Finding Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Faith

by Marvin Shilmer 22 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  All,

  Thanks for your replies.

  I believe sufficient data exists to form solid conclusions about the range of Jehovah’s Witnesses’ convictions on specific subjects, such as blood. But finding a means to determine the overall range of convictions actually held by the population of Jehovah’s Witnesses is, so far as I can tell, beyond available data.

  On the other hand when it comes to specific subjects such as blood there is plenty of data establishing the population of Jehovah’s Witnesses holds convictions falling well beyond the range of belief professed by the WTS. 1) An attested historical account of events in a German concentration camp shows an untainted disposition among JWs that does not forbid eating blood. 2) Peer reviewed medical journals provide raw data demonstrating that a large portion of JWs act well outside the WTS’ blood doctrine. 3) The WTS’ own historical writings demonstrate a range of conviction regarding blood that is well outside its current teaching. And there are other sources too, all of which confirm that when it comes to blood the WTS does not represent the views of the population of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

  This calls into question whether what comes from the WTS is representative of the overall range of convictions held by Jehovah’s Witnesses. Calling this even more into question is that 1) the WTS has actually stipulated its renderings are not a result of a majority conviction held among Jehovah’s Witnesses, 2) the WTS has admitted that at least one of its doctrines may run contrary to a majority view among Jehovah’s Witnesses and 3) the WTS has actually made a tacit admission that if asked JWs would express convictions contrary to current WTS doctrine.

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  under_believer

  Marvin, I would love to see data or citations backing up the statements you make in the final paragraph. I am fascinated by this subject.
• 

  jgnat

  What you are saying is that people EXPRESS FAITH one way, but ACT another. Pretty Schizophrenic if you ask me. But then again, I see the same results from the "virginity" survey.
• 

  james_woods

  I am also fascinated (but maybe a little confused), Marvin.

  You allude to having data from medical studies on JW in blood peril that indicates they deviate at least to some extant from society teachings. This is, of course, fascinating stuff. And, something I have always suspected. It also has the authenticity of coming from someone other than the watchtower's spin engines.

  However, I have one question with it - are we getting a sample of the average rank-and-file belief on this subject, or is this the reactionary behaviour of those who are put to the test in a blood emergency? Are they truly equivalent?

  I guess I am saying - isn't it possible that a lot of witnesses intenally believe that blood is kind of wrong because of the brainwash, but cannot live their faith when it comes down to the event. In that case, we may not be getting a sample of belief.

  Another statistic like this which should be available from the outside would be the tendency to avoid prison over the draft issue in the days of compulsory non-military service. Did they run away to Canada, baby out, hide in college, or go do their time in club fed like good dubs?

  No athiests in the foxholes, eh?

  James
• 

  IW

  Marvin,

  You're not saying that JWs are not complete mindless drones, are you? That has been an exJW axiom since my early days on these boards. Now they don't all do what they're told? Amazing turn around!!

  IW
• 

  M.J.

  If they did, if they really believed that we were just a few weeks or months away from annihilation of 99.9% of the planet's human population, it would dominate their conversations.

  Well, that sometimes is the case, depending on how whacked out a dub they are.

  To quote Alan F. Segal, professor of Jewish studies at Columbia University--"Doubts complete faith and keep it from becoming fanaticism.”
• 

  jwfacts

  I was a hard core JW, so believed and did everything by the book, so the Watchtower was the definition of JWism.

  However, once I left bethel and stepped down from being an MS I started to see that many JWs have their own believe systems. As I started discussing my doubts with others that is when I really came to see that each JW has formed their own secret opinions that they are able to accept or cope with.

  I don't think there is any definitive study on what individually is believed. I tend to think that they beliefs are starting to broadened as the WTS looses some of its hold on the minds of its members.
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Hello, Unbeliever

  You write:

  “I would love to see data or citations backing up the statements you make in the final paragraph.”

  Here:

  1) The WTS has actually stipulated its renderings are not a result of a majority conviction held among Jehovah’s Witnesses:

  “This building up of the congregation theocratically served to bring it to the fore as a place where one would learn God’s ways. If it was unsuitable for the congregation of anointed ones to be directed by democratic vote so that the majority, perhaps being largely immature ones, would direct instead of the spiritually mature, it was even more unsuitable when the great crowd would be gathered.”— The Congregation in the Time of the End, w61 3/1 p. 147

  2) The WTS has admitted that at least one of its doctrines may run contrary to a majority view among Jehovah’s Witnesses:

  “Moreover, some products derived from one of the four primary components may be so similar to the function of the whole component and carry on such a life-sustaining role in the body that most Christians would find them objectionable.”— Be Guided by the Living God, w04 6/15 p. 24

  3) The WTS has actually made a tacit admission that if asked JWs would express convictions contrary to current WTS doctrine:

  “Recently, academic researchers who say that they are interested in conducting surveys or religious community activities have contacted the elders of a number of congregations. Since there is a need to be careful about the nature of surveys and how such information will be used, we are providing the direction for a qualified elder representing the congregation to follow, provided your congregation is asked to participate in such a survey…. This approach is far more advantageous in giving a witness and providing information than having various members of the congregation taking the time needed to fill out survey forms carefully and accurately. While in some instances we can cooperate with research projects—including surveys—we certainly want to avoid having publishers expressing personal viewpoints that may not be in line with the Bible principles that really govern each Christian’s conduct and the united efforts of the brotherhood to carry out Jehovah’s will.”—Letter to all bodies of elders in the United States, WTS, April 25, 2001

  There are additional references, too.

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Hello, James

  Peer reviewed medical journals have provided raw data showing that large numbers of Jehovah’s Witnesses have chosen to act contrary to the WTS’ blood doctrine prior to the existence of any medical emergency. For example a review by Dr. Cynthia Gyamfi of responses of pregnant Jehovah’s Witnesses on health care proxies shows that a whopping 10 percent of the woman were willing to accept whole blood transfusions. Of this 10 percent, none actually received blood transfusion because it was not deemed necessary by the treating physician. Hence we have this record showing that prior to any emergency 10 percent of the study population was willing to act contrary to WTS teaching, which only makes one wonder how high that figure would go in the case of emergencies!

  Additionally we have other data in the form of old WTS publications and more recent personal letters addressed to and answered by the WTS demonstrating that among Jehovah’s Witnesses there is disagreement regarding the medical use of donor blood.

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  garybuss

  Belief #1, Treat the Governing Body as if they are never wrong.
  
  Belief #2, If the Governing Body is ever wrong . . . see belief #1.