Of particular noteworthiness in this regard is Galatians 1:8:
“However, even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to YOU as good news something beyond what we declared to YOU as good news, let him be accursed.”
According to our teaching, Paul was a member of the first century governing body.[i] Based on this teaching, the “we” he refers to would have to include such an august body. Now, if even direction and teaching from the first century governing body was to be examined and evaluated as to whether or not it was in keeping with the truth already received under inspiration, how much more so should we be allowed to do the same today.
I say, “allowed to do so”, but that isn’t really an accurate application of Paul’s words, is it? What the apostle is saying can only be understood as a duty that all Christians must perform. Blindly accepting what we are taught is simply not an option.
Unfortunately, we as Jehovah’s Witnesses do not perform this duty. We are not obedient to this inspired direction. We have been given a blanket exemption by the very type of authority it is intended to guard us against. We do not ‘carefully examine the Scriptures daily’ to see if what we are taught in our publications or from the platform is to be found there. We do not “make sure of all things”, nor do we “hold fast to what is fine.” Instead, we are like those other religions we have disdained for decades as possessors of blind faith, believing without question all that their leaders have handed down to them. In fact, we are now worse than those groups, because they are not exhibiting the blind faith of decades past. Catholics and Protestants alike feel free to question and challenge many of their teachings. If they disagree with their churches, they can simply leave without fear of any official repercussions. None of that is true for us as Jehovah’s Witnesses.
This blind acceptance and unquestioning attitude is evidenced by the release of the latest issue of The Watchtower, February 15, 2014. To begin with, consider that the first two articles discuss Psalm 45, a particularly stirring song of praise to the future king. This is presented by the inspired psalmist as lovely poetic allegory. However, the writer of the article has no qualms about blithely interpreting every aspect of the Psalm, applying it to fit our current doctrinal structure involving 1914. No need is seen to provide any scriptural support for these interpretations. Why should there be? No one is going to question the them. We have been well trained to accept these things as true, because they come from an unimpeachable source.
The third study article discusses Jehovah as “Our Father”, both a provider and protector. What is strange about this is that the very next and final study article is titled: “Jehovah—Our Best Friend”. Now there’s nothing wrong, I guess, with considering your father as your best friend, but let’s be honest, it’s a bit odd. Besides, that really isn’t the thrust of the article. It isn’t talking about a son being a friend to his own father, but rather a non-son, an outsider to the family, is being encouraged to pursue friendship with the Father. So it would seem we are talking about being a best friend with someone else’s father. That fits within our doctrinal structure which considers the millions of Jehovah’s Witnesses on earth today as God’s friends, not his children.
I’m sure that the vast majority of Jehovah’s Witnesses who will study this article in the new year will not even notice the dichotomy of thinking of Jehovah as one’s Father while simultaneously considering oneself to be only his friend. Nor will they notice that the entire premise for the fourth article is based on a single Scripture applied to one of Jehovah’s servants in pre-Israelite times; at a time before there was a nation for his name, and centuries before there was a covenant relationship that led as a tutor to the Christ and an even better covenant that opened the way for the restoration of all things. We are skipping over all that and focusing on the unique-for-the-time relationship Abraham had as something to long for. If you were to go to a prince and tell him, forget about being the king’s son, what you really want is to be his friend, he’d probably toss you out of the palace.
I’m sure that some who read this post will counter with the objection that it doesn’t matter how many scriptures there are…as long as a single one exists, we have our proof. To such a one I would like to give the reassurance that I have no problem with God considering me a friend. My question is that as a Christian, under the teaching of the Christ, is that how Jehovah wants me to consider him?
Have a look at this sampling list of Christian-era scriptures. What type of relationship are they extolling?
- (John 1:12) . . .However, as many as did receive him, to them he gave authority to become God’s children, because they were exercising faith in his name;
- (Romans 8:16, 17) . . .The spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are God’s children. 17 If, then, we are children, we are also heirs: heirs indeed of God, but joint heirs with Christ, provided we suffer together that we may also be glorified together.
- (Ephesians 5:1) . . .Therefore, become imitators of God, as beloved children,
- (Philippians 2:15) . . .that YOU may come to be blameless and innocent, children of God without a blemish in among a crooked and twisted generation, among whom YOU are shining as illuminators in the world,
- (1 John 3:1) 3 See what sort of love the Father has given us, so that we should be called children of God; and such we are. . . .
- (1 John 3:2) . . .Beloved ones, now we are children of God, but as yet it has not been made manifest what we shall be. . . .
- (Matthew 5:9) . . .Happy are the peaceable, since they will be called ‘sons of God. . .
- (Romans 8:14) . . .For all who are led by God’s spirit, these are God’s sons.
- (Romans 8:19) . . .For the eager expectation of the creation is waiting for the revealing of the sons of God.
- (Romans 9:26) . . .‘YOU are not my people,’ there they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’”
- (Galatians 4:6, 7) . . .Now because YOU are sons, God has sent forth the spirit of his Son into our hearts and it cries out: “Abba, Father!” 7 So, then, you are no longer a slave but a son; and if a son, also an heir through God.
- (Hebrews 12:7) . . .It is for discipline YOU are enduring. God is dealing with YOU as with sons. For what son is he that a father does not discipline?
This is hardly an exhaustive list, yet it makes pretty clear the fact that Jehovah wants us to consider him as a Father and we as his children. Do we have an entire article dedicated to the idea that we should think of ourselves as God’s children? No! Why not. Because we are taught that we are not his children. Okay, then. Surely there must be another list of scriptures from the Christian writers to convey that idea. Would you like to see it? I’m sure you would. So here it is:
No, that’s not a misprint. The list is empty. No scriptures speak of that relationship between Jehovah and us. None. Nada. Zilch. If you doubt that—and you should— type “friend*” without the quotes into the WT Library search engine and look at every single instance of its appearance in the Christian Scriptures.
Convinced?
What we have is a concept we deem so important as to dedicate an entire study article to it and then invest into its consideration something in the order of 12 to 15 million man-hours (allowing for meeting preparation, travel and time at the study.) Yet, the Christian writers under inspiration didn’t invest a single line of text to the idea. Not a single line!
Growing Dismay
As I read through the issue, I found myself experiencing a sensation of growing dismay. I don’t want this to be the state of affairs when I read a magazine I’ve looked to all my life as a source of Bible instruction. I don’t want it to be faulty and I particularly don’t want it to be so transparently faulty. However, as I continued to read, I was to find my dismay growing still more.
The “Question From Readers” that concludes the magazine examines whether the Jews understood the chronology of Daniel’s prophecy of the Seventy Weeks. The premise the writer works from is: “While that possibility cannot be ruled out, it cannot be confirmed.” The rest of the article goes out of its way to show that while we can’t rule it out, they probably didn’t understand the chronology.
One reason given is that there were “many conflicting interpretations of the 70 weeks in Jesus’ day, and none come close to our present understanding.” We seem to be implying that we know all the interpretations that existed 2,000 years ago? How could we? Worse, we are implying that our present understanding of a prophecy is the right one, but none of their interpretations were. This seems preposterous, does it not? To begin with, today we have to go with the archeological findings and chronological calculations of secular scholars. The Jews of Jesus’ day just had to wander into the temple archives where the records would show the precise date that the events marking the starting point occurred. We have to read translations of Daniel’s words. They could read and understood it in the original tongue. Are we really suggesting our understanding must be more accurate than theirs?
That there were erroneous interpretations of Daniel’s prophecy is hardly reason to conclude there weren’t accurate ones as well. Today, there are many erroneous interpretations of the Bible teaching on death or the nature of God. Are we to then conclude that no one has it right. That doesn’t bode well for us, does it?
One of the article’s examples is not even relevant. It refers to a misinterpretation on the part of Jews in the second century. But the question being asked is whether Jews during the time of Jesus understood the prophecy. Of course, Jews in the second century would have a wrong interpretation. To have admitted to the right one would be to have admitted that the Messiah did come on schedule and they killed him. Using this example to ‘prove’ our point is—and I’m very sorry to have to use this word but it is Biblical and more important, it is accurate—just plain stupid.
Another point to discourage the idea that the Jews understood the prophecy of the 70 weeks at the time of its fulfillment is that no Bible writer makes mention of it. Matthew does mention the fulfillment of many Hebrew Scripture prophecies, so why not this one? The fact is that many of Matthew’s references are arcane and wouldn’t likely have been widely known. For instance, he says, “and came and dwelt in a city named Nazareth, that there might be fulfilled what was spoken through the prophets: ‘He will be called a Nazarene.’”(Mat. 2:23) There is no Hebrew Scripture that actually says that, and it appears that Nazareth didn’t exist at the time the Hebrew Scriptures were penned. Apparently, Matthew is alluding to references to Jesus being the ‘sprout’, which is the etymological root of the name, Nazareth. Like I said, arcane. So there was a valid reason for Matthew to point out all these minor prophetic fulfillments found in Jesus’ life. (Isa. 11:1; 53:2; Jer. 23:5; Zech. 3:8)
However, if the prophecy of the 70 weeks was widely known, there would be no reason to highlight it. Why point out something that is common knowledge. Slim reasoning perhaps, but consider this. Jesus foretold the destruction of Jerusalem. The successful fulfillment of that prophecy would have gone a long way to bolstering the confidence in the Messiah among both Jews and Gentiles at the close of the first century when the Apostle John penned is gospel, letters and the Revelation. Yet, though written more than 30 years after the event, John makes no mention of it. If we are to take the absence of mention of a prophetic fulfillment by Bible writers as proof that they didn’t understand it, then we cannot only conclude that the 70 weeks of Daniel were not understood, but have to add in the fulfillment of the prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem.
