Logical Questions To Ponder:
"The Jehovah's Witnesses Organization," seems to be able to identify the Evangelical Protestant fundamentalists around them, yet they are unable to comprehend that the Watchtower Society itself, at the same time discribe themselves fundamentalists. In 1997, in an attempt to deal with the obvious fact that people who know Jehovah's Witnesses consider them fundamentalists, the Watchtower published an article about the subject:
"The Spread of Fundamentalism"
"A fundamentalist is one who holds rigidly to traditional, conservative religious values. The meaning of "fundamentalism" will be discussed more fully in the next article." (Watchtower, March 1, 1997, p. 3)
As we know, the Watchtower Society does hold "rigidly to traditional, conservative religious values". True, they have their own "specialties" but must be considered extremely rigid. In the next article the Watchtower continues and attempts to make a definition of fundamentalism that in their mind will exclude Jehovah's Witnesses:
"Fundamentalism -- What Is It?"
"Fundamentalists hanker after the old certainties, and some of them strive to bring their communities and nations back to what they feel are proper moral and doctrinal foundations. They do all in their power to force others to live according to a "correct" moral code and system of doctrinal beliefs. A fundamentalist is strongly convinced that he is right and others are wrong." (Watchtower, March 1, 1997, p. 4)
The above definition as printed in the Watchtower gives us, apart from some minor nuances an amazingly accurate description of the Watchtower Society. There is however no doubts that the Watchtower Society is extremely good at "forcing" on their own members a ""correct" moral code and system of doctrinal beliefs." Anyone half familiar with the Watchtower Society knows that, like the Protestant fundamentalists, Jehovah's Witnesses are "strongly convinced that [they are] right and others are wrong." But it gets even worse.
"Jehovah's Witnesses are concerned about the erosion of spirituality in the world and the immorality and religious uncertainty that pervade society. As a result, they are sometimes called fundamentalists. But are they? No. While they have strong religious convictions, they are not fundamentalists in the sense that the term has come to be used. They do not pressure political leaders to promote a certain point of view, and they do not resort to demonstrations and violence against those with whom they disagree. They have found a better way. They imitate their Leader, Jesus Christ." (Watchtower, March 1, 1997, p. 6)
There is no doubt that the Watchtower Society try to distance themselves from other fundamentalists by establishing the idea that in spite of their fundamentalist views, the Watchtower Society unlike the other fundamentalists doesn't use political means to "force" their ideas on other people, as if that has anything to do with being a ridgid religion or not. There is in reality little difference between them and the Protestant and Catholic fundamentalists.
Can you believe that the Watchtower also quoted this?
"Fundamentalist religions often try to force from the Bible what it simply does not contain --." (Watchtower, April 1, 1997, p. 4)
You mean like JW's fornal dress codes?
"Fundamentalism, while claiming to defend the Bible, has also actually undermined its authority. Fundamentalism undermines the Bible is by teaching unscriptural doctrines, such as eternal torment in hellfire, and at times by promoting standards of conduct other than those required by Scripture, such as forbidding the consumption of alcoholic beverages or the use of makeup by women. In these ways Fundamentalism has caused people to reject the Bible's message as naive, unreasonable, and unscientific." (Awake!, October 22, 1989, pp. 19, 20)
The Watchtower Society make all kinds of non-Biblical rules about beards, hairstyle, dress codes etc., all of this of course defames the "Bible message" just as much as any other fundamentalist view. No matter how much they try to deny it, the Watchtower Society proves itself to indeed be religious fundamentalists. There a list list of basic ideas or rules that JW's subscribe to that fundamentalist in nature:
1. You must attend 5 meetings a week, unless sick.
2. You are to devote at least 10 hours a month in the field service (going door-to-door preaching) to be considered "good association".
3. Marriage and/or becoming a pioneer and/or serving at Bethel are THEE "ONLY" worthy life choices/acceptable careers one should reach out for. Women MUST submit to men as their leaders. Compare to the Southern Baptists statement that women should "graciously submit to men."
4. You can not join ANY social clubs, YMCA, A/A or be on any school team.
5. A "mature Christian" should not celebrate birthdays and although JW leaders admit that forbidding the celebration of birthdays can not be Biblically backed and thus a "personal matter that should be left up to the individual," ... nevertheless if you chose to celebrate birthdays or harvest fests, you'll be labeled "spiritually weak".
Up untill 2000, Bob Jones forbid whites and blacks from dating. He said though it was not precisley backed in the Bible it was, "Based on Bibical Principles."
6.. Single adults, even those over 21, can not hang out together unless a chaperone is present.
Jones University does not let couples hold hands.
7. You must avoid ALL socializing with non-JW's, including school mates, work mates, neighbors and family members...
Failure to meet any of these requirements ("suggestions") will result in being avoided by others in the congregations and thus you are considered "spiritually weak" or "worldly".
From My Own Bio:
"Finally after being in JW for 26 years, I wondered: What did ANY of this have to do with my belief in having a personal relationship with Jah Jehovah and his Son, Jesus Christ, or my belief in a unitarian view of God or my belief in the restoration of the earth? Yes, what DID all these non-Biblically backed WT Society "suggestions"/rules have to do with these basic essential Bible truths? This question to me was every bit as mysterious as Christendom's Trinity belief. My conscience bothered me over all this because, like all JW's, I knew I could not voice these questions for fear of being instantly labeled, "a complainer against the 'WORD'" and that thus once again the confusion would come into play of merging the basic Bible truth beliefs actually found in the Bible with the WT Society's non-optional "suggestions"/opinions and that both of these would be merged together to form "God's Word" and thus to question THEIR "suggestions" would equal questioning Jehovah's own Word."
Shortly after Rutherford founded the Jehovah's Witnesses in 1931, they developed a "narrow salvation" theology similar to that taught by the extreamist branches Fundamental Protestants. Both of these groups teach that one must accept Jesus now (through the "window" of their doctrinal systems) or else be eternally lost. That means that comparatively few of the groaning billions of earth's humanity may expect to enjoy the salvation our God has provided in His Son. This places the 'Born Again' Evangelical/Fundamental Protestants and Jehovah's Witnesses poles apart from even Pastor Russell's orginal vision and belief of a' "Broad Salvation" theology which extended to all. In Contrast with Fundamental forms of Christianity, Progressive Christianties teaches a fair chance at salvation for all.
