JW replies on my Shunning article

by besty 55 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • carla

    Jw's at one time said or implied df-ing or excommunication was a pagan practice.... See "Are You Also Excommunicated?" Jan 8, 1947 (wt?) only have time to type the following-

    talking about the Catholic Church....... "The authority for excommunication, they claim, is based on the teachings of Crhist and the apostles, as found in the following scriptures.......... But the Hierarchy's excommunication, as a punishment and 'medicinal' remedy (Catholic Encyclopedia), finds no support in these scriptures. In fact, it is altogether foreign to the Bbile teachings. -Hebrews 10:26-31

    Where, then, did thhis practice originate? The Encyclopedia Britannica says that papal excommunication is not without pagan influence, "and its variatiions cannot be adequately explained unless account be taken of several non-Christian analogues of excommunication."................

    the weapon of excommunication became teh instrument by which the clergy attained a combination of ecclesiastical power and secular tryranny that finds no parallel in history. "

    sorry for any typos or if it has already been posted, in a hurry and my jw is hanging around

  • darth frosty
    darth frosty

    I had a nice response to the paul thing I posted a while ago. Basically it says how paul was speaking out of his arse in 1 cor and as soon as he could he corrected his mistake in 2 cor. If you look at the time line there is a mere 6 months between 1cor and 2cor?!?

    we're talking about 1st century mail and news service. I believe paul knew he messed up in his 1st tirade against the sinner and as soon as he could he retracted his rebuke. Think about it there is no way in the 6 month time span for him to write the letter get feedback on the sinners regret and than send out the second 're-instating' him as it were.

  • undercover

    Good article, besty.

    Thanks for the link...

  • DaCheech

    god can jugde anyone he wants, but mere fuck**head men?

    no logic in letting sinners judge my heart

  • Mary

    I responded to "Russ" on there. What a moron.

  • Hoping4Change
  • alfmel

    Paul is correct: anyone not living by the word of God should not be part of the congregation. In order to join the Church of Christ (as Paul suggests) you need to accept Jesus and live by his word. If you are not willing to do so, you may not join. If you join but later leave those teachings and live in a way that is fully contrary to the word, then you should be kicked out of the congregation. Paul also makes constant reference to avoiding those who didn't have the same Christian lifestyle. However, I don't really see in my readings of the Bible those teachings as "you must shun everyone who doesn't act like you." If you were looking for evidence to support shunning, Paul's writing may provide it, but I don't thnk they were the intent.

    If we look at Christ's words (and to me they carry more wieght than Paul's) we find a different story. In the Parable of the Good Samaritan, we find a self-proclaimed religious zealot wanting to trick Jesus and show off his religious knowledge. He asks Jesus what the greatest commandment is. Jesus replies: Love God and reminds the zealot about the second: love your neighbor as yourself. The know-it-all Bible reader then asks, "who is my neighbor" as if to suggest there was a group of people except from his love. Jesus then provides his parable and asks, "who was this man's neighbor?" The highly arrogant Jew now can't put his pride behind and admit a Samaritan is worty of his love, so he has to say "the one that showed mercy."

    To me, the story surrounding this parable teaches us to love everyone, even when you think you are justified in keeping your love away from them. The ancient Jews of Jesus' time were very harsh at judging and condeming, and Jesus rebuked the Jews constantly for this. I find it odd JWs seem to ignore those rebukes. There may be times when shunning a loved one might be the right choice. However, I don't think anyone with a real love for his/her neighbor would come to that point without a great deal of sorrow, soul-searching and tears. Certainly it is not something I would do simply out of fear or retribution. Fear sounds more like Satan's way of dealing with problems and troubled souls.

  • alfmel

    Replying to my own post, it seems Paul refers to several things when it talks about the church: the actual leadership organization, (apostles, prophets, pastors, etc.), the assembly of Saints in a particular place, etc. However, I don't think he ever meant "the church" to be the individual acts of the people. Thus, if the church had authority to deny people from joininig, then it would apply to the organization, not the individuals in the congregation. I can see an Elder denying entry to an apostate for the good of the fold, but I don't see that authority carrying to the spouse of that person.

  • steve2

    Paul, with his Jewish upbringing and legalistic mindset, was intent on maintaining control over the widely growing - and dispersing - churches. Hence, he used his "authority" to list the "conditions' that could get a believer banned from fellowship with other believers.

    Not surprisingly, anyone who questioned Paul's authority was a likely candidate for the boot.

    Contrary to what some protesters say, Paul introduced the "grounds" for excommunicating or disfellowshipping a believer. Thanks to him, this practice of banning believers from fellowship has triumphed in one form or another across the millenia.

    Forget the cheap attacks on mind-control cults; Christianity got in real early and we need look no further than the local church to see the way 'back to Bible Christians enact the cleansing power of a good excommunication:

    Let's all hail the human tendency to use threat and upnishment to exact unity.

  • Hopscotch


    Great response - I especially love this bit.

    Before offering people a bible study perhaps you should offer them a history study.


Share this