I've been a little busy recently. But in accordance with some of you (and against the advice of many of you)....I did send my 607 research to my FIL. His response is below. My planned response to him is in bold. My goal is to let him know that I will not be intimidated, and I see right through his response. His reponse is nothing more than an ad hominem attack. But at the same time....I do not want to come across as unnecessarily combative. I apologize in advance for the length. Here goes:
I have spent considerable time to review the information that you have compiled. As I read it , it occured to me that any discussion of the information wouldn't be an exercise in intellect but one of faith and who do you believe.You choose to believe the secular side of things while I choose to accept the information provided by Jehovah's organization.Both sides make assumptions to get to where they end up.
It also occurred tome that your mind was already made up and you choose to think the worst of Jehovah's organization, imputing wrong motives to them and as a result you have developed a loathing hate for them.I believe that the time to have addressed your concerns was back when you started to wonder about things.As we know that ship has already sailed.
I have seen on your book shelf a book written by Ray Franz a longtime enemy of Jehovah' Witnesses.Having seen this book I wondered how much of Ray's writings you have bought into as you did your research ? Probably the best thing to have happened with your doubts early on was to never have become one of Jehovah's Witnesses. It certainly would have prevented alot of grief and heartache.
It seems to me you had a beginning point of doubt and did everything it took to arrive with even more doubt. In essesnce you pretended to be something you weren't and now the rest of us get to deal with the results years later.I do know your father wasn't the best influence on you , but even he wanted you to be in the congregation.
When I first started studing my wife bought me the book "Thirty Years A Watchtower Slave " and maybe one of Ray's books. I looked through them and they seemed to be sour grapes. I have been a Witness for 33 years and never has anyone twisted my arm to do anything I didn't want to do. That's why I don't understand the anger of those who change their minds later. People do what people want to do.
You also mention outright lies from Jehovah's Witnesses.One how do you know these other people aren't lying ? I can from no belief to two forms of Christendom. Now talk about telling lies. Their whole faith is based on lies and more lies. While 607 is a big deal to you and wrong as you believe, does that make the information about the Trinity , Hellfire, Condition of the Dead, Immortality of the Soul and the pagan originations of numerous holidays wrong? I haven't found that to be the case. Jehovah's Organization is not perfect, but when they see they are trully wrong I have seen then admit it and go on down the road.They tell more on themselves than any religion I have ever seen.
\
I hope you get things figured out. Sending you research to New York is probably the thing for you to do. They have the continuity of what has taken place over time and are in the best position to hopefully give you the answers you are looking for. I hope you do get things figured out for everyone's benefit.
What would you like me to do with your materials ? Let me know and I will do as you wish.
Also, I would recommend reading the book of James.
I do thank you for at least considering how I feel on the matter. I do agree that any discussion would in part be on faith, but I guess where we differ is that in regard to this topic, (and all topics for that matter) I believe that faith must be built upon a solid foundation. From what I have found, the society has produced nothing but supposition. In regard to this topic, there simply is no foundation aside from that which has been artfully contrived. They are in essence laying a tarp on the ground and asking 7 million people to build their structure of faith upon it……only…no one knows what is under that tarp. This topic undermines the very notion of Jehovah having a modern day organization. So to put faith in an organization…in order to prove that said organization is directed by God is circular. How do I know that the organization is Jehovah’s? I have to put faith in it. Why should I put faith in it? Because it is Jehovah’s organization. The reasoning is circular.
While I admittedly have no good feelings towards the men in charge of this organization, I do truly love the individual witnesses. I believe most of them are very honest and good hearted people. In terms of imputing wrong motives…….when an organization quotes an authority completely out of context time and again….and doing so not only changes what he intended to say….but it happens to make it agree with the point that the organization is trying to get across, honestly, what other motive can be imputed? When an organization presents one sided arguments without considering all or in this case even half of the evidence, what other motive can be imputed? When an organization presents the conclusions of unnamed studies done by unnamed people and not so much as a footnote to direct the reader to the actual evidence that led to such conclusions, what other motive can be imputed? Do you really believe that everything I hi-lited was accidental or coincidental? And if so, why would God direct that? The time to have addressed concerns was indeed back when I began my studies. But as I mentioned in my research, I wanted truth. Not a new way of ignoring evidence. If what I have presented isn’t true then show me why it isn’t true. Your response to me now, if you have truth should be no different than it would have been 3 years ago. What you wrote to me was, unfortunately exactly what I predicted it would be. You did not answer any of my questions. You did not even attempt to. Instead, you chose to engage in an ad hominem attack on me. You attacked my character. You attacked my sources. You attacked my motive. You attacked my deceased father. But never once did you address why it is ok for the society to quote out of context…..or why the society holds different pieces of ancient evidence to different standards based on the argument they want to make……or how it is that ancient texts describing celestial phenomena can be dated to a time when astronomers say would have been a celestial impossibility. I could not help but think of the June 22, 2000 Awake that says (in regard to propaganda techniques to watch out for) “Some people insult those who disagree with them by questioning character or motives instead of focusing on the facts.”
The first thing I did when I began researching was start with the society’s articles on this matter. At the beginning, I really was hoping that I’d find adequate proof on their behalf. Honestly, the last thing I wanted to do was start over in life with nothing to believe in and regrets for having wasted my first 30 years. But after each article I read, I started to realize more and more that their arguments weren’t really arguments at all….but rather, excuses. All they sought to do was discredit, through any means necessary, even if it meant contradicting what they wrote in a previous article. All of this research led me to also study logical fallacies…..when, why and how they are used. The society’s articles on the matter are chock full of them. It is no wonder that witnesses are urged not the think critically. I would think that if anyone would understand why I didn’t want to discuss the matter with the elders until I had done my own research, it would be you. You left the Catholic Church by doing your own research too. Similarly, how can anyone find out truth if they only listen to what THEIR church leaders have to say?
To be honest, Ray Franz doesn’t have that many theories. His first book was nothing more than the memoirs of his time spent as a witness…..most of it directed to activities while on the governing body. His second book admittedly has more theories….and many more logical arguments against society based doctrine…..but none of it focuses on 607BC. My research on 607BC….my realization that the society has thus far furnished nothing but supposition to back up their claims on the matter…..and my noticing of the underhanded techniques they used to mislead their readers…..all of that combined is what led me to read what Ray Franz had to say. My being baptized as a Jehovah’s Witness has brought me a wife that I do love though we are going through the most tumultuous of times. I did not honor her and treat her the way I should have for many years and I wish I could change that. I have the two most beautiful baby girls as well. But unfortunately I see the mind control already taking shape with them and yes, it breaks my heart. Other than that, I’d say you’re right.
I did have a beginning point of doubt. It was a Thursday night meeting many years ago. Brother so and so was conducting. I do not recall the question, but I do recall the answer very well. His wife answered. Her answer was something like “it does not matter what the faithful slave says, even if we think it goes against a previous view point, even if we don’t understand, even if we don’t agree…..we do not ask questions…..we just do it”. I recall Brother so and so smiling in approval and saying “that’s right…..thank you”. And I recall seeing 50 heads nodding in agreement. Yes. That was my “oh my God…..what am I witnessing here?” moment. And that’s when I got scared. That’s the type of thinking that led to nearly 1,000 members of the People’s Temple dying. That’s the type of thinking that the Scientologists have. When you DO NOT question…..that is a scary place to be. Besides….it is at least in my opinion, in violation of scripture. We are to keep making sure of all things….not some things. The Bereans did accept the message….but not without critically examining to see if what Paul was saying was true. The bible doesn’t say that the Bereans continually accepted everything without hesitation. Nor does it say that they limited themselves to what Paul expressly approved for them to examine.
That was my problem. Truth is truth. When an organization has to go to great lengths to control what its people hear, see and read…….it is not a good thing. It is just one of the many signs of cult control (information control). And yes, most of what I read did lead me to have more doubt. That’s what happens when an organization spends 100 plus years covering over themselves. You say that I pretended to be something I wasn’t. At what point in my life do you accuse me of this? I spent my teenage years and my young adulthood trying to be a good witness. Yes, I had flaws but I was sincerely trying. It was around the age of 25 that I heard Sister so and so made that comment and THEN is when I started to fade away. I do not know what you are insinuating with that comment, but it does sound a bit judgmental. I wish I could say I am surprised, but I am not. My daughter has already developed the black and white thinking that permeates this religion. She is going to live forever. I am going to die. She serves Jehovah. I serve Satan. “Papa….why are you friends with Satan?” Do you have any idea how heartbreaking it is to hear your own daughter disrespect you in your own home by way of what she has been indoctrinated with at the kingdom hall? She is already learning how to judge others…..starting with me. And my dad did want me to remain in the congregation…….for a time. That is…until he researched the organization. He tried to warn me before he died….but I didn’t listen to him. I was being a good witness.
A lot of the books that have been written by ex-witness ARE sour grapes. I’ve read some and I find them distasteful. A personal vendetta against a religion does not make for good reading. But true, well put together information that lays out facts DOES make for good reading. Your mentioning of Ray Franz along with your “sour grapes” comment, insinuates (please pardon if I am reading into that incorrectly) that you believe he is one of those “sour grapes”. I trust that you did not read either of his books. If you had, you would see that he is anything but sour. He has nothing bad to say, even about those individuals that disfellowshipped him…..aside from aligning evidence that this is not God’s organization. Honestly, I too expected sour grapes and scathing remarks when I read his books. They are far from it. You are right in that nobody twists your arm to do anything in this religion. The problem that most witnesses face that are in the same spot I was a few years ago………… is fear. Armageddon is just around the corner and you are going to die soon if you aren’t doing what we tell you. You cannot have a relationship with God outside of our organization. You may choose to leave the organization and that is fine, but keep in mind that if your friends and family are still inside the organization….they will all shun you. Not to mention that your children may grow up, become witnesses and begin shunning you as well. If you call that Christian freedom…..then you, as a citizen of the United States, are equally as free to CHOOSE whether or not you want to pay your property taxes. The alternative will create havoc on your life….but hey….you have the FREEDOM to choose don’t you? It’s called emotional blackmail and that is why you SHOULD understand those that change their minds and are angry later.
In regard to outright lies…..first of all, I’d be willing to bet that if Ray Franz had produced one single untruth about his times in the governing body and some of the atrocities that went on……the society would have sued him. The society has sued or at least threatened litigation for much less. But that wasn’t even the point I was making. The outright lies are found within the very pages of society based literature.
“Why, then, do the nations not realize and accept the approach of this climax of judgment? It is because they have not heeded the world-wide advertising of Christ’s return and his second presence. Since long before World War 1, Jehovah’s Witnesses pointed to 1914 as the time for this great event to occur” – WT – June 15, 1954, page 370
“Bible prophecy shows that the Lord was due to appear for the second time in the year 1874. Fulfilled prophecy shows beyond a doubt that he did appear in 1874. Fulfilled prophecy is otherwise designated the physical facts; and these facts are indisputable” – WT – November 1, 1922, page 333
“Similarly, a prophecy providentially caused sincere 19 th century Bible students to be in expectation. By linking the “seven times” of Daniel 4:25 with “the times of the Gentiles” they anticipated that Christ would receive Kingdom power in 1914” – WT – September 15, 1998, page 15
“Since that time it has been emphatically manifest that the time had dome in A.D. 1878 when kingly judgment should begin at the house of God. It is here that Revelation 14:14-20 applies, and our Lord is brought to view as the Reaper crowned. The year A.D. 1878, being parallel of his assuming power and authority in the type, clearly marks the time for the actual assuming of power as King of kings, by our present, spiritual, invisible Lord – the time of his taking to himself his great power to reign, which in the prophecy is closely associated with the resurrection of his faithful, and the beginning of the trouble and wrath upon the nations.” – The Time is at Hand, 1902, page 239
Why? Why do they cover up the fact that they most certainly did NOT teach that Christ was to attain kingdom power in 1914……until WAY AFTER 1914 had come and gone? The 1954 WT above is a lie. The 1998 WT above is a lie. Yet you’ll still support it. Why do they insist on selling a version of “truth” to their readers that is anything but true?
607 should be a big deal to all witnesses, because the very foundation of the religion and its claims to have God supporting them rests on it. Yet when pressed on the matter, Jehovah’s Witnesses cleverly use a red herring logical fallacy and try to change the subject and focus on something that their faith allows them to accept as true. You’ve done the same thing. Trinity, hellfire, immortality of the soul, condition of the dead are all staples that witnesses believe but are no more proven than any other faith based doctrine. You are using your already existing beliefs and your faith in those beliefs as proof that it is God’s organization. That is no different than a Muslim using his unwavering beliefs as proof that Muhammad must have been God’s chief prophet. It is circular. How do you know that the disbelief in the trinity, hellfire, and immortality of the soul is right? Because it is coming from God’s organization How do you know that the society is Jehovah’s organization? Because you don’t believe in the trinity, hellfire, or immortality of the soul. I don’t profess to have all the answers in regard to what to believe. I don’t know what I believe right now. But even if the witnesses are right in regards to trinity, hellfire, and immortality of the soul…….that does not prove that they were chosen by Christ Jesus in 1919. All it proves is that they got some things right…..similar to many other organizations. The Adventists and especially Christadelphians have very similar beliefs. But somehow their similar beliefs don’t qualify them as being God’s organization. The only way to prove if Christ really selected them is to look closely at what they were teaching as “truth” back in 1918/1919.
In regard to pagan origins, I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t believe that the God of love truly focuses on pagan origins. If He does and He is that serious about it, then witnesses shouldn’t be wearing wedding rings or feeding one another cake at their wedding reception. Yet the pagan origins behind those rituals are ignored. I was dumbfounded when I read the September 22, 2003 Awake article on the usage of piñatas. The advice given in the article was of course to avoid stumbling others…..but it goes on to say “a main concern is, not what the practice meant hundreds of years ago, but how it is viewed today in your area. Understandably, opinions may vary from one place to another. Hence it is wise to avoid turning matters into big issues. The bible says, “Let each one keep seeking, not his own advantage, but that of the other person” – 1 Cor 10:24”. So first and foremost we should take heed to avoid stumbling others. But if no others are stumbled then the usage of a piñata is up to us individually because it is “not what the practice meant hundreds of years ago, but how it is viewed today in your area”. First let me say that I think the advice given in this article is good. But secondly…..how can they write that and then hypocritically turn around and damn other celebrations that have pagan origins? How about Mother’s Day? I brought this up to a particular person who shall remain nameless many years ago. Mother’s Day had its start with the worship of Rhea, the “mother” of all the Greek Gods. Such an act has long been a thing of the past. No one worships mothers today….so shouldn’t that same advice……that of focusing on what the practice means in our area today prevail? This person then changed his tune and told me that the celebration of mothers on Mothers Day puts too much emphasis on one specific person for that day…..it puts them up on a pedestal and that can be considered creature worship. But is that any more creature worship than having a graduation party for someone? Isn’t that person being “put up on a pedestal” as well? Why should the society’s advice in that article be arbitrarily applied?
I do not expect perfection from an organization. Your daughter has used the same line on me. But there is a difference between imperfection and willful deceit. There is a difference between imperfection and dishonesty. Imperfection would be saying “up until 1943, we incorrectly taught that Christ had already returned prior to 1914”…..not what was written in the 1954 and 1998 Watchtowers above. Instead, they wrote something that is completely false. I’ve read the Proclaimers book and yes it feigns a slight attempt at humility, but it is so watered down that readers cannot see the real truth. For instance, the book brings out an article from the May 1, 1968 Watchtower as proof that the society tried to give caution on the subject of 1975. The actual article says in part "The immediate future is certain to be filled with climactic events, for this old system is nearing its complete end. Within a few years at most, the final parts of Bible prophecy relative to these "last days" will undergo fulfillment. Does this mean that the year 1975 will bring the battle of Armageddon? No one can say with certainty what any particular year will bring. Sufficient is it for God's servants to know for a certainty that, for this system under Satan, time is running out rapidly. How foolish a person would be not to be awake and alert to the limited time remaining, to the earth-shaking events soon to take place." Now……….does that article caution that 1975 is not a sure thing? Yes, but look at the rest of it. "Immediate future". "Within a few years". "Time is rapidly running out". If anything, this article heightened peoples' expectations for the end to come. You cannot write one little cautionary statement when the two paragraphs it is contained in are shrouded with hope and excitement for 1975 and then expect people to focus on the caution you gave. That is an absolute basic in persuasive writing. If their goal was to raise awareness and caution, they would have gotten an F from any writing instructor. It should also be noted that those paragraphs in the magazine appeared in columns bordering each side of a large chart of dates, beginning with the year 4026 BCE and showing that 6,000 years ends in 1975. In this context, how "cautionary" was this article after all?
Ironically, the Circuit Overseer once gave a talk on the subject of safeguarding our eyes. He gave the illustration of trying to eat healthier. If we were doing that, would we go and buy a big chocolate cake, sit it on the table and look at it? Of course not. This same illustration applies to the Society. How can they expect ones to heed their warnings of date setting when the very article the warning is contained in presents……actually encourages such a hope? That's akin to buying that cake and staring at it when you are trying to diet. Even had that entire article been cautionary, would it have mattered? Does a cautionary article cancel out the plethora of 1975 hints that came before and after it? What rational, normal person would view that article mentioned in the Proclaimers Book as having any other intent than that of exciting expectations and hopes centered on the 1975 date? To say that this article was meant to temper expectations is absurd. But that’s the point. The society doesn’t bother to put the entire article in the Proclaimers book for modern day witnesses to see. No, they cherry picked only the parts they wanted their readers to see and put those in the book instead. This is the honesty God is directing? The Proclaimers book is chock full of similar examples. It seems they’d rather that readers have an Orwellian version of organizational history than an honest one. So why? Why not give the full picture? They do tell on themselves….but they do so when convenient and in a way that masks exactly what their having been wrong actually means to their claims of divine approval.
I hope I get things figured out too. Sadly though, I get the feeling that your version of “figured out” involves falling into place, towing the organizational line and ceasing to question the organization when I see evidence of hypocrisy, lies and dishonesty. If indeed getting things “figured out for everyone’s benefit” involves the aforementioned, then I shouldn’t be surprised either. It is yet another tactic taken by high control groups. High control groups use the “our way or the highway” method. We are right….no ands, ifs or buts. And if you choose not to obey, regardless of what you’ve found out about us…..we will hold you as the one responsible for any family disharmony that ensues.
Please give my materials to your daughter the next time she is over. She can bring them home. Or I can pick them up. Either way, I’d just as soon send what you have straight to New York as opposed to wasting more paper. I hope they can give me answers, but I doubt they will. If I were a betting man, I’d say that they will simply send a letter to the local congregation telling the elders about my questions and research. I will receive nothing from them directly.
I will re-read the book of James as you suggested. You may not believe it but I am not trying to be a terd when I make the following suggestion for you. I would recommend reading “The Finished Mystery” and “Millions Now Living Will Never Die”. These are the books that Jesus himself evidently approved as “proper food at the proper time”.
Based on the fact that your reply did not answer any of my questions, is it safe to assume that they will remain unanswered?
I understand how you feel right now. I felt the same way toward my one sister and toward my brother for many years. You may wish you could take your 5 iron out and wrap it around my head. Rest assured I do not feel that way about you. In the future you may engage in the obligatory shunning of me should my questions still go unanswered from even the highest ranking Bethelites and I am disfellowshipped or disassociated. Heck, you may even shun me now because you are privy to how I really feel about this organization. I don’t know what you are going to do…..but especially as you get older, please know that I will gladly help you do anything that you physically cannot do. If that means carrying bags of salt down your basement stairs of death, shoveling snow or unloading wood…..my assistance is always available.