Posted by M733 [M733] on November 18, 1999 at 14:25:34 {KEdmzBXaT6Qd6.0xyhd2BnZmKbeXQ2}:
Your recent post still ignores the real issue and still fails to answer the simple question originally put to you: Will you avail yourself of some simple means of proving you are indeed a Governing Body member? Instead, you claim that my posts and Raymond Franz's posting through me have adversely complicated your situation by potentially compromising your anonymity. Raymond Franz replies to that assertion in detail in his post. Nevertheless, it is worth emphasizing that nothing either I posted or Raymond Franz posted could truly exacerbate the situation of a person who, while claiming to be a current Governing Body member, had already posted an "Open Letter to the Governing Body" that rejects major tenets of Watch Tower theology. In reality, our posts only adversely affected your situation by calling your bluff, by exposing your unwillingness and inability to confirm that you are indeed a Governing Body member, and thereby undermining your credibility on this forum.
Rather than answering the question, however, you engage in ad hominem argument and attack me, the questioner. You impugn my motives, suggesting that I am apparently in some inexplicable way grasping after "special recognition." To reiterate, my concern is for truth, for the effect deceit can have on people who have already been hurt enough, and for how such deceit furnishes additional grounds for Jehovah's Witnesses to distrust and disregard material on the Witness movement produced by legitimate sources.
Despite your statements to the contrary in your recent message, in my first post I suggested a completely secure and private means by which you could establish the veracity of your claims. Further, Raymond Franz suggested other means as well -- means that again could be completely private and secure. However, you rebuffed those suggestions and chose not to avail yourself of any of the means offered to you. Do H20 members truly believe that there is no secure and private medium by which the so-called Governing Body member could establish the truthfulness of his claim? Is it really credible that the so-called Governing Body member could not, for example, go to a public phone in New York City and contact Raymond Franz? If you are what you claim to be, and if you truly care about truth and people, you owe it to all to end the controversy and to establish your credibility. The means suggested remain open to you. To repeat, you can do this privately and securely. I would gladly assist you. My e-mail address appears above.
However, in the absence of contrary evidence -- evidence that unfortunately I do not expect to be forthcoming -- I remain convinced that there is no factual basis for the so-called Governing Body member's claims. Obviously, persons have the right and responsibility to decide otherwise. But remember, if the writer is indeed a charlatan, any hopes he inspires of reform, any apologies he offers, and any supposed insights into the internal doings of the Governing Body or assistance he proffers are mere pernicious fictions -- vain and futile.
Following my post, I have posted in two parts, Raymond Franz's response to the claimed Governing Body member's recent post.
M733