Tag Archives: Jehovah’s Witnesses

David Splane, faithful and discreet slave, Governing Body, Matthew 24, Odd Doctrine

TYPES AND ANTITYPES: Transcript of discourse by David Splane at October 2014 Annual Meeting

2 Comments

The 2014 Annual Meeting Program video can be found on tv.jw.org (currently found under Programs and Events). The following speech can be found about the 2 hour and 8 minute mark in the video. It ends at about the 2 hour and 25 minute mark.

“David Splane of the Governing Body will speak to us on the theme: ‘Types and Antitypes.’” 

IT’S NOT FUNNY IF YOU HAVE TO “SPLANE” IT 

The following is an unofficial transcript of that talk. It is very informative to note the differences between this, the original talk, and the Watchtower article that was derived from it. Our site’s commentary on the March 15, 2015 Watchtower article is found here.

Transcript begins:

________________________________________________

Let’s get right into our subject: types and antitypes.

Now, years ago, our publications often applied certain Bible accounts and certain bible characters as “types” of something greater. But you’ve noticed that, in recent years, that is seldom done, and the purpose of this talk is to explain why.

First of all what is a type and what is an antitype? Well, the Watchtower of September 15, 1950 defined them this way. It said:

“A type is a representation of something that will come to pass at a future time. The antitype is the reality of the thing which the type represents.”

So that is the definition that was given by The Watchtower. And we might add that Jehovah is usually involved in designing the type.

Now, take the tabernacle. Jehovah was very clear about the construction of the tabernacle: what materials were to be used, the dimensions and so forth. Why? Well, apparently because he had designed the tabernacle to be a type of something greater: his great spiritual temple. And the temple was the antitype.

The sacrifices on the Day of Atonement. Jehovah was very careful about how events on the Day of Atonement were to unfold. And again, we have to realize that something was going to have to picture or foreshadow the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ. So, the sacrifice on the Day of Atonement, the type, and the perfect sacrifice of Christ, the antitype.

Now consider another example. When the disobedient Israelites in the wilderness were bitten by poisonous snakes, Moses is told by Jehovah to fashion a copper serpent and to place that serpent on a pole. Now that was a type. Now Jesus explains what it was a type of. Let’s turn to John chapter 3, John chapter 3 and verses 14 and 15. John 3: 14 and 15 If you are using an iPad, I’ll give you a chance to catch up. [Laughter] I couldn’t resist. “And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, so that everyone believing in him may have everlasting life.” Now, would anyone doubt that this is a type? Of course not. Because Jesus said it was.

Well notice that in both these examples, the tabernacle and the copper serpent, Jehovah was involved. He designed the type so that it would fit the antitype. He told Moses, for example to fashion a copper serpent and put it, not on a rock, but on a stake. And of course the tabernacle prefiguring the great spiritual temple.

And from the apostle Paul we learn even more about types and antitypes. For example, Paul, in Hebrews: Isaiah and his 2 sons represent Jesus, and the anointed. He also explains that Moses, the mediator of the Law covenant, represents Christ the mediator of the new covenant. And we learn from the letter to the Galatians that Abraham’s relationship with Sarah and Hagar, represents Jehovah’s relationship with the nation of Israel, and with the heavenly part of his organization. Type and antitype.

Now we know that these were genuine types because, the word of God says they are. But here is the question:

Who is to decide if a person or an event is a type if the word of God doesn’t say anything about it? Who is qualified to do that? Our answer? We can do no better than to quote our beloved brother, Albert Schroeder, who said:

“We need to exercise great care when applying accounts in the Hebrew Scriptures as prophetic patterns, or types, if these are accounts are not applied in the Scriptures themselves.”

Wasn’t that a beautiful statement? We agree with it.

Now the study of types and antitypes is not unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses. During the past 2,000 years, Catholic and Jewish scholars have made quite a diligent study of types and antitypes. In fact, there is even a name for the study. They call it “typology.”

The first century Jewish scholar, Philo of Alexandria, for example, suggested that the serpent in the garden of Eden, the tree of knowledge and the cherubs that were guarding the entrance to the garden were all typical of something greater.

And then describing the teachings of such early writers as Origen, Ambrose and Jerome, the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia says this:

“They sought for types and of course found them, in every incident and event, however trivial, recorded in Scripture. Even the most simple and commonplace circumstance was thought to conceal within itself a hidden truth. Even in the number of fish caught by the disciples when the risen Savior appeared to them,” he says, “How much some have tried to make of that number:, 153 .”

One scholar made much of Jacob’s purchase of Esau’s birthright with a bowl of red stew. Very significant that the stew was red. To him, the red stew pictured the red blood of Christ. The inheritance pictured the heavenly inheritance. It’s all… By that reasoning, Jacob pictures Jesus, Esau’s birthright pictures the heavenly inheritance, and the red stew pictures Jesus’ precious blood.

Now on the surface that might sound plausible to some, until you think about it. When you think about it you see three problems. First of all, Jehovah didn’t design the type. Jehovah did not tell Esau to sell his birthright. Selling his birthright was wrong, and Jehovah never tells us to do something that’s wrong. Second, who ate the stew? Esau did. So are we to conclude that, by giving up his inheritance, Esau put himself in line for the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ? That doesn’t make any sense. And most importantly, nowhere in Scripture do we read that the event was a type.

