by imallgrowedup 5 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
From another thread --
You do know that no one gets das associated anymore, right? Not since 1988-89. Somewhere in there. Only if you are baptized, and gave your life to Jehovah, then if you comit unrepented sin, then you are disfellowshipped. Gidget girl.
We all know this is not true!
Please sign in with date of DA to show one of our newest posters that she has been fed incorrect information!
growedup
It is my understanding that if an active JW takes a blood transfusion or enlists in the military they are automatically disassociated.
I'm neither DA'd or DF'd, and neither is my wife. For that matter, they might still be counting 4 hours a month and a Bible Study for her after the congregation secretary 'volunteered' that information for her (which only goes to show how bogus all those precious statistics are).
Chris
My wife and I were announced as disassociated because we wrote a letter requesting that our baptisms be nullified. This happened only four months ago.
I think she might be thinking of when the used to treated unbaptized publishers (approved associates) who committed DF'ing offenses the same was as baptized JWs who were DF'd. Unofficially, JWs said these approved associates (unbaptized) had been "disassociated" and were treated as if they were DF'd.
w88 11/15 Helping Others to Worship God ***
Previously, an unbaptized person who qualified to share in the field ministry was termed an "approved associate." However, "unbaptized publisher" is a more accurate designation, especially in view of the Biblical indication that God?s approval results from a valid dedication and Christian baptism.
Previously, unbaptized ones who unrepentantly sinned were completely avoided. While, as adjusted above, this is not required, the counsel at 1 Corinthians 15:33 should still be observed.
w89 2/15 p. 29 Questions From ReadersDoes the material on being approved by God mean that Christians may speak to one who once was considered an "approved associate" but later, because of wrongdoing, was to be avoided?
Yes, it does. The Watchtower of November 15, 1988, showed why it is Scriptural to adjust our view of an unbaptized person who shares in the public ministry with Jehovah?s Witnesses. Formerly, such a person was termed an "approved associate." If he thereafter unrepentantly broke God?s laws, the congregation was alerted, and the members would then avoid association and conversation with him.
As the recent material showed, the Bible requires that such disciplinary action be taken in the case of baptized persons who are unrepentant wrongdoers. (1 Corinthians 5:11-13; 2 John 9-11) Yet, the accountability of an unbaptized person who pursues wrongdoing is not the same as that of one who is baptized. (Luke 12:48) He has not been baptized and thus has not become approved in God?s sight, so disfellowshipping is not appropriate in his case. Basically, he is now a worldly person and can be dealt with accordingly.
I DA'ed in my last Public Talk (hehehe - that figures, huh?) on 6th January 2002, and handed a DA letter to the PO, as I stepped off the platform.
It was subsequently announced (ROFL) on Thursday 10th January.
As someone who was secretary in the cong for over three years, had read the secret Elder's flock book "Pay Attention" several times, and every letter in the file, I can add assurance to the FACT that the DA proceedure continued to exist up to 2002. I happen to know that it still exists, but I've not read every letter since the day I DA'ed, just a few of them as posted on the Net.
I smiled when I saw her post the 1989 date, too.
I didn't feel like correcting her, though.
If I recall correctly we received a letter (in 2001, I think it was), detailing how those who took a blood transfusion would no longer be DF'ed, but DA'ed instead, since they had made their stance regarding the congregation clear with their actions. In all honesty, we all knew that it was to get around "human rights" issues, regardling medical treatment.
They DA'd us after we'd celebrated Christmas six times! The nerve. January 2003
