Geoffrey Jackson: "That would be presumptuous of us"... (page 4)

Calebs Airplane

Paradise... I have written to them,,, thanks... here is the email (very similar to my post):

Dear Royal Commission

In the beginning of Mr. Stewart's line of questioning yesterday, Geoffrey Jackson was unambiguously asked if the members of the governing body (of Jehovah's Witnesses) consider themselves to be God's Spokesperson on Earth.

Geoffrey Jackson responded in the negative and even said this would be "presumptuous" of them to believe that.
However, this is NOT what Jehovah's Witnesses are being taught in Kingdom Halls around the globe. We are told that the Governing Body (aka Faithful & Discreet Slave) are, in fact, the ONLY Spokesperson that God has chosen on Earth and that our survival of Armageddon depends on our obedience to them.
In fact, here are just a few quotes of many that you will find regarding Mr. Jackson's completely false statement:

"Jehovah God has also provided his visible organization, his “faithful and discreet slave,” made up of spirit anointed ones, to help Christians in all nations to understand and apply properly the Bible in their lives. Unless we are in touch with this channel of communication that God is using, we will not progress along the road to life, no matter how much Bible reading we do." - Watchtower 12/1/1981; p. 27

"All who want to understand the Bible should appreciate that the “greatly diversified wisdom of God” can become known only through Jehovah’s channel of communication, the faithful and discreet slave." - Watchtower 10/1/1994; p. 8

"We need to guard against developing a spirit of independence. By word or action, may we never challenge the channel of communication that Jehovah is using today. “ - Watchtower 11/15/09; p. 14 par. 5

I strongly urge the Royal Commission to look further into this and the many other false and inaccurate statements offered as truthful responses by our leader Geoffrey Jackson. Thank you for your excellent work thus far in protecting innocent children in Australia.

Sincerely,

Caleb's Airplane

kepler

If I recall correctly, Mr. Jackson as chair of the writing committee holds a position that has been held by a number of other governing board members. Mr. Stewart should ask Mr. Jackson about this history of illustrious board members. Perhaps he will mention Ray Franz.

OwnAccord

This is nothing to get excited about. A jw pro-site has this discussion going and while it looks like they all know what was being asked, everyone is the same with the shady answers.

Someone asked:

What did Brother Jackson mean when asked by Mr. Stewart: Do you see yourselves(The Governing Body) Jehovah God's spokes people on earth? Bro. Jackson said: That I think would seem to be quite presumptuous to say we are the only spokes persons that God is using.

Don't our magazines point to the fact that the Governing Body is God's channel of communication? I'm confused

Reply from different people:

Using your quote.

I am a spokes person as you are.

Jackson answered the question as asked.

Maybe not as Mr. Stewart had intended.

It's called Theocratic warefare. :-)

What I thought was interesting is that Bro Jackson seemed to open the door to the possibility of an apology & compensation

Blite. I think he handled it right. We including the governing body have to be humble. And he was. The elders are spokesman. When we minister we're spokesman. Notice he indicated he (the gb) wasn't the Only spoke people. It's true and imho an honest answer that gives glory to Jehovah.

To me, the question was asking if the GB has the authority to speak with God's voice, in the same vein as the Catholic view of the pope. And to that question, the answer has always been 'no'.

If the question were really about people speaking God's message, that is a commission we all share, so the answer to the GB members being the only spokespersons is still 'no'

Jehovah said he would use the "stones" to speak if he had too - so Br. Jackson answered the question correctly. Jehovah will use whomever and whatever he needs to to speak for him!

So there you have it

millie210

Those people are such idiots.

Us, them, he, her.....blah, blah, blah.

The point is Jckson answered that would be presumptuous of US.

So all the equivocating and dancing around the plurality of the wording is ridiculous.

kepler

Some quick notes.

This episode seems to resemble the Glasgow inquiries about minister status for members of a congregation back in the 1950s in which Fred Franz and other officers testified. I suspect the council is aware of these proceedings and is handling testimony from a GB accordingly.

Consider the discussion about literal interpretation of the Bible and t cross references leading back to "spare the rod and spoil the child." Mr. Jackson claims that the Hebrew did not mean "rod". Something else? He interjects as writing committee chairman in this case, so far as I can tell. My Hebrew TaNakh says the same thing as quoted. "He who spares the rod hates his son." For all practical purposes from what I hear about discipline in JW surroundings, the Proverb is applied. But when question by the committee, Jackson caves again in public and says he does not condone corporal punishment.

On women as Elders, he makes the claim that the Bible from the beginning excludes the possibility. He should be aware of several translations of Paul's epistles where greetings from the Apostle to women who served in high capacity ( i.e., Elders were changed to masculine names). This includes the NWT.

Mr. Jackson should be asked about how he obtained his Biblical scholarship. According to his own account, he left school at the age of 15. It appears that he has excellent command of Polynesian languages, but no one has demonstrated he has any knowledge of Greek or Hebrew to make the calls he just gave in this 90 minute recording.

And Mr. Jackson, including his "that would be presumptuous", provides this testimony by first swearing on his own Bible.

I am familiar with videos of other GB members giving their views. Are there some in the archives for Mr. Jackson?

problemaddict 2

For a religion that has dubbed itself "the Truth", they sure seem to have a hard time telling it.

Closer to Fine

I know I was told "questioning the gb is the same as questioning God". In other words.... no one dares to question the gb! I thought I also saw that statement in a publication as well but have no way to search for it.

kepler

Another reflection from the testimony.

Mr. Jackson is completely unable to explain how the GB are appointed, other than citing the parable in Matthew 24 which after Rutherford had a row with his lawyer, morphed into translation as the faithful and "discreet" slave. In other words, his lawyer talked to much when he resigned from Bethel.

Since Mr. Jackson has a hands off philosophy in his public testimony, it would appear that governing board members had to be groomed by someone somewhere. In the case, say of Mr. Morris, who often relates about his Vietnam service and then objections which led to incarceration, many of us have tried to find public record of this but found nothing. His testimony indicates to observers that the GB does what it wants, selects its members and they are answerable to no one. Moreover, their backgrounds and activities are largely hidden rather than to serve as examples in conducting one's duty toward God.

defender of truth

No, it was the truth. All JW's are seen as spokesmen, or prophets, for God.

Theocratic warfare at its finest..

Stewart should ask him:

"Do the Governing Body teach that they are the only people on earth today who can decide the correct and truthful way to interpret the Bible..? and that they alone have the authority from the true God to do so..?

And would a JW be shunned for openly disagreeing with one of your teachings or interpretations, as published in the Watchtower magazine and also through letters from the Governing Body, if they did not respond to 'correction' , as in remaining silent?"

Please can someone email the RC??

We need to get GJ back in and ask these questions..!

defender of truth

Or simply ask:

"do you (Governing Body) view yourselves as Gods only channel of communication on earth today? "

Possibly also:

"And do Jehovah's Witnesses have to agree that you are the only channel of communication, or else they will be shunned?"

I don't understand why Mr.Stewart phrased the question in the only way that would allow Jackson to give a misleading answer?

Geoffrey Jackson: "That would be presumptuous of us"...

Share this