Noble Berean

Meanwhile all this discussion is going on, poor Caleb is being held
Prisoner in the confiscated Russian Bethel Branch Office by Russkies !!

That's really the crux of all the problems with the organization. Rank-and-file JWs do not have the right to question any doctrines--even with Biblical support. Only the GB can correctly interpret the Bible. Only the GB can make "refinements" in doctrine. If we have a disagreement with a doctrine, we must quietly wait with the hope that it might get changed someday.
A Governing Body taking the lead is not a bad thing. It keeps our organization...organized. But the Governing Body has no external auditor to scrutinize its ideas. The Bible should be that external auditor, but the Bible and the GB are intertwined. The Bible can't stand apart from the GB. Only the GB's interpretations of Scriptures are correct. Therefore, they can always discern the Bible in a way that supports the status quo.
I believe that's the case with the "two overlapping generations" theory. For decades, the organization said the generation was one group that saw Jesus' presence in 1914--it was apostasy to suggest otherwise. It's clear now that that idea was wrong. I guess a combination of ego and a fear of losing credibility means the GB won't let go of 1914 and the generation. So, they force the square peg in a round hole. They use weak Biblical evidence to make the old idea "work" while maintaining a sense of urgency (the second group is older now so we must be close!!). It's not about a Bible interpretation that makes the most sense anymore. It's about maintaining the facade that the org knows what it's doing and that we are still on the threshold of the new system. No doubt in a few decades (if this system persists) another "refinement" will come along that will have the same purpose (wash, rinse, repeat). If you type random numbers in a keypad it may eventually unlock, and eventually this system will end. So, if the org exists at that time of the end maybe they can say they were right to keep us on the edge--even if the evidence was incorrect. (I believe they use this justification currently in God's Kingdom Rules! paraphrasing from memory: "We were wrong on this but it kept everyone zealous at that time.")

That's really the crux of all the problems with the organization. Rank-and-file JWs do not have the right to question any doctrines--even with Biblical support. Only the GB can correctly interpret the Bible. Only the GB can make "refinements" in doctrine. If we have a disagreement with a doctrine, we must quietly wait with the hope that it might get changed someday.
A Governing Body taking the lead is not a bad thing. It keeps our organization...organized. But the Governing Body has no external auditor to scrutinize its ideas. The Bible should be that external auditor, but the Bible and the GB are intertwined. The Bible can't stand apart from the GB. Only the GB's interpretations of Scriptures are correct. Therefore, they can always discern the Bible in a way that supports the status quo.
I believe that's the case with the "two overlapping generations" theory. For decades, the organization said the generation was one group that saw Jesus' presence in 1914--it was apostasy to suggest otherwise. It's clear now that that idea was wrong. I guess a combination of ego and a fear of losing credibility means the GB won't let go of 1914 and the generation. So, they force the square peg in a round hole. They use weak Biblical evidence to make the old idea "work" while maintaining a sense of urgency (the second group is older now so we must be close!!). It's not about a Bible interpretation that makes the most sense anymore. It's about maintaining the facade that the org knows what it's doing and that we are still on the threshold of the new system. No doubt in a few decades (if this system persists) another "refinement" will come along that will have the same purpose (wash, rinse, repeat). If you type random numbers in a keypad it may eventually unlock, and eventually this system will end. So, if the org exists at that time of the end maybe they can say they were right to keep us on the edge--even if the evidence was incorrect. (I believe they use this justification currently in God's Kingdom Rules! paraphrasing from memory: "We were wrong on this but it kept everyone zealous at that time.")

Good thing Rutherford didn't have a sense of humor.

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.  
 
 

Nice idea, but how do you have one without the other? If you shun, it's always going to be emotional blackmail.

Please if you can @Albert Michelson, limit the amount of images which say basically the same thing, as these tend to clog up the thread. Thanks

What is happening to my eyes?

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.  
 
 

One cannot claim that the organization doesn't coerce people into remaining members when the are literally being blackmailed with the threat of family estrangement if they leave.
To add context this is the elders letter instructing them to disfellowshipped someone who has apostate beliefs.  Mind you this says nothing as to whether or not they are promoting their beliefs just that they have believed that differ from what this aside he says they need to accept.
however even if they were what's wrong with that? Don't JWs apostasize from their religious all the time? Why is it ok for  individuals to leave their respective religions, join the WT organization,  and speak out against their former religion but if someone who was previously a witness did this very thing then they deserve to be punished?

Perhaps it is as you say about separation of powers, but I suspect you are overthinking this. It is better if you do not.
Search the scriptures for how many indicate submission to a human authority is a good thing. Contrast that with how many indicate congregational authority is a thing that we can accept or reject as we see fit.. 
I think you will find the first vastly outnumber the second.
Of course, the exact methods will always be arguable. So if there is something you absolutely cannot abide, find the faith that is doing a preaching work comparable to Witnesses and go there. Otherwise, remain here - support what you can, sit out what you cannot. Look for what is good, cut slack for what seems lacking, and allow yourself to be taught by Jehovah.

Call me a skeptic, but how can Jehovah God honestly expect JWs to put GB and Moses on the same level?
Moses was a prophet, the GB is not. God spoke to Moses and his face glowed like the sun. God has never spoken to the GB. God used Moses to perform miracles. He parted the Red Sea with God's holy spirit. He healed the sick with the bronze serpent. There was a cloud pillar representing God that followed the Jews in the wilderness. Their souls never wore out. God left no doubt in the mind of the Jews that Moses was divinely appointed and had authority. Dissent was ridiculous. What do we have? The GB has a history of missteps in direction, yet they continue to expect unquestioned loyalty.

