Reviling - have you been admonished not to

by Judith 3 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Judith

  There was a talk in August or September of this year that told what men's places were, women's places were, and children. I can't find my notes (think I threw them away when I angry and reviled the WTS.)

  I do remember the speaker telling women not to revile their husbands. How would it look in the congregation if a sister (notice only sisters were mentioned and not brothers)went around talking abusively about her husband even if he was. She should let Jah take care of the problem. You know, more field service, etc.

  What I got from that talk (besides a headache) was that keep the abuse to yourself.

  Does anyone remember that talk? What were your thoughts about not reviling?
• 

  LoneWolf

  LOL, Judith. Couldn't help laughing at this question.

  Reviling is what I was disfellowshipped for about 13 years ago. I was talking quietly with someone and an irregular publisher came up and demanded that I stop. I answered him quietly, disagreed, and pointed out what the proper steps were if he disagreed with me, and he just got louder and more belligerent, attempting to physically interfere.

  I decided to speak to his conduct and said: "If you think you are going to intimidate me, you aren't man enough." A few minutes later I added, "I don't appreciate people comming on to me like bodacious circus apes." He promptly messed his pants, went crying to the elders, and they then disfellowshipped me for reviling. Heck I didn't even raise my voice!

  I can't say that I regret it. Ever since that day I've always included those phrases in whatever correspondance I've had with Brooklyn. That applies to them too.

  LoneWolf
• 

  Judith

  Hi Lonewolf

  Reviling - abuse in speech or writing. So you reviled the person telling you to stop talking. Did they not even warn you? Just threw you out? Or did you revile them also?

  In my notes of 10-7-01, The speaker said, "the woman is not to tell anyone about her abusive husband. It would be slander and that would be reviling. That also happened to be the last meeting I attended.
• 

  LoneWolf

  Yup. They just tossed me. Nope, I didn't use any against them.

  Actually, they used a similar explanation. Neither hold water, if for no other reason that the offender was using much worse.

  I pointed out that in neither statement did I defame that aggressive brother. In the first one, I was speaking of something that he was incapable of doing. If he wishes to feel that I am such a wimp that all he has to do is grunt and scratch his armpits to frighten me, then he is sadly mistaken.

  In the second, I was comparing his conduct to that of the animalistic demonstration of power that is used to intimidate. There was no reason nor scriptural logic to it. The description used was accurate, limited, and delivered in a quiet manner, not at all like the bombastic methods he was using.

  Thirdly, after a thorough reviewing of the dictionary's definitions of reviling, abuse, etc., I invited them to review Jesus's words to the Pharisees. (Matt. 25.) His words make mine look like a Sunday school picnic. If he was a perfect man and could say such things without it being reviling (and therefore being a sinner), then they need to revise their definition. It is only reviling if the things said are not true.

  Of course, they answered that Jesus had such authority. My answer were the questions: "Jesus was our exemplar, was he not? What does exemplar mean?" They had no answer to that.

  Plus, to bring it on down to a personal level, we do have a right to defend ourselves.

  LoneWolf