It's no wonder so many JW's suffer from mental illness and from terrible depression and anxiety. Ever noticed how many JW's break down with things like CFS or M.E.?
A truly abusive religion, especially to children.
Posts by Essan
-
34Inappropriate - Sick - WT & Awake articles over the years.
by Essan ini remember as a kid reading an article - not sure if watchtower or awake - which terrified the life out of me!
i remember thinking at the time "ok, this may be true, but i'm just a kid, i shouldn't be reading this!".
some of the details remain imprinted on my mind decades later.
-
-
-
128
"High-Control Groups"
by Consfearacy inhttp://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .
"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.
it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.
-
-
Essan
Consfearacy said: "By saying we're still under the umbrella of global apostasy (no one has it right) and by labeling all religions false prophets, you can ignore Hebrews 10:24-25, read the Bible and think whatever you want about it."
You should really think before you post. This latest statement contradicts even your own beliefs.
If the 'global apostasy' prevents Heb 10:24-25, as you claim, and if Heb 10:24-25 is a Christian obligation, then you are insisting that no Christian met the obligations of Heb 10:24-25 for almost 1,800 years during the Apostasy because there was no "Visible Organization" or denominational "True religion" during that time, despite the Bible being clear that there would be true Christian "wheat" throughout the entire period right until the end.
You see how your own reasoning traps you?
To break it down even more slowly for you - you believe the Bible when it says that Christianity would be overtaken and mired with the Apostasy after the death of the apostles. You believe that this Apostasy continued for around 1,800 years. You also believe - and rightly - that Christians have always been obliged to apply Hebrews 10:24-25 "Let us consider one another to incite to love and fine works, not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together".
But according to your present reasoning Christians were unable to apply Hebrews 10:24-25, despite it being a Christian obligation, for almost 1,800 years - 95% of Christianity's history - because the foretold Apostasy apparently made it impossible.
This must be your claim because you are claiming that if the Apostasy continues today, then it would be impossible to obey Heb 10:24-25!
Heb 10:24-25 is a Christian obligation. True Christians did meet this obligation, whenever possible, all throughout the 1,800 years of Christianity. They did this despite there being no visible "Organization" or one denomination that represented a supposed "True Religion" and they are still doing this today!
Seeing as my stance is that things are exactly the same now as they were in the late 1st century, when the Apostasy began according to the Bible, then it is up to YOU to to prove that anything has changed since then regarding the Apostasy, not for me to prove that it continues exactly the same. You need to prove a change from the status quo. The onus is on you. This you cannot do.
However it can be proven Scripturally that your claimed "coming out" of Apostasy could not have not occurred yet. As you'll see.
You continued: "....You don't have to associate with God's people because there are none. This isn't Christian freedom, this is utter disbelief in one way or another."
Sigh, if you stopped thinking in such a fleshly way your confusion might dissipate. God's people do exist. They are the wheat AMONG the weeds. They exist as a spiritual 'body', not a visible, organizational one, they are true Christians within many denominations who are willing to associate with upbuild and encourage each other, even across denominational lines. They are not like the Society, which teaches JW's to look down on any who aren't in their sect, and who are not "free" to associate with them, and who "beat their brothers", condemning them all and insisting they will all be destroyed, simply because they are not JW's!
You said: Unless all humans are corrupt, a book truly inspired of God will lead to the formation of a visible organization in a country where we enjoy religious freedom.
So you and your false prophets Russell, Rutherford and the "Organization" presumptuously claim, but Jesus explicitly says otherwise:
"Jesus told them another parable: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.
"The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?'
" 'An enemy did this,' he replied.
"The servants asked him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'" 'No,' he answered, 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.' "
"He answered, "The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the sons of the kingdom. The weeds are the sons of the evil one, and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.
"As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear." - Matt 13:24-30, 37-43.
So, despite your claims Consfearacy, this can't be done and so hasn't been done, no matter how much you insist, because your Master forbids it, until the END. Only the Society could make such a mess of such plain speaking Scriptures and only through mind control could they induce 7 million people to stare at the clear words of Jesus and yet not see the plain meaning. Instead his words trigger some pavlovian response in JW's which simply causes them to regurgitate the latest twisted and impossible interpretation on them from the Society.
JW's don't even see Scripture anymore because the Society, through endless training, has reduced verses simply to mental triggers for recalling Watchtower exposition.
-
128
"High-Control Groups"
by Consfearacy inhttp://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .
"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.
it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.
