Why a religion academic abandoned a plan for intensive study of JW doctrines

by MrMonroe 9 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  MrMonroe

  Michael Gilmour, professor of Engish and biblical literature at Providence University College, Manitoba, proposed a Society of Biblical Literature workshop examining the Watchtower Society's use of scripture. He thought they were poorly represented in deep academic analysis, particularly considering they have their own Bible and are "persistent" (other people say "relentless") in their proselytizing.

  In the end, he decided against it. Much of the reason is the suspicion and contempt held by JWs towards "worldly" Bible scholars, who, of course, may form different conclusions to those of the Governing Body.

  James A. Beverley, in his excellent book, "Crtisis of Allegiance," made the point that despite their claims to be Bible scholars par excellence, the WTS's writings or "research" are never (repeat never) cited by any other academics; none are ever persuaded by the claim that only the WTS can understand the "deep things of God."

  Here's Gilmour's comment here. The final paragraph is the clincher.
• 

  blondie

  Couldn't he just use their own writings? I would think that quite a few ex-jws or online have copies of the most representative books. I was always told by the CO, DO, GB that if it wasn't in the publications it wasn't official anyway. The WTS doesn't attack all non-jw religious literature and quotes fairly frequently from them though some are quite old.
• 

  sizemik

  I guess what he's getting at is that without "inside" participation . . . all you really have is a critique rather than fully supported analysis. That's the problem when dealing with a cult . . . even though he stopped short of saying that.
• 

  breakfast of champions

  Check out the link to his short critique of the Revelation Book. It's pretty interesting. This is the kind of thing I could show my wife to arouse critical thinking without arousing 'suspicion' Thanks!
• 

  ziddina

  marking...

  That article - and especially the comments - are very revealing. How CAN any other Christian church or religion have a discourse with Jehovah's Witnesses, if they would be viewed by the Jehovah's Witnesses as being "of the Devil"...

  Zid - who knows her 'devils', pretty well...
• 

  TimothyT

  I suppose he came to a similar conlusion as me: the WTS are not bible academics, historians or scholars. They just base their beliefs on whatever they feel like or whatever doctrines or teachings they decide to come up with. After stuyding parts of the bible its clear to me that the WTS has no idea what the bible is talking about when it is absolutely plain to me and millions even billions of others around the world.

  Its interesting though to view this from the perspective of a JW. "Who do you choose to listen to? The bible academic, the bible scholar, and the bible historian or do you choose to listen to 7 men who decide what the bible says despite having none or little academic training in understanding the bible?" Of course the JWs would side with the 7 men. To me this sounds absurd. They may aswell go and see the binman instead of the doctor for medical advice.

  Timmy xxx
• 

  Ding

  1. The WTS isn't interested in having "dialogue" with Christendom.

  They are only interested in teaching them "the truth."

  2. WT "hermeneutics" is easy to understand.

  The Bible means whatever 2/3 or more of the GB decides is "the truth."
• 

  dreamgolfer

  If you have ever met anyone who was at Bethel for a period of time, worked on the writing commitee and has left, you'd understand why.

  all they do is rehash the old dogma if it applies and "cut and paste" cut and paste" etc.

  There is no deep philosophical gems there. Just stuff that was created in their own image to present to the "Sheeply JW masses"

  You can't argue if you dont have the facts, over the past 10 years many of us have gotten facts from this wunnerful thing called the INTERNET

  Their dowfall was not to BAN PC's in our homes when they began to BAN going to college,

  Funny, I hear stories of folks bringin ipads to the KH and brothers have asked them to kindly "put it away" as it sets a bad example, oye vey - now that is crazy, setting a bad example at the KH

  my rant for the week is now concluded, all may go back to a more meaningful day

  shazam!
• 

  Cadellin

  Gilmour's analysis of the Revelation book using reader-response theory is a fascinating read; the link is in the article that Mr. Monroe linked to (if that makes sense). He very aptly describes the Society's rhetorical strategy:

  The vast quantity of literature produced by the society in order to keep the current body of symbols alive for the membership consists necessarily of a constant repetition of the basic viable symbolic themes. This repetition becomes mantric in quality, and the society’s constant rephrasing and re-presentation of the basic corpus of recognized belief becomes for the membership the rhythmic life-breath of the symbol, the truth...

  He's quoting Botting's book in that last phrase. No wonder the meetings and literature seem to repetitive! It's because--duh--they are and that's so easily recognized by an outsider. Even when I was in, I had that sense, but I discounted it, considering the "mantric" repetition to be instead "timely reminders." Blech.

  Reading Gilmour's analysis of the Revelation book really highlights how insular and paranoid the Society's teachings are, and underscores, for me, how you really can't critique a discourse as long as you're embedded in it. Once you're out, though, wow--the arrogance and paranoia just leap out at you.

  His comments regarding the visual imagery in the book are interesting too--he notes prominence given to depictions of white Western heterosexual males, how sexual imagery is reviled as "disgusting" while the book is peppered with very violent images, and how depictions of spirit creatures are consistently old, white Westernized males. It's worth a read.
• 

  MrMonroe

  The Revelation Grand Climax review is certainly interesting, and Cadellin highlights a fascinating point in it.

  The Revelation book wrote:

  Revolting sexual corruption is portrayed to this day in the war-damaged Buddhist sculptures at Angkor Wat in Kampuchea and in the temples at Khajuraho, India, which show the Hindu god Vishnu surrounded by disgusting erotic scenes (RGCH 262).

  The reviewer observed:

  It is interesting to note that representations of sexuality are described as revolting and disgusting but depictions of violence are not, if dozens of graphic pictures in RGCH are any indication.

  That is so funny. Here are a couple of the images.

  

  I mean, really. Just another Saturday night in Bethel, surely?