Posts by Journeyman

9

WT JUNE 2025 MODESTLY accept what YOU do not know

by blondie in

jw
friends

pp.

14-19 just some quote and a few comments from me, very, very repetitious.

the gb seems to think that the rank and file came up the years 1914, 1925, 1975, generation (70-80 years from 1914=1994), overlapping generations.

Journeyman

It is the title that is strange to me. If they had said "cannot know" instead of "do not know" it would make sense. For example, if I don't know calculus, but want to know calculus, what does modesty have to do with it? All I need to do is go to my local college and take a calculus class. Now if Jesus says that only the Father knows the day and the hour, then I modestly accept the fact that I cannot know that. They are conflating modesty with ignorance, i.e. not knowing something is virtuous because you are modest and humble. With Watchtower's new doctrine of "willful ignorance", which psychologists will tell you is done to avoid taking responsibility, now it is virtuous to be irresponsible because you are modest. Humility is conflated with ignorance.

finishedmystery - you make a great point there. I also noticed that distinction.

Having skimmed through the article though, in fairness there is nothing I can see that is a "bait and switch" between "cannot know" and "do not know", except para 7 where there's the line blondie quoted and analysed: "We do well to focus on what we do know — that the last days began in 1914", and some JW-specific figures about their ministry.

One of the footnotes does also say: "Jesus will take the lead in the war against Satan’s wicked world, so it is reasonable to conclude that he now knows the date for Armageddon and for when he will “complete his conquest.”—Rev. 6:2; 19:11-16." but I don't think that's quite so presumptuous.

Perhaps surprisingly, there is not even a mention in the article about obeying the direction of the organisation, even though in at least 3-4 paragraphs, there is an opportunity to slip it in. They don't even add it to the pictures and captions, which is usually a good place to insert chest-thumping for the Org if they can't include it in the text.

Almost the entire article is genuinely about the things we cannot know right now - when "the end" will come, what God will choose to do, and what will happen to us tomorrow - and surprisingly, nowhere in the text does it recommend turning to an "organisation" for the answers. However, it's worth noting that the opening song for the study is "SONG 123: Loyally Submitting to Theocratic Order", which DOES of course go on about obeying direction, so there is a not-so-subtle message laid down there, which seems suspiciously out of sync with the overall content of the article otherwise.

So I think for this one, I'll put it down to the (increasingly common) poor use of language in WT articles of late - the article should really be called "Modestly accept what you CANNOT know", or perhaps "Modestly accept what you do not YET know".

23

3 Changes The Watchtower Made on Babylon The Great in the Last 6 Months

by raymond frantz in

https://youtu.be/vpws6ncqpla?si=dqnf7-hupfr4pdta.

for decades, jehovah’s witnesses have been banging on about babylon the great—the so-called world empire of false religion—being on the brink of collapse.

any day now, they assured us, churches would empty out, priests would be left twiddling their thumbs, and humanity would collectively bin organised religion.

Journeyman

EDIT: posted common in wrong thread - apologies!

15

What "message" does the J.W Org. have to offer that will attract new members ?

by Phizzy in

the message they have been pushing for 150 years or so is "the end is near !"..

in the educated, civilised world, people think " yea ?

maybe because of economic meltdown exacerbated by climate change, but not from some intervention by a non-existent god".. "would you like a free bible study ?

Journeyman

But if they kill themselves before the GT starts, they will get an automatic resurrection pass to paradise where they will learn Jehovah’s Witnesses were right all along.

This is complete nonsense, and a caricature of what the current GB are saying. (Not that I'm a fan of their most recent spoutings, but let's be accurate here.)

At no time have the JWs taught that there is an "automatic resurrection pass" for anyone not a JW themselves. Of course, from a Biblical perspective, there IS no such thing as "an automatic resurrection pass" for ANYONE, since resurrection is dependent on God's mercy (grace) in applying Christ's ransom. He can choose to resurrect whomever he wishes - or choose not to. You don't get to sail through doing whatever you please. Yes, he promises to give life to those obeying him and his son, but even that is spoken of in terms that require effort and perseverance like "exerting yourself", a "narrow gate" and so on.

All this nonsense of characterising the change in the JWs teaching - whether it is correct or not - as a licence to do as you please is just as stupid as the suggestions that one should "stay PIMO and sit on the fence and see where things are going, then just jump at the end", etc, as if you can just fool God and "slip in under the net" at the last minute.

IF there is such a thing as the whole resurrection/judgement as Christians believe, the idea that some pathetic bags of skin and water like us humans can "gotcha!" the creator of the universe in that way is ridiculous.

