Can we talk sensibly about Disfellowshipping and shunning.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

https://jw.support/disfellowshipping/    This is interesting reading. 

Lets start from those early Christians in the 1st century.  When did they become known as Christians ?  Was it whilst Jesus was still alive or was it after his resurrection ?

Who was it that called those early 'disciples' Christians ?  Did they call themselves by that name ? 

And now an important question. Did any human have the authority to tell another human, "You are no longer a Christian". 

Was being a 1st century Christian, being a part of a human Organisation ?  So was it possible to turn a person out from it ?  

Did a 1st century person need permission to preach the word of God ? 

At this point we should remember the account whereby the disciples complained to Jesus that some 'outsiders' were preaching and healing in the name of Christ. 

Mark 9:38-41    Whoever Is Not Against Us Is for Us   Jesus allowed others to do good deeds in His name. 

Just the opposite of disfellowshipping or shunning.

So, when the JW Org / Elders disfellowship someone, what exactly are they disfellowshipping them from ? 

What scriptures and what authority do those Elders use to give themselves permission to disfellowship someone ? 

Do the Elders presume they have authority to judge a person and to say that such a person in 'no longer a Christian' ? 

Do JWs presume that only they are Christians, therefore anyone who is not a JW cannot be a Christian ? 

Jesus used the Samaritan man as an example of a Non Jew that did the will of God by showing kindness / mercy to a Jew that needed help.

Jesus was speaking to the Jews who at that time hated the Samaritans. They were almost 'at war' with each other. 

But Jesus was showing that a Non Jew could be pleasing to God.

Unfortunately the true meaning of that parable has been lost because people do not understand the hatred that was there. 

BUT, there is a message there for JWs. If only JWs would seek it and find it. 

So what about a person that leaves the JW org ? In the eyes of the GB, Elders et al, a congregant that leaves the Org is a deliberate sinner.

So does the GB / leaders / Elders et al, think that the congregant that has left, is automatically 'no longer a Christian' ? 

And what about the congregation memebers where one has left ? Do ALL the congregation really want to SHUN the one that has left ?

Exactly what scriptures do congregation memebers use to give themselves reason to SHUN a person that has left the Org ? 

I've been reading Watchtower quotes which say that each congregant must make up their own mind through their own conscience, to SHUN or not. 

But what action would be taken against a congregant that did not SHUN someone that had left the Org ? 

I suppose an important question here would be. Do JWs here honestly think that every person that leaves the JW Org, is 'no longer a Christian' ?

If that is so then it would seem that JWs believe that only the people in the JW Org are able to serve God.  So then JWs become anti-'non-JWs'. 

That would be in line with the Jews being anti-Samaritan, whereas Jesus was not. 

[Pudgy]

That is a LOT OF QUESTIONS.

why anyone would go through the trouble of answering them is beyond me…… Because nobody ever changes their mind here…… Ever.

 

[Witness]

There are some good historical quotes on jwfacts from past Watchtower mags and books,  on the act of disfellowshipping.  

Such as..

"Down in Goa the papers have carried notices that anyone having various books by Judge Rutherford would be excommunicated. What a bunch of mean and unmanly scallywags! Remember the blind man who was healed at the pool of Siloam, that when the man told the religious fellows where to get off they excommunicated him (John 9; 34, margin), and his parents before that had feared being put out of the synagogue by the "Jews". Isn't that the same cowardly action of the clergy in these days towards those who desire to have their eyes open and to "see"? "We'll excommunicate you!"" Consolation 1937 Nov 17 p.5

"Satan's organization sails under the high-sounding name of "Christendom". It boasts of a membership of over 500,000,000 persons. Its members are in bondage to creeds, customs, rites and ceremonies; they dare not disown these or criticize or expose them. To do so would bring down on their heads taunts, reproaches, disfellowship and persecution. Many thousands of the Lords people are held in these denominations as prisoners, afraid to express their disapproval of the creeds, methods and customs of the organization. Watchtower 1930 Oct 1 p.301"

Interesting that they say this  is a practice of "Satan's organization".  (Rev 13:1,2,4-7,10,11,12,15)

 

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

On 9/14/2021 at 12:41 PM, Pudgy said:

That is a LOT OF QUESTIONS.

why anyone would go through the trouble of answering them is beyond me…… Because nobody ever changes their mind here…… Ever.

 

But it's food for thought for JWs and non JWs. Sometimes people do not answer questions outwardly, but they do question themselves about things.  As for people changing their mind, how would you know ? Extra knowledge can sometimes make a difference. 

[Pudgy]

Please give me one real example, of that ever happening, here on the Archive.

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

16 hours ago, Pudgy said:

Please give me one real example, of that ever happening, here on the Archive.

Well i for one have learnt a lot in the time I've been on here. 

I've learnt how totally 'unChristian' some JWs can be. That includes the GB and their lawyers. (With proof from court cases)

I've learnt how people will deliberately twist the things i write.  I've learnt that some so called 'JW' people will deliberately tell lies about me to get me d/fed from this forum. 

And more importantly I've learnt some things about GB members past and present, and about things the Watchtower have put in writing. 

So extra knowledge has helped me to make a decision not to return to the JW Org. 

But you don't really want to know this. You just want to side track from the main point of this topic.

Can we talk sensibly about Disfellowshipping and shunning.

 

 

[Witness]

On 9/14/2021 at 2:11 PM, Patiently waiting for Truth said:

So does the GB / leaders / Elders et al, think that the congregant that has left, is automatically 'no longer a Christian' ? 

 

Usually the disfellowshipped one is said to be "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses".  If these people are the ONLY ones in the world that will receive salvation, as it is basically taught, then everyone else couldn't be considered a Christian right?  They perceive that any who leave, have no life with God,  no possibility to be redeemed unless they return.  

 w15 4/15 p. 30-31 puts it like this:   "Likewise, disfellowshipped ones who are no longer members of the Christian congregation—their spiritual family—may come to realize what they have lost. The bitter fruits of their sinful course, together with the memories of happier days when they enjoyed a good relationship with Jehovah and his people, could bring them to their senses."

 

 

[Pudgy]

That is a silly assumption that has no validity in reality, that  I  want to sidetrack the conversation.
 

Interjection of a point, salient or not, or an attempt at humor, funny or not, is usually NOT an attempt to sidetrack a conversation.

Perhaps it’s just a reaction to a conversation that’s based on false premises, or erroneous assumptions. Or perhaps any other number of reasons.

Just plain silly.

But even more than that, it’s just plain wrong.

……  this is a common problem when people extensively say that they want to discuss facts but then they avoid discussing facts, and start discussing motive…… Which is assumed.

And, in any discussion there comes a time to shut the hell up and listen to what the other person is saying, including where the conversation is going that you don’t want it to go.

Often times we don’t really listen, because while the other person is speaking, we’re thinking about what we’re going to say next.

(… as an aside this quite often happens amongst married folks, where the three second rule becomes very very important.

The three second rule states that after the other person speaks, count for three full seconds before you give a reply.

If you wait five seconds while intoning  “….hmmmm“ while scratching your chin, it also helps you to appear wise.)

The only way you can accurately discuss motive is to determine from the other person what their motive is by actually asking them what is their motive.

What  NOVEL IDEA!

You can make all the assumptions in the world and by accident you might stumble across it, or if you were a very good detective you might be able to discern it but the probabilities are not good.

May I make a suggestion…… Instead of asking five or six questions at a time, ask one question and see if anybody wants to answer it

(I have ADD, and frequently will walk up to someone, or worse, several people already involved in a conversation of their choosing, and out of the blue start talking about what I want to talk about, usually quantum physics or scuba diving or optics and light propagation. That almost always NEVER works as intended.)

…. but I digress …..

Perhaps people do and perhaps people don’t, and perhaps it’s a trick question like “do you still beat your wife?”, Which for most people it’s too much trouble to answer because it’s most times not a yes or a no answer.

….. then of course there are the questions that everybody in the group knows the answer and not really questions to be answered for new information, just to be beat into a purée like the traditional “beating the dead horse“.

…… Not really worth the effort.

A lot of conversations with agenda driven people are just too much work especially when nothing useful is to be gained by it.

I am a firm believer in the freedom of speech, and you have the right to ask any question you want, to anybody you want…… But you do not have the right to be entertained if the other person does not want to entertain you.

They have a perfect right, at their discretion, to completely ignore you and walk away, leaving you there to wave your hands and flap your lips in full expectation that they are going to entertain you with their answers …… And they have a perfect right to not do so.

They do not need a reason at all.

As a practical matter, singing to a pig  is a waste of time, just ruins a person’s voice, and irritates the pig.

Sometimes we are the singer…… And sometimes we are the pig.

 

 

[Pudgy]

If somebody can sidetrack your conversation with a “throwaway comment“, it wasn’t much of a conversation to start with.

[Pudgy]

In 1962 two notable things happened, the WTB&TS Came out with the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures  in one volume (the green Bible), and Natalie Wood in the movie “Gypsy”established what it takes to enthusiastically entertain other people. 
 

Of course, in 1963 John Fitzgerald Kennedy was shot.

[Pudgy]

…….. see?

 

[Patiently waiting for Truth]

Mr Rook, you prove yourself to be mentally imbalanced so i suppoe I should forgive you, and of couse it would be the Christain thing to do. But here you are being a total coward, hiding behind the dog thing and deliberately trying to distract from the FACTS that the GB / Watchtower / JW org are WRONG in their actions on many counts. 

So getting back on track :-

 

I suppose an important question here would be. Do JWs here honestly think that every person that leaves the JW Org, is 'no longer a Christian' ?

If that is so then it would seem that JWs believe that only the people in the JW Org are able to serve God.  So then JWs become anti-'non-JWs'. 

That would be in line with the Jews being anti-Samaritan, whereas Jesus was not. 

 

Mr Rook aka @Pudgy prefers to distract from the issue. So a question to you James, Did Jesus try to hide the truth about the Jewish religious leaders ?