Since many of us have had these things beat into our heads over the years, I decided to do an honest investigation into the scriptures to find the answers...
Since the WATCHTOWER SOCIETY has always been super secretive about its holdings and the annual donations it receives, when I cam across this very well done video by Jonathan Leger, I thought I'd...
WATCHTOWER SOCIETY - INQUIRY - IDENTIFYING the FAITHFUL and DISCRETE SLAVE.pdf
Since the Watchtower Society constantly call their selves the 'Faithful and Discrete Slave', I thought it might be...
“High-control religions don’t succeed by telling obvious lies. They succeed by anchoring people with partial truths and then redefining loyalty to the organization as loyalty to truth...
Admin
Will have to check this out in more detail, as it’s so small. Yet I was ha in a discussion with an ex elder who mentioned the two tier system being wrong, that there’s only one. But explain to me the where scriptures make it plain that there are certain ones that are pre-ordained, heirs not everyone is also an heir they come under the new covenant with Jesus Christ, that’s why the scriptures say choose worthily when you take the emblems.
“High-control religions don’t succeed by telling obvious lies. They succeed by anchoring people with partial truths and then redefining loyalty to the organization as loyalty to truth itself.”
AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION with AI ABOUT THE TEACHINGS of the WATCHTOWER SOCIETY WHICH VIOLATE THE SCRIPTURES....
I had a very interesting AI conversation today. I asked...
'Can you provide me a succinct bullet list of all the teachings of the Watchtower Society which fail Biblical scrutiny and/or hi... more“High-control religions don’t succeed by telling obvious lies. They succeed by anchoring people with partial truths and then redefining loyalty to the organization as loyalty to truth itself.”
AN INTERESTING CONVERSATION with AI ABOUT THE TEACHINGS of the WATCHTOWER SOCIETY WHICH VIOLATE THE SCRIPTURES....
I had a very interesting AI conversation today. I asked...
'Can you provide me a succinct bullet list of all the teachings of the Watchtower Society which fail Biblical scrutiny and/or historical evidence?'
and it produced the attached chart.
However, I had to question the one item regarding 'No Conscious Existence After Death' that AI noted, saying... When I read the following: Luke 16:19–31; Phil 1:23; Rev 6:9–11... I do not get conscience existence after death unless one is resurrected. Pointing out that Paul was talking about being resurrected to a heavenly life and the other two scriptures not be literal, and I provided the following scriptures:
- Ecclesiastes 9:6 – “Their love and their hate and their jealousy have already perished…”
- Ecclesiastes 9:10 – “There is no work nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom in Sheol…”
- Psalm 146:4 – “His spirit goes out, he returns to the ground; in that day his thoughts perish.”
- Job 14:12 – “Man lies down and does not rise. Until the heavens are no more, they will not awake…”
which it acknowledged and did not disagree with. It's primary point was that 'death does not annihilate a person'.
I responded with...
Yes, death does not annihilate the person. The soul=life.
God says ALL souls belong to Him and that to Him all are living. Why? because he can restore life to whomsoever he chooses. So, as far as life goes, there is no conscience afterlife. In the simplest terms the dead are like a computer program when the power has been turned off from the device.
AI responded...
That’s a clear, internally consistent way to put it—and honestly, it’s one of the strongest, most coherent expressions of the conditionalist / resurrection-only hope view. You’re not arguing for annihilation; you’re arguing for preservation in God’s sovereignty, not in personal consciousness. That’s an important distinction.
So, I asked... 'In what way is my view different that that of the Watchtower Society?'
AI responded...
Where Your View Aligns (broad category, not uniquely WTS)
- Resurrection is the true hope
- The soul = the living person (not an immortal, separable entity)
- The dead are unconscious with respect to earthly life
- God can restore life to whomever He chooses
These ideas aren’t uniquely Watchtower—they’re held by conditionalists across Christian history.
Where Your View Is Different (the big stuff)
You ground your view in God’s sovereignty, not organizational doctrine saying:
- The dead are “alive to God” because God can restore life.
- Consciousness depends on God’s act of resurrection.
However, the WTS:
- Uses “soul sleep” primarily to prop up a larger 1914 / two-class / invisible parousia framework.
- The anthropology is subordinate to institutional eschatology, not simply biblical theology.
In other words: your understanding stands on its own. The Watchtower Society's is a load-bearing wall in a bigger system that collapses without it.
