Are Jehovah's Witnesses Extremists?

From the May 1 Watchtower, complaining about those poor misunderstood Witnesses in Russia, who are (gasp!) actually accused of being extremists! Can you imagine!

So, the magazine presents a list of publications the Russians labeled as extremist - and I took a look.....

Mankind's Search for God - read pg 369 and beyond for classic Watchtowerism: if you are any other religion, you are part of Satan's system and God will kill you. Clear enough?

What Does The Bible Really Teach? - outright deception and fraud. This book urges you to get baptized but where does it explain the threat of disfellowshipping? - perhaps runing your family? Firmly asserts the deadly blood transfusion issue and more labeling of everybody else as 'false religion'. Not extremist? Really?

Questions Young People Ask - So, the biggest fear here is drugs? or pregnancy? or crime? No, it's masturbation, with TWO CHAPTERS DEVOTED TO THE SUBJECT! Ask yourself, isn't there something sick and twisted about a bunch of old men being obsessed with a private bathroom function by young pubescent people? Over and above other serious priorities? Disgusting...

So, Jehovah's Witnesses are not extremists. I guess they have to proclaim that rather loudly because ordinary people might not come to that conclusion without a lot of help.

Testimony From A Former Jehovah's Witness

I have 2 issues with the liars who call themselves the governing body, due to things that they led me to believe.

First, the idea that a 15 year old should get baptized. My father was a career Marine. There were a lot of things that he wanted to do with me/for me, but of course as soon as I got baptized I wanted to have nothing to do with any of it. My father and I reconnected about twenty years later and my father told me that my getting baptized was the only time in his life that he cried. My father had been through extremely trying circumstances in Vietnam, he did two tours there, lost his entire company on one tour. If I had taken a more balanced view of life there is no reason why I should have limited my involvement with my father at the age of 15, the way the WTBTS instructed (they deny this but they are liars) me to do. For example, I remember one year I refused to put up the Christmas tree because of the lies that the WTBTS teaches.

Second, the commandment from the WTBTS that we should not go to college. I love learning, I love reading, I can pick up new ideas and new skills pretty quickly. And I did manual labor most of my early adult life. AAAARRRRRGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHH And for what? Of course they claim in their literature that they never said this. LIARS. They said this at EVERY assembly. And anytime I asked an elder for advice on this, the advice was always the same.

I graduated from high school at the top of my class at the age of 16. I could have had a Ph. D. by the age of 19 or 20. I could have easily gotten scholarships.

Instead I spent all of my youth going to five meetings a week and putting in field service time and working 12 hours a day 6 days a week at construction work because I had no education.

Oh, and the worse part was whenever a "Brother" would hire me. No overtime, no benefits of any kind, lower wages than normal for the same job, the Brother constantly telling me how lucky I was to be working for a "Brother". Did you ever hear about that all Witness company named Trimline? Oh my goodness those liars were evil. I worked for a "brother" for that stupid company. They call you a "subcontractor" so they don't have to pay you any overtime, or any benefits, or matching social security, or unemployment. I worked for them for 3 years. Then I saw just how brotherly these liars are. I got very sick and almost died. I had acute pancreatitis and it was misdiagnosed for over one month. Pancreatitis makes you want to die the pain is so bad. I spent a little over 3 months either in bed or in the hospital. The "Brothers" never came to see me once. When I was well enough to go back to work I went to the Trimline office and the two "Brothers" that ran the place told me that no one had been calling on my accounts while I was ill. Which meant that I would have had to start over again. I was so upset because I knew that these two brothers spent all of their time fooling around and they could have easily covered my accounts while I was ill. And their attitude when I brought this up was "well, you should have thought about that before you took all that time off". I became so angry that I unloaded all of their Trimline crap out of my truck and I never spoke to either of these "Brothers" again. I also made up my mind that I would never work for a Jehovah's Witness again.

So, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society destroyed my relationship with my family and made it so that I had no education which forced me to work at manual labor for years, while I have a very acute mind and should be doing more intellectual work. I only started doing intellectual work at the age of 35.

I got to know some of those 'Christains' who keep to themselves and do home schooling, when I lived in rural Virginia. I think they were Mennonites. They all built their own homes, by hand. They were all self employed. I was talking to one family and I asked them how did they learn such useful skills since they don't go to public school or college. They looked at me very funny and said "the elders teach us". So, here are people who have the same "don't go to college" beliefs but they teach you very high paying trades that are in demand so that you can support yourself. Do you know ANYONE who is a JW elder who has high skills and who could teach someone else? Not that they would. I can't think of anyone like that.

So, if you are going to tell young people that they cannot learn a trade from "Satan's world", then I think that you take on the responsibility of teaching them several trades yourself. And the WTBTS feels ZERO obligation to do this. They want all their members to be janitors so that they can all pioneer.

