Criticism of Jehovah's Witnesses

Jehovah's Witnesses have attracted criticism from mainstream Christianity, some members of the medical community, former members and some commentators over their beliefs and practices. The religion has been accused of doctrinal inconsistency and reversals, false predictions, mistranslation of the Bible, harsh treatment of former members and autocratic and coercive leadership. Criticism has also focused on their rejection of blood transfusions, particularly in life-threatening medical situations, and claims that they have failed to report cases of sexual abuse to the authorities. Many of the claims are denied by Jehovah's Witnesses and some have also been disputed by courts and religious scholars.

Biblical criticisms

The Watch Tower Society has been criticized for its refusal to reveal the names and academic credentials of the translators of its New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures (NWT). The Society has claimed members of the NWT's translation committee wished to remain anonymous in order to exalt only the name of God, The Watchtower stating that the educational qualifications of the translators were unimportant and that "the translation itself testifies to their qualifications". Raymond Franz, a former member of the Governing Body, has claimed that of the four men he says constituted the committee, only one—its principal translator, his uncle Frederick Franz—had sufficient knowledge of biblical languages to have attempted the project. Frederick Franz had studied Greek for two years and was self-taught in Hebrew.

Much criticism of the NWT involves the rendering of certain texts considered to be biased towards specific Witness practices and doctrines. These include the use of "torture stake" instead of "cross" throughout the New Testament; the rendering of John 1:1, with the insertion of the indefinite article ("a") in its rendering to give "the Word was a god"; Romans 10:10, which uses the term "public declaration", which may reinforce the imperative to engage in public preaching; John 17:3, which uses the term "taking in knowledge" rather than "know" to suggest that salvation is dependent on ongoing study, and the placement of the comma in Luke 23:43, which affects the timing of the fulfillment of Jesus' promise to the thief at Calvary.

Also criticized is the NWT's insertion of the name Jehovah 237 times in the New Testament without evidence that the name existed in the original Greek manuscripts. Watch Tower publications have claimed that the name was "restored" on a sound basis, stating that when New Testament writers quote earlier Old Testament scriptures containing the Tetragrammaton (יהוה), "the translator has the right to render Kyrios ("LORD") as Jehovah." The NWT mentions twenty-seven other translations which have similarly rendered Kyrios as a form of the name Jehovah, stating that there is only one verse where the NWT does so without agreement from other translations.

The Society has claimed its translation "courageously restores God’s name, Jehovah, to its proper place in the Biblical text, is free from the bias of religious traditionalism, and ... gives the literal meaning of God’s Word as accurately as possible." Jason BeDuhn, associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff, Arizona, compared major translations for accuracy. He wrote that the NWT's introduction of the name "Jehovah" into the New Testament 237 times was "not accurate translation by the most basic principle of accuracy". BeDuhn also stated that whilst there are "a handful of examples of bias in the [New World Translation (NW)]", that "most of the differences are due to the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal, conservative translation of the original expressions of the New Testament writers." He concluded that "the NW and [another translation] are not bias free, and they are not perfect translations. But they are remarkably good translations ... often better than [the other six translations analyzed]."

Doctrinal criticisms

Claims of false prophecy

The beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses are founded on the basis of its teachings about the second coming of Christ, the Millennium and the Kingdom of God. Its publications have therefore made, and continue to make, predictions about world events they believe were prophesied in the Bible. The failure of events predicted in Watch Tower publications since 1881 has led to the alteration or abandonment of some doctrines as part of a process the Watch Tower Society has described as progressive revelation, in which God gradually leads his followers to a clearer understanding of his will. Its publications have claimed that God has used Jehovah's Witnesses and the International Bible Students (the organisation's earlier name) as a prophet. Critics including Associate Professor James A. Beverley have accused the religion of false prophecy for making those predictions, particularly because of assertions in some cases that the predictions were beyond doubt or had been approved by God. Beverley says the Watch Tower Society has passed judgment on others who have false predicted the end of the world (he cites a 1968 Awake! that says other groups were as "guilty of false prophesying" after having "predicted an 'end to the world', even announcing a specific date'",) but describes its record of telling the future as "pathetic".

Watch Tower publications have stated that Christians trust God and therefore "they do not question what he tells them through his written Word and organization". Such statements have led to criticism that members of the religion are expected to place "unwavering trust" in Watch Tower predictions and face expulsion if they do not accept its teachings, even though many of its predictions have subsequently been set aside.

The Watch Tower Society rejects accusations that it is a false prophet. It says its explanations of Bible prophecy are not infallible and its predictions are not claimed explicitly as "the words of Jehovah". It states that some of its expectations have needed adjustment because of eagerness for God's Kingdom, but that those adjustments are no reason to "call into question the whole body of truth." Raymond Franz claims that the Watch Tower Society tries to evade its responsibility when citing human fallibility as a defense, adding that the Society represents itself as God's appointed spokesman and throughout its history has made many emphatic predictions. Franz adds that the organization's eagerness for the Millennium does not give it license to impugn the motives of those who fail to accept its predictions.

