Jump to content
The World News Media

Governing Body: Does it show loyalty or disloyalty to question the GB?


JW Insider

Recommended Posts

  • Member
 On 8/25/2017 at 6:03 PM, JW Insider said:

It's easy to understand that sentiment. What's hard to understand is why you claim that you will always prefer the teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses even if you are aware that the Bible teaches something different. I'm really surprised that any Witness would admit that. Seriously!

You have admitted your thinking about Jehovah's Witnesses. Now its on record for all to see.

So you feel , after your edit, that its ok to pick and choose what to believe from Jehovah's Organization.

[edited to add the words in brackets] by "insider":

 "What's hard to understand is why you claim that you will always prefer the [certain, specific] teachings of Jehovah's Witnesses even if you are aware that the Bible teaches something different [about those certain, specific teachings]"

You even went so far as to say on 8/27 : "You obviously don't know that that my experience at Bethel makes me believe that I have "power" and "authority" to question the dispensation of spiritual food by God." Need I say more O.o You have more authority because you spent a few years at Bethel 40 years ago. LOL right. No wonder you believe you have as you say"special interpretation". O.o Rather haughty - no wonder you call yourself an "insider". Satan was an "insider" also, so I woundn't brag about it.

No reason to say further. Promoting the teachings of Christendom is wrong. Jesus said "by their fruits " you would recognize true from false religion.

The Bible teaches whatever our HEAD tells us we do = JESUS. NOT you and Christendom. LOL seriously O.o

This is a shipwreck in progress. All I have to say now is:

Related image

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 5.8k
  • Replies 106
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Then why did the Watchtower ever change anything if everything was directly from scripture? Obviously you are saying that this might not have been true last year, because some things have already chan

Knowing the role of the Governing Body should help us to understand how to treat them. This was brought up in another thread, but it seems relevant here. In the first century, the order of authority w

Posted Images

  • Member
2 minutes ago, bruceq said:

So you feel , after your edit, that its ok to pick and choose what to believe from Jehovah's Organization.

Yes. Of course. It's our obligation and our responsibility. See the list of scriptures that are currently in the very first post under this topic/thread. And there are at least a dozen more such scriptures that I didn't include. We should always pick and choose right from wrong. It's the very reason for having and training our conscience.

Otherwise, you could be led astray by various doctrines. Imagine if no one had questioned it when Russell said that the Great Pyramid was, "Jehovah's witness" as he called it, or "the Bible in stone." How long would Rutherford have gone on bragging about how when he changed the correct belief about Romans 13 to the incorrect belief that this was direct proof that prophecy was being fulfilled through the Watchtower Society?

11 minutes ago, bruceq said:

You even went so far as to say on 8/27 : "You obviously don't know that that .my experience at Bethel makes me believe that I have "power" and "authority" to question the dispensation of spiritual food by God." Need I say more O.o 

Yes, indeed. You need to say more. How about including the very next sentence in the context. AllenSmith had just said he "KNOWS" that this claim makes me believe this particular lie. So I answered:

10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

You obviously don't know that that my experience at Bethel makes me believe that I have "power" and "authority" to question the dispensation of spiritual food by God. If you "knew" of course, your guess could not have been so wrong.

I know that @Anna wanted me to give you the benefit of the doubt, that you weren't actually scouring my words to find some way to dishonestly twist them. I wonder what she or other readers of your words think now? And I'm back to wondering if you really have no concern to represent Jehovah's Witnesses as honest and studious. You could end up giving the impression that . . . well, I'm sure you already know what impression this gives. But I would ask you to remember that Jesus said "By their fruits you will recognize them."

  • (Matthew 7:20) 20 Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those men.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
15 minutes ago, JW Insider said:

Yes. Of course. It's our obligation and our responsibility. See the list of scriptures that are currently in the very first post under this topic/thread. And there are at least a dozen more such scriptures that I didn't include. We should always pick and choose right from wrong. It's the very reason for having and training our conscience.

 

So you DO believe in the authority of the Governing Body to interpret "Presence, Sign, Gentile Times..." Or in YOUR authority to interpret these things to us?

O.o

Image result for train wreck in progress

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 minutes ago, bruceq said:

So you DO believe in the authority of the Governing Body to interpret "Presence, Sign, Gentile Times..." Or in YOUR authority to interpret these things to us?

Thanks again for the direct question. I absolutely do believe in the authority of the Governing Body to interpret "Presence, Sign, Gentile Times, etc." And I also believe it is your responsibility, bruceq, to question it, the same way that the Galatians were expected to question the teachings about circumcision and law that were being promoted by James, Peter and John and others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 8/27/2017 at 0:12 PM, JW Insider said:

Thanks again for the direct question. I absolutely do believe in the authority of the Governing Body to interpret "Presence, Sign, Gentile Times, etc." And I also believe it is your responsibility, bruceq, to question it, the same way that the Galatians were expected to question the teachings about circumcision and law that were being promoted by James, Peter and John and others.

So you believe it is proper to question Jehovah and His Organization. O.o

I can see it now...you approach Jehovah and say: I have the authority to question what the Governing Body is teaching us even though YOU appointed them with the authority to interpret things to us because I spent a few years at Bethel. O.o

Once again here is insiders path of interpretation away from Jehovah's Organization. With your teachings you may attract some undesirables {even opposers}  as they see disunity by not following the teachings of Jehovah's Organization. 1 Cor. 1:10, Mt. 24:45.  -  And now I see it has happened!!!

Related image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
52 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

Prove, the governing body has changed Jesus doctrine which is God's Doctrine.

Sure. From 1919 to 1927 the Governing Body promoted the doctrine that the Great Pyramid was as Russell called it: "Jehovah's witness" and "the Bible in stone." The books stating this doctrine were promoted until about 1933. After Rutherford changed the doctrine, he even called the Great Pyramid, "Satan's Bible." (1928)  So if you believe that what was taught from 1919 to 1927 was "God's doctrine" then the Governing Body under Rutherford changed it.

Of course, in 1925 Rutherford also used the term "Satan" to refer to the larger part of the Governing Body at that time and he finally got rid of the entire Editorial Committee, which he had previously referred to as "Satan," in 1931.

The Watchtower also claims that Rutherford changed Russell's "correct view" of Romans 13 to an incorrect view, and says that it stayed that way in the 1930's until the 1960's. If you believe the current doctrine is "God's doctrine" and that the Watchtower is correct when it says that this doctrine was "correct" under Russell, then you should accept the Watchtower's view that Rutherford changed what you now call "God's doctrine."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
33 minutes ago, AllenSmith said:

Don't you feel better, rather than being hypocritical for almost two years? Remember, back then before I was deleted so you could look good to others here. I asked you to be HONEST!! I "respect" honesty. What I don't respect is dancing around honesty. I'm glad you finally got it out of your chest. That's good. You've unburdened yourself. And others can finally deal with realism, to know if you think that "truth" is insulting, then you obviously despise the Watchtower.

Oh boy!! :) I think that first question was supposed to be rhetorical, right? Clearly you are mistaken in thinking that this is the first time I've pointed out that the answers to such ridiculous questions are sometimes so obvious. The reason I have said the exact same thing on several previous occasions in the last couple years is that it highlights the contradiction you create when you call doctrines from any particular "current" time "God's doctrines." I have to say that it seems so demeaning to an all-powerful God to sully his name by saying that certain false doctrines had to be considered "God's doctrines" just because at the current time, back then, they were being promoted by the Governing Body.

Paul actually cursed at the Galatians for putting up with this kind of thinking: that just because the persons who are promoting a teaching are well-respected persons such as Peter, James and John, that they should just go along with it:

  • (Galatians 1:7-9) . . .; but there are certain ones who are causing you trouble and wanting to distort the good news about the Christ. 8 However, even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond the good news we declared to you, let him be accursed. 9 As we have said before, I now say again, Whoever is declaring to you as good news something beyond what you accepted, let him be accursed.

