If they are caught lying, they accuse others of being liars. If they are caught stealing, they say, “Not us, but others are robbing you.” If they are abusive, they play the victim and cry out that others are abusing them.
There is a gem of a video on tv.jw.org right now in which a Helper to the Governing Body, Kenneth Flodin, employs this technique. His purpose is to smear the good name of any Christian who might disagree with the scriptural interpretation of the Governing Body. He does this by means of a hop, skip and jump method of Bible reading. Reading from the letter of Jude, he starts in verse 4 saying:
(Ken’s words appear in boldface.)
““Certain men have slipped in” to the congregation, he says they, “ungodly” with “brazen conduct”, 12 and 13, “rocks...below [the] water...waterless clouds...fruitless trees...having died twice...waves...cast[ing] up the foam of shame...stars with no set course”. Look at 16: “These men are murmurers, complainers...following their own desires...make[ing] grandiose boasts while they are flattering others for their own benefit.”
He then concludes by saying: "So he’s really describing the traits of apostates today, isn’t he?”
Kenneth is cherry picking words extracted from eight verses of Jude to smear the reputation of anyone who disagrees with Watchtower doctrine. But is his application of Jude's message accurate?
Who’s the Apostate?
Before moving on, let’s use the Bible to analyse what he says.
Rather than cherry pick words and phrases, we’ll read the whole of the verses he’s referenced. (To make it easier to follow, I’ll be using superscript letters to provide reference points. Where they appear more than once, they link parallel thoughts.)
“My reason is that certain men have slipped inA among you who were long ago appointed to this judgment by the Scriptures; they are ungodly men who turn the undeserved kindness of our God into an excuse for brazen conductB and who prove false to our only owner and Lord, Jesus Christ.”C (Jude 4)
“These are the rocks hiddenA below water at your love feasts while they feast with you, shepherdsD who feed themselves without fear; waterless cloudsE carried here and there by the wind; fruitless trees in late autumn, having died twice and having been uprooted; 13 wild waves of the sea that cast up the foam of their own shame; stars with no set course, for which the blackest darknessF stands reserved forever.” (Jude 12-13)
These men are murmurers, complainers about their lot in life, following their own desires, and their mouths make grandiose boastsG, while they are flatteringH others for their own benefit.” (Jude 16)
Most of what Jude describes was also described by Peter. Notice the startling similarity with what Jude says.
“However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among you. These will quietly bring in destructive sects, and they will even disown the owner who bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. 2 Furthermore, many will follow their brazen conductB, and because of them the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively. 3 Also, they will greedily exploit you with counterfeit words. But their judgment, decided long ago, is not moving slowly, and their destruction is not sleeping.” (2Pe 2:1-3)
“These are waterlessE springs and mists driven by a violent storm, and the blackest darknessF has been reserved for them. 18 They make high-sounding statements that are empty. By appealing to the desires of the fleshH and with acts of brazen conduct, they entice people who have just escaped from those who live in errorI. 19 While they are promising them freedomH, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for if anyone is overcome by someone, he is his slave. 20 Certainly if after escaping from the defilements of the worldI by an accurate knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they get involved again with these very things and are overcome, their final state has become worse for them than the first. 21 It would have been better for them not to have accurately known the path of righteousness than after knowing it to turn away from the holy commandmentJ they had received. 22 What the true proverb says has happened to them: “The dog has returned to its own vomit, and the sow that was bathed to rolling in the mire.”” (2Pe 2:17-22)
Who are the “certain men” who have “slipped inA among” us, who eat with us, but are really “rocks hiddenA below water” at our feastings? The JW meetings are compared to spiritual feasts, so who has slyly slipped in to deceive us, eating alongside us? Certainly not Ken’s apostates. They are all on the outside, cast out for not agreeing with Watchtower doctrine. According to Jude, these ones are “shepherdsD who feed themselves without fear.” What do they have to be afraid of? Their position is secure. Peter calls them “false prophets” D and “false teachers.” D Both Peter and Jude say these ones engage in “brazen conduct.”B
What is “brazen conduct” in the Bible?
The Bible often links brazen conduct with the immorality of a prostitute. (Jer 3:3; Eze 16:30) The Jewish nation was likened to a prostitute for not remaining faithful to her husbandly owner, Jehovah God. (Eze 16:15; Eze 16:25-29) Apostate Christianity is likened to a prostitute for not being loyal to its husband, Jesus Christ, by engaging in illicit intercourse with the kings of the earth, such as the United Nations. (Re 17:1-5) Does any of this fit with the recent conduct of the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses? (See here.)
Brazen conductB is also linked with uncleanness and greediness. (Eph 4:19) Peter speaks of such greediness in conjunction with brazen conduct, adding that they exploit the flock with “counterfeit words”. (2Pe 2:3) These ones are, by Peter’s account, “waterless springs and mists (a cloud on the ground).” E Jude also calls them “waterless clouds.” E A spring that gives no water, a mist that brings no dew, a cloud that drops no rain—the counterfeit words of these false teachers provide no lifesaving waters of truth.
Shepherds feeding with us who are false prophets and false teachers. Does this ring a bell?
