The Makeweight Scenario - my way of explaining the increasing light doctrine

by cedars 19 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • cedars
    cedars

    Hi everyone

    Many of you will remember when I first joined this forum I shared some reasoning with you related to "increasing light" and the logic that led to my personally abandoning it as an explanation for why the Society repeatedly makes errors and failed predictions in its publications. I call it the "makeweight" scenario, and one or two have asked if I can launch a new thread for the benefit of new ones who may not have heard of it before.

    I explain things on my latest blog article on the link below, but for those who would like to read just the part about the Makeweight Scenario, here is the part of my blog article that discusses the concept of increased light (slightly edited to separate it from the article).

    IS THE LIGHT GETTING BRIGHTER?

    We are constantly informed in the Society's publications that any errors in books or magazines from years gone by are due to the “light getting brighter”. In other words, the brothers during the days of Russell, Rutherford and Knorr were not granted full understanding of the bible or God’s purposes for them. As a result, their publications contained many errors, which render them unworthy of any serious consideration by Jehovah’s people today.

    This idea brings with it a great contradiction, because although errors in the publications are freely admitted, they are still indirectly attributed to God as having been provided as “spiritual food” by his holy spirit through his earthly organization. The exact relationship between God’s holy spirit and the writers of Watchtower publications seems to be rather obscured in the literature, but here is just one example of how the Society claims that God’s holy spirit takes an active role in the actual preparation of the publications, however error-strewn they may subsequently turn out to be:

    “If we are sorely tried and do not know what to pray for, ‘the spirit joins in with help for our weakness, pleading for us with groanings unuttered.’ God answers such prayers. (Romans 8:26, 27) Let us pray for holy spirit and allow it to produce in us those of its fruits particularly needed to face a certain trial. (Luke 11:13) We will also increase our joy if we prayerfully and diligently study God’s spirit-inspired Word and Christian publications prepared under the spirit’s guidance. (The Watchtower, 1992 3/15 pp. 21-22)

    Thus, the bible is “spirit-inspired”, whereas the Watchtower publications are said to be prepared “under the spirit’s guidance”. Try as hard as I may, I have yet to find a single Watchtower article that satisfactorily explains the difference between “spirit-inspired” and “spirit-guided”. To my mind, both terms mean one and the same thing. Either way, it is clear from the above quote that the Society claims guidance from God’s holy spirit as playing a key role in the preparation of Watchtower publications. If this is the case, why would God deliberately “guide” the planting of erroneous thoughts and teachings in material intended for his worshippers?

    The Society frequently uses three scriptures to impress upon Jehovah’s Witnesses their teaching of “increased light”. These are as follows:

    Into the path of the wicked ones do not enter, and do not walk straight on into the way of the bad ones. Shun it, do not pass along by it; turn aside from it, and pass along.For they do not sleep unless they do badness, and their sleep has been snatched away unless they cause someone to stumble. For they have fed themselves with the bread of wickedness, and the wine of acts of violence is what they drink. But the path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established. The way of the wicked ones is like the gloom; they have not known at what they keep stumbling.” (Proverbs 4:14-19, New World Translation)

    “Consequently we have the prophetic word [made] more sure; and YOU are doing well in paying attention to it as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until day dawns and a daystar rises, in YOUR hearts. For YOU know this first, that no prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit.” (2 Peter 1:19-21, New World Translation)

    “And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of [the] end. Many will rove about, and the [true] knowledge will become abundant.”And I saw, I Daniel, and, look! there were two others standing, one on the bank here of the stream and the other on the bank there of the stream. Then one said to the man clothed with the linen, who was up above the waters of the stream: “How long will it be to the end of the wonderful things?” And I began to hear the man clothed with the linen, who was up above the waters of the stream, as he proceeded to raise his right [hand] and his left [hand] to the heavens and to swear by the One who is alive for time indefinite: “It will be for an appointed time, appointed times and a half. And as soon as there will have been a finishing of the dashing of the power of the holy people to pieces, all these things will come to their finish.” Now as for me, I heard, but I could not understand; so that I said: “O my lord, what will be the final part of these things?” And he went on to say: “Go, Daniel, because the words are made secret and sealed up until the time of [the] end. Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will certainly act wickedly, and no wicked ones at all will understand; but the ones having insight will understand.” (Daniel 12:4-10, New World Translation)

    Unquestionably, the scripture in Proverbs 4:18 is the most frequently used of the above three when driving home the idea of “increasing light”. However, the context of the scripture clearly shows that the “path of the righteous ones” is merely analogous of the favorable consequences enjoyed by righteous people in comparison with “wicked ones”. Bible prophecy or even “God’s word” is mentioned nowhere in this scripture. The “prophetic word” in 2 Peter 1:19 is a “lamp shining in a dark place” – it neither brightens nor dims. Daniel 12 describes the wicked ones failing to understand his prophecy, but only the “ones having insight” understanding. Indeed, according to this verse, whether or not bible prophecies are understood seems to be an indicator of whether or not the one “roving about” is wicked or righteous! There is certainly no room for changes in interpretation, or going back to an original idea. You either understand, or you don’t.

