The error of inadequate evidence is defined this way: “A hasty generalization is drawn from too little evidence.” [1]
In his book, Scripture Twisting, James W. Sire gives this example: “[T[he Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that blood transfusion is nonbiblical, but the biblical data which they cite fails either to speak directly to the issue or to adequately substantiate their teaching.”[2]
Let’s look at this example in some detail. Continue reading
The Watchtower uses a relative handful of scriptures as proof texts for its teaching that when you’re dead you’re dead—that is, that there’s no part of human beings (soul or spirit) that survives physical death:
For them, this is the end of the discussion. Any other scriptures have to conform to the teaching that these verses appear to support. This error is called “selective citing”. Continue reading
“Saying but not citing” is an error in which “a writer says that the Bible says such and such but does not cite the specific text (which often indicates that there may be no such text at all).”[1]
The Watchtower commits this error frequently. This allows them to imply that they are just teaching what the Bible teaches, when in fact the Bible provides little or no support for their teaching.
Here are four examples from Watchtower literature: Continue reading
Speculative readings of predictive prophecy occur when “a predictive prophecy is too readily explained by the occurrence of specific events, despite the fact that equally committed biblical scholars consider the interpretation highly dubious.”[1]
The prophetic speculation errors of the Watchtower are enough to fill a book—maybe several books.
I am going to highlight just some of the things it has said over the years about the significance of the year 1914. Note how—instead of giving up making predictions and assertions—the Watchtower simply changes its teachings and keeps on making prophetic claims. Continue reading
As I mentioned last week, the figurative fallacy means “either (1) mistaking literal language for figurative language or (2) mistaking figurative language for literal language.”[1]
There I looked at how the Watchtower, in its 1917 book, The Finished Mystery, made this error and came up with a now-abandoned teaching about there being four degrees of salvation, a doctrine which Jehovah’s Witnesses today would consider both wrong and fanciful.
Today, I want to look at how the Watchtower makes a similar mistake when interpreting Jesus’ account of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). Continue reading
Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑
