Words omitted from a Watchtower article

by Doug Mason 20 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Finkelstein

  The WTS has had a long history of taking information as a whole or out of selective context and working it up to create their own appealing doctrine which may by virtue of intentional design to be advantageous toward the marketability of literature.
  

  To support these doctrines the WTS heads proclaimed that they were or had been divinely chosen by god to dispense bible truths to further create a sense of viability toward their expressed doctrines. (1919)
  

  Of course the most alluring and focused doctrine would be the return of Jesus Christ (1874), 1914) and the following prophetic End Times, GT eventuating to Armageddon.

  These doctrines may not have had much biblical support, particularly in view of no one knows of the time or the admonishment of Christ for any of his "True" followers to set a time on God's own sacred time but they were nevertheless commercially advantageous for the proliferation of literature presented to the public.
  
• 

  TheOldHippie

  "Watchtower wants followers to think that the Bible Canon was closed by the Apostles, not at some later period by the Church."

  Not quite so, is it? "Scripture Inspired" book has a chapter on this, and ends with a list of canon identifying when compiled etc., and it is nowhere stated that the Apostles themselves decided on which books.

  Name and Place
  Muratorian Irenaeus, Clement of Tertullian,
  Fragment, Asia Minor Alexandria N. Africa
  Italy
  Approximate
  Date C.E. 170 180 190 207
  Matthew A A A A
  Mark A A A A
  Luke A A A A
  John A A A A
  Acts A A A A
  Romans A A A A
  1 Corinthians A A A A
  2 Corinthians A A A A
  Galatians A A A A
  Ephesians A A A A
  Philippians A A A A
  Colossians A A A A
  1 Thessalonians A A A A
  2 Thessalonians A A A A
  1 Timothy A A A A
  2 Timothy A A A A
  Titus A A A A
  Philemon A A
  Hebrews D DA DA
  James ?
  1 Peter A? A A A
  2 Peter D? A
  1 John A A DA A
  2 John A A DA
  3 John A?
  Jude A DA A
  Revelation A A A A
  Name and Place
  Origen, Eusebius, Cyril of Cheltenham
  Alexandria Palestine Jerusalem List,
  N. Africa
  Approximate
  Date C.E. 230 320 348 365
  Matthew A A A A
  Mark A A A A
  Luke A A A A
  John A A A A
  Acts A A A A
  Romans A A A A
  1 Corinthians A A A A
  2 Corinthians A A A A
  Galatians A A A A
  Ephesians A A A A
  Philippians A A A A
  Colossians A A A A
  1 Thessalonians A A A A
  2 Thessalonians A A A A
  1 Timothy A A A A
  2 Timothy A A A A
  Titus A A A A
  Philemon A A A A
  Hebrews DA DA A
  James DA DA A
  1 Peter A A A A
  2 Peter DA DA A D
  1 John A A A A
  2 John DA DA A D
  3 John DA DA A D
  Jude DA DA A
  Revelation A DA A
  Name and Place
  Athanasius, Epiphanius, Gregory Amphilocius,
  Alexandria Palestine Nazianzus, Asia Minor
  Asia Minor
  Approximate
  Date C.E. 367 368 370 370
  Matthew A A A A
  Mark A A A A
  Luke A A A A
  John A A A A
  Acts A A A A
  Romans A A A A
  1 Corinthians A A A A
  2 Corinthians A A A A
  Galatians A A A A
  Ephesians A A A A
  Philippians A A A A
  Colossians A A A A
  1 Thessalonians A A A A
  2 Thessalonians A A A A
  1 Timothy A A A A
  2 Timothy A A A A
  Titus A A A A
  Philemon A A A A
  Hebrews A A A DA
  James A A A A
  1 Peter A A A A
  2 Peter A A A D
  1 John A A A A
  2 John A A A D
  3 John A A A D
  Jude A A A D
  Revelation A DA D
  Name and Place
  Philaster, Jerome, Augustine, Third
  Italy Italy N. Africa Council of
  Carthage,
  N. Africa
  Approximate
  Date C.E. 383 394 397 397
  Matthew A A A A
  Mark A A A A
  Luke A A A A
  John A A A A
  Acts A A A A
  Romans A A A A
  1 Corinthians A A A A
  2 Corinthians A A A A
  Galatians A A A A
  Ephesians A A A A
  Philippians A A A A
  Colossians A A A A
  1 Thessalonians A A A A
  2 Thessalonians A A A A
  1 Timothy A A A A
  2 Timothy A A A A
  Titus A A A A
  Philemon A A A A
  Hebrews DA DA A A
  James A DA A A
  1 Peter A A A A
  2 Peter A DA A A
  1 John A A A A
  2 John A DA A A
  3 John A DA A A
  Jude A DA A A
  Revelation DA DA A A
  
  
• 

  TimDrake1914

  Thank you @TheOldHippie! I was not aware of this chapter in the "Scripture Inspired" book, so I had to go and read it. Guess I should have paid more attention to this book back in my Uber-dub days. But admittedly, I didn't become interested in scholarly discussions of the Bible until after I was mentally out, ironically enough. It is quite interesting, and very relevant to this discussion indeed. Having immersed myself more in scholarly writings of the Bible, I was able to understand much more about this chapter than I would have previously. Going back to our original discussion, I must say that this chapter doesn't really disagree too much with what scholars say about how the biblical canon was established. They do acknowledge how it is something that eventually developed over hundreds of years, and even acknowledge that it was the church fathers' opinions that really influenced the eventual canon. But what I found a bit comical was how WT explains what their own criteria for establishing canon is. Using their own criteria, one could definitely make an argument for leaving out books that they themselves consider "canon". Paragraph 6 of that chapter is quite revealing. In regards to determining canonicity, they write:

