The Bible View of Disfellowshipping & Shunning

[BibleSteve]

Now that I have read through the threads I think that BibleSteve needs to be commended for his many responses. He handled himself as a gentleman and a ‘scholar’. And he defused the more antiJW comments from some posters.

However, I can never agree with the shunning part of the JW faith. I have one person in mind when I say this. She is a young woman who was shunned by her JW family when she left the kingdom hall. I think that this has caused her some pain. She is now a member of the Orthodox faith. I view this shunning practice as evil. And of course, I am not sure just how it is practiced in the JW faith, but from what I gather, it seems satanic. I would like BibleSteve to shed some light on this practice in the JW’s to relieve my possible misconceptions.

I could never shun my children. :grouphug:

Thanks again for the kind words…

First off, it would be good for all Catholics to google: “excommunication vitandi” and you’ll find that shunning has been part of the Catholic Church…

Now, as for guidance from the Scriptures on this…

We all know that YHWH is righteous and holy. Though he is merciful and understanding with imperfect humans, he expects those worshiping him to reflect his holiness by trying to uphold his righteous standards.—Ps. 103:8-14; Num. 15:40.

An Israelite who deliberately violated God’s commands, such as those against apostasy, adultery or murder, was to be cut off, put to death. (Num. 15:30,31; 35:31; Deut. 13:1-5; Lev. 20:10) This firmness in upholding God’s reasonable and just standards was good for all Israelites, for it helped to maintain the congregation’s purity. And it served to deter anyone from spreading corruption among the people who had God’s name on them.

In the first century C.E. the Jews under Roman rule did not have the authority to administer the death penalty. (John 18:28-31) But a Jew guilty of violating the Law could be expelled from the synagogue. An effect of this severe punishment was that other Jews would shun or avoid the expelled person. It is said that others would not even have commercial transactions with him beyond selling him the necessities of life.—John 9:22; 12:42; 16:2.
After the Christian congregation was formed, it replaced the Jewish nation in having God’s name upon it. (Matt. 21:43; Acts 15:14) Accordingly, Christians could rightly be expected to uphold YHWH’s righteousness. The apostle Peter wrote: “In accord with the Holy One who called you, do you also become holy yourselves in all your conduct, because it is written: ‘You must be holy, because I am holy.’” (1 Pet. 1:14-16) Jehovah loves his people and wants to protect the purity of the Christian congregation. So he outlined a provision to reject or expel a person who persists in a course that dishonors God and endangers the congregation.

The apostle Paul advised: “As for a man that promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition; knowing that such a man has been turned out of the way and is sinning, he being self-condemned.” (Titus 3:10, 11) Yes, spiritual elders, such as Titus was, first try lovingly to help a wrongdoer. If he will not respond to their help and persists in a course of “sinning,” they have authority to convoke a committee of elders to “judge the members of [the] fellowship.” (1 Cor. 5:12, Today’s English Version) Love for God and for the purity of his people requires that those in the “fellowship,” the congregation, reject that man.
In the first century some of such wrongdoers arose. Hymenaeus and Alexander were of that sort, men who had “experienced shipwreck concerning their faith.” Paul said: “I have handed them over to Satan that they may be taught by discipline not to blaspheme.” (1 Tim. 1:19, 20) Expelling those two men was a severe chastisement, or discipline, a punishment that might teach them not to blaspheme the holy and living God. (Compare Luke 23:16, where the basic Greek word often rendered “discipline” is used.) It was proper that these blasphemers be turned over to the authority of Satan, cast into the darkness of the world under Satan’s influence.—2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 4:17-19; 1 John 5:19; compare Acts 26:18.

(continued)

 

[BibleSteve]

Some questions, however, may arise about how we should treat a former member who has been expelled. Thankfully, God has provided in his Word answers and directions that we can be sure are perfect, righteous and just.—Jer. 17:10; Deut. 32:4.

At one point a man in the Corinthian congregation was practicing immorality and evidently was unrepentant. Paul wrote that this man ‘should be taken away from their midst,’ for he was like a little leaven that could ferment, or corrupt, a whole mass. (1 Cor. 5:1, 2, 6) But, was he, when once expelled, to be treated as if he were just an average person of the world whom the Christians might meet in their neighborhood or daily life? Note what Paul said.

“I wrote you to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 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.” (1 Cor. 5:9, 10) In these words Paul realistically acknowledged that most persons whom we contact in our daily affairs have never known or followed God’s way. They may be fornicators, extortioners or idolaters, so they are not persons whom Christians choose as regular, close associates. Still, we live on this planet among mankind and may have to be around such persons and speak to them on the job, at school, in the neighborhood.

In the next verse Paul contrasts this situation with how Christians should conduct themselves toward one who had been a Christian “brother” but who was expelled from the congregation because of wrongdoing: “But now I am writing you to quit mixing in company “not associate,” TEV] 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.”—1 Cor. 5:11.

The expelled person is not a mere man of the world who has not known God nor pursued a godly way of life. Rather, he has known the way of truth and righteousness, but he has left that way and unrepentantly pursued sin to the point of having to be expelled. So he is to be treated differently. Peter commented on how such former Christians differ from an average “man on the street.” The apostle said: “If, after having escaped from the defilements of the world by an accurate knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they get involved again with these very things and are overcome, the final conditions have become worse for them than the first. . . . The saying of the true proverb has happened to them: ‘The dog has returned to his vomit, and the sow that was bathed to rolling in the mire.’”—2 Pet. 2:20-22; 1 Cor. 6:11.

Yes, the Bible commands Christians not to keep company or fellowship with a person who has been expelled from the congregation. Their refusal to fellowship with an expelled person on any spiritual or social level reflects loyalty to God’s standards and obedience to his command at 1 Corinthians 5:11, 13. This is consistent with Jesus’ advice that such a person be considered in the same way as “a man of the nations” was viewed by the Jews of that time. For some time after the apostles died, those professing Christianity evidently followed the Biblical procedure. But how many churches today comply with God’s clear directions in this regard?

 

[dosdog]

‘Rabbis told Jews to shun Evangelicals’
Israeli rabbinic authorities have abruptly called on Jews to shun a major Christian tourism event, baffling and upsetting evangelical groups that traditionally have been big supporters of the Jewish state. More than 6,000 Christians from more than 90 nations are expected to arrive in Jerusalem this week to take part in the 28th annual Christian celebration of the weeklong Jewish holiday of Sukkot, or Feast of Tabernacles, according to the event’s organizers, the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem.

But this year the chief rabbinate urged Jews to stay away from the event, saying some of the groups want to convert them to Christianity. Proselytizing is illegal in Israel.

Saudi Arabian Airlines bans Bibles
Saudi Arabian Airlines declares on its English-language Web site that the kingdom bans “Bibles, crucifixes, statues, carvings, items with religious symbols such as the Star of David.” Until the Saudi government changes this detestable policy, I say its airline should be barred from flying into Western airports.

Further, as Stephen Schwartz of the Center for Islamic Pluralism points out, signs in Saudi airports warn Muslim travelers that the airport’s mutawwa’in (religious police) confiscate Korans, other Islamic literature and Muslim objects of non-Saudi origin
jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1187779135932&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

 

[BibleSteve]

“I could never shun my children…”

Here’s some info about how JW’s deal with this situation:

If a minor child is disfellowshiped, the parents will still care for his physical needs and provide moral training and discipline. The child would still be expected to sit in on the family Bible study. And they might direct attention to parts of the Bible or Christian publications that contain counsel he needs. (Prov. 1:8-19; 6:20-22; 29:17; Eph. 6:4) They can have him accompany them to and sit with them at Christian meetings, hoping that he will take to heart Biblical counsel.

But what if a close relative, such as a son or a parent who does not live in the home, is disfellowshiped and subsequently wants to move back there? The family could decide what to do depending on the situation.

