Suppose Brooklyn Changed The Rules On Disfellowshipping?

by Englishman 33 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Englishman

  This is all great stuff!

  Re the 1974 WT. It was this WT that prompted my parents to get in touch with me after 2 years of non contact. Although my Dad died over 20 years ago, my Mum, who is widely regarded as "Sister ever-so mature" still associates with me and my brother with no limitations whatsoever. As far as she's concerned, as long as we don't become apostates - which in her book means joining the Catholics or Mormons - all is well.

  Besides, as she frequently tells the congregation members, it was my brother and I who sorted out my Dad's affairs and came up with the cash to keep the wolf from her door. "You want me to shun my sons who are not apostates and who care for my welfare, eh Brother Snottrag? Will you provide for me as well as they have done?"

  You can see where she's coming from..

  Englishman.
• 

  PinTail

  Oh I would go back so I could be on the minisrty school again. Naw don't think so!
• 

  Jaypeeto

  I wouldn't go back now, even if they did relax the shunning rules. I've done too much studying and research, and I know that they are a false and dangerous group, as one other poster put it. You couldn't pay me to go back. Love, Jaypeeto
• 

  Big Tex

  They can't relax the DF rule in any way. The threat of being DF'd is much like the Soviets building a wall around East Berlin and then later East Germany. It's the only thing binding a great many people to the organization. If the threat of being DF'd and then shunned were taken away there would be a flood of people leaving. So the wall stays up, not to keep apostates out but to keep the 'sheep' in.
• 

  ohiocowboy

  In theory, it sounds nice. In practice, I feel it could never work. Disfellowshipping and shunning is so ingrained with the teachings of the Society, that even if they were to change it, and yes, it's a very big if, but if they did, many followers would still shun people anyways, as it is so ingrained in them, and those who would change and actually NOT shun people would be looked down on as being spiritually weak by the others. It would cause divisions in the congs. and possibly cause others to Stumble.

  I do find solace though, in the fact that the WTBTS, by their own teaching in regards to Shunning, Blood, and the myriads on myriads of Bullcrap that they have spewed forth throughout the years, is causing more and more people to actually Shun them, thereby causing their own teachings to backfire in their own faces...
• 

  GetBusyLiving

  There is no way they are going to get rid of disfellowshiping. If anything they will try to make the rules tighter and demonize 'apostates' even more, especially now that the numbers are dropping so much. If they allow them to associate with people who know better they'll lose even more members. You have to give up you're brain to stay a witness.
• 

  jeanniebeanz

  The WTBTS could not do this and hold onto their people. Those of us who have a brain and researched their lies would never go back, and some of us are so pissed off over what happened that if our families could talk to us again, we would either tell them to take a hike, or do everything in our power to open their eyes.

  It would be one more reversal on doctrine, and some would just get fed up with them and leave. Happens everytime there is a change; some see through it and start doing their own research. It's a matter of time at that point, and with no df'ing to stop them, they'd be history.

  Jean
• 

  roybatty

  it wont ever happen.

  I agree 100%. Whenever I've explain to a non-JW the disfellowshipping arrangement and thus why my family and former JW friends won't even acknowledge my existance, they almost always say the same thing...

  "What an effective way of controlling people."

  The WT Society knows this is the ultimate tool to control the rank and file JWbots and they will never give it up.
• 

  myvalk

  my thoughts???

  i think they could not possibly do away with d'fing, or the amount of lawsuits that would result would keep them busy for years.
• 

  BluesBrother

  But consider a less extreme situation. What if a woman who had been disfellowshiped were to attend a congregational meeting and upon leaving the hall found that her car, parked nearby, had developed a flat tire? Should the male members of the congregation, seeing her plight, refuse to aid her, perhaps leaving it up to some worldly person to come along and do so? This too would be needlessly unkind and inhumane. Yet situations just like this have developed, perhaps in all good conscience, yet due to a lack of balance in viewpoint.

  I know a few dubs who say they would still subscribe to this viewpoint, because it is sensible and human, although it is no longer official policy ..What would I have done when I was in? each case on its merits, I guess . I was talking recently to someone who has a d/fd daughter but they keep a modicom of contact and still see their grandchild. They said they did a small favour for the daughter when needed -" because we do that for anybody of the world"..but I guess they kept it quiet from the elders

  No, I do not think the dubs will radically change the policy