Is it OK for a Religion to change doctrines and beliefs as time goes by?

by JH 13 Replies latest jw friends

  • JH
    JH

    I say that if they are inspired from God, they shouldn't have to modify their beliefs. Either they are inspired from God, or they aren't.

  • Finally-Free
    Finally-Free

    If a religion is free to change its doctrines then the members should be free to leave without having sanctions imposed upon them. When a person makes a dedication and gets baptized they do so according to current beliefs. No one should have the right to impose a change of beliefs upon others; my dedication was not a "living document" that is subject to change by others but not by myself. "Freedom of religion" shouldn't work that way.

    W

  • jaffacake
    jaffacake



    I don't believe any religion is inspired by God. But I believe there is clear teaching in the Bible that we must continue to adjust our beliefs with time and clearer understanding. Otherwise we would still believe Christ would return in our lifetime, like Paul and early Millennialist Christians mistakenly believed, for a while at least.
    Even Paul, as a NT author, was updating his beliefs between his earliest and latest letters. I do not believe the concept of one true religion, based on a collection of doctrines. This is wrong and wholly anti-Biblical.



    It is wrong to make changes the way JWs do it though, by claiming to get information from God, or by claiming exclusive rights to understanding scripture.

  • Ellie
    Ellie

    I don't think it is acceptable but then I'm no longer brainwashed.

  • garybuss
    garybuss

    The Watch Tower Society claims it isn't an inspired channel and it isn't a true prophet but only "divinely directed" and "spirit directed" business corporation owned by God.
    Pragmatically, religion is all assumptions, mythology, and superstition. Religion historically "evolved". I'd have to bet it will continue to evolve. The religions who HAVE to change MOST often are those who make claims, predictions, and promises. I think there's a chance the Watch Tower's religion fits the profile of a religion that makes claims, predictions, and promises.
    If the Witness people would think, the fact is, since the predictions were fulfilled "invisibly", the promises (rewards for loyal service) will also be delivered "invisibly". It's like the beating you get for the beating you got.

  • misspeaches
    misspeaches

    I think the way the JW's flip flop around on their doctrines and beliefs is appalling. And it is insulting to God to say that he has given them new light. Effectively they are saying that God didn't give them the right info to start off with.

  • heathen
    heathen

    I think it's fair to say that since we are dealing with things that are very much open to interpretation that the beliefs can be modified based on the presence of new evidence in support of said changes . The facts are that the whole world religious sector was at one time completely apostate so It makes sense that it would take time to weed out the false teachings that have become tradition . I still agree with the WTBTS on some issues and I still think they have the wrong ideas on some things . At least they recognize the need for change were as most religions can't stand the concept of change at all on anything . They are wrong and the only thing they can do is come up with more absurd reasoning to explain things .

  • jaffacake
    jaffacake
    most religions can't stand the concept of change at all on anything .

    That's not my experience...which religions are against the concept of change? None that I have been involved with.

    The only time the WTS makes changes is when it has already been proved wrong or caught out. WTS is less open to change that any religion I know. The changes are not really voluntary, but about survival. Because its style is to publishes so many doctrnes and predictions (that it no doubt sincerely believes) that are PROVED false, that it has no option but to make changes. It is the only way to survive.

    Rusell and Rutherford used to scoff those Christians who believed that pyramids were built as tombs for Pharoahs. Why - they could 'prove' it was designed by God as his stone witness (it even corroberated the 1914 date by the length of its passage). But when King Tut's tomb was discovered in the 1920s WTS changed its doctrine from pyramids being designed by God to being designed by Satan. Come on...you claiming credit for being willing to change unlike other religions?

  • dorayakii
    dorayakii

    If that religion claims to be inspired by God, then, NO, NOT AT ALL

    If that religion merely claims to be "spirit-directed", then minor non-dogmatic and non-enforced changes in belief are acceptable.

    If that religion does not claim to be either inspired or spirit-directed, then they shouldn't have "doctrines" as such in the first place. They should have merely a loose belief-system that is free to be left and taken up by members as they choose.

  • heathen
    heathen

    jeffcake--- I'm talking about the trinity dogma mostly . Also the belief of instantaneous resurrection which are easily proven false but what you will get is a bunch of convoluted arguments and opinions that can't be supported in scripture . I notice that most religions miss the points that jesus made about not involving yourself in the political scene . There really is alot of things they get wrong . All you have to do is read the bible instead of taking their word for things.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit