I'm in the middle of reading CoC. It's very eye opening. But on thinking about how the GB finally changed their stance on allowing civil service instead of prison when a Christian was face with military service, it makes me wonder if the WT EVER apologizes for any reversal of beliefs it imposes? I can't remember any, but I thought maybe someone on here with more time in and more knowledge might know of an apology somewhere. Idk why it matters to me. I just am curious. Also, I mean really from the time the GB was invented til now. Thank you!
Has the WT ever apologized for changing their stance on something?
by Left in the Cold 24 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
OnTheWayOut
That will get you started. Apology for 1975.
1980 "With the appearance of the book Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God, and its comments as to how appropriate it would be for the millennial reign of Christ to parallel the seventh millennium of mans existence, considerable expectation was aroused regarding the year 1975. Unfortunately, however, along with such cautionary information, There were other statements published that implied that such realisation of hopes by that year was more of a probability than a mere possibility. There were statements made then, and thereafter, stressing that this was only a possibility. It is to be regretted that these latter statements apparently overshadowed the cautionary ones and contributed to a build-up of the expectation already initiated....In saying anyone, the Watchtower included all disappointed ones of Jehovah's Witnesses, hence including persons having to do with the publication of the information that contributed to the build-up of hopes centred on that date. (Watchtower, March 15, 1980, p. 17-18)
-
jgnat
They apologize the way the Pope apologizes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Remember:_A_Reflection_on_the_Shoah
-
AnnOMaly
They have expressed 'regret' once (see OTWO's post), but I have never known them say "We got it wrong. We're sorry."
-
Left in the Cold
Thanks. I guess if you're wrong about the end of the world probably you ought to 'regret' it. I was born in after 75. I was always told whenever the topic came up, which was rare, that some Witnesses started thinking 1975 was the end of the world. Many lost their faith when it did not come to fruition. I also was told that the WT did not support this idea ever. That it was just some idea the some Witnesses created. I'm finding that not to be the case really. It's kind of shocking. I wonder how many people (like I did) just think it was a rouge group of zealots coming up with their own idea of the end.
-
DesirousOfChange
I also was told that the WT did not support this idea ever.
Yeah, that's right. . . . . the Rank & File just pulled it outta their butt.
Doc
-
flipper
LEFT IN THE COLD- Any " apologies " the WT society has made in print to rank & file JW's are not really " apologies " - just statements made to JW's that their personal expectations were wrong and that each JW has to " adjust " their views to the ever changing " new light " that is revealed to the " faithful slave " through the alleged " holy spirit " allegedly given to the " faithful slave ". For WT leaders it's a very self serving way to excuse any mistakes on their part and a way to guilt JW members into accepting the new BS " new light ". JW's are guilted into believing that they are allegedly " unfaithful " if they don't accept the " faithful slaves " version of " new light " as coming from Jehovah. It's a twisted continuing circle of deception on the WT Society's part. With NO accountability on WT leaders part for their own errors
-
Glander
Yes, all wiggle words.
But one category they handle very carefully is when they have to extract themselves from positions that lead to legal entanglements.
They will typically bring out their CYA as "New Light". A good example is the history of how they got from the meeting announcement that "Sister Mary Jones is being disfellowshipped from the Christian Congregation for fornication/adultery....We also regret to announce that Brother Dick Stinkfinger is being...etc" to just saying "Sister Betty Bigguns is no longer to be considered a 'hovah Widna."
-
problemaddict
It is interesting. I was thinking something similar, because it seems the general concensus is that the GB has NO PROBLEM admitting when they are wrong. That is why they freely change a traching, and don't just keep it status quo. I was wondering why that specific thought prevails, even though it just doesn't seem accurate, minus the 1980 quote. Hey......its something.....I guess.
-
OnTheWayOut
They have expressed 'regret' once (see OTWO's post), but I have never known them say "We got it wrong. We're sorry."
Yes. I was simply using the word 'apology' in my comment because the title of the thread is asking about such. But after reading the article, one would be able to say "Where did they say they were sorry for what they did?" It is simply including themselves among those who contributed to [false] hopes.
Even that 'regret' was reluctantly printed because their earlier comments totally blamed the members for getting their hopes up beyond what was said, and the members felt slighted by such a statement. Even then, it was certainly done more to retain members than to appease them after the slight.
