Often, an ex-Jehovah’s Witness will make the claim that when a new teaching appears in the Watchtower, all Jehovah’s Witnesses are required to believe it without question. It is a strong accusation, and if true, would be a major piece of evidence for the Watchtower Organization to be, not a religion, but an uninspired cult. But is this accusation true? Many Jehovah’s Witnesses deny that it is. However, the truth of the matter cannot be found simply in verbal assurances. The printed material of the Watchtower Society itself must be examined, for it is the printed page that reveals the attitude of the organization as a whole on the matter, and serves as a more reliable record for it.

During the first stage of ones induction into the Watchtower Organization, questions and doubts are actually welcomed. Speaking from personal experience, I remember feeling a certain exhilaration explaining the finer points of my religious beliefs to those who had questions. There is no doubt that Jehovah’s Witnesses are tolerant of being questioned. However, much more breathing room is given to the bible student than to the full-fledged baptized Jehovah’s Witness. How do Jehovah’s Witnesses feel about those who are already baptized asking questions and having doubts? Page 22 ofThe Watchtower of January 15,1983 answers [emphasis mine]:

“Avoid… questioning the counsel that is provided by God’s visible organization…. some who point out that the organization has had to make some adjustments before, and so they argue: “This shows that we have to make up our own mind on what to believe.” This is independent thinking. Why is it so dangerous?”

Also, on page 441 of the 1974 Watchtower volume (July 15 issue):

“The point is that Christians have implicit trust in their heavenly Father; they do not question what he tells them through his written Word and organization.”

The words are clear as day. The line is drawn in the sand. If one questions the organization (The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society), he is not a Christian, period. In the second quote, they are equating what they call God’s written word (The Bible) with themselves. Questioning their teachings is equated to questioning the Bible itself. The words of the organization are the words of God.

From the written word of the Watchtower organization it is clear that although they may make a show of tolerating questions and doubt from new recruits, this is no longer the case for them after making the commitment.

So does this mean that asking a question about a doctrine is not tolerated at all? No. The articles cited are not implying that questions they term “sincere” are not allowed. The context of the sentences imply that their use of the word “question” implies a challenge to their doctrine. So questions are tolerated, but only if the answers given satisfy. If they are not satisfying, Witnesses are instructed to suppress their thoughts on the matter, and simply “wait on Jehovah” to make it clear at a later date. If the Witness cannot suppress his or her thoughts, and allows it to grow into doubt, then he or she faces excommunication, or disfellowshipping as the JWs term it.

Consider, lastly, the following court transcript. The Douglas Walsh trial took place in Scotland in 1954. It was convened to determine if all baptized Jehovah’s Witnesses legally were ordained ministers and thus exempt from military service. The following testimony was given by the late president of the Watchtower Society, Frederick W. Franz (he was not the president at the time of this hearing, emphasis added):

Q. In addition to these regular publications do you prepare and issue a number of theological pamphlets and books from time to time?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you tell me this; are these theological publications and the semi-monthly periodicals used for discussion of statements of doctrine?

A. Yes.

Q. Are these statements of doctrine held to be authoritative within the Society?

A. Yes.

Q. Is their acceptance a matter of choice, or is it obligatory on all those who wish to be and remain members of the Society?

A. It is obligatory.

Here, clear as day, a high official of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society said in open court that the statements made in the literature of Jehovah’s Witnesses are to be accepted by all members. The questioning continued.

Q. Did [Pastor Russell] not fix 1874 as some other crucial date?

A. 1874 used to be understood as the date of Jesus’ Second Coming spiritually.

Q. Do you say, used to be understood?

A. That is right.

Q. That was issued as a fact which was to be accepted by all who were Jehovah’s Witnesses?

A. Yes.

Q. That is no longer now accepted, is it?

A. No.

Q. But it was a calculation which is no longer accepted by the Board of Directors of the Society?

A. That is correct.

Q. So that am I correct, I am just anxious to canvas the position; it became the bounden duty of the Witnesses to accept this miscalculation?

A. Yes.

Q. So that what is published as the truth today by the Society may have to be admitted to be wrong in a few years?

A. We have to wait and see.

Q. And in the meantime the body of Jehovah’s Witnesses have been following error?

A. They have been following misconstructions on the Scriptures.

Q. Error?

A. Well, error.

Not only are Jehovah’s Witnesses required to believe what is printed, they are required to believe it despite the fact that it may be in error! Also, notice the use of polished words. Wrong teachings aren’t “errors,” they are “misconstructions.”

A. These [Watchtower Society] books give an exposition on the whole Scriptures.

Q. But an authoritative exposition?

A. They submit the Bible or the statements that are therein made, and the individual examines the statement and then the Scripture to see that the statement is Scripturally supported.

Q. He what?

A. He examines the Scripture to see whether the statement is supported by the Scripture. As the Apostle says: “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good”.

Q. I understood the position to be - do please correct me if I am wrong - that a member of the Jehovah’s Witnesses must accept as a true Scripture and interpretation what is given in the books I referred you to?

A. But he does not compulsorily do so, he is given his Christian right of examining the Scriptures to confirm that this is Scripturally sustained.

Q. And if he finds that the Scripture is not sustained by the books, or vice versa, what does he do?

A. The Scripture is there in support of the statement, that is why it is put there.

Q. What does a man do if he finds a disharmony between the Scripture and those books?

A. You will have to produce me a man who does find that, then I can answer, or he will answer.

It is quite incredulous to claim that no one has ever found a disharmony between scripture and Watchtower publication. Franz knew full well that back then, just as well as today, and as printed in past and current literature, Witnesses who don’t agree with the printed page from the Watchtower are excommunicated, separated from their family and friends. Franz is unwilling to admit that the present truth at the time could have been in error, despite testifying earlier in the affirmative!

Q. Did you imply that the individual member has the right of reading the books and the Bible and forming his own view as to the proper interpretation of Holy Writ?

A. He comes - - -

Q. Would you say yes or no, and then qualify?

A. No. Do you want me to qualify now?

Q. Yes, if you wish?

A. The Scripture is there given in support of the statement, and therefore the individual when he looks up the Scripture and thereby verifies the statement, then he comes to the Scriptural view of the matter, Scriptural understanding as it is written in Acts, the seventeenth chapter and the eleventh verse, that the Bereans were more noble than those of Thessalonica in that they received the Word with all readiness, and they searched the Scripture to see whether those things were so, and we instruct to follow that noble course of the Bereans in searching the Scripture to see whether these things were so.

Q. A Witness has no alternative, has he, to accept as authoritative and to be obeyed instructions issued in the “Watchtower” or the “Informant” or “Awake”?

A. He must accept those.

This sums up the attitude nicely. One is free to examine the scriptures, but only to confirm what the Watchtower Society has already printed. If the Bereans were under some sort of obligation to believe what Paul had told them, confirming it in the scriptures would have been pointless! If this was the case, then Paul wouldn’t have even mentioned it! What’s the point of “searching the Scriptures” when the conclusion is already determined? Additionally, Paul was proving to them that Jesus Christ was the messiah, not of complex doctrinal issues that he himself had determined.

It is clear from their own literature, and recorded testimony in open court, that Jehovah’s Witnesses hold the words of the Watchtower Society equal to that of the Bible in the sense that both are obligatory for the membership to accept.