Apostates Literature Presents Half-Truths Saith The Watchtower of Jehovah Witnesses

Jehovah Witnesses are taught not to accept apostate materials from anyone. First, lets define the word apostate by Watchtower definition. An apostate is a former Jehovah Witness (JW) member that was previously following the truth of Gods word (aka Watchtower Theology) and has disassociated themselves from the organization of the Watchtower. The JWs believe these so called apostates that write books or any literature against the Watchtower are demonized. If they accept apostate materials or even touch it or bring it into their homes, they and their family members can get demonized. Observe one of the Watchtower quotes below. Yes, apostates publish literature that resorts to distortions, half-truths, and outright falsehood. They even picket Witness conventions, trying to trap the unwary. Hence, it would be a dangerous thing to allow our curiosity to move us to feed on such writings or to listen to their abusive speech! While we might not think it a risk for us personally, the hazard remains. Why? For one thing, some of the apostate literature presents falsehoods by means of smooth talk and counterfeit words. (Romans 16:17, 18; 2 Peter 2:3) What would you expect from the table of demons? And while the apostates may also present certain facts, these are usually taken out of context with the goal of drawing others away from the table of Jehovah. All their writings simply criticize and tear down! Nothing is upbuilding. THE WATCHTOWER LIBRARY CD-ROM; VERSION 2.0; 1995; BROOKLYN, NY; THE WATCHTOWER; 7/1/94; Page12, Article Titled At Which Table Are You Feeding? One must think the Watchtower must be perfect. The anointed men of the governing body running the organization in Brooklyn certainly does not present any falsehood nor use counterfeit words or they never take anyone out of context when quoting individuals like scholars. After all, they are anointed and the Watchtower is Gods Channel of Communication. Jehovah God has also provided his visible organization, his "faithful and discreet slave," made up of spirit-anointed ones ... Unless we are in touch with this channel of communication that God is using, we will not progress along the road to life, no matter how much Bible reading we do. Watchtower 1981 December 1 p.27 The Path of the Righteous Does Keep Getting Brighter Tough Questions For JWs: Do you have an example of an apostate literature and some facts that were taken out of context?

Obviously the answer you will be given is a resounding NO! Why not? Because Jws do not carry apostate literature. Follow up with this next question. Why doesnt the article 7/1/94 page 12 present an example of an apostate literature and some facts that were taken out of context by apostates?

I mean really, if all apostate materials present falsehood, gee whiz, at least give us one example.

The Watchtower cannot give one example simply because theres not one apostate literature that distorts truth and information. Former JWs that write books about the Watchtower, all 100% of the time are exposing true facts about the men of the Watchtower. How do the men of the Watchtower know that apostate literature distorts information, presents half-truths and facts are presented out of context? Are they reading apostate materials? Why can they read it but youre forbidden to read it?

Till this day, JWs cannot answer these questions. What about the Watchtower publications, do you believe the men of the Watchtower whey they quote an individual they quote them in context?

YES, the Watchtower is Gods organization. Of course they quote individuals in context. Saith the JW. Do you consider catholic literature apostate materials?

If they say Yes, because Catholics believe Jesus is God, then why would the Watchtower use a Jesuit Priest Edmund Fortman as a legitimate source in their magazine Should You Believe in The Trinity? Then its obvious if JWs carry their Trinity magazine, you can say JWs have apostate literature in their bag. If they say NO, perfect. Have the JW take out their Should You Believe in The Trinity magazine. Im sure every JWs carries that magazine in their bag. Lets take a look at a Trinitarian that was quoted by the Watchtower in this magazine on 6. The Watchtower writes Jesuit Fortman states: The New Testament writers . . . give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. . . . Nowhere do we find any Trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead. Ahh yes, the language Jehovahs Witness love to read especially whether it is from a liberal bible trasher or even from a Catholic Jesuit priest. It doesnt matter who said it as long as the individual is a scholar right? This is the part where a JW will tell you, Look, Edmund Fortman was a Jesuit Catholic priest and a theologian and He rejects the Trinity. Really? Do you think he rejects the Trinity based on that quotation the Watchtower wrote? Hath Fortman said The New Testament writers . . . give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. . . . Nowhere do we find any Trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead.? The quotation the Watchtower uses is from the Fortmans book The Triune God. Obviously written by a Catholic and a Trinitarian, certainly this book is considered apostate material and it shouldnt be in the homes of any Jehovahs Witnesses.

