Posts by bjc2012

61

How many found the REAL truth from the internet?

by Leander in

jw
friends

if it was'nt for the internet i would still be stuck in the endless cycle of drone like meeting attendance and field service.

(technically i'm still in but not for long) i'm really glad that some ex-jws took the time to speak about the real truth.

for the longest time i always thought that what i was taught was correct, i never even felt the need to question it or validate it with actual facts.

bjc2012

You Know,

Please check out this thread.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=26649&site=3#340259

bjc

18

How would you counter these common JW arguments?

by Leander in

jw
friends

as i mentioned before in previous posts i'm trying to prepare myself for an exit of the borg.

so what i've been doing over the last few days is thinking of ways to counter the questions that i know will be directed to me.

in particular how would you go about responding to the following questions?.

The only reason that you need for leaving should be that you are following Jesus' admonition recorded at Matthew 24:15,16, which reads: Therefore, when you catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation as spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in a holy place, (let the reader use discernment,) then let those in Judea begin fleeing to the mountains." You can show them WT articles that proclaim the UN to be the 'disgusting thing." You might then ask them if it is true that the UN is the 'disgusting thing' then how would they explain the Watchtower Society becoming an NGO in association with the UN for nearly ten years. They will probably give you the library card explanation. You could counter with the thought that no matter what the explanation is, any association with the UN is wrong especially since they condemn every other religion for doing this very thing. Therefore, in your opinion, this association constitutes what Jesus was warning his followers about and that you are going to follow his advise and leave now as you don't want to wait until they 'place the beast' as it would be too late to leave then. You do not need to answer any other questions as you've already given them a scriptural reason for leaving. If you need any information on the UN situation, you can find it all on the Scandals forum.

bjc

3

Theocratic War Strategy - UN

by anglise in

this is a direct quote from the guardian newspaper today (8th oct 01):.

in an internal document, the wtbts describes its policy as a theocratic war strategy.

it claims: in time of spiritual warfare it is proper to misdirect the enemy by hiding the truth.

bjc2012

One important point we must remember on this subject is this. The whole premise of using "Theocratic War Strategy" on people is based upon the WTS' concept of what constitutes a "lie" by definition. WTS style "lying". Let's analyze this definition.

The WTS defines a "lie" as follows,

"The opposite of truth. Lying generally involves saying something false to a person who is ENTITLED TO KNOW THE TRUTH and doing so with the intent to deceive or to injure him or another person." (Insight on the Scriptures Vol. II page 244 under subject heading of "Lie".)

So, "Theocratic War Strategy" is used to "deceive" all those who are NOT "entitled to know the truth" about the matter.

Therefore, by this definition, when the Governing Body acted to "deceive" the UN Officials when applying for secret NGO status, while writing articles condemning other religions like the Catholics against such a practice as being idolatry, they were not really "lying" at all. At least, according to what "they" [WTS] call a lie.

That's how they see it.

However, contrary to this original premise, we notice when the real heat was put on them (by the Guardian News and others) say, in the UN Library Card Defense which is obviously a falsehood (lie), the Governing Body brazenly told a OUTRIGHT FALSEHOOD to all 90+ branch offices without hesitation. The vicious falsehood came in the form of the "Library Card" Defense, an official statement, released by the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses on November 1, 2001.

In doing this, the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses, callously employed "Theocratic War Strategy", or this transparent "deception" to deliberately mislead the entire brotherhood of JWs worldwide.

Now by doing this, the Governing Body violated their "own" warped, disfunctional standards of what a "lie" is by definition, as taught by the the so-called F&DS in the printed publications.

Because of this action, all sincere JWs, that is even those who subscribe to the theory of "Theocratic War Strategy" presently, must ask themselves the following questions about this "library card" defense fiasco:

According to the WTS definition mentioned above of a "Lie" in the printed publications, aren't the brothers "entitled to know the truth" about the matter?

It is a fact, the printed publications clearly teach, if those who are "entitled to know" are purposely deceived by such a statement, then it is a "Lie" by definition. And we would have to say the spiritual brothers are certainly "entitled to know the truth", aren't they? Therefore, the "Library Card" Defense, is indeed a vicious "lie", told to mislead those that "are entitled to know", the spiritual brothers of the JW Organization. The statement becomes an evil statement intented to "deceive" those "entitled to know". Just like or comparable to what is customarily employed by the original "deceiver", the "father of the lie", Satan -- is it not? (John 8:44)

bjc

You Know and the "Presence of Christ"...

by bjc2012 in

regarding the date of 1914 and the "presence of christ" starting at that time, you know made the following comment, .

nevertheless, while it is obvious to me that the kingdom of the world was not given to christ in 1914, or any time since then, i am not willing to discard what appears to me to be a mountain of evidence that christ's parousia has been ongoing since that time.. comment made march 31, 2002 at this link:.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=24763&site=3.

bjc2012

Regarding the date of 1914 and the "presence of Christ" starting at that time, You Know made the following comment,

Nevertheless, while it is obvious to me that the kingdom of the world was NOT given to Christ in 1914, or any time since then, I am not willing to discard what appears to me to be a mountain of evidence that Christ's parousia has been ongoing since that time.

Comment made March 31, 2002 at this link:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=24763&site=3

Key rebuttal Question or thought:

If this is so, then Christ "returns" or has been "present" AS WHAT, since 1914? In what official capacity, has he been in his invisible "presence" since 1914?

(Surely not as "king" since he, as you've clearly said above, receives the "kingdom of the world" much later. -- Rev. 11:15)

For a followup discussion on 1914 versus the first century kingship of Jesus, see the following link:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=26176&site=3

bjc

13

China & India Lack of JW Activity

by invisible in

jw
friends

if there god is supposed to be the all-powerful, backing their organisation fully, men being led by god's spirit etc, then what of the lack of activity within china which has in excess of a billion inhabitants?

is their god not partial to the chinese?

what of india also?

bjc2012

And if they didn't count the missionaries they sent to these countries as publishers, then the ratio would probably be higher that it currently is.

bjc

22

What is the most unBiblical teaching of the JWs?

by jerome in

it has been said that the jws hold to many beliefs that are unnsupported scripturally and inforce many 'unwritten' rules which they refer to as 'principles'.. i would like to start off the thread with what i think is the most important unbiblical teaching that they need to promote inorder to exist.. the watchtower teaches that "a prophet is able to make mistakes while he is speaking for god and still be considered as true.

mind you that these are not slips of the tounge but doctrines and predictions that have been promoted for years and have only been modified only after the watchtower had no choice but to change them.. this in my opinion is the most unscriptural teaching that the watchtower promotes.

if it werent for this teaching then the watchtower would most definately have to be marked as a false prophet!

bjc2012

Jerome,

When you expose the error of the 1914 teaching, the whole "house of cards" comes tumbling down, including the F&DS teaching and the authority therof. (Matt. 24:45) Check out this link.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=26176&site=3

bjc

1

Christ "Enthroned" in 1914 -- Truth o...

by bjc2012 in

"he is the reflection of [his] glory and the exact representation of his very being, and he sustains all things by the word of his power; and after he had made a purification for our sins he sat down on the right hand of the majesty in lofty places.

it means absolutely nothing to all of jws worldwide.. why do we say such?.

he is just sitting there, "awaiting" upon his time to start his kingdom rule, which of course comes in the year of 1914, the year "discovered" by charles russell.

bjc2012

CHRIST "ENTHRONED" IN 1914 -- BIBLE "TRUTH" OR FALSEHOOD

Hebrews 1:3 says:

"He is the reflection of [his] glory and the exact representation of his very being, and he sustains all things by the word of his power; and after he had made a purification for our sins he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty in lofty places."

Above we read, Jesus was allowed to sit down at the "right hand" of His father. What does this Bible "expression" mean to all Jehovah's Witnesses and the WTS?

Nothing. It means absolutely nothing to all of JWs worldwide.

Why do we say such?

Well, it seems the WTS has taught for many years now, that even though Jesus Christ is in heaven, given God's everlasting favor, and granted the great privilege of sitting at the right hand of God Himself, sitting upon God's Heavenly Throne, he is NOT ruling at all. He is just sitting there, "awaiting" upon his time to start his kingdom rule, which of course comes in the year of 1914, the year "discovered" by Charles Russell. They cite Hebrews 10:12, 13 as their proof.

This teaching is promulgated worldwide, even in the face of Matthew 28:18 which shows Jesus describing his great, all-pervasive "authority" shortly after receiving a powerful, spiritual resurrection to glory by saying,

"...ALL AUTHORITY has been given me in heaven and on the earth."

Now, someone unfamiliar with JW teachings might at this point say, "this doesn't make sense. How do they explain the above verse?"

Well, after reading this verse above, JWs will heartily agree with you that Jesus has been "given all authority" over heaven and earth. They won't disagree with that verse. But they will insist that Jesus Christ IS STILL NOT ruling in the heavens, even though he has been given all of this power. They teach, he doesn't start "ruling" until 1914. The date the first president of the WTS, Charles Russell "discovered" and revealed to the world by way of Russell's early writings, principally "Zion's Watch Tower".

JWs agree that Jesus was allowed to "sit upon Jehovah's throne" after his heavenly resurrection. But they cite Psalms 110:1 in showing the significance of the date of 1914, which says:

"The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord is: "Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet."

They point out that Jehovah gave Jesus the invitation to "sit at my right hand" only. That's it. No "rulership" for Jesus is implied in this above critical statement. They also remind you that Paul quotes from this text at Hebrews 10:12, 13, to re-enforce their position on the matter.

So, the Watch Tower Society teaches that although Jesus has been allowed to "sit upon Jehovah's throne," since his death in the 1st century, Jesus did not receive the "throne" for rulership until the year of 1914. He was not "enthroned". Simply put, he was just allowed to "sit" upon the throne of God, without being actually "ENTHRONED". They say that came much later. They say, Jesus was "ENTHRONED" in the year of 1914. But he was allowed to "sit" upon God's Throne and has been "sitting" there for close to 2,000 years. But he wasn't "enthroned". That's the critical distinction that must be made.

Did you get that?

