How many JWs would Disassociate if their were no family sanctions?

by Chook 20 Replies latest jw experiences

  • no-zombie

    The problem here guys is that Governing Body could very well remove shunning from the law books ... people bail ... and then the GB changes their mind and puts it back on ... happy to have pruned out the unbelievers and put the fear of God back in the congregation.

  • Island Man
    Island Man

    I think at least 5% would disassociate. I don't think it would be as much as 50%. But I believe that about 50% would probably immediately stop shunning disassociated relatives, and that number would grow gradually until shunning of disassociated relatives ceases altogether or becomes just the aberrant behavior of an over-zealous minority.

    The thing to keep in mind is that there are other repercussions to disassociating, apart from shunning, and heavily indoctrinated Watchtower loyalists will impose these threats even without being prompted to do so by Watchtower. Some are employed with other JWs and risk losing their job. Some would still risk being disinherited. Some would risk being kicked out of the house. Some would risk being divorced on the trumped up grounds of "spiritual endangerment".

    For this to really do good, Watchtower would not only have to remove the shunning sanction, but actively teach JWs that it is wrong to shun disassociated ones or punish them in any way. Here's a scary thing to think about: Faced with legal pressure, Watchtower can officially put an end to their shunning policy tomorrow without there being any relief from shunning for X-JWs. They would just have to print something like this:

    "In the past God's people have been given repeated Bible-based counsel on the need to "quit mixing in company" with those who are unrepentant sinners, or who renounce their Christian dedication by written word or action. (scripture citations) However, today, more and more governments are concerned with enforcing human rights and rights to freedom of religion. Some interpret our faithful adherence to the scriptures' injunction on not associating with disfellowshipped and disassociated ones as being unduly strict to the point of violating human rights and freedom of religion. Hate laws once used to prevent the verbal incitement of hatred toward minority groups are now being used to restrict persons and organizations from publishing religious direction that the state deems as hateful and/or intolerant. ("framing trouble by decree" scripture citation) How should God's people respond to such developments? Jesus taught his followers to be "innocent as doves but cautious as serpents" (scripture citation). To this end, our publications will no longer feature the direction to quit associating with disfellowhipped or disassociated ones. We no longer give the direction to cease communication with such ones. Of course, true Christians know the Bible's direction on such matters and endeavor to follow their Bible-based conscience regardless of the direction or lack of direction given by any individual, government or organization. ("we must obey god as ruler rather than men" scripture citation)"
  • Wake Me Up Before You Jo-Ho
    Wake Me Up Before You Jo-Ho

    @no-zombie There's no way the Governing Body is interested in weeding out the unbelievers. Those men CLING to the numbers like a kidnapper clings to its hostages who have seen their attacker's face and can easily report them if set free.

  • undercover

    I think it was Farkel that once said that if DFing/DAing and shunning were not part of the make up of the JW religion, there would be no exJW forums and groups.

    There would be no reason to bemoan our fate at having learned the truth about 'the truth'. There would only be minor, if any, debates or arguments with family still attending. We'd just drift away, no different than people who drift away from the Baptist church they grew up in.

  • John Davis
    John Davis

    The problem with the statement that half or more would just drop out if it wasn't for shunning around family is that by that logic there would be whole families would leave or where 1 or 2 family members would still be in, that is just statistics. If that was the case then you would see whole families on exodus now. So i really doubt it is anywhere near 50%.

  • pontoon

    I would be GONE in a heartbeat.

  • Vidiot

    I suspect we'd see a quiet yet impossible-to-ignore (not to mention financially crippling) mass exodus.

    And what's more, I think the Org suspects that, too.

  • Vidiot
    Wake Me Up - "There's no way the Governing Body is interested in weeding out the unbelievers..."

    I dunno.

    Lately, a few of us have come to suspect that the Org actually does want to pare the rank-and-file down to just a core group of hard-core True Believers, but to do it at a rate that they control, so as to keep the WTS solvent and unembarassed, particularly in the face of increasing legal trouble.

    I call it "managing the decline".


    How many JWs would Disassociate if there were no family sanctions?

    Not a lot, maybe 10%-15%.

    Most of them are happy where they are.

    The rest are institutionalised.....("Where else would we go?")


    Anyone who really wants to leave, leaves no matter what.

  • Vidiot

    I've lost count of how many still-in ttatters have come on here and said that they'd leave if they could but currently - for whatever reason - can't.

Share this