RAY FRANZ ACCUSED OF LYING (page 3)

AllTimeJeff

This guy's fun. I hope he kept enough bread crumbs so he can find his way back.....

So if Gregerson was never shunned, DF'd and didn't DA himself, on what grounds did they disfellowship Ray? Below is the letter Ray received during the witch hunt at Crooklyn. It specifically states that the 'crime' was his association with 'someone' who was DA'd. Let's hear the WT apologetics explain that one.

547e6ed6.gif picture by sam3217

quietlyleaving

Mary this is from Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_Franz

Peter Gregerson
While Franz and his wife were attending the local congregation in Alabama, the Elders there wrote to the Watch Tower Society requesting that he be appointed as an Elder. The Society wrote back and "said succinctly that the Society did not think it advisable for the elders to recommend me as such (or as a ministerial servant). The only reason given was that the notice of my resignation ...was still recent." [ 28 ] Franz describes in his book account how these were the first signs of a campaign orchestrated against him, in literature and within the organization, and with many articles on 'Apostasy' being published one after the other and directly linking him to them (although not in name). [ 29 ]
He describes the attitude and writing style in the Society's literature turned inquisitional and repeatedly negative, and constantly emphasized 'how to identify apostates', based on the new premise that anyone who thinks an independent thought not completely in line with all of the Watch Tower Society's teachings and interpretations is an apostate, [ 30 ] they did not have to teach or discuss these thoughts, but to merely have them was enough for the charges of "apostasy" to be made.
At the same time, according to Franz, his employer and landlord, Peter Gregerson, was being harassed and interrogated by elders, [ 31 ] as someone had conveyed a private conversation that Peter Gregerson had about the 15 August 1980Watchtower magazine, where it used a Greek term Naos instead of the word Hieron in regard to the temple where Jesus threw out the money lenders, and whether the resurrected 'Great Crowd' are in heaven or on earth, as Naos is used for them in the Bible, and for the 'Most Holy of Holies' where God dwells. The point was relatively minor, but due to the Society's new policy on independent thoughts, and Peter Gregerson being Raymond Franz's employer and landlord, the matter was not dropped, but was accelerated and intensified, according to Franz's and Gregerson's accounts.
On 18 March 1981, according to Peter Gregerson, due to stress and constant badgering and intimidation, he submitted a letter of resignation from the organization. Those who disassociate themselves were, at that time, still allowed normal and friendly contact with their fellow Witnesses. Gregerson states that he could not tolerate the constant harassment and unchristian manner [citation needed] he was being targeted for, with regards to a private conversation about a Watchtower article that used what has been alleged to be an incorrect Greek word for the location of the 'Great Crowd.' Soon after his resignation, the Watch Tower Society changed its policy for those who are "disassociated" and reinstated a previous policy which classes those disassociated with those who are "disfellowshipped" (a much more serious condition). Those who were disfellowshipped were placed in the same category as "wicked sinners, antichrist, anti-God, fornicators, idolaters, drunkards and extortioners," [ 32 ] as were also those who were guilty of the crime of "independent thoughts", as stated in the Society's 1 September1980 letter to all Circuit and District overseers.

the WTS' convoluted changes are at the heart of the confusions

inkling

So if Gregerson was never shunned, DF'd and didn't DA himself, on what grounds did they disfellowship Ray? Below is the letter Ray received during the witch hunt at Crooklyn. It specifically states that the 'crime' was his association with 'someone' who was DA'd. Let's hear the WT apologetics explain that one.

All I can say is: "checkmate"

Well, that and: "Thank you, Mary"

[inkling]

steve2

The criticism levelled at Ray Franz is like condemning a soundly constructed building because one of its curtains appears blemished. Surely there must be something more substantial that critics can level against Ray Franze than milking distinctions between the meanings and consequences of certain words.

I see no contradiction between the 2 accounts.

tenyearsafter

The website that this comment about Ray came from is full of WT apologists (a term that does little service to authentic apologists) who rant rather than reason. To even consider their pathetic and baseless comments is demeaning to every thinking person on this board. When a single one of them can put forth an argument with substance rather than lies, innuendo and end-arounds, then it might be worth listening.

BizzyBee

I could not see any contradiction in the accounts. Furthermore, I sat in the same room with both Ray and Peter in the early 1980's for three days (at Peter's lake cabin) along with about 15 other ex-JWs. Both men told the story in detail and were in total agreement about the sequence and substance of the events in question. I think that trumps an apologist's blog.

JWdaughter

The man who posted this claims to be an Atheist who has read fully all of Franz's books.

He seems to equate DA'ing and DF'ing of today with the way it was done in the late 70's. He also does this on the assumption that one of the men who brought up the charge on Franz was his(Gregerson's) brother and since his brother was DF'ing Ray for the 'crime' of eating with Gregerson, that naturally, his brother was shunning Gregerson and also refusing to eat with him. Chandler ignored fully the further facts that half a KH worth of JWs WORKED for Peter Gregerson and derived their living from him. You don't shun your boss in a small town. And in the letter Franz wrote, he mentioned how many local JWs had been publicly seen to be eating with Gregerson after the magic cut off date. That being the case, even Franz's book supports the statement of Gregerson that he did not experience shunning(at least not to the point that he felt systematic and institutional shunning.) Did his brother not eat a meal with him? Probably did, and chalked it up to 'family business'. Those here can testify as to how some family are pretty flexible in their shunning policy for close family vs. everyone else. A meal can be family business if it is your folks anniversary or a wedding or a baby shower. Or they can flat out treat you like you are dead. Depends.

Of course the man Chandler is not an atheist ex JW. He spends a lot of time defending the organization he claims to not follow. He does this so that he can say anything and do anything to others-and not 'bring dishonor to Jehovah's name' since not being JW, anything he says can't be used to defame the org.(in his twisted mind). He can swear, insult, call people names, slander and lie.

Isn't nice to be anonymous on the internet?

digderidoo

Apparently Peter Gregerson has recently made a statement somewhere on the net, in answer to this accusation.

Paul

Leolaia

"Many do not realize, however, that this book, aptly titled Crisis of Conscience, was written at the strong suggestions of Gregerson, who even paid Franz a weekly salary in order to enable him to write the book."

http://thisbread.blogspot.com/2008/08/peter-gregersons-wise-and-painful.html

RAY FRANZ ACCUSED OF LYING

Share this