Can you give specific examples of the WTBTS taking quotes out of context?

by Chemical Emotions 28 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Doug Mason
    Doug Mason

    I remember the mischief in the "Chronology" article in the "Aid" book, such as half a sentence from Neugebauer (repeated in the "Insight" book), misrepresenting Pritchard's book, and so on.

    Something I wrote about 1987 might be relevant to your question:

    I wonder if "Scholastic Dishonesty of the Watchtower" is still around. It contains a letter from Mantey who wrote to the Watchtower demanding an apology for the way they were using his book.

    I recall that they misquoted Hislop by using "the trinity" whereas he wrote "a trinity".

    In the original NWT NT intro they showed a picture from Justus Lipsius of a man tied to a pole, without revealing that this was only one of many pictures in Lipsius' book (De Cruce Liber Primus) and that he concluded the conventional depiction was the correct one.

    Page 134 of the 1963 book, "Babylon the Great Has Fallen!" says that page 306 of "Harper's Bible Dictionary" says Nebuchadnezzar came against Jehoiakim in 618 BC, but the Dictionary says that Jehoiakim was dethroned in 598 BC.

    The WTS repeatedly cites the book "Babylonian Chronology" by Parker and Dubberstein as being the authoritative source, yet the WTS does not accept the dates provided by P&D.


  • VM44

    The Scholastic Dishonesty of the Watchtower - Michael Van Buskirk.pdf ( 2.46MB )

  • Doug Mason
    Doug Mason


    Thank you!


  • Doug Mason
    Doug Mason


    How did you get the URL for Michael's booklet so quickly?

    I was still trying to get my "brain" into gear and you had already posted the URL for Michael Van Buskirk's booklet.

    I still have an original "somewhere", but it was good to see it is available online.


  • IsaacJ22

    There are many examples in the Creation Book. The whole book is pretty terrible and is the worst example of WT research I know. The science is bad and the quotes are even worse. A number of reviews and articles have been written about it since it's a popular book among creationists.

    I actually tried contacting some of the people quoted in the book myself just to confirm--for myself--that these claims about their quotes being taken out of context were legit. This was a long time ago.

    The most thorough paper on it I know is locate here. Another site that handles some of it's problems can be found here if you want a less lengthy example.

  • Black Sheep
    Black Sheep

    If it is for the benefit of a JW, download current rags from their website and look up any quote that looks the slightest bit fishy.

    Fresh is best

  • blondie
  • FollowedMyHeart


  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    When the Borg released their new Creation brochures last year someone went through one of them and did a thorough search of all the quotes and posted the full quotes in context here.

  • WontLeave

    The picture of a stake in the apendix of the reference Bible is taken from De Crucis Liber Primus, by Justus Lipsius

    The same book, however, depicts Jesus on a cross. The stake picture has nothing to do with Jesus.

Share this