What the hell is "new light"?

by undercover 18 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  AllTimeJeff

  Funny thing about Jesus, he never spoke of new light. He just changed Judaism, thats all. Paul turned it into "Christianity". A rather radical change, with a canonical collection of books accepted as the word of god. (no matter how contradictory these books could be)

  "New light" represents the borgs fascination with the micro over the macro. They constantly miss the forest for the trees. There is an excellent reason from their point of view to do this, as they are wrong on all of their prophecies.

  Leolaia gave the correct understanding of Proverbs 4. It's amazing after you listen to all of the propaganda that they come up with about them being the guardians of the truth, that they can only come up with this one scripture, in Proverbs of all books, to cover their sorry @$$ when they have to change a stupid failed prophecy...... again.

  Lets face it, if you believe new light, then you believe that it was gods purpose to get it wrong for 2000 years, that it was gods purpose to have the truth "visible" for only two periods in human history. If you believe in new light, then you believe that god plays with the truth like we might play with a cat trying to chase a laser beam, always locating it, and always thinking they can grab a ray of sunshine.

  If you believe this, then you believe that god teaches right through falsehoods and mistakes. Please tell me where ambiguity is a hallmark of Jesus teachings. Or Pauls...

  This raises more topics and questions to be sure, but it also proves one thing: JW's are totally, 100% fabricated, power mongering liars who dont give a damn about their flocks.
• 

  orangefatcat

  WT February 1881 r188: page 3 “CAST NOT AWAY THEREFORE YOUR CONFIDENCE” para 1:

  If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now: But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. "New light" never extinguishes older "light," but adds to it. If you were lighting up a building containing seven gas jets you would not extinguish one every time you lighted another, but would add one light to another and they would be in harmony and thus give increase of light: So is it with the light of truth; the true increase is by adding to, not by substituting one for another.

  A very interesting comment from a very old watchtower , it is too bad that they don't clarify this statement into their present literature. I mean I have seen some JW's literally go on and on about New Light as if it was the last thing on this planet. However you will never see that quote in one of their latest magizines Heaven forbid if a witness ever quoted it in a conversation. they would surely be tarred and feathered or stoned to death by scolding words such as apostate.. I would make them (WTS) look bad. And the Society really doesn't look bad nor do they want to give the impression that they look favourably upon Russell's teachings.

  As demonstrated by Judge Rutherford he despised Russell. Of course he was a very haughty man and hungry for power over the organization and nothing like Russell. Russell had his foibles but I do believe that he thought he had found the true faith. It is too bad that he didn't . His teachings were so far fetched much like the teachings of the witnesses today but in a different sort of way. The end result is the same, neither then nor now has the WTS found the true light or illumination of the Christ. They think they have but indeed as we all see by their fruits that they have not proved to be what they claim.

  I recall in the sixties and seventies the organization seemed not too bad. Things were somewhat okay people seemed content all eagerally awaiting the events of 1975 with that a complete change occured within the WTS, you could feel it. You could sense the stress and anxiety of the witnesses. I was in Montreal at the time. I was not suprised either way I thought if it happens it happens and I wasn't suprised when it didn't because I had read years earlier a bk written by McMillian, called "Faith on the March" and he said in that book somewhere. That in the year 1914 the brethern of the Lord all awaited at a specific location dressed in white robes awaiting to ascend into heaven." How foolish they must have felt when it didn't happen. And they had to go back to the drawing board as it were. Well that is why I really didn't believe Armageddon wasn't happening in 75. None of the signs were present.

  It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure the WTS mad jack asses of themselves again. By the late 70ties and onward the organization was never really stable in any way that I could see. Even though I went to Montreal to help in the pioneer work I truly knew deep down I wasn't a very happy witness although I was great at showing a facade. I do believe that many hundreds of thousands maybe millions use the same facade a smile but behind the smile is deep sadness and regrets. Wishing they could leave but fear of reprecussions and lose of family and friends, lets face it it is a very hefty price when one is disfellowshiped. and that is the one tool the Society holds over the heads of all of the witnesses. They will never do away with it, it is their upper hand their iron fist. And that is why witnesses are afraid to leave.

  The only new light the WTS has is when they change a burnt out light bulb.

  Orangefatcat.
• 

  WTWizard

  New light is when you start looking into a concept with no prior knowledge of the subject. You develop a hypothesis, which becomes the new light. When you do the science, the data either supports the hypothesis, denies it, or supports it but with modifications. As you do further science, it becomes clearer how you need to modify the original hypothesis, or which new hypothesis you need should you have to ditch the original one. You do further science to enhance the conclusion, answering related questions. As this progresses, the light gets brighter and improves.

  Or, that is how it's supposed to work. For me, the "new light" came when I realized that the hypothesis of God being good was wrong, and I needed a new hypothesis. Ever since then, it has been refinements only. I now realize that the whole God-is-good hypothesis is nothing more than a scam, whether man-made or God-made. Any further information would improve the quality of that light, but not create new light.

  Of course, the Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger does not look at it like that. If you dump a hypothesis because of new evidence, the light gets brighter (they call it "new light". Going back to the original hypothesis without significant new evidence to support it only extinguishes that light, and yet they call it more "new light". Either way, it is all a scam--when I clicked onto my first apostate web site, the lights came on.
• 

  KAYTEE

  New light,!!!

  It’s another word for lying, if they want to use that nonsense how do they explain Deu.18 v 20-22 where god warns about ones prophesying and getting it wrong, in other words ALL that they got wrong is now NEW LIGHT

  They have an answer for everything…….that’s why they get it so wrong

  KT
• 

  kurtbethel

  The WT religion reminds me of the water car people. They are always tinkering with it and true believers can get kits to modify their car, and they even have yahoo groups. But alas, physics and the numbers do not bear out their claims. In energy you do not get something for nothing. The water car people blame the conspiracy of big oil or demons or satan or whatever for suppressing their truth.
• 

  Witness 007

  "New Light" means someone at Bethel threw a dart at the bible and came up with a new bull crap theory .......once again going beyond the things written in the bible.
• 

  LouBelle

  New light - light as bright as a million watt light bulb could help identify early signs of parkinsons' disease. I kid you not.
• 

  blondie

  "New light" was a phrase used by Russell in his writings and taken over by subsequent WT authors. A search of the WT CD will show that the WTS rarely uses that phrase in its publications now except in quotes from Russell and Rutherford's time.

  http://www.ctrussell.us/ctrussell/ctrussell.nsf

  If we were following a man undoubtedly it would be different with us; undoubtedly one human idea would contradict another and that which was light one or two or six years ago would be regarded as darkness now: But with God there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning, and so it is with truth; any knowledge or light coming from God must be like its author. A new view of truth never can contradict a former truth. "New light" never extinguishes older "light," but adds to it. If you were lighting up a building containing seven gas jets you would not extinguish one every time you lighted another, but would add one light to another and they would be in harmony and thus give increase of light: So is it with the light of truth; the true increase is by adding to, not by substituting one for another.

  WT 1881 February, R188, page 3
• 

  shamus100

  The light is the light. And new light is truth; lights truths light.

  When are you idiots going to throw your brain out the window and accept circular reasoning as truth? Reinna does it every day, and look at how happy she is!