by Crazyguy 19 Replies latest watchtower scandals
I have seen posts on several you tube sites stating that Jackson said during his RC testimony that JW's don't shun, celebrating Christmas is not a disfellowshipping offence, birthdays are OK and ones doesn't have to agree with JW doctrine.
I have read most of the posts on other threads while and after his testimony but never read any of this? Did he really say these things or is someone on the net just stirring up some BS?
Not true...
Somewhat true, he was really wishwashy.
Download his entire testimony and then keyword search for Christmas, Birthday, etc.
Jackson's is the last day's testimony.
Below is a notable exchange:
Q: So, for example, if they had become inactive or sought to fade without formally disassociating, and the elders came to visit and found them celebrating Christmas or a birthday, they would be found to be in transgression of the rules, would they not?
Jackson: That is not my understanding. But again, as I said, it is not my field, that goes into policy with regard to those type of things, but from my personal experience, that's not the case.
...
Jackson: Yes, but if I could mention, Mr Stewart, your first proposition you put forward, that they meet someone who is celebrating Christmas ‐ you know, this person is not associating with other Jehovah's Witnesses, not actively trying to change other people, and so on ‐ a person such as that is not going to be handled judicially, as far as I understand. So, sorry, I have to disagree with you, but I hope you can see
Question: "They would be found to be in transgression of the rules, would they not?
Jackson: That is not my understanding.
Even if the JWs decided celebration of Christmas was effectively a voluntary disassociation, Jackson was still lying. And he knew he was.
hmm, why he say,
'that is not my understanding',
and no one reply, 'well then sir, what IS? your how old? you have how many years experience to make religious rules ? stop avoiding the question! '
think about that statement... that is not my understanding... ,makes no sense to me.
sounds so immature and petty, and so obviously
evasive...
ok so now, if questioned, or accused, everyone should take a lesson , lol
'now [sister / brother ] you do realize your actions have led you to be in a position to be disfellowshipped...
lets just say ' that is not my understanding...'
Is there any statement in the literature, including elder's handbooks, that says the celebration of any holiday is a disfellowshippable offence?
See pdf pages 26 and 27 of the old elders manual, it is classed under 'apostasy' :
1991 elders manual from Royal Commission
See pdf page 66 of the latest elders manual. Also classed as 'apostasy' :
