July 15 2006 WT - Uncleanness - disfellowshp?- details (page 3)

PopeOfEruke

Leolaia!!

you seem to know an awful lot about the different magazines??? Hmmmmm.......

I can feel a JC coming on!!!

LOL!!

Pope

steve2

I could scarcely manage more than rolling my weary eyes at the article's repetitive hang-up about levels of uncleaness. How predictably pharisaical.

However, in all fairness I must credit the authors' restraint in not once mentioning that old affliction of young JWs the world over, "masturbation". Is the Watchtower finally lightening up on this frigteningly seductive "unclean" practice?

Highlander

That article reminds me a lot of the 'elder school' notes that was posted by Sir82.

It's only fitting that the 'sheep' receive this wonderful 'new light' at the 'appointed' time.

steve2

The elders might determine that even though these individuals did not manifest a brazen attitude characterizing loose conduct, there was a measure of greediness in their conduct.

Said in reference to a couple's conduct, this quote invites all sorts of speculation about the detail needed for the ensuing judicial investigation. Such an investigation would appear to need to be extremely explicit so that sound conclusions could be made about distinctions between brazen and non-brazen conduct:

Do the elders need to bring out the Sexual Slurpometer to measure the level of greediness displayed by the unmarried couple?
What would a sub-brazen attitude be? Muffled, rather than cry-out-loud screams of arousal? Some articles of clothing left on rather than total nakedness?
What would elders do if one of the party was significantly greedier than the other (Party A was content with just a quick feel, whereas Part B was grabbing for at least thirty seconds worth?)
Perhaps they need DNA proof: Did Not Arouse. If this is the case, it does not matter what the unmarried couple does to each other provided they are not doing it in a brazen and greedy manner.

Depending on your interest in the sexual details of other individuals, serving as a JW elder has just become either infinitely more burdensome or more appealing: "Now tell us, Brother XX, exactly what you and your fiancee did in the back of your car last Saturday night...and I mean the exact details, please..."

sass_my_frass

That article turned me off for like, hours.

Mary

I wonder how long it'll be before they switch back to "Old Light" that said beastiality and homosexuality don't constitute grounds for divorce because it's not really "porneia".

TheListener

The second to last paragraph on page 30. Very scary indeed. I would not want to be the one under investigation.

For some elders; the more leeway they have in determining wrongdoing the more vendettas they can settle.

under_believer

Random thoughs:
* The scriptural citations read like a grab-bag of random quotes from all over the Pauline Epistles, all strung together to support a single result. Gal., 2 Cor., Eph... Amazing how they believe that Paul's primary mission was inspired writings on morality, even though the scriptures do not support such a conclusion.
* "as well as oral and anal sex"--so, these are back in the porneia category again? I thought they'd come back out. Maybe I was mistaken. Based on an earlier thread on this forum, many, many otherwise faithful Witnesses at all levels of service are guilty of repeated unrepentant fornication--with their own mates.
* Loose conduct--based on the definition, how many people are truly guilty of loose conduct? How much overlap is there between "fornication" and "loose conduct?" If you are guilty of both, will Jehovah destroy you twice at Armageddon?
* Degrees of uncleanness--"Elders should carefully and prayerfully weigh each situation and find out what occurred and how often, the nature and extent of the misconduct, and the intent and motive of the wrongdoer." I find this to be the worst, most mind-boggling statement in the article. PRAYERFULLY weigh each situation? Imagine that--three grown men sitting around with heads bowed, one of them uttering "Jehovah, please give us your Holy Spirit so we can decide whether Brother Fornicator's sexual manipulation of Sister Moaner's clitoris was done with a motive to give orgasmic pleasure. In Jesus' name, etc., Amen." HOW CAN ANYONE WRITE THIS SHIT AND PUBLISH IT?!
* My summary of this entire article--
Dear brothers:
Please endeavor to be Pharisees.
Agape,
your brothers,
the WTBATSONY.

TheListener

Unbeliever, in your post you said:

* "as well as oral and anal sex"--so, these are back in the porneia category again? I thought they'd come back out. Maybe I was mistaken. Based on an earlier thread on this forum, many, many otherwise faithful Witnesses at all levels of service are guilty of repeated unrepentant fornication--with their own mates.

I may be mistaken, but I think the article was discussing only unmarried individuals. On page 29 of the scan the article says that porneai "applies to illicit sexual relations outside of scriptural marriage." This would preclude someone from using this article to say oral/anal sex is wrong for a married couple. imho.

Narkissos

LOL. I guess the average elder will have a lot of personal study to do on the Internet to keep in pace with the organisation.

What about " the things that take place in secret by them it is shameful even to relate" (Ephesians 5:12 NWT)?

(Thinking of one previous question of mine about "judicial" vocabulary, this article shows that nothing has changed in this regard for the English-speaking JWs. I wonder if the French issue substitutes "religious discipline" to "judicial," or the new vocabulary only applies when elders deal with specific "sinners"?)

July 15 2006 WT - Uncleanness - disfellowshp?- details

Share this