by KateWild 34 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
thedog1,
I do not aknowledge that my JC have the right to direct matters in our cong. They harm people, and are not guided by holy spirit IMO. From my experience Holy spirit does not guide things in the congregation, I am glad I am not alone in this.
You seem so caring and considerate, I bet you wouldn't have even df'd me in the first place if we were in your cong. If all elders were like you, we would have a better organisation, but the fact is they aren't.
Love Sam xx
I listened to the recording of the JC and although the elders were calm they were also extremely condescending. They frequently talked over Kate and were only interested in pursuing their own agenda whilst failing to answer any questions put to them. It is an unjust process which is open to corruption. Since a single sister can be questioned on any and all topics without any support or protection it is easy for some to fall into a hectoring style and any questioning of their judgement or authority results in a patronising and hostile response.
I agree that although there are many in the congrgations who try to act as christians there are others who are sinning in both small ways and great. Not least are appointed men who are so self satisfied with their position that they treat the flock of god as their own fiefdom. There is much casual cruelty in the congregation and judging of one another so that it becomes a part of the culture so that those still in become adept at navigating the minefield and stop noticing it.
Disfellowshipping is an inhumane and corrupt practice and the debate is not whether they followed the watchtower rules but rather by what right they practice it at all. To try to metaphorically kill people and render them cut off from friends and family however temporary is a disgusting way to treat another human being. They turn people into bullies and create a level of hardship that they have no right to impose on another person. Every time a JW treats someone as invisible or not present, every time they allow these petty humiliations they become less humane.
There is so much good happening outside the congregation that puts the organisation to shame.
@thedog1:
Is the Jerusalem Bible a more literally or commentary-like version? RSV is a more literal, and yet not as "forceful". But note: it is irrelavant. Why does it demand, or even "suggest", that this is an organizational action - especially in light of the fact that the members of the Cor. congregation did not completely follow Paul's words? (see the scripture I cited in 2 Cor when the man was trying to repent). That is, there was no central decision. The language can be VERY forceful, but it is FORCEFUL language to the congregation, not a direcive to form a committee and decide for all the members. Why does it mean a central body makes the decision for the members - thereby giving the elders athority over the conscience of the congregation?
The inidividual members, at least in this case (the one you cite in 1 Cor 5 as support for the authority), ultimately made the decision on their own, and some of them decided to keep association.
MMM
@KateWild:
" You seem so caring and considerate, I bet you wouldn't have even df'd me in the first place if we were in your cong. If all elders were like you, we would have a better organisation, but the fact is they aren't."
Perhaps true. But even the greatest intentioned, most justice-loving man would be too corrupt. :) - It is simply none of their business. The only reason they think so is because the WT has said this. Not scripture.
MMM
What bothers me about the Witness JC process, if you are so inclined to respond thedog, is that it is held behind closed doors. Not so in the bible.
Peace to you, thedog1!
Here are Christ's own words. They do not match Paul's (who later got it right and understood the truth from the Truth (Christ), as shown when he told people NOT to judge, as opposed to telling people TO judge early on in his ministry. You know, like getting new light... only the truth never changed or grew, Paul was simply mistaken, as he contradicted what Christ has specifically taught on this issue. Perhaps due to Paul's previous reliance upon the old law and its rules/consequences) Christ's words CERTAINLY do not match the procedure of the wts.
But here are the words of Christ:
"If your brothers sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witness.' If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector."
(thank you to my sister who recently brought up this passage)
So first:
Go and show the one who has sinned against you his fault.
That is kind of self-explanatory, or should be at least.
If he doesn't listen... then take one or two others along.
Yes... YOU... take one or two others along with you. So that YOU are present, regarding the sin done against you. (there is no 'judical committee' here. Nothing in this is even remotely close to the wts practice, but absolutely 100% AGAINST Christ)
If he does not listen to THEM, THEN take the matter before the church.
Again, self-explanatory. No secret jc meetings. No... so and so was df'd or is not longer a witness... for any unnamed reason. Everything is out in the OPEN.
If he does not listen to THEM, THEN you treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
And how would you treat someone as you would a pagan or a tax collector, according to Christ? Would you not love them, as you are told to love your enemies and bless those who persecute you?
Did He not also say...
"But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your father in heaven. He causes the sun to rise on the evil and the good; and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect."
So I guess it depends on who you are following and listening TO.
On another point, that might be best in its own topic... as to keeping the congregation clean. Christ makes a person clean. His blood. His Body and those members OF His Body, are made clean in 'the blood of the lamb'.
But how can a congregation be clean when it is the blood of Christ that makes one clean and grants forgiveness of sins... and almost all IN that congregation are taught to refuse to come into the new covenant in his blood?
"This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you."
Some things you may want to consider.
Peace to you,
tammy
Are you posting the contents of private messages?
No, it was from another thread it went off topic, Sam xx
Hi Thedog1,
"This seems to me to be a direction from Paul rather than simply a suggestion. How should we apply this today?"
To follow the 1 Cor 5 & 2 Cor 2 model closely it would need to work like this: A prominent leader within the Christian community would author a public letter to a congregation wherein man involved in deviant sexual behaviour would be called out for removal. Among Jehovah's Witnesses, this would be the equivalent of a Governing Body member or other individual who authors published material. In a follow up, again the prominent leader would publically say something like this "This rebuke given by the majority is sufficent for such a man" (2 Cor 2:6).
Although, our training as elders schools us on how procedures work within the Witness faith, that is where it goes off into the weeds. There is just no clear parallel between NT writings of Paul and how the quasi-judicial process of Jehovah's Witnesses works. Although there is talk of a Bible trained conscience trained to distinguish between right and wrong (Heb 5:14) in reality individual members are asked to provide the rebuke by relying implicitly on the conscience of the elders involved, wherein even asking for the facts of a case is forbidden.
Cheers,
-Randy
marking
