“STANDARDS” -- Jehovah's Witnesses are honest enough to admit when we were wrong… (djeggnog)

by the pharmer 2 Replies latest jw friends

  • the pharmer
    the pharmer

    My finale (?)

    Although I realize djeggnog was making a generalization in the quote I put in the topic heading, I would hope when we make statements like these, that we would hold ourselves individually to the same standards we’re promoting. The evidence that was displayed to me in my easy question thread has proven to be otherwise.

    I understand admitting error can be difficult and humbling—been there, done that (continually).

    But I want to make sure that everyone who has read djeggnog’s replies to me, is aware that I have given him every opportunity to admit and correct himself where I have shown him to be wrong with facts – whether on topic or off topic (and I’m not talking about opinions and interpretations – those are another matter altogether), and that I have given him plenty of opportunity to reconcile his conflicting statements. This current thread is as much of an fyi for other readers of that conversation(s) as it is my last invitation to djeggnog, to show how/if he will apply the same standards to himself as he promotes.

    My concluding comments to him on that thread were:

    Not only have you been unable to reconcile your original conflicting statements (or been unable to show exactly how and why they don’t conflict), but you also have not addressed many of your mistakes or misinformation – some of which I have brought to your attention.

    I read comments from you in response to other people, where you tell them things like, “…perhaps you could benefit yourself by just going to a public library and doing a bit of reading up on this subject.”

    Yet, at the same time you boldly make statements and claims full of misinformation to me without addressing them once they’ve been pointed out.

    It doesn’t take much reading up on the subject you so confidently made claims about to me, to realize just how incomplete and incorrect your statements are. For example, you stated, “…there are no sharps in the A-minor scale.” If you assume that there is only one type of minor scale out there (natural minor), then in your mind you would think you are correct, but in reality you are incomplete. All I would have to do to show how incorrect your statement is, would be to ask you in terms of A-minor, “how many sharps are in the harmonic minor scale” or “how many sharps are in the melodic minor when ascending?” I could take it a step further and ask you what the difference is between an ascending A-melodic minor and the A-Major scale.

    Djeggnog,

    Please reconcile your original conflicting statements and address your additional mistakes/misinformation.

    Thanks,

    Pharmer

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    I've read Catholic "apologies" before and found them...weak. The Watchtower "apology" for the 1975 fiasco is similarly weak. That's the trouble with organizations that set their seats so close to the throne. The rariefied air goes to their heads.

    My personal opinion is that DJeggnog's sincere efforts to justify the Watchtower's actions stem from a false assumption of their authority (see above comment), and the corrections 'at the proper time' though justified and pure in his mind, sound notably weak to an outsider's ears. When he speaks of Jehovah's Witnesses admitting they are wrong, I think he is using the royal "we", the Organization's rare apologies or changes in doctrine that come out months or years late.

  • The Oracle
    The Oracle

    Yeah, I agree jgnat.

    The WT apologies suck. They really suck.

    The Oracle

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit