Sam Herd Compares Shunning your own Children to Casting out Demons.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

 

 

... like at the famous "Battle of Little Big Horn" when George Armstrong Custer's  army troops were being massacred by the Indians, while firing his last bullets he turned to the Indian Scout beside him, and said  "What are we going to do NOW, Scout?"

The Scout replied  "What you mean WE, pale face?"

 

[Srecko Sostar]

18 hours ago, JW Insider said:

"How quickly can you get him disfellowshipped?"

very interesting experiences to hear from you and others here.

 

[Srecko Sostar]

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

For most of us, it's a congregational decision following a set of rules reinforced bureaucratically from a central legalistic authority: the WTS. But in reality each of us stands on our own. In this regard none of us should be under any central authority except God and Christ. We should not shun because we are told to shun.

well said!

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

If we are only following rules instead of a desire to imitate Christ, then we are being overreached by Satan.

This sentence said the same thing, as one Bible scripture, what in fact, is going on; “The Evil One controls the whole world.”—1 John 5:19. nwt and all religions too. WTJWorg is not exempt. If somebody want to claim how WTJWorg is not under satan influence then he/she not believe in this Bible premise/statement/conclusion. 

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

We shun when it is appropriate,

From time to time, people are hurting each other. Some solve it by talking, some with a quarrel, some with silence. All these methods are known to the human spirit. If our friend stopped talking to someone, maybe we would stop talking as well. Is this good or not, we can discuss, but it happened. On other hand, as you highlighted, shunning on command is out of mind.  

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Just because Lloyd Barry shunned Theodore Jaracz doesn't mean the rest of us should have

But if someone is Lloyd's close friend .......:))))

3 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Even if a majority of a congregation has shunned someone this does not necessarily mean that the rest should either.

But hey, where is unity then ??:)))))

 

[JOHN BUTLER]

4 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Sometimes, to do the "right thing" ... you have to suffer GREAT personal injury, loss of livelihood, your home, your family, or even have to die.

Sometimes you have to do that thing which is abhorrent and against all natural ingrained inclinations ... AND THINK!

Dying is easy to do for your faith, losing your money and real estate is harder to do, as there is no glory in it.

Dying for your faith is an instant "free pass". OTHER people will clean up the mess.

Losing your money, your comfortable job,  and your real estate is embarrassing ... and HARD.

That is why we have the current policy of chopping off the babies head when it cries.

It does not require any real thinking, and we STILL sleep warm at night in a soft bed.

Because we know that ... no matter WHAT we do .... the free money keeps rolling in.

The problem with JW Org is the thing taught is Not To Think. Just Obey.  Don't ya know that the GB are the 'faithful slave' they get all the communications direct from God. They gotta b right en it.  That's how it taught. 

Don't think about what you can celebrate and what you can't because we will TELL you what to celebrate and what not to.

Don't think about how to do the ministry because we will TELL you how to do your ministry. 

Don't think about who you can talk to or mix with because we will TELL you who you can talk to and mix with.

Don't think about what clothes to wear because we will TELL you what clothes to wear.

Well I think you might just get the idea from those examples.

The thing that the GB hates is if congregants start to think for themselves. Because that's when the GB starts to lose their hold over people. They lose a little bit of power and control every time someone thinks for themselves. 

That's why people get disfellowshipped for asking too many questions. Oh dear that's 'causing a division in the congregation'. Disfellowship them. Off with their heads.

[JOHN BUTLER]

1 hour ago, AllenSmith34 said:

The word “SHUN” is an antagonistic word. It only has true meaning in a worldly society that doesn’t understand between having people sin to a point, it merits scriptural discipline. Keeping the congregation clean is certainly NOT shunning. Within that word, you have different variations to suit the needs of individuals, and families. A DF’d family member will not receive scriptural enlightenment if that person continues in their worldly ways. What would be the point to accept the behavior of those that go against Gods laws? 1 Corinthians 5:11-13

 

What love for thy brother does one show when human intervention is blinded by sympathy rather than have your brother change course and repent? Hebrews 10:27-29

 

Those that think it’s heartless, reject Gods purpose for correcting humanity to a more disciplined unit of faithful Christians. What’s the advantage to stay complacent? Humanity would have learned nothing from Christ and millennia of suffering.

 

What people seem to forget, with our personal human emotion, we are responsible to God himself in everything we do? If we are subject to discipline, we brought that upon ourselves. Regardless of how personal one might feel. EXCLUSIVE devotion is demanded by God for a true Christian.

 

Does that mean, there won’t be certain communication with a DF’d member, of course not, there will be some reasonable kind of communication that doesn’t affect an active member from causing their congregation to suffer as a unit.

 

Therefore, the optics of the word SHUN is wrongfully applied by opposers. A father and son construction team won’t find themselves at odds when it comes to, work. What they will find at odds is if the son is DF’d, and he wishes his father, listen to him trying to undermine the fathers Christianity. At that point, the father would do right to distance himself from the son.

 

This scenario can be applied to many conditions. 2 Corinthians 6:14 Does that mean some brothers STOP communicating with certain family members? YES! Depending on what kind of culture we were brought up with, a father and mother might never talk to a daughter or a son that has become gay or lesbian. That’s a PERSONAL CHOICE they have made. Because their culture might be strong enough to reject such a change. Therefore, how can a child that has made such a change, not influence the daily Christian life of a faithful member, if the parents see God’s law broken by their children’s action? 1 Corinthians 6:18

 

How about alcoholism, drug addiction, kleptomania. How many here have invited such a person to their home. Especially a home where there are children and have no worries that these people won’t be a bad influence or steal something to continue with their addiction. Even if it’s a family member.

 

How about hanging around with people that are guilty of adultery, fornication. Having extramarital affairs. What good will come of it, if someone decides, that’s an exciting lifestyle? Who wins then?

 

Therefore, understand what the parameters are with the word SHUN, that will benefit you, and allow you to see things more clearly, instead of talking points with personal stories that have no relation to the word honesty.

 

Agree if prostitution, spousal abuse, child abuse, thief, murderer, reviler etc. seems reasonable, enough not to have people removed to keep a congregation clean. Of all the listed possibilities, which one can be acceptable because human nature dictates it? 1 Corinthians 5:11

 

This is what the world offers, and it’s simple to succumb to its influence. It goes beyond what the word SHUN is to people that think there is a middle ground because human emotion demands it. 1 John 2:15-17

 

Contrary to popular belief, no priest can absolve you from sin on Sunday so people can have a fresh start on Monday. Therefore, where does the real love for thy brother lay, if thy brother refuses to repent? 2 Peter 2:20-22 what will be gained by a mistaken sympathy of your fellow man that has known God and rejected him?

 

Therefore, no one can say, it isn’t out of the ordinary that some cultures SHUN people or family members out of their own volition without there being any scriptural application attached.

 

No misinformation or mischaracterization will EVER change that!

 

Therefore, certain courts are hypocrites for trying to impose on something ordinary people do anyway without biblical bias!

 

Spoken like an elder or puppet of the GB.

This is my personal case : I left the Org after doing three months research into the Child Abuse accusations Earthwide in the JW Org. In my opinion the GB were responsible for most of it and the elders just acted as puppets for the GB. I could no longer see the GB as the 'faithful and discreet slave class' because of their actions and instruction to others. "By their works you will know them"... 

I did not spread any message in the congregation, so I did not cause division. I emailed as many elders as I could and told them I was 'resigning' from the JW Organisation. This does not mean I was or am turning against God or Jesus Christ. I just left the JW Org. ... 

The elders didn't ask me for a reason, they just called me in to 'do the paperwork'.  I had to sign a copy of the email that I'd sent which one of them had printed. 

Prior to me 'resigning' I had told a few 'brothers' that i intended to resign, not giving them a full explanation... This was so that those people that mattered to me would know I had not been disfellowshipped for sinning against God... 

Now we all know that the GB has told all elders how to announce it only one way from the platform. So and so 'is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses'. This is a deliberate ploy so that everyone will SHUN that person. No one would know if the person left of their own choice or was disfellowshipped for 'wrong conduct'. So of course no one would then speak to such a person. Total shunning.

Even those that knew I was 'resigning' do not speak to me. I repeat total SHUNNING. 

Why ? Not because of anything I've done, but out of fear of the elders and the thought of themselves being disfellowshipped. 

I am strong enough to cope and have a good wife. I can cope. Many cannot cope, they suffer badly.

But of course to the American mind, of which most of the GB are, it is just collateral damage... The same as is the Child Abuse victims. 

[Evacuated]

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Paul expected that a majority would rebuke this particular man, given the circumstances. He did not expect 100 percent agreement about the way a "disfellowshipped" person was treated.

Just wondering if this is the right slant here. It would seem your suggestion is that there is a majority, not unanimous. view in the congregation that this man was deserving of exclusion.

Could it not be read that the descriptive "majority" is actually a reference to those NOT engagaged in the immoral conduct as contrasted with the "minority" who were?

[Anna]

3 hours ago, AllenSmith34 said:

The?? word?? ?“SHU?N?” is an? antagonistic word. It only has true meaning in a ?worldly so?ciety t?hat d?oes?nÂ’t???? understand between having people sin to? ?a poi?nt, it merits scriptural discipline. Keeping? th?e congr?egation clean is certainly NOT shunning.???

I'm afraid not according to the "life and ministry meeting work book" 2017-06-08

 

[Anna]

2 hours ago, JOHN BUTLER said:

The thing that the GB hates is if congregants start to think for themselves. Because that's when the GB starts to lose their hold over people. They lose a little bit of power and control every time someone thinks for themselves. 

I won't deny that there are some congregants who do not think for themselves and prefer to have someone else think for them. But that is not the objective of the the GB. I can't see how that would be to their advantage. They want our trust and cooperation, yes, but what personal advantage is it to them if they have "power and control" over people? They believe they are going to leave the earth and live in heaven in the near future. They are just doing their job they feel they have been assigned by Christ, which is to get the kingdom message preached, and keep the congregations morally and spiritually clean. There is nothing sinister behind that.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

6 minutes ago, Anna said:

They want our trust and cooperation, yes, but what personal advantage is it to them if they have "power and control" over people?

Then... they cannot be fired by anyone on Earth, and revolt is completely suppressed ... and no matter WHAT they do, or don't do ... the free money keeps rolling in ... and they never have to get their hands dirty, or miss a meal, or sleep cold, or wear worn out clothes.

This not in the slightest bit unusual, when religions have LOTS and LOTS of real estate.

It is ho-hum normal.

We are NOT the exception.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

What helps me stay in, generally, is that I expect NOTHING from anybody, and consider everybody no damn good.

I put up with them ... BUT THEN .... they have to put up with me.

We're EVEN.

[Anna]

6 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Then... they cannot be fired by anyone on Earth, and revolt is completely suppressed ... and no matter WHAT they do, or don't do ... the free money keeps rolling in ... and they never have to get their hands dirty, or miss a meal, or sleep cold, or wear worn out clothes.

This not in the slightest bit unusual, when religions have LOTS and LOTS of real estate.

It is ho-hum normal.

We are NOT the exception.

I think there are easier ways to ensure you don't get your hands dirty, miss a meal, sleep cold and wear worn out clothes. We have quite a number of brothers in our hall that have done just that. (Done pretty well for themselves).

Oh, and they can't get fired either as they are the owner of the business ?

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

9 minutes ago, Anna said:

I think there are easier ways to ensure you don't get your hands dirty, miss a meal, sleep cold and wear worn out clothes. We have quite a number of brothers in our hall that have done just that. (Done pretty well for themselves).

I was referring to the GB, not the folks at the bottom.  They at the bottom have absolutely no say or valued opinions whatsoever, and therefore not the same reprehensibility. 

Think about the backgrounds of the GB .... they are all old men who if they were not doing what they do now ... what else COULD they do to survive in the "real" world, outside of free money, and LOTS of it?

They could not economically survive of their own devices, is my best guess.

Instead of reading scripture, it would be "You want fries with that?", or "Welcome to Wal-Mart".