What are apostate lies?

by vitty 63 Replies latest jw friends

  • under_believer

    sbf, would you consider being specific about what in Penton's book you consider to be an attempt to "rewrite history?"

  • just2sheep

    once a dub always a dub. except when talking about important apostates that there is a difference between an ignorant bethel elder and an equally ignorant jwd elder.

    all bethelite's are stupid, selfish pawns---except for the ex-bethelites who have a book to sell. these are seen as shining examples of what jehovah's witnesses ought to be.

    your worth to this forum is in direct proportion to the number of posts on your post history and your intelligence and knowledge is summed up by the number of topics you have posted (including such topics as---what are you wearing? where are you going on saturday? oral sex...is talking dirty included? and the ever popular--- America, the great satan or just another cess pool?

    this (fill in the blank) will bring the borg to its knees.

    i have seen these things on evey xjw site i have seen, which isn't all of them because i got bored seeing the same things over and over.

  • Leolaia

    Here is the passage in the book in which Evans discusses the persecution of JWs. The part slimboyfat quoted is on p. 256 and the statement is accurate...while other groups, pacifist religious groups, would have faced persecution, no other group in Germany was like the JWs in their "hostility" towards their government...remember these were the days Rutherford was publishing his rants against the Catholics, Nazis, Big Business, Jews, Communism, the League of Nations, former Bible Students, the US government, and anything else that he construed to be a part of "Satan's Organization". The message was 100% hostile towards the Nazis, and German JWs suffered greatly for bravely pressing on with the message. All of that is true. It is all true for the years mentioned by Evans...in 1936...by 1937...in 1938...in the late 1930s...etc. Does this mean that this historian of the Third Reich rejects the claim that certain JW leaders (note, not "Jehovah's Witnesses" in general, as the claim is represented above) earlier took the opposite approach in 1933, and shows it to be an "apostate lie" (as implied above)? No. Evans doesn't talk about the situation in 1933 at all. No matter how "uncompromisingly hostile" to the German state Rutherford and others were in 1934 onward, the facts speak for themselves that they were not "uncompromisingly hostile" in 1933. The situation in the late 1930s is not representative of the situation in 1933.

    The Society interestingly has blured the difference between the two situations in this straw-man version of the claim:


    w04 9/1 p. 16 par. 14 Beware of "the Voice of Strangers" ***


    accusations. Although some news reports about Jehovah’s Witnesses are fair, at times the media let themselves be used to broadcast the biased voice of strangers. For instance, in one country a news report falsely stated that the Witnesses supported Hitler’s regime during World War II.
  • AuldSoul

    Oh, vitty, that is SOOO easy. Here is an example of some apostate lie: "Jehovah's Witnesses have the truth! Adhering to instructions from a Governing Body of men is necessary for salvation! In 1918, Jesus chose an organization that he had specifically warned people away from in order to test the faith of those who claimed to be his disciples!"

    If you need more, let me know. I have lots of them I could share.


  • M.J.
    Fortified by a resolution passed at their international conference in Lucerne in 1936 strongly criticizing the German government, they began distributing what the regime regarded as seditious leaflets. The police responded with arrests and prosecutions, and by 1937 Jehovah’s Witnesses accounted for well over half of all cases brought before the Special Court in Freiberg, Saxony, and a substantial proportion elsewhere as well.

    Leolaia is right. This doesn't sound like neutrality to me.

  • Narkissos
    The first stance taken by the Watchtower was at once obsequious and duplicitous

    To say the least. The lavish use of anti-semitic clichés -- Jehovah himself providing for the "final solution" in due time -- make them sound, retrospectively, criminal.

    , but it was not a "compromise". They were first and foremost concerned that they could carry on their meetings and preaching activities. They were prepared to suspend these for a time, only on the basis that a very short cessation would allow them to explain their position and resume.

    As if that -- meetings and preaching activity -- were the important matter, in comparison with the explicit approbation of Nazi ideology! (Where was "neutrality"?)

    But I'll concede that this might not have been a "compromise" indeed. There is a distinct possibility that Rutherford was sincerely fascinated by the Nazi regime and ideology, as many were, and his later opposition resulted from his frustration at Hitler's contemptuous reaction.

    They even tried to appeal to the Nazis' better nature

    By catering the German anti-semitism and frustration at the unfairness of the Versailles Diktat? You must be joking.

  • LittleToe
    They even tried to appeal to the Nazis' better nature - this is not the same as compromising with the Nazis on a sustained basis and fully cognizant of their ultimate designs in the way that the mainstream Churches did.

    So you confess that they compromised, then? Just that it wasn't on a [whatever you define as] "sustained basis"?

    Further, your broad brush-strokes are also interesting, e.g.: mainstream churches, fully cognizant. Do you genuinely believe that every church other than the JWs was "fully cognizant" of the Nazi horror?

    Even if you're taking the p*ss to wind folks up, I have to wonder what kind of a mind comes up with this stuff...

  • hillary_step


    I wrote a 12, 000 word dissertation on the historiography of JWs and the Third Reich and got the top mark for it.

    MacDonalds University?

    While it is true that Nazi persecution of the Jehovah's Witnesseses as a religion was vigorous, it was by no means exclusive. I suspect that you already know this and are merely rattling the cage for effect.

    Best regards - HS

  • LittleToe

    wb Hillary, you've been missed

  • Honesty
    While it is true that Nazi persecution of the Jehovah's Witnesseses as a religion was vigorous, it was by no means exclusive. I suspect that you already know this and are merely rattling the cage for effect.

    Best regards - HS

    And here I was, getting worried that he might be hungry. I should have know it was another JWD thread about 'postates that woke him up again.

Share this