"No obligation" to care for non dub Mother"

BluesBrother

I stumbled accross this ancient booklet "Neutrality Of Jehovah's Witnesses" which is a re print of the Watchtower November 1st 1939 . note the Rhetorical question at the top of the page , and the answer given at the foot of page 22 and over to 23

alt

That statement shocked me ! How can anyone dare say that we owe our "Brother,sister mother after the flesh nothing bar to preach the kingdom to them, unless they are of what he called "The family of God"....

I credited this to Rutherford because we know that the modern WTBTS does advocate caring for ones elderley relatives whether they be in, out or disfellowshipped. But this statement from the same "Spirit directed" organiisation shows that they had a total lack of understanding of the priciples of Christianity ..and in no way reflected the God they claimed to represent

Kenneson

Rutherford wouldn't have cared for a non-believing mother, but he sure looked out for himself, deceiving people into purchasing Beth Sarim and Beth Shan so said for the soon-to-be resurrected Old Testament princes (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc.), when in reality it served his own purposes.

pratt1

How about the reverse?

Does a non-believing or DFor DA child have the responsibilty of taking care of their elderly parents?

Voyager

Excellent work BluesBrother! I am always amazed at some of the quotes we come across when researching older literature. And some of the newer literature have some pretty "rank" quotes as well!

Good job Blues!

Preston

if there's any justice he'll be resurrected as a single woman in Iran...

JustTickledPink

Well if you believed that the JW religion had the FALSE religion and you had the right religion and they didn't believe you, then you could actually say the JW relatives were non-believers in the "faith" and use their very own book against them.

Buster

And we all know this is an attitude that still exists.

If dubbies could look at the cited scripture, Mark 9:40, with the fresh perspective of a larger context (say from verse 38 on), they would see that they are being misled (lied to) by the misapplication of the scripture. As a matter of fact, it is a simple matter to see that the WTS (along with many of those little boutique religions) take that scripture out of context and apply the exact opposite meaning.

That scripture is about allowing variations in application of faith - not disallowing. You see, Christ accepted the works of faith even of those that werre not foloowing him.

It turns my stomach to see someone use that scripture to justify ignoring one's family obligations.

Bonnie_Clyde

The attitude still prevails. I heard Samuel Herd (governing body member) at at circuit assembly say that if your mother is df'd, you would have as little contact with her as possible. I bet that many witnesses would use it as an excuse not to even care for the physical needs of their mother.

what_Truth?

Blues Brother, how recently did they change the doctrine? Back in the mid-80's, when my grandfather died, my disfellowshipped dad was taking care of my JW grandmother for a while. The elders went after her for associating with a disfellowshipped person. My dad, who was working towards being re-instated, was also told not to associate with her. (of course this could have something to do with the fact that he was going after several brothers who had not paid back the money she lent them).

justhuman

Rutherford the Boose as usual!!!

"No obligation" to care for non dub Mother" - Rutherford