# *The Greater Issue

[ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Farkel [Keflar] on November 25, 1999 at 09:39:59 {yaNwUlwC5cjc7.1TE24IvhKqcjatLo}:

In Reply to: The Greater Issue posted by AP on November 25, 1999 at 07:56:54:

AP,

:in an attempt to initiate some sort of constructive and objective dialogue, I would like to offer a few thoughts on what I believe lies at the heart of our enforcement of certain beliefs that are not readily grounded in clear biblical commands or principles, namely, the lack of individual accountability for what we accept as truth.

I've noted that most attempts to initiate objective dialogue are met with the same responses, and that's what I'm going to do.

:Suppose Friend's suggested revision of our current blood policy, particularly the view that "accepting donated blood products for saving life in medical emergencies does not manifest disregard for God's word, including the symbol of life (Luke 10:16)," is adopted and printed in the literature.

I would pray that it is. It is notable just HOW Friend had to go about it in his presentation, though, and he fully realized he had to take the approach he did. To do as AF suggested and just plainly admit that the current blood policy is not supported in scripture and apologize is not only something I doubt the society could ever do, but something that most JWs would have a hard time accepting.

:What is it that would then make a person who previously chose to avoid the use of whole blood or its components, now decide that it is acceptable? Is it the very fact that the Society now says it is okay, or would it be the scriptural argumentation used to support the new position? Probably many would say the latter, but it is no doubt the latter only BECAUSE of the former.

Agreed.

:Now, not only does the use of another person's research have the potential of enhancing a meeting part or giving new ideas to someone else, but what seemed to go unnoticed by all those in attendance was that we are in fact making use of someone else's research every time we study the WT or other publications of the Society. Yet, to most if not all those in attendance, it was a "good point." They could not see the contradiction.
You are fully aware of JW doublethink, AP. I've also come to the conclusion that the JW leaders are also so steeped in it that they can't even see it themselves. If that is the case a lot of the so-called "lying" done in the publications is nothing more than doublethink so entrenched that even WT writers can't get past it.

:But there seems to be a growing number of persons who are simply unwilling to critically evaluate the material, and truly make their decision after a careful and prayerful consideration of the facts.

That can be attributed to a number of things 1) laziness, 2) not enough time to do it, and/or 3) the fact that the WTS discourages such research as evidenced by the KM you paraphrased.

:True, this same problem exists in Protestant and Catholic religions, which is confirmed for me every time I go out in field service, and it unquestionable is true for many on this and other discussion boards, as is evidenced by certain people's blind acceptance of bad arguments and lame excuses for out-right lies.

Some of that can be attributed to the fact that many have not seriously studied argumentation. I see just as many strawmen, red herrings, ad hominems, and false dilemmas in newspaper editorials and "news" magazines as I see on this board or even in WTS publications for that matter. Furthermore, many religions including, but certainly not limited to JWs discourage critical thinking and discussion. People go along without protest because they believe that their leaders are speaking for God. If the leaders are speaking for God, then who would dare engage in research that might lead to contradictory conclusions? It would be a waste of time!

:Are the friends truly examining those teachings they accept from the Society, which are not specifically articulated in God's Word? If not, are they not, then, letting others do the research for them?
Of course they are, but you quite aware this is nothing new! I left the JWs more than a quarter of a century ago, and grew up as a JW. In my 25 year association, I could count on one hand the people I knew that did independent research. Whether there are even fewer of these people today, I do not know, but you seem to think so. If true, then based upon my experience and yours, the number of people who dig into the Bible and other sources to test and see if what the WTS publishes is true, is startlingly small.

:I think the Society could do more to place the onus on the individual's shoulders, by not taking such a hardened position on issues that are not clear Bible teachings, or that cannot be said to clearly come under some biblical principle. Only by lessening the consequences of an individual's exercising his or her freedom concerning certain issues that are not spelled out in God's Word, can they remain consistent with the view that we should not let others 'do research for us.'

Agreed, but I'm pessimistic that it will ever happen in the near future.

:So, rather than try to get the Society to change its view on one particular item, as important as it may be (and it is important), I think it is far better to encourage them to recognize the responsibility of each person to decide for his- or herself on matters that are not unambiguously articulated in the Bible.

As Ray Franz observed, the members of the GB don't trust the R&F enough to give them such freedom. They view the flock as ignorant children who are incapable of making the right decisions in even the most minute matters. If that weren't true, there wouldn't be so many rules, regulations and policies that are clearly "not unamgibuously articulated in the Bible."

:This can be done, not by leaving the organization and condemning it on the way out and everywhere else,

Had I taken your advice, I would have still been a JW in the purges of 1981 and witnessed a major clamping down on thought and expression during those years. I would have been forced to accept the heinous new policy on disfellowshiping introduced in the September 15, 1981 WT. I would have had to suffer under pharisaical policies and would have had to face death if I had needed an organ transplant. I would have used up another 27 years of my life in service to the WTS "waiting" for these changes you are now proposing but have not yet come. So, AP, for many of us leaving was a far better choice than waiting for decades for needed changes to be made.

:but by putting our trust in God and Christ and working with the Society in creating a more Christ-like environment.

Noble words, but considering how long "God" and "Christ" have waited to effect change, one can't help but wonder just what "God" and "Christ" have to do with the JW religion.

:In the end it would save them the trouble of having to deal with charges of "control" or "micro-management," and allow them to focus on the more important tasks of preaching the good news, making God's name known, and giving to those in need, both spiritually and physically.

I'm with you, but I'm obviously very skeptical that this will happen soon.

:I think this path could not only resolve the blood issue, but all other, similar issues, both now and in the future. What do you think?

Of course, but your post has merely stated the obvious.

:NOTE: Only serious-minded replies will be considered.

So, I take it that if you don't respond, my reply is "not serious minded, eh? :)

:I realize that several persons here have an uncontrollable desire to belittle just about anything

I guess the times you've done the same thing shows that your desire to do same is "controllable?" Sorry. I just couldn't resist!

:that is presented in the light constructive criticism,

My mother taught me that NO criticism is constructive. It's a good thing I didn't listen to her.

Farkel

Follow Ups:

- **The Greater Issue ON THE MONEY 17:21:39 11/25/99 (0)
- **The Greater Issue AP 13:16:18 11/25/99 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject: **The Greater Issue

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ HOURGLASS2 OUTPOST ] [ FAQ ]