Thirdwitness -- An Agent of the Governing Body?

by AlanF 156 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  dilaceratus

  Auld Soul: The purpose of thirdwitnesses posts is not to positively assert data in favor of the Watchtower Society's chronology and explanations, but to challenge and debate the validity of the current view of secular history.

  
  So you now disagree with AlanF and his friend M. from the Circus's central thesis: that some member(s) of the WTBTS' hierarchy, who do not understand that their chronology is defenseless, have manufactured Thirdwitness in order to mount an Internet campaign defending their beliefs?
  What of their "glitzy" website? Does it now seem reasonable to conclude that someone other than the Watchtower is able to use CSS?
  

  Utimately, even if thirdwitness is an agent of the Governing Body, it doesn't matter beyond trying to determine what WTS agenda might be driving this new strategy.

  
  Thirdwitness self-destructs the moment they attempt to debate, and their self-serving and nonsensical arguments are plain to anyone with basic reading comprehension skills. The fact that Thirdwitness maintains that a city does not exist that unquestionably does is really all that need be said about them. Even if it were a "new strategy" by the WTBTS it is grossly incompetent, but the "conspiracy" alleged to be behind it is contradictory. (The conspiring bigwigs don't understand the holes in their beliefs; therefore, in a secret attempt to do some damage control, instead of debating the issues they don't know they're wrong about, they scheme to concoct a persona with a wide range of idiosyncratic and non-Watchtower beliefs to do so for them... Q.E.D.)
  The only evidence is that Thirdwitness admitted that its postings were a collaborative work! Exactly what one would expect of a proxy.
  What does matter is that a thread that has been viewed over 3,000 times by a poster highly respected for the quality and logic of his writing irresponsibly attaches an inflammatory supposition onto Thirdwitness, without any evidence other than another's "intuition." There are a hundred different ways such a guess might have been investigated privately. I object to such content-free bullying, whatever the source, or the target.
• 

  AuldSoul

  dilaceratus: that some member(s) of the WTBTS' hierarchy, who do not understand that their chronology is defenseless, have manufactured Thirdwitness in order to mount an Internet campaign defending their beliefs?

  Once again, your powers of perception have underwhelmed me. You have misinterpretted the central thesis of AlanF et. al. and have consistently misrepresented said thesis from the point of your misinterpretation forward until now.

  The thesis is actually as follows: that some member(s) of the WTBTS' hierarchy, who do understand that their chronology is defenseless, have manufactured Thirdwitness in order to mount an Internet campaign attacking secular history.

  The purpose behind such a campaign is clear. It allows obfuscation of secular data without their direct involvement, and repaints the issue as one of apostate secular sources under the control of Satan versus God's true channel. The campaign does not defend the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses. It attacks the validity of the arguments of opposers to those beliefs. It is an offensive campaign of obfuscation, not a defensive campaign of supporting current doctrine.

  The next time you think to criticize others, make sure you correctly understand their position prior to making a public attempt. Otherwise, you come off seeming foolish.

  AuldSoul
• 

  IW

  The next time you think to criticize others, make sure you correctly understand their position prior to making a public attempt. Otherwise, you come off seeming foolish.

  Excellent advice. It would have been great if you, AuldSoul, and AlanF would have followed your advice. Your suppositions suffer proof something Alan relentlessly insists upon when he calls others to task for their accusations, positions and opinions.

  But now suddenly, innuendo and unproven allegations are just dandy because it's the exJWs doing it? To be sure there is more to this than meets the eye but it's not so much about 3rd Witness as it is about WHY this thread was even started in the first place.

  IW
• 

  dilaceratus

  Auld Soul: Once again, your powers of perception have underwhelmed me. You have misinterpretted the central thesis of AlanF et. al. and have consistently misrepresented said thesis from the point of your misinterpretation forward until now.
  
  The thesis is actually as follows: that some member(s) of the WTBTS' hierarchy, who do understand that their chronology is defenseless, have manufactured Thirdwitness in order to mount an Internet campaign attacking secular history.