This is clearly fallacious reasoning.
Did the writers not mention the fulfillment of the 70 weeks because it was already common knowledge, or did Jehovah not inspire them to write it down for other reasons? Who can say? However, to conclude that a prophecy intended specifically to foretell the arrival of the Messiah down to the very year went unnoticed or misunderstood by all, including the faithful, is to assume that God failed in his purpose to make this truth known. The fact is everyone was in expectation of the Messiah’s arrival at that very time. (Luke 3:15) The accounts of the shepherds thirty years prior might have had something to do with that, but a chronological prophecy pinpointing the year would have surely been of greater impact. Consider also that the prophecy needed no interpretation. Unlike our own chronology pointing to 1914 which is built on a dozen assumptions and speculative interpretations, the 70 weeks gives a clear indication of its starting point, its time period, and its ending point. No real interpretation needed. Just go with what it says and look stuff up in the temple archives.
That was precisely what the prophecy was put in place to provide.
Given that, why are we going out of our way to discourage the idea that they could have understood it at that time. Could it be because if they had understood it, we are left to explain how they couldn’t have also understood the other prophecy of Daniel we say pinpoints the start of Christ’s invisible presence?
At Acts 1:6 the disciples ask if Jesus was about to restore the kingdom of Israel. Why ask that if they could simply have toddled off to the temple, looked up the precise year Jerusalem was destroyed (no need for secular scholars then) and done the math? It seems incongruous that we, two millennia later, could understand that prophecy, but the Jewish disciples after 3 ½ years learning at the feet of Jesus would be ignorant of it. (John 21:25) However, if we can be convinced that they didn’t even understand the single-fulfillment 70 Weeks prophecy which very obviously calls for a chronological calculation, then how could they be expected to figure out the far more esoteric dual-fulfilment nature of the 7 times of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream?
So returning to the original question: “Do you think you know more than the Governing Body?” I wish I could say no. They are eight members out of eight million. They are each truly ‘one in a million’. One would think that Jehovah would have picked the best of the best. I’m sure that is what the majority of us believe. So it saddens me greatly when we publish articles like this that can be so easily shown to contain flaws in reasoning. I am not special. I hold no doctorate in ancient languages. What I know about the Bible I learned by studying it with the help of the publications of the Watchtower society. I—WE—are like a university student studying biology, who learns a great deal of truth mixed in with a lot of scientific false doctrine. That student will be grateful for the truth he has learned but will wisely not idealize his teachers, especially if he has seen that they have also taught a lot of silly evolutionary falsehood.
So the fact is, the original question is based on a false premise. It is not that I know more or need to know more than the Governing Body. What I know is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Jehovah has given his word to me and to you and to all of us. The Bible is our road map. We can all read. We may get guidance from men on how to use the road map, but in the end, we have to go back to it to verify that they are not leading us down the garden path. We are not allowed to throw the map away and rely on men to navigate for us.
I feel dismay at reading magazines like the February 15, 2014 issue because I think that we could be so much better than this. We should be. Sadly we are not, and even more sadly, we seem to be getting worse.
[i] It is true that many of us who support this forum have come to realize that in the first century there was no such thing as a governing body as we know it today. (See A First Century Governing Body – Examining the Scriptural Basis) However, what is important here is that the Organization believes this to be the case, and more germane to our topic, also believes and teaches that Paul was a member of that body. (See w85 12/1 p.31 “Questions From Readers”)
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-20 13:17:01
Powerful stuff Meleti.
The opening question has led to circular reasoning at its finest. How do we know the GB know more than we do? Because they teach us these “truths”. How do we know that they are truths? Because they are taught to us by the GB.
Outside of this all I hear is an appeal to statistics. The GB and JWs in general must have God’s backing because of growth and success. This clearly ignores the reality that many organizations, both religious and secular experience growth and success, some of them in outstanding ways. When playing with so many statistics it is easy to pluck out the best and spin the data in ways that exaggerate performance. Statisticians do it all the time.
Take two simple adjustments – 15 minute reporting segments, and 30 hour aux pioneer concessions. The message is continually promoted that these are “loving provisions from Jehovah” (a concept that I have no interest in talking people out of believing), but the tangible result is a very simple and accelerated boost to the number of regular publishers and auxiliary pioneers over the past few years. Since we are so numbers oriented it’s easy just to present those elevated figures while quietly ignoring that they were mainly achieved by a mathematical slight of hand.
Ah, I went off-topic, and probably sound a bit cynical.
Good work on the article though Meleti. It certainly provides a lot to ponder.
Apollos
Comment by on 2013-11-20 14:03:29
The Feb 15 issue has left me in a state of spiritual apoplexy. Thanks for taking it on in its own terms. One is tempted to post it on the information - ahem now Bulletin Board - at the KH.
Comment by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-20 14:23:42
Excellent Article! I review the articles and comments on this site every day and was pleasantly surprised that you posted something new!
Maybe the question is “Does the eight member governing body know more than 8 MILLION of God's people?” As previously stated on this site for them to declare that they are God’s spokesmen and demand obedience to unscriptural reasoning and speculation is horrid. However, the fact that you can still read the watchtowers and not get nauseous is commendable. I was an avid reader until about three months ago. Perhaps I will resume if for nothing else to sharpen my mind and carefully review the Bible to discover what it REALLY says about the topics they are discussing for that month.
Awesome research and love the scriptures that were cited. Iron sharpens Iron. Keep up the good work!!Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-20 14:52:01
Thank you so much.
Reply by smolderingwick1 on 2013-11-20 15:50:54
Yes, GodsWordIsTruth, sharpen your mind, and at the risk of repeating ad nauseam keep popping those anti-inflammatories to combat the urges and surges of salacities! We are all enduring together!
Reply by GodsWordisTruth on 2013-11-20 19:54:52
Amen!
Comment by Come Lord Jesus on 2013-11-20 14:50:07
Recent "generations" at the Kingdom Halls may not know that we stopped using the term "Bulletin Board" decades ago for the reason that letters and instructions from the Watchtower Society did not carry the weight of Papal Bulls.
Evidently that policy changed, along with the meaning of "generation."
Comment by kev c on 2013-11-20 16:34:08
This question do the governing body know more about the bible than us leads us to some quite serious implications. If the answer is yes they do. Then we have to ask why is it that many of the doctrines and so called theocratic procedures seem out of harmony with scriptures and their obvious contextual application many at this point will say that they are not. I say to those brothers read the christian scriptures every day in an undertone and in context day after day for years then ask yourself that question again. Could it be argued for doing such a thing as this a thing encouraged in psalm 1. I have been punished by god and assigned a part with those mentioned at 2 thessalonians 2 who god has given over to believing the lie. Is that my reward. For making an honest search. If that is not so then and the governing body do know more than i then were back to the question why is official teaching out of harmony with scripture. Perhaps they do have special knowledge imparted by holy spirit that the rest of us are not privy to. But i always was of the understanding that these gifts were done away with long ago. I always thought that was official watchtower doctrine. If it doesnt work like that then how can they be sure that they really are gods spokesman. The prophets of old usually performed signs and portents that proved to the populace that they had gods backing. I would like to say at this point i have no intention of wanting to pull the brothers down. Ive invested alot of time and energy into this organisation. I guess im just another doubting thomas who would like to see a bit of proof. A thing i dont think is to unreasonable considering our eternal salvation may be on the line here. Kev
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-20 17:33:20
Kev,
You have well articulated the disconnect. Either there is special new knowledge contrary to Galatians chapter 1, or we should be able to "call out for understanding itself" as per Proverbs 2, and "find the very knowledge of God". If we read, pray and meditate, He will not hand us serpent when we ask for something good (Matt 7:7-11). The fact that many of us have reached similar conclusions by a personal and independent (yes I dare utter the word) study of God's Word cannot be shrugged off as some sort of deception by the Devil. It is when "another sort of good news" rears its head that we should question the source.
Apollos
Comment by SilverTop on 2013-11-20 16:55:04
I cried when I read your article. It was such a relief to read what I've been feeling for so long. The BIBLE says we ARE God's CHILDREN. His Sons and Daughters. The WTBTS says that we can only hope to be His friends. I read the Bible and feel the closeness and love of my Heavenly Father, I go to the Kingdom Hall and feel like I am the most worthless little thing to ever look towards the sunshine! Meletivivlon, if ever you harbor doubts that your blog here is not useful, is not needed, rest assured that your work here is so appreciated. You used Scriptures to back up everything you've said, and you're right, it is so depressing to see what is happening within the Watchtower group. I have also wondered about the Organization's heavy-handedness and implying that they are so perfect that they cannot be questioned. The idea that questioning them is the same as questioning Jehovah. Constantly being admonished to not do any research on your own, don't harbor personal opinions, ask no questions, don't doubt the Society...its all too much. I was inactive for nearly five years, and I'm starting to feel the same set of emotions once again that caused me to stop going to meetings and just spend time reading the Bible and praying to Jehovah. I also remember being told to NEVER refer to the 'Information Board' as a Bulletin Board, I never knew why, just thought is was more of the Society attempts to be "different from the world".
