Why is it so hard to speak about Jehovah's Witnesses in neutral terms?

by neverendingjourney 9 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • neverendingjourney
    neverendingjourney

    Catholicism. Islam. Buddhism. Jehovah's Witnessism?

    I find it odd that Rutherford specifically set out to identify the religion by a specific name: Jehovah's Witnesses, but the official group was never given a proper name. So you have a way to refer to the members but not the organization. Thus members of the group develop their own loaded language: The society teaches...the organization suggests...the Slave directs that...but neutral observers cannot speak of the religion without either adopting the religion's loaded language or using buzzwords that set off "apostate" alarms in the mind of JWs, such as referring to the group as The Watchtower.

    Thoughts on why this is?

    I think it may have something to do with Rutherford's view at the time that organized religion was bad (religion is a snare and a racket). He viewed his group as being a collection of true Christians, not an organized religion, so why would you want to officially identify the institution? It would seem contradictory to what he was teaching.

    This is simply conjecture on my part, though. I've not seen any hard evidence that would confirm this suspicion.

  • Perry
    Perry

    It was a clever move. It was a perfect fit with the Christ-denying heresies of the Watchtower - doctrines of devils.

  • snare&racket
    snare&racket

    I have come to belive that Rutherfrd wanted to make the religion his own.

    Pastor Russel in his will said no more doctrines, no more literature, just print mine. He left the name of several people to take over the empire and then...died.

    Russell was not one of the main people to take over the religion according to the will, It ended in a huge fight, the people wanting to remain loyal to Russell and then Rutherford, a legal eagle with a huge ego.

    He literally threw the people out on the street, the police were called, there are news articles about the physicsl fight that took place. Those men went on to form a religion loyal to Russell, they have a website etc explaining their dilemma, Russell had taught it was wrong to take fellow christians to court, and so Rutherford simply TOOK the reigns by force.

    http://www.pastor-russell.com/legacy/intro.html

    Rutherford now was the head of a movement with huge ties to Russell. Many followers left. He began a campaign of change. He changed doctrines significantly before he died, heaven and earth were now seperate hopes, no blood, no christmas, no smoking, the cross became a stake with no evidence other than the word meant cross and stake and even though we know the Romans used crosses Rutherford wanted to stand out. He changed rules about vaccinations and medical treatment, he mocked science and evolution, he mocked the American government and wrote inflammatory remarks about the war, america and serving as a soldier. He was imprisoned and turned himself into a martyr. He decided the long understood ....mistake.... of using the word jehovah as gods name, was in fact worthy of consideration once more and so began another new teaching for him... he even named the movement based on it.

    Quite embarassing, 700 years after Jesus, a monk added the hebrew sentence YHWH to the word for LORD adonai, by just using the vowels,

    YaHoWaH or in latin JaHoHaH. This was because old copyists did not like writing YHWH due to superstition so would write adonai beneath it, so when reading the bible aloud, people said LORD not god's name. The copyist 700 years after Jesus wrongly assumed it was some kind of code, so mashed the two together.

    Anyway, Rutherford, despite knowing this added Jehovah back into the religious language, his big moment in time, and to put a line underneath it he named the movement after it. To this day Watchtower have to tap dance around this desicion. every scholar knows the rendering of that name is nonsense.

    When looking at Rutherford's history, the ego on him is palpable. Everything he did was about change, putting his stamp on things. He made some huge boo boos though. He was known as a drukard and a man that cursed all the time. People resigned over it and so began the early disfellowship doctrines. He would have alcohol illegally brought down from Canada, he wrote thatthe prohibition was Satan's work. But this is not the worst of it "The decleration of facts" is a letter to Hitler from Rutherford, in it he is openly antisemetic and announced on god's behalf that the german country had god's approval. All of this was printed in the german yearbook of the time. Many JW's were slaughtered in jehovahs (ironic) name and Watchtower white washed the issue until 1996 when they did a tiny apology in an article, to paraphrase they said "We were not referring to all Jews" etc etc. The Society, on a side note, went on, the next year, to claim compesation on behalf of its dead followers from the Swedish Holocaust Compensation fund. To think, that they had actually sent letters of support!

    So yes, forgive my waffle, but if you go and research Rutherford, you will detect Rutherfords keen interest in putting his own stamp on things. Most of his doctrines survive and exist today even if slightly varied. He has affected millions of people, not for good in my opinion. But I am sure he would smile at the idea anyway.

    I guess the gall of building a Mansion in LA whist driving two cadillacs during the great depression says much. The mansion built for 'the returning prophets' says much of him and the movement.

