Watchtower Officials Spill The Beans! (page 2)

anglise

Brilliant Voyager

well done for finding this.

The WTBTS are so devious.

Anglise

Will Power

By Mr. Toole of the WT on pg 136

We are really trying to educate people and teach tolerance. That really is getting at the very root cause of the problem. It is fanaticism that causes some of these problems, where people have a singular view that their way is right and woe betide anybody who disagrees with it. It gets to the stage, when you start having that elevated to a level of government, where you have a very dangerous situation because then you are only one step away from totalitarianism, where you have people in high places deciding what you can and cannot believe on a whole host of things.

Tying in with your question before about what should governments do, I would have thought in a free society that people should be able to have whatever beliefs they want unless they become detrimental or positively disruptive to society at large. The price we pay for a free society is to allow people to have whatever opinions they want, unless it gets to the stage where they are destroying the public order. Now, whether or not it is destroying the public order should be a matter for objective analysis, not a subjective, bigoted type of imposition of other people?s wills.

The wolf in sheeps clothing woos their enemy (scarlet beast) with candy coated poison.

xjw_b12

Voyageur Absolutely Fascinating Read. Good job of digging that one out.

Interesting on the blood issue, how they jump to historians and the medical community to try and support their "biblical" viewpoint.

And those questions in regards to their "cooperation" or lack thereof with other churches.

I say those Senators "had their number"

It a long read people, but I encourage you to take the time to read the whole JW section. You may want to save it on your hard drive to view later.

btw on my adobe acrobat reader, it was contained on pages 60 - 78, if that helps anybody !

rocketman

I read the segment, and thanks for the post and link.

It seems to me that not much really happened there. The part about jws being better parents in custody cases because the religion does not allow particpation in 'dangerous' sports strains the credibilty of the jws. How many parents really want their kids bungee jumping anyway? or boxing? It's a non-issue that the jws make into an issue in order to gain any leverage they can.

As far as the jw assertion that the governements listen only to opposition groups and are thus misinformed, the jws themselves will always put a positive spin on their beliefs and practices, so their presentation of the 'facts' is biased anyway, in their favor obviously. Therefore, getting inpt from both sides is always best, not just theirs (the jws).

rocketman

Oh yeah, the isolation from other religions - they looked pretty bad on that. They want people from various to listen to them and come fellowship with them, but they have nothing to do with other religions. No wonder such religions view them with contempt. And yes, when they said they wouldn't participate even in a joint prayer service after some hypothetical catastophe did make them look bad. fact is, though they asserted that an individual might decide to partcipate, we all know that that person would quickly be reproved by elders for doing so - and that's something they would never tell. And that's one big problem with the jw religion - they present themselves one way in public, and carry on another way behind closed doors.

metatron

This shows the importance of well-thought out, articulate exposure of the Watchtower's selfish and cold-hearted view

of people. Eventually, this exposure has real effects - and we can hope for more pressure to be put on the Society

in areas of taxation and child custody, for example.

metatron

RunningMan

This is a beautiful read. The Senators seemed to be remarkably well informed and articulate. Here are a couple of quotes:

Senator SCHACHT?If it was an old Hebrew law, one would have thought it would have had some standing in Jewish practice and theology?. (good point! If it's an old Hebrew law, why don't old Hebrews practice it?)

For the parents to impose a life or death issue on children who have not yet the ability to think for themselves, I have to say I find a complete and absolute attack on that child?s human rights and their right to live.

There were a number of issues on which the JWs were backpedaling.

Inquiry

Very interesting read... basically two issues were raised that were pertinent to the discussion.. blood transfusions to minors and adoption biases... maybe it was in the WT's submission... which I would love to read... but the arguments seemed to lack any case substantiation.... a lot of talk about Europe, and Russia... but not much on Australia itself...

It is interesting, the spin that is... concentrating of freedom of worship... in the ministry... but no mention of freedom of worship inside the religion... that's were the WT falls off it's onion.... I think the hearings would have done well to hear from members of these organisations and questions put to them on what their views were in terms of the populace in general, and their individual freedoms... I think that would give a more informed picture of the effects on the populace of the teachings of these various orgs...

But all in all.. definately a keeper...

Thanks

Inq

RunningMan

I noticed they used the tired old illustration about a doctor telling a patient to abstain from alcohol. So, that means don't take it orally or intravenously. So, abstaining from blood means don't eat it or take it in any other way.

This argument is so stupid that I can't believe they even bother with it. Argument by analogy is invalid. It is a logical fallacy. Notice what happens in this case: The doctor tells you to abstain from red meat. Does this mean you cannot have a kidney transplant? You would have to be a complete idiot to make that assumption.

Jourles

Something else that I noticed which was minor:

He put our members in concentration camps, tried to exterminate us, and thousands lost their lives, but they would not compromise because they felt that killing people was incompatible with being a Christian.

I thought the latest published numbers were around 700-800 - the ones who lost their lives?

I wonder how the government of AUS would feel now that the WTS said in print that everyone could vote if their conscience allowed it? That would be a 180 position from their 1999 statements:

Senator PAYNE
?I have read in a number of the submissions a reference to voting. Do members of the church not vote?
Mr MacLean
?No. We do not take sides politically; we avoid that. We maintain a neutral stand in regard to those things.

"But if your conscience allows it, by all means, go ahead."

Watchtower Officials Spill The Beans!

Share this