Relation between the definition and the WTS dogmas

by Eddie

As we have just read, dogmas are nothing other than "opinion", "order", "decision", "theorem" (...), in general: the doctrinal formulation of basic truths, fixed theorems or systems.

Question: Isn't that exactly what the WTS practices? – Well, the Brockhaus edition explicitly speaks of Catholic theology, but this does not imply that there can be no mention of other faith communities or churches, sects or whatever they are called. On the contrary: the statement of the largest German encyclopedia work has universal validity.

Doesn't the WTS adopt various doctrines "ex kathetre" from its "chair" in Brooklyn, which become a religious duty for its faith members?

Isn't the teaching that the "faithful and understanding slave" of Matthew – or rather the Gospel of Luke – is the "organization of God" a duty of faith for every Jehovah's Witness?

Isn't it postulated already at the preparation for baptism and at the baptism itself that this "faithful and understanding slave" is to be accepted according to the WTS doctrine, because otherwise the baptism would be invalid or the person to be baptized would not be allowed at all?

In every committee case (an internal church court), isn't the question "do you recognize the faithful and understanding slave" as the mouthpiece of God ultimately asked to the accused in case of doubt? – And who denies it, or even doubts it, is automatically excluded? Does this not resemble the heretical courts of the old school of the Catholic Church?

Isn't it a dogma for a JW to be forced to refuse blood transfusions during surgery? No matter whether this person is behind it with his conscience or not?

Does the duty of obedience to the "organization of God" not count much more than one's own conscience?

Aren't all these dogmas? This was called the claim of unconditional recognition in the encyclopedia. If these are not dogmas that the WTS sets up, the dogmas of the Catholic Church are probably no longer dogmas.

Now from the next page on to the individual dogmas, which do not have any legal claim to completeness, but are among the most important dogmas of the WTS.

The order in which the dogmas are explained is by no means a weighting.