A Spirit-Directed Organization?

[dizzle]

Excerpt from the Christian Research Journal Volume 26, Number 3

Article "Faithful and Wise Servant" by Emond Gruss

If the Watch Tower's current teachings are used as their standard of biblical truth, then their teachings in 1919 did not qualify as "the right sort of food, at the proper time" that was claimed as Christ's reason for the selection of this organization. The Watch Tower Society before and after 1919 (1) published numerous false prophecies and erroneous interpretations of Scripture; (2) participated in, by its own definition, "considerable creature worship," idolatry, and customs and practices of pagan origin; and (3) promoted doctrines that were later attributed to Satan's trickery and deception. The record is not an example of a Spirit-directed organization according to the Watch Tower Society's own statement: "Being the 'spirit of truth,' God's holy spirit could never be the source of error but would protect Christ's followers from doctrinal falsehoods."

Former Watch Tower authority Raymond Franz observes: "It would be an insult to Christ Jesus to say that he selected this organization on the basis of what it was teaching uniquely and disntinctively as of 1919." He asks, insightfully, "Why would Christ have picked out the admittedly error-plaqued souce of information as the example of faithfulness and discretion, as the only one passing the test and chosen as the sole avenue of communication through which the enthroned King would now send all guidance to mankind." The answer is, He didn't.

[Non-Trinitarian]

Today @ 11:20 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=389605#post389605)
Dee Dee Warren:

Excerpt from the Christian Research Journal Volume 26, Number 3

Article "Faithful and Wise Servant" by Emond Gruss

If the Watch Tower's current teachings are used as their standard of biblical truth, then their teachings in 1919 did not qualify as "the right sort of food, at the proper time" that was claimed as Christ's reason for the selection of this organization. The Watch Tower Society before and after 1919 (1) published numerous false prophecies and erroneous interpretations of Scripture; (2) participated in, by its own definition, "considerable creature worship," idolatry, and customs and practices of pagan origin; and (3) promoted doctrines that were later attributed to Satan's trickery and deception. The record is not an example of a Spirit-directed organization according to the Watch Tower Society's own statement: "Being the 'spirit of truth,' God's holy spirit could never be the source of error but would protect Christ's followers from doctrinal falsehoods."

Former Watch Tower authority Raymond Franz observes: "It would be an insult to Christ Jesus to say that he selected this organization on the basis of what it was teaching uniquely and disntinctively as of 1919." He asks, insightfully, "Why would Christ have picked out the admittedly error-plaqued souce of information as the example of faithfulness and discretion, as the only one passing the test and chosen as the sole avenue of communication through which the enthroned King would now send all guidance to mankind." The answer is, He didn't.

This comment shows a lack of understanding of JW beliefs. We believe in progressive revelation and that our knowledge increases over time. Were we perfect in the first part of the last century? No. Are we 100% correct today? Probably not. But we have and had a firm hold on many biblical truths that other religions today do not have. IE., we know God isn't a Trinity and many other truths religions don't have. In time, after more prayer and research, we realized other things as well. IE, additional research of the Bible and its view of participating in pagan practices caused us to question whether birthdays were appropriate. Even further research showed that early Christians also refused to celebrate birthdays. Once we learned this, we stopped celebrating birthdays.

But the fundamental truths, along with our desire to preach the good news of God's Kingdom, is what caused Jesus to select us as his Christian Church.

[dizzle]

This is so completely begging the question. The errors were serious and the claims BACK then were that the doctrine was right. Revisionism will not do. The claim was not that the organization WOULD dispense the right food at the right time, but that it WAS doing so, and at that time was worshipping Jesus, celebrating birthdays, allowing blood transfusions, and promulgating false prophecies. Hardly sounds like the right food to me. And what about Millions now living Will Never Die? Such statements are not only wrong, they are sickenly unconscionable as people made real life choices based upon this charlantry and suffered immensely for it.

