by Rapunzel 19 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
If the WTBTS did satellite they couldn't reach all the impoverished third worlders , which their intent is to reach the four corners of the globe with their style of preaching on a very personal agenda . To them you aren't in good standing unless you are involved with the D2D work .
True. D2D is inefficient, but it takes time, and the drones need to be kept busy.
Yes!!!
That's another point: DRONE CONTROL.
And in that case, efficiency/inefficiency of the method makes no difference: keep them occupied, including the snoopervisors w/ their clipboards and stopwatches.
Mustang
Here's another twist: If there were a new, high efficiency scheme in place, the present tired, demoralized infrastructure would collapse under the load.
Mustang
Basically, the Witnesses are doing everything "ass backward" - they make people do things that they don't want to do [door2door, being a prime example]; and they neglect to do what they should do ["church" [or congregation] brunches/suppers; child/youth activities in parallel with the meetings schedule, after all, why inflict torture on a kid by making him/her sit through those hideously boring meetings?; commmunity service and outreach programs; etc.].
Again, the analogy may be somewhat tenuous [and trite], but it will serve me just as well: A branch or vine cut off from the tree cannot survive very long. In many cases, things that have become isolate tend to wither, petrify, or ossify.
The thing is that much of what the Witnesses teach, and their methods of operation, are outdated. They may not necessarily be headed for oblivion, because I suppose that there will still exist a certain number of the "faithful" to carry on well into this century, at least. I fear that the Witnesses are headed for something worse than oblivion - utter irrelevancy.
At one time, the whole "Henny Penny/chicken little " idea ["The sky is falling! The sky is falling!] may have attracted people with a certain mindset. And who knows, maybe it can still attract some kinds of people.
But these people tend to get bored quickly and leave if their expectations are not met.
Perhaps the biggest question confronting the Witnesses is: Are there going to be enough "born-ins" to meet the needs of the organization. By all accounts, even many of those born into Witness families are leaving, leaving in droves as they say.
If this is ineed the case, will they be able to attract enough converts? In my view, they not be able to. Essentially, the modus operendi of the Witnesses has not evolved beyond that of mid nineteenth-century/early twentieth-century colportage. They're really nothing other than the little drones who used to lug those portable phonographs around with them as they went door to door. Their "spiel" is still canned and rehearsed. Perhaps they may still be able to hoodwink someone with absolutely no knowledge of the Bible. But upon encountering anyone with possessing even the slightest biblical or historical knowledge, they will be "blown out of the water," as it were; any "argument" that they put forth will be decimated and shreaded. "Babylon fell in the year 607?" POW! "See here. You take a few verses from the 'square hole' of the book of Daniel, and you pound them into the 'round hole' of the Book of Revelations, and you get the 1914 doctrine upon which our entire doctrine rests." POW! Anyone with the slightest inkling will be able utterly defeat a Witness in any debate.
And the irony is, at the very time when information about the Bible is increasing on the Internet and becoming more and more accessible, it seems that the Witnesses themselves are becoming less and less capable or willing to expound upon or defend their own teachings. I mean, what the hell are they to think when the definition of the term "generation" changes two or three times?
As I see it, the Witnesses as an organization are facing a "fork in the road."They can go down either one of two paths. They can either "go mainstream," giving up their contrarian, socially antagonistic ways. Or else, they can totally withdraw and become even more "apocalyptic." If this happens, there is always the danger of something bad happening.
Perhaps this dichotomy is too simplistic. Perhaps there is a third [or even fourth] way available to them. It just seems me that at this point in their movement's history, they are going to have to make big changes. Stasis would not seem to be an option. It will be interesting to see what happens. For their sake, I hope that wise decisions will be made.
Repunzel-- The WTBTS does not say that Babylon fell in 607 BCE . It says that judah fell in 607 BCE, Babylon was conquered in 537 bce or there abouts . The city still functioned way into the future ,it was not destroyed right away. The christian religion is based on the belief the world is ending and God is looking for people to not destroy when he takes control of all aspects of human affairs .
Hey Rapunzel you blow my mind with this thread. Talk about thinking 'out of the box'. A Watchtower satelite? You and badboy should collaborate some time.
If I can pull at the corners of some of your thoughts that is all I can do quickly.
You talk about Witnesses hiring marketing consultants or psychologists. But this would require an enormous mental turn around. JWs have a long tradition of relying on lawyers to further their cause, but to resort to marketing - would that not be tantamount to to admitting that Jehovah is not 'directing the work' after all? Presumbly the leadership would be discreet about resorting to such measures, but those in charge of considering new strategies would themselves presumably have to still be committed to the Witness cause for it to work. How could they marry that commitment with a truly 'ousdie the box' approach to future changes? Not easy at all. Think too far outside the box and they might end up doubting the cause they are trying to promote.
Plus they have pushed the line so long that house to house is the biblical pattern.
At one time Witnesses used to boast about being at the forefront of technology: radio in the 1930s, and computer aided simultaneous translation in the 1980s. (forget the proper name they give that) They tend not to make that boast about using the latest technology any more. In fact they did not even promote their website for the first couple of years I think. I remember some local brother stumbling across it before it was ever mentioned in the magazines or in the literature.
I found the suggestion of the Society handing out money to ordinary followers amusing to say the least. That so ain't going to happen. Ever. The Society are so cheap (haven't you seen the flimsy "books" they produce lately?) it is painful and they have been making cuts left right and centre. Even Circuit Overseers look like they may be the victims of a major cost cutting exercise next year.
You write:
I fear that the Witnesses are headed for something worse than oblivion - utter irrelevancy.