Now the study of types and antitypes was not only common among Catholic and Jewish scholars, but were very prominent among Protestant scholars as well. The Puritans, like Edward Taylor, applied many Bible events to themselves. The Baptists and Congregationalists did likewise. So it’s not surprising that the early Bible Students, who generally belonged to these groups were also really fond of types.

And as many of us have been. Many of us have remembered happy moments at the congregation book study studying all about types and antitypes. And it’s true that the study of types could be thrilling!

So now here’s a question. If the study of a certain subject make chills run up and down your spine, could it possibly be mistaken? And the answer is yes.

The case of brother Arch W. Smith is an example. In 1886, Brother Russell published a book that contained a chart linking the ages of mankind to the Great Pyramid of Egypt. Now that pyramid was called by the Bible Students, the “Bible in stone.” They loved the study of the Pyramid. In fact, if you have seen pictures of Brother Russell’s grave, you’ve noticed that there was a pyramid nearby. And that’s because the Bible Students believed very much in the Great Pyramid of Egypt, and some became very engrossed, in measuring certain rooms and certain features of the pyramid and to try to determine, for example, how long they had to wait before they went to heaven, and so on.

And so one who was just thrilled by the study of types was Arch W. Smith. It was a hobby of his, he loved it. In fact he gave a lot of prayerful thought to the dimension of the pyramid, and from time to time he would write in to Bethel and let them know what his findings were, to support the idea that the Great Pyramid had a place in Jehovah’s purpose. He loved it!

But when The Watchtower of 1928 came out and said that Jehovah doesn’t need a stone monument built by pagans to accomplish his purpose, Brother Smith accepted it. He let reason win out over emotion.

Well, in recent years the trend in our publications has been to look for the practical application of Bible events, and not for types where the Scriptures themselves do not clearly identify them as such. We simply cannot go beyond what is written. Now there’s a real advantage in looking for the practical application of Bible accounts, rather than confining certain applications to one class: “This applies only to the anointed.” “This applies only to the other sheep.”

Let’s just see why. Turn to Romans chapter 15 and verse 4. Now remember that Paul is writing to his anointed brothers here. Romans chapter 15 and verse 4. And he says, “For all the things that were written beforehand” . . . Well what things? The Hebrew Scriptures obviously. . . “were written for our instruction so that through our endurance, that through the comfort of the Scriptures, that we might have hope.” What is Paul telling the anointed? He’s telling them that you can learn from these accounts in the Hebrew Scriptures. You can apply principles of the Hebrew Scriptures to yourselves.

Let’s consider an example: Now soon after his conversion, Paul is preaching in the city of Damascus. The Jews are furious and they try to kill him. So anointed disciples take Paul and they lower him down the city wall in a basket. Is it possible that some of those anointed ones they thought of Rahab? Who helped the two spies escape from Jericho by a similar method? Would anyone say to them, “You can’t apply that to yourselves…Rahab pictures the other sheep, you are of the anointed?” No! They could apply the lessons of that account to themselves.

Now let’s consider another example, a modern one. In the Song of Solomon we read of a chaste young virgin who falls desperately in love with a poor shepherd boy. Solomon, who incidentally was still an inspired Bible writer at the time, but he’s a very wealthy man, he tries to lure her away but he’s unable to do so. Now suppose that in a certain congregation there’s a sweet young sister, who falls head over heels for a poor pioneer brother, who’s a real spiritual man but he doesn’t have a penny to his name. Now her friends encourage her to marry a wealthy brother, who is very rich but he doesn’t have a lot of time to spend on spiritual things. The sister remains firm. They say, you wouldn’t have to work! You can pioneer. She says no my love is for that pioneer boy. Would anyone say to her, the Song of Solomon doesn’t apply to you because you’re of the other sheep, not of the anointed?

You see how practical it is to take these Bible accounts and really apply them to the everyday life of people.

What about others of the other sheep today? In this audience there are modern-day Nehemiahs who are spurring the building programs we have. Wonderful young Timothys, graduates of our Bible schools, warmhearted Tabitha’s, hospitable Lydias. And don’t we find exceptional young Circuit Overseers who are like Elihu in giving wise counsel to elders who are much older. And don’t many Christian young women remind us of dear Rebekah who was willing to follow her husband to a distant land for the accomplishment of Jehovah’s purpose?

We deeply appreciate the spiritual heritage that was passed on to us by the early Bible Students. In harmony with Zechariah chapter 4 and verse 10: “We do not despise the day of small things.” However the light does get brighter. And we feel that we must follow the light, wherever it leads us. Our love should be for the truth and not for a particular doctrine or teaching.

Well how would you sum this talk in a few words?

The wrong answer is, “We don’t believe in types and antitypes any more.” We do! We certainly do. Where the scriptures identify them as such, we embrace them. But where the Bible is silent, we must be silent.

Now in the three talks that follow there are going to be important clarifications in our beliefs.

Perhaps a certain adjustment will touch a spiritual nerve, make us rethink a cherished teaching. Our love for Jehovah and the truth will make us receive this information gladly and with open hearts.

Often today we hear brothers say, we’re having a hard time keeping up with the celestial chariot. So are we. So are the Governing Body. We’re not driving the chariot. Jehovah is driving the chariot and we’re running just as fast as you are, trying to keep up. So let’s all do our best to keep up with it. And let us thank Jehovah for continuing to deal with us. And for continuing to provide nourishing spiritual food.