Unfulfilled predictions

Since the earliest writings of Watch Tower Society founder, Charles Taze Russell, in the mid-1870s, the society's publications have asserted the reliability of their predictions, with emphatic language such as "established truth" and "indisputable." Predictions made in 1892 that Armageddon would take place in October 1914 asserted the date was "definitely marked in Scripture," and Watch Tower editor Charles Taze Russell declared: "We see no reason for changing the figures—nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours." Predictions about the beginning of Christ's thousand-year reign in 1925 were said to be "correct beyond a doubt," "absolutely and unqualifiedly correct," "indisputable" and bearing "the stamp of approval of Almighty God."

Watch Tower publications have occasionally acknowledged that they have "suggested dates that turned out to be incorrect" as a result of their "eagerness for Jesus’ second coming," adding that they had never claimed that the predictions were "the words of Jehovah." The publications have at times simply dismissed their previous statements, instead asserting that members had "read into the Watch Tower statements that were never intended," and that the beliefs of members were "based on wrong premises." Other failed predictions are ignored completely. One book, The Finished Mystery (1917), applied events to the years 1918–1925 that were earlier held to occur prior to 1914. When some of those events again failed to transpire, the 1926 edition of the book altered the statements and removed the dates.

In 1975, as publications and public talks continued to build expectations that Armageddon would take place that year, Governing Body member Frederick Franz announced at a Witness convention in Toronto that he was "looking forward confidently" to what the autumn would bring; at another Toronto convention the following year, he announced that Armageddon had not occurred because Witnesses had been expecting it. Author James Penton claimed Franz meant that because Jesus had stated that no one would know the "day or the hour" of his return, the Witnesses should not have believed they could know that it would occur in 1975. Penton commented: "Franz placed the blame for the fiasco on the entire Witness community."

Predictions (by date of publication) include:

• 1877: Christ's kingdom would hold full sway over the earth in 1914; the Jews, as a people, would be restored to God's favour; the "saints" would be carried to heaven.
• 1891: 1914 would be "the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men."
• 1904: "World-wide anarchy" would follow the end of the Gentile Times in 1914.
• 1916: World War I would terminate in Armageddon and the rapture of the "saints".
• 1917: In 1918, Christendom would go down as a system to oblivion and be succeeded by revolutionary governments. God would "destroy the churches wholesale and the church members by the millions." Church members would "perish by the sword of war, revolution and anarchy". The dead would lie unburied. In 1920 all earthly governments would disappear, with worldwide anarchy prevailing.
• 1920: Messiah's kingdom would be established in 1925 and bring worldwide peace. God would begin restoring the earth. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and other faithful patriarchs would be resurrected to perfect human life and be made princes and rulers, the visible representatives of the New Order on earth. Those who showed themselves obedient to God would never die.
• 1922: The antitypical "jubilee" that would mark God's intervention in earthly affairs in 1925 would take place in "probably the fall" of that year. The chronology was described as "correct beyond a doubt", "absolutely and unqualifiedly correct", bearing "the stamp of approval of Almighty God" and "too sublime to be the result of chance or of human invention".
• 1924: God's restoration of the Earth would begin "shortly after" October 1, 1925. Jerusalem would be made the world's capital. Resurrected "princes" such as Abel, Noah, Moses and John the Baptist would give instructions to their subjects around the world by radio, and aeroplanes would transport people to and from Jerusalem from all parts of the globe in just "a few hours".
• 1938: In 1938, Armaggedon was too close for marriage or child bearing.
• 1941: There were only "months" remaining until Armageddon.
• 1942: Armageddon was "immediately before us."
• 1966: It would be 6000 years since man's creation in the fall of 1975 and it would be "appropriate" for Christ's thousand-year reign to begin at that time. Time was "running out, no question about that." The "immediate future" was "certain to be filled with climactic events ... within a few years at most", the final parts of Bible prophecy relating to the "last days" would undergo fulfillment as Christ's reign began.
• 1968: No one could say "with certainty" that the battle of Armageddon would begin in 1975, but time was "running out rapidly" with "earthshaking events" soon to take place. In March 1968 there was a "short period of time left", with "only about ninety months left before 6000 years of man's existence on earth is completed".
• 1969: Human existence would not last long enough for young people to grow old; the world system would end "in a few years". Young Witnesses were told not to bother pursuing tertiary education for this reason.
• 1974: There was just a "short time remaining before the wicked world's end" and Witnesses were commended for selling their homes and property to "finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service".
• 1984: There were "many indications" that "the end" was closer than the end of the 20th century.

See also: Eschatology of Jehovah's Witnesses

See also: Unfulfilled religious predictions

Changes of doctrine

History of Eschatological Doctrine
	Last Days begin	Start of Christ's Presence	Christ made King	Resurrection of 144,000	Judgment of Religion	Separating Sheep & Goats	Great Tribulation
1879–1920	1799	1874	1878			during Millennium	1914, 1915, 1918, 1920
1920–1923			1914	1878	1878		1925
1923–1925						during Christ's presence
1925–1927							within generation of 1914
1927–1929				1918
1929–1930	1914
1930–1966	1914				1919
1966–1975							1975?
1975–1995							within generation of 1914
1995–present						during Great Tribulation	imminent

See also: Development of Jehovah's Witnesses doctrine

Although Watch Tower Society literature claims the Society's founder, Charles Taze Russell, was directed by God's Holy Spirit, through which he received "flashes of light", it has substantially altered doctrines since its inception and abandoned many of Russell's teachings. Many of the changes have involved biblical chronology that had earlier been claimed as beyond question.