[Non-Trinitarian]

Today @ 02:34 PM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=389691#post389691)
Dee Dee Warren:

This is so completely begging the question. The errors were serious and the claims BACK then were that the doctrine was right. Revisionism will not do.
Of course we thought it was right. If we didn't think it was right, we wouldn't have said it.

Consider this: When was it no longer necessary to get circumcised? How many years did the Christians make new converts get circumcised when they didn't have to? Does this mean they were false prophets or were not God's Organization?


The claim was not that the organization WOULD dispense the right food at the right time, but that it WAS doing so, and at that time was worshipping Jesus, celebrating birthdays, allowing blood transfusions, and promulgating false prophecies. Hardly sounds like the right food to me.

We never "worshipped" Jesus as you use the term. It was more like Rev 3:9 or 1 Chron 29:20. Already discussing birthdays on another thread (in which we are patterned after the early Christians). Not sure they had blood transfusions in 1919. And yes, they did have wrong expectations of things. Again, early Christians slowly came to appreciate things, IE., circumcision. (SP?) But they were telling people about Jesus. In the same way, we didn't fully understand everything, but we at least knew who God and Jesus was. Few religions have in the simplest question answered correctly.


And what about Millions now living Will Never Die? Such statements are not only wrong, they are sickenly unconscionable as people made real life choices based upon this charlantry and suffered immensely for it.

We don't know if they are wrong but even if, so what? Early Christians also thought the end was imminent. People made "real life choices" to serve God, regardless of WHEN the end came.

[musicman]

Of course we thought it was right. If we didn't think it was right, we wouldn't have said it.

Consider this: When was it no longer necessary to get circumcised? How many years did the Christians make new converts get circumcised when they didn't have to? Does this mean they were false prophets or were not God's Organization?The WatchTower claims it is God's Organization and that what it says is God's truth. If it makes doctrinal statements that they later change or admit are false, then the WT is by Scriptural standards, a false prophet in the truest sense of the word. Please point out in the Scriptures where Jesus or any of the Apostles taught that new converts had to be circumcised in order to be a Christian? There were some believers in Jerusalem church who thought that Gentile believers had to follow the Old Testament Law, but this was resolved by the leadership of the church. There is no place in Scripture that ever says the Apostles taught such a thing. After Jesus' ascension, the Apostles were the authority in the early church. Since they never taught this, there is no example of error or false prophesy here (as you claim). You are attempting to play semantics with DD's comments.

We never "worshipped" Jesus as you use the term. It was more like Rev 3:9 or 1 Chron 29:20.This sounds like Bill Clinton's "it depends on what you mean by 'is'". I don't buy it.


Not sure they had blood transfusions in 1919. And yes, they did have wrong expectations of things. Again, early Christians slowly came to appreciate things, IE., circumcision.
The first blood transfusion occured in 1667. The technique became quite common in the mid-eighteen hundreds. It was standard procedure in American hospitals by 1900. I don't get this "early Christians slowly came to appreciate things" - please give Scriptural examples that show doctrinal change or admissions of error as given by Jesus or the Apostles.

We don't know if they are wrong but even if, so what? Early Christians also thought the end was imminent. People made "real life choices" to serve God, regardless of WHEN the end came.I can't believe you said this. Once again, if someone claims to give a prophetic message from God and that message is false, that person (or organization) is a false prophet. It's true that early Christians believed that Christ's return was imminent, but you don't find them setting any dates (unlike the WatchTower Society).

musicman

[dizzle]

And it is demonstrably false that the WTS did not advocate "worshipping" Jesus in exactly the sense I implied. After the fact spin-doctoring does not change this fact. A "Spirit-directed" organization does not buy houses for the alleged return of long dead prophets that never happens (oops) and does not instruct its members to engage in a practice it later condemns as idolatry. The Spirit does not slowly come to learn things.

