Quotemines please

goddidit

As we all know, reaching a believing JW is difficult, maybe impossible.

I've tried many years of reasoning before I realised that reason isn't something they really understand, and science is something they can brush off with a wave of their hand. Now I'm going to prepare very succinct examples of their blatant quotemining and somehow get one of them to read it, then ask them why purveyors of the Truth need to use lies to support their claims. Maybe I'm too optimistic but I'm hopeful this might have some effect. For this I need some difficult to dismiss example of quotemines, the more recent the better.

I aready have these, which I suspect will be dismissed as from an 'old book' (not that I'm sure what the hell difference that makes).

http://corior.blogspot.com/2006/02/misquotations-in-creation-book.html

Anyone?

Amelia Ashton

I love this one but in my 2006 copy it is on page xxi

The Quote	Life -- How Did It Get Here? By Evolution or by Creation? (1985), p. 39: 5 At this point a reader may begin to understand Dawkins' comment in the preface to his book: "This book should be read almost as though it were science fiction."
The Source	Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene, 1976, p. ix: "This book should be read almost as though it were science fiction. It is designed to appeal to the imagination. But it is not science fiction: it is science. Cliché or not, "stranger than fiction" expresses exactly how I feel about the truth."

goddidit

Amelia, from what I know of the JW mindset that one is easily dismissed.

My favourite from that page is: " The manifest fit between organisms and their environment is a major outcome of evolution...."

but a few more blatant ones would be good.

outsmartthesystem

I have plenty from their oct 1 2011 and nov 1 2011 magazines that were to set the matter straight regarding 607BC. Here is an example taken from the Oct 1, 2011 WT:

"Thus Christopher Walker of the British Museum says that Ptolemy's canon was "an artificial scheme designed to provide astronomers with a consistent chronology" and was "not to provide historians with a precise record of the accession and death of kings".

But they fail to quote the REST of what he said:

"Nevertheless it has served as the backbone of the chronology of the Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid periods, and served reliably. There is no difficulty in correlating Ptolemy's chronology with the vast accumulation of data now available from Cuneiform sources."

Please keep in mind that whomever you are trying to reach will still not see the "truth" for what it really is until he/she is ready. I showed my father in law dozens of quotemines and asked him why the holy spirit would direct the writer to hide what was really written. His response to me wasn't "wow.....I don't know". Nor was it "Let's get to the bottom of this". It was "how dare you impute wrong motive on Jehovah's organization!" He promptly turned me in to the COBE to be disfellowshipped. Not once did he address those scholastically dishonest quotes. He had no interest. He only wanted to prove his unquestioned loyalty to the organization. Please remember that. unless this person is ready to wake up......he/she will find a way to dismiss anything and everything you show them. If the information you show is too shocking......it will be the end of your relationship

AnnOMaly

Lots in the 2011 WT articles on 607. Prof. John Steele's quote is one of many taken out of context and misused (the Walker one mentioned above already).

The Abba Hillel Silver quote.

The Ephraim Stern quote.

cobaltcupcake

It's just too sad to me that I never questioned their quotes, believing the WTS to be absolutely truthful.

Black Sheep

A TROOOO believer Dub won't give a toss. They use dishonesty themselves when they need to polish the WT's image or a doctrine they think the listener would find distasteful. I've had Dubs condone quotemining when they found themselves trapped.

Indian Larry

Unfortunately most "true believers" are not bothered with facts. If you could help someone to see TTATT with facts there would no longer be a ORG. My suggestion is fade (there is good advice on this site how to fade with no recrimmination) periodically ask the other person questions that will make them think. That is pretty much all you can do. If you could prove it with facts I would have done it with my family long ago.

goddidit

Thanks for everyone’s comments. I'll have a good look throught these.

@Black Sheep and Indian Larry

How does this work? Do they know it's false but.. What? I just can't fathom it. Do they simultaneously know it's a lie but think it's the truth, using double-think?

@Indian Larry

I'm not in and have never been. I'm just trying to help someout out. He's a colleague, not a close friend and I probably won't be working there much longer anyway.

So with all this talk I hear of fading, I guess a lot of people are in it under duress but keep up the lie in case someone finds out they don't believe, and that's what the shunning's all about. Right?

Quotemines please

Share this