by ex-Special Pioneer 27 Replies latest jw friends
Thanks, James. I was unaware of the "rules change" and its resulting impact. (I read "CO" as Circuit Overseer).
I can see where having the felony conviction on one's record could be a roadblock to many things later in life. Many careers where one must be licensed or certified by a State Board routinely deny felons. Many job applications for the most mundane positions ask about it as well.
I can see where having the felony conviction on one's record could be a roadblock to many things later in life. Many careers where one must be licensed or certified by a State Board routinely deny felons. Many job applications for the most mundane positions ask about it as well.
Also you cannot legally own a gun (in most states, IIRC) - in some states, you cannot vote. I recall that my attorney warned me about all this when I was facing the issue...the Watchtower never said a word about the ramifications of being a convicted felon. I was lucky enough to pull a high number in the Nixon draft lottery and did not have to face the final issue. I am not sure that I would not have just gone to Viet Nam instead of to prison if it had come to that.
Without going into great detail, I think every one of the JW guys my age who were convicted and did prison time were just as screwed up by it as the proverbial Viet Nam war veterans who were not appreciated by the general public when they came back.
Incredible arrogance on the part of the society - and remember, in Mexico, if you were wealthy enough - you could just buy a draft evasion card and the society was fine with that. At the same time people were being killed in Malawi over refusing to buy a political card. Ray Franz wrote about this hypocrisy in CoC.
From the outside, I am not surprised that no one is now in charge of the "watchtower-ology". That is the usual result of demanding that people do not think.
dgp - "From the outside, I am not surprised that no one is now in charge of the "watchtower-ology". That is the usual result of demanding that people do not think."
Ditto.
That kind of thing requires itellectuals, creative-types, and out-of-the-box-thinkers; all of which have long since been shown (or ran for) the door.
The answer is no one. New light since his passing has largely been reactionary as prophetic interpretations pass their "use by" date or when organization procedures/policies need tweaked to respond to a current crisis.
Franz' pontifications were merely a continuation of Rutherford's. There have even been suggestions that Franz was Rutherford's ghost writer. They were born out of the schisming within the Bible students and the creation of Jehovah's Witnesses as a distinct sect. Rutherford not only had the need to distinguish the group from other Christian sects, he had the need to distinguish his loyalists (later recoined Jehovah's Witnesses) from other Bible Student sects. The way he went about this was by creatively reinterpretting Bible prophecies and applying them to his group. This is where you get into all of the typology that makes the Organization the greater this and that. Negative types in the Bible are applied to "Christendom" or apostates, Bible Students that did not adhere to Rutherford's leadership. This is why to this day you still have all of these Bible prophecies being applied to the Watchtower during the 1920's and 30's, such as Daniel's days or Revelation's trumpet blasts.
The organization lately is not really as focused on prophecy as during the Rutherford/Franz era. Recent books on prophecy have more to do with things like dress and grooming, Internet pornography, and meeting attendance. When prophecy is dealt with it is primarlily cut and paste from older Watchtowers.
Recent books on prophecy have more to do with things like dress and grooming, Internet pornography, and meeting attendance. When prophecy is dealt with it is primarlily cut and paste from older Watchtowers.
Good observation. It's all spun to be about rules of conduct, the preaching work and obedience and, increasingly, extremely simplistic with "dumbed-down" reasoning aimed at about a Grade 4 or 5 reading level.
Here’s my view…
I don’t think you’ll see the likes of old Judge Rubberfart or Freddy F . again. They were the product of a bygone era, like carnival barkers. They are fast becoming caricatures that young people can’t identify with.
With the passing of time both have proved to be an embarrassment to the WT. Their crazy failed predictions, types, anti-types etc., have been quietly set aside.
Almost forgotten.
For the WT to prosper and grow I believe another “leader” will emerge from within the GB. He will have it’s full backing, becoming, I think, the first among equals.
People just don’t respond well to following committees.
Be on the watch for a younger (50ish) charismatic, well educated and articulate individual.
Rather than preaching a wacky agenda or riling people with fiery denunciations, this new guy will be smooth and well oiled. He’ll be slick and engaging.
However, beneath the polished, reassuring words of comfort and hope the core message will remain…
Follow us/me into paradise. Surrender your life or die.
(I’m thinking the Pied Piper of Brooklyn NY)
Freddy was indeed the oracle from the 40's to the 70's; his stock waned and the power of the GB waxed when the end did not come.
But why do we think he was so good? Because he was less crazy than Rutherford, and could turn large piles of dung into birghtly polished turds, like the blood policy, disfellowshipping for smoking, the certainty of 1975, on and on.
His words had the power they did because the fellowship is just not well educated or trained to think critically. As an example, we listened with rapt attention to the factors behind the dating for 1975, but when Time interviewed him in 1976 his answer to their pointed question about why the end has not come? "We just don't know how long it took for Adam to name all the animals." I was embarrassed then, even more now, by that stupid answer.
Still, he seemed smarter than we were, and so his ideas held sway for may years. We never questioned that he was a Rhodes scholar; we trusted that he knew Greek. He was the equivalent of the smartest guy in the room, we believed him.
Today is very different; no oracle today has it as easy as Franz did.
We are in the age of instant access to deep background info about all religions; we can find out in 5 minutes that Franz never was a Rhodes scholar, and never took more than a short survey course in Greek, not even relevant Greek.
Even those who don't want to research into the origins of the WT or the Bible for that matter will sooner or later be exposed to it.
You can easily find very good information about the historical Jesus and that he was just not our Jesus.
Religions, especially the witnesses and other mind control pseudo cults, must change their approach to be relevant. The Abrahamic faiths must abandon their insistence that their history is literally true; it is just too easy to prove that it is not.