[NonTrinitarian]

Please point out in the Scriptures where Jesus or any of the Apostles taught that new converts had to be circumcised in order to be a Christian? There were some believers in Jerusalem church who thought that Gentile believers had to follow the Old Testament Law, but this was resolved by the leadership of the church. There is no place in Scripture that ever says the Apostles taught such a thing. After Jesus' ascension, the Apostles were the authority in the early church. Since they never taught this, there is no example of error or false prophesy here (as you claim). You are attempting to play semantics with DD's comments.
Please turn to Acts 15 in your Bible. Note that the time period is within Paul's ministry so this shows it was a number of years past Jesus' death. Note verse 6 where it says the "Apostles and older men gathered to see about this affair." Then the evidence is presented. Note verse 15 where James begins to speak. See the DECISION in verse 19. It is now that the Apostles and older men decide that circumcision was not neccessary. Note that this decision was not made until AFTER they heard all the testimony. It had obviously NOT been determined beforehand else the apostles would have said earlier and there would have been no discussion on it. Now in vs 24 they say that they did not give them any instructions as to having to be circumcised. Obviously not because if they had discussed it earlier, they would have came to the same conclusion. It just never came up because the apostles were already circumcised. But a general opinion had obviously been going around for some time that circumcision was necessary and only in Acts 15 did it become official church teaching that it was not. Before that many Christians were made to get circumcised but this doesn't mean those who were ignorantly doing this were "false prophets." Then the decision was passed on to other congregations, as Acts 16:4,5.

Another example of a late understanding has to do with the eating of meat. Jesus had declared all things clean when he was on earth and yet three years later Peter still thought it was wrong to eat meats. (See Mark 7:19 and Acts 10:14)

I don't get this "early Christians slowly came to appreciate things" - please give Scriptural examples that show doctrinal change or admissions of error as given by Jesus or the Apostles.
Actually it's a pretty common teaching by many religions and theologians. It's called prgressive revelation.


I can't believe you said this. Once again, if someone claims to give a prophetic message from God and that message is false, that person (or organization) is a false prophet. It's true that early Christians believed that Christ's return was imminent, but you don't find them setting any dates (unlike the WatchTower Society).
JW's don't claim to hear "voices" or have a direct line to God and thus do not claim to be a "prphet" as you are using the word. Our understanding comes from the Bible and at times we miss understand it. And yes, I agree that the early JW's were wrong on their expectations regarding dates. But I accept that fact because at least their not out teaching a Trinity and many other gross wrongs.

[NonTrinitarian]

And it is demonstrably false that the WTS did not advocate "worshipping" Jesus in exactly the sense I implied. After the fact spin-doctoring does not change this fact.
Is this sentence worder correctly? I don't understand what you are trying to say.


A "Spirit-directed" organization does not buy houses for the alleged return of long dead prophets that never happens (oops) and does not instruct its members to engage in a practice it later condemns as idolatry. The Spirit does not slowly come to learn things.
Not familiar with the house buying thing but it probably didn't happen. Probably another lie propogated by an anti-JW web site. Irregardless though, you said "The Spirit does not slowly come to learn things."

I agree. But people do and it is the Spirit which slowly reveals things. Jesus told his apostles they had many things to learn but were not able to understand them yet. That's why he said the spirit would guide them. And it did. Case in point: Jesus declared all meats clean and yet it wasn't until some three years later that the Spirit told Peter he could eat all meats. Was Peter a false prophet for three years?

[musicman]

It just never came up because the apostles were already circumcised. But a general opinion had obviously been going around for some time that circumcision was necessary and only in Acts 15 did it become official church teaching that it was not. Before that many Christians were made to get circumcised but this doesn't mean those who were ignorantly doing this were "false prophets." Then the decision was passed on to other congregations, as Acts 16:4,5.



