“Jehovah has always had an organization, so we have to remain in it, and wait on Jehovah to fix anything that needs to be changed.”
Many of us have encountered some variation on this line of reasoning. It comes when the friends or family members we are speaking to find they are unable to defend the doctrines and/or conduct[i] of the Organization. Feeling that they must remain loyal to men through thick and thin, they fall back on this common defense. The simple truth is that Witnesses are very comfortable with their world view. They are comfortable with the thought that they are better than everyone else, because they alone will survive Armageddon to live in Paradise. They are eager for the end to come, believing it will solve all their problems. To think that any aspect of this belief might be in jeopardy, that perhaps they've made the wrong choice, that maybe they've devoted their lives to a forlorn hope, is more than they can bear. When I told one ex-missionary friend, a particularly gung ho Witness, about the UN membership, his immediate reply was: “I don’t care what they did yesterday. It’s today that concerns me.”
His attitude is by no means rare. We have to acknowledge that in most cases, it really doesn’t matter what we say, because the love of truth in the heart of our friend or family member is simply not powerful enough to overcome the fear of losing out on what they've desired all their lives. Nevertheless, that should not stop us from trying. Love motivates us to always seek the best for such ones. (2 Pe 3:5; Ga 6:10) Given that, we will want to use the best method for opening up the heart. It is easier to convince someone of truth if they can get there on their own. In other words, better to lead than to drive.
So when someone defends the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses using the reasoning that "Jehovah has always had an organization", one way we can lead them to truth is to start by agreeing with them. Don’t argue the point that the word “organization” doesn’t appear in the Bible. That will just sidetrack the discussion. Instead, accept the premise which they already have in mind that organization = nation = people. So after agreeing with them, you could ask, "What was Jehovah's first earthly organization?"
They are sure to answer: "Israel". Now reason: “If a faithful Israelite wanted to worship Jehovah during one of the many times when the priests were promoting idolatry and Baal worship, he couldn’t go outside Jehovah’s organization, could he? He couldn’t go to Egypt or Syria or Babylon, and worship God as they did. He had to stay within God’s organizational arrangement, worshiping in the way outlined by Moses in the law. Don't you agree?”
Again, how can they disagree? You are making their point, it would seem.
Now bring up the time of Elijah. When he thought he was alone, Jehovah told him that there were 7,000 men who had remained faithful, having not “bent the knee to Baal”. Seven thousand men—they only counted men in those days—likely meant an equal or greater number of women, not to count children. So possibly as many as 15 to 20 thousand remained faithful. (Ro 11:4) Now ask your friend or family member if Israel stopped being Jehovah’s organization at that point? Did these few thousands of faithful ones become his new organization?
Where are we going with this? Well, the key word in their argument is “always”. From its foundation under Moses until the Greater Moses appeared in the first century, Israel was "always" Jehovah's organization. (Remember, we are agreeing with them, and not disputing that "organization" is not a synonym for "people".)
So now you ask your friend or family member, 'What was Jehovah’s organization in the first century?' The obvious answer is: The Christian Congregation. Again, we are agreeing with the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Now ask, 'What was Jehovah’s organization in the fourth century when Emperor Constantine ruled the Roman Empire?' Again, there is no option other than the Christian congregation. That a Witness would consider it apostate by that point doesn’t change the fact. Just like Israel was apostate for much of its history, yet remained Jehovah’s Organization, so Christendom continued to be Jehovah’s organization down through the middle ages. And just as a tiny group of faithful ones in Elijah's day didn’t cause Jehovah to make them into His organization, likewise the fact that there were a few faithful Christians throughout history doesn’t mean they became his organization.
Faithful Christians in the fourth century couldn’t go outside the organization, to Hinduism, or Roman Paganism, for example. They had to stay inside Jehovah’s organization, inside Christianity. Your friend or family member will still have to agree with this. There is simply no alternative.
The logic holds when we move to the 17th century, the 18th century, and the 19th century? Russel for example didn’t explore Islam, or follow the teachings of Buda. He stayed inside Jehovah’s organization, inside Christianity.
Now in 1914, there were fewer Bible students associated with Russell than there were faithful ones in the time of Elijah. So why do we claim that everything changed then; that Jehovah rejected his organization of the past two millennia in favor of a new group?
The question is: If he’s always had an organization, and that organization has been Christendom for the past 2,000 years, does it matter which denomination we adhere to, as long as it’s organized?