• Date of beginning of Christ's kingdom rule. Russell taught that Jesus had assumed kingly power in April 1878. In 1922, Joseph Rutherford altered the date to 1914.
• Date of resurrection of anointed Christians. After the failure of predictions that Christ's chosen "saints" would be carried away to heaven in 1878, Russell developed the teaching that those "dying in the Lord" from 1878 forward would have an immediate heavenly resurrection. The Watch Tower confirmed the doctrine in 1925, but two years later asserted this date was wrong and that the beginning of the instant resurrection to heaven for faithful Christians was from 1918.
• Great Pyramid as a "stone witness" of God. Russell wrote in 1910 that God had the Great Pyramid of Giza in Egypt built as a testimony to the truth of the Bible and proof of its chronology identifying the "last days". In 1928 Rutherford rejected the doctrine and claimed the Pyramid had been built under the direction of Satan.
• Identity of "faithful and wise servant". Russell initially believed the "faithful and wise servant" of Matthew 24:45 was "every member of this body of Christ ... the whole body individually and collectively". By 1886 he had altered his view and began explaining it was a person, not the Christian church. Russell accepted claims by Bible Students that he was that "servant" and in 1909 described as his "opponents" those who would apply the term "faithful and wise servant" to "all the members of the church of Christ" rather than to an individual. By 1927 the Watch Tower Society had abandoned Russell's view and was teaching it was "a collective servant".
• Beginning of the "last days". From the earliest issues of the Watch Tower, Russell promoted the belief that the "last days" had begun in 1799 and would end in 1914. As late as 1921 Watch Tower publications were still claiming the last days had begun in 1799. In 1930 that date was abandoned and 1914 was fixed as the beginning of the last days.
• Jews' role in God's Kingdom. Russell followed the view of Nelson H. Barbour, who believed that in 1914 Christ's kingdom would take power over all the earth and the Jews, as a people, would be restored to God's favour. In 1889 Russell wrote that with the completion of the "Gentile Times" in 1914, Israel's "blindness" would subside and they would convert to Christianity. The book Life (1929) noted that the return of Jews to Palestine signalled the end was very close, because Jews would "have the favors first and thereafter all others who obey the Lord" under God's restoration of his kingdom. In 1932 that belief was abandoned and from that date the Watch Tower Society taught that Witnesses alone were the Israel of God.
• Date of Christ's invisible presence. The Watch Tower Society taught for more than 60 years that this began in 1874, insisting in 1922 that the date was "clearly indicated" and had been given the stamp of authority by God "beyond any possibility of erasure" and warning that doubting the date would lead to a "repudiation of God and our Lord Jesus Christ and the blood with which we were bought". In 1943 the society moved the event to 1914.
• Identity of the "superior authorities". Russell taught that the "superior authorities" of Romans 13:1, to whom Christians had to show subjection and obedience, were governmental authorities. In 1929 The Watchtower discarded this view, stating categorically the term referred only to God and Christ, and saying the change of doctrine was evidence of "advancing light" of truth shining forth to God's chosen people. A 1952 The Watchtower study stated that the words of Romans 13 "could never have applied to the political powers of Caesar’s world as wrongly claimed by the clergy of Christendom" and a 1960 The Watchtower described the earlier view as a factor that had caused the Bible Student movement to be "unclean" in God's eyes during the 1914-18 period. Two years later, in 1962, The Watchtower reverted to Russell's initial doctrine.
• Identity and function of the Governing Body. Frequent mentions of the term "Governing Body" began in Watch Tower Society literature in the 1970s. The Governing Body was initially identified obliquely as the Watch Tower Society's seven-member Board of Directors, although the Board at that time played no role in establishing Watchtower doctrines or making editorial and publishing decisions. Those decisions were made entirely by the Society president, who exercised unrestricted freedom. Such had existed from the Watch Tower Society's origins: a 1923 Watch Tower noted that Russell alone directed the policy and course of the Society "without regard to any other person on earth" and both his successors, Rutherford and Knorr, also acted alone in establishing Watch Tower doctrines. An organizational change on January 1, 1976 for the first time gave the Governing Body the power to rule on doctrines and become the supreme ruling council of Jehovah's Witnesses. Despite this, The Watchtower in 1971 claimed that a Governing Body of anointed Christians had existed since the 19th century to govern the affairs of God's anointed people.
• Treatment of disfellowshipped persons. In the 1950s when disfellowshipping became common, Witnesses were to have nothing to do with expelled members, not conversing or showing them recognition. Family members of the expelled person were permitted occasional "contacts absolutely necessary in matters pertaining to family interests", but could not discuss spiritual matters with them. In 1974 The Watchtower, acknowledging some unbalanced Witnesses had displayed unkind, inhumane and possibly cruel attitudes to those expelled, relaxed restrictions on family contact, allowing families to choose for themselves the extent of association,, including whether or not to discuss some spiritual matters. In 1981, a reversal of policy occurred, with Witnesses instructed to avoid all spiritual interaction with disfellowshipped ones, including even a close relative. Witnesses were instructed to avoid greeting disfellowshipped persons. Parents were permitted to care for the physical needs of a disfellowshipped minor child. An ill parent or physically or emotionally ill child could be accepted back into the home "for a time". Witnesses were instructed not to eat with a disfellowshipped relative and were warned that emotional influence could soften their resolve. In 1980 the Witnesses' Brooklyn headquarters advised travelling overseers that a person need not be promoting "apostate views" to warrant disfellowshipping; it advised that "appropriate judicial action" be taken against a person who "continues to believe the apostate ideas and rejects what he has been provided" through The Watchtower. The rules on shunning were extended in 1981 to include those who had resigned from the religion voluntarily.
• Fall of "Babylon the Great". Russell taught that the fall of the "world empire of false religion" had taken place in 1878 and predicted "Babylon's" complete destruction in 1914. After that date passed, Rutherford, in 1917, claimed religion's final destruction would take place in 1918, explaining God would destroy churches "wholesale" and that "Christendom shall go down as a system to oblivion". In 1988 the Watch Tower Society claimed Babylon had actually fallen in 1919 "as far as having any captive hold on God's people was concerned" (the fall indicated by the release from prison in 1919 of senior Watchtower figures), with her "final destruction" "into oblivion, never to recover", expected once again "in the near future".

United Nations association

Main article: Jehovah's Witnesses and the United Nations

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that the United Nations is one of the 'superior authorities' that exist by God's permission, and that it presently serves a purpose in maintaining order, but they refuse to give it political support or consider it as the means to achieve peace and security. Jehovah's Witnesses also believe that the UN is the "image of the wild beast" of Revelation 13:1-18, and the second fulfillment of the "abominable thing that causes desolation" from Matthew 24:15 and the political means that will be used for the devastation of organized false religion worldwide, and that, like all other political powers, it will be destroyed and replaced by God's heavenly Kingdom. Jehovah's Witnesses have denounced other religious organizations for having offered political support to the UN.

On October 8, 2001 an article was published in the British Guardian newspaper questioning the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society's registration as a non-governmental organization (NGO) with the United Nations Department of Public Information and accusing the Watch Tower Society of hypocrisy. Within days of the article's publication, the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society submitted a formal request for disassociation, removing all association with the United Nations Department of Public Information, and released a letter stating that the reason for becoming associated with the United Nations Department of Information (DPI) was to access their facilities, and that they had not been aware of the change in language contained in the criteria for NGO association. When the Watch Tower Society sought NGO association, "the organization agreed to meet criteria for association, including support and respect of the principles of the Charter of the United Nations", acknowledging that the purpose of membership is to "promote knowledge of the principles and activities of the United Nations." The official UN/DPI website states that "association of NGOs with DPI does not constitute their incorporation into the United Nations system."

Social criticisms

Blood

Main article: Jehovah's Witnesses and blood transfusions

Jehovah's Witnesses reject transfusions of whole allogenic blood and its primary components (red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets and plasma), and transfusions of stored autologous blood or its primary components. As a doctrine, Jehovah's Witnesses do not reject transfusion of whole autologous blood so long as it is not stored prior to surgery (e.g. peri-operative extraction and transfusion of autologous blood). This religious position is due to their belief that blood is sacred and represents life in God's eyes. Jehovah's Witnesses understand scriptures such as Leviticus 17:10-14 (which speaks of not eating blood) to include taking blood into the body via a transfusion. Controversy has stemmed, however, from what critics state are inconsistencies in Witness policies on blood, claims that Witness patients are coerced into refusing blood and that Watch Tower literature distorts facts about transfusions and fails to provide information that would allow Witnesses to make an informed decision on the issue.

Fractions and components

In the case of minor fractions derived from blood, each individual is directed to follow their own conscience on whether these are acceptable. This is because it is difficult to define at what point blood is no longer blood. As a substance is broken down into smaller and smaller parts it may or may not be considered the original substance. Therefore some of Jehovah's Witnesses personally choose to accept the use of blood fractions and some do not. However, if a fraction "makes up a significant portion of that component" or "carries out the key function of a primary component" it may be objectionable to them.

Such a stance of dividing blood into major components and minor fractions rather than either accepting all blood or requiring all blood components to be poured out onto the ground has led to criticism from organizations such as the Associated Jehovah's Witnesses for Reform on Blood. Witnesses respond that blood as the fluid per se is not the real issue. They say the real issue is respect and obedience regarding blood, which they perceive as being God's personal property. Members are allowed to eat meat that still contains small traces of blood remaining. Once blood is drained from an animal, the respect has been shown to God and then a person can eat the meat. Jehovah's Witnesses view of meat and blood is therefore different from the Jewish view that goes to great lengths to remove even minor traces of blood.

According to lawyer Kerry Louderback-Wood, a former Jehovah's Witness, the Watch Tower Society misrepresents the scope of allowed fractions. If taken together, they "total the entire volume of blood they came from". An example of this can be seen in blood plasma, which consists of 90-96% water. The remaining amount consists mainly of albumin, globulins, fibrinogen and coagulation factors. These four fractions are allowable for use, but only if taken separately. Critics have likened this to banning the eating of a ham and cheese sandwich but allowing the eating of bread, ham and cheese separately.

