Edward Dunlap, was a registrar and instructor of the only school of Jehovah's Witness missionaries, the Watchtower Gilead Bible School, and also one of the main contributors to the Bible dictionary of the organization Aid to Bible Understanding. Understanding the Bible) He was also the writer of the only biblical commentary of the Watchtower, Commentary on the Letter of James . He expressed having some difference of opinion on some points of doctrinal character in private conversations with friends of many years. In the spring of 1980 a committee of five men, none of them a member of the governing body of the organization, met with him in secret session for several hours, questioning him about his views. After more than forty years of association and having contributed to the writing of numerous articles in the Watchtower magazine as well as several books, Dunlap was fired from his job and from his home at the international headquarters of Jehovah's Witnesses and expelled from the organization.

From the time the reference book, Aid to Bible Understanding, was written, he had had a close association with Edward Dunlap. I met him in 1964 while I was attending a ten-month course at the Gilead School. At that time he was the registrar of the school and one of the four instructors. Our class (the 39th) consisted of about a hundred people, mostly men from the branches of the branch. It can be affirmed with truth that most of them considered Dunlap's classes by far the most instructive in what had to do with acquiring understanding of the Scriptures. (Lloyd Barry was also in this class and made similar comments on more than one occasion as a member of the Governing Body.) I doubt that any student of Ed has ever doubted his love and deep knowledge of him from the Scriptures.) Originally from Oklahoma, somewhat shabby looking, and despite an ordinary education, Ed had the ability to take very difficult and complex topics and put them in simple form and language, whether the subject of the functions of the Mosaic Law or scientific study of genetics. However, the most important thing for me was the lack of pretension. Apart from his preference for brightly colored ties, he was basically - in size, speech and behavior - a simple person, without ostentation. No matter what responsibility was assigned to him, he remained the same.

He had always been completely dedicated to the organization; the record of his full-time service matched mine in length. Another circumstance that says something about him is related to a condition that developed in the late 1960s. Commonly called tic douloureux (French term meaning painful spasm), the medical term for this is trigeminal neuralgia, which is inflammation of a large facial nerve, the trigeminal branch in three parts, and that is capable of producing some of the most painful humanly known diseases. The stinging and blinding pain can be caused by anything, a gentle breeze, the touch, that excites the nerve, and as the disease worsens, the victim becomes increasingly difficult to do normal things such as combing, brushing teeth, or eat, without risking n attack. Some thus afflicted go so far as to commit suicide.

Ed suffered with this for seven years, having periods of mejota and then worsening. During that time, the president, Nathan Knorr, for some reason took the opinion (perhaps based on comments from others) that this was something emotional on Ed's part and not a genuine physical problem. One day he talked with Ed about his ailment, inquiring about his married life and other related matters. Ed assured him that one had nothing to do with the other, that he could be enjoying a good day's vacation and an attack was coming without warning. The president, however, gave no weight to Ed's explanation and informed him that he had decided to send him to the factory for some time to do some exercise. I would go to work in the bookbinding department.

Ed, then in the sixties, had been for some time taking potent medications - prescribed by the doctor in the central offices to suppress the painful attacks, and sometimes had been in bed for days and even for a whole week, with his ailment. But now he was sent to the bookbinding department and assigned to supply a machine in the binding line. He did it for months and took great pains to carry out this "theocratic" assignment as well as possible. But as he told me confidentially, this experience made him realize for the first time of the absolute control that the organization exercised over one's life. His attempts to explain were overlooked and against all good sense, he was placed in the situation desirable to someone who suffered from such ailment.

He did not expect any apology from the organization for the serious error of the organization in the trial, nor for the way they had considered and handled their distressing problem. None was offered.

Since our workplaces, both during the Ayuda project and thereafter, were very close to each other, we talked often, sharing interesting points that we found during our investigations. The Drafting Committee of the Governing Body assigned us to work together on a number of projects, such as the Commentary on the Charter of Santiago . In our conversations we did not always agree on all points, but it did not affect our friendship or mutual respect.

I mention all this because Edward Dunlap was one of the few people who knew how deep my concerns were in relation to what I saw in the organization, and in particular, what I saw in the Governing Body. He shared such concern. Like me, he came to feel that way because he could not harmonize much of what he saw, heard and read with the Scriptures.