Yet it was the same people Paul named here that we have called the "Governing Body" in Jerusalem: Peter, James and John, for example. So you can't argue that when Paul says, "beyond the good news that was declared to you" that he was referring to the Governing Body. He was referring to the doctrines of Christ Jesus and Jehovah God as now found in the Bible.

  • (Galatians 3:1-3) 3 O senseless Ga·la?tians! Who has brought you under this evil influence, you who had Jesus Christ openly portrayed before you as nailed to the stake? 2 This one thing I want to ask you: Did you receive the spirit through works of law or because of faith in what you heard? 3 Are you so senseless? After starting on a spiritual course, are you finishing on a fleshly course?

So there's nothing new here in spite of you rhetoric. You have always known that there have been false teachings that were considered "God's teachings" at the time. But this very idea brings reproach on the truth. The entire meaning of the word truth is turned upside down if you are required to say that falsehood is also truth and that a person can even be disciplined for believing truth when he is still required to accept falsehood as "God's doctrines."

Instead, we can be appreciative of the progress that has always been made. We can cheer on the Governing Body for the wonderful tools they have provided, and the set of core doctrines that we appreciate. We can thank Jehovah that they have been so successful under His guidance, as someone here just said. But calling what is good, bad, and what is bad, good is not what Jehovah wants from us. 

  • (Isaiah 5:20) 20 Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good, Those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness, Those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Knowing the role of the Governing Body should help us to understand how to treat them. This was brought up in another thread, but it seems relevant here. In the first century, the order of authority was apostles then prophets (1 Cor 12:28). 

It seems to me that the prophets and apostles checked each other so that no one group became too powerful in the first century. They both had different but equally important roles to fulfill: the apostles took the lead over the congregation and the prophets were spiritual guides. 

The prophets were necessary to "fill in the gaps" of an incomplete Bible, but today we have a complete Bible. So, prophets are unnecessary. However, the GB asserts that Bible discernment is unsuccessful without their interpretations of it. In other words, the Bible alone is insufficient--we need the GB to "fill in the gaps." So, the GB acts likes the apostles by taking the lead and prophets by being exclusive interpreters of the Bible.

This premise seems flawed to me. The Bible should stand alone as a separate entity. It shouldn't be intertwined with the GB, because the Bible should act as an external auditor for the GB's actions. At present, by being "guardians of doctrine" the GB can make the Bible fit their method of operation. The Bible is not a rigid thing and this can be taken advantage of.

So while I respect the Governing Body for taking the lead, I feel that they have too much unchecked authority, and this could set a bad precedent for the future. The GB should be actively checked by the Bible and any student of the Bible.  
 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

"Governing Body: Does it show loyalty or disloyalty to question the GB?"

Firstly, I ask, loyalty to what?  The organization or to God?

I think the better question is, do we show loyalty to God and Christ when tolerating wayward teachings by the GB?  If these men were faithful servants, they would welcome questions and suggestions from fellow anointed servants and adjust their own thinking by reasoning on the scriptures. This is the role of a steward; to gather from all sources. 

  Although they truly would love to called so, and hint at it frequently, they are not Moses. Instead of pointing to themselves as the source of the final word, they should be pointing to God. Acts 14:15; Luke 4:8; Rev 19:10 There is not just one rotten and discarded teaching from the mouths of the GB, there is a bushel of them.  Matt 12:33; Col 2:8

Are they above law of loving one’s neighbor as one’s self?  They certainly show it in the same way as the Pharisees. Matt 5:20; Mark 10:42-45; Phil 2:3; Rom 12:10; Eph 5:21

Even Jesus did not expect glory for himself. John 7:16,18; 17:4

We are judged on our love for purity in truth, not for following men.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.