Introduction

This witnessing material is composed primarily of photocopies of documents authored by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, the legal corporation for the Jehovah's Witnesses. Along with these are included questions that pertain to each document. The intent of these questions is to enable you to find out from any J-W if he believes God's standards of righteousness change over time or change for important religious people.

Four areas of God's standards of righteousness are examined:

1) God's standards on seeking information from spirit-mediums and demons.
2) God's standards on idolatry and worshiping angels.
3) God's standards on restricting united public worship.
4) God's standards on admiring the political wild beast described in the book of Revelation.

In order to learn for certain from the J-Ws if they think God's standards have changed between one time and another, it is necessary to ask them about two events: first, a biblical example where God's standard was violated and, second, another similar example in the twentieth-century.

Then after each subject is discussed the J-Ws are asked these questions:

Did God's standards of righteousness change?
Did God approve of the persons in the biblical example?
Did God approve of the persons in the twentieth century as worthy to enter heaven?
Did God accept their worship as being part of true worship?

The J-Ws will likely tell you God did not approve of those persons sited in the biblical example. However when they examine the twentieth-century example, two answers are possible. Some J-Ws will respond that God's standards in the four areas do not change. But those wishing to keep their membership in their church will feel pressured to say God approved of the persons in the second example, even for entrance into heaven. These will water-down God's standards of righteousness and in essence accuse God of saying what was once bad is now good and what was once good is now bad.

But note how the J-W's New World Translation at Isaiah 5:20 reads:

 "Woe to those who are saying that good is bad and bad is good, those who are putting darkness for light and light for darkness, those who are putting bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"

  This is NOT about whether the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses have changed. This is about whether God's beliefs have changed.

  This is NOT asking the J-Ws about what they believed years ago. This is about learning what they believe today. The photocopies do mention what some religious persons did years ago but there is no interest in what those persons believed at that time. Instead you want to know what they say God believed at that time. Does God approve of persons who do such things and does He accept them into heaven? If God did not approve of the persons in the biblical example, did His standards later change so He could approve of such persons in modern times?

  This is NOT trying to criticize the persons involved in the twentieth century examples. It is acknowledged these persons may have had good motives and even sincerely believed what they were doing was right. These persons are examined only to provide a realistic basis for asking ‘Do God's standards of righteousness and worship change?'

  This material is NOT asking if the J-Ws have ever made mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes, every religious group makes mistakes and the Jehovah's Witnesses know they are not perfect. Some Jehovah's Witnesses believe past members have made mistakes, but that is their decision. You should avoid drawing attention to mistakes and focus on what the Jehovah's Witnesses currently believe about who God approves and those who God accepts into heaven.

  This material is NOT asking if God allows mistakes, obviously He does.

  This material is NOT asking if God can forgive those who make mistakes, God can.

J-Ws do not read any religious literature published by anyone other than their religious directors. They are also not accustomed to receiving literature from anyone but representatives of their church. Therefore, never present any non-J-W religious literature. J-Ws also get nervous if someone uses original copies of their own literature to show them something. Since it would take effort to obtain such literature, they conclude that if you went to that much work, you must have done all this research yourself and are determined to be the teacher and prove something to them. I recommend using only photocopies but do not present them to the J-Ws until they ask you to do so. Photocopies do make them a little nervous, and the arrows on the enclosed copies will add to their nervousness. However, you can tell them you did not do the research to produce them nor did you put the arrows there. I recommend you photocopy the enclosed materials in case they wish to take a copy to investigate their accuracy. If they take your copies, they may accidentally lose them. (If you re-copy the materials and choose to remove the arrows, you may wish to hilight the key words in yellow or become very familiar with them.)

The questions provided in this material are primarily looking for Yes or No answers. Avoid asking questions requiring long answers to Why . . .? Your first goal is to find out what they believe. Finding out why they believe something can come later. If you get an answer that is not a Yes or a No and sounds more like an answer to Why . . .? you can ask: So does that mean ‘Yes' or ‘No'?

If during your discussions the J-Ws say something that sounds preposterous, simply remark this is a new thought to you and will think about it and reserve commenting on it until some future time.

There will be times in your discussions with the J-Ws when you will use the Bible. I strongly recommend you initially use only the New Jerusalem Bible. This uses the Hebrew name "Yahweh" for God's name everywhere it belongs in the Old Testament. The paperback edition can be gotten for a very low cost from the American Bible Society (phone = 1-800-322-4253).
 
