WTS answers Diane Wilson, author

by blondie 44 Replies latest social current

• 

  Cygnus

  Reborn,

  You are the one rationalizing. Nowhere has the WT organization ever claimed infallibility or inspiration from God on par with scripture. Your WT references illustrate two things:

  1) that the WT organization has thought way more of itself than the actual facts ought to warrant

  and 2) that such statements by the WT are clear indications that whoever wrote them were likely clinically insane

  As Pathofhorns said, in practice, such language introduces and ferments the idea that Loyalty to Organization = Loyalty to God. However, that is primarily the fault of the sheep who follows through and accepts such an idea.

  My point is, if you asked an elder, or a CO, or a Governing Body member which was more important: the Watchtower or the Bible, they'd say the Bible. If you asked where the WT gets its teachings, doctrines and policies from, they'd say the Bible. And they are right. And terrible as it might seem to some of us here, I would argue that even extrabiblical practices that the Witnesses choose to adhere to can rightly be extrapolated from the Bible or the culture of Jews/Christians.

  Whether you like it or not, the Bible DOES teach that God works through groups of people. ORGANIZED groups of people. Witnesses believe that they today are that organized group of people. They also realize that they make mistakes, just as did Moses, Jonah, David, Peter, etc.

  People call JWs "false prophets." Was Jonah a false prophet because his initial message to the Ninevites didn't come to be? No Bible believer would argue that. And yet that is how JWs become characterized. God disciplined Jonah and he retained God's favor. Could the same be argued for the Watchtower organization? Yes, I believe so.

  I see alot of emotion on this board regarding the LIES LIES LIES the Watchtower tells. I agree that the Watchtower certainly has printed misinformation and the PR statements are not telling the whole truth. Certainly nobody should mistake me for being a proponent of the Watchtower religion. There are only four things about JWism that I agree with. But EVERYONE at some point or another says things in their defense in attempts to clear their name and what they stand for. And the record shows that, while the WT has certainly made astonishingly arrogant statements about itself in God's purpose, nowhere do they claim to be infallible or inspired. Nowhere.

  I stand behind what I said. I see no lies in that interview.
• 

  Reborn2002

  Cygnus-

  You said:
  

  My point is, if you asked an elder, or a CO, or a Governing Body member which was more important: the Watchtower or the Bible, they'd say the Bible.

  Wrong.

  *** Watchtower 1967 October 1 p.587 Finding Freedom with Jehovah's Visible Organization ***
  Thus the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible. For this reason the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovah's visible organization in mind.

  *** Watchtower 1983 February 15 p.12 You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth-But How? ***
  A third requirement is that we be associated with God's channel, his organization. ... Jehovah is using only one organization today to accomplish his will. To receive everlasting life in the earthly Paradise we must identify that organization and serve God as part of it.

  The Watchtower organization is more important than the Bible, this is according to their own literature.

  Patience my naive friend, hopefully you can keep up. Remember now, the literature:

  *** Watchtower 1959 October 1 p.607 Questions from Readers ***
  The literature published by the Watch Tower Society is published in the name of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. Regardless of who may write certain articles, they are checked carefully by members of the governing body before they are published; so they are properly viewed as coming from the Society.

  ...So we let the literature speak for itself.

  You said:
  

  and 2) that such statements by the WT are clear indications that whoever wrote them were likely clinically insane

  You made that one easy, but Ill continue.

  You said:

  I agree that the Watchtower certainly has printed misinformation and the PR statements are not telling the whole truth.

  How does that not equate to misleading people or lying? Ahh yes, dont remind me.. theocratic war strategy right?

  Time for an educational lesson.

  The definition of prophet according to Webster's Dictionary-

  prophet-n. 1. a person who speaks for God; or a god, or as through divine guidance 2. a religious teacher or leader regarded as, or claiming to be, divinely inspired 3. a person who predicts future events in any way

  Go back to the interview and read carefully.

  Semonian said:

  Q Has the Watchtower ``zigzagged'' on doctrine?

  A We've never claimed to be infallible, inspired or perfect as an organization.

  Q Is the organization a direct channel between God and humanity?

