i have the opportunity to take an independent study class through my university this summer.
my advisor, a history professor, suggested i choose jehovah's witnesses as a topic.. we are now trying to formulate a syllabus.
she suggests i write two papers: one on the history of jws, and another on their doctinal approach.. so now my question is...what books/articles/videos do i list on my syllabus as sources i intend to read and use for the papers?.
The closest thing to a history of Jehovah's Witnesses is Apocalypose Delayed by James Penton, who himself is a historian.
Lots of valuable historical information in Crisis of Conscience, although it reads more like a memoir than a history of the movement.
that is the reason the watchtower leaders are desperately trying to protect their indoctrinated supporters from being influenced by the critics.. it will get harder and harder to recruit in countries where the internet is easily accessible...the watchtower has no control over the public like it does the indoctrinated jws.
..any interested person can very easily google and learn the truth about the watchtower cult before a 'return visit' can be made.
although most jws would be afraid to go into 'apostate ' sites, more and more are waking up to the truth about the watchtower , their interest triggered by different reasons such as the child abuse cover up, the constantly changing doctrines,the downsizing etc.
We don't shun. Don't believe what hateful apostates say. Read jw.org
Slightly off topic story.
About 15 years ago I was out in service with a JW who was originally from Mexico. The person answering the door said he didn't want to hear us out because we didn't believe in the trinity. The JW said something along of the lines of "Who told you that? We do believe in the trinity." He then proceeded to give a legalistic, insincere speech trying to mislead the guy into believing we agreed with him.
After we were done, he said he'd learned that tactic from a CO in Mexico. You have to be creative if you're going to reach out to worldly people, you see. I was pretty livid. He was being so blatantly dishonest. I shared that story with a JW friend of mine and he became incredibly upset to the point where I though he would have gotten violent had the Mexican JW been there with us.
It's amzing to think that in 15 short years that kind of dishonesty would have become standard practice.
introduction to the faith.
ive been a lurker for many years now, and recently created an account to post comments.
someone suggested i should introduce myself and tell my story.
It's funny. Sounds like you're a year older than me. I, too, was a self-motivated Watchtower youth.
However, my reaction to the 95 change was different. I remember reading the magazine when it came in the mail and being thoroughly excited. I always felt there were gaps in knowledge that needed to be filled in and here was Jehovah supplying information at the proper time! I wish I had reacted as you did.
I graduated high school a year early. Became a regular pioneer. Shortly thereafter, the doubts became too big a burden to carry and it was a long, slow march out of the religion. I didn't become inactive until I was 26 years old.
Like you, I decided to pursue a career and have done quite well for myself in that aspect of my life.
Best of luck on your journey.
i was raised with this belief, that we would never die and actually make it into the "new system".
mu faithful jw aunt still talked about my mother (her sister) and her walking together into the great tribulation--- and never die at all!
she spoke of that 2 days before she passed away.. i believe most witnesses expect to die and then get resurrected.
I recently talked my brother into setting up college savings accounts for his kids. He's either a current or a former elder. I don't know because I don't ask. We haven't talked about "the truth" since I stopped going to meetings 9 years ago.
My brother was always the type of person to disregard long-term planning due to Armageddon's supposed proximity. He's now in his late 30s and realizes on some level that the end ain't coming anytime soon. At worst, he's hedging his bets. Good for him.
against my better judgement, i've decided to share the following as a response to guy pierce passing and the announcement of the elimination of district overseers later this year.. late in january (2014) i got an email from one of my contacts (a fader) who served at bethel for several years, but is no longer at wt hq.
he still has a lot of close contacts within the service department and in other departments at patterson and knows people in all of the ny offices.
i kept this email set aside on a flash drive and haven't shared it with anyone - figuring i'd publish an article about it later this year when i had more time to do it right.
I think we should resist the urge to take an outsider's perspective on change. We can all easily imagine ourselves as business consultants hired by the Watchtower to come up with a list of initiatives to improve morale and promote growth and retention.
Let's not forget that the men on the GB won a decades-long competition designed to reward the most loyal company men and status quo seekers. They've been selected for their aversion to change. Had they demonstrated the inclination to think creatively or shown independent thinking, they would have been weeded out at the CO or ambitious young Bethelite level.
Edited to add:
You also have the 2/3 supermajority problem. Even if you were successful in convincing a change-resistant GB member, you'd have to get 2/3 of them to agree. That's a tall order.
An exceedingly slow death by bureaucratic inertia remains the most likely outcome, in my opinion.
the whole organization is going through huge and big changes.
it can be seen by names of departments, to how things function and teaches.
my questions to you is, what do you think the future changes will be, both in teaching and organizational matters?.
God I've been out so long I don't remember what the "current truth" is with respect to the gathering of the great crowd.
But you're right. I remember reading many times about the assembly in which Rutherford asked all the non-anointed to stand and said "behold the great crowd." Well if they're all dead, they were never really the great growd to begin with because the great crowd passes through armageddon alive.
One of many holes in their doctrine.
the whole organization is going through huge and big changes.
it can be seen by names of departments, to how things function and teaches.
my questions to you is, what do you think the future changes will be, both in teaching and organizational matters?.
"As time has gone by, some Christians baptized after 1935 have had witness borne to them that they have the heavenly hope. Thus we cannot set a specific date for when the heavenly hope ends." Watchtower 2007 May 1 p.31
the whole organization is going through huge and big changes.
it can be seen by names of departments, to how things function and teaches.
my questions to you is, what do you think the future changes will be, both in teaching and organizational matters?.
Laika,
They did away with the 1935 date 6 or 7 years ago. It was all over this board. You can probably pull some threads on it using the search feature.
the whole organization is going through huge and big changes.
it can be seen by names of departments, to how things function and teaches.
my questions to you is, what do you think the future changes will be, both in teaching and organizational matters?.
I think you're looking at it from the perspective of what conclusions some business consultants would come up with if they were hired to review their operations and make suggestions in order to improve their ability to grow.
At the end of the day, the men sitting on the GB won a decades-long, rigorous competition that rewards the most loyal of company men and status quo seekers. The ability to seek out change is not in their DNA. If it were, they would have been weeded out at the CO or ambitious young Bethelite level.
respectful_observer's thread on guy pierce's death,.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/277198/1/heard-a-rumor-guy-pierce-died-this-morning#.uyq-pv21x1n.
got me thinking.
Here's a little theory about how the GB selections go down and how that contributes to there being little to no substantive change.
First let's assume GB members are appointed on a 2/3 majority vote basis. Let's also assume that there are important changes that are being held back because a 2/3 majority hasn’t been achieved. That's akin to giving the 1/3 minority a veto. The minority could similarly exercise such a veto if they had reason to suspect a new GB member would not side with them on contentious issues.
So there's gridlock until the 1/3 minority feels sufficiently secure that a potential new GB member will side with them in preserving the status quo. Perhaps little heart-to-heart talks with short-list members every now and then to get their view on things. Therefore, nothing really new is ever introduced.
Hence, slow death by bureaucratic asphyxiation is the likely outcome for the group.