The human body contains between 2–3 kg of leukocytes (white blood cells), but only about 3% of these are in the blood. White blood cells are considered a major component of blood and therefore forbidden. Breast milk contains hundreds of thousands of white blood cells per milliliter, however this is not forbidden.

Storing and donation

Jehovah's Witnesses believe that storing blood violates direction from the Bible to 'pour blood out onto the ground'. They do not donate blood except for uses they've individually pre-approved. However, they are told that acceptance of blood fractions from donated blood is a matter of conscience. A 2006 issue of Jehovah's Witnesses' newsletter Our Kingdom Ministry stated, "Although [Jehovah's Witnesses] do not donate or store their own blood for transfusion purposes, some procedures or tests involving an individual’s blood are not so clearly in conflict with Bible principles. Therefore, each individual should make a conscientious decision" [emphasis added]. Critics have challenged these policies because acceptable blood fractions can only be derived from stored blood provided by donors.

Legal considerations

Regardless of the medical considerations, Jehovah Witnesses advocate that physicians should uphold the right of a patient to choose what treatments they do or do not accept (though a Witness is subject to religious sanctions if they exercise their right to choose a blood transfusion). Accordingly, US courts tend not to hold physicians responsible for adverse health effects that a patient incurred out of his or her own requests. However, the point of view that physicians must, in all circumstances, abide by the religious wishes of the patients is not acknowledged by all jurisdictions (for one example, see France).

The situation has been controversial, particularly in the case of children. In the United States, many physicians will agree to explore and exhaust all non-blood alternatives in the treatment of children at the request of their legal guardians. However, some state laws require physicians to administer blood-based treatment to minors if it is their professional opinion that it is necessary to prevent immediate death or severe permanent damage.

Kerry Louderback-Wood has claimed that Jehovah's Witnesses' legal corporations are potentially liable to significant claims for compensation if the religion misrepresents the medical risks of blood transfusions. Wood claims that constitutional guarantees of freedom of religion do not remove the legal responsibility that every person or organization has regarding misrepresenting secular fact.

Animal blood

The Watchtower has stated that "Various medical products have been obtained from biological sources, either animal or human ... Such commercialization of ... blood is hardly tempting for true Christians, who guide their thinking by God's perfect law. Our Creator views blood as sacred, representing God-given life ... blood removed from a creature was to be poured out on the ground, disposed of."

Self-determination

Critics of Jehovah's Witnesses, including former Witness Randall Watters, Timothy Campbell, David Grosshoeme, Kaynor Weishaupt and Jan Groenveld, object to Witness policy and behavior where, in their view, the integrity of family relationships and the capacity of members to exercise freedom of mind is impacted. The religion has been accused of having a dogmatic and authoritarian form of leadership, reinforced with a disciplinary system that encourages informers and includes the sanctions of the disfellowshipping and possible lifetime shunning of members.

An American social educator, John B. Brown II, in a paper presented to a 2005 conference of the Center for Studies on New Religions, stated that some members of the anti-cult movement themselves infringed and violated the human rights and religious freedom of Jehovah’s Witnesses. He said the anti-cult movement’s position on Jehovah’s Witnesses was considered discriminatory by human rights advocates; that most anti-cult organizations were quick to criticize Jehovah's Witnesses but failed to mention the religion's contribution to religious freedom in their research; and that most anti-cult and counter-cult organizations had failed to provide credible research.

Authoritarian control

The Watch Tower Society claims that Jehovah's Witnesses is the only organization practicing true Christianity and that the religion's Governing Body, functioning as part of a theocracy, is the sole "channel" of communication between God and humanity. Watch Tower publications emphasize the need for members to be fully obedient to the organization to demonstrate their loyalty to God, describe the organization as being "like a mother to you, to nourish, feed, discipline and protect you", and promote the benefits of staying part of an organization that strengthens and protects members from Satan's temptations. Frequent calls for obedience and loyalty, and its judicial system that can expel and order the shunning of members, have led to criticism that the religion's leadership is autocratic, dictatorial, authoritarian and similar in outlook to the governments of totalitarian states.

Former Witnesses Heather and Gary Botting, who say the organization dominates its members, claim this power is gained by "acceptance of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society quite literally as the voice of Jehovah – God's 'mouthpiece'." Former Witness Raymond Franz claims the concept of loyalty to God's organization has no scriptural support and serves only to reinforce the religion's authority structure, with its strong emphasis on human authority. He has claimed The Watchtower has repeatedly blurred discussions of both Jesus Christ's loyalty to God and the apostles' loyalty to Christ to promote the view that Witnesses should be loyal to the Watch Tower organization. Religion professor James A. Beverley describes the belief that organizational loyalty is equal to divine loyalty as the "central myth" of Jehovah's Witnesses employed to ensure complete obedience. Sociologist Andrew Holden has observed that Witnesses see no distinction between loyalty to Jehovah and to the movement itself; Heather and Gary Botting have claimed that challenging the views of those higher in the hierarchy is regarded as tantamount to challenging God himself.

