Memorial attendance - how many inactive JW`s?

by jambon1 2 Replies latest jw friends

  • jambon1
    jambon1

    The yearbook regularly speaks of the 'large' field of activity that involves the 7/8 million extra memorial attenders who are not active publishers.

    The thing is, in our hall, few of these people were actually new to the cong. Many were faders/relatives/ex JW`s.

    I would say there are only a couple of million at best who may 'be there for the 1st time' each year.

    Anyone notice this too?

  • DannyBloem
    DannyBloem

    yes, this is true. Although the faders, relatives and long time interested ones are also seen as potential.

    a couple of million may even be to much. Maybe arounf 1 million or less.

    It will be more in places that are more new to the truth and where the growth is more (like africa)

    D

  • Gordy
    Gordy

    Good point Jambon1

    Thinking back on the years I was a JW. I have often thought the same.

    Once a year you would see the non-believing Husband or Wife of a JW turn up or some other relative. I remember one JW sister who would bring her husband and 5 children, who would never be seen again until next memorial.

    Some of these sisters who dragged their husbands along seem to think that it would help their husbands get through Armageddon, because they had after all attended the Memorial over the years.

    You would see those who had not been to a meeting for months, probably since last Memorial.

    Those with "bible studies" with bring them along, yet even having been studying with such ones for months, the Memorial would be their first time at the KH. Then you still wouldn't see them again afterwards.

    The WT should ask itself if the attendance jumps by 7-8 million on that day......why aren'tall those people JW's then.

    Interestingly when you look up JW members in an encylopedia or similar they always seem to give the number of JW's as 12-14 million. Do the publishers ask the WT for their numbers, and get given the memorial figure, rather than the actually number of baptised JW's.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit