Monday, November 1, 2010

See Your Enemy, Part 3

In parts 1 and 2, I discussed directly the false prophecies of the Jehovah's Witnesses, as well evidence of their deliberate alteration of the Bible to fit their doctrine. I also included the names and qualifications of the New World Translation's authors and how they barely pass what would be considered scholarly authorities by any stretch of either definition or imagination. I included scripture throughout the missive, ending Part 2 with a quote from the Lord Jesus Himself regarding His stark warning regarding false prophets.

I will here address what was another response from JohnOneOne, the apparent Jehovah's Witness who has taken the time to offer the perspective of the Watch Tower Society. Of the many assertions I made and backed up, he has chosen to respond to one. The comment was brief, and I have listed it below, to be followed by what will be a thorough response.

JohnOneOne said...
With respect to your claim that, throughout the years, Jehovah's Witnesses have proven themselves to being "False Prophets," the following two weblinks might be of some help in putting the fact of Jehovah's Witnesses failed expectations into proper perspective:
"The Churches, Jehovah's Witnesses, and the Question of Unfulfilled Prophetic Expectations"
"The Problem with 'False Prophecy' Polemics"
November 1, 2010 1:42 AM

The first link is an extensive list of the false prophecies that were maintained by churches of many different denominations. The site's About statement is as follows;

""Jehovah's Witnesses United" is simply the name of this site. All those directly associated with this site are active Jehovah's Witnesses in good standing with their local congregations. The site was created so that scholarly information supporting the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society's teachings and the New World Translation could be collected in one location on the web. This site is not meant as a substitute for Society literature, but as a further resource for those who would like to "dig deeper.""

What is fascinating about this alone is that the teachings of the Watchtower Society and their altered text are all that can be considered by those who are in good standing with their Kingdom Halls and seek to remain so. It is both the mandates and the terms of the Watch Tower Society that govern the hearts of Witnesses. They are to receive all direction *only* from their governing body and their doctrine. The Word of God, which should have been the standard from which all doctrine is conformed to, is instead made to conform to the Watchtower's mandates, and is therefore altered repeatedly until the square peg fits in the round hole. The hubris necessary to reach this height rivals that of Lucifer himself, who thought to set what *he* thought higher than that which God thought, and got sent from heaven like a bolt of lightning for his temerity.

There is a word for that, for thinking that your modifications to God's Word improve it from that which God already ordained through His Spirit working through the prophets and apostles:

blas-phe-my noun

1 a : the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God.
1 b : the act of claiming the attributes of deity.
2: irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable.

This is how the Watchtower Society operates: According to them, they *alone*, with their "bible scholars", have the only truth; *all else is false*. In fact, according to the Jehovah's Witnesses, the publications of the Watchtower Society, or as they phrase it, of "God's visible theocratic organization", are the only channel by which God speaks to mankind today at all, and thus are required reading for all Christians. Furthermore, without accepting whatever it says in its entirety, all claims of loving God and receiving biblical truth are lies. Without the Watchtower, you will die.

Before anyone starts, I'm not inventing this, or doing something so feeble as making a "claim". Here it is in their own words:

1) "Make haste to identify the visible theocratic organization of God that represents his king, Jesus Christ. It is essential for life. Doing so, be complete in accepting its every aspect... We cannot claim to love God, yet deny his word and channel of communication." Watchtower, October 1, 1967.

2) "We must take seriously what his Word says and what his organization reveals to us.... Would not a failure to respond to direction from God through his organization really indicate a rejection of divine rulership?" Watchtower, February 15, 1976.

Watchtower Society = Divine Rulership?

Witnesses in their governing body have attested to this even when asked under oath.

In 1940, the New York King's County Court had a question for Frederick Franz, who was on the witness stand and under oath to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. They asked, "Who subsequently became the Editor of the magazine, the main editor of the "Watch Tower" magazine?" To which Frederick Franz answered, "Jehovah God." --New York King's County Clerks' Court Record, 1940, volume 2, page 795.

So Frederick Franz, the main author of their New World Translation, concurs; The Almighty God is the editor of the Watchtower. A child with beginning comprehension of transitive property can see the relationship: If God is the main Editor of the magazine, then everything in it must be the inspired word of the Lord. The Editor of a periodical is the one who accepts responsibility for anything written in it, because it meets with his or her approval first. A *human* Editor might make mistakes, or miss a detail, or accidentally let someone's error turn into a "failed expectation"... but if God Himself is the Editor, can there be any mistakes? So it isn't *my* claim, it is the sinking sand upon which the organization has been built. The blasphemous equation of Watchtower = divine rulership is their own monster.

Still, this was a record from man's court, and not something which the Witnesses themselves have written and approved, so this one recorded fact is perhaps viewed as a fabrication (see:irony), or at the least holds little value to them.

So let's stick only with what they say of themselves, as approved by Jehovah, according to them.

