Rolf Furuli has broken with the GB (page 6)

jp1692

SBF: Furuli says that Watchtower . . . now resembles the Catholic hierarchy.

They have admitted that in open court. Here is a screenshot from page 9 of Furuli's book:

TD

I'm sure he hasn't published the book just to sit in the corner and not to talk to anybody about it. Especially after he gets dfed very very soon

Well that would be a change...

Unlike Gregg Stafford and others, Furuli is not known for being civil even in private to those with doctrinal disagreements.

Yes I get that. What I don’t understand is why Furuli thinks this is a departure from Watchtower practice of earlier decades. Watchtower was autocratic and dictatorial long before the Governing Body showed up in 1971. Compare Hayden Covington and Fred Franz’s testimony at the Walsh trial in 1954.

HAYDEN C COVINGTON - Former Lawyer for the Watchtower Society

Q. Is it not vital to speak the truth on religious matters?
A. It certainly is.

Q. You have promulgated - forgive the word - false prophecy?
A. We have. I do not think we have promulgated false prophecy, there have been statements that were erroneous, that is the way I put it, and mistaken.

Q. It was promulgated as a matter which must be believed by all members of Jehovah's witnesses that the Lord's Second Coming took place in 1874?

(A short discussion of evidence given by Fred W Franz about 1874 takes place here.)

Q. That was the publication of false prophecy?
A. That was the publication of a false prophecy, it was a false statement or an erroneous statement in fulfillment of a prophecy that was false or erroneous.Q. And that had to be believed by the whole of Jehovah's Witnesses?
A. Yes, because you must understand, we must have unity, we cannot have disunity with a lot of people going every way, an army is supposed to march in step.
Q. Back to the point now, a false prophecy was promulgated? A. I agree to that.Q. It had to be accepted by Jehovah's witnesses?
A. That is correct.Q. If a member of Jehovah's witnesses took the view himself that that prophecy was wrong, and said so, would he be disfellowshipped?
A. Yes, if he said so, and kept on persisting in creating trouble, because if the whole organisation believes one thing, even though it be erroneous, and somebody else starts on his own trying to put his ideas across, then there is a disunity and trouble, there cannot be harmony, there cannot be marching ...... Our purpose is to haveunity. Q. Unity at all costs?
A. Unity at all costs, because we believe and are sure that Jehovah God is using our organisation,the governing body of our organisation, to direct it, even though mistakes are made from time to time. Q. A unity based on an enforced acceptance of false prophecy? A. That is conceded to be true.
Q. And the person who expresses his view, as you say, that it was wrong, and was disfellowshipped, would be in breach of the covenant, if he was baptised?
A. That is correct.Q. And as you said yesterday expressly, would be worthy of death?
A. I think....
Q. Would you say yes or no?
A. I will answer yes, unhesitatingly.Q. Do you call that religion?
A. It certainly is.Q. Do you call that Christianity?
A. I certainly do.

PP. 345-348

********************

FREDERICK W FRANZ (President 1978 - 1999 )

Q. Can you tell me this; are these theological publications and semi-monthly periodicals used for discussion or statements of doctrine?
A. Yes.
Q. Are these statements held to be authoritative?
A. Yes.
Q. Is their acceptance a matter of choice,or is it obligatory on all those who wish to be and remain members of the Society?

A. It is obligatory.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/131122/1954-douglas-walsh-transcript-pdf

sir82

Judging by the points where he agrees with the WT he is not very bright.

LOL.

When the WTS even loses the guys who buy into their pretzel-logic twistings that are needed to accept the idea that every account in the Bible is literal, factual history, well....

...maybe it's time to hang up the spikes and retire to the Cayman Islands where you've got your slush fund stashed.

cyberjesus

Let me save you $8 dollars...

