Can you guys give me some examples of some of the flickers of light? A JW threw the "the light gets brighter" thing at me and I want to ask what it means when they flip flop between yes and no on issues.
Doctrine flip flops
by reneeisorym 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
blondie
superior authorities
organ transplants
rape/screaming
resurrection/Sodom & Gomorrah
-
TheCoolerKing
Let's see. How about their prediction that Armageddon would be here before the "generation of 1914" passed away. Then in a November 1995 issue of the Watchtower, they redefined what "generation" meant.
Or how about their 'end of the world' predictions:
1914, 1915, 1925, 1942, 1975. -
OnTheWayOut
Resurrection of the Men of Sodom
Zion's Watch Tower Reprints, July 1879, p. 7; The Watchtower, June 1, 1952, p. 338;1879 - They will be resurrected.
1952 - They will not be resurrected.
1965 - They will be resurrected.
1988 - They will not be resurrected.
August 1, 1965, p. 479; June 1, 1988, pp. 30-31.The 'Lord' in Roman s 10:12-16
Zion's Watch Tower Reprints, December 1, 1903, p. 3282;1903 - 'Lord' refers to Jesus.
1940 - 'Lord' refers to Jehovah.
1978 - 'Lord' refers to Jesus.
1980 - 'Lord' refers to Jehovah.
The Watchtower, July 1, 1940, p. 200; May 1, 1978, p. 12; February 1, 1980, p. 16.' Higher Powers' o f Romans 13:1
Watch Tower Reprints, September 1, 1916, p. 5952;1916 - 'Higher powers' refers to governments.
1943 - 'Higher powers' refers to Jehovah God & Jesus Christ.
1964 - 'Higher powers' refers to governments.
The Truth Shall Make You Free, [1943 ed.], p. 312;
The Watchtower, June 15, 1964, p. 20.
The WT Society admitted this change in doctrine cost many Jehovah's Witnesses their lives
(The Watchtower, November 15, 1950, p. 441)Separating 'sheep and goats' (Matt. 25:31-46)
The Watchtower, Augus t 1, 1919, p. 238; J1919 - will take place after the time of tribulation.
1923 - is taking place now, before the tribulation.
1995 - will take place after the tribulation.
ehovah's Witnesses — Proclaimers of God's Kingdom, 1993, pp. 163-164;
The Watchtower, October 15, 1995, p. 19, 22-23. -
OnTheWayOut
http://www.cftf.com/booklets/jwslisten/flipflops.htm Prior to 1975 it taught that each Jehovah's Witness is a minister. Then, in 1975, it reversed this and began teaching
that most members are not ministers, even changing the monthly Kingdom Ministry's name to Our Kingdom Service;
then in 1981 it returned to the old teaching and again renamed the publication Our Kingdom Ministry.
The 1972 Organization book instructed that "none in the congregation should greet" disfellowshipped persons. (p. 172)
Then the August 1, 1974, Watchtower reversed this by teaching that "Jesus' own example protects us against adopting
the extreme view" of refusing to speak to them. (pp. 464-465) Then the September 15, 1981, Watchtower returned to the
previous point of view. (pp. 24-26) -
OnTheWayOut
At times explanations given by Jehovah's visible organization have shown adjustments, seemingly to previous points of view. But this has not actually been the case. This might be compared to what is known in navigational circles as "tacking." By maneuvering the sails the sailors can cause a ship to go from right to left, back and forth, but all the time making progress toward their destination... -- The Watchtower December 1, 1981, page 27
"TO SUCCEED IN THE RACE FOR LIFE" "not on a zigzag course" -- The Watchtower, August 1, 1992, p. 17 The organization says:Seeing the strenuous efforts needed to succeed in the race for life, Paul went on to say: "Therefore, the way I am running is not uncertainlyÉ" (1 Corinthians 9:26) ...Hence, to run "not uncertainly" means that to every observer it should be very evident where the runner is heading. The Anchor Bible renders it "not on a zigzag course." If you saw a set of footprints that meanders up and down the beach, circles around now and then, and even goes backward at times, you would hardly think the person was running at all, let alone that he had any idea where he was heading. But if you saw a set of footprints that form a long, straight line, each footprint ahead of the previous one and all evenly spaced, you would conclude that the footprints belong to one who knows exactly where he is going. -- The Watchtower, August 1, 1992, p. 17
-
RULES & REGULATIONS
Facts About the Jehovah's Witnesses
(The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society) Copyright © 1997 Institute for Religious Research. All rights reserved.In 1975 the WTB&TS taught that the man who sows the seed in the parable of the mustard seed (Matthew 13) is Satan. Later that same year the WT Society taught that this sower was Jesus.
A similar incident occurred in 1978, when the WTB&TS identified the "Alpha and Omega" of Revelation 22:12-13 as Jehovah (that is, God the Father), and then five weeks later taught these verses referred to Jesus.
The Watchtower Society's failure to correctly interpret the Bible is most clearly seen in their doctrinal flip-flops. First they teach position A, then they change to position B , claiming God has given them "new light." Later on, however, they revert back to their old teaching (position A) and in some cases change once again to position B. Here are some examples.
Resurrection of the Men of Sodom
1879 - They will be resurrected.
1952 - They will not be resurrected.
1965 - They will be resurrected.
1988 - They will not be resurrected.The 'Lord' in Roman s 10:12-16
1903 - 'Lord' refers to Jesus.
1940 - 'Lord' refers to Jehovah.
1978 - 'Lord' refers to Jesus.
1980 - 'Lord' refers to Jehovah.' Higher Powers' o f Romans 13:1
1916 - 'Higher powers' refers to governments.
1943 - 'Higher powers' refers to Jehovah God & Jesus Christ.
1964 - 'Higher powers' refers to governments.Separating 'sheep and goats' (Matt. 25:31-46)
1919 - will take place after the time of tribulation.
1923 - is taking place now, before the tribulation.
1995 - will take place after the tribulation. -
reneeisorym
I love this lady to pieces, but the more complicated ones aren't going to make sense to her. Anyone have a link to some quotes for the organ transplant or the rape/screaming one? I used some of those up there. Thanks!!!!!
-
RULES & REGULATIONS
Watchtower 1964 January 15 pp.63-4 Questions from Readers
Questions from Readers
• According to the Bible at Deuteronomy 22:23-27, an Israelite engaged girl threatened with rape was required to scream. What is the position of a Christian woman today if faced with a similar situation? Is she to scream even if an attacker threatens her life with a weapon? -M. U., United States.
According to God's law an Israelite girl was under obligation to scream: "In case there happened to be a virgin girl engaged to a man, and a man actually found her in the city and lay down with her, you must also bring them both out to the gate of that city and pelt them with stones, and they must die, the girl for the reason that she did not scream in the city, and the man for the reason that he humiliated the wife of his fellow man." If, however, the attack took place in a field and the woman screamed and thus tried to get away from the attacker, she was not to be stoned, since she was overpowered and there was no one to rescue her.-Deut. 22:23-27.
But suppose the man had a weapon and threatened to kill the girl if she failed to lie down with him? These scriptures do not weaken the argument or alter the situation by citing any circumstance that would justify her in not screaming. It plainly says she should scream; hence, oppose the attack regardless of the circumstances. If she was overpowered and perhaps knocked unconscious and violated before help came in answer to her screams, she could not be held accountable. The thought of the scriptures apparently is that the girl's screaming, by attracting neighborhood attention, would frighten off her assailant and would save her, even though he threatened her life for not quietly complying with his wishes and passionate desires.
Such Scriptural precedents are applicable to Christians, who are under command, "Flee from fornication." (1 Cor. 6:18) Thus if a Christian woman does not cry out and does not put forth every effort to flee, she would be viewed as consenting to the violation. The Christian woman who wants to keep clean and obey God's commandments, then, if faced with this situation today, needs to be courageous and to act on the suggestion made by the Scriptures and scream. Actually this counsel is for her welfare; for, if she should submit to the man's passionate wishes, she would not only be consenting to fornication or adultery, but be plagued by the shame. There would be shame, not only from the repulsiveness of the experience, but of having been coerced into breaking God's law by having sex connections with one other than a legal marriage mate. Not only that, but she might become an unwed mother, or she may contract a terrible disease from her morally debased attacker.
It is true that a woman faces the possibility her assailant will carry out his threat; but, then, what guarantee does she have that such a desperate criminal would not kill her after satisfying his passion? In fact, such a one, perhaps already hunted by the law, may be more likely to kill her after the attack, since she would then have had a greater opportunity to identify him and would therefore be in a better position to supply a description of him to the authorities. In such case, following the Scriptural counsel of screaming could well save one's life by attracting attention and driving the attacker away at the outset, instead of causing him to feel that he must get rid of his victim for fear of being identified later.
In most instances it is doubtless a matter of calling the assailant's bluff, since the girl's screams could result in his arrest for attempted rape. Also, if he carried out his threat and committed murder, he would face the likelihood of apprehension and conviction for this even more serious offense. Of course, there is the possibility that instead of fleeing immediately, the attacker may strike his victim or inflict a superficial wound to silence the screams, yet would not the endurance of such physical punishment be insignificant compared to the disgrace and shame of submitting to an immoral man?
A Christian woman is entitled to fight for her virginity or marital fidelity to the death. Just how best she can defend herself against anyone who wants to defile her depends upon her courage and quick wits. At least, as has been mentioned, she should first try to frighten off the would-be rapist by screaming and making as loud and noisy a spectacle of the matter as she possibly can, in order to summon any convenient aid. This being unavailing, then she has a right to defend her virtue by whatever means she can.
The morals of this generation have indeed sunk to an unprecedented low, just as Bible prophecy foretold for these last days. The fact that over 15,000 women a year, about one every half hour, are raped in the United States alone emphasizes this fact. It also serves as a warning to women that they should exercise care so as to avoid dangerous situations. Since women are almost always attacked when they are alone, they should arrange to have a companion along, especially when they are out after dark. And in localities where it is considered dangerous for women even during daylight hours, women should not go out alone but should take along a companion. God's Word says: "If somebody could overpower one alone, two together could make a stand against him. And a threefold cord cannot quickly be torn in two." (Eccl. 4:12) For a Christian woman to persist in going out alone in a city or locality where women are frequently attacked is to invite trouble and needlessly endanger life. It is the part of wisdom to give thought to what could happen in a given situation and then take the necessary precautions. The wise person foresees danger and takes steps to avoid it. "The shrewd one considers his steps."-Prov. 14:15.
Flip Flop
Watchtower 1983 March 15 pp.30-1 Honor Godly Marriage!
Defining "Fornication"
What do we understand here by "fornication"? The Greek word in this text is porneia.
[…]
[Footnotes]
[…]
A male or a female who is forcibly raped would not be guilty of porneia.
-
Terry
A Christian woman is entitled to fight for her virginity or marital fidelity to the death.
Sooooo interesting that LIFE is not held to be sacred in the case of a victim of rape. Nobody who is coerced is held responsible for the deed they are coerced to perform because it is outside their will and choice. Being coerced is a deal breaker.
Yet, the Pharisees in Brooklyn hold coercion to be binding upon a person's life in rendering them unfit to live in the case of rape.
The wages sin pays is death. Being forced to become a rape victim does not consist of sin any more than being held at gunpoint and forced to sign a check constitutes permission.
A faithful Jehovah's Witness woman is TWICE victimized! Once by the rapist and once by the faithful and discreet slave who penetrate her conscience with the sadistic double-bind which destroys her one way or the other.
Anybody who accepts this instruction, for whatever reason, and approves the organization which promotes it, for whatever reason, is beyond being reached by logic or argument.