How Reliable is the WT Observer?

Pureheart

Sorry for duplicating this post. I made a mistake and posted on the wrong forum.
My question is, can we rely on the Observer to give us accurate information on the JWs. I ask this question because I have read many disturbing things about the Society in its early beginnings. Before I make my own conclusions I would like to know that this information is exactly accurate.

Ranchette

I reposted on this thread because the other one will probably fall off the page.

Much much more reliable than what you get from WT
Seriously though,
The info on the WT observer gives the sources for most of the info contained there.
You can check it out.
That site contains lots of real news stories from around the world concerning JWs.

Ranchette

Ranchette

biblexaminer

Pureheart. You are a newbie??

You are in for a little shock. That's all I need to say.

Lionel_P_Hartley

Pureheart,

The WT Observer tends slightly to the sensationalist. Not everything it says is accurate but most of what it says merits investigation, and most is correct. Part of the problem with the small number of somewhat inaccuarte reports is that Kent, not being a native English speaker, sometimes misunderstands nuances in the language. This is only a problem because most WTS stuff is produced in English.

I am no supporter of the WTS, but don't rely on the Observer 100% unless you have done the research. It is, as I say, a jumping off point.

I do very much respect Kent's energies, and also his willingness to correct what he has posted when problems have been pointed out. But errors propagate proportional to the amount of stuff that one publishes.

Lionel Hartley

outnfree

Although I now know it to be quite reliable, I found when I was first searching the web for information about the Witnesses that it's style was too abrasive for my taste.

So I avoided it and spent time at the very gentle BeyondJehovahsWitnesses.com site and then at freeminds.org

You might try that, Pureheart.

outnfree

Par dessus toutes choses, soyez bons. La bonte est ce qui ressemble le plus a Dieu et ce qui desarme le plus les hommes -- Lacordaire

jayhawk1

I would say 98% of the observer is right on the money. Kent has a great site, and definitly highly accurate. Some of Kent's newer stuff might be a little off, and even it may have merit. But I would say all of the history stuff is accurate.

"Hand me that whiskey, I need to consult the spirit."-J.F. Rutherford

Here is the page of the dumbest Jehovah's Witness I have ever seen.
http://hometown.aol.com/onjehovahside/

larc

Pureheart,

It might be useful if you specified which particular piece of information you find to be questionable. Then Kent or others could comment on the validity of the information in question.

Pureheart, "come let us reason together", etc.

messenger

Take WT times one thousand equals WT observer honesty

Pureheart

Larc,
I am not the type to make people overwork themselves, because I don't do that to myself. But since you want me to narrow my concerns down, here goes;
In Brother Russells will, he specified the ones he wanted to serve in order to keep his work going. The Observer said that Rutherford took over and did not honor Russells choices. The Proclaimers book alluded to that but did not name the ones that resisted Rutherfords take over.
Also, in Brother Russells will I understood him to say that there would not be another "one" person to lead the WTS, but would be
directed by a body of men; Editorial Committee, Board of Directors.
I will leave it at that for now.

Pureheart

think41self

Gee Pureheart,

First you question the validity of Cassi's post about her life and the horrible abuse she suffered, now you broadly question a site that offers facts about JW's.

Kind of hard to believe your sincerity...at least on my part. You might have to report back to the brothers that your attempts to cause doubts among us has failed. Maybe you just don't get it.

think41self

Holy Flying Screaming Buddha, Batman!

How Reliable is the WT Observer?

Share this