“New light” Watchtower magazine leaked from organization weeks ahead of general release

by cedars 211 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • AnnOMaly

    As one poster here has said before, the Bible Students have long thought JWs to be akin to the breakaway (apostate) 10 tribes of Israel. This NooLite™ will only further reinforce that view LOL.

  • AnnOMaly

    double post

  • sir82

    So how would the loyal dubbies on JWTalk know what an "apostate" mole had supplied an "apostate" blogger who has written about it on an "apostate" website?

    Sounds like there may be a mole or 2, or a double agent, on JWTalk.

    Imagine the tizzy they would be in if they knew the source! Paranoia would run rampant.

  • belbab

    I wish to comment on Oubliet's and Sir82's post.

    You indicate that there is some contradiction between The Governing Body as the slave and other anointed assistants also being a part of that "Faithful Slave"

    Before David Splane was appointed to the Governing Body he was named as a "helper" to the governing body as posted on this board some years ago.

    The GB has to perpetuate itself as members die off. They have to have others that qualify waiting on the sidelines to replace the ones dying off. So these ones groomed as replacements could with a stretch be considered as part of the gov. body, also.


  • breakfast of champions
    breakfast of champions

    When I was introduced to Mark Sanderson, he was described to me as "someone who works closely with the Govening Body." I thought maybe he took out the trash or made the coffee.

    Evidently, even before he was promoted, he was part of the "faithful slave class" "at headquarters."

  • alecholmesthedetective

    I thought maybe he took out the trash or made the coffee.

    Evidently, even before he was promoted, he was part of the "faithful slave class" "at headquarters."

    OMG Breakfast of Champions I love the perfect usage of the word "evidently" there. In true WT fashion.


  • whathappened

    I have read every post on this thread and am amazed by all the brilliant minds on this site. Thanks to Cedars, the mole, and all of you who have helped me try to navigate this crazy "new light." I feel like a deer in the headlights and am sure this is going to wake up a good deal of current witnesses. Let's hope so.

  • The Quiet One
  • The Quiet One
    The Quiet One

    " eagleeye2 wrote: I haven't read anything of this thread but the title and bystander's comments, but I have to ask who cares and what difference does it make? Shakespeare wrote a truth when he said,"That which we call a rose By any other name would smell as sweet." The job of faithful and discreet slave has been done faithfully and discreetly throughout thetime since Jesus Christ appointed them. That is all that matters to us whom they serve and to Jehovah and his Son. Only those with spiritual ADHD will be agitated. " http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-witness/T4CEDK8EPM7NEGETH/p3

  • sd-7

    Just finished reading the whole article, cedars. First let me say, a GIANT THUMBS-UP TO YOU, PAL! This is excellent stuff.

    Particularly I was pleased by the chance to research in a little more detail about the transition to Rutherford--even reading the Proclaimers book as a teenager I found that part of JW history to be troubling. I couldn't put my finger on what was wrong with the picture back then, but I knew that (1) this seemed like what would happen in a business out in 'the world', not in the Christian congregation and (2) Rutherford seemed like a real jerk who basically did a hostile takeover and centralized power in himself. But realizing that he basically did some legal wrangling and that there wasn't some 'apostasy' going on like the Society makes it seem in hindsight....really makes them out to be Lying With a Little Extra Tasty Crispy In It. Sorry, it's the first thing that came to mind. Must be hungry.

    It shouldn't amaze me every time they equate themselves to the apostles, to Jesus, or to God, or insert themselves in place of one of those three, but it always does. I'm just blown away at the fact that they used Matthew 4:4 to justify their authority. Matthew 4:4. And John 17:3. So they're saying that "man does not live on bread alone, but on every utterance coming through [the faithful slave's] mouth." And "this means everlasting life, taking in knowledge of you, the only [faithful slave], and of the one who [will give you authority over all his belongings], Jesus Christ."

    Hmm. Maybe they do need to write a new Bible, or maybe they already have, and that's what'll be released at the convention. Because this taking of such unbelievable liberties with the scriptures is...well, blasphemy is the only thing that comes to mind. To me, this is actually worse than say if you just don't believe in God. To basically say you are God, you are the mouth of God, and are to be obeyed as if you're God...it's usurping the throne of God. And of the Lamb, 'cause salvation is now attributed to obeying you. Hmm. Now that I think of it, guess that means all JWs have removed themselves from the 'great crowd' if they obey the 'slave', because they're commanded to say or at least indicate by their actions, "Salvation we owe to the faithful slave".

    The other factor here is that we have a 'faithful slave' that, at the time of its appointment by Jesus, was promoting to the world that someone else was the 'faithful slave', predicting the resurrection in 1925 that didn't happen, and basically effing things up. It didn't get any better when the baton was passed to the next [ahem, the same] generation, either. And then of course, Jesus appointed them, 96 years ago, so therefore that means we should obey you? Does not compute. Thus the, shall we call it modified apostolic succession?

    It highlights one of the big problems of this religion. It's very interested in making sure every failing of everyone else is underscored, published, committee'd (just made up a word'd), but it can basically bend or break the very rules it condemns everyone else over. Of course, logical reasoning dictates that this doesn't mean they're wrong by definition; it merely means they are hypocrites. Hypocrites can be right, at least in the sense that a broken clock can be right twice a day, but in this case it just happens that they're utterly mistaken and hypocrites at the same time.

    But clearly, in order for this to even fit together, they should've added that Jesus gave the 1919 members of the 'slave' the authority to appoint additional members as older ones died off. Except that they can merely rely on apostolic parallel (ie. appointing Matthias to replace Judas Iscariot).

    It does seem convenient that despite Jesus saying people would be worshipping with spirit and truth and that location wouldn't matter anymore, apparently Brooklyn/Wallkill/Warwick/Upstate New York Somewhere is now the New Jerusalem of sorts, since apparently Jesus picked only the people who were stationed there in service. One does wonder why no one from the rest of humanity was ever picked. When you see such a specific application of a scripture that is only clear in that it is vague and non-specific, your brain has got to register that the square peg has been shoved into the round hole with a rather vigorous force, and there are a lot of cracks showing where there shouldn't be any if it actually fits.

    I think the fact that four Watchtower articles were devoted to this subject--four consecutive Watchtower Studies, four hours of worship time--goes to show just how very serious all of this is for them, for the Society. And how troubling this really is for people who are awake and realize what's going on. I find it offensive that a meeting of this nature, opened and closed with prayers in Jesus' name, could be discussing and glorifying the acts of men and the authority of men--even going so far as to tell Jesus what he's going to do!

    There is no 'faithful and discreet slave' class. There is only the Master, the Governing Body, cloaking itself in the garments of a slave, appearing to serve, appearing to be something they simply are not. It is inconceivable (I keep using that word, but it does mean what I think it means) that these men on the Governing Body could read these articles and approve their publication without being profoundly troubled in their Christian consciences as to what role they are assigning to themselves in front of the entire congregation. What sort of example is this setting for elders, for husbands, for the love of...


    HULK OUT!!


Share this