Inactive ones are not JWs

by gone for good 33 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  gone for good

  Years ago, the insinuation was often presented, that those who were inactive were actually not witnesses at all. The point being made was that ''...winesses is a verb, not a noun...''
  

  I know there were published assertions to this end in the older books and magazines, with possibly even quotes from the likes of Rutherford or Knorr ,

  Can any of you researchers here find some of these references with your CD library scanning methods?

  I sincerely beg your assistance as it will part of a human rights challenge,

  These quotes will help in making the point that - ''a deliberate and conscious decision to cease performing the public works of a religion (whose raison d'etre is those works) is a legitimate and obvious public expression of abandonment of that religion.''

  I'd appreciate your input as well .
  
• 

  konceptual99

  Inactive ones are still officially considered Witnesses and if they start attending once again they can be held to account for things done whilst inactive.

  Of course there are various shades of grey as to how individuals are treated either by their families or the wider congregation.

  Trying to argue that something an inactive person does not matter as they are not known as a Witness holds little water as the elders will claim they are still baptised, not DF/DA and would face a JC if they were attending.
• 

  blondie

  In researching the WT-CD I found that the WTS went both ways, inactive are still part of the flock and if you don't turn in time, not a wit.
• 

  Phizzy

  In their mind you can never leave, even DF'd ones are just looked upon as JW's under restriction.

  Unless the org is talking to the Media about an embarrassing DF'd one, then that person, conveniently, is "no longer a JW".

  This, the Org thinks, exonerates them from any responsibility for what the person did whilst a JW, however horrendous, the fact that the Org took action after the event. Several Court cases prove that this Hogwash does not Whitewash.

  The Org never really relinquishes control, in its own mind at least.
• 

  blondie

  Are the inactive still part of the "flock," the congregation of jws? Note comments by the WTS to the contrary in this article?

  Quote

  *** w93 7/15 p. 27 Tenderly Shepherding Jehovah’s Precious Sheep ***
  Inactivity in the ministry or in attending Christian meetings does not mean that the sheep is no longer part of the flock. He remains part of “all the flock” for whom the elders must “render an account” to Jehovah.
• 

  campaign of hate

  Wouldn't be surprised if they soon they start treating inactive ones like they are did- fellowshiped.

  Perhaps they will automatically disassociate anyone who is irregular for 12 months.
• 

  gone for good

  Blondie -

  Thanks for the reply.

  There were a couple really dogmatic quotes from years gone by that I can't locate... quotes that unequiviocally asserted that those not preaching were not JWs.

  The quotes may have been from times prior to the term ''inactive'' appearing on time cards.
  

  
  
• 

  idiotnomore

  My wife and I were inactive with very minor meeting attendance for a while some years ago. It was only through my wife's friendship with an elders wife from a previous congregation that we were reactivated. We had an elder call on us from time to time usually when he knew we wouldn't be at home. His wife told my wife's friend that because we were inactive they couldn't do anything to help us and we were basically in the world unless we reactivated ourselves. At the time I wrote it off as this elder and his wife just being assholes.
• 

  OneEyedJoe

  Doesn't really help you, but I distinctly remember my congregations COBE saying the bit you mentioned about "wittness" being a verb not a noun. He also added, that that's why we don't inflate our numbers by including everyone who's a baptized JW in our counts - only those who have an active share in the preaching work are considered JWs. He said there's 8 million JWs today, but there could well be 20 million people out there who have studied with us and even been baptized, but if they don't preach regularly then they're not considered JWs.

  Like I said, doesn't help you a ton, but this guy isn't the type (and I doubt he has the faculties) to come up with stuff on his own, I'm sure there's been something printed about this at some point. He's an old guy, though, so it might've been 50 years back.
• 

  the comet

  Campaign of hate- I have wondered about that too, as I no longer turn in service time. I think it would be a evil genius move if they said, if you're inactive for longer than 6 months, without a valid excuse, it's considered disassociating yourself. It could be done fairly easily, you get a visit from a couple of elders asking why you aren't turning in time. If you don't have a good reason, you get a couple of months to turn in time. When/if you don't they annouce you as no longer one of jw's. If they did that, guess what? I'm turning in service time every month, and I bet many people would do the same. Instant increase in numbers!