Brother Russell I feel was right, to my knowledge Bro Rutherford followed the same disaplinary process, it only changed in 1953 when Knorr after an Awake article in 1947 condemning expelling (by the Jews in 1st century) and ex communication practised by the Catholic Church as satanic evil and un neighbourly. I know all the scriptures quoted of by heart, Paul’s words. 20 years ago I experenced this excessively cruel process as have many who are connectEd with this site. The action as practiced by Jehovah’s witnesses is evil through and through. Shunning is worse its entirely anti Christian. Paul’s words are not directives from the body of apostles it’s his personal advice to those taking the lead in the Corinthian congregation. His words on judging if taken as creating a judicial committee to sit and judge their fellow brother, this Contradicts the recognised words of Christ and the recognised actions of the first century christian congregation. It’s a misinterpretation. As for the excuse that The congregation must be kept clean So disfellowshipping must be enacted. The congregation is kept clean by Christs BLOOD not by Christian men sacrificing their brother on the alter of ‘Baal’. Child sacrifice was practiced by Jews in Israel so they would live with a blessing on the land. One life for the land. One spiritual life is sacrificed to Satan so the congregation can be clean. Remove the wicked one hand him over to Satan. BAALISM. No Paul is not teaching this. Brother Russell is completely clear and it’s not ex communication. Satan introduced hell as well it was brother Russell and his associates who turned to Jehovah and received his approval. Sorry anyone who says they worship Jehovah through his beloved son repudiate his self sacrificing sacrifice if they insist on Baal ism - disfellowshipping ex communication or expelling.
Disfellowship is it Christian? And shunning ?
- Thread starter Paz
- Start date
R
RR144
Guest
The whole purpose of addressing sin in our brethren is to win or gain them back! Jesus himself gives directions for handling sin in our midst. In Matthew 18, Jesus said to his disciples that they must be humbled “like children” before being “greatest in the kingdom of heaven” (vss1-6). Jesus then further explained that as a shepherd would go to great lengths to recover a straying sheep, so would be the rejoicing over recovering one of his sheep who had strayed (vss.10-14).
Then, specifically, Jesus carefully outlined a protocol for his disciples how to humbly proceed in recovering a brother (or sister) who might be in sin.
After the “church” (congregation) makes a decision—a unanimous one or nearly so preferably—the Church is to withdraw from him their fellowship. Thenceforth the offender is to be treated “as a heathen man and a publican.” Although we could no longer have Christian fellowship with such, we would treat him as a “heathen” (Gentile) with justice and kindness and the love of pity—but not with the love of affection due to a brother in Christ. The disfellowshipped would be outside our religious and social company—as invited to the home—but not outside of our love, care and desire to help. Although not appointed to any office in the congregation, he would not be forbidden attendance at meetings. Repentance even up to the moment of the Church’s judgment is possible. To secure repentance and reform is the very object of every step of these proceedings—not his punishment. The penalty of withdrawal of fellowship is designed to serve as a protection to the congregation to separate those who walk disorderly. But the separation is not to be esteemed a perpetual separation—but merely until the reproved one shall recognize and acknowledge his wrong and to the extent of his ability make amends.
Then, specifically, Jesus carefully outlined a protocol for his disciples how to humbly proceed in recovering a brother (or sister) who might be in sin.
- First, go to him or her privately to enquire about the sin
- Second, take or three other mutually respected individuals who might further enquire about the sin and encourage repentance
- Finally, if he refuses to listen take the issue to the congregation— not to the elders or some “governing body”—to weigh the problem and act accordingly.
After the “church” (congregation) makes a decision—a unanimous one or nearly so preferably—the Church is to withdraw from him their fellowship. Thenceforth the offender is to be treated “as a heathen man and a publican.” Although we could no longer have Christian fellowship with such, we would treat him as a “heathen” (Gentile) with justice and kindness and the love of pity—but not with the love of affection due to a brother in Christ. The disfellowshipped would be outside our religious and social company—as invited to the home—but not outside of our love, care and desire to help. Although not appointed to any office in the congregation, he would not be forbidden attendance at meetings. Repentance even up to the moment of the Church’s judgment is possible. To secure repentance and reform is the very object of every step of these proceedings—not his punishment. The penalty of withdrawal of fellowship is designed to serve as a protection to the congregation to separate those who walk disorderly. But the separation is not to be esteemed a perpetual separation—but merely until the reproved one shall recognize and acknowledge his wrong and to the extent of his ability make amends.
SollaSollew
Well-known member
"But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man."
A few points to keep in mind:
- Paul was addressing the congregation not the "elders", so Paul was asking each congregant to make up his mind on this issue.
- The conditions for such exclusion are: immorality, greed, idolatry, reviler, drunkard, extortion. Anything outside these guidelines do not apply.
- Disfellowshipping from the congregation is not mentioned, Paul was encouraging not to keep company or association with such ones but this was still the personal decision of each congregant. The dangers of association with such ones would or should be self evident.
R
Robert194972
Guest
You're right The Borg has turned it into something bad and have taken it further. But that still doesn't alter that fact that it is Christian to dis fellowship and and stop associating with. Not even to eat with. according to scripture.