Keep in mind, this is an extremely important teaching to all JWs. A critical teaching because many other doctrines, practices and teachings of the WTS, such as the Authoritarian "Faithful and Discreet Slave" Class Arrangement itself, all hinge upon this particular "understanding" of scripture and its peculiar leanings. It is no small matter to all Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide. (Matt. 24:45-47)

However, Bible research reveals one simple problem with this teaching.

It is impossible for an individual to be allowed to sit upon the throne of God, without actually being himself "enthroned". The statement or teaching is then an "impossibility".

Here are a few examples from the Bible to prove this point.

"SITTING UPON THE THRONE" -- WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

Please keep in mind that all of the examples I've cited below, are all taken from the WTS' New World Translation Bible.

The first one that comes to mind, is the one where King David spoke the Davidic promise to his son, Solomon by saying,

"...If your sons will take care of their way by walking before me in truth...there will not be cut off a man of yours from sitting upon the throne of Israel." (1 Kings 2:4)

By saying this, did David mean "enthronement" or official rulership for his offspring, by saying "sitting upon the throne"? What would you say?

Also, how about the one where Solomon repeated this promise by saying,

"...There will not be cut off a man of yours from before me to sit upon the throne of Israel..." (1 Kings 8:25; 2 Chron. 6:16)

Also in this case, was Solomon implying "rulership" and "enthronement" by saying they would be allowed to "sit upon the throne"?

And here is an even stronger example. The inspierd Psalmist was even more specific about the act of "enthroning" and what it meant by this expression, when speaking of Almighty God and saying of God Himself,

"God will hear and answer them, even He that is sitting ENTHRONED as in the past." (Psalms 55:19)

Now what does that expression mean for Almighty God, this "sitting enthroned"? Does not this very expression "sitting enthroned", actually mean "enthronement", as is clearly shown here?

And remember, this verse is taken from the New World Translation, the WTS' own Bible?

Now these are but a few examples, taken from the WTS' own bible.

And yet, the Watch Tower Society says that Jesus Christ was only "enthroned" in the heavens in the year of 1914, although he has been "sitting upon God's throne" and "given all authority in heaven and upon earth" ever since the first century. That's what they teach.

However, even using their own Bible, we can see there is no way that anyone could be allowed to "sit upon God's throne" and himself, not actually be "enthroned." That simply does not make good sense!

Clearly Jesus has been empowered as Jehovah's king from his own words found at Matthew 28:18.

So, it would be the height of foolishness to say that Jesus was going to "receive authority" over earth's affairs in the year of 1914 when he clearly states for the record that he had already received "authority" over everything right after his resurrection from the dead in the first century.

And we read that Jesus even promised his followers,

"To the one that conquers I will grant to sit down with me on my throne, even as I conquered and sat down with my Father on his throne." (Rev. 3:21)

Here again, Jesus promises his faithful followers that they too, would be permitted to "sit upon his throne," if they would "conquer," the same way he had "conquered" and was permitted to "sit upon his father's throne". Nevertheless, in the same way, before they could be permitted this great privilege, they too would have to prove themselves "sons" of Jehovah.

"Anyone conquering will inherit these things, and I shall be his God and he will be my son." (Rev. 21:7)

Jesus points out the prerequisite for "inheriting all these things" was for one to "conquer" and thus show himself to be a "son," in the complete sense of the word. In this way, one would become a "son" and subsequently be "declared" after a period of testing, just as Jesus was. In this way, he would become a "conqueror" like Jesus. And in this way, Jehovah would become his "father" in the final, definitive sense. Paul spoke of Jesus' "declaration" of "sonship" by saying,

"[Jesus] ... who with power was DECLARED God's Son according to the spirit of holiness by means of resurrection from the dead -- yes Jesus Christ our Lord". (Romans 1:4)

"[GOD] LEFT NOTHING THAT IS NOT SUBJECT TO HIM"

An additional scripture that also sheds light on the subject of Christ's authority and all that was given him at his resurrection from death is found at Hebrews 2:8 which says:

"All things you subjected under his feet." For in that he subjected all things to him [God] left nothing that is not subject to him. Now, though, we do not yet see all things in subjection to him."

This is a scripture that Jehovah's Witnesses nor the WTS will spend much time examining in their literature. We see this is so because Hebrews 2:8 shows us "all things have been made subject" to Jesus, since his resurrection. In fact it says, "[God] has left nothing that is not subject" to him. That's right, "nothing."

Therefore, according to this verse, Jesus Christ is in complete control of "all things," and "nothing" is exempt from his authority and control. However, Paul adds this enlightening point for us by saying,

"...though, we do not see all things in subjection to him."

We today, do not actually see the full power of Jesus demonstrated in "making all things subject" to him. No, even though in actuality everything is "subject" to Jesus right now. Nevertheless, God's Son simply has not totally exercised that power to fully demonstrate his domination over everything. That comes later.

Jesus fully demonstrates his full control and domination over all, AT THE VERY END OF HIS REIGN. This is when Jesus removes all inherited "sin" "sickness" and Adamic "death" from earth's scene. He also at this time, at the end of his reign, removes all human "governments, authorities and powers" exercised upon earth, as recognized Satanic "enemies" of his. When he does this, and brings them "to nothing" in complete and utter destruction before God, Jesus' reign will "end". Afterwhich, Jesus will "hand over the kingdom" to his God and father, Jehovah, and "subject" himself to this One, God Almighty, the Supreme Ruler in the Universe. This is how Jesus' reign in heaven, will end. (1 Corinthians 15:24-28)

So, in harmony with Jehovah's will, the "enthroned" and reigning heavenly king, Jesus Christ, simply has not as of yet, fully demonstrated his superiority over "all things" upon earth and their total "subjection" to his power. That comes later.

