My Thoughts on the Recent Online Library Updates

Until recently, if you wanted to obtain information from Watchtower publications going back to the 1950’s through the 1990’s, you either had to have the printed publications, access to the Watchtower Library CD-ROM, or worse, scans of the publications.  This made the situation quite difficult for non-JW’s and their interactions with JW’s.  Here’s why:

  1. A non-JW like me shouldn’t have a Watchtower Library CD-ROM to begin with.  If a JW knew I had it, the conversation would end because I was considered either an apostate or dishonest (since the CD is for JW’s only).
  2. Most of the time, JW’s would refuse to even look (literally) at a scan of a publication.  Often, they were concerned that it was somehow edited by apostates.
  3. It was easy for JW’s to dismiss old publications as “old light.”  Since these old publications weren’t really studied anymore, JW’s often didn’t care to discuss it.  That is, if it wasn’t on or a physical publication (not a scan) from the last 10-15 years, it wasn’t really up for discussion.

Finally, when added in their online library (which basically replicated the CD-ROM function), the conversation changed.  Now there would be more accountability for the JW to own up to what the organization was teaching.  For example, you can’t really accuse apostates for editing quotes or scans when you can simply pull the quote up on  This changed everything.  Previous to the addition to the online library, I would tactically ask the JW I was studying with to bring me quotes from their CD-ROM in order to prove a point I was trying to make (e.g. the changes on “this generation” or blood transfusion policies).  Remember, if I were to bring these quotes in, the study conductor would wonder how I got my hands on these (i.e. maybe Mike has been talking to apostates).  This is why at one point I phased all my conversations to Bible only and ignored the publications altogether when trying to prove a theological point.  Once the online library was added, the conversation would go something like this:

Mike: Since our discussion last week, I was able to do some research on the online library.  I found this to be a very helpful tool in learning more about what JW’s believe.  Can we discuss some of the things I researched?

JW: Yes, i’d be happy to.  What did you find that you’d like to discuss?

Mike: the leaders in your organization make some very bold claims about themselves and some dates that I can’t find justification for in the Bible.  Here’s a few things I pulled up that i’d like for you to explain to me…

While the online library only went back 20 years or so, it was still immensely helpful and kept the previously mentioned obstacles out of the way.  However, I did wonder why the Watchtower didn’t also upload the older publications to the online library?  Until now, I reasoned that the Watchtower would never upload their older publications.  It would be too embarrassing for them.  I must admit that I was wrong.  We could all speculate as to why the Watchtower made this decision, but one thing is for certain: they aren’t afraid of this level of transparency.  And apparently they aren’t overly worried about younger JW’s finding the articles about 1975 and other doctrines now rejected by the Governing Body (e.g. organ transplants), or non-JW’s studying to become JW’s (or, those looking for ammo to refute the JW’s) finding this information out.

With that said, I wonder if they’ll ever upload the pre-1950’s material?  While I highly doubt it, I can no longer be sure.  But what I can say is that making the 1950’s-1990’s material public and easily searchable may make matters difficult for the Watchtower and Jehovah’s Witnesses.  As to how difficult will be determined in time.

6 thoughts on “My Thoughts on the Recent Online Library Updates

  1. You may find that the now embarrassing material will have been edited by WT. They’ve been known to do this before. They would justify this by saying that they are entitled to edit their own copyrighted material. It is disingenuous, of course, as it gives a false impression of what JWs were really being taught at the time. I may be wrong,

    1. Hi Jimmy- I will be looking out for that. Sure, they have the right to do what they want. But the honest thing to do would be to add a footnote where they make the changes. That’s what honest authors do when they publish new additions to a book where they corrected their mistakes.

  2. Hi Mike. Great item and some good questions. JimmyG makes a good point, “You may find that the now embarrassing material will have been edited by WT”, they have done this before. Also, why have they waited for so long before doing this? Is it because “apostates” have mentioned about the lack of older material being available and the GB are saying “look, we have nothing to hide”, and trying to prove that the nasty apostates are wrong? One thing is for sure, as ex JW’s know, the Org is very clever and mostly know what they are doing (they are also very crafty).

    1. William- since the Governing Body could probably care less what myself or ex-JW’s think, I can only agree that yes, they know what they are doing here. It’s easy to think that this was a foolish move on the WT’s part. But I don’t want to underestimate them. They have a reason for doing what they did and when they did it. But yes, why wait so long? I can imagine how many meetings were had in discussing whether it would be a good idea or not, weighing all the pros and cons. But whatever the case, they saw it as something good and beneficial for faithful JW’s to have easier access to the older publications. Even if it’s a shot in their own foot, it didn’t outweigh whatever good they saw in benefitting JW’s.

  3. Quite frankly, I am still puzzled as to why and what motives were involved in adding the older publications. JimmyG is correct- the Org has been busted in the past changing older articles to make them look better. King of Faders has a YouTube channel where he uses nothing but Watchtower publications to bring them to account. It will be interesting to see in the near future if he finds any “changes”.

    But I do agree Mike, the Org thought long and hard about whether or not to add to their older list. Time will tell if it was a good move or not….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.