WTS hypocrisy? What exactly do you mean?

by Pole 30 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

Pole

From what I've noticed so far, an awful lot of posts on this board deal with Watchtower hypocrisy which has been manifest both in their doctrines and in their double-dealing with many issues.
A few all-time classics would include:
1) Secret association with the UN
2) 1975 / Generation 1914 doctrine changes
3) Child-molesters policy
4) Diluting their stand on accepting blood (too late for those Witnesses who may have benefited from this change)
5) A whole assortment of mind control strategies, shunning,
6) Personal disappointments and mistreatment at the congregation level experienced by so many members of this forum
etc.
Now, a little disclaimer: I'm not trying to defend the Governing Body in any way. In fact I consider the information and the opinions presented here extremely useful in understanding what the WTS really is as a religious organization. I also have this bitterness syndrom resulting from the emotional havoc that many of the WTS doctrines and "theocratic procedures" wrought in my personality before I've managed to get rid of them.
Having said that, I often ask myself the following questions:
1) To what extent are WTS leaders (whoever they may be now) cynical manipulators who are fully aware of their responsibility?
2) Do you really believe that they sometimes get to admit in private that their actions and policies have been erroneous or harmful, but they only do it in order to find an efficient way of keeping up the appearances?
3) Do any of them have seriuos doubts about being "God's channel of communication" and how do they deal with them?
In other words if you were to put the Governing Body on a continuum of hypocrisy that can be applied to many cults or totalitarian organizations or even entire states how would you describe them?
A
Totally delusional and paranoid.
Can be very dangerous in issuing policies and (mis)organizing other people's lives, but they're devoid of moral reflection, due to heavy self-brain washing, or mental disorders.
B
They just fool themselves for most of the time.
The newly-appointed leaders look-up to the old-timers, and copy their intellectual impertinence, which in a way makes them immune to any remorse.
If they have misgivings abut their actions and decisions they fall back upon collective responsibility and they resort to self-delusion.
They always manage to find bottom lines of different sort, even if they are ridiculous, but they allow them to reason any doubts away.
Stuff like:
"the preaching work is gaining momentum world-wide, so we can't be wrong", or
"we've built thousands of kingdom halls all around the world, thousands are still needed, so let's focus on that instead of lagging behind Jehovah's fast moving chariot musing about what we may've done wrong in the past" or
"so many brothers are really grateful for the spiritual provisions we make - they outnumber those who seem to be disgruntled by far, so there must be something wrong with the latter ones. If we disfellowship them - it will only help them understand how they are wrong in independent thinking"
C
Totally cynical and manipulative.
Ends always justify means.
In extreme circumstances willing to accept Stalin's view: "The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic."
You can only have absolute knowledge of their morality if you give them absolute power.
They're only restrained by their egoism (getting sued and jailed if they don't change a certain policy).
Obviously descriptions A and C are extreme but still worth keeping in mind when using terms such as "hypocrisy" or "manipulation".
So what exactly does ?WTS hypocrisy? mean to you - not in terms of acts of hypocrisy, but rather in terms of the people who are guilty of it?
No Apologies

D - All of the Above
No Apologies
Pole

D - All of the Above
All of the above all the time? That would be too much of a sweeping generalization to me....
XQsThaiPoes

I don't think any of it fits them.
THe watchtower is different than JWs. For example if you have a child in the circuit work or at bethel they fire you. So how can they have a child molestation policy if they have no children?
I think what happens is like all companies the watchtower comes up with a product line. THe product either does not sell, is not reliable, or is defective. So they can it. Products that are smash hits like the paradise earth are still going strong. Products that were defective have had to be recalled and serviced or replaced. Such as 1914 or devil aluminum. Oh and there is a corilation between anluminum oxide in anti perspirant and cancer of the lymph glands. Apparently by not sweating toxins pool in your under arm area to the point of giving some people cancer.
minimus

I don't buy that the Watchtower is JUST a publishing house.
XQsThaiPoes

Nope it is also a real estate, holdings, and event cordination company.
Pole

XQsThaiPoes
I think what happens is like all companies the watchtower comes up with a product line. THe product either does not sell, is not reliable, or is defective. So they can it. Products that are smash hits like the paradise earth are still going strong. Products that were defective have had to be recalled and serviced or replaced. Such as 1914 or devil aluminum. Oh and there is a corilation between anluminum oxide in anti perspirant and cancer of the lymph glands. Apparently by not sweating toxins pool in your under arm area to the point of giving some people cancer.
Even if we accept your "product-line" metaphor - which is one of the many metaphors you could use to describe the workings of the WTS, my question remains valid: what are the motives of the people in charge of designing the "products"? Do they buy the stuff they design? Do they live by the stuff they design? Are they after money, power, or what? CoEs don't plan marketing strategies for the thrill of it. Politicians don't get elected just for fun. What are the motives of the people in charge?
Do you believe they are self-propelling machines, no reflection, no second thought? Please be specific.
I don't think any of it fits them. THe watchtower is different than JWs. For example if you have a child in the circuit work or at bethel they fire you. So how can they have a child molestation policy if they have no children?
I missed your point here it may be a linguistic problem. Could you elaborate on it?
Thanks for the comment anyway.
Pole
Oxnard Hamster

So what exactly does ?WTS hypocrisy? mean to you - not in terms of acts of hypocrisy, but rather in terms of the people who are guilty of it?

