i was wondering ... what are all of the "official" reasons provided by elders for disfellowshipping someone?
i know the most common reasons are adultery and fornication, but what about the others?
a couple of years ago i traveled back to my hometown` and one of my old jw acquaintances told me that her grown son had been disfellowshipped for refusing to stop associating with another disfellowshipped person.
The "Shepard the Flock" book lists the following DF offenses:
manslaughter
attempted suicide
porneia
brazen/loose conduct
child sexual abuse
pursuing a romantic relationship with someone not free to marry
gross uncleanness
misuse of addictive drugs
apostasy
drunkenness
gluttony
stealing
lying
fraud and slander
obscene speech
greed/gambling
fits of anger/violence
As pointed out above a couple of these are so broad as to include just about anything.
why didn't jesus ever write anything?
why are there no letters to jesus?
no painting of jesus from that time?
Due to the ban on idolatry, the Jews didn't not make busts or paintings of anybody. The Romans would not have considered him a suitable subject for artwork.
scenerio.
your daughter gets pregnant.
your little girl whom you've invested your life and love.
We have a ten year old granddaughter living with us. Her father (our son) got his act together and is back in college. Her mother is around, but only sees her from time to time. (I don't want to go into the nature of the complications, they're in the past.) My wife and I wouldn't trade her for the world, although we sometimes are forced into facing the fact that we were younger last time we did this.
It worked for us, but I recognized it might not for everybody.
it just seems to me religion in general primarily makes truly bad people worse, not genuinly good people better; and in many cases has even made good people do bad things in the name of their religion.
just curious, a personal poll if you will.
what are you guys' current views on religion as a whole?
I could tell you lots about that once you tell me how it is in anyway connected to your bizarre assertion that, " 500/1000 years ago when much of the world was warring tribes religion is what brought peace"
I'm with Cofty on that one. I quick look at Wikipedia brought up this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Lists_of_wars_by_date
If religion ended war 500-1000 years ago (or even made a dent at getting started) I'm not seeing it.
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
religions aren't necessarily incorporate, sole proprietorships, government entities, etc
Name a religion in this country that is not a legal entity.
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
Within a generation or so this will be a moot point.
Less in my opinion. All three of my children (ages 39, 38, 29) see this as a non issue. Even folks my age are changing our opinions. I believe recent polling puts support for gay marriage somewhere above 50% depending on which poll you look at. I imagine that this issue will be done within ten years, tops.
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
What if the customer isn't a person?
If it's not a person what the hell is it? For the record, I'll take anybody's (anything's?) money, also under the Washington State ADA you have to allow service animals in your establishment.
If you're trying to be coy about a religion being the customer, in the United States a corporation (which an organized religion is) is a legally the same as a person. See Citizens United v FEC. Which I think was probably legally correct but morally wrong. While we're at it, I think the Hobby Lobby decision was wrong. If I was CEO of Michael's (HL's main competition around here) I'd sue the Feds and demand equal treatment under the 14th Amendment.
it just seems to me religion in general primarily makes truly bad people worse, not genuinly good people better; and in many cases has even made good people do bad things in the name of their religion.
just curious, a personal poll if you will.
what are you guys' current views on religion as a whole?
Fatherfirst, OTWO, done4good:
I've pointed out what the churches have been doing for the homeless (among other things, but the homeless camps are a good example). You have countered that people don't need a religion to get together and accomplish good things. I agree they shouldn't need it. The trouble is, at least around here, they don't seem to actually DO something. There is lots and lots of talk, the problem gets studied from all angles and everybody agrees that we should give the homeless a home - in somebody else's neighborhood. The thing the churches do best is convince the faithful that some degree of personal sacrifice and/or inconvenience is necessary to do good.
The above process has become so well-established on all sorts of things it is now referred to as "the Seattle way." Anytime you feel like trying to herd cats, come on out.
sickening to see the photo of the religious zealots all stood around the governor signing into law the right for people to discriminate against others (gay, lesbian, trans-gender) based purely on religious dogma.. if religious people want those freedoms then the can't have it both ways - they cannot complain if *they* are discriminated against.. "sorry, we don't like zionists, get out".
"oh, it's some special mass and you can't work your shift?
you're fired!"..
V
Our attorney general says that under the under the Washington State Consumer Protection Act it is against the law to discriminate against your customers based on religion, race, creed, and sexual orientation. Since this is the law he's using to crack down on Arlene's Flowers, I'm going to take him at his word.
I operate a small consulting business, which I would like to keep going. I'm not going to buck the AG's office on a dubious claim from somebody that doesn't even live here that it is legal to discriminate against customers that belong to a religion I don't like.
You can operate your business how ever you like. Mine doesn't engage in identity discrimination.
it just seems to me religion in general primarily makes truly bad people worse, not genuinly good people better; and in many cases has even made good people do bad things in the name of their religion.
just curious, a personal poll if you will.
what are you guys' current views on religion as a whole?
Fatherfirst, I don't know if today's good outweighs yesterday's bad. I'm sure the people who live in Tent City appreciate having a place to live. Seattle is a very liberal city, and one of the most unchurched. Yet it is the churches that are largely meeting this need.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tent_city#Seattle.2C_Washington
