I think you've got this spot on Drew. Looking at my old Congregation, I just can't imagine how it can still be going strong in 30 years if the Organisation doesn't change the structure at all, when I see the people who will be running it in a few years, the people in my age group, I just know not enough will be able to continue the expansion. Example, the youngest elder/MS who was not raised in the religion is in his early 50s (The PO, SO, and Sec are all retired, in their 60s/70s.) There a few elders in there 30s, and MSs in their 20s, but ALL of them were raised in the religion. There hasn't been a non-foreign adult brought into my Congregation in years.
Where will they bring outside people in? With a 37% retention rate, they cannot depend on those raised in forever.
The growing irrelevance of the Watchtower message
by drew sagan 94 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
Zico
-
Gayle
It's slowly eroding, which is still good to see. Of course, the USSR was slowly eroding for a while, and yet still when the Wall was torn down, I stood watching on TV, awestruck! So maybe it's possible.
-
drew sagan
If you motivate someone out of fear, there is a very quick response: if someone screams "fire!", people respond by running really fast...for a really short period of time. Amazing things can be done in short bursts based on fear. The problem was that it wasn't sustainable. Thus, many would go strong with the program for about three years, and just burn out, give up hope...and drop out.
On the other hand, this particular member simply started to take the screams of "fire!" with a grain of salt...and eventually after years in the group it started to sound like the screams from the boy who cried wolf. Thus the message became less and less relevant.
So his take was that a group can't rely solely on fear-based motivation or they'll fizzle out.Exactly!
I like the phrase "unsustainable". I think that says it all.
Again I go back to the Mormon model. I think that they seriously have done an excellent job at planning ahead. They are light years ahead of the Witnesses.
For those that think that some of the changes they have made recently are a big deal, I would ask you to consider those changes in a much larger context. It may be a big deal for a JW when the structure of a meeting changes, but it is nothing more than novelty. This can be said for most of the changes put forward by the Watchtower so far. They definitely show that things are slowing down, but beyond that they show no real desire for change. They may only help in slowing down the process, but cannot stop it let alone reverse it.
I would also like to comment on the idea that the WTS is hoping to scale down to a "core" of true believers. I wonder if such a thing actually exists. From my own personal experience very few people I ever knew as JWs could really be considered "core" believers. Most were going along with the flow, under the pressure from family and friends. Sure they believed it, but their activity levels were more the result from the fear they would have a negative label attached to themselves and their families. If the GB thinks they can scale back to a 'core' they are going to find themselves pretty lonely. -
yknot
While I don't see any current GB member having the 'right stuff' to truly lead, Ted or loyalty to Ted might be a factor.
However I know there are many in my generation who are diehard reformists, what impact they will make in the next 25 years is yet to be seen.
Sadly I am sure even I could write more invigorating articles using cut/paste from the WT CD & CDs from Freeminds.
There hasn't been spiritual leadership since the mid-80s, just the coasting of old men who occassionally fall asleep at the wheel.
-
Quirky1
Are we seeing last ditch efforts here?
-
daniel-p
Drew, about the "core"... The core is what I grew up in, with the very devout and strict JWs. They are there, but they are the minority, I believe. Perhaps there's no cut and dry core to fall back on, but the organization is scaling back and their (published) numbers will begin to note this. Even if a supposed "core" can't be achieved, smaller numbers will enable them to enforce their policies more effectively.
-
daniel-p
In addition, I agree that most of the organizational managers do believe they are part of God's organization. However, that belief does not extend evenly over every policy and doctrinal matter. Everyone has their own realms of doubt and avoids or explores them accordingly. I believe most GB members believe they are doing the right thing... but its hard to think they actually believe they are God's chosen channel. Likely, they never achieve the level of introspection it takes to acknowledge that they might not be his channel.
-
Narkissos
Very interesting thread.
Imo the main problem from a long-range perspective is that they haven't got any positive "appeal product" independent from eschatology, that would both attract and retain "customers" to them rather than to any other religious group -- as all groups which successfully survived early short-term expectations, like early Christianity or the SDA, had.
Apart from eschatology their originality is essentially negative: no Trinity, no immortal soul, no hell, no blood, no birthdays, and so on. What positive reason (beside mere group dynamics, from "love bombing" to fear of social exclusion) is there for anyone to become or remain a JW apart from eschatology? Strictly none imo.
So unless they find out and successfully develop such an "appeal product" which would stand out from concurrent groups and yet be unrelated to eschatology, I think they are doomed in the long term.
Perhaps the extant defensive and reductionist policy reflects an objective agreement between those that truly believe "the end is near" and those who know that there is no viable future for the organisation, awaiting for some "genius idea" to take them out of the dead end -- whether that eventually happens or not.
-
M.J.
DS, let's not forget one factor, however.
The group definitely relies on a constant stream of recruits coming in WHO ARE NEW TO THE MESSAGE. It's these folks who bring in enthusiasm, cause they haven't lived through the years of the same ol', same ol'. Even if the message seems kind of weird, being based on some far-out 1914 mumbo-jumbo, the seeming chaos presented by the media still helps clinch the deal.
This is what has carried them throughout the years, I would imagine.
The long term members, by default, are the "hard core" ones. The group does a great job of disenfranchising anyone who grows an independent brain. This is by design. Thus the large percentage of people that leave, is a good thing as far as the org is concerned. But it's okay as long as there's a good supply coming in the front door.
When growth drastically slows down is when things will start to break, I think. -