What was MJ’s relationship with the Jehovah’s Witnesses like?

Well, now I'll just clarify. Because when you say JW, that's just too grandiose to me.
It's just my lazy shorthand. I can't even be bothered to type out people's names, Mr JT :D

The more likely reality is that MJ talked to two or so older men, just a couple of adult men entrusted with responsibility, in his local area. In what he considered his home base. We're talking men that Michael likely knew, probably on a first name basis, perhaps for a significant period of time. Definitely, Katherine knew them. And trusted them, perhaps they even had a say in who they spoke to. This wasn't an alien encounter.

These men had their own personal feelings, and opinions, on various things, and they would've tempered this either way based on the Bible, on studied verses they've interpreted. They'd emphasize, modesty. A sensitivity to coming across in a way that would appear too, not tame.

This would all be shared with Michael in a, perhaps concerned, but still regardless, non-antagonistic way. But of course Michael was a sensitive soul, and it is fair to say he would not take counsel and/or criticism extremely, balanced, let's say. He'd get anxious. Nobody exactly loves counsel.
Michael does react to things with great sensitivity, it would seem, and he seemed to really not want to hurt people's feelings or to transgress. Otoh, he was an artist and obviously decided that his art was not going to be compromised.

Either way still, this was over 40 years ago. In a totally different world with totally different sensibilities. What Michael did essentially began to usher in the modern world. Things are very different now, and most of what he did is considered tame, downright child friendly at times. So yeah, that is just the way of the world.

And MJ must've mellowed out some, he kept a tame image. Not any tattoos, not so much abrasive language. He did not go on too "wild" of an arc all things considered.
Which is not unusual for a Christian and I love his image, conservative though it was. It was him, it was Michael and he always looked fabulous. He was way more radical than anyone else at the time, imo. An upfront Christian, dressing fairly conservatively (offstage), talking openly about prayer. Much more challenging and radical than some of his peers.

By his 40s he still had nothing negative to say about his faith, and he even entrusted the kids to stay with his mom and accompany her to the Kingdom Hall.

I think what's lesser talked about is MJs liaisons with women. Like you said, he had energy on the Triumph tour still.

Tatum O'Neal and Ola Ray, etc, have stories, they can't all be false. And what would offend most Christians more than fantasy and stories is relations with a woman you're not married to. I feel like that sort of thing would get brought up to Michael too. Hence maybe why he did embrace a more, conservative public appearance.
Everything you have said makes complete sense to me. The 'elders' or the leaders will have had a convo with Michael but not necessarily in a confrontational way. That Boteach quote surprised me a little bit bc I can't understand why Michael would say he didn't know where the boundaries where. I would have thought by the time of Motown 25 - when he's an adult and has been in the church for years - he would know what sort of thing JW wouldn't be comfortable with. It's really interesting - to me - to watch Michael's performance and try to see it as JW would have seen it and look for the areas they'd be uncomfortable with.

A person's faith is their own personal business, imo. And I still think that, if JW was trying to 'control' Michael, they were doing a rubbish job, lol. In reality, as you say, it probably wasn't at all like that. And he was always his own person.
 
I still think the JW "church" was trying to exert an extreme level of influence on Michael in the '80s. Just because he fought against them and eventually left that group, it didn't mean they weren't very focused in their own attempts.
 
I still think the JW "church" was trying to exert an extreme level of influence on Michael in the '80s. Just because he fought against them and eventually left that group, it didn't mean they weren't very focused in their own attempts.
Well in that case it really depends on whether you resent or appreciate that. Michael was a successful pop star already; what he did propelled him the furthest, but some consider that as a turning point for him and they don't even have to be religious. MJ pre and post Thriller were reasonably different animals and that's definitely when all the tragedy and cruft started to come in.
 
Well in that case it really depends on whether you resent or appreciate that. Michael was a successful pop star already; what he did propelled him the furthest, but some consider that as a turning point for him and they don't even have to be religious. MJ pre and post Thriller were reasonably different animals and that's definitely when all the tragedy and cruft started to come in.

I resent any organization which hides behind a crafted illusion of their personal beliefs, to purposely manipulate and intimidate others. I realize that not every member of the Jehovah's Witnesses is like that, but from what I've read over the years many elders in the group are very selfish and corrupt. So when I think of a vulnerable person like Michael who was often easily swayed, it makes me angry to think that so many people he trusted (religious or not) took such unjust advantage of him.
 
Hopefully he didn’t think much of them, Jehovah witness isn’t that good. Just a scam
 
Hopefully he didn’t think much of them, Jehovah witness isn’t that good. Just a scam

Yeah, their "New World Translation" is a complete twisting of the Bible, and combined with the way the higher-ups often treat people, I don't want anything to do with them. A preacher I like once told a story though, about meeting one of them. They introduced themselves, and he said "You're a witness for Jehovah? I am too!" They got confused and said, "We've never seen you at the Kingdom Hall", to which the preacher replied "Well, maybe you're in the wrong kingdom."
 
Yeah, their "New World Translation" is a complete twisting of the Bible,

Wrong, independent scholars have testified it is one of the most accurate translations. I did a bible study with them, so i am biased but I dont care. They restored the divine name which was removed for superstitious reasons from other Bibles. It sticks to the actual meaning of the text rather than other loose translations.
 
Wrong, independent scholars have testified it is one of the most accurate translations. I did a bible study with them, so i am biased but I dont care. They restored the divine name which was removed for superstitious reasons from other Bibles. It sticks to the actual meaning of the text rather than other loose translations.

The primary English names for God, Jehovah and Yahweh, are both derived from an ancient Hebrew symbol known as the tetragrammaton. Its rendered in their language as "YHWH" or "YHVH", since Hebrew doesn't have any vowels.

As for other differences, there are many, but the root problem is their denial that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are divine. Instead, they say that Jesus was the human form of the archangel Michael (along with he and Lucifer being literal brothers), and that the Holy Spirit is more of an impersonal force instead of the third part of the Trinity. I don't want to derail this thread, but if you would like to discuss this further, message me.
 
The primary English names for God, Jehovah and Yahweh, are both derived from an ancient Hebrew symbol known as the tetragrammaton. Its rendered in their language as "YHWH" or "YHVH", since Hebrew doesn't have any vowels.

As for other differences, there are many, but the root problem is their denial that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are divine. Instead, they say that Jesus was the human form of the archangel Michael (along with he and Lucifer being literal brothers), and that the Holy Spirit is more of an impersonal force instead of the third part of the Trinity. I don't want to derail this thread, but if you would like to discuss this further, message me.

Exactly, so you agree other Bible translations have falsely substituted LORD instead of the divine name,

Secondly they do believe that Jesus is divine, since he is the son of God. The Holy spirit is divine, since it is considerd a force of God. You may wish to believe in the trinity, but it is a dogma not found in the New Testmament. If God was three persons, Jesus and the apostles would have said so. I'll try to make this the last post on this, since as you said its another topic...
 
Exactly, so you agree other Bible translations have falsely substituted LORD instead of the divine name,

Secondly they do believe that Jesus is divine, since he is the son of God. The Holy spirit is divine, since it is considered a force of God. You may wish to believe in the trinity, but it is a dogma not found in the New Testament. If God was three persons, Jesus and the apostles would have said so. I'll try to make this the last post on this, since as you said its another topic...

They used the term LORD because they considered the name of God too holy to speak, not because it was a substitution for a falsehood.

As for Jesus, they believe He was created, which if that were the case means He can't be divine. And if Jesus doesn't share God's divine nature, then His blood sacrifice at Calvary for us means nothing. That's one of my biggest problems with the JW doctrine. Regarding the Trinity, Jesus repeatedly refers to God as His Father, even saying "The Father and I are one" (John 10:30). Also, the account of the Fall in Genesis records God as saying "man has become like us, knowing good and evil" - note He says "us" instead of "me", so God has to have more than one identity as part of His eternal nature.
 
They used the term LORD because they considered the name of God too holy to speak, not because it was a substitution for a falsehood

There was no directive from God, or Jesus, or the apostles to remove the divine name. Hence, those translations were a falsehood. If God didn't want humans to use his name, then it would have been blank from the beginning, ...the ten commandments would have been blanked. Therefore, you have to give the Witnesses credit for the restoration, as well as a few other translations
As for Jesus, they believe He was created, which if that were the case means He can't be divine. And if Jesus doesn't share God's divine nature, then His blood sacrifice at Calvary for us means nothing. That's one of my biggest problems with the JW doctrine

You can be divine without being God. A son genetically has the qualities of a father. Similarly, Jesus Christ has divine qualities given to him by God

That's one of my biggest problems with the JW doctrine. Regarding the Trinity, Jesus repeatedly refers to God as His Father, even saying "The Father and I are one" (John 10:30). Also, the account of the Fall in Genesis records God as saying "man has become like us, knowing good and evil" - note He says "us" instead of "me", so God has to have more than one identity as part of His eternal nature.
John 17: 21 states that all Christians are one with Jesus and the Father. Does that mean the trinity should be expanded to 3 Billion people?

Genesis 3: 22 does refer to Jesus, but it is not evidence of a trinity. Jesus states he preexisted with the father before the world was ( john 17: 5)

1 Corinthians 8: 5-6 confirns to completely separate beings exist: "For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live. "
 
If the discussion doesn't stick to Michael I'm reporting these posts for rule breaking. Believe what you feel but keep the other stuff out of it.
 
For Michael the JWs were a spiritual prison. They asked him to be somebody else. They never understood him, his spirit, his singularity. He was not fitting in their mould. There are letters issued by the JWs in which they warn their members to be on the alert to prevent their children from imitating Michael. Later, they even wrote to tell him that he was no longer welcome in their ranks. Their letter crossed paths with Michael's in which he renounced being one of them. But their influence limited him in many ways, throughout his life, unfortunately. They are a sect, not a religion.
 
Out of all the contributing factors Michael’s childhood trauma, being raised as a Jehovah’s Witness is not discussed nearly as much as Joseph’s abuse or early fame & isolation.

You would think being part of, and let’s not mince words here, a cult would deeply affect his life.

I’ve read that he left in the 80’s, but then I have also read he still considered himself one by the 2000s.

So did he leave or not? Did he retain any beliefs from his time as one? How exactly had it impacted his life?
This is a great question! In all honesty I don't know and nobody else does either. Only Christ knows the answer. I'm not trying to sound snotty, I'm just trying to be honest and gentle because religion is a very.....delicate topic. I made a forum as well called Was Mr. Michael Jackson a Christian, in the forum we have gone over popular beliefs such as Christianity, Islam, and JW. We have gotten to the point of actually trying to help lead others to Christ, which I am thrilled about! But back to the main question, I personally do not believe that he went back to JW and I pray to my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ that Mr. Jackson has accepted Christ as King also. Much Love from Christ above. ❤
 
Back
Top