Expert: Andrew - 2/9/2005

Question
Yes, if you know what the doctrine would be please answer me at:
mrjbr@juno.com

Hi,
       I have some questions about Jehovah's Witness doctrine. My mother
is a Witness. I was as a youth, but drifted away years ago.
       I found a copy of "Pay Attention to Yourselves and the Flock" or
the elder's manual. On page 103 it states: "Normally, a close relative
would not be disfellowshipped for associating with a disfellowshipped
person unless there is spiritual association or an effort made to justify
or excuse the wrongful course."
       According to this, my Witness mother should be able to at least
write me, but her elders & relatives forbid her from doing so, though she
wants to.
       I promised my mother that I would explore some of my concerns,
which I have held since age 12, before I seek reinstatement.
My questions/concerns are as
follows. I sent them to Brooklyn, but did not hear back.
       Thanks!
       John
       1) Regarding the resurrection: In addition to the scriptures that
support this belief, can you please explain how this may occur? We know
that bodies decompose over time. Some bodies are cremated or otherwise
destroyed. How will resurrected ones be brought to life in a recognizable
body? If this requires a new physical form, how does this differ from
reincarnation, which I was taught was not possible? This has never seemed
logically possible to me.
       2) Regarding Armageddon and the New Order: If mostly Jehovah's
Witnesses will be the only ones spared, there will be millions killed.
How can a loving God justify killing people whose only transgression is
not being a Witness even if they are moral? Also, if so many are killed,
how will the bodies be dealt with and disposed? How will we maintain the
Earth when its resources are already diminishing? What will be done with
nuclear weapons?
       3) Regarding killing: How can the killing at Armageddon and the
killing in the Bible be justified when the 10 Commandments state "Thou
shalt not kill"? How can the murder of Jesus be a good thing when God
could have just forgiven man?
       4) If we are to follow the teachings of God, not man and Jesus
was the voice of God on Earth, why do have doctrines that he never
discussed? Homosexuality is condemned by Jehovah's Witnesses and other
Christian organizations when Jesus never discussed the subject or gave an
opinion. I am not homosexual, however I feel compelled to question this
in their behalf. Much of the scriptures I've been shown on the subject
are Hebrew Law, or the words of a man other than Jesus.
       6) The scriptures are clear that we should love one another above
all else, and that we should not judge lest we be judged. In Romans, it
says to leave the judging to God. However, by complete shunning of
someone for their sins are we not judging them? I can understand
distancing oneself from someone when his or her behavior or values are
not the same as ours, but total shunning - especially of a relative -
seems like something Christ would not do, considering that he ate with
tax collectors and prostitutes.

-------------------------
Followup To
Question -
Do you know any elders that will answer doctrinal questions via e-mail?
Answer -
Dear JB,

By "elders" I assume you mean current active Witnesses, who would naturally be proponents of Witness doctrine. I don't know any.

Witnesses are discouraged from using the Internet by their leadership, because the Internet allows a free flow of information, which can potentially undermine totalitarian control. Totalitarian religions are averse to such free flow for the same reasons that totalitarian governments are. So such proponents will be hard to find, if any.

As a former Witness, I spent decades studying Witness doctrine, so I am very familiar with it; although I am no longer a proponent. I would be happy to address your doctrinal questions, at length if consistent with my ministry, briefly otherwise.

My ministry is to disseminate information that promotes family integrity and freedom of mind.

Best wishes,
Andrew

Answer
Dear JB,

Brookly headquarters doesn't answer John and the mother is forbidden to write him because he is suspected of being an "apostate" or heretic. Their evidence for this is that he has access to the elder's manual. Rank and file Witnesses do not have access to it, as it is only available to elders and circulated among "apostates" despite the wishes of headquarters, which considers the elders manual confidential.

John's express plans to explore his concerns before repenting (as opposed to capitulating without a second thought) only reinforces their view that he is an "apostate".

Witnesses do not welcome free thinkers, although they may say otherwise. They may tolerate questions among those who are just beginning to study with them, insofar as to create the impression that 'all sincere questions have a bible answer'. But they do not tolerate challenging questions, particularly from those who have already studied with them in the past. John would fall into this latter category.

Witnesses do not teach that resurrected persons are brought back in the same body, nor necessarily even a body outwardly recognized by others as the same. Rather, they teach that a new body is re-created, and the memories of the original person are restored to that body, so that in essence, it appears from the person's own perspective that he simply fell asleep and then awoke. The premise is that the essential character of the person is embodied in his memories. The Witnesses have no concept of a metaphysical soul.

At Armageddon, the Witnesses believe that millions will be killed by God for not responding to the message Jehovah's Witnesses bring door-to-door. The theory is that God feels justified in doing this because he is now making sure that all have an opportunity to hear, by means of the Witnesses' door-to-door activity. Unresponsiveness to God, even if one is not aware the message is from God, is considered a grave enough sin to merit death. Bodies are to be disposed of by scavengers and survivors.

The Witnesses teach that, once the current "wicked system" is swept away, survivors will be taught to take care of the earth in a sustainable way, and therefore diminished natural resources is part of the mega-trend God will reverse. There is no specific teaching I am aware of on how dangerous wastes such as nuclear weapons would be dealt with by survivors after Armageddon. Witnesses generally trust that God will take care of such matters or teach them how to do so.

Witnesses never consider it acceptable for they themselves to kill. They consider it an entirely different matter for God himself to kill, and that the 10 commandments are given to men, not to God.

The murder of Jesus is only considered by Witnessed to be a "good thing" in the mainstream Christian context that he had to serve as a propitiatory sacrifice for our sins. Propitiatory has a meaning similar to "quid pro quo", or this for that. It is only good that he died so that we don't have to, according to Witness thinking.

The Witness teaching about propitiation, and God needing a trade rather than a free forgiving, is that His sense of justice is as important as his sense of forgiveness, so God marvelously came up with a way to forgive which is consistent with his sense of justice.

Witnesses have many doctrines that Jesus never discussed because they consider their organization the "visible part of God's heavenly organization", or an extension of it. They also claim that their organization is "spirit directed", although they never specifically disclose how it is so directed. This was a critical turning point in my gaining freedom from the groupthink of the Witnesses, discovering the frivolity of this claim. I had long imagined that the Governing Body, in closed session, must have some mechanism for receiving spirit direction, but there is no such mechanism, as made clear by the book, Crisis of Conscience. So the Witness doctrines on matters never discussed by Jesus are simply an excuse to exercise greater control, which is thought to be helpful to members, by keeping them on the "narrow path to life". Such high control makes no allowance for the possibility of error among the human leaders, and this is how it leads to great abuses.

You are absolutely right that the bible puts love above judgement. However, there are verses that advocate shunning, so the Witnesses feel justified in following the practice of shunning because of these verses. In theory, one takes the practical step of remaining pure by seperation without judging others in their hearts. However, in practice, there is a great deal of judging done in hearts. The mind cannot divorce itself from the actions of the body.

There is something of a dilemma here for all fundamentalist Christians, and not Witnesses alone, because Jesus did advocate shunning and dividing families due to idealogies, so on the surface, it appears that Jesus himself advocated cultish tactics. Personally, I hold this superficial appearance to be a misrepresentation of what he really meant; for if God is love, how can he act converse to love?

I hope this is helpful.

Best wishes,
Andrew