  • neverendingjourney
    neverendingjourney

    I agree with you, although in fairness the blood doctrine was Freddy's brainchild. Lots of medical and scientific quackery to speak of during the Rutherford era, but this particular pernicious doctrine was Freddy's idea.

    It came very early in the Knorr era. Knorr wasn't interested in pursuing Rutherford's publicity-seeking ways and, with the notable exception of the blood ban, mostly reigned in policies that would further alienate witnesses from society at large.

  • problemaddict
    problemaddict

    Not to make a big stink, but the "mansion" isn't really a mansion as much as a big house, and it isn't in LA, its in San Diego. You know how you look when the facts aren't just right. Haha.

  • LogCon
    LogCon

    snare&racket

    Whew!

    For a moment there I thought I read "To this day Watchtower have to lap dance around this decision"

  • neverendingjourney
    neverendingjourney

    Not to make a big stink, but the "mansion" isn't really a mansion as much as a big house

    It was a mansion for its time, although it wouldn't properly be considered a mansion by today's standards.

    There was a house I saw a few years ago that once belonged to the family of a former U.S. president. It had a historical marker on site that referred to it as so-and-so mansion. The actual name escapes me. That's what it was referred to at the time. It was no bigger than your typical McMansion you see in modern day suburbia, maybe 3,500 sq. ft.

  • pixel
    pixel

    Many JW's were slaughtered in jehovahs (ironic) name and Watchtower white washed the issue until 1996 when they did a tiny apology in an article, to paraphrase they said "We were not referring to all Jews" etc etc.

    Snare, is there a link to see this?

  • snare&racket
    snare&racket

    Sorry, sorry, sorry.....

    Sand diego is where the mansion is, apologies, I thought it was in L.A. (forgive me I am in the Uk). It is definetly a mansion to me by the way. Have you seem the home movie footage of Beth Sarim on youtube? It has apple orchards!

    The older literature was very much against vaccines, organ transplants and I was sure blood too, though I know freddy franz made it a hard rule. Maybe I am wrong on it being in the earlier literature, but i was sure I had seen it. I will check that out, sorry if I was wrong.

    As for the reply on the decleration of facts pixel...

    The Society said the denunciation of "commercial Jews" in the Declaration "clearly did not refer to the Jewish people in general, and it is regrettable if it has been misunderstood and has given cause for any offense."

    Jehovah's Witnesses–Courageous in the Face of Nazi Peril", Awake!, July 8, 1998, pgs 10-14.

    This is what the racist Rutherford had written

    "The greatest and most oppressive empire on earth is the Anglo-American empire. By that is meant the British Empire, of which the United States of America forms a part. It has been the commercial Jews of the British-American empire that have built up and carried on Big Business as a means of exploiting and oppressing the peoples of many nations. This fact particularly applies to the cities of London and New York, the stronghold of Big Business. This fact is so manifest in America that there is a proverb concerning the city of New York which says: 'The Jews own it, the Irish Catholics rule it, and the Americans pay the bills.' We have no fight with any of these persons mentioned, but, as the witnesses for Jehovah and in obedience to his commandment set forth in the Scriptures, we are compelled to call attention to the truth concerning the same in order that the people may be enlightened concerning God and his purpose.

    Instead of being against the principles advocated by the government of Germany, we stand squarely for such principles, and point out that Jehovah God through Christ Jesus will bring about the full realization of these principles and will give to the people peace and prosperity and the greatest desire of every honest heart ... A careful examination of our books and literature will disclose the fact that the very high ideals held and promulgated by the present national government are set forth in and endorsed and strongly emphasized in our publications, and show that Jehovah God will see to it that these high ideals in due time will be attained by all persons who love righteousness and who obey the Most High. Instead, therefore, of our literature and our work's being a menace to the principles of the present government we are the strongest supporters of such high ideals."

  • neverendingjourney
    neverendingjourney

    know freddy franz made it a hard rule. Maybe I am wrong on it being in the earlier literature, but i was sure I had seen it. I will check that out, sorry if I was wrong.

    No need to apologize. Nobody should expect you to be a human encyclopedia. I know I'm not.

    JW Facts, as is to be expected, has a great analysis of the doctrine's development. Rutherford banned the eating of animal blood, but

    The Watchtower 1945 Jul 1, pp.199-200 contained the first discussion that God's prohibition also applying to human blood. It included mention of blood transfusions, though not directly forbidding them.

    http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/blood-transfusions.php

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit