Bible Reading Leads Back to Christendom?

Note: This article should be considered a supplement to the previously written article, "Reading the Bible Alone: A Common Sense Perspective." Please refer to it for discussions of Sola Scriptura and the need for study aids. Moving on...

1.0 OPPOSING ARGUMENT

The time is long past due that somebody should deal with this "favorite" accusation of opposers and apostates. Getting right into it, the quote always used is the following:

“Among the ranks of Jehovah's people some have said that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such Bible reading, they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom's clergy were teaching 100 years ago..." (Watchtower, Aug. 15, 1981, p. 29).

The above quotation was taken directly from an apostate, and naturally there is a significant difference between it and the original quote (see section 2.0).  Noticed that they show their deception right out of the gate by leaving the quotation marks off of "Bible reading."

The accompanying argument from the opposer often takes the form of:

Why is it that your governing body prohibits independent Bible reading? Do you personally agree with the WTS that if you were somehow prevented from reading Watchtower literature you would reject your faith and embrace the pagan beliefs of Christendom?

2.0 QUOTE IN CONTEXT WITH EXPANDED SCRIPTURES (ITALICS MINE)


Note: because the cited Scriptures in the paragraphs do have a direct bearing on how we should understand the information given, I have taken the liberty of expanding them within the article itself.

"The Watchtower." August 15, 1981, p. 29 (italics for emphasis are mine).

From time to time, there have arisen from among the ranks of Jehovah’s people those who, like the original Satan, have adopted an independent, faultfinding attitude. They do not want to serve “shoulder to shoulder” with the worldwide brotherhood. (Compare Ephesians 2:19-22.)

Ephesians 2:19-22 "Certainly, therefore, YOU are no longer strangers and alien residents, but YOU are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, 20 and YOU have been built up upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while Christ Jesus himself is the foundation cornerstone. 21 In union with him the whole building, being harmoniously joined together, is growing into a holy temple for Jehovah. 22 In union with him YOU, too, are being built up together into a place for God to inhabit by spirit."

Rather, they present a “stubborn shoulder” to Jehovah’s words. (Zech. 7:11, 12)

Zechariah 7:11, 12 "But they kept refusing to pay attention, and they kept giving a stubborn shoulder, and their ears they made too unresponsive to hear. 12 And their heart they set as an emery stone to keep from obeying the law and the words that Jehovah of armies sent by his spirit, by means of the former prophets; so that there occurred great indignation on the part of Jehovah of armies.”

Reviling the pattern of the “pure language” that Jehovah has so graciously taught his people over the past century, these haughty ones try to draw the “sheep” away from the one international “flock” that Jesus has gathered in the earth. (John 10:7-10, 16)

John 10:7-10, 16 "Therefore Jesus said again: “Most truly I say to YOU, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All those that have come in place of me are thieves and plunderers; but the sheep have not listened to them. 9 I am the door; whoever enters through me will be saved, and he will go in and out and find pasturage. 10 The thief does not come unless it is to steal and slay and destroy. I have come that they might have life and might have it in abundance...16 “And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those also I must bring, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd."

They try to sow doubts and to separate unsuspecting ones from the bounteous “table” of spiritual food spread at the Kingdom Halls of Jehovah’s Witnesses, where truly there is ‘nothing lacking.’ (Ps. 23:1-6)

Psalms 23:1-6 "Jehovah is my Shepherd. I shall lack nothing. 2 In grassy pastures he makes me lie down; By well-watered resting-places he conducts me.3 My soul he refreshes. He leads me in the tracks of righteousness for his name’s sake. 4 Even though I walk in the valley of deep shadow, I fear nothing bad, For you are with me; Your rod and your staff are the things that comfort me. 5 You arrange before me a table in front of those showing hostility to me. With oil you have greased my head; My cup is well filled. 6 Surely goodness and loving-kindness themselves will pursue me all the days of my life; And I will dwell in the house of Jehovah to the length of days."