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-20 17:59:47
Silvertop
Once we appreciate that only God can "be found true, though every man be found a liar" (Rom 3:4) then we can realign our expectations accordingly. We have been sold on the idea that the organization is the exception to this rule along with many other things that the Bible says about dependency on humans. The fact is that no human can give you absolute truth. Neither the Watchtower, anyone writing on this site, or any other human source.
However what we can do is sharpen each other through discussion of God's Word, and this site is a great way of doing that. There are a good number of additional Christian resources now widely available that can help us with our studies in truth. I have come to realize that one of the more prominant red flags indicating that a website or other resource might be dangerous is a high level of dogmatism. Once humans become certain of their own theology in the finer points of scripture, it is an indicator that something might be wrong. This might seem counter intuitive when we think about the apparent certainty that the early Christians needed to have in order for Christianity to grow. But outside of the inspired thoughts expressed in the scriptures, there is clear evidence that even the writers accepted that they were looking "through a glass darkly" (1 Cor 13:12). To believe that any of us is now above question on a teaching beyond that written in scripture is outrageous and dangerous hubris.
This is no barrier to our personal discovery of absolute truths. The feeling of freedom and relief that you have expressed is what happens when a fundamental Bible truth is no longer blocked from our vision. The truth about Jesus Christ and his Father truly sets us free.
Your brother,
Apollos
Comment by SilverTop on 2013-11-20 18:32:45
Thank you so much Apollos, I appreciate your kind and true words. This is what studying God's word is all about. an INTERCHANGE of thought, ideas and encouragement. Not one person talk and everybody listen and not dare say anything contrary. The idea is to learn and to grow, to think along fresh new lines and thereby gain greater understanding. We will never learn all there is to know abut Jehovah God, there will always be something new to learn. I look forward to learning about my Heavenly Father throughout eternity.
Agape,
SilvertopReply by kev c on 2013-11-21 04:09:26
Dear sister try not to be too downhearted about these things. It is upsetting to see they way things are going in the congregations. But try and look for positives. Accurate bible knowledge leads to love and we need to find ways of lavishing this love on others. Rejoice i say. Matthew 5 v 1 to 16. Warm christian love. Kev c
Comment by Alec Holmes on 2013-11-21 08:24:23
I'm sorry to say this Meleti, but there is no such thing as "official doctrine", "present truth" or "falsehood" in science.
The scientific method seeks to prove what is not true. It's based on empirical evidence. When new evidence emerges old ideas are discarded. It's updated by the constant scrutiny of fellow scientists. This ensures that science be self-correcting.
There's no one whose views are not subject to question, and this is imperative to science. You can dismiss scientific knowledge and evolution as false or silly, but are you prepared to let the Bible be equally scrutinized?
PS: Even the Catholic and Anglican churches accept evolution as true.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-21 09:03:30
In true science, that is the case. It is also the case in true religion. However, in the science and religion that is practiced by imperfect humans, it is very much not the case. Ben Stein did an excellent documentary on this called, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. It shows that in the area of control by a unchallengable hierarchy science and religion are kinfolk. Scientists that dissent with the establishment in the area of intelligent design and evolution are punished in much the same way that religions punish those who dissent with established doctrine.
I am prepared to let the Bible be equally scrutinized.
>>PS: Even the Catholic and Anglican churches accept evolution as true.
I would consider that to be the final nail in the evolutionary coffin.Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-28 23:13:21
Intelligent Design is a pseudoscience which attempts to rebrand creationism in a “scientific” cloak. It has produced no positive evidence for its claims. The Bible does not agree with established scientific facts. Life evolves.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-12-29 00:28:17
You are wrong, but this isn't a site for debating creation vs. evolution, so we'll leave it at that.
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-21 11:51:51
It's a nice idea Alec, and in certain branches of science it works well enough. However if a person begins with an unassailable premise rather than allowing the evidence to speak freely then the truth will be stifled.
Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me, if you know so much. (Job 38:4, New Living Translation)
As far as the exercise of the scientific method as applied to the origins of the universe and biogenesis, the evidence has only moved us closer to the argument for an intelligent source. At least, that is if you remove the unfounded premise that there is no God, and allow the evidence to speak freely.
It was only since the middle of the last century that observable evidence has made it virtually undeniable that the universe had a beginning. Prior to that many 20th century scientists were of the mind that the universe has always existed. This was after centuries of observation and application of the “scientific method”. I hardly need to point out to you that the first three words of the Bible are “In the beginning ...”.
The primary way that Dawkins and his followers have spent their time addressing the remarkable new discoveries in molecular biology and other fields that point to intelligent design is to attack the whole premise and try to paint it as a pseudo-science. I have heard very little substance that actually attempts to deal with the real evidence raised.
The sad fact is that the majority of people listen to soundbites without personally examining the evidence. People will believe propaganda, because they are too busy, or lazy, to think for themselves.Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-28 23:23:33
Evolution is a fact. The evidence is available more than ever before.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-12-29 00:29:43
A fact requires proof, but there is none. Again, a topic for a different site. If you wish to debate it, I'm sure there are many sites which will welcome you. Here, our interest is the investigation of the Bible.
Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-29 02:18:29
Quite so. A truly open-minded, self-confident, and firm study should read the opposing view to know what exactly it is rejecting.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-12-29 07:41:18
Quite so. I can't speak for others on this forum, but I have done just that, though for years, put decades. An open mind should not be an indecisive mind. There comes a time when the open minded individual realizes he/she has reviewed all the available evidence, weighed all the arguments on both sides, and decides it's time to reach a conclusion and move on.
Of course, if there are forum members who have not yet reached that point and would like to review the evidence in the evolution vs. creation debate, there are many places on the internet to do that.
We have made the decision not to do it here, because our purpose here is deeper Bible study, and we feel that engaging in evolution vs. creation debates would undermine that purpose.
I hope you can understand our reason for this decision.
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-12-29 08:05:50
To be fair Alec, it's been explained before that we don't want these topics sidelined into the debate you seek.
To call ID a pseudoscience is just an appeal to the clamor of Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, et al, with the hope that if you shout loud enough and sneeringly enough then people will believe this label. It's true that the theory of ID is not science in the sense that we cannot reproduce it at every step of the way. The same is true of the theory of evolution. It is all based upon inference, not on scientifically reproducible steps. ID is also based on inference from observation, so what is it that makes one a pseudoscience and the other a fact?Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-29 08:58:45
The evidence is out there. Don't take my word for it. Research it, read it, don't ignore or be intimated by it.
Geology, archaeology, and the entire corpus of biological science have demonstrated evolution as incontrovertible fact.
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-12-29 10:16:22
I don't know what leads you to believe that I ignore it or am intimidated by it. You have no way of knowing how much I have read from both sides of the argument. You are simply assuming you know. If you have this tendency to assume, you are likely also making assumptions in assessing the scientific evidence.
You needn't have concern that I will just take your word for it. I find it hard to listen any argument presented as "incontrovertible" when clearly it is not. As far as I am concerned only someone with a completely closed mind would use the word "incontrovertible" in relation to evolution and abiogenesis.Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-29 10:25:43
Please ignore me and consider the evidence.
Reply by smolderingwick1 on 2013-12-29 12:44:29
Anyone interested should read, "My Pilgrimage from Atheism to Theism - An Exclusive Interview with Former British Atheist Professor Antony Flew."
DR. ANTONY FLEW, Professor of Philosophy, Former atheist, author, and debater, once considered the greatest debater against intelligent design. It is readily downloadable on the internet.
http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1336&context=lts_fac_pubsReply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-29 12:50:40
Not a scientist.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-12-29 13:35:51
Oh well. There it is then...
Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-29 13:53:38
A study on what scientists believe can be found below.
Eminent scientists reject the supernatural: a
survey of the Fellows of the Royal Society
http://www.evolution-outreach.com/content/pdf/1936-6434-6-33.pdf
Reply by smolderingwick1 on 2013-12-29 15:08:45
He was until he denied atheism at which time Dawkins threw him under the bus. Strange how the scientific community can become so religiously tied to dogma.
Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-29 16:52:47
He wasn't.
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-12-29 17:18:07
Logic and reason exist independently from any branch of science. No good science however can exist independently from logic and reason.
Please answer me one question Alec. In your view is abiogenesis "incontrovertible"? Logically if you answer yes, you must be able to explain (and perhaps even demonstrate) an exact scientific method. If you answer no, then you should really calm down your rhetoric.Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-29 20:13:30
Abiogenesis is a fact. Regardless of how you imagine it happened it is a fact that there once was no life on earth and that now there is.
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-12-30 06:54:11
So it is clear that you like to use the words "fact" and "incontrovertible" when in reality you admit that you can only "imagine" how things happened. Some scientific method.
Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-30 07:27:56
It happened. And regardless of what I imagine so did/does evolution. Again, what I think is irrelevant, study the evidence.
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-12-30 07:38:38
Regardless of what you imagine, there is a God. Study the evidence.
Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-30 07:46:35
I have.
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-12-30 07:50:01
Me too. I think I mentioned that to you multiple times. However it didn't stop you repeating yourself ad nauseam.
Study the evidence.Reply by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-30 08:06:14
Answering your questions is far more interesting than replying to your ad hominem attacks.
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-12-30 10:28:39
But you and I have different ideas as to what constitutes an answer. I asked you about abiogenesis, and rather than supporting your scientific claim, you simply implied that it was self-evident.
Well I also feel that God is self-evident. But in addition to his self-evidence I believe that there is ample external evidence.
Your statement on abiogenesis in my view is akin to the ancients saying "a sun is born anew each day". You state that something must be so, but only because you work on a certain premise and rule out another premise according to your preconceptions.
Had you lived in another period you would no doubt have had your ears tickled by a predominant "scientific" view of an eternal universe, and used that to deride Genesis 1:1. And who would have been right?
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-12-30 08:05:05
Alec
In my opinion, your interjection on these comment threads with no substance, but just a repeating of the same rhetoric every time is giving the impression that you wish to be perceived as an atheist troll. (For those that may not know what I mean - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll)
If you raised a serious question to answer, or offered anything of value, I could accept that, but really I don't think you have anything to offer except empty words that sideline our discussions.
In line with Meleti's previous request, please just go and find somewhere else to air these vacuous mantras.
Apollos
Comment by BeenMislead on 2013-11-21 10:18:06
Thank you for this article Meleti !! It really helps me to know that I am not alone in my growing dismay with the organization.
When I am asked the question “Do you think you know more than the Governing Body?”, my thoughts usually go to the vast number of things they have said over the years that proved to be wrong. Which means it is quite possible that they can be wrong about something today also.
But if you point that out, they go to their favorite escape hatch at Proverbs 4:18 which says:
“But the path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established.”
But if you read the context ... Solomon is not talking about progressive revelation of truth in verse 18. Solomon is imploring a path of righteousness as opposed to wickedness. He does not switch gears in verse 18. This is classic eisegesis on the part of the organization.
______________________________________________________________
Exegesis:
- A systematic process by which a person arrives at a reasonable and coherent or true sense of the meaning and message of a biblical passage.
- The investigation and study of Sacred Scripture through tradition, history, archaeology, and criticism, to find the true meaning.
Eisegesis:
- The interpretation of a word or passage by reading into it one's own ideas.
- Is the antonym for exegesis, which means reading into a text something that simply is not there.
______________________________________________________________
Also their “the light gets lighter and lighter” analogy is self-defeating because:
When you don’t know you are in darkness, when you truly are in darkness, then you can never possibly know you are out of it.
Something to think about!!Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-21 10:44:45
II quite agree that the Organization has been misapplying Prov. 4:18 all along. However, I didn't know there was a word for that. I should have. There's a word for everything in English, it seems. "Eisegesis". I like it! Thanks for adding to my vocabulary. Keep up that independent thinking. ;)
Reply by kev c on 2013-11-21 13:59:51
Yes proverbs 4 v 18. Has nothing to do with prophecy. Its all about the effects wisdom has on a young mans life. I dont know how they get away with it
Comment by Come Lord Jesus on 2013-11-21 13:00:57
Meleti-
Thank you for continued insight on the matter of millions of us being brought into the new covenant as sons of God.
Given the present situation at "headquarters", what can we do about this? Just complain about WT articles and tell each other organization horror stories, of which there is no shortage?
The scriptures and our relationship to Jehovah through the Christian faith give millions of us an obvious opportunity to vote, not only with our feet and voices, but with our lips - by partaking of the memorial emblems as members of the new covenant, which we are by undeserved kindness of our loving father, Jehovah.
This conclusion now seems in-escapable. But welcome are the views and comments of the readers of this valuable ministry, which you perform here!Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-21 13:18:36
That is an excellent idea, my brother. If we all partook publicly it would be a silent and safe protest against the false doctrine of the two-tier system. Imagine if thousands of new partakers appear next memorial. Headquarters would have a bird, but what could anyone do. The key would be to partake, but if asked for our reason, we simply reply that it is an intensely personal decision. Period. End of story. They may try to get us to incriminate ourselves (at least in their eyes) by admitting we believe the official position is false, but if we hold our peace and reply only that our decision is personal, they can do nothing. There is no provision for disfellowshipping an individual simply because he is partaking.
I personally do not believe that such an action, even if 100,000 participated, would alter the course that the Governing Body has taken. I'd love to be wrong about that, but nothing in my study of human nature leads me to believe that would be the case. What it would do however would be a heaping of fiery coals, so that true heart conditions could be made manifest. (Rom. 12:20)Reply by kev c on 2013-11-21 14:37:32
Problem could be with that one meleti if they are out to get you they will. If they cant get you on one charge theyll try to get you on aselgia loose conduct. Which they think has to do with a bad attitude toward the society or the elders. Looking at the greek in barclays new testament words it not of course but it is being used. As a. Trump card to get the unwanted out of the congregation when they cant pin you down. And ive seen it used. A few times. Sad to say the least we are speaking of the christian congregation here. Hopefully its not like that in your local congregations.
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-21 15:58:17
"Any excuse will serve a tyrant."
That being said, one can avoid much unnecessary suffering by remembering to obey Jesus' words about not throwing pearls before swine. The Pharisees tried to do away with Jesus for three years, but couldn't until he was betrayed. From experience, I would say the best advice in these circumstances is to remain silent. Never answer a direct question. If you have the ability to remain silent and let the silence build, do so. What can they put on the blue card? Disfellowshipped for refusing to answer our questions? Alternately, the technique our master used repeatedly was to ask a question in turn. That takes skill and perhaps not everyone feels comfortable with that. Another tactic is to simply ask to be left alone and play the victim, which isn't hard, because that is exactly what they would be making you into.
There are many fine elders. However, there are those who are like the wolves Jesus foretold would appear. The important thing is not to give them any excuse. Even when one is on solid ground scripturally, it can be twisted to bad ends. I've seen this done firsthand. They can't make fire if you give them no straw. In fact, if they wish to meet with you, it means they don't have the evidence to act, but only suspicion. In that case, there is no obligation to meet with them at all.
They may not like that, but there is no bible law that says we have to meet with the elders. There is no need to meet with two at a time either. That is done solely so they can come away and declare that two witnesses heard what you said. If one feels the need to meet, then simply say that you only feel comfortable meeting with one person and you want a trusted friend to accompany you. So you have two witnesses and they have one.
The trick is not to give them a reason to think they are acting in the cause of righteousness. They need to feel they are acting in behalf of God, keeping the congregation clean. If you deny them that excuse, you greatly reduce their ability to act with justification, which is what they are looking for, because in the end, they have to believe they are acting for God.
What Kev says is true. They can simply declare loose conduct. A tyrant needs no excuse. "Against authority there is no defense." However, "all those desiring to live with godly devotion in association with Christ Jesus will also be persecuted." (2 Tim. 3:12) Ultimately, persecution will come if we adhere to the laws of Christ. As difficult as it may be, it is to be welcomed.
(2 Thessalonians 1:6-8) . . .This takes into account that it is righteous on God’s part to repay tribulation to those who make tribulation for YOU, 7 but, to YOU who suffer tribulation, relief along with us at the revelation of the Lord Jesus from heaven with his powerful angels 8 in a flaming fire, as he brings vengeance upon those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus.
Reply by Chris on 2013-11-21 15:56:21
They would no doubt write a WT article counseling against such an event.
You can almost preempt the language
" It is unfortunate that in these last days with the end so close upon us, that some individuals are desirous of more prominence amongst their fellow brothers and sisters. Not satisfied with the spiritual bounty and blessings that come from being a member of the Other Sheep these ones have sought to sow dissent and confusion by laying claim to the heavenly hope at this time. We need to ask ourselves, "Am I worthy to humbly take up this mantle of service" or does my desire spring from a heart that has been seduced by the Satanic thinking of this world. A world where being seen as special is something to be cultivated and nurtured.
It is also true however that with the pressures of this system weighing us down many are given to mental aberrations and even illness. In such cases we need to be understanding and loving, but never tolerating those who are haughty and presumptuous. Be warned brothers and sisters, the judgement of God on those who are partaking unworthily will be fearful."
Who writes this stuff ;)Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-21 16:00:48
Chris, you may have the gift of prophecy. :)
Reply by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-21 21:02:10
This made me laugh out loud! Wow this is exactly how this would be worded!!
Comment by Chris on 2013-11-21 16:41:12
This is true.
While I used to think my appointment as a prophet was in 1985 (when I was baptized) I have now come to realize that this happened in 2012.
