Public Talk Outlines

by Lady Lee 72 Replies latest watchtower beliefs  Original

  • TheStumbler

    hello all,

    one of my JW family members recently sent me a cassete tape recording of the 'human origins - does it matter what you believe' talk.

    I don't have a cassete player so havent listen to the recording yet.

    I was curious so downloaded the talk outline (talk 133).

    I would like to write a rebutal and send it back to my JW family member.

    But, I'm confused by the references. many of the talking points are followed by a reference such as '(g95 8/8 5; w86 4/1 12,191)'

    Is this a reference to a watchtower publication?

  • jookbeard

    could never have done one, when I was working my way up to MS the new MS were giving half hour PT's each, I wasn't far off becoming one, our cong had this obsession in grooming so called excellent public speakers, my old man loved them, would go to congs miles away to give them.

  • rather be in hades
    rather be in hades

    hi stumbler

    But, I'm confused by the references. many of the talking points are followed by a reference such as '(g95 8/8 5; w86 4/1 12,191)'

    yes those are references to watchtower publications. if they were to REAL publications with any substance, then the watchtower society would crumble under the weight of reality.

    g is awake, so that's the 8/8/1995 awake page 5

    w is watchtower, so that's the 4/1/1986 watchtower page 12, or page191 in the boundvolume book of that year.

    if you want to look at those publications, your best bet is to download the watchtower cd. torrents are a good source, or you can google it. not too hard to find.

    now if you want the, "oh my god what kind of nutjobs are these crazy mofos?!?!?!" kinds of documents, i'd suggest:

    that has a LOT of interesting material, originally sourced and what you'll find there, especially in the earlier years like the 1880s through1930s will shock you.

    there's also watchtowerquotes which is great and a few other sites out there. can't recall them off the top.

  • TheStumbler

    g is for Awake - of course! :)


    Thanks, Rather be in Hades

    I've already got the Watchtower CD ROM so should have all the materials I need.

    The talk is about evolution so shouldnt need any of their old literature but looks interesting. I'll bookmark it for future reference. 

  • TheStumbler

    Just skimming through the Talk Outline, it seems the talks are much more strident than articles in the Awake or Watchtower. I guess talks are more preaching to the converted so they can unshackle the crazy stuff.

    Couple of things jump out at me


    'Human brain was designed to learn forever (Give exampls ; g98 6/22 9)'


    Would love to see the scientific reference for that statement!


    It's such a confused mish mash of arguments and logical fallcies. (basically one big straw man and ad hominem attack on evolution and zero discussion of scientific evidence)


    The Outline says that evolution comes in many varities such as 'natural selection' and 'punctuated equilibrium'.  WTF! Natural selection and punctuated equilibrium are not mutually exclusive concepts! Natural selection is a part of, and drives, punctuated equilibrium! No doubt saying 'punctuated equilibrium' on the paltform would make the speaker appear very knowledgable to the average JW. The talk assumes and relies on the listeners ignorance. 


    The Talk Outline states that humans were created perfect but provides no scientific evidence and just gives a reference to Deuteronomy! That's the standard of argument; 'the bible says so so therefore must be true' 


    This one had me scratching my head: 

    'Sin's harmful effect on our genes, not animal genese, introduced undesirable traits (Read Deuteronomy 32:5)


    Sin has a harmful effect on our genes??!!! And this was mentioned in Deuteronomy??!!


    It winds me up that my family believe in this BS and can't see through it. 


  • TheStumbler

    Writing the rebuttal will be very easy because the Talk Outline is so poor. But, I will have to consider my words so that my family actually read it....

  • rather be in hades
    rather be in hades

    evolution is interesting. it stares us in the face on a daily basis.

    dna and genetics are the key.

    why do we KNOW evolution occures?

    well, aside from fossil records which back all of this stuff up, we know about dna and genetics. in essence, we know the MECHANISM of evolution and change.

    it's too bad in 2012 we still have to argue about that :(

    good luck, what was in the talk that you plan to refute if i may ask? i mean, i'm sure you'll have a ton to pick and needle with considering the complete lack of scientific evidence/reality on their part, i'm just curious to see how you'd structre the argument :P

  • TheStumbler

    I'll try and just point out the logical fallicies and faulty premises. Line by line. 


    I'll describe what an ad homen and straw man argument are and then point where the talk uses such arguments. 


    I'll point out the statements that are not supported with, or are positively refuted by, scientific evidence. 


    But really, most of the talk can be summed up with 'the Bible says we were created therefore Evolution is false. Evolution offers no hope. The Bible promises life in Paradise'. 


    It is true, Evolution does not promise life in paradise. But when I will try and make the point that evolution is an amoral proces and whether or not one views as immoral has no effect on its veracity as a scientific theory. I might also have to explain what a scientific theory is and that the theory of evolution refers to the scientific explanation of the mechanisms that cause evolution and not evolution itself which is observed and inferred by the fossil record and genetics. 


    Dont't know. I've explained all this stuff before to the JW in question and they just get this glazed look. 

  • Black Sheep
    Black Sheep
    I'll try and just point out the logical fallicies and faulty premises. Line by line.

    Choose only one line

    They don't want a list except to look for a mistake or your weakest arguement. They think they are the teachers, so they are not interested in listening to you, so just pick their weakest arguement and use questions about it to get them to do the research that they need to do to realise that they have a problem. Don't do their research for them, just make them talk themselves into a hole then try to dig their own way out of it.

    Make them feel the guilt for any trickery, or diversion tactics they try on you and for anything they say they will get back to you on, then conveniently forget.

  • rip van winkle
    rip van winkle

    Lady Lee- this is phenomenal!!! Such a good idea. Marked.

Topic Summary

i have been collecting the public talk outlines.

i have almost all of them but there are a few missing.

i have tiles for some but just numbers for others.

Related Topics