I'm going to share some excerpts of a 22 letter that I sent to the GB on May 31,1999. Bear with me.
Bottom of page 20
"In conclusion, I like to draw your attention to the account of the man who committed incest at 1 Corinthians chapter five. Paul on verse thirteen says, "Remove the wicked man from among yourselves," In chapter six Paul moves the spiritual brothers to shame for not correcting trivial matters, a good lesson to keep in mind for a lot of senseless disputes in the congregation.
Top of page 21
The account of this brother that was 'removed' picks up at 2 Corinthians 2:5-7 begining with verse six, Paul says, "This rebuke given by the majority is sufficient for such a man, so that, on the contrary now, you should kindly forgive and comfort (him), that somehow such a man may not be swallowed up by his being overly sad. Therefore I exhort YOU to confirm YOUR love for him."
By the way, I'm not being facetious for the questions that I am about to ask.
Let me begin by asking this question, what time frame had elapsed since the time that this man was 'removed' to the time he was 'received' back in the congregation? One year? Two years? Three years? Would you be believe it was a matter of a few months! According to the 'All Inspired and Beneficial' publication, the time frame for writing the first and second Corinthians was, as page 214 paragraph one says, "Not many months had passed since the writing of the first letter to the Corinthians." Do you get the picture?
My next question is, if attending meetings is a prerequisite to repentance and so highly important to these elders, WHY are there so many details missing in this account when it comes to reinstating a brother/sister? For instance, the account doesn't say he was repentant, we only assume. It was also the majority who gave the rebuke. There's nothing nothing in that account that says; he had to attend meetings to be forgiven, is there? How do you explain the shortness of time of his return? The Apostle Paul knew by hiw own personal experience how Jehovah showed him underserved kindness and he now was going to imitate his father's qualities of showing mercy and justice to his brother that had been removed of only a few months. Paul had no personal grudge against his brother.
Brothers, I have always found it difficult to understand how we can work so hard in finding the sheep, spend so much time in studying with them and bring them into the organization and then one false step on their part, wham, they are zapped, expelled." This is not the end of the letter.
Here is a few interesting side notes for your reading. On page 15 I said, "Brothers, there's no need for me to go into details about how many times throughout the organizations history brothers have pinpointed dates about the end of the world. Tell me, how many brothers were wrong? Tell me, why did these brothers pinpointed dates when Jesus words were very emphatic at Matthew 24:36 saying, "Concerning that day and hour nobody knows...only the Father? The publications since the early beginings have always posted dates, how many of the brothers were wrong? In the recent Watchtower of May 1, 1999, page 21 paragraph six and the second to the last sentence reads, "This end is unquestionably coming, even though we cannot pinpoint a date..."
What took the brothers so long to understand Jesus words at Matt 24:36? It's like some people who cannot take a NO for an answer, what part of NO is it that they do not understand? What part of "nobody knows" that is written did the brothers not understand all these years? Do you get the picture? Please do not think I'm being sarcastic or insulting, I'm desperately trying to drive home my points. Is it not also written, 'make sure of all things?" (1Thess 5:21)
I also made a strong defense against the use of the scripture in Acts 26:20 for disfellowshipping which reads, "...I went bringing the message that they should repent and turn to God by doing works that befit repentance."
On page 12 I said, "I have tried for the life of me to figure out how this scripture can be used to disfellowship someone for not attending meetings. My wife has NOT been attending meetings for months, in fact, I have attended more meetings than my wife and I still can't reinstated because the elders do not have enough moxie to say, "......we will not reinstate you becuase you are not regularly attending meetings because meetings is a prerequisite to repentance." Instead, they use vague terms such as ; well you haven't manifested a pattern that would warrant reinstatement."
As to the above scripture, Acts 26:20 I said this on page 13. "I'm trying to figure out how anyone can be expelled by using this scripture especially when the Apostle Paul was speaking to a non-Christian, in defense of his faith! This scripture, Acts 26:20 and its application nowhere resembles the scripture of Acts 15:28, 29, where it's directed to fellow spiritual brothers. Was King Agrippa a fellow anointed Christian? What did King Agrippa know about meetings and repentance? How can these brothers violate the rule at 1 Corinthians 4:6 which says, "Do not go beyong the things that are written" and get away with it? Could you and would you kindly refer me to any written material in the scriptures or the publication of the orgainzation that says, "attending meetings is a prerequisite to repentance?" In fact, the Watchtower of April 15, 1999 page 30, asks the question under, 'DO YOU REMEMBER' "What must one do to receive God's forgiveness for wrongdoing?" In part it says, "...A repentant spirit and a desire to right the wrong."
The closest I came to any material about meeting attendance is found in the Watchtower of March 1, 1998 page 19 paragraph 17 and the last sentence of that paragraph reads, "AS FAR AS THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES PERMIT, THEY FIND DELIGHT IN BEING REGULAR ATTENDANCE AT CHRISTIAN MEETINGS."
As I said, this letter is 22 pages in length. I got no answer. Did I expect any? NO!
Guest 77