  
  
  Once again, your ability to read for content is appalling. Never mind your failed search for visual clues that a joke was being made in two sentences which contained: a) two facetious misspellings, b) an italicized segment, and, c) two exclamatories. Did you even read the post AlanF started this thread with?
  
  

  AlanF: The last fifteen years have seen the death of many long time Watchtower policy makers. With their deaths, a new generation of leaders is gradually coming into power and influence, especially under the influence of that arch-conservative Ted Jaracz. Jaracz and his cronies appear to be singularly unaware that certain critical Watchtower doctrines and practices have no support in the Bible or in terms of secular arguments, and they seem to have lost a sense of history in terms of proclaiming "the end is near". It makes sense that normal people would avoid such a proclamation, but the present JW leadership is far from normal. They've lost the experience and perspective of the previous generation of JW leaders, and so it seems logical that such new leaders might attempt to defend "the faith" aggressively, and combine it with a proclamation that "the end is near".
  
  Any such defense would have to be covert, in the sense that whatever GB member or WTS official leading the charge, or giving the green light, would have to keep all connections to those in the field secret from other JWs. This would be necessary because the Society has directly instructed JWs to avoid the Internet at all costs. It is also a WTS tradition that only those directly appointed by it are allowed to publish public defenses.
  
  Given the above, I have a strong suspicion that thirdwitness and his collaborators are either Bethelites, or JWs with extremely close ties to Bethel, or both, all of whom have been given the green light by Watchtower officials to get on the Internet and do battle with JW critics.
  
  Unfortunately, these defenders have bitten off more than they can chew. Having been steeped in the JW cult for a long time, they've lost the power for independent thought. They think that whatever nonsense the Society puts out should be accepted on the authority of the Society alone. They think that facts are there only to support the Society's claims, and when the facts don't fit, they follow the Society's tradition of ignoring them. They've made an extreme tactical blunder in posting their defenses on a open forum, where critics pay no attention to the Society's claims of authority, and deal with the facts. These defenders simply aren't used to getting their asses kicked in doctrinal debates, because in the JW world, debate does not occur.

  
  
  

  Auld Soul: The next time you think to criticize others, make sure you correctly understand their position prior to making a public attempt. Otherwise, you come off seeming foolish.
• 

  hillary_step

  dilaceratrus,

  There are a hundred different ways such a guess might have been investigated privately. I object to such content-free bullying, whatever the source, or the target.

  Do you not think that you are being a tad dramatic here?

  I read AlanF's post merely as speculation as to a scenario that may have value and may not. He made no dogmatic statements but merely suggested what may be happening behind the scenes and wished to get other opinions on the matter. If you are suggesting that it is an impossible scenario that Alan has suggested, then I have not read this in any of your posts on this thread. If it is not an impossible scenario, then he has every right to speculate on such a matter. It may be an improbable, but certainly not an impossible one.

  Given some of the rank lunacy that is posted to this board with pass by without comment, I think you are being unreasonable.

  Thirdwitness self-destructs the moment they attempt to debate, and their self-serving and nonsensical arguments are plain to anyone with basic reading comprehension skills.

  Perhaps in a perverse way you are making a point in AlanF's favor here, as basic reading and comprehension skills are not an everyday gift among the average JW. They need a peg of safety on which to hang their delusions and Scholar and Thirdwitness do this in an admirable fashion by appearing at first glance to know what they are actually talking about. This is all many JW's need to breathe a sigh of theological relief and continue banging the doors.

  I suspect that ThridWitness has received private mail commending him on his success in dealing so deftly with 'apostate theories'.

  HS
• 

  dilaceratus

  Hillary_step: If it is not an impossible scenario, then he has every right to speculate on such a matter. It may be an improbable, but certainly not an impossible one.

  
  
  

  Given some of the rank lunacy that is posted to this board with pass by without comment, I think you are being unreasonable.

