Biggest lie?
Watchtower and the Governing body are "Chosen" or "Spirit directed".
What is Your Favorite WT Lie?
by Sea Breeze 90 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Beth Sarim
That was a good one too !!!!
-
Balaamsass2
So, so many flip flops. Is old "light" a lie...or the "new light"?????
If God Jehovah has existed eternally, has he been lying to his "faithful slave" or just playing with them? Or.....do they simply "make up things" or "hear" things like a precocious preschooler????? Or...are they simply old fashioned con-artists???
It is hard to recall all the lies and flip flops. JWfacts.com has a handy short list.
https://jwfacts.com/watchtower/changed-watchtower-teachings.php
-
Sea Breeze
@Ultimate Axiom - Great list. Thanks!
How about this one: Pastor Russell's wife tried to take control of the Watchtower so he had to legally separate from her. It had nothing to do with him being caught in the maids' bedroom with the door locked.
-
Ultimate Axiom
I’m not so sure that we can call any of the JW doctrine a lie. After all the Catholic Church teaches that the Pope is infallible (not that different to the GB’s only channel claim), transubstantiation takes place during mass, unbaptised children can’t enter heaven etc etc, and while we can call it all bullshit, can we call them lies? A belief, or even an opinion, no matter how deranged, is not a lie IMHO.
However, when the Watchtower takes a fact of its history, and twists or denies it, that is a blatant lie. If you do a search in Watchtower publications for expressions like ‘it was announced decades in advance’ then it will almost certainly be either a lie, or deliberately misleading.
Their shameless hypocrisy is greater exposed when you also consider what they say about themselves:
“Certainly no one knows their (JW) modern-day history better than they (JWs) themselves do’ (Foreword to ‘Jehovah's Witnesses - Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom’, 1993).
“The Writing Department follows the pattern of ‘tracing all things with accuracy.’ … the Writing Department insists on using only material that is accurate and truthful, even regarding seemingly insignificant details.” (Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses, 2011, pages 9 and 13).
“A lie is defined as … anything that gives or is meant to give a false impression. The intention is to cause others to believe something that the liar knows is not the truth. By lies or half-truths, he strives to deceive those who are entitled to know the truth.” (Watchtower, December 15, 1992, page 22).
And there’s a certain irony to this statement:
“Misleading statements and outright lies about Jehovah’s servants and their beliefs are sometimes featured in the media.” (Watchtower, December 15, 2013, page 6).
No doubt true, but they often feature in Watchtower publications as well, perhaps more so.
-
Vanderhoven7
That three WT elders have God's authority to act as judge and jury; to decide guilt and determine repentance
-
DesirousOfChange
That the Cedar Point OH conventions and the resolutions have any meaning or connection to anything in Revelation.
-
KalebOutWest
After all the Catholic Church teaches that the Pope is infallible (not that different to the GB’s only channel claim), transubstantiation takes place during mass, unbaptised children can’t enter heaven etc etc, and while we can call it all bullshit, can we call them lies?
These are Watchtower lies.
I don't believe in Catholicism, Christianity or anything supernatural for that matter, but all of the above I remember being told and reading (at least in substance) in Watchtower publications, from the platform and various teachers while at the Kingdom Hall, conventions, presentations, etc.
The actual Catholic teachings?
A pontifical leader is not infallible, but can, on rare occasions declare an issue that has been decided after much years of study within the Roman Catholic Church (usually after there has been a serious question or issue) and, speaking for all members of the Church, declare, dogmatically, that the issue has been settled. Only that declaration is an infallable statement. Since the Church's foundation, this has only happened once, in 1950, when Pope Pius XII defined the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary in his papal bull, Munificentissimus Deus. It merely means that the Bishopric of Rome speaks as an official mouthpiece once an official decision has been arrived at by the rest of the people or members of the Church. The Episopate does not necessarily, of its own office, have this ability, as without a Church there would be no issues nor people to decide the matters.
Transubstantiation does takes place outside of Mass as well. There are holy relics which, reportedly hold pieces of the Eucharist which still undergo study by independent researchers (I don't have their names at present) and in the presence of often holy people literally change their chemical nature unlike actual Eucharistic elements. Why or how these things do this may be a trick or a natural occurrence, but it is a good trick or interesting phenomenon either way to watch.
And, the Church recognizes the validity of the sacrament in Orthodox Churches as well as Anglican Churches (which, by the way, have had similar "miracles," so to speak).
It is also not a teaching of the Roman Catholic Church that unbaptized children or even that non-Catholics do not enter heaven or gain salvation. What about Jews? It is official doctrine that they go to heaven. They also believe that people like Jehovah's Witnesses are saved without stepping one foot in a Catholic Church or ever believing a stitch of Catholic doctrine.
The USCCB and other local episcopates as well as the Holy See keeps the official CCC (Catholic Catechism) online, and any and all of its official teachings are on there for everyone to read at any time.
One thing the Watchtower was very good at lying about was teaching people about other religions (and what they believed) and claiming that once it did this, that 'we were now equipped to know the truth' about them.
That was a very big lie. If you have not updated your views about religion, atheism, agnosticism, philosophy and humanism since you left the Watchtower, you still believe in those lies of the big, bad W.