Heather and Gary Botting, Andrew Holden and Raymond Franz claim Witnesses are encouraged to feel dependent on "the organization", and are discouraged from engaging in independent Bible study. The Watch Tower Society's direction that members must not read criticism of the organization or material published by other religions, and that members are incapable of understanding the scriptures without the Society's involvement is claimed by Franz to create a form of mental isolation that has been cited as an element of mind control. It is claimed by Franz that the organization's aim is to create a sterile atmosphere in which its views and interpretations can circulate without having to confront any challenge.

Description as a "cult"

Authors Anthony A. Hoekema, Ron Rhodes and Alan W. Gomes, claim Jehovah's Witnesses is a religious cult. The Watchtower has stated that some early Bible Students had established a "personality cult" around Russell. Hoekema bases his judgment on a range of what he describes as general characteristics of a cult, including the tendency to elevate peripheral teachings (such as door-to-door witnessing) to great prominence, extra-scriptural source of authority (Hoekema highlights Watch Tower teachings that the Bible may be understood only as it is interpreted by the Governing Body), the denial of justification by grace alone (he says Witnesses need to earn everlasting life by demonstrating obedience to God in the millennium), a view of the group as the exclusive community of the saved (Watch Tower publications teach that Witnesses alone are God's people and only they will survive Armageddon) and the group's central role in eschatology (Hoekema says Witness publications claim the group was called into existence by God to fill in a gap in the truth neglected by existing churches, marking the climax of sacred history).

Jehovah's Witnesses deny they are a cult and say that although individuals need proper guidance from God, they should do their own thinking. American religious scholar J. Gordon Melton, cult deprogrammer John Bowen Brown II, and Knocking producer Joel P. Engardio also reject the claims.

Coercion

Since 1920 the Watch Tower Society has required all congregation members participating in the preaching work to turn in written reports of the amount of their activity, explaining that the reports help the Society to plan its activities and identify areas of greater need and help congregation elders to identify those who may need assistance. In 1943 the Society imposed personal quotas, requiring all active Witnesses to spend at least 60 hours of door-to-door preaching per month, claiming these were "directions from the Lord". Although these quotas were subsequently removed, former Witness Raymond Franz claims "invisible" quotas remained, obliging Witnesses to meet certain levels of preaching work to remain in good standing in the congregation or to qualify for eldership. Franz describes repeated urging for adherents to "put kingdom interests first" and devote increasing amounts of time to door-to-door preaching efforts as coercive pressure. He says many Witnesses constantly feel guilty that they are not doing more in "field activity".

Former Witnesses Heather and Gary Botting, claiming an emphasis on a personal track record would mean that salvation is effectively being "bought" with "good works", observed: "No matter how long a Witness remains an active distributor of literature, the moment he ceases to be active he is regarded by his peers as good as dead in terms of achieving the ultimate goal of life everlasting in an earthly paradise ... Few realize upon entering the movement that the purchase price is open-ended and that the bill can never be paid in full until death or the advent of Armageddon."

The Watchtower, however, noted that although public preaching is necessary, such works do not "save" a Christian and it urged Witnesses to examine their motive for engaging in preaching activity.

Russian religious scholar Sergei Ivanenko, in a dissenting opinion to a report by a panel of experts to Moscow's Golovinsky Intermunicipal Court in 1999, stated, "It would be a serious mistake to represent the Religious Organization of Jehovah's Witnesses as a religion whose leadership forces its rank and file believers to engage in one form of activity or another, or place upon them strict restrictions or directives." Ivanenko, who based his view on a study of Watch Tower Society literature, concluded: "Jehovah's Witnesses strive to live in accord with Bible principles on the basis of an individual, voluntary choice ... This also applies in full measure to preaching." James A. Beckford, a professor at the University of Warwick, England, who published a study of English Jehovah's Witnesses in 1975, also told the court: "It is important for each of them to exercise free moral agency in choosing to study the Bible and to live in accordance with their interpretation of its message." On June 10, 2010 the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) stated in regards to a charge of coercion of family members, that "Quite often, the opposite is true: it is the resistance and unwillingness of non-religious family members to accept and to respect the [Jehovah's Witnesses] religious relative's freedom to manifest and practise his or her religion that is the source of conflict."

Medical and legal commentators have also noted cases claiming that Witness medical patients were coerced to obey the religion's ban on blood transfusions. In a case involving a review of a Russian district court decision, however, the ECHR found nothing in the judgments to suggest that any form of improper pressure or undue influence was applied. It noted: "On the contrary, it appears that many Jehovah’s Witnesses have made a deliberate choice to refuse blood transfusions in advance, free from time constraints of an emergency situation." The court said: "The freedom to accept or refuse specific medical treatment, or to select an alternative form of treatment, is vital to the principles of self-determination and personal autonomy. A competent adult patient is free to decide ... not to have a blood transfusion. However, for this freedom to be meaningful, patients must have the right to make choices that accord with their own views and values, regardless of how irrational, unwise or imprudent such choices may appear to others."

