New Light: A Divine, Demonic, or Human Interpretation of Scripture?Ken Raines
Their light frequently gets replaced by new light. What was light or truth to them for decades can overnight be replaced with different light. The previous position is then called "old light"! Doesn't this indicate that what they publish as "light from God" is not really light or truth from God after all, but merely their private interpretations of Scripture? How much confidence then should one place in the Society's position on any issue given their ever changing interpretations of Scripture? How can they claim on the one hand that what they publish is from God and is His interpretation of Scripture and not a private interpretation, and on the other hand change God's interpretation? Meat in Due SeasonThe Watchtower Society from the beginning of its history has claimed that they are publishing "meat" or "food" in due season or at the "right time." They claim that this food, which usually contains interpretations of Scripture, comes not from them, but from God. They have said:
This food from God is the "proper explanation of the Scriptures."2 It has been referred to as "new light," "flashes of lightning," and so on. They have said this light comes from Jehovah and is therefore Jehovah's light.3 God's ChannelOne of the Watchtower Society's most frequent ways to describe this process by which they receive and then publish "Jehovah's light" on the Bible is to say they are God's "channel of communication." Rutherford went so far as to claim that the "remnant" of Jehovah's Witnesses were in direct communication with Jehovah.4 Today they claim that they are God's "channel of communication" in that Jehovah God speaks or communicates to and through the anointed class of Jehovah's Witnesses.5 This is why they made the famous comment that Jehovah's Witnesses should "respond" to their direction as they would "the voice of God."6 Claiming to be God's "channel of communication" through which He speaks is in reality claiming to be God's mouthpiece or prophet. The most famous example of their directly claiming to be God's prophet is from the April 1, 1972 Watchtower, p. 197. After making this claim the article went on to say:
"Of course" what the record shows is a history of false prophecy by this "prophet." The latest example being the so-called "generation of 1914" which was supposed to live to see Armageddon. Jehovah's Witnesses and the BibleGiven these claims one can understand why they hold the position they do with regard to the Bible. The Society has taught for most of their history now that no one can properly understand the Bible without their literature. They have frequently made statements like this:
Since they believe the "organization" alone has the holy spirit to guide them into the truth, they teach that the Bible is a sealed book to all but them:
In fact they have said several times that the Bible belongs to them, the "organization," not to the individual Jehovah's Witness or anyone else.10 Private InterpretationsSince they teach one can not understand the Bible properly without the Watchtower Society's literature, they have frequently admonished individuals who are not of the "anointed" class who may try to understand the Bible on their own. They tell all "sheep-like" people not to "lean on their own understanding" or come up with what they call a "private interpretation" of Scripture. They are told to strictly adhere to whatever the Society puts forth as the latest "proper explanation" of Scripture, even if the individual firmly believes it is wrong.11 No Human OpinionsWhy does the Watchtower Society object to individuals proclaiming "opinions" or "private interpretations" of Scripture? Are their opinions somehow better than all others? No. They have said, at least from about 1928 to 1958 that they didn't publish any human opinion! For example, Rutherford said this about the Watchtower:
This belief was continued until 1958 at least where they claimed:
Of course, the only ones who have this "gift" of understanding the Bible are the leaders of the Jehovah's Witnesses. Jehovah's InterpretationA major point to consider in looking at their old position on the "sheep and the goats" and "the generation of 1914," is the Society claimed to publish Jehovah's interpretation of Scripture, not human interpretations when they developed these doctrines. They claimed that no one could interpret the Bible. In fact, they said they din't interpret the Bible. Yet their publications are full of Biblical interpretations. Where do they get them then? Here is how they answered this from the late 1920s until the 1950s:
They claimed that they published Jehovah's interpretation of Scripture! A long article that addressed the issue of understanding and interpreting the Bible was published in the Watchtower of July 1, 1943. They said on page 202 that "no individual or religious organization" is the interpreter of God's Word." Instead, they said, "The Supreme Court" [Jehovah God] was the only interpreter of the Bible. They said Jehovah has always used a "channel for making known his truth and interpretations." On the next page they identified the modern-day "channel" for God's interpretation of Scripture as being the "faithful and wise servant," the leaders of Jehovah's Witnesses. "However," they said:
These were not isolated or off-handed remarks, but was their officially stated position for decades. Here are two more examples:
These claims by the Society was best summarized in the following comments from a 1952 Watchtower:
In short, Jehovah God reveals the "divine" interpretation of Scripture to the remnant of Jehovah's Witnesses and then these merely print God's interpretation as His "channel of communication." "Speculations by men" before the "due time" for Jehovah's interpretation given through His "channel" will never bring to light the "true meaning of Prophecy." Angels of [New] LightRutherford said that everything he wrote was God's interpretation of Scripture and prophecy given to him by angels who transmitted the same into his mind:
