Society on Documenting Personal Views (page 2)

philo

When I read this, I thought it was a brilliantly subtle parody. To be honest, I am still not entirely convinced that it's real.

A case of truth being stranger than fiction perhaps. It beautiful.

philo

sf

Dear Mr. Shilmer,

Thank you for posting this. I have saved it and will paste it on yahoo chat sites. People are beginning to eat this stuff up! Keep "it" coming, and keep I'll keep "it" pasted for all to see.

And yes, I knew I'd begin to see such "writings" by the tower. Can't wait to see the up and coming articles in the WT mag itself.
This is so par for them to write such krap. It's as if they are in a huge cage trying to figure how to get out...and stay out! bwahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

sKally (evil slave klass)

mommy

Welcome Marvin
Everyday, I am more and more amazed at the org thinking. What great suggestions they have given the brothers, directing the "surveyors"
to the wtbts literature. Not allowing them to voice their own opinion on it.And what is this line about?

While in some instances we can cooperate with research projects—including surveys—we certainly want to avoid having publishers expressing personal viewpoints that may not be in line with the Bible principles that really govern each Christian’s conduct and the united efforts of the brotherhood to carry out Jehovah’s will.

I read it 5 times very slowly, and still I do not understand. They are saying that individual publishers may not agree with the wtbts thinking? So how can they throw united in there? Seems the opposite to me.

Thanks again Marvin, I am looking forward to your future posts.
wendy

Mulan

Does anyone else think it's odd that they suggest offering these people publications to read? Right. Like they will sift through a book for their answers. JanG is right. Stonewalled!

slipnslidemaster

with the Bible principles that really govern each Christian’s conduct and the united efforts of the brotherhood to carry out Jehovah’s will.

The first thing that jumped to my mind was the Scottish court case during which organizational unity was put forth before truth.

Slipnslidemaster: Doin' the humpty hump...just doin' the humpty hump...

dedalus

Inquiry might be made about such matters as having a paid clergy class, the racial makeup and diversity of the congregation, the volunteer nature of our ministry, and the unity of our congregations.

Huh? When you're a Witness, going door-to-door is compulsory. If you don't "volunteer," you're marked "inactive," and it's tacitly understood that you're "spiritually weak" and a "bad associate."

It would be well to find out what university or group the researchers represent and determine just what information they would like to have.

And it would be good if someone programmed the drones at Bethel to write well grammatically.

Mommy wrote:
They are saying that individual publishers may not agree with the wtbts thinking? So how can they throw united in there? Seems the opposite to me.

Great observation, Wendy! I hadn't thought of that.

Dedalus

patio34

While I agree on all that is said in this thread about WTS basically forbidding personal views, it doesn't differ that much from the government agency that employs me. There are certain people designated to speak to the press.

One difference is that those so designated are free to say what they will and not instructed to refer to printed materials.

So I guess I just answered my own question. It does differ because anything the elder (sorry, qualified elder) can't find in the publications is to be referred to the WTBS itself.

Dedalus,

Good point on the grammar! I didn't notice that--thanks.

Pat

Gozz

It is this continuing attempt to stop individuals from expressing personal views that will ultimately lead to what the Society is trying to avoid. And that's how the system works.

Patio, while hat you note is true, it is also true that in the minds of Jehovah's Witnesses (JWs), the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (WTB&TS) is not a business venture; the Society subtly mixes religion and business, talking about "freely expressing the reason for our hope" and at the same time, in the same breath talking about "watching what we tell reseachers". If there's nothing to hide, then why the command to be silent. It's as if individual witnesses cannot express their views, and state that they are their views. Sad. Truth will out.

Amazing

Hi Marvin: Would you please find a way to scan a copy of the WTS letter you transcribed for us. Either onto a new post, or by email to one of the main posters you know well. I would love to have an actual copy if at all possible. It is very important. Thanks.

Amazing

patio34

Gozz, I agree. They can't have it both ways and it is not a business. Besides, the reason the government agency I work for does it is that they want knowledgeable people involved in the projects themselves, not lower staff-level not inolved. So it's apples and oranges.

Ray Franz, in "Search of Christian Freedom" makes the same point about the way the legal dept. coaches ones who have to testify in court. Such as 'don't speak as if you were in an assembly part.' Pages 284,285.

Btw, those books he wrote are extremely helpful. It would be hard to overstate how they have helped me. It is because they are streamlined towards JW doctrine by an ex-teacher of JW doctrine.

Pat

Society on Documenting Personal Views

Share this