________end of transcript________

Personal notes:

  • In the commentary on the Watchtower article based on this talk ( http://ad1914.com/2015/01/26/2107/ ) we pointed out a few items of interest:

    First of all, the idea is given that these “type-antitype” explanations have already been phased out to some extent over the past few years, but with no official explanation until now.

    The talk mentions that some legitimate examples of “type/antitype” included the tabernacle (shadows), the sacrifices, Abraham’s wife and mistress, and the snake on a pole. The 3/15/2015 Watchtower article replaced the snake on a pole with the sign of Jonah.

    It’s pointed out that this “typology” stuff has had a long history among a lot of religions, Jewish, Catholic and Protestant. (And some ridiculously bad examples are mentioned as if they were more ridiculous than Watch Tower examples.)

    The logic behind using the Rahab and Shulamite examples is twisted and anachronistic. As far as Paul’s companions knew, there never was and never would be an incorrectly explained “other sheep” class represented by Rahab. And what sister says, “The reason I am choosing the broke pioneer over the rich brother because the Song of Solomon applies to me.” In Splane’s illustration, she never actually says that, but Splane indicates that there is some danger that the sister is going to hear an argument meant to to push her into the arms of the rich brother simply because she is not “anointed” — as if only “anointed” sisters should be able to choose the poor penniless pioneer.

    But the speech says, basically, that the Watch Tower teachings took this too far. It says it will only be used from now on if the Bible tells us specifically that it is a “type.” This seems commendable.

    The problem is that this new guideline is watered down considerably in the March 15, 2015 Watchtower article based on this talk. It seems very likely that between the Annual Meeting and the end of the 2014, someone noticed that following the words of this talk would completely ruin the two most important unique doctrines of JWs today:

    1. That the Kingdom of the pagan, Gentile, violent, insane, Jew-killing Nebuchadnezzar was a “type” of God’s non-Gentile Kingdom through Christ Jesus, the perfect Prince of Peace, as represented by the Jewish Davidic/Messianic Kingdom at Jerusalem.

    2. That the “faithful and discreet slave” in Matthew 24:45 was a “type” of the Governing Body.

    Also, found it “funny” how Splane treats the old Pyramid scheme, promoted in the Watch Tower publications from the 1880’s to the 1920’s.

    The March 15, 2015 article tries to keep the idea of being once “thrilled” by these explanations in the past as a good thing. Splane had used it to show that being thrilled doesn’t always mean it was right.

2014-Year of the Kingdom, Centennial, Governing Body

More Evidence for 1914 Kingdom than for Gravity, Electricity, Wind — says JW Governing Body

1 Comment

[wpvideo 5YXeIEOd]

The source of this video is Stephen Lett, a member of the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, at the “Seek First God’s Kingdom” International Convention for 2014.  A better version of the video is found here: [youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJ6405yjZfo&w=640&h=480] I made a poor copy of it above just in case it gets removed from YouTube.

He says:

God’s Kingdom has been ruling in heaven as we’ve discussed during this convention for a hundred years, and it has produced tremendous effects — tremendous results. In fact, there is more evidence confirming the existence of the Kingdom than the evidence that would convince us that there’s gravity, electricity, wind.

I couldn’t just let that “blow over.” [wind] It was “shocking.” [electricity] I had to let it “sink in.” [gravity] All jokes, aside, though…

The first thing this reminded me of, was the fact that Rutherford blatantly overused claims about facts, proof and evidence (apparently as a reminder that he had a legal background). Rutherford loved to include the word “facts” in things like “Face the Facts” “Declaration of Facts” etc.  Rutherford would say things like, “the physical facts” “the Scriptures and facts” “indisputable facts” “beyond a doubt” and “distinctly indicated” even when he was not just wrong but indisputably wrong:

“The indisputable facts, therefore, show that the “time of the end” began in 1799; that the Lord’s second presence began in 1874.” — Watchtower 1922 Mar 1 p. 7.

 “The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914.” — The Watchtower, September 1, 1922, p. 262.

“Bible prophecy shows that the Lord was due to appear for the second time in the year 1874. Fulfilled prophecy shows beyond a doubt that he did appear in 1874. Fulfilled prophecy is otherwise designated the physical facts; and these facts are indisputable.“ — Watchtower November 1,  1922, p. 333.

Note the underlined portion: “Fulfilled prophecy” as previously interpreted and as understood by Rutherford, was the same thing as “physical facts” that are indisputable and “beyond a doubt.”

There can be no doubt that Dagon the visible god of the ancient Philistines foreshadowed the Roman Catholic Hierarchy, of which the pope is chief. The Scriptural and the historical evidence fully agree upon this point. …This further supports the conclusion that the Philistines foreshadowed the Roman Catholic Hierarchy. — Riches, 1936, p. 241.

