Jehovah`s Witness/Same Old Stuff response
QUESTION: Hi Derrick.
Glad to see you have taken DW to task. I have been looking for it since the day he alluded to you in such an unchristian manner.
The reason I am writing now, is to please correct your assertion that no JW has called them out or said something to them (i am paraphrasing, forgive me if not precisely accurate). I have written both DW and Sister T in the past on their manner and content but you can guess the response I received. Correct, I was not public about it but I felt that was the fair approach certainly initially. For personal reasons I did not make things public, but if memory serves I gave you the go ahead to mention my experience.
Like you (my impression) I am a stickler for truth especially so in a forum such as this, so just wanted to point out the above.
btw...I have been away so am only now getting to read your postings. Again, welcome back. And appreciate you pointing out that not all JWs agree with/condone their tactics
ANSWER: Good afternoon, Phillip. I hope you are having a wonderful evening, and its great to hear from you.
Yes, it was towards the end of last year, if I remember correctly, that you addressed Rando about his conduct. If I am not mistaken, I had given an answer about marriage, and you questioned him about what it was he found objectionable in the answer. And if I remember correctly, he really didn't answer your question.
So yes, you certainly have approached them about their conduct, and that is to your credit.
I guess what I am having a little difficulty with here, is that you are under the impression that I said something which would indicate that NO JWs have addressed them for their conduct. That certainly was not my intent, to give that impression, as I know that you have addressed them, Mr. Hepburn has, and a few other JWs here and there, have also done so.
The only thing is, I have gone back and re-read my response under the title "Same Old Stuff", and I honestly do not see where I implied that NO JWs have. In fact, I pointed out that some indeed, have done so. An excerpt....
"The truth is, there have been JWs who have tried to tell them. Interestingly enough, my first "welcome back" to the board after being gone for a month, came from a very nice and polite JW, who simply does not agree with the actions of the ones representing their religion in this forum. And any DECENT JW wouldn't agree with it."
The above comment was actually a reference to you, Phillip, and the fact that you did address them. Although I didn't call you by name, I knew that you would know I was referring to you, even though others reading may not know.
Also, I said, in reference to the "LOL" questioner....
"In fact, this person was actually called out a couple of times, by other JWs, about their childish behavior, and always typing "LOL" to everything."
So, even in this response, I made it clear that there have been JWs on occasion, who have tried to reason with them.
And also, I even quoted from DW, where he himself acknowledged that a "brother" had told him his manner of answering questions, was not good. I really do try to present both sides accurately.
I think perhaps the misunderstanding is coming from a statement that I made on down in that same response. This one....
"And that's another thing... You mention about how people see them. A very good point, there. WHERE are the decent JWs who read this forum, and would feel compelled to speak out against obvious lies coming from their so-called "brother"? I mean, if I did what DW did, and intentionally twisted statements into something just the opposite of what was said, the JWs would be out in droves .... "That Derrick Holland is a liar!!! He is acting just like Satan, twisting words and making up things about our beloved DW!!!! This is exactly how apostates and opposers act!!"
But funny....JWs here do it all the time, and the other JWs reading are as quiet as a turkey farm on Thanksgiving Eve."
I think possibly my reference to JWs reading and "being quiet" when they lie, is perhaps what you are referring to, and want me to clarify. And I certainly am happy to do so, as I do not want to give a false impression that NO JWs have ever done so.
In fact, Phillip, if you will give me permission to make this public, then the clarification contained here will be posted. If not, then do you want me to write something myself and post it, to this effect?
But let me say this to you. Yes, you eventually did allow me to make those previous correspondences public, from last year. But in the beginning, you addressed them privately. Don't get me wrong...I understand, and agree, with your reasons for doing so. But what I think JWs really need to consider, and this is actually what I was referring to when I talked about them "being quiet", is that when you do it in private, then nobody else sees it. Again, this is the Scriptural course to take....at first, anyway. It gives them a chance to correct their behavior on their own, without being embarrassed publicly. Again, I agree with your premise.
