Concluding Remarks About the Letters
The first letter I received from the Watchtower Society was an immediate disappointment. The Watchtower Society’s response about the animals on the ark was a mere two sentences long. In those two sentences, they simply directed me to an attached Watchtower article (they even got this wrong – the attached article was from the Awake! magazine, not the Watchtower). The disappointment was that I had already seen and read the article they attached. As I said in the introduction, I had already read everything the Society wrote about the Flood prior to writing to them; I would not have written to them otherwise.
The attached article (which can be viewed here) offered only one source: Clarke’s Commentary. Though most libraries in my area did not carry that book, I was able to find a copy. Upon obtaining a copy, I immediately knew why most libraries didn’t bother to carry it – it was published in 1810. I found the page which the Society had referenced and was saddened to find that Clarke himself did not list the animals, either. He had merely offered the numbers from other sources he had come across. I was left with the conclusion that the Society’s teaching of 43 mammals, 74 birds and 10 reptiles needed to repopulate the ark was outdated, misleading and unverifiable.
For a time, I continued to believe the Flood had been an actual, historical event. I convinced myself that the answers were out there; it’s just that the Society had never bothered to find them. I reasoned that the Society was so busy teaching people about God’s Kingdom and about the soon-to-come Armageddon and subsequent paradise that they had little time to do more than provide cursory proof for Noah’s Flood.
But as time went on, I realized that the flood was a big deal. Jesus believed it was a real event and so, if it was not real, then Jesus was either mislead, misleading or entirely fictionalized. Additionally, as mentioned earlier, the Society does not allow for dissenting opinions. So, if I no longer believed in Noah’s Flood then I was, by Witness standards, an apostate, even if only secretly.
Soon I came across the book Great Disasters wherein the author postulates that the Flood was an historical event, albeit a localized one. This is what I chose to believe (secretly) for a couple of years.
But in time, I discovered other areas in which the Watchtower Society was incorrect. In some cases, they seemed genuinely mistaken in their teachings, but in other cases they took quotes out of context to support their own teachings.
At the time I wrote the second letter, therefore, I no longer believed that the Watchtower Society was “the Truth”. I was also quite convinced that the flood had been local, if indeed it had ever happened at all. My wife suggested that I write to the Society explaining my findings and humbly asking them if, perhaps, the flood was not global. Though I was sure they would not concede the point, my wife argued (effectively) that I should at least give them a chance. When they are unable to understand, or are frustrated about a certain religious teaching, Witnesses often resort to the maxims “wait on Jehovah” and “Jehovah will reveal it in His due time”. This is what many Witnesses told me when I asked questions about Noah’s flood, among other things. I was afraid to send the second letter, lest it result in disciplinary action, but I sent it hoping that the Society would admit that the Flood was not global and that, if they accused me of being an apostate, I would counter with the argument that since “Jehovah reveals things in His due time,” then perhaps NOW is His due time.
As you can see from their response, however, the Society did not budge on this issue, not even so much as admitting that I might be correct.
The next two letters were sent in a further effort to point out the lack of proof there was for a global deluge. I no longer believed in a global deluge, nor did I believe that the Watchtower Society was God’s channel for communicating with humanity. Nevertheless, I wrote the letters from the perspective of someone who desperately wants to know the answers, and is pleading with the Society to admit their error. My reason for this was two-fold: 1) Had I just come right out and told them that the Flood was fictitious and that they are not God’s mouthpiece, they would have rejected my letters at the outset and likely refused to respond to me at all. 2) As I said in my most recent letter to them, friends and family have continually urged me to keep asking questions. These friends and family members are well-intentioned. They believe the Watchtower Society speaks only truth and, therefore, if I disagree with the Society on any point, I must be in error. If I was to tell these people that I did not want to write back to the Society because “I know I’m right”, they would not believe me. Therefore, I was compelled to write so as to have documented proof of my efforts to uncover the Society’s ‘evidence’ for a global deluge.