  "There must be no appeal to superstition or creature worship but, rather, an appeal to love and service of God. There would have to be nothing in any of the individual writings that would conflict with the internal harmony of the whole, but, rather, each book must, by its unity with the others, support the one authorship, that of Jehovah God. We would also expect the writings to give evidence of accuracy down to the smallest details. In addition to these basic essentials, there are other specific indications of inspiration, and therefore of canonicity, according to the nature of each book's contents, and these have been discussed herein in the introductory material to each of the Bible books. Also, there are special circumstances that apply to the Hebrew Scriptures and others to the Christian Greek Scriptures that help in establishing the Bible canon."

  There are many things I could point out about their criteria, but I found the highlighted statement most comical. For anyone familiar with scholarly discussions on textual criticism of the Bible, reading that statement would make one believe that only ONE Gospel should be considered canon at most, or that no gospel should be! HAHAHAHAHA!
• 

  jwfacts

  TheOldHippie6 hours ago

  "Watchtower wants followers to think that the Bible Canon was closed by the Apostles, not at some later period by the Church."

  Not quite so, is it?

  I agree with what you say, but my comment is not that Watchtower says it was closed by the Apostles, but wants people to think it was closed by the Apostles.

  To illustrate, Watchtower says Jesus is mediator for only the 144,000, but most JW's do not know this because Watchtower rarely refers to this teaching, because their doctrine is quite offensive. They are happy for JWs to misunderstand their teaching, which is why when they rarely discuss the mediator doctrine and when doing so frame it so it is very difficult to understand their teaching.

  In a similar way, Watchtower knows the Apostles did not choose the canon, so do not state that, but they like to leave that impression. IMO, the quote from OP is misquoted with little benefit to do so than to leave the impression the Apostles and/or first century Christians were responsible for deciding on the Bible Canon, rather than the "Church" at a later period. They regularly speak about the apostasy occurring after the death of the Apostles, and how John wrote the final books of the Bible, so that JW's will assume the Bible Canon was completed by John. I certainly thought that way until I left Watchtower and did research outside Watchtower publications, despite spending a lot of time going through All Scriptures Inspired.

  When Insight, Volume 1 p. 409 discusses the Canon, it states "Outside the Scriptures themselves there is evidence that, as early as 90-100 C.E., at least ten of Paul’s letters were collected together. It is certain that at an early date Christians were gathering together the inspired Christian writings." It then goes on to discuss how the Early Fathers were quoting the NT books. Again, this does not say the Canon was closed by 100, but as I read these quotes as a JW, wanting to believe God directed the Canon, I thought that is what it meant.

  
  
• 

  Doug Mason

  I have just received a letter from Professor Skarsaune, which I shall include in my formal response to that passage in the 2010 Watchtower.
  
  The WTS wishes to make it appear that the decisions regarding the Canon were made by their (mythical) first-century Governing Body, whereas the passage they cite from Professor Skarsaune contradicts that assertion. The Professor has picked up on that.
  
  Doug
• 

  jwfacts

  The WTS wishes to make it appear that the decisions regarding the Canon were made by their (mythical) first-century Governing Body,
  

  Exactly my point, but put more succinctly.

  The term governing body and its concept does not appear in the New Testament, yet has become the fundamental basis for explaining how first century Christians operated and the devotion of JWs to the religion now. With the latest changes in doctrine, it seems supporting the GB concept is the key motivation of the change.
• 

  Doug Mason

  You might find my charts at pages 57 to 64 of my Study helpful:

  http://www.jwstudies.com/Why_Does_WTS_Accept_Christendoms_Scriptures.pdf
  

  When I give these page numbers, I mean the numbers at the bottom of the page, not the PDF page numbers. I should set about correcting that anomaly.

  Doug
• 

  TimDrake1914

  Thank you for that link Doug. I hadn't seen that one before, and it looks like another great study. Coincidentally, I just wanted to personally thank you, Terry and Paul for all the great work you've all done for us EX-JWs. Personally speaking, I've benefitted greatly from all the writings you all have put together, and I wouldn't be where I am today if it wasn't for all the work you all have done. One of the doubts I always had that led me to eventually wake up was the doctrine of 1914, and your writings in particular, Doug, really helped me understand it enough to see the real truth behind it.
• 

  Doug Mason

  TimDrake,

  Thank you so much.

  I am about to release a brief summary on the Society's creation of 1914. There will be nothing new in it but my intention is to provide a simple introduction and an overview.

  Doug
  
• 

  GLTirebiter

  "Which writings were to be included in the New Testament, and which were not, was never passed by any church fashion or by any individual, but was the result of a process in which many churches in all parts of the church were involved..."

  In other words, the New Testament canon is a doctrinal Tradition of the church. Since the WTBTS rejects Traditions as false teachings, do they reject the New Testament?