Dear ZLibrary User, now we have a dedicated domain for your region and you have been redirected to it. You can bookmark the new address and use it in the future.


PDF, 5.46 MB
Download (pdf, 5.46 MB)

Most frequently terms

Carl Aage Andersen
A very interesting book that finally criticizes the Watchtower's leadership
25 June 2020 (22:07) 
Geoffrey Hebdon
A brilliant review of the extreme powers of the ruling masters of this religious cult and is a must read for all those interested in how this secretive, ruthless body operates.
02 July 2020 (19:25) 
The whole book is self-contradictory and very hypocritical. He says JW's writings teach you the truth, but they aren’t written accurately. Jesus is the leader of Witnesses, but he is allowing them to be misled. It’s his beloved religion but he doesn’t agree with it and they don’t agree with him. Imagine someone saying that they love Christianity, but the apostles are wrong, and they are misleading Christianity. (Jude 8-10) Is he for the religion or is he against it? He wants his reader to believe that the GB’s have apostatized but that he has the same love for the organization. Yet for years he was a “Watchtower apologist.” Now he shows his same love by attacking the very leaders that he supported. Something has indeed changed! Furuli now doesn’t accept direction from the religion but wants the religion to accept direction from him. He says he believes what the organization taught years ago, but the information written years ago contradicts his present-day stand. Which should one believe Jekyll or Hyde?

Imagine a Christian who we will name Diotrephes who claims he loves his religion but thinks, the apostles are all too controlling and no longer go by the truths of Christ. He claims their spokesman “Peter” even tells members what to do for personal decisions. Since Diotrephes knows the apostles are wrong, he does not accept anything from them with respect. What should Diotrephes do? He should write a book to tell the world how he loves Christianity, his beloved religion, but how the apostles have ruined it, because he knows better than they do! (Compare 3 John 9,10) The member has become the spokesman and wants to tell the “apostles” how to do their job correctly according to the real rules – Furuli’s rules!

Really, this whole issue is that he has personal differences and wants Jehovah's Witnesses to change to match his personal interpretations. He has personal issues on how best to translation the Bible (only literal) but confuses translation theory with “inspiration.” He fails to fully appreciate that inspiration only directly applies to the original manuscripts and not to versions. Thus, the popular adage, “Traduttore, traditore.”

In order to justify publication of a book that goes against his religion, he came up with a reason. There is not a FDS and in the 1st century there was no GB. (Christianity would be better off without the Apostles) Great, let us appoint a new leader! Don't trust them, trust me! Yet he is the one that actively defended Witnesses including their leadership for decades and now, he is attacking the same organization. Soon his disappointments may very well turn to hatred of the religion. It is the pattern of an apostate.

Besides its inconsistency, it is full of errors. Both of a minor nature and serious nature. Common fallacies and illogical reasoning are throughout his book. Over the years, I have found that much of his scholarship is good, but this publication is sorely lacking. A Witnesses might express why they think this book is so poorly written by saying it is because “God’s spirit left him.” Or because Furuli instead of ‘functioning properly’ and ‘building up,’ the congregation, in harmony with how ‘God arranged each member as God pleased,’ appointed a new leader-himself. (1 Cor 12:18,24,28; Eph 4:16) Others have said, it’s because he is biting the hand that fed him during most his life and thus God has given him over to a disapproved state of mind with empty reasoning and a senseless heart. (Romans 1:21,28) Regardless, of the real reason the work is seriously lacking, the fact remains it is the worse book he has ever written and not worthy of serious reading! For one who doesn’t know the organization well, this book will twist reality and cause one to jump to wrong conclusions throughout it. It doesn’t deserve two stars as it is way too misleading.

Repeatedly, I found myself shaking my head in disbelief at what he wrote. Much of it is subtle which might be more of a challenge for the average reader to see where he errs. I usually read scholarly works, and this is clearly not one. This book was written to find an excuse for rebelling against the same religion he used to defend. He would have done better to settle his issues with his religion than to publicly broadcast his personal feelings of where he of course is right, and they of course are wrong at least in his world.

Minor issues: Sampling for one page alone. There are at least 5 errors on page 102 alone: par 1 quotation actually says: “men of God perfect” not “making the men perfect;” “Jehovah’s witnesses” not “Jehovah’s Witnesses”; Not “overcome and avoided” but overcome or avoided.” Should be “Isa… 55:3,4;” not “Isa…55:3,4:” etc. If this is the average minor errors per page, then the book is full of it!

More significant issues: Contra Furuli, 1944 was not the first mention of GB. The July 15, 1943 p. 216 par 24 said “the remnant of Jehovah’s “people for his name were colaboring with the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society as their legal governing body.”

On p. 107 mentions the GB has become more focused because the expression is used more often. Therefore, he claims they are now stronger in the minds of Witnesses. But such reasoning is faulty in many ways. It is like doing a word study but not considering synonyms or similar thoughts. For example, before 2001 the term “Society” was used all the time to mean the GB/FDS. However, in Jan 2001 the expression “the Society” stopped being used for the GB. Thus, it only makes sense that the term GB would start to be used even more. Thus, the terminology has nothing to do with elevating them but is strictly the same entity changing their clothes. When a person changes their outfit for the day, they are still the same person. This book is full of issues like this one, where good judgment is clouded with wishful thinking.

Very significant errors: Furuli wrongly claims that the organization is now hierarchical much like a pyramid with the boss on top, run like a corporation. However, it is absurd suggesting this is new. Even in the 40’s theocratic rule was described as ‘ruling from the top down.’ “The Lord Jesus puts into practice the Theocratic rule and procedure within that organization, establishing over it a unified command and ruling it from the top down and not at the dictation of personal preferences from the bottom up.” (wt7/15/43 p218) JW are not independent but have a national body (outside influence) that makes decisions for the Congregation. Religions can be roughly divided between hierarchical or independent. Witnesses are submissive to an external body outside of a local congregation. (National office often called the Watchtower Society or FDS and more recently the GB– however the role was always there whatever it was called during a given time period) In mishandling a court case, Furuli fails to appreciate that for a court of the land, an appointment for leadership in a religion is either from within the local church (independent) or from an outside source. If a national office, then the organization is hierarchical. This is the point that a Witnesses attorney was highlighting. JW teach that “Jehovah uses a channel” and that each congregation is to be submissive to that channel. (Heb 13:7,17 ft. governors of you –NWT84 where the term “GB,” comes from.) The name of the channel may change at times, but the role remains.

Also, Furuli wants you to believe he accepts what was written in the 40’s and 50’s. That the organization was great then but not now. But these very articles condemn his stance. As the quotation above in the 1943 Watchtower shows, Witnesses teach that ‘theocratic rule establishes a unified command ruling from top down not at the dictation of personal preferences from the bottom up.’ Thus, the articles Furuli uses to defend his personal interpretations are the very ones that condemn his rebellious stand. He criticizes leadership for taking on a role of interpreting but he is doing worse and taking it upon himself to interpret for his readers! However, even more hypocritical is the fact that he is criticizing others for "abusing" their authority while he as a member of the religion has clearly gone behind his own authority. Instead of being obedient and submissive, he hypocritically tells his leadership they need to be submissive and obedient to him! So, one needs to keep in mind his gross hypocrisy as he points the finger at others for abusing authority.
07 July 2020 (05:47) 
Wonderful Part Two
Actually, an argument can be made the opposite of what Furuli claims. That in reality the GB has given up some authority. Here are but 3 examples: 1) Branch committee in the US. In the past, the GB ran the whole US “Bethel.” The GB members were the overseers of the departments in Brooklyn. Now, instead of the GB making the decisions, since 2001 they have a branch committee that now makes decisions for USA branch area. 2) Since the 90’s the GB has been using “helpers.” These ones participate on the GB committees. 3) Changes in allegorizing (typology) Scriptures. Now more authority is given toward the Bible than their interpretations. If the Bible is silent on a type then they are silent. Martin Luther is quoted as saying, “I consider [allegorizing] to be not merely dangerous and useless for teaching but even to cancel the authority of Scripture.”

