DA-ing Announcement in the Society's New Book

by Mark 136 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Mark

  Elsewhere,

  I'm afraid I don't have an easy way of posting the contents of the book in .pdf format,

  but I'm sure someone will do so soon.

  All,

  I totally agree with your comments. The motivation behind this move is the advice of

  the society's legal department, but I'm sure they will advertize the change to the rank

  and file as an attempt at simplification. So now the elder bodies have a new inquisitorial

  whip to crack at the 'spiritually weak' members of the congregation. I'm sure that, as we

  speak, the service department is preparing instructions on how to use their new 'toy'.

  Watch out for the 2005 elders' school.

  Mark
• 

  Leolaia

  The Watchtower Society on the subject of cults:

  ***

  w01 4/15 p. 25 You Can Succeed Regardless of Your Upbringing ***

  From all appearances, Malinda?s parents were respectable churchgoing members of their community. But they were also deeply involved in a cult. "Some of their cult practices were abusive to me and destroyed my spirit as a child [Sound familiar? N.B.]," laments Malinda, now in her 30?s.

  ***

  g97 10/8 p. 11 A Trouble-Free Paradise?Soon a Reality ***

  The Witnesses? beliefs, based entirely on God?s Word, the Bible, prevent them from falling into the trap of becoming a sect or a cult. [Where does the Bible say that God today has Jehovah's Witnesses as his theocratic organization? N.B.] They take a kindly interest in all other people, of whatever religious persuasion. No, they do not try to force these people to change their viewpoint [Except those already in the organization who can't accept every new twist and turn in doctrine. N.B.].

  ***

  w94 2/15 p. 7 Are Jehovah?s Witnesses a Cult? ***

  It is precisely because of this close adherence to Bible teachings that the veneration and idolization of human leaders so characteristic of cults today is not to be found among Jehovah?s Witnesses [Instead they demand obedience to an organization that claims to be directed personally by God. N.B.]. They reject the concept of a clergy-laity distinction [Except they do, they just call it a distinction between the "anointed" and the "great crowd of other sheep", the latter being dependent on the former for salvation and direction. N.B.]. The Encyclopedia of Religion aptly states about Jehovah?s Witnesses: "A clergy class and distinctive titles are prohibited."

  They follow Jesus Christ as their Leader and as Head of the Christian congregation [No mention here of the belief about the F&DS class, which is the obvious cult-like doctrine that is conveniently omitted from this discussion. N.B.]. It was Jesus who said: "Do not you be called Rabbi, for one is your teacher, whereas all you are brothers. Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One. Neither be called ?leaders,? for your Leader is one, the Christ."?Matthew 23:8-12.
• 

  garybuss

  If being a Witness is a trip, then disfellowshipping is a speeding ticket. Disassociating is saying screw it and going back home.
  
  If being a Witness was like a video game, disfellowship is death after a monster attack, go back to the starting pad and start killing frogs. Disassociating is saying screw it and quitting the game.
• 

  doinmypart

  Under the new rules if a person is "no longer a Jehovah's Witness" will the WTS still require that person be shunned? As it stands now DF'd & DA'd Witnesses are shunned, not John Doe off the street who isn't a JW.

  Perhaps the WTS is using this move to become more mainstream or is this just wishful thinking?
• 

  IP_SEC

  Under the new rules if a person is "no longer a Jehovah's Witness" will the WTS still require that person be shunned? As it stands now DF'd & DA'd Witnesses are shunned, not John Doe off the street who isn't a JW.

  Thats exactly my question. How do they dicriminate between No longer a Witness and Not a Witness. If we are supose to continue to shun I dont see how they can use the terminology No longer a Witness.

  No longer a Witness could easly be understood as just a worldly person. Heck thats the way it struck me from the first and I know better.

  Inactive people fall under that distinction now. Will they be lumped in the the Disfellowshipped Sinners
• 

  Balsam

  So basically if a person just stops attending meetings the Elders can take that as a wish to no longer live by congregational standards and disassociated that person. And they have the gall to speak of God's love, what a joke that organization is, it no more represents the bible then say Hitler did.

  Balsam
• 

  BluesBrother

  Put yourself in the place of a dub sitting at a Thursday meeting. He hears that someone is "No longer a Jehovahs Witness" . So? what does that mean, has he been d/fd or not? is he guilty of some gross sin? .... I guess they have to read between the lines and assume that they have to shun him..

  If they announced it about me, they would probably think "We knew that anyway because if he comes he never comments or puts in a report" - no change?
• 

  iiz2cool

  Under the new rules if a person is "no longer a Jehovah's Witness" will the WTS still require that person be shunned? As it stands now DF'd & DA'd Witnesses are shunned, not John Doe off the street who isn't a JW.

  I'm sure they'd continue to shun, regardless of changes in terminology. They can't afford to have their sheeplike ones? talking to sinful demonized bastards like me.

  Walter
• 

  roybatty

  "[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses."

  They've been saying that for years about people who are inactive, or miss a lot of meetings. I think they'll use this as a means of getting rid of people they don't like.

  I was told when they anounced my Da'ing, that's how they stated it. This was some 5 years ago. As a matter of fact, prior to that when I was an elder and it was my turn to make the "special" anoucement about someone being I don't believe I ever used the words "disfellowshipped" or "disassociated" but rather was instructed to state that "so and so no longer a member of the (fill in the blank) congregation." I recall the PO being very specific on how I was to make the announcement. Again that was some 6 or 7 years ago. Maybe the Society is just making sure all congregations are following procedure. Gag! Almost makes me choke saying that.
• 

  Doubtfully Yours

  "by his actions"???!!!

  How about lack thereof???!!! This is exactly my problem. There's no action from me. Not a whole lot of preaching, not a whole lot of associating with the spiritual ones, not a whole lot of meeting attendance.

  Well, I better step lightly or my name will find itself at the beginning of that statement soon in my congregation.

  DY