Does the WTS currently claim to be guided by the HS?

blondie

Hey, bob, you realize that we are mostly ex-jws and don't think the WTS is guided by holy spirit. They do call themselves a "spirit-directed" organization. Not a JW, then you can't get holy spirit.

Blondie

unclebruce

Does the WTS currently claim to be guided by the HS?

g'day bob1999,

Yes, in 1979 the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society produced a whole book on it. Holy Spirit - the Force Behind the Comming New Order!

I don't have time to go right through it now but here is the end of chapter six:

A Congregation Anointed for Kingdom Proclamation

36 Back there in the first century C.E. the Christian believers rejoiced over that decision of the Jerusalem Council. We ourselves today can still rejoice over that same inspired decision. From the Holy Scriptures we recognize that the spirit-begotten Christian congregation as a "new creation" is anointed with Jehovah’s spirit, just like the Chief One of that congregation, Jesus Christ. So now it is incumbent upon that congregation to do what that anointing commissions them to do, namely, "to tell good news to the meek ones." Jesus Christ himself did not sidestep the obligation to do this but set the pattern for all his followers. (Isaiah 61:1-3) As spiritual sons of God they are taught by Jehovah what to tell out as "good news" from Him. (Isaiah 54:13) By the faithful example and words of his Son Jesus Christ, Jehovah teaches the Christian congregation that the lifesaving news to tell out everywhere is the good news of the Messianic kingdom of God.

luna2

When they are caught with their pants down and they are called on it...their defenders will pull some Watchtower article out showing that their writings are not inspired by Holy Spit and that the WTS is made up of mere humans who are not infallible.

When they are making predictions or trying to fire the R & F peons up to greater heights of magazine distribution and meeting attendance, their Watchtower articles hint strongly that every gas bubble emitted from their collective buttocks are definitely inspired by Jah.

The WTS publicatons are written in such a way that you can find support for both sides of any argument regarding JW doctrine. They are like politicians working both sides of the fence.

Berean

Since they have, for all practical purposes, put themselves in place of HS, the answer is Yes they think they are guided by HS since they guide themselves.

bob1999

5 Holy spirit still operates in very lofty ways. It guides and directs Jehovah's heavenly organization. (Ezekiel 1:20, 21) WT 1992 2/1

Servants in the congregations are not such because some man has selected them. It is not the circuit servant or the congregation committee that determines who will oversee the congregation of God. It is Jehovah's holy spirit that must operate to appoint them as overseers. WT 1957 6/15

True shepherds recognize that during these last days, Jesus has appointed his faithful and discreet slave over all his belongings and that holy spirit has directed this slave in appointing elders for the shepherding of the sheep. (Matthew 24:3, 47; Acts 20:28) Hence, being theocratic involves having a deep respect for this slave, for the organizational arrangements that the slave has instituted, and for the elder arrangement within the congregation.-WT 1993 1/1

Then there are modern claims that it is Christ through the angels doing the directing work of the WTS.

So my question is how can the Holy Spirit be directing when Rutherford says that he is no longer the guide?

...1918... in that year the Lord Jesus came to the temple of Jehovah God. The holy spirit that had been the guide of God's people, having performed its functions, was taken away... J.F. Rutherford, Salvation, 1939, pp. 216, 217.

Is the WTS being directed by the Holy Spirit or by the angels? Maybe both! What a joke.

I see this as a major discrepancy and problem.

Thanks to all...

peacefulpete

Well just to be fair to the people who wrote that 1939 partial quote, it was being claimed that the HS was withheld for 3 1/2 years because they had not been zealous enough, thus "fullfilling " Revelation.......blah blah blah

Their manifest delusions and dishosnesty are sufficient to dismiss their claims of supernatural direction, we do not need to distort their writings.

Justin

This subject has been discussed previously, and it has been shown that the holy spirit was reinstated once Rutherford passed off the scene and the Knorr/Franz era began. So, Rutherford's claim that the holy spirit had been taken away is "old light," like so many other teachings. I would like to be able to read Rutherford's comments in context once all his books are on line.

That being said, the ministries of the Holy Spirit and the angels are not exclusive of each other in the NT. See Heb 1:14; 6:4; Acts 2:1-4; 5:19-20; 15:28, etc. What makes Rutherford's statements so controversial is the removal of the Holy Spirit and the exclusive use of angels.

Rutherford may have had in mind the passages in John which refer to the Spirit as the Paraclete ("Comforter" - KJV; "helper" - NWT). Jesus is portrayed as referring to his own imminent departure, and saying to the disciples: "Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. . . . Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth . . ." (16:7, 13) The Spirit operates in this capacity during Jesus' absence. While the Gospel of John does not have much to say about the Parousia (second coming), the inference could be drawn that with the return of Jesus the Spirit would be withdrawn in the capacity of Paraclete. Jesus would once again be with his disciples in person to comfort and teach them. For Rutherford, this coming of Jesus apparently was not his Parousia-coming in 1914, but his coming to the temple in 1918, for then the spiritual resurrection (supposedly) also began in fulfillment of the promise: "I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also." (John 14:3) If this were his understanding, Rutherford could claim that he did not mean by the removal of the Spirit a complete absence of the Holy Spirit from the earth, but rather that the need for the Spirit as a guide or teacher was no longer there. However, a fallacy here would have been the belief that angels were being used instead of the Spirit - for even angels would have been agencies substituting for an absent Jesus, whereas the inference we have drawn is that once Jesus had returned there would be no need for anyone or anything else to take his place. So then, if we follow JW thinking to its logical conclusion, we have a situation similar to the Memorial which is still observed, namely, that the "coming" of Jesus in this sense is not accomplished until all the anointed have finished their course and passed off the earthly scene - for he comes specifically for them to take them home to himself.

There is, however, a larger context in which to view this. It is the question of how far removed a new religion (whether a sect or a cult) can distance itself from the parent religion without losing its identity. For example, Christianity found it necessary to retain the Old Testament rather than being entirely independent of Judaism. Both Russell and Rutherford found it necessary to state that dispensational changes were taking place which necessitated their distancing themselves from Christendom. Russell claimed that certain "truths" specially meant for the harvest period were now due, and Rutherford needed to distance his presidency even further from Russell - so that the corresponding distance from normative Christianity was increased. By the time of Rutherford's death there were questions as to whether the new religion could even be considered Christian anymore. Whether conscious of this fact or not, Knorr and Franz had to discard some of Rutherford's more extreme positions, including the removal of the holy spirit. And this is what they did.

But, as I say, I would like to see of there is any explanation given in Rutherford's own writings.

greendawn

They do indeed ride on two horses as they do on a number of other issues, they have two opposing concepts and they keep wondering between them as it suits them, so at times they are spirit inspired and at times they are not spirit inspired. Their yes is not really a yes and their no is not really a no. They are devious.

Does the WTS currently claim to be guided by the HS?

Share this