Paul spoke of the situation this way by saying,

"As for us, our citizenship exists in the heavens, from which place also we are eagerly waiting for a savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will refashion our humiliated body to be conformed to his glorious body according to the operation of the power that he has, even to subject all things to himself. (Philippians 3:20, 21)

Therefore based upon this understanding of matter, is it any wonder Paul wrote,

"But this [man] offered one sacrifice for sins perpetually and sat down at the right hand of God, from then on awaiting until his enemies should be placed as a stool for his feet." (Hebrews 10:12, 13}

Now, the WTS says this scripture proves Jesus is "awaiting" rulership. He is "sitting" at God's right hand, "awaiting" the year of 1914, so that he can become "enthroned" and BEGIN His rule.

But is that what Paul said? We just read what Paul said of the matter.

Paul said, sure, Jesus is "awaiting" something. But it is not kingdom rule. No, he is not "awaiting" this at all. No, but Paul said that Jesus is "awaiting" or expecting the Word from God to fully demonstrate his "authority" over his "enemies", by placing them "as a stool for his feet." Which means, as Paul states, to "bring them to nothing," or complete and utter destruction. That's what Paul is saying.

"Next, the end, when he hands over the kingdom to his God and Father, when he has BROUGHT TO NOTHING [or destroyed] all government and all authority and power. For he [Jesus] must rule as king UNTIL God has put all enemies under his feet [or destroyed them]. As the last enemy, death is to be BROUGHT TO NOTHING [or destroyed]." (1 Corinthians 15:24-26)

As we have just read, Paul shows that at the end of Jesus' reign, he is allowed to bring his enemies, as "to nothing" or total destruction. Jesus' kingdom or rulership will extend itself until the actual time he is told by God to "put all enemies under his feet", in destruction. He is to "bring them to nothing". All "governments and authorities" upon earth, also inherited "sin" and "death", are all "brought to nothing" at the same time, by Jesus Christ's heavenly rulership. As the scripture says above, "For he must rule as king until..." he accomplishes this for God. And when he accomplishes this, that is, "brought to nothing", "all [human] governments, authorities and powers", "brought" all inherited Adamic sin and death "to nothing", then, Jesus' rule ends.

bjc

30

Anointed Experience #1 - Discerning the Body

by Amazing in

jw
friends

"thichi" asked in my previous post about some of the 'anointed' experiences i alluded to, especially those that i mentioned that were somewhat painful.

here is one such event that i have relayed before in shorter comments:.

i was an elder at the time, visiting in pennsylvania on business.

bjc2012

Hi Amazing:

I enjoyed your experience mentioned above. I believe it relates a great "truth" about the Governing Body and its true, hidden feelings about the younger "anointed" in their midst.

I think the whole experience you've related shows, even though the C.O. proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was a kooky "nut" case, the sad truth of the whole matter is that the poor soul is simply "parroting" or reflecting crudely, the exact sentiments of the G.B. as regards whether to accept the claims of younger "anointed" as being genuine or not. They simply don't believe these are genuine "brothers of Christ". And that's the real truth of the matter.

You can easily tell this by the written material they provide as "spiritual food in due season" for the flock in general when the subject comes up. These "kooky" ideas about a 1935 "cut-off date" and so on, have been implanted by the G.B. thru their publications, especially those publications written in the more recent years.

For example, I posted this information a little while back on the subject of the younger "anointed" and whether the G.B. really considered them to be genuine "brothers of Christ". Also why these "least of Christ brothers" were never ever consulted nor commonly "used" in serious positions of authority at Bethel Headquarters (Service/Writing Department), or given larger privileges at Assemblies and so on. This careful "distinction" has always been made.

I wrote the following:

--------quote from post-------

"XXX XXXX",

First of all the question of the younger "anointed" not being used by the organization in high positions.

How do you explain the writing and service dept. at Brooklyn Bethel being made up of primarily of those of the "other sheep" for the past 50 years when plenty of the younger "anointed" were available to be used? This is the "seat" of government for all the congregations and where congregational policy is formed. The "other sheep" have occupied these primary positions for 50 years or more, in the face of thousands of "anointed" being available for such duties.

And as for the writing dept. Why are the "anointed" as members of the FD&S, not dominant in this department? Instead, it is the "other sheep" again. And has been so for the last 50 years or so. How do you explain that?

There is a reason for this, I assure you. A very good reason why these things have happened that exposes the WTS' duplicity and deceit.

But another question: "XXX XXXX", how do you explain, the overwhelming bulk of the writing of the all of the various publications over the last 50 years or so, except upon rare occasion, have being done by the "great crowd" and not the "anointed" who are practically non-existent in writing dept?