-
-
Essan
Consfearacy said: "I've noted that you and others tend to exaggerate predictions you claim have "failed." There were two predictions about Jesus' invisible presence and the conclusion of this system of things: 1914 and 1925. Just becasue other dates outside of these two have no meaning to you doesn't mean they failed"
No, you underestimate. There were many other dates on which either predictions were made or to which events were linked.
All of them have failed. All of them have been abandoned. Even 1914 has a completely different meaning for JW's now than it had for them then. It is the only one of the Society's dates that has survived - with a different interpretation. You may think some of these dates still have meaning - but the Society and JW's don't. Perhaps they have meaning in your Theosophist philosophy? I have no idea.
You said: "So what you're saying is everything they teach harmnizes with the Bible and thus originates with God..."
Erm, no. That's absolutely not what I'm saying. Very little of what they teach is Scripturally sound. But that is another discussion.
You continue: "...but because of a prior viewpoint, what the Bible says should be rejected or the organization should be rejected"
It's not a "prior viewpoint" it's a career of false prophesy and failed prediction throughout their 100+ year history, with the last being the "Creator's Promise" that the generation that "saw" the events of 1914 would not pass away before Armageddon and that the end would come "in our 20th century" (Matt 24:14) . And why should what the Bible says be rejected because of an Organization? There is no connection between the two. You can reject the Society and retain the Bible - in fact if you actually understood and valued the Bible, you'd feel compelled to reject the Society! But you value the Society more. The Organization should be rejected because the Bible very clearly states that any who falsely predict and proclaim the arrival of Christ are "False Prophets" to be avoided by true Christians. (Matt 24:23-28).
You said: "Would you feel comfortable stating the early Bible students were not false prophets because they were not sorcerers?"
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Sorcery is not in any way a defining characteristic for all false prophets, so why would the Society not engaging in sorcery have any bearing whatsoever? We've been through this before. Lying = Liar, Sorcery = Sorcerer, False Prophesy = False Prophet, and False Prophesy is proclaiming or predicting anything in God's name, claiming Divine authority, and proving false in the proclamation or prediction. It's really very simple. Sure, some False Prophets could be deliberate liars and sorcerers too - but they don't have to be those things to be classed as "False Prophets" according to the Bible. They just have to be presumptuous in speaking in God's name - which, as you've been shown in this thread and others, the Society has done repeatedly. (Deut. 18:20-22)
You said: "The New Testament that has direct application to Christians is quite clear about the identifying marks of a false prophet..."
Indeed it is!
“Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand. “Therefore if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ do not go out; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it. For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together." (Matt 24:23-28)
This has fulfillment in the JW's case with statements such as:
"Satan's empire is falling; millions now living will never die. Do you believe it? Do you believe that the King of glory is present, and has been since 1874? Do you believe that during that time he has conducted his harvest work? Do you believe that he has had during that time a faithful and wise servant through whom he directed his work and the feeding of the household of faith? Do you believe that the Lord is not in his temple, judging the nations of earth? Do you believe that the King of glory has begun his reign?" - The Watchtower, November 1, 1922, pp.332-337
"Surely there is not the slightest room for doubt in the mind of a truly consecrated child of God that the Lord Jesus is present and has been since 1874" - The Watchtower, January 1, 1924, p. 5
I could go on, but what's the point? Clearly they are "false prophets" according to Matt 24:23-28. Or did Jesus arrive in 1874?
You said: "But wicked men and impostors will advance from bad to worse, misleading and being misled. 2 Timothy 3:13 That's what made these men false prophets as I pointed earlier"
I don't really care what YOU say false prophets have to do to be identified, seeing as we have just dealt with Jesus clear words on the matter. However, the Society perfectly fits this description also. Or did they not "mislead" their followers regarding the arrival of Christ in 1874? Did they not "mislead" them by stating that Armageddon would come in 1914? Or are you going to now claim that it has to be only certain things - things you conveniently decide - which they had to "mislead" about to be false prophets? Please.
You said: "Your superficial use of prophecy to suppress what the Bible teaches is not based in scripture."
Nice soundbite, yet you've done nothing to back this claim up Scripturally. And the definition you quote of Prophesy is totally damning to the Society, in case you hadn't noticed, seeing as it's already been demonstrated in my last post they did claim inspiration and infallibility for their doctrine, chronology and predictions.
t-2 pp. 690-691 Prophecy
"An inspired message; a revelation of divine will and purpose or the proclamation thereof . Prophecy may be an inspired moral teaching, an expression of a divine command or judgment, or a declaration of something to come . As shown under PROPHET, prediction, or foretelling, is not the basic thought conveyed by the root verbs in the original languages (Heb., na·va'′; Gr., pro·phe·teu′o); yet it forms an outstanding feature of Bible prophecy.
And this definition you quote is double damning for the Society and for your argument (a well as that of Debator) because it shows that the Society can be condemned as a "False Prophet", not only on the basis of it's false predictions - it's "declarations of something to come" - but also on false proclamations regarding the "divine will and purpose". So much so that I'm surprised you risked posting it - surprised by pleased. So, according to this definition, simply proclaiming false doctrine while claiming authority as "God's Mouthpiece" etc. would also condemn them as "False Prophets".
So, shall we also discuss what they now consider to be false doctrine that was preached by the Society? What a about their worship of Jesus until 1954?
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/worship-jesus.php
Whichever way you cut it - and you have cut it several ways, flip flopping like the Society itself - whichever way, the Society meets the criteria for a "False Prophet" better than the vast majority of Christian denominations.
-
13
JARACZ OBITUARY
by St George of England inso the wts finally got around to writing about him in the november 15, 2010 watchtower.
if you read about his "sincere interest in others was shown by his deep concern that all be treated fairly and mercifully", you may think they have the wrong person!.
george.
-
-
Essan
asilentone sad: bullshit
Was that your suggestion for a more appropriate obituary for Jaracz?
If so, I like it. It's short, to the point and says everything that needs to be said
-
23
UN & NGO - PRO-WT Apologetics is TOP HIT on Google search!
by Essan ini typed in 'watchtower ngo' into google search the other day and was shocked to see that the top result was for a pro-wtbts site called 'jehovahsjudgement'.
i'm very disappointed by this because it means that one of the first sites jw's searching for the truth about the society's involvement with the un are going to come across is this deceitful apologetics page which tries to make it seem like the society affiliating with the un is no big deal and perfectly acceptable!.
this pro-wtbts site is successfully debunked by a response site - http://jehovahsjudgmentexposed.blogspot.com/ - which takes apart their excuses and manipulative deceptions fairly expertly, but still, this site doesn't appear when you do a google search and i had to look really hard to find it.
-
-
Essan
Thanks for that Nostromo.
That sounds like the battle of the loons. LOL.
http://e-jehovahs-witnesses.com/forum/showthread.php?4369-I-just-realized-that-e-watchman-exposed
About the only thing Watchman ever got right is that the Society's involvement with the UN is grossly hypocritical and, by their own definitions, Apostasy. Otherwise, Watchman is as much a false prophet as Russell and Rutherford ever were, just less successful.
-
128
"High-Control Groups"
by Consfearacy inhttp://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .
"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.
it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.
-
-
Essan
Consfearacy said: Essan, the purpose of this thread was to distinguish Jehovah's Witnesses from "mind-control cults" and false prophets.
I understand that. However, the JW's are "False Prophets" as was proven in the evidence laden thread you just abandoned for this one:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/197276/1/WHO-ARE-THE-FALSE-PROPHETS-TODAY
So, of course I'm going to address your false claims in you make them anew here.
You said: For starters, Russell and the early Bible students had to speak with some certainty if anyone was to take them at all seriously.
Why, because God couldn't function in his purpose otherwise? Because His 'sheep' have to be scammed with bombastic and bold claims and predictions that can't be delivered upon? I think you underestimate Him. You are using human reasoning. Speaking with certainty that is not warranted in God's name is "False Prophesy". In any case, speaking with certainty about predictions which then fail - repeatedly - proves that no one should take them seriously.
You said: If they did make direct statements in admission to fallibility and not receiving divine revelation from a supernatural source as in the case of the prophets recorded in the Bible, they are distinguishing themselves from men God directly communicated with. They didn't have to clarify this every time they spoke about the future.
But as the quotes above show the Society and it's leaders certainly did speak of " receiving divine revelation from a supernatural source", in terms identical in meaning.
And of course they "distinguished themselves" from TRUE Prophets in the Bible, because they are "False Prophets". You can't do much more to distinguish your self from a "True Prophet" than by acting as a false one! You are comparing them to the wrong prophets. If you compare them, their actions, words and particularly their failures to false prophets in the Bible, then you will find an exact match. You also need to account for the false prophets in the NT whom Jesus and the Bible writers specifically warned us of for what the JW's say is "our day": those who would falsely announce the arrival of Christ! - just as the Society did, several times. The Society perfectly match Jesus description. Few, if any others, match it quite so well.
In fact, your criteria is not Scriptural but is invented to try to get the Society off the hook. I challenged Debator to find verses where false prophets were condemned in the Bible where they specifically claimed "Direct communication from God through supernatural means" or "Inspiration" etc. because she, like you, falsely claimed that this was the crucial identifying mark of a "False Prophet" and had to be explicitly stated by the False Prophet. She couldn't provide a single verse where these false prophets made such specific claims.
Can you?
But bear in mind, even a couple of examples in not enough. You would need to show that everyone identified as a false prophet in the Bible made such explicit claims to prove that the Society also had to make such claims in order to qualify as a "False Prophet".
All a false prophet needed to do to be identified as false was to proclaim something, often a prediction, in God's name which was not true or did not come true. Deut. 18:20-22. The fact that anyone even attempts to predict something and proclaims it as certain and claims it as being of "Divine Origin" automatically shows they are attempting to fill the role of a prophet and everyone understood that to be the case. They didn't need to, and never did, explicitly say "Oh, I'm a prophet by the way and this prediction comes to your courtesy of God directly through inspiration!", they just predicted in God's name and their prediction failed. This the Society has done many times, as the few quoted examples in my first post and in the linked thread above show.
God's Prophets in the Bible didn't claim infallibility in all they did and said. They were fallible and would acknowledge that. But when they spoke in God's name, with his authority, and predicted future events at specific they were not fallible, or else they would not dare to speak or make a prediction his name (unless they were "False Prophets"). So there is no difference with the Society here regarding fallibility, except that the Society did dare to speak out and predict in God's name when they were not authorized or equipped. When it suited the Society they occasionally said they were not infallible - but only after a prediction for which they had previously claimed infallibility had failed or was near enough to failure to scare them!
Fear driven inconsistency, and swinging from "this is an infallible prediction!" to later lyingly protesting that "we didn't intend to claim infallibility", is no defense.
-
128
"High-Control Groups"
by Consfearacy inhttp://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .
"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.
it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.
-
-
Essan
Hard to format these posts
They don't seem to post as they were written. Apologies everyone if it's incomprehensible but what is there looks nothing like what I submitted. When I hit submit the post goes all weird, bits go bold that weren't mean to be, gaps disappear, other gaps appear etc. Not sure how to control it and editing doesn't work, although I'll keep trying. Very glitchy.
Oh well.
-
128
"High-Control Groups"
by Consfearacy inhttp://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/similar-religions-to-jehovahs-witnesses.php .
"it is important to understand that in most bible-based cults, although the member is aggressively taught doctrine, it is not the doctrine that holds him in the group.
it is the sense that the group is god's true people, a feeling cultivated by techniques of mind control.
-
-
Essan
Some of these exact arguments by Consfearacy have just recently been thoroughly debunked by a number of posters in a thread here so Consfearacy obviously he feels it's necessary to start another thread where those troublesome decisive counter-arguments can't be read. I've learned that there is little point talking to Consfearacy directly, as he's incapable of reason, so I'm just going to talk to myself in this post LOL:
Consfearacy said: "The principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses from the inception of organization's history up to now has never claimed infallibility or divine inspiration."
But what do the facts show?
"in·fal·li·ble
[in-fal-uh-buhl] –adjective
1. absolutely trustworthy or sure: an infallible rule.
2. unfailing in effectiveness or operation; certain: an infallible remedy."
So, infallible means "absolutely trustworthy or sure", and "certain".
With that understanding let us see if we can perceive claims of infallibility for the predictions doctrines and interpretations of the "principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses":
"Bible prophecy shows that the Lord was due to appear for the second time in the year 1874. Fulfilled prophecy shows beyond a doubt that he did appear in 1874. Fulfilled prophecy is otherwise designated the physical facts; and these facts are indisputable. All true watchers are familiar with these facts as set forth in the Scriptures and explained in the interpretation by the Lord's special servant... Do you believe it? Do you believe that the King of glory is present, and has been since 1874? - The WT, November 1, 1922, pp.332-337
So, I’m sure you’ll agree that "beyond a doubt" and "indisputable" mean exactly the same as "certain", "sure" and "absolutely trustworthy" which, as we know from the dictionary entry quoted above is the very definition of "infallible". So "indisputable" and "beyond a doubt" = "Infallible".
So has the Society claimed infallibility for it's doctrine? Yes, clearly they have. The claim of infallibility for an interpretative teaching necessarily indicates a claim of infallibility on the part of the teacher when giving it (and as in this case, when insisting on it's belief as fact). The two can't be separated. The statement "I'm not infallible, but there is no possibility of this teachings being wrong", is contradictory. It makes no sense. This is the doublespeak you are being asked to swallow.
Another example of claiming infallibility on the part of the "principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses":
"This chronology is not of man but of God. Being of divine origin and divinely corroborated, present-truth chronology stands in a class by itself, absolutely and unqualifiedly correct...." - Watchtower, July 15, 1922
Obviously, "absolutely and unqualifiedly correct" means exactly the same thing as "absolutely trustworthy or sure", which is the dictionary definition of "infallible".
There are, of course, dozens of other similar claims of infallibility by the "principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses", but these two should be sufficient to debunk the lie that they “never” claimed infallibility. As words have clear definitions and meanings which it is always possible to convey in other words, the idea that the Society never claimed infallibility just because they never used the word "infallible" is obviously absurd and highly deceptive.
This brings us to the second claim made by Consfearacy, that "from the inception of the Organization's history up to now has never claimed... divine inspiration."
Look again at the quote above. They are claiming that their chronology is "not of man but of God". Well, seeing as dates such as 1874 and 1925 are not given in the Bible and have since been ditched by JW's, where is the writer claiming these dates and the understanding of their significance came from and how is he indicating they were received? Remember: "Not of man but of God", "Divine Origin", "Divinely Corroborated". How did the writer get these predictions from God, how could he claim they were "Of Divine Origin" if they are nowhere to be found in the Bible? How could he be so sure that they were "absolutely and unqualifiedly correct", if he wasn't claiming they were from God?
As with the word "infallible", one doesn't have to use the word "Inspiration" in order to attribute an original prediction, teaching or doctrine directly to God. These are clear implicit claims of inspiration, and they are common in the Society's literature. But there are quotes which are even clearer.
“in·spired
[in-spahyuhrd]
–adjective
1. aroused, animated, or imbued with the spirit to do something, by or as if by supernatural or divine influence: an inspired poet.
“in·spi·ra·tion
5. Theology .
a. a divine influence directly and immediately exerted upon the mind or soul.
b. the divine quality of the writings or words of a person so influenced."
So, if Inspired and Inspiration means “aroused, animated, or imbued with the spirit to do something" then clearly, inspiration means exactly the same thing as "spirit-led" and "spirit-directed", terms which the Society commonly uses. These terms are synonymous with "Inspired" and "Inspiration".
Again, keeping the above two definitions in mind, let's look at another quote from the "principle teaching channel of Jehovah's Witnesses" which "from the inception of organization's history up to now" has apparently "never claimed... divine inspiration".
"Today the children of Zion need no extraneous proof that the spiritual food and understanding of the prophecies they have comes from God. They know that no man or men could provide such food. No man or men on earth attempt to lay claim that lay of these truths proceed from man. (Watchtower, Oct. 1, 1931, p. 328)
"The writer does not give his opinion. No human interpretation of scripture is advanced." (Reconciliation, 1928, p. 6)
Russell, regarding his chronology predictions, now abandoned as false. said, “It is beyond the breadth and depth of human thought and therefore cannot be of human origin.” (Studies In The Scriptures, 1889, vol. 2, p. 15)
"The Watchtower is not the instrument of any man or set of any of men, nor is it published according to the whims of men. No man's opinion is expressed in the Watchtower." (Watchtower, Nov. 1 1931 p. 327)
So, if no man's opinion is ever published in the Watchtower, whose is? If the Watchtower isn't the instrument of men, then whose instrument is it? What are we supposed to conclude here? Obviously, that God's words are all you will ever read in the Watchtower, as it is his instrument. Just as they state, it all comes "from God", not from any man or men. It is beyond men's capabilities.
If that is the case, how does God convey his word to the human writers of the Watchtower, especially when they are publishing highly speculative and original material, including various dates for Armageddon, which are not to be found in the Bible? Clearly, they must be inspired to do so, otherwise the Watchtower would be expressing the opinions of men - but as we have been assured, this is impossible!
And again, Russell spoke of: "...the truths I present, as God's mouthpiece" and said that "this clear unfolding of truth" he proclaimed was NOT "due to any human ingenuity or acuteness of perception, but to the simple fact that God's due time has come." - WT7/15/06, p.229
What does it mean to be 'God's Mouthpiece'? Can you preach original "truths" and make date predictions - which are not written in the Bible - as 'God's mouthpiece', present them as fact, and yet not be claiming to be "inspired" or under "divine influence"? Hardly. What does it mean that "God's time had come"? God's time had come to allow a few more brand new Bible verse to suddenly be discovered stating Armageddon would come in 1874, or 1914, or 1925? No, apparently "God's time had come to" exert "divine influence" on the mind - or "inspire" - "God's Mouthpiece", "The Lord's Special Servant".
But such claims of inspiration become even more explicit:
"In all his (Russell's) warnings he claimed no originality. He said that he could never have written his books himself. It all came from God, through the enlightenment of the Holy Spirit." (Studies in the Scriptures, Vol. 7, p. 387.)
It all came from God.
Russell was incapable of writing those books. He was inspired - his mind under "divine influence" - to write.
So yes, it's undeniable that the Society both claimed "Inspiration" and "Infallibility" in it's teachings and predictions, because the meanings of both those words are necessarily defined using other words, words which blatantly all apply to the claims the Society made, and made explicitly. The idea that one one has to use certain words specifically is bogus, meaningless, deceptive.
It's a bit like claiming that "I never said I was "male", I just said I had testicles and a penis."
Finally, as for the claim that the Society, in regard to it's many failed predictions for Armageddon and other supernatural events, "also left the results of candid Bible research open to the possibility of unfulfillment." - well this is simply not true, and Consfearacy knows it. They never left their predictions open to unfulfillment, as even some of the quotes above show. They stated them, for years, as absolute fact, revealed by God which must be accepted as truth by their followers. However, as the predicted date grew very close or was passed - THEN they totally changed their tune, as they lost their nerve, and began contradicting former statements. That is something quite different, obviously, to what Consfearacy claims.
-
7
Inspired vs spirit-directed: what's the difference?
by keyser soze ini remember asking this question to couple of elders who came to visit me.
i had pointed out their failed prophecies, and the fact that they were constantly making corrections in their publications, and how this proved god wasn't really behind it.. they went into the usual song and dance about how the gb were simply imperfect men, and never claimed to be infallible.
i reminded them that the bible writers were also imperfect men, and yet the bible supposedly was infallible.
-
-
Essan
It is a loop-hole in that 'Spirit directed' is meaningless.
If you can claim to be 'spirit-directed' and yet are allowed to repeatedly make mistakes for which your excuses is "Well, I'm fallible, I never said I was inspired.", then how would anyone ever know who was really 'Spirit-directed" and who was just a decetitful scam artist? The answer is they wouldn't. And the Society is banking on that.
Claiming 'spirit-direction' is really a claim to authority over others, but without any requirement to prove your entitlement to that authority. It places all the obligation of trust on those who are stupid enough to listen to the Society without any burden of requirement placed on them to show they are worthy of receiving that trust.
It's nonsense. Sleight of hand. BS.
The Society has played this ridiculous game for a long time, claiming inspiration but using every word to describe 'inspiration' other than inspiration - rather like a woman hanging out at the curb at night, dressed like a hooker, stopping men and offering them a "good time", sleeping with them and accepting money, but never actually calling herself a "prostitute".
It doesn't make a difference, sweetheart, a hooker is as a hooker does.
And the Society has long claimed inspiration and unwarranted Divine authority, but without using the exact word "inspiration". They have other words that amount to the same thing with which to impress and awe the unwary. But then they bamboozle them further when their words fail by faling back on the technicality that they never actually claimed to be "inspired".
-
23
UN & NGO - PRO-WT Apologetics is TOP HIT on Google search!
by Essan ini typed in 'watchtower ngo' into google search the other day and was shocked to see that the top result was for a pro-wtbts site called 'jehovahsjudgement'.
i'm very disappointed by this because it means that one of the first sites jw's searching for the truth about the society's involvement with the un are going to come across is this deceitful apologetics page which tries to make it seem like the society affiliating with the un is no big deal and perfectly acceptable!.
this pro-wtbts site is successfully debunked by a response site - http://jehovahsjudgmentexposed.blogspot.com/ - which takes apart their excuses and manipulative deceptions fairly expertly, but still, this site doesn't appear when you do a google search and i had to look really hard to find it.
-
-
Essan
Hey Cattails. That's some great sleuthing you did there.
Yeah, the website seemed a little too professional and 'glossy' to be simply simply an amateur production. It does reek of the Society, both it's use of deceptive doublespeak and it's presentation.
I wonder.