by cedars 211 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
From the article:
“It is vital that we recognize the faithful slave. Our spiritual health and our relationship with God depend on this channel.” – Matthew 4:4; John 17:3.
Damn! Goodby Jesus. And they have the balls (sorry) to quote John 17:3. Maybe they after all are producing a new Bible with a new John 17:3:
"This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and [the Slave, The Governing Body]. Oh yes, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ."
I have known since around 1980 this was the direction the wts was heading. They have become the catholic church , which is what they always wanted anyhow. They want total power .
I bet they cringe when these leaks occur, lol, right under their stuck up nose.
Since us "apostates" are no longer the Evil Slave, it looks like we received a demotion!
Cedars, I appreciate your observation that:
The tumultuous period in the organization’s history between 1914 and 1919 thus becomes the focus of doctrine perhaps more than ever before. There is no longer a “seamless” transition from the time of the apostles through to today. Prior to 1914, there was NO “organized channel” on the Earth. By 1919, one had been suddenly and miraculously formed – by none other than Christ himself.
This is apt. And it explains why 1914 is thatthing JWs believe. It is the central doctrine, without which they cannot exist. Christians think Christians are all about the death and resurrection of Christ. JWs think Christians are all about 1914.
1914 is their Trinity doctrine: it cannot ever be changed.
Wow, this is far more complicated than I would have imagined. Cedars, tell your source that we appreciate the info but PLEASE BE CAREFUL. If they are planning on going out with a bang, this probably isn't a big enough one since the article will be public soon anyway. Tell them to save it for a major leak (LOL).
Anyway, I started reading your article but dont' have the time to properly digest. Also, I believe I'll need a few beverages in me to truly analyze. Good lord, its so convuluted that you can get a headache thinking about it. Seems like all their new light is so illogical that even the most avid believer just shrugs their shoulders and moves on. This one may be even dumber than the new Generation teaching.
Thanks for taking the time to write about it.
I think the prequel guides us as to what happened here.
Somebody downunder actually tries to sue the mythical 'faithful slave'.
In response, their lawyer nearly admits that the whole concept is bogus. They've been repeating this phrase like a mantra for over a century as The Ultimate Authorization for their continuing fraud - but never really defining it in any sensible fashion. and then, Gee Whiz, somebody actually tries to sue the "Slave'? !!!!
So, they define it in a specific way ( c'est moi, in effect). However, there could be a very handy change here, legal-wise.
In the past, they liked using a cliche about 'properly caring for Christ's belongings' i.e. cash, buildings, etc.
That might be changed.... if being given authority over all His belongings is future. Nothing to sue for here, folks. Come back after the Great Trib, if you're still around. Somebody else is responsible, not us.
That said, I will be curious to see what they actually say about the UN. Being very blunt might cost them down the road, as they grovel before some human rights types, looking for intervention. Like with Russia.
metatron
New light, so much new light ... I can't help but think that Jesus' parable applies to all this new new new stuff.
The religion is going to BURST!
(Luke 5:36-39) Further, he went on to give an illustration to them: "No one cuts a patch from a new outer garment and sews it onto an old outer garment; but if he does, then both the new patch tears away and the patch from the new garment does not match the old. 37 Moreover, no one puts new wine into old wineskins; but if he does, then the new wine will burst the wineskins, and it will be spilled out and the wineskins will be ruined. 38 But new wine must be put into new wineskins. 39 No one that has drunk old wine wants new; for he says, ‘The old is nice.'"
I have known since around 1980 this was the direction the wts was heading. They have become the catholic church , which is what they always wanted anyhow.
I understand what you are trying to say. But there isn't much similarity between the two, organizationally speaking. Dissident Catholics have a very difficult time getting excommunicated. Even famous ones like Gary Wills can't seem to manage the trick. And, unlike the JWs, any time some adjustment to teaching needs to be made, there are endless discussions with everybody.
One thing I will attempt to point out is that the 'change' in understanding about who attacks religion from 'the United Nations' to 'elements within the U.N.' and back to 'the United Nations' seems of little consequence. The UN is comprised of its members. When its members decide something, it is the same thing as saying that the UN decides something. The UN is not some entity that exists apart from its member nations.
I think this 'change' is merely a different use of terminology, and that it could well be termed 'elements within the UN' or 'member nations of the UN' or something of that sort at a future time.
And one more point Cedars: I don't think the charicature of you at the bottom of your articles does you any favors. It looks silly. You go to great lengths to write informative articles and then post an exaggerated comic of yourself, which, to me anyway, slightly undermines your effort.
Rocketman
I think this 'change' is merely a different use of terminology
...which is hopefully the point I make. It isn't "new light" but it is reverting to the more direct language of the 70s and 80s.
It looks silly. You go to great lengths to write informative articles and then post an exaggerated comic of yourself, which, to me anyway, slightly undermines your effort.
Thanks, but I'm hoping readers are more interested in the written content than the picture I use as my avatar.
Cedars