  A Again, our governing body has never claimed that our organization is inspired or infallible. Instead they, our governing body, study the Bible diligently and through prayer they make a request for his Holy Spirit to direct them and be upon them. And with his help, they come to decisions. So we believe this to be the channel that God is using today. But our governing body has said that it is not inspired or infallible.

  yet:

  *** Watchtower 1959 January 15 pp.39-41
  'Down with the Old-Up with the New! ***

  14 By the historical facts of the case Christendom is beaten back in defeat. Jehovah's witnesses are deeply grateful today that the plain facts show that God has been pleased to use them. ... It has been because Jehovah thrust out his hand of power and touched their lips and put his words in their mouths...

  *** Watchtower 1964 October 1 p.601 Pay Attention to Prophecy ***
  ... for God has on earth today a prophetlike organization, ... Jehovah's anointed witnesses on earth.

  *** Watchtower 1980 January 1 p.2 Page Two (inside front cover) ***
  [Not available on the 1993/995 CD-ROMS]
  A WATCHTOWER enables a person to look far into the distance and announce to others what is seen. Likewise, this magazine, published by Jehovah's Witnesses, aids the reader to see what the future holds

  The list goes on and on.

  How much more written evidence do you need?

  You said:

  And the record shows that, while the WT has certainly made astonishingly arrogant statements about itself in God's purpose, nowhere do they claim to be infallible or inspired. Nowhere.

  To quote Sean Connery in the movie The Rock as he addressed Ed Harris's character at the end of the film.
  "Personally, I think your a fucking idiot."
• 

  morrisamb

  Cygnus, just saw your response. Otherwise I would have responded sooner.
  You wrote: "But the fact is: accusation of rape or child molestation is perhaps the worst allegation that could be made against somebody, especially if that person is a professed Christian and otherwise seemingly upstanding in conduct and behavior."

  I know something that is worse: being the rape or molestation victim. The fact that the elders want to make sure the accusation is true does not take away from the way they handle the victim. They are not qualified...That is my point. This is way over their heads and please tell me, what are the chances that 3 men have the qualifications to deal with any of the following: a crime, an accusation as serious as rape; a victim's feelings; trauma, and on and on.

  They should get out of this business immediately; leave it to professionals, social workers, police, therapists. If the Elders handling our case had called annonomously the police or child care workers and said, "We are aware of 4 children who have been sexually abused over a period of years, but we feel by excommunicating the perpetrator this will be enough to stop his reign of terror," do you think the reply would be: "Good plan." I think not.

  It's time to stop playing God. Improper handling of rape and molestation cases enables the perpertrator to continue their reign of terror.

  You state: "Put yourself in their shoes." My god, man what the hell are you talking about? Put yourselves in the victims' shoes.
• 

  Reborn2002

  bttt

  Dont want this gem from a JW-apologist to go unnoticed by the lurkers and vast majority of the board.

  What say you Cygnus? No response?
• 

  morrisamb

  Me thinks the cat got Cygnus's tongue.

  What response could he give, Reborn, that would be adequate? On the other hand, perhaps his silence speaks volumes.
• 

  Cygnus

  morris,

  : I know something that is worse: being the rape or molestation victim.

  I am talking about handling allegations and accusations, not being victimized by some trauma. I agree that rape is a horrible thing, but that is a separate issue.

  : The fact that the elders want to make sure the accusation is true does not take away from the way they handle the victim. They are not qualified...

  However they are responsible for the congregation.

  Are you suggesting that a person who feels that she was raped (whether by another JW or not) should NEVER discuss the matter with the congregation elders? That it is none of the congregation's business at all? Perhaps you are suggesting that an alleged rape victim ought to turn in their disassociation letter and quit and forget about the JWs altogether?

  : If the Elders handling our case had called annonomously the police or child care workers and said, "We are aware of 4 children who have been sexually abused over a period of years....."

  I am uncertain that in your case whether it was the elders' responsibility and not yours to notify the authorities. The Society's policy however is that elders will notify if they are supposed to, and that they leave it up to the individual whether he or she wishes to notify the authorities. What is there to criticize about that? If certain elders in the past have attempted to keep JWs from disclosing crimes, then that was their mistake. And it was also the mistake of the persons who followed such directions by keeping quiet.

  Reborn,

  I am just responding now because I do not sit in front of a computer all day and all night.

  First, I am not a JW-apologist. I have been a full-fledged apostate for almost 5 years.

  What you are doing, Reborn, is taking infamous Watchtower quotes and misapplying them. Such quotes are damning in that they show how arrogant and pompous the WT organization has been, but they do not prove your allegations.

