Df-ing dilemmas

by Pathofthorns 6 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Pathofthorns

  I have often wondered if the Society would ever actively seek out ones who were disfellowshipped for a past policy that was reversed. Obviously the line probably is the individual wasn't submissive, or was "running ahead of the slave" so it doesn't matter.

  But if a teaching is reversed, it clearly is an admission that the prior one was a "command of men" not one of God. To have disfellowshipped someone over something beyond what is stated in scripture appears to be clearly wrong, and would seem to carry a heavy responsibility upon those who basically handed a God-fearing person over to Satan.

  I find it particularly disturbing in matters such as organ transplants and certain blood fractions, where individual's only choices were disfellowshipping or death. What about those who decided according to a bible trained conscience, accepted a forbidden treatment, were dfed and were later proven to be right? Worse still, what about those who died obedient? (right, i forgot,they get a resurrection)

  Who takes responsibility for all of this? Those who died loyal? Those whose spiritual lives were destroyed by bum policies? Would anyone ever seek these ones out to appologize,to welcome them back? This level of arrogance and begging off from responsibility is disturbing and disgusting.

  Path

  (watch how this thread developes [url] http://discussion.witnesses.net/Forum67/private-8QWKRq0/HTML/000143.html[/url]
• 

  AhHah

  Path,

  This has often troubled me also.

  As far as I know, the only way back into an approved standing once a disfellowshipment is official (any appeals have been exercised or forfeiteted) is the long, hard way -- grovel and beg for mercy, and go to meetings regularly for months or years without being able to speak to anyone. It doesn't matter why you were DF'd -- right or wrong. And don't look for any publicly announced retractions due to faulty doctrine. It was "current light from God" at the time you were DF'd, so deal with it. Where is the love? The humility?

  I never could reconcile the whole procedure for reinstatement in any event. It always seemed harsh, unloving, unmerciful, arbitrary and non-biblical to me. Of course, now I understand that it is all about power and control and fear and guilt -- it is definitely NOT about love. Just thinking about it now gives me the creeps.
• 

  Frenchy

  I have often wondered if the Society would ever actively seek out ones who were disfellowshipped for a past policy that was reversed.

  
  No. If you disagree with a teaching then you simply wait until Jehovah (translation: GB) corrects the situation. No apology is given because it was ‘present truth’ at the time.

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 

  Pathofthorns

  That answer stinks Frenchy. The more I've thought about this, the sicker it makes me feel.

  Path
• 

  Frenchy

  Path:
  I agree.

  -Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it-
• 

  waiting

  Hey y'all,

  The Catholic Church used this type of thinking about eating meat on Friday (mortal sin worthly of Hell, at least until you got to Confession). When they changed the teaching that it was ok - what about all those poor souls in Hell for all eternity burning?

  Those persons who partook of meat against their conscience sinned against what they're conscience believed at the time of the teaching.- according to Catholic Church (in WTBTS article, they condemned the Catholic Church for changing their teachings, btw. If it was "truth" - there is no need to change it.)

  So, even though the law was wrong - the sin was not the eating of meat - the sin was going against what your conscience thought as right.

  The WTBTS uses the same logic. If the persons df'd thought they were sinning against their conscience - they sinned - thus df'd.

  It doesn't seem to bother the Catholic Church or Watchtower Society that they instituted the situation to make the person sin against their consciences by making & teaching a sinful act (which wasn't).

  Neither religious organization accepts any responsibility for the pain they cause. Slight parallel there?

  waiting
• 

  Pathofthorns

  The WTBTS uses the same logic. If the persons df'd thought they were sinning against their conscience - they sinned - thus df'd.

  I don't believe conscience ever really comes into play at all. Our consciences were dictated to us, therefore I believe like Frenchy, the action is taken because one transgresed what was "present truth" at the time.

  Its all about obdedience to "authority". To keep this "unity" there cannot be those who are "out of step". Hence disfellowshipping.

  Path