Although he was associated with the organization since the early 1930s, during much of that association he did not consider himself as part of the "anointed ones." I talked to him about it one day in the late 1970s and he told me that when the Watch Tower began to associate, he pointed out that there were two classes that would inherit the heavenly life: the "elect" (composed of the 144,000) and the " big company "(or" great crowd "of Revelation chapter seven). The "great company" was said to be Christian of a lesser faith than that of the elect and therefore, though equally destined for heavenly life, the "great company" would not be among those who would rule with Christ as kings and priests. Since of the two classes one was superior and the other inferior, Ed typically assumed that he belonged to the lower class, the "great company."

It came in 1935 and Judge Rutherford, in the Washington DC assembly, announced the "revealed truth" that those of the "big company" were biblically living, not in heaven, but on earth. Ed said that he had always harbored the hope of heavenly life, and he felt that there could be nothing more wonderful than serving in the presence of God and in the company of his son. But because of the announced change in the organization's position, he cushioned those hopes and accepted what was told of his hope as part of the "great company."

It was not until 1979 that he clearly came to the decision that no human organization could change the invitation found in the Scriptures, in effect setting a date for a change in the hope presented in the Bible itself as open to any person embracing such hope, be it his name, Peter, Jacinto, Joseph or Ed. So, forty-five years after 1935 he began to participate in the emblems, bread and wine, in the Lord's Supper, something that only the "anointed" "from among the Jehovah's Witnesses do.

Edward Dunlap believed that chapter 8 of the letter to the Romans was not about two classes of Christians divided by their hope, one heavenly and the other earthly, but that it deals with two kinds of people: those guided by the spirit of God and those ruled by sinful flesh. The contrast that the Apostle Paul presents is not between life in heaven or life on earth, but between life and death itself, between friendship with God or enmity with Him. As Ed noted, the apostle did not say some, but "ALL who are led by the spirit of God" are his children (verse 14).

Suffice it to say here that Ed Dunlap shared with me the same basic concerns, particularly those related to dogmatism and the authoritarian spirit that was manifesting. His point of view, like mine, was that human authority, when taken beyond its proper limits, inevitably ends up taking away the merit of Christ Jesus as head of the congregation.

Inquisition

Four weeks after I started my period of absence, while I was still in Alabama, I received a phone call from Ed Dunlap. After a general conversation he told me that two members of the Governing Body, Lloyd Barry and Jack Barr, had come to his office and questioned him for three hours about his personal beliefs. At one point Ed asked, "What is the purpose of this judicial interrogation?" They assured him that this was not the case, but simply wanted to know how he felt about some issues.

They did not give him any explanation about what had motivated his interrogation. Although they pretended to make people believe that the discussion was only of an informative nature, for Ed this gave clear indications of the principle of an action on the part of the organization that would prove to be inquisitorial and punitive. The questions asked about their point of view regarding the organization, about the teachings regarding the year 1914, the two classes of Christians, the heavenly hope, and similar points.

Regarding the organization, he told his interrogators that his biggest concern was the lack of Bible study on the part of the members of the Governing Body; that he felt that it was the obligation of the brothers to consider the study and research of the Scriptures as their first priority, instead of allowing the concern for office work and other matters to lead them away from Bible study ...

... I saw Ed Dunlap standing in front of one of the buildings in the headquarters. He had to meet that day with one of the judicial committees.

Ed was then sixty-nine years old. The previous year, in 1979, he had commented that he was seriously considering leaving central offices. He knew that he had been the target of attacks, both in the sessions of the Governing Body, and outside of these. On one occasion he asked the Drafting Committee to relieve him of the harassment experienced ...

... When at the end of 1979 I informed Ed of our thoughts about leaving, he said that he had weighed the idea but had come to the conclusion that such a step was not possible. Considering his advanced age and economic situation, it was difficult to see how he and his wife could reasonably maintain themselves. By staying, they would have at least one place to live, food and medical attention. So he had decided to stay and added, "If they bother me a lot in the Editorial Department, I'll ask them to transfer me to the carpentry shop or any other job."

Less than a year later he was summoned to a hearing with a judicial committee. The day I saw him said, "I'm going to be very frank with them, it's against my nature to be evasive." He added that he had very little doubt as to what the committee would do.

After the initial visit of Barry and Barr with him, for almost six weeks none of the members of the Governing Body went to Edward Dunlap to discuss the matter, to reason with him or to discuss the Word of God with this man who had been associated for almost half a century, he had spent some forty years in the field service, who professed heavenly hope, and who was now about seventy years of age. They themselves are witnesses that this is true. How different from the pastor who leaves the ninety-nine to go in search and to help the "lost" sheep.

He was tasked with judging Ed Dunlap, a five-man committee from the headquarters staff. The Governing Body remained in the background. All the five men assigned were younger than Ed; none professed to be of the "anointed ones." After deliberating for a single day they came to their decision.

Quite typical of the attitudes shown are the following expressions:

When asked about his point of view regarding the organizational teaching of two classes of Christians, Ed pointed out the words of Romans 8:14, which say: "ALL who are led by the spirit of God" are children. of God ... Fred Rusk, who had served as an instructor at the Gilead School for several years while Ed was the Registrar, said, "Oh, Ed, that's just your interpretation of the passage." Ed asked, "So, how else can you explain it?" Fred Rusk's reply was, "Look, Ed, it's you who's being judged, not me."

When asked about the rules of the organization, he emphasized that the Christian is not under law, but under undeserved kindness (or grace). He added that faith and love were superior forces in regard to justice than the rules could ever be. Robert Wallen said, "But Ed, I like to have someone tell me what I have to do." Bearing in mind the words of Hebrews 5:13, 14, that Christians should not be like babies but as mature people, "who by means of use have their perceptive faculties trained to distinguish both right and wrong," Ed. He replied, "Then you have to read your Bible more." Robert Wallen smiled and said, "Me and two million more." Ed replied, "The fact that they do not do it does not excuse you from doing it." He emphasized that this was the biggest problem, the brothers simply did not study the Bible; they depended on the publications; their consciences were not genuinely biblically trained.

... The judicial committee wanted to know if he would speak in the future about these points with other people. He replied that he had no intention of "campaigning" among the brothers. But he also said that if some people came privately to him, asking for help, he would, because he would feel the obligation to help them. Surely this was the determining factor. Such freedom for the discussion and private biblical expression was not acceptable, but seen as heretical, as a dangerous attempt against the order of the organization.

One of the statements presented seemed particularly paradoxical. Ed had told them clearly that he had no desire to be expelled, that he enjoyed the company of the brothers and did not contemplate or desire to be separated from them. The committee encouraged him to "put his trust in the organization and have patience," saying, "Who knows? Maybe in five years many or all of the things you're saying will be published and taught."

They knew the fluctuating nature of the teachings of the Society and without a doubt this was what motivated them to express themselves like this. But, according to this statement, how far did their conviction come from the correctness of these teachings and their solid biblical basis? If they were willing to accept the possibility that the teachings of the organization in these points in question were not more solid and lasting than what was said, how was it possible then for them to use these teachings to determine if this man was a loyal servant of God or an apostate?

If they considered that such teachings were so subject to change to the extent that it would be worth waiting and seeing what the next five years would bring, why would it not then also be appropriate to postpone all judicial action against this man who had given, not five years, but half a century of service to the organization?

The logic of such reasoning can be understood only if one accepts and sustains the premise that the interests of the person - including his good name, the reputation forged with effort, the years of life offered in service - are disposable if they interfere with the objectives of an organization.

I am sure that each of the men in that judicial committee recognized that Edward Dunlap had a deep love for God, for Christ and for the Bible - and yet they felt they had to take action against this man. Why? They knew the prevailing character in the Governing Body, expressed through its Committee of the Presidency. Loyalty to the organization required such action on their part, since this man neither accepted nor could accept all the pretensions and interpretations coming from that organization.

... When the Judicial Committee of five Bethel elders-doing what, by any standard of what is proper, it was the Governing Body's turn to do-finally met with Ed Dunlap and informed him of his decision to expel him, Ed He said:

Okay, if that's your decision. But do not say that it is because of "apostasy." You know that apostasy means rebellion against God and Christ Jesus, and you know that this is not true of me .

So, they expelled Ed Dunlap, and asked him to leave what had been his home in the headquarters in Bethel. He returned to Oklahoma City where he had grown up and where, at about 70 years of age, he began earning a living for himself and his wife, wallpapering walls, a job he learned before beginning his forty years of full service as a representative of the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society.

It is difficult for me to understand how those who were responsible - genuinely and primarily responsible - for all this can approach God in night prayer and say, 'Show us mercy as we have shown mercy to others.'

After his summary expulsion from headquarters, Edward Dunlap went through Alabama on his way to Oklahoma City and his new beginning ... When he spoke with him, he told me, "It seems to me that the only thing you can do is try to bring a Christian life and helping people within whatever sphere of influence one normally has, the rest is in the hands of God. "