https://youtu.be/Gt0cUEz3emY?si=wUr7AFQWrYdDQgnt
The new Watchtower Study Edition is out and I have a bone to pick with the Watchtower with paragraph 14 from Study Article 14. There we read:
"We want to help clear Jehovah’s name of all reproach. Consider this scenario: You have a close friend who is kind, generous, and forgiving. One day, you hear someone accuse your friend of being cruel and dishonest. How do you react? You defend him. Similarly, when Satan and those under his influence try to ruin Jehovah’s reputation by spreading lies about Him, we respond by telling the truth about Jehovah, vigorously defending His name. (Ps. 34:1; Isa. 43:10) We show that we want to serve Jehovah whole-souled by our words and actions."
Before we go into the paragraph i found the accompanying photo hilarious, the photo portrays a worldly person observing what it seems apostates demonstrating with placards outside an assembly hall. I don't know what is more disturbing the placards with an X Over jw.org or a Tower or the guy who holds a placard with a YES sign over a balloon.It looks like apostates are balloon lovers now or this picture was made by AI. Then this lady encounters a couple of Jehovah’s Witnesses by a literature cart and gets to speak to them about the Trurh. First of all last time I checked I was indifferent towards balloons, secondly most exjw activists are far more effective online with their activist I don't have to go outside an assembly hall to demonstrate, why would I do that? That would fit right in with the Watchtower's narrative on apostates, thirdly I find it disturbing that they still cling to their old pre Norwigian smack down and financial loss incident that we the apostates are Satan and they the governing body is Jehovah.
This paragraph from Study 14 of *The Watchtower* presents a scenario designed to justify the organization's aggressive stance against criticism, particularly from former members labeled as "apostates." While it attempts to frame defending Jehovah's name as a virtuous act, the argument collapses under scrutiny, revealing a disturbing pattern of manipulation, oversimplification, and self-serving rhetoric.
Here we hard an old but tested method of manipulation, the Strawman Argument, Painting Apostates as Villains. The core analogy presented compares Jehovah to a personal friend whose reputation has been unjustly tarnished. This framing is emotionally charged but deeply flawed. Apostates (a term weaponized here to describe former members critical of the organization) aren't attacking God Himself but challenging the Watchtower Society's interpretation of God and its authority structure. Conflating the organization's leadership with Jehovah is both misleading and dangerous. It positions any criticism of the leadership as a direct attack on God, thus insulating the Governing Body from accountability.
Moreover, the accompanying photo only reinforces this distorted narrative. The image of a supposed apostate holding a placard with a bizarre "YES" sign over a balloon is laughably absurd. Are we to believe that apostates are now a balloon-worshiping cult? It seems more like a caricature straight out of a poorly directed satire. Or, perhaps it’s just an AI-generated mess, a reflection of how out-of-touch the organization's portrayal of dissenters has become.
This visual mockery serves a calculated purpose: to discredit former members as unhinged, irrational, and even comical, rather than acknowledging the very real and legitimate grievances many ex-Jehovah's Witnesses have raised. It's easier to dismiss critics when you reduce them to ridiculous caricatures.
The image also seems fixated on the idea of apostates protesting outside assembly halls. While public demonstrations have taken place in the past, especislly before the internet youtube, social media era, they represent a tiny fraction of ex-JW activism. The vast majority of former members use online platforms, social media, and documentaries to expose the organization's harmful practices—like mishandling abuse cases and enforcing shunning policies. Yet, the Watchtower clings to this outdated imagery because it fits their narrative better: a horde of angry, bitter protesters instead of thoughtful, articulate critics presenting evidence-based arguments.
Why would an ex-JW even want to stand outside an assembly hall holding a sign? The truth is, they don't need to. Online activism has proven far more effective, reaching millions without the need for physical confrontation. The image of the placard protestor is a relic from a time when the Watchtower controlled the narrative more tightly. Now, with the internet, that control has crumbled—and the organization's leaders know it.
What i find most disturbing with this paragraph is the Blurring the Line Between God and the Governing Body
Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this paragraph is how the Watchtower equates the Governing Body with Jehovah Himself. The phrasing makes it clear: questioning the authority of the organization is portrayed as an attack on God. This is spiritual coercion at its finest.
The verse references, such as Isaiah 43:10 ("You are my witnesses," declares Jehovah), are twisted out of context to imply that the modern-day Watchtower leadership represents God's voice on earth. Yet, this claim was never made by the religious leaders of ancient Israel, even during periods of deep apostasy. Consider Jeremiah 7:4, where the corrupt leaders claimed, *“The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord are these.”* They believed the mere presence of the temple guaranteed divine protection despite their wickedness. Sound familiar? The Governing Body's insistence that they alone speak for Jehovah mirrors this exact arrogance.
The audacity here is staggering. To claim that speaking out against the organization equates to defaming God Himself is not just theologically unsound but outright blasphemous. No human governing body—whether in ancient Israel or modern times—has the right to elevate themselves to divine status. The Watchtower, however, has done precisely that, and in doing so, has crossed into dangerous territory.
And let's not forget the most grotesque element of all that came out last year, although disfellowshipping practices were slightly relaxed the attack on people who criticise the Watchtower remains the same, apostates, pedophiles and people who plan the downfall of their marriage are on the same level, according to last year's Watchtower Study Articles on disfellowshipping. This isn't just offensive; it's morally bankrupt. Comparing those who speak out against harmful doctrines and policies to child abusers is an appalling smear tactic designed to shut down dissent through shame and disgust.
For those wondering if this comparison is exaggerated, consider this direct quote from *The Watchtower* (July 2011, p. 11):
*"What fills the minds of apostates? It is nothing fine. Rather, their minds are filled with poison. Therefore, whatever they say is to be thoroughly rejected. Would you invite a physically unclean person into your home, someone who is still covered with filth? Would you invite a known child molester into your home? Surely not!"*
The fact that the Watchtower could even mention critics in the same breath as child abusers speaks volumes about their priorities. This is not the language of a loving Christian organization but one of fear-driven control