Who has really been "feeding" the JW brotherhood over the last 50 years, the "other sheep" or the "anointed"? Which group? (Matt. 24:45-47)

And how can the obvious pushing of the "other sheep" ahead of the "anointed" as the G.B. has done, be viewed as pleasing to God, if we are to take the FD&S arrangement seriously? (Matt. 24:45-47)

Well, before you answer, consider this.

Could the real answer lie in the following:

"XXX XXXX", since you have recently become "anointed" within the last 7 years or so, and only baptized within the mid-seventies, I'm sure you are acutely aware that the G.B. would have great reason to doubt your "recent" claim to be of he "anointed". I'm sure you are aware of this.

I'm also sure you are aware of the fact that the WTS has said in numerous articles over and over again, the claims of all "recent" anointees, since the years of 1931-35, should be questioned! The WTS has pointedly said, without leaving any doubt, that these "comparatively recent" self-professed "anointed" ones should "examine" their motives in claiming to be of the "anointed". All those we claim to be "anointed" since the year of 1931-35, need to take another "look" at their "background" and "feelings" about professing to be one of the "chosen" of God. Isn't that so, "XXX XXXX"?

The February 1, 1982 Watchtower pgs. 28, 29 under the subheading: "How Can a Person Be Certain?" breaks it down this way, in the most explicit manner by saying,

"Those sharing in preaching this good news of the Kingdom in modern times are confident that Jehovah God is leading his dedicated servants by means of his visible spirit-begotten organization, the "faithful and discreet slave." (Matthew 24:45-47) Under its direction the heavenly hope was held out, highlighted and stressed until about the year 1935. Then as "light flashed up" to reveal clearly the identify of the "great crowd" of Revelation 7:9, the emphasis began to be placed on the earthly hope. (Psalm 97:11) It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that by that time the full number of the 144,000 would have been nearly completed. Of course, any individuals proving unfaithful would need to be replaced. But, understandably, these would be comparatively few. And by whom would these be replaced? It seems reasonable also to conclude that most likely this heavenly hope would be extended to some who had endured in integrity, who had stuck to their dedication over the years, rather than its being held out to unproved newly dedicated ones. (Compare Luke 22:28-30) ..."

Do you see the problem, "XXX XXXX"?

The Governing Body simply does not believe the "claims" of the recent "anointed". They do not see them as "genuine" anointed brothers of Christ. Not even the "lesser ones", as you claim to be. Not even that! So, they really don't believe you, "XXX XXXX", in your claims to be of the anointed. You are not believed, by your precious Governing Body "anointed" brothers.

And that means, invariably, that your profession of being of the "anointed" is also not to be taken seriously by all of JWs, worldwide, because of this particular man-made doctrine or teaching of 1931-35, the 1931-35 "tradition" of the anointed. That's a fact too. It's the reality of the situation. The cold facts. (See Mark 7:7, 8.)

But, let's continue.

The articles further states to remove any doubt about how they feel about recent "anointees" in the organization,

"...However, from reports at hand it appears that even some newly dedicated Christians have considered themselves to be 'born again.'"

Now, here is the big point, the "dagger-in-the-heart" point. The article says:

"Any who in comparatively recent times dedicated themselves and were baptized and who consider themselves to be "born again" would do well to reflect seriously on the following questions:

1) What reasons have you for feeling that Jehovah God has planted this hope in you?

2) Could it be that your emotional feeling is a holdover from the mistaken belief you previously held while in Babylon the Great that heaven is the destiny of all good people?

3) Or could it be that you feel this way because you had great inward disturbances, that you at first fought against the idea but it gradually won out?

4) But did it win out because you wanted it that way, perhaps even unconsciously?

Such struggles do not of themselves prove that you were "born again".

5) Or do you feel that you have been chosen by God to be one of the 144,000 anointed ones because of your keen appreciation of spiritual things, because of your fondness for deep spiritual truths?

Then note that ever so many who do not profess to be "born again" are "spiritual men" in the fullest sense of the word. (1 Corinthians 2:14, 15) And there is no question about the spiritual strength of those men and women of faith listed in Hebrews chapter 11. None of those were "born again." All of them looked forward to "a better resurrection [to life under God's kingdom] right here on this earth. -- Hebrews 11:35

6) Or might it be that you feel the way you do because of your displaying more zeal than some of your fellow Christians?

But that of itself could not be the determining factor, for the apostle Paul time and again found it necessary to counsel anointed Christians in regard to taking their spiritual obligations seriously. (1 Corinthians 11:20-22); Galatians 4:9-11)

7) Or could it be that your profession to be of the anointed is due to a lack of modesty?

There are some who quite recently have professed to be of the anointed but who, instead of building unity in the congregation, have felt they must have their own Bible study group. To the contrary, mature "born again" Christians remain close to the local congregation even though it is largely comprised of the "other sheep," (John 10:16) However, a person's being "born again" is a personal matter between God and each Christian. No one should judge another on this question. -- Romans 14:10"

[my thought: I think the WTS just did, that is "judge" on the matter. And I believe you, "XXX XXXX" will concur with me on that opinion too. ]

The article continues:

"From all the foregoing what do we conclude [on this matter of recent JWs being anointed]? That Jehovah God is just and righteous, wise and loving. He has the right to assign his intelligent creatures to their respective roles -- some to serve his purpose in the heavens, others to do so here upon earth. It is not as though the heavenly prize is something to be gained by personal choice and effort, or to be coveted selfishly. It is unique and no human creature may presume upon it. It is indeed a marvelous undeserved kindness that Jehovah God bestows on a few of his creatures, in the furtherance of his wise, just and loving purposes, but not due to any special merit on their own part. Being "born again" is limited to these. (Romans 3:23, 24; 11:33-36) ... No one should be so presumptuous as to say to Jehovah, "What have you been doing?"

