HOW HYPOCRITCAL CAN YOU GET (part 1)...

by Frequent_Fader_Miles 10 Replies latest jw friends

Frequent_Fader_Miles

I used to view the Pharisees as the 'evil spawn of Satan'. I still remember that image in the literature of a bearded man looking down at people. Boy was I clueless!! Anyone of you out there ever laid eyes on the Branch Organization Manual? I managed to get hold of one and some of the things in there are just incredible! Here's one of the things that stood out to me (unbelievable!) ...

CHAPTER 24/ PAGE 147
14.
When an article is sent to the Writing Department in Brooklyn it must be accurate in every detail . Basically, that responsibility rests with the writer. We should use as writers only individuals whom we know will do dependable research and present the facts carefully . However, when the Branch Committee coordinator or the branch representative of the Writing department reads an article and sees anything at all in it that raises a question , this point should be checked with the original writer, or it should be looked up to make sure that what is said is absolutely right . If the point is in error, an appropriate correction should be made . Similarly, if statements are ambiguous, they should be clarified. Maters should be expressed, not only with a view to explaining them, but so that they will not be misunderstood by translators or by readers. Avoid use fo expressions having unnecessary political or propagandistic overtones.
What a classic case of "do as I say and not as I do"!!!!! Apparently this guideline applies only to lowly minions, and not to the Society in their own publishing. Why does this rule not apply to 1914, 1975, or even the 'generation change'?
Check this one out ...
CHAPTER 25/ PAGE 153
50.

It is important that translators keep their work confidential . Apart from the responsible brothers and those involved in the project, others (including marriage mates and other Bethelites) do ot need to know (a) what is being translated and (b) who is translating a particular item. No publication should ever be associated with a particular person. This is especially so in the case of Bible translators. This confidentiality protects both the organization and translators .
Seems like a 'catch 22' situation to me. Even in the dictionary they list the names of the editorial team and the linguists!!! What makes them any less accountable for the work they publish? How is anyone to be sure of their qualifications? The Society claims that confidentiality protects the organization and the translators ... but who's PROTECTING THE 'FLOCK' FROM INACCURATE INFORMATION? Things to make you go hmmmmm ….
AuldSoul

The self-serving nature of the leadership of Jehovah's Witnesses makes it quickly apparent who it is Jehovah's Witnesses are really serving; and servile toward.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul
DannyBloem

50. It is important that translators keep their work confidential . Apart from the responsible brothers and those involved in the project, others (including marriage mates and other Bethelites) do ot need to know (a) what is being translated and (b) who is translating a particular item. No publication should ever be associated with a particular person. This is especially so in the case of Bible translators. This confidentiality protects both the organization and translators .
This is quite funny. When I was at bethel recently a girl showed me exactly what she translated, what the problems were with the language. What all other translaters said about certain things. Names and braches were shown to me, they have a question database.
nothing at all that it was convidentional. or she just did not care...
DB
garybuss

Our English language Watch Tower literature is like it was translated from some other language . . . and they got it wrong.

I swear they must be trying to write in an ambiguous way. An example is the alternative military service article. I must have read that at least 12 times and I still can't figure out what it said.
Caine

An example is the alternative military service article
What is this article? can you give it to me? What is it about?
jaguarbass

How is anyone to be sure of their qualifications?
They don't have any qualifications that is why they dont list their names. If someone was qualified they would not reach and support the conclusion that the witnoids embrace.
yesidid

Hi Caine,
I think this may be the article mentioned.
(Emphasis mine)
***
w965/1pp.19-20PayingBackCaesar’sThingstoCaesar***CivilianService

16 However, there are lands where the State, while not allowing exemption for ministers of religion, nevertheless
acknowledges that some individuals may object to military service. Many of these lands make provision
for such conscientious individuals not to be forced into military service. In some places a required
civilian service, such as useful work in the community, is regarded as nonmilitary national
service. Could a dedicated Christian undertake such service?Here again, a dedicated,
baptized Christian would have to make his own decision on the basis of his Bible-trained conscience.
17 It seems that compulsory service was practiced in Bible times. ------. The New Testament, too, cites
examples of corvée in Judea, showing how widespread it was. In accordance with this custom, the soldiers
pressed Simon of Cyrene into carrying Jesus’ cross [torture stake] (Matthew 5:41; 27:32; Mark 15:21; Luke 23:26)."
18 ---Where such civilian service is for the good of the community and is not connected with false religion or is not in some
other way objectionable to the consciences of Jehovah’s Witnesses, they have often complied. (1 Peter 2:13-15)
This has usually resulted in an excellent witness and has sometimes silenced those who falsely accuse
the Witnesses of being antigovernment.—Compare Matthew 10:18.
19
What, though, if the State requires a Christian for a period of time to perform civilian service that is a part of
national service under a civilian administration?Here again, Christians must make their own decision
based on an informed conscience. "We shall all stand before the judgment seat of God."
(Romans 14:10)
Christians faced with a requirement of Caesar should prayerfully study the matter and meditate on it.
It may also be wise to talk the matter over with mature Christians in the congregation.
After this a personal decision must be made.
—Proverbs 2:1-5; Philippians 4:5.
20 ----Would performing it prevent or unreasonably limit them from fulfilling their Christian responsibilities?
(Matthew 24:14; Hebrews 10:24, 25)On the other hand, would they be able to continue to make
spiritual progress, perhaps even sharing in the full-time ministry while performing the required service?
—
Hebrews 6:11, 12.

21 What if the Christian’s honest answers to such questions lead him to conclude that the national civilian
service is a "good work" that he can perform in obedience to the authorities?That is his decision before
Jehovah. Appointed elders and others should fully respect the conscience of the brother and
continue to regard him as a Christian in good standing.
yesidid
yesidid

Or maybe it was one of the articles where the society said it was wrong to do alternative service:
***
w869/1p.20ChristianNeutralsinaBloodstainedWorld*** 16
---
Whether the issue was shedding blood, noncombatant military work, alternative service, or saluting an image
such as a national flag, faithful Christians took the position that there was no middle ground. In some c
ases they were executed because of this stand.
—Matthew 24:9; Revelation 2:10.
***
yb82pp.226-227Italy***
From 1978 to 1980 there have been, on an average, 500 young brothers a year in prison on account
of the neutrality issue. It is calculated that up to the present, several thousand Witnesses have kept
a clear conscience before Jehovah God in this respect. ---
***
g7412/8pp.23-24TheNetherlandsFreesImprisonedWitnesses***
Authorities
BegintoListen
On March 26, 1971, three representatives of Jehovah’s witnesses met with a forum representing the ministries
of Defense and Justice. The discussion lasted two and a half hours.
One of the first points of discussion
presented by the forum was this: "That you wish no part in performing military service is clear and needs
no further explanation. But what really is your objection to civil, alternative service?"
The Witnesses explained that it is not that they are opposed to civil service as such, but, rather,
it is a matter of strict neutrality. Therefore, any work that is merely a substitute for military service
would be unacceptable to Jehovah’s witnesses.
Other questions narrowed the issue down still further. "When a person objects to military service,"
the government’s agents declared, "he passes from military jurisdiction on to civil jurisdiction
and from that moment has nothing at all to do with the military. Why, then, is the accepting of
such civil service still so objectionable?"
Willingly accepting such work is objectionable to the Christian because of what God’s law says about the
matter: "You were bought with a price; stop becoming slaves of men." (1 Cor. 7:23)Civilian servitude as
a substitute for military service would be just as objectionable to the Christian. In effect, he would
thereby become a part of the world instead of keeping separate as Jesus commanded
.—John 15:19; 17:14-16.
***
w882/1p.19WillYouBeaWitnessfortheTrueGod?***
16 A study entitled "More About Justifying Violence" said: "Jehovah’s Witnesses have consistently
maintained their stand of nonviolent ‘Christian neutrality’ . . . Their continuing stand against national
service of any form, military orcivilian, and their refusal to honor symbols of national identity have
resulted in periods of prosecution, imprisonment, and mob action in many countries
***
w512/1p.77PacifismandConscientiousObjection—IsThereaDifference?***
13
Because they are wholly dedicated to God by their vows to him through Christ, Jehovah’s witnesses are
according to God’s Word no part of this world which is governed by the political systems. For this important
Bible reason they tell officials of the government that they conscientiously object to serving in any
military establishment or any civilian arrangement that substitutes for military service.
yesidid
yesidid

Or maybe it was the article where they blamed Jehovah for the suffering caused by their previous teaching:
***
w988/15p.17StrengtheningOurConfidenceinGod’sRighteousness***
FeelingsofHavingSufferedNeedlessly

6 In the past, some Witnesses have suffered for refusing to share in an activity that their conscience now might permit.
For example, this might have been their choice years ago as to certain types of civilian service. A brother might now
feel that he could conscientiously perform such without overstepping his Christian neutrality regarding the present system of things.
7 Was it unrighteous on
Jehovah’s part to allow him to suffer for rejecting what he now might do without consequences?
----What reason could anyone have to regret having followed his conscience in taking a firm stand for Jehovah? By loyally upholding
Christian principles as they understood them or by responding to the proddings of conscience, they proved worthy of Jehovah’s friendship.
yesidid
-
J-ex-W

No publication should ever be associated with a particular person. This is especially so in the case of Bible translators. This confidentiality protects both the organization and translators .
My computer is using funky lettering, and I can't change it. Oh, well. Anyway...
This is interesting. The Society always tells US, the congregation members, that the anonymity of translators/ authors--especially Bible translators--is so that the "GLORY" for the work done goes to the one to whom it truly belongs.......JEHOVAH!! Interesting *twist* on things..........

HOW HYPOCRITCAL CAN YOU GET (part 1)...

Share this