Another example of a late understanding has to do with the eating of meat. Jesus had declared all things clean when he was on earth and yet three years later Peter still thought it was wrong to eat meats. (See Mark 7:19 and Acts 10:14)



You are confusing the issue. No one is denying that the Bible gives evidence that there was a difference of opinion regarding the practice of circumcision, even among the Church leadership. This is why they gathered together - it was the role of the Apostles to make an official, agreed-upon decision about a point of doctrine. Their decision WAS the official pronouncement by the Church (organization if you prefer). Prior to this decision, there had been no official doctrinal stand regarding circumcision, because as you touched on, it hadn't been an issue until Gentiles began converting to Christianity. This is completely different from what the WatchTower Society does. When the WatchTower Society speaks, it speaks as the official mouthpiece for God's organization on earth. When the WTS speaks “truths” and then later changes the “truths”, or the “truths” are found to be false, then the WTS is not just “in error”, it is a false prophet.





JW's don't claim to hear "voices" or have a direct line to God and thus do not claim to be a "prophet" as you are using the word. Our understanding comes from the Bible and at times we miss understand it. And yes, I agree that the early JW's were wrong on their expectations regarding dates. But I accept that fact because at least their not out teaching a Trinity and many other gross wrongs.



Even though the WatchTower made false claims, you say it is not a “false prophet”. How, then, would you define what a false prophet is?



musicman

[NonTrinitarian]

When the WatchTower Society speaks, it speaks as the official mouthpiece for God's organization on earth. When the WTS speaks “truths” and then later changes the “truths”, or the “truths” are found to be false, then the WTS is not just “in error”, it is a false prophet.

Sorry but that's your opinion. We've always held that we don't know everything and that as time goes on and we study more and more, we come to a better understanding of something. Just as we see time and again in the first century. False prophets are those who knowingly teach lies contrary to God's Word. Like the Trinity, etc.

[dizzle]

[/color]

Sorry but that's your opinion. We've always held that we don't know everything and that as time goes on and we study more and more, we come to a better understanding of something. Just as we see time and again in the first century. False prophets are those who knowingly teach lies contrary to God's Word. Like the Trinity, etc.
Wow. Are you saying that I KNOW that the Trinity is false but teach it anyway? Is that what you are claiming? Your arguments implode upon themselves but you cannot see it.

Reread my quote of what this "Spirit-directed" organization claims for itself and see if you can repeat your above quote with a stratigh face. Maybe you guys "just don't know" that the Trinity is right. YOu certaintly "did not know" that worshipping Jesus was wrong, and that is a biggie.

[NonTrinitarian]

Wow. Are you saying that I KNOW that the Trinity is false but teach it anyway? Is that what you are claiming?
No. I didn't say that at all. I said a false prophet is someone who teaches a known lie. An example of a lie is the Trinity. That doesn't mean everyone who teaches the trinity is knowingly teachign a lie and subsequently a false prophet. I too used to teach and beleive in the Trinity. Obviously I don't think I was a false prophet. There's a difference between ignorance and willfulness. And yes, I do believe there are people who can see the Trinity is false but are scared to speak up because of family, friends, church members, etc. So no, I was not calling you a false prophet.

YOu certaintly "did not know" that worshipping Jesus was wrong, and that is a biggie.
We didn't "worship" Jesus in the way you mean the word.

[musicman]

We've always held that we don't know everything and that as time goes on and we study more and more, we come to a better understanding of something. Just as we see time and again in the first century. False prophets are those who knowingly teach lies contrary to God's Word. Like the Trinity, etc.
NonTrinitarian, you agreed earlier that the WatchTower has changed its position on things like birthdays, prophetic statements, blood transfusions, and worshipping Jesus (even though you say "worship" didn't actually mean "worship" in the sense it is meant today). You say that, over time, the WTS was led by the Spirit to a better understanding of certain previously held beliefs and that is why these things are not practiced by your church anymore. You've said that your church has "progressed".

My question is, if God has led the WTS to change certain beliefs that they once thought were correct, but now believe to be incorrect - how do you know that doctrinal stands your church teaches you to believe now will not change sometime in the future? How do you know that the WTS will not someday be led to a "deeper understanding" and accept the Trinity? How do you know with certainty that any of the doctrinal positions the WTS proclaims today are really true? By your belief in "progressive revelation", those doctrinal positions could change because the Spirit may lead the WatchTower to a greater understanding that you and the WatchTower just aren't ready for yet.

You keep claiming that the Christian Church has changed its position on certain points of doctrine (i.e. the circumcision issue). That is completely false. The Apostles gave an official stance on circumcision when it was necessary - previous to that decision there was no "official" doctrinal position. You might have a point if, after the Apostles had given their official stand on the issue, they then changed their position from what they decided in Acts 15 - but that never happened.

[NonTrinitarian]

NonTrinitarian, you agreed earlier that the WatchTower has changed its position on things like birthdays, prophetic statements, blood transfusions, and worshipping Jesus (even though you say "worship" didn't actually mean "worship" in the sense it is meant today). You say that, over time, the WTS was led by the Spirit to a better understanding of certain previously held beliefs and that is why these things are not practiced by your church anymore. You've said that your church has "progressed".

My question is, if God has led the WTS to change certain beliefs that they once thought were correct, but now believe to be incorrect - how do you know that doctrinal stands your church teaches you to believe now will not change sometime in the future? How do you know that the WTS will not someday be led to a "deeper understanding" and accept the Trinity? How do you know with certainty that any of the doctrinal positions the WTS proclaims today are really true? By your belief in "progressive revelation", those doctrinal positions could change because the Spirit may lead the WatchTower to a greater understanding that you and the WatchTower just aren't ready for yet.
First of all, let me remind you that many protestant theologians believe in progressive revelation so it's not just 'our belief.' And yes, I do think we may come to a deeper understanding of certain teachings later on. But the fundamental teachings are core. IE, I don't believe the Trinity is false because the WTS tells me it is false. That's how I became a JW. Trying to prove them wrong on that doctrine. If the WTS came out and said, 'well now we believe in the Trinity', I would leave. I don't hold to these beliefs because I am a JW. I am a JW because they teach the same things I believe. Particularly the core beliefs I believe are necessary for salvation. Additionally, I do believe JW's have the predominant truth and most correct understanding of God's Word. And their fruitage, in my opinion, is unmatched by any religion. So by their fruits, love, unity and teachings, I believe I have found the truth.


You keep claiming that the Christian Church has changed its position on certain points of doctrine (i.e. the circumcision issue). That is completely false. The Apostles gave an official stance on circumcision when it was necessary - previous to that decision there was no "official" doctrinal position. You might have a point if, after the Apostles had given their official stand on the issue, they then changed their position from what they decided in Acts 15 - but that never happened.
My point is that wrong teachings were held by people, even the apostles. Later they were corrected. I am not saying nor do JW's beleive there is an equivication between the apostles and the governing body of JW's. You will note in any WT mag that the governing body does not have any "more" holy spirit than anyone else can have. We are not like the 1st century apostles who did have direct revelation, visions, etc from the holy spirit. The governing body is a group of men, imperfect and human, who rely on God's Word. We do believe we have God's spirit but it does not operate in the same manner as it did in the first century.

Consider this: Nearly all religions disagree with Preterists. These same religions believe they have God's Spirit, at least I hope they do. But I don't think Preterists think these religions are false prophets even though they think they are wrong. And I don't think many any these religions think Preterist are going to hell. Each religion disagrees with other religions on various points but in general hold each other as brothers. Why? Because of the "Fundamental truths" these religions teach. When they start viewing others as a "cult" is when they teach non-orthodox teachings, like non-Trinity. Grant us the same respect. Do I personally believe "every teaching" of JW's? Some I would not be too surprised if they changed later. But they are not fundamental teachings I believe are necessary for salvation so I don't make a big deal out of it or go and tell others what I don't agree with. I've seen enough to know where I want to be.

[dizzle]

You really need to stop misrepresenting progressive revelation. It totally damages any credibility you might have in any other points. Doing an about face to something completely opposite is NOT progressive revelation. And progressive revelation has nothing to do with an authoritarian organization reversing itself on major issues.