Let's first examine the content of the first link.:

It contains first a write up on the false prophecies of numerous church denominations through the centuries; Lutheran, Catholic, Baptist, Assemblies of God, and so on. It doesn't mind calling them so, either--I presume for the purpose of informing its readers that they did not corner the market on false prophecy. Where it stops on themselves, however, it does not admit to being guilty of the same, but rather of "errors" based upon "data thought to be accurate".

As all lies are made more powerful by mixture with the truth, it even cites the verse in Deuteronomy: "When a prophet makes a statement in the name of the Lord, if what he says does not take place and his words do not come true, then his word is not the word of the Lord: the words of the prophet were said in the pride of his heart, and you are to have no fear of him." Deuteronomy 18:22

It then attempts to deflect the label of false prophet by saying that the label does not apply to "many of the predictions that we have documented*, because of those *many*, (many??--why not *any*??--God is the main editor, after all...)the speaker simply failed to correctly discern what a prophecy within the Bible meant. That is the only thing of intended substance offered to explain themselves: "*Whatever* we said or didn't say, we simply misinterpreted what was there and broadcast our errors to the world as if they were true,and we certainly never claimed that God told us to say it..."

Well. Except they *did*--the article's verbal sleight-of-hand notwithstanding.

The claim that they did not make these utterances in God's name, and therefore are not false prophets, is a damnable lie, already exposed by their blanket label of divine rulership from the Society, with God as the main editor. This lie is easily made because they do not assume anyone would take the time to pull up their back issues and see the more explicit truth in their own writing.

1) On page 5 of the January 1, 1942 issue of The Watchtower, they wrote: "Those who are convinced that The Watchtower is publishing the opinion or expression of a man should not waste time in looking at it at all... Those who believe that God uses The Watchtower as a means of communicating to his people, or of calling attention to his prophecies, should study The Watchtower..."

and HERE:

2) on pages 6 and 7 of the May 15, 1984 issue of the Watchtower, they said, "Jehovah's prophetic word through Jesus Christ is: 'This generation [of 1914] will by no means pass away until all things occur.' (Luke 21:32) And Jehovah, who is the source of inspired and unfailing prophecy, will bring about the fulfillment...

"Just as Jesus' prophecies regarding Jerusalem were fulfilled within the life span of the generation of the year 33 C.E., so his prophecies regarding 'the time of the end' will be fulfilled within the life span of the generation of 1914.

"Yes, you may live to see this promised New Order, along with survivors of the generation of 1914 -- the generation that will not pass away."

Did you see it?

1) If the opinions and expressions in it are not those of men, then who is left to express opinions and expressions? That 1942 declaration states unequivocally (and again) that the Watchtower Society conveys both the opinions and expressions of GOD, not MEN; dancing around the phrases only made it worse. They put it in marble when they said that if you *did* think they were of men, then you shouldn't even be *reading* it. That this act of attaching divine authorship to the Watchtower usurps the authority which belongs to God and His Word *alone* passes beneath the readers notice from all the gyrations.

2) The Watchtower 1984 issue quote is consistent with the same hubris-filled statement as the first. They do NOT begin their statement with "We believe" or "It is our opinion", which would excuse it as possibly fallible as JohnOneOne's second link wants us to think (which I'll get to) but rather uses the unmistakable, "Jehovah's prophetic word through Jesus Christ *is*:"

That would be saying the Almighty God speaks when you speak, there, fella.

So. Um,.. no. Defending lies with more lies only works when the person you are trying to deceive has no real desire to know the truth. Or has the sense God gave a walnut.

The first link's defense not only proved my case that they are false prophets, it showed that they don't even care to know the whole truth of what is in their own manuscript vaults, and thus further obscure the truth. The site is there for those who wish to "dig deeper". They must expect people to somehow look at what they dig up without the use of their eyes, which if used to read the *Bible* more than their periodical, they would note that verifying what they we are told *before* saying "Amen" to it, is in fact encouraged. But to someone accustomed to being led by the nose rather than led by the Word, and led to pray to the Almighty for the truth while seeking His face and submitting to His will, heads will simply nod, and nose-rings will jingle within the confines of their leashes, and the glaring absence of the real Truth goes completely missed.

Now, the second link, from the same site, contains several pages of all the times in which the Watchtower society attempts to *completely* reverse itself and claim it did *not* say they were speaking in God's name, prefaced by what boils down to, "If I recorded everything you ever said in your life, I could take a bunch of your words and make you look like a villain or a saint. Why aren't folks choosing to remember the good things we've said and done instead of focusing on the bad stuff?"

Does the act of bemoaning remembrances of things which you should not have said constitute a defense, or amount to an excuse of the petulant whining variety a child might exhibit when caught doing something he or she should not have done? "Martin and Billy did it, too...!" is irrelevant to the point entirely; One is either telling the truth, or one is lying through their teeth. As God is holy and righteous, He commits no errors. So--if errors have come from the Watchtower, God is not holding the office they claim.

It is a complete 180 degree turn from the prideful stance clearly illustrated in "Those who are convinced that The Watchtower is publishing the opinion or expression of a man should not waste time in looking at it at all... " and instead contains quotes from all over their publication that say "We have not the gift of prophecy" and "we are merely giving our surmises" and even "The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances, nor is it dogmatic." It paints the Jehovah's Witnesses as saying they've "speculated" and "committed errors."--an organization run by God Himself lets errors come from it??--and it also concludes, "Thus, the Watch Tower Society is not a false prophet, for the simple reason that it is not a prophet."

While this... let's call it *modification*, leaves the quotes I've listed from their published works, and innumerable others, out as if they were never written, it also fudges the definition of words like "prophet", and therefore, false prophet. This is not surprising, as the organization employs the art of the chameleon with abandon to make the Word of God match their doctrine.

So let's be clear.

proph-et noun
1) One who utters divinely inspired revelations.
2) One gifted with more than ordinary spiritual and moral insight.
3) One who foretells the future

A false prophet, therefore, is someone who makes the claim to be what is defined as a prophet, when in fact he or she is not.

And that the Watchtower Society claims to be prophetic gets no more explicit than this:

"Whom has God actually used as his prophet?.... Jehovah's witnesses are deeply grateful today that the plain facts show that God has been pleased to use them.... Jehovah thrust out his hand of power and touched their lips and put his words in their mouths." (Watchtower, January 15, 1959, pages 40-41)

Come on, man. How are you going to say *I* made a claim, when the Watchtower made it 51 years ago? They declare *themselves* prophets, used by God, with God's own words put into their mouths. It even states how grateful they are to be used as such. What fool is supposed to think the slew of denials in the second link are supposed to have any relevance whatsoever in the face of these declarations from the same "theocratic organization" that wrote the altered New World Translation?

There are two eight letter words which accurately sum up the second link. I will list the definition for the one that is fit for print.

ret-ro-fit (vt)
1) to furnish with new or modified parts or equipment not available or considered necessary at the time of manufacture.
2) to install (new or modified parts or equipment) in something previously manufactured or constructed.
3) to adapt to a new purpose or need : modify

Now, should a convicted criminal's sudden repeated claims, all firm denials of having ever committed acts of violence, be believed in the face of that same person's recorded evidence of unrepentant bloodshed? No. That would be foolish. Nor should the repeated claims that "We're not false prophets, because we aren't prophets" be believed in the face of the unrepentant words to the precise contrary in the defendant's own handwriting.

Amidst the excuses and deflection words are petulant questions like, "...but Billy Graham, John Wesley and Martin Luther did it, too, are you giving them the same treatment?"

Sure, they get the same treatment in my book, if they have committed the same offense. But you know something? Those men didn't try to sell me a loud, belligerent lie, only to insult my intelligence by telling me the exact opposite, as if I don't know how to read or comprehend. Those men did not then have the *audacity* to give me literature to use to teach *MY CHILDREN* their brand of poison, in an attempt to make me an accomplice in their blasphemy, and commit *their souls* to the same fate. And they didn't *dare* say to my face that I was not to fall to my knees and worship my Lord and Savior Jesus for saving my wretched soul from the death it deserves, because Jesus "is not God, and not therefore to be worshiped".

I will cry aloud and spare not my throat in the shouting at shining the light of Truth on *any* man, *any* doctrine, that exchanges the truth of God's Word for a lie and leads the sheep to the Second Death. I have exposed the very United Church of Christ denomination which weaned me while simultaneously choosing comfortable lies of immorality over inconvenient, offensive truth of God's demand of holiness and righteousness--and I am now doing it to the Satan-inspired cult that sought to devour me and mine while I was spiritually lost and outside of the salvation of the Almighty God.

A real organization in true service to God would recognize its refusal to acknowledge the truth of God and repent of its ways; not alter the Bible to suit their hubris-filled doctrine, not make excuses that others have done the same and worse, not cover their rears by fudging the truth of definitions and pointing out the failures of others, like Adam pointing at Eve with Tree of Knowledge fruit juice still running down his face. I "claim" that the Watch Tower Organization has lied for over 100 years and quote the proof from their own text, and in response I am offered links to sites which that very organization has crafted to make excuses for itself, and admit to lesser crimes.

Rather than buy the organization's own claims of innocence in the face of its own documented guilt, and pretend there is no moral hazard associated with that, I will just stick to the unbastardized Word of God and verify everything which anyone claims *before* I say "So Be It", as the Bereans did, and earnestly contend for the faith, as written in the Book of Jude.

1 comment:

  1. You might also find this useful. A study of the Jehovah's Witnesses and their erroneous translation's problems with the Greek Word proskuneo: