by Fernando 5 Replies latest watchtower bible
When the Watchtower says something it often speaks from a latent/hidden/covert FRAMEWORK, WORLDVIEW or CONTEXT. This made me think of some questions this morning:
How important is it to FIRST uncover and understand this FRAMEWORK before responding to the PICTURE being presented?
If we swop the Watchtower's reductionist and exclusivist FRAMEWORK for another, are we still playing by their rules?
Should we rather actively seek out an expansive and inclusive FRAMEWORK, WORLDVIEW or CONTEXT?
Frankly, we don't have to get this complicated. Witness writing is fear-mongering sensationalism, and they have proven to be false prophets for the end of the world at various dates.
Who cares what the FRAMEWORK, WORLDVIEW, or CONTEXT is?
Wrong prophecy and interpretation is just simply wrong.
PICTURE: Don't celebrate birthdays, Christmas or Easter. Don't take or donate blood or organs. You must door knock. You must meet in a building with other religionists. You must proselytise (teach religion).
FRAMEWORK: Legalism. You can be right with God by following the "right" rules. Supremacist self-righteousness. Widely practiced in the Watchtower despite being radically unscriptural (Matthew 23, Romans 3 and 4) and denounced in their own publications (g79 6/8 pp. 27-28).
Being deeply loyal, committed and sincere, as well as suffering from "Psychological and Spiritual Stockholm Syndrome" it was only when I uncovered and understood this illegitimate hidden framework (of supremacist legalism, moralism, ethnocentrism and Gnosticism) that I was able to see the Watchtower as a dishonest spiritually blind, confused, inebriated and insane cult and sect. Before this I simply could not see that the emperor was naked.
Before this the significance of date setting and date errors simply escaped me as it does around 7 to 19 million other members and associates at this time. If this was a simple matter, without complication, and without a spiritual dimension, it would have been easy to simply point out the error and set the hostages free.
That having been said it is clear that millions have found it a lot easier than I have to leave. I presume my addiction to religion and the Watchtower was more severe. As a 3rd generation born-in I also had no pre-cult reference points, memories or alternate "realities".
We start by assuming a hidden presupposition: The supernatural world exists and is controlled by an invisible super-being Jehovah who communicates Truth through the Watchtower.
We proceed to verify the presupposition by assuming a fact not in evidence: the bible is the inspired word of Jehovah which only the Watchtower channel of correct interpretation can unveil and interpret.
We proceed (logically) to the exerting of intimidation upon the rank and file to put loyalty toward the elite Governing Body before any other consideration. This intimidation is enforced through threats of shunning, disfellowshipping, losing one's life at Armageddon.
Changes in teaching are "refinements" and "adjustments" rather than errors.
Anything that can't be explained away by this terminology was "eagerness" and "zeal" by sincere humanity subject to human weakness.
All of these factors weigh upon the members. Relying on rational personal reflection is discouraged as spiritual weakness, apostacy and leaning on your own human understanding.
By "Framework" I think it is reasonable to conclude you mean "presumptions" or latent assumptions, which can be of many shades. Take the birthday celebrating as an example. Putting aside all of Terry's obvious assumptions inherent in all religious belief, we focus only on WT. It is defended by citing that since only two birthdays (excluding the possible reference in Job, which would not be a negative referent) are mentioned in the Bible, of two rulers, Pharaoh and Herod, and since something bad happened on those days, celebrating birthdays must be wrong. This is reinforced by the (further) so-called argument that Ecclesiastes' negative wisdom perspective of 'day of death better than birth' read literally but quite missing the point, IMO. Now, this method of using the Bible as a limiting tool, as if to say unless it is specifically authorized, but especially if its only occurrences are bad, then you may conclude this is God's way of sending a message about birthdays. That kind of argument is faulty on many grounds, but principally, the flaw can summarized as, Just because something is mentioned in two unrelated contexts, and something bad occurred at that event, does not necessarily mean that that this thing must ALWAYS be bad. Two bad birthdays = all birthdays bad. WT further assumes that these two (disputedly) sole occurrences of a birthday event allow us to conclude some unified coherent 'message' about birthdays, not just birthdays of bad rulers, or wish-granting on birthdays, as if it was the birthday celebration as the cause rather than the occasion. Jesus was executed on Nissan 14, and on Passover, therefore Passover was the cause. No? Well then neither was the birthday. Another example might be 'dogs' in the Bible. They are always described unfavorably or as unclean. Therefore we should not have them as pets. How many assumptions am I making to reach that conclusion?
My younger son wrote a parody article about the Satanic origin of mushrooms, since they should not count as 'vegetation' botanically speaking, and therefore did not occur during any of the six creative 'days.' You get the point--you cannot conclude that these texts represent an exhaustive almanac, but JWs always find exceptions, like 'anniversaries' aren't the same as 'birthdays,' etc etc.
I agree that idetifying logical flaws of arguments does help frame the JW worldview, and does reveal how backwards things are. Sometimes there is an agenda that defines how an arguments will play out. For example, C.T. Russell was deathly afraid of the doctrine of eternal punishment, even though it does seem to be alluded to eschatologically in both Matthew and Luke. Without going into any argument for or against the (ir)rationality of the view, it's being dishonest fundamentally to the text of the bible itself. The JW translation is also an example of this, changing the wording of things to suit doctrinal arguments. That didn't begin with JWs, of course, but it is just another example.
I think you make good observations.
Euripides
Thank you Euripides - great comparison and inconsistency between birthdays and passover!