    The truth is, when read in their full context, none of the above three commonly used scriptures describe a scenario in which Jehovah God would use his holy spirit to knowingly and deliberately issue false information to his worshippers as a “makeweight” until true information is revealed at a later stage. This is simply not how the “God of truth” goes about doing things in the scriptures. (Psalm 31:5) Rather, when God wants his servants to know something, he tells them unequivocally and with no ambiguity or innuendo. In the case of a prophecy, for example, the words of a true prophet speaking on behalf of Jehovah are said to always come true without fail. The bible even tells us that you can identify a false prophet simply by noting whether the words he has spoken in Jehovah’s name have come true or not. (Deu. 18:20-22)

    Faced with the evidence, there is therefore no scriptural reason for believing in the Society’s teaching of increasing light. Either the Society speaks as God’s representative in all things, or not at all. They must choose for themselves, as must their readers.

    In reality, the “increasing light” teaching provides a convenient escape hatch whenever the Society is confronted with evidence of past teachings that are either suspect or downright misleading. It also allows the Society to change their prophetic interpretations whenever history proves the previous teachings to be false. However, wherever the “increasing light” doctrine came from, it most certainly doesn't originate from the bible – that much is clear. The bible has simply been misquoted in a number of places in such a way as to apparently lend support to the notion. In reality, the bible speaks clearly and unequivocally of those who speak falsely in Jehovah’s name, and its judgment of such ones is far from flattering.

    Comments, anyone?

    (As always, please vote on the 2012 JW Survey if you haven't already done so!)

    Cedars

  • cedars
    cedars

    Here's a link to the article itself for those who are interested...

    http://jwsurvey.org/cedars-blog/under-the-microscope-the-watch-tower-societys-claims-to-divine-direction-part-4

    Cedars

  • wha happened?
    wha happened?

    The light. changing, is what woke me up. I remember in '95 thinking to myself, "why the change? I thought they had this stuff figured out already?" And then the wake up call. What if people believed what is considered new light now, a few years ago. Would they be apostates? Would they be df'd? And once the new light was accepted, would they be reinstated?

    And an 'dub would go to the grave to defend the current light. But if the light changes, did they die for an empty cause?

    After going back and ready scripture, and noticing a lack of "new light" over the years as documented in the bible, a realization hits.

  • Soldier77
    Soldier77

    Excellent article and love your blog as well ceders. Keep up the good work!

  • dontplaceliterature
    dontplaceliterature

    Great work, cedars!

  • kepler
    kepler

    Cedars,

    I went back to some correspondence from about a year ago with people not part of this website. I had located the transcript to the Walsh trial in Scotland in which the chief officers of the Society gave testimony. Covington overall was skilled at avoiding snares such as "belief in worldly armies?", but there is also something said about the "increasing light" doctrine...

    I had gone back to read the trial transcripts largely due to quotes on cross examination that had remained on my mind. Some were not attributable to Frederick Franz, as it turned out, but to the society’s counsel Hayward Covington. Covington had never assumed for himself the title of anointed as did other board members, but was very effective in argument before the Supreme Court. There were ironies in the current context though. In petitioning the government of Britain for religious exemptions, it was noted by the counsel for the state that the society regarded all religion as satanic, agencies of the devil – and, moreover, that the government of Britain was the two-headed beast of Revelation. Covington conceded these things to be true, but also asserted that the Society maintained that there should not be “anarchy in the world” – an interesting compromise with evil to be sure.

    P. 345 H. C. Covington cross examined: [ The crown = Q., Covington = A.]

    Q. Is it not vital to speak the truth on religious matters?

    A. It certainly is.

    Q. Is there in your view room in a religion for a change of interpretation of Holy Writ from time to time?

    A. There is every reason for a change in interpretation as we view it, of the Bible. Our view becomes more clear as we see the prophecy fulfilled by time.

    Q. You have promulgated, forgive the word, false prophecy?

    A. We have – I do not think we have promulgated false prophecy, there have been statements that were erroneous, that is the way to put it, and mistaken.

    Q. Is it a most vital consideration in the present situation of the world to know if the prophecy can be interpreted into terms of fact, when Christ’s Second Coming was?

    A. That is true. And we have always striven to see that we have the truth before we utter it. We go on the very best information we have, but we cannot wait until we get perfect, because if we wait until we get perfect, we would never be able to speak.

