1954 Fred Franz court statement:"God does not deal in Temples made with hands."

by kepler 9 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  kepler

  Writing on a topic and writing an essay: are they the same thing? I suspect that ranging too wide on a topic is an error to avoid in this medium.

  Earlier, while examining issues drawing from Genesis, Hebrews and court testimony of Frederick Franz in Scotland in 1954, I came across a statement that only very slowly sank in.

  As background on the Jehovah's Witnesses for the Walsh petition case for exemption from government service, it was stated in the Strachan vs. Walsh testimony that the line of Witnesses was unbroken from the time of Abel. In subsequent cross examination by the crown’s attorney [page 94], Mr. Franz was asked:

  Q. So that is a comparatively new body, Jehovah’s Witnesses?

  A. No. It is an old body. It begins with the first Witness of Jehovah on Biblical record, Abel, and continues to the present time.

  Q. But there was no person or building to which a person could go prior to 1870 and say,”I wish to join a company or congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses”?

  A. It is Jehovah God who makes one his Witness and that depends on the individual’s dedication of himself to Jehovah God through Jesus Christ. Then he becomes God’s [97] by dedication. Then he must serve as his witness.

  Q. Is my question amenable [?] to a simple yes or no? Prior to 1870 was there any person or building to which an individual could go and say, “I wish to join a company of Jehovah’s Witnesses”?

  A. No; because the Temple of God is not an earthly building. It is a spiritual Temple, and God does not deal in Temples made with hands. So it is foolish to speak about a physical building here upon this Earth to which an individual must go to become one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Abel did not go to any.

  Q. I appreciate your point of view on church buildings, but prior to 1870 was there an earthly organization in the sense that has existed since 1870?

  A. No. All the Scriptures show there would not be. The Scriptures show that God’s people would be temporarily in a state of captivity to the great mystic Babylon, and they would be deprived of their privileges.

  ------------------

  If, on the authority of the Vice President of the WTBTS, we are told that "God does not deal in Temples made with hands", then what has all this fuss been about with regard to destruction of temples in the ancient world and temporary states of captivity? Should this be simply dismissed as an angry outburst of annoyance at cross-examination? Or does this reflect more of the future president's philosophy than I ( or others ) were previously aware of? Naive as I am about all these matters, I can't help thinking that this is a remarkable statement on his part.

  Definitely a question.
• 

  wha happened?

  Yes, God doesn't exist in man made temples, yet the WT has plenty of "man made temples". Food for thought
• 

  Perry
• 

  Knowsnothing

  I just ask a question. Do you still believe the bible still makes sense?

  It is the bible that makes this statement.
• 

  wha happened?

  it's odd that he cites this as they obviously have alot of real estate
• 

  Zordino

  Ofcourse there was no Watchtower, Jw's and such before 1870. Russel hadn't gotten into the publishing business yet... Duh...

  See God wanted so much to get into the Publishing Biz back then. So he "inspired Old Chucky to get it going.
• 

  kepler

  Maybe that line "God does not deal with temples made with hands"had immediate recognition for some. Searching for the phrase I found several references.

  With some context,the final speech in the life of Stephen, In Acts chapter 7:45-50 (and quoting Isaiah 66:1-2):

  It [the Tent of Testimony] was handed down from one ancestor of ours to another until Joshua brought it into the country that had belonged to the nations which were driven out by God before us. Here it stayed until the time of David. [46] He won God's favor and asked permission to find a dwelling for the House of Jacob, [47] though it was Solomon who actually built a house for God. [48] Even so the Most High does not live in a house that human hands have built: for as the prophet says:

  [49] With heaven my throne and earth my footstool, what house could you build me, says the Lord, what place for me to rest, [50] when all these things were made by me?

  -------------

  In Mark, in chapter 14 it is said:

  [55] The chief priests and and the whole Sanhedrin were looking for evidence against Jesus in order to have him executed. But they could not find any. Several, indeed, brought false witness against him, but their evidence was conflicting. [57] Some stood up and submitted this false evidence against him, "We heard him say, 'I am goin to destroy this Temple made by human hands, and in three days build another, not made by human hands.' "

  In John 2:18-19 The Jews intervened and said, "What sign can you show us that you should act like this?" Jesus answered, "Destroy this Temple and in 3 days I shall raise it up."

  ------------

  Judging from our discussion thus far, I would say that there is plenty more to sort out about what the Bible is saying on the matter of Temples, hands and the Lord's relation to them - discounting Fred Franz's testimony in Scotland. Just comparing Isaiah, Luke (via Acts), Mark and John would be a lengthy discussion topic of itself. And then after 70 AD, the Jews would cease to have a central temple. I would say though that Isaiah is saying that the Lord as all-powerful and omni-present need not reside in a temple constructed by humans, and it would not necessarily follow that he placed no value on temples at all.

  But Franz was asked in cross-examination where someone could report prior to 1870 to join up with Abel as another Jehovah's Witness. Franz dismissed the question by saying that Jehovah did not deal in human temples. So where do we go from there?

  Am I wrong to understand that the chronology surrounding 1914 is based on the destruction of a temple? Or is the chronology about events that happened 2520 years before in isolation from the Temple destruction? If so, what? And why would the Lord be more disposed to treat of those matters than temples? If Fred Franz really believed what he said in his outburst, then I have to wonder if he really believed in the doctrine on which he staked all his claims.
• 

  sd-7

  Although God does not dwell in temples made with human hands, Christians today recognize that they must remain loyal to Jehovah's visible organization and the "faithful and discreet slave" class, which will soon be ruling from heaven at the completion of the fulfillment of God's promises.

  Before 1870, there were individuals who discovered a portion of Bible truth; whatever the case, we can be confident that "Jehovah knows those who belong to him."

  --sd-7
• 

  Sic Semper Tyrannis

  Freddy was obviously annoyed with the line of questioning, and wasn't used to having to defend his viewpoints in such strong terms. The Walsh case as far as I know was an attempt to qualify JWs in the UK as ministers, thus exempting them for national service and conscription. The government was trying to paint them as a relatively recent sect with little history behind it, and Franz was trying to reason that Russell and his successors were an extension of the true religion starting with Abel. He backed himself into a corner and had to connect the dots with Abel, Moses, King David, Jesus, the apostles, and the modern JW organization. It's no surprise Franz came up with some curious comments.
• 

  itsibitsybrainbutbigenoughtosmellarat

  "Christians today recognize that they must remain loyal to Jehovah's visible organization and the "faithful and discreet slave" class, which will soon be ruling from heaven at the completion of the fulfillment of God's promises."

  In view of their record, how can that be possible?