Debator,
Thanks for the reply. One point you didn't respond to in my post was the point about disfellowshipping those that asked questions or had differences of opinion. In Paul's list of offenses that would cause the congregation to view the wrong doer as a non-Christian (I don't want to sidetrack the conversation regarding how the disfellowshipped are treated because it's not really pertaint to the discussion), no where is harboring private doubts listed. Yet, the Flock book (assuming you have access) lists that as a disfellowshipping offense. I really think they overstep bounds that even Jesus or Paul didn't cross which seems to imply the GB believes they have full apostlic authority to generate rules beyond what is written in the Bible.
I understand your insisting there is a difference between spirit or bible guided and inspired. The bible condemns murder and theft. So, you can say that you're bible guided if you refuse to do those things based on those writings. However, inspired would be enforcing a rule detailing what constitutes theft. In this sense, the WTS wants folks to follow the rules they promulgate in the same fashion that they expect JWs to follow something written in the scriptures. TD mentioned blood fractions. Over the years, this has changed many times. The WTS has put out specific rules regarding which treatments are acceptable and which are not. However, shouldn't an individual get to decide what they think constitutes "blood" and what is broken down sufficiently enough to say its not blood any longer? If I accepted a blood fraction such as hemoglobin prior to 2004 and confessed to the BOE, I could have been disfellowshipped losing family and friends. However, after 2004, I could take that treatment without sanction. So, if I was convinced that the WTS was being guided by Holy Spirit to say hemoglobin was scriptually wrong and died as a result, who's responsible? Me? I guess in one sense because I would have put faith in men. But I think that's the point, the WTS asks us to faithfully follow their words as if they are inspired and back that up with the possibility of being shunned. If they were asking on direct orders of Jehovah (thus inspired) then fine. Otherwise, it's their opinion and while they are free to put it out there, they overstep "guidance" by enforcing their opinions.
Regarding the appointment of elders, having been one for a number of years, I understand how this works. But, even then, it's a bit disingenuous. Many in the congregation believe that elders are directly appointed by holy spirit. In year's past, this is how the WTS presented the process. Now, they've back off a bit saying that elders are appointed by holy spirit in the sense the qualifications are set out in Tim & Titus which was written under inspiration. That's really not the same. Quite frankly, as an elder in several congregations, what happens is the secretary brings in the box with the time records and when a brother's name is brought up, those records are pulled to see if he and his wife (and kids if they're publishers) are reporting at least 10 hours a month (on average). If no, then the discussion is dropped. Yet, neither Tim or Titus mentions this as a qualification to being an elder. In places I've been, the only other points of discussion are usually 1) does he give decent talks, 2) comment regularly, 3) visible to the congregation, 4) will he get along with the rest of the BOE or be tough to work with. The rest of the qualifications are usually not even discussed.
Actually, when I read the entire Greek scriptures in context, I saw just the opposite of high organization. The scripture in Galations 2 is a great example. So you have James, Peter and John (reputed to be pillars in the Jerusalem congregation) speaking with Paul and Barnabas talking about where they should preach. They (everyone) agreed that Paul was called directly by Jesus to be an apostle to the nations and that's where he would go while they (everyone) agreed that James, Peter & John would stick with the Jews. Under WT structure, Paul & Barnabas would have been told what to do. Read that whole chapter and tell me if Paul believed in any sense that he reported to the Jerusalem elders. The WTS often refers to Paul functioning in a similar fashion to a CO today. Now, what do you think would happen if a CO told the branch "Nah, the spirit is leading me to go here instead of where you want to send me"? We both know that brother wouldn't be in the circuit work much longer. I know what you're going to say, "it doesn't work that way today". I agree, but then you have to admit that the structure of the WTS today is much different than the 1st century congregation because Jesus played an active role in directing the work with individual members as opposed to the claim that he is working only with the GB.
Yes, the individual congregations were organized in terms of having fellowship, taking care of its members, buidling each other up in faith, etc. But I don't see anything above that. In Revelations, Jesus directs counsel to individual congregations. Why? Because it was the early Christian believe that the individual congregations answered only to Jesus as the head. If you can point out where the middle man is, I'd love to see it.
As for disagreeing over prophcey, having that correct I believe would be the mark that an organization is operating under spirit direction. If they're not sure, they should say it and not make a big deal of it. But, saying that the passages in the book of Revelation are fulfilled in the WTS (such as the 7 seals being 7 conventions - see Revelation - It's Grand Climax book) and then expecting everyone to just accept it is difficult to swallow. I see the WTS as the ones that would look to punish those who attempt to act as the Beoreans and demand proof for such high claims. Obviously, since I have family in I just avoid discussing such troubling items because I don't want to be shunned.
As for 607, I've read 3rd witnesses arguments and there's quite a bit of circular logic. There are way more than 2 secular sources and if you look in the Kingdom Come book, there's an appendix that admits there is a large amount of evidence pointing away from 607. Even the website you referred to admits in the opening paragraph that there isn't secular evidence supporting 607. If 607 were such a pivoital date and God desires "all to be saved" why isn't there more evidence? If they discover evidence that puts the destruction of Jerusalem at 607, then while that still doesn't prove that Daniels 7 times prophsey had another fulfillment, at least it's something. Just saying because I said so is fine when a parent is talking to a 2 year old but it's not fine on matters of such importance. I want more proof than that.
I agree that it's fine to think that JWs are God's chosen people. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to disagree (at least to anyone I know) without serious, long lasting repercussions. I really think that's the biggest shame of all.