Lets see where the Watchtower failed to quote Mr. Fortman in full. Please note, red is an important part of the quotation that the Watchtower failed to quote and blue is only what the Watchtower quoted in the magazine. "As a Catholic and a firm believer in the Triune God my belief will inevitably affect to some extent my selection, interpretation and presentation of the documents and writings that manifest the historical development of this doctrine, but hopefully it will not substantially distort these. This is not an exhaustive and definitive study but it is meant to be more than a superficial survey, and it is hoped it may stimulate other fuller studies. The doctrine of the Triune God has had an amazing history. Convinced that this doctrine is a Christian doctrine that did and could originate only from divine revelation. I start the study from the authentic record of divine revelation that is found in the sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments. What does the Old Testament tell us of God? It tells us there is one God, a wonderful God of life and love and righteousness and power and glory and mystery, who is the creator and lord of the whole universe, who is intensely concerned with the tiny people of Israel. It tells us of His Word, Wisdom. Spirit, of the Messiah He will send, of a Son of Man and a Suffering Servant to come. But it tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. If we take the New Testament writers together they tell us there is only one God, the creator and lord of the universe, who is the Father of Jesus. They call Jesus the Son of God, Messiah, Lord, Savior, Word, Wisdom. They assign Him the divine functions of creation, salvation, judgment. Sometimes they call Him God explicitly. They do not speak as fully and clearly of the Holy Spirit as they do of the Son, but at times they coordinate Him with the Father and the Son and put Him on a level with them as far as divinity and personality are concerned. They give us in their writings a triadic ground plan and triadic formulas. They do not speak in abstract terms of nature, substance, person, relation, circumincession, mission, but they present in their own ways the ideas that are behind these terms. They give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. But they do give us an elemental trinitarianism, the data from which such a formal doctrine of the Triune God may be formulated. To study the gradual transition from an unformulated Biblical witness to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to a dogmatic formulation of a doctrine of the Triune God, we look first to the Eastern Church where most of this development took place. The Apostolic Fathers were witnesses to the Biblical data and the traditional faith rather than theologians, but they furnished useful insights into the lines along which the Church's unconscious theology was developing. Most of them indicated quite clearly a belief in the divinity of Christ, less clearly a belief in the distinct personality and divinity of the Holy Spirit. They gave solid evidence of a belief in three pre-existent 'beings,' but they furnished no trinitarian doctrine, no awareness of a trinitarian problem. The Apologists were, in a sense, the Church's first theologians: the first to attempt a sketch of Trinitarian doctrine and an intellectually satisfying explanation of Christ's relation to God the Father. To set forth the truths handed down to them from the Apostles they used the terminology and philosophy that were then current, and in the process they Christianized Hellenism to some extent. They manifested a belief in the unity of God and in some sort of 'trinity of divinity.' even though they had as yet no distinct conception of 'divine person' and 'divine nature.' (The Triune God, Edmund Fortman, introduction, p.xv) Did anyone notice how the Watchtower deceptively takes partial quotations and combines several different statements giving a different thought of what the individual really intended to say? Very subtle of the Watchtower. Its just like the subtle serpent in Genesis when he twists Gods word and tricked Eve. The Watchtower did the same to their own followers.

This is just one out of 100s of misquotations not just in the Trinity brochure but overall publications of the Watchtower. Now for some more tough questions:

Do you as a Jehovahs Witness accept Edmund Fortman as an authority after reading his full statement? Is he really a reliable source to use? If apostate material by your own definition resorts to distortions, half-truths, outright falsehood and present facts out of content, then arent your publications apostate as well?

Lets take a look at this interesting quotation by the Watchtower: On their publication called Qualified to be Ministers; 1967; page 199; Be very careful to be accurate in all statements you make. Use evidence honestly. In quotations, do not twist the meaning of a writer or speaker or use only partial quotations to give a different thought than the person intended. When you make references to the Scripture or to any other authority, be definite. And use reliable, capable authority. The Bible is the most conclusive and reliable of all. Quoting from official publication of an organization to show what they believe is good. Also one wants to use evidence from an authority that the hearers will accept. Certainly the Watchtower men were not honest and careful with making accurate statements. That last statement is very interesting one wants to use evidence from an authority that the hearers will accept. Well, once again I askDo you as a JW accept Edmund Fortman as an authority after reading his full statement? Right about at that moment, they will pack up and tell you they have another appointment which is a lie.