 

It is easy to acquire a copy of this book. When you next see the J-W say this:

 I respect the zeal you show in your ministry and I wish more Christians would show such zeal and commitment. However because of some things I have read about your church, things that sound very odd, I would need a very good explanation before I would consider any lengthy discussions with you.[The J-Ws will likely pursue this and ask you to explain.] I have read some things about your church's teachings and I found them to be very disturbing. The articles gave me the impression you believe God changes His standards of righteousness on such issues as spiritism and idolatry. I could never join a church that says God's standards change on such serious issues. Does not Galatians 5 say spiritism and idolatry will keep one out of the kingdom (see verses 19-21)? [They will probably deny their church says God's standards change.]

 I read somewhere you believe back in Bible times God disapproved of those who consulted spirit-mediums and those who worshiped angels. However those articles I read imply you also teach God has approved of those who in modern times did such things. I thought this sounded odd to me and it prevents me from being interested in your religion.

 I hope you are being completely honest with me. Do you have any official literature from your church that explains in detail your doctrines on such things as spiritism and idolatry and plainly shows what you believe on God's standards and whether His standards ever change?

In their book, read chapter 5 entitled Whose Worship Does God Accept? Study paragraphs 1 through 16 and attempt to answer the questions printed at the bottom of each page corresponding to each paragraph. Note paragraph 13 speaks about paying attention to demons, paragraph 14 speaks about worshiping angels and paragraph 16 mentions "the principle of neutrality toward this world's affairs" (referring to politics). At the top of page 51 circle the words "Whose Worship." In the margin next to paragraph 13 write in ink these words: "Pastor approved book: Angels & Women." Next to paragraphs 14 and 15 write: "charter approves worshiping archangel." At the bottom of the page, next to the question for paragraphs 14 and 15, write: "stopped public prayer — Daniel 6." On the next page, next to paragraph 16, write: "admired political League of Nations — Revelation 13:3; 17:8."

Next, in this material, are three sections containing photocopies addressing the four topics just mentioned. Study these photocopies. Next, note at the end, in the conclusion, is another photocopy (or two). Place all these photocopies in a plain unmarked envelope and put it in a bookcase or some other place where it is accessible but out of reach so it does not appear as though it is read frequently. Make sure the copies are in the right order to correspond to the following presentation.

When the J-Ws return say this:

 I looked through your book and was pleased to find chapter 5 addressed my concerns about God's standards of righteousness. It also explained your stand on spiritism and idolatry. If I understood what it said, I agree with most of what I found there. But I still wonder if I might have misunderstood what it said because the things I read before in other articles suggest you believe God has occasionally approved of persons who consulted spirit mediums or worshiped angels. I would need to be absolutely sure I understood chapter 5 and you truly believe it yourself before I would get more involved with your church. Would you be willing to discuss this chapter with me?

 This chapter 5 is a major issue for me and if it turns out I misunderstood what it said and you really do believe God has occasionally approved of persons who consulted spirit mediums or worshiped angels, then there would be no point for me to talk with you or study anything else. I am not the least bit interested in a group that says God has ever approved of consulting spirit-mediums. So, if you will not study chapter 5 with me then that would tell me maybe you really do teach God approved of such things. Does studying chapter 5 before chapter 1 break some church rule?

Paragraphs 6 and 7:

 This paragraph shows where Jesus foretold some religious persons will make the excuse that even though their worship was contaminated they were doing powerful works and should be allowed into heaven. But Jesus shows even if they were the only ones doing those powerful works, their worship was not acceptable. Later in this chapter 5 it mentions idolatry and paying attention to teachings of demons contaminate pure worship. I want to make sure I understand what you believe about this. If a person engages in these practices, even just a little, but they are also doing powerful Christian works, would God reject their worship? Suppose, for example, a person in your church who did more works than anyone else but also had contaminated worship, would God overlook that and approve of him because he was a member? I need to know if you believe Jesus makes exceptions and if they would be accepted into heaven.

 I know some people believe if you are sincere and have the right motives, their worship will still be approved even if they do not know God's basic standards of righteousness. But this paragraph seems to say this excuse will not get them into heaven. Again, I am posing different questions to see if you believe there may be exceptions. What if a person had less of God's light and mixed idolatry with true worship? Do you believe it would be possible for God to approve of his worship and let him into heaven?

 This tells me involvement with demons pollutes one's worship. Do you believe this in all cases or could there be any exceptions where God would still approve of someone seeking messages from demons?

 This again says impurities make worship unacceptable to God. To me it would seem if one believed God's standards of righteousness change, then that would mean some impurities are now all right and God now approves of things that were once bad. Does this seem reasonable?. . . I came across Isaiah 5:20 and wondered what you feel it means.

The Pharisees may have been sincere but they were wrong. They had blindly accepted the beliefs handed to them. They should have examined what they were taught and made certain of what was true. Therefore I should be certain the things I am doing meet with God's approval. I should thoroughly examine my worship to see if what I am doing or believing makes my worship unacceptable. It also says I should be cautious of beliefs handed to me by others. That is what I am trying to do and I hope you do not mind if I examine the beliefs you are handing to me or if I ask questions to clarify this paragraph.

The paragraph mentions the warning at First Timothy 4:1 about people being mislead by paying attention to the teachings of demons. From the title of this chapter — "Whose Worship Does God Accept?" — I concluded this paragraph was saying anyone who sought information from a spirit-medium was not giving acceptable worship to God even if they had partial truth and good motives. Is that what this is saying? I ask this because I had read an article some time ago and got the clear impression your church taught God had approved of folks who sought messages from a spirit-medium. So naturally I hesitated to study with you. I hope you understand why I hesitated. If you had heard of a church that believed God occasionally approved of consulting demons would you not have been cautious too? I was worried my next few questions might upset you because I wanted to ask about these stories I had heard. I hope you do not mind but I need to be absolutely certain you do not think God even occasionally approves of consulting spirit-mediums. Would that be all right?

I would like to ask about two events where someone consulted a spirit-medium, one biblical example and one more modern, in order to be assured you do not believe God approved of it nor do you feel God changed His mind. What do you think about First Samuel 28:7-19? There it says King Saul went to a spirit-medium seeking information. I realize he may have had good motives and did not have the light of God's word we have today, but did that excuse what he did? Did God approve of him? Was his worship acceptable to God? . . . [The J-W then answers God did not approve.]

My second question deals with a more modern event. I read an article that described a pastor who found a book dictated by a demon to a spirit-medium. The pastor liked the book and wanted to distribute it to his church and others as Christmas gifts. As I recall, the article telling about this pastor was published in your literature. I got the impression from it your church felt God's standards had changed and He now approved of those involved. I tried my best to understand what your church said in the article but it still seems to say God's standards must have changed. Do you think I misunderstood the article? [This will likely cause the J-Ws to be curious about the article and offer to help you understand its meaning. Mention you read about this in a photocopy of what appeared to be their literature. Wait until they ask to see the photocopy and then go get the envelope show them. Pull out just the first piece of paper.]

 I received this article from somewhere. [hand them the photocopies] It appears as if this originally came from your church publications. Would you like me to check my records to find out who photocopied this so you could contact them to learn more about this story? [They will likely say ‘No' and not later ask where the copies came from.]

 (July 30, 1924 The Golden Age, page 702)
I got the impression this was from your church. Do you know if the "Golden Age" is from your church? . . . Here is a review of a book called "Angels and Women". It seems to have been recommended by a Pastor by the name of Russell. Then it says the book is beneficial because it throws light on certain Biblical subjects. It was published by a friend of Russell. Then it mentions how to get a discount by buying it in lots of ten or more.

 (Forward to the book "Angels and Women" pages 4, 5)
 This appears to be the foreword to the book "Angels and Women" and says the reviser of this book is of the opinion that the original manuscript was dictated to the spirit-medium by a demon desiring to return to divine favor. It further says the intent is to help readers get a better understanding of demon influences. Does this mean it is alright to read spiritistic material if it came from a demon wanting to  return to God?

 (December 3, 1924, The Golden Age, pages 150, 151)
This next "Golden Age" says this book was dictated by a demon. Then a person asks — since your church was able to get a discount when buying 10 or more, would it be a good idea to give them away as Christmas gifts? In the reply it claims the book was in harmony with the Bible and Pastor Russell supervised his close friend in revising the book and publishing it. So this friend went into marketing the book. This article recommended it, said it helped one to better understand the devil's organization and many have derived benefit from reading it. Do you see why this sounded to me like it was suggesting God approved of what these persons did? That would mean God's standards have changed since the time of King Saul. I wondered if you now feel if a demon's message is true then it is alright to distribute that message. Is this not what the Bible calls paying attention to demon inspired messages, something God does not approve? So from reading paragraph 13 in your book, what should I conclude about whether God accepted the worship of these persons or not?