More on your other statement when I can get a chance because you backpedaled on your prior point

[NonTrinitarian]

You really need to stop misrepresenting progressive revelation. It totally damages any credibility you might have in any other points. Doing an about face to something completely opposite is NOT progressive revelation. And progressive revelation has nothing to do with an authoritarian organization reversing itself on major issues.
Peter, an apostle, went for three years thinking he couldn't eat a pig. He did a 180 when he was shown he was in error. Just because you have your own definition of progressive revelation doesn't mean I accept it.

More on your other statement when I can get a chance because you backpedaled on your prior point
I am assuming this is on worshipping Jesus. There is no back-peddling on anything I said. Take all the time you need because you won't find it. At most you'll find a misunderstanding on your part, like when you thought I was calling you a false prophet. So far I haven't seen any reason to back-peddle on anything. Not that I won't. If I misstated something or didn't research it well enough, I do back-peddle. But I just reviewed this whole thread and stand behind everything I've written.

[dizzle]

I am not the one who has my own definition it is you. If you wish to use words in communication it is helpful to use the meanings that everyone understands. What you have done is try to cloak error with the indice of credibility by claiming progressive revelation yet you are pouring an entirely different meaning into the word. Progressive revelation has nothing to do with an authoratarian religious organization presuming to speak for God, claiming to be the only source of God's truth and God's only representative and doing about faces on doctrines, ones that can save people lives even. Shame on you for defending that.

The faith HAS ONCE FOR ALL been delivered to the saints my friend. There is no more progressive revelation. It is finished. I sure hope you are open to the fact that the WTS is simply progressively revelatory deficient on the Trinity for who knows? New light might come along.

[NonTrinitarian]

I see no reason to further this point as we are merely going round and round. I take your comments, assuming they are intended for my best interest, and appreciate your concern. My road to becoming a JW was a long one that I fought hard to resist but in the end, IMHO (AV just told me what that meant!), the plain truth regarding fundamental teachings was with the JW's. I am happy to discuss those but I'm getting off this false prophet stuff as we simply do not see eye to eye.

[dizzle]

NonTrin keeps trying to wrong-headedly explain away the Watch Tower’s contradictions, errors, and false statements as “progressive revelation.” This is just simply put… nonsense. The theology doctrine of “progressive revelation” has to do with God’s revelation of Himself and His plan of salvation though His Word up until the NT which was:



… the faith once for all delivered to the saints.



There is no further progressive revelation. It is either an ignorant distortion of this doctrine or a knowing misrepresentation to use this as an excuse. And as I have said, NonTrin then has no guarantee that the Watch Tower may just get “new light” one day that the Trinity is in fact correct. He has no assurance that this may in fact happen.



But of course the claims of the Watch Tower are much different than what Non Trin has claimed, they have claimed to be the only spirit directed organization on the earth and God’s sole means of dispensing the proper food in the right season. Does this mean there is a right season for false teaching? How can they have been spirit-directed when they taught doctrines that were later attributed to satan? What fellowship hath the Spirit of God with Belial? Perhaps their exclusive claims (and not only perhaps but very much so) are actually originating in satan? They have admitted they have been deceived by satan before, though one would think that as God’s sole dispenser of the proper food in the right season would not fall prey so often and so readily. This logically must mean that satanic deception is just what is needed in some seasons.



Not familiar with the house buying thing but it probably didn't happen.

Probably another lie propogated by an anti-JW web site.

Do you deny that the WTS bought a house to hold in trust for the then allegedly soon return of the faithful of Hebrews 11 of which they have taught numerous contradictory teaching?



False prophets are those who knowingly teach lies

contrary to God's Word.

Sorry but Deut 18 does not say that a false prophet has to know at the time that his prophecy is false. It merely says that it will not come to pass. So you are excusing any false prophet who genuinely believes their error? Why are you adding to the Word of God?