End of quote from article.

"XXX XXXX", how would you like to sit thru this particular WTS study with your loving brothers "throwing tomatoes" all thru-out the meeting at you, the recent "anointee" of God. And for months after this, "pot-shots" being taken at you. How friendly would the congregation be to you, while you were trying to maintain your personal claim to be of the "anointed", and the G.B. and FD&S dispensing this type of information against you, and your personal claim to be of the "anointed"? Perhaps, some on this board have had that "experience". It would not be pleasant, I assure you.

But my main point in bringing up this information is this: After reading the above, why do you think the G.B. does not use nor promote, as they say, "any who in comparatively recent times" have dedicated themselves to Jehovah God and have "claimed" or "professed" the heavenly hope, to ultra high positions of authority within this organization?

They listed 7 reasons. They didn't leave us in the dark about this whole issue.

All of the reasons they gave are totally unscriptural, when examined. Again, I know you concur. You'd have to, to maintain your claim to being of the anointed. And yet, when they finish their listing of all of their reasons why people like you can't possibly be of the "anointed", they conclude by saying, "well...we can't judge". What hypocrites!

But lets take another example. This is not the only time, they've emphasized their personal preference in this matter, ahead of God's Will. Nor the first time, they have put their man-made "tradition" ahead of God's Word. (Mark 7:7, 8)

Again, the February 15th 1985 Watchtower pg. 21 par. 18, 19 comments directly on this very matter. Under the subheading called: "THE NEED FOR SELF-EXAMINATION", the publication said,

"The modern history of Jehovah's Witnesses shows that since 1931 more attention started to be given to the "other sheep" through the Kingdom message...What does this new emphasis indicate? Surely that the gathering of the "little flock" was drawing to a close and the time had come for Jesus, through the administration of the "the faithful and discreet slave," to turn his attention to gathering the "other sheep."

The article continues:

"With the foregoing in mind, we say to ALL THOSE WHO HAVE RECENTLY become associated with Jehovah's people and who may have made some claim to being one of the anointed class: EXAMINE CAREFULLY your relationship with Jehovah. ASK YOURSELF, is the heavenly hope that I profess to have somehow

(1) a holdover from a previously held church teaching that all church members go to heaven?

(2) Is my hope in any way connected with some selfish desire or emotional feelings."

In other words, are you seeking "selfish" prominence of some kind? Are you emotionally disturbed? Unbalanced?

Now after reading that, do you think the G.B. and WTS headquarters staff believes the more recent "anointees", to truly be spirit-begotten by God? Or, just poor, misguided individuals who have some "emotional" problem of some kind?

Does the Governing Body feel the more recent "anointees" are ones truly worthy of heavy spiritual responsibility and privilege within the organization of JWs, like being a part of Writing or Service Departments?

I don't think so.

-------end of post-------

These WT articles mentioned above came out around the same time of your experience above. 1982-85, early to mid 1980s. So, these printed statements typified the prevalent thinking among the JW "brotherhood" at that time about the young "anointed". Which means the kooky C.O. was just parroting what he heard from an actual G.B. member, who no doubt expressed the "private" sentiments of the entire Governing Body on the matter. And we know, they haven't changed their thinking on this unscriptural 1935 "cut-off date" teaching, to this day.

So any younger "anointed" among us today, who are within the JW "brotherhood", can simply expect more of the same treatment exemplied by your experience. No change in sight.

bjc

41

Is The Governing Body EVIL?

by jst2laws in

i am going to stick my neck out and postulate that the gb is not evil .

nor is the watchtower society as a whole.

i'm sorry this got a little long but please accept the challenge and show me wrong.

bjc2012

Hi Jst2laws,

I once told the most famous JW "apostate" that for about 4 weeks I thought he was the most important person in the world until I realized his importance was only in connection with the WTS which is nothing but a fraud. His response was that he has had bigger disappointments in his life than my disillusion.

Your observation is correct, and so was the observation of the "most famous JW apostate", if JWs have no special relationship with God.

When we say someone is evil, we are making a "declaration" of a fact. We have "declared" him evil in the sight of God and man. This implies direct "accountability" to God for his actions. However, by making the person "accountable" to God, we have given him or attributed to him, an implied "relationship" with God. We are saying he have been given a "Law" from God (that he has transgressed), which then implies a "Covenant-Relationship" with God. A fact most on this discussion board cannot find acceptable.

Has the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses been given a "Law" from God? Are they a part of a Christian "Law" Covenant with God?

Its only when we can answer all such questions, and firmly resolve all such issues in our minds, that we can say with any real conviction that they are truly "evil" or not before God.

If we are speaking Biblically, evil has to be defined within the confines of what God's Word defines as evil. And God only defines that which is truly evil as being in opposition to Him directly, thus in opposition to his "Law" or "Covenant". Instead of referring to the act or person as evil, God's Word classifies it as being "sin" or a "transgression" against God's established Law. It becomes a personal encroachment against His established boundaries. And if the "transgression" or act is deliberate or practiced, with no signs of "repentance" for carrying out the deliberate act or practice of sin, then the person and/or persons are classified as "evil" by God.

The Bible shows "Sin" cannot be charged to someone that has never been given a direct "Law", commandment, or established boundary by God. God must first draw the line, inform one of the line's existence and what it means to "cross" that particular line, and must express to the person in the most emphatic terms the lasting effects of "transgressing" that boundary, before genuine "guilt" is charged to the offender.

Paul described the situation we speak of this way by saying,

"In reality the Law produces wrath, but where THERE IS NO LAW, neither is there any transgression." (Romans 4:15 NWT)

A people without a God-given "Law", though technically sinning, have not been "charged" with sin, or of having "transgressed" God in any way. God does not consider this conduct "any transgression" against Him.

Again Paul said,

"For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not charged against anyone when THERE IS NO LAW." (Romans 5:13 NWT)

Even though the "sin" is present, the "sin" is not charged against the person or persons involved, if there is no "Law" present.

So Paul could say,

"...Really I would not have come to know sin if it had not been for the Law..." (Romans 7:7 NWT)

And this,

"...by Law is the accurate knowledge of sin." (Romans 3:20 NWT)

So the vital connection is with the "Law" of God itself. With the giving of a "Law", comes accountability with God.

So when the "Law" is given, and is transgressed, then the "wrath" of God naturally comes. As Paul said,

"In reality the Law PRODUCES [God's] wrath..." (Romans 4:15 NWT)

So, in the strictest sense, the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses CANNOT be found guilty before God, without establishing FIRST whether the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses have actually been given a "Law" from God or not.

Have they been given a Christian "Law" from God? Has a Covenant-Relationship with God, been truly established?

If we can answer in the affirmative to those vital questions, then, and only then can we "charge" the Governing Body of JWs with "sin" and "transgression" before God, and thus label them as "evil". Thereby making God liable to take any required "action" of recompense against them He deems necessary in compliance with His Law.

Simply point, as the "most famous JW apostate" taught, if Jehovah's Witnesses are just another group of people with no particular relationship with God, then they have no special "accountability" with Him either. And oh how right he was! Because "blame" and "guilt" implies "accountability". And "accountability" implies "relationship". This is an unavoidable conclusion that the "most famous JW apostate" saw in his study of the Scriptures.

And we do well to heed his astute advice in this matter, if we are persuaded in our own minds and hearts that they simply do NOT have a covenant-relationship with God.

So the question of whether the Governing Body is evil or not, is proven less than moot, having no particular significance at all, if we do not first address the question of whether a "Law Covenant" from God has been granted to JWs.

If we say no, then the Governing Body of JWs simply have no special standing with God at all. And no particular "guilt" before Him either. Then, we must confess their past "works" are meaningless, and perhaps even their pitiful existence.

And if that is the case, then we are all just wasting our valuable time, thinking about JWs and their leadership, talking about the G.B. and discussing their every disturbing move. Even their hypocritical 10-year secret liason with the UN does not mean so much. We are not even surprised by their actions, and so on. We simply don't concern ourselves with them any more, just as countless thousands of ex-JWs do everyday when they leave the organization. (For example, my father put in 50 years with the JW organization, found out they were wrong, left and never even looked back. He got on with his life, right up until his death. Had a happy retirement and was a happy man all the way. He said he didn't regret his 50 years in, his service was given to God and not man. He figured God would take into account his "sincerity" with any mistakes made being a part of the organization.)

If "accountability" is not there, then there is no real need for us to keep up with the "latest" on JWs or constantly occupying ourselves with what "they" are doing and what "they" wrote in their "rag" magazines of late. That's if the G.B. of JWs are under no "Law" of God or have no Covenant-relationship with God to start with. We are wasting our time calling them meaningless names, like "evil slave" and "man of lawlessness" and so on when God Almighty has "no beef" with them in particular. No more so, than the other "Osama bin ladens" of the world, anyway. We have to admit the truth, that those Bible descriptions we gleefully gave to the "clergy of christendom", simply don't fit them, but fits someone else undetermined at present (or maybe nobody at all).

The Governing Body's religion becomes just like any other religion and the corruption each church organization faces, daily. Admittedly we see no ex-Baptist discussion boards, ex-Catholic discussion boards, ex-Methodist discussion boards, at least that I'm aware of. That's because wrongdoing is so rampant there, and has been for so many years, its just taken as "commonplace happenings" among the people who frequent and support these organizations.

We are faced with this thought, is this the reality?

This is what the "most famous JW apostate" thinks.

Given that premise, we are forced to adopt the attitude that the G.B. (and all JWs) are simply a small bunch of "nobodys" in whom nobody hardly on the face of the earth cares about at all nor wants to know anything about. There are roughly 6 billion people in the world. But only 6 million JWs worldwide. That breaks down to 1 JW for every 999 people on the planet. Which means in reality, 99.9% of the world's population is not the least bit concerned. They have bigger problems to deal with, and "bigger fish to fry".