 “The Scriptures and the facts show that the work which the man Elijah the prophet did foreshadows a work done by the faithful servant class under Christ Jesus, and which work ended in A.D. 1918… Jehu came into contact with the prophet Elijah and lived for more than 28 years of the period of the prophet Elisha….Jehovah, during the Elijah period that is from 1878 to 1918, began to prepare a people …brought over into the Elisha period, which began in A.D. 1919. — Riches, 1936, p. 66

So it wasn’t just hyperbole with Rutherford. He defined his accepted understanding of fulfilled prophecy as the same thing as “physical facts” that are indisputable. In effect, if Rutherford believed it, this was the same as “evidence,” and you didn’t dare dispute it. The last quote above from the book “Riches” repeated an idea that Rutherford had been trying to convey in several different ways since Russell died. Russell’s time had been seen as a “Day of Preparation” that was supposed to have prepared the “faithful” to remain loyal to Rutherford’s ideas, just as they had previously remained faithful to Russell’ teachings. Russell was seen as “that faithful and wise servant” of Matthew 24 who had been serving “meat in due season” (“food at the proper time”).

We could go on an on with examples like this from Rutherford.

And what about Lett? It might not be fair to attack the specifics of an unfortunate choice of hyperbole. Apparently, however, it wasn’t really intended as merely hyperbole in Lett’s case, either. He is quite serious in the video. He clearly picked “gravity, electricity and wind” because they are supposedly invisible, just like the invisible kingdom of Christ that started in 1914. There is a strange logic among certain types of non-scientists that invisible things are not real. That it somehow takes “faith” to believe in things invisible to the naked eye. Galileo had a similar problem. Religionists have been heard to speak as if these things are unreal, miraculous or in some sense, “magical.”

It’s hard to know exactly what he meant that evidence was. Possibly he’s so impressed with the growth of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but this is on par with the growth of Mormons (LDS) and Seventh Day Adventists who have similar beginnings. But growth means Jehovah’s blessing (as long it is the growth of Jehovah’s Witnesses). It is likely some combination of a strong belief in the growth of JWs  combined with his own belief that so many other things he believes in makes him feel that the Watch Tower Society and Jehovah’s Witnesses are right.  Therefore all of it combines in his mind to become evidence. If he feels they are right about everything else, then they must be right about this theory about the Kingdom, too.

Similar to Rutherford, if Lett merely believes the interpretation of 1914 to be fulfilled prophecy, then Lett sees it in the same light as indisputable evidence.

But the real problem is that even if it was hyperbole, we couldn’t excuse it. That’s because the purpose of his speech is to imply that there is at least some evidence somewhere for an invisible kingdom that has been ruling for 100 years.  As it turns out, there isn’t any. Every bit of the evidence for 1914 has been shown to be false, mistaken, and in some cases, made up dishonestly.

So the question for Stephen Lett is not, “Where is this evidence that is supposedly greater than the evidence that would make us believe in gravity, electricity or wind?” No, the real question is:

WHERE IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE AT ALL FOR 1914?

 

We could easily expose the inadequacy of any portion of that evidence. And if you look through the site, you’ll see that this has already been done by many others.

 

2014-Year of the Kingdom, Celebration, Centennial

1914-2014: Celebrating the End of an Error!

Leave a comment

A 100-YEAR ANNIVERSARY is usually something to take pride in — something to celebrate! And, yes, the 100-year milestone of the 1914 date truly is something to celebrate. But not for the same reasons that the majority of Jehovah’s Witnesses are giving special attention to the date. We’ll explain the reasons we are celebrating, of course. But first, some background:

1979wtIn 1979, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society* celebrated the 100-year anniversary of the Watchtower magazine, which was first published in July 1879 as “Zion’s Watch Tower and Herald of Christ’s Presence.” wts-centennial-1984In 1984, the Watch Tower Society celebrated the 100-year anniversary of the charter of the Watch Tower Society itself.

“THIS IS THE YEAR OF THE KINGDOM”

And now, in 2014, the Watchtower celebrates the 100-year anniversary of 1914. A phrase that has been heard multiple times among Jehovah’s Witnesses from their headquarters (Bethel) is that 2014 is “The Year of the Kingdom.”

The following links (to jw.org) are examples of this kind of emphasis since the beginning of 2014.

kmaug14

(Something is just a bit ironic in this article. It’s in the ellipses, hidden in those three little dots after “Behold, the King reigns! ” . . . Give up? The answer is linked here.)

 

THE TRUTH BE TOLD

Many of us with years of experience among Jehovah’s Witnesses have yet another reason to celebrate 2014. Primarily, we’re celebrating Truth — finding “pleasure in truth.” Isn’t that what had attracted us to Jehovah’s Witnesses in the first place?

Psalm 51:6 says: “Look! You find pleasure in truth in the inner person.” (NWT, 2013)

It should become clear to anyone who spends much time looking at the research that has been reproduced, referenced and presented on these pages that the 1914 teaching was simply a mistake. So exactly why would we celebrate? Are we gloating?

For most of us, we are happy with the demise of the 1914 teaching because it corrects an error. And correcting an error is always a good thing.

Researching and studying about 1914 was, in fact, quite painful at first for some of those whose experience are available here. But it was a step to real progress. Many of us now have a much better understanding of the Bible, and we are now more conscious of our spiritual needs. We feel more empathy and better understand one another, especially those who, like ourselves, had found ourselves defending belief systems that required continual change and correction over time. And this empathy has often included our own families, friends and loved ones. For many of us, it was specifically the deep and sincere research into the 1914 doctrine that ultimately produced the proper humility that allowed us to make greater progress in our continued quest for truth.

A MILESTONE OR A MILLSTONE?