I know the following is an act of hypocrisy, but it's an example of how the people use hypocrisy to excuse their own actions while keeping underlings under their thumbs.
While I was studying with the JWs, I worked as a volunteer for the Salvation Army. As you all are adequately aware, JWs have zero tolerance for anything that even looks remotely like another religion, including the SA. However, I needed volunteer hours in order to become accepted in my local college's teacher education program, so I went ahead with it.
When I finally worked up the nerve to ask to join the Theocratic Ministry School, one of the questions the overseer asked is if I cut all ties with the SA. However, I have since discovered that brothers and sisters have no qualms about buying articles of clothing from the SA. When I confronted some of them with this act of hypocrisy, I usually got a bunch of meaningless rhetoric in return.
It supports what you said about how they use the ends to justify the means. It's okay to shop at the SA because established JWs can save money. However, it is not okay for me, a person new to their indoctrination, to work there, even though doing so means gaining a career down the line. This is all just another example of how they like to keep the microscope on new recruits and make sure they don't "drift."
seattleniceguy

Interesting question, Pole.
I don't think that the GB is fully aware of the consequences of their actions. Very few people can really be evil on purpose. However, because they cannot think critically and honestly about their circumstances, and the fates of the millions of hapless JWs who heed their every word, they are liable to a lot of actions that we on the outside rightly see as hypocritical, or occasionally just plain nuts. If you don't understand the road you walk on, you will make infinite wrong turns. This is bad enough for a single person, but horrendous for a group of leaders.
SNG
Lady Lee

1) To what extent are WTS leaders (whoever they may be now) cynical manipulators who are fully aware of their responsibility?

According to Franz in Crisis of Conscience page 262 Franz says:
"My years on the Governing Body, the things I had heard said in and out of sessions, the basic spirit I saw displayed, steadily brought me to the awareness that, as regards the organization, the 'wineskins had grown old,' had lost whatever flexibility it might have had, and it was stiffening its resistance to any Scriptual correction either as doctrinal beliefs or its methods of dealing with those who looked to it for guidance."
He continues further down the page:
"I was not opposed to authority. I was opposed to the extremes to which it was carried. I could not believe that God ever purposed for men to exercise such all-pervading authoritarian control over the lives of fellow members of the Christian congregation. My understanding was that Christ grants authority in his congregations only to serve, never to dominate."
" Similarly, I did not object to "organization" in the sense of an orderly arrangement, for I understood the Christian congregation itself itselfd to involve such an orderly arrangement. But I believed that, whatever the arrangement, its purpose and function, its very existence, was only as an aid for the brothers; it was there to serve their interests, not the other way around. Whatever the arrangement, it was to build men and women up so that they would not be spiritual babes, dependent on men or on an institutionalized system, but able to act as full-grown, mature Christians. It was not to train them to be simply conformists to a set of organizational rules and regulations, but to help them to become persons "having their perceptive powers trained to distinguish both right and wrong."4 Whatever arrangement there was, it must contribute toward a genuine sense of brotherhood, with the freeness of speech and mutual confidence true brotherhood brings-not a society composed of the few who are the governors and the many who are the governed. And finally, whatever the arrangement, the way to 'take the lead' therein must be by example, by holding firmly to the Word of God, passing on and inculcating the instructions of the Master the way he gave them, not "adjusting" these to fit what seemed to be in the interests of a humanly created organization, not by 'making people feel the weight of one's authority' in the way the great men of the world do.5 It must result in the exaltation of Christ Jesus as the Head, never in the exaltation of an earthly authority structure and its officers. As it was, I felt that the role of Christ Jesus as active Head was overshadowed and virtually eclipsed by the authoritarian conduct and constant self-commendation and self-praise of the organization."
Now Franz knew, better than we do, what goes on during a meeting of the GB. He was the one doing the research that he then presented to the GB concerning the differences between what the Scriptures said and their practices. They didn't want to hear it. They wanted to maintain the control they had over the r&f and the corporations. And they definitely didn't want anyone to know how far they had drifted from the intent of the Scriptures. To ensure his silence and that no JW would listen to him they DFed him. Sounds to me like a bunch of people covering their butts.
2) Do you really believe that they sometimes get to admit in private that their actions and policies have been erroneous or harmful, but they only do it in order to find an efficient way of keeping up the appearances?
The GB know the game. If they have doubts they know that if they vioce them to the wrong person they will wind up being DFed like Franz was. That was a powerful lesson to anyone in the know to shut up. Those who had any sympathy for Franz or any similar thoughts would have to choose to live the rest of thheir lives in silence and therefore "keep up appearances" or wind up on the street - no pension, no family, no home - nothing.
3) Do any of them have seriuos doubts about being "God's channel of communication" and how do they deal with them?
See above and what happened to Franz.
In other words if you were to put the Governing Body on a continuum of hypocrisy that can be applied to many cults or totalitarian organizations or even entire states how would you describe them?
A
Totally delusional and paranoid.
Can be very dangerous in issuing policies and (mis)organizing other people's lives, but they're devoid of moral reflection, due to heavy self-brain washing, or mental disorders.
Most of them for of the time on most of the issues.
B
They just fool themselves for most of the time.
The newly-appointed leaders look-up to the old-timers, and copy their intellectual impertinence, which in a way makes them immune to any remorse.
If they have misgivings abut their actions and decisions they fall back upon collective responsibility and they resort to self-delusion.
They always manage to find bottom lines of different sort, even if they are ridiculous, but they allow them to reason any doubts away.
Some of them, some of the time on some of the issues
C
Totally cynical and manipulative.
Ends always justify means.
In extreme circumstances willing to accept Stalin's view: "The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic."
You can only have absolute knowledge of their morality if you give them absolute power.
They're only restrained by their egoism (getting sued and jailed if they don't change a certain policy).
A few of them some of the time - hopefully not too many but I suspect more than we would like or want

WTS hypocrisy? What exactly do you mean?

Share this