Shammatta—"Disfellowshipping" Jewish Style

by AuldSoul 50 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  AuldSoul

  Posters are free to post what they like within the guidelines.

  Read point 10 a bit closer, SBF.

  ...please avoid:

  10. Posting an off-topic comment.

  Your comments of anti-war sentiment were, without any question, far afield of the topic.

  While I agreed that I believe Witnesses are worse than the First Century Christian congregation I did not state that as fact. You said I did so. I stated that the practices differ greatly.

  The point of stressing the divergence would be clearer to you if you were more familiar with the organization. You are not. Allow me to educate you. They pride themselves, organizationally, on following the model of First Century Christianity. They fail miserably in the attempt. This is one area in which they fail miserably.

  Since you are so lacking in knowledge about the organization, perhaps you would be better served asking me why I stressed the difference so fervently instead of incorrectly assuming you already knew why. To point out that 'interpretation' is involved on your part is to spare you the potential embarassment of calling it what it really was, baseless, mean assumption. Everyone interprets everything, but you weren't satisfied with the mild version of prompting you to ASK for an explanation instead of offering one.
• 

  quietlyleaving

  auldsoul

  Elders on the forum: Do interactions with the Service Desk and certain COs or DOs give you the impression that you are viewed as amhaarets? (Psst! I already know the answer, but I just wanted lurkers to see that even congregation elders are considered this way by the organization elite)

  Not an elder but from what I've observed - yes
• 

  slimboyfat

  Pointing out differences between JWs and the first century Christians is useful for showing they don't live up to their own claim to follow that pattern faithfully. It is not so useful for determining whether JW practice is comparatively humane. Not unfairly ("They claim to be characterized by love. They are lying.") I interpreted that larger objective as the intention of your 'discussion'.

  In practicing disfellowshipping JWs appear to be closer to the Corinthian pattern of congregation judgement outlined by Paul than many churches, and the labelling and ostracizing of 'apostates' resembles the injunctions of John's letter better than liberal mainline churches. The harshness of the Witnesses does not match that of the first century, but it is a closer match than many churches dare to reenact.

  Many of your topics decend into you bickering about what should be classed as ontopic, a discussion ironically which is never itself ontopic.

  Slim
• 

  AuldSoul

  ("They claim to be characterized by love. They are lying.")

  Why, SBF, you've unwittingly hit on it!

  "They are lying" is the point of the discussion. In fact, that is the point of many of the discussions on here. Your posts often seem to miss the point entirely, but you've captured it here.

  Organizationally, when they say they are the sole channel of communication from God, they are lying. When they say disfellowshipping is an act of love, they are lying. When they say they are modeling their religion after the First Century Christians, they are lying.

  When you mix political points in with glorying in the virtue of individual JWs who are low on the organizational totem pole as a means of minimizing the damage done to me personally and others personally, my emotional response is to want you to experience firsthand what you speak so glibly about. I don't like wishing that pain on anyone, especially not someone so plainly bereft of knowledge of the subject. Logically, I'd rather you remain ignorant. But when you post such tripe as factual from a position of ignorance my emotional response is rather different.

  In this specific case, I was discussing a specific thing they lie about. They lie by calling their use of a "very powerful weapon" of spiritual coercion an act of love.

  I asked before, I wonder if you missed it or simply ignored it.

  Please answer me this: Do JWs use threat of organizational shunning as a very powerful weapon to coerce conformance, to the end of creating the appearance of unity?

  That is the point of the discussion. If this is what JW shunning is really about, then it is purely an act of organizational self-interest, not an act of love.
• 

  slimboyfat

  I don't think you know what you are getting at from one moment to the next, except the point that you 'already know the answer' and I am of you 'educating' me. So just to let you know I am bailing out of this 'discussion'.

  Sorry if that was off topic.

  Slim
• 

  TheListener

  I haven't read all the posts yet, but I wanted to get this out there:

  When I was a bethelite there was a common expression for witnesses who were out in the field and not at bethel. Anyone remember it?

  It was "worldly witness" - sometimes this term was used appreciatively, sometimes in a derogatory fashion. Usage depended upon the situation.

  How many of us have heard this "Hi, this is my friend so and so, he's an elder (or pioneer, or ministerial servant, or bethelite)" Titles and positions mean everything. They equal spirituality.
• 

  AuldSoul

  Bye, SBF!

  FWIW, I don't mind disagreement.

  I do know the answer to the request I made of elders. I know the answer first-hand and second-hand from at least eight sources on dozens of occasions. You do not know the answer, yet you chose to answer as if you did know and I did not. I was addressed by you, basically called a "know-it-all", was accused of being critical of JWs in general (which wasn't the case), and I defended my position.

  Play the victim, if you like. You were the aggressor, I was the defender. Unless you perceived yourself to be speaking for all JWs, in which case you were defending people I have never attacked.

  <--- I won't be doing this at your departure from this thread.

  I guess ol' SlimBoyFat will leave the discussion without posting even one single on-topic post, even when asked a direct question pertinent to the topic.
• 

  AuldSoul

  Thanks for that input, Listener. For the record you were an elder for a long time and a Bethelite, right? I only ask to establish that you speak from experience.

  Would you consider it a fair statement that criticism of the organization does not equate to criticism of the average JW?

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  TheListener

  Would you consider it a fair statement that criticism of the organization does not equate to criticism of the average JW?

  I would.

  I can dislike apple pie, but like apples. ???
• 

  AuldSoul

  Listener: I can dislike apple pie, but like apples.

  Beautiful analogy.

  Also, I did not know Bethelites called non-bethelites "worldly JWs." That was a new one for me, thanks. Given some of the Bethelites I know, the reverse might be more appropriate.