However, on the other hand, if we say that Jehovah's Witnesses have been given a "Law" from God, (and there are those that believe this, I being one of them), then we must insist that they are especially "accountable" to that Law, from God's point of view. We must say, God is now obligated to do something about their "transgressions" against His "Law". We confidently say, we know they have incurred "God's wrath", and will be "punished" by God accordingly. But surely not because they have attained to "righteousness" in any way. No, no more than ancient "Israel" did, who must live with the dubious distinction of having "disowned" and murdered, the "Chief Agent of life", Jesus. (Acts 3:14, 15 NWT) So JWs have attained no "righteousness" at all. But God gets involved primarily because of whats mentioned in Ezekiel 36:20-22 [see NIV], of which I think addresses the most important overlooked factor in this whole drama. The verse in the Bible where God's showed what was of the utmost importance to Him when "transgression" against His "Law" was involved,

"I had CONCERN FOR MY HOLY NAME...". (Ezekiel 36:21 NIV)

bjc

161

I've been studying for about a year now...

by Meow921 in

i've been studying with the jw's for about a year now.

i know that by nature (or nurture!

) i have an addictive personality so i have tried to be real careful that i'm doing the right thing by getting involved with them.

bjc2012

You Know,

...Until recently a brother had to have been in the fulltime service for a minimum of 40 years. I don't even come close. Besides, your reasoning is flawed anyway. It is obvious to us that it is Jehovah's purpose to transfer leadership from the anointed to the non-anointed anyway, this in view of the fact that Jehovah's purpose is to harvest his chosen ones to his heavenly kingdom.

You Know, you have raised an interesting thought. I'd like to expound on this in depth. Let's explore this thought because I think it would be good for persons of interest like "Meow921" to also review such information about the WTS' organization BEFORE JOINING it.

First of all the question of the younger "anointed" not being used by the organization in high positions.

How do you explain the writing and service dept. at Brooklyn Bethel being made up of primarily of those of the "other sheep" for the past 50 years when plenty of the younger "anointed" were available to be used? This is the "seat" of government for all the congregations and where congregational policy is formed. The "other sheep" have occupied these primary positions for 50 years or more, in the face of thousands of "anointed" being available for such duties.

And as for the writing dept. Why are the "anointed" as members of the FD&S, not dominant in this department? Instead, it is the "other sheep" again. And has been so for the last 50 years or so. How do you explain that?

There is a reason for this, I assure you. A very good reason why these things have happened that exposes the WTS' duplicity and deceit.

But another question: You Know, how do you explain, the overwhelming bulk of the writing of the all of the various publications over the last 50 years or so, except upon rare occasion, have being done by the "great crowd" and not the "anointed" who are practically non-existent in writing dept?

Who has really been "feeding" the JW brotherhood over the last 50 years, the "other sheep" or the "anointed"? Which group? (Matt. 24:45-47)

And how can the obvious pushing of the "other sheep" ahead of the "anointed" as the G.B. has done, be viewed as pleasing to God, if we are to take the FD&S arrangement seriously? (Matt. 24:45-47)

Well, before you answer, consider this.

Could the real answer lie in the following:

You Know, since you have recently become "anointed" within the last 7 years or so, and only baptized within the mid-seventies, I'm sure you are acutely aware that the G.B. would have great reason to doubt your "recent" claim to be of he "anointed". I'm sure you are aware of this.

I'm also sure you are aware of the fact that the WTS has said in numerous articles over and over again, the claims of all "recent" anointees, since the years of 1931-35, should be questioned! The WTS has pointedly said, without leaving any doubt, that these "comparatively recent" self-professed "anointed" ones should "examine" their motives in claiming to be of the "anointed". All those we claim to be "anointed" since the year of 1931-35, need to take another "look" at their "background" and "feelings" about professing to be one of the "chosen" of God. Isn't that so, You Know?

The February 1, 1982 Watchtower pgs. 28, 29 under the subheading: "How Can a Person Be Certain?" breaks it down this way, in the most explicit manner by saying,

"Those sharing in preaching this good news of the Kingdom in modern times are confident that Jehovah God is leading his dedicated servants by means of his visible spirit-begotten organization, the "faithful and discreet slave." (Matthew 24:45-47) Under its direction the heavenly hope was held out, highlighted and stressed until about the year 1935. Then as "light flashed up" to reveal clearly the identify of the "great crowd" of Revelation 7:9, the emphasis began to be placed on the earthly hope. (Psalm 97:11) It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that by that time the full number of the 144,000 would have been nearly completed. Of course, any individuals proving unfaithful would need to be replaced. But, understandably, these would be comparatively few. And by whom would these be replaced? It seems reasonable also to conclude that most likely this heavenly hope would be extended to some who had endured in integrity, who had stuck to their dedication over the years, rather than its being held out to unproved newly dedicated ones. (Compare Luke 22:28-30) ..."

Do you see the problem, You Know?

The Governing Body simply does not believe the "claims" of the recent "anointed". They do not see them as "genuine" anointed brothers of Christ. Not even the "lesser ones", as you claim to be. Not even that! So, they really don't believe you, You Know, in your claims to be of the anointed. You are not believed, by your precious Governing Body "anointed" brothers.