Members or Individuals

Dazed_Confussed

Any truth to the thought that instead of being considered "members" of the JW organization, that they will shortly be considered only as "individuals" of the organization?

Yes. ‘Members’ was removed from the 2020 revisions of ‘Shepherd the Flock of God’ and ‘Pure Worship—Restored At Last’. In the case of the latter, it is the only change made in that revision, so they must consider it necessary. Almost certainly for legal reasons related to reducing organisational liability. (It’s not just a doctrinal thing because they still use ‘members’ when referring to ‘first-century Christians’.)

Dazed_Confussed

Excuse me for asking this question twice and thanks for your reply. I found it under:

JW's Not Members anymore but Individuals

Overrated

Yes I'm an individual who no longer wants to be a member.

Corney

If the term was just silently replaced but there was no explicit statement that JWs are no longer members, it doesn't change anything legally. Also, religious and other associations are generally not liable for actions and omissions of their members, so I fail to understand the reason for this change, even though it appears to have something to do with legal issues.

Jeffro

Even if not legally binding, they may think it may save them public shame. For example, in a case of child sexual abuse, they might say, oh they’re not a member of our denomination, just someone who attends our services.

mickbobcat

Here they go again changing word meanings

RayoFlight2014

Watchtower has always kept two sets of books, in one way or another.

Unless they are expecting to, and have accepted they will lose their non-profit, charity status; they will have to maintain membership and have a means to positively identify those active or "financial" members...that means is currently the field service reports - AKA "The Publisher". "The Member". Same thing. That is what identifies an individual as an active member, and is what Watchtower claims is their charitable programming - the preaching work is 70% of their activities and the only component they can claim to qualify them as a charity.

Without members, there would be no preaching work, without the preaching work there would be no programming, and with no programming there would be no charity, and without a charity they wouldn't be able to own the properties, land and buildings that are assigned to registered charities.

Maybe they should start selling them off?....oh wait...

I'd really love to know how they are rearranging the chessboard.

smiddy3

I thought they changed members to volunteers .No longer being members or publishers just volunteers.?

Jeffro

As of this year, they just use vague wording such as “those in the congregation” rather than any specific descriptor.

Members or Individuals

Share this