There is another aspect to these waterless clouds. E They are carried hither and thither on the winds. Whatever way the wind is blowing, that’s the course they take. As circumstances change they keep changing their counterfeit words. The provide the hope of rain, but the clouds just pass over leaving the land dry. This brings to mind the constant, once-per-decade readjusting of the interpretation of “this generation”, to keep us ever in expectation. (Mt 24:34)
Their brazen conductB also includes making “empty high-sounding statements” G and “grandiose boasts.”G Here are some examples of this:
Confidence in the “Slave”
It is also important to remember where we first learned the truth. (w84 6/1 p. 12)
“The faithful and discreet slave”: A small group of anointed brothers who are directly involved in preparing and dispensing spiritual food during Christ’s presence. Today, these anointed brothers make up the Governing Body” (w13 7/15 p. 22)
When Jesus comes for judgment during the great tribulation, he will find that the faithful slave has been loyally dispensing timely spiritual food to the domestics. Jesus will then delight in making the second appointment—over all his belongings. Those who make up the faithful slave will get this appointment when they receive their heavenly reward, becoming corulers with Christ. (w13 7/15 p. 25 par. 18)
By word or action, may we never challenge the channel of communication that Jehovah is using today. (w09 11/15 p. 14 par. 5)
Only Jehovah’s Witnesses, those of the anointed remnant and the “great crowd,” as a united organization under the protection of the Supreme Organizer, have any Scriptural hope of surviving the impending end of this doomed system dominated by Satan the Devil. (w89 9/1 p. 19 par. 7)
These ones have caused people to escape from a “life in error”I and from the “defilements of the world”I only to bring them into greater reproach by causing them to “turn away from the holy commandment”J they have received from Christ. Jesus commanded his followers to partake of the emblems representing his blood and flesh. He also commanded us to teach the same good news that he taught, not another. (Gal 1:6-9) Witnesses have been taught to turn away from these commandments.
“Paul also helps us to understand that those with an earthly hope do not partake of the Memorial emblems.” (w10 3/15 p. 27 par. 16)
Note, however, that the message that Jesus said would be proclaimed in our day goes beyond what his followers preached in the first century. (be p. 279 par. 2 The Message We Must Proclaim)
Does any of this fit the apostates which Kenneth has in mind? Hardly. Does it not fit those whom Kenneth is representing?
These false shepherds flatterH their flock and promise them freedom.H ‘You are special. You are the only true religion. Stick with us and you will be saved. You will grow young, survive Armageddon, and enjoy the spoils of war. A mansion, fine things. You'll be princes in the earth, and even be able to cavort with lions and tigers.’
In next week’s Watchtower study, we are told:
“Therefore, the environment in which Jehovah is now molding us is viewed as a spiritual paradise that is presently taking shape. We feel safe and secure despite the wicked world around us. Moreover, in this setting, those of us who grew up in loveless, dysfunctional families finally experience real love.” – par. 8
It is flattering for JWs to believe that only they have love, while out in the world there is no safety, no security, no real love, just wickedness. It is flattering to believe that soon they will be free by being the sole survivors of Armageddon. But if Peter and Jude’s words fit, then this will not be the outcome, for these false teachers and false prophets have turned their back on their owner, Jesus Christ. Obviously the ones both Peter and Jude were referring to in the first century gave lip service to Jesus. Otherwise, they could not have remained ‘hidden beneath the water.’ However, they proved false to their Lord and King. They took authority for themselves and did what they could to marginalize the authority of their Lord Jesus. Both Bible writers speak of the same outcome for such ones: “Blackest darkness.”F
Peter adds:
"What the true proverb says has happened to them: “The dog has returned to its own vomit, and the sow that was bathed to rolling in the mire.”” (2Pe 2:22)
Don’t take Kenneth Flodin’s word for it, nor mine for that matter. Judge for yourself who best fits the criteria Jude and Peter have laid before us.
We Don’t Do This, They do!
To illustrate the point made at the start of this article, we’ll now examine how Kenneth goes about trying to prove his point:
“Are apostates today as reprehensible as those ones that Jude mentions in his short letter? Are they devious, or maybe they’re sincerely trying to help poor misguided Witnesses? No! They’re devious! Have you ever noticed that apostates generally do not try to reason from the Scriptures? Why not? Because they know we know the Scriptures and we would see through the twisting.”
Kenneth accuses those who disagree with Watchtower doctrine of using lies and half-truths, and of twisting the Scriptures. He asks his Bethel audience if they have “noticed that apostates generally do not try to reason from the Scriptures?" How would they notice this since they are forbidden from listening to anyone who disagrees with WT doctrine?
Kenneth is in a perfect position to make whatever accusations he likes and to disparage anyone seeking to reveal the truth, because his audience is forbidden to check up on anything he says. If they were allowed to do so and stumbled across the Beroean Pickets archive site, for instance, they would encounter Bible reasoning in over 400 articles and more than 13,000 comments. That hardly fits with Kenneth's accusations.
He then makes a flattering statement to his Bethel audience, stating that apostates are presumably afraid of using the Bible, because Witnesses know their Scriptures and would see right through the twisting. Oh, if only that were true! If only my JW brethren could see through the twisting of Scripture!
To prove that his statement is an outright lie, I propose a test. Let us take what is arguably the most important doctrine taught by Jehovah’s Witnesses, the hope of the Other Sheep class, and discuss it using the Scriptures. If there is a Witness apologist out there who would be willing to take up this challenge, I’ll set up a debating forum, and we can discuss it, but again, only from Scripture. No opinions, nor speculation allowed. Just what the Bible teaches.
I will attempt to prove using the Bible that the hope for all Christians is to serve with Christ in the Kingdom of the Heavens as adopted children of God. The other side will attempt to prove that there is a secondary hope as outlined in JW publications for the other sheep of John 10:16.
To make your task easier and to outline the key points of contention, here are the seven elements of the JW Other Sheep teaching with references from the publications.
