Continuing the off-topic discussion in: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/jw/friends/202959/1/Another-question-about-the-Governing-Body
Is Disfellowshipping Scriptural?
by pirata 9 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
-
pirata
PSacramento Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Post 6691 of 6729
Since 6/22/2009The "don't even eat with suh a man" was thepassage from 1Corinthians were Paul, giving his own pesonal opinion about a higly specififc problem in their church ( A man doing his step-mother, eww...).
Paul pointed out that the church must explain to this person what he is doing wrong and IF he understands that what he is doing is wrong and continues to do so, that they should send him on his way and not deal with him at all.
You won't find Paul advocating shunning or anything liek that ANYWHERE else nor find him or any other apostle saying to shun anyone in any general outlines.
And, fare more importantly, you will NOT find anywhere that Jesus advocate anything of the sort.
james_woods Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Post 3313 of 3320
Since 10/26/2005You won't find Paul advocating shunning or anything liek that ANYWHERE else nor find him or any other apostle saying to shun anyone in any general outlines.
And, fare more importantly, you will NOT find anywhere that Jesus advocate anything of the sort.
And, to take this further - you will NOT find anywhere that Paul, the Apostles, or Jesus advocated a "governing body" to legislate the christian church. Both DFing and the GB (and for that matter, door-to-door book selling) are non-biblical and inventions of the Watchtower using out of context bible verses to support totally new 20th century doctrinal inventions.
Botzwana Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Post 36 of 40
Since 11/29/2010Paul pointed out that the church must explain to this person what he is doing wrong and IF he understands that what he is doing is wrong and continues to do so, that they should send him on his way and not deal with him at all.
I have no idea if I am doing this right. I am trying to put the above text into a quote box. When you say not deal with him at all, does that not mean shunning. To have no dealings with someone.... What else could it mean?
PSacramento Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Post 6717 of 6729
Since 6/22/2009I have no idea if I am doing this right. I am trying to put the above text into a quote box. When you say not deal with him at all, does that not mean shunning. To have no dealings with someone.... What else could it mean?
It meant no social dealings with him at all ( hence the meal example) but you may be missing the point, it was a very specific recommendation ( not a commandment) and it was Paul's personal opinion. You will note that you will not find any writings of Jesus or any other apostles saying such a thing.
It was targeted at a specific circumstance and was not a "general remark for church policy".
In all the other writings if Paul you will not see him tell anyone to do this ever again, it just is nOT there.
You can't take what Paul said about a specfifc situation and for a specififc person and make it a general rule or doctrine, Paul didn't preach it and you will NOT find evidence of it in the NT.
Jesus preached forgiveness and accepteance and compassion and tolerance and NEVER turned anyone away or sent anyone away.
Botzwana Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Post 38 of 40
Since 11/29/2010Yes Jesus preached forgiveness etc. But was not Paul handpicked by Jesus himself? Aren't Paul's words to have major impact as well? If you think it's a personal opinion then how can anyone take anything Paul says any other way? Either it's his personal opinion, or it's holy spirit. Which is it?
sir82 Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Mongolia
Post 4898 of 4899
Since 5/17/2005As has been noted above, Paul wrote one paragraph in one letter to one congregation which had one issue with one man.
The Watchtower Society has extrapolated an entire procedural policy based on that one paragraph.
Terms and concepts you will not find anywhere in the Bible (hey if it's a valid argument for the word "trinity" it ought to work here too):
-- Disfellowshipping
-- Judicial Committee
-- Appeal
-- Restrictions
-- Reinstatement Procedure
-- Public reproof
-- Private reproof
-- Disassociation
-- "...is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses"
Botzwana Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Post 39 of 40
Since 11/29/2010Sir82, But didn't David talk about it too? Those that hide what they are I do not come in etc. So you have two Bible writers talking about the same thing.
sir82 Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Mongolia
Post 4899 of 4899
Since 5/17/2005There a huge difference between David making a personal decision that he himself would not associate with certain other Israelites,
vs.
Enforced shunning of family members. Enforced coercion to behave a certain way ("refuse that blood transfusion, or else besides God hating you, all your friends and family will never speak to you again").
It's not so much the principle of shunning, it's the enforcement and coercion.
"Shun your son / daughter / aunt / uncle, avoid all but the most vital 'family business', or every friend and family member you have ever known will shun you too".
The Watchtower Society has said that Paul's words at 2 Corinthinians chapter 2 were written in reference to the sinner Paul condemned in his first letter:
2 Corinthians 2
1 So I made up my mind that I would not make another painful visit to you. 2 For if I grieve you, who is left to make me glad but you whom I have grieved? 3 I wrote as I did, so that when I came I would not be distressed by those who should have made me rejoice. I had confidence in all of you, that you would all share my joy. 4 For I wrote you out of great distress and anguish of heart and with many tears, not to grieve you but to let you know the depth of my love for you.