 If I ever wanted to become a member in your church would I be required to believe distributing this book "Angels and Women" was good and beneficial? I ask this because I want to be careful not to violate Isaiah 5:20 which warns about saying bad things are good.

Excuse 1: This could not be our literature. It looks like someone has put this together to make us look bad.
Reply: I did not see the original so I will not say this is accurate and true. If this is a fake then someone is trying to deceive me. How can I know if this is false? Is there someone I can ask or some way I can find out? . . . Even if it is fake, I still want to know what you believe about whether God has ever approved of such things, either this event or any other like it. Do you believe God would have approved of this if it had happened?

Excuse 2: These persons had less of God's light and the light has since gotten brighter as stated in Proverbs 4:18.
Reply: How does that answer whether God approved of them or not? Are you saying this because they had less of God's light and He expected less and therefore approved of them? I recall you said back in paragraph 8 you believed this was an empty excuse. Does this mean you actually do believe the less you know, the less God expects?

Excuse 3: No one is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes. Why are you picking on their mistakes?
Reply:I know everyone makes mistakes and all the faithful biblical prophets made mistakes. But I am not trying to pick on anyone or judge them. I am not asking about these persons as much as I am asking what you believe about God and His judgments. My faith in God has nothing to do with whether these persons made a mistake or not. But my faith would be affected if I believed God's standards change. I am only trying to do as your book says. I need to be certain the form of worship you are handing me is acceptable to God. The title of the chapter is "Whose Worship Does God Accept?" And I am asking you, in this case, whose worship did God accept? Did He approve of these persons or not?
 
Excuse 4: Who else was doing God's will and good works? God must have approved of them, otherwise He would not have blessed them.
Reply: I recall an occasion where Moses did wrong by striking the rock twice with his staff and thus drew attention to himself instead of God (Numbers 20:7-12, 24; 27:14). God still blessed the assembly by bringing forth water but He did not approve of Moses. So God even blesses those he disapproves.
 
Also, when we studied paragraphs 6 and 7 in this chapter, I remember we talked about those who said to Jesus they did many powerful works in his name. But according to those paragraphs Jesus rejected them because their worship was contaminated. I thought you agreed with that. So if someone has admired the wild beast, distributed messages from demons, and worshiped an angel, does Jesus approve of them because they have done many powerful works?

Excuse 5: God did not approve of the persons in the biblical example, but He did approve of these persons in the twentieth-century example. He just did not approve of what they did.
Reply: I am confused on why God approved of the persons in the twentieth-century example but did not approve of those in the biblical example. The title of the chapter asks "Whose worship does God accept?" not "What worship." So it is asking about "who," a person, not a "what." Is this paragraph answering this question? It sounded to me like it was saying God does not accept the worship of the persons who do the things described in this paragraph. So my question is the same. Who does God approve and whose worship does God accept? Did God accept those persons who payed attention to the teachings of demons and did God accept their worship as part of true worship?

 This paragraph shows how I need to be careful, otherwise I might do something unacceptable to God. A couple issues are mentioned here. One is customs that are unacceptable to God, the other is idolatry, specifically, worship of an angel.

 I had heard that you believe celebrating Christmas and birthdays is unacceptable to God. Is that right? [Let the J-W answer.] Then have God's standards changed on this? . . . I guess that means these persons that wanted to distribute the book "Angels and Women" for Christmas and birthdays were disapproved by God. Is that what you mean?

 On the second issue, the example here shows even worshiping an angel of God is idolatry and would contaminate pure worship. I noticed in reading ahead in paragraph 21 it says God "is worthy of the purest form of worship and accepts nothing less than exclusive devotion." When John worshiped this angel in Revelation 19:10, was this idolatry? From the title of this chapter "Whose Worship Does God Accept?" I wondered if your book was saying God did not accept John's worship as part of true worship. If God did not accept his worship, do you believe others might be more fortunate and for some reason God might accept their worship of an angel? [The J-W then answers God did not approve.]

 I ask this because I had read another article and got the clear impression your church taught God had approved of folks who worshiped an angel. I would like to ask about that story so I can be certain of what you believe. As the end of paragraph 15 says, "keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord" Would you be upset if I keep on making sure of what you are telling me is acceptable to God?