As far as not worshipping Jesus, you are engaging in illegimimate spin-doctoring. Here is an excerpt from the 1945 WTBTS Yearbook on the purposes of the Society:



… and for public Christian worship of Almight God and Christ Jesus.

NO differentiation is made between the meaning of the word worship. This stands in stark contrast to the Society’s current about-face position:



… it is unscriptural for worshippers of the living and true God to render worship to the Son of God…

and



…true Christians do well to direct their worship only to Jehovah God, the Almighty.

This is a bald-faced about face from the Society’s prior postion:



…to worship Christ in any form cannot be wrong…

He was the object of unreproved worship even when a babe…. He never reproved for acts of worship offered to Himself….

<the prayers of Christians> are usually thank offerings and communion seasons – telling the Lord (the Father or the Son, either or both, for the Father, as well as the Son loves us; - John 16:27 – and we have a promise of communion with both; - John 14:23 – both are to be worshipped and loved equally, for “all men should honor the Son even as they honor the Father;” John 5:23… <emphasis is in the original!>

The quotes could be multiplied but it only gets even more embarrassing for the WT. Now does an organization that was grossly advocating creature worship qualify as a spirit-directed organization and God’s sole church on the earth?



I may also ask why the first quote of the Society’s Charter I provided from the Yearbook is omitted by ellipsis when requoted in 1969. What is the Society hiding? How come when this Charter of the Society is quoted in the Watchtower, words are added changing the meaning of the Amended Charter? Why is it so embarrassing? Wouldn't a group advocating idolatry and then later hiding it qualify as a false teacher?

[twohumble]

Dee Dee

Wonderful post, well thought out. I may add only what scripture tells us about someone or some entity that claims to speak for God.

""When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.Deuteronomy 18:22)

We should fear the enemy of God, and here Deuteronomy warns us of false prophets. Likewise, in 1 John, we are warned of antichrists who teach false doctrine. Paul, and Luke also tell us to test all things according to scripture, so that when new teachings come, we can evaluate them based on Gods Word. The Watchtower falls woefully short on all of these points, and seems to resemble the very thing that John, and Moses warned us about. To claim to speak for God so many times, and totally be wrong and reverse their stance is scary to me.

[kofh2u]

Dee Dee

Wonderful post, well thought out. I may add only what scripture tells us about someone or some entity that claims to speak for God.

""When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.Deuteronomy 18:22)

We should fear the enemy of God, and here Deuteronomy warns us of false prophets. Likewise, in 1 John, we are warned of antichrists who teach false doctrine. Paul, and Luke also tell us to test all things according to scripture, so that when new teachings come, we can evaluate them based on Gods Word. The Watchtower falls woefully short on all of these points, and seems to resemble the very thing that John, and Moses warned us about. To claim to speak for God so many times, and totally be wrong and reverse their stance is scary to me.


There are some aweful nice doctrines in the 12 Major Christian denominations, and much in each of the different dogmas is pretty good, too. All differ and none are completely right.

Is 42:3 reeds

Isa. 42:3 A bruised reed (of doctrine) shall he not break (down), and the smoking flax (of dogma) shall he not quench: (But), he shall bring forth judgment unto truth (when the book of seven sealmis opened).

Matt. 12:20 A bruised reed (of doctrine) shall he not break (down), and the smoking flax (of dogma) shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory (when the book of seven sealmis opened).
.

[Iluvatar]

This comment shows a lack of understanding of JW beliefs. We believe in progressive revelation and that our knowledge increases over time. Were we perfect in the first part of the last century? No. Are we 100% correct today? Probably not. But we have and had a firm hold on many biblical truths that other religions today do not have. IE., we know God isn't a Trinity and many other truths religions don't have. In time, after more prayer and research, we realized other things as well. IE, additional research of the Bible and its view of participating in pagan practices caused us to question whether birthdays were appropriate. Even further research showed that early Christians also refused to celebrate birthdays. Once we learned this, we stopped celebrating birthdays.