For example, a disfellowshiped parent may be sick or no longer able to care for himself financially or physically. The Christian children have a Scriptural and moral obligation to assist. (1 Tim. 5:8) Perhaps it seems necessary to bring the parent into the home, temporarily or permanently. Or it may appear advisable to arrange for care where there is medical personnel but where the parent would have to be visited. What is done may depend on factors such as the parent’s true needs, his attitude and the regard the head of the household has for the spiritual welfare of the household.

This could be true also with regard to a child who had left home but is now disfellowshiped or disassociated. Sometimes Christian parents have accepted back into the home for a time a disfellowshiped child who has become physically or emotionally ill. But in each case the parents can weigh the individual circumstances. Has a disfellowshiped son lived on his own, and is he now unable to do so? Or does he want to move back primarily because it would be an easier life? What about his morals and attitude? Will he bring “leaven” into the home?—Gal. 5:9.

In Jesus’ parable of the prodigal son, the father ran to meet and then accepted his returning son. The father, seeing the lad’s pitiful condition, responded with natural parental concern. We can note, though, that the son did not bring home harlots or come with a disposition to continue his sinful life in his father’s home. No, he expressed heartfelt repentance and evidently was determined to return to living a clean life.—Luke 15:11-32.

 

[Pax]

…
…
…
Their refusal to fellowship with an expelled person on any spiritual or social level reflects loyalty to God’s standards and obedience to his command at 1 Corinthians 5:11, 13. This is consistent with Jesus’ advice that such a person be considered in the same way as “a man of the nations” was viewed by the Jews of that time. For some time after the apostles died, those professing Christianity evidently followed the Biblical procedure. But how many churches today comply with God’s clear directions in this regard?

BibleSteve,

I was pretty much Okay with your posts up until the end. When you finally said, "on any spiritual or social level, I think you went off track. None of the scriptures you quoted go that far. Moreover, if we go too far there may be no practical chance or opportunity to bring someone back to the fold. Likewise, Jesus tells us that “whatever we do to the least of our brethren we do unto him.” Nothing in the scriptural passages you cited overrides our obligations of Christian charity. The example of Jesus, himself, helps to explain what is expected of us and his example gives practical guidelines in dealing with others no matter who they are.

IMHO, the shunning of a person to an extreme degree is not in keeping with the scriptures. I believe that the intent of the passages you cited is a practical one. We must protect ourselves from temptation and from heretical ideas. Likewise, we are not to create an appearance of support for sinful behavior or heretical ideas by way of our associations. This practical approach balances Christ’s demands for loving one another, even the least of his brethren, with the provisions for not associating with the type of individuals described.

I hope this helps.

 

[Pax]

BibleSteve,

I have had former Jehovah Witnesses tell me that they have been shunned by the congregation and even their own families in such a way that they are treated as if they do not even exist. They are ignored in a very absolute way.

Is this common? Is it approved generally even if it is not codified?

 

[why_me]

It still seems rather harsh BibleSteve. As a point of information: How often do children return to the ‘fold’ after being shunned? Have you found that the shunned children tend to rebel more?

I understood the scripture that the JW’s take for shunning before I made my comments on a different thread. It is just that this whole shunning business leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Could you shun your child in such a way? And where does love come into the picture?

As you can see I have a lot of questions.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

Shunning is not required scripturally.
The only case is where we are told not to even say godspeed
to a person who denies the Apostolic Faith and brings another teaching of another Jesus.

If we Catholics followed that standard today,
we would silently close the door on all JWs, Mormons,
and anyone else who claims to be a Christian but denies the
Deity of Christ.

The early church NEVER practiced shunning of excommunicated members. However, the church didn’t go out of the way to party with them either (thereby hardening them in their state of sin).

I was disfellowshiped and shunned for sin while I was in the throes of a catastrophic nervous breakdown (which is what caused me to lose all hope and fall into sin in the first place).
The Elders knew I had been suffering for nearly two years with mental illness at the time and they refused to even take that into account. As one of them wickedly snarled at me,
“The congregation is more important than one person.”
Hmm. Oh really? Even a sick person who is beside himself with mental illness and depression and couldn’t even THINK STRAIGHT? But that’s how they were. They had their Elder’s rulebook and they followed it legalistically to the letter.
Jesus, by contrast, said that when a sheep strays, you leave behind the 99 who haven’t left the fold and go after the one who has and bring him BACK. The whole time I was disfellowed I was extremely sick. The Elders knew this and never once called to check on me to see if I was recovering. They didn’t give a damn, I had broken “the rules.” If it weren’t for the grace of God preventing me, I would have committed suicide because of that wicked shunning. They never, never, never, never, never, not even once, the whole time I was DF’d, showed the slightest concern for my welfare — spiritual, mental, physical — at all.
If they HAD, I probably would eventually have gone back.
But that’s not how it works in the Watchtower World.
Once you are disfellowshiped, they all turn their back on you and shun you, even the Elders. Now, the Elders WILL talk to you but IF and ONLY IF you come to them begging and pleading like a dog. They won’t approach YOU to encourage YOU. I was attending meetings regularly at the Hall the first year of being DF’d, and not one elder came up to me to encourage me to keep trying. DEAD SILENCE. These people are as vicious as the Pharisees. They believe in justice without mercy, even on a person who they KNOW is suffering from serious mental illness.
Yet, like an idiot, I continued to DEFEND that wicked organization to my worldly friends for several years after being DF’d, that’s how much of a hold it had on my mind. Then I read Ray Franz’s book exposing the inner workings of Bethel, naming names, and I began to lose the shackles.
Now I thank God they disfellowshiped me.
I wouldn’t be in the true religion, the Catholic faith, today,
if they hadn’t. So in a way, their cruelty and legalism was the best thing that ever happened to me.
May God have mercy on their souls.

Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+

 

[BibleSteve]

…How often do children return to the ‘fold’ after being shunned?..

Personally, I wouldn’t know… however according to this comment in the August 1,1974 WT, about 40%

“Thus, in the United States (where there are now more than half a million Christian witnesses of Jehovah), during the ten-year period from 1963 to 1973, 36,671 persons had to be disfellowshiped for various kinds of serious wrongdoing. Yet, in that same period 14,508 persons were reinstated, accepted back into the congregations owing to their sincere repentance. This is nearly 40 percent of the total.”

 

[BibleSteve]

From the 8/1/74 Watchtower Article: “Maintaining a Balanced Viewpoint Toward Disfellowshiped Ones”

A LITTLE leaven can ferment a whole lump of dough. So too can immoral influence infiltrate and corrupt a whole congregation. Rightly, any congregation should want to protect itself against such influence, and the elders of the congregation especially should be concerned with doing this.—1*Cor. 5:6; Acts 20:28-30.

There is real danger in being lax in this matter, as the congregation in Corinth was lax toward a wrongdoer in their midst, failing to take action to clear out such ‘leavening’ influence. But there is a parallel danger. What? That of going too far in the other direction, going from laxity to rigidity and hardness.

We may note the warning given by the apostle Paul in his second letter to the Corinthians, evidently (according to the context) in connection with the sinner described in his first letter whom it had been necessary to ‘remove from among them.’ (1Cor. 5:1-5, 13) In that case this wrongdoer apparently had repented. After speaking of the congregation’s forgiving this one for the sadness he had caused them congregationally, Paul went on to say, “that we may not be overreached by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his designs.” (2Cor. 2:5-11) What did the apostle mean by this?

Satan’s “designs” are to devour any of God’s servants that he can, and he goes about “like a roaring lion” to accomplish that aim. (1Pet. 5:8) The man who had been disfellowshiped in Corinth had been ‘handed over’ to Satan in the sense that he had been put out of the congregation and thus was thrust out into the world under Satan’s domain. (1Cor. 5:5; Acts 26:18; 1John 5:19) Like a “little leaven” in the “whole lump” of dough, this man had been “the flesh” or fleshly element inside the congregation; and by removing this incestuous man the spiritually minded congregation had destroyed the “flesh” from the midst of it. Now Satan’s design or aim would be to hold on to such prey until succeeding in completely swallowing up the man, destroying him spiritually. If the congregation, though in all good conscience, were to be overly cautious and reluctant about receiving the now truly repentant wrongdoer back, delaying unnecessarily his reinstatement, this would suit the Adversary’s purpose. (Compare 2Corinthians 2:7.) So, other translations of 2*Corinthians 2:11 read: “For Satan must not be allowed to get the better of us; we know his wiles all too well.” (New English Bible) “And so we will not be outwitted by Satan—we know well enough what his intentions are [what he is after, Goodspeed].”—Jerusalem Bible.

Congregational elders, as well as individual members of a congregation, therefore, ought to guard against developing an attitude approaching that which some Jewish rabbinical writers fomented toward Gentiles in viewing them as virtual enemies. It is right to hate the wrong committed by the disfellowshiped one, but it is not right to hate the person nor is it right to treat such ones in an inhumane way.

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.

If we imitate our heavenly Father we will remember that he even showed certain considerateness toward the first human pair after their disfellowshiping in Eden, providing them with clothing. (Gen. 3:21) This was an undeserved kindness toward them. As Jesus reminded his disciples, Jehovah God “makes his sun rise upon wicked people and good and makes it rain upon righteous people and unrighteous.” (Matt. 5:45) The apostle Paul showed that, despite the independent course the Gentile nations took contrary to God’s way, Jehovah “did not leave himself without witness in that he did good, giving [them] rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling [their] hearts to the full with food and good cheer.” (Acts 14:16, 17) So, not “mixing in company” with a person, or treating such one as “a man of the nations,” does not prevent us from being decent, courteous, considerate and humane.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

Ray Franz, a former member of the Governing Body,
discusses that 1974 article in his book CRISIS OF CONSCIENCE. He notes that after a few years of following the policy of humaneness enunciated in the 1974 article Steve provided, the Governing Body, at the instigation of Fred Franz and Lloyd Barry, decided to go back to a much more hardline policy regarding treatment of disfellowshiped people.

I was DF’d under terms of the much more hardline policy of DFing and shunning that the GB adopted around 1980.

Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+

 

[BibleSteve]

Let’s put the focus right where it belongs… on the person who’s committed the crime and what YHWH specifically asks his faithful followers to do about it…

Since the Apostle Paul referred to fornication, let’s use this example…

Let’s remember, under the Mosaic Law, YHWH specifically requested that fornicators where to be put to death. De 22:23-27. Adultery (fornication between married persons) was a violation of the seventh commandment and merited the death penalty for both parties.—Ex 20:14; De 5:18; 22:22. At 1 Cor 10:8 we read that 23,000 were executed for fornication…

Jesus Christ showed the wickedness of fornication by classing it with murder… (Mt 15:19, 20; Mr 7:21-23)

Later, Christians were warned against fornication, and placing it alongside idolatry and the eating of blood.—Ac 15:20, 29; 21:25.

The apostle Paul points out that fornication would prevent an individual from inheriting the Kingdom. (Ga 5:19-21) He counsels that the Christian should deaden his body “as respects fornication.” (Col 3:5) In fact, he warns that it should not even be a topic of conversation among Christians, who should be holy. Eph 5:3;

Why is fornication so bad?

The apostle explains that a Christian committing fornication sins against his own body, using reproductive members for a perverted purpose. He is greatly affected spiritually in an adverse way, brings defilement into God’s congregation, (1Co 6:18, 19)

He encroaches on the rights of his Christian brothers (1Th 4:3-7) by (1) bringing uncleanness and disgraceful folly, with reproach, into the congregation (Heb 12:15, 16), (2) depriving the one with whom he commits fornication of a clean moral standing and, if that one is single, of being clean when entering into marriage, (3) depriving his own family of a clean moral record, as well as (4) wronging the parents, husband, or fiancé of the one with whom he commits fornication. He disregards, not man, whose laws may or may not condone fornication, but God, who will exact punishment for his sin.—1Th 4:8.

Fornication is so serious of a crime against God that fornicators are shown to be thrown into the lake of fire at Rev 21:8

Now, do you get the point about how YHWH feels about fornication?

