Did it with Jesus - Now the WTS is sidelining the Bible

hamsterbait

Has anyone else noticed how more and more in studies and other articles the WT no longer sticks only to the bible as its authority? They criticised the RC for quoting the catechism to settle matters of doctrine, yet more and more I notice points 'proved' by: "Note what the Watchtower says" "In this regard the Watchtower of 1967 mad this point" "The publications of the WTS have repeatedly proved [insert] to be the case" It is getting to the point where if you say "PROOF, please," they will DF you on the spot. Never mind the scripture about saving the one with doubts. Does anyone here have a CD to compare how often they use "the bible" with "watchtower says" (or similar)? HB

AlmostAtheist

When did the term "current understanding" join the Theocrapic Dictionary? It would've been about the same time they began what you describe. It's never "the Bible says" (unless you're out in service, of course), it is instead "the current understanding [of the Watchtower] is...".

My current understanding is that the Watchtower is a publishing company with no authority over me. (I'm not expecting any "New Light" on this one...)

Dave

garybuss

If ya have a direct channel to God, why'd ya ever need a Bible?

Reefton Jack

Well - they will tell you that the Watchtower is "more important than the bible":

- After all, "Christendom" has been reading the bible for centuries, and "it hasn't done them any good."

That's the party line, anyway!

glitter

An elder said to me yesterday (after I'd said I'd only ever want to study the Bible, not the literature - this was the major sticking-point when mum dropped me right in it with a JW last year and I ended up with a study) and he said without an ounce of irony:

Well, I suppose you *could* have a Bible Study using *just* The Bible."

WTF?!