If an organization run by "imperfect men" is acceptable, why did Hojovah reject the nation of Israel?
If Hojovah were to send his son to earth to correct errors in Watchtower Corporation, would the "slave" repent? Or would they disfellowship Jesus?
by SPAZnik 31 Replies latest jw friends
If an organization run by "imperfect men" is acceptable, why did Hojovah reject the nation of Israel?
If Hojovah were to send his son to earth to correct errors in Watchtower Corporation, would the "slave" repent? Or would they disfellowship Jesus?
"If Hojovah were to send his son to earth to correct errors in Watchtower Corporation, would the "slave" repent? Or would they disfellowship Jesus?"
Good analogy. They might put Jesus up on the 'cross' (after first trying a 'torture stake', and finding that to be ineffective).
They can't have it both ways:
They try but it isn't honest, ethical or moral
My retort to that statement is that if it's run by imperfect men, why do they require total unquestioning obedience under the threat opf DFing if you dare to disagree with the "imperfect men"..
isn't there a verse about not trusting in men in the Bible?
Fortunately, the courts haven't let the Catholic Church get by with saying that the whole sexual abuse scandal was because decisions/policies were made by "imperfect men" and they won't let the WTS get by with it, either. And it's going to apply to more than the sexual abuse scandal in the WTS; it's going to apply to blood transfusions, too.
I think the next time a Dub criticizes the Pope, Cardinals, and Bishops, I should reply that, like the GB, they are just imperfect men.
StAnn
The leaders are not "in" the lead, they "take" the lead.
Very astute observation and conclusions, garybuss. Unfortunately, from what I have learned from ex witnesses here, your logic will be lost on those in most need of it.
They might put Jesus up on the 'cross' (after first trying a 'torture stake', and finding that to be ineffective).
LOL! Now wouldn't that be something to see?
The "imperfect men" or "sinner" argument is valid to a point. A brief look at the Apostles and their sins makes the case. There is a big difference, however, when a religion wants its members to 'excuse' the flaws of the leaders, and overlook doctrinal errors in the name of such 'imperfection' yet it will not allow the same from the rank and file when they disagree and do not accept the same said errors.
The Watchtower Society could take a lesson from the Catholic Church. The Church has always defended its dogma (solid matters of faith and morals - not liturgical and other practices) as being unchanged and protected by God, even in spite of scoundrals in the leadership. Some Popes have been really bad, and other leaders down to priests have been convicted of serious crimes. But, the Catholic members openly condemn the Church without fear and are expected to sue the local Parish and Diocese for harms suffered. Good Pastors (Parish Priests) openly and honestly address such issues, and act to publicly and privately consol victims. In spite of sins and 'imperfection' the Church simply has always claimed and continues to claim that its basic dogma is still protected ... whereas the Watchtower can never make such a claim.
I'm not sure if we should be considering the activities of the 1st century Christians in the same manner that we consider the activities of this organization today. Just because I write a letter and it gets preserved in some fashion is not by itself an indication that God approves of and agrees with its contents. I'm quite sure Paul would have ripped up his letters if he thought what's been done with them is what was going to be done with them.
Amazing, good points.
StAnn