Actually I think they would be throwing away their hole card
Panzer ...
I think I addressed the "hole" card thing above.
Rub a Dub
by heyfea 22 Replies latest jw friends
Actually I think they would be throwing away their hole card
Panzer ...
I think I addressed the "hole" card thing above.
Rub a Dub
I can only imagine it would a word game. Nothing dramatic like that changes overnight, and if there really was a change, it would be in name only
If the WTS only changed the type of announcement, like saying so and so is no long a JW, but still require that the r & f shun these individuals, then, the end result for the people on both sides is the same. Only the WTS might benefit from this. Gosh! They are prime evil!
HEYFEA stated, " They are prime evil. " You certainly have that correct
Not true. JWs still DF people. A few years back, they changed the announcement to "XYZ is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses." But this was not a substantive change (more of a "lipstick on a pig" sort of thing). There has been no change in JW disfellowshipping policy.
I think someone is just slow to catch up to the wording that's been different for some time now. It's a legal thing. Saying "so-and-so is no longer one of JWs" implies that they weren't kicked out but rather chose by their actions or words that they no longer wanted to belong.
Cate
The Watch Tower is fun for me to watch. Every decision they make, I categorize the reason for the change . . . Is it a decision to benefit business? Or is it a religious decision concerning faith?
Most are obvious, like the voting policy.
If that was the case then I want to have my disfellowshipping recinded. In fact I wrote a letter to the governing body telling them in plain english that if they fornicated with the UN for 10 years and I only did one act and was sorry only unto God then why shouldn't they allow me back in the organization just so I can see my sisters.
That letter is somewhere in my archives.
If someone wants to look it up and post it I don't mind in the least.
Orangefatcat.
If that is true they really are worried about keeping membership.
The suggestion of them marking people is laughable and not to be taken seriously.
I don't personally see this happening, not unless there is sever decline in attendees.