May’s ‘study WT’ admits having taught “far-fetched” ideas

by wheelwithinwheel 48 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • John Aquila
    John Aquila

    Type = (Matthew 24:45) . . .“Who really is the faithful and discreet slave . . .
    Antitypes = Governing Body


  • Finkelstein

    Humanity being unified and supportive upon lies, fear and ignorance.

    The WTS .came up with select doctrines to enhance the proliferation of its own published goods, plain and simple.

    That and to self empower the men at the top levels of the organization.

  • steve2

    When my otherwise dear JW aunt demanded to know why I was no longer going to meetings, I said I could not answer because I would be seen as questioning the brothers, she spat back at me what nonsense I was talking because the Watchtower had the Questions from Readers section! She was serious.

    I did not need additional proof of how hopelessly dim-witted dedicated Witnesses are - but her equating 'asking questions' with the airbrushed spin of Questions from Readers simply confirmed how unsafe the organization is for those who dare question it and how willfully oblivious obedient Witnesses are to the machinations of religious authority.

  • sd-7

    This article will have no meaning to most JWs other than a curious sort of history. Its implications, however, are potentially HUGE. I'm talking practically any of the various teachings they've held to, including 1914, could be demolished by the very argument they're using here.

    After all, given that the Bible doesn't clearly identify the Kingdom/God's sovereignty as an antitype of the giant tree in Nebuchadnezzar's dream, we need not conclude that the seven times were anything but a lesson to humble Nebuchadnezzar. Of course they'll never use the argument this way, but they could. It gives them an out, and all they have to do is use it whenever the right time for it (ie. when it's most useful to their purposes) arrives.

    The curious thing is, that while they specifically mention some examples of antitypes they used, they DO NOT include references/footnotes to the overwhelming majority of the articles they mentioned. (So the average JW is not going to bother trying to look them up.) Instead of going into detail about what the Watchtower articles specifically said, they preferred to use outlandish examples from Origen, Jerome, etc. People who were NOT Jehovah's Witnesses, who were members of 'Christendom'. Given that such men's ideas would be considered as decidedly false, that tells you a lot about how such 'antityping', to coin a word, is being viewed here.

    And it goes even deeper than that. Not limiting a particular story's meaning to just the anointed also potentially paves the way--at least in theory--for making major changes to this two-class system. The great crowd are already domestics, a place previously held by anointed. This could--could--be used to justify some other imaginary 'privilege' being assigned to the great crowd, like actually considering them as 'God's children' as well, for once. Not likely, but still possible.

    So rather than admitting their own teachings were "far-fetched", they use that term about Christendom's writers (the aforemention Origen/Jerome/etc.), thus deftly avoiding calling attention to their own religion's obviously outlandish teachings. It was a bait and switch. They were talking about their own literature, but then changed the subject under examination to false religious teachers. If you're paying attention, though, this can be summed up by saying "Fred Franz was a false religious teacher, and that's why we don't teach what he taught anymore." Fascinating. It's a great read, if you're up for a laugh.

    Wow. Times really are a-changin' in Watchtowerville. These guys might even approach the same zip code as admitting a mistake one day. ... Naaah!


  • Finkelstein

    I find find it humorously ironic that even when the WTS tries to white wash over its many false doctrines they are still

    complacently dishonest and self supportingly corrupt in their attempt.

  • daringhart13
    This will only matter to the very, very small minority that actually studies or reads ...... the vast majority of JWs have no clue...... they put out zero effort. They don't know anything about these subjects and they make no effort to study now....... it all ends up on deaf ears.
  • steve2

    You mean the average Witness actually knows about the concepts of Types and Antitypes? That's an unfounded assumption. As with a lot of telling adjustments, it won't make a scrap of difference to your "average" JW - which is why it is hidden in a Questions from Readers article.

    I know Witnesses who still refer to the Evil Slave class - even though the literal reading of that parable was ditched by the GB a few years ago.

    Don't expect a clarification any year soon.

  • jwleaks

    From the article:

    Some writers in the centuries after Christ’s death fell into a trap—they saw types everywhere.

    Glad to see that years later they are still referencing Charles Taze Russell, Joseph F Rutherford and Frederick W Franz in The Watchtower magazine.

    Types and Antitypes

  • DarioKehl

    Is this article the one being considered tomorrow at the meeting?

    this may give us a slight edge in debates. If this is all being tossed, then how can we have confidence in their interpretation of the blood doctrine or that 144,000 is a literal number rather than symbolic? They just gave us free ammunition.

  • jwleaks
    DarioKehl - Is this article the one being considered tomorrow at the meeting?

    No. It is the same magazine but is the Question from Readers. The GB and WTBTS would never allow a new doctrinal change to be considered the first-time at a meeting. It is always made known first (i.e. revealed), generally and primarily to English-speaking JW's living in the USA, such as through a corporate AGM of the WTBTS or through a public talk (test the market), that can always be discredited as the thoughts of an imperfect individual. By the time it makes it to the Watchtower magazine for 'study' it is no longer "new light" but clarification.

Share this