I need some good responses to the excuse "The elders are imperfect"

by BonaFide 25 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Farkel

  :"The elders are imperfect"

  So are the ones they routinely disfellowship. Why should they be forgiven, yet those in their flocks who are less mature spiritually NOT be forgiven?

  Farkel
• 

  rebel8

  They're imperfect........that's why we need to be careful not to be followers of men, accepting what they say unquestioningly. (Or with your technique, that's right........that's why we need to be supportive of them while still realizing the literature is written by imperfect men.)

  They're imperfect......that's why they've said a number of times in the literature that we should examine our own faith and what's taught in the literature if it doesn't jive with the Bible.

  They're imperfect......that's why it would be silly of us to think so only in hindsight (after their teachings change/prophecies fail).
• 

  purplesofa

  I still find it hard to believe you were some sort of CO.

  Do you not have any expericances of your own that you can

  give your fellow witnesses of your own imperfections while in the rank you

  were/are?
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  Hey BF,

  "You know Bonafide, the Governing Body isn't perfect, that's why there are updates to the literature."
  "Well, the elders are imperfect"

  I guess my response would depend on the person and the point I'm trying to get across. Let's start with the scenario where Billy is lamenting that the end hasn't come as promised by the GB:

  Yes, you're right, of course. They're imperfect and have to update their understanding of things. It's very simple for you to point that out to me now, but back in the 80s, I took it very seriously that the end would come before "this generation" died. That was in every publication and every magazine, you know. It would have come before 1994, obviously 80 years from 1914. Isn't that what you understood and believed. See, I took that instruction and pioneered, never had full-time work, never married or had a family, gave up many things in expectation that what they said was the truth. But I didn't realize that what they were saying was going to change because they were "imperfect" in their interpretation of the scriptures. Obviously, you already understood that their expectations are imperfect about the end. Instead of throwing your whole life into "the truth", you planned for family, a home, living a settled life. Right now my life isn't pretty because I believed them and obeyed. Yes, I guess you're right that it's foolish of me to rely on what they had said. I guess if I was in your shoes, I could easily just say, "pooh, pooh, they are imperfect and you're suffering, but I don't care because I'm fine."

  Or, if I want to be even more condescending to someone that is trying to "lecture" me:

  Yeah, in case you forgot, I knew most of the members of the GB individually and have served on 4 BoEs. I don't think I need you to tell me that the GB and elders are imperfect. You don't need to justify to me why they have to constantly update the literature. I want to know how are we supposed to explain it to a Bible student? If they studied the Truth book or Live Forever book years ago and want to resume where they left off, how are you going to tell them, "Oh, we can't use that book, too much has changed. Now we use this little revised tiny print paperback book"? And then when they start asking questions about why things that have changed, what do you say? Do you say, "Oh, they were imperfect and not prophets before, but we have to treat them like they are perfect prophets now"? Well, I don't suppose you've had enough real experience in the ministry with householders that ask the hard questions. That's just as well, I suppose.

  What would I say if I wanted to try to open them up to make a point...

  Of course they are imperfect, so we have to expect that they are going to keep making changes on things. They've already made a lot of changes that I would never have expected 30 years ago. I never expected that anything would change, really. But they did. And it's to be expected that more things are going to change in the future. So, I've learned not to expect perfection at all. It would be foolish to be dogmatic about some of the things we understand now since they could change any time. It would be hard argue on subjects such as blood, because it just might change in the very next Watchtower.

  Okay, how about a different smart-assy BF-style nearly-apostate response...

  Yes, as individuals they are imperfect. But, when they're meeting as a group--as a responsible body--and the have prayed for the direction of God's Holy Spirit on matters, what do you expect? You expect that their decisions are divinely directed and to be obeyed as being correct. Isn't that how it was with the first century "Governing Body"? Individually, those in Jerusalem were imperfect, but, as a body, was their decision as recorded in Acts imperfect? Should those first century gentiles have really been keeping the Law and getting circumcised? No! But the Governing Body in Brooklyn today changes their decisions all the time because they don't have God's Spirit at all and are a bunch of effing effers!

  Whew, I need to go cool off now. Sorry the suggestions weren't really "simple". Do any of these help, BF?

  B the X
• 

  asilentone

  I like the very short and simple 3 answers from Heaven, if you blah too long, they will probably shut you down before you know it.
• 

  blondie

  I found that trying to talk to or convince anyone of this point that it ends up being pearls before swine.
• 

  Scully

  Doctors are also "imperfect". But when they make very human, very imperfect mistakes, they can (a) be sued for malpractice, (b) disciplined by their regulatory body, (c) lose their licence/privileges to practice medicine, etc. In other words, they are held accountable for their errors.

  We all recognize that humans are imperfect and are subject to making errors. The problem is not with being imperfect per se, but with lack of accountability. When people make errors and are not held accountable for those errors while still claiming a certain elevated status, it creates resentment among those others who do not have the "status", but are held accountable for their very human, very imperfect errors.

  It also smacks of hypocrisy when finger-pointing occurs, such as, "Those Catholic priests molested children, and that proves they are not God's chosen people and they should be put away in jail and the Church should pay compensation to the victims" vs. "Those JW elders molested children, but they are just imperfect men; Jehovah will take care of it in his due time."
• 

  bluecanary

  Doctors are also "imperfect". But when they make very human, very imperfect mistakes, they can (a) be sued for malpractice, (b) disciplined by their regulatory body, (c) lose their licence/privileges to practice medicine, etc. In other words, they are held accountable for their errors.

  Ooh, good analogy. I like. I claim.
• 

  White Dove

  My suggestion disappeared, but I like Scully's better.
• 

  Billy the Ex-Bethelite

  Okay, simpler than a 45 minute discourse...

  "You know Bonafide, the Governing Body isn't perfect, that's why there are updates to the literature."

  "yeah, sure is hard to keep up with all the updates. I wish they'd put expiration dates for when the literature will be going bad."

  "Well, the elders are imperfect"

  "yeah, so I guess we have to get used to their imperfect direction. I wish they'd include that in the announcements, like, so-and-so is disfellowshipped and the elders are imperfect."

  Okay BF, maybe these suggestions aren't any better, but at least they're shorter.

  B the X