If they say that it does matter, then we ask them why? What’s the basis for differentiating one over another? They’re all organized, aren’t they? They all preach, though in different ways. They all show love as evidenced by the charitable work they do. What about false teachings? What about righteous conduct? Is that the criteria? Well, the whole reason that our friends or family members brought up the argument that “Jehovah has always had an organization” is because they couldn't establish the righteousness of the organization based on its teachings and conduct. They can’t go back now and do that. That would be circular reasoning.
The fact is, we haven't left Jehovah's organization, or nation, or people, because since the first century, Christendom has been his "organization" (based on the definition of Jehovah's Witnesses). That definition holds and as long as we remain Christians, even if we withdraw from the "Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses" we haven't left His Organization: Christianity.
Whether this reasoning reaches them or not depends on their heart condition. It has been said that ‘you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink’. Likewise, you can lead a man to the waters of truth, but you can’t make him think. Still, we have to try.
___________________________________________
[i] The growing scandal of the Organization’s policies which have proven harmful to victims of child sexual abuse as well as its inexplicable compromise of neutrality effected by joining the United Nations as an NGO are two instances of this.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by Christian on 2017-09-27 22:12:52
The line of reasoning expressed here, Meleti, is just so straightforward and clear. I feel as if I've watched a bulldozer level a convoluted building site, with all kinds of annexes and rubbish and swept it all away. Brilliant! I've personally had many of these thoughts at different times through my life, but your essay has connected all the dots making it as clear as crystal. I was feeling a bit below par when I came to this site this afternoon, a bit like one of Elijah's 7000 perhaps, but now you've revitalized me. Thankyou.
Comment by Jerome on 2017-09-27 22:38:16
Excellent reasoning Meleti! It skillfully forces the person to follow their own argument through to its logical (or illogical in this case) conclusion. This is going in my folder of points to reason on with family and friends.
Jerome
Comment by Vox Ratio on 2017-09-27 23:33:17
Hi Meleti,
I sincerely hope that all of our brothers and sisters might reason similarly to how you have here.
Jesus pledged his post-ascension involvement in the life of his disciples and mandated that his teachings be both preserved and propagated (Mat. 28:19f). This is why we can be confident in Jude's appeal when he was inspired to write that the faith necessary for salvation was once and for all (hAPAKS) delivered to the saints (Jud. 1:3). Indeed, this seems to be a resolute guarantee that the terms of salvation were invested in the life of Christ and the discourse of his apostles.
If a Christian enters into a contract and finds out later that the contract has been changed without their signature, then it is not the Christian that has acted treacherously. Likewise, if the faith necessary for salvation has been changed since the time of the apostles, then a Christian cannot be faulted for originally believing these same apostles. Rather, it is God who would be found to be unfaithful to the terms of his own contract.
Given the promised rectitude of the apostles' teaching, if God has always had an organisation through which one can be saved, then why would a new organisation be necessary to bring salvation at some later date? Did God change his contract? Never! So who really is the one saying that God's contract has been changed?
Comment by Mowani on 2017-09-28 01:54:47
Hi Meleti, thanks for your article. What you say about the christian era does not jibe with the latest Splane doctrine that there was no organisation/slave between the first century congregation and 1919. A well-informed witness would right away point to that change of doctrine.
How do you include this new turn of doctrine in your reasoning?Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-09-28 09:41:20
Hi Mowani,
Splane's broadcast taught the "new light" that there was no 1900-year faithful slave. So there was no slave in the first century, even though they still acknowledge that there was a Christian congregation or organization as they prefer to call it in the first century. They claim there was a first century governing body leading the first century congregation, but that this governing body was not the faithful slave. The entire teaching is ludicrous and it was reviewed here.Reply by Mowani on 2017-09-28 10:39:42
You are right, they make a difference between "slave class" and GB/organisation. The rank and file witness is confused about that though...
Comment by rick on 2017-09-28 06:54:16
This is very good reasoning. However, I would anticipate that an informed Witness would argue that when Jesus returned in 1918-1919, he then rejected all divisions of Christianity except the Watchtower Society. At that point he appointed a 'faithful and discreet slave' to oversee his cleansed organization. However, if you can bring a person up to 1918-1919, then one might discuss the current 'overlapping' generation doctrine. The 1914 doctrine lays the foundation for the 1918-1919 doctrine. The reasoning of most people is that the 1914 generation has long passed away. (by our past teachings, that would be true) By the current 'overlapping' generation doctrine as presented by David Splane, I, having been born in 1949, can be considered part of the 'American Civil War Generation'. If I tried to convince someone that I was part of the 'American Civil War Generation', I'm afraid that they would dismiss me as a crazy person.