While reversing out my driveway I saw the words OBJECTS ARE CLOSER THAN THEY APPEAR in my side mirror. I initially thought nothing of it, but when I approached a road worker holding a sign that said SLOW MEN AT WORK I began to think I could help these slow men to see that the end was closer than they thought!
But I brushed it off as a whimsey. Until I came to a series of signs that said "NARROW ROAD, then ONE WAY, NO STOPPING and DEAD END.
A man without my gift of prophecy would have thought that I had misread the map and was hopelessly lost, but I knew these were signs from above. When a traffic officer approached me to ask what I thought I was doing I knew he was a tool of the Devil and I fled from him......straight off a cliff.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-21 16:51:29
If we could get you and anderestimme together, we could probably open up a traveling comedy duo. There's money in it. We could book the Kingdom halls in the midwest, polish the routine and then open in New York to rave reviews.
Reply by Chris on 2013-11-21 17:19:06
Only if you pick the songs :)
We would need a corporation, a board of directors and a limousine.
Scratch that!
I will be the President and I want a V-16 Cadillac.
If you didn't laugh sometimes you would cry.
If it wasn't for the encouragement amongst brothers and sisters here, I would have lost the plot sometime ago. Just knowing that there are many who have not bent their knee to the WTS is deeply comforting to me.
Comment by peely on 2013-11-21 17:46:03
Interesting article, Meleti. Regarding your later comment:
The trick is not to give them a reason to think they are acting in the cause of righteousness.
In the end, however it comes down, does it really matter? I personally look forward to disfellowshipping if it means removing that horrendous mark of the beast (Rev. 13:16,17)
Acts 5:41 - The apostles left the high council rejoicing that God had counted them worthy to suffer disgrace for the name of Jesus.
If we view suffering for Christ as an honor than the pain is lessened, although I speak for myself. I am not in a position to lose family members and have already lost friends for speaking out. Friends who put the love of the organization above their love for the Heavenly Father and His Son. This appears as idolatry, doesn't it? Incense may not be burning, but eight men have readily "enslaved" the congregations.
How many times have we used the following set of scriptures concerning separating ourselves from "Christendom", thinking the Organization fit the details? But instead it is the individuals turning to Christ, standing up for real truth resulting in disfellowshipping that these scriptures apply to. Such comfort is found in these words, as well as serious warning to heed.
Mat 10:29-39 - What is the price of two sparrows—one copper coin? But not a single sparrow can fall to the ground without your Father knowing it. 30 And the very hairs on your head are all numbered. 31 So don’t be afraid; you are more valuable to God than a whole flock of sparrows.
32 “Everyone who acknowledges me publicly here on earth, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But everyone who denies me here on earth, I will also deny before my Father in heaven.
34 “Don’t imagine that I came to bring peace to the earth! I came not to bring peace, but a sword.
35
‘I have come to set a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.
36
Your enemies will be right in your own household!’
37 “If you love your father or mother more than you love me, you are not worthy of being mine; or if you love your son or daughter more than me, you are not worthy of being mine. 38 If you refuse to take up your cross and follow me, you are not worthy of being mine. 39 If you cling to your life, you will lose it; but if you give up your life for me, you will find it.
Chris, can I use some of your material?Reply by Chris on 2013-11-21 18:36:30
It is not mine to give, I am inspired remember ;)
Comment by Come Lord Jesus on 2013-11-22 06:08:52
Meleti-
You and others are focused on the natural concern - what can they or will they do to us. But those whom God has adopted as sons are obligated to embrace and respond to the glorious freedom of the children of God, without fear of man.
Romans 8:
19 For the creation is waiting with eager expectation for the revealing of the sons of God.+ 20 For the creation was subjected to futility,+ not by its own will, but through the one who subjected it, on the basis of hope 21 that the creation itself will also be set free+ from enslavement to corruption and have the glorious freedom of the children of God.
The manner in which these children of God respond to their adoption was plainly laid out by Jesus, who teaches us to all be brothers with him. We annually celebrate the memorial together to give testimony to our calling, and we keep doing this in remembrance of him.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-22 08:12:14
Quite right you are. We must make "public declaration for salvation", and partaking is part of that public declaration. (Rom. 10:10)
(1 Corinthians 11:26) . . .For as often as YOU eat this loaf and drink this cup, YOU keep proclaiming the death of the Lord, until he arrives.Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-22 11:31:56
But therein lies the reality. The eating of the loaf and drinking of the cup at the annual memorial is not performed as a proclamation of the death of the Lord in anticipation of his arrival. Neither would it be seen as such by those observing (present company excepted). Partaking at JW memorials has long become a symbol for something else entirely. It is a statement of where a person believes that s/he stands within the two-hope system inaugurated by Rutherford's doctrines.
Unless those who see me partake recognize the reasons for my doing so and are prepared to accept that my Christian faith is valid, then I for one am currently unable to partake in that format. To my mind I may as well attend a Catholic communion if the only important thing is that I personally partake. But clearly that cannot be right. The act of partaking cannot be detached from the entire ceremony and what it stands for can it?
I will partake with any number of others who will recognize the truth of the matter, or I will do it alone. As far as my attendance at the memorial, I have been invited as a respectful observer, and that I will remain for now. To me it is not the reality of the "Lord's Evening Meal". It is an annual ceremony performed by those whose view of this matter I currently do not share. I feel that I can respectfully observe that, much as I might respectfully observe a wedding or a funeral in any church whose theology I did not agree with.
It's just my view, and I'm not trying to impose it on others.
ApollosReply by kev c on 2013-11-22 14:42:56
The same thought struck me as well apollos that scripture as often as you partake you keep on proclaiming the death of the lord until he arrives. Doesnt seem to get a mention at the memorial. I do see the need to partake. But. Considering pauls words at 1 corinthians 5. V 7 and 8. Let us keep the festival ....... With.sincerety and truth. And looking at the surrounding context. I would rather do it alone. Sad really considering its a communion meal. Kev
Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-22 19:40:17
kev c
That is a really solid point. It truly matters who is present and in agreement with the meaning of the occasion. I had not read that passage before in this light.
Thank you,
ApollosReply by kev c on 2013-11-25 02:57:42
Thanks apollos its probably the same reason jesus dismissed judas iscariot from the first observance. Kev
Reply by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-25 12:50:21
Excellent scriptural reference!
Reply by smolderingwick1 on 2013-11-22 14:15:17
While I agree with you Apollos, there is one thing missing. Each of us have a conscience, albeit restricted by whatever external organizational forces that exist. As such some are more conscientious than others, and more sensitive. We're all on differing pages and so your conscience might differ from mine, whereas my discernment might lead me to a different understanding. Clearly, we are not Catholic, but neither are we to be SO bound to organizational dogma that we cannot do what conscience dictates. These are matters that need no explanation or apology.
I know why I partake. And it is not with any superior feeling or attitude that others might suspect. Similarly, I cannot stop others from thinking that I believe I "know more than the Governing Body." I already considered that one. It's the first question my wife asked when I began investigating whether or not all should partake, when I asked: "If we aren't under the Law Covenant or New Covenant, then where in scripture are we? Did not conscience dictate that so many give up their lives in German concentration camps while the SS scratched their heads as to why?" For this reason I take Peter's words very seriously as he linked our conscience to baptism:
"For if someone, because of conscience toward God, bears up under grievous things and suffers unjustly, this is an agreeable thing." Why? Because as he goes on to write that we must "Hold a good conscience, so that in the particular in which you are spoken against they may get ashamed who are speaking slightingly of your good conduct in connection with Christ." Otherwise, why does he conclude by saying "That which corresponds to this is also now saving you, namely, baptism, (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the request made to God for a good conscience?)" (1 Peter 2:19; 3:16, 21)
I have debated this for years. Our baptisms were to be inseparably linked to conscience, which is why being Christlike means that we do not belittle the conscience of others, and neither do we force our conscience onto others. Whether I was born Catholic, Protestant or Muslim, I am under obligation to my conscience when being baptized into Christ. If I am not, then my baptism is meaningless.
Love and affection,
sw1Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-22 19:37:06
Hi sw1,
I may be misunderstanding what you are trying to say, but most certainly I respect the conscientious decision of others who see this matter differently. I hope you noticed my final sentence "It’s just my view, and I’m not trying to impose it on others."
If I were to see partakers at our memorial I would rejoice at their decision. I truly respect your public declaration sw1.
At this stage I do not make the decision to partake outside of the arrangement simply because of how some individuals would view me. As kev c points out this is intended as a communion meal. If I am the only partaker at the event, and if I know that the other attendees will not recognize the true significance of the action, then I cannot personally see reason to make that my forum for a public declaration.
But I must repeat, that I totally respect the decision of others to do differently.
It is a matter on which I can see myself potentially changing my decision in the future. It really does require balancing quite a number of considerations.
