Watchtower Governing Body: Are They The Exclusive Channel For God??

[savagewind]

I should add that JW's even changed question 2 in their baptism vows in 1985.

1966: (2) On the basis of this faith in God and in his provision for salvation, have you dedicated yourself unreservedly to God to do his will henceforth as he reveals it to you through Jesus Christ and through the Bible under the enlightening power of the holy spirit?

1970: (2) On the basis of this faith in God and in his provision for redemption have you dedicated yourself unreservedly to Jehovah God, to do his will henceforth as that will is revealed to you through Christ Jesus and through God's Word as his holy spirit makes it plain?

1985: (2) Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in association with God's spirit-directed organization?

They felt the need to add "organization". JW's are making a vow to a mulit-million dollar, man-made, earthly corporation.

Then all JWs who get baptized since 1985 are different than all JWs who were baptized before 1985.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

I agree as well.

This is how a JW is baptized, which is in no way scriptural.

*** w85 6/1 p. 30 Subjecting Ourselves to Jehovah by Dedication ***
At the close of the convention baptism talk, the baptism candidates will be in position to answer with depth of understanding and heartfelt appreciation two simple questions that serve to confirm that they recognize the implications of following Christ’s example. The first question is:


On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?

The second is:

Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization? (Where is this a condition of baptism in scripture?)


Having answered yes to these questions, candidates are in a right heart condition to undergo Christian baptism.

 

[averageJOE]

Then all JWs who get baptized since 1985 are different than all JWs who were baptized before 1985.

That's their mental gymnastics game they have to play.

 

[e.r.m.]

This is how a JW is baptized, which is in no way scriptural.

*** w85 6/1 p. 30 Subjecting Ourselves to Jehovah by Dedication ***
At the close of the convention baptism talk, the baptism candidates will be in position to answer with depth of understanding and heartfelt appreciation two simple questions that serve to confirm that they recognize the implications of following Christ’s example. The first question is:


On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?

The second is:

Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with God’s spirit-directed organization? (Where is this a condition of baptism in scripture?)


Having answered yes to these questions, candidates are in a right heart condition to undergo Christian baptism.

Unscriptural, yes.

 

[averageJOE]

r
I agree! One woman in particular I met online who was disfellowshipped for disagreeing with them that Jesus arrived invisiably in 1914. I think she has never seen her grand -babies. If I was a faithful JW I think I would not be able to believe her story. But I am not and I know that they teach lots of Bible errors with no hope in sight of ever changing it to be in harmony with Isaiah 1:18.

For instance they teach that love is not provoked but also teach that God has destroyed people with their children and will destroy everyone except the people who will obey the governing body of Jehovah's Witnesses. I have asked them a few times WHO will organize paradise after the men of the faithful and discreet slave have been raised to Heaven but nobody has an answer to that.

Yup. Not accepting the Watchtowers claim of 1914 is, according to them, apostasy.

There are thousands of JW's out there who even after being disfellowshipped have not lost their faith or love for their god. It was the organization of the Watchtower they began to doubt and question. In their own heart's and mind's they didn't do anything wrong, and had nothing to apologize for. Yet they are labeled as "wicked" and "have become demonized". The reason for dissfelloshipment is irrelevant, they are treated the same. Cheating on your wife with a 16 year old and getting her pregnant is the same as merely wanting to join the Peace Corps.

 

[savagewind]

Yup. Not accepting the Watchtowers claim of 1914 is, according to them, apostasy.

There are thousands of JW's out there who even after being disfellowshipped have not lost their faith or love for their god. It was the organization of the Watchtower they began to doubt and question. In their own heart's and mind's they didn't do anything wrong, and had nothing to apologize for. Yet they are labeled as "wicked" and "have become demonized". The reason for disfellowshipment is irrelevant, they are treated the same. Cheating on your wife with a 16 year old and getting her pregnant is the same as merely wanting to join the Peace Corps.

Some people call this exaggerative bashing, but it is really true. But I don't think "wanting" to join the Peace Corps is grounds for disfellowhsipping. Actually joining a worldly organization is grounds for disfellowshipping. The governing body is not under the same rule. According to them they can do whatever they think will further kingdom interests, even joining a worldly organization.

 

[savagewind]

Someone might be disfellowshiped for voting and another for child sexual abuse and they are both to be shunned in the same way. The people shunning do not know what the offense which caused the disfellowshipping is.

And I know for a fact that who gets disfellowshipped is not consistent. I am not disfellowshipped, but I think I should be as other people who disagree with governing body dogma are disfellowshipped.

Even though I am not disfellowshipped I am shunned. So? Who knows?

JWs are not the only ones who shun.

 

[e.r.m.]

Yup. Not accepting the Watchtowers claim of 1914 is, according to them, apostasy.

There are thousands of JW's out there who even after being disfellowshipped have not lost their faith or love for their god. It was the organization of the Watchtower they began to doubt and question. In their own heart's and mind's they didn't do anything wrong, and had nothing to apologize for. Yet they are labeled as "wicked" and "have become demonized". The reason for dissfelloshipment is irrelevant, they are treated the same. Cheating on your wife with a 16 year old and getting her pregnant is the same as merely wanting to join the Peace Corps.

I think any group that believes they're the one true church will feel the same way. I wonder if Mormons would feel the same way. I know Catholics say there's no salvation outside the Catholic Church.

 

[e.r.m.]

Someone might be disfellowshiped for voting and another for child sexual abuse and they are both to be shunned in the same way. The people shunning do not know what the offense which caused the disfellowshipping is.

And I know for a fact that who gets disfellowshipped is not consistent. I am not disfellowshipped, but I think I should be as other people who disagree with governing body dogma are disfellowshipped.

