The Watchtower, Scholar and Misrepresentation of Source References

by AlanF 46 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  scholar

  Alan F

  When the Creator/Creation was first published there was no such thing as the ID movement as it was only in its embryonic stage. Its major proponents were publishing their research for the first time and so as single authors, their books were commented on by the Society as time progressed. Now as a more identifiable novement, the Society may well comment on their theories as appropriate. The Society has no allegiance or connection with these Creation or Design organizations but if their spokesmen have something useful to say regarding the Bible and God's existence then such comments can be utilized by the Society.

  Your petty and irrelevant claim that you have found 100 misquotes in the 1985 Creation book is childish and juvenile. It seems to me that this publication has unnerved in its debastating analysis of the Evolution nonsense. All of the sources are as usual are fully correct but I would be the first to admit that many of these authorities would not like their views used to undermine a pet theory.

  When is all said and done it is the reader of WT publications that decides whether the information presented is factual and well written and the Society receives many thank you and appreciative letters from the public including many academics so your claims are simply pathetic.

  The Society follows it own style of referencing when writing to the general public but if an interested reader requires a fuller reference then a simple letter to the publisher will suffice. We must remember that our publications are multi-lingual and therefore expediency demands that the material be as simple as possible. It is foolish to think that a person in a Third World country is going to take a long trip to the city library and seek a old or the latest published book.

  Back to Thiele, the reader alone must determine if Thiele was in fact misrepresented by the Aid article. I believe that his Note is in context with his thesis and is also in context with the Aid article. That is whu you had to dragged kicking and screaming to scan the relevant pages. I am confident that it is only Gruss, Thiel e and Alan F only believe that there is a misrepresentation. The average person uipon seeing the evidence would simply be amused at such controversy. Apostates are very desparate people.

  scholarJW
• 

  hillary_step

  You told nine lies in your post. How do you live with yourself?

  I doubt whether this cat has used up all his nine lies yet Alan.

  Scholar,

  The Society follows it own style of referencing when writing to the general public

  Why?

  HS
• 

  doogie

  I am confident that it is only Gruss, Thiel e and Alan F only believe that there is a misrepresentation.

  (raises hand)...umm...i think its a misrepresentation too.

  Apostates are very desparate people.

  hahaha. that may be...you're the one posting on an apostate board. apostate means turning away from what you were taught. weren't you taught to stay away from these boards?

  oh, we uhpoztates kan spel reel gud to! (it's spelled 'desperate')
• 

  AlmostAtheist

  Your petty and irrelevant claim that you have found 100 misquotes in the 1985 Creation book is childish and juvenile.

  9 blatant lies, 8 spelling errors, 7 offbase comments, 6 sad defenses...

  5 ad hominems!

  4 threads wasted, 3 hours typing, 2 mismatched fighters

  and a scholar in a pear tree!
• 

  Pistoff

  When is all said and done it is the reader of WT publications that decides whether the information presented is factual and well written and the Society receives many thank you and appreciative letters from the public including many academics so your claims are simply pathetic.L

  Let me see if I follow your logic:

  The Society makes a statement, let's say regarding Thiele (who does trust Ptolemy) that he does NOT trust the canon and Ptolemy;

  since their quote makes it appear that Thiele does not trust Ptolemy, the reader concludes this is true.

  When this reader decides that the information is factual, based on a misquote (there can be NO other way to view this; Thiele does does does trust Ptolemy) and that Thiele does not regard Ptolemy as accurate, this is good in your eyes, Scholar???

  Scholar, does Thiele believe in Ptolemy's accuracy or NOT?
• 

  The Leological One

  When this reader decides that the information is factual, based on a misquote (there can be NO other way to view this; Thiele does does does trust Ptolemy) and that Thiele does not regard Ptolemy as accurate, this is good in your eyes, Scholar???

  Scholar, does Thiele believe in Ptolemy's accuracy or NOT?

  I can have some amount of empathy for scholar, being that I've debated on net boards my views on God, creation, the Bible, etc. and been either the only one or maybe one of 2-3 at most others that shared my views and had about an impossible time trying to keep up with responses by 10-20 others, and I've felt no matter what I wrote it wouldn't make any difference due to the other view having so many adherents...

  BUT it does seem Scholar is really trying hard to defend some things that have been demonstrated to be untrue to probably any neutral reader. Scholar, you might have to go through some things like I have, having to wonder sometimes if indeed what evidence I've seen proves the other side's point, and like me, if you sincerely look into these matters and honestly come out knowing for certain your views were correct, then that would only strengthen your faith in the WT.

  Otherwise, you're doing the opposite of making the WT seem defensible via trying to defend things already hopelessly proven wrong and likely strengthening the view that WT proponents will say almost anything to uphold the WT as being God's reliable source of information; I might relent on one point you made about the ID movement just getting started during the time that Creator book came out, though I'm not a JW (married to one) and so don't know much about the book or exactly when major ID proponents started coming to the forefront with their views.
• 

  Spook

  Scholar,

  Check out this simple start from Wikipedia on ID: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design

  I'll have you know, I just today sent off my disassociation letters to the WTBTS, local elders and hundreds of my friends and family. I have not been injured, mistreated or harmed in any way at all. It has brought me to weeping in dissilusionment to study the recreance of the Governing Body.
• 

  ozziepost

  I'll tell you what, you've got to admire scholar's tenacity! Or is it just a matter of counting time?
• 

  seattleniceguy

  There is none so blind as he who will not see, indeed.

  Excellent work, AlanF. Dishonest scholarship creates in me an anger unlike any other. Readers in general expect honest writing, but people who believe they are reading the products of God's only channel are all the more trusting. It is the fact that the Society intentionally misrepresents that enrages the depths of my soul. There is no excuse for this behavior: it is unconscionable.

  SNG
• 

  stillajwexelder

  and none as deaf as those who do not want to hear