Ray Franz's book , just a pack of lies?

by sleepy 13 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Steven

  Hi Garybuss,

  Thank you for clarifying you previous post. Apologies if I came on a bit strong - I wasn't sure where you were coming from first of all but I am in full agreement with what you are saying about being cautious of what may happen.

  In my post I was also urging a degree of caution since ultimately a person has to make their own mind up on something & if someone else tries to move them in a direction, or go too fast then this can cause a backlash.

  I see what you are saying about the COC thing & it potentially leading to difficulties. I guess the only thing Sleepy can do is assess his & his wife's circumstances & see what is best to do next.

  Hopefully no bad feelings - its just being newly out of the society I guess I was worried that you were getting a bit personal whereas actually you were only out to caution.

  Yours,

  Steven.
• 

  Room 215

  Hi Sleepy,

  For whatever it's worth, I was at Bethel from 1965 to 1969, and still retain several contacts there. I personally knew the vast majority of the characters mentioned in Ray's book, and can attest to the accuracy of all that I know about the issues raised. It's dead-on accurate and unassailable. Therein lies its power.
  What you have to understand is that before this whole ``apostasy'' business blew up, most of the discredited people -- Ray, Dunlap,. Sanchez, et al, were among the most highly respected members of the Bethel family.
  The decision to publish the ``Aid'' book, with an accompanying mandate from then-president Knorr, to be bound only by the Bible and not necessarily what the Society had published heretofore-- was the great catalyst.
  The resultant research, and its implications that significant structural changes in administative policy and doctine were overdue,polarizd the leaderhip into two classes: the old guard, who were frightened by the prospect of structural reform, and the liberals, who sought to implement a less authoritarian, with mroe autonomy for local congregations, less centralized control, and de-emphasis on works.
  In the ensuing struggle, the powerful conservative element prevailed, and discredited the liberals, pushing them out. Overnbight, the atmosphere at Bethel darkened, from one of relative openness (wherein one felt quite free to discuss almost any topic or pose any question provdied it was done discreetly, among friends, with the lone proviso that one not do so disruptively or out amongst the locals), to one of total paranoia and witch-hunt.
  Once the dissenters were expelled, draconian expulsion rules were enacted, centralized control reasserted, the Society circled the wagons, and the ``us-against-them'' bunker mentality took over.
  That's where we are today, and it's a situation exacerbated by Armageddon's non-eventuation. Ask any former Bethelite willing to talk--there's no shortage of these that contribute to this board-- and you're likely to get confirmation.
• 

  garybuss

  Hi Steven,

  I have had a fair bit of experience with my own half cocked interventions and attempted disruptions. I have written about those episodes and many of those articles are on www.freeminds.org

  I am currently reading Steve Hassan's book, Releasing The Bonds. It reflects my experiences pretty well and I recommend reading it with reflection before attempting to intervene in the religion of a spouse or anybody for that matter.

  Also I found this true for myself. I need to have dealt with my own issues surrounding the experiences in a high control group before I can be of any real help to anybody else. That means I don't try to influence anybody else until I have completed my own grief cycle. I can't counsel somebody else with anger issues until I have worked through my own.
  
  The principle issue with Jehovah's Witnesses is fear. I had to think of the bounds the Watch Tower Corporation implanted into the minds of Witnesses like an invisible pet fence. The dog tail wagging, sees you and momentarily forgets the shock collar. It runs toward you and POW . . . it get shocked and reminded of it's limitations. Same thing happens with a victim of a high control group when they venture out too far. The fear hits them and just like the shock collar they withdraw under the porch and It takes a long, long time before they will trust that area again because they remember the shock, or the fear that seems so real.
  
  Leaving a high control group seems different for everyone. Seems to me we need to keep rapport number one and be supportive and be more of a resource for them when and if they do decide to leave.

  For couples, a marriage counselor trained in the dynamics of a high control group has accomplished far more than the disconfirming information approach. I would advise to never confront a Witness with disconfirming information or questions. I would advise to thoroughly do your own homework and do not stop with Jehovah's Witnesses. Investigate Second Adventists, William Miller, Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

  Be suspect of "faith", belief without proof. That is how you were tricked before. And last of all investigate the objective history of theism. Read Carl Sagan's, Demon Haunted World. It will show you how to recognize hype and dogmatism from objective reality. When you investigate, always take the approach opposite to your perceived stand. That means if you are a skeptic, read as a true believer putting together an objective research. If you are a true believer, research as a skeptic.

  Never read one book. Read point counterpoint. No real expert has read only one book. Look at both sides objectively.

  When I did all this, my approach to a person living in a delusion is very different than it was before I got my education.
  
  Best wishes to all,
  
  gb
• 

  Amazing

  Hi Sleepy: I am more than pleased to answer all your questions. Not only have I read both of Ray's books several times, I have checked every reference. And then later have corresponded and visited with Ray and his wife Cynthia.

  You said, "My wife is very sceptical of Ray Franz's book COC."

  This is healthy to be skeptical of anything. I wish I had been as skeptical before becoming a JW in the late 1960s.

  You said, "What I want to know is this , has the society ever shown that the events described in that book are false and the letters or statments quoted are false?"

  No, the Society has said nothing, and taken no action. The Society has modified some of its doctine in response to what Ray and other ex-JWs have written. You can see this between the older "Aid" book and the "Insight" books on the Gentile Times or Appointed Times of the Nations issue. Worth the comparison. Ray states in his book that he was responsible for much of the research in the Aid book project on this topic. And I think he had overall oversight of the project. His book says what his role was. The Society can say nothing because Ray told the truth.

  You said, "I feel their silence on the matter speaks for itself."

  You are correct! The Society made veiled references to those who have left the organization, but have been careful not to even name Ray Franz to the rank and file JW or in their publications. They may have been more specific at Bethel or in priavte. Rumors about Ray have circulated, but never any specific challenge to Ray.

  You said, "Has the society ever sued any so called apostate writer for lies in their books?"

  Not that I am aware of. Although, unless an issue festers in the media and causes great grief, the Society might not sue as this tends to backfire. In Ray Franz' case, he made the news in Time magazine, and his books have rocked the JW world, but the Society takes no action, because they cannot win against truth.

  The only other issues by ex-JWs that the Society is concerned about are the AJWRB folks (Assoc. JW for the Reform on Blood) and their work with the medical community. The Society is slowly changing with babay steps due in part to their work. And then the recent SilentLambs and molestation issues, and the Society is scared out ther pants. They have made two policy adjustments this year alone. They are not likely to sue Silent Lambs because he tells the truth.

  The Society has defended itself in some litigation and have been successful, or removed as co-defendants. But, to my knowledge, they have not pursued a cause of action against ex-JWs for what has been written against the Society.

  You said, "I personaly dont agree with all the critacism about Jehovahs witnesses and understand that Ray's slant on matters may not always be unbiased (who ever is?) but I feel that the facts presented sound true."

  Ray was very kind and objective in both of his books. I was a JW for 25 years, during much time I served as an MS and Elder, etc. So, when I read his books, I found they were right on the target. But, I still looked up every reference to historical Watch Tower literature and I was also able to find most other references, except things like his private corresponsdence that Ray received and reported in his books. You will be delighted at the honesty, fairness, truthfulness, and accuracy. You will never be the same after you read his books. I would read Crisis of Conscience at first.

  You said, "I just can't prove that to my wife, other than saying he has the documents and names of people and as far as I know the society has not refuted his book."

  When I first read C of C I brought it home about 3/4ths the way into it. My wife glanced at it. But she was scared about any religious changes. So, I ended the topic. 3 years later I read his second book, In Search, and started withing with my family using questions during our family study - questions that they had to answer, but did not show I had any agenda. In time they all woke up. Then I gave them all copies of C of C or I shared what I had. My wife, for some reason never read them, but she still left the organization.

  I hope the above helps, and I will watch for any follow-up questions you may have. - Amazing

  PS: In my visit with Ray, we discussed his views of thoe who are negative about the Society. And Ray was not happy with those who rely on unsubstantiated rumors or who blow things out of proportion. He was very concerned about honesty, fairness, truthfulness, and accuracy. This is why he avoided some interviews because he questioned the sincerety or fairness of some. So, he wants the Society presented in a fair light.