**Do you see any commentary about extenuating circumstances that excused fornication? **(“Well, we really love each other so we don’t have to be married”… or “Well, I was really drunk and it was just one time…” or “Well, I was feeling really emotionally distraught, so it should just be overlooked…”)

YHWH has explained that fornication is an offense for which an individual should be expelled (disfellowshipped) from the Christian congregation. (1Co 5:9-13; Heb 12:15, 16)

What is the big punishment? Stoning? Death? The request is that we stop associating with the fornicator so they understand the seriousness of the crime they’ve committed against YHWH and the congregation. Is this so horrendous? That we stop talking to the person who’s done this serious crime against YHWH? Will we follow God’s request in this, or will we ignore his request?

If they are truly repentant, and exhibit a proper attitude, they will be allowed back into fellowship with the congregation…. In fact, many are (40% from the previous post)

**A person who is repentant will not go around complaining about how they had extenuating circumstances that should allow their crime to be overlooked…

For example, we don’t read that David complained about those who pointed out his fornication and the consquences he received…**

2 Sam 12:13

 

[why_me]

I think BibleSteve that the JW’s need to reevaluate their shunning policy. It seems to cause too much harm in families. As I said, I could never shun my children even if I were a JW. Nor could I shun a friend. I have too much love in my heart to do that.

Could you shun your children if they left the fold or if they were disfellowshiped? How does a parent or friend handle such a cause of action?

 

[Jaypeeto4]

BibleSteve here shows himself a typical Organization Man.
He believes in Justice, to be sure, but Justice Without Mercy.

I don’t know how it is now,
but JWs don’t stop shunning you as soon as you repent.
A repentant person NEEDS the fellowship and encouragement of his brothers and sisters in order to strengthen their repentance.
The JWs do not do this.
Even if the Elders know you are repentant,
they still direct that you remain “outside” and shunned
for at least one full year after your DF’ing. And they don’t
give a flying damn how badly this harms you spiritually.
They knew, in my case, that I was deeply sorry for what I had done. I was attending all the meetings. I was studying their literature. I was praying. Did they contact me even once, on their own initiative, to encourage me or pray for me or pray with me? No, they did not. I’m talking about the Elders, who ARE allowed to talk with you, not the rank and file members who aren’t. No one in the congregation even knew what my sin was.
Despite that, one old bat who claimed to be “of the anointed” spread the rumor all around the congregation that I was disfellowshiped for being a Drug Addict. Which was absolutely false. I had never touched drugs.
St. Paul, when counselling in 2nd Corinthians what to do with the repentant sinner, URGED the Christians of Corinth to CONFIRM their love for him and strengthen him because Satan would otherwise try to destroy him. But I was shunned though repentant because “The Society” says the DF’d person should be shunned for a year or more. It’s strictly a legalistic policy.
I don’t care how BibleSteve or other JWs try to justify their cruel and evil and destructive practice. We don’t LIVE under the Old Law.

And BibleSteve might want to note that the death penalty was never applied across the board under the Old Law either. Otherwise Samson, Aaron, David, Solomon, Manasseh, and many others would have been stoned to death like they deserved, not allowed to repent and be forgiven as they were. I guess it was good to be da king.

Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+

 

[Zooey]

How often do children return to the ‘fold’ after being shunned?

Personally, I wouldn’t know…

Because, with respect; I really want to know: Is that because your children are following the rules?
Is it, that you have never known of anyone bothering to find out if any of these children ever return?
Or–:crying: worse still-- Do you mean, that once a child has gone, there is a mock funeral held, & that person’s name is never mentioned again? All memorabilia destroyed??:crying: :tsktsk: :dts: :dts:

 

[BibleSteve]

Zooey: I provided a reference that indicated about 40% return…

Also, please note my post about fornicators… it was filled with Bible references…

YHWH has made His views known on the matter of fornication. It’s really just a matter of whether we respect His views and choose to follow what he asks.

 

[BibleSteve]

BibleSteve here shows himself a typical Organization Man. He believes in Justice, to be sure, but Justice Without Mercy

My post simply pointed out Bible references… not organizational proceedure.