  For instance, that 1967 Watchtower says that only Jehovah's organization can properly interpret the Bible. That does not equate with your allegation that the Watchtower is more important than the Bible. Do you see the difference?

  The 1983 Watchtower says that association and servitude with the organization is essential for salvation. That is because the organization teaches the truth _from the scriptures_. You have it backwards. Now, if the Society came out with a new Bible, or added to the Bible, a la the Latter-Day Saints, then perhaps you'd have an argument. As it stands you do not.

  : : I agree that the Watchtower certainly has printed misinformation and the PR statements are not telling the whole truth.

  : How does that not equate to misleading people or lying? Ahh yes, dont remind me.. theocratic war strategy right?

  I think the old articles on thecratic war strategy were pretty stupid. However, I saw no reason why Semonian should have felt obligated to delve into minute detail regarding the Society's errors and mistakes. If the interviewer wanted to hear a nonJW's or an exJW's opinion, she would ask one.

  : Q Is the organization a direct channel between God and humanity?

  : A Again, our governing body has never claimed that our organization is inspired or infallible. Instead they, our governing body, study the Bible diligently and through prayer they make a request for his Holy Spirit to direct them and be upon them. And with his help, they come to decisions. So we believe this to be the channel that God is using today. But our governing body has said that it is not inspired or infallible.

  : How much more written evidence do you need?

  I need to see where the Watchtower has claimed to be inspired and infallible. I see from your quotes where the Watchtower claims that God uses them (as Semonian said). I see where the Watchtower claims that they benefit in understanding from the holy spirit (as Semonion said). I see where the Watchtower has a governing body that makes doctrinal decisions (as Semonian said). I see where the Watchtower claims to be a channel to God for disclosure of his guidance, direction, and the doing of his will (as Semonian said). What I don't see in your quotes is a claim that the Watchtower is and always has been perfect, inspired on par with scripture, or infallible and never wrong.

  Reborn, I was where you are several years ago. I thought that I was really a tough guy by taking on the big bad monster that is the Watchtower Society. I had the WT CD-ROM and I did the same thing you are doing with it. I could probably recite those articles you are cutting and pasting by memory. The fact is the Watchtower has made huge blunders in the past, and certain statements and mindsets have given very many elders license in their minds to commit some great atrocities. That does NOT mean that contemporary JW spokespeople are LIARS LIARS LIARS or that JW policies are 100% wrong in every aspect.
• 

  morrisamb

  Cygnus, I will only respond to your comments to me...

  You write: However they are responsible for the congregation.
  Are you suggesting that a person who feels that she was raped (whether by another JW or not) should NEVER discuss the matter with the congregation elders? That it is none of the congregation's business at all? Perhaps you are suggesting that an alleged rape victim ought to turn in their disassociation letter and quit and forget about the JWs altogether?

  There seems to be a great leap in logic here. Turn in a disassociation letter? I'm talking about victims being prepared not to get the emotional support they might think shepherds would give. Do I think rape is any of the congregation's business? Please. One of the reasons many women don't reveal their rape is the fear of shame, being made to feel guilty, heartless questions.

  You write: I am uncertain that in your case whether it was the elders' responsibility and not yours to notify the authorities.

  Well, let me see, our ages were 7, 10, 12 and 15. What do you think?

  Your logic is something I have experienced all my life.
• 

  D8TA

  I'm not going to re-quote the material in Reborns posts, its there go back and look it up...or use your CD or hardcover resources.

  Okay, I see that Cygnus has a history of "prestige" from H20 days, so I don't really care who's an apologist, apostate, or any other kind of label applied. Frankly I dont give a rat's ass what the WTBTS view of doctrine or theology is. Right or Wrong. Don't give a shit.

  What I see here is an argument of semantics:

  I need to see where the Watchtower has claimed to be inspired and infallible.

  I can agree that no where, implied or direct, have I personally found the WTBTS say that they are "infallible".

  But on being "inspired":

  Merriam-Webster's defintion of Prophet.
  Main Entry: proph·et
  Pronunciation: 'prä-f&t
  Function: noun
  Etymology: Middle English prophete, from Old French, from Latin propheta, from Greek prophEtEs, from pro for + phanai to speak -- more at FOR, BAN
  Date: 12th century
  1 : one who utters divinely inspired revelations; specifically often capitalized : the writer of one of the prophetic books of the Old Testament
  2 : one gifted with more than ordinary spiritual and moral insight; especially : an inspired poet
  3 : one who foretells future events : PREDICTOR
  4 : an effective or leading spokesman for a cause, doctrine, or group
  5 Christian Science a : a spiritual seer b : disappearance of material sense before the conscious facts of spiritual Truth
  - proph·et·hood /-"hud/ noun

  Now, I'm sorry...we can say "Oh doh! Gee, the WTBTS never really USES the ACTUAL word INSPIRED". Of course they don't. But what we have here, is yes they do call themselves Prophets. Now I'm going to save your argument Cygnus that you will use with definition here. Your OPINION will dictate to yourself what is defined. Reborn's OPINION will dictate to his self what is defined. Your conclusion to your OPINION, does not minimize nor extinguishes the argument of OPINION from Reborn. There is the argument that yes, the WTBTS does state they are "inspired", but not directly.

  This is a "point of view" issue, where the facts can go either way.

  On to:

  Reborn, I was where you are several years ago. I thought that I was really a tough guy by taking on the big bad monster that is the Watchtower Society. I had the WT CD-ROM and I did the same thing you are doing with it. I could probably recite those articles you are cutting and pasting by memory. The fact is the Watchtower has made huge blunders in the past, and certain statements and mindsets have given very many elders license in their minds to commit some great atrocities.

  ::golf clap::

  Then...well...good for you! Nice to see people grow in the direction they seem deem fit to suit them. Nothing wrong with that.

  but

  That does NOT mean that contemporary JW spokespeople are LIARS LIARS LIARS or that JW policies are 100% wrong in every aspect.

  Well, again, a matter of opinion. Several occasions, yes, JW spokespeople have lied. Now, I recognize that people have many different definitions of a "lie". Sooo, Reborn is entitled to his view of "how" the WTBTS lies.

  And again, yes yes yes, JW policies are not 100% in EVERY ASPECT. But there are ASPECTS that Reborn has found to be wrong. Now, since what you entitle to be "wrong" and what "he" entitles to be wrong split off in two different directions...does not lead to a conclusion of right or wrong in opinions. Both of you are right, within your arguments.

  Why am I making this post? There's a point on argument where people knock down an opinion, due to their point of view. There's no "right" or "wrong" about it. We can contest our opinions openly, and disagree. But what bothers me, Cygnus, is in your last post of your argument closed rather arrogantly. In the sense that Reborn's argument didn't hold any weight, that you stated a "fact" when it was a matter of opinion.

  D8TA
• 

  Cygnus

  morris,

  There are incompetent people in every field. Going to a "professional" does not necessarily mean you are going to get the help you require. I submit that some elders actually do help in the process of recovery from trajic events.

  However, this again has nothing to do with the issue of a person being accused of rape or molestation. If a woman or a child's parents do not want to go through the difficult questions to validate what they believe happened to them, then what is there for elders to do? I simply do not comprehend where you are coming from in relation to the elders' responsibility as leaders in the congregation. What exactly do you want them to do? Interrogate the accused but ask nothing of the accuser?

  D8ta,

  You're right, it is semantics. I know full well what the WT has said and has thought of itself. But my point remains. At my judicial hearing, I said that the elders were following orders from Brooklyn (or something to that effect). The chairman slammed his hand down on the Bible and said, "NO, we are following THIS!" All in all it is a wash. But my point is, without the Bible, there are no Watchtowers, no Watchtower doctrines, no Watchtower policies, etc etc etc.

  Therefore, the WT claims a prophet-like status, in that they claim to properly understand and are the channel for revealing the meanings of inspired words of scripture -- regarding conduct and behavior, doctrine, and prophecy. Do I believe it? No of course I don't. But who am I or who is Reborn or anyone else to put words in their mouths or redefine their own definitions of what they claim to be?

  Reborn's point of view is not categorically wrong, he is simply a little overzealous in finding ways to apply his criticism. Like I was once.

  Oh, and in response to:

  : what bothers me, Cygnus, is in your last post of your argument closed rather arrogantly

  I feel I have a right to be arrogant in certain respects. I feel I do have a measure of clout here, even if I do not post that often. I have been around the block more than once, I have a lot of friends in the know, and I have learned the ability to see things from all different angles and perspectives. So I will come across as arrogant if I feel it is warranted. However, I am not the one calling the other a "fucking idiot."
• 

  morrisamb

  Cygrus, I have no agenda. I don't get your points in response to mine. I'm out of this thread. Chow...