Why do you fear that Rapunzel? I realise this is a sort of extented 'thought game' of what could the Witnesses do to improve their lot. But we don't really want them to succeed do we? Of all the futures plotted out stagnation and irrelevancy seem to me the most likely, and from where I am sitting perhaps the most to be hoped for.
There is always a danger they could turn more apocalyptic as you say. And then the rules of the game may change entirely. On the other hand a major trend especially in Europe in the past decade is indicated by attempts to be classed by governments as a regular religion like any other. They won such status in Germany in 2005, and they have just recently started the process to be recognised as a church in Austria too. Such moves inhibit too much introversion and authoritarianism as they need to present a reasonable face to the outside world. There was an interesting article on this trend toward the mainstream a few years ago.
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1388177
You need access to an acedemic library to get that article though. (Unless it is posted elsewhere I don't know)
German scholar Detlef Garbe has also observed that religious groups become less eschatologically focussed the more they explore their own history and build up a 'tradition'. Mormons have long had a very strong sense of history and tradition. During the 1990s the Witnesses made some moves in that direction with the production of the Proclaimers book, plus an awful lot of work, including collaboration with outside academics, into the history of Jehovah's Witnesses in Nazi Germany, East Germany and Soviet Russia in particular. In previous decades the attitude would have been more: "who has got the time to write our history? Don't you know Armageddon is coming any minute?"
James Beckford wrote an extensive analysis of the organisation's structure in the 1970s at a time when they were also undergoing a lot of changes. He even suggested where they might improve efficiency, but I don't think his book was widely read by the leadership or his comments taken on board.
I agree there are bound to be a lot of changes in the organisation in the next few years and decades. Who knows what surprises are in store! From recent comments surrounding the dropping of the Book Study meeting though it really appears they have no clear thought-out strategy. At the moment they are just making it up as they go along. Whether someone comes along with some big-picture ideas remains to be seen. Either way it will be interesting.
During the 1990s the Witnesses made some moves in that direction with the production of the Proclaimers book, plus an awful lot of work, including collaboration with outside academics, into the history of Jehovah's Witnesses in Nazi Germany, East Germany and Soviet Russia in particular. In previous decades the attitude would have been more: "who has got the time to write our history? Don't you know Armageddon is coming any minute?"
Interesting observation. There were also, nearly every month, some article on some "bible believing reformer" who lived some time between 100 - 1800 AD. The implicaiton was that at least some of these guys must have composed that ever elusive "faithful & discreet slave" during those dark centuries between the lives of the Apostle John & CT Russell.
But that focus seems to have utterly dissolved in the last decade or so, other than supericial references to "advertise advertise advertise" and vague references to a "spiritual heritage".
Why pull the plug? Did someone at HQ wake up and realize they were getting to be too much like the Mormons?
I also agree, they don't seem to have any sort of overall plan, they just lurch from one cost-cutting maneuver to another.
And the irony is, at the very time when information about the Bible is increasing on the Internet and becoming more and more accessible,
It's not just the I-Net. More Biblical research and older documents have been turned up in the last few decades.
Having been born and JW educated in the 50's era, I remember that it was indicated that since the KJV & Douay (~1610 both) there had been many new documents unearthed.
Well, since those 50's, the same increase in material has occurred AGAIN. It means that it all is due for a further reconsideration.
seems that the Witnesses themselves are becoming less and less capable or willing to expound upon or defend their own teachings.
And yes, that makes it the ultimate in irony
Mustang
Perhaps this dichotomy is too simplistic. Perhaps there is a third [or even fourth] way available to them. It just seems me that at this point in their movement's history, they are going to have to make big changes. Stasis would not seem to be an option. It will be interesting to see what happens. For their sake, I hope that wise decisions will be made.
"Simplistic dichotomy": I'll go for that.
"Perhaps there is a third [or even fourth] way available to them.": Yes; I can envision a "Business Plan" that would take them off into a different/neutral(?) direction, starting from where they are presently. It would likely make money and would be a distraction as well as a benefit to the Rank & File. What is it? Anyone wants to know will have to pay: $$$
"It just seems me that at this point in their movement's history, they are going to have to make big changes.": Natch!!!!
"Stasis would not seem to be an option.": Don't count this one out. This engine has lost it's original brains, and whatever is left is asleep at the switch. No positive response and just letting whatever comes their way whittle them into oblivion is the likely scenario that I would endorse.
It boils down to this: how long can a headless chicken run?
"It will be interesting to see what happens. For their sake, I hope that wise decisions will be made.": You may be the only one with any sympathy for them.
Mustang
Thank you, everyone for your thoughtful responses and ideas.
I have to extend a perticularly sincere mea culpa [and my thanks for having corrected the error that I made] to Heathen.
I should have written that the Witnesses erroneously believe that the temple at Jerusalem was razed [destroyed] in the year 607, whereas everyone else agrees that the destruction of the Temple occurred in the year 587-586 B.C.E. With the destruction of the Temple, the diaspora began. Many Jews belonging to the social elite at the time were coerced into exile in Babylon. They were liberated some 50 years later by Cyrus the Persian in 536 B.C.E.
I suppose that, somehow in my mind, the Witness refrain "Babylon The Great Has Fallen" got conflated with the idea of the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem in 587-586 B.C.E. This was an egregious error on my part and I apologize. And I thank Heathen for pointing it out.
As we all know, the Witnesses alone are just about the only group to assign the date 607 to the sacking of the Temple. As I remember, they offer this date which flies in the face of all other historical evidence in order to support their 1914 date.The two dates are connected in their view, are they not?
