It Is WRONG To Make Threads About What The Watchtower Is Doing If You Do Not Have Facts To Back It Up!!!

by minimus 81 Replies latest jw friends

  • maninthemiddle

    I want to second what Found Sheep and Think About It Said, if you see false information speak up and call them out on it.

  • Marvin Shilmer
    Marvin Shilmer

    Minimus writes:

    “I think we should not make statements about what the Watchtower Society is secretly doing if we can not substantiate the statements.”

    I see no problem with a person sharing what they know Watchtower is doing if they know the information firsthand. The problem is that firsthand knowledge is not always verifiable. Hence, when it comes to sharing firsthand knowledge, I see nothing wrong with sharing information of what Watchtower is doing. In that case the reader must take the information for what it presents: alleged firsthand information that cannot otherwise be verified. In most instances I would say such information is not worth much, but if lots of alleged firsthand accounts are the same or nearly the same, and if the information is plausible based on information that is less than confirmation but suggest a probability, then such information becomes useful.

    Author Gillon says it best:

    “Despite Mr. Malyon’s and Mr. Ridley’s and other official JW claims to the contrary it seems to this writer probable that Jehovah’s Witnesses who go against the “official line” forbidding blood transfusion risk major sanctions from the church, including highly oppressive rejection by erstwhile friends, co-religionists and worst of all, even by family members, such rejection apparently sanctioned and sometimes encouraged by JW authorities. There are simply too may examples cited by Dr. Muramoto and “Lee Elder” and on the web sites cited by them, as well as in the cases and in the web sites cited by Mr. Hart in his article in The Big Issue, for official denials to be plausible.”—(Gillon, Refusal of potentially life-saving blood transfusions by Jehovah’s Witnesses, Journal of Medical Ethics, 2000: 26:299-301)

    Marvin Shilmer

  • sabastious

    I make statements about them without facts, I think that is fine. So long as you know that what you are saying is indeed conjecture. If someone wants to make a statement they believe is true about the Watchtower because of experience then let them do it, but question them if it doesn't add up to you.

    It's the only way truth can make it to the surface.


  • sabastious
    I've been reading hear for a bit now and it seems like it doens't take long for a false statement to get bashed.

    I wholeheartedly agree. I think this place is awesome for that.

    Most people here have very functioning bullsh*t detectors.


  • minimus

    James, you are correct about the reason for this thread.

    MS, there's plenty of unfounded claims being said here.

    Why give a (legit) platform for someone to make unsubstantiated claims on this site??

  • leavingwt
    When impressionable people read these things, it sets our efforts back immensely.

    Please define "impressionable people".

  • Farkel

    The common sense approach is what Marvin Shilmer said. Never present something as if it were fact if it isn't. Always disclose whether it is fact, opinion, speculation or heresay.

    If everyone did that, there would be no way religions could ever get a foothold, let alone survive.


  • james_woods

    A couple of other examples would be the Ray Franz account about the Governing Body vote on Mexico vs. Malawi over the political cards - and the Barbara Anderson story about the list of known child molesters.

    Very useful (and believable) information even if we do not have legal proof of either.

    It is something entirely different to make up BS (or repeat someone else's BS) and put it into a thread here - which is what I think Minimus is saying.

  • neverendingjourney
    I don't recall many (any, actually) topics started here that made outright claims that were later proven to be untrue.

    Oh, boy! Do you really want to open that can of worms?

    Do you remember when the pioneer-hours reduction was being taken at face value on this forum? Or what about the end-of-circuit-overseer rumor?

    Both were taken at face value by many and came from a supposedly reliable source.

    There are many more examples, but these two immediately come to mind.

  • Quirky1

    I could start a thread about taking a shit but I'm not going to have any proof until the paper work is done....

Share this