by Hobo Ken 116 Replies latest jw friends
I think his wife was in our congregation for a while before she married, and my dad says she was pretty. That was probably before I was born. I shouldn't mention that.
That's cool I know who it is now. I will listen with renewed interest. I don't know if I have the gumption to mention I have heard his infamous podcasts if I see him again though.
Slimboy -- That's interesting. Ron and his wife sound of the same caliber as their relatives. They have a similar effect on cong. They are both very motivated and have just come back from Madagascar, where his daughter and her husband have been for the last couple of years preaching. They were used for the "local needs" item at Thurs. nights meeting to discuss their time there and their experiences. This was in order to fire up the cong. with renewed zeal and enthusiasm for the ministry. Ron is aware that the podcasts are up on the net. It would be funny if you did get to talk to him about them and question some of things he said........while recording it of course. He could have his own series...lol.
Do you think Ron Hunter now realises the Witnesses might not have the truth? Do you think he might leave? I would have thought at his age and with all the time and effort he has invested in the Witnesses that leaving would be very difficult. Plus there is his marriage to think about. Isn't it a bit cruel to try to rob people like that of their JW beliefs? Younger people like ourselves are in a different position because we potentially have more time to carve out a different path for ourselves. And isn't he more likely just going to be upset or angry when he finds his conversations were recorded and posted on the Internet?
Slimboyfat ----- Well, this is what he said to the whole congregation on Thurs. night.
He then went on to relate an experience of a brother talking to someone in the ministry and related how the man said, "You people think you're always right". The brother responded by saying to him, "Do you not think that you're right?" He went on about how good an answer this was and then said, " You know brothers, do you know that that man was wrong in saying that. He was wrong to say that we think we're right." Do you know why he was wrong? Because JWs don't THINK they're right....we KNOW we're right !"
At this point in time, it doesn't seem likely that he will leave........but then, who knows? Most of us here never thought we would become the people we were warned about. I don't think it's 'cruel', as you say, to rob people of their beliefs. I would also need to challenge you on the fact of them being 'robbed'. When you truly see something for what it is, warts and all, then you either choose to hang on to it regardless or let go of it. It always comes down to CHOICE. No-one can truly take something away from you unless you're prepared to let go of it yourself. All JWs proclaim to be "Lovers of Truth" so they should be willing to embrace it when it's shown to them. The trouble with someone like Ron and many other JWs, is down to what they are 'convinced' is the truth. You can see that with what he stated to the cong. on Thurs...."WE KNOW WE'RE RIGHT!"
Ron wasn't willing to take on board anything we put to him, even if it had scriptures attatched to it or we had some other means of concrete evidence to support what we were saying. If The Org. says something on a certain manner or teaching, then people like Ron will never deviate from that out of loyalty to the GB ,......even if they're wrong.
JWs also make it a career to "rob" people of their closely held beliefs, by means of their ministry, regardless of how long that particular person has been involved in their religion. They view it as such that they are 'saving' the person and showing them the 'truth'. But sadly, when staunch JWs are shown the "truth", they run a mile from it.
Also, would it not be more cruel if Ron and wife had to live the rest of their lives devoted to a publishing corporation with no real freedom and no real hold on life? How sad would that be ? He probably is upset and angry at Matt putting recordings up on line, but it doesn't come anywhere near the upset he's caused us or our children. Only time will tell what will happen......but in spite of everything, I would love to see him and Sue come out.
Like the saying goes "Better late than never"
might add years to their lives really once the scales are removed.
Jws have no problem telling little kids that there is no santa claus. SAME THING!
Can't wait to hear the rest.
wp
How come you are still listening to the meetings? Just out of interest? I do that too sometimes.
I think some older Witnesses are at something approaching a point of no return. There is no way for some people to extricate themselves from the Witnesses and not come out of it worse. Many people such as yourselves can build a new life, and even have a helpful narrative for it to make sense in the form of your new faith, but that won't work for everyone. It is all fine and well to say that people have a choice what they do with information, but I still think there is a valid analogy to 'robbing' someone of their hope if you expose closely held beliefs. Imagine an elderly widow for example who relates the life she spent with her adoring husband. Imagine you stumble on some of his love letters to another woman. If you tell the widow what you found, assuming she does not already know about it, then I would also argue their is something involuntary about how she has to react to that information too, even if in another sense she still has freedom to choose how to react. You make a good point:
JWs also make it a career to "rob" people of their closely held beliefs, by means of their ministry, regardless of how long that particular person has been involved in their religion.
Yes I know and what I am saying is that it might be a bad idea to copy their example. I have thought about this a lot and it is one of the things that makes me wonder whether it's best just to leave many Witnesses to their beliefs - unless they are already on the way out and looking for outside contact. I remember being on the ministry and visibly upsetting older churchgoers by showing them scriptures that contradicted their beliefs. These people often were very unlikely ever to become Witnesses yet they could be distressed by thoughtless Witnesses who believed everyone should be told the "truth" regardless of the consequences. You should be careful about justifying actions on the basis of 'we are only doing what the Witnesses themselves do'. Isn't the point of rejecting the Witnesses' worldview precisely that we don't enjoy their way of doing things any more?
I think it would be fantastic if Ron Hunter left the Witnesses too. It would be amazing, and I hope their relatives that I know might do the same. But I really can't see it happening. These people have so much invested in being Witnesses that it really seems like an intolerable request that they give up that hope for something as vain as what we now call the "truth" about the organization.
I am also a bit curious: what's the legal position on taping someone without their knowledge and putting it on the Web? On the one hand I find it interesting, but I wouldn't like it done to me.
This is how I see it.
When persons are in great danger from a source that they do not suspect or are being misled by those they consider their friends, is it an unkindness to warn them? They may prefer not to believe the warning. They may even resent it. But does that free one from the moral responsibility to give that warning? WT 74 15/1 pg 35.
I haven't listened to the podcast yet but hope to this evening. I don't think its legal to broadcast a private meeting but then it doesn't look likely that anyone is going to press charges.
I think its much harder to challenge and confront people when you know them unless they are challenging you. Judicial committees seem to bring out the bully in elders.
@ slimboyfat "Isn't it a bit cruel to try to rob people like that of their JW beliefs?"
Isn't it a bit cruel to disfellowship people and have a policy of shunning against such ones just because they don't believe absolutely-to-the-letter the same (fluctuation and changing) doctrines that come from the Governing Body?
Jehovah's Witnesses are in existence for the sole purpose of (trying) to change other peoples' beliefs.
@ boyzone, well said.
@ quietlyleaving - the BoE in question with regards to these recordings investigated the issue and decided not to pursue the matter. The publicity which was certainly erupt around any legal action on their part would be the exact opposite of what they'd want to achieve.
It's worth noting too that nowhere in the recordings are any of the individuals other that Hobo and Iknowall explicitly identified.
