by jwfacts 75 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
I have just finished an article Misquotes, Deception and Lies and would like your comments, proof reading, and any other examples that you think are important to add.
Most of these already appear on jwfacts.com within specific articles, but it is more powerful seeing them included together. There have also been a number of requests over the years for such a collection.
Enjoy.
Great idea jwfacts, I'm sure it's excellent. I look forward to reading it.
Cedars
It is excellent!
Congratulations Paul.
A concise and succinct analysis of mis-quotes and the disingenuousness of the WT.
Amelia xxx
I remember reading the "consistently" 1914 quote in 1993 about the time I had access to more WT publications and the publication of the Proclaimers book. I'm sure this was the doctrinal point that got me digging deeper and opening my eyes to the lies and deceptions of the WTS. It took 8 years to make a complete break but this info made sure I never went back.
jwfacts... excellent article!
Regarding the 7 Gentile Times, I would have also added that the 2,520-yr calculation really originated with John Aquila Brown in 1823 (50 years before Nelson Barbour and CT Russell simply recycled it)...
... especially sone Anthony Morris the Turd made this comment in the 2010 DVD Faith In Action: "The fact that they (the Bible Students) were able to pinpoint that year (1914) is just phenomenal"...
(now that's deceptive)
This is incredible, jwfacts
I'm stunned by the work done on the creation book. I remember studying it, now I can't believe how deceptive it was.
thankyou to everyone who has exposed the facts!
Thanks for the comments.
That will make a good addition Calebs Airplane. I don't have the DVD, is that an exact quote of what he says? Surely Morris must know there was nothing phenomenal about how Russell took the interpretation from the Adventists, or that their inpretation failed.
Thanks for your hard work Paul, this article will be a real eye-opener for JW's, who put more faith in the WT publications than the Bible.
Just one typo I noticed whilst having a quick read, under the heading "Plagiarism" you have typed "inherit" instead of "inherent".
Well done mate, you will help many to break free. I am surprised you were able to reastrain yourself and only include the content you have, the WT has done this so much, the Origins brochure for instance.
Dr Carol Cleland who is mis-quoted in the brochure had this comment to make about the WT in an e-mail about the matter:
"My work has been used before by these people and it really angers me because they are using it to defend views that I reject..... it is deeply dishonest for theists to deliberately distort the words of scholars for their own purposes; as I recall , this is a sin"
She was not happy !
"The Truth is not something you have to lie about".
THANK YOU for this!
Excellent! This kind of dishonesty, or manipulation of sources and history, to lead the trusting reader down a prescribed path has become more and more of an irritant to me. The two 'When Did Jerusalem Fall' articles finally did it for me - no more 'benefit of the doubt' given to them - not after all the boasting in the Yearbook about how thorough and accurate the Writing Dept. is.
Proofreading. This is all I could see:
Jesus heavenly rule - apostrophe needed
"Thy Kingdom Come (1911 ed) p.239 - check reference - it should be 'The Time Is At Hand.'
return of Abraham and the other Ancient - Ancients
virtually every other source, including encyclopaedias, historians and scholars, state that Jerusalem fell in 587 B.C. - Suggest more accurately saying "state that Jerusalem fell in either 587 B.C. or 586 B.C." or "fell in 587 B.C. (some give the date 586 B.C.)."
misleading way the watchtower - capital W
they have almost never discuss the concept of - discussed
I also suggest for the '607 B.C.' section including the misuse of Ephraim Stern's 'Babylonian Gap' article and maybe an example or two from those infamous '607' articles mentioned above, or else a link to Doug Mason's and COJ's discussions of them.
