Heaven, I've heard Steve Hassan's book, seems to get quite a few mentions on here - it's been on my radar for a little while. I know it reccommends not getting into a debate with a cult member but rather dropping subtle comments now and again to get them to think for themselves. If you criticise the cult at all they put up their defences.
One point I have pushed my dad on, and not let him side-step, was the definition of 'yohm' in Genesis. My question was 'What context of 'yohm' in Genesis requires that is cross referenced with a figurative meaning rather than literal meaning (its primary useage).
I even wrote the question down on papaer because the next day he just gave me a Watchtower magazine that loosely covered
the subject but did not actually answer my question. I am fairly sure that the cross references they use are arbritrary and if so he will not be able to find me an answer. I think his answer may be that the men in Brooklyn are 'spirit guided' he intimated as much before but I think he knows
that is a weak answer because he seemed reluctant to come out and say it.
If he is unable to find an answer and discovers for himself that the cross references are arbritrary will this make him see a major flaw in Watchtower's methodology?
I know should be able to just accept that it's his religion and let him get on with it but it has done real damage to the family and to be honest, since he's become an 'Elder', I have been uncomfortable with the fact that he takes part in practices I deeply disagree with (Judicial Committees etc)
I think sometimes I'm the one with the problem then, at a funeral a couple of weeks ago he tells me loudly (so others could hear) that the priest was wrong and 'taking scripture' out of context - then I think, nah he's the one with the problem.
hmmm, Daddy issues. :)