DA-ing Announcement in the Society's New Book

by Mark 136 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  seattleniceguy

  I like the question of what it means that so-and-so is no longer a Witness. Does that mean, then, that he is treated just as any other non-Witness? If indeed the purpose of this change is to stop getting in trouble with European courts, then surely they will have to stop printing commands to treat as disfellowshipped "someone who was a Witness but is not a Witness anymore." It may still be enforced by word-of-mouth instruction, but Witnesses are good at switching between legalism and reading between the lines when it is convenient to them. If they want to associate with someone, they will look at the printed material as the last word, and finding no clear directions on the matter, will conclude that the person is to be treated as any other non-Witness.

  So I think it may be good news.

  SNG
• 

  minimus

  If a person does not "act" like a Witness---going out in service, attending meetings, "witnessing about the truth", his "actions" suggest he is NOT a JW, hence by his actions, he "disassociates" himself!
• 

  Billygoat

  It is just a matter of time before they are forced to admit that they are a cult.

  I seriously doubt this will ever happen. Don't you see how they've set themselves up to win either way? If the numbers keep going up, then it's "wonderful that Jehovah is blessing their fold." If the numbers go down, it's because "the love is cooling off in the last days." Either way, they're setting themselves up to still be "Jehovah's earthly organization" to the unknowing.

  I think unless something terribly drastic and public blows the headquarters wide open, then the flock will continue to grow with new members that are seeking solace in this world, but more and more like us, will be leaving in droves. I don't think they're will be much change. I think sometimes our hopeful thinking believes that something will blow this organization up like Enron, but there are still people working for Enron. Some of them will not leave for whatever their reasons are, I don't know, but they're still there.
• 

  eyeslice

  I can only agree with all the comments here - the defintion is becoming more vague.
  
  The rub is that if 'so and so is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses' then should be treated like people of the world - JWs don't treated worldly people in general like dogs. What they do is shun former JWs.
  
  Reading between the lines, many of us here could be treated as DA'ed people simply because we no longer attend.
  
  Eyeslice
• 

  Doubtfully Yours

  Minimus,

  I do some of what you say, but just not enough in many of their eyes. I don't know, I guess I'll be in serious trouble soon. Darn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  DY
• 

  Nocturne

  I seriously doubt this will ever happen. Don't you see how they've set themselves up to win either way? If the numbers keep going up, then it's "wonderful that Jehovah is blessing their fold." If the numbers go down, it's because "the love is cooling off in the last days." Either way, they're setting themselves up to still be "Jehovah's earthly organization" to the unknowing.

  Billygoat....that's a really good point. They love to set themselves up so that either way they have an explanation. If the numbers go down, I think they will claim that it was just a new arrangement from Jehovah to cleanse his organization.

  Now I wonder, how many witnesses actually know about the current dissociation policy? I remember, in my entire time in the borg I never heard of anyone being dissociated, and I didn't even know they had that until I found JWD. And for people who are fading, it could make it easier for the elders to dissociate them. I know that when I quit during the summer and the elders got in contact with me, they asked me repeatedly the famous question "do you still consider yourself a jw?" and one even asked me point blank if I wanted to dissociate myself. It makes me wonder if now they will be able to dissociate inactive members who refuse to meet with elders since in a way, they are not accepting "Jehovah's arrangements" to help those that have "cooled off" from the ministry.
• 

  Siddhashunyata

  In my opinion,we are witnessing a progression. While it appears the WT is on the offensive, the truth is that they are on the defensive. They no longer have control. The fight is being brought to them because of the Internet and the networks that are forming. Indiscreet DFing, DAing, and Shunning will not stop this. In fact , it will only hasten the end of Shunning and thereby the end of centralized control of the congregations.
• 

  AlanF

  I'll bet you a nickel that this change was prompted by the fear that they're going to lose the Anderson case.

  This is also going to open a legal can of worms. Everyone who leaves the JWs may well be automatically viewed as a person who is "no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses". How JWs as a community view such a person will, of course, generally be dictated by whether some group of elders decides to publicly announce it. This is frought with potential legal problems, though, since a person's relationship with family and friends will be largely dictated by the whims of a local group of elders (never influenced by the Society -- wink, wink!) rather than a strict application of "church law". That leaves elders open to lawsuits for slander much more than do the present rules. It also further insulates the Society from such lawsuits.

  AlanF
• 

  doinmypart

  I agree with Siddhashunyata.

  The WTS is on the defensive, otherwise they wouldn't change the status quo.

  They are grasping at straws, trying to maintain the illusion before the R&F.
• 

  roybatty

  I like the question of what it means that so-and-so is no longer a Witness.

  Back in the day, that's the way I remembered the announcement..that either "so & so was Df'd" or "so & so was no longer a JW." I found it weird that we would annouce that they were no longer a member of the congregation. I always wondered if this was done by the Society in order to distance themselves from being sued.