יהוה_saves
Well-known member
i think disfellowshipping is Christian and can be supported with scripture. But shunning? treating a close family member not merely as if he or she were dead, but as if he or she NEVER EXISTED. This is wholly unChristian and to put it bluntly, pernicious, vicious, destructive and malevolent. Watchtower blasphemously portrays this malevolent man-made policy as a loving act, and much like hellfire, there is no scriptural indication that this idea has ever occupied a place in Jehovah’s heart. Furthermore- say a child gets baptized at age 10 or 12 at the behest of his parents and perhaps his peers and even the elders. He lives up to his baptism as he grows into young adulthood, during which Watchtower changes aspects of its prophetic exegesis (calling it “new light”) as the passsage of time necessitates. Watchtower’s prophetic exegesis is not what it was five or 10 years ago. Consequently the 12 year old baptismal candidate boy is now a young adult man, with material changes in his perspective of “the truth”, so much so that he wishes to peacefully walk away. And for this he is a subject to be shunned. And what of his siblings and parents? They must bear the brunt of this shunning policy for what could be and often is, a lifetime. What a cruel, tyrannical and destructive way to treat a family. This type of shunning is a cruel bludgeon that the Gov Body exploits to gain stringent control of all communication between those who wish to leave Watchtower (certainly in some instances for valid reasons) and those who wish to stay. It’s emotional, psychological and spiritual torture- and not a single family within the Watchtower system remains untouched (unharmed) by this practice. No loving God would sanction such a practice; there is no bible precedent for it. it can and should be described and defined as spiritual abuse, the worst, most excruciatingly painful kind.
Last edited:
BillyRay
Well-known member
@Paz In your post, you speak a lot about not judging, and totally gloss over the difference between inherited sins of imperfection, personality flaws, and serious sin. You can't have unrepentant fornicators, adulterers, and homosexuals freely influencing members of the Christian congregation! (There are more - I just chose a couple) There's a simple lyric contained in an old Donny Osmond song - "One bad apple spoils the whole bunch, girl". (I could've gone with the old leaven and lump illustration.... but....) If it's acceptable for one - it's acceptable to all. If you're unrepentant, and continue on your course - you gotta go. That's all there is to it.
I also want to address those that say that disfellowshipping isn't a a deterrent to serious sin. That's true. It's not. However, it is a consequence of serious sin - particularly when unrepentant. The deterrent should be your love for Jehovah, and what your commission of a serious sin will do to that relationship. THAT is the deterrent that should prevent serious sin.
Now, if you want to have a conversation about the increasing of disfellowship-able offenses from the original 11 to the current 40+ we can have that conversation - as many of the "new" ones are arbitrary and un-scriptural in my opinion. There's too much ambiguity in the standards for elders to be able to properly judge some of these.
I also want to address those that say that disfellowshipping isn't a a deterrent to serious sin. That's true. It's not. However, it is a consequence of serious sin - particularly when unrepentant. The deterrent should be your love for Jehovah, and what your commission of a serious sin will do to that relationship. THAT is the deterrent that should prevent serious sin.
Now, if you want to have a conversation about the increasing of disfellowship-able offenses from the original 11 to the current 40+ we can have that conversation - as many of the "new" ones are arbitrary and un-scriptural in my opinion. There's too much ambiguity in the standards for elders to be able to properly judge some of these.
יהוה_saves
Well-known member
why is there no distinction amongst many JWs between disfellowshipping and the cruel,
merciless shunning policy? why are so many JWs unable to see that these are exclusive?disfellowshipping is perhaps a discipline that yields peaceable fruit. Shunning is certainly not- it is the very opposite, esp the type of shunning ratified and decreed by the Gov Body. To treat a person as if they never existed is to annihilate him- an anti-typical burning at the stake. Shunning does not nurture and bring forth the Christian personality, it stifles it and extinguishes it, and it instills a morbid fear into active JWs that stunts the growth and depth of loving relationships.
SollaSollew
Well-known member
I never was a fan of John Cedars but I did like how he described the Societies use of DF - "they weaponised it". Which is very true, they use DF as a weapon against the flock. For me it stands toe to toe with the teaching of Hell Fire.
יהוה_saves
Well-known member
exactly. i differ ever so slightly in that shunning IS the weapon and linking it to discipline is the weaponizing. I met a man on an exjw website that is being shunned by his parents for 37 years and counting. No reasonable man can claim this is from God.
Serenity
Well-known member
With the child abuse problem, why would any parent allow their young son or daughter go off alone to do anything with an older man, especially one they barely know, even in the organization? Is it a "Spiritual Paradise". It's not safe to allow children to be alone with older teenagers or adults, not even elders, or sons of elders. Unless you have a very highly trusted friend, a very well-known individual, preferably a close family member, it is very unwise to trust anyone alone with your kids. 'Trusting' the brothers and sisters and their kids was a huge mistake that I made years ago. Never again. Trusting people outside the organization, in the world, no way. That's not being unloving, that's just using common sense to protect your children in the face of the sad reality of the horrible world that we live in today.
Last edited:
Alannah
Well-known member
Why would Jehovah let these things happen? Especially since he loves children, I am very sorry to hear that this has happened to you and anyone else on here that is just terrible.
R
Robert194972
Guest
While it is true that the WT has taken the misrepresentation of Jehovah and his word to new lows, and even weaponized aspects of the word, and are even in apostate mode at the minute, issues that Jehovah will set straight in his own due time. Still the truth is still the truth. ie; Nu-16:26, Ro-16:17, John-1:10. 1 Cor-5:9, 11. All these as verses as they apply support shunning.
Alannah
Well-known member
Thank you 😊
R
Robert194972
Guest
Thank you for the refresher my sister. Just one small/not so small detail, Starting over was not an option for Jehovah. He would have violated his rest.
Alannah
Well-known member
Thank you my sister I will watch right now 😊
R
Robert194972
Guest
Sorry my sister but Jehovah could not have ended it there, because of his supreme sense of justice and love. The Sabbath was set before the rebellion. Gen-2:1-3 The next best move due to the fact that there were witnesses, Jehovah allowed Satan the opportunity to prove his point. As the video shows the teacher is right.