Hi Pope; Yes, you're quite correct---all this stuff is creepy. Focusing on it constantly probably isn't conducive for healthy spirituality. In the past few hours I did try at my library for Jack of Shadows. Is it anything like Coningsby by Disraeli or Philip Dru-Administrator by House?
Watch Tower Roots:
by blackguard 40 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
link
Many thanks for the thread reference that you provided sf. That was an excellent discussion and I felt that some parts of the debate reflected much of my own thoughts on these matters.
By their very definition conspiracy theories, secret agendas (call them what you will) cannot be supported by the normal rules of factual evidence. For this reason they are wide open to a variety of interpretations dependent upon who is reading the situation and why.
For example, although Russells father shows up in the Masonic records, Charles Taze Russell does not. This is explained by those who support such theories in one of two ways. Either CT Russell was too senior or prominent to have his name recorded, or his name was removed from the records in yet another Masonic conspiracy.
When I was studying "the truth" I asked for factual evidence to support some of the things that I was being told. It was not forthcoming and consequently I did not "join up". I was then told that the evidence was there but because I did not want to see it I could not.
I get the feeling that conspiracy theories travel along much the same lines.
link
-
blackguard
Hi link, I know you were responding to sf's link. One researcher claims that C.T.Russell's name did appear in the mother Lodge in Ireland and that this was testified to by several individuals who sighted it there. I don't know if this is true. The difficulty one might have in "proving" a matter is the insistence upon applying the hellenic system of logic. Even the acceptable legal theory of circumstantial evidence is flawed when one considers that a lot of 'felons' get released from prisons annually because other hard evidence later surfaces to clear them of crimes. I would suggest that the semitic axiom has merit,." by their fruits shall ye recognize them". I think if one applies this rule to a situation over a period of time or activity a pattern emerges of what this person or group really represents. In the case of bona fide masons, one should remember that being on a Lodge registry doesn't mean they're part of a world wide conspiracy or hidden agenda any more than the rank and file are privy to the hidden agendas that some executives of the Watcher corporation know about. I propose in the case of the Watcher corporation of looking at the type of fruits it produces and going the next step to see if its roots is responsible for its bad fruitage.
-
sf
"I propose in the case of the Watcher corporation of looking at the type of fruits it produces and going the next step to see if its roots is responsible for its bad fruitage."
Please, when you do discover and uncover ANY such 'items', post them up here so as we may 'sift' through them ourSELVES.
link, you are most welcomed.
Thank you, sKally
-
Satanus
Jack of shadows is available on the kazaa network, though it is a very slow download, where i am.
SS
-
blackguard
Hi Saint; Thanks for that link
sf: What makes you think that I have not uncovered ANY such items? And what makes you so presumptuous to think I would share them with yourSELF?
-
Farkel
:WATCH-TOWER ROOTS:- OCCULTIC, MASONIC, ILLUMINIST,
Horseshit.
: FASCIST...
Near-Horseshit.
: AND THE CHURCH OF CORPORATE MAMMON
Fact.
Simple.
Farkel
-
unclebruce
Hey Farkel,
turn that horseshit to 'sheepshit' and i'm with ya most of the way
unclebruce
ps: i still in my simple way bend toward the belief that Russell was a freemason simply because he described himself as such. He may not have been the Most Exulted Grand Poobar of the Ancient Glaswegian Rite but he sure acted like it. In anycase the JW/freemason didn't extend beyond his death - they'd never have let Judge Rutherford wear the apron
***
G'day Blackguard,
I didn't realise you were new here. Articulate folk like yourself are a pleasure. Welcome to the bored and thanks for the reply. I have the strong feeling i've seen the article elsewhere is all and brushing my question away with a humourous aside about a typo, while very entertaining (my typoos and gramatickle incompetancy are a sauce of constant amusement for pedants and myselfish) does little to enhance your credibility. Don't take this personal, even the biggest badest folk here have trouble answering the simple questions.
happy posting
unclebruce of the yes and know class.
ps: There is a big difference between a response and a reply and i hope you prove capable of more than just the later.
Edited by - unclebruce on 27 November 2002 1:3:45
-
blackguard
Hi Farkel; You have quite an extensive and impressive vocabulary. And unclebruce:- I don't think I have a monopoly on Watch Tower history or roots. I have seen others write similarly. There seems to be an element in the xjw movement (if it could be defined as such) that are covert WTS apologists or sympatheziers, insistent that certain things aren't so. My point in identifying a difference in hellenic and semitic thinking is that the latter is rather simple: 'If it waddles like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, if it looks like a duck and if it lives in an enclosure full of duckshit, it is in all probability a duck despite its pleas and its apologists to the contrary'. I think the bottom line to these type of discussions is that people are going to believe what they need to believe and no amount of 'evidence' is going to convince them otherwise. And I'm not in the business of needing to convince people. I remember once telling an intelligent young wippersnapper that the ladder he was about to embark had a broken rung and to be careful when he got half-way up; his attitude was because he couldn't see it he wouldn't believe it. When he fell off the ladder his stunned look amused me. (Fortunately he wasn't hurt)
-
sf
My post was sincere, sir. It seemed to me, that you were cryptically implying that you indeed may have some 'items of interest' to a few here. I beg your pardon for 'reading into' something that may not have been between the lines.
Please, if and when you have something you are able and willing to share, it would be nice if you would and or could. Simply.
{{ UNC }}
sKally