by blondie 17 Replies latest jw friends
Whatever the legal motive, don't you think that "adherent" is more descriptive than "member"? That is, "adhere" means something that sticks, like tape or some other adhesive.
Isn't the real litmus test for a loyal Witness that he/she sticks to whatever the GB says about anything? Thus I can't help but think that any change to "adherent" from "member" has some element of this thinking behind it, whether such thinking is overtly conscious to the GB themselves or not.
The 2020 US Religion Census, which the JWs participated in, uses the word adherent for all religions. Here is a screenshot of their into page at https://www.usreligioncensus.org/ :
LEARN ABOUT OUR DATA
They probably got it from 1 Cor 5:13 --- remove the wicked person from among yourselves.
"Removed"
Its like lipstick on a 🐷 pig.
Same outcome.
@Blondie: I'm not lying; the sheeple are now legally referred to as "adherents", not "members."
Members: People part of a group or Organization, abiding by the Org's rules, mandates, doctrines, procedures, etc. Typically act as a group based upon the Org's direction.
Adherents: Individuals acting on their own volition, deciding for themselves to adhere to the recommendations of an Organization, but not legally bound to do so. If they do something on their own, the Organization is not responsible for their actions, as they aren't MEMBERS.
Where it gets hairy: After 1984 or so, the baptism questions were amended to be that you are baptized into the JW's in the name of the "Father, the Son, and God's spirit-directed Organization on earth." (removed Holy Spirit)
WingCommander, I hope you didn't think I said you were lying, far from it. I was just looking for a direct correlation to that in the vocabulary of the WTS publications. I found that most current use of "adherent" was aimed at non-jw religions. What I found was the terms "fellow believers" or "fellow worshippers" are used now, and agree that the word "member" has fallen by the wayside. Do you have somewhere the WTS has interacted with the legal system and "adjusted" the term "member" in the WTS comments to the legal system? Not for proof for me, but other people who are not familiar with the WTS legal tactics. I don't doubt that the WTS is using careful word choice to establish a so-called "legal" premise in their own mind (the WTS). Like "removed" rather than "disfellowshipping." Or saying that the WTS doens't have a clergy class in past WT publications, but now have "adjusted" it to "paid clergy" to qualify under the "clergy-penitent" exemption that the Catholic Church and others are using to say they are not required to report child abuse. But the idea/meaning is the same.
This was in April 2020 from PP - Thanks Blondie was going to try Kim but his files were available from u--
""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/
So why would they baptize individuals for if they would no longer be members of the organization? What idiots.
So its "anyone, publisher, someone" buzz words now, not members. So why did we get baptized? Say the words? If you join a club to be members, why wouldn't the word "members" apply? Because of something legal, this is a lawyers way of getting around the fact they "someone, publisher, someone" really isn't one of us. The news reports say " he/she was a member of Jehovahs Witnesses" if a crime has occured, say child abuse. So makes the org look bad that a "member" did it.
