At what point in the story did WT get it wrong, went off at a tangent?

by prologos 23 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  prologos

  Looking at the bible narrative now, with open mind, the talking snake and all, it is a poorly contrived story. but

  all these clever people picking up and adding to the thread, the fabric its intriguing, certainly a valued literary work. fiction.

  Using this story WT has woven another, parallel account that you would expect to harmonize with it, and hopefully attempt to connect with reality.

  In your thinking, where did WT become unhinged, drifted off into total detachment?

  example: In 1918/19 WT announcing that within 6 years people would start never dying, come back from the dead. dead wrong.

  from then on anything further was even wronger.
• 

  Satanus

  Giving the nt part of the bible a small amount of credibility, i would use the preterist approach to it. That says that 'prophecies' were fulfilled withing the first century. Based on that approach, the wt was wrong from its very beginning - charlie russel. The context of the time supports that. The second advent craze was in full swing. This was a mainly protestant preoccupation, as the catholic had outlawed this type of thing centuries before. The rc church had the right idea, on this. The catholic idea was based more or less on augustine's city of god book.

  S
• 

  *lost*

  It's looking to me that maybe thay never had it 'right' in the first place.

  I used to be of the opinion, maybe Russel was genuine, that is was when Rutherford took over it bacame demonic, with changing from Bible Student to je-hova's witness

  (God I even hate saying that name now)
• 

  Room 215

  I think the reactioonary, destructive 1980 Franz-Dunlap "witch hunt" and expulsion of several other progressive liberal minds set them on a downward course, a tailspin subsequently accelerated by the emergence of the internet.
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  Even putting aside my understanding now that it's all b.s., picking up from Miller's "great disappointment" (wiki it) means it was whacko from the start.
• 

  Fencing

  I would say they went wrong as soon as Rutherford took over and he started shifting things towards an authoritarian mindset. Before that, they were a much more free group that encouraged open discussion and sharing ideas. Rutherford's desire to have his own personal "army" to command ended all that.
• 

  slimboyfat

  At what point did they ever have it right?
• 

  donny

  As some have alreadys stated, it was wrong from the get-go. When you start with a bad foundation, you will end up with a house that may look good on the exterior, but it is always on the verge of collapse. The Society, like many before and after it, tries to pass off a book of stories about the life and times of nomads from the Middle East into the complete history of the beginning of man.

  Then the Society claims to be the only one out of 35,000+ sects that can interpret this history book with accuracy. That in of itself guarantees failure which is precisely what we have seen.
• 

  Room 215

  At what point did any religion ever "have it right?"
• 

  Refriedtruth

  

  A picture (spooky occult pagan picture) worth the thousand words....

  Always do a 'regression analysis' where did it come from??

  Now I have not given up on Christianity yet,but this image and Russels gravesite Pyramid marker is WT telling.