5 If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you to some extent—not to put it too severely. 6 The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. 7 Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow.
That phrase "by the majority" also appears in the New World Translation.
You can look thru every index ever published by the WTS - you'll never find one explanation of why Paul used those words.
Hoewever, the implication is quite clear: If the majority "inflicted punishment" on the man, clearly a minority did not.
Even assuming (a large leap) that Paul had in mind something like what the JWs currently practice in their disfellowshipping procedures: Where are Paul's words of condemnation for that minority?
They aren't there. Even assuming (a large leap) that Paul had in mind something as harsh and rigid as the JW interpretation of his words, he never had any intention that it be forced, upon pain of identical punishment, upon all members of the congregation.
sir82 Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted a day ago (12/8/2010)
Mongolia
Post 4900 of 4899
Since 5/17/2005Another point:
What did Paul write?
"Quit mixing in company with anyone who is a fornicator, idolator, etc." - present tense
What did David write?
"I do not sit with those who hide what they are..." - present tense
Compared to current JW policy:
Even one sin, weeks, months or years in the past, can be grounds for disfellowshipping. If you can't prove to the 3 men sitting in the little room that you have repented, they bounce you. Doesn't matter if you are not a "practicer" of the sin, doesn't matter if you really have repented - do it once, don't satisfy 3 men of your sincerity, and out you go.
Where is the Bible principle that is based on?
Not to mention the impossibility of 3 men somehow determining the "degree of repentence" of someone else - but I've derailed this thread's topic enough already....
Sayswho Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted ~ 22 hours ago (12/9/2010)
Post 100 of 100
Since 4/25/2010Sir82...
Fantastic reasoning...That's what I have to say!!! It's amazing how we do not look or see what we are reading or being taught...we just take whatever point is being made by the Org as fact.
pirata Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted ~ 22 hours ago (12/9/2010)
Post 788 of 789
Since 12/31/2009Botzwana,
Please consider the scriptures below. What was Jesus instructions/example in regards to this matter? Who are the apostles saying to avoid (esp. note the presence of "antichrist" and "anyone called a brother")? To what extent were they to avoid? Would most non-christians fit the definition of antichrist?
(Matthew 18:15-17) “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. 17 If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.
(Matthew 9:9-13) Next, while passing along from there, Jesus caught sight of a man named Matthew seated at the tax office, and he said to him: “Be my follower.” Thereupon he did rise up and follow him. 10 Later, while he was reclining at the table in the house, look! many tax collectors and sinners came and began reclining with Jesus and his disciples. 11 But on seeing this the Pharisees began to say to his disciples: “Why is it that YOUR teacher eats with tax collectors and sinners?” 12 Hearing [them], he said: “Persons in health do not need a physician, but the ailing do. 13 Go, then, and learn what this means, ‘I want mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came to call, not righteous people, but sinners.”
(1 Corinthians 5:9-13) In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10 not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, YOU would actually have to get out of the world. 11 But now I am writing YOU to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. 12 For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do YOU not judge those inside, 13 while God judges those outside? “Remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves.”
(Romans 16:17) Now I exhort YOU, brothers, to keep your eye on those who cause divisions and occasions for stumbling contrary to the teaching that YOU have learned, and avoid them.
(Titus 3:10) As for a man that promotes a sect,reject him after a first and a second admonition;
(2 Corinthians 2:5-6) Now if anyone has caused sadness M , [for cross reference, see next verse] he has saddened, not me, but all of YOU to an extent—not to be too harsh in what I say. 6 This rebuke given by the majority is sufficient for such a man,
( M 1 Corinthians 5:1) . . .Actually fornication is reported among YOU, and such fornication as is not even among the nations, that a wife a certain [man] has of [his] father.
(2 John 7-11) For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Look out for yourselves, that YOU do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that YOU may obtain a full reward. 9 Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to YOU and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into YOUR homes or say a greeting to him. 11 For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.
(1 John 2:22) Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one that denies the Father and the Son.
(2 Thessalonians 3:6-15) Now we are giving YOU orders, brothers, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every brother walking disorderly and not according to the tradition YOU received from us. 7 For YOU yourselves know the way YOU ought to imitate us, because we did not behave disorderly among YOU… 11 For we hear certain ones are walking disorderly among YOU, not working at all but meddling with what does not concern them.… 14 But if anyone is not obedient to our word through this letter, keep this one marked, stop associating with him, that he may become ashamed. 15 And yet do not be considering him as an enemy, but continue admonishing him as a brother.
