Question about WTS/UN scandal (page 6)

JosephAlward

Hartley claims documenting research interests would have been the benign remedy:

for JWs would ask - well, then why did you register instead of taking the benign approach of simply documenting your research interests?

I think the answer to that question may be found in the words of the Head Librarian:

Passes are granted to serious researchers upon presentation of a letter with the raised seal of your institution and subject to clearance by both the Library and UN Security.

Perhaps the notion of having a lowly librarian pass judgment on the worthiness of the research interests of God's organization might have been more distasteful to the Watchtower than getting on the list of affiliated NGOs. It seems that there is a measure of discomfort either way, so it's not so cut and dried.

Add to that the possibility that the passes to graduate students and other research institutions may not have been for a full year, as is the case for affiliated NGOs, and we might imagine that the balance tips in favor of affialiation.

Finally, the Watchtower may not wish to portray itself or its representives as a collection of "serious researchers." The association with the worldliness of university scholars might have been more than they wished to endure.

Thus, I can think of at least three answers the Watchtower could give to questioning Jehovah's Witnesses. I can see the downside to either path followed by the Watchtower: affiliation, or becoming "serious researchers."

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

Lionel_P_Hartley

Joseph,

I love it. There an infinite number of excuses that the WTS could make. There are also an infinite number of explanations of "necessary." Hell, for all we know Harry Peloyan had a woody for Paul Hoeffel and that's what made it "necessary" to affiliate.

Your trouble, Joseph, is that (a) you are so arrogant that you think that only evidence that satisfies you is the evidence that is sufficient and (b) you don't understand that, in principle, your methods mean than no issue will ever be resolved.

For example, in a previous thread you stated;

I don't need to have Jehovah's Witnesses into my home to know that the Watchtower is among the most destructive legal institutions in the world.

But how do you [i}know[/i] that. That is unfair accusation and you would be laughed out of court if you made it there. Why is it destructive - can you prove that? After all, JWs are free to leave if they wish, and they are not coerced to deny themselves or their children blood transfusions, they are free to seek legal assistance if their children are abused, etc. Trusting members of this forum might be deceived by your words into repeating this statement to their JW relatives, who would then, justifiably, accuse them of ungrounded accusations - it is typical apostate behavior,

You really are rather slow, Joseph. And you don't know thing one about Jehovah's Witnesses and the Watchtower Society. You don't have a clue.

Lionel

JosephAlward

If someone besides Hartley wishes to present the "Portuguese" argument in a dispassionate, objective manner, I would be happy to try to rebut it.

Hartley makes repeated references to my education and my profession, even though I've never breathed a word about it on this or any other JW forum. I've never told anyone on this forum what I do, and I've never said anything about my education, or lack of it, because it doesn't matter. But, for some reason, he seems preoccupied with it, having made remarks about it in six different posts over the last week.

I've never acknowledged those comments, but he keeps coming back with more of them. Not one other member has ever seen any reason to mention my profession even once, and indeed, why should they care? What matters is the argument, not the man making the argument. The argument either stands, or falls, on its own. I fail to see what Hartley's repeated reference to my education or my profession has to do with refuting my arguments, and his continual reference to it kind of creeps me out. Especially after he said he was done with this thread, then he came back 20 nanoseconds later.

Until I better understand what seems to be his unnatural and unprovoked preoccupation, I'll be inclined to believe that he is not completely centered emotionally. Thus, I would prefer to argue the Portuguese question with someone else. In fairness, I will finish whatever threads in which Hartley and I are currently active, however.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

Lionel_P_Hartley

I can see the downside to either path followed by the Watchtower: affiliation, or becoming "serious researchers."

That's plain stupid. Since the second course involves no obligations to the WTS they could simply have said - we applied for a library card and that's all there is to it. Many, probably most JWs in the UK and US, knew that the WTS was using the UN library - after all, Bethel used to organize tours to the UN as I undersatnd it - so that would have been no big deal.

I'm fed up debating this stuff and educating you in the process. Stick to what you know please. If anything.

Lionel_P_Hartley

Joseph,

Perhaps I'm the only one who read through your web page and checked out who you were - I must admit that I am especially surprised that someone in your profession could be so myopic. Anyone who makes a whole thread out of the misspelling of "annointed" has to be some kind of pedant.

Oh well, sorry if I irked you. But I was actually happy to see you on this forum, for I felt that a measure of academic objectivity would be healthy. But I was wrong. After all, anyone who offers to "rebut an argument - the Portguese one - before it is presented is obviously biased - now isn't he?

Reply or don't bother - I really don't care.

I will admit to not sticking to what I said and abandoning this thread - apologies for that. I guess I really felt that you might be capable of objectivity.

LPH

JosephAlward

Hartley claims,

Perhaps I'm the only one who read through your web page and checked out who you were

Oh, really? There is no such information on my web page.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

Lionel_P_Hartley

Idiot - do you think that I was so thick as to read your web page and not plug your your name into a search engine? The page interested me enough to do that - but don't worry Joe, I'm harmless. I'm just surprised at how dense you are - given yr web page. My assumption now is that you copied the stuff from someone. After all, in the quote you cited I didn't say that the info was on yr web page, now did I? I said that I had read yr web page and then checked out who you were. Are you learning impared? If so, then kindly state and I will factor that in. You do seem to have problems with sentences.

I do believe that I have heard the "extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence" mantra elsewhere. Of course, it's correct. But, for some it is a mantra - to give the illusion of scholarship. Is that what it is for you - a buoy in a chaotic sea?

Give it up Joe - or would you like to call a truce and debate intelligently, and without name-calling (of which I am guilty as charged) something significant such as quantum mechanics - in a separate thread?

I must add that I do think you have some promise - but don't be arrogant unless you can back it, and please, as SS requests, do some background on the WTS.

Seriously, Joseph, I think you have good intent but you are not sufficiently familar with WTS stuff to make a valuable contribution - yet. Odd as you may consier it, I do respect yr answers to SS. That I mean sincerely and it has altered my opinion of you. Not that that should matter.

LPH

ps: I do declare - I am breaking my rule yet again....and answering you.

JosephAlward

Idiot - do you think that I was so thick as to read your web page and not plug your your name into a search engine?

Why would you have to wait to see my web page before using a search engine?

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

Lionel_P_Hartley

Well, when I read the first post of yours that I saw, I noted the link to your web page,

So I went and read your web page.

And then I said, this is interesting, I wonder who this "Joseph Alward" character is.

So then I went to the Google serach engine and I typed in Joseph Alward. And you came up.

If there's any part of this that needs amplification do let me know.

Question about WTS/UN scandal

Share this