They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such ‘Bible reading,’ they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom’s clergy were teaching 100 years ago, and some have even returned to celebrating Christendom’s festivals again, such as the Roman Saturnalia of December 25! Jesus and his apostles warned against such lawless ones.—Matt. 24:11-13; Acts 20:28-30; 2 Pet. 2:1, 22.

Matthew 24:11-13 "And many false prophets will arise and mislead many; 12 and because of the increasing of lawlessness the love of the greater number will cool off. 13 But he that has endured to the end is the one that will be saved."

Acts 20:28-30 "Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed YOU overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own [Son]. 29 I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among YOU and will not treat the flock with tenderness, 30 and from among YOU yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves."

2 Peter 1:1, 22 "However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will also be false teachers among YOU. These very ones will quietly bring in destructive sects and will disown even the owner that bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves...The saying of the true proverb has happened to them: “The dog has returned to its own vomit, and the sow that was bathed to rolling in the mire.”"

Through his prophet Zephaniah, Jehovah tells His people how He will dispose of those who shamelessly try to sow discord in His earthly organization, saying:

“I shall remove from the midst of you your haughtily exultant ones; and you will never again be haughty in my holy mountain."

3.0 EVALUATION OF THE PARAGRAPHS

3.1 Evaluation of Quotation Marks

“shoulder to shoulder” - Used here in a figurative sense, indicating close cooperation. It is not a direct quote.

“stubborn shoulder” - A direct quote from Zechariah

"pure language" - An indirect quote from Zephaniah 3:9. The Witness reader would know the source.

"sheep" - Direct quote from Matthew

"flock" - Direct quote from Matthew

"table" -Direct quote from Psalms

'nothing lacking' - The article is here following the convention that double quotation marks indicate an exact quotation, while single quotation marks indicate a paraphrased quotation or a quotation where grammar, pronouns or plurality have been changed in order to fit the sentence containing the quotation (similar to reported speech). They are quoting from Psalms 23, but have simply changed the grammar to keep smooth sentence flow.

'Bible reading' - This the key phrase in our discussion. It could be taken as referencing the immediately preceding sentence, which is given from the opposing point of view. Based on the tone and context, this quote is very likely to be what is known as a scare quote. Scare quotes commonly indicate irony and non-literal usage, i.e., the author does not accept the terminology as originally used by or applied to another. This would also explain the use of the single inverted commas instead of double, as some grammar commentaries do recommend singles to distinguish between direct quotations and ironic quotations.

example:

Apostate Jehovah's Witnesses say that they have love for current Witnesses. But strangely, through such 'love', they have propagated untold amounts of hatred and paranoia.

compare to the original:

They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such ‘Bible reading,’ they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines...

I offset the word "love" in the first example to indicate that I, as the author, did not agree with the claims of Apostate Jehovah's Witnesses, and that I felt  that it is was ironic for such a word to be applied to their actions.

In like manner, the quote from the Watchtower is referencing the claims of the opposing side, and indicates by use of single quotations that it does not not accept the phrase as used by the opposing side - they view it rather as being ironic or as being a misnomer.

3.2 Is it Really Bible Reading Alone that Causes Reversion to Apostate Doctrines?

In this section, I will be taking a look at an aspect of the article that many may have overlooked:

"They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such ‘Bible reading,’ they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentaries by Christendom’s clergy were teaching..."

This phrasing seems a little bit odd does it not? Would not it be simpler and just as clear to say, "reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that Christendom was teaching..."? Yes, it would be simpler, but it would not fit the context anymore. When we look at the sentence in the context of what we have already discussed above, it makes perfect sense to have all of those supposedly 'extra' words (notice that I just used an indirect scare quote there).

