Do A Majority of Those That Bother With Doctrine Reject the Current Teachings?

by OnTheWayOut 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • OnTheWayOut

    I want to thank you all for your comments. I am sure there are some JW's who believe and follow the crazy explanations, unlike us who follow them to see why they are not to be believed. But it seems to me that hardly any JW's really accept stuff like "overlapping generation." So they are either in it full of doubt or they are in it because they are scared/confident/concerned that the end is imminent, possibly due to their belief in the prior doctrines. (I know I once accepted the doctrine of a 1914 generation surviving 'til the end.)

    Despite my confidence that we cannot just shake our loved ones awake with challenges to the doctrine, I am now equally confident that many will wake on their own, others will appreciate our reaching out on a loving, caring level.

    I am also confident that Watchtower will clearly start it's membership downfall in just a few years (or sooner). And it will reach a point of no recovery perhaps in less than 20 years. The number is pure opinion/speculation from me, but all recruitment is essentially from born-in children. A high percentage leave and both upper echelon and rank&file that stay have little faith in doctrines.

    When the end doesn't come for the elderly members, more adult children and grandchildren will let their own next generation remain unbaptized.

    I really am starting to believe in the Watchtower becoming what the "Bible Students" (Russelites) are today- virtually nonexistent.

  • waton

    OTWO the gb agrees with you, that is why they are rebranding: no wt in, and steering away from doctrines, the (we are right you are wrong) approach to h2h. ha ha.

  • steve2

    The current breed of JWs over the past three to four decades do not seem that invested in defending their beliefs.

    I recall the untroubled ease with which JWs dismissed the religious views of householders. Even back then, the JWs I worked with would simply thank the householder for answering the (simplistic) opening questions and move straight onto offering the latest literature. No attempt was made to develop the discussion beyond the basics.

    I recall how embarrassed I often felt when my fellow Witnesses would cut short a householder, offer the literature then leave.

    By contrast, when I and a handful of other JWs at least attempted to draw the householder out, we'd be later told, "Don't waste your time; we're not there to argue." Interesting that they equated holding a discussion with arguing!

    No, I don't think JWs in the main have given the over-lapping doctrine much thought, let alone "found" a way to explain it.

  • waton

    "Yeah, poor witnesses would have to go H2H with the premise, presentation: "Good morning We are wrong,--- you are right. but please watch this video anyway. ?. ha ha.

Share this