ApollosReply by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-22 21:10:31
My husband and I had this very discussion tonight. He proceeded to say " Even if you are right and this command to partake of the emblems applies to all Christians why would you risk stumbling so many in the congregation? ( I presume that he feels that others would be so gravely stumbled because I am only 32 and it would be whispers all over the congregation leading the elders ultimately approaching about this matter) He then proceeded to quote scriptures( that we are all familiar with )where Paul talks at length about respecting the consciences of others. He closed by saying,...." Even if it’s within your right to do so , that still doesn't give you a license to do it…. think about the affect it would have on your fellow Christian Brothers and Sisters".( sound familiar?) “ If you feel that strongly observe in private.... Wait on Jehovah to clarify matters if they need to be clarified”........
I walked away feeling confused. Then I thought ...Paul was talking about eating things sacrificed to Idols. Not something as radical as disobeying an outright command of our Lord.
I am torn. I am praying to Jehovah to direct me.The scriptures are clear ...but am I running ahead? Then I thought for them to "clarify" to matter on the Memorial would that mean that they would ultimately have to rid the doctrine of the two tier system , admit that the scriptures were authored by our God for ALL Christians not just 144,000, which we ultimately lead to dismissing idea of the "slave" being only anointed Christians and The GB having no real authority....I am not trying to sell Jehovah's hand short (since he has toppled kings and nations before)but I cannot see this happening in this enviroment...... Sorry….thinking out loud…..Still mediating on these thoughts...Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-22 22:13:37
GodsWordIsTruth
Jesus made clear that we would have a measure of obstacles and a degree of anxiety in carrying out our Christian lives and duties.
If you are convinced that you should partake, then your first commitment is to ensure that you do so. I and others here will agree with you that the active commemoration of the meal is evidently not in the category of "things we shouldn't do it it offends others". The first century Christians were viewed suspiciously by society in general because they maintained their privacy in liturgical matters. But that was from people on the outside. To find us questioning whether we should carry out a command of Jesus in case it offends fellow Christians is a strange situation indeed. It seems that similar issues must have been faced between the Jewish and the Gentile Christians from the outset. And let's face it - JWs are the modern day Jewish Christians in many respects.
To share in the meal where everyone present either agrees with and partakes, or at least understands your reasons for so doing is a wonderful occasion of Christian unity. I pray that this will be something that we can do in increasing peace and unity until the Lord returns, even if those groups are small for the time being.
Apollos
Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-22 21:41:01
I do see your point and even agreed with it for a time. However, there are many sincere but misled Christians attending the memorial. If brothers and sisters who are respected as examples in the congregation begin to partake and if this gives courage to others so that each year more and more respected ones who cannot be easily dismissed as whack jobs partake, it is bound to have positive consequences.
The fact that the physical man will misjudge the spiritual man is no reason for the spiritual man to hide what he does.
Comment by on 2013-11-22 21:09:35
My husband and I had this very discussion tonight. He proceeded to say " Even if you are right and this command to partake of the emblems applies to all Christians why would you risk stumbling so many in the congregation? ( I presume that he feels that others would be so gravely stumbled because I am only 32 and it would be whispers all over the congregation leading the elders ultimately approaching about this matter) He then proceeded to quote scriptures( that we are all familiar with )where Paul talks at length about respecting the consciences of others. He closed by saying,...." Even if it’s within your right to do so , that still doesn't give you a license to do it…. think about the affect it would have on your fellow Christian Brothers and Sisters".( sound familiar?) “ If you feel that strongly observe in private.... Wait on Jehovah to clarify matters if they need to be clarified”........
I walked away feeling confused. Then I thought ...Paul was talking about eating things sacrificed to Idols. Not something as radical as disobeying an outright command of our Lord.
I am torn. I am praying to Jehovah to direct me.The scriptures are clear ...but am I running ahead? Then I thought for them to "clarify" to matter on the Memorial would that mean that they would ultimately have to rid the doctrine of the two tier system , admit that the scriptures were authored by our God for ALL Christians not just 144,000, which we ultimately lead to dismissing idea of the "slave" being only anointed Christians and The GB having no real authority....I am not trying to sell Jehovah's hand short (since he has toppled kings and nations before)but I cannot see this happening in this environment...... Sorry….thinking out loud…..Still mediating on these thoughts...Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-22 22:10:52
There are two ways for Jehovah to clarify matters. One is for him to correct the GB and make them do things right. That belief is based on the idea that we are the true religion. The problem with it is that Jehovah has never done that before. He is the same yesterday, today and forever so that doesn't bode well for those hoping for him to correct matters. After all, the nation of Israel was his true religion and he destroyed it.
The second way that he could clarify things is the way he has always used. He sends in his servants, the prophets, to proclaim the course of righteousness. These are persecuted, but for a few these ones lead the way to salvation.Reply by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-23 00:13:03
For some reason my post was posted twice... sorry....
Very good comments! Apollo I want to make sure that I understand your view.... Do you believe that JW's view of who should partake in the Lords Evening meal is unscriptual?If so, are you saying essentially that you would not partake because their view takes away from the occasion? I'm not sure that anyone religion is observing this command properly...Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-23 08:43:42
I suppose when it comes down to it, I am not satisfied that it is the occasion. It is part of JW liturgy yes. But is it truly the "Lord's Evening Meal" as outlined in scripture? Now that we are having this conversation I realize that this question has been building in my mind for many years.
We are there to hear a talk - more than half of which is to explain why you should really not partake of the emblems.
Then we observe each person politely rejecting the symbols of Jesus' body and blood. The attendants breath a sigh of relief when nobody has attempted to partake, or dropped the emblems.
Then we have an invitation to all the people that attend this one time a year to try to get them to the special talk, with a view to getting them to the meetings.
Then many of the brothers and sisters socialize in private homes, but you are unlikely to hear any scriptural discussion on "proclaiming the death of our Lord".
So I ask again, is this the Lord's Evening Meal as outlined in scripture? I believe I have attended the Lord's Evening Meal once so far in my life, and there was no doubt in my heart and mind that it was the real thing.
But again I must emphasize that I completely respect the decision of others to partake in the existing forum if that's what they feel to be right.
ApollosReply by smolderingwick1 on 2013-11-23 11:38:18
Well said, Apollos and I know the frustration of illegitimacy surrounding our particular celebration.Yet if you dare miss the occasion there is a commotion: "S/he didn't even come to memorial!" And if you sit there and dutifully pass the emblems without a sip or nibble, you might feel as many have expressed that it more resembles a black sabbath in a coven of witches. Seeing this from both sides, I was bound by conscience (my own as everyone should) and partook for the first time. That was the worst. My wife being so upset and the silence of others so desperately wanting to question, counsel or discuss their sentiments with me. But now it's done and there's less likelihood I'll be shocking the congregation again.
sw1Reply by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-23 18:39:58
There are certain things which a person may, in all good conscience and with best intent, wish to say or do, knowing that there is no possible way to say or do those things without others taking it the wrong way. Partaking at our memorial is one example. Explaining the issues I have with the occasion itself is another.
I know that there will be readers of this blog who may read my comments as sacrilege since I am questioning the validity of the ceremony that they treat as the most holy night of the year. I apologize to those readers who may take it that way. I sincerely respect the occasion and what it stands for from the perspective of many attendees. I do not wish to cause any offense.
At the same time I hope that they will appreciate that the matter of observing the meal in the true manner outlined in God's Word is something of great importance to me personally, and will understand why I long for it to truly be that way.
Did true Christians in the 3rd, 5th, 15th centuries for example have any means to observe this occasion properly? I think so. Regardless of what false beliefs were going on at any point in history the straightforward instruction from our Lord in the inspired Word is simple for anybody to observe in spirit and truth.
Could such a thing happen in a large way in 2014? I hope so. But for me the JW event cannot be the vehicle for it, although I am still open to be persuaded otherwise.
Apollos
Comment by Chris on 2013-11-23 23:30:34
While I have been 'inactive' for many years I have always attended the Memorial, and for years I accorded it the dignity I felt it deserved.
Last year was distinctly different for me. I felt the whole occasion was empty and I saw it for what it really has become. It is little more than a sad ritual to elevate the anointed when it should be a proclamation of our Master's return. I would go far enough to say the Holy Spirit was not present.
It actually made me angry because it was just so disrespectful and formulaic. The brother giving the talk looked so constrained and programmed, and the outline was vague and used cherry picked scriptures, and I found myself pretending to be a member of the public and querying the whole process
I wanted more.
Not this empty shell of an occasion!
Not this loveless meaningless ritual!
I am still agitated when I think about it and unlike last year where I partook privately afterward, this year I don't think I will attend.
Perhaps I should attend and partake but I would be drawing attention to myself and that's not what the Lord's Evening Meal is about. If everyone partook as they should then this class distinction would disappear.
Sorry to sound so grumpy but I am reaching a point where MY conscience will no longer be quiet and I need to make decisions on a great deal of things affecting the spiritual health of my family.
As far as I know I am still the head of my household but I will have to check the paperwork, I think my wife has had the Society's lawyers draft in a veto clause :)
Comment by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-24 01:27:51
We are bound to obey His command. I don't believe that there is one group of people that are commerating this occasion based on the scriptures. Yet, that does not absolve us from the responsiblity as we read in to be from the scriptures. I respect the conscience of both who feel the need to partake and those who choose to not. I'm praying fervently to Jehovah for direction and the wisdom to recognize His direction when he gives it. I really don't want to gravely offend others. I hate idolatry but I'm not going to storm in church and break statues of Jesus and Mary because they venerate it. At the same time I don't want to feel like I'm
shrinking back from doing what is right....
