1925 versus 1975

by larc 15 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  larc

  Amazing,

  I think you are right. Rutherford's writing was much more direct and dogmatic. The writing in 1975 had more loop holes built into it. It is interesting that in 1925, the Society was building new printing facilities, a strange activity for that particualar year.

  Refiner's fire,

  Like you, I think the driving out of Russell devotees was a major factor in the decline. Also, from Rutherford's presidency until about 1935, he was changing beliefs and proceedures at a dizzying pace. I think it was too much for many to absorb. Also, the memory of the last failed prophecy was only 11 years old by 1925, compared to the 50 year span from 1925 until 1975. I think that two failed prophecies within eleven years was too much for some to take.
• 

  Wren

  Am curious about 1975 having less devastating effect. I was going to post topic about if there was any sociological cause with membership rise & fall of 1975. The babyboomers were at their peak with stats of 1/3 to 1/2 in USA were 25yrs and under. USA has high membership. Greater population in their idealistic stage or people exploring new thought at the time.

  I wonder if with the fall, many ex-members viewed it as a phase or growing up & out period. Not everyone left because of doctrine issues. This thinking softens the blow with not just JWs but the public as well. "Cults/experimental groups were all the rage late 60's & 70's". If there are any links to this topic, I would like to check them out.

  Edited by - wren on 4 October 2002 13:46:40
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  I think 1975 still causes JW's to doubt, when they hear about it.
• 

  refiners fire

  ..."the memory of the last failed prophecy was only 11 years old by 1925, compared to the 50 year span from 1925 until 1975. I think that two failed prophecies within eleven years was too much for some to take.".....

  also a factor, I guess. Festingers "cognitive dissonance" theory demonstrates that decline in membership, revolving around failed prediction, is slight. His theory shows that the "disappointed" church will engage in recruitment activity to draw in new members and reinforce their beliefs to themselves. Interestingly thats what the Witnesses did after the "Advertise" speech?? Interesting thought. Course, the good thing about theories is that they arent carved in stone. After the great disappointment of 1844 the Millerite movement disintegrated, some of them into hysterical fragments practising bizarre worship rituals, then gradually faded away into virtual non existance. So theres some flexibility in out come there.
• 

  larc

  Refiner's Fire,

  Festinger's concept can explain when there will be an attitude change, but it can not predict how it will change. For example, let's suppose that someone hates Catholics. At the same time, they become friends with someone who is a Catholic. Now, this causes dissonance. How can my good friend be a Catholic, when all Catholics are evil? Now, to resolve this dissonance the person must either change his view of Catholics or of his friend. He could conclude that Catholics are not so bad after all, or, he could conclude that his friend is really not his friend and can't be trusted. In either case of attitude change, the dissonance is reduced. Now, the smart thing the Society did after both 1925 and 1975 was to blame the rank and file for misreading the messages in the literature. This put guilt on the members and totally detracted from the source of guilt, the Society itself. Thus, cognitive dissonance was avoided my this manuver (sp?)
• 

  refiners fire

  hey Larc, I notice you call it Festingers "concept", instead of "theory". Now believe me im strictly a well read amateur and no expert in anything, but Id be inclined to agree with you. Im a bit non plussed as to how its much of a "theory". Ive read both Festingers books relevant to the "theory" of cognitive dissonance, and as I recall, his conclusions are based on his penetration and observation of a flying saucer cult in the 1950s with a history of Millerism as back up for his theory that in the face of an expectational "disappointment" the church will RECRUIT rather than DISBAND. Looking back now, its hard for me to imagine how Millerism (the entire movement) demonstrates this concept.

  The Miller movement disintegrated into virtual non existance thru splintering and hysterical manifestations. Dont know if youve ever read a book called "The Disappointed" Larc, by R. Numbers and J. Butler (University of Tennessee press) but its quite interesting in terms of an overall history of the Millerite movement from prophetic expectation thru to total fragmentation. Festingers book "When Prophecy Fails" is most interesting (to me) in terms of dynamics within the group, eg, theres a very memorable power struggle takes place as a member of some influence within the group tries to usurp authority. And some fairly bizarre stuff takes place as the members prepare themselves to be picked up by the Saucers.

  (edited for spelling)

  Edited by - refiners fire on 5 October 2002 16:52:9