But wait! Aren’t we getting ahead of ourselves? Many readers of this article will surely think that the Watchtower’s celebration of this 100th Anniversary is just evidence that the 1914 teaching is not going away any time soon. Why are we acting like this anniversary is somehow a “death knell” for the Watchtower’s traditional 1914 doctrine?

There are plenty of reasons:

Any JW who has ever tried to seriously defend the 1914 doctrine has likely already discovered that there is no Biblical or secular evidence for pointing to that specific date. Worse than that, there are dozens of lines of evidence against it. (If you get to the level of studying the pivotal 607 BCE date, it turns out that there are literally tens of thousands of pieces of evidence against it. We might have thought that date was set in stone, and as it turns out, the very stones [link] cry out against it.) Every single claim about the doctrine turns out to be problematic from a doctrinal perspective. Defending it creates insurmountable contradictions, and this is something that many Witnesses have had to keep to themselves.

But the Watch Tower publications haveexplaining now asked Jehovah’s Witnesses to focus on 1914 one more time, and to try to defend it one more time. The October 2014 Our Kingdom Ministry states: “Realistically, we may find it challenging to explain deep Bible truths, such as how we know that the Kingdom started ruling in 1914.”

Most, but not all, Jehovah’s Witnesses who write for the Watch Tower publications believe the 1914 teaching, and some “cracks” have already showing up in the publications.

Even for those who still believe it, however, the renewed focus has clearly created some awkward discoveries. Claims that once appeared regularly in Watch Tower publications have almost disappeared, replaced with reworded claims that make it clear the writer discovered the problem with old claim.  Even some of the more recent doctrinal changes in just the last couple of years provide additional indications that Watch Tower writers have begun to see how the doctrine creates contradictions.

Luke 9:21 indicates the perils for a “man who has put his hand to a plow and looks at the things behind.” If you’ve ever tried to plow (or mow a lawn, at least) while continually looking back at where you’ve been, you will find that the lines aren’t straight. The Watch Tower’s own writers are looking back and finding out that the lines aren’t straight.

Most of us, whether JWs, ex-JWs, or non-JWs, already understand implicitly that the current 1914 teaching can’t last forever with world conditions going as they have been for the last hundred years. The teaching has already required adjustment in several ways, and it would be impossible to continue the current teaching without additional changes in the next couple of decades. The doctrine is like a sinking millstone. It can’t remain afloat.

KEEP ON TWEAKING FIRST THE KINGDOM

Remember this famous graphic from the 1968 “Truth Book”?generation_truth_book
 Someone (on another website) produced an updated version based on the 2010 “clarification” of the meaning of “that generation.” The image indicates, graphically, why there is very little room — or appetite — for further adjustments.overlapping-generations

If anyone isn’t up-to-date with some of these more recent changes to the “generation” doctrine, it’s also discussed here.

A decade before the most recent changes to the “generation” the January 1, 2000 Watchtower stated:

“In recent years, we have been encouraged to look again with deeper understanding at—among other things—the generation that will not pass away before the end comes…. It may be difficult at times to understand such updated explanations, but the reasons for them become clear in due course.” [emphasis added]

In due course, of course, the definition of that “generation” changed again. There was an explanation that worked up until 1995, and then the 1995 explanation that was considered potentially “difficult” in the quote above, which itself preceded a new explanation in 2008, which lasted only a couple of years before the currently accepted explanation first appeared in 2010. Historically, the Watchtower has offered 7 distinct explanations, as depicted in the graphic below, found at the following web address: http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/generation.php

THE TRUTH, 2014 REVISED EDITION

As already stated, one excellent reason for our celebration is simply “pleasure in truth.” Jehovah’s Witnesses are repeatedly encouraged to do as the Beroeans did:

“Now these [Beroeans] were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they accepted the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily to see whether these things were so.” — Acts 17:11

As if to drive home the point even further, Paul later wrote to those in Thessalonica, telling them to “make sure of all things.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

That desire — that pleasure, that eagerness of mind — to “carefully examine” and “make sure” will be clear to anyone looking at those many experiences that many have shared here on this site. And if you have never seen Carl Olof Jonsson’s most comprehensive book, Gentile Times Reconsidered, take a quick look at the book here and you will surely be impressed at the level of research and scholarship.

CENSURED SENTRIES OF THE CENTURY

There’s another good reason to celebrate, and it’s in a more serious vein. We are all aware of how the Watchtower magazine often “celebrates” the lives of those persons in history who sacrificed much for the sake of truth and for the sake of their faith.

It’s a common theme found in many Watchtower articles — one that truly touches the hearts of those who have given up so much for their faith, their conscience, and especially for those related to them in the faith. That same theme was recently highlighted in the June 1, 2014 Watchtower article: Three 16th-Century Truth Seekers—What Did They Find? (links to jw.org) Another recent example is found the April 1, 2014 issue: Thomas Emlyn—Blasphemer or Advocate of Truth? (links to jw.org)

The parallels between experiences posted on this site and “16th-Century Truth Seekers” will likely seem quite unexpected to many Witnesses. We’ve included a short post about the Watchtower’s article on Thomas Emlyn, for example, because the similarities to the experience of Witnesses who studied the 1914 teaching are really quite amazing.

HOW WE ARE CELEBRATING

  • We’re celebrating the lives and experiences of many who suffered the consequences of speaking and writing honestly about their research. We have made an entire section devoted to such experiences and expect to add several more over the coming months.
  • Another way we’ll celebrate is by highlighting some of the excellent work and research that has been done to promote the truth about this matter. Some of that research has been contributed to this site, and much more will be referenced from a special section of the site: Websites, videos, books and discussions.
  • And for those with a strong historical or scholarly interest in the development of the doctrine, we’ll also will continue to add material to the section titled: Analysis of the1914 Teaching – Biblical, Secular, Historical.
  • Of course, the most important way we are celebrating is by an effort to help everyone understand each other a little better. For example:
    • Everyone can get a better understanding of the historical development of the doctrine and the religious organization itself and therefore more empathy for people who are confused by it or object to it.
    • The included experiences should help Witnesses and ex-Witnesses understand each other better, especially those who might now find themselves in “estranged” circumstances.
    • Witnesses and ex-Witnesses alike often find themselves believing they are “on their own” when doubts or concerns arise. Hopefully this site will show otherwise, and encourage discussion with an entire community of persons who would gladly offer support and encouragement.

Truth doesn’t always lead to peace, but where both sides give truth a chance, it can offer the most stable basis for peace, understanding, empathy and love. Who could ask for anything more?

Uncategorized

Who Was Thomas Emlyn?

Leave a comment

The Watchtower writers didn’t intend for ex-Witnesses to see the close parallels between their own experience and that of Thomas Emlyn. But that’s not the only reason we include a reference to this recent article. It should also help JWs think twice before complaining that a site such as this one is tantamount to “hero worship.”

Although Emlyn’s specific doctrinal issues might be different than ours, the April 1, 2014 Watchtower celebrates his life because he took a stand for truth and suffered the consequences. The article says that the outcome of his trial was obviously influenced by seven bishops of the Church of Ireland. But he stood up to their scorn, suffering a year in prison and the charge of blasphemy.

Similarly we include the experiences of  many people who, like Thomas Emlyn, have stood up for truth and suffered the consequences due to the treatment by the leadership of the Watch Tower Society and other Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Although Emlyn’s issue was with the Trinity doctrine, those who researched the 1914 or related teachings have often experienced amazing parallels to this story. Some excerpts from the Watchtower article are included below:

During those times, Emlyn was carefully studying the Bible. … As he researched the Gospels, he became convinced that they supported his improved understanding.

The Watchtower often reserves the phrase “careful study of the Bible” for those interested in studying the Bible with Witnesses, in the context of conversion, baptism, and making use of the study aids provided by the “faithful slave.” But what was the attitude of Watch Tower leadership when that careful study of the Bible would convince someone of an improved understanding. Read Randy Watters experience and you might be surprised to see how member of the Governing Body responded: “Stay away from deep Bible study to determine meanings of the scriptures.”

Emlyn did not immediately reveal what he had found. However, some in his Dublin church noticed that he did not refer to [the doctrine] in his sermons.

This is common to several of the experiences. Note that Ron Frye, who had been a Circuit Overseer, spent nearly a decade reevaluating the doctrines before leaving. Naturally, these issues can never be heard in your public talks.

..[H]oping to vindicate his views, he published [a book] An Humble Inquiry Into the Scripture-Account of Jesus Christ. In this publication, he gave clear Scriptural proof…. This infuriated members of Emlyn’s former congregation in Dublin. A formal complaint was filed.

When a Witness leaves and writes a book, this is considered one of the most heinous forms of apostasy. The writing is immediately deemed “evil” or “poisonous.” The Watchtower has likened such books to “pornography.” And even knowing that someone could collect information about them that might be publicized negatively is fear-inspiring to them. Note the reaction of the “Judicial Committee” in Poul Bregninge’s experience when he told them he had a tape recorder.

Emlyn was arrested …in Dublin on June 14, 1703. …The trial proved to be a farce. Seven bishops of the Church of Ireland sat on the bench with the judges. Emlyn was not allowed to speak in his own defense. Richard Levins, a distinguished lawyer, told Emlyn that he would be run down “like a wolf, without law or game.” …

This was the climate in Brooklyn Bethel when Nestor and Toni Kuilan were “arrested.” Nestor was told that if he ever wanted to be re-instated he would have to go through the Governing Body. The Governing Body worked behind the scenes to make sure the final judgments were to their liking. This is well known in the case of Ray Franz, who also details, in his books, some of the unchristian judicial methods the Watch Tower leadership engaged in during the cases of  Edward Dunlap, Cris and Norma Sanchez and many others. And this is validated again by the experiences  contributed here by Randy Watters and Nestor Kuilan.

When Emlyn was found guilty, the solicitor-general proposed that he retract. Emlyn refused. He was fined and sentenced to a year’s imprisonment. …

This actually sounds mild compared to the way Peter Gregerson puts it: “he also knew that leaving the Watchtower, after nearly fifty years of loyalty, would not be easy. His wife and her family, his children, …and… closest friends were all Witnesses. And in their eyes, to leave the Watchtower is to turn one’s back on Jehovah himself, and to be essentially given a death sentence. If a person is disfellowshipped, other members are no longer allowed to speak with that “wicked” person.”

Emlyn moved to London, where he eventually associated with William Whiston, another Bible scholar who had been ostracized because he published what he felt was Bible truth. …

Compare this attitude with the fact that Jehovah’s Witnesses are trained to be prejudiced against those who associate themselves with non-Witnesses. We have included the contributions of some, like Joan Cetnar, who have found solace and spiritual fulfillment through other religious organizations and ministries. And, of course, others have found this same fulfillment without any need for organizations of any kind.