- The Other Sheep of John 10:16 are a non-anointed class of Christian, distinct from the little flock of anointed Christians of Luke 12:32 who inherit the kingdom.
See w15 5/15 p. 24: “Undoubtedly, we rejoice that God has promised immortality in heaven to faithful anointed ones and everlasting life on earth to Jesus’ loyal “Other Sheep.” - The Other Sheep are not in the New Covenant.
See w86 2/15 p. 15 par. 21: “Those of the “other sheep” class are not in the new covenant…” - The Other Sheep are not spirit anointed.
See w12 4/15 p. 21: “We other sheep are also aware that we will not always have Christ’s anointed brothers among us on earth.” - The Other Sheep do not have Jesus as their mediator.
See it-2 p. 362 Mediator: “Those for Whom Christ Is Mediator.” - The Other Sheep are not God’s adopted children.
See w12 7/15 p. 28 par. 7: “Jehovah has declared his anointed ones righteous as sons and the other sheep righteous as friends” - The Other Sheep are not to obey Christ’s command to partake of the emblems.
See w10 3/15 p. 27 par. 16: “Paul also helps us to understand that those with an earthly hope do not partake of the Memorial emblems.” - The Other Sheep have an earthly hope, of living forever on a paradise earth.
See w15 1/15 p. 17 par. 18: “On the other hand, if you are part of the “great crowd” of “other sheep,” God has given you the earthly hope.”
Please take each of these points and provide the scriptural proof behind them.
Deceitful Apostates!
Kenneth next tries to prove that "apostates" are deceitful. He cites a single example from his past which is supposed to convince his audience that all those who disagree with Watchtower doctrine (aka apostates) are the same. This would be like me trying to prove that all Jehovah’s Witnesses are child abusers by citing the case of Jonathan Rose.
Kenneth is himself employing a deceitful tactic. Yet it goes deeper. In an attempt to prove how devious his apostates are, he refers to a letter he received years before containing a photocopy of page 148 from the 1910 Watchtower volume and asking the question, “Why did your Mr. Russell say you only have to read his book, Studies in the Scriptures, instead of the Bible?”
Here’s a link to that 1910 Watchtower volume. Download it, open it, and then enter 148 in the “Page:” box. Once there, you will see in the right column the subtitle that Kenneth says was covered up in the photocopy he received. So it would look like trickery was used, but wait a minute—the absence of that subtitle doesn’t explain the writer’s question. What was that question based on, and why did Kenneth ignore answering it?
Here’s the real passage in question starting with the third paragraph in the left column of page 148:
If the six volumes of SCRIPTURE STUDIES are practically the Bible topically arranged, with Bible proof-texts given, we might not improperly name the volumes—the Bible in an arranged form. That is to say, they are not merely comments on the Bible, but they are practically the Bible itself, since there is no desire to build any doctrine or thought on any individual preference or on any individual wisdom, [such as Russell's famous delving into pyramidology, the ages of man, and numerous failed prophetic dates and fabricated antitypes???] but to present the entire matter on the lines of the Word of God. We therefore think it safe to follow this kind of reading, this kind of instruction, this kind of Bible study.
Furthermore, not only do we find that people cannot see the divine plan in studying the Bible by itself, but we see, also, that if anyone lays the SCRIPTURE STUDIES aside, even after he has used them, after he has become familiar with them, after he has read them for ten years—if he then lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible alone, though he has understood his Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years he goes into darkness. On the other hand, if he had merely read the SCRIPTURE STUDIES with their references, and had not read a page of the Bible, as such, he would be in the light at the end of the two years, because he would have the light of the Scriptures.
Kenneth has not addressed the question the letter writer asked. He has created a strawman argument out of the hidden subtitle. The writer didn’t claim that Russell said his books were a substitute for the Bible. Kenneth is arguing a question that is not on the table. The question was ‘why did Russell claim that this readers only had to read the Scripture Studies?’ That is precisely what Russell states in many words in the highlighted portions above.
Kenneth is trying to confuse the issue. To illustrate: Let’s say your doctor says that for your health you can only consume two ounces of butter a day, or you can have any amount of margarine if you choose to substitute it for butter. Obviously, margarine is not butter, but it can be used as a substitute for butter. Now let’s say you decide to eat a butter croissant every day, because you have learned that it contains two ounces of butter.
Is the croissant a substitute for butter like the margarine? No, it contains butter, but it’s not a butter substitute. Russell isn’t claiming that his books are margarine to the Bible’s butter. He’s saying that you can consume his books to get your butter. You don’t need the butter directly, the croissant (his books) will do even better. It’s a rather arrogant statement to make, but that is what the letter writer was asking about and what Kenneth failed to address. Yet he claims the apostates are the devious ones!
Despising Authority
Kenneth’s key point comes midway when he reads Jude 9.
“9 But when Miʹcha·el the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses’ body, he did not dare to bring a judgment against him in abusive terms, but said: “May Jehovah rebuke you.”” (Jude 9)
Kenneth says that Michael didn’t assume an “authority that did not belong to him.”
He next says:
“So Jude was giving a lesson for those in the congregations that were ‘despising authority, speaking abusively of glorious ones’; it was a lesson for them. Michael set a good example of not overstepping authority. And that becomes an equally good lesson for us today to know the limits of our authority and responsibility. And unlike those rebellious ones in Jude’s day, we don’t want to be rebellious, instead we want to follow the lead of the faithful slave...The slave that Michael—our Lord Christ Jesus—is using today.”[i]
To Kenneth, the “glorious ones” today are the members of the Governing Body, the “faithful slave” in his view. But what credentials do they have to support such a grandiose boast? Would Kenneth accept that the Pope is the faithful slave? Obviously not. If he disagreed with a teaching of the Catholic Church, would he feel he is “despising authority” by speaking out? Not a chance! So what’s the difference?
The difference in his mind and in the mind of all JWs is that those other religions teach falsehoods, so they have lost any claim they may have had to being the faithful slave. Well, if it is sauce for the goose to denounce the false teachings of trumped up “glorious ones” like the clergy of Christendom, then it is sauce for the gander to do the same for the clergy of Jehovah’s Witnesses who have assumed the mantle of their authority in the time honored tradition of all the organized religions claiming Christ as their leader, but disowning him by their conduct and their teaching.
The authority we have to say such a thing does not come from a self-appointed committee of men, but from our Lord Jesus who commissioned all his disciples to preach the good news he taught and to speak truth in spirit. (Mt 28:18-20; John 4:22-24) So we speak with boldness because Jesus authorized us to fear no man, or would the Governing Body have us reject their rendering of this verse:
“So they spent considerable time speaking with boldness by the authority of [the Lord][ii], who bore witness to the word of his undeserved kindness by allowing signs and wonders to be performed through them.” (Acts 14:3)
In Summary
Jude and Peter were not inspired to write their words with Jehovah’s Witnesses in mind. Their words applied in their day and continued to apply all the way down through the centuries to this very day. Kenneth’s line of reasoning to defend his masters from the attacks of true Christians, who are only trying to help others to understand the truth, are not new. These arguments have been used over and over again by self-appointed religious authorities who have proven false to their only owner, Jesus Christ.C This is the path taken by all of Christendom.
There does seem to be a hint of desperation behind this latest jw.org video. The access the internet provides to anyone anywhere makes it increasingly difficult for "rocks hidden below the water" to remain hidden.
________________________________________________
[i] Witnesses believe Michael is Jesus, but that understanding is based on speculation and overlooks verses to the contrary such as Daniel 10:13
[ii] The NWT improperly substitutes “Jehovah” for kurios, Lord, in this verse.
Archived Comments
We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.
Comment by Meleti Vivlon on 2016-07-28 21:42:32
[Posted on behalf of an anonymous commentor.]
This may be relevant to your article on Ken Flodins "Deceit" video. The 2013 Watchtower March 15 page 24 says BY AND LARGE, Christendom’s churches have dis- tanced themselves from God’s name. For example, the Revised Standard Version states in its preface: “The use of any proper name for the one and only God . . . is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.” See also Watchtower 2015 Dec 15 page 10. If you check out the actual quote in the preface of the revised version, it is a classic example of deceptive quoting, which nobody would bother to check. Keep up the good work by the way Meleti.Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-07-29 13:19:21
For the curious, the full RSV preface can be found here. The sentence referenced above, unedited, is below. Personally, I'm having a hard time seeing the deception.
For two reasons the Committee has returned to the more familiar usage of the King James Version: (1) the word "Jehovah" does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew; and (2) the use of any proper name for the one and only God, as though there were other gods from whom He had to be distinguished, was discontinued in Judaism before the Christian era and is entirely inappropriate for the universal faith of the Christian Church.Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2016-07-29 13:25:51
Yes, Andere. I would agree.
Comment by 1984 on 2016-07-29 08:27:44
Great analysis Meleti, critical thinking at its best. The watchtower is such a narcissistic cult, to think that all these scriptures and their application were written exclusively for them. And how they love to point the finger at everybody else while hiding their own sins. I guess they don't like being scrutinised too much, so better to deflect the attention to everybody else. Now, whenever I think about the Governing Body I start singing to myself "you're so vain, you probably think this scripture's about you...." My mischievous English sense of humour coming through - it helps relieve the tension (and not blow an artery vinman! ?)
Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-07-29 13:25:54
Thanks 1984, you transported me back to 70s AM radio. I bet vinman's blood pressure is already back within manageable levels.
Comment by stephen on 2016-07-29 14:58:01
I hope Vinman doesn’t blow an artery!!
So with that in mind, I will follow the example of the apostle Paul and say this to Kenneth Flodin and his cronies, in behalf of Vinman!
(Galatians 5:12) CEB
I wish that the ones who are upsetting you would castrate themselves!
Comment by vinman on 2016-07-29 20:57:34
Thanks guys for all your support!?
I have calmed down for the moment. But honestly, these guys just make me sick. The Catholics say, "We believe in supporting the wars of the nations. Take it or leave it." "We know Christmas traditions are pagan, but we don't care." "The Rosary is not scriptual but that's fine."
At least these guys are honest, and a person has no doubt what he is getting involved in. With the Watchtower, what do you REALLY know?
Let's see. Dead are dead. Paradise is coming after Armageddon. Kingdom is a real government. "Oh man, that clinches it for me. I am ready for baptism."
What you don't know: The Watchtower
Comment by william on 2016-07-29 23:45:07
I disagree with some of the above comments. I am too busy to look up references, and I don't like to defend the WT, but somebody might benefit from the following:
(a) It's not fair to quote the reasons for the RSV and ignore the reasons in the ASV. The RSV didn't defeat the reasoning of the ASV, but just disagreed. Many Bible scholars regularly used used the name Jehovah throughout the 1800's. If you have a high speed internet connection you can search and find plenty of books back then by scholars with the name Jehovah.
(b) The laity tell Bible scholars how to write the Bible, sort of. As I remember, the new revision of the English-language Jerusalem Bible dropped Yahweh because of the unpopularity with the laity.
(c) There ARE other gods that Jehovah needs to be distinguished from. That's the reason for the name.
