the best conjecture seems to be that the gb are going to drop the literal 144,000 teaching, especially in view of the december watchtower that pointedly does not mention the 144,000 number.
if they are dropping the literal 144,000 number, but still claim that only a small number are anointed, and can partake, and that only a few are left on earth, then it is fair to ask what has really changed?
they are simply clearing up the embarrassing situation that there were obviously more than 144,000 "anointed" believers from 36 ad until now, and that the number of partakers has been increasing in recent years.
Exactly.. So IMO, the current priority is to try to pump the water out of the sinking ship. [...] All they need to do is survive long enough to buy some time to further evolve.
This reminds me of something reportedly said by Gil Amelio, the CEO of Apple before Steve Jobs returned to save the foundering company: "Apple is like a sinking ship with a hole in the bottom, and my job is to get the ship pointed in the right direction".
recently on a saturday morning there was a knock on my door.
two ladies asked me if i was familiar with the jws.
i said: yes unfortunatley.
First off, what could they possibly say that'd contradict us? If we have the truth, then we should be able to debunk any false info. So why not have a look? We can research it and give them an answer back. Was always curious about what was in there and that led me to want to look at apostate literature to see why we couldn't stand up to it.
Similarly, for me, the most doubt-causing thing I ever experienced in service was from a Witness in my own car group who was talking about how he wouldn't read a certain book (something like Dawkins' The God Delusion) because he'd heard it would "make you fall out of the truth". I couldn't imagine why I should be afraid of any information if I had the truth. After all, I wasn't in "the truth" because I liked the status quo and was born into it, it was because I actually believed it was the truth! The implication that other JWs might be purposely avoiding learning things that would challenge their faith was a major factor in my eventually being willing to look at contrary, and even "apostate", information.
recently on a saturday morning there was a knock on my door.
two ladies asked me if i was familiar with the jws.
i said: yes unfortunatley.
Ditto Fernando. I don't recall any householders saying anything useful to me to make me question my beliefs. There was one time I was given a packet of information to read by a householder (some sort of Bible research he had done), but it was confiscated by an elder as soon as I got back in the car.
(1) did it cause you to leave sooner than you might have, otherwise.. (2) it didn't bother you enough to do anything about it.
hey, we are all imperfect.. (3) did you want to prove you were better than they, and nothing they could do or say, was going to stumble you.. (4) they stumbled me, probably as much i stumbled them.
we all know it's an old boy's club and we are not going to tell on each other.. loislane.
I didn't know of any hypocritical JWs, besides kids my age who were nearly all leading a double life. I just ignored them and was glad when they left the congregation when they turned 18 or so. I wish I had known some, because it would have helped me see more quickly that the people in the organization were not much better than "worldlies". It's possible that my tendency to be disconnected from other people prevented me from knowing about lots of scandalous little personal details; I just assumed that everyone was pretty much saintlike except for me.
if the wbts is just another business?
then what do the gb get out of all this?.
tim cook (ceo apple) makes around 378 million a year.. donald trump makes around 60 million a year.. i understand the wbts may have vast property holdings, stocks, bonds, and revenue from donations.. but i can't grasp the incentive for the gb to make this stuff up.
In Crisis of Conscience, Ray Franz exposed the Governing Body's practice of voting on doctrinal changes, whereby a two-thirds majority would result in a doctrinal change. Personally, I can't help but wonder what the deal was with the remaining third of the GB. Weren't they also appointed by "holy spirit"? Were they not equal members of the "faithful slave"? Did they perhaps forget to tune in to "God's Channel of Communication" that morning?
Yes, but the original "governing body" (ugh) in Jerusalem also disagreed over the issues at hand. Paul made it pretty clear that he was in the school that opposed forcing Mosaic Law on Gentile Christians, yet he still had to abide by the decision that some laws still applied, like abstaining from blood and things sacrificed to idols, and pass the word on to the congregations. It was the result of a compromise for the sake of unity. Therefore, it's entirely possible that the GB feels that this is just how God's spirit works when they have to hold a vote on someone's "new idea". There's no need to assume they know it's a scam and are acting in bad faith. They are products of the system themselves; enthusiastic salesmen who got promoted to VP positions.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/religious-boy-fights-court-for-right-to-die-20130917-2tx5u.html.
this is tragic.
the boy is 17, and earlier this year the courts ruled that he was to be forced a transfusion.
It seems (to my limited legal knowledge) like there's no counter-advocate provided by the court in cases like this. Correct me if I'm wrong. Rather than just asking the teen to prove his beliefs (which he will do by parroting the literature of an organization he was raised in), there should be a court-appointed person who challenges his beliefs. I would have given my life at 17 over this issue too, but if I knew then what I know now, at least I would have had a chance to make a better decision.
Someone with knowledge of JW beliefs and counter-arguments should be assigned to speak privately with the boy over the course of a few sessions (allowing him time to process what he is learning and to rebut), and maybe there should be a psychotherapist involved somehow. They should then (again, as part of the legal system) privately offer him an "escape plan", since if he accepts blood, he will be ostracized by his community. Band on the Run mentioned seeking a foster home so she could continue her schooling; why not offer something like that to the boy in this case if he needs a way out?
it seems the finland branch has taken over the work from estonia, latvia and lithuania (see http://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/offices/finland/).