Conformity

The religion's Governing Body has been accused by former Witness Ray Franz of resenting, deprecating and seeking to silence differences of viewpoint within the organization and demanding organizational conformity that overrides personal conscience. In the 1954 "Walsh case" trial in Scotland, Watch Tower Society legal counsel Hayden C. Covington said of Jehovah's Witnesses: "We must have unity ... unity at all costs". A key organizational textbook declared Witnesses "must be seen to be gathered together in unity of thought and action regardless of their physical location on earth", while Watchtower literature strongly emphasises the importance of avoiding or fighting against the "dangers" and "infection" of "independent thinking", such as "questioning the counsel that is provided by God's visible organization".

Critics have claimed the Watch Tower Society places strong pressure on all members to conform to the teachings and personal behavior it sanctions. Watchtower publications are studied at meetings with "catechistical" question-and-answer sessions in which both questions and answers are provided by the organization, placing pressure on Witnesses to repeat the thinking of the headquarters organization. Another study noted: "The conforming multitudes are told what they should feel and think." Witnesses who do voice viewpoints different from those expressed in publications and at meetings are said to be viewed with suspicion. Former Governing Body member Raymond Franz has claimed most Witnesses would be fearful to voice criticism of the organization for fear of being accused of disloyalty.

The Society has stated: "The true Christian congregation cannot rightly be accused of being harshly dogmatic",, but former Witnesses Heather and Gary Botting cited one study of the Society's teaching methods which concluded: "Any suggestion that the society encourages genuine open debate, or even discussion, not contained by the strictures of a given answer to a given question must be rejected. Jehovah's Witnesses will brook no criticism from within, as many concerned members who have attempted to voice alternative opinions regarding the basic doctrine or application of social pressure have discovered to their chagrin."

George D. Chryssides states that Jehovah’s Witnesses tend to take a stance as a body, rather than as individuals. Matters of individual conscience are regarded as of lesser importance, and confined to details of personal living, and certainly not matters of doctrine. As a basis, he cites their teaching that individuals' consciences are unreliable, needing to be subordinated to scripture and to the Watch Tower organization.

Shunning

Main article: Jehovah's Witnesses and congregational discipline

If a member of Jehovah's Witnesses does not comply with the organization's interpretations, they can be excommunicated, termed disfellowshipping. This involves being shunned by all members of the religion, including any family members that do not live under the same roof. Jehovah's Witnesses say that disfellowshipping is a scripturally-documented method to protect the congregation from the influence of those who practice serious wrongdoing. The Encyclopedia of Religion notes: "Any community claims the right to protect itself against nonconforming members who may threaten the common welfare. In a religious setting this right has often been reinforced by the belief that the sanction [of excommunication] affects one's standing before God."

Prior to 1981, if a member disassociated from the religion but was not disfellowshipped, the practice of shunning was not required and normal contact could be maintained. A policy change in 1981 required that all who were considered to have disassociated by their actions were to be treated in the same way as a member who had been disfellowshipped for wrongdoing. The new policy meant that congregation members are not informed whether a person was being shunned due to "disfellowshipping" or "disassociation", or on what grounds.

Prior to 1989, members who were unbaptized publishers were referred to as "approved associates"; their wrongdoing could mean that they could similarly be shunned, though in this case termed "disassociated". This practice was revised and it was deemed that those who had not taken the step of committing themselves to obedience by being baptized (Jehovah's Witnesses disallow infant baptism) could not be sanctioned in the same way as those who had been baptized.

Critics state that fear of being shunned and family break-up causes people who might otherwise freely leave the religion to stay. The only way to officially leave the religion is to write a letter requesting to be disassociated or to be disfellowshipped, but both entail the same set of prohibitions and penalties. Former Witness Ray Franz contends the judicial process involved, due to its private and nearly autonomous nature, contradict the precedent found in the Bible and the organizations' own teachings and can be used in an arbitrary manner if there is consensus among just a few to so use their authority.

Reporting of sexual abuse

Main articles: Jehovah's Witnesses and child sex abuse and Silentlambs

Critics such as Silentlambs have accused Jehovah's Witnesses of employing organizational policies that make the reporting of sexual abuse difficult for members. Some victims of sexual abuse have asserted that when reporting abuse they were ordered to maintain silence by their local elders to avoid embarrassment to both the accused and the organization.

The religion's official policy on child protection, which discusses the procedures for reporting child sexual abuse, states that elders obey all legal requirements for reporting sex offenders, including reporting uncorroborated or unsubstantiated allegations where required by law. Elders are to discipline pedophiles in the congregation. Victims are permitted to notify the authorities if they wish to do so.

While a Witness may lose congregation privileges following a single credible accusation of abuse, Jehovah's Witnesses claim to be scripturally obliged to require corroboration ("two witnesses") before applying their severest forms of congregational discipline. If there is not an actual second witness to an incident of abuse, a congregation judicial committee will accept medical or police reports, or a witness to a separate but similar incident as such a second witness against a member accused of sexual abuse.

