i wanted to thank so many who have taken the time and effort to read and recommend captives of a concept over the past decade.. for those who have not seen it, there is an interview on youtube that may have helped some witnesses begin the process of getting the sense of the way the watchtower religion actually works.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5trkrpia-3q.
don cameron.
.
I wanted to thank so many who have taken the time and effort to read and recommend “Captives of a Concept” over the past decade.
For those who have not seen it, there is an interview on YouTube that may have helped some Witnesses begin the process of getting the sense of the way the Watchtower religion actually works…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5trkRpIa-3Q
Don Cameron
my husband and i (both born in jws with extended family all "in" except for one of my sisters who left when we did) left the church 5 years ago.
we did not fade, we just didn't believe it anymore, told our families so and left.
obviously, big drama in our family after this, messy feelings, etc.
Many have been helped by the evidence and reasonings presented in "Captives of a Concept."
captives of a concept is based on the governing bodys pre-2012 interpretation of the most important scripture in their theology matthew 24:45-47. the book shows that when that interpretation is compared to the organizations history that relates to it, it becomes evident that the watchtower society has never been gods organization.
see chapter 3. their old interpretation was that the society had been so faithful and discreet about what they had provided in the way of spiritual food at the proper time that jesus appointed rutherford and his associates over all his belongings in 1919. therefore the society has been gods organization ever since.. their new interpretation is that the society had been so faithful and discreet about what they had provided in the way of spiritual food at the proper time that he appointed rutherford and his associates over his domistics in 1919. and therefore the society has been gods organization ever since.. notice that it doesnt make any difference which interpretation is used.
in order to qualify for the belongings appointment in verse 47 or the domestics appointment in verse47 the society had to have been faithful and discreet about what russell and rutherford had provided in the way of spiritual food at the proper time down till 1919.. but as captives of a concept clearly shows, they had not been either faithful or discreet which is why raymond franz expressed it this way.... it would be an insult to christ jesus to say that he (appointed) the society (over his belongings or domestics) on the basis of what it had been teaching as of 1919.. and so even though captives of a concept focuses on the pre-2012 interpretation and the belongings appointment in verse 47, what it says also applies to the post-2012 interpretation and the domestics appointment in verse 45.. and therefore the conclusion of either interpretation remains the same.
“Captives of a Concept” is based on the Governing Body’s pre-2012 interpretation of the most important Scripture in their theology – Matthew 24:45-47. The book shows that when that interpretation is compared to the organization’s history that relates to it, it becomes evident that the Watchtower Society has never been God’s organization. – See Chapter 3
Their old interpretation was that the Society had been so faithful and discreet about what they had provided in the way of spiritual “food at the proper time” that Jesus appointed Rutherford and his associates over all his BELONGINGS in 1919. Therefore the Society has been God’s organization ever since.
Their new interpretation is that the Society had been so faithful and discreet about what they had provided in the way of spiritual “food at the proper time” that he appointed Rutherford and his associates over his DOMISTICS in 1919. And therefore the Society has been God’s organization ever since.
Notice that it doesn’t make any difference which interpretation is used. In order to qualify for the “belongings” appointment in verse 47 or the “domestics” appointment in verse47 the Society had to have been faithful and discreet about what Russell and Rutherford had provided in the way of spiritual “food at the proper time” down till 1919.
But as “Captives of a Concept” clearly shows, they had not been either faithful or discreet which is why Raymond Franz expressed it this way…
“It would be an insult to Christ Jesus to say that he (appointed) the Society (over his belongings or domestics) on the basis of what it had been teaching as of 1919.”
And so even though “Captives of a Concept” focuses on the pre-2012 interpretation and the “belongings” appointment in verse 47, what it says also applies to the post-2012 interpretation and the “domestics” appointment in verse 45.
And therefore the conclusion of either interpretation remains the same. And that is that the Watchtower Society has never been God’s organization.