Comment by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-24 08:05:05
From the many excellent comments on this subject, it is obvious that we all feel the need to obey our Lord and partake of the emblems at the next memorial. That we have in common. The question is how to go about it. The other concern is how to deal with the consequences. That there should be consequences--negative consequences--for such a simple and sacred act is in itself an atrocious commentary on what we have become as a religious Organization.
Each comment I've read expresses thoughtful and sound reasoning. This is clearly a matter of conscience. I see no clear moral path. Our Organization loves to lay out the path for us, removing the element of conscience completely and treating any who would try to restore it with harsh punishment. There have been many comments of appreciation for the freedom of expression this site offers. We are most grateful to all who participate here because it is so very upbuilding to read the expressions of faith and to learn from the scriptural reasoning of others. There is a general bettering (if I can us that word) of our collective spirituality. The comments on the subject of partaking have certainly helped me to a better understanding.
Obviously, if we had a small group of likeminded Christians, our best course would be to unite with them and partake together; holding the Lord's Evening Meal as he intended. However, that is not always an option. Sometimes there is only one partaker. Sometimes there is division in the home, with one wanting to attend the congregation meeting and another not.
Some feel they will not partake at the hall because it would be sending the wrong message, supporting the erroneous view the GB teaches on this matter. Others would counter that not partaking also supports the erroneous view. Onlookers will conclude that the non-partakers believe they are of the 'other sheep' class. It seems to be a lose-lose situation. Perhaps the only way to send the right message it to not attend at all. Still, even then, will the congregation believe one has done so because they disagree with the way we perform the ceremony or because we are simply drifting away or losing faith or worse, 'going apostate'? The fact is that whatever we do will be misunderstood. The physical man cannot understand the spiritual man. (I'm away from my computer, so forgive me for not being able to provide scriptural references as I should.)
I do not believe our decision should be made based on what others may think. However, that is an opinion. I will not go down the path of moralizing which trapped the Pharisees and our Organization.
Since we do not commemorate the memorial fittingly as the Bible requires, some reason that partaking would be inappropriate. In the first century, Paul spoke of ones who were partaking unfittingly, but that would bring condemnation down upon them individually. He did not discourage others from attending and partaking because some acted unfittingly. Still, our situation differs in that the ceremony itself is conducted unfittingly. Could we then argue that attendence itself lends support? Are we complicit because we participate, even if we participate by not partaking? Does our silence grant consent? Perhaps the only correct course would be to stay away altogether. Still, that solution may not be an option for all. What of the situation where a wife feels she must partake, but the husband disagrees? Should she stay at home and commemorate the Lord's death privately, leaving her husband and possibly children to attend at the hall?
I may reason that whether I'm alone at home or alone in the congregation, my commemoration is mine and mine alone. Some will attend at the hall and not partake, then meet with friends privately afterwards and hold another more appropriate Lord's Evening Meal. Some may partake at both the hall and privately.
Some feel that by partaking at the hall, they are proclaiming The Lord until he returns. They view this as an opportunity to lovingly express by example what all should be doing, even though most will misunderstand. However, if even one understands and is therefore saved, the risk is worth it. They are acting modestly, because modesty means recognizing one's limits. We cannot change the way the ceremony is conducted, but we can change how we personally deal with it. It is within our power to partake or to hold off partaking. Each must decide for themselves what will accomplish the most good for all concerned.
Comment by smolderingwick1 on 2013-11-24 12:45:16
Very well put, Meleti. Even without the scripture references my brain was sufficiently overdosed on scripture as I read it. :)
Comment by smolderingwick1 on 2013-11-24 13:04:23
I often think that Luke's account in Luke 12:47, 48 applies in so many areas of our conscience: "Then that slave that understood the will of his master but did not get ready or do in line with his will will be beaten with many strokes. But the one that did not understand and so did things deserving of strokes will be beaten with few."
Comment by kev c on 2013-11-25 04:12:16
Gods word is truth. This is a tough one for you. Your hubby sounds well meaning and is just probably qouting what he has been led to believe is the truth. This about the conscience is familiar watchtower reasoning. Its been used as a catch all net for many years. However whose consscience is the most important. This in some respects is the bottom line a crisis of conscience. What does your conscience tell you to do. 1 peter 3 is good on this point. It speaks of.how a husband and wife should act toward one another then goes on to speak of the conscience. Theres a good balance in those verses. I would say try not to make too much of a rift. In the end with patience he may come round to your thinking. Your husband will love you very much and is probably a bit worried. Jehovahs blessing. Hope you dont mind me saying these things. Kev
Reply by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-25 15:11:23
I really, really appreciate your thoughts Kev C. He is worried. My stance is hardening as I get older and grow in understanding by means of Jehovah , but the questions and disagreement I have with the GB is not new to him. In the past he has just strongly encouraged me to wait on Jehovah . After our conversations I pray about these matters and then continue to wrestle with my thoughts.
A year ago I told him that I'm happy to discuss the Bible in our family worship sessions but the printed material from the society is out. That was only because I was frustrated. I started to feel like it wasn't family worship at all because we disagreed on so much and he was slightly agitated at my answers. We always get sidetracked during these studies because he feels like we have to discuss the “elementary things” again and that “sufficient time has passed” for those discussions and we are prohibited from getting into the “deeper things of God”. He is very annoyed because he says that I was raised in the truth and that he married a regular pioneer.( I guess that makes me spiritually qualified for marriage ) He stopped the Family worship altogether .He is discouraged and I can see it. I feel horrible. I offer periodically to follow the TMS bible reading schedule and /or discuss topics from the reasoning as a suggestion for Family Worship so that we could resume but he hasn’t taken me up on the offer. I’ll keep trying.
Yesterday he approached me saying that he is the head of the house and asked if I could support him when teaching the children. I told him absolutely. However, if my children ask ME a question outside of the study , I cannot and will not tell them anything that I believe is unscriptural. I will direct them to the "slaves" point of view on the subject out of respect for him but I will then tell them to reason on the scriptures for themselves because the Bible is the Final authority not the slave. He is a very mild man but I can tell that angered him.
Here I thought that was a mild and respectful answer. I even drew upon past WT articles, without even realizing it, on how to handle your mate when he is unbeliever to deal with this situation. (After all good advice is good advice) I by no means consider him a non believer, but I'm finding that in talking with him that the 10% that he says we disagree on about the Bible is driving a wedge between us when we have spiritual discussions. I told him that I will attend the meetings out of respect for his headship at this time although I cannot tell him how much longer I could do so in good conscience . He seemed very content with that the fact I could attend the meetings even when I made it clear that I do not under any circumstances want to be associated with the JW. There’s just not a good way to leave without harsh repercussions.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2013-11-25 15:34:43
My heart breaks for you. I can't imagine how difficult this is. My wife lags behind me in her awakening, but she can see the logic and loves truth more than men, or an Organization. Coincidentally, she told me she doesn't want to go this week to the WT because she finds that type of article very discouraging. This is a women who pioneered in two foreign assignments where there was a greater need. What your husband seems to be exhibiting--if I may be so bold--is blind faith. For years I've seen how blind faith has torn apart families in fulfillment of Jesus' words, but I never imagined that I'd find it "in the truth" and that it would be working the other way round, if you get my drift.
Still, when I preached in Catholic countries in the past, I found that those who were most zealous for their faith often made the best witnesses. No one goes to Jehovah unless He first calls him out. Look at Saul. The most zealous of all the Pharisees. Jehovah knows hearts, so if it be his will, I'm sure that something will happen to awake within your husband's heart the awareness that he's on a wrong course.Reply by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-25 16:58:33
Thank you very much for your thoughts Meleti.
He was raised in the "truth"as well and comes from a family that is very rooted “ in the truth” He often reassures me that it is okay to have questions about the JW doctrines. I respectfully correct him and tell him that they started out as questions but after research over the years and prayer they are now disagreements with the JW doctrine and that is not okay in the organization. He is insistent that the GB does not ask for implicit obedience and that they do not imply that if you do not believe what they are teaching at the time that your salvation is in jeopardy. I showed him concrete examples of where the literature implies that is the case( watchtowers ,reasoning book etc .) and he paused and then went on about how we can expect human imperfection to creep in the organization and/or literature when humans are trying to handle the word of God and to disregard it .
I have expressed to him that his faith is blind. Yet, he insists that he does not follow man and that God has the final say . He claims that if the GB asked him to disobey anything that he knows to be violating God’s law he would without hesitation disobey the GB. However, in the same breath he says that the GB is directed by God’s Holy Spirit.
