Focus to Penton & COJ - a friendly resolution?

Alas, the erudite COJ and Penton's recent contributions are found within the "Child Abuse" forum, and I know that they are therefore missed by many who never leave "General/Friends". You can read them by clicking here. Sober, judicious, and penetrating, I am informed.

Helpful as always, I have attempted to assist them in their search for truth (I am confident that two such renowned authors will not abandon their quest prematurely!) with the little offering below.

Alas, some hours after I posted, Jim Penton responded in the same thread but overlooked (or for other reasons chose to ignore) what is below, but stating that he was not going to post here again. Lest it be lost in an abandoned thread in a forum other than the main one, I reproduce it here (with minor amendments).

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Jim Penton wrote on Nov 1, 2002 08:03:

Hi Carl [...] The point you make [...] the two or three witness rule [...] shows that Ray was not the author.

May I first say that no sensible person has suggested that the "two witness" policy had originated with Ray - and conceptually origination is somewhat akin to "authorship" (which is what you and COJ have been discussing). Of course the policy predates Ray's involvement by decades and may be claimed to be scriptural in origin - in much the same vein as is much of the genocide, rape, brutality and sundry inhumanity can be seen to have divine sanction in the pages of the Old Testament. I am confident your views on this are not quite the same.

What is of more interest is whether or not Ray was an expositor of this policy. By that I mean, did he actively (as distinct from merely being part of a Society, Body or Department, or a colleague of the person(s), so involved) assist in its explanation, expounding, statement, restatement or similar propagation.

As COJ (in his post of Nov 1, 2002 04:03), RP, you and I (and no doubt others) have remarked, "Your Word Is a Lamp to My Foot" [yl] from 1967 is the source from which much in the 1972 Organization book (viz. "Organization for Kingdom-Preaching and Disciple-Making" [or]) is directly derived. Indeed the passages on 164-165 of the later book (dealing with the "two witnesses" rule) are for all purposes all but an exact copy of what was written in 1967: the Watchtower, ever since the days of Russell, loves being paid twice or more often for the same material.

You correctly point out that 1967 is:

four years before Ray Franz became a member of the Governing Body

However, the date of his co-option into the GB (effectively, in a junior role at that) is not that relevant here. The GB and its members do not, in general, write the Watchtower publications: Nathan was no Rutherford. It is Ray's participation in, work for, and responsibilities within the WRITING DEPARTMENT that is more relevant to these assertions.

I think you will therefore find this relevant:

"Karl Adams, who was in charge of the Writing Department when I entered it in 1965, [snip]"

The emphasis is mine. The source of the quotation I have given above is "Crisis of Conscience", Third Edition, Commentary Press, 1999, page 70. The "I" in the quote refers to the author of that book, Raymond Franz.

So, Ray was on the Writing Staff - indeed, he was their 'Fresh Blood', now settled in, and already renowned for his undoubted verbal standards and linguistic competence - at the time of the writing of "Your Word Is a Lamp to My Foot", 1967, which book contains on its pages 177-178:

Judgement of matters affecting the lives of dedicated servants of Jehovah carries with it a great responsibility, and, for that reason, the committee is obligated to be sure that it has all the facts before it renders its decision. (1 Time. 5:21; Prov. 18:13; Deut. 13:12-14) For a matter to be established as true, there must be two or three witnesses. (1 Tim. 5:19; Deut. 19:15) These cannot be persons who are simply repeating what they have heard from someone else; they must be witnesses of the things concerning which they testify. No action is taken if there is just one witness; it is not that brothers discredit the testimony, but the Bible requires that, unless the wrongdoer himself confesses his sin, the facts must be substantiated by two or three witnesses in these serious matters.

which is clearly the source of the "Organization" text.

I therefore humbly counsel both COJ and yourself to be (even more?)careful in your assertions, and to "make sure of all things". In this way the appropriate questions may be asked, and accurate answers obtained, without too many blind alleys being traversed.

I have carried out a careful examination of the English used in "Your Word Is a Lamp to My Foot", in general and around pages 177-8. It is rather better than the common Writing Staff anodyne. May I suggest that you, and COJ, direct your activities to similar research? You may not have this quite as unravelled as some may say you believe.

Carl may remember me from gentile times on H2O. I recall how he, AF and I jointly attempted to educate the delusional Bibleman/Joshua1992 about elementary spherical geometry and astronomy; specifically, why a setting full moon must perforce be around dawn.

[signed]

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Focus to Penton & COJ - a friendly resolution?

Focus

Elsewhere

Focus

Share this