In many ways it appears as if the Watchtower movement is slowing down. A number of changes over the last few years certainly show that the Watchtower is in a period of transition.
They have cut back on the number of magazines they print as well as lowered the cost of production by eliminating things like hard backed books. They have sent home many workers from their largest operation in Brooklyn New York. They have acknowledged there are not enough people within the faith stepping up to fill leadership roles (A few years ago they began to tell their congregations publicly that there was a need for 30,000 - 40,000 Elders and Ministerial servants). Because of this void there is a strain on those currently in leadership roles, and the Watchtower has begun to cut back on it's scheduled meetings in order to relieve it.
There are other things as well. Baptism numbers are not as impressive as they used to be, especially when compared to the average peak publisher hours. Such comparisons show that while many people are being added to the Watchtower ranks, they are also loosing many members at the same time. There have also been changes in Watchtower policy regarding the counting of field service time, lowering the bar for more people to be counted as publishers. Depending upon how many people are taking advantage of this arrangement, the Watchtowers growth statics could be even more bleak than they currently appear.
I think these things (as well as many others) suggest that the Watchtower movement is in a very tumultuous position. Much of which I feel has to do with the growing irrelevance of their message.
There is very basic problem with religions that are based around specific apocalyptic speculation, namely that eventually those within the movement get tired of hearing that the 'end is near'.
Think of it this way. Who were the type of people in the late 1800's and early 1900's that joined the Bible Student/JW movement? Were they really interested in joining a religion that was over 120 years old? No! They wanted to be part of something that was new and exciting. Russell provided that during his lifetime, and Rutherford provided something so different from Russell that he kept the excitement going.
But the Watchtower has since become much more of an institution now. They are an 'established' faith. The problem is that their message does not reflect it.
Apocalyptic obsessions work great during the foundation of a group. They help bring together passion and excitement. But drawn out over the long term they can be very tiring. Look how much people sacrificed for the JW faith in the early part of the 20th century. Now look at were the movement is today. It has become much more routine. It follows a very predictable pattern.
A number of other groups eventually figured out that they could not obsess over the end of the world. It may have been what started the movement, but they would not continue to allow it to dominate. The transition experienced in Mormonism I think is a quite telling one. They have been quite successful in not letting their apocalyptic speculations get in the way of the future of the church.
But the Watchtower has not caught on, yet. They continue to discourage college when they should be starting the process of (gasp) starting their own. They call on members to consider a life without children when they should be telling people to grow nice big families full of true believers.
They continue to think short term. It is obvious that they still actually believe the end of the world is close. Amazingly, this dedication to their end times speculation could possibly tear apart the entire movement. Rather than planning for the future they are taking the risk of hoping the end comes before they have to deal with it.
Will they adapt and begin to plan for the future, or will they fade into disorganization and confusion. Time will tell. One thing is for sure, unless the movement begins to make some major changes like other contemporary institutions have, it is troubled times ahead.
drew sagan
JoinedPosts by drew sagan
-
94
The growing irrelevance of the Watchtower message
by drew sagan inin many ways it appears as if the watchtower movement is slowing down.
a number of changes over the last few years certainly show that the watchtower is in a period of transition.
they have cut back on the number of magazines they print as well as lowered the cost of production by eliminating things like hard backed books.
-
-
drew sagan
-
13
My Dad Told Me I'll Never Retire...But I Should Still Have a 401k
by B_Deserter inhe was telling me that by 2020, none of "this" (the weeeerld) is going to be here, but it's still a good idea to have a 401(k) because you can use it for other things, like a down payment on a house or something.
then he started talking about how he never thought he would retire, and now he's faced with it.
i just kind of thought that was funny.
-
-
drew sagan
You dads comments tell a much bigger story about what is going on within the Jehovah's Witness movement.
As time passes, their message of "Armageddon fast approaching" is becoming more and more irrelevant. While the individual members may actually state verbally that they believe they will never retire, grow old, die, ect, they live their lives in expectation that those things may actually occur.
I think this is an important observation to recognize. While the Watchtower rhetoric about the "end times" is still being pumped out full force, it has very little effect on the membership. People (especially in western lands) are starting to look more long term. They hope and wish that the Armageddon would come in their lifetime, but are not as "sure" as the past generations of the movement were. They certainly are not making the same kind of sacrifices that previous JW generations did.
Putting this in a grander perspective, it appears as though the Watchtower movement is going to be faced with some pretty substantial problems. It's main message is loosing importance in our times. Because it is now an established faith it simply will not be able to continue with it's end time message through the end of this century. I suspect that within our lifetimes the movement will either change yet again, or shrivel into disorganization. -
32
Elder calling around
by Am ha·a'ret ini'm a new member as i've not completely left the org yet and being a "good lil jw" would never have looked at a site like this previously!
there is one elder in the cong who calls around every so often to "chat" as i only stopped attending meeting a couple of months ago.
i've spoken to him about certain subjects - eg the un thing and the misuse of quotes - but he has no useful answers for me.
-
-
drew sagan
If you want to keep your contacts, ignore this guy. Either that or play along with his "encouragement". Whatever you do be very careful if he wants to bring another Elder!!!. They will try to get their "two witnesses" against you if they can.
-
20
New Music/Artisit Recommendations?
by purplesofa inbeen out of the loop for awhile on new releases.. anything new you guys want to share?.
thanks, .
purps.
-
-
drew sagan
I'm a big Sufjan Stevens fan
-
54
Is Genesis account just a myth?
by AK - Jeff inthere are many stories that make we wonder if anything akin to solid reasoning can prop up the bible's accounts of early life on earth.
but perhaps this scripture is a key:.