But Phillip, there comes a time when you have to realize that these guys are doing damage to the cause of the religion they claim they represent, and to the religion you belong to. If you try and try to address them privately, with no results, then there does come a time that you need to go public with it. Why? Because thousands of people are reading this, and being given an impression...either good or bad....about JWs. And think about the impression of JWs, that a chance reader of this board, might get. Suppose that person has no contact with JWs near him, and his only exposure to them, comes from the likes of Rando, DW, Eddie, or Sister T? What will his impression be, when he sees one of them lying and slandering, and the others encouraging and taking up for them? I mean, most people can excuse one bad apple, but it starts to look like a consensus, when numerous other Witnesses support the person in their unchristian conduct. And then they start to get the impression that this must be the way JWs are, and are taught to be. And we both know that is not the case....as far as being taught to act this way, at least.
So yes, I probably should have been more clear in my comment about JWs being "quiet" when another JW is lying. Again, there have been SOME (you included), who have made an attempt to address it. But please understand, Phillip....In comparison to the JWs who either remain silent and look the other way, or even outright come out in their defense, the number who have taken a stand against their conduct, is quite small. In fact, I could count them on one hand. And that is sad to say. And when the only JWs who ARE addressing them, are doing it mostly in private, then it does give the impression to the reading audience that JWs are okay with the conduct of these individuals. Do you see where I am coming from? Readers cannot see what you send in private....but they do read the support from others, that posts in public.
So yes, I will be more than happy to offer any clarification you wish for me to. Do I have your permission to make this public? Or, at least, allow me to make it clear that I heard in private from a JW, who wants it made clear that not all JWs condone these guys....If you had rather me write something myself, I can do that.
But again, the point of my comment, was mainly what we SEE in the public forum. I did not say, nor imply, that NO JW has ever called them out. But again, most of that has been done out of the public view. And it has basically fallen on deaf ears, sad to say. Very little by way of open rebuke, has happened from the JW side. DW can post his constant lies and misquotes, and so can Rando, and then we will often see something from Sister T or Eddie, encouraging them in this. Its really a bad impression being given to the readers, because that is about all they actually see. . And I know if it were me, and if someone claiming to represent my beliefs was acting like they do, I would first address that person in private. And if that didn't work, then I would make a public statement, that this is not how Christians are supposed to act. That's just me, anyway.
Phillip, I do thank you for the stand you have taken. And also for your kind and polite writings to me. You have never disrespected me in any way, and I appreciate that. So, how do you want me to proceed?
Thanks for writing, and take care.
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
QUESTION: Hi Derek.
Thanks for your quick response and willingness to identify and if necessary correct any misunderstanding. You are indeed correct that that was what I was referring to. In hindsight I was a bit hasty in wording. Suspect I took quickly took away a meaning that wasn't there especially given context of whole post.
Your recollection is excellent and I may be mixing up DW and Rando.
I totally agree regarding private versus public and intend to be more public. This is something I had decided before now and consequently my "at the time" reference. By all means, you have my permission to make this public. If appropriate please adjust my error re DW vs Rando.
Thank you, Phillip. I have made this correspondence public, per your permission to do so.
I am happy to make clear that not all JWs are like the group that we see in this forum, who not only are capable of printing known falsehoods about others, but also will support each other in this regard. In fact, not all of the JWs in this forum, are like this either. I am sure many JWs who read this board, are appalled, as well. Most sensible people, JW or not, know it is wrong to willfully lie and distort the words of another person, so as to give those words a different meaning than what was intended. This is certainly not what a God of truth, would require of His servants.
And I also want to make it clear that there have been some JWs, including the man who wrote me here, that have tried to approach and reason with these people. Most of this has been done in Private, however, which is the Scriptural way to attempt to do it.....at first. But sadly, most of what is seen in public, is support from other JWs, to the ones doing the lying and distorting. This can give a misleading impression to a reader who may know nothing of this religion, and their only impression of it, could be what they see here. I too, would prefer that a person examine a religion, any religion, based on its own teachings as compared with the Scriptures, rather than by the deplorable conduct of a few members.
And my previous comments about JWs being "quiet", were mainly intended to address what we see in public, and not to deny that there have been some JWs here and there, who have stepped up and tried to address their fellow JWs in private.
I hope this helps, and am happy to clear up any misunderstanding.