Reply by Thaddeus on 2017-10-01 12:36:34
Great comparison Rick!
When the "appointment" occurred in 1918-1919 subject is brought up, I enjoy discussing the "food" that Rutherford (the Organization) was dispensing. Wrong "food" at the wrong time,neither faithful nor discreet. I, being a collector of Watchtower literature, am aware first hand of this wrong food, much of which is never ever refered to by the Organization.
I hear many times in reply "it was right for the time".
Comment by Joseph Anton on 2017-09-28 08:14:49
"I don't care what they did yesterday. It's today that concerns me." Forgive and forget correct? Which I myself would be more than happy to do. There's a Caleb And Sophia episode where the idea of forgiveness is presented as a chalkboard, and if we take an eraser to the transgression written in chalk, it disappears forever. It's a lovely thought - and based on biblical principle - until you realize that whatever sins or transgressions or council you refused is all logged into a file cabinet at the Kingdom Hall and often follows you to the next Kingdom Hall by way of letter of introduction. I believe I'd be able to look past the sins of the organization and move forward if they could find a shed of forgiveness themselves and look past mine. Those file cabinets are bad juju. Bad juju indeed.
Comment by Phelps on 2017-09-29 13:40:02
Quería compartir con ustedes Está información sobre este salón de asambleas en Dinamarca. Me gustaría saber qué opinan: Jehovas Vidners Stævneplads
Helsinkivej 3A-E, 8600 Silkeborg, Dinamarca
+45 86 85 39 00
https://goo.gl/maps/nUPTdPqVzrG2
Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2017-09-28 10:21:13
Meliti, thank you for your simple answer to the question as to whether God has always had an organisation. Obviously, through the days of Israel, there was just one organisation. After that it was clearly Christendom, although how much it was organised in the first two centuries seems a bit vague.
It is important to remember, also, Jesus' illustration in Matthew 13:24-30. Jesus sowed fine seed. Satan over sowed it with weeds. Jesus said to let them grow together until the harvest. If there is one true organisation and all we have to do is be in it, it would be quite easy work to get rid of the weeds. But it isn't. Even Jesus knew the angels would have to be careful.
During all the period since the first century true and false Christians have been growing together. Every now and then, a group decides there is something seriously wrong with the Christianity of the day and breaks away, obviously feeling that they have got it right and the "others" have not. And each time a point is reached where those watching can see that
the splinter group hasn't got it right. Did Jesus act ? No. Why not ? because it was not harvest time.
All this means is we must wait and do our best to be faithful until Jesus acts.
And it was much like that in Jesus day. But hard for sincere individuals, until they recognised the Messiah and saw clear evidence as to who he was.Reply by Warp Speed on 2017-09-30 10:02:06
Hi LJ,
Nice comment. I have come to the same conclusion with regards to Matthew 13. It is very comforting to know that I'm not alone in my thoughts. Another reason I love this forum!
Thanks for the encouragement?
Reply by Thaddeus on 2017-10-01 12:26:03
So true, Leonardo Joseph us.
Our WT study today (August 2017) titled "Are You Willing to Wait Patiently?"
“You too exercise patience.”—JAS. 5:8.
As you said, we must wait and do our best to be faithful until Jesus acts.
Thank you for your comment.
Comment by Meleti Vivlon on 2017-09-28 21:55:12
I am and I am.
Comment by Warp Speed on 2017-09-30 17:52:54
Excellent post Brain! My thoughts exactly. Love the Pink Floyd reference too.
Comment by truthseeker971 on 2017-10-01 11:24:49
Opening the hearts and minds of JWs especially family members can be a delicate matter full of landmines, as has been mentioned here. It has to be a gradual process if they are to become freed and see the real light. They are constantly bombarded at every meeting with "organisation" speak. Again today, the Public Talk on Jehovah's "chariot"..Jesus Christ not mentioned once; surprise surprise, as Head of the Congregation. For us who have awoken, this JW dogma is idolatrous, and denies Jesus position and authority. However to them, its all perfectly scriptural.
The Spirit will guide us in our efforts.
Comment by Thaddeus on 2017-10-01 12:07:44
You said in the third from the last paragraph "They can’t go back now and do that. That would be circular reasoning."
That is EXACTLY what many will do. We have learned the "skill" of circular reasoning from possibly the best, the Organization of JWs itself. Circular reasoning is one type of logical fallacies used by them to take minds and hearts captive. In my opinion J.F. Rutherford was a master of logical fallacies.Reply by wild olive on 2017-10-12 00:04:59
Hi Thaddeus, yes the Judge was a master of logical fallacies, as is anyone who doesn't adhere to the truth of Gods Word, the "sword " cuts right through those high sounding falsehoods Heb 4:12
Comment by BrotherNicodemus on 2017-10-02 12:28:31
Thanks for this reasoning approach regarding Jehovah using this Org or not. When the natural opportunity arose, I calmly used your reasoning with my supportive, thinking and agreeable wife. She seemed to appreciate the logic. I am patient and do not force stuff on her. She has always wondered things as well but takes her time and calmly considers things over time. I am blessed to have her. I have not shared much doctrine issues with her except as opportunity naturally presents it. And even then just bite sizes thoughts or considerations. Enough for her to consider privately later in comparing her own thoughts, study, doubts and experiences past, present and future. Yes it is key to help them see that Jehovah is in fact using the Christian Congregation throughout the world, despite each church's or sect's differences and mistakes. Using the individual wheat-like ones among the weeds.
Comment by Smoldering Wick on 2017-10-06 13:15:36
Just my silly mind following rhetoric imposed by Pharisaical reasoning. My first public talk assigned was "Appreciating Jehovah's Organization." I gave it to so many congregations, I'm almost positive my wife was completely zoned out toward the end . . . be that as it may, my present belief is that God allows for human organizations for one reason only: to teach us how sectarian we become when developing the human doctrines necessary to run them. Sometimes human error is our best teacher.
sw
Comment by wild olive on 2017-10-12 00:31:37
Just to add a bit more to Meletis excellent approach and reasoning. I find it's useful to always agree and then amplify .
So yes Jehovah has at various times had an organisation, the best of course is the nation of Israel, the whole arrangement was written down in the first 5 books of the bible under inspiration , the Pentateuch as it's called , would you agree? So if Israel was the pinnacle of divine organisation (Ga 3:19 optional), for what reason did Jehovah establish such an organisation?( there are several answers to this, one is to serve as a tutor leading to Christ, for pure worship, fulfill prophecy etc) but what I say is , Jehovah established an organisation to dispense / teach/ preserve / honor a covenant ,that covenant being the Law Covenant,would you agree?( Ex 19:5&6 34:6&7 Deut 7: 9 Isa 55:3 56:6 24:5 Psl 50:5 Dan 11:30&31 there are more that won't fit here ) So the organisation he established ( priestly services ,sacrifices etc)was to support and assist the covenant , not the covenant assist the organisation, so knowing this , what covenant does the present organisation support? If it's the new covenant why are most of us not in it? And would it not be a realistic expectation since that was the main reason for the previous organisation, to have Jehovah's worshipppers in a covenant? And if Jehovah wants us in a covenant , as he always has with his worshippers, shouldn't his organisation be getting all of us in a covenant? And if it's not getting us into a covenant is it doing Jehovah's will? Agree and amplify ?
Comment by Reasoning from the Scriptures with Jehovah’s Witnesses- Has Jehovah always had an Organization? – Healing for the Soul Ministry on 2017-10-28 06:58:41
[…] via “Jehovah Has Always Had An Organization.” — Beroean Pickets – JW.org Reviewer […]
Comment by Garbagecloud on 2017-11-15 07:55:24
Great article here. Although I'm not sure a Jw would accept your reasoning on Elijah and the 7000, and that they didn't become the new organisation. Wasn't it the case that those worshipping Baal were put to death after they were unable to put fire to the alter? I think a JW may spin this to say that only true worshippers are acceptable to Jehovah, and that those who don't follow the small group are not acceptable, because the road is narrow etc.
On second thought, the only reason they went to the "Jehovah always used an Organisation" argument, was because they're doctrines don't hold up under biblical examination. So they may shoot themselves in the foot if they go down that road. Again, great article, thanks.
Comment by Why Give to the One Who Has Everything? | Beroean Pickets - JW.org Reviewer on 2018-03-11 08:11:37
[…] on the premise that the organization is really what it claims to be, God’s organization. (See Jehovah has always had an organization for a recent discussion on this topic.) Without this premise the entire reasoning presented in this […]