Even though I am not disfellowshipped I am shunned. So? Who knows?

JWs are not the only ones who shun.

The only Biblical reasons that I know for disfellowshipping are divisiveness and unrepentant sexual immortality.

 

[savagewind]

The only Biblical reasons that I know for disfellowshipping are divisiveness and unrepentant sexual immortality.

If I stayed a JW and talked about scripture the way I know it I would be divisive. I remember once in the field service I was adamant that there is no real proof that the holy people of ancient times (before Christ) would never go to heaven. And the sister who was perfect (or so I thought) got ruffled real bad. I'll never forget that.

 

[e.r.m.]

If I stayed a JW and talked about scripture the way I know it I would be divisive. I remember once in the field service I was adamant that there is no real proof that the holy people of ancient times (before Christ) would never go to heaven. And the sister who was perfect (or so I thought) got ruffled real bad. I'll never forget that.

If a person places their confidence in the Bible, there's no reason to get ruffled. Her being ruffled means her confidence is elsewhere. A strong Jehovah Witness can defend their position from the Bible. I've seen them do that.

 

[savagewind]

If a person places their confidence in the Bible, there's no reason to get ruffled. Her being ruffled means her confidence is elsewhere. A strong Jehovah Witness can defend their position from the Bible. I've seen them do that.

She did not get ruffled for having no answer. Their answer is that Christ made the way to heaven so no one before that can go there. But then scripture says they are all living to Jehovah. Like maybe Jehovah can't reach past Jesus to take them to heaven. She got angry and love doesn't DO that (according to them).

 

[e.r.m.]

She did not get ruffled for having no answer. Their answer is that Christ made the way to heaven so no one before that can go there. But then scripture says they are all living to Jehovah. Like maybe Jehovah can't reach past Jesus to take them to heaven. She got angry and love doesn't DO that (according to them).

She sounds like an institutionalist.

 

[savagewind]

She sounds like an institutionalist.

Yes and God isn't imho.

 

[e.r.m.]

Yes and God isn't imho.

This reminds me of
1 Samuel 8:5-8 They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have.” [6] But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. [7] And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. [8] As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you.

It's an age old problem where people desire a physical authority head. Their organization provides some sense of security. Also, to buy into the idea that "we are special and unique", is very intoxicating.

 

[JayJayDee]

What are your thoughts on this comment from someone else?

Policy means rules. They have rules that they must obey to be considered Jehovah's Witnesses. They have rules to starve their loved ones of love so that those who wish to leave will beg their way back. This is what they are being taught to do. It is not considered by them a choice. If they don't obey the rules then they will be treated coldly by most other JWs.

If I was not a JW and my adult child decided to live a life that I disapproved of, I would not support it. I would have no desire to continue a relationship with someone who was committing acts that offended ME...let alone offended my God.

There are many parents out there who have no contact with their adult children because of their chosen lifestyle, that has nothing to do with religion...it is a matter of upholding common decency. Some of us still have morals and a sense of right and wrong that has not been corrupted by this world.
Why single out JW's in this? We won't support that person's lifestyle if it is offensive to us.

When we send our children to their room for time out because we want them to understand the gravity of their bad behavior, do we allow the other kids in the family to go and play with them. Why don't we?

 

[Pegg]

What are your thoughts on this comment from someone else?

Policy means rules. They have rules that they must obey to be considered Jehovah's Witnesses. They have rules to starve their loved ones of love so that those who wish to leave will beg their way back. This is what they are being taught to do. It is not considered by them a choice. If they don't obey the rules then they will be treated coldly by most other JWs.

it is Jehovah who requires this....the WT, as a christian organisation, rightly apply Gods word and teach all of us his requirements.

1 cor 5:11-13 quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral, greedy, idolator...remove the wicked man from among yourself"

All i can say is i'm happy knowing there is at least one organisation on earth who abide by Gods word and uphold his requirements.

 

[savagewind]

it is Jehovah who requires this....the WT, as a christian organisation, rightly apply Gods word and teach all of us his requirements.

1 cor 5:11-13 quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral, greedy, idolator...remove the wicked man from among yourself"

All i can say is i'm happy knowing there is at least one organisation on earth who abide by Gods word and uphold his requirements.

Which one covers disagreeing with dogma?

 

[e.r.m.]

If I was not a JW and my adult child decided to live a life that I disapproved of, I would not support it. I would have no desire to continue a relationship with someone who was committing acts that offended ME...let alone offended my God.

There are many parents out there who have no contact with their adult children because of their chosen lifestyle, that has nothing to do with religion...it is a matter of upholding common decency. Some of us still have morals and a sense of right and wrong that has not been corrupted by this world.
Why single out JW's in this? We won't support that person's lifestyle if it is offensive to us.

When we send our children to their room for time out because we want them to understand the gravity of their bad behavior, do we allow the other kids in the family to go and play with them. Why don't we?

Sorry, that's cold. If one's adult child is molesting kids, is a professional con-man, or has joined a terrorist organization, that's extreme. That's not most people. If your child decides to pursue a gay lifestyle or using drugs, would you disown him? As disciples of Jesus, we are to set boundaries of course, but we don't turn our backs on them. Where do you get that from?!

 

[psychoslice]

Wow , so basically every religion can be defined as a cult in your view.

I dont think that definition is really what a cult is. Usually a cult has a human leader who convinces the group that he/she is a saviour and they exclude themselves from society, become very secretive and the leader uses some brainwashing or mind control techniques to instil fear and submission...a lot of sexual abuse by the leader is also very common with real cults.

I cant say any of this has been true of Jehovahs witnesses...and i've been one for 20 years now.

What has been your experience with our organisation?

Yes every organised religion is a cult