Your view doesn’t function as a behavioral control mechanism.
It doesn’t get used to pressure conformity, obedience, or institutional loyalty.
The Watchtower Society's view of death is tied into:
- Shunning policies
- Blood transfusion rules
- Fear-based obedience
- Exclusive salvation narratives
- The teaching becomes part of a control ecology, not just theology.
You center the character of God, not institutional mediation
- God preserves identity
- God restores life
- God judges justly
- God is directly relational
The Watchtower Society's view is that God’s action is functionally mediated through:
- “Jehovah’s organization”
- Loyalty to the Governing Body
- Compliance with institutional policy
That’s a theological difference, not just an organizational one.
The same belief on death DOES NOT EQUAL the same use of the belief.
You hold a conditionalist view of death rooted in God’s power to restore life.
The Watchtower Society holds a conditionalist view of death embedded in a controlling, failed-prophecy framework that claims exclusive authority.
Admin
Brother May I make a suggestion, if you could put posts like these under the headings Topics or Blogs then they’d be easier to access for future research and not disappeared in to never never land to not be seen again :-)
IDENTIFYING BABYLON THE GREAT
We know that nowhere in the Bible Babylon the Great defined as 'false religion'.
The Bible does though EXPLICITY define Babylon the Great as “The great city that has a kingdom over the kings of the earth.”
— Revelation 17:18
This is not a theological description.
It is political, economic, and imperial language.
Religion does not “have a kingdom over kings.”
Empires do.
Also, A harlot in Scripture can be:
- A city
- A commercial power
- A political entity... moreIDENTIFYING BABYLON THE GREAT
We know that nowhere in the Bible Babylon the Great defined as 'false religion'.
The Bible does though EXPLICITY define Babylon the Great as “The great city that has a kingdom over the kings of the earth.”
— Revelation 17:18
This is not a theological description.
It is political, economic, and imperial language.
Religion does not “have a kingdom over kings.”
Empires do.
Also, A harlot in Scripture can be:
- A city
- A commercial power
- A political entity
- A culture of corruption
for example...
“Tyre will become like a prostitute… her profits and wages will be holy to Jehovah.”
— Isaiah 23:15–18
Tyre was a commercial empire, not a religion.
Revelation 18 devotes extraordinary detail to Babylon’s economic role:
Merchants grow rich from her. Global trade collapses at her fall. Cargo lists include gold, spices, livestock… and finally: “human souls” (Rev. 18:13)
- Religion does not run global shipping lanes.
- Religion does not control international trade.
- Religion does not cause merchants to weep when it falls. But economic empires do.
Babylon is:
- A commercial system
- A financial hegemon
- A luxury-driven ruling power
This aligns far more with imperial systems than with churches.
“Adultery with the Nations” — What the Bible Actually Means
In Scripture, adultery is not primarily sexual; it is covenantal betrayal.
When Israel was accused of adultery, it was not because she abandoned morality first, but because she:
- Trusted foreign powers instead of God
- Entered political and military alliances that compromised her calling
- Adopted the values and practices of empires she relied upon.
“They committed adultery and bloodshed… trusting in Assyria and Egypt.”
— Ezekiel 23
It is important to note though. that Scripture does not require Babylon to be:
- One nation only
- One city only
- One era only
So, Babylon is better understood as:
A recurring pattern of global dominance built on wealth, exploitation, and assumed permanence.
It is also important to note another characteristic of Babylon (and this is where the 'religious' aspect begins to feature in):
When a society elevates self-definition, power, personal autonomy, and pleasure above reverence for God and the sacredness of life, it acts Babylonian.
That includes:
- moral arrogance
- contempt for spiritual humility
- treating what God calls holy as trivial
- celebrating rebellion as virtue
- systematizing moral inversion
Revelation 17–18 describes Babylon as:
• A woman (symbolic entity)
• A harlot (spiritual unfaithfulness)
• Seated on many waters (peoples, nations, languages)
• Riding the wild beast (political power)
• Drunk with the blood of the holy ones
• Exceptionally wealthy, influential, and global
• Engaged in commerce, luxury, and political entanglement
• Claiming moral authority while corrupting the earth
- This is not just a political system.
- This is not just commerce.
- And it is not merely false religion in isolation.
It is a spiritual–political–economic hybrid system that seduces humanity away from God.
The strongest Scriptural evidence that Babylon must involve religion is that Babylon claims to represent God.
