WTS Shunning My Venting #3
On my rough estimate there may be 50 wts victims of enforced shunning for every one wts child abuse victim. (It is recognized that greater trauma is inflicted on abuse victims.) With such a large pool of shunned dubs, a number must have suffered such bad experiences as to warrant Conti-like cases against the wts. A Conti-level court victory by a shunned youth would be an emphatic way of ending the wts practice of enforced shunning.
Are any enforced shunning cases close to reaching court?
Alternatively, a ruling from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) that enforced shunning is so evil (morally wrong or bad) , inhuman (without compunction or human feeling), and cruel (causing pain and suffering) that it constitutes a religious hate crime, would achieve the same purpose.
Can anyone see this happening?
________________________________
The wts’ enforced shunning has nothing to do with the Bible. The only conclusion to be drawn from study of the scriptures used by the wts to support enforced shunning, is that the wts is making an absurd and dishonest use of the Bible to exercise control over its rank and file members.
The Bible texts used by the wts to enforce shunning are:
? 1 Cor. 5:11-13. 11) But now I am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolator or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. 12) For what do I have to do with those outside? Do you not judge those inside, 13) while God judges those outside . Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.
Once df/da, a person surrenders both his place in the wts and his title “brother” and spiritually returns to the world. Thereafter, he cannot scripturally be distinguished from any other person in the world. He is not to be judged by those “inside”. His judgement comes from God not man. Not the wts.
1 Cor. 5:11-13 fails the wts in two ways. It does not condone enforced shunning of df/da persons. It clearly prohibits it. Anyone who applies enforced shunning to a df/da person is putting himself in the position of God. That is not a good position for anyone to be in, let alone the wts.
? 2 Thes 3.6. Now we are giving you orders, brothers, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition you received from us.
Again, this is a direction to shun a misbehaving brother. It has no application to anyone not a brother, even if he had previously been one.
A third scripture used by the wts is:
? 2 Jo. 9-11. 9) Everyone who pushes ahead and does not remain in the teachings of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son. 10) If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching , never receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him . 11) For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.
Verses 5 & 6 identify the “teachings” that one must remain in. “… I am writing you … a commandment we had from the beginning, that we love one another . And this is what love means, that we go on walking according to his commandments .”
By twisting these texts to try to make them support its concept of enforced shunning, the wts’ is not “walking according to his commandments.” By its own standards, the wts should never be received into a Christian home or have any greeting made to it. This is the exact opposite of what the wts proposes.
Moreover, the wts interpretation of 2 Jo 9,11, brings this text into direct conflict with Paul’s two texts. This undermines the oneness and integrity of the Bible.
Since the wts presents the Bible as God’s Law, it should be subject to the same rules of interpretation as any written law. One authority on written law, (Maxwell ) says: “… it is an elementary rule that construction is to be made of all the parts together, and not of one part only by itself. … the true meaning of any passage is that which (being permissible) best harmonises with the subject and with every other passage ...”
As 1 Cor. and 2Thes., are expressed in plain, clear language and are in agreement, 2 Jo. must be seen as the odd one out. A construction must therefore be found that will bring 2 Jo. 9-11 into harmony with the other two verses, and not the other way around, which is what the wts has done.
Finally.
? Deu. 18: 10-11 10) There should not be found in you anyone who … 11) or one who … or anyone who inquires of the dead .
The wts has argued that the df/da are spiritually dead and since Christians do not talk to the dead, dubs don’t talk to the df/da. Once again, this is a misuse of scripture; Deu 18:10-11 is clearly about spiritism and the occult. Deu. 18.10-11 does not even remotely apply to shunning and should not be considered.
___________________________________
Conclusion
The wts’ doctrine of enforced shunning has nothing to do with the Bible.
The wts is violating its Christian obligation to obey the Word of God.
By adhering to its doctrine of enforced shunning the wts is making an absurd and dishonest use of the Bible to exercise control over its rank and file members.
The wts must already know all this, and more.
If it does know, it should tremble.
mtwtf