One possible explanation for the change to CBS (& maybe other changes?)

by sir82 21 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  sir82

  As has been noted on this forum and elsewhere, recent years have seen a flurry of changes coming to the JW organization, at blinding speed (at least, as compared to their usual glacial pace).

  Here's a thought that occurred to me as to why all these changes, all of a sudden.

  2 or so years ago, the GB had 11 members. Since then, Sydlik & Barber have died. The votes for "drop the book study" were probably either 6-5 or 7-4 in favor - a majority, but not the required 2/3 majority.

  Now they're down to 9 members, and probably the most recent vote to drop the book study was 6-3. Voila! New light, and a "loving provision" is transformed into "an unnecessary burden" with the lumbering upward motion of those geriatric hands.

  It's rather like the US Supreme Court - crafty lawyers will wait until the right "mix" of Justices has been appointed before starting a lawsuit which they hope will arrive before them. GB members probably hold back on their most "unorthodox" ideas until the right mix of GB members is attained, either by reductions thru death or additions.

  It also makes me think that this could be the reason why there have been no recent appointments to the GB over the past 2-3 years, although there is certainly room for them (I believe the number has been as high as 18). Some "group of 6" voting bloc finally has the numbers needed to implement changes they've been wanting to make, and any new members might take away their 2/3 majority.
• 

  slimboyfat

  What, you think there are 6 on one side of the room and 3 on the other sitting growling at each other all these years?

  I don't think it is as simple as that. I bet some change their minds all the time (like Lloyd Barry did in CofC), and voting patterns also depend on whose turn it is for a nap (as per Samuel Herd's convention story about the GB member who made "spiritual" comments apparently in his sleep).

  Plus your suggestion about why there are no new GB memebers is simply illogical. If the 6 younger "reforming" members have the votes to make the changes, then they would also have the votes to appoint like-minded brothers to the position to help them push more through.

  Jaracz and Barr are both very old. I presume there must be some new appointments soon. Or who knows they may give up the whole GB routine at some point.
• 

  WTWizard

  They could try to appoint me. And then I will just upset the whole Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger, doing away with the whole group in one fell swoop. After that, I would simply discard every single one of their decisions, archiving everything in books that would be available to the public (including existing members of the organization). From there, I would make things so simple that even a small child would easily be able to figure it out.

  In doing so, I would succeed in returning it the way Christ originally meant for it to be, whether I want it that way or not.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Plus you don't offer much of an explanation for the changes so far as I can see. Sure at least two thirds had to vote for the changes, that much is obvious. The interesting question is why they voted for the changes.
• 

  sir82

  Whoa there, pardner!

  I wasn't pretending to offer "deep insight", it was just a thought that occurred to me. A possible explanation of the timing, not the reasons. Why a change now, when even books released at the most recent DC continue to highlight the importance of the CBS?

  If the 6 younger "reforming" members have the votes to make the changes, then they would also have the votes to appoint like-minded brothers to the position to help them push more through.

  Does it take a 2/3 majority, or a unanimous vote, to get new members onto the GB? I don't know.
• 

  slimboyfat

  Someone should ask Ray Franz that question quick.
• 

  slimboyfat

  And you don't offer any insight into the timing either.

  The change was presumably decided upon some time between the new God's Love book being written and the announcement this spring. This does not coincide with any appointments or deaths.

  Sorry to be harsh on you, but you are a renegade of board destruction after all.
• 

  sir82

  And you don't offer any insight into the timing either.

  The change was presumably decided upon some time between the new God's Love book being written and the announcement this spring. This does not coincide with any appointments or deaths.

  Do you think they vote on book study changes every week? If they operate anything like the elders I've worked with, they revisit ideas once every few months / years / decades.

  In the meantime, there were far more pressing matters, like issuing pictorial condemnations of denim skirts and determining which out-of-context quotations to use in the next study issue of the Watchtower.
• 

  passwordprotected

  I can see where sir is coming from. And he's right, elders tend to vote and act in groups. The GB would surely be no different. There are always agendas, sometimes personal ones, and if you can get enough fellow elders on your site you can push a matter through the vote. With the young bloods taking over the GB, it could be the case that they're finally pushing their agendas through.
• 

  Awakened at Gilead

  I agree with Sir82. I mentioned this concept in my YouTube vid, since I explained that Gerritt Losch had mentioned during a talk:

  "There are many things that need to be changed in the publications, but its not the right time yet". Maybe what he meant is that he didn't have a 2/3 majority yet.

  Eventually they will have to appoint new members as some more old geezers die off and/or become insane (more so than they already are). It will be interesting to see how they contyinue to flip /flop once again as the composition of the body that makes up the new light changes also.