michael had a voice like a trumpet.

    This was it? No wonder this book was not up front about its beliefs.

    In one of the few times I had attended a Sunday service back in the spring of 2009 with my ex, I was struck by the WatchTower text for the day. It was an examination of "stumbling" in Matthew - and in questioning people were encouraged to say how willing they were to cut off their arms or cast their eyes out. I did not observe any missing limbs or sensory organs. In passing, Christ's Sermon on the Mount was mentioned - and the text referred to his theme of "Blessed are..." as something I remember quite well in its strange condescension.

    "Nifty."

    I had assumed that the organization was not just Bible based, but lost in a sea of apocalyptic pronouncement based on the Old Testament. I hadn't stop to consider or even sensed that power and devotion were being concentrated on a present day institution.

  • kepler
    kepler

    Yes, an added note.

    What cast me into outer darkness was the answer to a question about what I had learned in school the previous December weekend.

    I said I noticed how Luke 23:39-43 was translated in the NWT.

    That cost me everything.

  • jwfacts
    jwfacts

    Sazz - i cant believe what im reading here! do you guys honestly believe that refinements in knowledge should not be made?

    I cannot believe you think it is acceptable for a religion make changes, when they claim God directs their teachings, when they make doctrine on life and death subjects, when they do not allow followers to question their teachings, and then force family members to shun each other if they do.

  • Terry
    Terry

    I had assumed that the organization was not just Bible based, but lost in a sea of apocalyptic pronouncement based on the Old Testament. I hadn't stop to consider or even sensed that power and devotion were being concentrated on a present day institution.

    Not to put too fine a point on it, christianity for JW's is less about Christ and more about the Brand. It is less about the bible and more about their

    special accomplishment the eisogesis laden NWT. Our fellow man is not the focus of our love because we should devote all our loyalty to obedience

    to the pronouncements of the GB.

    This religion is so fingerprint-laden with man's tampering and hubris it is hard to swallow it can pass muster as christian at all.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    ohhh wowww..... i cant believe what im reading here! do you guys honestly believe that refinements in knowledge should not be made?

    Sazz seems to refuse to acknowledge the fact that the WTS. never was inspired to tell the Truth, it was always inspired to proliferate

    its published works as well to create a semblance of power toward men who were the editorial leaders and that in essence is the Truth.

    Lies and corruption which were spread by misinformation and coercive alluring tactics.

    The WTS/JWs is an Corporate organization of false prophets, if you do not accept this then you personally are going against the written

    word of the bible itself.

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW
    At the end of the day no one is forced to follow the rules..Sas

    Your in the Wrong Place ..

    To Lie for the WBT$..

    ...................... mutley-ani1.gif image by GeneralWaco ...OUTLAW

  • wasblind
    wasblind

    Every group of people may start out believing something and realize that it doesnt work out so good or it isnt exactly true and then they refine it.___Sazz

    Question: Did Jehovah allow the Prophet Hananiah to refine the things he said when they weren't true ??????

    If so, How many ????

  • garbonzo
    garbonzo

    My Dad: "The GB is only studying the Bible to know what Jehovah wants. They can make mistakes." New light yo.

  • Finkelstein
    Finkelstein

    The GB is only studying the Bible to know what Jehovah wants.

    The real truth ......... The GB study and express what they need and the religious publishing company (WTS.) which they are executive directors of.

    Jehovah would never support the lies and corruption of this organization.

    Jehovah would never support a commercialized false prophet/profit.

  • Terry
    Terry

    Every word printed by the Organization has indicated a double standard between their own pronouncements and that of other religions.

    The Watchtower considers itself as carefully "selected" by Almighty God, "guided" and "edited" by heaven.

    But, the use of this sort of language has been awkward when errors become obvious.

    Plausible Deniability has crept in since around 1925 and Rutherfords "I made an ass of myself" self-identification.

    Wouldn't it have been a different mindset if Rutherford had said, "Jehovah allowed me to make an ass of myself."?

    Or, what about "Jehovah made an ass out of me."

    Retreating behind a faceless generic Governing Body voice the so-called "human" element is only pulled out and scape-goated when

    things get really bad.

    How about we get these writers to explain?

    Break it down for us, will you?

    How much of what you print are you GUESSING about? Is any of it mysteriously numinous?

    No, the Watchtower wants it both ways without any detailed breakdown of where man's opinion and hypothesis ends and Divine spirit begins.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit