Does anyone else see a pattern?

by TD 15 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  TD

  It seems to me that a repeating pattern with JW's is unfolding yet again. I wonder if anybody else can "see" the same thing, or am I just imaginiing things?

  Here's the scenario:

  Appointments to the JW governing body seem to come in waves. There was a wave in the mid 70's and there was a wave just a few years ago.

  Members of the JW governing body are about the only ones that are free to speculate on and affect doctrine. But at the time of their appointment, they are all hard-line, robotic, vote-for-their-own-lynching company men. So immeidately following a wave of new appointments to the GB, the JW organization toughens up on many of their wackier and factually untenable teachings. --The things these new GB members grew up believing. These include, but are not limited to:

  • Earthquakes increased during the 20th century.
  • The Spanish influenza was the worst epidemic in history
  • The Great War of 1914-18 was the bloodiest conflict up to that point in Man's history
  • All animals were originally vegetarians
  • The Bible explicitly forbids transfusion medicine
  • Life has existed on Earth for less than 50,000 years

  But as time goes on and these these men have time to actually think (At least slightly) the JW organization doesn't actually reverse itself, but at least backs off from openly teaching these things.

  We've seen it with blood. Just a few years ago, the JW organization seemed poised on adopting the more subtle argument advanced by Greg Stafford and others. Now they are back to the brain-dead "Abstain from blood" mantra. (Sorry to keep harping on this.)

  We've seen it with earthquakes. They are once again insisting that things got much worse after 1914.

  This goes on for 20 - 30 years or so until there is a new wave of appointments -- ad infinitum
• 

  Atlantis

  TD:

  No, it is not your imagination! Many of us old-timers have noticed these "waves" for years. I think you make some rather good points here TD!

  Thanks old friend!

  Cheers! Atlantis-
• 

  Pahpa

  It's an interesting thought. But we have seen some changes on the doctrinal side in the last couple of years. If the Governing Body members approved of these it might indicate that changes are possible in other areas within the organization.

  I agree that the new GB members are probably all "hard liners" when it comes to policy. But after a few years, the newer members will want to make their mark in the history of the Society. They will have a choice. But since the "hard line" is about as bad as it gets now, it would seem that a shift in the other direction would be the only way to go. ( Admittedly, this could well be a case of wishful thinking on my part.)
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Maybe current GB hardliners don't want to argue with newbies down the line, so they
  publish their doctrine every now and then, and if the newbies want to address it, the
  old-timers remind them how so much is invested in the status quo, which has been
  published (again) within the last so-many years.

  By the time the newbies have been there awhile, they realize the score. It's not about
  real communication with God, aiding the millions of the flock, or advancing the Good
  News of the Kingdom. It's about self-preservation. Once they realize the score, they
  perpetuate the old doctrine reminders, themselves.
• 

  Gayle

  It obvious also on their speaking with their disfellowshipped relatives,,sometime under certain circumstances it may be okay to talk with them some and other times not at all. Sometimes there is a "relaxing" to get people into the fold and then there's tightening to get a firmer grip of the their members.
• 

  yaddayadda

  No, I havn't noticed that particular trend. A very interesting topic though.
  
  Somewhat contrary to your theory, I have noticed that when any new GB member comes on board or a new President is appointed, the appointments are usually followed by some 'new light' or minor changes that reflect a general softening in interpretation or policy (eg, shortly after Franz's death the 'generation' and 'sheep and goats' interpretations were changed). This indicates that the GB has dominant personalities who cling to pet interpretations and when those die there is some accommodation to any fresh insights held by the new members.
  
  Along these lines, something that may be significant is the large gap in the date of appointment between the two most senior members of the GB, John Barr and Theodore Jaracz, and the rest of them. There is nearly a 30 year gap between the appointments to the GB of John Barr (who is 94 now and cannot have too much longer to live) and Theodore Jaracz (who is 83 and has recently had a heart attack) and the rest of them. Gerrit Losch is the next appointee and he was appointed in 1994.
  
  Here are the dates of birth and dates of appointment to the GB of the current GB members(a new appointment may be pending following Carey Barber's recent demise - it seems they like a minimum of 10 GB members):
  
  John Edwin Barr 1913, 1977
  Theodore Jaracz 1925, 1974
  Gerrit Lösch 1942 July 1, 1994
  Guy H. Pierce 1935 Oct 1, 1999
  Samuel F. Herd 1935 Oct 1, 1999
  David H. Splane 1944 Oct 1, 1999
  M. Stephen Lett 1949 Oct 1, 1999
  Anthony Morris III 1950 Sep 1, 2005
  Geoffrey W. Jackson 1955 Sep 1, 2005
  
  Notice the LARGE gap between Barr and Jaracz's appointments in 1977 and 1974 respectively and the rest of them. The next oldest appointment is in 1994. And all the rest were appointed less than 10 years ago. There also appears to be a bit of a generation gap between Barr, Jaracz, and the rest of them (but not so much Pierce and Herd). These could well be telling factors when Barr and Jaracz die.
  
  Everyone knows that Jaracz is the kingpin at the moment. John Barr appears to also be a very dominant figure because of his seniority and the fact that he evidently still has all faculties and is still active. Historically we know that the GB tends to be dominated by one or two strong personalities and the rest of the GB more or less revolve around them. Ray Franz noted that some GB members would always vote according to how a certain dominant personality voted. It is my suspicion that Jaracz and Barr could be those dominant figures who are insistent on keeping the status quo and are preventing some of the more contentious creeds from being revisited (eg, blood doctrine, child molestation policy, shunning of family members), something that is desperately needed. When these two finally die off there could well be some flashes of 'new light' adopted soon after. Rather than reflecting a hardening of doctrine, as you suggest, these changes are likely to be towards a less rigid stance (its hard to imagine the current position being any more rigid and legalistic).
• 

  Stealth453

  You hit it pretty close to the head. Have seen the same thing myself.
• 

  Arthur

  Good points TD

  I hadn't noticed this trend before. Actually, I hadn't given much thought to the relationships between doctrinal / dogma changes with GB appointments until you brought it up. Interesting. . .

  Here's one thing that I have noticed about trends, though. I began to realize that world events seem to influence the WTS / GB to promote a hightened expectation of Armageddon in cycles which come around about every 30 years:

  1914 - Outbreak of WWI

  1941 - Bombing of Pearl Harbor and WWII

  1970s - Run up to 1975; Vietnam War, Watergate

  2001 - 9/11 - followed by Afghanistan and Iraq invasions

  2034 - This will mark 120 years (Noah given 120 year warning) from the year 1914 (time of the end)
• 

  moshe

  The WT has always been silent about one trend they don't like- The one where the signs of the end are given and we are told to "observe the rumors of war", something to that effect. What they have never mentioned is that since the creation of telegraph then telephone, then radio, then TV and finally spy satellites with each invention rumors have went down! No longer do people hunker down in their serf's mud & stick hut worrying about the rumor from across the mountain that an army was coming to devour them. People know within 24hrs what is happening in the world, today. Stop worrying about Armageddon- it ain't coming folks.

  ps- and I did not read this somewhere else.
• 

  M.J.

  You nearly outlined yesterday's "special talk".

  If these guys go with another hardline wave now, they'll have to deal with the internet backlash which wasn't around for previous waves.

  Here's a good graph which conflicts with their "these are the most devastating times in the history of mankind" mantra: