That does make complete sense Flipper.
The whole convention program of outlines are here if required:
cobweb
JoinedPosts by cobweb
-
48
Are baptized Witnesses that are no longer in the "truth", but were NEVER DF'D, now to be shunned and treated like disfellowshipped ones?
by Dunedain ina relative of mine was telling me, that in his, and a few neighboring congregations, there is a little confusion amongst some of the jw's about this "issue".
some families are having a hard time about whether certain relatives will be attending certain family functions, because some family members that are no longer in the "truth", might be invited to these functions.
mind you, these persons were never disfellowshipped.
-
-
-
48
Are baptized Witnesses that are no longer in the "truth", but were NEVER DF'D, now to be shunned and treated like disfellowshipped ones?
by Dunedain ina relative of mine was telling me, that in his, and a few neighboring congregations, there is a little confusion amongst some of the jw's about this "issue".
some families are having a hard time about whether certain relatives will be attending certain family functions, because some family members that are no longer in the "truth", might be invited to these functions.
mind you, these persons were never disfellowshipped.
-
-
cobweb
As far as what was actually said at the convention is concerned, the outlines are available to read for yourself.
This is the outline for the talk titled 'Shun Unrepentant Wrongdoers'
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwqmWMK7dwtlQ2tfT2ttZWtkRUU/view?usp=sharing
The outline says the following
Loyal Christians would not associate with “anyone called a brother” who is practicing serious sin. This is true even if no congregation action has been taken, as may be the case with an inactive one (w85 7/15 19 14) This can be a real trial when a family member is involved. We must not allow strong family ties to lead us to compromise loyalty to Jehovah and his organization (w13 1/15 15-16 16-20)
They use the term 'serious sin'. That to me does not mean someone who is merely not going to meetings. But I suppose jws will often go beyond the things written as it were.
There was a talk given on Saturday morning regarding how to treat inactive ones.
This is the link to the outline:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwqmWMK7dwtlT0FCZ1pwYllob3c/view?usp=sharing
It says:
THEY ARE RELATED TO US IN THE FAITH (1 min.) We are especially interested in helping inactive ones because they are our spiritual brothers and sisters [Read Galatians 6:10] Unlike unbelievers, inactive ones started running in the race for life but may have stopped because of anxieties, hurt feelings, or a sense of guilt (Heb 12:1) We should reflect Jehovah’s interest in helping them (Eze 34:16a) The organization made a concerted effort to visit inactive publishers during the recent Memorial season, and our interest in helping them to return is ongoing HELP THEM RETURN “TO THE SHEPHERD” (5 min.) Inactive ones can return to Jehovah [Read 1 Peter 2:25] Jehovah sent prophets and finally his Son to help the nation of Israel to return (it-2 565 3) Jehovah can use us to help inactive ones return to him. A brief telephone call or a visit will remind them that they have not been forgotten by their spiritual family (km 2/07 8) When inactive publishers attend a congregation meeting, we should welcome them warmly. Avoid asking questions or making statements that may embarrass them. When we meet inactive ones, we should promptly let the elders know. Elders take the lead in ‘going after the lost one’ (Lu 15:4-7) They arrange to visit inactive ones at least once a year. Lost sheep are to be carried back gently by the elders (Lu 15:5) Elders understand that sheep separated from the congregation are likely to be exhausted from mistreatment in Satan’s world and from lack of spiritual nutrition Elders should ensure that all inactive ones receive a copy of the brochure Return to Jehovah
None of that help for inactive ones involves socializing with them, but they do not mention this applying to family in this talk, so it seems to me like they are not counseling against socialising with a family member who is inactive but not carrying on serious sin.
Personally, I faded quite some years ago, and I haven't yet had any witness family change their behaviour toward me in the last six months. If they became aware that I was doing something deemed 'serious sin' I suppose that would change. Everyone's experience will be different though, because it relies on individual jw consciences.
-
48
Are baptized Witnesses that are no longer in the "truth", but were NEVER DF'D, now to be shunned and treated like disfellowshipped ones?
by Dunedain ina relative of mine was telling me, that in his, and a few neighboring congregations, there is a little confusion amongst some of the jw's about this "issue".
some families are having a hard time about whether certain relatives will be attending certain family functions, because some family members that are no longer in the "truth", might be invited to these functions.
mind you, these persons were never disfellowshipped.
-
-
cobweb
The way it was put at the convention was if you know of someone not df but who is engaged in sinful activities then you ought to shun them.
To my understanding then, it depends to what extent your sinful activity is known about. I think if you were carrying on a fairly sin free life after fading or you were simply discreet, it could be possible to not be shunned.
It also depends on the individual conscience of the jw as to whether they will apply the shunning counsel. I have heard of a faded jw where one brother shuns him and the rest of the family doesn't. The trouble with that is that the person shunning is deemed to be more loyal and so it can have a knock on effect.
-
161
ARC Analysis Summary of Case Files
by Richard Oliver ini have been doing research on the arc as some people on here have suggested.
i find it interesting on the case file analysis some of the findings.
it looks like queensland and new south wales had the biggest problems with this.
-
-
cobweb
Forget the technicalities of your argument on child abuse a moment.
I'm throwing this out there. Do you think it is possible that there is some connection between your desire to defend the Org and the Org's rejection of you based on your sexuality. I wonder if you have a need to earn approval somehow. Maybe its unconscious. This to me would explain your passion.
OrphanCrow said something like this in your other thread and I think he's on the money:
OrphanCrow6 days ago
I truly feel like I am trying to talk to a person in an abusive relationship when I am replying to you, Richard. You display exactly the same kind of twisted logic to rationalize your experience
Maybe reflect on it a bit and don't dismiss it altogether. I really think it can't be good for you to be so in favour of an organisation that is taught to hate what you are. Because you are never going to be good enough for them. You need to be able to accept yourself. It doesn't matter how much you defend them.
I know i am going off piste with this comment and its a bit personal. Forgive me, but I just have the impression theres some deeper reason you are so determined to defend the org on tbe child abuse issue, to the extent that you are.
-
161
ARC Analysis Summary of Case Files
by Richard Oliver ini have been doing research on the arc as some people on here have suggested.
i find it interesting on the case file analysis some of the findings.
it looks like queensland and new south wales had the biggest problems with this.
-
-
cobweb
Is there any point going over this same ground? I feel like you are going to make the same argument until everyone agrees with you but its not going to happen. You have made some points that are academicly true - fair enough, but you seem oddly obtuse to the thrust of what everyone else is trying to communicate. Both sides keep trying but if it hasn't happened by now, it aint gunna. Surely its a waste of time and energy and source of frustration to keep going at this.
-
144
2.16.2017 NJ Star-Ledger Ad: "Were you sexually abused by the Jehovahs Witnesses?"
by breakfast of champions inmy wife found this 1/4 page ad on page 2 of yesterday's nj star-ledger, probably the biggest newspaper in nj.
pretty telling.. .
-
-
cobweb
as long as they sue the shit out of WT and get their clients what they deserve.
Agreed. Bleeding the organisation dry is personally the bit I care about. This is a good end in itself as far as I am concerned. I'm not doubting they are capable of that. But for those who actually went through abuse, they're objectives may go beyond that and want a decent settlement for themselves as well as doing damage. Its that second aspect I am unsure about.
Its early days, I am just adding a cautious note for the sake of perspective.
No matter what, I do think its encouraging and exciting that a lawfirm, allbeit an ambulance chasing one, feels positive enough about their chances of taking on the Org that they have put out ads. That says something.
-
144
2.16.2017 NJ Star-Ledger Ad: "Were you sexually abused by the Jehovahs Witnesses?"
by breakfast of champions inmy wife found this 1/4 page ad on page 2 of yesterday's nj star-ledger, probably the biggest newspaper in nj.
pretty telling.. .
-
-
cobweb
It is exciting news, but I think it is wise to double check the reputations of the law firms involved before getting too carried away. There are a few comments on the reddit forum that have chastened my enthusiasm a little.
-
13
Last installment of the Scientology series tonight on A & E
by nonjwspouse in10 pm est on arts and entertainment channel.
where leah began with the idea of just a few shows, i think she is now taking this on for "as long as it takes".
she is in that mode of being outraged that what she believed in so long is such a lie she wants to shout it from the rooftops, and get people to notice.
-
-
cobweb
Just watched a crappy cropped youtube upload of yesterday's final ask anything episode.
It was a great way to round out the series. They had Steve Hassan on there. He got quite emotional as he'd had quite a lot of hostility from the COS and he set off Leah crying. I wondered if he'd mention JWs but he didn't.
Steve did make the point though that one way to get someone to see thry're in a cult is to compare with other cults. Thats is why this show has power that goes beyond Scientology.
Leah said there was only ever supposed to be 8 episodes but its left open as to whether she will do more. It didn't seem like she was ready to let it go.
-
8
The Syrian Dan-El
by schnell ini started reading deceptions and myths of the bible by lloyd graham tonight, and graham mentions that the book of daniel, like the story of joseph, is ripped off from a syrian poem about another hero named daniel (or dan-el).. a cursory google search doesn't pull up anything.
is this accurate?
has this ancient poem survived?
-
-
cobweb
Just had a quick look and there is a chapter in Stories from Ancient Canaan by Michael D. Coogan & Mark Smith called Aqhat where he gives a brief overview and then there is a translation of the Ugaritic text from the tablets. Danel is the one of the main characters. I would copy and paste as I have an epub copy but its fairly long. I wouldn't say its been ripped off, the stories are completely different but I expect the name was re-purposed. Scholars believe the writing of bible book of Daniel is 2nd century so the entire character of Daniel is probably an invention. I am no expert on these things though; my understanding is fairly limited.
-
161
ARC Analysis Summary of Case Files
by Richard Oliver ini have been doing research on the arc as some people on here have suggested.
i find it interesting on the case file analysis some of the findings.
it looks like queensland and new south wales had the biggest problems with this.
-
-
cobweb
You have a long thread on this issue already. Forgive me if i get this wrong because i haven't read those threads through, but my impression is that you are very passionate about the idea the JW organisation is only minimally responsible for child abuse and people are being unfair and opportunistic by making such a big thing about it & its not justified to sue them in the manner that is occuring. Is that the size of it?
Where does your passion come from for making this kind of argument? If you are not an apologist i don't really understand what is your motivation for making this issue such a focus.