Yes, I will pay attention to what YHWH says in the Bible and put that ahead of my own personal feelings.

 

[Delraek]

BibleSteve here shows himself a typical Organization Man.
He believes in Justice, to be sure, but Justice Without Mercy.

I don’t know how it is now,
but JWs don’t stop shunning you as soon as you repent.
A repentant person NEEDS the fellowship and encouragement of his brothers and sisters in order to strengthen their repentance.
The JWs do not do this.
Even if the Elders know you are repentant,
they still direct that you remain “outside” and shunned
for at least one full year after your DF’ing. And they don’t
give a flying damn how badly this harms you spiritually.
They knew, in my case, that I was deeply sorry for what I had done. I was attending all the meetings. I was studying their literature. I was praying. Did they contact me even once, on their own initiative, to encourage me or pray for me or pray with me? No, they did not. I’m talking about the Elders, who ARE allowed to talk with you, not the rank and file members who aren’t. No one in the congregation even knew what my sin was.
Despite that, one old bat who claimed to be “of the anointed” spread the rumor all around the congregation that I was disfellowshiped for being a Drug Addict. Which was absolutely false. I had never touched drugs.
St. Paul, when counselling in 2nd Corinthians what to do with the repentant sinner, URGED the Christians of Corinth to CONFIRM their love for him and strengthen him because Satan would otherwise try to destroy him. But I was shunned though repentant because “The Society” says the DF’d person should be shunned for a year or more. It’s strictly a legalistic policy.
I don’t care how BibleSteve or other JWs try to justify their cruel and evil and destructive practice. We don’t LIVE under the Old Law.

And BibleSteve might want to note that the death penalty was never applied across the board under the Old Law either. Otherwise Samson, Aaron, David, Solomon, Manasseh, and many others would have been stoned to death like they deserved, not allowed to repent and be forgiven as they were. I guess it was good to be da king.

Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+

Hi Jaypeeto4,

Are your family JWs and, if so, are they not allowed to talk to you?

I just can’t imagine my family “shunning” me instead of forgiving me and praying for me… St. Monica constantly prayed for her son, St. Augustine, instead of “shunning” him because of his sins, and look how that turned out!

 

[Delraek]

Let’s put the focus right where it belongs… on the person who’s committed the crime and what YHWH specifically asks his faithful followers to do about it…

Since the Apostle Paul referred to fornication, let’s use this example…

Let’s remember, under the Mosaic Law, YHWH specifically requested that fornicators where to be put to death. De 22:23-27. Adultery (fornication between married persons) was a violation of the seventh commandment and merited the death penalty for both parties.—Ex 20:14; De 5:18; 22:22. At 1 Cor 10:8 we read that 23,000 were executed for fornication…

Jesus Christ showed the wickedness of fornication by classing it with murder… (Mt 15:19, 20; Mr 7:21-23)

Later, Christians were warned against fornication, and placing it alongside idolatry and the eating of blood.—Ac 15:20, 29; 21:25.

The apostle Paul points out that fornication would prevent an individual from inheriting the Kingdom. (Ga 5:19-21) He counsels that the Christian should deaden his body “as respects fornication.” (Col 3:5) In fact, he warns that it should not even be a topic of conversation among Christians, who should be holy. Eph 5:3;

Why is fornication so bad?

The apostle explains that a Christian committing fornication sins against his own body, using reproductive members for a perverted purpose. He is greatly affected spiritually in an adverse way, brings defilement into God’s congregation, (1Co 6:18, 19)

He encroaches on the rights of his Christian brothers (1Th 4:3-7) by (1) bringing uncleanness and disgraceful folly, with reproach, into the congregation (Heb 12:15, 16), (2) depriving the one with whom he commits fornication of a clean moral standing and, if that one is single, of being clean when entering into marriage, (3) depriving his own family of a clean moral record, as well as (4) wronging the parents, husband, or fiancé of the one with whom he commits fornication. He disregards, not man, whose laws may or may not condone fornication, but God, who will exact punishment for his sin.—1Th 4:8.