Don Cameron
some have wondered if "captives of a concept" had anything to do with why the governing body changed their interpretation of the most important scripture in their theology at their annual meeting on october 6, 2012.. this is because the book places great emphasis on the societys interpretation of matthew 24:45-47 and then holds them to it while examining the organizations history to make sure that went on in its history fits their interpretation.
this comparison is essential to the societys claim to being gods organization.. their previous interpretation came from their former most imminent bible scholar president frederick franzs in his "gods kingdom of a thousand years has approached.
" their history comes from their "jehovahs witnesses proclaimers of gods kingdom.".
As we know, there are two separate appointments mentioned in Matthew 24:45-47. The Governing Body moved the “belongings” appointment in verse 47 from 1919 to some time in the future and the “domestics” appointment in verse 45 from 33 C.E. to 1919.
The “new light” 1919 appointment was still dependent on the Society having been found faithfully and discreetly giving the domestics their right spiritual food at the proper time down till 1919.
“Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time?”
But Chapter 3 of "Captives of a Concept" gives 48 examples where the Society had not been either faithful or discreet about what they had been giving in the way of spiritual food at the proper time down till 1919.
And so Raymond Franz’s statement still holds true when he said, “It would be an insult to Christ Jesus to say that he selected the Society on the basis of what it had been teaching as of 1919.”
And so it doesn’t matter which appointment is involved. The Society didn’t qualify for either one of them in 1919.
Is there any reason to believe that they will be any more faithful or discreet in the future and therefore receive Jesus’ “belongings” appointment at that time?
Don Cameron
some have wondered if "captives of a concept" had anything to do with why the governing body changed their interpretation of the most important scripture in their theology at their annual meeting on october 6, 2012.. this is because the book places great emphasis on the societys interpretation of matthew 24:45-47 and then holds them to it while examining the organizations history to make sure that went on in its history fits their interpretation.
this comparison is essential to the societys claim to being gods organization.. their previous interpretation came from their former most imminent bible scholar president frederick franzs in his "gods kingdom of a thousand years has approached.
" their history comes from their "jehovahs witnesses proclaimers of gods kingdom.".
Some have wondered if "Captives of a Concept" had anything to do with why the Governing Body changed their interpretation of the most important Scripture in their theology at their Annual Meeting on October 6, 2012.
This is because the book places great emphasis on the Society’s interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47 and then holds them to it while examining the organization’s history to make sure that went on in its history fits their interpretation. This comparison is essential to the Society’s claim to being “God’s organization.”
Their previous interpretation came from their former “most imminent Bible Scholar” President Frederick Franz’s in his "God’s Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached." Their history comes from their "JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES Proclaimers of God’s Kingdom."
When comparing their history in the Proclaimers book with their interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47 in Franz’s book it becomes evident that they are so far out of sync that there is no reason to believe that the Watchtower Society has ever been God’s organization.
Apparently the Governing Body finally noticed this problem. And so at the above meeting they threw out Franz’s interpretation and replaced it with some of their own “new light.”
For example: Their “old light “ was that Jesus was so pleased with what the Society had had been teaching down till 1919 that he then appointed them over all his “belongings.”
But a careful examination of just 48 of those pre-1919 teachings makes it impossible to believe that Jesus would have been pleased with any of them. Or as Raymond Franz expressed it…
"It would be an insult to Christ Jesus to say that he selected this organization on the basis of what it was teaching as of 1919."
Apparently the Governing Body too finally figured this out and therefore tried to fix it by turning ion the following “new light”…
"Jesus’ appointment of the “slave” over his “belongings must be a future event. He will make that appointment during the great tribulation.
They simply arbitrarily moved the date of that appointment away from 1919 to an unspecified date in the future. Why must it be a future event? Because, if the above appointment was available in 1919 the Society would not have qualified to receive it/
But now all of the sudden it doesn’t matter how much wrong food at the wrong time the Society had provided down till 1919. Now what matters is what the Society will be found teaching in the future. And the Governing assures the Witnesses that at that time they will be found providing the right spiritual food at the proper time and therefore receive Jesus’ “belongings” appointment then.
While it is easy to prove that the Society had not been faithful or discreet about so many of their pre-1919 teachings, it is impossible to disprove what the Society will or won’t be teaching in the future. The Governing Body likes it that way.
And of course if it doesn’t turn out that way there will always be plenty of “new light” to fix whatever will need to be fixed at that time.
How do people get to think like this? And how do millions of other people not see anything wrong with it? I keep going back to what the Apostle Paul explained at 2Thessalonians 2:10,11…
"Because they did not accept the love of the truth that is why God lets an operation of error go to them so that they may get to believing the lie.”
Whether or not "Captives of a Concept" helped them notice the above problem, it hasn’t helped them fix it. It would seem that the “operation of error” seems to be blocking them from being able to get the sense of what it all means. And that is that the Watchtower Society must not be “Jehovah’s organization.”
Don Cameron
some have wondered if captives of a concept had anything to do with why the governing body changed their interpretation of the most important scripture in their theology - matthew 24:45-47. of course there is no way of knowing.
but since some of the changes deal with matters that are brought out in the book, it does seem fair to wonder.
the book makes the major point that according to their former interpretation the only way the society could be gods faithful and discreet slave organization today is if they had received jesus belongings appointment in 1919. .
I mistakenly referred to Matthew:24:24-47. Ii meant to say 24:45-47.
Don
some have wondered if captives of a concept had anything to do with why the governing body changed their interpretation of the most important scripture in their theology - matthew 24:45-47. of course there is no way of knowing.
but since some of the changes deal with matters that are brought out in the book, it does seem fair to wonder.
the book makes the major point that according to their former interpretation the only way the society could be gods faithful and discreet slave organization today is if they had received jesus belongings appointment in 1919. .
Some have wondered if “Captives of a Concept” had anything to do with why the Governing Body changed their interpretation of the most important Scripture in their theology - Matthew 24:45-47
Of course there is no way of knowing. But since some of the changes deal with matters that are brought out in the book, it does seem fair to wonder.
For example:
The book makes the major point that according to their former interpretation the only way the Society could be “God’s faithful and discreet slave organization” today is if they had received Jesus’ “belongings” appointment in 1919.
But Chapter 3 shows how impossible it would have been for them to have received that appointment in 1919.”
Is this the realization that motivated the Governing Body to move that appointment away from 1919 and kick it in to an unspecified date in the future? Only they know the answer.
Here is how they solved this problem…
Since that future appointment will not depend on what the Society had been teaching down till 1919, what will it depend on? They explain it this way in the July 15, 2013 Watchtower…
"When Jesus comes for judgment during the great tribulation,he will find that the faithful slave has been loyally dispensing timely spiritual food to the domestics. Jesus will then delight in making the second appointment—over all his belongings.
They simply assert that in the future the Society will then be found dispensing timely spiritual food and therefore will receive the “belongings” appointment at that time.
How does one disprove such a statement? The Governing Body likes it that way.
Don Cameron
its bad enough when the governing body rewrites the organizations past history.
but last october they also began rewriting the organizations future history relative to the appointment over all of jesus belongings mentioned in matthew 24:47.. for many decades they had insisted that jesus made that appointment back in 1919 because the society had been so faithful and discreet about what they had been teaching down till 1919. .
but as shown in captives of a concept they had not been either faithful or discreet about what they had been providing in the way of spiritual food down till 1919. therefore under that scenario there was no possible way the society could have passed a food-at-the-proper-time examination at that time.
It’s bad enough when the Governing Body rewrites the organization’s PAST history. But last October they also began rewriting the organization’s FUTURE history relative to the appointment over all of Jesus’ “belongings” mentioned in Matthew 24:47.
For many decades they had insisted that Jesus made that appointment back in 1919 because the Society had been so faithful and discreet about what they had been teaching down till 1919.
