JW's Not Members anymore but Individuals

pistolpete

I've been waiting for someone to post this and I've haven't seen it yet, perhaps I overlooked it since I don't visit that often.

But here is the link to the discussion. In it you will find letters and links to this new light. Whether it's true or not, please verify.

As of . this year Watchtower sent a letter to all Bodies of Elders. Stating that the publishers in the congregation are no longer "members.
Now Jehovah's Witnesses are to be referred to as an "individuals" and no longer a "member". As of April 2020.

https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/iyekpt/breaking_news_from_watchtower_headquarters/

littlerockguy

So why would they baptize individuals for if they would no longer be members of the organization? What idiots.

Beth Sarim

''So why would they baptize individuals for if they would no longer be members of the organization? What idiots.''

Wait on Jehovah to unveil it with 'new light'. Or 'invisibly'.

If true this does not surprise me several years ago and I can't Source it JW's learned that they were not Representatives that only circuit overseers and above in the hierarchy are considered Representatives so whether or not representatives and members are synonymous I don't know

3rdgen

It's obvious to me that the lawyers want to remove as much liability as possible for the Borg. If nobody is a member how can the borg be sued for what an individual chooses to do (or not do) on his own? This is yet another way to distance themselves from having to pay settlements.

Overrated

Since the Org does not consider members as members. It should be real easy to disconnect with them since they don't count you as a member. It would make fading very easy.

StephaneLaliberte

In canada, if you have contractors and yet, treat them as employees, they are considered employees and have the same legal obligations then if they were in fact employees. It is not what you say that matters, it is how you act. Hence, even if they say that people are individuals and not members, they are in fact members. They gather together, have membership in smaller groups (service and bible groups). If they do something wrong, they can be disfellowshipped. They congregation and bethels hold records about them. They are financially sustained by them. All the actions are those of members of a religious organization. Taking away the name changes doesn't change that. BUT, it will likely contribute to lengthening a few court processes.

Diogenesister

Link Dislike Like

3rdGen It's obvious to me that the lawyers want to remove as much liability as possible for the Borg. If nobody is a member how can the borg be sued for what an individual chooses to do (or not do) on his own? This is yet another way to distance themselves from having to pay settlements.

I agree. In another thread I said I think the confusion over the following - Governing Body’s 2009 statement that as The Slave they are appointed over\responsible for Jesus’ “valuable things” In the form of Kingdom Halls, Assembly Halls and Warwick etc

Yet at the same time not appointed Over/responsible for ‘the domestics’ until ~~Jesus~~ Antony Morris drama Queen return in the form of Armageddon - is just the Watchtower lawyers talking

waton

what is the latest baptism question relating to organisation membership" " do you understand -- to be part of Jehovah's 's organisation (not spirit directed any more)?

can you be a part but not a member?

smiddy3

If I remember correctly the rank and file are not members of the organization they are only volunteers of their own choosing so the organization is not responsible for their actions.

But the fact that they are baptised into the organization ,doesn`t that make them members ?