RAY FRANZ ACCUSED OF LYING (page 2)

JimmyPage

As far as I'm concerned Ray Franz gets a lifetime pass.

I'd venture to say he gets one from Jesus Christ as well.

How the Watchtower Society will be judged is an entirely different story.

this is easily resolveable. Peter G was daed...not dfed. He voluntarily daed- and at that time was not subject to shunning. He told the truth. Ray details changes that occurred 9/15/81 onward while Peter G stated his situation as it occured prior to WT changes,

seek2find

I think it's possible that Peter was saying that, his experience was different because he voluntarily left rather than be disfellowshipped and that being the case, he has a different viewpoint than he would have otherwise. Regardless, I think this person is grasping for any little thing he or she can to discredit Ray. What I'd really like to know is how are they going to defend the Society's position on issues that Ray exposed. For instance how about the registration of the Organization in Mexico as a "Cultural Organization" to get around the property ownership laws. Doing so greatly restricted the witnesses use of the Bible and their way of worship. Isn't that called compromise? How many times were we as witnesses instructed to not compromise? I remember not standing for the national anthem because it would be a compromise. seek2find

I quit!

Looks like someone search long and hard to find that one. If that is all they could come up with I think Ray is in pretty good shape. I find that sometimes our memories of past event can be change or very from person to person on small points like this without any intentional lying on our part. I would ask this person if they feel this is lying and such a horrible offence then I'm sure they would leave the Watchtower if they found out they had lied on numerous occasion. I would press the issue. I don't think you would get a straight answer of them. WT apologist know all about the WT lies and are good at avoiding answering honestly about them.

AllTimeJeff

This is much ado about nothing. Here is what I responded with.

There is nothing contradictory here. In fact, on that web page, he says he has not been a JW for 27 years. (Since 1981) Wouldn't that agree with what Ray Franz reports in CoC?
In addition, what does he mean by one "who never had any problems such as reproof, disfellowshipping, shunning, etc. so I have no "sour grapes" attitude." That could mean many things. In addition, I would dare say that since Ray Franz was disfellowshipped for associating with Gregerson, that he would have long ago disputed any discrepencies. He has not chosen to do so. He is simply offering some facts about himself, apart from Ray Franz or Coc.
I don't know what you are driving at. It appears you are trying to discredit Ray Franz by calling this into question. Anyone who has a copy of CoC knows that Franz photocopied many letters concerning himself and Gregerson, and they are not in dispute. Of course, you would have to read the entire book before you would know that.

JWdaughter

I read both accounts. There was no contradiction. Franz doesn't need to justify himself to anyone. The guy who posted it was desperate to find anything to discredit Ray with, and that is the closest he could come to doing so, and he missed entirely.

still_in74

the easiest way to validate the truth of Ray's writings is the fact that the WTS has never sued him for slander.

Is there a more letigious organization on the planet than the WTS? Do you think for a moment that if Franz was lying that the org would not do everything in its power to prove it? To publicly humiliate him?

Look at the judge that threw Rutherford & his cronies into prison, they even went so far as to connect a charge of accepting bribes (which happened 20 years later) by implying that the Judge may have accepted bribes in the judgement against the WTS.

The WTS will stop at nothing to discredit anyone that speaks out against it. If Franz was lying you can be sure the WTS would have sued him for it, and somehow, in the Revelation book a revision would be written which would then connect the public humiliation of Ray Franz to a prophetic event in Revelation.

You can gaurantee that the WTS & its lawyers have read CofC cover to cover with each revision.

inkling

he says he has not been a JW for 27 years. (Since 1981) Wouldn't that agree with what Ray Franz reports in CoC?

So, he has not been a JW for 27 years, but has never been "disfellowshiped" or "shunned".

This basically sound like "fading", and back then, DA'ing yourself was very much like fading, as far as how the congregation views you, right?

(when did that change to DA=DF, BTW?)

So I don't see a fallacy when in his blog, Gregerson says he did not have any experience of disfellowshipping and shunning and therefore does not have a sour grapes attitiude and so people can ring and speak to him (I think he is trying to make himself accessible to JWs).

Exactly. Maybe he is choosing to highlight the technicalities that might make some Witnesses ok with talking to him.

This whole accusation is just silly and desperate.

[inkling]

Leolaia

Oh jeez, the claim is so pathetic it's not really worth replying to. Of course, FH Chandler could just call Gregerson up himself and ask him to clarify what he meant in that single vague sentence -- Gregerson gives his phone number in the page Chandler linked -- but of course he is not "allowed" to do that since it would involve talking to an "apostate".

r

digderidoo

I have just replied on it. I can't even see the contradiction, one says he never had experience of disfellowshipping, the other said he was da'ed as he felt he was about to be disfellowshipped.

Paul

RAY FRANZ ACCUSED OF LYING