26

WT June 2025: We Are Not Blind We Just Don't Know

by raymond frantz in

https://youtu.be/7xumqjq3zfc?si=ivcg96t4dtgze4ft.

so this is from the brand new watchtower study edition of june 2025 which has just been posted on jw.org .under the title: modestly accept what you do not know, a let’s read paragraphs in question 4 &5: “read matthew 24:36. we do not know when the end of this system of things will come.

even jesus, while on earth, did not know the ‘day and hour.’ he later told the apostles that jehovah, who is the great timekeeper, keeps the timing of certain events ‘in his own jurisdiction,’ or authority.

Journeyman

Personally, I am glad that they are now admitting that they do not know. It is better than making things up.

That's true, but it's going to come with an enormous backlash in payback (which is already starting). You can't string "generations" of people along for a lifetime then say "sorry, we were wrong" without expecting serious repercussions.

The error was in the arrogance of claiming to have "secret" knowledge of dates and times in the first place, and assuming YOU were right, even if the previous guy wasn't, time and again, despite the fact that the Bible itself warns against that very thing.

That, coupled with the R&F being encouraged to put their hope in the wrong thing (ie: imminent "salvation" and quick "rewards", rather than on service to God and Jesus for the long term as a "net good" in its own right)

One of the main reasons why I have never felt as badly let down as many others who have associated with JWs for decades - including many who were "exemplary" for years - is that I never believed the "it's just around the corner" thing, with all the comments like "oh, you'll never leave school in this system", "you'll never retire in this system", etc, etc. I always felt that, when you look back at the sweep of history, even just since the days of the Millennial movement, Barbour, Russell and all that lot - people had come and gone believing the end was "imminent" and it wasn't then, so why right now? It seems the height of arrogance to assume YOU and YOUR era will be the ones, when many have gone before who were mistaken (no offence intended to any ex-JWs who sincerely believed that in the past - I mean from the point of view of those teaching that idea.)

I've always felt that when God decides it's time, he will do it. Just because 1914 was a massively significant year from the perspective of human history, does not mean it has the actual meaning the JWs think it has. But for all the things they have changed recently, they are still adamantly insisting they have nothing even SLIGHTLY wrong with the teaching on what happened in heaven in 1914.

And Listener is right that they are still doubling down on the message "well, we are still God's only channel, so although we were wrong in the past and we can't claim to be infallible now, you should still listen to us exclusively and obey what we say". That way lies madness, and guaranteed failure.

2

Is the 2024 annual meeting new light already obsolete?

by nowwhat? in

the latest new light was jehovah was going to "put it into their (the nations) heart to give over their power to the united nations.

with the june watchtower now out which is to be studied in september would be the time when they study the annual meeting new light.

instead we get the "we don't know" when the end is coming!

Journeyman

Thanks for the clarifications, Duran. You know, when I read or watch many of the recent GB "new light" or "clarifications", I increasingly get the sense they don't even know - or care about - their own organisation's history.

They often get the detail of a lot of their own supposed teachings wrong, both when retelling them, and when saying "we now have a change of thought!"

You'd have thought with all the supposed technology they have at NY Bethel, they'd at least be able to search the databases of their own historic articles properly! Many of us on here can find statements of the WT organisation far more accurately than they can! (And I don't just mean faults and flaws - we can often find better explanations of their own teachings from their own past than they give in talks today).

I put it down to personal arrogance - the current GB are too busy thinking how they can promote their own "new" theories to suit what they want to do in the near future, and can't be bothered to properly check the history and context of their own predecessors' writings.

16

Will They Change the Memorial Talk This Year?

by raymond frantz in

https://youtu.be/o5almnehew4?si=kdgrjgbiutjkvcxe.

i’m hoping the memorial talk will be different.

change the talk!

Journeyman

Some years ago the Memorial talk was completely changed. From that time on there has been no mention of Nisan 14 and the Israelites in Egypt, killing the lamb, sprinkling the blood etc. The complete Passover part was removed. Even the song, "'twas Nisan 14 when your glory was seen...." was removed and substituted with another.
Can anyone remember the year this change took place? I never heard any explanation as to why the change but just assumed they had discovered they were celebrating on the wrong after all.
George

I can't remember WHEN it was done, but yes I remember that. It struck me at the time that it was "dumbing down" the message (little did I know then how much more was going to come down the line), especially as the Memorial is the first time many get to learn about "the ransom" and how significant it was, and how it linked right back to promises and acts of God from centuries before.