As was mentioned and as was demonstrated, direct scare quotes are used to indicate an author's disagreement with a certain phrase or word, i.e., that it was improper or ironic for the opposing side to have used it in the first place. Why exactly is this 'independent Bible reading' ironic and improper in the eyes of the authors? That question is answered in the same sentence: because it was never truly independent Bible reading to begin with. That was the point of specifically mentioning the "commentaries" - the article is making the point that these 'champions of independent Bible reading' are in reality only parroting commentaries of Christendom which they have been reading on the side! It is not the Bible reading at all that causes apostasy, but rather it is the COMMENTARIES of apostate Christendom that cause it, according to the article. That is the intent. 

4.0 RETURN TO WHICH APOSTATE DOCTRINES?

But for just a little while, let us humor the opposing side. Let's say that, hypothetically, a Witness reads the Bible alone, which in turn causes the him to reject the Witnesses and go back into Christendom. Ok....what part of Christendom are we talking about? The truth is, that there are over 33,000 different denominations of Christianity in the world today, all with varying and conflicting interpretations of the Bible. So which group of apostate Christians does reading the Bible alone lead one too hmm? Does it lead one to Pentecostal interpretations? Southern Baptist? Catholic? Evangelical? Anglican? Greek Orthodox? Methodist? Lutheran? Seventh Day Adventist? Christadelphian? Mormon? Assyrian?

In all honesty, it is arrogant and narrow minded to throw this claim against the Witnesses with the intent of proving to them that they would join the "one true faith" without their study aids--in fact, it is utter poppycock! If 10000 people were to read the Bible entirely on their own with no aids and no commentaries, then we would end up with 10000 different sets of beliefs, which is ironically exactly the situation we have today in Christendom!

Jehovah's Witnesses can say that reading the Bible (with outside commentaries) can lead back to the apostate doctrines of Christendom, because they view Christendom as encompassing ALL false Christianity, and because they view the apostate doctrines of Christendom as encompassing ALL false Christian beliefs.

However, opposers of Jehovah's Witnesses CANNOT say that reading the Bible alone will lead to THEIR interpretation of the Bible, because they use "apostate doctrines" as if it refers only to THEIR beliefs and not the beliefs of the other 32,999 'Christian' denominations!

4.1 Support for the Numbers

The number of denominations comes from: 

D. B. Barret, G.T. Kurian, and T.M. Johnson. In The World Christian Encyclopedia: A Comparative Survey of Churches and Religions in the Modern World. 2nd ed. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.

This peer reviewed Wikipedia article also cites the 38,000+ number (more recent statistics than 2001) 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations 

"Note: This is not a complete list, but aims to provide a comprehensible overview of the diversity among denominations of Christianity. As there are reported to be over 38,000 Christian denominations, many of which cannot be verified to be significant, only those denominations with Wikipedia articles will be listed in order to ensure that all entries on this list are notable and verifiable."

And that statement is perfect true. Even in the 38,000 number, ONLY LARGE AND SIGNIFICANT denominations are included. If all of the smaller denominations were to be included (membership of 100 or less) the number would inflate beyond all imagination. 

In any case of course, what we can say with absolute certainty is that there are A LOT of different denominations of Christianity out there today, which is a far cry from the "one faith" and "oneness of mind" that the Bible talks about. 

The World Christian Database also lists several thousand denominations. Also note that the WCD, in citing only 9000 denominations, are only looking at the Protestant Denominations, and are ignoring the tens of thousands of independents that make up the majority of the 33,000 figure.

http://www.worldchristiandatabase.org/wcd/about/denominations.asp

-->

5.0 DOES 'RETURNING TO A DOCTRINE' MAKE THAT DOCTRINE CORRECT?

The entire premise of the opposer, in using the 1981 Watchtower quote, is to prove that a belief or interpretation is automatically proven to be right just because somebody returns to it, for whatever reason and in whatever circumstance. But that claim should be absurd to anyone with common sense.

Does a Baptist converting to Catholicism prove that Catholicism is doctrinally correct?

Does a Catholic becoming a Baptist prove that the Baptists are doctrinally correct?

