...But on the other hand, it also raises some serious thoughts for the rest of us, which we can point out to Jehovah’s Witnesses, in the hope we will make them think rationally. And first of all is the realization that in the Watchtower Society club (because this has now become a club that offers "bread and spectacles" and a psychological sense of security), their Governing Body has realized they do not possess the truth, but are merely another tiny group among the many thousands of Protestants  who sell ideology and false hopes.  However, thanks to the internet, ideology can be found everywhere and data and information have also permeated every home via the internet; thus it is no longer convincing enough to merely brazenly declare "WE possess the truth"  and then refuse to talk to people who have more information.

In order to hold on to their members, they need to secure them by ensuring their continous enjoyment of good times, with frequent communictions among them, banquets, dining, trips to international conventions that will make them feel they belong to an international  brotherhood, while in parallel enjoying religious tourism – all of which ensure that they have a good time. They are shown various movies; studios have been set up to play various videos so that they spend less time on other media that exist in the world - and so they wont be deprived of brainwashing, along with all the other related items of a good times club.

But as with any club, things shouldn’t have to be so demanding. They should be simpler.  For one to be put in a difficult position during a toast because of clinking their glasses together, or because of not being allowed to have a beard for example, or women not being allowed to wear trousers, all the while having others asking them: "But why all these prohibitions? Where does the Bible forbid them? Didn’t Christ have a beard? Didn’t Russell have a beard?"  Well, of course they did!  So what?  Just because many centuries and millennia ago, people used to clink their wine cups together to supposedly drive away evil spirits, it doesn’t mean it has that same meaning in our time. So, what is the reason you had remained stuck to an ancient custom?

In order to deal with such questions and at the same time put the "good-times" Jehovah’s Witnesses in a tight spot (because they have to be entertained in order to remain in the organization, since they can no longer be convinced into accepting “the truth”, but rather prefer to “be sold” entertainment), these difficult areas had to be demolished.  Integration and remaining in the organization should be easier, while details that are not found anywhere in the Bible should be removed as non-Scriptural rules – something that has been in force in the organization for far too long.

And - as in many such cases - the excuse usually given for such changes is worse than the change itself.

So, after listening to the speaker of the Governing Body giving an example that would surely justify their change (regarding the clinking of glasses!), many questions have come to mind.

They claim that they prayed to God and thus received this new guidance, so that all the aforementioned prohibitions could now be acceptable.

So, the question is: If it was God who has recently enlightened them with a new light to implement this change, what does that imply? Doesn’t it mean that all the other religions, which had never imposed any such regulation throughout Time that forbade... glass-clinking, were quite logically presuming that old mentalities of driving out spirits by... clinking glasses have no place in modern society, hence no problem with clinking glasses, and believing that such customs should not be considered pagan?

Hmmmm... I wonder, could it be that God had enlightened those other religions - long before He enlightened the Jehovah’s Witnesses - which would mean that those other religions had rightly adjusted existing beliefs, long ago?

In our OODE website itself, this point has been  repeatedly stressed, i.e., that it is of no significance what people believed about something in the past, and what would be the purpose of continuing it today.  

So, now the JW Governing Body has come to declare exactly what we have been maintaining all along:  that guidance is indeed given, “upon enlightenment by God and after praying”....   So, what is the Governing Body now admitting?  That they are NOT as mature and knowledgable as they have been claiming all along -   compared to all the others who were already knowledgable?

And what do they mean by the example of when a child is young, the mother holds it by the hand, but when it grows up and after having learned to guard itself against dangers, she will leave its hand so that it can judge for itself as a mature adult what is right and what is wrong?

Could this mean that the Jehovah’s Witnesses organization was - again - not so mature and knowledgable until now? Were Jehovah’s Witnesses infants all these decades? Were they incapable of perceiving?

This example would have made sense to them, when in reference to a specific person, or to isolated individuals. Isolated individuals can of course be toddlers and they can mature gradually,but they will need a gradual education until they do mature.

But when this example is used as an argument that applies to an entire organization, isn’t this essentially asserting that the entire organization was not-so-knowledgable and mature until now, and that it suddenly matured overnight, solely because it was finally ... allowed to clink glasses?