(d) We should not blindly follow Judaism. If you read the Talmud you will learn that Rabbis have said many foolish things.
(e) Not everybody agrees that Jehovah is far from the Hebrew pronunciation. George Wesley Buchanan wrote an article called “Some Unfinished Business With the Dead Sea Scrolls, (Revue de Qumrân, 1988).” He uses Yehowah or something similar in his books. I believe that he bases his spelling on the Greek manuscripts in the Dead Sea Scrolls (which contained vowels.)
(f) Nehemia Gordon, born orthodox, but converted as a Karaite Jew, uses a similar spelling and pronunciation.
(g) Ancient Greek nonbiblical texts (including magical incantations) used forms of the Divine Name including vowels that are reminiscent of Jehovah more than Yahweh. This may be from the The Oxyrhynchus Papyri. I don't have time to research this. I read the book 30 or more years ago. But G.w. Buchanan went by similar reasoning using Greek Dead Sea Scrolls.Reply by Vox Ratio on 2016-07-30 03:34:33
Hi Wally,
Thank you for sharing your studies. I can attest to each of your points during the course of my own research, and I have no problem in accepting that the name Jehovah is a reasonable anglicised pronunciation of the Tetragram. In fact, it wasn’t until the 1960’s that scholars seemingly began to emphasise the perceived verbal etymology of the Tetragram as being more important than the ancient theophoric constructions in the Hebraic names of the Old Testament. The evidence for this within literature can be seen here:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=jehovah%2Cyahweh&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cjehovah%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cyahweh%3B%2Cc0Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-07-30 12:47:52
There is also an interesting article on the pronunciation of the divine name here. Interestingly, the academic who wrote the article comes to the conclusion that the divine name couldn't have been pronounced "Yahweh", in sharp contrast to the RSV's assertion that it is "almost if not quite certain that the Name was originally pronounced "Yahweh".
Reply by Vox Ratio on 2016-07-30 18:20:18
Hi AndereStimme,
Thanks for posting that reference. Gertoux is a careful scholar and I have his original book from which this more recent article was developed (here). It’s quite a heady read, but the most detailed systematic examination of the Tetagram that I’ve been able to find in one place.
Thanks again for sharing that with us. I appreciate your work, brother.
Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-07-30 11:50:57
Hi Wally,
I posted the full RSV quote because I thought it was relevant to the accusation of deception on the part of the organization in partially quoting it. I didn't in any way mean to imply that I agreed with it. In point of fact, I strongly disagree with both reasons given by the RSV for (mostly) omitting the divine name.Reply by william on 2016-07-30 13:41:13
I see that I misunderstood your comment. But I alway give confused information when I can't consult sources. So I will clarify a comment I made yesterday for anybody who is interested. The book I referred to was Bible Studies: Contributions, Chiefly from Papyri and Inscriptions, etc.; Authorised Translation by Alexander Grieve; 2nd edtiion (1903), by Adolf Deissmann. You get download it free from Google (Advanced Book Search) since it's out of copyright now. Chapter VI is called Greek Transcriptions of the Tetragrammaton, pages 319-336. Despite the name of the book, the forms of the Divine Name cited in Chapter VI were not just from papyri and inscriptions, but from church fathers. Some forms favored Yahweh (Ιαβε). Others had “o,” (Ιαω; Jaoth) and some could be read as 3 syllables (Ιαουε; Ιαωια; Ια ουαι).
From a footnote on page 18 of The Book of Daniel (by George Wesley Buchanan; 1999, Edwin Mellen Press): “Based on biblical poetry, proper Hebrew names, a fragment of the OG among the srolls found near the Dead Sea, and Greek transliterations in the works of the church fathers it is certain that the central vowel oh or oo was not omitted in antiquity when the Tetragrammaton was still pronounced ... The name was pronounced “Yeh-hoh-wah” or “Yeh-hoo-wah”, not “Yah-veh” or “Yah-way.” Buchanan says the accent belongs on the last (third) syllable.
Buchanan refers to “the pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton in a Cave Four Septuagint fragment from Leviticus in the first page of the article. I have never read the article. You may be able to buy a copy of Buchanan's 1988 journal article at:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/24608864?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Nehemia Gordon has a youtube on the pronunciation of the Divine Name:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah3k1dhR-ag
Comment by vinman on 2016-07-28 19:47:00
I just watched this video last night. My blood was boiling. Now I read your article. Guess what? I am about ready to blow an artery.
The layers of deceit Flodin uses, is beyond comprehension. The Watchtower always double talks. This is nothing new. Studies in the Scriptures is no exception. ( Example: "Jehovah's witnesses themselves are not nor can they be interpreters of prophecies. but as fast as the superior authorities Jehovah and Christ Jesus reveal the interpretations through their provided channel that fast do God's people publish them" (Watchtower, April 15, 1952, p. 253) Flodin is just proving the point. But the average witness will never know.
The Watchtower is the master of deceit. This is a prime example. It is a refutation that would take you some time to unravel with a witness. And we know a witness will not allow that time. It is so layered and cunning that it leaves a witness thinking, "Stay away from apostates, no matter what they say."
The average witness will run with this.
Anyway, great article. I better check my blood pressure now. ?Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2016-07-29 09:05:14
What a great quote, Vinman! That's going into my quotes-to-use-in-future-articles file.
Comment by lazarus on 2016-07-30 07:28:51
Thanks Meleti for this thorough review of not only the watchtower in Question but also the scriptural analysis of Jude and Peter. It does Highlight how important it is to test all expressions as 1 John 4:1. You nailed it.
Has the ploy in using this example Wt 1910, 'so called 'photocopied' manipulation of selected words to distort, what Bro Russell wrote and how Bro Flodin seeing through this manipulation, and Exposes it on JW Broadcast as a warning to all, that all outside criticism of the literature is lies and can't be trusted.
Well I had a brother ask me today, if I had seen this very program. Which I replied yes! Then I asked for their opinion. In brief, they thought it was ludicrous that an apostate would cut and paste only portion of what Bro Russell wrote, and totally bought Bro Flodin exposing the deception!
I suggested in finding the copy of the article in question and analysing the scriptures to see if it were true. Which he agreed?
So we can see the brothers will just accept what is presented unfortunately.
I really hope the Brothers take to heart the lessons from the Wt study to do the Research and ask Questions and of course prove it scripturally.
This is interesting.
*** w57 7/1 pp. 414-415 Questions From Readers ***
Questions From Readers
● My husband possesses a book, The Chaos of Cults, by Jan Karel Van Baalen, and, on pages 218, 219, that book states regarding Pastor Russell: ‘His boldness was so extraordinary that he calmly announced in the opening pages of his Studies in the Scriptures that it would be better to leave the Bible unread but read his comments than to omit the latter but read the Bible.’ My question is, did Pastor Russell really state or have written such a statement in the book or books Studies in the Scriptures?—E. N., United States.
So they had this article brought to there attention 47 years later from 1910, and are having another shot at it 59 years from 1957 so there you go. Rehashing old arguments for a modern day audience. The Internet, don't you just love it for research.Reply by vinman on 2016-07-30 11:28:09
1940 "We resolve that we shall obey all instruction received from the Watch Tower, knowing that such proceed from the higher powers, Jehovah God and Christ Jesus. We resolve to be completely obedient to the Society as the visible part of the Great Theocracy." {WT Feb 1 1940 47}
"Jehovah has made the necessary arrangements within his organization to instruct his people, and all recognize that for some years The Watchtower has been the means of communicating information to God's people. That does not mean that those who prepare the manuscript for The Watchtower are inspired, but rather it means that the Lord through his angels sees to it that the information is given to his people in due time, and he brings to pass the events in fulfillment of his prophecy and then invites those devoted to him to see the same." {RICH 316}
1933 "To feed or teach his people the Lord has used the Watch Tower publications.. No man is given any credit for the wonderful truths which the Lord has revealed to his people through the Watch Tower publications." {WT Dec 1 1933 263}
1933 "Certain duties and kingdom interests have been committed by the Lord to his angels, which include the transmission of information to God's anointed people on the earth for their aid and comfort. Even though we cannot understand how the angels transmit this information, we know that they do it; and the Scriptures and the facts show that it is done." {PREP 36-7}
1939 "It should be expected that the Lord would have a means of communicating to his people on the earth, and he has clearly shown that the magazine called The Watchtower is used for that purpose." {YEAR 1939 85}
"Some claiming to be fully devoted to Jehovah find it difficult to learn to be obedient to organization instructions. This is strong proof that such are not in the temple. .. If you find it difficult to be in harmony with the organization instructions, that is sufficient reason for a careful self-examination to see what is your standing before the Lord.. angels are delegated by the Lord to convey his instructions to the members of his organization on earth. Just how this is done is not necessary for us to understand." {WT Dec 1 1933 364}
1942 "The Watchtower does not consist of men's opinions" {WT Jan 1 1942 5}
1938 "The resolutions adopted by conventions of God's anointed people, booklets, magazines, and books published by them, contain the message of God's truth and are from the Almighty God, Jehovah, and provided by him through Christ Jesus and his underofficers .. It is his truth and not man's .." {WT May 1 1938 143}
1932 "If you spend 15 minutes reading each of Rutherford's books you would get more pleasure than you would reading the Bible for a whole year" {VIN3 383}
Oh, I'm sorry for distorting and hiding truth. ?Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-07-30 11:49:06
Yikes vinman, now you've got my blood pressure up!
Comment by AndereStimme on 2016-07-30 13:53:42
Funny that Flodin didn't mention this quote from the same 1910 Watchtower:
"Furthermore, not only do we find that people cannot see
the divine plan in studying the Bible by itself, but we see, also,
that if anyone lays the SCRIPTURE STUDIES aside, even after he
has used them, after he has become familiar with them, after
he has read them for ten years - if he then lays them aside and
ignores them and goes to the Bible alone, though he has under-
stood his Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within
two years he goes into darkness. On the other hand, if he had
merely read the SCRIPTURE STUDIES with their references, and
had not read a page of the Bible, as such, he would be in the
light at the end of the two years, because he would have the
light of the Scriptures."
Russell is careful to say in subsequent paragraphs that the "Scripture studies" were valuable because they were in "full harmony with the Word". But it hardly matters if it's sheer arrogance or arrogance born of delusion, does it? Especially when it's a delusion of divinely appointed grandeur.
In any case, the organization is still making the claim that you can't get salvation without it, and that to stay spiritually strong we need to read the Bible and the organization's publications. So why is Flodin claiming that the accusation against Russell was false when the organization makes the same exact claim today?
[Edit: I just realized the passage I've quoted above is already in the article. Who would have thought that I wouldn't achieve perfect comprehension reading it on my phone while my kids were talking to me?]
Comment by vinman on 2016-07-30 14:30:49
What I just cannot understand, is whether or not the gb or it's little minions really believe what they are saying. All it took for me was seeing one or two lies about there history, and I was out. Doesn't this bother them?
