What Is The Stupidest Rule You've Encountered As a Witness?

by minimus 90 Replies latest jw friends

  • stillajwexelder

    no oral sex -

  • Gadget

    How it was right to go and talk to others about how their religion was worng but bad to let people tell us why being a jw was wrong.

  • pdx

    Saying 'good luck' or 'that was lucky' was bad, from the god of good luck, but saying 'that was fortunate' or 'fortunately' was all right. I guess the Greek Gods are more acceptable than Asian Gods..

  • minimus

    You can be df'd for any sin but NOBODY gets disfellowshipped for gluttony.

  • Sassy

    The fact that the rules are inconsistant. One person can be dfd for fornication and yet another, who becomes pregnant by that same action, is not.

    I know of a group of kids from several congregations in a close area that ended up getting together for a party.. Alcohol had not been on the agenda. But a pioneer brought alcohol to that party. Said pioneer only supplied did not drink. Most of the kids were underage. Depending on who you were, and what congregation you were from depended on what punishment they received. Most of these kids had never had a drink before. ONE mistake, yet some of the kids lost all priviledges and were publicly reproved. One couple were not allowed to have their wedding in the KH only weeks later. ONE mistake. and the PIONEER didn't get any discipline because said pioneer did not partake.. Other kids got off scott free.. Where is the justice in unity? Said rules are wrong.. stupid..

  • minimus

    Since MANY elders like to drink a lot----they are more lenient on that "sin".

  • Sassy

    yes.. but my point was said elders who can enjoy a drink or two or three or four... etc etc..

    came down hard on those kids, publicly reproved and humiliated them (except for the exceptional elders children)

    To me if you have a rule.. it applies to everyone! But the rules are the rules do not have to be consistant..

  • belbab

    I' ve been "outside the gate" since 1973 so I am not so knowledgeable about all the rules being enforced in these "latter days". But the following is something more recent that was related to me (bragged to me) by an ex-jw who at one time was an elder. He lived on the fringes of dub-dum, had a JW wife and about four grown children some who are pioneers and missionaries.

    He was a red-neck type of guy, and was playing around big-time on his wife, from regular one night stands to being shacked up for periods of time. He always tried to find a married woman to seduce, ( safer sex).. His wife, a staunch Jaydub wanted to get a divorce, and wanted to get him to admit to fornication to make it scriptural. He knew if he admitted to it, he would be disfellowshiped and then would be alienated from his children. He knew all the rules.

    One of the rules is that if a man commits fornication and his wife learns of it or suspects it she either has to forgive him or avoid sexual relationship with him. If she has sex with him the elders consider that as forgiveness and she has reaccepted her marriage mate and she would be unable to use any former fornication as grounds for divorce.

    What this "brother" would do, was visit his wife, (they still had business affairs to attend to) and he would bring a bottle, and one thing leading to another ("Candy is dandy, liquor is quicker", Ogden Nash) they would end up in the sack together.

    The wife finally had to tell her grown up daughters who would let him in if he visited, not to let him in the house. But she did not tell them the reason why.

    Can any one else out there cooberate this "rule"


  • Sassy

    I remember that rule too.. if you have sex you are showing forgiveness.. (or if you verbally say you forgive same deal). Then you know longer have grounds for divorce.

  • xjw_b12


    If a brother gave a public talk, he HAD to wear a suit. No suit = no talk.......

    I remebered when visiting a cong in Winnipeg, and the temperature was in the mid 90's and the hall had no air conditioning. Those of us who seated were sweltering, never mind the poor brother giving the talk. About 15 minutes in, he excused himself, backed away from the podium, removed his suit jacket, nealtly folded it up and draped it over a chair. He then loosened his tie, then carried on with giving the talk.

    I thought, good for you bro., but it was definately "a topic for conversation" after the meeting.

Share this