The Watch Tower and Organised Religion

 Under the heading RELIGION in Reasoning From the Scriptures, p.326, the Watch Tower asks, Is belonging to an organised religion necessary? They write:

'Most religious organizations have produced bad fruitage. It is not the fact that groups are organized that is bad. But many have promoted forms of worship that are based on false teachings and are largely ritualistic instead of providing genuine spiritual guidance; they have been misused to control the lives of people for selfish objectives; they have been overly concerned with money collections and ornate houses of worship instead of spiritual values; their members are often hypocritical. Obviously no one who loves righteousness would want to belong to such an organization. But true religion is a refreshing contrast to all of that. Nevertheless, to fulfill the Bible’s requirements, it must be organized.'

Quoting 1 Corinthians 1:10 they say:

“Now I exhort you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you should all speak in agreement, and that there should not be divisions among you, but that you may be fitly united in the same mind and in the same line of thought.” (Such unity would never be achieved if the individuals did not meet together, benefit from the same spiritual feeding program, and respect the agency through which such instruction was provided. See also John 17:20, 21.)'

They insist there must be regular meetings, a consistent spiritual feeding programme, respect for the agency doing the feeding, oversight of organised preaching. They argue there should be love among the whole international brotherhood, based on 1 Pet.2:17, and reinforce the call to evangelise with Mt.24:14. If, like me, you believe in church, in Christians congregating, is it hard to argue with their reasoning?

Unity? Or Uniformity

There are, typically, so many straw men in their argument it’s difficult to know where to start. Let’s go through their list:

Regular meetings – I believe we can check that box, although, perhaps like Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses fail to notice Christian believers going to church, prayer meetings, fellowship groups, etc.

A consistent spiritual feeding programme – Any church that regularly and systematically hears the Bible preached and taught can tick this box.

Respect for the agency doing the preaching – I can’t speak for 2.2 billion Christians attending countless churches across the world, but certainly there is respect for leaders in the churches I know.

Love for the whole association of brothers – Notice, no mention of sisters. I think, however, we are closing in on what they are really getting at. What they mean when they speak of unity is uniformity. They look at what they call ‘Christendom,’ see disagreements, sometimes outright warfare, that leads to refusal to fellowship, division, disagreement on doctrine, even among leaders, and an apparent, though not necessarily a true lack of love across the worldwide church. But are God’s chosen people, the watch Tower Society so squeaky clean?

Watch Tower Denominationalism

Jehovah’s Witnesses are Adventists and, as such, are a sect of Adventism. You might even say denomination. Of course, in the official historical account the Watch Tower tend to keep quiet about its Adventist roots. If they see division in denominationalism, however, this is a simple case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Before 1931 they were known as the Bible Student movement. It was in 1931 that Joseph Rutherford, seeking to distance himself from Charles Russell, reconstituted and rebranded Russell’s group as Jehovah’s Witnesses. As Andrew Harrison writes:

‘The Organisation started in Pittsburgh USA in the early 1870’s when several young people, influenced by the Adventist movement, began studying the Bible to discover the date of Christ’s return. Today, it is not as it originated with the founder Charles Taze Russell; in those days there was room for differences of opinion and expression in a loose affiliation of Bible study groups. Their second President, Joseph Rutherford, made many changes to the Witnesses and, by the time he finished, it is doubtful if Russell would have recognised the group he started.’ (Jehovah’s Witnesses, an Introduction)

There have been a number of sects of Jehovah’s Witnesses, including:

1. The Laymen’s Home Missionary Movement, started in 1920 by Paul S L Johnson following the death of Charles Russell.

2. The Dawn Bible Students Association, founded in 1932 by Norman Woodworth just a few blocks from Watch Tower Headquarters.

3. Goshen fellowship, started in Britain in 1951 by Jesse Hemery.

4. The Theocratic Organisation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, started in the USSR in 1962.

5. The True Faith Association of Jehovah’s Witnesses, started in Romania by groups of disaffected Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1992.

6. The Lord’s Witnesses, started in England by Gordon Richie following his excommunication in 1996.

7. Christian Witnesses of Jah, a label used since 2007 to describe those loosely affiliated with former Jehovah’s Witness Greg Stafford.

There Must be Factions

So, The Jehovah’s Witnesses at your door, on their carts in the High Street, are members of a sect of a sect, from whom other sects, in protest, have broken away. Does this make the religion of Jehovah’s Witnesses Protestant? Hardly, not in the legitimate sense we mean, but you see my point.

Of course, the howl of protest would be, ‘But we have the truth, we are Jehovah’s true chosen ones.’ The trouble is, they all say that. As I look at Jehovah’s Witness magazines showing scenes of ‘paradise on earth,’ I am reminded that the serpent also dwells in paradise, and this paradise is no exception.

The remarkable thing to me is not that ‘Christendom’ is riven with division, but that, in the midst of division, we still find each other and, as far as orthodox teaching will allow, still call each other Christian. Now, if Jehovah’s Witnesses could do that there would surely be less shunning and more loving.

‘For there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognised.’ 1 Cor.11:19

It is how we conduct ourselves in the midst of inevitable controversy that marks us out as approved by God, not that absence of controversy.