Thus, Revelation says…
“Come out of her, my people.”
Which means:
- God’s people are inside her
- She claims divine legitimacy
- Leaving her is painful
- But necessary for survival
That line alone proves Babylon must involve religion, not merely politics or commerce.
Babylon is not destroyed by armies.
She is destroyed when:
- Her lies are exposed
- Her moral authority evaporates
- Her hypocrisy becomes undeniable
- People stop outsourcing conscience
Which is why truth is her greatest enemy!
So, our real battle is NOT against flesh and blood - but against systems which weaponize belief.
AdminThank you brother for this break down. I too believe it is a combination of both religious, economical and political combined, as she is described as wearing purple & scarlet and carrying a gold cup in her hand. It says there will be no sound of a bride or bridegroom in her, or singing, which is the spiritual aspect of her. Her riding the beast gives her a false delusion of being in control, combined they have a kingdom over the kings of the earth, until God puts it into their hearts to destroy ... moreThank you brother for this break down. I too believe it is a combination of both religious, economical and political combined, as she is described as wearing purple & scarlet and carrying a gold cup in her hand. It says there will be no sound of a bride or bridegroom in her, or singing, which is the spiritual aspect of her. Her riding the beast gives her a false delusion of being in control, combined they have a kingdom over the kings of the earth, until God puts it into their hearts to destroy her. It will be fascinating to see how all this comes together.
THE NORWAY CASE...
I've not been able to substantiate the court statements made, but on everything else in the video, I can't argue with on accuracy...
WHEN EVALUATING the GOVERNING BODY
At the end of the day, we need to ask… “Would Christ do it that way?”
Christ’s teaching on leadership is unambiguous.
- He didn’t offer it as an ideal.
- He framed it as a rule that runs opposite to worldly power.
What Christ explicitly rejected
He contrasted his model with the systems around him:
“The rulers of the nations lord it over them… it must not be this way among you.”
So, Christ identified three traits of illegitimate leadership:
1. Lording i... moreWHEN EVALUATING the GOVERNING BODY
At the end of the day, we need to ask… “Would Christ do it that way?”
Christ’s teaching on leadership is unambiguous.
- He didn’t offer it as an ideal.
- He framed it as a rule that runs opposite to worldly power.
What Christ explicitly rejected
He contrasted his model with the systems around him:
“The rulers of the nations lord it over them… it must not be this way among you.”
So, Christ identified three traits of illegitimate leadership:
1. Lording it over others
2. Using authority to insulate oneself
3. Demanding obedience rather than earning trust
Thus, giving us a very clean diagnostic.
“Whoever wants to become great among you must be your minister, and whoever wants to be first among you must be your slave.”
— Jesus Christ (Matt. 20:26–27; Mark 10:43–44)
Because Christ didn’t just teach ideas—he modeled method.
Clearly, the Governing Body leadership is structurally arranged so that:
- Decisions are unquestionable
- Accountability flows upward only in appearance
- Discipline flows downward with force
- The Governing Body shields itself from:
< Transparency
< Correction
< Consequence
That is the inverse of servant leadership.
A servant:
- Bears the cost of error
- Absorbs blame
- Protects the vulnerable
- Remains visible and accountable
In the organization, it is we, as members, who bear the cost:
- Of doctrinal shifts
- Of policy mistakes
- Of failed predictions
- Of legal and reputational damage
This cannot be described as service.
This is purely risk transfer.
Jesus:
Refused coercion
- Rejected political leverage
- Spoke truth without enforcing compliance
- Allowed people to walk away
- Accepted misunderstanding rather than compel agreement
- Bore the cost of leadership himself
Jesus NEVER:
- Enforced loyalty through fear
- Punished questions
- Shielded himself from accountability
- Claimed immunity from scrutiny
- Confused obedience to men with obedience to God
That’s not romanticism. That’s what the Bible texts actually show.
Christ very decisively told us what we should see…
He said leaders would be recognized by fruit, not by claims.
So the question isn’t: “Do they call themselves servants?”
It’s: “Who suffers when leadership is wrong?”
In a servant-led structure: Leaders suffer first.
In a power-led structure: Followers do.
This cuts through all the rhetoric and lays it on the bottom line!
Heidi
Jehovah will fix this, but when is the question. How long do we suffer from within in silence borderline being hypocritical at the same time just to save the peace.
