thank you...
Sw
"The Scholastic Dishonesty of The WATCHTOWER" as a pdf?
by VM44 25 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
Band on the Run
I just tried to access it and was told that the file is not available.
-
Wonderment
I have read a lot of material which alledgedly shows WT dishonesty everywhere. Before, when I started reading them, I tended to believe most everything. When I started comparing both sides of the matter, I came to the conclusion that BOTH sides have erred on many issues, and both camps are right with some of their statements. There is no such thing as, the WT is wrong 99% of the times and these critics are right 99% of the times. It is not that simple.
There is evidence that the WT has twisted, misinformed more than a generation of readers. It is sad to see Witnesses who take WT material as if it was written by God's hand. My daughter is one, a loyal Witness herself, who chastised me for sending her money around birthdate time, for wishing her a Happy Birthday. She called me back to tell me she felt uncomfortable with that. I must stop, because when I quoted the Bible, she told me she reads the Bible and she knows her position is right. BTW, she kept the money.
On the other hand, we have tons of people believing these WT critics without question as if they spoke truth all the way. Not true! They too have a problem with facts. They are masters at twisting things, and hiding material relevant to the subject. I have found, at least on the subject of bible translation, the WT to be more accurate than their critics. On other subjects, such as their history, the Society is less accurate. On quoting other references, they omit quite a bit of pertinent material, and they use such material to prove or indicate their current argument without disclosing the authors intended meaning.
The WT critics too give you a one sided view of things as well. The link provided in this thread is indicative of that. The WT critics often place inmense weight on university accreditation when it suits them, even though the material they passionately defend can be understood and rightfully explained differently by other scholars, as is often the case. The Mantey example shows their mishandling of the matter. They keep saying that Mantey, who was a brilliant scholar, proves the WT scholarly dishonesty clearly. But does it? Not nearly in the way the critics paint it.
Most objections of Mantey are doctrinally motivated, not grammar. Have you noticed that? Here we have one of the biggest names of Greek scholarship in the past 100 years, and he dwells on material that is really theologically arguable. And even when he addresses the grammar, he does not acknowledge that his view does not represent all scholars, and a good number of equally trained scholars disagreee with him with some of the very same isssues he brought up. He won't say that of course, because some of these evangelical scholars want to imply that just about everything they teach agrees with the Bible, just as much as the WTS wants all their followers to think that Jehovah is guiding the faithful and discreet slave.
They are both wrong, but if I had to choose who is more honest among the two camps, I think the WT is more accurate, more often, than are some of their critics. Compare for instance, the book Reasoning from the Scriptures from the WTS with similar material printed by countercult movements, and you will find slanted material everywhere, more so with the countercult movement material
-
VM44
Just verified that the link works
http://www.sendspace.com/file/ob14ll
Sendspace might have been overloaded with simultaneous requests for this file.
-
jaydee
Thanks VM44...
Link still going strong after 7 years
-
Vidiot
"Scholastic dishonesty" practiced in the WTS?
Obvious in retrospect, but realizing it had been happening (specifically regarding evolution) was one of my more significant wake-up moments (Barb Anderson too, from what I've read, so I consider myself in distinguished company).
At the time, I was still "in" but having serious doubts and anxiously trying to find ways the WTS could still somehow be right, and I was learning about the Christian Right in the US (for semi-related reasons), and discovered that their arguments against evolution seemed to mirror the WTS's.
Imagine my surprise when I discovered far more accurate and honest deconstructions of the Christian Right's arguments, and realizing at the same time that the WTS had simply been echoing most of what non-JW sources had already said....
...and then thinking to myself, "wait, if the only way the Society can refute evolution is by cribbing 'worldy' creationists, deliberately misquoting scientists, and circular semantic arguments, doesn't that suggest that the logic and reason behind evolutionary theory is far more sound that the WTS lets on? And if that's the case...?"
...
Once again, for the newbies, lurkers, and trolls...
...if you have to cheat to defend your beliefs, your beliefs don't deserve to be defended.