Regardless of the amount of authority the GB has, for Jehovah's Witnesses this is the instrument that God uses and thus deserves obedience and submissiveness. (Heb 13:7,17) At times they draw on the example of Moses. As an imperfect leader Moses was subject to some harsh criticism. How did God respond? Numbers 12:8,9 says, ‘Jehovah’s anger burned against them asking them why they were not afraid to speak against his servant Moses.’ Keeping in mind that JW understand that their leadership is the channel God is using today, Furuli though claiming to believe like JW, goes against such Scriptural statements that Witnesses highlight. One wonders where does Furuli see himself? Like Moses? Like the critics? Maybe like God, the one who has the right to set his own standards.

On page 14 Furuli claims that the Wt of Nov 1,1946 and Feb 1, 1952 both condemn an organization like Witnesses have. However, it is wishful thinking on Furuli’s part to claim this and far from reality. His mishandling of the 1946 Watchtower, is a classic example of selective handling of information. (starting on pg 101 in his book) He ignores the purpose of the 1946 article and instead chooses to focus on something taken out of context, in order to support his argument which has no factual basis. It is mind boggling to understand how he handled issues so shoddily. He leaves out key information that would present the actual picture the writers were making and very different than Fuurli twisted it to make. On pages 103-104 Furuli tries very unsuccessful, especially to the acute reader, to contrast the view of the Witnesses in the 40’s to the present, even claiming that the difference between the 1946 view and the present view is enormous. His failure is because the contrast is only in his head. However, what is enormous is the change that he himself has made from defending the organization to attacking it.

What Furuli is doing is like the following illustration. A man gets a Bible as a gift. The man is so proud of the gift that he has his name embossed on it. With a big smile, he shows everyone he can, his Bible saying, “I love my Bible, I read my Bible every day!” However, one day a person name Furuli says, “It can’t be your Bible because the Bible is God’s Word not man’s.” He continues, “years ago you would never have said it is your Bible because I have a recording of you specifically saying the Bible is ‘God’s Word and not man’s!’ How arrogant of you to even put your name on God’s Word! This behavior cannot be tolerated, the world must know! For you to claim that this book is yours, is proof of how you have enormously changed!” Furuli writes a book to “prove” his case: He writes what the man said before: “The Bible is God’s Word not man’s” and contrast it with what the man recently claimed namely: “I love MY Bible.” Furuli’s conclusion: “This shows how arrogant the man has become and now claims the Bible is his instead of God! Years ago, the man would never had said that, but now he tells everyone that the Bible is his! The changes this man made are remarkable!”

In this illustration, Furuli fails to appreciate that both statements are not contradictory. It is similar with Witnesses. They teach that God is the only real “interpreter” and thus by relying on him and his spirit, any of the Witnesses’ interpretations they give are to their best possible endeavors, his interpretations. The astute reading will notice that there are actually two different senses in which the words are being used. In one sense, it is talking about the source of the information (God- his word and his interpretation) and in the other usage it is talking more or less about possession (Physical book and own interpretation). Jehovah being the interpreter is still taught by Witnesses and is not an all or nothing issue.

The 1946 article is not saying that Witnesses can’t interpret (possess correct understanding of Scripture), but that God is the real interpreter. The point? The Witnesses have and do still teach that God by means of his spirit helps them interpret the Scriptures. This in no way contradict the fact that Witnesses can be spoken of as giving interpretations. It is much like the man in the illustration who still believes that his own Bible with his own name on it, is really God’s Bible.
07 July 2020 (05:49) 
Wonderful Part Three

So what is the Nov 1946 Watchtower about? It is attacking the position of the RCC that claims to give “inspired” interpretations and infallible teachings. Thus, the Witnesses are saying in this article that there is not an infallible earthly authority to interpret the Bible. For Furuli to apply this strictly to “interpretations” of the Bible instead of “inspired interpretations” of the Bible is very misleading. JW’s claim that no group has authority equal to the Bible or beyond what the Bible gives them and thus the Bible is the final authority. They claim that the only authority the GB/FDS/WTS has is what has been given them in Scripture. The view of the Jehovah’s Witnesses has remained the same.

Furuli also wrongly contends that KH’s were taken away from the congregations that legally owned it. First, most KH’s are still owned by a local legal entity. The exception is when a congregation is dissolved. Next, as stated in T-36 dated 11/1995 “the titleholders …have the same relationship to the congregation as any other instrument…. All such instruments or tools are used to serve the congregation in harmony with the theocratic arrangement….They have absolutely nothing to do with the use to be made of the property.”

Shall we go on? Don’t have the time to deal with the over abundance of errors and hypocrisy.
In conclusion, this leaves us with a fitting question: For whom is this book good? Witnesses will not have their faith strengthen. Apostates will not like it because he defends 607, blood, JW stand on child abuse. So again, who is it good for? If you are still low on toilet paper…well then put the book to good use!

Really, your time would be better spent with any of the following real scholarly works instead of Furuli’s personal agenda:

Watch Tower of Allegheny Historical Tour James S. Holmes
Jehovah's Witnesses in Europe by Katarzyna Stokosa Gerhard Besier
Jehovah’s Witnesses: Continuity and Change by George D. Chryssides
Jehovah's Witnesses and the Secular World: From the 1870s to the Present (Histories of the Sacred and Secular, 1700-2000) Zoe Knox

Will conclude with one final thought: During 2001 a person who actively opposed Witnesses wrote: "The most important external factor is … the controlling organization, the Watchtower society (WTS)." To which a JW replied, “It is a bold and utterly false claim to say that the Watchtower Society is the authority for Jehovah's Witnesses and not the Bible. … You have completely misunderstood the theocratic arrangement among Jehovah's Witnesses and misinterpret it as some form of spiritual dictatorship. However, the truth is that responsible persons function as teachers and not as prophets.”- As written by Rolf Furuli himself
07 July 2020 (05:51) 
Si es muy triste. El diablo es fuerte. El libro is muy malo tambien.
07 July 2020 (06:13) 
Tony Bo
The reviewer ''Wonderful'' wants to defend the Watchtower. Whether you are a Watchtower apologist or not. I don't know. But I bet you Watchtower is a doomsday cult.

They are moving from a publishing company to a real estate company. In fact, there were not Governing Body in the first century. No Faithful and Discreet Slave class.

You too don't be a HYPOCRATE. This is a must read book by every JW.
10 July 2020 (03:26) 
J. Lewis
Yes he contradicts himself repeatedly and comes off as foolish, on a tangent as it were. This makes me seriously question anything he had to say about Bible chronology having to do with 607 B.C. to 1914. One has to consider the source.
11 July 2020 (20:41) 
Hello Wonderful
I was reading your criticism of the book. What are you an English teacher? I want you to know if you really study and do research you will learn that the bible is filled with allegories rewritten by the catholics most of the events never happened in the so called Bible that was stolen. So, both of you don't know what you're talking about. Christianity ha ha ha!
21 July 2020 (21:37) 
Qué lástima! No conozco a R. Furili, pero he sentido aprecio por él por sus buenas obras. Me duele que haya dejado la Organización, y espero que regrese pronto.
29 July 2020 (20:47) 
To Wonderful
To suggest WT claim in their 1946 article “there is not an infallible earthly authority to interpret the Bible” should be examined thru this other WT articles -w81 8/15 pp25-30 par.14)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...
-W67 7/1 pp395 paragraph 9)But, understanding of Scriptural doctrines, laws and principles does not automatically come to a person. God is not dealing with individuals apart from his earthly organization.
-W67 10/1 page 587 parr. 9)Thus 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.
W51 6/15 pp373-381 paragraph 11) Hence, besides individually possessing God’s Word, we need a theocratic organization. Yes, besides having God’s spirit of illumination, a Christian needs Jehovah’s theocratic organization in order to understand the Bible.
-W1910 9/15 Reprints 4686 page 297 par.7
Furthermore, not only do we find that people cannot see the divine plan in studying the bible by itself...if he had merely read the scriptures studies with their reference and had not read a page of the bible, as such, he would be in the light of the scriptures.
Furuli certainly is hurt but is not that far off, Judge for yourselves the WT long held position.
24 October 2020 (20:44) 
You can write a book review and share your experiences. Other readers will always be interested in your opinion of the books you've read. Whether you've loved the book or not, if you give your honest and detailed thoughts then people will find new books that are right for them.