Major Doctrinal Changes Must Be On The Way

by notsurewheretogo 80 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • notsurewheretogo

    The statement in the article "Who is Leading Gods People Today?" in the Feb 17th study edition of the WT is VERY interesting.

    It states: ""The G.B. is neither inspired nor infallible" ..we can err .in Doctrinal matters...."

    Smiddy started a topic on that and it is an interesting thread.

    But thinking about it, why would they ever say this? As a faded person for the last 4 years I have been using this very reason as to why I am faded because I conclude that the GB are not in any way directed or inspired.

    The reason why they must be saying this is to prepare the dubs for MAJOR doctrinal changes. We have all said in the past that the doctrines of 1914, the anointed on earth, disfellowshipping, blood etc have to change at some point in the near future.

    Thus, has the groundwork now been laird for this? If they can say they err on doctrines and then 6 months later change the fact that 1914 is not a special biblical date then the dubs will not be so upset.

    I am seriously considering going to the meeting when they discuss the above WT to see how people react to it.

    It is a game changer, if they can say that, and then change major doctrines AND STILL get them to believe it is "the truth" then the GB will be very happy with that.


  • alanv

    It is not the first time this has been said. They regularly tell the sheep that the governing body are God's reps and should be obeyed. But to cover themselves, every now and and again they say that they are not inspired or infallible.

    So just same old, same old as far as I am concerned.

  • notsurewheretogo

    Really, I've never seen it in print that they can err in doctrinal matters...they have said in the past they are not inspired but they have said they are to say they are NOT inspired AND infallible is pretty big as you cannot be spirit-directed IF you are wrong.

    Thus, I see what they say in this magazine as a bit different to past sayings about being "inspired".

  • cobweb

    I think if you went to that watchtower study you would be majorly disappointed by the reaction. There won't be one.

    I am not convinced this is even a change. As far back as I remember they have always held two contradictory positions.

    For the most part they uphold the line that they are jehovah channel, spirit directed mouthpiece. This is their position of strength.

    However when it suits their purposes -when they make a mistake about prophecy they roll over on their back and use the 'we are imperfect men' line. I can't remember the exact wording of their 1975 non apology but wasn't that what they said? They don't tend to use this defence often as it takes away their power but it is in their historical arsenal.

    Witnesses are able to accept both positions and not recognise the contradiction.

    As for why they are using this 'we are just imperfect humans' argument now, I agree, I can't see a reason for it other than to lay the groundwork for changes in the future. This is like an apology for something that they haven't announced yet.

  • Half banana
    Half banana
    "The G.B. is neither inspired nor infallible" ..we can err .in Doctrinal matters...."

    You didn't need to tell us 'cos quite frankly JW org, we had noticed that this habit of yours, flip-flopping doctrines, is the mainstay of your pathetic religion.

  • notsurewheretogo

    @cobweb as I say...I have never seen them say in print "we can err". The 1981 apology written by Ray Franz on the 1975 isn't really an apology and quite frankly doesn't really admit they can err.

    As I've said they have said in the past they are not inspired but they have never said "we can make mistakes" as far as I can recall.

    To be so direct in saying this, I think, opens up the way for them to change major doctrines.

  • Ultimate Axiom
    Ultimate Axiom

    Yes, they have admitted in print that they are not inspired and not always right;

    “… the “faithful and discreet slave” has alerted all of God’s people to the sign of the times indicating the nearness of God’s Kingdom rule. In this regard, however, it must be observed that this “faithful and discreet slave” was never inspired, never perfect.” (Watchtower, March 1, 1979, page 23).

    “Jehovah’s Witnesses today … do not claim that this slave class is infallible” (Jehovah’s Witnesses – Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom, 1993, page 626).

    That however is not rellevant, because THEY MUST BE TREATED AS IF THEY WERE;

    “It is vital that we respond to the directions of the “slave” as we would to the voice of God.” (Watchtower, June 15, 1957, page 371).

    “To hold to the headship of Christ, it is therefore necessary to obey the organization ... Doing what the organization says is to do what he says. Resisting the organization is to resist him.” (Watchtower, May 1, 1959, page 269).

    “… a mature Christian … does not advocate or insist on personal opinions or harbor private ideas when it comes to Bible understanding. Rather, he has complete confidence in the truth as it is revealed by ... “the faithful and discreet slave.”” (Watchtower, August 1, 2001, page 14).

  • notsurewheretogo

    But there is a difference in saying we are not infallible and "we can err in doctrine" though is there not?

    The GB may have said in the past they are infallible but that doesn't reference could mean they are just imperfect men and therefore have the same imperfections as us.

    Yet, this time they actually say they CAN err in doctrines. To me, I see that as fundamentally different and pretty significant...but then that is just my feeling on it.

  • dozy

    Yeah - I see this admission as a major change. In fact - one of the discussions I had with the elders before I left I mentioned some of the GB's mistakes and they were adamant that the GB do not err or make mistakes when it comes to doctrine - they just make needed adjustments as the light gets brighter.

    I just wonder with the new world HQ etc that the GB are thinking of remodelling the religion for the 21st century ( yeah I know - a bit late ) & seriously thinking of ditching some of the residual doctrinal Rutherford / Fred Franz etc nonsense that has no biblical support whatsoever ( such as making the blood ban a conscience matter or maybe something less controversial like allowing birthdays ).

  • slimboyfat

    Could be. They've got to drop 1914 at some point, right? On the other hand, having read this forum since it started in 2000, I have got 1914 correctional fatigue at this point. It's been predicted so many times.

    One time in the early 2000s in particular someone pointed out that 1914 hadn't been quoted in the WT for something like 6 months or more. But it was as if bethel was reading the forum, because there was a spate of 1914s after that.

    Plus the comment might not mean anything, other than that GB like to assert their authority just for its own sake sometimes. Remember the WT a few years ago that said: be ready to following directions from the WT even if they appear to make no sense from a human standpoint. That was a pretty suggestive statement, but not much has come of it, so far.

    As for what changes are likely, their history shows they only makes changes when events make the change necessary (dropping generation first time in 1995), legal challenges (selling literature or food at conventions) or if there is a financial motive (dropping district overseers and reducing magazines).

    They've dug their heels in over blood and seem intent on simply waiting until new technology and medicine solves the problem for them. Plus shunning has been ramped up not scaled down.

    They are much more likely to drop 1914 or the 144,000 teaching than they are to drop shunning or the blood ban in my view. Doctrinal changes like 1914 and 144,000 would be cheap to make and they would actually make sense, which is an unexpected bonus from this organisation.

    If they do drop 1914 they'd need to revise even their Bible, now that they included 1914 in a picture in there as well.

Share this