I knew one brother whon was df'd for over drinking. He used to comment to the brothers that according to the scripture, all the overweight publishers should be df'd as well
Watchtower says:You can be Disfellowshiped for being FAT!!!!!
by Witness 007 27 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
Stubborn Disbeliever
My family is all still active (well, you know what I mean) with the JWs..and they're all fat. Always have been..."it's genetic" my grandparents would say lol. But if my family doesn't get df'd for severly over drinking, then they won't be df'd for being fat.
-
DATA-DOG
It's genetic.....
The Biggest Loser proves genetics are less influential than lifestyle and diet. I would say it is more of a " Armageddon will fix it " mentality combined with poor education. The fatties are taking up too much room at conventions.
-
steve2
Actually, given the organization's literal interpretation of Biblical texts endorsing disfellowshipping, I am truly surprised they don't disfellowship individuals for gluttony; god knows they've kicked a few out for alcohol over-use which is as equally scorned as gluttony in Scripture.
It could well be that, they did a frank appraisal of the numbers and realized if they did action gluttony as a disfellowshipping offense, the bulk of JWs in Western countries would be at risk of being kicked out. To the best of my knowledge and direct observations, being a JW is no protection against bulging waist lines, protruding stomachs and thundering thighs and for some, no amount of waddling door-to-door reduces that burden.
-
tiki
The answer my friend is blowing in the wind......
they may print stuff about gluttony, obesity, etc....but fret not. if they were to really get onto it and start dfing people for that, the numbers at least in the US would suffer such a cut, it would look way bad. fatties, piggies, and people who just happen to carry more adipose tissue for no discernible reason are totally off the hook.
-
steve2
oh tiki you are a scream - but there is a lot of truth in what you say. For socio-cultural reasons, gluttony has become medicalized and all suggestions that it is a condition of 'sinful' over-indulgence has been muted. Similarly,alcohol-overuse has been medicalized, yet that has not stopped the organization from regularly disfellowshipping JWS with alcohol problems - possibly because the behaviors associated with drunken states are usually 'unbecoming a Christian' in a more clearcut way than are the associated behzviors of gluttony.
-
BluePill2
Good points tiki!
This issue shows once more that "Holy Spirit" has nothing to do with elders decisions or with the disfellowshipping process. This was one of my awakenings. I had participated in well over 50 Judicial Committees and the decisions, the whole process hit my like an iron bar - I could SEE that there was no godly intervention whatsoever. Just man-made stuff. The irregularities, injustice, the blatant twisting of facts where to clear.
People get da'ed all the time for drinking problems (my father was). Why? Because you can SEE the person babbling on the street/bar or staggering home, or vomiting (usually "proofs" that witnesses bring on in JC).
But with obesity you CANNOT prove gluttony. The WT would be hell-bent to start a flood of accusations or law suits because of discrimination offences against "sick people". They cannot prove it. "Holy Spirit" doesn't help them. Hence: not one single JC because of gluttony.
People will confess masturbation, sex, etc. because it is evident, but how do you confess gluttony?
"Brother Hounder, I ate 3 Hamburgers the other night. I felt a little full, usually I can only digest 2, please prepare a JC for me, please."
Ridiculous.
-
rebel8
I do remember that being a rule at the time, but I don't remember it being enforced. Ever. One of the few rules that wasn't...maybe because it was so common and they'd all have to df themselves. The jw culture revolved around eating, eating, eating. Nothing else was ok to do. Can't go dancing, can't listen to most music, can't see most movies, can't even have interesting sex....
-
DATA-DOG
" can't even have interesting sex.... "
ROFL!!!!!!!!!! Thank God for Taco Bell!! At least I can dream of a Grilled Stuffed Steak Burrito while rendering the due for the zillionth time in exactly the same way as last time!
Am I the only one who thinks this picture is sexually suggestive? Seriously. I notice these things a lot. Is it just me?
-
WTWizard
Here is a religion that contributes to people's being fat (and other health issues). Lack of sleep is common among the witlesses, and that contributes to being fat. Field circus is mostly driving around, with a little slow walking thrown in (you cannot lose significant weight, unless you have a health problem or you are extremely obese and your only exercise before was eating pizza, by doing field circus). Most witlesses eat quickly, usually at fast "phude" places, to keep their time going as long as possible. Some stop for coffee (or sodas, doughnuts, etc.) because field circus is so non-fulfilling. They hound people that walk a lot, run, or go to the gym that they need to do more field circus. Myself, I remember having gotten fairly fat (the Freshman 15 X 4) in college and losing it by walking a lot. I kept it off until I became a jokehovian witless, and then the weight came back.
And add the stress of never being up to par, and having to answer to joke-hova, and that adds to the fat side. You are stagnant, and under stress that you are not doing enough. Do anything, and they ask "What if Jesus were to walk in right now?". They ask that of your whole music and video collection--and not just how loud you play it (if you don't play it so loud that others are bothered by it, what business do the hounders have in dictating the content). Privacy is non-existent. And, unlike Satan, joke-hova is judgmental. With Satan, you masturbate or do fornication, so what. With joke-hova, it is a big deal. Even thinking a thought that people naturally have (animals, too) will earn you damnation with joke-hova.
So, the religion contributes to people having trouble losing weight or keeping it off. To make things worse, how much is "fat"? I can remember back in the early 1980s, they revised my ideal weight tables. Prior to 1982, a person that is 5'8 (in the English system) with a medium frame would have to be between 138 and 152 pounds (American pounds, not British pounds, stones, or kilos). Sometime in late 1982, they worked out a system increasing these numbers to 145 and 157--I always went by the original 138-152/non-smoking. More recently, they came out with this crap about BMI--body mass index. Basically, they take your height and weight and multiply it by a series of confusing numbers, to come up with this index. Under this system, the person at 5'8 would have to be around 168 pounds to even need to worry--which is where "obese" starts under the original system.
With all this, what constitutes "obese"? Do the hounders even know the formula for body mass index? Can they even find it? Or, are they going to start weighing everyone with doctors scales every boasting session and start calculating whether a person is "fat"? And which scale will they go by? Some old-school hounders might go by the pre-1982 scale, and anything above the high number is "too fat". Others might use the revised scale or the BMI--one hounder's "fat" might be another's "ideal weight". And this for a religion that makes it all the more difficult to lose weight!