by NotaNess 21 Replies latest jw friends
I kind of understand the "Never made the real commitment" part, but isn't learning the "Truth" for 15 to 20 years, and going out into the "world" as opposed to committing,... the same as choosing to NOT accept Jehover's (aka WTS) ways and be with the brothers and sisters in union?
Why is the shunning treated different? Is it because, there's always hope by the parents, that they will come around?, etc.
What's your experiences? Is there something scriptural here?
Well, don't forget that you pledged allegiance to the publishing corporation chosen by God. It doesn't matter that you don't like his original book--if you say you like the publishing corporation's books, but then turn your back on them after having tasted the sweet heavenly manna contained therein....you're bird food.
Just don't pledge your support to the company by getting baptized. You're right on--never baptized ones are still marks.
No there is no real reason to shun someone who was baptized and left and not shun one who knew the truth, but just failed to respond and get baptized. At least, not according to the scriptures.
I feel as you do. The one who got baptized and participated for years has certainly put more faith and effort into it than the one who made no effort at all.
The real reason that they want those shunned that have left has nothing to do with the scriptures, though. It is self preservation that the organization is concerned about. The ones who left after a period of time are more likely to leave because of knowledge of the shortfalls and corruptions hidden all around. That makes them much more dangerous.
It is crazy how they will shun one child who may actually be living a more moral life than their siblings all because, "they were baptized". Never could understand it.
It's just a thought, but perhaps it is because the Borg is becoming sensitive to the rank-and-file starting to "get it" in regard to their "fallibility." Too many JWs are no longer as "igorant" as they were in the past...before education was "accepted," and the internet came to the homes to educate anyone who searched for "truth." They don't want to be as "strict," so that they can "hold on" to as many members as they can...perhaps thinking that if they are more "tolerant," the JW child will "come around," and become an official member. After all, if families start to leave...entire families!!..think of the monetary losses to the Borg!! So keeping the "patience" regarding the wayward JW child just makes "sense."
Funny, I posted this topic and then found blondie's topic about the 5/13/07 meeting, see below:
*** w653/15pp.175-176pars.8-10OurOwnTwentieth-CenturyGenerationandtheResurrection ***
The "goats" would also include those husbands and wives who have believing marriage partners but who, in spite of the good example of their believing marriage mates, are found to be still unbelievers in the day and at the hour of the execution of God’s judgment against this enemy world; also, the children of a believing parent or the children of believing parents (fathers and mothers), which children were once "holy" as minors, as unresponsible children, but who have grown up to responsible years and have refused to become dedicated, baptized believers by the time that divine execution upon the "goats" begins.—1 Cor. 7:12-16.
Before I was baptized in the mid 80s I was what they called back then an approved associate in which I was a publisher and was on the school and if I would have done something to get DF'd I would have been formally announced as disassociated from the platform and treated as if I were baptized anyway and shunned so back then not being baptized would still divide people
So it's highly likely that JW parents that see a son or daughter as being more of a "Rebellious" nature, they would actually literally tell their child or young adult to "pass" on the baptism thing for now, for fear of having to end up really shunning them down the road.
Think the GB would approve of that???
I grew up in the false, and never, ever, had any inclination whatsoever to go swimming with the dorks in t-shirts at the circuit assembly baptism cesspool. My siblings were all baptized and df'd, and they are shunned. However, it seems that the dubs have a delusional hope that I will some day lose my sanity and join them, so I continue to have friendly relationships with several of them. Religion is never discussed.
I don't know if this is the case; certainly it would be better from the parents point of view, because there is nothing in writing preventing them from staying in touch with their child, but from the childs point of view (now an adult) I imagine they'd have noticed that none of their old friends talk to them any more, and that some of their old friends would have made that formal. They're still 'bad association' and would receive a good share of what they would personally consider shunning from a lot of people who they used to be close to and thought they could rely on.
I was told that the reason a person who associated but was not baptized is not shunned is because the baptism vows are a legal contract and the baptism is a formal "joining" the group. Submitting to the elders and accepting an appointment reserved for a baptized member is confirmation of the contract.
The Witnesses view baptism as a first mortgage on your life and they hold the paper.
I know a Witness father who has two adult children who were both raised as Witnesses. One was baptized, the other was not baptized. Both quit associating in adolescence. Both smoke tobacco. The baptized adult child was disfellowshipped and is shunned. The non-baptized adult child is not shunned. The father associates regularly with the non-baptized adult child and shuns the baptized adult child. Both adult children still use tobacco.
The sin being punished is actually the baptism.