    Q. Let us follow that up just a little. It was promulgated as a matter which must be believed by all members of Jehovah’s Witnesses that the Lord’s Second Coming took place in 1874?

    A. I am not familiar with that. You are speaking to a matter that I know nothing of.

    Q. You heard Mr. Franz’s evidence?

    A. I heard Mr. Franz testify, but I am not familiar with what he said on that, I mean the subject matter of what he was talking about, so I cannot answer any more than you can, having heard what he said.

    Q. Leave me out of it.

    A. That is the source of my information, what I have heard in court.

    Q. You have studied the literature of your movement?

    A. Yes, but not all of it. I have not studied the 7 volumes of “Studies in the Scriptures”, and I have not studied this matter that you are mentioning now of 1874. I am not at all familiar with that.

    Q. Assume from me that it was promulgated as authoritative by the Society that Christ’s 2 nd Coming was in 1874?

    A. Taking that assumption as a fact, it is a hypothetical statement.

    Q. That was the publication of a false prophecy?

    A. That was the publication of a false prophecy, it was a false or an erroneous statement in fulfillment of a prophecy that was false or erroneous.

    Q. And that had to be believed by the whole of Jehovah’s Witnesses?

    A. Yes, because you must understand we must have unity. We cannot have disunity with a lot of people going every way. An army is supposed to march in step.

    Q. You do not believe in worldly armies, do you?

    A. We believe in the Christian Army of God.

    Q. Do you believe in worldly armies?

    A. We have nothing to say about that, we do not preach against them, We merely say that worldly armies like the nations of the world today are a part of Satan’s Organization, and we do not take part in them. But we do not say the nations cannot have their armies. We do not preach against warfare. We are simply claiming our exemption from it, that is all.

    Q. Back to the point now. A false prophecy was promulgated?

    A. I agree that.

    Q. It had to be accepted by Jehovah’s Witnesses?

    A. That is correct.

    Q. If a member of Jehovah’s Witnesses took the view himself that that prophecy was wrong and said so, he would be disfellowshipped?

    A. Yes, if he said so and kept persisting in creating trouble, because if the whole organization believes one thing, even though it is erroneous, and somebody else starts on his own trying to put his ideas across, then there is disunity and trouble. There cannot be harmony. There cannot be marching. When a change comes it should come from the proper source, not from the bottom upwards, because everybody would have ideas, and the organization would disintegrate and go in a thousand different directions. Our purpose is to have unity.

    Q. Unity at all costs?

    A. Unity at all costs, because we believe and are sure that Jehovah God is using our organization , the governing body of our organization, to direct it, even though mistakes are made from time to time.

    Q. And unity based upon an enforced acceptance of a false prophecy?

    A. That is conceded to be true.

    Q. And the person who expressed his view, as you say, that it was wrong, and was disfellowshipped, would be in breach of the Covenant, if he was baptized?

    A. That is correct.

    Q. And as you said yesterday expressly, would be worthy of death?

    A. I think –

    Q. Would you say yes or no?

    A. I will answer yes, unhesitatingly.

    Q. Do you call that religion?

    A. It certainly is.

    Q. Do you call it Christianity?

    A. I certainly do.

  • cedars
    cedars

    Thanks everyone!

    Yes Kepler, I'm aware of the Walsh trial. Thanks for highlighting it. It's incredible how candid the officials were about their motives (including Freddie Franz, I believe?). I read somewhere that, at some point, Jack Barr's family were the only family living in Scotland (or something like that) and WT officials used to come and stay with them. It's interesting to think that young Jack, with whom they may have been staying, would eventually end up promoting the exact same harsh and unyielding philisophies of his forebears.

    Cedars

  • mP
    mP

    @cedars

    have you ever asked why light = truth ? why does the wts use suchlingo ?

  • cedars
    cedars

    mP - that's a good question. I believe "light" has long been used as an analogy of knowledge, hence the word "enlightenment". Possibly the various scriptures in the bible referring to god's word as light have something to do with this - I'm thinking specifically of some of Jesus' illustrations about lampstands, etc. Obviously, the more heavily veiled in metaphor the concept is, the better for the Watchtower, as it means they are less impelled to explain the precise mechanics. As I mention in my article, nowhere in the Society's literature do they explain precisely the process by which their writers are "spirit guided" or how this differs from "spirit inspired". Confusion reigns supreme, and this state of affairs suits the Society perfectly. It's all simply a matter of "faith".

    Cedars

  • Terry
    Terry

    Food at the proper time?

    When is it ever proper to send people out with errors with the lable of Truth?

    If something is True--why would you have to change it?

    As I've said many times, it is no great virtue to admit you shit your pants in public--everybody already knows.

    The smell of "old Light" stinks up the history of this religion.

    In what way does guessing in trial and error fashion differ from the transmission of The Truth from the Governing Body?

    None.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit