DFing, DAing, and apostasy

by troubled 9 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  troubled

  I have a question involving disassociating, disfellowshipping, and apostasy. Particularly DAing.

  The Bible say where someone comes to you and does not bring "this teaching" or is an unrepentent practicer of gross sin, never let them into your homes or greet him; remove the wicked man from among yourselves. And this is the scriptural basis used for shunning persons who are DF'd or DA'd.

  But my question is this: when it says if someone comes to you and doesn't bring "this teaching," what specifically does "this teaching" refer to? Is it "the Truth" as a whole? Or the teaching of the Christ and his ransom?

  What I've always believed and been taught is that any person who formally leaves Jehovah's organization, whether DF'd or DA'd, has this scripture is applied to them. They are viewed as not remaining in "the teaching," as apostates, and are not spoken to.

  But what if the person voluntarily DA's? What if that person has NOT committed a gross sin? If "the teaching" in the scriptures refers to that of the Christ and his ransom, and the DA'd one still accepts that teaching, is there still a scriptural basis to shun them?

  I plan to read over the info in the Reasoning book again and do more research. But was curious if others have researched into this and/or what they've found out.
• 

  Mulan

  Hello troubled. Instead of being concerned about what the WTS says this means, try to read it and see the intent of the writer.

  That is a good rule, no matter what your question is, regarding scripture. What did the writer mean, and what did the reader understand it to mean? Then you will find the 'real' Truth.

  Marilyn (a.k.a. Mulan)
• 

  BoozeRunner

  I recent years, DA'ing has become the way to get rid of annoying JW's who seek justice or change from the warped hierarchy in the WTS. It is done w/o any letter from the individual, who has committed NO sin nor any other infraction warranting such treatment.
  This happened to my brother, an elder who realized that his PO was not handling matters according to WTS instructions.

  Boozy
• 

  troubled

  Thanks for replying. Anyone else have any information/advice?
• 

  Simon

  I looked into that scripture quite a while back and the 'teaching' that was being refered to before that was said was about Jesus being resurrected in flesh (as opposed to spirit)...

  ... of course the WTS doesn't teach that, does it ?!
• 

  Amazing

  Hi Troubled: The Bible says this:

  2 Jn 1:9-11, "Whosoever goes onward and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God: he that abides in the teaching, the same has both the Father and the Son. If any one comes to you, and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into (your) house, and give him no greeting: for he that gives him greeting partakes in his evil works."

  First, the "teaching" is of Christ, and all that Christ represented. No church or organization is mentioned. Second, the 'greeting' in those days was to wish a person well in their work, and not the brief 'hello' we might say in 21st Century USA. Third, a Christian would not receive a person into their home who was teaching against Christ. There are debates as to how this applies, but I will not get into that.

  The above verse is what the Society uses to shun because those who leave their religion, whether voluntarily by Disassociation, or forcibly through Disfellowshipping. They are, by their conduct and/or their 'teaching', viewed as promoting wicked works.

  Technically, all who leave the WTS are in some form of 'apostasy'. For example, someone DF'd for adultery, they are viewed as 'teaching' by example that adultery is okay, because they did it, and did not display adequate repentance, such they they are viewed as 'promoting' their teaching. However, normally they are not treated as apostates because they are shunned for unreprentant sin, and may not be actively going door-to-door 'teaching' JWs to commit adultery. So, the label 'apostate' is mainly applied to those who 'actively' teach against the Watchtower religion.

  The 'teaching' of Christ, though, has to do with recognition of him as the Son of God, come in the flesh, dying for our sins, and resurrected to heaven. A good research of the Bible reveals that this is the core central doctrine of Christianity. Groups like the Watch Tower Society manage to expand this to anything and everthing their religion teaches. Loyalty to the 'teaching' of Christ is broadened and embellished into loyalty to the 'teachings' of the Watch Tower organization. - Amazing
• 

  Defender

  Hello troubled,

  Your question is valid and merits serious consideration. You are right in understanding that "this teaching" refers to the good news of Christ and his ransom. That was the focal point of the good news that Christ and his apostles preached back in the first century. In fact, this remains to be the main Good News to be preached to this day. Any revision, alteration and addition such as those that the Society has formulated constitutes a serious diversion.

  Just few examples

  1- Nowhere in the scritpures do we find emphasis and salvation atributed to an organization. Instead, it is Jesus Christ who occupies this sacred role.

  2- While God's name is recorded as "YHWH" in the Old Testament and some has transliterated it as "Jehovah", it was not the main focus of the Good News of Christ. In all of Christ's recorded prayers in the NT, not once does he address God in his personal name. Not even at the point of his death at the stake. Instead, he referred to God as his Father and "Eli, Eli..." which means "My God, My God..." upon his death. This is something that JWs would find difficult to do.

  3- The Society's reference to two classes of Christians is foreighn to scriptures. When reading the scriptures properly and undertanding the context, then you would realize that when Jesus referred to "Other sheep", he was talking about the prospective sheep that would come in from the nations and join the local sheep from Israel to become under one shepherd. The aposlte Paul also focused on one hope and one faith.

  Therefore, the main issue is not whether the Society's shunning its DF'd or DA's members is scriptural, but rather whether a true Christian who after realizing the true intent and main focus of the Good News should shun and abhor the teachings of the Society and those that adamantly come bearing them.
• 

  SixofNine

  Funny li'l paradox isn't it. One can't really be a Christian in the sense of a footstep follower of Christ, and still even TRY to apply this scripture.

  Any thinking person will understand exactly why I said the above. The rest of you, your place is outside with the dogs.
• 

  Had Enough

  Hello troubled:

  I've been following your posts as much as I could this past week but have often been too busy to form a decent reply.

  Even now I can't give you any more of a reply than to direct you to a couple of websites that I found most helpful when wrestling with this issue. I've been where you are now and have spent many hours searching for answers that make sense.

  I hope you can find some direction from the info from the above posters and from the following sites I have saved for my own references.

  Scriptural Discussion on 2 John 5-11 and 2 Cor. 5:1-13
  http://www.escapefromwatchtower.com/friends.html

  Several discussions and links at
  http://watchtower.observer.org/apps/pbcs.dll/oversikt?Kategori=DOCTRINE6

  Interesting discussion on subject

  http://www.xjw.com/shunning.html

  I hope these help for now. There's more but I have to log off again.

  Had Enough
• 

  hawkaw

  Troubled,

  Amasing is bang on but I say go further.

  Read the entire 2 John to get a real sense of what is going on. Especially the verses just before 9 and 10.

  When you read them you realize who John was talking about (and he wasn't talking about people who were expressing a concern over little kids needlessly bleeding death).

  Oh, I almost forgot - make sure you have read up on Alan F's stuff on the 607 BCE stuff at the web site I sited earlier ( http://www.geocities.com/osarsif/index2.htm . I also urge you to pay particular attention as to how the society changed the date of the fall of Jer. from 606 BCE to 607 BCE.

  It will blow you away and give you a hint as to how weak the society's date system really is.

  The more you learn, the more you force them to come clean.

  hawk ( http://www.ajwrb/org