Interesting post from Channel C...much less emotional that those posted here.
Posted by AliveinChrist on Sun - Oct 1 - 4:14pm:
Greetings group
I haven’t been able to post for some time now, do to life and work. However recently I have been troubled with the misrepresentation of Stafford and what it is that he has been saying, and what others including many of my ex-JW friends have also said about him.
For example, one person last week stated:
“I read here on the forum that Greg Stafford is taking a stand in favor of the Watchtower organization.”
I really wish that very intelligent and able persons like that would at least take the time out to listen to what Stafford has been saying, as apposed to what others have been saying that Stafford is saying. Stafford began his apologist career online defending mostly the JW stand on the nature of Christ, against the Trinity, and in favor of the usage of the Divine name. He did have some debates online about whether or not the Watchtower deserves the title of a ‘false prophet’ often defending them. He mostly defended the WT against misrepresentation about what they believe and teach, since there has been much written against the JW’s in the apologetic world, and there seems to be no one in the Christian apologetic world that corrects the errors made by many main stream Christians who have written about them and often mischaracterized the JW positions on theological matters. Therefore, Stafford did write a book criticizing the critics of the JW’s and pointing out what he believes to be the logical and scriptural errors of the many WT critics.
However, Stafford went on to find many of the critical works about the WT organization well founded, and wrote a second book where he critically examined the authority structure, the chronology, as well as doctrines such as the blood policy of the organization. In doing so, he was seen by JW’s as having abandoned the WT and condemned by many of the popular JW apologist letting the secrets out, publicly displaying the dirty laundry, and giving the critics even more substance to write about.
He has had two public and recorded debates on the Trinity and Deity of Christ, against JW critics Rob Bowman, and James White, where he defended not the WT, but the unique position of Christ Jesus.
On his web site a few months ago he announced that he would be finishing the 3rd addition of his JWD publication, and that while he worked on it, he would on a limited basis return to the meetings for ‘another look.”
Stafford stated on his web at http://www.elihubooks.com/greg-stafford/another.htm :
“It is time for another look at the organization that has fallen into the same injurious path that one travels when ‘man dominates man to his injury.”
End quote
In saying such a thing about the WT, it doesn’t seem to me that Stafford has “returned to the organization” or that he is “defending the WT organization.”
It seems more of a criticism of the WT that a returning to blind obedience to them. In the same article mentioned above, Stafford goes on to illustrate Jeremiah 24:1-10, stating that the WT is no more safe that what happened to Jerusalem before it was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in 587 bce, and that Jesus illustration of the wheat and the weeds will also be fulfilled upon them. I don’t know of anyone loyal to the WT who would use such illustrations of the WT! In returning to the WT organization, it clearly is not a returning to loyalty to the WT, and Stafford seems to have gone out of his way to make that point clear.
And last week, on an online interview of Stafford, on the ‘Narrow mind broadcast” at http://www.unchainedradio.com/nuke/ Pasture Gene Cook and Dr. Robert Morey set up what was clearly a staged attempt to discredit Stafford, by announcing to him the subject to be about the Trinity and Christ, and then coming out and asking Stafford questions about the future knowledge of God and predestination, subject about which Stafford has never written about or defended the WT position on. Clearly the attempt was to show that Stafford didn’t understand Gods nature or knowledge, and therefore couldn’t be trusted on matters of the Trinity. Since neither Cook nor Morey are on Stafford’s level in discussion about the Trinity, this trick was what they had designed. I believe that it was Stafford’s best interview yet. In that Stafford gave a brief overview of his life, he publications, and his position with the organization. Cook and Morey came off and arrogant and condescending, saying Stafford is not a ‘brother nor a Christian’ while Stafford had only nice and uplifting things to say about the very people who tried to trick him. I was impressed with Stafford’s answers as well as his comfort in talking to two apologists who were both insulting and dishonest. Morey is perhaps the worst and most insulting of the many Christian apologist that I have heard talk, in the over and over he spoke about his academic credentials, and that he is not just a student of logic, but a teacher of logic, and on and on. Stafford spoke only once of his education, and even downplayed it, saying that the importance should be on the ideas and logic. The result of the interview will be a public debate with Stafford and Morey about the Knowledge of God, followed by a second debate on the Trinity.
Stafford clearly defended his position with respect to defending the WT by stating that he will defend the WT when he agrees with them, but he would not support them where he disagrees with them.
I think that position is the only rational and logical position to have, since no one should defend any human or human organization entirely, only where that person or that group agrees and teaches what is Truth should we support not just them, but the idea or teaching that they support.
In that some here among my ex-JW brothers and sisters have stated that Stafford’s positions is “incomprehensible,” it needs to be shown by such ones based upon the facts of what Stafford has stated and not upon heresy that such a position is incomprehensible. In fact, I am willing to bet that the very ones making such a claim are in fact ideological and theological close to what Stafford has been saying, namely, that what the WT has said about God and Christ and the usage of the Divine Name are important, yet that the WT position concerning its claimed authority and chronology as well as its blood doctrine are outright false. When Stafford returned to the WT, it clearly was not a return to being a full functioning member of the WT with full loyalty to the origination, rather, he obviously returned on the limited basis for a specific purpose, and even did that critiquing the organization. He wrote a book defending the teachings of the importance of the Divine Name, Jehovah, as well as the unique position of Jesus Christ, and he wrote a second book critically and publicly assessing the claims of the organization.
I believe that Stafford’s position is perhaps the only one that is nonsensical and has no loyalty to any person or group of people, but to the ideas, teachings, and interpretation of the bible that he believes in. Where he agrees with the Witnesses, he will defend them, where he disagrees with them, he has more than proven that he is willing to depart from them and say otherwise.
Can someone tell me what is ‘incomprehensible” about that?
In the end of the Morey and Cook interview, Morey stated to Greg:
“You are not a brother, you are not a Christian.” Greg simply replied that any judgment that Morey made could come back upon him.
I sincerely hope that among those of us who are ex-Jw’s that was look carefully at what we say about each other, and that if we are going to wrote about each other, at least take the time to find out exactly what it is that we believe before we write it. Greg seems to me to be saying about the exact same thing that most of all those here believe, however it seems that like Morey, we are quick to make judgment about Stafford before we really know much of anything about what it is exactly he has said or is saying. In my opinion, Stafford has done about as good a job as any in getting the conversation opened up about the Trinity, God’s unique Name, as well as the secret and dirty laundry of the WT that the JW’s don’t want aired publicly.
When the JW’s were being criticized for not debating or defending their teachings in public debate format, Greg rose up and took on the best of the Trinitarian apologist. When many criticized those to defended the organization for not having candor about the many errors in the organization, Greg wrote a second publication discussing those errors. On his web site, he states that there is both “Good and Bad’ in the organization, and I agree with him. I think the group of Ex-JW’s who only criticize the Watchtower and can only see the ‘Bad’ are just as ignorant and emotionally blind as the Watchtower loyalist who can only see the “Good” in the organization, both are extreme positions that are founded on emotion, not logic. When Greg states that there is “Bad” in the Watchtower, he is called an ‘apostate’ among many names and abandoned by his JW acquaintances. When he says that there is “Good” in the organization, I was disgusted and appalled by how many ex-JW’s especially those on jehovahs-witness.com were so quick to throw him to the lions for daring to say that there are some positive teachings in the WT. To me the extremist on both sides were simply a reflection of each other, one not being able to admit that anything good and beneficial exist there, and the other not being able to admit that there is anything that is wrong or bad with it.
I can only say that even after I left states to get out of the WT, when I had seen abuse after abuse and began to learn about the many errors in teachings and interpretations that the WT had made, I would never dare to say that no ‘good’ exist in the origination. Ironically, most JW’s who leave were very happy to have been a part of the WT for many decades, and many ex-JW apologist such as Jonnson, Franz, and Penton, have written books where they also say that same as Stafford has stated, that there are many positive things in the WT, along with the ‘bad’ things. In fact, that is the over all theme of Franz book, and perhaps why his book is so powerful in making its points.
In conclusion, I can only say that Channel C has by far the most intelligent and thoughtful ideas and philosophies being posted among the many ex-Jw web sites, and I hope that it continues on and avoids the degradation of conversation that is prevalent among the many other Ex-JW sites. I believe that if you want to know what a person says or thinks, the best way is to go to the source, and this is true about what Greg Stafford’s position is. He has written much and has had many debates and radio interviews, therefore there is no reason for ignorance of what he believes or has stated, for I personally think it to be the only one that is in fact rational and comprehensible.
Thank you,
In Christ
AliveinChrist
