Subtle indirect control: What the new JW book "Walk Courageously With God I really about
On the surface, Walk Courageously With God is about Bible characters, telling their stories, and their life lessons.
Today I took a good look at the new book and I realized it goes hand in hand with the broader changes in the organization -ie the shift from direct orders/ rules to principles, the emphasis on “personal decisions”, and the growing distancing of the organization from its adherents.
How?
After each story, the reader is asked some self reflective questions.
"Reflect on the lessons"
Each question comes with a picture, which nudges the reader toward the "correct" answer — the one the organization wants them to arrive at.
Example 1:
A JW does not participate in a birthday celebration
The reader reflects on the picture and concludes they will not celebrate a birthday.
Example 2:
A young JW is shown a university prospectus by a teacher
The reader reflects on the question and concludes that they will not pursue higher education (the other pictures in this series of photos go on to show the guy does not choose to pursue higher education but chooses the organization instead)
Example 3:
A JW refuse a blood transfusion
The reader reflects on the question and concludes they will refuse a blood transfusion.
Example 4:
A JW couple discuss buying a car
The reader reflects on the question and decides a simple life involves doing volunteer construction work for JW org (see the photos in frames on the couple's desk and wall) and attending pioneer school.
Example 5:
A JW is questioned about fellow JW
The reader reflects on the situation and understands they can lie under certain circumstances. The picture reinforces fear. See "Theocratic Warfare"
The illustrations show the expected behavior or something that pushes them in the right direction.
Also the questions reference not only scripture but also Watchtower literature, steering the reader toward the organization’s preferred interpretation.
The reader internalizes these lessons, believing they are making their own choices, even though the book subtly guides them to a predetermined conclusion.
This is quite a clever move. The organization has structured the book so that the individual JW thinks they are arriving at their own conclusions, while in reality they are being controlled without the organization giving a direct command.
You may have noticed a broader trend in recent years, highlighted in the 2025 Annual Meeting: no laws, no rules -just principles, with the exception of scriptural laws such as refusing blood. The message is that behavior should be guided by principles rather than rigid rules, but consequences still exist for certain choices.
The many shades of "personal decision" in Watchtower teachings:
Recent organizational changes which show a distancing of the organization from its adherents:
- Members → Adherents: The organization replaced the term “members” with “adherents.” Adherents cling to the organization voluntarily, while the organisation distances itself from responsibility for them. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/1g17j1p/from_members_to_adherents_the_problem_with/
- JW can now use their "bible trained conscience" to decide whether to say a greeting to a disfellowshipped (removed) person https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/1bfc7xj/the_governing_body_has_decided_jw_can_use_their/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
- Dress and grooming: Men can have beards and a suit is not always required; women can wear pants at meetings, and a skirt or dress is not always required.
- Toasting is now a “personal decision” (so there must have been a rule before ) https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/1lri1kt/the_governing_body_has_concluded_that_toasting/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
- Higher (“additional”) education is now framed as a “personal decision”, whereas previously JW who pursued additional education were judged and sometimes punished, and most avoided it because of the pressure. The recent clarification emphasizes that such a decision should be without judgement. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/1mx494v/here_it_is_jw_gb_update_5_2025_additional/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
- No more reporting of ministry time unless you are a pioneer. Instead, JW simply tick a box. This makes ministry appear personal and self-directed, while the organization distances itself from responsibility. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/173l5t5/the_report_we_submit_each_month_is_connected_with/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
- The organization no longer tells JW exactly what to say in the ministry. Everything is framed as “personal ministry” - JW are to come up with their own presentations.
- When it comes to minors, the organization has shifted responsibility to the JW parent to avoid legal issues with disfellowshipping them.
Even practical instructions, like the October 2025 Announcements and Reminders which instruct JW to print ministry material at home, shifts responsibility onto the individual JW. Perhaps they will do more of this in future.
If there were truly no rules and only principles for the most part, why does the Shepherd the Flock of God elders’ manual exist? It lists behaviors that call for a committee of elders (formerly "judicial committee") to come together to discipline the offender. The organization publicly frames everything as a personal decision or principle, but some choices still carry discipline from removal of privileges to removal from the congregation and subsequent shunning. https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/1dtx2n1/heres_why_i_think_theyve_dropped_the_term/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Now the organization wants to appear less controlling and they want to avoid legal issues. Where previously it gave direct instructions, it is increasingly distancing itself from JW adherents. This distancing allows the organization to maintain influence while giving it plausible deniability: they can claim JW are making personal decisions, even though the guidance still steers behavior.
Walk Courageously With God is much more than a book about Bible characters. The book, the illustrations, and the questions all work together to control behavior while presenting the appearance of freedom of decision.
I imagine it will be studied at the congregation book study.
I am quite sure I haven't included everything I could have done in this post but I have to stop somewhere!
----------------------------------------------
Organization distancing itself from ministry by saying the message is personal, not organizational:
Why the change from member to adherent? Legal implications:
https://churchexecutive.com/archives/dangers-in-defining-church-membership
Posted Oct 6, 2025, 7:08 PM UTC