Posts by JosephAlward

58

Question about WTS/UN scandal

by gilwarrior in

ok we know that the wts was, until recently, associated with the un even through the wts clearly condemns it.

of course the reason they gave for associating with the un is lame.. my question is this: what do you think is the real reason that the wts decided associate themselves with the un?.

i don't think that anyone has ever answered that question.

JosephAlward

" in 1991 it became necessary to register as an NGO to have continued access." (Emphasis added)

This is the statement many forum members believe is a documentable lie, but I’ve not yet seen incontrovertible evidence of this.

In 1991, the Dag Hammerskold Library evidently put in place more stringent entrance requirements. Entrance would be limited to those with a grounds pass, which is issued to three different categories of patrons: (1) UN staff members, (2) institutions whose applications documented a legitimate research interest, and (3) organizations which became affiliated with the Department of Public Information.

Thus, it evidently became “necessary” in 1991 for any organization to qualify in one of these three ways if it wished to have continued access to the main library. Thus, when the Watchtower says that it became "necessary" to affiliate itself with the DPI, it seems to be the truth, not a lie.

Careful readers will note that I twice used the word “evidently” in my comments above; I did so because I do not have any evidence that the requirements for admission to the library were changed in 1991, beyond the statement from the Watchtower. Nor do I have any evidence that they were not changed. Thus, given that the Watchtower is not making an extraordinary claim, and given that such a claim could easily be contradicted if it were false, I am assuming that the Watchtower’s statement about the requirements is accurate.

Accusers who claim that the Watchtower is lying about the requirements for entrance to the library being changed in 1991 are making an extraordinary claim, and therefore are required to come up with the extraordinary evidence to back up that extraordinary claim.

Does it exist?

Until someone can provide written documentation from the security officer in charge of the main library in 1991, or from any other official in a position to know what the entrance requirements were in 1991, that unambiguously shows that there were NO changes put in place in that year, then all the Watchtower accusers will have is their fervent hope--indeed, expectation--that the Watchtower is lying. However, hope and expectation cannot take the place of real evidence; until it is forthcoming, I think one should not be so quick to assume that just because the Watchtower has been deceitful in so many other matters, that it is being deceitful here. If the accusers are wrong and are publicly condemned as wrong, they will be painted by the Watchtower as overzealous apostates who wish to bring down the Watchtower at any cost, including lying, and the efforts of so many sincere former and current Jehovah’s Witnesses to bring about change will be set back immeasurably.

Will someone provide the written evidence showing that there definitely were no changes put in place in 1991? If that's provided, then I will be quick to agree that either the Watchtower was lying about the change in 1991, or else they are just hoping that that is what happened; either way, the Watchtower will look very bad indeed. On the other hand, if it's not provided, then forum members should stop accusing the Watchtower of lying about the requirements for entrance to the library.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

58

Question about WTS/UN scandal

by gilwarrior in

ok we know that the wts was, until recently, associated with the un even through the wts clearly condemns it.

of course the reason they gave for associating with the un is lame.. my question is this: what do you think is the real reason that the wts decided associate themselves with the un?.

i don't think that anyone has ever answered that question.

JosephAlward

Lionel Hartley writes:

The WTS stated that they were required to affiliate to get a card

Really? Where was such a thing stated?

If Hartley is referring to the Gillies letter, then he must only be half-remembering its contents, because nowhere in the Gillies’ letter does Gillies say or imply that the Watchtower was required to be affiliated in order to get a card. Below is the relevant excerpt from the letter (emphasis added):

In 1991 one of our legal corporations registered with the United Nations as a NGO (non-governmental organization) for the sole purpose of getting access to the extensive library of the United Nations.

Perhaps Hartley confused “sole purpose” with “sole means.” Gillies said that the sole purpose of the affiliation was obtaining a card, not that the sole means of getting a card was affiliation.

There’s a big difference in meaning, of course; the first is the correct one; the latter one--the one Hartley chose--is the false one, and, not coincidently perhaps, is also the one which would make Gillies a liar if he had ever said it. Which he didn’t.

Incidentally, all of this has been gone over before by me with Hawkaw, who conceded that he had been misinterpreting Gillies' letter. Interested forum readers will find my comments to Hawkaw about this at * http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=17010&site=3&page=3 beginning with my December 12 post at 11:01.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

8

Was DPI assoc. even adequate for library access?

by Five Gospels in

ive been reading many of the un threads with interest but i am already finding it difficult to locate little tidbits of information spread across the numerous threads on this issue that i didnt bother to bookmark.

i think its already well established that the wt societys associative status with the uns dpi was not required to gain access to its library (as my understand is that any person can request permission and may thereafter be granted access on a temporary basis) but i also seem to recall reading that somebody actually contacted the uns main library and that person was informed that ngos with dpi-associative status do not have automatic access to the librarys materials but must still request a pass or card which also requires some type of formal application.

could somebody please confirm this and/or direct me to the relevant thread?.

JosephAlward

After DPI affiliation is obtained, all that is necessary is to submit evidence of the affiliation to the library, and a grounds pass is issued.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

58

Question about WTS/UN scandal

by gilwarrior in

ok we know that the wts was, until recently, associated with the un even through the wts clearly condemns it.

of course the reason they gave for associating with the un is lame.. my question is this: what do you think is the real reason that the wts decided associate themselves with the un?.

i don't think that anyone has ever answered that question.

JosephAlward

Hartley observes,

did the WTS want access to the UN's library. Of course! But to get access they actually applied for affiliation as an NGO.

So, it seems that Hartley and I both agree what the answer to Gilwarrior's question is: The Watchtower affiliated itself to get access to the main library. That was the topic of this thread, and unless others wish to offer documentation showing that the Watchtower expected and received political benefits because of their affiliation with the DPI, this should end it. I think Gilwarrior has gotten his money's worth, haven't you, Gil?

There are other questions Gil could have asked, but didn't, such as the question of the propriety of the affiliation, but these would perhaps be better addressed in a different thread.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

58

Question about WTS/UN scandal

by gilwarrior in

ok we know that the wts was, until recently, associated with the un even through the wts clearly condemns it.

of course the reason they gave for associating with the un is lame.. my question is this: what do you think is the real reason that the wts decided associate themselves with the un?.

i don't think that anyone has ever answered that question.

JosephAlward

Gilwarrior:

What do you think is the real reason that the WTS decided associate themselves with the UN?

Hartley:

who really cares why they affiliated?

Answer: Obviously, Gilwarrior does.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

58

Question about WTS/UN scandal

by gilwarrior in

ok we know that the wts was, until recently, associated with the un even through the wts clearly condemns it.

of course the reason they gave for associating with the un is lame.. my question is this: what do you think is the real reason that the wts decided associate themselves with the un?.

i don't think that anyone has ever answered that question.

JosephAlward

Until forum members are shown clear evidence that the Watchtower benefited politically by having been affiliated with the Department of Public Information, they should not discount the reason for affiliation given by the Watchtower. The Watchtower says that they asked for the affiliation because it gave them access to the United Nations' library.

How likely is this?

Well, given that one of the Watchtower's more important missions on earth is showing that world governments and world institutions cannot affect solutions to world problems, demonstrating that the United Nations is failing to find lasting solutions to these problems is a priority for the Watchtower. To respond to this priority, the Watchtower naturally would wish to have access to the best information available about government-sponsored programs worldwide--failing ones, they hope, and the single greatest repository of this information in the world is the United Nations’ Dag Hammerskold Library in New York City, the biggest and the best of all of the UN’s libraries.

However, the door to this library is guarded, and access is granted only to those patrons who have a “ground pass.” This pass is given to UN staff members, to institutions which demonstrate a legitimate research need for the UN material, and to organizations which have become affiliated with the DPI.

Thus, a clear benefit--the ground pass--came to the Watchtower when it affiliated itself, and in the absence of a clear, documented example of even one single political benefit, I think the need for the library ground pass should stand as the most likely reason for the affiliation.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

5

There are No Annointed Ones

by JosephAlward in

jw
friends

i've been reading posts to this forum for about four months, and i've been continually struck by the extraordinary number of forum members who consistently spell "anointed" incorrectly as "annointed.

" i estimate that only one time in four is this word spelled correctly in this forum, when it should be ten times in ten.. now, i would be the last to suggest that any of us should ever try to police the spelling of other posters, since what really matters is the message, not the spelling, but this is an extremely important word in jehovah land--or am i wrong about that?

probably no one will care very much if a current or former jw misspells most other words, but not spelling "anointed" correctly, given its extraordinary importance within the jehovah's witnesses' culture, would seem to be no more excusable than not spelling "jehovah" correctly.

JosephAlward

I've been reading posts to this forum for about four months, and I've been continually struck by the extraordinary number of forum members who consistently spell "anointed" incorrectly as "annointed." I estimate that only one time in four is this word spelled correctly in this forum, when it should be ten times in ten.

Now, I would be the last to suggest that any of us should ever try to police the spelling of other posters, since what really matters is the message, not the spelling, but this is an extremely important word in Jehovah Land--or am I wrong about that? Probably no one will care very much if a current or former JW misspells most other words, but not spelling "anointed" correctly, given its extraordinary importance within the Jehovah's Witnesses' culture, would seem to be no more excusable than not spelling "Jehovah" correctly.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

23

Interfaith in NYC?? Who knows details?

by OhHappyDay in

well, i read something about, but i have no link nor further details.

JosephAlward

This morning I received two emails. The first is from the Unitarians, who were offended at the comments about their faith on the Interfaith Center’s web page. The second is from controversial Mr. Steven Friedlander, who Dino said told him that their organization “never” links to another site without permission from them on letterhead stationary.

Dear Mr. Alward:
I certainly don't recall the interfaith center requesting permission to
link to the UUA site; I am discouraged at their presentation of UUism in
light of the coverage they provide to other religions. I will write to them
to request a more complete listing of our faith traditions. Thanks for
writing to us to alert us to this page.
Best wishes,
Debbie Weiner
Deborah J. Weiner
Director of Electronic Communication
Unitarian Universalist Association
25 Beacon Street
Boston, MA 02108
617-948-6104
* http://www.uua.org

Here’s the letter from Friedlander (emphasis added):

After having consulted with our Communications Coordinator, Will Luers, I can now report the following with regard to the content on The Interfaith Center of New York’s website.
Our website contains both links to many different organizations and groups as well as our own proprietary content. All material is intended to provide information to the public. We do not have any arrangement with the Jehovah’s Witnesses (including its affiliated groups) with regard to the content on our site. If you have further questions, please contact Will Luers (ardvarkdesign.com). Thank you again for your feedback.”
Steven M. Friedlander, Vice President
The Interfaith Center of New York, Inc.

I think this ends it.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

9

contradiction?

by oscartheduck in

anyone care to unify 2 samuel 24:1 with 2 chronicles 21:1 for me?.

============================.

the watchtower, april 15, 1928, p. 126 "as every one knows, there are mistakes in the bible "

JosephAlward

Logical writes,

They were eyewitness accounts written by men, not scripture, so dont worry about it.

But you should worry about it, because Paul said

All Scripture is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16)

If the accounts in Samuel and Chronicles are not scripture, then what is?

Furthermore, if all scripture is God-breathed, then the all-powerful, all-knowing God would certainly have had the perfect good sense to know that readers would be confused about who incited David. Since it is obvious that there is an apparent contradiction between 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles, we should conclude that these words could not have come from the all-knowing, infinitely precise god described in the Bible. He would have known how to communicate without leaving behind so much confusion. Thus, Paul was wrong about all scripture being God-breathed, so the Bible is in error.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html

12

Bible Fraud

by radar in

jw
friends

here is an extract from the book: the bible fraud, by tony bushby.. some may find this a revelation!.

just who were the parents of jesus christ?

in the opening sentence of a new testament parable, jesus stated:.

JosephAlward

...they ignore the prophecies fulfilled by Christ

No "Christ" fulfilled any prophecies. The prophecy "fulfillment" stories were invented by well-meaning evangelists who just assumed that the "Christ" they thought existed decades earlier was the messiah the Old Testament spoke of, and therefore that person must have fulfilled the Old Testament prophecies. Thus, the evangelizing gospel writers scoured the Old Testament for anything that looked like it might be a prophecy of events in the life of the coming savior. Then they made sure that they told stories which correlated with those "prophecies." They made a lot of mistakes, however. But, I'll save that for another time. Most of those arguments are found in articles linked-to on the web page in the signature below.

Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"

* http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html