DF'ing: Why shun child, but not spouse?

AlmostAtheist

The Bible has precious little to say about shunning. Write a scripture on each finger and you'll still have one clean hand.

But the Watchtower has managed to read into it a myriad (are non-JW's allowed to say "myriad"?) of rules about who to shun, how much, under what circumstances, etc.

One that caught me sideways a day or so ago was the fact that a wife with a DF'd husband doesn't have to shun him. They aren't supposed to talk about "spiritual things", but there's no straight out shunning. This is also true of DF'd children still living in the home. But as soon as the kids move out, they are supposed to be shunned. Why the kids and not the hubby? There are plenty of husbands that don't live with their wives, perhaps due to work. They drive to their worksite, live there for a month, then come back for a few days. Or they're truckers. Whatever.

The point is that when your DF'd spouse doesn't live with you, you don't have to shun them. But if your DF'd children don't live with you, they are off-limits.

What scriptural "justification" (excuse) do they have for this contradictory stance?

Dave

skyman

Don't have one other than the SAY SO COMPANY says so. So GOD says so. That should clear it up for you. YAP clear as mud.

Finally-Free

While a DF'd or DA'd husband is not completely shunned there is a distinct difference in the way he's treated. He's looked upon as one of the walking dead and treated accordingly. His opinions no longer carry any weight, even in non religious matters. He life is barely tolerated. He is eventually driven to leave. That was my experience anyway.

W

willyloman

If you still have an "Aid" book lying around, look up "Pharisee." It explains everything there is to know about the DF/shunning policy that has evolved in dubdom. Jesus would be so pissed!

sonnyboy

Because husbands are more powerful than God.

sammielee24

There's no scriptural basis for any of it but the 'reasoning' is that the spouse has to return home and the children do not. (the word reasoning is used tongue in cheek since quite obviously any JW has lost the ability to function in this manner)

tijkmo

she might be married to a man who was a dedicated Christian but was later expelled from the congregation. Yet that would not end their marital ties; only death or a Scriptural divorce would do that.—1 Cor. 7:39; Matt. 19:9.

39

A wife is bound during all the time her husband is alive. But if her husband should fall asleep [in death], she is free to be married to whom she wants, only in [the] Lord.

. 9 I say to YOU that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery."

A disfellowshiped person has been spiritually cut off from the congregation; the former spiritual ties have been completely severed. This is true even with respect to his relatives, including those within his immediate family circle. Thus, family members—while acknowledging family ties—will no longer have any spiritual fellowship with him.—1 Sam. 28:6; Prov. 15:8, 9.

6 Although Saul would inquire of Jehovah, Jehovah never answered him, either by dreams or by the U´rim or by the prophets.

8

The sacrifice of the wicked ones is something detestable to Jehovah, but the prayer of the upright ones is a pleasure to him.

9

The way of the wicked one is something detestable to Jehovah, but the one pursuing righteousness he loves.

these are the scriptural references to establish the organizational stance...

i think the word you are looking for is..........reaching

but i've got a better word