Okay, I'm writing a letter to my brother explaining why I no longer believe the WTBTS is God's earthly channel (since he asked). So I want to mention all the contradictory, scandalous, evil doctrines they teach or once taught. However, I need to have documented proof of them from "non-apostate" sources. For instance if there are publications from the society that contradict each other or state blatantly wrong doctrines that would be great. I'm referencing the UN's website in regards to the NGO scandal. Anything that he can check out for himself and does not come from an ex-JW would be awesome. Thanks for any help you guys can offer.
Need Help (Refuting JW Doctrines)
by alaskagirl 9 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
-
Ciara
There is a good book by Thomas F. Heinze called "Answers to my Jehovah's Witness Friends". It has a lot of good references if you want to get some good quotes, but I wouldn't suggest sending him the whole book or he'll most likely just throw it away.
Good Luck,
Ciara
-
metatron
They're guilty of fraud because they've been promising that Armageddon is Soon! - for one hundred and twenty years.
If you dealt with a normal business that keep promising to deliver a product of service and failed to do so for over
a CENTURY ( !!), would they be sued in court? Would the police shut them down?
Yet, because of the Watchtower hiding behind the 1st amendment, they continue to get away with fraud, unlike 'worldly'
corporations, which have HIGHER STANDARDS of conduct.
metatron
-
Nocturne
Just tell him the destruction of Jerusalem didn't occur in 607 but in 586 bce, and challenge him to find one secular source that says otherwise.
-
joenobody
Good example Nocturne - forces her brother to do a ton of research and slide down the slipper slope.
PM me to let me know how you are doing.
-
Dogpatch
Here is an online version of my book, Thus Saith Jehovah's Witnesses that should help, with all the photocopies:
http://www.freeminds.org/ts/contents.htm
Randy Watters
-
hooberus
I have never been a JW and I have many of the old publications. If you like I will send you some copies of original WT publications of what I consider to be powerful evidences against the WT.
-
trumangirl
I would be careful not to lay into the org to soon and too heavy, unless your brother is receptive to this.
Instead, try concentrating on the unfulfilled prophecy doctrines, particularly 1914. Most JWs who have doubts will find it easier to talk about prophecies as they know that the Society has stuffed up on these. Refer him to the LF book of the young man turning into an old one and how the WT taught that armageddon would come in the 1914 generation. Ewatchman has some good scriptural reasonings about 1914 in his essay on the subject. Also the book about the Last days by Carl Olof Johnson is great for showing that the 'signs of the last days' don't stack up with the historical evidence.
Here is some excerpts of my letter to a JW friend, (which i haven't received a reply from yet, probably won't either). You have my permission to cut and paste bits that you may want to use and make them your own!
Good luck!
(Can't seem to switch the underline off here:)
I want to explain some more why I no longer accept that God?s kingdom started in 1914. There are lots of way to show this, even without considering chronology. The Society says we should concentrate on the ?composite sign? of Christ?s presence, so I will deal mostly with this.
You will no doubt be aware that the world population has rapidly climbed in the 20 th century. What is the reason for this? Historical researches say it is because the rate of mortality is less now than in past generations. It is a proven fact that more people died from famine and pestilence before the 20 th century. For instance, the last great famine in
Regarding pestilence, the Reasoning book mentions the Spanish flu. However, this was nowhere near as bad as the Black Death in the 1300s and other plagues. Modern medicine, immunisation and other public health measures have drastically reduced epidemics in the 20 th century. The Reasoning book mentions other diseases which were just as bad (even worse) before 1914, such as malaria. As for heart disease and cancer, the reason these illnesses (note they are not even ?pestilences?) have increased is because they are mainly old people?s diseases, and people are living longer now.
The Society places enormous emphasis on the First World War, saying it was a ?turning point in history? etc, but this is only if one considers it from the perspective of the generation who were living at that time. The Napoleonic wars and the civil war are but two examples of equally widespread wars that were a ?turning point? too. Some historians say the French revolution was the greatest turning point in modern history. Moreover, since the end of WWII the world has experienced a period of greater overall peace than at any other time in history. There hasn?t been a war in since then, whereas in centuries past, has gone through decades-long periods of almost constant war.
The truth is there has not been an outstanding increase in the number of wars, famines, pestilence or earthquakes. These things have occurred regularly down through the centuries. I have come to the conclusion that in mentioning these things in his sermon on the Mount of Olives, Jesus was describing the general state of history from 33CE that his disciples would have to endure, all the wars, famines, pestilences and earthquakes, just as there always has been, until his eventual return in kingdom power. He is not linking an escalation of those things to some mysterious year 1900 years in the future. Jesus began with the words ?Look out that nobody misleads you?. Verses 4-8 of Matt 24 are inter-connected. Compare Mark 13:5-8 and Luke 21:8-11. In verse 11, Luke includes ?fearful sights and from heaven great signs?. In ancient times, solar eclipses and comets were viewed as religious signs and portents, as were earthquakes and other disasters. Jesus was trying to tell his disciples not to be fooled by such proclamations.
Jesus always presents the kingdom as being something that would happen suddenly, without prior notice, and manifest to everyone (like sheet lightening) without that person having to know about historical patterns of disasters or speculations about Bible chronology.
Please read Matt 24:43-47. The Society?s interpretation is that verses 43 and 44 apply to the future at Armageddon, but verses 45 and 47 have already happened back in 1918/1919. Then for verses 48-51, it reverts back to the future! It is just illogical. Surely the whole passage is referring to the future.
How many thrones does Jesus sit on? How many times does he arrive in great glory? We are taught that he does this twice, ie, a throne in 1914 to be followed by a separate ?judgment throne? in the future during the great tribulation. However when we examine Jesus own words about his arriving in glory and sitting on a throne, he only describes one throne in Matt 25: 31-33. Compare this passage with Matt 24: 29-31. There Jesus is in very similar language described as coming on the clouds of heaven with ?power and great glory?, sending forth ?his angels?. Jesus is obviously describing the same event in both passages.
The 1914 dogma has led to all manner of inconsistent, retrospective interpretations of prophecy, such as the ones that equate various prophecies in Daniel and Revelation to events in the 1910s/1920s that have no historical significance. Do you really believe that announcements at JW conventions, or a minor change in the organisation?s structure, are fulfillments of Bible prophecy? (for instance see page 173 of Revelation book which equates the seven trumpet blasts to conventions).
I hope this letter makes sense to you. I am aware that a recent Watchtower study article has warned against listening to ?apostate reasonings?, but it is strange that ?reasonings? are put on the same level as pornography and other forms of entertainment that appeal to the flesh. Even in the world, many people accept that pornography can be damaging. But what is it about ?reasonings? that we should be afraid of? Honest, meaningful reasonings are a good thing. One listens to a ?reasoning?, thinks about it critically, reasons on it without bias, and either accepts or rejects it on the basis of logic and the evidence presented. What is so bad about that?
-
alaskagirl
Thank you all so much for the replies. You've all been so helpful. And Randy I want to thank you for my release from the WTBTS. My fiance (now husband) used your website and some of your audiotapes to help me get out 5 years ago. Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!!!
I'll let you all know what kind of response I get (if any at all).