Website My Beloved Religion – And The Governing Body |R.J. Furuli Ph.D

[SC Facilitator]

The book has been translated into Italian and French, and it is being translated into Portuguese and German.

This webpage contains detailed articles dealing with the organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses. New articles will be added continuously.

The price of the book My Beloved Religion—And The Governing Body is 100 Norwegian kroner.
Anyone who lacks money in these Corona times gets the book free.


Rolf J. Furuli has been lecturer in Semitic languages, and for more than a decade he has taught courses in Akkadian, Aramaic, Ethiopic, Hebrew, Phoenician, Syriac, and Ugaritic. He has also studied Arabic, Greek, Latin, Middle Egyptian, and Applied Linguistics, and he has translated many documents from the mentioned Semitic languages and Sumerian into Norwegian and English. In 2005, he defended his doctoral dissertation where he argued for a completely new understanding of the verbal system of Classical Hebrew. He has written 11 books and a number of articles dealing with the Bible, Bible translation, and ancient history and chronology.

My Beloved Religion – And The Governing Body | R.J. Furuli Ph.D website

Thank you Snookered

 

[Massy]

I read this book , very interesting, i m not agree about the fact that Furuli going on to thinks that the Jehova's wittnesses are the true religion

 

[Diana S]

Thanks Massy. If you like to leave a review you can do it sometime here on this Forum Reviews (Book, Movie etc)

 

[LeeB]

Critics of Furuli say that in his research methodology he makes broad assumptions. Furuli claims new understanding of the Hebrew verb. Furuli was a JW for 56 years but challenged the authority of the governing body and was disfellowshipped June 17, 2020. These facts show me that his work is tainted by his former association with the JW’s.

 

[Neil]

I tend to think that just because one was associated with the higher ups of JW’s for many years does not make him an authority on anything. Unless he has inside information on the organization, his theology means absolutely nothing to me.

 

[LeeB]

Furuli is a self appointed expert who, even though being disfellowshipped by his beloved religion , continues to defend it. The JW’s must have thought him to be a threat on that point I agree.

 

[William]

I remember reading this when it first came out. The book is mostly pointless, I'm afraid. You're better off reading (or re-reading, if you've already read) Crisis of Conscience and its follow-up volume, In Search of Christian Freedom, by Raymond Franz.
Rolf Furuli is obviously still enamoured with Watchtower theology.
This book fails to engage the works of other scholars working in the fields of biblical studies, religious studies or, more basically, Christian theology. Had he taken the time to acquaint himself with the basic teachings of the great religions (Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, etc.) Furuli wouldn't be so confident in his assertion that "there's only one true religion", nor would he make the totally ludicrous assertion that Jehovah's Witnesses form that one true religion.
Moreover, this book is further proof that being able to read texts written in a particular language doesn't qualify one to interpret those texts theologically or even correctly. He throws Hebrew and Greek words here and there, as if the lexical meaning of words were all that matters when one is reading, when actually the meaning of words depends on context, etc. He might be able to read Hebrew and Greek but he's no biblical scholar, and he displays that fact, page after page. No intellectually honest biblical scholar or even student can remain indoctrinated by the Watchtower as this man clearly is.
Again, one would expect someone of his academic status to engage the works of other Christian thinkers. Unlike Raymond Franz (who wasn't even a PhD!) Rolf Furuli, someone who feels entitled to critique the Watchtower's theology, simply ignores the larger world of Christian thought by failing to engage with much of Christian scholarship, except citing a few linguistic reference works. (If you don't believe me, check the bibliography at the end of the book)
The most embarrassing problem I find with his book is the fundamentalist, biblicist mindset pervading it from beginning to end. His view of the Bible—taken over from the Watchtower, influenced by a rationalist fundamentalist arm of 19th-century American Protestantism, still in evidence among many Evangelicals today—amounts to some kind of bibliolatry. The Bible is seen as inerrant. He obviously subscribes to biblical inerrancy—a drop-down-from-heaven view of the Bible that ignores its human features and historical contingencies, tries to harmonize its contradictions and claims for it total accuracy in all matters historical, scientific, theological, etc.
I've come to believe that the source of most, if not all, of the Watchtower's and Furuli's bad theology is this naïve biblicism I just mentioned. Rather than upholding a high view of Scripture, they rather abuse Scripture, forcing it to conform to a modern rationalist framework of understanding divine revelation.
There are more viable ways of understanding the authority of Scripture, other than biblical inerrancy. I've found these books helpful in coming to terms with the nature of the Bible and its authority as Scripture:​

• Escaping from Fundamentalism or Beyond Fundamentalism: Biblical Foundations for Evangelical Christianity (same book, different titles) by James Barr​
• The Bible Made Impossible: Why Biblicism Is Not a Truly Evangelical Reading of Scripture​
• A High View of Scripture? The Authority of the Bible and the Formation of the New Testament Canon​
• The Lost World series of books by John H. Walton et al., especially The Lost World of Scripture, The Lost World of Genesis One and The Lost World of Adam and Eve.​

​

 

[LeeB]

The old covenant writings are described in Hebrews 10:1 , and Hebrews 9:1-10 . Shadows and symbolism with no substance. Christ came as a great light that makes these shadows disappear revealing the substance. I believe the only way to understand the scriptures is by the Holy Spirit but for others it is ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. What parades itself in the world calling itself Christianity is not Christianity. God deliberately hides the truth from those not being chosen, Romans 11:7-10 , God has other future times assigned for people not called in the current age. With the Holy Spirit one can overcome any obstacle that exists and discover the truth of God. Gods truth always comes by divine revelation, by the Holy Spirit.
1 John 1:27. Jesus confirmed these things. So then if anyone desires to have the truth God is the only one who can teach it.

 

[William]

The old covenant writings are described in Hebrews 10:1 , and Hebrews 9:1-10 . Shadows and symbolism with no substance. Christ came as a great light that makes these shadows disappear revealing the substance. I believe the only way to understand the scriptures is by the Holy Spirit but for others it is ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. What parades itself in the world calling itself Christianity is not Christianity. God deliberately hides the truth from those not being chosen, Romans 11:7-10 , God has other future times assigned for people not called in the current age. With the Holy Spirit one can overcome any obstacle that exists and discover the truth of God. Gods truth always comes by divine revelation, by the Holy Spirit.
1 John 1:27. Jesus confirmed these things. So then if anyone desires to have the truth God is the only one who can teach it.

While I don't agree with your interpretation of those verses you cited, I can agree with you on the following: God—the Holy Spirit—is the one who teaches us the truth, since He is the Truth, the One by whom we know and are known. You also say God's truth always comes by divine revelation, by the Holy Spirit—and I couldn't agree more.
The question is how does the Spirit reveal Himself? Certainly NOT only through Christianity's scriptures, if you ask me. And to whom does God reveal himself? To His children—all humans, pagan, Christian, Jew, etc., to various degrees.
If I'm not misreading your comment, it seems to suggest that, when it comes to knowledge of the truth, there's an inherent opposition between "learning" (by which, I guess, you mean scholarship) on the one hand and the illumination of the Spirit on the other hand. In my mind, however, there's no such distinction between "ever learning" (which does/can not lead to knowledge of the truth) and the work of the Spirit in leading us to the truth. It is not an either/or—either "learning" or the Spirit—but both/and—both "learning" and the Spirit. The Spirit illumines the mind of those who employ their God-given powers of reason, curiosity, intellectual honesty, etc.—everything that comes under the umbrella of "learning". God rewards those who look for him. When a scholar who fears God pours his whole life into studying something, that scholar deserves a hearing from anyone who loves the truth. Truth doesn't just fall into anyone's head automatically.
Again, if I understand what you're saying, biblical scholars (and, by extension, those who make use of their scholarship in deepening their faith) are the "others" that are "ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth", while others who ignore such "learning" are the ones to whom the Spirit reveals the truth. I think such comments smack of obscurantism and fideism. Faith is not afraid of intellectual matters. And it is DEFINITELY not the case that ALL academics are faithless people without God's spirit.
As for this comment—“What parades itself in the world calling itself Christianity is not Christianity”—I don't know what you mean by it. Does it mean that you have a special revelation allowing you to make such a judgment about people (billions of them!) and institutions that call themselves Christian? Or do you presume to be one of the chosen few who happen to belong to what is Christianity? Please enlighten me.​

 

[LeeB]

1 Corinthians 2:14 , Romans 8:7-9 , James 4:4 the Holy Spirit joins with the human spirit to affirm that we are Gods children. Romans 8:16.
Romans 8:14 Without the Holy Spirit a person is not In Christ, not converted. Jesus told us the Spirit is our teacher but we must have the Spirit to be taught. Man’s knowledge is nothingness, Isaiah 55:9 , surely you do not view carnal knowledge and Spiritual knowledge equally. You said above, “ certainly not only through Christianity’s scriptures “ , 2 Peter 1:21 , 2 Timothy 3:16 , John 16:13 , what other writings do you see as equal to Christianity's scriptures ? People in the world are cut off from God. True Christians test the spirits to see if they are from God or not, 1 John 4:1 , this is the gift of discernment. To believe that anyone or everyone is a Christian is naive. Just because someone says they are a Christian does not mean they are. You mentioned the chosen few, Matthew 22:14 , Luke 13:23-27 , there are few in this age that will experience salvation. I do sense hostility from you along with antagonism. You have been offended by what I have written. Rather than attack me go to the scriptures and prove me wrong.

