DF'ing and DA'ing procedural change in the horizon

by iloowy 285 Replies latest members private

• 

  wozadummy

  cameo-d said "Why must a person "beg forgiveness" of man? Wouldn't this show it is a man made decree if man is the one to forgive?"

  Well then the JW's are definitely the same as their arch enemy the Catholic church appointing intercessors for peoples sins are'nt they?

  Maybe also this topic is about the org applying their view of scripture where they say God is refining the precious metals with their lawyers so they have a water tight system to protect their money - hardly based on scripture though.
• 

  darth frosty

  You gon see there phantom number of 7 million witness drop to 3.
  
  If this is true.
• 

  daniel-p

  About the sustainability of the organization: If true, this policy would go a long way to support the sustainability of the WTS. As someone mentioned previously, they have no problem with being smaller if it means their ranks are tighter. And it's actually the smarter move for them. There's a lot of research behind organizational behavior and the need for an organization to stay smaller as opposed to unchecked growth in order to retain internal control, avoid regulation or unwanted press, and stay financially healthy. In their case, enlarging the organization and retaining their basic corporate structure of printing Bible-related publications is a very tricky thing.
  
  So no, I don't think this policy has anything to do with "scaring" inactive one back to the Kingdom Hall. Based on my experience at Bethel, looking from the inside outward to the R&F, there is no great desire to "save souls." The emphasis of management is on exercising impersonal mechanisms for control of the organization. And this policy would be in line with that, since it includes incorporating the fear-factor tool of monitoring "omissions" of worship, which, as has been shown in this thread, is a completely unscriptural thing. No matter though: the WTS is a master at enacting unscriptural policy. (There's only about a hundred other examples...).
• 

  Dogpatch

  There are some cults that reverse the tide against social progress as they "ripen on the vine"...

  in harsh economic/political times such a move is smart, as you can catch all the frightened ones.

  give them something to live for!

  Randy
• 

  restrangled

  Its really very simple if this is for real.....So many have gotten smart about the terminology and proceeded to sue.

  The words disfellowshiping etc, are not to be used under any circumstances. (sorry my cut and paste isn't working, but it was in the second or third paragraph of the original post)

  It's just a legal game, and if any of you think all these elders are going to have time to figure out who is and isn't over the past year or years dropped out, just tired, sick, blah, blah, blah......its and absolute joke.

  Relax faders, I am sure when this gets read, (if its real) there will be a lot of tired elders, heaving a sigh of relief and letting go of a lot of guilt and addresses.

  r.
• 

  cognac

  A child entering a 'contract' or baptism by the society does not have the maturity to comprehend what they are entering into. That's why a child is protected by law. The society works on the premise that because they are a religion, they can practice prejudice in punishment...and they have gotten away with it. Until they are forced to change and are forced to meet the challenge...then they will not change.

  I believe people have tried to revoke there baptisms because they were underage. They were not allowed to because they have continued in the religion into there adult life. Since many people don't figure out that it's a cult until they become an adult, I don't beleave it would matter that they were underage when getting baptised. Because they still followed the religion when they were of age...

  However, correct me if I am wrong...
• 

  daniel-p

  Restrangled: That's only one of the elements of change in this thing. Yes, it's a matter of semantics. However, the other component is the inclusion of "omissions" of worship as a determinant in judging one a member of the religion or not. THAT is big!
• 

  cameo-d

  Maybe there's just not enough room on the ark.

  Just like there weren't enough lifeboats on the Titanic.

  Somebody has to get sacrificed.
• 

  sammielee24

  I believe people have tried to revoke there baptisms because they were underage. They were not allowed to because they have continued in the religion into there adult life. Since many people don't figure out that it's a cult until they become an adult, I don't beleave it would matter that they were underage when getting baptised. Because they still followed the religion when they were of age...

  However, correct me if I am wrong

  I believe you are right in part - however, it is not the revoking clause that appears to me as the root base of action, it is the prejudice against the baptized JW's that is the core issue. If a person is not baptized, they are not punished in the same manner. If two people both smoke a cigarette and both go before the elders - the non baptized publisher is counselled but the baptized publisher is cast out and shunned. Shunning is extreme and therefore, the society puts the criminals into separate categories for the same crime and punishes one group to the extreme while the other serves no punishment at all. If you apply that in a prejudicial way for example regarding race/gender/age and employment - it would be like the employer firing all the older, male, asian guys and hiring only young Swedes. A lawsuit would be filed and won in no time against the employer for discrimination. As it is now - some of the first questions that are asked when a lawyer talks lawsuit are pointed to discrimination against age, religion and gender..as all of those are considered high penalty factors. The society discriminates against the baptized person when it comes to action for the crime - no unbaptized need ever be disfellowshipped, shunned or be forced to go through reinstatement...even if the crime remains the same - and therefore, the society operates on a clear case of prejudice that when applied as punishment, has a clear detrimental effect on the punished. sammieswife.
• 

  jwfacts

  I attempted to annul my baptism on the basis that I was underage when forming the contract. They replied that I had entered contracts with the Society as an adult when applying for pioneering and applying for bethel, so refused to accept the underage reasoning.

  This new change is a move to remove as much legal risk as possible. The thing that concerns me is that it is becoming more harsh when saying that a person can show they are "no longer one of JW's" if they stop attending meetings.