  
  
  Were one to attempt to name those most responsible for devastating criticism of the WTBTS's claims using the digits of one hand, AlanF would surely be one of those little piggies. With that authority comes a commensurate responsibility, for his statements (even of opinion and speculation) carry more weight, and are rightly taken more seriously. There are any number of posts on this very thread which indicate that, for some, his speculation has been immediately adopted as fact. Their non-evidence-based beliefs are not his responsibility, but this thread is.
  
  [Ecce signum,]
  [Dilaceratrus]
• 

  hillary_step

  Dilaceratus,

  Were one to attempt to name those most responsible for devastating criticism of the WTBTS's claims using the digits of one hand, AlanF would surely be one of those little piggies. With that authority comes a commensurate responsibility, for his statements (even of opinion and speculation) carry more weight, and are rightly taken more seriously. There are any number of posts on this very thread which indicate that, for some, his speculation has been immediately adopted as fact. Their non-evidence-based beliefs are not his responsibility, but this thread is.

  So what you are saying is that because AlanF is taken so seriously as a poster, he should be more responsible as to how he chooses to speculate on-line? I think I have read you correctly. I could not disagree more. Though I understand your sentiment, I cannot see that it is condusive to a persons intellectual health.

  Poor hapless XJW's, who are unable to distinguish right from wrong, and rely on important authority figures to chart their miserable little lives. Most people on this Board have grown up way beyond what you credit them with Dilaceratus. I would not worry about their emotional health, I am sure they will survive without some Messianic figure in Denver to lead them to the promised land.

  HS
• 

  stevenyc

  I can understand the notion that a website of disinformation be sanctioned by some 'higher-ups' within bethel. Maybe to the extent of assisting the authors of such a web site. However, I feel it would be contradictory to their purpose to deliberately expose and then attempt to defend that web site here at JWD. As we saw in the posts from thridwitness, such a defence will expose the flaws to an extent that further defence turns into a theater of pitiful cognitive dissonance.

  steve
• 

  AuldSoul

  dilaceratus: Were one to attempt to name those most responsible for devastating criticism of the WTBTS's claims using the digits of one hand, AlanF would surely be one of those little piggies. With that authority comes a commensurate responsibility.

  Your conjectured rambling that effective, incisive, even devastating criticism grants someone AUTHORITY that would bear RESPONSIBLITY has no VALIDITY. It smacks of the same sort of argument used by thirdwitness, scholar and other posters regarding Jonsson or Franz. As though Jonsson or Franz has authority over us.

  AlanF is responsible for and has authority over exactly one person, as far as I know, namely himself.

  dilaceratus: There are any number of posts on this very thread which indicate that, for some, his speculation has been immediately adopted as fact.

  Your argument assumes heirarchy of authority that does not exist. Whereas the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has a heirarchy of authority, we do not. If you hoped to find one, or hoped to hold anyone's feet to the fire over what someone else believed based on a comment by a poster here, you are out of luck. If people agree with AlanF as to the strength of likelihood that this may be a campaign of some sort that doesn't mean they (1) view it as a threat, (2) agree with the exact nature as initially expressed by AlanF, or (3) agree with the objectives initially tossed out by AlanF.

  Your illogic is based in false assumptions and a desire to find structure where there is none. In the absence of structure, you imagined one into existence. The fact that your imagination is providing you faulty information as a basis for your posts is your own lookout.

  AuldSoul
• 

  hillary_step

  It also has to be acknowledged that both Scholar and ThirdWitness opened up the speculative can of worms by coming to this Board pretending to be one person acting alone, and eventaully being found out not to be individuals.

  Noticing an erratic writing style where Scholar was concerned I eventually forced him to admit that he was not acting alone. Exactly the same scenario occured with ThirdWitness. So at the very least we can say that two groups of people are meeting, discussing how best to post information regarding 607BCE etc on 'apostate' web sites. We know that Scholar is advised by an elder whom he admitted had considerable experience in the matter - these elders are very few and far between.

  HS