-
aqwsed12345
“The Catholic Church teaches that the Pope is infallible (not that different to the Governing Body’s only channel claim).”
This is a misunderstanding of Catholic teaching. Papal infallibility does not mean the Pope is infallible in everything he says or does. It is strictly limited to very specific conditions outlined in the doctrine: 1) The Pope must be speaking ex cathedra (from the Chair of Peter). 2) He must explicitly define a doctrine concerning faith or morals for the universal Church. This has occurred only twice in the last two centuries (the Immaculate Conception in 1854 and the Assumption of Mary in 1950, both retroactively recognized as infallible teachings). By contrast, the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses claims to be the sole channel of communication for God on Earth, which goes beyond merely clarifying teachings to controlling all aspects of belief and practice without the rigorous theological and historical process the Catholic Church employs.
“Transubstantiation takes place during Mass, and there are relics outside of Mass reportedly undergoing similar changes.”
This mixes accurate teaching with speculative claims. The Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation teaches that during the consecration at Mass, the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Christ while retaining their appearances (accidents) as bread and wine. This transformation is a matter of faith and not measurable by scientific means. The mention of Eucharistic miracles is separate from the doctrine. Some Eucharistic miracles, where hosts reportedly transformed in visible, miraculous ways, have been studied (e.g., Lanciano). These are rare, not doctrinally required for belief, and are treated with caution by the Church. The claim conflates the doctrine of transubstantiation with these miraculous occurrences, which are not a core part of Catholic faith.
“The Catholic Church teaches that unbaptized children can’t enter heaven.”
This is an outdated misunderstanding of Catholic teaching. The Church does not teach that unbaptized children are excluded from heaven. While earlier theological speculation (e.g., the concept of Limbo) suggested unbaptized infants might not experience the Beatific Vision, this has never been an official doctrine. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1261) expresses hope in God’s mercy for the salvation of unbaptized infants, trusting in God’s love and justice.
“The Church believes that non-Catholics and even Jews can gain salvation.”
The Catholic Church acknowledges the possibility of salvation for non-Catholics. The Second Vatican Council clarified this in Lumen Gentium (1964), stating that those who seek God sincerely and strive to follow their conscience can achieve salvation, even if they are outside the visible bounds of the Church (CCC 847). The Church emphasizes that salvation ultimately comes through Christ, even if individuals are not fully aware of Him (CCC 846-848).
“The Watchtower was good at lying about other religions, including Catholicism.”
The Watchtower often misrepresents other religions, they have frequently mischaracterized Catholic teachings, especially on the Trinity, Mary, and the role of tradition. For example claiming the Trinity is a “pagan” doctrine, ignoring its deep roots in Scripture and early Christian history, misrepresenting Marian devotion as idolatry, failing to distinguish between veneration (dulia) and worship (latria), or stating that Catholicism opposes Bible reading, ignoring the Church’s historical role in preserving and disseminating Scripture. These distortions serve to reinforce the Watchtower’s narrative that all other religions are false.
“The Watchtower takes a fact of its history, twists or denies it, which is a blatant lie.”
The Watchtower has a documented history of historical revisionism. Examples of Watchtower dishonesty include claims that 1914 was predicted “decades in advance,” despite earlier Watchtower publications asserting different dates for Christ’s return and Armageddon (e.g., 1874, 1925), presenting itself as having an unbroken line of “truth,” despite shifting doctrinal stances (e.g., on blood transfusions, the nature of Christ’s presence, and the generation doctrine). The Watchtower’s rewriting of its history undermines its claim to be the sole channel of God’s truth.
“The Pope blesses soldiers and wars.”
This is a partial truth requiring context. The Church has a long tradition of opposing unnecessary violence and advocating for peace, as seen in papal encyclicals like Pacem in Terris (1963) by St. John XXIII. However, the Church historically acknowledged the concept of a “just war” (developed by thinkers like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas), recognizing that governments have a duty to protect their citizens. Papal blessings for soldiers were often pastoral, not endorsements of war itself, aimed at encouraging virtue and repentance among those sent to fight.
“Catholic dogmas are inventions not found in the Bible.”
Catholic doctrines are deeply rooted in Scripture and apostolic tradition. For example while the technical term “Trinity” is not in the Bible, the concept is clearly present in Scripture (e.g., Matthew 28:19; John 1:1, 14; 2 Corinthians 13:14) and was clarified by the early Church in response to heresies. Teachings like the Immaculate Conception and Assumption are based on Scripture (e.g., Luke 1:28, Revelation 12) and the development of doctrine under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. The Papal Infallibility is Rooted in Christ’s promise to Peter in Matthew 16:18-19 and further supported by Luke 22:31-32 and John 21:15-17, the doctrine ensures the Church’s unity and fidelity to truth.
-
Ultimate Axiom
Papal infallibility does not mean the Pope is infallible
The Church does not teach that unbaptized children are excluded from heaven
The Watchtower often misrepresents other religions
Yes I realise the Catholic Church has had new light on these doctrines, and that the Watchtower regularly uses the straw man principle when attacking the doctrine of other religions. My point wasn’t about the doctrines themselves, but questioning whether promoting a point of doctrine, however ludicrous, can be classified as lying.