"these are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the lord god made the earth and the heavens, and every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the lord god had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
-
-
drew sagan
That is why I believe that a study of the earth's hydrology, will without fail, to create a metaphoric pun, dry up the Genesis account more quickly than all other argumentation. The water cycle has gone on unabated for eons of time - the evidence is compelling. Look at the Grand Canyon as example.
Still trying to look at this from the perspective of modern man eh ;)
I would again stress that they way the ancients read into stories such as the Genesis account is very different than we as modern people do today. We look at the story and want to know if it is either "true or false" in a historical and scientific sense. Over and over again modern bible based fundamentalists (such as the Watchtower, which most of us are familiar with) tell us that contained within the pages of Genesis is an ancient account of the historical and scientific process by which our world came into creation. They state that the accuracy of Genesis proves that God authored the Bible because the ancients could never have understood such scientific realities, yet they are present within the text, so the story goes.
With so many claiming that absolute scientific truth is contained within the pages of Genesis the automatic response by many is to go word by word and compare it to modern science. They then quickly see that most of Genesis does not meet up with modern scientific understand and thus label the Genesis account accordingly. By focusing so hard on these aspects of the text I think a greater understanding is lost though.
I think this quote from the volume I previously mentioned says is all"...the reader of the Bible should not, however, be misled into dismissing either myth or legend as "irrelevant" and accepting only history as "relevant". What usually passes for history is not an accurate scientific recording of events but an interpretation of such events-assuming even that one knows what the event "really" was. The best of modern historians is an interpreter, selective summarizer, commentator, and often philosopher who brings a point of view to the material. This is precisely what the Book of Genesis does. While it's material included myths and legends, those in time became incorporated into the consciousness of the people. For what people believe their past to mean assumes a dynamism of it's own; the experience itself becomes creative".
-
7
Any Linux users in the forum?Please share your experience
by justhuman ini just kind of fed up with windows os.
specially all this virus that recently i have been receiving.
so i have decided to drop windows xp os and bill gates microsoft and go for a linux mandriva os.
-
-
drew sagan
I installed ubuntu linux on a number of extra computers I had at work. It took a little bit of patience, but it installed rather easily and ran well. Depending upon what your needs are it is possibly a good option. It is good for word processing and web surfing, although installing browser plug-ins is a bit difficult. I don't know if I would want to run it for very demanding software such as photo and video editing, games, ect.
-
26
Iraq war for oil? Question for Bush haters
by 5thGeneration ini've been meaning to ask this for a while.. i'm just curious how all the bush bashers who screamed for years that iraq was 'all about the oil' justify their view now with oil prices hovering around $140/barrel?.
just wondering because that argument has kinda been quashed, hasn't it?
i never saw the u.s. just taking iraq's oil nor do i now see iraq doing any favours by discounting the price.. i don't like bush so this is not a desire to argue.
-
-
drew sagan
The Iraq war had nothing to do with getting better prices for consumers. It was an ideological war that was waged with the naive assumption that America could essentially create a strong partner in the middle east that would help put pressure on surrounding nations not in line with American interests (especially Iran). If such an idealistic outcome actually did come to pass America would come out of it much stronger than it had gone in. Think of an America in which the Afgan war as well as the Iraq war actually went as hoped by those who pushed for it. The funny thing about all of this is that while the intent of this war was to make America an even stronger player on the world scene, it has actually weakened it.
-
54
Is Genesis account just a myth?
by AK - Jeff inthere are many stories that make we wonder if anything akin to solid reasoning can prop up the bible's accounts of early life on earth.
but perhaps this scripture is a key:.
"these are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the lord god made the earth and the heavens, and every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the lord god had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
-
-
drew sagan
A pretty basic, but good reference on what's going on within the genesis text, it's multiple sources, and such: The Torah, A Modern Commentary Looking at the text mainly from the perspective from a modern, 21st century, scientifically educated viewpoint will take you in many directions. Rather than trying to get out of the text what we feel it should provide, it should rather be looked at from the perspective of the culture from with the story originated at what it meant to the people who read it, shared it, and revered it.
-
8
Hypocritical quote from article on Watchtower.org
by drew sagan inwas looking at watchtower.org when i came across this paragraph: when one falsely shouts "fire!
" in a crowded theater and some are trampled to death in the wild stampede to get out, must not the shouter bear the responsibility for the resulting deaths and accidents?
when someone says, "i do not agree with what you say, but i will defend your right to say it," are you given carte blanche, unlimited freedom, to say publicly whatever you wish, regardless of the consequences?
-
-
-
8
Hypocritical quote from article on Watchtower.org
by drew sagan inwas looking at watchtower.org when i came across this paragraph: when one falsely shouts "fire!
" in a crowded theater and some are trampled to death in the wild stampede to get out, must not the shouter bear the responsibility for the resulting deaths and accidents?
when someone says, "i do not agree with what you say, but i will defend your right to say it," are you given carte blanche, unlimited freedom, to say publicly whatever you wish, regardless of the consequences?
-
-
drew sagan
Was looking at Watchtower.org when I came across this paragraph:
WHEN one falsely shouts "Fire!" in a crowded theater and some are trampled to death in the wild stampede to get out, must not the shouter bear the responsibility for the resulting deaths and accidents? When someone says, "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it," are you given carte blanche, unlimited freedom, to say publicly whatever you wish, regardless of the consequences? There are those who think so.
Amazing how the Watchtower has for well over a century has shouted "fire" by telling people to base their lives on the speculative concept that the end of the world would occur within their own lifetime. And to add to that the leaders of this organization refuse to debate, discuss and defend their beliefs in a respectable way with the society around them!. This includes rejecting and ignoring all of academia as well as other religious groups that would be open to dialog.