Don Cameron to the rescue

by irondork 5 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  irondork

  Today, I informed a co-worker that we were “in the last day of the last days.” His eyebrow informed me I had better explain.

  With this thread fresh on my mind from this morning ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/227971/1/Statement-from-heaven ), I told him what was being reported from the highest levels of the WT society and that they were getting this information first hand… FROM HEAVEN.

  His eyebrow informed me I didn’t do a very good job.

  I told him more about the history of failed predictions and he asked, “How do they keep getting away with this stuff? I mean, doesn’t anybody call them on it? Why do people keep following them?” Until yesterday I would have been ill prepared to answer such a question. I would have dribbled out something about indoctrination, mind control, being trained not to question the up line.

  As it turns out, I had just read the chapter in Don Cameron’s, Captives of a Concept that precisely answers Mr. Co-worker’s questions.

  Turns out, the Watchtower Society has never gotten anything wrong! That’s right folks. No false teachings – No false prophecies.

  For example, all the false end-time prophesies that were presented as ”coming from God” or being “in fulfillment of bible prophecy” are easily dismissed by getting rid of the word “prophesy.” They’re not prophecies anymore. Now they are “unrealized hopes” and “expectations that needed adjustments.” They never put forth a false prophesy. See how easy that is?

  Here’s another one. If you remove the word “false” from any false doctrine or prophesy, then it is no longer false. Instead, it is a “past truth”, “incomplete concept”, “formerly cherished view.” This is such a cool toy! We can play with this all day.

  I explained to my co-worker that when you are born into an organization like the JW’s, your powers of perception, deduction, and reason have been blindfolded. That makes getting away with slick word tricks like this fairly easy.

  His eyebrows told me he was pretty disgusted by what he just learned.

  (Several quotes from: Captives of a Concept, Don Cameron, chapter7)
• 

  clarity

  Iron...........excellent!

  GB are like pitifull little school boys with there own little version of...

  pig latin! They feel ever so clever!

  Wonder if they ever snigger behind their hands?

  clarity
• 

  FatFreek 2005

  Good find Irondork. And, thanks to our friend Don Cameron.

  

  Cheers, Len.

  ps: right click in Windows will give you menu of copy choices.
• 

  JWB

  'IN THE NAME OF' = 'BY THE AUTHORITY OF'
  
  "What does it mean to be baptized in the name of the holy spirit? As noted earlier, those hearing Peter on the day of Pentecost were aware of the holy spirit. In fact, they could see proof right before their eyes that God continued to use the holy spirit. Peter was one of those who had been “filled with holy spirit and [who had] started to speak with different tongues.” (Acts 2:4, 8) The expression 'in the name of' need not imply the name of a person. Today, many things are done 'in the name of the government,' which is not a person. They are done BY THE AUTHORITY OF the government. Similarly, one who is baptized in the name of the holy spirit recognizes that the holy spirit is, not a person, but Jehovah’s active force. And such baptism means that one acknowledges the role the holy spirit plays in God’s purpose. (Watch. 15 Mar 2010, page 14, paragraph 16, "Baptized in the Name of Whom and What?") [Emphasis mine]
  
  "Disrespect for God's Sovereignty. When a person acts presumptuously toward God he is showing disrespect for Jehovah's sovereignty and Godship. THOSE CLAIMING TO BE HIS SERVANTS AND MISREPRESENTING HIM ARE MOST REPREHENSIBLE. Of the false prophets, Jehovah said: 'The prophet who presumes to speak in my name a word that I have not commanded him to speak . . . that prophet must die. . . . When the prophet speaks in the name of Jehovah and the word does not occur or come true, . . . with presumptuousness the prophet spoke it.'--De 18:20-22." (Insight, Vol II, page 681, "Presumptiousness") [Emphasis mine]
  
  "Jehovah’s Witnesses, in their eagerness for Jesus’ second coming, have suggested dates that turned out to be incorrect. Because of this, some have called them false prophets. Never in these instances, however, did they presume to originate predictions ‘in the name of Jehovah.’ Never did they say, 'These are the words of Jehovah.' The Watchtower, the official journal of Jehovah’s Witnesses, has said: 'We have not the gift of prophecy.' (January 1883, page 425) 'Nor would we have our writings reverenced or regarded as infallible.' (December 15, 1896, page 306) The Watchtower has also said that the fact that some have Jehovah's spirit 'does not mean those now serving as Jehovah's witnesses are inspired. It does not mean that the writings in this magazine The Watchtower are inspired and infallible and without mistakes.' (May 15, 1947, page 157) 'The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances, nor is it dogmatic.' (August 15, 1950, page 263) 'The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers. (2 Tim. 3:16) And so, at times, it has been necessary, as understanding became clearer, to correct views. (Prov. 4:18)'—February 15, 1981, page 19." (Awake! 22 Mar 1993, page 4, "Why So Many False Alarms?")
  
  The question might well be asked, although they have never said, 'These are the words or Jehovah' have they not PRESUMED TO SPEAK BY THE AUTHORITY OF JEHOVAH? It seems to me that they have always wanted to have the respect that would attach to a genuine prophet of God, but not the accountability.

  BTW: irondork, Don Cameron makes some very strong points in his book.
• 

  Quendi

  I have read Captives of a Concept and I recommend it to anyone who has ever had any affiliation with the WTS.

  Quendi
• 

  smiddy

  An excellent read

  smiddy