The example set by Emlyn and others can move us to consider whether we are willing to stand up for the truth in the face of scorn. We too can ask ourselves, ‘Which is more important—the honor and blessing of the community or upholding the truth of God’s Word?’

Clearly this article in the Watchtower is one of many examples that hits very close to home for many who happily worked and served among Jehovah’s Witnesses for years, or even decades. We celebrate how they have made the proper choice dictated by conscience: “standing up for truth in the face of scorn.” But we won’t scorn them.

 

Governing Body, Matthew 24, Watch Tower

New! Important CHANGES in March 15th, 2015 Watchtower, Explained & Clarified

15 Comments

Articles in this series:

If you are one of those few people who REALLY keeps up with the recent changes to current doctrines among JWs, then you should appreciate the upcoming series of articles we are about to post on the subject. If you are one who does NOT always keep up with the recent changes to current doctrines among the JWs then you should REALLY appreciate these articles even more.

There are a some specific doctrinal changes spelled out in the March 15, 2015 Watchtower (the “Study Edition” available on the JW.ORG website).  But the biggest, most important change is about a method for explaining Scripture that will affect many more doctrines than the specific examples mentioned in the magazine.

With this issue, literally thousands of pages of previously printed doctrinal material are rendered obsolete. It also sets a new direction for Bible commentary in The Watchtower that has the potential to completely “reset” SEVERAL of the unique doctrines of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and MOST of the prophetic interpretations. Even the chronological interpretations are at risk of becoming obsolete.  (For example, until the last decade, “1918” was taught as a prophetically significant date that was once mentioned just about as often as 1919 was mentioned. Yet, many JWs are not even aware that 1918 has already been quietly dropped as a prophetically significant date, for reasons that are aligned with the changes set forth in this March 15, 2015 issue.)

To get an idea of how sweeping the general change already is, you would have to know just how much prior doctrine is affected by these sentences from the March 15th Watchtower:

“In times past, it was more common for our literature to take what might be called a type-antitype approach to Scriptural accounts.” (p.3) “Humans cannot know which Bible accounts are shadows of things to come and which are not. The clearest course is this: Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so.” (p.18)

The following is a list of 42 of these “prophecies” or “prophetic dramas” found in one of the Watchtower publications that we (JWs) actively taught and studied when I was a younger Witness. Most of these have never been dismissed and they still represented accurate doctrine until now. Learning these teachings took up a large portion of the curriculum for the students of the Watchtower Bible School of Gilead while I was at Bethel from 1976 to 1980. One of the weekly meetings, the “Congregation Book Study,” was often devoted entirely to discussions of this type.

3-15-15wt3-15-2

Also note that the 42 examples listed only include those that specified the “great crowd” who would have an earthly hope instead of the “anointed” with the heavenly hope. Because these “prophetic dramas” have been emphasized less, especially in the last couple of decades, many Witnesses didn’t realize that most of these explanations were still “on the books.” In other words they were still considered valid, correct doctrines. At least until now.

DIDN’T THEY TRY THIS BEFORE?

It probably sounds like hyperbole to attach such a potential significance to these new changes. However, we have an excellent reason to believe that these changes are indicative of more changes underway. What’s that reason? Simple. We saw what happened when they tried this before. The Watch Tower Society didn’t try it officially, because not everyone was on board with it. Nevertheless, beginning in the late 1960’s and 1970’s, several members of the Writing Department were already reading Bible narratives and writing and teaching about their meaning in the exact way described in this new issue of the Watchtower.

In fact, the idea of changing this teaching method already came up during the research and writing of the Watch Tower’s first Bible dictionary, Aid to Bible Understanding, completed in 1971. This “Aid Book” as we called it (now slightly revised as Insight on the Scriptures) is nearly devoid of types and antitypes. By 1972, the research behind the Aid Book had already resulted in major changes to the Watch Tower organizational structure, including a re-definition of what the governing body would soon become, and the new “elder arrangement,” which was just being put into place. The following is from an article in the August 15, 1972 Watchtower that reflects some of the thinking on this subject at the time:

*** w72 8/15 p. 502 God Readjusts the Thinking of His People ***
Another thing that has given rise to questions is the use by Jehovah’s witnesses of parallels or prophetic types, applying these to circumstances and to groups or classes of people today. Many people who read the Bible view its accounts all as simply history, but when they begin to study with Jehovah’s witnesses a readjustment of viewpoint takes place as they see that there is more to the accounts than history. …

The question that is sometimes asked is, Did Jehovah stage that ‘dramatic’ event, so that we would have a warning now? Well, would he cause such bad things to happen? Would he maneuver them himself? No. …

It helps us to understand more fully when we keep in mind that the people in ancient times were real, living their daily lives in association with their families and fellowmen, having hopes and desires as we do today, the same general problems with sin working in their members, and many of them faithfully waging a fine fight to serve God.

The article just quoted actually tried to play both sides of the issue in order to introduce the change but also dismiss the need to make too many changes at once. (The 1972 article tended to favor the “type-antitype” status quo.) During the late 1970’s, the brothers in Writing who were the most productive and who were the most capable of Biblical research included the brothers who had worked on the Aid Book, and by that point in time had already been getting assignments to write Watchtower articles on many Bible topics. These articles tended to minimize the “type-antitype” pattern.

