Will they get rid of the FDS concept?

by Hermano 33 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Hermano

  What do they need the FDS concept for? It's a weak idea, based on one scripture which is a rhetorical question. They've already published several articles indicating that just because you are annointed doesn't mean you have any special insight, so they've already disconnected annointed from leadership. Why not just get rid of the ridiculous FDS concept and just tell everyone to obey the Governing Body? It's no secret that they are the real leaders...

  And once they do that they leave the door open to changing 144,000 from a literal number to a symbolic number. After all, they already reversed the "door to heaven closing in 1935."

  So really, what does the FDS concept gain them at this point? Why not just do away with it?
• 

  leavingwt

  The only way to properly run a cult is to have an authoritarian leadership structure. The FDS provides this. God only deals with them. Top-down. Individual members are not important.
• 

  donuthole

  I think they need to impress on the flock that their claims to authority is 'Biblical'. If anything I think the FDS will be folded into the GB completely, instead of the current teaching that it is all 'anointed'.
• 

  Ding

  I don't think JWs are questioning the current teaching at all.

  So why change something that works so well to keep JWs in line?

  If they do change it at all, they may say the FDS = the GB rather than the entire 144,000 but I can't see them doing away with it.

  Their whole authority structure depends on them having been appointed by Christ to rule his earthly affairs.
• 

  King Solomon

  So really, what does the FDS concept gain them at this point? Why not just do away with it?

  Really? And kill the goose that laid the golden egg?

  I suppose they could've claim authority to serve as mediators, based on OT thinking pertaining to the Levite tribes (the ones who ran the temple).

  However, why do THAT, when they could simply appeal to Jesus? Remember, he was a veritable fountain head of half-formed nebulous concepts (AKA parables), and he mistakenly left one lying around that was PERFECT (well, not really, but it'll do), just begging to be twisted into a prophecy that has proven very lucrative indeed to those who co-opted it for their own purposes.

  The GB has squeezed out the authority of the anointed ones, just so they can't have some cranky ol' 90 yr old fools try to pull rank on them, telling them what they should do (I'm sure they had enough of those interlopers in the last century). What self-installed authoritarian body ASKS for oversight? Now they just have to wait for the anointed class to die off, and then everyone will forget about the 1914 "last generation" thing, and they're the last man standing.

  Interestingly, the NWT is the ONLY translation that translates the phrase as, "faithful and DISCREET servant"; ALL the others translate it as "faithful and WISE servant". I still haven't gotten any explanation of why they chose the word, "discreet", unless they were trying to discourage the kind of thing Ray Franz ended up doing: indiscreetly sharing insider dirty-laundry....
• 

  Hermano

  Just to clarify, I'm not talking about the leadership structure. I'm saying I dont think the rank and file buys the idea that: the 144,000 = the FDS = "providing food at proper time". Don't most of them know that really it's Governing Body = FDS = "providing food at proper time"? If so, then why not just get rid of the FDS idea and go with other scriptures which they use to justify the leadership structure. It just seems to me that the FDS idea is very shaky. Why is it needed at all?

  Once you're awake, it's really hard to think like those who are still in....
• 

  Hermano

  If anything I think the FDS will be folded into the GB completely, instead of the current teaching that it is all 'anointed'.

  Ok, donuthole. I can see that happening. It's just that the scriptural support for FDS seems very shaky. It's ONE scripture, where Jesus asks a rhetorical question. Who knows what the hell he could've meant? Seems to me that having that as a foundation of authority is lame and weak. Why not just get rid of that argument altogether and stick with "we are the equivalent of the 12 disciples and Jerusalem council"? (And I know there are weaknesses there too, but at least it sounds ok at face value.)
• 

  cedars

  Hermano - I know what you're getting at, but I think the FDS myth actually serves as quite a vital "smokescreen" doctrine. It muddies the waters just sufficiently to leave ordinary Witnesses under the illusion that they are being led by a large crowd of people numbering into the thousands rather than the reality, which is seven guys in Brooklyn.

  If the FDS provides such a useful doctrinal smokescreen, why get rid of it?

  Cedars
• 

  King Solomon

  Once you're awake, it's really hard to think like those who are still in....

  Ahhhh, just try not to think about it: that's exactly what it's like for those who are still in.

  They are told that all things will be revealed in due time, patience is a virtue, wait on Jehovah, etc. It's a JW version of a royal kiss-off, the "go away kid, you bother me" thing, if someone asks too many annoying questions.... Soon people take the hint and don't bother asking, nodding their head like idiots as if their question has been answered to their satisfaction and they understand, when it really hasn't....
• 

  leavingwt

  The FDS is represented by the GB.

  Doctrine is irrelevant.

  Where else would they go?