From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Subject: Re: Jehovah's Witnesses
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:57:01 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center

asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen) writes:
> agr00@ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose) writes:
> 
> >So we learn here from the Watchtower that they do claim that they are
> >prophets from God.  
> 
> 	Positively ! There's only one difficulty: If you read the article 
> 	carefully, they didn't claimed us to be prophets in the strictest 
> 	sense, but "prophets". This means that when the REAL prophets have 
> 	been dead for ages and they can't act like prophets any longer, we 
> 	can "prophetize" for them - we can bring their prophecies into 
> 	peoples homes. We can act as their feet. But we aren't prophets in 
> 	the sense we would receive some extra knowledge. I think this 
> 	distinction should be made. 

Antti, I don't know where you get that from.  If the Jehovah's Witnesses
claim to being a "prophet" is only that they can bring the prophecies
found in the Bible to people's door, then anyone from outside the
Jehovah's Witnesses could do the same, and thus also be "true prophets".
By that criteria, you would have to consider Mormons "true prophets",
which you do not.  

Jehovah's Witnesses claim to be "true prophets" because (they claim) 
God actively commissioned them to go door-to-door, spreading the word
they spread.  And they DO claim to have "new light" that other people
have/do not have.  They claim, as God's "true prophets", to be
delivering "meat in due season from God". Until they make some major
gaff, like the 1914 thing, or vaccinations being an abomination against
God, etc; then (as Antti is trying to do) they have to find some way
of backing away from their stated role as God's "true prophets". 

> >However, they DID again predict the "end" to come in 1975.  And once
> >again, it did not come to pass.  In fact, even the Watchtower admits
> 
> 	So sad, started so well, ended so badly. You fell to your own pit:
> 	You have lied. Or, if this is too strictly said, I say: You've been
> 	lied. There wasn't organized Jehovah's Witnesses in the strict sense. 
> 	Jehovah took a nation to his own age (in our times) 1931 and those 
> 	things happened before it. Before 1931 we weren't allowed to use that
> 	name, we must have thrown some junk out first. 

Now this gets interesting.  So what you're saying is:
1) That Russell was a "phony JW".     
2) That when those before 1931 said God was using them as His "channel"
   to the world, they were lying. 

I've never heard any JW put it the way you are here.  Is this official
JW belief (I doubt it) or your own attempt to explain away the screwups that
otherwide would be difficult to deal with? 

>       Take for instance 
> 	Paul: If you think his life, he made many false predictions and 
> 	believed falsely, before his eyes opened. This has happened to the 
> 	Society aswell. 

This, Antti, is where you need a little historical prospective.  As far 
back as the 1880s, the JWs (rather, Russell) believed HIS eyes had
already been opened; that they had been freed from "false religion". 
That they were "starting from scratch" so to speak, worshipping "in
spirit and truth".  (These buzz-words sound familiar?) I'd suggest
going to your KH library, and read some of those early works. 

>       Another lie is about 1975. We didn't predict 
> 	anything actually, it was said that Armageddon MAY come 1975 just as
> 	it may come next month. I've studied every reference to that year, so
> 	I know, what I'm talking about. 

This is always a controversial one for JWs.  Did the JWs say "The world
WILL end in 1975?"  No.  They said: 
1) the world will end 6000 years after Adam & Eve's creation.
2) 6000 years after Adam & Eve's creation is in 1975. 
So, they didn't come right out and say it directly, but anyone
could put 1 and 1 together and get 2.  (and many did..)  My wife,
who was a teenage JW in 1975, remembers the time well; she
remembers telling classmates that their class would never graduate
(she was class of '75) because the world was going to end that
year.  

The problem the JWs (or rather, the JW leadership at the Watchtower
Society) has, is that they refuse to accept responsibility for what
they said and did regarding 1975.  Because of all the criticism they
recieved over 1914, 1918, 1925, and WWII, they prefer to blame
"speculation by individual JWs" for the whole 1975 thing.  

> 	Back to the first lines. You said we've done good things. Consider 
> 	what Jesus said about tree - could a bad tree produce good fruit ?
> 	This is my point.

He said you were "zealous".  As I mentioned the other day, I don't see
that being zealous is neccesarily something good in of itself; generally,
the less "good" something is, the more zealously it must be pushed.
Now, to apply your "could a bad tree produce good fruit ?"
to others besides yourself.  The Catholic Church is active in charity
and feeding famine victims in Africa. Good fruits, are they a bad tree
then? The Mormon church sends missionaries all over the world, spreading
the Gospel as they do practical work projects to help the people they
preach to.  Good fruits, bad tree? The list could go on and on.  So they
must all be good trees?  

> >These issues and books I have quoted here are very hard to
> >find, because the Watchtower does a REAL GOOD job of making sure copies
> >are not to be found if possible.  If you would like me to mail you
> 
> 	Another lie - we have a library in our KHs everywhere. You've been
> 	lied, I'm sorry to tell you that. 

I think I'm with Antti here.  I've seen plenty of old books in KH libraries.
The JWs may discourage their people from reading them, and a JW might draw
suspicion to himself by reading them, but they are there. 

> 	I've accepted Jesus as my saviour and I try my best in following him,
> 	although it's difficult. 

Perhaps you might try partaking of communion.  Helps me when I do..

Walter Smith
smithw@cs.itc.hp.com

Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:20936 sci.skeptic:19446 alt.censorship:8780 alt.sex:35846