Steve Bates Article on UN/WTS in Tablet newspaper

by hawkaw 26 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  Nathan Natas

  I hope Stephen checks here from time to time.

  Thank you, Stephen Bates!
• 

  Sirona

  Hi

  Could anyone tell me which watchtower mag this quote is from:

  "in times of spiritual warfare it is proper to misdirect the enemy by hiding the truth..."

  that Stephen Bates quotes at the end of the article.

  Thanks
  Sirona
• 

  badwillie

  Thanks to Stephen Bates for his interest and writing talent! I wish there were more journalists in this country that would feature this stuff. Once your eyes are open you realize that the organization is full of self importance, nobody in the real world gives a hoot about Watch Tower policies and how they may harm their people.

  - Badwillie.

  PS. Stephen, thanks for using our experience in the article!
• 

  Trevor Scott

  Sirona,

  try Watchtower May 1, 1957, pg. 284-285

  TS,
• 

  hawkaw

  The Watchtower Magazine of May 1, 1957 page 285 as per the WTS CD ROM 1999.

  *** w57 5/1 285 Use Theocratic War Strategy ***
  Use Theocratic War Strategy
  A WITNESS of Jehovah was going from house to house in Eastern Germany when she met a violent opposer. Knowing at once what to expect she changed her red blouse for a green one in the very next hallway. No sooner had she appeared on the street than a Communist officer asked her if she had seen a woman with a red blouse. No, she replied, and went on her way. Did she tell a lie? No, she did not. She was not a liar. Rather, she was using theocratic war strategy, hiding the truth by action and word for the sake of the ministry.

  In this she had good Scriptural precedent. Did not Rahab hide the Israelite spies by both action and word? Did not Abraham, Isaac, David and others likewise hide the truth at times when faced with a hostile enemy? They certainly did, and never do we read a word of censure for their doing so. Rather, we read of their being termed exemplary servants of Jehovah. Their actions were in line with Jesus’ wise counsel: “Look! I am sending you forth as sheep amidst wolves; therefore prove yourselves cautious as serpents and yet innocent as doves.”—Matt. 10:16, NW.

  Perhaps some will wonder as to where the line is to be drawn between use of theocratic war strategy in hiding the truth and the telling of lies. First of all, let it be noted that whenever one takes an oath to tell the truth he is obligated to do so. By dedicating himself to do God’s will each Christian has taken a vow or made an oath to do God’s will and to be faithful to him. To this oath he certainly must be true. Likewise, when a Christian is placed on a witness stand he is obligated to speak the truth if he speaks at all. At times he may prefer to refuse to speak and suffer the consequences rather than betray his brothers or the interests of God’s work. And, of course, there is no occasion for use of war strategy when dealing with our Christian brothers. In dealing with them we tell the truth or tactfully remind them that what they seek to know does not concern them.

  Lies are untruths told for selfish reasons and which work injury to others. Satan told a lie to Eve that worked great harm to her and all the human race. Ananias and Sapphira told lies for selfish reasons. But hiding the truth, which he is not entitled to know, from an enemy does not harm him, especially when he would use such information to harm others who are innocent.

  A great work is being done by the witnesses even in lands where their activity is banned. The only way they can fulfill the command to preach the good news of God’s kingdom is by use of theocratic war strategy. By underground methods the literature is brought into the country and distributed. Would it make sense to hide this literature by one’s actions and then reveal its whereabouts by one’s words when queried? Of course not! So in time of spiritual warfare it is proper to misdirect the enemy by hiding the truth. It is done unselfishly; it does not harm anyone; on the contrary, it does much good.
  Today God’s servants are engaged in a warfare, a spiritual, theocratic warfare, a warfare ordered by God against wicked spirit forces and against false teachings. God’s servants are sent forth as sheep among wolves and therefore need to exercise the extreme caution of serpents so as to protect properly the interests of God’s kingdom committed to them. At all times they must be very careful not to divulge any information to the enemy that he could use to hamper the preaching work.

  [Footnotes]

  For details see The Watchtower, February 1, 1956.
• 

  Thirdson

  Great story Stephen!

  I expect it will be one of the most read on-line articles at the Tablet ever.

  Regards,

  Thirdson

  'To avoid criticism, say nothing, do nothing, be nothing'
• 

  Thirdson

  The link in here is too good to be languishing off the board. I posted the same link on Beliefnet.com and it got one response from a loyal poster claiming it was an extremely biased article.

  Thirdson

  'To avoid criticism, say nothing, do nothing, be nothing'
• 

  fodeja

  I posted the same link on Beliefnet.com and it got one response from a loyal poster claiming it was an extremely biased article.

  Well, it's not free of opinion, but it's definitely a VERY good article (I didn't like the second Guardian article, which apparently lost a lot of "balance" due to editing).

  One point appears to be a factual error, though:

  But then, last summer, the elders met in Brooklyn and, after an apparent divine revelation – but more precisely following a vote of eight to four – decided that in certain circumstances the transfusion of blood components such as plasma might be acceptable, so long as the recipient genuinely repented afterwards. This was not publicised to congregations and, under questioning, was said to be no change at all.

  Unless I'm completely mistaken, the entire "change" was that taking forbidden blood components would not result in a judicial investigation and likely disfellowshiping, but in more or less automatic disassociation. The outcome, of course, being exactly the same, so that's really not much of a change at all.

  f.
• 

  Thirdson

  Fodeja,

  You are right that the change was not that great. I don't think the article is far off with the interpretation of the change. Nothing clear has been said from the WTS and various clarifying comments have been made. The AJWRB web site has the best coverage.

  However, letters written to elders (in the UK at least) stated that a JW who reportedly accepts blood or the banned blood components should be investigated and if found true and unrepentant the person would be regarded as DA'd and not DF'd.

  So "blood transfusions are OK if repentant afterwards" may not be the spirit of the WTS's new rules but is not far off the truth.

  Thirdson

  'To avoid criticism, say nothing, do nothing, be nothing'
• 

  waiting

  Thanks Hawkaw,

  As usual for you - great accomplished work. GREAT ARTICLE.

  For decades the Jehovah’s Witnesses have condemned the United Nations as the Scarlet Beast of Revelation, but privately they were still affiliated to it.

  Perhaps someone can shed some light on the above? Is the United Nations the Image of the Wild Beast or the Scarlet Beast, or the Wild Beast, or are all the same thing?

  I was under the impression that the WTBTS teaching was that the UN was the Image of the Wild Beast. Has there been New Light and I slept in late again?

  waiting

  ps: I printed out the article for my husband. The direct link to the Tablet works fine. Great article.