How would you respond to this JWs assertions?

Vanderhoven7

My questions posted to Mr. Penny

Do Jehovah's Witnesses teach their members to shun ex-Jehovah Witness family members living outside the home? Do you support this practice?

How would your religion deal with a member who no longer believes in the events alleged by your organization to have happened in 1914?

Would your organization support divorcing a spouse if this member of your religion stated that he no longer believed Jehovah was leading the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses?

Vander

Mr. Pennyone's Response:

Hi Vander,

No one is disfellowshipped from among JW's unless they unrepentantly engage in or practices GROSS SIN. When that becomes evident the Bible tell Christians what to do. Read 1 Corinthians 5:1-5.

When that person had repented and cleaned up his life he was reinstated into the Christian congregation. --- 2 Corinthians 2:5-11. Is shunning a Christian thing to do? Read 1 Corinthians 5:11-13.

"How would your religion deal with a member who no longer believes in the events alleged by your organization to have happened in 1914?"

Find out why. And review the facts with such a one. Now if then this person becomes a divisive element in the congregation by promoting his views he can be disfellowshipped. --- Titus 3:10,11; 1 Timothy 1:19,20

"Would your organization support divorcing a spouse if this member of your religion stated that he no longer believed Jehovah was leading the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses?"

Jesus Christ said that the only Scriptural ground for divorce is adultery. Jehovah's Witnesses obey that rule. Read Matthew 19:3-12.

much Christian love

1pennyone

ambersun

"How would your religion deal with a member who no longer believes in the events alleged by your organization to have happened in 1914?"

Find out why. And review the facts with such a one. Now if then this person becomes a divisive element in the congregation by promoting his views he can be disfellowshipped. --- Titus 3:10,11; 1 Timothy 1:19,20

I would like Mr Penny to explain how action such as this towards a member, who's only crime is to express individual thinking, does NOT imply strong cultish undertones.

Also, why is there such a fear of the rank and file being swayed by alternative thinking among the ranks if their belief is supposedly so strong? Surely the thoughts of an individual would not be a serious threat unless there was some danger of them having doubts themselves?

punkofnice

Dear Penny-short-of-a-shilling. Thanks for the reply. But why are you using 'Theocratic Warfare strategy' on me?

TBH it made me laugh. On the one hand 'short-of-a-shilling' is saying you only get DF for GROSS SIN then says a person can be DF for not agreeing with 1914!

SUCH DOUBLESPEAK!!

talesin

1. How do the JWs define GROSS SIN? Who decides if the person is truly repentant? Why must a Judicial Committee (JC) be made up of 3 people (ie, there is a 'vote' taken by the 3 members of the JC, and there MUST be 3 people so there isn't a 'tie' decision)? Can not 4 elders make up a JC? Why?

Why is it that at one time the organization considered receiving a kidney transplant cannibalism (GROSS SIN). People died rather than receive a kidney transplant, and be disfellowshipped. The organization later reversed its position, and it is no longer considered a SIN to receive a transplant. How does the organization justify this change of rules?

2. What must a person do to be considered a 'divisive element'? (In many cases, merely questioning a doctrine has been considered grounds for disfellowshipping.)

3. I have nothing on this one ...

tal

DesirousOfChange

No one is disfellowshipped from among JW's unless they unrepentantly engage in or practices GROSS SIN. When that becomes evident the Bible tell Christians what to do. Read 1 Corinthians 5:1-5.

Now if then this person [a member who no longer believes the doctrines] becomes a divisive element in the congregation by promoting his views he can be disfellowshipped.

Not believing the "current" Truth is clearly a "GROSS SIN" for which one can be disfellowshipped.

Thus, what one believes today, could constitute a GROSS SIN tomorrow.

DOC

OUTLAW

Mr.Penny is is Fluent in the WBT$/JW Language..

Dub-le Talk..

.......................;-)...OUTLAW

Terry

Sure sure.

Right.

I've heard this before.

I'm living proof it is nonsense.

Individual judiciary committees act according to the personal opinions of the members themselves in a given situation.

What is the standard of proof? Actual testimony by eyewitnesses?

Heck no. It can be a rumor.

There are plenty of JW's who DO COMMIT gross sins and become very rebellious.

These are the majority, I'm sure.

But, plenty of members are caught in circumstances which only APPEAR TO BE SINS. When they are called before the local committee and treated like criminals they lose their temper and get into an argument.

Others, become disheartened. They can't stand up for themselves. They are poor at rebuttal. They fold.

If it were only as simple as the "official" JW policy!

Vanderhoven7

Thank you for your responses.

Ambersun & Desirousofchange: yes the old the gross sin of independent thinking reveals their absolute insecurity. LOL

Punkofnice: Right; since when does disbelieving and disagreeing with the GB on 1914 equate with GROSS SIN.

Talesin: If you don't mind I think I will incorporate both of your arguments in my response.

OutLaw: I agree with you...and I like the term "Dub-le talk" also known as theocratic warfare strategy

Terry: Yes it bothers me, as if official policy was not bad enough, but ones' alleged eternal welfare rests in the hands a few men's opinions and interpretations of the facts.

I'll get back to you all regarding Mr. Penny's response

jwfacts

http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/disfellowship-shunning.php goes in detail regarding disfellowshipping.

JWs most certainly do not only disfellowship for GROSS SIN. There are over 35 reasons a person can be disfellowshipped for. Many like smoking, oral sex, gambling etc are not gross sin, in fact not even listed in the Bible as sin at all.

Also many of these reasons for being disfellowshipped change over time. For instance, alternative civilian/military service and organ transplants were a d/f offence, now they are not. How unjust that people were shunned unjustly.

1 Corinthians 5:11-13. does not say to shun, and certainly does not say a d/f person cannot be greeted in a kingdom hall. It discusses not socialising with the person. Even then, it was not an obligatory command, since 2 Cor says only the majority participated in the rebuke.

2 Corinthians 2:5-6 "Now if anyone has caused sadness M , he has saddened, not me, but all of YOU to an extent-not to be too harsh in what I say. This rebuke given by the majority is sufficient for such a man "

Vanderhoven7

Thank you Paul. I actually posted your entire response and followed that up with the following:

Hi Mr. Penny,

I noticed you avoided answering my question about shunning family members living outside the home.

Let's try again.

Are Jehovah's Witnesses required to shun parents or sibblings who have been disfellowshipped for the gross sin of smoking?

Would previous members of your organization still be "dead to JWs" if they had been disfellowshipped for expressing their independent thinking on the subject of organ transplants in the 70s? Let's say they saved the life of one of their children by allowing them to have a kidney transplant when transplants were banned by your organization? If today they are still unrepentant about saving their child, would they be exonerated for having being right and obeying their conscience instead of the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses?

Thanks,

Vander

P.S.: I'm expecting more Dub-le talk from Mr. Penny as Outlaw would say

How would you respond to this JWs assertions?

Share this