Hi all, I am meeting up with my father in a couple of weeks(all that know me know i havent seen him for three months or spoken to him) anyway he called up the other night to finally see how I was and he kept saying so you do you think you will come back to the truth.Anyway i want to confront him bout the whole organization being involved in the UN but i want to make sure i have all the info on it and know everything there is to know bout it so I can get my point across. Can anyone help me as i know they are involved but not to what extent, thanks. es
HELP ME
by Es 12 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
blondie
Do you think he is ready to listen? I heard some things about the WTS about 10 years ago, knew they were true, but wasn't ready to act.
Has he ever expressed some doubts about anything, the actions of some he respected, some unloving directives from the CO that he ignored, etc., etc.
I was told about the Mexico/Malawi situation but there was nothing in the WTS publications to back it up. But I did notice that the explanation of the 2300 days in the Bible changed dramatically over time in the WTS publications. When I started reading the Studies in the Scriptures and saw what strange ideas they had back then; then on to Rutherford's books. Another inch down on my barrier. Then the child abuse situation; that I could relate to since I had actually personal experiences.
No matter how accurately or effectively you explain; they have to be ready to absorb it and act on it. They have to have seen it themselves in their own lives or the lives of those close to them.
Only you know your father, Es, what his chinks might be.
Love, Blondie
-
Es
Heya Blondie Dad's the kind of guy that wont openly admit if he disagrees with anything in the truth. I have overheard him tho that there are times when its been hard for him to go on....even if its not for him i want to use the info just so he knows one of the reasons i could never go back simply coz of the lies that are constantly being told. My father will never leave the truth he is a real follower im sure whatever the governing body would say he would follow without questioning it. es
-
The Lone Ranger
Hi ES. I was once a JW who made the truth his own. And re: the UN thing, althought it shocked me when I first read about it on this forum, I don't think it would've convinced me when I was a die-hard JW, I beleived in the WTS so much that any excuse they gave would've convinced me. What really did it for me was when I read about Charles Russel getting 1914 from the pyramids, 1914 is the basis of ALL JW theology, maybe try that angle as well.
-
Black Sheep
You can talk all you like, but it is very difficult to get through the barrier.
Don't attack him. If he brings it up you could try this.
If you have old literature (or a WTCD, literature would be best) you could ask if if the book you are holding is written under spirit guidence and when he agrees ask him to read a passage from it where they have made asses of themselves. You don't need to make much comment at all, and I would try not to. Let the literature do the job for you.
Book "Holy Spirit" 1976 Ch 2, Par 37
37
Taking the lead in rendering such unswerving service and worship to God is Jehovah?s "firstborn," "his only-begotten Son." This one was once willing to serve as a sacrificial Lamb here on earth. No less so than we Christians, the faithful heavenly throngs appreciate such self-sacrifice. In confirmation of this, the apostle John is given a vision of the heavenly scene that now finds fulfillment in our twentieth century, as follows:"And I saw, and I heard a voice of many angels around the throne and the living creatures and the elders, and the number of them was myriads of myriads and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice: ?The Lamb that was slaughtered is worthy to receive the power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing.? And every creature that is in heaven and on earth and underneath the earth and on the sea, and all the things in them, I heard saying: ?To the One sitting on the throne and to the Lamb be the blessing and the honor and the glory and the might forever and ever.? And the four living creatures went saying: ?Amen!? and the elders fell down and worshiped."?Revelation 5:11-14.
Was that fulfilled last century?
Ch 4, par 18
18
Those verses from Isaiah?s prophecy point back to when Moses? people were delivered from their enslavement to the ancient Egyptians. There, in the spring of the year 1513 B.C.E., God made an imperishable name for himself, a name of matchless beauty. But now, too, in our twentieth century, the time has come for this same God to make a ?beautiful name for his own self.? On a vastly grander scale he will perform a deliverance resembling what he performed at the Red Sea. Happy will all persons be to whom God?s name Jehovah will then become "beautiful."Question for 18: Similarly, how is the same God about to make a "beautiful name" for himself in our twentieth century?
Was that fulfilled last century?
There are plenty more in this vein around 1975 and some are even better, I was searching WTCD "this century" "All Words" "Sentence Scope". The problem is getting your hands on the books. Your father may well have them at home. Only give him printouts or show him a computer as a very last resort.
Maybe you could just find the relevent info and give him a list of things to read from his library at home, explaining that he may find the answer to his question "will you come back?" in the literature, meanwhile, how about just being a good father to me, and I'll be a good daughter to you and we will get on with enjoying each others company.
Cheers
Chris
-
Narkissos
Hi Es,
About the UN-thing the best evidence imo is the official UN letters acknowledging the status of the WTBTS and the general requirements for affiliation, which can be found online (and probably in several threads here).
But I agree with other posters that this is unlikely to convince your father.
A few months before I was df'd I visited my father. We had very nice conversations -- probably the best we ever had -- in which he freely admitted to some doubts about the WT (I remember him saying, "with the Society ten repetitions are worth one piece of evidence"). I didn't push on WT-bashing, rather tried to share positively my own approach which was quite different -- I was reading the New Testament again in a WT-free way. I don't know how far he understood me but he was happy with that. Even my hardline JW stepmother later dropped me a line saying how my visit was a "spiritual blessing" and how I gave off "the sweet odor of Christ" (no kidding).
When I was eventually df'd, this changed completely and he became very defensive. No admission of doubt ever. We had some nice discussions though in the next few years, in the rare occasions when we were alone. Then I didn't get into religious subjects, but he did (breaking the rules) because he was curious.
I wish you (and him) the best.
-
JW83
Hi Es, good luck with your dad. I would push the family angle more than anything - love, love, love! That's what worked with my folks, eventually. The other stuff is just head stuff - you have to get the heart first.
-
New Worldly Translation
I'm thinking of doing something similar with my parents. What I'm going to do is write down a lot of the JW's main doctrines (paradise earth, 144.000, 1914 and other dates etc) and write down all the info I can about them. Also answers to any rebuttals that my parents might bring up. Some of the scriptural ones are -
Ephesians 4:4 - There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called? One Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
Why would the name God gave to His people not be "Christians" since Acts 11:26 says, "The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch"? Why is the name "Jehovah's Witness" found nowhere in the New Testament, if that is God's divine name for His people under the new covenant? Why would God wait almost 2000 years to suddenly start using the name "Jehovah's Witness". Does this mean that first century Christians were not known as Jehovah's Witnesses"?
Since the Jehovah's Witness organization currently rejects most of the teachings of its founder Charles Taze Russell, and since they also reject "Judge" Rutherford's teachings, how can we be sure that in 25 more years, Jehovah's Witnesses won't also reject the current president, Milton G. Henschel, as they did Russell and Rutherford?
The NWT translates the Greek word "kyrios" as "Jehovah" more than 25 times in the New Testament (Mt 3:3, Lk 2:9, Jn 1:23, Acts 21:14, Rom 12:19, Col 1:10, 1Thess 5:2, 1Pet 1:25, Rev 4:8, etc.). Why is the word "Jehovah" translated when it does not appear in the Greek text? Why is the NWT not consistent in translating kyrios (kurion) as "Jehovah" in Rom 10:9, 1Cor 12:3, Phil 2:11, 2Thess 2:1, and Rev 22:21
The Watchtower Society teaches that the 144,000 of Rev 7:4 is to be taken literally. If chapter 7 of Revelation is to be taken literally, where then does the Bible say that the 144,000 will come from? (See Rev 7:5- 8).
If Jesus was executed on a torture stake, with both hands together over his head, why does Jn 20:25 say "...Unless I see in his hands the print of the nailS ...", indicating that there was more than one nail used for his hands?
Jesus uses the phrase "Truly I say to you, ..." over 50 times in the Bible. In the NWT, the comma is placed after the word "you" every time except in Lk 23:43, where the comma is placed after the word "today". Why is the comma placed after "today" instead of after "you" in this verse? If the translation of this phrase in Lk 23:43 was consistent with the translation of this phrase in all the other verses in which it appears, and the comma was placed after the word "you", how would it read?
In Rev 19:1, where does it say that the "great crowd" will be?
In Col 1:15-17, the NWT inserts the word "other" 4 times even though it is not in the original Greek (see Gr-Engl interlinear). Why is the word "other" inserted? How would these verses read if the word "other" had not been inserted?
If Jesus was executed on a torture stake, with both hands together over his head, instead of on a cross with both hands outstretched, why does Mt 27:37 say that the sign "This is Jesus the King of the Jews" was "posted above his HEAD" instead of being posted above his hands? How could it have been posted above his head if his arms were stretched out over his head?
Heb 11:16, in speaking about some of the faithful people of the Old Testament (Abel, Noah, Abraham, etc.) says, "But now they are reaching out for a better [place], that is, one belonging to heaven..." and, "... their God for he has made a city ready for them." The footnote on the word "city" refers to HEAVENLY Jerusalem of Heb 12:22 and Rev 21:2. How can this be since according to the teachings of the Watchtower Society, the only people who will go to heaven are the 144,000 spirit anointed who have been chosen from people who lived after Christ died?
Where does it state in the bible that the door to heaven shut in 1935?
Where does it mention in the bible anything about a great crowd living on a paradise earth?
Name one thing that the WTS has said would happen that has actually occurred (if 1914 is mentioned say that the bible students expected armageddon to happen and them all to be whisked to heaven in that year)
If they are always wrong and not inspired by God and their doctrines are unscriptural, why should we believe them?
I'm still working on stuff and possible questions that might be raised. I figure it's best to be prepared and play them at their own game with the bible. The ultimate would be if they read CofC & ISOCF. They are not even 'apostate' literature by the WTS own terms. Ray Franz says in the book that he's not trying to turn people away from the WTS or feed them his own personal doctrine. It's just his journey through the org and his experiences in it - people can judge for themselves what to do with that info.
Personally I don't think my parents will take everything onboard and quit but at least I can say I told them the WTS is bunk.
All the best, I hope the chat with your dad goes well.
-
-
jgnat
I agree with others that this is unlikely to be a conversion meeting. I think the best you can hope for is to re-establish communication and lay a foundation for future conversations.
How about telling him that though you miss him deeply, you are utterly convinced, from the things you learned, that you can never go back. If you like, you can get him to switch his language/thinking a bit. For instance, ask him not to call it the "Truth". If he asks why, tell him you are not ready to go in to it right away, but would rather concentrate on him and how he's doing.
Irreverent, Blondie's husband, used a similar approach with my hubby. My hubby cannot conceive why anybody would want to leave the most perfect organization on earth. When my JW hubby asked him why he was no longer in the "Truth", Irreverent simply replied, "I'd rather not get in to it, I don't want to stumble you."
What Irreverent did with his kind reply was leave the door open. He also inserted a big question mark in my hubby's head that he can't remove.