How so? It may be an extreme example, but the point remains that these Kings were appointed by God, yet God punished those who followed the King into false worship. So, this idea that we should follow no matter what seems to conflict with the example of ancient Israel. Apparently God does expect us to exercise our own independent conscience at times and not just be unified, unified, unified.
Sorry I am a newbie here.

Hi again. You really didn't address my comments about the Israelite Kings who disobeyed God. Doesn't that indicate that just b/c someone is taking the lead over God's people that does not mean they are doing the correct things? Jehovah God did punish his chosen nation...he didn't spare the followers b/c of the corruption of the leaders. So, why today should we follow without question? Will God care on his judgment day that we just followed along or will he care that we did right according to our own conscience? (And I'm not suggesting the GB is on par with those wicked kings, but I'm just trying to make a point.)
You brought a good point...what Biblical reference point do we use to know how to treat the GB? You suggest Moses is the right comparison, but what about the first century Christian Governing Body as a comparison? Wasn't the apostle Peter (one of the men taking the lead) openly chastised for avoiding the uncircumcised gentiles? Can't imagine any open criticism of the GB today. There's very little info about this first-century group...in fact there's 1 recorded event of the GB intervening on the matter of circumcision.
And let me be clear what I'm not saying. I am not suggesting anyone split off or take on the GB's role. I feel that it's appropriate for a GB to exist in God's organization. But is it appropriate that all JWs be in 100% agreement with the GB's direction under threat of shunning? Is their scriptural basis for that kind of authority on scriptural interpretation? What's most important: unity or personal scriptural truth? If your Bible based conscience does not harmonize with the group does that make you an "apostate"?

Ummmm...I hate to sound critical, but I will ask the obvious question, what about those teachings that weren't actually true and we taught them as truth, until we found out otherwise. Are you hereby saying Jesus was lying?

I don't quite understand what you mean by this
I agree with you
I don't really see that when Jesus told people to drink his blood and eat his flesh is an example of something that wasn't true but later was. This is just a case of interpretation. The people interpreted that to be taken literally (false premise), but Jesus meant it symbolically (correct understanding). Using your example of drinking Jesus' blood and eating his flesh, it's like if we had taught that this was literal, but later, we correctly discerned it was symbolic. According to your argument Jesus would be guiding this thinking when we thought it literal?
The thing is, these bumps in the road are our own making. We create the bumps.They are nothing to do with Jesus. The changes made by the Chariot are because WE had got thing wrong. If we had got them right the Chariot wouldn't need to change at all. It shows Jesus' and Jehovah's purpose does not change but sometimes has to take a detour to go around a wrong teaching (the bump) and get back on the correct path (when we finally get it right). Who knows, the chariot might be taking a big detour right now around 1914. It had to take that detour several times because of a wrong date. It took one around the 1925 teaching until 1925 passed, and the Chariot could get back on track....

How so? It may be an extreme example, but the point remains that these Kings were appointed by God, yet God punished those who followed the King into false worship. So, this idea that we should follow no matter what seems to conflict with the example of ancient Israel. Apparently God does expect us to exercise our own independent conscience at times and not just be unified, unified, unified.
Sorry I am a newbie here.

Hi @bruceq with the greatest respect...is the attitude of always accepting everything the organization says in harmony with the Bible? Didn't the leaders of God's chosen nation of Israel do bad things? Were the Israelites given a free pass when their leaders gave incorrect direction? Or were they punished along with the leaders? Isn't there evidence that God expects individuals to discern what's right/wrong on their own and not just follow along with the group?

Call me a skeptic, but how can Jehovah God honestly expect JWs to put GB and Moses on the same level?
Moses was a prophet, the GB is not. God spoke to Moses and his face glowed like the sun. God has never spoken to the GB. God used Moses to perform miracles. He parted the Red Sea with God's holy spirit. He healed the sick with the bronze serpent. There was a cloud pillar representing God that followed the Jews in the wilderness. Their souls never wore out. God left no doubt in the mind of the Jews that Moses was divinely appointed and had authority. Dissent was ridiculous. What do we have? The GB has a history of missteps in direction, yet they continue to expect unquestioned loyalty.

Hi @bruceq with the greatest respect...is the attitude of always accepting everything the organization says in harmony with the Bible? Didn't the leaders of God's chosen nation of Israel do bad things? Were the Israelites given a free pass when their leaders gave incorrect direction? Or were they punished along with the leaders? Isn't there evidence that God expects individuals to discern what's right/wrong on their own and not just follow along with the group?

Hi @bruceq with the greatest respect...is the attitude of always accepting everything the organization says in harmony with the Bible? Didn't the leaders of God's chosen nation of Israel do bad things? Were the Israelites given a free pass when their leaders gave incorrect direction? Or were they punished along with the leaders? Isn't there evidence that God expects individuals to discern what's right/wrong on their own and not just follow along with the group?

I'm going to venture he's referring to 1914 being the start of The Great War (WWI)?

Actually, Acts 1:7 says there is something wrong with us banging on about the generation. It says it's none of our concern. It's not in our domain. Knowledge of the times and seasons does not belong to us. It belongs to the Father alone. Anyone who tries is overstepping their authority.
(Acts 1:7) . . .” 7 He said to them: “It does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction [NWT fn: "authority"].
This is why Paul could say that we don't need anything written to us about chronology:
(1 Thessalonians 5:1) Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you.

Like when they go off topic a bit. The ladies seem to stick to the hard work as in their daily lives, while the gentlemen, sometimes like rambunctious kids in older bodies, veer off to speak of other interesting things like musicals, poems, etc., to rest their brains from the hard grind of the topic.  They know how to relax, even if it means shooting at another, using strange language (TTH, JTR) but JWI always uses good language and puts in a few puns for fun in between.  Men always know how to have some fun.

recently changed to: