Opposers of Watchtower Society Challenged

by Kenneson 28 Replies latest jw friends

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson


    Topics she/ he(?) wants to discuss are the Watchtower Un-Ngo and 587-607 B.C. She/he's(?} also badmouthed Silent Lambs, etc. in other threads. Anyone up to the challenge?

    http://www.profindsearch.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=125

  • smellsgood
    smellsgood

    darnit.
    This kind of thing is very tempting to me...

    smellsgood

  • skeptic2
    skeptic2

    well I'm in the process of registering.

    The specifics of the NGO issue are of little importance.

    The question I want to raise is against this quoted statement:

    the promoters of 587 were not motivated by “truth seeking”, as they so often claim, but rather from an arrogant desire to simply prove the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York wrong

    All historians are concerned about the WTS? Seems a little far-fetched. I'm going to ask how many credible historians disagree with the 587 date.

  • observer
    observer

    Quote from the site:

    ------
    Why did the DPI state in an e-mail that requirements for association of NGOs has not changed since 1991?

    - The UN staff member who wrote that widely-circulated e-mail is wrong.
    ------


    Yeah, right..... so much for challenging.

  • DannyHaszard
    DannyHaszard

    I engaged Firehawk last winter an active practicing JW who lies and denies it classic dub psychopath all the way...

  • drew sagan
    drew sagan

    This is the problem guys.
    These JW defenders allways want to take the arguement down to their level (which is basically low). Think about these facts:

    1. They are not supposed to be on the internet posting about JWs at all anyway.
    2. Usually most of their work is just a repeat of what the WTS has said anyway.
    3. All of their arguments are pushed towards one goal, proving JWs right.

    In any real search for truth, we have to be able to accept the facts and/or the lack thereof. Most of these people used to follow Robert King (another gem of a "truthseeker") and basically think that either he is right or the society is right. Or they label everybody that leaves as people who are like Robert King.
    I think it is safe to say there is no reason with such people. If they are on the internet then they aren't sincere JWs, end of story. They are extra-fanatical JWs who want to scare people into believing what they have to say.

    My opinion, just walk away from this kind of stuff. Your not really talking to JWs, you are talking to people who are on the fringes of this organization and are hanging on for dear life. It's the honest people on the inside we need to worry about.

  • skeptic2
    skeptic2

    if you have no stake in the argument (as I don't), it can be fun to see what the responses are to simply questions.

    like I wonder if this person will tell me there is a conspiracy amongst most historians, he/she may well do so, at which point the argument is closed - which is great, it clarifies how wacky the belief system is

  • Elsewhere
    Elsewhere

    lmao... I love die-hard JWs like her! She is an exJW in denial. She fights so hard because deep down she knows we are right and she's too proud to accept the fact that she's wrong.

    It is just a matter of time before she will give it up and join us.

  • thecarpenter
    thecarpenter

    Luukkkeeee, join the dark side... You don't know the power of the dark side.....

  • Kenneson
    Kenneson

    I know a person who tried to register at the Profind site several days ago and has not yet been able to. Don't know what the problem is. So, if you care to answer on this forum feel free. Firehawk has already noted the link to here.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit