Blacksheep, perhaps you can be so kind as to share the relevant parts that were omitted in the context of the original article? Of course, that sentence or paragraph (or whatever Cedars demand that it be referred to as) is the relevant bit. I looked earlier, but the online Awakes only go back to 2000.
Cedars, it is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty to omit relevant facts to support a straw-man argument of your own creation. THAT is the very definition of straw-manning: misrepresenting your opponents position to make it easier to attack. You can rationalize it away all you want, but you've done it before and you're doing it now.... You're fibbing again, Arnold.
You dont have to agree or disagree with that, because the principles of fair argumentation are not open for debate.
As stated, omitting relevant pertinent information to the topic under discussion only undermines your credibility, and anyone who gets into a discussion with a JW on this point is only going to have egg on their face when the JW needs to explain to them how someone (Cedars) "forgot" to point out the rest of the article which drastically effects the claim.
Look, some of us here actually have JWs family members still in: do you really want to be responsible for causing these family members to be locked deeper into the jaws of the WTBTS, after the person who knows TTATT looks like a fool by relying on your bad information, over-stating a case which isn't even supported by facts? JWs get lied to routinely: the last thing they need is to be lied to about TTATT.
Btw, Grundy didn't make as broad or hyperbolic a claim as you did. What we have is a classic "propagation of errors", where errors are retained, but become more damaging as others rely on the prior without exercising independent fact-checking. You upped the ante by claiming it was a hard-lining of JW policy, when its much like the ASL video: sometimes seeing the same message delivered in a different way causes the content to seem to be different when it's really not.