 I read an article that described some persons who worshiped an archangel just as they worshiped God. Like the other article I got the impression your church was implying these persons were approved by God and their worship was acceptable to Him. I also got the feeling your church holds the view these persons were approved enough to go to heaven. Could I have misunderstood the article? Please know that I am not criticizing them for this and I am not trying to tell you they made a mistake or they did not. I just want to be sure I understand your church's teachings on true worship and whether God accepts angel-worship as part of true worship or whether He views it as idolatry. I hope this is not upsetting but I tried my best to understand what your church said in the article but it still seems to say God's standards must have changed. Do you think I misunderstood the article or is it possible your church does teach God's standards change?[By now the J-Ws are probably curious enough to ask you to bring out the photocopy. If they do not, peek inside the envelope and say . . .]

 This says many years ago your church had a charter that said your church's purpose was to worship both God and Jesus. But this says you also believe Jesus is the arch-angel Michael. Now I imagine your charter could have changed but I got the impression your church still believes God approved of this as part of true worship and it was not idolatry. So is this saying you do believe God's standards change or not?

 Here are several articles. . . .

 (April 15, 1995 The Watchtower page 18:)
 This one says God's standards do not change, especially on idolatry.

 (Theocratic Ministry School Schedule for 1990 page 4 for March 19 and April 16)
 This says you believe Jesus is Michael the archangel and he is not to be worshiped — is that what you believe today? Does this mean worshiping Michael would be false worship and idolatry? — I am not trying to persuade you of anything and I am not yet asking why you believe this, I am only asking what you believe to be certain I understand your views on what is acceptable to God as true worship.

 (1945 Yearbook of Jehovah's Witnesses, title page and page 32)
 This says there was a church charter and the purpose of the church was to worship God and Jesus, whom you believe was an archangel. So would this be an exception where God would approve of angel worship and accept it as part of true worship for some reason? Or was this idolatry?

(Reasoning from the Scriptures 1985, 1989, page 202)
 This has a quote from the charter. Since this book quoted it in 1989, could there be a more recent version of this charter or is the 1945 charter still considered current? Did you get a copy of the charter when you joined your church?

(September 1 & 15 1893 Zion's Watch Tower, pages 1580 & 1581 in the reprints = pages 280-284 in the original magazine):
 This next page is taken from the 1893 Watch Tower. Under the section "Our Chicago Convention" it seems to say your church's original position was Michael and his Father were to be worshiped equally. Was that your original position? But your belief today is bowing in worship to an angel is idolatry and is therefore wrong. Isn't that what you believe? . . . I wondered if your church still said God approved of these persons who worshiped Michael even though it was idolatry. Does it?

 (August 15, 1941 The Watchtower page 252)
 This article says all the earth shall worship the Son, you would say Michael, as he worships the Father. When I compared paragraph 14 in the Knowledge book I asked myself the same question as the chapter, "Whose worship does God accept?" Do you today believe God accepted the worship of these persons or not? Did he view them as true worshipers, approved for entrance into heaven or not?

 (Make Sure Of All Things, 1953, page 85)
 Then in 1953 in this heading it says Christ is to be worshiped. I assume this book is saying he was to be worshiped as an angel, not as the one true God. Right?

 So I am trying to understand the full meaning of paragraph 14 in your Knowledge book. Does worshiping an angel cause one's worship to be contaminated? Does this mean during the years your church taught Michael was to be worshiped, God considered them to be approved as true worshipers because God's standards on worship do changed or were they disapproved by God? Were they approved for entrance into heaven?

 If I ever wanted to become a member in your church would I be required to believe worshiping Michael as stated in the charter was good and beneficial? I want to be careful not to violate Isaiah 5:20 which warns about saying bad things are good.

Since this chapter is about acceptable worship and I wanted to make sure of just what is acceptable to God, now is the right time for me to ask about one more issue. It is about God's people being united in worship and whether God strongly desires that or not. I would like your thoughts on two events, first a biblical event and then a modern one.

 In Daniel 6:7, 10, 11, 16 it describes how some ancient authorities made a rule that God's people were not to pray publicly to God for 30 days. Daniel could have kept his prayers and worship secret but he did not and he knew he was risking his life. For this Daniel was thrown into a lion's den. From this story I concluded at that time God approved of Daniel for resisting the rule restricting public prayer and disapproved of those who made the rule. Is that how God's standards were at that time?

 My next question deals with a similar modern event. In another article I read how someone made a rule restricting public prayer and worship in modern times. Apparently for 46 years all Jehovah's Witnesses in one country were forbidden to pray publicly and were not to ever appear like they were worshiping God. But I got the impression your church's view was those who made the rule were approved by God because God's standards on united true worship have changed since Daniel's time. Do you think I might have misunderstood the article or what? Could you help me understand the article?

(August 15, 1970 The Watchtower, page 493, paragraph 16)
This has to do with Daniel and how he carried on true worship. A law was established saying he could no longer pray according to his custom. While he could have chosen to pray in secret, he did not. He disobeyed those who told him to stop and risked his life to continue public prayer. To me public prayer is a vital part of true worship and no one has the right to tell me to stop. What is your view today?

(June 15, 1990 The Watchtower page 28)
This statement has to do with the same subject of what worship is and how important it is. It says song and prayer at meetings are an important part of united worship.

(October 15, 1979 The Watchtower, page 20, paragraphs 7 and 8)
This appeared to say the same thing. Your church does not stop their customary worship just because someone wants to restrict them. It further mentions the example of Daniel and how he would not stop his public worship for anyone or any reason. Then it says faithful members of your church do not stop their public worship either. I assumed from this if the government allowed you to engage in public worship but a member chose not to, then that member would be considered unfaithful. But when I looked at the next page I figured I must be misunderstanding this whole issue of what united worship is and if it is important.

(1995 Yearbook pages 212, 213, 232, 233)
This seems to say even though your church could meet freely for worship and prayer, someone known as the "Society" wanted to convince the Mexican government you were not a religion so it could hold educational meetings in public buildings. To do this they gave a directive, just like the one given to Daniel, that all members could pray in private but not publicly. They also had to stop singing praises to God and stop using the Bible in their ministry. Their meetings were not to be religious but only educational. This was only in Mexico so they were not united with the rest of the church in the aspect of worship.

The next part says for 46 years until 1989 your church continued to be known in Mexico as a civil organization and not as a religious one. Then they changed and decided to be known again as an organization that worships and prays. The church directors then allowed your members to pray publicly and to sing again.

I am not criticizing nor am I telling you they made a mistake, I am only asking the same question this chapter is asking "Whose worship does God accept?" Did God approve of those who made this rule that all members must stop their public prayers and worshipful appearance? If some had acted like Daniel and continued their public prayers and worship, would God have approved of them or had God's standards changed?

If I ever wanted to  become a member in your church would I be required to believe stopping prayer for 46 years was good and beneficial? I want to be careful not to violate Isaiah 5:20 which warns about saying bad things are good.

 If a custom truly violates God's principles then I can see it would be wrong and would not be approved by God. So I suppose if someone were to practice the religious custom of exchanging wedding rings and did it because of its ancient ties to pagan religion, then it would be wrong. I guess it depends on why one does it. Right?

 But the issue that caught my attention is here in this paragraph where it mentions being neutral towards governments. I want to be sure of what you meant by "neutrality" and what God finds acceptable. For example, I have heard many people believe the "wild beast" mentioned in Revelation chapter 13 is a political entity. If that is true, then I would have thought God does not approve of those who admire the wild beast. I have read a few things supposedly telling about your church's stand on this issue and I am not sure I have it right or maybe I just do not understand. What I concluded was you believe God's standards on this have changed and sometimes God approves of those who admire the wild beast. Is that what you really believe? [Let the J-W comment on this.]

Because I want to be absolutely sure I understand, I would like to ask about two situations where someone admired the political wild beast and please tell me whether you believe God approved of them or not.

The first example is about the people foretold in Revelation 13:3 and 17:8. Does God accept the worship of these persons? I did not think so but I am not trying to tell you what to believe. What if these admirers had less of God's light and did not fully realize this political entity was really the wild beast of Revelation? Would that excuse them so they would still be approved by God for entrance into heaven? From the title of this chapter "Whose Worship Does God Accept?" I guessed your book was saying God did not accept their worship. [Let them comment.]

My second example is a more modern example. I had read your church teaches the wild beast of Revelation was the League of Nations. But I also got the impression you now teach God approved of some of the people who admired the League and they were accepted into heaven. Could I have misunderstood the article? Please know I am not criticizing them for this and I am not trying to tell you they made a mistake or they did not. I just want to be sure I understand your church's teachings on true worship and whose worship God accepts. I hope this is not upsetting but I tried my best to understand what your church said in the article but it still seems to say God's standards must have changed.