Fornication is so serious of a crime against God that fornicators are shown to be thrown into the lake of fire at Rev 21:8

Now, do you get the point about how YHWH feels about fornication?

**Do you see any commentary about extenuating circumstances that excused fornication? **(“Well, we really love each other so we don’t have to be married”… or “Well, I was really drunk and it was just one time…” or “Well, I was feeling really emotionally distraught, so it should just be overlooked…”)

YHWH has explained that fornication is an offense for which an individual should be expelled (disfellowshipped) from the Christian congregation. (1Co 5:9-13; Heb 12:15, 16)

What is the big punishment? Stoning? Death? The request is that we stop associating with the fornicator so they understand the seriousness of the crime they’ve committed against YHWH and the congregation. Is this so horrendous? That we stop talking to the person who’s done this serious crime against YHWH? Will we follow God’s request in this, or will we ignore his request?

If they are truly repentant, and exhibit a proper attitude, they will be allowed back into fellowship with the congregation…. In fact, many are (40% from the previous post)

**A person who is repentant will not go around complaining about how they had extenuating circumstances that should allow their crime to be overlooked…

For example, we don’t read that David complained about those who pointed out his fornication and the consquences he received…**

2 Sam 12:13

BibleSteve,

I agree that the sin of fornication is horrible, but how has “shunning” done anything to correct this cultural view we have in our world today of premarital sex being ok and normal? The children of JWs are exposed to this culture just as much as anyone else. We need to work on stopping Satan’s spread of lies in our culture and not just focus on our own “little world”. Our country is supposed to be based on Christianity, but premarital sex and abortion is rampant - what’s wrong with this picture? What are the JWs doing to stop organizations like Planned Parenthood that promote these lies of Satan? Can you imagine what good could be done if we all (followers of Christ) grouped together to stop these evil groups? Just a thought…

 

[BibleSteve]

BibleSteve,

I agree that the sin of fornication is horrible, but how has “shunning” done anything to correct this cultural view we have in our world today of premarital sex being ok and normal? The children of JWs are exposed to this culture just as much as anyone else. We need to work on stopping Satan’s spread of lies in our culture and not just focus on our own “little world”. Our country is supposed to be based on Christianity, but premarital sex and abortion is rampant - what’s wrong with this picture? What are the JWs doing to stop organizations like Planned Parenthood that promote these lies of Satan? Can you imagine what good could be done if we all (followers of Christ) grouped together to stop these evil groups? Just a thought…

Delraek,

I appreciate your values and your sentiment about ways to fix it.

Based on my reading of the Bible, I don’t see God’s commands to go fight against organizations like Planned Parenthood. I look to Jesus and his example… He focussed his time and efforts on teaching people about God’s Kingdom and helping others appreciate the value of putting God’s Kingdom first in their lives and seeking his righteousness.

He taught about sins that were committed in ones heart.

JW’s and JW children are proactively taught about guarding ones thoughts, and guarding ones association. 1 Cor 15:33 reminds us that bad association spoils useful habits.

This may seem unbelievably archaic, but JW teenagers are taught not to date. We believe that dating is not for some recreational purpose of hanging out, making out, and just having fun… Dating is for the purpose of finding a marriage mate.

We believe if a person is not ready for marriage, he shouldn’t be dating… holding hands, making out, hugging, etc. which unfortunately often lead to fornication amongst unmarried couples.

All couples who are dating are taught to use a chaperone and to never be alone together… passion sometimes leads to serious mistakes.

Shunning was specifically recommended by the apostle Paul, so this is what we do when someone choses to commit fornication. All JW’s understand that commiting fornication would result in disfellowshipping and the loss of all association with their friends and family for a year or more… that gives many pause for reflection and reconsideration before commiting this sin against God.

Amongst the JW community we do not condone fornication at all… we don’t allow it, don’t condone it, and remove it from our congregation.

There is no room for couples living together, or excusing fornication because they “love each other”, etc.

If a couple choose to do this, they will lose out on all the fellowship and association that comes within the the context of the congregation.

Thank you for your comments. I really appreciate the opportunity to share ideas with you.