The Memorial songs back then seemed more dignified too, and they were uplifting, rousing songs, especially the second, which usually ended the meeting. One was about the meal itself, one about Jesus Christ.

"The Lord’s Evening Meal": [jworg] /en/library/books/Sing-Praises-to-Jehovah-Small-Size/The-Lords-Evening-Meal/
"Hail Jehovah's Firstborn": [jworg] /en/library/books/Sing-Praises-to-Jehovah-Small-Size/Hail-Jehovahs-Firstborn/

Then they put in two awful dirges of songs for a few years, now recently they've changed them again to one about the anointed as a "special possession" (which wouldn't be so bad if the GB hadn't also planted themselves in the forefront as being the ONLY spokesmen for that entire group) and another which, admittedly, is about being "grateful for the ransom" and does include lyrics acknowledging Jesus' willing sacrifice, but is a less memorable and rousing song than they used to end with.

They used to refer to the fact that at the end of the "Lord's evening meal", Matthew and Mark say Jesus and the eleven "sang songs of praise" before going out into the night, so a rousing song seemed a good way to end what should really be a joyful commemoration, because of what it stood for.

My pet peeve about the memorial is their obsession with just once a year and it has to correspond with Nisan 14 as the same as the passover night.

I have no problem with that at all. It seems perfectly reasonable. The Passover was an annual event. The "last supper" was held on a Passover, and so it's logical that when Jesus said "keep doing this in remembrance of me", to hold it annually.

For centuries and across most of the earth, "remembrances" are generally annual: birthdays, wedding and death anniversaries, commemorations of significant world events. For example, in the UK and Commonwealth countries, the event called "Remembrance Day" marking the sacrifice of armed forces personnel in conflicts is observed annually on 11th November, in commemoration of the ending of WWI on 11/11/18. So an annual event seems perfectly reasonable to me for both practical and scriptural reasons.

I think the concept of the Catholic Mass is overdoing it with frequency.

Now that, I do agree with. Daily or weekly or even multiple times a day seems overkill, and easily loses the significance of the event. Given the parallel with the Passover and the calendar (whether solar or lunar), annual seems most sensible. Of course, there is a debate of which "year" it should be held according to, but again, reasonably, I would say it should be according to the calendar used by the nation of Israel at the time Jesus was on earth. I'm no expert on that, and I believe the JWs don't always get that calculation right, but they are one of the few organisations claiming to be Christian who seem at least to be trying to align their observation to the original conditions.

3

bangers and cash

by stan livedeath in

bangers and cash is a uk tv series about a family running a business of selling cars and car related items in an auction house.. one of family members referred to an event some time in the past with the words.

" when god was a boy ".

oi ad to larf..

Journeyman

I remember something similar from some years ago in a comedy show when someone said something like:
"That was back when the Garden of Eden was just an allotment*". 🤣

(*Note for readers outside the UK: an allotment is a small plot of land made available for individual, non-commercial gardening for growing food plants - they used to be very common in the UK where many people did not have their own gardens, and have made a big comeback in recent years as more people in towns and cities want to get back to growing their own foods naturally.)

21

What's with the attack (counsel) on husbands with no corresponding article for wives?

by Rattigan350 in

what's with the attack (counsel) on husbands with no corresponding article for wives on the jan 2025 w that is being studied today?.

is there a point to that?.

Journeyman

I guess Watchtower has finally decided to address the spousal abuse problem among JWs.

I do think that's a large part of it, especially as the issues being caused are difficult to hide these days, with social media, sharing of sex pics and video clips, etc. That point was raised on the other thread related to this at https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/5207275514363904/oral-anal-sex-flip-flop-march-2025-announcements-reminders

Even in "the world" (read: the real world outside the JW enclave) there is a lot of concern about coercive sexual activity these days - fed by wide availability of explicit pornography - especially among the young and especially by males against females. Not everyone wants to engage in oral or anal sex, bondage or other acts and they certainly don't want to be literally forced into it against their will (I'm not talking about "rough" but consensual sex which some couples prefer, but emotional blackmail, gaslighting or violence to make a partner comply).

In the face of that, it's obviously affecting congregations too, but with the GB now surprisingly coy about discussing sexual acts in the marriage bed, they are talking around the subject rather than being clear.

The message should be clear enough: elders do not need to know what a married couple are doing in the bedroom, but both partners must know that non-consensual, coercive sex acts are wrong. For those who believe in God like the JWs, the obvious follow-up is to say that He sees the way a husband treats his wife in this regard and will judge accordingly (verses like 1 Peter 3:7 are often used here). Likewise a woman abusing her partner would not be showing "deep respect" to him (Ephesians 5:33). Also, that if such behaviour becomes outwardly known, it will effect the spiritual standing of the offending partner and, if it breaks criminal laws in the land (marital rape for example) will be referred to the secular authorities.

