by Vanderhoven7 18 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Vidiot:Maybe you’re using an older copy of the Shepherding book.
It's the April 2023 version of the Elders book, the most recent one.
For a JC to be formed, a person needs to actively share his apostate thoughts with others, and it will be formed after the person persists even after 2 official warnings by the Body of Elders.
Also, the 2 counsels and the JC will be formed only when there are 2 witnesses, with whom the person has shared his apostate thoughts actively.
Hmm. Okay.
The 1980 letter to circuit overseers about "apostates" says to disfellowship those who are not in subjection to what the GB/FDS teaches...it says "Keep in mind to be disfellowshipped, an apostate does not have to be a promoter of apostate views..."standing away from"...Therefore, if a baptized Christian abandons the teachings...as presented by the faithful and discreet slave, and persists in believing other doctrine...then he is apostatizing...rejects what he has been provided through the slave class, then appropriate judicial action should be taken."
1980 Letter to circuit overseers about apostates...
https://files.accessjw.org/s/QkEpDaBMN6EdkZJ
2023 edition of "Shepherd the Flock of God" Elder's book under "Determining Whether A Judicial Committee Should Be Formed" Chapter 12 point 17, not being in subjection/submission regarding the elders' direction regarding associating with other disfellowshipped ones is considered "brazen conduct" and a disfellowshipping offense...
https://files.accessjw.org/s/NSCySFCnaSiE2A5
Also in that publication, same Chapter 12 point 39 subpoint 4, not agreeing with what is published by organization is labeled "apostasy" and is a disfellowshipping offense. "Deliberate action" can mean not obeying the elders, for instance, if a publisher refused to say "amen" to the public prayer of an elder because of knowing that elder's involvement in covering abuse, then that publisher would be seen as taking "deliberate action" to undermine the authority of the elder and would be disfellowshipped for "apostasy" even though not actively teaching any specific contrary view - the "causing divisions" clause is like a catch-all to disfellowship anyone who holds "apostate" views - and again, "apostasy" in their eyes doesn't mean against the Bible it means against the Governing Body/FDS teachings...
If a baptized JW does not agree with the disfellowshipping teaching they are considered "apostate". Even if that person does not "teach" others about their belief, if they continue to associate with disfellowshipped JWs or if they live in a way that the elders don't like then they will be disfellowshipped. Rather then charging them with "apostasy" they will be charged with "brazen conduct" or "causing divisions" or something else, but it's all the same. If the elders or Bethel want you gone, they'll drum up some false charges just like the Sanhedrin did for Jesus.
By standing away from the teaching, the GB are apostate! As for having association, I know at least one elder who regularly keeps in touch with a son who wrote " the letter"
I really do feel that born-ins or those indoctrinated from childhood are blindsided by this heinous cult.
Re. EasyPrompt’s post…
Distill it down, and - basically - thinking the Governing Body is wrong about something constitutes “apostasy”.
Which is insane.
Anyone remember Letto the Clown’s little nugget?
”…That little baby is an enemy of God…”
By the aforementioned logic, a rank-and-file JW just privately disagreeing with that statement (let alone calling it out as the weirdest, most batshit thing ever said), makes them - in the WT’s eyes - worse than a rapist, child molester, or serial killer.
I’ve said this before, but…
…reading XJW material on the Net doesn’t turn you “apostate”.
It just helps you realize you already are one.
I watched Ruth Morams latest video today.
She touched largely on this unfair ""judicial system"" the Borg employs in its abusive ways
That was her weekly subject this time.
here it is in case you missed it.