In Vindication I Rutherford said about "cherubim, seraphim and angels" that "the Lord uses these" to put into their hands the "fiery message from his Word" the Bible "and which is to be used as directed" by these angels. Everything they published from "booklets, magazines, and books" were thus "from the Lord Jehovah" and not men and were "provided by him through Jesus Christ and his underofficers," the angels! Thus, "The interpretation of prophecy, therefore, is not from man but is from the Lord", he said.21 The separation of the "sheep and the goats" and the "generation of 1914" doctrines were developed by Rutherford through such angelic channeling. These doctrines were never presented to my knowledge as the mere "speculations" of men. InspirationDispite the fact that the Society has never claimed to be "inspired" by God, the above documented claims are essentially the same as their definitions through the years of the word "inspiration." For example, in 1964 they said the following about the inspired writing of the Bible:
The Society has never, to my knowledge, claimed to receive "progressive revelations" by means of dreams, visions, or "word-for-word inspiration." They have however claimed to receive supernatural revelations from God given to them through Jesus Christ and the angels, all by means of the holy spirit by the "regulation of one's thoughts." This article on progressive revelations also makes the claim that they are the modern channel for new, progressive revelations from God:
And yet they claim that they are not inspired! For example, Rutherford made the claim that what he wrote came from angels who transmitted Biblical interpretations into his mind supernaturally, yet also claimed that this did not mean that the Watchtower publications he penned were "inspired":
Isn't this a "distinction without a difference"? Is not this inspiration even by the Watchtower's definition? They have defined "inspiration" as "The quality or state of being moved by or produced under the direction of a spirit from a superhuman source."25 I fail to see the difference. Rutherford claimed his writings were "produced under the direction of a spirit from a superhuman source." At least, that's what he claimed. SpeculationsDespite these claimed sources for their literature, they now claim that their generation of 1914 prophecy and doctrine was simply their "speculations":
They never said this while they were doing this "speculating"! This is their current approach to explaining their false prophecies -- it was simply their "speculations" and "mistakes." The problem with this is they are thereby implying that what they publish is not "food" from Jehovah God as they previously claimed, it is simply their human, fallible, mistake-prone OPINION. If this is true, why can't everyone form their own opinion and come to their own conclusions? If they want to be consistent in this, they must also drop their claims to spiritual authority in understanding the Bible. This is the problem with their interpretations being wrong while making grandiose claims. They can't have it both ways. If the Watchtower Society's Biblical interpretations did come from spiritual beings like angels as they claimed, since the interpretations were wrong the angels were lying spirits by definition, thus they were under demonic direction. If they say it was simply their "mistake" or "speculation," they are repudiating their previous claims of receiving "new light" from God. They are admitting, in effect, that they were simply publishing their (fleshly) interpretation all the while claiming to be specially enlightened by God! In either case, why should any "thinking person" pay attention to what they say anymore? As Rutherford said:
Notes1 The Watchtower, August 1, 1950, p. 231, §17. See also, The Watchtower, June 1, 1943, p. 166. 2 The Harp of God, 1921, p. 237. 1928 and later editions do not have this statement in them. 3 1928 Yearbook of the International Bible Students, Daily Texts and Comments, May 14. Emphasis in original. See further, 1943 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses, Daily Texts and Comments, August 1. They still teach this doctrine today. See for example, The Watchtower, May 15, 1987, p. 31. 4 The Watchtower, September 1, 1930, p. 263, §23. 5 Informant, January, 1956, p. 1; The Watchtower, April 1, 1988, p. 31. 6 The Watchtower, June 15, 1957, p. 370, §6, 7. 7 The Watchtower, August 15, 1952, p. 501, §15. 8 The Watchtower, July 1, 1973, p. 402, §4. 9 The Watchtower, February 15, 1981, pp. 17, 19. See also, The Watchtower, December 1, 1990, p. 19, §13. 10 The Watchtower, October 1, 1967, p. 587, §9. 11 The Watchtower, February 1, 1952, pp. 79-80, §11-12. 12 The Watchtower, November 1, 1931, p. 327. See further, Reconciliation, 1928, p. 6; Government, 1928, p. 5; The Watchtower, August 1, 1940, p. 230, §27. 13 The Watchtower, July 1, 1958, p. 406, §24. 14 Awake!, October 22, 1947, p. 24. 15 The Watchtower, February 1, 1952, p. 79, §10; 1953 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses, Daily Texts and Comments, November 9. 16 The Watchtower, July 1, 1943, p. 203, §35-36. See also, 1944 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses, Daily Texts and Comments, December 3. 17 The Watchtower, January 1, 1943, p. 9. 18 The Watchtower, July 15, 1950, p. 214, §8. 19 The Watchtower, April 15, 1952, p. 253, §19; 1953 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses, Daily Texts and Comments, Wednesday, March 25. 20 J. F. Rutherford, Preparation, 1933, p. 64; The Watchtower, August 15, 1933, pp. 247-248; The Watchtower, September 15, 1938, p. 286. 21 J. F. Rutherford, Vindication I, 1931, p. 120; The Watchtower, May 1, 1938, p. 143. 22 The Watchtower, June 15, 1964, p. 363, §13. 23 Ibid., p. 365, §20, 22. 24 J. F. Rutherford, Riches, 1936, p. 316. 25 Insight on the Scriptures, 1988, Vol. 1, p. 1202. 26 The Watchtower, November 1, 1995, p. 17, §6, p. 19, §8. 27 The Watchtower, January 1, 1942, p. 5, §9. This is my wife's favorite quote by the Society. She believes it is true and this is why she doesn't "waste any time" reading The Watchtower. I however do. The reason is not that I believe it contains Jehovah's interpretation of Scripture, but is strictly academic -- I love to research the stuff, boring as it is at times to read.
Index ·
Portuguese ·
Copyright © 1998 Ken Raines ·
https://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/0140.html
|