I think the people who write the literature are either insane or pathological.

Simple Questions For Jehovah's Witnesses

If there has always been a faithful and discreet slave on the earth, why didn't Charles Russell just join them?

Why did he go to all the trouble of establishing the Watchtower Society??

What Sort of Man Was Judge Rutherford?

No one really expects 'perfection' of their fellow humans, even of those in high station. Our past President, Bill Clinton certainly demonstrated that men in high station can and do give into acts that are not accepted by the public at large. Likewise, I doubt anyone expects that Joseph Rutherford would be perfect, but we would expect that as a human, he had his ways.
What about "True" Spiritual Leaders?: The question that needs to be asked is, 'Can we expect something more from a man or woman who is called, chosen, appointed, selected, anointed, and used by God as a contemporary Prophet to lead His people?' If such a man in high station, or an organization who has these men at their helm, and claiming to 'keep their organization clean', holding to high and 'lofty' standards, and being God's 'Channel of Truth' for all mankind in these 'Last Days' of a 'wicked' system, then are we not to expect that these men are in someway blessed, and guarded from bringing reproach on God, and that God is careful to select the 'creme de la creme' of His people to represent His Kingdom interests here on earth? A representation that is said to be the 'sole source of truth and enlightment from God' for the entire planet?

What kind of man, therefore, was this Judge Joseph F. Rutherford?: He was known to "... use vulgar language, and sufferred from alcoholism, ..." - Apocalypse Delayed, P.48, M. James Penton.

Rutherford was once accused of attending a 'burlesque' show (a type of glorified nudie bar) with fellow Elders, a young Bible Student woman, on the evening of the Memorial celebration. - ibid.

"On 27 April 1926 George H. Fisher wrote a letter to W. Nieman of Magdeburg, Germany accusing Rutherford of attending Al Jolson's Winter Garden Theater to see the Paris Edition of the then notorious show 'Artists and Models.' ... Rutherford's lame answer to Fisher's charge was that he was too busy in the Lord's work to be bothered with replying to such criticism, and anyway, had never seen Al Jolson in his life and did not know what he looked like." ibid, P.318, Note 4. Also see The Golden Age (4 May 1927), 505, 506)

Did not know what Al Jolson looked like? Then, if that is true, I don't know what Elvis Presley or the Beatles looked like either. Come on! In 1927 Al Jolson was the biggest thing since Peanut Butter!

Who was George H. Fisher? He was a close trusted Rutherford selection to be on the Board of Directors. Fisher was among the four selected to replace the four Directors that Rutherford had earlier removed. So, George H. Fisher was not one of those fallen 'evil slave', but specially chosen by Rutherford to serve alongside him in directing the Lord's work. Fisher was effectively the equivalent of a member of the GB today.

What did Fisher have to make his case?: George Fisher wanted to take Ruthrford before the Bible Student 'ecclesia' for discipline, and he documented this in the above referenced letter, and had the necessary witnesses to do so. ibid, P.318.

There you have it! Rutherford did not deny being at the Burlesque show (again, a type of glorified nudie bar). He did not bring forth an alibi or witnesses to the contrary. He did not submit to 'Theocratic Procedure' in harmony with the Bible, answering to and be confronted by multiple witnesses to the same act. He did not submit to the legitimate concerns of a fellow Director (GB Member) No, Joey Boozy, Cigar-smokin Ratherflawed was tooooooooo busy in the Looooorddddd's work to respond.

What Happened Regarding Blood Doctrine in 1945

Many commentators have cited 1945 as the date Watchtower announced its religious position against blood transfusion. That assertion is wrong. More importantly commentators often miss the import of what Watchtower did publish in 1945 regarding blood transfusion as it relates to belief held by the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

1. It was first in 1944 that Watchtower articulated a position against blood transfusion. This presentation we find in the following statement[1]:
See The Watchtower, December 1, 1944 p. 362

2. The oft cited 1945 Watchtower presentation was a response to objection from the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses about what Watchtower had published in 1944, which is a very important fact that should not be overlooked because of its significance then and now. This objection we find in the following statement[2]:
See The Watchtower, July 1, 1945 p. 199.

1945 marked the year in which the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses began objecting to Watchtower’s teaching that it is wrong to accept blood transfusion. Despite decades of Watchtower teaching otherwise and finally imposing its religious view under pain of its organized communal shunning program, things have not changed.

To this day the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses has not wholly accepted Watchtower’s doctrinal position opposing blood transfusion as wrong, and to this day individuals in the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses voice their discontent with the doctrine, See The Watchtower, March 1, 1950 pp 79-80,The Watchtower, May 1, 1950 pp 143-144,The Watchtower, May 15, 1950 pp 158-159.

Lack of support for Watchtower’s blood taboo among Jehovah’s Witnesses is observed by the Watchtower organization and medical researchers who consistently find a significant minority that is, despite the dire social consequence for accepting blood transfusion, willing to and does accept blood transfusion.

● Watchtower admits this observation by testifying that Witness have accepted blood transfusion despite the potential consequence of being disfellowshipped. See The Watchtower, October 15, 1987 p. 14. Secular news sources have also recorded this.

● Medical researchers have shared their observations based on review of records and direct surveys, which in both instances consistently finds a 10-12% minority that holds a view contrary to Watchtower’s doctrine. See Larry J. Findley, MD and Paul M. Redstone, MD, Blood Transfusion in Adult Jehovah’s Witnesses A Case Study of One Congregation, Arch Intern Med, March 1982; Vol. 142 pp. 606-607, Kaaron Benson, Special Article: Management of the Jehovah's Witness Oncology Patient, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute Cancer Control Journal, Vol. 2, No. 6, November/December 1995, Cynthia Gyamfi, MD and Richard L. Berkowitz, MD, Responses by Pregnant Jehovah’s Witnesses on Health Care Proxies, Obstet and Gynecol Vol. 104, No. 3, September 2004 pp 541-544.

● Internal Watchtower documents also demonstrate that the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses has never embraced Watchtower’s blood taboo as Watchtower would have it embraced. See: Blood — How Resolute?

So what happened at Watchtower in 1945?

1945 witnessed the beginning of Watchtower's now 55 year effort to force a doctrine onto the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Watchtower began teaching its blood transfusion taboo in 1944.[1] When simply teaching it did not work, Watchtower began imposing its teaching under pain of disfellowshipping, which enforcement technique remains to this day under the term “disassociation”.

In 1945: Watchtower decided to force a teaching onto the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses whether it wanted to accept it or not. That decision is what happened at Watchtower in 1945.

In 1945: the community of Jehovah's Witnesses began objecting to this teaching by Watchtower, and have persisted in that objecting as best they could under threat of Watchtower’s harsh shunning policy. This resistance is what happened in 1945, and it persists.

Only when Watchtower ceases its policy to excommunicate Jehovah’s Witnesses for conscientiously breaching its blood doctrine will a clear picture emerge to answer whether a majority of Jehovah’s Witnesses accept or reject Watchtower’s blood doctrine.

April 15, 2011 Discourages Internet At Home

The subheading is "Guard Your heart by exercising self-control. On page 27 paragraph 17 it says "One way a person could wonder into the foolish course of the "young man in want of heart" is by aimlessly flipping though television channels or surfing the Internet. Whether intentionally or not, he might chance upon sexually stimulating scenes. He could gradually develop the unclean habit of viewing pornography, with devastating consequences to his conscience and his relations with God. It could involve his very life."

It than says in paragraph 18 "Of course, we can and should exercise self-control by taking immediate action if we are confronted with a provocative image. But how much better if we avoid the situation in the first place. Setting appropriate safeguards and adhering to them involve the exercise of self-control.

Here is where it gets strange and bizarre (at least to me it does.) It goes on to say "For example, keeping the computer in an open area can serve as a protection. Some find it best to use the computer or watch television only when other are present. Other have decided not to have access to the Internet."

They are not talking about children here they are talking about adult members of the religion and having the computer in the open and not watching TV by yourself because you might not be able to resist temptation? They have to tell adults this? I was thinking who is in this religion that is so out of control? If adult member of this religion have to have this spelled out to them then Jehovah help us. No wonder there is such a problem with child molesters in the halls.

Does Jehovah thinks that his people are so stupid, so foolish, so weak that they cannot control themselves? The internet is an integral part of life today and not having access to it is simply ridiculous. The entire article was incredibly insulting.

Is There Any Evidence That It Is The Truth?

When Christ inspected’ the faithful and discreet slave’ in 1918, he found those anointed ones on earth (Joseph Rutherford and his associates) to be faithful in providing spiritual ‘food at the proper time.’ Hence, Jesus was pleased thereafter to appoint them ‘over all his belongings.’ (Read Matthew 24:45-47) Page 24 of the January 15, 2008 Watchtower
First question everyone interested in, or associated with, the religious order known as Jehovah’s Witnesses should ask:

What was it about the “food” (ie. publications and content therein) that Jesus judged it to be “spiritual” and “at the proper time”? Clue: being able to read and evaluate these publications, and content therein, will help you answer this question.

Second question everyone interested in, or associated with, the religious order known as Jehovah’s Witnesses should ask:

Where is the evidence that Christ made any inspection at any of any kind in 1918 (or any other year, for that matter)?

Could it be, perhaps, that the religious order known as Jehovah’s Witnesses just is like any other man-made religion making grand claims of being the ultimate truth and the only way to God?