When I left the JWs one of the first things I was told was that I was too prideful not to listen and trust the FDS anymore. Were you told that?
This really is a logical fallacy called arumentum ad hominem, literally Latin for “argument to the man.” It involves responding to an assertion by attacking the individual making the argument rather than responding to the argument itself.
At any rate, responding to an ad hominem attack can be a slippery slope but I'd like to respond with a few questions.
Which is more prideful: To find out what you do or believe is wrong and change it? Or to feel that what you believe cant be wrong and not even look at the other side of the story?
Is it more prideful to say as one of the Governing Body, or congregation elders, one cannot be challenged. Or to say that we are all valid and intelligent enough to understand the bible and how to live a righteous life?
I have “The Truth”©®. Or: Maybe I don't have the truth. Or better yet, Can we ever really presume to have Truth?
Peace!
MF