Why disfellowship must be eliminated for the survival of the WT itself

by TheScientist 109 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  truthlover123

  So true- this is a big one
• 

  no-zombie

  People here have to understand that the Governing Body does not care about stumbling the Brotherhood. The rank-and-file are already their captives. No ... all they care about is recruiting new members and the operating capital they bring. As a result they will ultimately do anything, overturn any long held belief or tradition, just to grow numerically. It is true that they might not like doing it (in fact it may even cause divisions within the Governing Body itself), but as things become more desperate, you can be sure that extraordinary things will happen.
  

  Thus the disfellowshiping regulations, the higher education ban, political neutrality, birthday celebrations, and core time-based doctrines, will all be seen as negotiable items at some point ... as survival is the strongest motivator of change.

  We have to remember that ... even an animal will chew off one of its own legs, to get out of a trap. Will the Governing Body be any different? I think not.
  
• 

  slimboyfat

  It might be in their interests to change, but that doesn’t mean they’ll do it. People can act against their interests all the time, especially when religious belief is in the mix.

  Take a look at the history of the Catholic Apostolic Church. They were a group in the nineteenth century who believed the second coming was imminent and appointed a new set of apostles accordingly. Priests in the religion could only be appointed by those apostles. It was a fairly successful religious movement, but the years wore on and some of the apostles died. What would they do? They couldn’t appoint new apostles according to their dogma, so they carried on with the remaining apostles. More of the apostles died until there were few left. Surely they would revise the dogma now. No, they carried on until there were no apostles left. Because there were no apostles left, no new priests could be appointed. In turn, the priests became fewer and fewer in number. Surely they would change the dogma now, either appoint new apostles, or else change the rule that only apostles could appoint priests. No, they wouldn’t do it. The final priests died in the 20th century, the membership declined and churches closed. It was successful movement in the nineteenth century with many wealthy members and, despite its membership drying up completely, a legacy fund and trustees maintain their former church in London. The church building is now used by other groups. The building is testimony to a religion that died out rather than alter its dogma.
• 

  TheScientist

  It might be in their interests to change, but that doesn’t mean they’ll do it. People can act against their interests all the time, especially when religious belief is in the mix.
  

  Two scenarios then:

  1. They don't change: the numbers continue to decline as there is no new people entering the sect, young people (which parents force them to be JW) and some adults continue leaving the sect. The old and mid-age JW die and the sect dies together with them.

  2. They change: some people enter the sect though JW friends and less negative opinion of the society, young people choose to stay in it because it's "cool", mid and old-age can talk to their relative ones which are exJW.

  In any case, either the sect is ended (which is good) or the sect become more inofensive (which is good too).
• 

  slimboyfat

  the numbers continue to decline …

  They have to begin declining before they can continue declining. Unlike the vast majority of churches JWs are holding their own in western countries and continuing to grow in many others. They suffered one year of decline during the pandemic, under 1%, and quickly recovered. Other churches lost huge numbers of members in the UK during the pandemic. Attendance at the Church of England is down by 20% and this may actually turn out to be an underestimate. The Church of Scotland needs to close hundreds of churches in the next few years to cope with the decline.

  I have argued in the past that the Internet is a net benefit for WT in terms of dealing with dissidents. In the past when people discovered “it’s not the truth” there was not the easy option of joining a like minded group of people online. Instead they took their issues to their families and friends in the congregation to have it out. This was majorly disruptive in some cases, such as in Calgary where reportedly over 100 JWs left the organisation in the fallout from Jim Penton’s defection. These days that doesn’t happen because people choose to leave quietly instead, make contacts with other ex members, and don’t cause all that much trouble in their congregations.
• 

  TheScientist

  They have to begin declining before they can continue declining. Unlike the vast majority of churches JWs are holding their own in western countries and continuing to grow in many others. They suffered one year of decline during the pandemic, under 1%, and quickly recovered.
  

  I'm wondering where you got those numbers from. In the JW World Report's numbers, the number of baptisms is stagnating year after year. And we are talking about official numbers. Things could be worse than they let on. Just look at the number of empty meetings and congregations being merged into one. I agree that in poorer countries, the work has not seen this decline. But overall, the situation is depressing. Otherwise they wouldn't be making so many desperate changes.
  
• 

  vienne

  I watch many of the anti-Witness videos. Most are repulsive, irrational, poorly done, and by people who do not present themselves or their mentality in a good light. I don't believe the Watchtower has anything to fear from most of those who oppose it.
• 

  joe134cd

  “Things could be worse than they let on.”

  https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/4801405261447168/comparison-between-jws-lds-sda-mexico
  

  This may help answer that question about the truthfulness of wt reporting methods. Like slim said, it’s when you start comparing other groups, that are similar to Wt, that you realise how well and truthful they are.

  Speaking for my own country. Which could be described as a wealthy western country. The census figure has always been, and still is presently, twice that reported by Wt. I’ve heard similar reports anecdotally as well. Interestingly though, I will say, that over the years there has been a slight decrease in the census figure. I explain this in terms of the people leaving the religion, are now not leaving because they can’t be bothered going, but still identify as a jw in the census. But leave because they disagree with the doctrine or the JW culture, hence they don’t identify in the censes. I think the dynamics in people leaving has changed, due to availability of information. However that been said the figure is still roughly twice that of wt.
• 

  Phizzy

  With the Disfellowshipping thing, this may have already been said, but they are never going to drop it, who gets rid of an effective tool, where nothing else will perform the same function ?

  They may modify the criteria for DFing, similar to how they keep lowering the Bar to qualify as an MS or Elder, they may RAISE the bar to get yourself DF'd

  For example, if it is "sexual sin", stressing to Elders that the errant one must be given every chance over a period of time to repent, "it may take some time to bring a person to Repentance". And similarly when dealing with Doctrinal differences more time than in past may be spent "re-adjusting" the person, which in reality means getting them to shelve what they have discovered.

  And if the Elders have decided a person is a " Spiritual Danger", time may be recommended so as to persuade the person to keep their trap shut.

  In the past, as in my case, the very first 2 Elder "Shepherding call" was only with the purpose of getting a quick DFing accomplished, the Org. may discourage that attitude.
• 

  slimboyfat

  There’s a difference between lower baptism numbers (true) and decline in membership (not happened yet).

  I agree with Phizzy that the criteria for DFing may change. Unofficially, it already has in my observation, because DFing is nowhere near as common now as it used to be. Back in the 80s and 90s it was a fairly regular occurrence, as was reinstatement. These days it hardly ever seems to happen. Why is that? Maybe people have got more savvy about avoiding getting DFed because of online advice and support. Maybe elders have become more reluctant to resort DFing for various reasons: aware that it looks bad to outsiders, don’t believe in it themselves. I think it’s a combination of these factors.