Follow-up to my letter to my JW brother

by Roger Kirkpatrick 5 Replies latest jw experiences

  • Roger Kirkpatrick
    Roger Kirkpatrick

    A follow-up to my letter to my brother which I posted earlier:

    My brother, Ronnie, had texted my sister, Linda, and me regarding our late mother's estate. Linda engaged Ronnie in a text conversation about our mother’s ashes because he has ignored her texts for several years. His response to her last text was so arrogant that I couldn't resist the urge to respond:

    LINDA: I love you, Ronnie. Whatever you do with Mama is fine with me. I am just a curious sort. Will you still keep in touch with me now? I wonder about that as well. I haven’t heard anything about Larry since I was there 5 years ago. Or you either, practically.

    RONNIE: I have no problem keeping in touch, but we have little in common. Our lives are centered around the truth.

    ROGER: I think what you meant to say is that your lives are centered around what the Watchtower calls “present truth.” The Watchtower’s “present truth” is ever changing, ever shifting, like sand. It must change because it cannot stand the test of time. For example, we were told in 1969 that we would never grow old in this system of things. We were also told repeatedly that the end of this system would come within the 20th century. It’s all in print. You cannot name one Watchtower prophecy that ever came true. Not one. Strange for an organization which claimed IN PRINT to be God’s prophet, don’t you think?

  • steve2

    Just out of curiosity: Is it clear to your brother that you are airing private exchanges with family names on a public forum?

    JW or not, I'd be mortified if I was exchanging texts between family members in private and they were posting them on a public forum.

    In my view, and with due respect - at very least, names should be changed.

  • scratchme1010

    I respectfully disagree, steve2. Actually, not completely. I acknowledge what you state, but to me, I think Roger Kirkpatrick's feelings are more important than what you pointed in your reply. The privacy of names, I think, should be left up to the poster. Some may disagree with that, but I also want to point that we are all responsible for what we post and how we post.

    The conversation doesn't seem too intimate to me.

    Roger Kirkpatrick, I wonder if there was a response to your text. It's difficult to deal with family, but I am glad that you had the opportunity of letting your sibling know where you are standing.

  • steve2

    Actually scratchme1010, most forums have rules over confidentiality and the use of privately identified material involving named individuals.

    In another post by Roger, Simon queried him about whether the names he used were real and Roger replied they weren't. If it were left to people's own judgements, anyone could write slanderously about anyone.

    There is a huge moral and ethical difference between naming names and simply anonymously recounting what you've been through.

  • ToesUp

    Unfortunately, you will never change some of these people. They will never see things YOUR way . We have tried this with some family members. You will always be the bad guy. We don't even try with our families anymore. We figure, if people don't want to be a part of our family, that is their loss. Good riddance to em.

  • smiddy

    So if roger is not using real names including his own or his family members there is no problem and I hope that is the case.

Share this