(Luke 6:27-37) “But I say to YOU who are listening, Continue to love YOUR enemies, to do good to those hating YOU, 28 to bless those cursing YOU, to pray for those who are insulting YOU. 29 To him that strikes you on the one cheek, offer the other also; and from him that takes away your outer garment, do not withhold even the undergarment…31 “Also, just as YOU want men to do to YOU, do the same way to them…36 Continue becoming merciful, just as YOUR Father is merciful. 37 “Moreover, stop judging, and YOU will by no means be judged; and stop condemning, and YOU will by no means be condemned. Keep on releasing, and YOU will be released.
(1 Corinthians 4:6) Now, brothers, these things I have transferred so as to apply to myself and A·pol´los for YOUR good, that in our case YOU may learn the [rule]:“Do not go beyond the things that are written,” in order that YOU may not be puffed up individually in favor of the one against the other.
-
pirata
PSacramento Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted ~ 7 hours ago (12/9/2010)
Post 6721 of 6729
Since 6/22/2009Here is the thing, you can't take ONE part of ONE letter from ONE apostle aimed at a specififc circumstance, and Paul make sit clear that his opinion is in regards to that one circumstance, and use it to justify shunning on the grounds OUTSIDE THAT CIRCUMSTANCE.
Where is the sense in that? what would Jesus have done?
There is a passage where Paul even says to treat him like a tac collector right? well then, how did Jesus treat tax collectors?
He ate with them and even made one of them his apostle.
A far cry from shunning don't you think?
The point is, Paul told them to disassociate with an unrepentive sinner, someone that was breaking Jewish law of adultery and he stated it as an opinion ( when Paul would make a statement from Christ he would specifify that with "the Lord says") and that this ONE example is not enough to base a whole shunning doctrine on, especially sense Paul never mentions anything like that again.
darth frosty Re: Another question about the Governing Body posted ~ 6 hours ago (12/9/2010)
Post 2829 of 2829
Since 11/28/2005As far as the Dis-felloshiping thing here is something I wrote a while ago about pauls intentions from this post.
As far as them worshiping paul, your right. I believe that despite his enlightenment that happened on the road to damascus, paul still felt a need to hold on to the hard core rules of judism. On the flip side one thing about paul he was quick to amend a wrong.
I love the account that the dubs point out to justify DF'ing. The story of the man knocking off his step-mom and the whole congo knew. Paul came down hard on him and said the congo should have nothing to do with him. Within six months of sending out that letter, the congo had another one in their hands telling them to disregard what he had said earlier and to accept the guy back into the fold, saying he had repented and suffered enough.
Now think about this. There is a time difference of six months between 1 cor and 2 cor. 6 months!!! We're talking about 1st century mail here. In six months time paul coined the first letter and sent it out, got feedback and tales of repentence on part of the sinner (oh I forgot to mention that his heavy handed sentence was causing divisions in the congo because many felt it was too harsh a punishment.) So hearing about the commotion and anguish his words were causing...paul retracted his statement. He said to accept him back so as not to have division in the congo that satan can take advantage of. So for the betterment of the congo paul in 2 books or letters started the practice of disfellowshiping and did away with it. Pity the dubs dont look closer to the real end results of this practice.
-
donuthole
Disfellowshipping as practiced by Jehovah's Witnesses is not "scriptural". They have built a policy on top of a few disparate Bible verses and claim the practice is Biblical. In the Bible you do not see judicial hearings - what you do see is an example where an individual, Paul, unilaterally expels a man from the Corinthian congregation against the wishes of a congregation without a JW-style judicial process. (And if we are talking about the same man in 2 Cor, Paul quickly retracts from his position and tells them to accept the man back.) In the Bible you don't see investigation meetings, written appeals, private reproof, reinstatement requiring meeting attendance for a set period of time, restrictions on commenting at meetings, and other practices of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Witnesses list of disfellowshipping offenses is not mirrored in the Bible and is cobbled together from a variety of texts, however some, such as smoking, have a tedious Biblical basis, if at all. In the books of Acts the prohibition is given against blood and fornication. As a Witness if you commit fornication you will go through the judicial process which can lead to disfellowshipping, on the other hand freely accepting a blood transfusion will get you disassociated by actions. The Bible does not allow that some offenses can get you disassociated by actions, a legal term completely invented by the Witnesses.
-
ProdigalSon
Yes, the Bible can be used to advocate disfellowshipping, rape, incest, murder, war, stealing, plundering, child sacrifice, cruelty to humans and animals, torture, castration, self-abuse, extortion, witchcraft, black magic, bestiality, stupidity, ignorance, laziness, ethnic cleansing, false prophesying, prejudice, mysogeny, narcissism, elitism, slavery, racial profiling, prostitution, fascism, communism, jealousy, hatred, fear, lying, deceit, treachery, and striking people dead for holding back part of the price of their land, even though it's their own private property.
I know, I sound like a broken record, but the Bible needs to be wiped off the face of the earth.
