by kairos 19 Replies latest jw friends
That's a crazy question.
They really mean, "Do you regret your decesion to leave".
---
It's just an ice breaker to become nosy into one's personal life.
---
BTW, last time I was asked this, no, everytime I'm asked this I reply with: "I'm NEVER coming back".
They seem to hear that.
I guess ,depending on who asks this, I wouldn't dignify the inquirer with an answer. Jesus failed to reply to Pilate's question: he was aware that Pilate was already predisposed to a certain conclusion. Who asked this?
I have occasionally in moments of deep darkness considered going to the occasional meeting
and just pretend to be on the path to redemption.
But then I bitch-slap myself sensible and think, naah, no way.
I just reply, "That would be like a dog returning to its vomit. Ugh.'
Turnabout is fair play. *shrugs*
Wise reply blackfalcon! Very mature observation.
I reply : "I cannot come "back", the religion I left a few years ago no longer exists, if you want me to join, you must convince me that you teach the truth".
Three different Elders have had this said to them, so far none have taken up the challenge, I wonder why ?
So, are you thinking of coming back?
"Yes, sometimes it happens... But, my conclusion is unalterable and unchangeable : I'll come back, only the day that the WTBTS will look like a org really looking for the truth"
"What do you mean? We haven't left! We're simply waiting on Jehovah to straighten a few things out!"
[and waiting, and waiting, and waiting]
Doc
My reply would be: "Yes, I may consider coming back; but only when and if the Watchtower has given me convincing enough evidence that they're being driven by God and Jesus. Until then, I'm not partaking on it".
If you have become an atheist in the meantime, the Watchtower will never give convincing evidence of being directed by God because you don't believe God exists to start with.
It's best that you keep within your control what "evidence" you're willing to accept as "convincing". The less you disclose about what that "evidence" might be, the less you're opening to become bound to any pre-condition you may set up. For example: "If the organization abandons the absurd 1914 teaching, I might consider going back". The result is that, if they drop it, you'll be called upon your words to go back, despite you may still feel utterly uncomfortable with it. Best policy is to keep it to yourself. For example, claim that such "evidence" is between you and God only and nobody is entitled to be informed of it. God knows and nobody else is entitled to know. Then you keep your cards all to yourself and you stay in control.
If they argue: "You should come anyway and wait on Jehovah to change things if he sees fit, because at least you'll be spiritually protected" You might reply: "I have done that for a considerable time and I didn't see anything happening that can't be explained by imperfect human steering and decision-making, without any godly direction implicated. It was the current status quo that caused me to be spiritually damaged. So, until I see unequivocal evidence of a clear direction by God's spirit, I don't see why I should change my decision to stay away". Or: "Jehovah doesn't need me to go back in order that he enforces any changes, right? So, if and when those changes are made, I'll re-evaluate again my decision to stay away".
Eden
Only when they threaten to use my dedication as a legally binding contract and get a court order, or threat thereof, that I will have to take Seroquel unless I go back and do as they say. Once I get one of those dangerous drugs, however, all bets are off because they are intended to tamper with your soul.
