by PSacramento 42 Replies latest watchtower bible
That being said, you probably already know more about what you want to discuss than your "teacher."
that is what I found out when I started asking this guy questions, and he is an elder......if the person is a 'born-in' JW, they probably know nothing but blind submission to the wants and desires of Jehovah the GB.
imo if you start with meatier topics you do run the risk of being treated as an "apostate" by your family - it is something to weigh up carefully.
Another thing is that this bethelite is going to try a 2 pronged approach - like farkel describes above he will corner you but he is also going to befriend you and attempt to seduce you into loving Jehovah and his people. All Jehovahs witnesses are trained to focus on "selling" their product and to get you to focus on it. The bethelite is going to want to keep coming back to further kingdom interests.
I would recomend following the skeptical path you have chosen and continue shoring up your defences by maintaining and developing other interests and facing the fact that your family have changed because of becoming JWs.
edit: imo bethelites are being trained to take a very hardline approach nowadays - especially the younger generation - twenties and thirties.
imo if you start with meatier topics you do run the risk of being treated as an "apostate" by your family - it is something to weigh up carefully.
I think one needs to be careful how they introduce the 'meaty topics'. Blood is a definining doctrine of the JWs, so it is pretty easy to approach with questions. One of the tacks I took with this elder is to talk about blood, fractions and then let him speak......and then I asked about the change and if someone who accepted a 'fraction' prior to the change would be reinstated after the doctrine change.......he sort of stammered about for a bit, never an answer.
I needed to be very cautious about seeming too aggressive, but I knew he could sense early that in many cases, I knew a lot more than he thought, and also seemed to be concerned about some of the stuff he did not know. Yes he tried the 'nulite' line on me as well....but that is when I led back to the changes and what happens to one who happened to believe in 'nulite' prior to it becoming 'nulite'.
Another question that worked is I asked him if I were to decide to become 'one of Jehovah's Witnesses' and then at a later time decide to not be one, would we be able to maintain a friendship......he beat around the bush quite a bit, and with some prodding finally admitted that he would no longer be able to associate with me and the reason for that is one's associations should be very much in line with what Jehovah purposed......well to me that is conditional love, and that is one thing that one can easily glean from the NT, Jesus loved unconditionally........
Before doing anything, you will first have to determine his cult status.
Was he born-in or raised in it, or converted when he was older? Depending on which one he is, this will tell you what you can and can't bring up.
For example, if he was born-in and his parents were somewhat zealous JW's, then he should be familiar with 1914 and 1919, and possibly 1975 and the "generation" teachings. These are meatier subjects that you will want to discuss with him.
If he should happen to be someone who later converted, he will likely not be familiar with most of the dates and their significance. He is likely a JW by behavior and not by being convinced with the NWT (not the Bible) that the WT is God's channel of communication.
Good luck...
I know that he is an elder and that he studied at Bethel, I think he is the one giving my Bother-in-law his studies.
My wife is concerned, I told her to read Crisis of Conscience to understand why she shouldn't be :)
I read the artcle "The New World Translation by Dan Corner", it helped me get some questions unto paper.
(old post)
01. April 1986 QfR:Do we have Scriptural precedent for taking such a strict position? Indeed we do! Paul wrote about some in his day: "Their word will spread like gangrene. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of that number. These very men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred; and they are subverting the faith of some." (2 Timothy 2:17, 18; see also Matthew 18:6.) There is nothing to indicate that these men did not believe in God, in the Bible, in Jesus’ sacrifice. Yet, on this one basic point, what they were teaching as to the time of the resurrection, Paul rightly branded them as apostates, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship.
This is most fascinating. When the F&DS was supposedly appointed in 1919, the Watch Tower Society was still teaching that the Resurrection had begun in 1878 -- a teaching not altered until 1927 -- and which teaching the WTS now rejects as false. Does it not bugger the imagination to believe the Lord appointed over all his belongings an organisation that (by its own published standard) would be 'rightly branded apostate, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship'?
bennyk,
I always worry about bringing up stuff that is "in the past" because of that silly "things are getting brighter" crap that they all fall back on, its very annoying.
LOL !
I mean, up until the NWT was made, the WT was still using the apostate bibles of Babylonia and to this very day they still use the canon of the great whore of Babylon, the RCC.
bennyk,
:This is most fascinating. When the F&DS was supposedly appointed in 1919, the Watch Tower Society was still teaching that the Resurrection had begun in 1878 -- a teaching not altered until 1927 -- and which teaching the WTS now rejects as false. Does it not bugger the imagination to believe the Lord appointed over all his belongings an organisation that (by its own published standard) would be 'rightly branded apostate, with whom faithful Christians would not fellowship'?
Yes. I've commented about this problem before, thusly:
The WTS taught that the first resurrection occurred in 1878 and now teaches that it occurred in 1918.
If the current teaching is corrent, then the former teaching was apostasy.
If the former teaching is correct then the current teaching is apostasy.
If neither teaching is correct, then it is apostasy.
According to 2 Tim. 2:17, 18, ANYONE teaching that the resurrection has occurred when it hasn't is guilty of apostasy.
Ergo, the WTS guilty of the worst sort of apostasy, one precisely equal to that of Hymenaeous and Philetus.
Farkel
Farkel,
What proof does the WT cite for stating that the ressurection has already started in 1919 ?
I think the NWT is a bit of a non event.
Please remember tat the WT had all their teachings in place before the NWT was even printed.
They used the name Jehovah and taught the doctrines they teach now, with some variations.
As a third generation JW I absolutely agree that you are barking up the wrong tree.
The big thing is "If you are directed by the Holy Spirit how have you made all the mistakes re dates.
There are only two conclusions:
1. The Holy Spirit makes mistakes.
2. You are not directed by the Holy Spirit and you are presumptious and blasphmous by claiming such.
y