But the fundamental truths, along with our desire to preach the good news of God's Kingdom, is what caused Jesus to select us as his Christian Church.

According to Charles Taze Russell, founder of the Watchtower Society, "new light NEVER extinguishes old light", meaning that your "progressive revelation" would never contradict previous knowledge, only add to it. Of course, the Watchtower Society has made certain to destroy the old writings so that present day Witnesses don't have much opportunity to read the ridiculous stuff that was presented as "truth" in the past - and then contradicted later. (Although they did re-publish Judge Rutherford's Millions Now Living Will Never Die with a new title - Millions Now Living May Never Die)

The Watchtower has flip-flopped back and forth 180 degrees on doctrinal issues, and many times the same doctrines. This is certainly not "progressive revelation", it is intellectual dishonesty. Here are some examples:

Will the men of Sodom be resurrected?
- Yes - Watchtower, July 1879, p8
- No - Watchtower, June 1, 1952, p338
- Yes - Watchtower, August 1, 1965, p479
- No - Watchtower, June 1, 1988, p31
- Yes - Insight on the Scriptures, 1988, vol. 2, p985
- No - Our Kingdom Ministry, December 1989, p7

Are JW's Ministers?
- Yes - Watchtower, April 15, 1970, p250
- No - Watchtower, December 1, 1975, p733
- Yes - Watchtower, March 15, 1981, p 14-17

Who are the "superior authorities" of Romans 13?
- Government - Society's Watchtower Reprints, p1555
- God & Christ - Jehovah's Witnesses in the Divine Purpose, p91
- Government - Watchtower, May 15, 1980, p4

So lets stop pretending the Watchtower Society is God's channel of communication. The WT belongs to the Father of the Lie, rather than to Jesus Christ who Himself is "the truth". The light is not getting brighter, it has been blinking on and off from the Watchtower!

[Krusader]

Non-Trinitarian - since your road to becoming a JW was a long one, were you a JW in 1975 when your organization falsely prophesied that Armageddon would probably begin in October of that year?

[Shadow Phoenix]

Non-Trinitarian - since your road to becoming a JW was a long one, were you a JW in 1975 when your organization falsely prophesied that Armageddon would probably begin in October of that year?

The house was called Beth-Sarim. I'd suggest checking the "Salvation" book as well as the 1975 yearbook to see the statements made about this house and why it was built. There's a stark contrast.

Progressive Revelation is true but what would one say of God if he revealed the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem and then suddenly decided, "I think Capernaum would be a better place." That would imply that God changed his mind, which is ultimately what happens here. In the end, the Watchtower won't get the blame for the mistakes. It's God.

Now if all these beliefs we have are pagan, consider this. Would it be possible for you to leave the Watchtower, cease going door-to-door handing out their publications, and yet have the same beliefs such as anti-Trinity, no birthdays or holidays, no blood transfusions, Jesus is Michael, etc., and still be "saved"?

[Armor of God]

The house was called Beth-Sarim. I'd suggest checking the "Salvation" book as well as the 1975 yearbook to see the statements made about this house and why it was built. There's a stark contrast.

Progressive Revelation is true but what would one say of God if he revealed the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem and then suddenly decided, "I think Capernaum would be a better place." That would imply that God changed his mind, which is ultimately what happens here. In the end, the Watchtower won't get the blame for the mistakes. It's God.

Now if all these beliefs we have are pagan, consider this. Would it be possible for you to leave the Watchtower, cease going door-to-door handing out their publications, and yet have the same beliefs such as anti-Trinity, no birthdays or holidays, no blood transfusions, Jesus is Michael, etc., and still be "saved"?
Wow, the last post was made June 1st, and Non-trin still hasn't returned to answer?

Hmm.....wonder if he forgot. Or maybe he was going to answer, but the WTS told him not to. And then they reversed that decision and told him, "go ahead," only to change their minds a few weeks later.

Maybe he'll be back when they get the light bulb changed.