World population reached 3 billion in 1960 whereas JWs didn't reach 3 million until 1985. JWs are still increasing faster than world population.
Of course, as we know, the growth is now in poorer areas, whereas the U.S. ratio is declining (and other first-world countries?), thus the reason for this belt-tightening.
up to about 5 minutes ago... i still had the notion that maybe jw's predicted something and got it right... that the league of nations was going to rise and become the united nations.
i think that jw prophecies/predictions are like a shotgun: shoots many projectiles, one of them has got to hit.
you cannot predict 5 different things and then, when one of them gets partly fulfilled, drop the other 4.5 things, change the 1/2 thing you predicted that was right and make it seem like that was the only thing you predicted, and make the entire one point fit after the fact.. reading watchtower literature throughout the years (1879 till now), and then coming here and getting awesome explanations from people like leolaia and other researchers, i finally understand the claim that most apostate websites make: the wt has a 100% prediction failure rate.. they were lucky that something big happened in 1914... but now i am much wiser and i know that everything they predicted for 1914 did not turn out as they predicted... 1914 has been a date with many different hats... from the start of armageddon, to the beginning of the last days... etc.... thank you very much jwn for completely opening my mind.
The Watch Tower did predict that the Gentile Times would end in 1914 (well, or 1915), which they thought meant the end of the world. Then in the '40s, I believe it was, they changed Christ's return from 1874 to 1914. So they did predict something would happen in 1914, but not at the right time of year (fall, versus the start of WWI in the summer), and not the right thing.
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:officedocumentsettings> <o:allowpng /> </o:officedocumentsettings> </xml><![endif].
[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:worddocument> <w:view>normal</w:view> <w:zoom>0</w:zoom> <w:trackmoves /> <w:trackformatting /> <w:punctuationkerning /> <w:validateagainstschemas /> <w:saveifxmlinvalid>false</w:saveifxmlinvalid> <w:ignoremixedcontent>false</w:ignoremixedcontent> <w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext>false</w:alwaysshowplaceholdertext> <w:donotpromoteqf /> <w:lidthemeother>en-us</w:lidthemeother> <w:lidthemeasian>x-none</w:lidthemeasian> <w:lidthemecomplexscript>x-none</w:lidthemecomplexscript> <w:compatibility> <w:breakwrappedtables /> <w:snaptogridincell /> <w:wraptextwithpunct /> <w:useasianbreakrules /> <w:dontgrowautofit /> <w:splitpgbreakandparamark /> <w:enableopentypekerning /> <w:dontflipmirrorindents /> <w:overridetablestylehps /> <w:usefelayout /> </w:compatibility> <m:mathpr> <m:mathfont m:val="cambria math" /> <m:brkbin m:val="before" /> <m:brkbinsub m:val="--" /> <m:smallfrac m:val="off" /> <m:dispdef /> <m:lmargin m:val="0" /> <m:rmargin m:val="0" /> <m:defjc m:val="centergroup" /> <m:wrapindent m:val="1440" /> <m:intlim m:val="subsup" /> <m:narylim m:val="undovr" /> </m:mathpr></w:worddocument> </xml><!
[endif][if gte mso 10]> <mce:style><!
Yes, JFR must have been popular with some. That quote at the end from Johnson (who is quoting an unnamed individual) indicates that JFR had a likeable side when he wasn't 'being a lawyer', by which I think he really meant 'being a bully using his lawyerly training' (no offense, BotR :-)
I think the area where he most relied on popular support was when he was voted in as the obvious choice for President (even if that didn't indicate affection for him, just respect). The bylaws that gave him greater power were apparently approved by a naive Board, and then he replaced the rebellious Board members with friends, so at that point he no longer needed majority support.
One interesting part from Johnson's testimony (at the time his muscular arm was grabbed by JFR) was that:
At this Bro. Martin started to hoot at me, and was joined in by quite a number of Bro. Rutherford’s sympathizers. So greatly were the feelings of the majority, myself among them, outraged by this exhibition of rowdyism that they left the dining room.
He is saying that the majority was not in favor of JFR at that place and time. However, according to Wikipedia, a referendum of subscribers in 1918 gave JFR 95% of the vote. I think it's safe to say that he who had the Society had the reader's support. The average reader knew nothing of JFR's personality and simply assumed that the Lord was with whomever was already in control (who was elected, after all).
Interesting aside: I see no references to the divine name anywhere in the 1917 publications "Harvest Siftings" et al. It doesn't seem that Bible Students made frequent reference to it back then.
the best conjecture seems to be that the gb are going to drop the literal 144,000 teaching, especially in view of the december watchtower that pointedly does not mention the 144,000 number.
if they are dropping the literal 144,000 number, but still claim that only a small number are anointed, and can partake, and that only a few are left on earth, then it is fair to ask what has really changed?
they are simply clearing up the embarrassing situation that there were obviously more than 144,000 "anointed" believers from 36 ad until now, and that the number of partakers has been increasing in recent years.
Mm, good point, Laika. Perhaps after they've passed, the next GB will go back to the "historical period" definition of 1995.