~PS
-
pirata
Hi Botzwana,
Alright, here's my take on disfellowshipping and the scriptures. I claim neither inspiration nor absolute correctness in my analysis :)
Considering only Jesus instructions, one does not get the impression that those who have left the faith should be shunned.
(Matthew 18:15-17) “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. 17 If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.
(Matthew 9:9-13) Next, while passing along from there, Jesus caught sight of a man named Matthew seated at the tax office, and he said to him: “Be my follower.” Thereupon he did rise up and follow him. 10 Later, while he was reclining at the table in the house, look! many tax collectors and sinners came and began reclining with Jesus and his disciples. 11 But on seeing this the Pharisees began to say to his disciples: “Why is it that YOUR teacher eats with tax collectors and sinners?” 12 Hearing [them], he said: “Persons in health do not need a physician, but the ailing do. 13 Go, then, and learn what this means, ‘I want mercy, and not sacrifice.’ For I came to call, not righteous people, but sinners.”
Jesus said "let him be to you just as a man of the nations". The watchtower 99 10/15 p17-20 has a discussion of this.scripture. Regarding it, the article says:
w99 10/15 p19 par 6 "Jesus' disciples hearing those words knew that their countrymen would not socialize with Gentiles. And they definitely avoided tax collectors, men who were born Jewish but who turned into misusers of the people."
I don't really buy that explanation because Jesus wanted his followers to follow his example, not the Jewish customs of the time. Matthew 18 and Matthew 9 make it clear that Jesus ate with tax collectors and talked to Gentiles on occasions.
Now we have the apostles who started to set up guidelines as problems rose in the congregation. Notice who is addressed in this scripture:
(1 Corinthians 5:9-13) In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10 not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, YOU would actually have to get out of the world. 11 But now I am writing YOU to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. 12 For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do YOU not judge those inside, 13 while God judges those outside? “Remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves.”
Here it seems clear to me that one would not eat with a "anyone called a brother" who is practicing serious sin. Once they are removed from the congregation, the judging is done. God judges those on the outside. The scripture does not say to continue judging them once they have been removed from the congregation?
A second category to be avoided is the antichrist:
(2 John 7-11) For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Look out for yourselves, that YOU do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that YOU may obtain a full reward. 9 Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to YOU and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into YOUR homes or say a greeting to him. 11 For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.
(1 John 2:22) Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one that denies the Father and the Son.
If we take the simple definitions of that antichrist as those who do not confess Jesus as coming in the flesh and those who deny the Father and the Son, that applies to pretty much all atheists and non-christians (the JWs would also apply it to "Christendom" since they deny the "truth" about the father). To me (in JW land), I think this means that we should treat the antichrist the same as a "worldly" person.
In what sense do we not invite them into our home or say a greeting to them? I found an amusing article regarding this with a Christian asking if, in light of 1 John 10, it is okay to invite JWs or Mormons into their home. (http://www.ronrhodes.org/q2john10.html). The basic thrust is that at the time, Christians met in private homes for worship. Thus it would not be right to allow the antichrist's in to worship/teach together. This is similar to how we JWs would not worship with people of other religions either. This whole argument assumes that by receiving them into your homes or saying a greeting to them actually means "in worship". I'm not entirely convinced that it does, though.
In summary, people have a tendency to try and spin the scriptures to match the teaching they favor most. Both sides can have good points. I think the Bible has generous room for interpretation on this matter, and it is better to err on the side of Jesus' love rather than Pharisee's rules. Forcing people to completely reject their family and friends and calling it "love" just seems to far from the love that Jesus taught.
Feel free to challenge any of my points. I'm still forming my thoughts on this (ask me a year ago and I would have wholeheartedly agreed that disfellowshipping as practiced by JWs is scriptural. I felt that between that and the preaching work it was a sign of true Christianity).
--------
On a completely different (non-scriptural) level, I think that any form of mandatory shunning of opposing people/information is a form of manipulation used by an organization, whether religious or political, in order to keep control of their subjects. If you've never read the novel "1984", I'd highly recommend it. -
-
Black Sheep
Feel free to show me the scriptures that support Elders meeting in secret to decide the guilt, innocence or repentance of a member.
(Matthew 18:15-17) “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. 17 If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector.
This is not what happens with a JC. A secretive JC provides no protection to the congregation, or the alleged sinner, from a church leadership that is overstepping the mark or has gone astray itself.
-
donuthole
Here is another Bible text that could be mentioned -
(2 Thessalonians 3:14-15) 14 But if anyone is not obedient to our word through this letter, keep this one marked, stop associating with him, that he may become ashamed. 15 And yet do not be considering him as an enemy, but continue admonishing him as a brother .
If I remember correctly what is here translated as "stop associating with him" is identical to what is used in Corinthians where the NWT renders "quit mixing in the company of". Is a total and complete cutting off and with no communication whatsoever as practiced by JW's envisioned by the writer?