Here is what I think. As Meleti said, they are indeed clergyman. I think we give them way too much leeway by saying that they are sincerely mislead themselves. I believe they are like any other clergy similar to the Mormons. They are liars and they are protecting there lifestyle. No more sympathy. They are Pharisees and that is the bottom line. The Pharisees knew what they were doing and so do these guys.
They study "apostate" websites. There is no way they can deny the truth of what they find. They purposely hide the truth.
This is my opinion, and I am sticking to it.Reply by AndereStimme on 2016-07-30 16:01:29
I've wrestled with this question myself. The human mind has incredible powers of self-delusion, especially when dealing with world-view challenges. However, I do think that we know deep down that we're not being totally honest and once we start down that road it will eventually lead to outright dishonesty. Where any GB member, minion or rank and file member might be in that process, I believe, is not our place to judge. I base that opinion on the following scriptures:
Acts 7.60 And falling to his knees he [Stephen] cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
Matt 5.44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you
It may not be the easiest counsel to apply, but it's certainly good for our blood pressure!
Reply by william on 2016-08-01 11:27:55
Vinman, you are probably right about the lying being deliberate. Some of the explanations for the conduct of the governing body may be found in organizational behavior and cognitive ability. I wish Mileti one of his associated authors would write articles touching on this. The regular visitors to this web site know how to read and to understand the original intent of the author. The regular visitors to this site assume everybody else can too. But that may be wrong. If you carefully read Ray Franz's books about his interactions with other members of the writing department and governing body, it seems that some of them simply didn't think in the rational manner that Berean Pickets take for granted. Regarding organizational behavior: At Bethel, people who wanted to advance learned to laugh at Knorr's jokes even though they weren't funny. They learned from the aftermath of Black Thursday, and also from Knorr's rants against the 40 letter-writers that Knorr wouldn't tolerate any criticism of his Bethel Family (which was a spiritual paradise) or of his appointees (who were really Jehovah's appointees.) You can see how an unscrupulous person in an environment like that would quickly learn how to act to be promoted to the Bethel Office, the Service Department, or the Writing Department. But what the organization actually needed to improve itself was to promote some of the complainers. Whistleblowers are doomed in ALL organizations, including JW's. Hypocrites, actors, people whose words are opposite their thoughts, rise in ALL organizations. The effects of the 1980 Purge were worse than what happened under Knorr. They main purpose of the organization since then has been to maintain the unscriptural doctrines that some Witnesses were complaining about in 1980 and before. But the main purpose of a Christian organization should be to correctly understand and teach Bible doctrines and conduct. And you are observing a textbook-case of an organization that badly needs whistleblowers and dissenters, but gets rid of them.
Comment by Dajo on 2016-07-30 18:50:35
I watch all of those 8 to 10 min "morning worship" talks. Never seen Floodin so nervous/desperate, it was like he was doing it under some sort of stress. Noticed he used the word "pickets".
Whoever did that outline had a clear agenda. Very delusional and the cracks are showing.
I think to some thinking ones who see it, more questions will be raised as to the honesty and misapplication of scripture.
Excellent analysis Meleti.
I wonder if any will respond to the test proposed. It was that very thing that got me unshackled a few months back. The whole other sheep thing is a pure concoction from Rutherford. Nothing more, nothing less. Based on the type-antitype thingy.
Whenever opportunity affords itself and I have the luxury of a deep conversation with a thinking congregation member, I find if I just stck to the topic of the other sheep, great crowd etc then they go away puzzled and thinking about it.
Thanks for those 7 other references. I wonder if we'll get a response?
Comment by Earthcaretaker on 2016-07-31 22:43:26
Some years ago the WTBTS produced a PSA (Public Service Announcement) in which they signed off on it as 'Brought to you by the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses'. Within several weeks I saw brothers and sisters that I thought knew better start to exclaim 'this is the work of Apostates!'. Instead of reviewing the content critically as it was (nothing in it was contrary to JW teaching), they denounced it as being efforts by 'those dirty Apostates!'. The lack of critical thinking on the part of many JW's is reflected in comments such as : 'I parrot everything the Society tells me' or 'I let the Society do my thinking for me'. Because of this indoctrination, anything that seems remotely out of sync with the 'organization' is deemed 'Apostate' and unworthy of any further meaningful discussion ...period. And yet Christ Jesus our exemplar took on the greatest 'Apostate' of them all and used the scriptures in refuting his claims. In like manner he dispatched the religious leaders of his day with the scriptures. Remembering Ray Franz's comment ' ...they (JW's) are victims of victims' I have to pull back my anger at this organization and remember that there are still victims there...as I once was.
Comment by Yehorakam on 2016-08-01 21:29:50
Hi Meleti. Thanks for a good examination of the video. I appreciate that in your efforts to review the WT articles, you haven't forgotten to address the videos on jw.org. In particular I would like to address a comment you've quoted from Kenneth Flodin:
"Are they devious, or maybe they’re sincerely trying to help poor misguided Witnesses? No! They’re devious! Have you ever noticed that apostates generally do not try to reason from the Scriptures? Why not? Because they know we know the Scriptures and we would see through the twisting.”
At this point I would like to let everyone aware of a case in the Dominican Republic of a brother who by his examining the scriptures daily discovered a few things we believed as Witnesses that were not in accord with Biblical truth. In a short time, after sharing multiple SCRIPTURAL REFERENCES that were extremely clear with different brothers and sisters, he was approached by the elders in his congregation and told that he could not do this. He explained that he was only sharing scriptures with the brothers and sisters and asked what was wrong with that if it is our desire as an organization to adhere as close to scriptures as possible. He was told that he could not "go ahead of the governing body." To make a long story short, because of his insistence of bringing attention to the SCRIPTURES, they arranged a judicial committee for him. He said he would not come unless he was allowed to defend his position with the scriptures. They said OK. Upon arriving and attempting to explain to the elders the SCRIPTURAL basis for what he was sharing, he was essentially told: "We don't need YOU to teach US! We know what the Bible says.' So, he was denied the opportunity to use his Bible to show them the truths he had discovered and subsequently disfellowshipped along with his whole family and a few others who had the courage to say that they believed the SCRIPTURES he had shown to them. So, although Kenneth Flodin's words might apply to a true apostate who makes light of the scriptures and abandons righteous principles that please God, they certainly DO NOT apply to those who have endeavored to draw attention to our deviation from SCRIPTURE and have been subsequently disfellowshipped and labelled for apostasy. His words are a blanket statement spoken out of fear, a fear that grips those in authority when they realize that a humble servant could expose a teaching that is not scriptural or receive a divine understanding before they do.
Perhaps a positive point is that by Flodin highlighting the controversy over the Studies in the Scriptures, there will be thousands that will go to the internet and want to see what Studies in the Scriptures really said....and then discover how many bizarre and personal interpretations Russell made, sadly to his own shame. Flodin doesn't realize it, but he just made the problem bigger by arousing curiosity. On my own investigation, I saw that on the cover of one of the Studies in the Scriptures, he used the symbol for an Egyptian false god. It's a sun with wings. I didn't need an apostate to tell me that. Just Google images and then a floating thought that I had seen the image before in Egyptian architecture. Upon searching in Wiikipedia and Google, I discovered that he put an Egyptian false god on the cover of his "masterpiece." I asked myself, how could someone so immersed in spiritism (Egyptology and Pyramidology) have received God's spirit? He might have been sincere in his search when he started, but he was soon corrupted. He was not free of false religion and his Studies in the Scriptures only served to misguide thousands. Who is responsible for misguidance? Only Satan. Could God have been with him as he involved himself in a form of spiritism, made false predictions, misapplied scriptures, said Christ had came when he didn't and misguided thousands and all the time insisted that it was God's guidance and that his book was as good as the Bible?
Going back to the case in the Dominican Republic, brothers are repeating everywhere that you can be disfellowshipped by "going ahead" of the governing body even if you have SCRIPTURAL proof. You must wait on them. In other words, you can no longer put faith in or share when you discover something new in God's word. You must wait for the governing body to tell it to you through the Watchtower for it to be confirmed "truth." So as a result, God's word ALONE does not have enough power or force to convince our brothers and sisters of anything. They must see it in a Watchtower to believe it. This is nothing more than a modern form of idolatry where millions of beautiful individuals have given more importance to the word of men than the word of God.
May Christ continue to shine the light of "real truth" on many more. It will happen as God said it will. We can only rejoice as more come out from under the idolatry of men, and come to 'accept God's word as it truthfully is as it works in them as true believers.'
In the end, the label of "apostate" also seems to apply now to those who use the scriptures to declare clear biblical truth where it touches a bone with the organization.
Much love to all my fellow "apostates" who continue to adhere and expound scripture and prove true to the one who called us out of the darkness to the wonderful light.Reply by billy on 2016-08-04 20:06:29
Thanks for that Yeh yes the truth is out there it only takes a little research to discover it and courage to face it - I made a comment recently on a brothers Facebook page under the subject of the Catholic Church bringing in woman deacons - I said maybe that's because after the Australian royal commission into sexual abuse the court was appalled by the way many churches expect young children to approach men having to detail very private descriptions of their sexual abuse - a sister made a comment that her daughter was approached by an elder to kiss her - the sister went to the elders and the matter was taken care of - she also quoted the GB member stating that they would re look into having sisters involved in these type of situations - then the attacks began against her - she was accused of being vengeful and angry trying to discredit the org another comment was that these type of conversations should not be discussed on Facebook for the public to see
Watching this scenario unfold shows how a total shutdown to the facts at hand are handled - it is confronting to face the truth about ones own religion and people go into a panicky defense mode but they don't have any problem pointing out the sins of other religions
Great article MelitiReply by Meleti Vivlon on 2016-08-04 22:52:10
Thanks billy. and you're quite right. They are ready to criticize any other religion, but when the shoes on the other foot, suddenly it's a sin.
Reply by billy on 2016-08-04 23:53:49
All posts and article have been deleted - why am I not surprised
Comment by tyhik on 2016-08-05 03:26:31
In this video, Kenneth F claims that there was a deceit related to that photocopy. The aim of the deceit, he claims, was to cover up the title and the paragraph he cites in the video. But he also talks about the special placement of the covering paper to give impression that there was no more text on the page. Here are Kenneth's words from the video:
"But then I got original, the 1910 magazine and compared and very quickly you could discern the deceit, the trickery that was involved. When photocopying that page they put a piece of white paper over the bottom part of the page so you did not see the bottom of the first column. And they were very tricky, they placed it exactly on a line, where it sounded like when reading down the first column that the sentence completed on a second column."
I decided to check this "sentence completing on the second column" claim and found no way to cover the bottom of the page the way Kenneth claims it was covered. The paper must have been placed below the paragraphs cited by Meleti and above the title Kenneth cites. This leaves just a short selection of lines, which to show or cover. And none of these lines fits as a first part of the sentence that continues on the top of the second column. So it very much seems to me that bro Kenneth has made up that sentence continuation story to strenthen his deceit claim.