Not all Watchtower writers agreed with this change. However, many letters were received that thanked the Watchtower Society for producing these “refreshing and clear” articles that “make it easier to apply the Bible in our daily lives as Jehovah’s Christian witnesses.”

The brothers in Writing who had helped with the Aid Book had become especially involved in those new articles with the “refreshing” style, as some called it. One of these brothers had an excellent knowledge of the Biblical languages, including not just Hebrew but also Aramaic and Syriac. Another other one could write an article in minutes on almost any Bible topic, pretty much from memory, and those articles could usually be used in the Watchtower without any edits or changes. Their work was approved through the appropriate review committee(s), including Governing Body members, and resulted in dozens of Watchtower articles, and several books, which are still easily identifiable by their style when looking through the bound volumes of the Watchtower from those years, or the Watchtower Library CD. Two books were written in this same “refreshing” style in a Bible commentary format. Those two books, Commentary on the Letter of James and Choosing the Best Way of Life (which was a commentary on 1st and 2nd Peter) were released at the summer District Assemblies in 1979. They became the first major examples of books that scrupulously avoided “type-antitype” patterns, even when touching upon subjects that had previously required it. This includes an “untypical” reference to the “faithful and discreet slave” that called upon all Christians to be this sort of person. A recently deceased brother who had been at Bethel during the period described it to Randall Watters like this:

 “There were a couple new books published that were nothing like the typical FWFranzesque prophetic calculus manuals. These books were not typical fare, and you could see the puzzled looks when they reached the book study groups and meetings. Biblical commentary within scriptural context…”

Unfortunately, the Watch Tower Society in general was not yet ready for this type of reading and writing about the Bible narratives. “Heads rolled” when the significance of those changes was noticed by “old school” supporters of these now obsolete doctrinal methods. This included the two mentioned above, and a few others, too, who were not disfellowshipped, but who were dismissed from Bethel. However, this March 15, 2015 issue of The Watchtower now renders that “old school” doctrinal pattern obsolete. The pattern utilized in the Aid Book and in subsequent Watchtower articles and books for the next 7 years, especially from 1976 through 1980 is now considered ‘the way Jehovah approved.’ (Watchtower 3/15/2015 p.7,8)

While we cannot vouch for the exact numerical claims in the quote below, one person has put it this way, on a site where JWs often discuss issues with other JWs:

Now, with this article, nearly half the Watchtower articles that Rutherford wrote (since about 1931) and about a quarter of the Watchtower study articles that Fred Franz wrote (since 1942 – under Knorr) have been downgraded. When I worked with the Gilead students we were still spending about half their time going over these old Bible stories to make sure they understood when the anointed class was meant and when the great crowd was meant. (Anyone who has a copy of the Gilead Notes from up to about 1980 will know what I mean.)

Historically, I find that very interesting, but from a progressive perspective, it was bound to happen now that there is less concern about distinguishing anointed from other sheep, I find it quite refreshing that we no longer need to be worried that we draw the right application to the various people in so many of these Bible accounts.

If you do not have the magazine in printed format, it is available at the following location on jw.org:

http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/w20150315/

That link (on the JW.org site) displays a page that has the following articles listed. Over the next few weeks we will provide a commentary on each of them and link the titles to our commented versions of these articles.

THE WATCHTOWER (STUDY EDITION) MARCH 2015

 

“This Is the Way You Approved”

Why have our publications in recent years often given simpler, clearer explanations of some Bible accounts?

 

Will You “Keep on the Watch”? 

Read this clarified understanding of Jesus’ parable of the ten virgins, which focuses on the parable’s simple, urgent message. 

 

Questions From Readers

In the past, our publications often mentioned types and antitypes, but in recent years they have seldom done so. Why is that? 

 

Learn From the Illustration of the Talents 

This article refines our understanding of the parable of the talents.

 

Loyally Supporting Christ’s Brothers 

How do those whom Christ judges to be sheep support his brothers?

In attempting to comment on those Watchtower articles listed above, this site will attempt to cover each of the articles listed above that cover the updated doctrines.

Watch for the following subjects to be covered across the five articles:

  • The Prior Importance of the “Type Anti-Type” Approach
  • The Good Samaritan – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • Naboth, Ahab, Jezebel – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • The Prodigal Son – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • Elijah and Elisha – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • The Ten Virgins – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • The Talents – Type-Antitype method reviewed
  • What happened at Bethel when this same approach was used as an aid to Bible understanding?
  • How can this approach potentially change the explanation of the “Faithful and Discreet Slave”?
  • What will this approach do to the method of explaining all prophecies in Isaiah, Jeremiah and other prophetic books with a formula linking any mention of faithful kings, priests and prophets to the faithful anointed in our day, or linking unfaithful ones to Christendom, or linking any mention of captivity to the imprisonment of Rutherford and others in 1918/1919, etc.?
  • What can this approach do to the “anti-type” fulfillment of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the 1914 teaching?
  • Will this ultimately make 1919 go the way of 1918? (As mentioned, 1918 was once a large part of Watch Tower doctrine and it has been gradually but effectively dismissed over the last several years.)
  • Will this ultimately make the current distinction between Great Crowd and Anointed less important?