 

[William]

1 Corinthians 2:14 , Romans 8:7-9 , James 4:4 the Holy Spirit joins with the human spirit to affirm that we are Gods children. Romans 8:16.
Romans 8:14 Without the Holy Spirit a person is not In Christ, not converted. Jesus told us the Spirit is our teacher but we must have the Spirit to be taught.

Man’s knowledge is nothingness, Isaiah 55:9 , surely you do not view carnal knowledge and Spiritual knowledge equally.

Isaiah 55:9 says nothing about the uselessness of man's knowledge. It says that God's ways are inscrutable. By the way, if you recognise that God is the source of ALL truth, then it follows logically that God is the one who makes "man's knowledge" possible.

You said above, “ certainly not only through Christianity’s scriptures “ , 2 Peter 1:21 , 2 Timothy 3:16 , John 16:13 , what other writings do you see as equal to Christianity's scriptures ?

This is circular reasoning. You can't expect to persuade any intelligent person with this way of reasoning: No other religious writing is equal to Christianity's scriptures. And how do we know that? Because (according to how I interpret it) Christianity's scriptures claim to be exclusively true; it says all other scriptures are false.
The very status of the scriptures are in question here. You can't argue your way out of this—or any matter—by citing a few decontextualized verses.
The question is this: who says that God's revelation is confined to the Bible alone? God is too big, his self-revelation too generous to be confined to only the Bible. The Christian particularism that sees other faiths, even other groups within Christianity, as deluded is just untenable, especially if you study the precepts of other religions and observe the fruits of the Spirit in the lives of non-Christians or even the lives of those we consider not "true" Christians. I have close Muslim friends. I don't need anyone to tell me that these are equally God-fearing people loved by God. What does it matter that they don't use our scriptures? Our scriptures are not God, in case it needs to be said.

People in the world are cut off from God.

Let me remind you that God loves the world. "People in the world" are God's children too, not only Christians, certainly not only you (Acts 17:26-28). Yes, many people are estranged from God their father (remember Jesus' parable of the prodigal son) but only for a while. But all shall be well because God's love will ultimately triumph over every obstinate heart. For he came that he might save the cosmos (John 12: 47). Nothing can stand in the way of God's love.
In every nation, tribe, religion, the person who responds to the call of God is not cut off from God, like Cornelius in the book of Acts.

True Christians test the spirits to see if they are from God or not, 1 John 4:1 , this is the gift of discernment.

Right. Discernment is made possible by knowledge. You have to know the good in order to discern it. Actually, faithful worshippers of God—both Christians and non-Christians—need to have discernment, in order to test the spirits to see if they are from God or not.

To believe that anyone or everyone is a Christian is naive.

Who believes that anyone or everyone is a Christian? Not even non-Christians believe that. So, yes, I agree. Acknowledging the fact that not everyone is a Christian is one thing; deciding, based on your own understanding of Christianity, who is or isn't a Christian is another thing. Looking at the mass of people who call themselves Christian and judging them not to be Christians seems out of place to me. It reminds me of those religions—Jehovah's Witnesses, Seventh-day Adventists and other groups—that claim that those outside their organizations are not "true" Christians (whatever that means).

Just because someone says they are a Christian does not mean they are.

Depends on who says they are a Christian. If the person acts as a Christian and says that they're a Christian, you'd better believe them. If they say they're a Christian but act contrary to the faith, then they're open to the charge that they're not really Christian/acting in a Christian way.
Either way, it's neither your place nor mine to decide who's in and who's out.

You mentioned the chosen few, Matthew 22:14 , Luke 13:23-27 , there are few in this age that will experience salvation.

Based on how you choose to read these passages, maybe. I beg to differ, though this is neither the time nor place for me to explain why.

I do sense hostility from you along with antagonism. You have been offended by what I have written. Rather than attack me go to the scriptures and prove me wrong.

No, it's not hostility. It's not even antagonism. It's DISAGREEMENT, something we should all expect from time to time.
Debate isn't hostility. I have not attacked YOU. I didn't feel attacked when you replied to my post. I found that I agreed with some of the things you said, and I said as much. I also found myself disagreeing with your perspective; I believe you were wrong on those points and that's what I tried to show.
That's the point of such a platform, right?
I believe I was careful not to make any ad hominem arguments. If I slipped, I'm sorry.