From: daveb@pogo.wv.tek.com (Dave Butler)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Andreas (was: JWs vs. Christians)
Date: 15 Apr 92 00:27:59 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Wilsonville,  OR.

There comes a point every so often, when Andreas posts sufficient inanity for
me to feel compelled to respond.  The latest has mostly to do with his
statements about the the JW committee which has judged blood transfusion to be
unclean and dangerous.  On several occasions Andreas has been asked to provide
the names and qualifications of the people on this JW committee and has not
done so.  He insists that we give credence to this committee, but instead of
presenting their qualifications, he simply tells people to simply read that JW
council's conclusions, and see how "effective" a job they are doing.  Since
Andreas excuses his laziness by stating that he doesn't have time to go and
research the names and qualifications of that committee, this strongly implies
to me that Andreas himself has no real knowledge of who these men are, or what
their qualifications are; if he did, he'd be at least partially able to answer
the question. 

Now we have Andreas, who admits that he has no knowledge of hematology, or
even had knowledge that such a science existed, proclaiming to us that this
anonymous committee, which does no actual research of any kind, is a better
judge on the subject of hematology than the doctors who spend their lives both
doing research in hematology, and reading about everyone elses' research.  He
makes this declaration despite the fact that he has not even displayed
personal knowledge on the qualifications of this committee itself.  Thus we
have Andreas, who knows nothing about hematology, hematologist, or the
qualifications of the committee, still insisting that we accept his judgement,
grant that committee more credibility than hematologists, and agree that this
faceless committee is the most qualified group to judge the scientific issues
of blood.  I find that incredibly self-righteous.  Andreas, I see no reason to
trust you or your judgement. 

On a slightly different subject Andreas, after several requests, you claimed
that you were too busy to bother presenting the names and qualifications of the
members of this committee.  You made that excuse in spite of the fact that you
spend time every day reading and writing articles on the net.  Further
Andreas, you are quite condemnatory when others cannot immediately produce
documentation at your request (eg: Walter Smith, Jay Windley).  You call such
people "liars" and agents of the "anti-Christ".  You have made it quite clear
that if there is any research to be done, regardless of who presents an
assertion, it is not worth your time to research, and it is always our
responsibility to do research to your satisfaction.  This is an implicit
declaration that your time and effort, even the time and effort you merely
spend reading and writing net articles, is much more valuable than our time
and effort.  What hubris you display.  I find you to be a lazy, arrogant,
sanctimonious, hypocrite, who judges himself and his contributions to be
innately more valuable and less in need of documentation to be credible.  How
dare you demand documentation, or revile those who do not produce it, when you
are too self-righteous and lazy to research your own!?!

And finally Andreas, you have threatened litigation and imprisonment to those
you believes have libeled your faith.  Well Andreas, you have now libeled the
faith of others as allowing lying, stealing etc:

>>>>>>>	Simply the religions there lying, stealing etc. is allowed. 
>>>>>> ... you are not answering the question.  ...
>>>>>	The religions of the Great Babylon, The False Religion. 
>> So name some of them.  Name ten or so, if you don't want to bother naming
>> thousands.
> 
> 	The Lutheran Church, the E. Orthodox Church, the RCC, Jews, Muslims,
> 	Hindus, Buddhists, the Anglican Church, Calvinists etc. etc. 
 
Andreas, if the law against libel in your country are strong enough to have
Walter Smith jailed for libeling JWs, then your own libelous accusation is
definitely strong enough to have you imprisoned.  And by the standards you
yourself have sought to impose on others, you will have deserved it.  So we
shall see if the the Finlandic Police actually imprison you for spreading
slanderous lies about other religions, or we shall see that your accusation
that Walter Smith was doing something deserving of imprisonment, was just
another of your ridiculous lies.  Of course if you are thrown in jail for
libel, you will then **BE** the example of something you said did not exist: a
non-Disfellowshipped JW deservedly in prison (or do you think the JWs would
disfellowship you for making such a libel). 

To put this article in perspective to other JWs, no I don't hold you
responsible for the inanity that Andreas produces (the other JWs I have known
were nothing like Andreas).  And Walter Smith has definitely got ahold of a
good thing as far as he's concerned.  When criticizing a group it is always
wonderful to be able and provoke the attention of a recognized zealot and
idiot, to act as defender of the faith.  For instance, if my aim were show
fundamentalists to be mindless dolts, I would much rather debate some
offensive idiot like Brother Jed than someone perceptive like Jonathan
Edwards.  I admit though, it is very difficult at times to separate Andreas'
raving from the the beliefs of JW's in general, because of the way Andreas
wraps himself in the flag of "Jehovahs Witness Defender".  If Andreas does not
represent JWs in general, you would be best served by making sure that the net
is aware of this and voice your concerns, just as the more mainstream
Christians on the net disavowed any connection with Joe Applegate (another
person who excelled in self-righteous condemnation).  Also, if Andreas is truly
deserving of public rebuke (eg: libeling all other religions as allowing
"lying, stealing etc."), then rebuke him so that we do not think that all JWs
feel that way.  If I had someone who both claimed to represented me and also
freely insulted others, I would most definitely rebuke him.  
 
				Later,

				Dave Butler

    I would rather have a thousands idiots attacking my position, than
    have one idiot helping to defend it.
				Paraphrased from Voltaire