The Watchtower's Bible Scholars?

by stevieb1 9 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  stevieb1

  Witnesses are often told that is is not necessary to look to outside sources such as Bible encyclopedias and commentaries because the Society's Writing Department already has these and presents us with the best comments from them for us anyway. What I have noticed though, is that there are many comments from 19th century commentators and not much in the way of quotes from modern-day Bible scholars and their works.

  I understand that at the recent Kingdom Ministry School it was said that the Society has the best Bible scholars available for our instuction. If that was said (can anyone confirm?) it was the height of arrogance to say it! What they really mean by Bible scholar is a brother who knows the Society's own teachings inside out and not necessarily the Bible itself. I understand too that if the Society has hundreds of Bible commentaries available I reckon that they are not open to scrutiny by the majority of the Bethel family and largely ignored even by those who have access to them.
• 

  voltaire

  Is it really scholarship to read through a commentary written by another religion and say "this is true, this isn't," and then present that to your members?
• 

  moman

  The Society is a corporation run by a bunch of lawyers.
  What more do you need to know?
• 

  Farkel

  : understand that at the recent Kingdom Ministry School it was said that the Society has the best Bible scholars available for our instuction.

  "We have the best Bible scholars available."

  "Who determines the quality of those Bible scholars?"

  "We do, of course!"

  "Oh. I see."

  Farkel

  "I didn't mean what I meant."
• 

  Joseph Joachim

  there are many comments from 19th century commentators and not much in the way of quotes from modern-day Bible scholars and their works.

  Of course not, for two reasons:

  1. The WTS appointed itself as God's exclusive channel of Biblical interpretation, so it'd be contradictory if they considered other sources as authoritative. The boys in writing might contradict themselves in other respects, but they will never grant any authority whatsoever to modern mainstream scholars.

  2. Virtually no one today, except the most fundamentalists exegets (which I wouldn't call scholars) believe such things as: literallity of most accounts in Genesis, book of Daniel not being written during the Macabean period, the four gospels being based on first-hand accounts, miracles, Revelation as a profetic book, etc, etc, etc.

  Witnesses have no idea what modern biblical studies are about. They are the perfect example of the sad combination of arrogance and ignorance.
• 

  VM44

  Wouldn't the Watchtower Bible scholars be located at
  the Gilead school?

  There one would find some Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek language
  experts, as well as people knowledgeable about Biblical exegesis,
  history and other topics.

  I wish that I could find a list of the Gilead courses, and the
  instructors who teach them.

  Especially interesting would be the courses that teach the
  students how to do "Blibilcal Research." I wonder what
  references they are allowed to use?

  Gilead, by the way, is recognized as an educational facility by
  the State of New York.

  --VM44
• 

  Kenneson

  The only "scholarship" I have observed in the Watchtower literature are quotes (sometimes misquotes) from books or individuals who favor their doctrines, zeal, or way of life.
• 

  Justin

  I agree with Joseph Joachim's reply that one of the reasons the WT writers use older sources is to avoid exposing themselves to a source which might use the historical-critical method in Bible interpretation. Even something as old hat as there being two or three Isaiahs (rather than the book of Isaiah being composed by one writer) would be anathema to them.

  Of course, they could refer to modern Evangelical scholars, many of whom would also reject historical criticism, but then their readers would have other contemporary sources to refer to other than the WT. That wouldn't do.

  Amazingly, in the fourth century, John Chrysostom wrote: "the prophets did not proclaim all their oracles at one time, but being inspired in different circumstances, they uttered short pronouncements, which were later put together to form a complete book." I don't think the WT will be referring to that statement, even though it's pretty old.

  Justin
• 

  refiners fire

  Here is Watchtower scholarship.

  Scan a 6 page scientific article.
  Find 2 lines that do not TOTALLY
  disagree with your preestablished position.
  Present the 2 lines in quotation, along with some carefully chosen words of your own.
  The miracle occurs, the quote appears to support your preestablished position.
• 

  plmkrzy

  From what I can gather the only scholars were last seen in the early 1900's.

  Are not all current scholars of the WTBTS JWs. and only JWs. Not trying to be negitive about it but there is a difference between the ones who were originally together and the ones who say they are scholars now. They have to be very limited on how they examine there research now.
  plm

  "The fellow that agrees with everything you say is either a fool or he is getting ready to skin you."
  - Kin Hubbard