No need to dance around with coded words or flip-flopping advice (wrong, not wrong, wrong-ish but we don't really want to know, etc).

13

Don't you just love LITERATURE truths?

by BoogerMan in

as jw's we swallowed such concoctions for years - without a single scripture provided as proof!.

w71 12/15 p. 759 - "apparently, the apostle peter was the chairman of the governing body on the festival day of pentecost of 33 c.e., and the disciple james, the half brother of jesus christ, was the chairman at a later date, according to the account in acts of apostles.

from this, and from what historical evidence there is available, the chairmanship of the governing body rotated.".

Journeyman

The entire "Imitate their Faith" book was based on speculation and conjecture. They would just make something up to make the point that they wanted because these bible characters aren't deep or interesting at all.

That book really wound me up. Personally, I think that it could have been interesting as some (maybe not all) of the characters they chose could make interesting stories.

My problem wasn't with that, it was with the constant speculation disguised as "fact". The trouble with picking characters about whom little is said apart from perhaps one specific story/lesson, is that there is not enough source material to make an entire chapter that can cover a one-hour study session.

One possible solution to that is to make the material more of a discussion along the lines of: "what could s/he have been thinking? A or B? How would you feel in a similar position? What if s/he had chosen to do X instead of Y?" That approach would have stimulated the thinking and the imagination of the audience too.

But no - the GB being who they are, they had to make bald statements of FACT - "this means this" or "this is because of that" - often with little or no supporting evidence.

Plus of course, sowing in their favourite themes like:
"This situation shows the wisdom of obeying those who take the lead" or
"This account shows how we must never question the direction we receive" etc, etc!

They play the same tricks with the videos they make too. Often there is insufficient background in the Scriptures for them to make full-length movie detail, but they just make up "facts" to fit, like the ridiculous "invention" of a sister for Jonah, when the Bible is silent about his family.

The whole thing is then made worse by the fact the R&F are taught to think everything from the GB is 100% real, so they start quoting these fictitious events and "facts" as if they were "gospel" (if you'll pardon the pun!)

The same happens with the artists' impressions in the WT and other literature, that are treated as if they were newsreel footage and eyewitness photos!

27

Examples of Watchtower flawed interpretation of Bible passages?

by Vanderhoven7 in

asking jehovah’s witnesses to interpret specific passages is a great way to demonstrate their interpretive abuse.

got any clear examples?.

Journeyman

The same brothers that preached anti-beard, now are all wearing beards. All because of the new mandate handed down by their leadership.

Oh God, yeah, the whole beards thing has been a farce from start to finish.

Firstly, the nonsense that having a beard was "inappropriate" or could preclude you from "privileges". Absolutely no scriptural validity to that at all.

And the best they could come up with was that resisting that "rule" was somehow an indication of not being sufficiently "obedient", which disqualified the brother because of his "attitude". Well, you could say that about any arbitrary rule you could set, like telling brothers they couldn't wear the colour blue, or no slip-on shoes, or something! Madness.

Then, after their volte-face on the subject last year, the way they had to make a big fuss about the change, "advising" how the R&F should view it, etc, showed again just how hung up they were on the subject. Likely, the recent GB members were embarrassed to even have to address it, but rather than just being honest and saying "this is silly, forget it" they had to make it out to be some great spiritual revelation!

And as Vanderhoven said, the pathetic way so many brothers then rushed to grow beards - including many elders - as if it was somehow something they suddenly wanted now that the GB had "approved" it. Pathetic.

All along I've thought the obsession with beards was ridiculous. I believe it dates back to the days of Rutherford wanting to put a clear distinction between "Russellites" and his own supporters. I remember seeing for myself a copy of one of the old publications from the 1930s showing Jesus as a clean-shaven blond bloke, like some kind of "Captain America" of the Heavens! 🤔
(Except I can't even say that now, as the new CA is black! 😅)

I would perhaps have vaguely understood if the Org's doctrine had been that brothers must wear beards, rather than that they shouldn't. That would have had at least some vaguely historical and scriptural justification. (Leviticus 19:27 and the Nethinim not shaving their beards.)

But "shunning" beards and treating brothers who chose to wear them as pariahs was just foolish and it was a completely pointless "rule" that hung over the brothers for decades. Give it a few more years and they'll probably deny it was even an issue, but that the R&F "misunderstood", or something like that!