After 70 years of JW indoctrination, and 20 years of education i conclude the following:

Jehovah Magical Lord in the sky =

Bible =

Jehovahs - Witnesses =

Governing Body =

Getting an Education =

Importance of Critical Thinking =

Ok now send me $2. I saved you $8 and 4 hours of reading... And I havent even read the book

slimboyfat

Well I’m not sure what people are expecting from the book, but for me it is a very interesting book. I didn’t begin reading the book with any expectation that it was going to reveal exactly what’s true among the religious beliefs of Jehovah’s Witness, or generally unlock the mysteries of the universe for me. I don’t really expect to find that from books these days. The last book I began to read with that high level of expectation was perhaps the Creator book with the nebula cover in 1998, or at a stretch the Daniel book in 1999. Nowadays I can read books for what they tell me by listening to other perspectives that overlap, but course in different directions from my own experience. On that score Furuli’s book is an excellent read, because it provides a unique insight into an old time JW grappling with the sometimes bewildering changes in the Jehovah’s Witness religion over the past decades, combined with his own studies and defences of the religion, and how he ultimately decided that the discontinuities are too great to bear. Just because the conclusions he arrives at are not precisely my own doesn’t detract from his detailed attention to doctrinal shifts in Watchtower interpretations that still echo and resonate with me from when I was a true believer. I still find the shifts in antitypical interpretations such as the locusts of Joel interesting to sketch out, and there’s real pathos when Furuli concludes ultimately that the new JW approach to reading the Bible renders most of the JW back-catalogue of books obsolete “fiction”; condemned by the current GB as wrong, not just in the particulars, but in their entire approach to making sense of the Bible. Furuli has been an insider in the Watchtower system, rising to the level of district overseer. He pursued academic study that at once gave him a level of credibility, but at the cost of becoming in some sense an outsider within a religion that is increasingly hostile to higher education. If all you want to read are memoirs of JWs who “woke up”, read a book by Dawkins, and now they understand there’s no God and life is what you make it, then it’s probably not the book for you. There are plenty of accounts of that type already available if that’s what you enjoy. If you are open to reading a reflection from a lifelong devoted JW who continues to grapple with the belief system inside the perspective of believer then it’s a worthwhile read.

sir82

new JW approach to reading the Bible renders most of the JW back-catalogue of books obsolete
“fiction”; condemned by the current GB as wrong, not just in the particulars, but in their entire
approach to making sense of the Bible.

+100

Did you read the 2010 "Jeremiah" book?

It's approximately 3% about prophecy, and the other 97% is about the "example" that Jeremiah set for "modern-day worshippers of Jehovah" - obedience, endurance, obedience, bad associations, obedience, preaching, obedience.....did I mention obedience?

The entire book analyzes mere snippets of text, a verse here, a sentence fragment there, stretching and grasping to make "modern day application" while completely ignoring the context of how, when, and why the book was written.

Any JW who died before, oh 2000 or so, would absolutely not recognize it as a JW book if they were somehow resurrected & read it.

cofty

Anybody who can investigate their beliefs to the extent Furuli claims to and still advocate 607 is hardly worth attention is he?

It is one of those subjects that is beyond all sensible debate. How the cult made that original error is obvious and their history of defending it is risible. If Furuli can't see through that he is wilfully obtuse.

Earnest

Long before the Walsh trial of 1954 the Watchtower was "theocratic" (i.e. autocratic and dictatorial). The June 15, 1938 issue of The Watchtower, pp.182, 183 required all companies (i.e. congregations) to adopt the following resolution (in part):

We ... recognise ... that "THE SOCIETY" is the visible representative of the Lord on earth, and we therefore request "The Society" to organize this company for service and to appoint the various servants thereof ...

Prior to this time the "various servants" were elected democratically by the congregation without any approval required by "The Society".

However, what has changed since 1971 is that the congregations can no longer make decisions about their Kingdom Halls or their contributions which is significantly more autocratic than it has ever been.

cofty

Good point Earnest. Rutherford inveighed at great length against 'elective elders' in a number of his books. He likened them to all manner of prophetic antitypes.

Rolf Furuli has broken with the GB

Share this