NEW BOOK EXCERPT..WORTH NOTING.

integ

Hi,

As you've heard, the new book "Organized to do Jehovahs Will" was released today. Here is an excerpt that I trust you will "appreciate", in regards to getting involved with the "world".

' ..a Christian might renounce his faith by his actions, such as by becoming part of a secular organization that has objectives contrary to the Bible, and hence, is under judgement by Jehovah God. (Isa, 2:4) If a person chooses to join those who are disapproved by God, a brief announcement is made to the congregation, stating: "[ Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovahs' Witnesses." Such a person is treated the same way as a disfellowshipped person.'

One of the big points here, besides the obvious hypocrisy given the Societys' involvement in the UN, is the fact that the "wrongdoer" does not not even have the privilage of a judicial meeting....They can just DF you. There is no mention I see of a JC in this case, which makes me wonder if this new carte blanche DF'ing stance will be just a catch-all tool to DF anyone just for the hell of it. With this stance, they can Df you for working in a store that sells cigarettes if they want to. Or if you happen to work at a place that makes parts for the military...or WHATEVER. I am just at the beginning stages of absorbing the wonderful pieces of instruction to be found in this book, so I will contribute more gems as I go along. I'm sure others on this forum have the book as well, so input and various thoughts are encouraged.

Thanks,

Integ.

the_classicist

I guess the people who joined the YMCA would be df'd. Same with those who joined the UN.... wait a minute!

Fleur

No wonder my mother was freaking out. I bet they could also use that to df someone who sees a df'd person in their family.

(~(*^~*^~%^%#!~~@@_)#(!!!!!!!!

blondie

integ, actually the WTS considers that the person has disassociated themselves by joining a church or joining the military which is why no JC is held. The same would be true if a person accepted a blood transfusion (since 2000) that rather than being DF'd, they would be viewed as having disassociated themselves.

Blondie

Ticker

It sure does seem hypocritical given their involvement with the UN themselves. Im sure they would explain it away as "well the UN actually is an org in line with the bibles objective of world peace." But wait isn't the bibles objective of world peace acomplished by God and not a manmade org, arn't mans efforts futile according to the bible. So in essence an announcement should be made from the platform stating "The Watchtower and Bible Tract Society inc. is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses." We all know that announcement is never coming. Just another case of whitewashing their exterior. Very dissapointing and hypocritical.

Ticker

IP_SEC

Dang well I was hoping this would be a loosening up some by calling folks "no longer one of JWs" it would be like well they are worldly now and not the same as a disfellowshipped person.

Its no change, just a pc way of saying someone is DAd.

How can they enforce this. No longer one of jehovahs witnesses, is the same as a worldy person. Whats the difference between this and an inactive person? Im livid.

stillajwexelder

I think the material in this book will keep us all busy on this board for quite some time

purplesofa

I still think it puts pressure on family members that have inactive ones, to make it back or have the risk of being announced as No longer a Jehovahs Witness. I don't know why they can't just leave well enough alone.

integ

This book will drive you absolutely insane......If you have any animosity towards the borg now...just wait till you read this. This book reflects "current thinking", and from what I have read so far, they are in no way loosening things up. I really don't know what to make of it. It's almost too upsetting for me to read this crap. They have seriously lost their mind. My hope is, that's not all they are going to lose.

Integ.

observador

"integ, actually the WTS considers that the person has disassociated themselves by joining a church or joining the military which is why no JC is held. The same would be true if a person accepted a blood transfusion (since 2000) that rather than being DF'd, they would be viewed as having disassociated themselves."

You're right, Blondie. But, his point is a good one, because WHO is to make the decision that a person has crossed their lines? If an elder understands it that way, would that be enough to warrant such an announcement? If case there are more than one elder who understands it that way, how many should there be? In case they meet, wouldn't that be a JC? Will the person be advised of the announcement before hand?

A lot of questions still to be answered...

Observador.

NEW BOOK EXCERPT..WORTH NOTING.

Share this