And what about the mass exodus of Christians today into agnosticism and atheism? A great many agnostics that I have spoken with claimed that they rejected Christianity and the Abrahamic God in part because they read the Bible entirely on their own, and were consequently disgusted and confused by what they saw. Therefore the statement, "Strangely, through such 'Bible reading,' many have gone from being Bible believing Christians to skeptical agnostics" would be perfectly true. And yet as Christians, do we admit that the agnostics are correct in their interpretations of the Bible simply because many have abandoned Christianity? Of course not!

The truth value of any doctrine/interpretation is INDEPENDENT of who gives it or how many people either accept or reject it. So what if there have been some Witnesses who have reverted back to the doctrines of Christendom by their own Bible reading? They would still be wrong! And we would still be able to prove that they are wrong by simply examining the evidence!

For example, what if a Witness suddenly starts reading the KJV all on their own, comes across Micah 5:2, and concludes that Jesus must be God because only God has eternal origins? And what if they decide to leave the Witnesses because of this revelation? The answer is that they would simply be WRONG due to lack of evidence or due to misunderstanding of evidence, as has already been demonstrated in previous articles:

http://tearsofoberon.blogspot.com/2009/10/micah-52-jesus-eternal-origins_03.html

Again, a person's choice to adopt a certain set of beliefs is not in of itself an indicator of the correctness of those beliefs - they could simply be ignorant of the issues. The only true way to determine the correctness of a Biblical interpretation is through sound argumentation and exegesis with the aid of historical, contextual and linguistic evidence.

-->

6.0 WHAT ABOUT OTHER QUOTATIONS?

The WTS clearly states, in many quotes that you can't understand the Bible without the JW publications: 

The Watchtower, 10/1/94, pg 8

"Even as Bible prophecy pointed forward to the Messiah, it also directs us to the close-knit body of anointed Christian Witnesses that now serve as the faithful and discreet slave. It helps us to understand the Word of God. All who want to understand the Bible should appreciate that the “greatly diversified wisdom of God” can become known only through Jehovah’s channel of communication, the faithful and discreet slave."

The Watchtower, Oct 1, 1967, p.587.

"...the Bible is an organizational book and belongs to the Christian congregation as an organization, not to individuals, regardless of how sincerely they may believe that they can interpret the Bible. For this reason the Bible cannot be properly understood without Jehovah's visible organization in mind."

6.1 In Relation to the Original Accusation

The main thrust of the argument can be broken down to:

(1) A person picks up and reads the Bible entirely on their own.

(2) That person does not have the aid of the FDS

(3) That person will adopt all the views of Christendom (ignoring the fact that the views of Christendom are a gigantic, unharmonious hodgepodge).

Notice that I highlighted the conclusion in red. The proper conclusion to the above argument would be:

(3) That person will not fully understand what they read.

LACK OF UNDERSTANDING =/= CHRISTENDOM'S UNDERSTANDING. Going from not understanding what they read to picking up doctrines of Christendom is a leap of logic.

For instance, the Witnesses (and many others) have long maintained, and rightly so, that the Trinity is not taught in the Bible. So how exactly will a person who reads the Bible entirely on their own, pick up a doctrine that is not even taught in it?!

6.2 Tips for How to Deal With the Accusation

The above accusation is really rather simple to defeat. All one has to do is ask a single question:

"If the Bible can be properly understood without the FDS, then why is Christendom still wrong on her core doctrines?"

This question serves two purposes:

(1) To get the opposer back into the Bible (where they do not want to be!).

(2) Force them to give and back up their own interpretations (which they do not want to do!)

As I will be written about later, opposers do not like critical theological or Biblical discussions with the Witnesses. They would much rather ignore the Bible completely, and simply attack the organization and play their silly little games of "is it really so?" (kudos to whoever can guess what I am alluding to there). They also despise having to put their own beliefs and their own ideas out in the open and under the spotlight. It is easier for them to just take potshots at passersby while hidden on the rooftop than it is to take shots from the middle of the crowd, where they can get shot back.