Marrying someone dfed is basically telegraphing your intention to ultimately leave the organisation, either PIMO or POMO. No PIMI would do so, surely? (Sorry about calling you "Shirley")
Is a member of the Jehovah's Witnesses marries a disfellowshipped person, what is the outcome?
by EdenOne 21 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
Duran
but one is a baptized JW and the other is disfellowshipped / disassociated, what are the consequences?
Thanks for your help.
R.Maybe this might be helpful?
(Sorry about calling you "Shirley")
-
Diogenesister
Good grief, Duran, that link! It perfectly describes the worst practices of the organization as directed by it's leaders! For example shunning/DF, stealing kingdom halls bought by the publishers & making them pay twice for literature, lying in court and baring false witness against CSA sufferers/slandering ex witnesses.
W 74 8/1 p.468
Today, too, we want to realize that one of the best evidences of repentance is not just in words, formally stated, but in actions. (Compare 1 John 3:18.) Thus, when certain ones came to John the Baptist (who was baptizing persons in symbol of repentance for forgiveness of sins), John did not view their formal action as the most important factor or all that was needed. Rather, he told them to go and “produce fruits that befit repentance,” citing for them examples of such fruit or good works, such as showing merciful generosity, abandoning cheating and extortion, abstaining from harassment or false testimony against others. (Matt. 3:7, 8; Luke 3:7-14)
-
NotFormer
That's a good point, Diogenesister. That the WT, by their own actions, have failed at every turn to live up to their profession of Christian faith and to demonstrate repentance of past sin.
And then they stand in judgement upon others... 🙄
-
slimboyfat
I think we can safely say marrying a DFed person is a no, no. We can file it under things so obvious they didn’t think it needed saying. Like how there was no actual counsel point in the Theocratic School about not delivering your talk while dressed as Satan, or that prayers shouldn’t be spoken backwards and offered in the name of the Grand Smurf.
-
NotFormer
slimboyfat: "Like how there was no actual counsel point in the Theocratic School about not delivering your talk while dressed as Satan, or that prayers shouldn’t be spoken backwards and offered in the name of the Grand Smurf"
Do you realise how much meeting attendance would rise if these things were not just allowed, but advertised?? 😹😸👍🤞🙏🧛🧙🧑🎄🥷🦹
-
Walter
I need a quick answer, and also a solid reference in the literature, please
According to "Shepherd the flock" book, a judicial committee has to be formed, if member of congregation is continuously having close conduct with a disfellowshipped person not part of family. (sfl chapter 12, "brazen conduct")
And i guess it is impossible that a JC get's convinced of such a person's repentance in case of marriage; so he/she will be disfellowshipped for sure.
-
BluesBrother
Shepherd The Flock ,
“ “Unnecessary Association With Disfellowshipped or Disassociated Individuals: Willful, continued, unnecessary association with disfellowshipped or disassociated nonrelatives despite repeated counsel would warrant judicial action.—
We know that judicial means that it can result in d/f . Marriage would be the ultimate association. Definitely grounds for d/f
-
EdenOne
Walter and BluesBrother, yes, in my days as elder, that would be my "go-to" basis for a decision to disfellowship a Witness that would marry a disfellowshipped individual.
Slimboyfat, yes, I guess that falls onto that category "it's-so-obviously-wrong-that-we-don't-even-have-to-put-it-in-writing"
Thanks Duran for the reference.
I was just wondering if anyone knew of a publication referencing that in print, or speaking of an experience to that effect. I guess the Elders' manual will have to suffice to support my claim. Anyway, if someone finds something, please let me know here. thx.
Cheers!
-
EdenOne
Oh, and since we're on the subject, here's something else I need, please:
We all know that JW's treat "never-before-Witnesses" (worldly people) one way, and "ex-Witnesses" (disfellowshipped, disassociated) a different way. And, by comparing different passages in literature, it's easy to demonstrate.
However, I would like to find one example in the WTBTS literature (or vídeo, or public addressing) where this is expressed blatantly in the same article, or, better yet, in the same paragraph or even in the same sentence. Something like: "We treat worldly people THIS way, but, on the other hand, we treat disfellowshipped people THAT way". Can you help me out please? Thx
R.