There’s a scripture in the Bible that’s always intrigued me, even as a young Witness. In Acts 11, it is written that Paul and his companion Silas are chased out of the city of Thessolonica by the Jews in the synagogue there for stirring things up with their preaching. They left in the night for a nearby city named Berea, where they found a more receptive audience. In fact, the writer compliments the Bereans as being of a “more noble character” in verse 17, where the writer (traditionally thought to be the Apostle Luke) says “Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.” (Acts 17:11, New International Version)
For the moment, let’s accept these words at face value, and assume the “Scriptures” being referred to are in our Old Testament (or Hebrew Scriptures, as Witnesses call them). Well, actually, more likely a portion of it; it’s highly unlikely that the Old Testament as we know it is what those Jews were reading. As far as scholars today have been able to determine, the Old Testament became that around 180 CE or so when Jewish rabbis decided what to include in the canon. For those Bereans it was likely at least what today constitute the first five books of the Bible (which they believed were the writings of Moses), and maybe also some of the prophets like Daniel, Ezekiel or Jeremiah. In any case, whatever these Jews were comparing Paul’s preaching to, the writer of Acts thought that was a good thing to do, even referring to them as having a “more noble character.” Many of them converted to Christianity, according to the next couple of verses in Acts.
So why does this scripture interest me? I think it’s a clear signal that critical thinking is considered to be important in examining one’s beliefs. These Berean Jews didn’t just accept what Paul and Silas were teaching; they checked it against whatever they had as accepted Scriptural authority. This, Luke is saying, is a good thing. I wrestled with this, even as a Witness kid. Right there in plain English is the exhortation to not take was said from an authority, but to compare it to what the Bible says (at least in this example). Now it is true, we were encouraged (in fact, it was a virtual requirement) to read the Bible regularly, and the Watchtower Society quoted scriptures quite liberally in all the literature. But all the quotes were within the context of a lesson of some sort, and frequently it was a single, pithy verse that supported (or seemed to at least) the specific point that was being made. But if there was ever question, we were encouraged to “not lean upon our own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5). And what that translated to is that we were to consult the Society’s literature for our answer. So while on one hand, the Bereans were held up as examples of noble character for their critical thinking, it was clear to us that we were to let the Society determine for us how Scriptures were to be interpreted. The Society resolved this apparent dichotomy in the best way possible: as the “spokesperson” for God there is no reason to compare their writings to any higher authority, since none exists.
That’s not very conducive to critical thinking, I’d say. But I think that’s the point.