He posed a very weird question to me the other day. He said that if during the great tribulation ( I decided not to debate about when it began) broke out tomorrow , if the GB told me to go to take refuge in a certain location …..would I obey? I was speechless. I didn’t know how to answer that question. I am not sure that it would come to that but I eventually responded by saying that Jehovah has never left his servants in doubt when it came to salvation ( fleeing to the mountains, building an ark , not looking back in Sodom )there is no record of even the most rebellious Israelites not following the pillar of fire or choosing another path instead of crossing the Red Sea . He implied that it would be unreasonable for me to expect those things in “our day “ since Jehovah does not communicate with us in that way. But ss it ? I guess if you believe what you are being fed by the GB , that they are being used directly by God ,that we have to rely on them for instructions on how to survive, and that they are the only means in which Jehovah is dealing with us ….somehow Jehovah intervening without the GB seems impossible .
He has grown weary of the discussions. He feels somehow that Satan is attacking our family and tearing us apart( according to his prayers) . We agreed on me continuing the meeting but I only did so because I see that it is breaking his heart. He admitted that he is hoping that I hear something that will change my mind. I love him to much right now to tell him it’s a lost cause. I’ve decided to wait this out for his sake until Jehovah tells me it’s enough. I imagine that the Memorial will be the turning point. I just take it one day at a time and pray.
I find it disturbing that he cannot read the bible without the assistance from at least one publication from the WTS. He acts as though reading the Bible without a “map” is impossible and it makes him uncomfortable.
Reply by kev c on 2013-11-25 16:48:32
Dear sister you may have to just agree to disagree at least for a while on these points. Dont let religion destroy your family ive seen it too many times. Cling to faith hope and love. These are the most important things. As for your children in the end they are more likely to respond to christian qualities more than doctrine. Kev
Reply by smolderingwick1 on 2013-11-25 22:46:53
Dear GodsWordIsTruth,
While I cannot add much wisdom to this, neither do I wish to add dilemma, You and I seem to be in reverse even to the point that my wife and I have ceased discussing our differences. Not wishing to take anything away from conscience (since the Governing Body is her mediator and head at present) at this point, I simply let her have her view and carefully skirt around anything that might seem to her as disrespectful to them.
I'm sure she would think I'm a potential threat to her spirituality if I did anything but support her belief. Maybe this is a good lesson for both. Putting up with differing opinions, I believe the more I try to support and commend her for what I know she believes, it builds mutual respect. I always remember one brother's comment to me years ago when I asked how he maintained such good headship over his family while not being autocratic. He simply said to me, "Love is what we do and not what we say. I just do what I think is the loving thing and leave the preaching to her."
I know it sounds funny but it's true, especially for husbands. We should all learn to listen more and demand less while doing more to show how submission can be accomplished. A man should remember that Paul's first words in Ephesians 5:21 were, "Be in subjection to ONE ANOTHER in fear of Christ." There's a fine line between what this means, why husbands might feel inferior, but Jesus did it best by submitting himself to washing the feet of his disciples, demonstrating to them how subjection is better exemplified than demanded.
Affection in Christ,
swReply by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-25 23:19:12
I appreciate your comments. The situation is reversed with me.He feels like his headship is threatened .I try to reassure him it is not. But he views my unwillingness to "submit" to the GB's views on the Bible as an act of unfaithfulness in "what is least". He asked for a shepherding call a few months back and I politely declined. That is not a forum for the kind of issues I am having.
Comment by apollos0fAlexandria on 2013-11-25 17:56:04
GodsWordIsTruth
I feel for you and am concerned for your situation.
It is true that if push comes to shove, we must put Jesus Christ before even close family members (Matt 10:37). It seems clear that Jesus was using hyperbole to help us to see what the ultimate decision should always be if there was a conflict, although I think it's noteworthy that he did not bring husband or wife into this context. In general the letters of the apostles make clear that the marriage arrangement can and should withstand religious differences.
It's clear that you do not want your differences to become a wedge. To me, it sounds as though your husband sincerely wants what is best for you and the family spiritually, even if he might be misguided. I am sure that you don't take that for granted in a world that in general does not encourage an arrangement of spiritual headship, by God, Christ, husbands, or anyone for that matter.
We must also consider that none of us has an absolute monopoly on truth. On this site we discuss some doctrines which appear to be falsifiable from God's Word. I stand by the thoughts that I have commented on here, but I also accept I could be wrong and am prepared to be corrected. As long as another person is willing to call me a Christian brother or sister then I will accept him or her as such, even if I do not agree with his or her views (unless s/he has crossed an absolute line according to God's Word). That being the case, I personally would try to give the utmost latitude to differences in theology within my marriage. I believe God's Word allows for it. I believe God's Word allows for these differences outside of the marriage too, and promotes unity over uniformity, but that is a whole topic in itself that has been previously discussed here.
I understand how difficult it must be to have significantly different views on fundamental spiritual truth. But time and changing circumstances may relieve pressure on this situation. Our organizational doctrine may change, and if it does, he may see your point of view, or perhaps your concerns will be assuaged.
Clearly if every spiritual discussion is a potential conflict it will leave a dangerous gap in the spiritual armor of your relationship. Is there any way that you can step back and consider all of the things you have in common spiritually, and then work forward from there? I don't know that this site is a place to be giving this sort of advice or discussing this, but since the issue has been raised I hope you do not mind my 2c worth.
ApollosReply by kev c on 2013-11-26 05:48:40
Totally agree with all those comments and have tried to apply them all the way through as my wife has never been a christian. It works we are still going strong after all these years. Dont ever give up love is a perfect bond of union and overides any differences we have. Kev.
Comment by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-25 23:11:30
Thanks very much for all your comments and concern. I'm not sure how I strayed from the original post but thank you very much for allowing it :) I agree that taking a step back is best at this time. It's very hard because we shared so much spiritually together.I believe focusing in the things we have in common would be a positive step in the right direction. It's a weird circumstance because if you didn't know us and overheard our conversation you would swear that we have totally different religious backgrounds.....I will continue to pray to Jehovah for direction. Hopefully we can meet in the middle so at the very least we can begin reading the Bible together. It's such a hot button these days.
Comment by Chris on 2013-11-26 02:03:14
GodsWordIsTruth said "It’s a weird circumstance because if you didn’t know us and overheard our conversation you would swear that we have totally different religious backgrounds"
Amen to that sister. From my conversations with my wife I know exactly what you mean.
I mean no disrespect to your husband, but it's a bit like their growth has become stunted after years of a poor spiritual diet (while being told it is healthy)
They lack the necessary spiritual vitamins and minerals that you can only get from feeding from God's word before it has been washed, filtered, refined and repackaged by the WTS.
Their literature should really contain a warning -
"This publication was produced on equipment used to print Bibles and may contain Bible fragments"
Comment by GodsWordIsTruth on 2013-11-26 08:56:29
I totally agree with you Chris. I cringe when I hear some of my friends say something like ..."I keep up with my magazines, but I have to get better with my Bible reading." Not trying to be judgmental but why is it not the reverse? We are literally flooded with information from the GB, the daily text, multiple new releases from the conventions, yearbooks, and the Watchtower and Awake every month. Not to mentin the KM's and studying the various books for the TMS. I haven’t even touched the preparation for service. At one time I prided myself on being able to “ keep up with the organization” but my Bible reading was very limited I just did not have the time to devote to it , or so I thought.
My husband is on the same treadmill. That is why I believe that Bible reading outside of what the GB has planned for the weekly bible reading seems to put a dent in his efforts to keep a strict spiritual routine. He is hopelessly trying to stay afloat. I guarantee that if the average witness speaks with my husband they will feel that he is definitely keeping up with the “celestial chariot”.
In my opinion there is simply no time for research outside of the organization. Instead of being molded by the Bible you are molded by the information given through GB and the extent of Bible reading for some JW’s I believe are the scriptural references in the publications that GB believes supports their thinking on a subject. As a people we are well versed in the scripture but we are always “studying up to the test” (the Oral review for example).Reply by kev c on 2013-11-26 09:21:06
Youve got it. Only when we put thier yoke down will we find the time to increase in bible knowledge. Keep them busy thats the policy
Comment by Andronicus on 2013-11-26 13:10:37
The best option for me? Purchase some unleveaned bread, some wine, and partake in private.
Comment by Katrina on 2013-11-28 00:37:12
Andronicus I agree, as Jesus said KEEP doing this in remembrance of me, it is a commandment, one recognizes that we accept this gift baptism and the memorial I believe are all tied in together.
For the past few years after much prayer and scripture meditation, I certainly think all those who are ministers of Christ including the GC are his disciples, Christians doing Gods will in faith, and faith in the ransom is one of the baptismal questions.Reply by Andronicus on 2013-12-03 18:09:08
Thanks, Katrina. There's no scriptural basais for me to simply be an "observer". I'm tired of being on the outside looking in. Enough.
Comment by Crazyguy on 2013-12-01 02:00:01
..
Comment by Alec Holmes on 2013-12-29 08:12:46
I certainly do and concur with your spirit. All I feel I need to say to anyone on this forum or to those visiting is, don't dismiss the evidence around you when you encounter something that challenges your beliefs. Calm, reasoned debate (a misrepresented word by the Watchtower) is an important and necessary part of letting ideas breathe, be tested, be scrutinized. You beautifully and respectfully debate on this forum, regarding things pertaining to the Bible. It is just as valid and worth it to do your personal research on the validity of the book itself.