Another question about the Governing Body

by ballistic 15 Replies latest jw friends

  • ISP
    ISP

    Indeed blondie....they knew that 'God' did not deal with them in any special manner but they let their followers believe differently.

    ISP

  • Erich
    Erich

    ...thats when majority voting 2/3 came in ???

    "GOD does not play dice", said A. Einstein....

  • ISP
    ISP

    It has to be obvious when they didn't agree...they voted. How...er democratic as oppose to theocratic!

    ISP

  • MadApostate
    MadApostate

    First, to the best of my recollection, the WTS doesn't teach that a GB has always existed since the days of the apostles, but rather that some of the "anointed" have always been around since then.

    Second, CoC spends an entire chapter on the current WTS teaching that the WTS Board of Directors constituted the GB since Russell's days. RF points out the fallacy of such with evidence that CTR, JFR, and NHK all ran the WTS as a Monarchy.

  • cornish
    cornish

    In the period towards my exit from the JWs.I used to mull over this,I couldnt understand why when the Governing body wanted you to do as you were told they would speak with the authority of inspiration,ie,do as you are told and believe what we tell you because its from God.On the other hand when flaws and contradictions arise from this they would print articles stating that they are just humans like us who make mistakes,so in effect they are saying,on one hand,its from God,and on the other hand its from imperfect humans,they want things both ways when it suits them.
    They want all the power and authority of an inspired prophet but accept none of the responsibility.
    If they admitted they were a bunch of self appointed men the whole house of cards would fall.

  • ballistic
    ballistic

    This to me proves it is not a theocracy. Not one come-back from anyone who believes they have a direct link to God and damning evidence that they run the organisation board room style and make up doctrine as they see fit.
    Wouldn't the Watchtower make more interesting reading if it contained the minutes of these meetings, i.e. what proposals got turned down, what current beliefs did not have a unanimous vote, how many of them voted to join the UN, etc.

    Do you think this is why the Watchtower is full of re-gurgitated rubbish - they can no longer come to agreement on anything?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit