Biography Stub‑class

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Christianity: Witnesses Stub‑class High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Jehovah's Witnesses (assessed as High-importance).

Canada: Alberta / Education Stub‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Alberta. This article is supported by WikiProject Education in Canada.

Another article's Talk asked about Penton's bias against Jehovah's Witnesses. It seems best to simply reference verifiable scholars on the matter, and put those here. Penton himself wrote in one of his books, "Whether I have succeeded in being fair and reasonably objective in my presentation is a matter for my readers to decide."

• "Review" by Richard Singelenberg, Journal of Church and State, vol.47 no.3, page 627, "However, to conclude...as Penton does...is demagogical rather than the result of solid analysis. [...H]is presentation suffers from his aversion against his former religious community. ...If Penton would have been able to transform his seemingly personal vendetta into a detached analysis, this study would have rendered considerable surplus value. As it is now, the...scientific community will frown upon the author's lack of objectivity."
• Between Resistance and Martyrdom: Jehovah's Witnesses in the Third Reich by Detlef Garbe, Univ of Wisconsin Press, 2008, page xx, "I would like to refer the reader to my comments about Penton's previous publications... His statements, source selection, and interpretation reflect a deep-seated aversion against this religious association, of which he had once been a member. ...from a historiographic viewpoint Penton's writings perhaps show a lack of scientific objectivity."
• "Book Reviews" by Kevin P. Spicer, Church History, July 2006, ©American Society of Church History, page 205, "Penton is a bit too reproachful in his evaluation of the Witnesses' actions...the weakness of Penton's study shows itself"
• Against the Draft by Peter Brock, University of Toronto Press, 2006, page 447, "More controversial is Penton's belief that 'the Witnesses...were in part responsible for their sufferings' in Nazi Germany... [Penton]'s main concern is to refute JW 'hagiolatry' and the sect's scholarly 'apologists.'"
• Histories and Stories from Chiapas by Rosalva Aida Hernandez Castillo, University of Texas Press, 2001, page 93, "Many researchers who are former Witnesses, such as...James Penton...represent converts as automatons controlled and homogenized by the religious group's ideological strength, a position belied by their own personal experiences."

One independent researcher claims that Penton is not merely a dispassionate academic, but a key anti-JW leader:

• A Brief Guide to Beliefs by Linda Edwards, Westminster John Knox Press, 2001, page 440, "In 1981 the Jehovah's Witnesses experienced a series of schisms that led to a large number leaving the organization. The leader of the opposition to the Brooklyn, New York, headquarters group was Professor James Penton, whose family had been among Russell's earliest converts. Penton and the people who sided with him sought to reemphasize the doctrine of justification by faith and return the group to its original interest in Bible study. The intention of Penton and other Witnesses who shared his ideas appears to have been reform from within. The Brooklyn leadership rejected their views and expelled anyone who supported them."

In May 1981, Newsweek magazine called Penton "one of 50 ex-Witnesses in Alberta, Canada, who are now working actively to debunk the sect's teachings".

Bryan Ronald Wilson was president of the International Society for the Sociology of Religion and had researched and published about Jehovah's Witnesses; Penton's JW books quote from Wilson. Wilson published these pointed comments in 1994:

"[A] member who departs is likely to be regarded as apostatizing, and all the more so, of course, if that member then proceeds to ridicule or excoriate his former beliefs and to vilify those who were previously his close associates. [...The] apostate becomes a central figure in the formation (or misformation) of opinion in the public domain concerning these movements. ...The disaffected and the apostate are in particular informants whose evidence has to be used with circumspection. The apostate is generally in need of self-justification. ...The apostate...seeks to reintegrate with the wider society which he now seeks to influence, and perhaps to mobilize, against the religious group which he has lately abandoned. ...Neither the objective sociological researcher nor the court of law can readily regard the apostate as a creditable or reliable source of evidence. He must always be seen as one whose personal history predisposes him to bias with respect to both his previous religious commitment and affiliations, the suspicion must arise that he acts from a personal motivation to vindicate himself and to regain his self-esteem”. – Apostates and the New Religious Movements by Bryan Wilson, Freedom Publishing, 1994

Interestingly, Penton's 1997 book quotes from Wilson's words above, but concludes (page 233): "It may well be true that what Kliever, Melton, and Wilson say is correct about certain apostates, but it is difficult if not impossible to believe that their generalizations are true of all apostates.[italics retained from original]"
It would seem Penton felt stung by the universally-respected Wilson.--AuthorityTam (talk) 20:44, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• You have evidently gone to great trouble to cherry pick adverse comments about Penton and ignored those complimentary of his books. In any case this talk page exists to discuss the content of the article, not your views on his books or his motives. BlackCab (talk) 04:59, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia a should describe all view point complementary or independent views on his motive. These points should be included in the article in addition to any positive reviews by independent scholars--Fazilfazil (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The relevance of the lengthy section on a 1976 Toronto Star article is far from clear. The depth of discussion of that article by far outweighs its significance. I'd recommend deleting the lot and noting only that Penton wrote the book the Star article referred to. BlackCab (talk) 04:55, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An image used in this article, File:James Penton portrait.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:James Penton portrait.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:54, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]