Feedback please - letter from Mom

Bubbamar

I just got a surprisingly nice letter back from my mom. In my last letter to her I made a comment that a 10 year old in 1914 would be 100 now and that she must think the end is very near (that was the current light when I got DF'ed.) I did that on purpose to get her to tell me about the 1995 doctrine change. Well, interestingly, she didn't even address it!! I can't even believe it. I thought she would be all over it! What do you guys think that means?? Could she be embarrassed? Or is she hoping that I am looking for the big A and wants me to believe its still due any day?

I also asked her about her reasons for still shunning me and told her that I know of other families that do not shun their family members as harshly as she does me and asked if she felt that contact with me could somehow taint her. She said that some people stretch the DF doctrine as far as they can but that the bible and WT are very clear about it. She said that it's only discipline but can lead to everlasting destruction.

Is that true?? I thought it was also to keep the congregation clean. If its discipline then that's even sicker than I thought. I've been disciplined for 18 years for Christ sake!! Enough is enough isn't it. Well, I guess for a JW enough is never enough.

It was interesting that she sounded relatively sane and nice in this letter and the last one was cold, mean and crazy...telling me not to push her for more, etc--very JW. She even sent a little gift this time - a Time booklet of things that happened in 1967 - my birth year.

Anyway, any guesses about her avoidance of the 1914 issue? or thoughts on her explanation of the DF doctrine?

iiz2cool

She may not have even noticed the change in the "generation" doctrine. They get new light? so often that many seem to have grown immune to it. I remember a number of times when people got up to give talks on the school, and made statements that were clearly "old light" but they were never corrected by anyone.

As for who receives "everlasting destruction", I don't think it's the society's or congregation's place to decide that.

Walter

Netty

Also, as far as the new light thing, they introduce it ever so sublty so that people dont catch on to their false prophecies. She may have read the article, and been at meetings where (IF) it was discussed, and never noticed because of the crafty deceitful way it is all written.

Farkel

bubbamar,

As Ray Franz stated, "they are victims of victims." The DFing mindset is so firmly entrenched in their culture, they think it is a natural thing to do and cannot see that such a practice is the antithesis of what is natural between family members.

Farkel

kls

Your mothers shunning is her lose. She probably did not address it because she may figure why bother ,you are already lost. To her this may just be an Apostate trying to fight doctrine with her and she does not want to deal with it. I mean no offense so please do not take it as such but people shunning they're own loved ones for some stupid man made BS ,well they just really piss me off. I do feel the hurt as much as i can and it just tears me up . These idiots should see what it is really like to not have a family

TD

JW's are among the shallowest thinkers I have ever met. Most can't identify the specific problem with the 1995 enlightenment, but many seem to unconsciously realize that something is not quite right.

The "old understanding" may have been wrong, but it at least made sense and consequently JW's were very comfortable with it. You could easily define your terms, plug your definitions into the scripture and have a meaningful statement.

For example, if:

"This generation" = "Those who see the commencement of the sign."
"Pass away" = "Die of old age"
"All these things" = "The entire sign including the End"

Plug these in and you get:

Truly I tell you, "Those who see the commencement of the sign" will not "Die of old age" until "The entire sign including the End" occurs.

However, if:

"This generation" = "Those who take no note of the sign."
"Pass away" = "Be destroyed at the End"
"All these things" = "The entire sign including the End"

You get:

Truly I tell you, "Those who take no note of the sign" will not "Be destroyed at the End" until "The entire sign including the End" occurs.

The temporal preposition, "until" is linking two events that overlap in time. This violation of prepositional logic reduces the whole scripture to meaningless tautology.

Golf

TD, I like your comment, "JW's are among the shallowest thinkers I have ever met." Hmmm, that is potent!

Guest 77