But as shown in “Captives of a Concept” they had NOT been either faithful or discreet about what they had been providing in the way of spiritual food down till 1919. Therefore under that scenario there was no possible way the Society could have passed a food-at-the-proper-time examination at that time. And therefore there was no possible way they could have received Jesus’ “belongings” appointment in 1919. And therefore there is no way the Society could be God’s organization today.
Apparently the Governing Body finally came to realize this and so in October of 2012 they fixed that problem by moving the appointment away from 1919 into the future.
All of the sudden it no longer matters what they had been teaching in the past. From now on what matters is what they will be found teaching in the future. And the Governing Body assures Jehovah’s Witnesses that at that time the organization will prove itself to be both faithful and discreet about the spiritual food they will be providing at that time and therefore will receive the above appointment then.
How does one disprove what they say will happen in the future? They have placed themselves in the position where what they are saying cannot be disproved.
While it easy to disprove that the Society received Jesus’ “belongings” appointment in 1919, it is impossible to disprove that they will receive that appointment in the future. The Governing Body likes it that way. It allows them to continue to assert that the Society is God’s organization no matter how many “mistakes” were made in the past.
When I see stuff like this I cannot help thinking about what Paul e explained to the Thessalonians…
“Because they did not accept the love of the truth …that is why God lets an operation of error go to them that they may get to believing the lie.” – 2 Thessalonians 2:10,11
I’ve noticed how “anointedjw.org” has been gently trying to help the Governing Body stop believing several other lies. So far the Governing Body has not responded to their help.
Don Cameron
matthew 24:45-47. .
old light: jesus appointed rutherford and his associates over his belongings in 1919. verse 47. new light: jesus appointed rutherford and his associates over his domestics in 1919. verse 45. why the change?
what difference does it make?
Matthew 24:45-47
Old Light: “Jesus appointed Rutherford and his associates over his “belongings” in 1919.” – Verse 47
New Light: “Jesus appointed Rutherford and his associates over his “domestics” in 1919.” – Verse 45
Why the change? What difference does it make? Rutherford and his associates would still have had to pass the food-at-the-proper-time examination mentioned in verse 45 in order to receive either Jesus’ appointment over his “belongings” or “domestics.”
But as “Captives of a Concept” documents, since there was no possible way they could have received the appointment over Jesus’ “belongings,” there is therefore no way they would not have received his appointment over his “domestics” either.
And so it doesn’t make any difference whether the Governing Body points to the domestics appointment or the belongings appointment. There is no reason to believe they would have received either one. And without those appointments in 1919 there is no way the Society can be God’s organization today.
We are still waiting to see the Governing Body’ full explanation of their “new light.” The last time I looked at their “Online Library” they were still teaching “old light.”
Don Cameron
regarding the governing bodys new light relative to matthew 24:45-47, anointedjw.org recently said the following:.
this new light certainly poses a problem for the governing body.
perhaps this is another reason why they have not yet published a sober and scriptural xplanation of this new light.
Regarding the Governing Body’s “new light” relative to Matthew 24:45-47, Anointedjw.org recently said the following:
“This ‘new light’ certainly poses a problem for the Governing Body. Perhaps this is another reason why they have not yet published a sober and scriptural xplanation of this ‘new light.’ Perhaps in their attempt to write a logical and reasonable explanation, they have come up against problems like this and have not found a way out.”
When “Captives of a Concept” came out in 2004 it emphasized the importance of understanding the Society’s then current interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47. It doesn’t take long to realize the problems that old interpretation caused when compared to the organization’s history that related to that interpretation.
The book then said, “The Governing Body inherited their interpretation of Matthew 24:45-47 and are now stuck with it. To date they have not been able to figure a way to get out of it.”
It would seem that the Governing Body’s recent “new light” is their attempt to find a way out of the mess that was created by that “old light” interpretation. It may well be that their “new light” may just create an even bigger mess when or if they ever do try to explain it.
Don Cameron
