Sorry Elsewhere for busting in on your thread. I just wanted to say........................(((((((((((((((((((((Flower))))))))))))))))))))) You sure have come a long way. Good for you!
I got an answer from my dad
by Elsewhere 35 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
MegaDude
I say hold your own disfellowshipping committee meeting and disfellowship those JW cultic relatives out of your life. It sounds like you've reached that conclusion.
In time you will look back and realize that letting them go was a major turning point in your life working out better. It's hard at first but definitely more peaceful than tormenting yourself trying to get them out of the JWs and back into your life.
"If they're worth feeling bad about, they're worthy of amnesia."
-
Solace
(((((((((David)))))))))
Im so sorry hun. I hope you are ok.
I agree with the others, you have planted a seed of doubt in their minds.
Its just so wrong, I only hope someday they can see how much they have hurt you.
-
ugg
else where....sending lots of hugs.....please know you are being thought about... that is just so sad....
-
MegaDude
I like what Gary Buss said above:
These are fragile people and their delusions can never be confronted. It is upsetting to them to even have their delusions discussed. Usually when that happens, rapport is lost and contact is lost. On some level they know they are delusions but they need them and they will fight to the end or run away to protect them.
---------------------------------
I came across a quote from a book called "The Myth of Certainty" the other day, which I was reminded of when I saw Gary's post.
"When people defend their world view, they are not defending reason, or God, or an abstract system; they are defending their own fragile sense of security and self-respect. It is as instinctive as defending one's body from attack. No one understood the psychology of this better than Kierkegaard. He recognized how subtly intertwined are our beliefs with our instinct for self-preservation, and counseled the greatest sensitivity for those who seek to lead someone from error into truth: "First and foremost, no impatience....A direct attack only strengthens a person in his illusion, and at the same time embitters him. There is nothing that requires such gentle handling as an illusion, if one wishes to dispel it. If anything prompts the prospective captive to set his will in opposition, all is lost....The indirect method....loving and serving the truth, arranges everything...., and then shyly withdraws so as not to witness the admission which he makes to himself alone before God--that he has lived hitherto in an illusion."
Only those with the greatest confidence in the truth they hold can risk the above approach. The less secure must annihilate the opposition.
Edited by - megadude on 28 December 2002 12:41:36
-
Elsewhere
Mega,
What you say rings of truth... I can look back on my life and see how I have changed over the years. I too once firmly stood my ground on what I believed and did not believe. Any time I would hear an opposing idea I would go on the attack.
I have learned that it is better to simply put my thoughts on the table and allow people to critique them. Allowing people to give their input and make constructive criticism on my ideas, while putting my pride to the side, has allowed me to grow enormously.