And all these years of the Governing Body preaching about mature brothers and mature elders and mature overseers of the Governing Body - what happened to all those claims? Were they addressing immature children until now - albeit themselves apparently surpassed in maturity by other religions – many of which had understood everything ages ago?

And now that they are saying they are allowing you to act freely because they have matured, did they imply that ALL Jehovah’s Witnesses have matured too?  Are all of them set free, because ALL  Jehovah’s Witnesses have now become instantly mature?

Can we assume that there are NO Immature Jehovah’s Witnesses now?  Otherwise, if they haven’t become mature, why are they being allowed to clink glasses, if they haven’t yet matured enough to discern?

And even if those who have now become knowledgable and mature in order to understand simple and self-evident things like clinking glasses (which most people of other religions already know), then how much maturity do they have, in order to understand deeper issues of faith? Matters of life and death, which have absolutely nothing to do with commonplace table etiquette...

So, if maturity can magically become evident thanks to a simple...”clink!”, then one is entitled to wonder with how much maturity the organization’s dogmas were formulated. In their vast majority, they must have been compiled in the past by immature and not-so-knowledgable predecessors, who were obviously unaware all these past decades of this one simple item...  Were they truly aware of all the other, truly significant matters of faith?

I mean, the example alone of the hand-held child whose hand is released when it has become a mature adult, is in itself an immature choice for an example - especially when it is set as the example that applies to an entire organization.  This choice of example should only apply to specific persons.

If an entire organization claims to represent the Church of God, it cannot make mistakes. The Church -  the Body of Christ - does not make mistakes. The faithful were mature from the beginning of the Church - from since the time of the Apostles. Dogmas are always formulated by mature Christians, not by immature children.

And - getting back to the Jehovah’s Witnesses - that is, if the organization now regards them as having matured, why does it still "hold their hand" so tightly on a whole bunch of other matters?

If they are now mature, why is the organization so afraid of allowing them, for example, to talk to apostates or to decide for themselves - say – on what their political preferences are? Or to go and attend a birthday party (which is a social celebration, not a religious one)? The list is endless for things that are banned for Jehovah’s Witnesses, by regarding all their members as immature individuals that are incapable of deciding for themselves. Instead, they are still being forced to  go through committees every time, either to be advised, or be threatened, in order to do certain things.

So, where is their maturity seen here? Could it be they are not mature after all?  Or could it actually be (because that is the essence of the matter), that the organization is simply ensuring that its club remains an enjoyable place, and has nothing to do with maturity and clear understanding?

In the 1960s and 1970s, with my own father being a Jehovah’s Witness Elder – which meant regarding him a mature man – we had no problem clinking glasses during a toast at a family dinner or at any other celebration - even if a member of our family happened to buy a lottery ticket or if they happened to win one (which they had won, some times).

So... based on the example given by the speaker of the Governing Body, I can ask: “Were we more mature during that period than the rest of the organization, if the organization only just recently acknowledged maturity for something that we were already doing since ages ago?”

As you know, a Jehovah’s Witness will remark here that: "You were simply immature, because you hadn’t  been obeying  what the organization said."

Congratulations for pinpointing a bitter truth! 

What we were doing since way back then – however immature you may want to label it – the organization has ONLY NOW admitted maturity!   Because you know what?  We weren’t doing  it to go contrary to the organization; we were doing it because, quite simply, it was obvious there weren’t any specific prohibitions on such matters - not from within the Bible, nor from any kind of logic.

In fact, the prohibition of clinking glasses during a toast with my family was an entirely foreign thing! In fact, the first time I heard of it was when I was a grown man – a married man. It was then that I first heard that the organization forbids it as paganism, because it was done in the past, when people used to do it to send away the evil spirits.  I had laughed inside me on hearing this information, mainly because of how ridiculous the ban sounded.  And it should be noted that I was one of Jehovah’s faithful witnesses, and very familiar with the organization’s doctrines better than any average elder, even before becoming an elder myself...

So, dear friends Jehovah’s witnesses, you might want to sit down and give some serious thought to the above,  and don’t allow any ridiculous excuses disorient your thoughts from the essence of certain imposed changes, and from the end purpose - the real purpose -  that they were finally introduced.

Translation A.N.