Further reading

• Apocalypse Delayed: The Story of Jehovah's Witnesses by M. James Penton. Penton, who is a former Jehovah's Witness and a professor emeritus of history at University of Lethbridge, examines the history of Jehovah's Witnesses, and their doctrines. Read selections from: Apocalypse Delayed: the Story of Jehovah's Witnesses University of Toronto Press. ISBN 0-8020-7973-3 (Canada, 1998) (Google book search)
• Apostles of Denial by Edmond C. Gruss. ISBN 0875523056 / ISBN 978-0875523057.
• Crisis of Conscience by Raymond Franz, a former Jehovah's Witness who was a member of the Governing Body of the Watch Tower Society for nine years. This book gives a detailed account of the authority structure, practices, doctrines and decision-making practices Franz experienced while serving on the Governing Body. Sample chapters online: 1, 9, 10, 11, 12. Publisher: Commentary Press. 420 pages. Hardback ISBN 0-914675-24-9. Paperback ISBN 0-914675-23-0. 4th edition (June 2002)
• The Gentile Times Reconsidered: Chronology & Christ's Return by Carl O. Jonsson. Jonsson considers the origin of the belief that the Gentile Times began in 607 B.C. and examines several lines of evidence and the methodology for deriving it. ISBN 0-914675-06-0 Publisher: Commentary Press (July, 1998, Fourth edition 2004)
• The Gospel According to Jehovah's Witnesses Online book critiquing doctrines of Jehovah's Witnesses written by a Roman Catholic layman.
• The Inside Story of Jehovah's Witnesses by W.C. Stevenson. Online book written by former Circuit Overseer.
• I Was Raised a Jehovah's Witness by Joe Hewitt. Hewitt gives a frank and compelling account of his life as a Jehovah's Witness and his subsequent persecution and excommunication after he decided to leave the Jehovah's Witness movement. Read selections from: I Was Raised a Jehovah's Witness (Google book search) Published 1997, Kregel Publications, ISBN 0825428769
• Jehovah Himself Has Become King by Robert King. The author considers himself one of Jehovah's Witnesses but was excommunicated after publishing his review and criticisms of current Watchtower interpretations related to Bible prophecy, and documentation regarding the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society's involvement with the United Nations. He is presently preparing an updated, second edition. ISBN 1420854984 / ISBN 978-1420854985 / Publisher: AuthorHouse (September 14, 2005, First Edition) (Available from Amazon.com)
• Jehovah's Witnesses Defended and Three Dissertations, both by Greg Stafford. The author considers himself one of Jehovah's Witnesses but has renounced affiliation with the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society. He now considers himself a Christian Witness of Jah, or one of Jehovah's Witnesses who rejects what can be shown to be nothing but traditions of men without any credible biblical or other bases for belief. These books review and thoroughly explore some of the most common, and/or prevalent, criticisms made about Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society. http://www.elihubooks.com/content/books_media.php
• Jesus and the Trinity - Online book responding to Witness teaching on the Trinity
• The Orwellian World of Jehovah's Witnesses by Heather and Gary Botting. Both authors were raised Jehovah's Witnesses and are trained scholars. In fact, the book is based on a doctoral dissertation by Heather Botting. Read selections from: The Orwellian World of Jehovah's Witnesses (Google book search) University of Toronto Press, ISBN 978-0802065452
• 30 Years a Watchtower Slave: The Confessions of a Converted Jehovah's Witness by William J. Schnell. ISBN 978-0801063848
• The Truth Book: Escaping a Childhood of Abuse Among Jehovah's Witnesses by Joy Castro, adopted as a baby and raised by a devout Jehovah's Witness family. Read selections from: The Truth Book: Escaping a Childhood of Abuse Among Jehovah's Witnesses (Google book search) Published 2005 Arcade Publishing, ISBN 1559707879
• The Watchtower in Light of Scripture - Online book by former Jehovah's Witness Circuit Overseer
• Witnesses of Jehovah by Leonard & Marjorie Chretien. ISBN 0890815879 / ISBN 978-0890815878.
• Wolves Among Sheep by James Kostelniuk. Harpercollins Trade Sales Dept, ISBN 978-0006391074

External links

Supportive

• Official Jehovah's Witnesses website
• Jehovah's Witnesses response to child abuse allegations (video)
• Jehovah's Witnesses Official Policy on Child Protection
• United States Holocaust Memorial Museum - Stories of how Jehovah's Witnesses did not compromise their beliefs.

Critical

• Apologetics index - Criticisms of Jehovah's Witnesses from a mainstream Christian viewpoint.
• Associated Jehovah's Witnesses for Reform on Blood - A site that promotes reform of the Watch Tower Society's blood doctrine.
• Exposé on the Jehovah's Witnesses - From Blue Letter Bible. An examination of the Watch Tower Society. Contains relatively brief explanations of each point.
• Free Minds, Inc - the largest Watchtower dissident site
• Historical Idealism and Jehovah's Witnesses - Documents the historical development of Jehovah's Witness chronology and the claimed "idealized" history of it by the Watch Tower Society
• Jehovah Witness and the Deity of Christ Article discussing NWT's presentation of Christ.
• JW Files--Research on Jehovah's Witnesses - A site "dedicated to research on Jehovah Witnesses".
• jwfacts.com - Information about Jehovah's Witnesses
• JWRecovery Magazine - An ex-JW community contributed magazine / journal which provides information and support assistance to former Jehovah's Witnesses.
• Religious Tolerance.org Jehovah's Witnesses Policies & examples of child sexual abuse.
• Silentlambs.org Silentlamb's official web site.