email from father in law (page 3)

besty

" 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."

Your response:

"I completely agree that you and I make assumptions - no way are either of us neo-Babylonian archaeology and history experts. For me it comes down to probabilities. Who is most probably right? Doctrinally unmotivated researchers who are scrutinised for error by their fellows OR unnaccountable religious organisations with a clear vested interested in promoting a particular date?

Therefore I would disagree that 'both sides make assumptions to get to where they end up.' That's not how historical research works.

Logically I must assume the secular experts are correct unless - UNLESS - someone else presents overwhelming evidence that has been missed or misinterpreted by subject matter experts and publishes their findings for common review. So far the Watchtower Society has failed to publish their findings in any of the accepted journals for review. What they have done is published a king list with dates for each of their times in power - I'd be happy to consider this information from the Watchtower with you if you are open to that?"

And then leave it with him to come back to you from there.....

Just my 0.02

Fernando

Hey outsmartthesystem!

Some impressions formed on the fly:

His letter does not seem too bad.

You letter seems long, and I doubt he'll understand or get the opportunity to make up his own mind.

Many have observed that questions are generally better.

For example:

Does the lliterature of the time support the claim that Charles Taze Russell knew that Jesus had started ruling in 1914?

BluesBrother

The reply from F in Law reads so much like the stuff I hear all the time from family. My mind soured, thinking the worst of the Bros,led astray by people on the net. I must have an ulterior motive ....etc etc. Do they learn this stuff at Service Meetings?

Your reply was really balanced and kind, not at all the "rabid apostate" that they claim us to be...Well done.

braincleaned

WAAAAAY too long! He will roll his eyes at it, and at this point will probably ignore it.
However there is a FANTASTIC phrase you wrote:

"I wanted truth. Not a new way of ignoring evidence."
Wow! THat packs a punch!!! Brilliant. I'll use that!

Go back, edit your letter to the barebone intent. Believe me... don't send it yet.

respectful_observer

If he's encouraging you to read the James, you could always tell him that you did and that you also read it alongside the WTS-published "Commentary on the Letter of James" (written by Ray Franz edit: Ed Dunlap if the rumors are true I think), and that you found both the bible verses and the Commentary very refreshing and reassuring of your beliefs.

I'm not sure what he could say against that approach. If he points out the authorship of the book, you could ask why God would allow it to be written, reviewed, and published as "truth". If he doesn't, you could ask him that question afterward.

J. Hofer

*thumbs up*

one suggestion though: i wouldn't spend too many words on defending ray franz, wouldn't mention him at all really, he's got nothing to do with 607 and it's easy to get side tracked.

Quendi

bookmarked

outsmartthesystem

"It's so irritating how he keeps referring to JW's as "Jehovah's Organization" as if it's a proven fact that they are in fact directly organized by him."

I know! Trust me....it was everything I could do to keep that emotion in check

outsmartthesystem

Doc - The shit has already hit the fan. At this point I am waiting for the rebound

outsmartthesystem

"Have you just tried telling him you love him and he is important to you, but you can't belong to an organization that is clearly not what it claims to be and bullies and intimidates anyone that disagrees with it."

I've not told him I love him, because I really can't say that I do. I tried the emotional approach (saying that I cannot with a good conscience go on with something that I don't trust). That invoked a "what don't you trust?" Then regardless of what you provide (whether it is doctrinal....or a written contradiction.....or cult-type behavior) he meets it with "how dare you say ______ about Jehovah's organization

email from father in law

Share this