New DF/DA Policy?

by new light 31 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • tijkmo
    tijkmo

    think there is abit of paranoia and deliberately looking for faults going on here...there is no ambiguity in the statements....an inactive person is NOT the same as a d/a person...and an inactive person has always been someone who is not active in the ministry even though they may be attending all the meetings and doing nothing else wrong......so no ..no-one is going to be considered organizationally as being d/a because they dont go to meetings or engage in fs...these ones should still be getting regular help from loving concerned sheperds..lol...what is of interest is whether they address the issue of who gets disfellowshipped...the book says UNREPENTANT wrongdoers but pretty much all the d/fs i have heard of recently inc my own have been of GENUINELY SORRY wrongdoers who were just not believed by an incompetent untrained unqualified unaccountable j/c hellbent (tijkmo) on executing punishment...

    Of note too is the comment that someone may become inactive due to PERSECUTION...which is understandable if you are locked in solitary confinement but ought never to be the result of treatment by other members of the true religion noted for its love amongst itself...inc continuing to treat a reinstated person as if they are still d/f

    Further..all the time i was d/f i never stopped witnessing about j....so how can they announce that they are no longer one of j..w.. the statement is slanderous and there would be quite a few 'witnesses' to the fact although they would probably be silent witnesses if instructed

  • purplesofa
    purplesofa
    Further..all the time i was d/f i never stopped witnessing about j....so how can they announce that they are no longer one of j..w.. the statement is slanderous

    good point.........they cannot keep you from witnessing when you are DF. Also, in keeping with what disfellowshipping is about, to help the erring one to turn around. And disfellowshipping is supposed to be a form of discipline and Jehovah disciplines those that he loves. Think of all in the org that are hiding thier sins, at least one that is DF has thier errors in the open.

    purps

  • IP_SEC
    IP_SEC

    First activity or inactivty has never been based on meeting atendance only service

    Second, Yes I agree 'no longer one of Jehovahs witnesses' is slanderous to me. As I still believe in the God of the Hebrews and witness about him.

    I dont think the announcement wording has helped them legally.

  • purplesofa
    purplesofa

    Ok.......think of this...........With the announcement and pronounced judgement the you are no longer a Jehovahs Witness......A DF person could not say......I am a JW but in a disfellowshipped state. they would be classified as no longer a JW. In all reality anyone could say they are a Jehovahs Witness. Anyone could chose to be a witness for Jehovah.

    Oh well, maybe they just don't wnat the congregation to know if a person is out by choice or force.

  • IP_SEC
    IP_SEC

    AHHH you may have hit on something here purple... in fact I think I can agree with you 100% They dont want people to know how many new ppl are DAing....

    interesting

  • iiz2cool
    iiz2cool
    maybe they just don't wnat the congregation to know if a person is out by choice or force.

    I think that's what it is. More people are leaving by choice now, and I don't think the society wants their members to know that. It causes people to think, and that's something the society doesn't want.

    Walter

  • RunningMan
    RunningMan

    I believe that might be the key. The society does not like people thinking that they can just walk away. They don't like members to know that many others are walking away with impunity. So, they are upping the stakes a little bit.

    I'm not sure if this is a good strategy for them, but it certainly is in keeping with their high-handed authoritarianism.

  • new light
    new light

    Thanks for posting those quotes, especially IP_Sec. It would seem that not much has changed. I was curious to see if they would sanction more agressive housekeeping by removing us walkaways. Purplesofa threw a lot of light on things with her idea. It makes sense to me that they don't want people to know how many leave deliberately.

  • cyber-sista
    cyber-sista

    Yes, it would seem that not much has changed BUT....as I found out a couple of years ago that there is a lot of new light and unwritten rules in WT organization that is not presented to the average JW until a situation arises. Then the elders pull these little tricks out of their bag and twist them around to fit and control whatever situation they please. They could interpret this rule anyway they want--we all know of people who have been shunned for not commiting a sin, but only for speaking out against wrongdoing in the congo.

    cybs

  • toreador
    toreador

    How can they take away a persons baptism? Isnt this in effect what they are doing when they think they can judge you are no longer a JW? I dont get it. Isnt this admitting to all that you are simply baptized into an organization and has nothing to do with baptism in the name of the father son and holy spirit?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit