by Hobo Ken 12 Replies latest watchtower bible
Listen to part 3 of the death or obedience podcast which charts the df'ing process from start to finish.
In this part the elders give a "sister" a grilling about her alleged apostasy and attemp to explain how god uses the organisation.
Here is the link.
She handles herself very well while all the elders can do is shoot the messenger and skirt around everything. All they wanna know is whether she's been reading stuff critifical of the organisation and attack her attitude etc. Trying to reason with thoroughly brainwashed members of a cult is impossible.
A bit difficult to hear, but recordings like this are notoriously dificult to obtain, good work.
The definition of an 'Apostate' according to the Elders is:
Anyone, who in any way, does not agree to the 'Elders interpretation at that time' of what the WTBTS writes or says in any of their literature.
They can alter, twist, add to or 'have their opinion' on anything; AND YOU MUST AGREE OR
YOU are AN APOSTATE!
I know from personal and very bitter experience.
fokyc
Meaning, if two different hounders have differing viewpoints about anything that's in the Bible or that the Filthful and Disgraceful Slavebugger puts out, everyone in those congregations is automatically an apostate. If they agree with one, that puts them against the other one.
@ WTWizard - you'll find that your point is exactly correct as the series continues. The follow-up visit from two elders shows that one elder has a very particular view a certain subject while the other elder has the complete opposite.
I've attached below a 1980 letter that, so far as I know, hasn't been updated, and which states WT's definitive position on what constitutes apostacy:
If anyone has any WT letters that supercede this one, please let me know.
Thanks.
P.S. Note the significance of the date of the letter!
Thanks again Hobo Ken
Much appreciated
Thomas Covenant
Excellent arguement about who would be bloodguilty if the WT Society were to re instate the organ transplant ban and people were to die of it. He would not answer where the bloodguilt lies.
As I've said here before, I consider ALL Jehovahs's Witnesses, including myself whilst I was in it, to be PARTLY responsible for all deaths resulting from the blood and organ transplant policies.
A little extreme, I know, lol.
As Flipper would say
Peace out
I have to say Thomas that I agree.
If I was to contact or stimulate a member of the public on the field circus to become a jw, then as a result of following the "faith" that person refused a blood transfusion ( a policy which is equally flawed and dangerous) where is the first point of contact?
It could be argued that I was only following orders.....Nuremberg trials etc..
Thanks I.T Support for posting that letter from the WT. Imust be thick.what is the significance of the date Sept.1980?
The main point of interest to me though was that they speak of "despite scriptural reproof" so I would insist that they cannot DF me for Apostasy unless they can plainly show me from Scripture where my views are in error.
Love
Wobble
