How isn't the premise of the GB a total contradiction?

[Noble Berean]

The February 2017 WT had this to say about the GB:

Quote

The Governing Body is neither inspired nor infallible. Therefore, it can err in doctrinal matters or in organizational direction.

Compare this to the November 2016 WT which had this to say about the GB's authority:

Quote

Some may feel that they can interpret the Bible on their own. However, Jesus has appointed the ‘faithful slave’ to be the only channel for dispensing spiritual food. Since 1919, the glorified Jesus Christ has been using that slave to help his followers understand God’s own Book and heed its directives. By obeying the instructions found in the Bible, we promote cleanness, peace, and unity in the congregation. Each one of us does well to ask himself, ‘Am I loyal to the channel that Jesus is using today?'

The GB wants the unquestioned control and the credit for leading God's organization, but they also wants total freedom from accountability when they are wrong. The existence of the org is based around everyone accepting this premise.

But how is this premise not 100% illogical and absurd? The GB is presenting itself in 2 completely conflicting ways:

1. The GB is uninspired, fallible, and errs, so they should not be blamed for incorrect direction.
2. The GB should not be questioned by JWs, and there is no place for independent thinking.

The GB cannot state they make errors in their direction and simultaneously demand unquestioned obedience to their direction. That doesn't make any sense. If anything, JWs should be skeptical of the GB's directions because of their history of incorrect direction. However, critical thinking is discouraged as a negative trait in organization literature--even when that thinking is based on the Bible.

If there is a God, then surely he is just, and I cannot imagine he would structure an organization on such an illogical premise.

Think of how this premise negatively affects JWs. Adherents are essentially commanded to follow direction that may be 100% wrong. They are told to "wait on Jehovah" if they have doubts. This also means that a JW could be punished for having a correct idea that is currently not in harmony with the GB. I'm sure this has happened with JWs over its history.

Also, isn't it disturbing that the GB have set things up so that they have maximum control and minimum accountability? It's the definition of plausible deniability. Everyone here is well aware of the legal issues with blood transfusion rejection and the sex abuse. In these legal matters, it is pretty clear that the organization is distancing themselves from any accountability and is instead placing the burden on the individual JW. This flies in the face of the culture of the religion where everything a JW does revolves around supporting the organization. There is no room for personal opinion. To suggest otherwise in legal cases is very dishonest and shady. Moreover, it goes against the idea that their is an equal relationship--we're supposed to die over organizational doctrines but the GB won't even acknowledge their role in court proceedings?

The very fact the organization uses plausible deniability in their literature is highly suspect. The fact that they can force JWs to follow their direction, but when it's wrong they can point to a WT and say, "See! We said we were fallible and uninspired!" It all smells dishonest and shady.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

This is a very well thought out analysis ... I have also come to the EXACT same conclusions, but would have expressed it less coherently, logically, and concisely.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

The "47 for no seat belt" cracks me up.

[Matthew9969]

And yet jw's will continue worshipping them.

[Noble Berean]

2 hours ago, Matthew9969 said:

And yet jw's will continue worshipping them.

The lack of response is telling

[Israeli Bar Avaddhon]

Unfortunately, that's the way it is.Unfortunately, that's the way it is.
All the scaffolding of the "anointed of the Lord" is wrong.
The Bible is the only authority that should ensure and encourage free trade with the only constraint of respect and recognize the authority, unique and supreme, the Bible.

The only thing we should debate and think about is if the Bible states that we must study and meditate personally on the Word of God, or that we must obey without asking questions because "only some" have the authority to understand and teach.

Unfortunately, many Jehovah's Witnesses think that if those who take the directive are wrong, they will only pay for those who have taught badly.
Instead the Bible teaches that everyone will pay for their mistakes.

We all have a Bible and the basis for studying it and meditating it.
Who is not of "noble mind" will pay for their own personal mistakes