(August 1, 1967 The Watchtower page 454)
I have heard of the wild beast and I think this is saying the League of Nations and the United Nations together form that beast. True? Then this seems to be speaking about true Christians and how they have not been marked in the head for supporting the League of Nations in either thought or word. They have been without spot. Does this mean those who supported the beast in either thought or word received the mark of the beast? . . . This article added that true Christians took the course exactly opposite to what the religious institutions of the world have done. My question is — When this talks about Christians who did not support the League of Nations in either thought or word, who is this talking about? I thought just about all churches gave some kind of support or admiration to the League of Nations when it was first proposed, including yours.

(June 1, 1994 The Watchtower, page 12, paragraph 17)
I think I understand most of what is on this page but I wanted to be certain. This article discusses how churches have been involved in politics. Does this paragraph mean if a religion supported political institutions in any way at all then a person interested in true worship should completely break ties with it, even if one has friends in the church and has learned a lot from them?

(September 15, 1971 The Watchtower page 560, paragraph 8)
This tells of churches attributing prophetic acts of God's kingdom to the League of Nations. Then it said your church consistently exposed the League for what it was, a disgusting thing. But if all churches admired the League when it was first proposed, then does this mean your church only admired the League for a time and then consistently exposed it? Is that what this means?

(October 1, 1983 The Watchtower pages 15 and 16, paragraph 9)
This paragraph quotes Revelation 17:8 and says the admirers of the image of the wild beast will suffer destruction. But what if a church only admired the wild beast for a short time? Could it get the mark of the beast removed and not suffer destruction?

(February 15, 1919 The Watch Tower page 51) (readable version and the printable version).
The second paragraph starts out by saying your church could not help but admire the high principles embodied in the League of Nations. It goes on to mention how wonderful its goals were and lists them. Then the last part says what the League was proposing to do was the same as what God's kingdom would do on earth after the great time of trouble. I wondered from this if your church felt the persons who admired the League were an exception and were approved by God because God's standards change.

(Also of interest are these three Watch Towers that show the Watchtower Society encouraged readers to buy war bonds to help with the World War 1 debt. (Printable: May 15, 1918 Watch Tower, June 1, 1918 Watch Tower, March 1, 1919 Watch Tower).

If I ever wanted to become a member in your church would I be required to believe admiring the League of Nations was good and beneficial? I want to be careful not to violate Isaiah 5:20 which warns about saying bad things are good.

Conclusion

After presenting all four sections, pull out the next photocopy which includes their Live Forever book (pages 124,125) and the November 15, 1980 Watchtower pages 16,17

More than all the previous articles, this last page seemed to be the strongest in giving me the impression your church teaches God's standards must have changed and God has approved of persons who sought messages from spirit-mediums or who worshiped Michael or who admired the wild beast. For here it says the church teachers who did these things were tried, tested and found to be faithful and qualified to go to heaven. They claim to have had a righteous standing before God ever since 1919 and have been kept in an approved state. Yet because they worshiped Michael from 1919 until 1953 and stopped public prayer in Mexico from 1946 until 1989 I wonder if they could have been approved at any time during this period.

(March 15, 1990 The Watchtower pages 13, 14; paragraphs 15, 16, 18)
This also gave me the same impression for it seems to say your church's current stand is that Jesus thoroughly examined your church teachers in 1919 and approved of what they had been doing even before 1919.

In paragraphs 15 and 18 it is talking about the same time period as when the book "Angels and Women" was in the process of being published. It is also the time when your church was worshiping Michael equally to God and admiring the League of Nations. But the article gives the impression whatever they were teaching with regard to spiritism, political neutrality and true worship had God's approval.

If I conclude from reading your Knowledge book in chapter 5 those who did these things could not have been tried and faithful, and therefore were not kept in an approved state and did not go to heaven, would God approve of my belief? Would my worship be acceptable to God?

If they choose to leave their church, ask them about John 5:22,23; Acts 7:59 (according to their 1985 edition The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures footnote, Stephen was praying to Jesus); John 14:14 (their Kingdom Interlinear  has Jesus here inviting prayer to him); Galatians 4:6 and Ephesians 3:17; Romans 8:14; 1 John 2:23.