The Bible View of Disfellowshipping & Shunning

  • Thread starter Thread starter BibleSteve
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
**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.**

Again, pure legalism.
Jesus was the Son of God, and he ATE with fornicators, whores, drunkards, (crooked) Tax Collectors, etc. NOT to condone their sins, but to serve them lovingly as their physician.
These Public Sinners that Jesus ate with were not ignorant
of God’s Law regarding their sins, either. They were JEWS living UNDER THE LAW. They were IN The Old Covenant.
Yet Jesus was softer on them than he was on the Pharisees who obeyed all the “rules” == even tithing 10% of the dill and cummin — but who neglected mercy. “The Sick Man needs the Physician” Jesus said. I was desperately sick. Instead of a physician and counseling, I was booted and shunned. Jesus, however, did not treat me that way despite my weaknesses and flaws. He KNEW I wanted the Truth no matter what those Organization Men in my congregation thought and did. And over time, he showed me the truth – gradually, through prayer, scripture study, and reading the history of the early, early Church. Technically, being a mortal sinner, I deserved death.
So did all those people Jesus ate with. But he warned the legalistic and self righteous, proud-of-their-cleanliness Pharisees that the Tax Collectors and the Harlots would enter the Kingdom BEFORE THEY WOULD. NOT, as liberals would have it, that Jesus condoned crooks and whores, he did not, but because despite these peoples Sins, they were willing to listen to the Word. If he had been a Jehovah’s Witness, he would have said, these crooks and whores are Jews and know the Law of God and are disobeying it. I won’t meet with them, I certainly won’t EAT with them. Which is what the Pharisees expected him to do and were appalled that he sat with and lovingly taught these people instead.

I think JWs mean right. They are zealous for the moral law of God, and that is a good thing in itself. But there are things equally important. Jesus warned the Pharisees,
“Go and learn what this means:
I DESIRE MERCY and NOT SACRIFICE”
The JW policy makers need to meditate on that carefully, too,
for “he who shows no mercy WILL BE SHOWN NO MERCY.”

God bless,
Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+
 
“What! Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom. And yet that is what some of you were. But you have been washed clean, but you have been sanctified, but you have been declared righteous in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and with the spirit of our God.”—1 Cor. 6:9-11.

Some who downplay the problems of fornication point to the example of Jesus Christ as that recorded in Matthew, the ninth chapter. “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. But on seeing this the Pharisees began to say to his disciples: ‘Why is it that your teacher eats with tax collectors and sinners?’ Hearing them, he said: ‘Persons in health do not need a physician, but the ailing do. Go, then, and learn what this means, “I want mercy, and not sacrifice.” For I came to call, not righteous people, but sinners.’”—Matt. 9:10-13.

Would this not, in casual reading, appear to indicate that Jesus approved of sinners in that he was willing to associate with them, and criticized the Pharisees for objecting to it? Note, however, Jesus’ introductory statement: “Persons in health do not need a physician, but the ailing do.” Would this not rather suggest that Jesus’ reason for associating with them was to cure them and not simply to accept them in the ailing condition in which he found them as sinners?

Thus it is evident that Jesus was not accepting people in their sins as they were. Rather, one of the most important aspects of his ministry was to cure men of their spiritual illnesses, enabling them to be accepted by God because of their changed way of life. (1 Pet. 3:12; Mal. 3:18; Acts 10:34, 35)

John, an apostle of Jesus and one whom Jesus especially loved, characterized sin and those who practice it in these words and showed what the end of such ones would be: “Everyone who practices sin is also practicing lawlessness, and so sin is lawlessness. You know too that that one [Jesus] was made manifest to take away our sins, and there is no sin in him. Every one remaining in union with him does not practice sin; no one that practices sin has either seen him or come to know him. Little children, let no one mislead you; he who carries on righteousness is righteous, just as that one is righteous. He who carries on sin originates with the Devil, because the Devil has been sinning from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was made manifest, namely, to break up the works of the Devil.”—1 John 3:4-8.

Those who would gain or who would continue to enjoy God’s approval should note well Paul’s words to the Galatian congregations: “Do not be misled: God is not one to be mocked. For whatever a man is sowing, this he will also reap; because he who is sowing with a view to his flesh will reap corruption from his flesh, but he who is sowing with a view to the spirit will reap everlasting life from the spirit.” (Gal. 6:7, 8) God does forgive sins and looks with mercy and compassion upon the children of Adam who were born in sin. (Ps. 51:5) However, the true God revealed himself to Moses as “Jehovah, a God merciful and gracious, . . . pardoning error and transgression and sin, but by no means will he give exemption from punishment.” (Ex. 34:6, 7) Even in the case of King David, with whom Jehovah had made a covenant for the kingdom, God made no exception. David was punished for his sins, but because he was repentant he was also mercifully forgiven. However, Jehovah’s forgiveness does not extend to those who deliberately violate the righteous principles upon which his own throne is established, nor to those who make sinning a way of life. (Compare Hebrews 1:8, 9.) On the contrary. His position is one of active hostility toward such ones and they can by no means escape the judgment he has reserved for them.
 
How should we treat ones within the congreation who have been expelled due to fornication and other non-Christian behavior?

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. 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?
 
I just found this very informative thread.

The reason I’m interjecting a comment is that I have had on two occasions worked very closely with JWs. In one of the two workplaces, there were several JWs and one of them had been disfellowshipped.

Not being JW, I had no clue as to what all had gone on, all I knew was that this ‘disfellowshipping’ caused a considerable amount of tension in the workplace environment and made it difficult to actually get stuff done because there was no communication. Personally, I thought they should have left their beliefs at the door when they came to work in the interests of doing their job. I finally quit.

I appreciate BibleSteve’s explanations given in a thoughtful and clear manner.
 
I appreciate BibleSteve’s explanations given in a thoughtful and clear manner.
Thank you Beachcomber…

Just a personal note.

JW’s go through a very complete Bible training before choosing to become one of JW’s… the study program generally is 6 months to 2 years before one decides to get baptised.

There is no JW that doesn’t understand that fornication is an unacceptable behavior in the congregation… There is no room for misunderstanding… there is no living together, no one night stands… the bottom line is there is no sex before marriage.

Everyone knows this and realises that the likely result will be disfellowshipping for about 1 year if they go ahead with this behavior. A person person who commits fornication is not talked to or associated with. They are encouraged to attend meetings and keep up with their personal Bible study… About 40% are reinstated into the congregation… and I must tell you it’s a wonderfully happy event even when someone is reinstated… love, hugs, smiles, slaps on the backs, invites to dinner, and get-togethers…

But, for someone to get baptised, go ahead and commit fornication, and then complain about getting disfellowshipped… and suggest their case should merit extenuating circumstances is beyond me.

What’s not to understand?

(1 Corinthians 5:9-11) In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10not [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. 11But 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.
 
What is this disfellowshipping process?

If a person commits an offense against God and the congregation like fornication, they are disfellowhipped… this means the congregation will not associate with them in line with Paul’s comments at 1 Cor 5:11

(1 Corinthians 5:9-11) In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10not [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. 11But 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.

If the disfellowshipped person wants to be reinstated into the congregation he will exhibit a repentant and humble attitude to the elder body of the congregation…

And typically, he will attend all meetings for about 1 year without enjoying fellowship with the congregation.

Why about one year, why not just a week and let him back in?

Unfortunately, there are many who say their repentant, are let back in, and go back and commit fornication again…

By requiring an extended period of time, the repeat fornicators are weeded out and the congregation is kept clean.
 
Hi BibleSteve,

No one here is saying the fornication isn’t a grave sin. But if the person is truly repentent they should be forgiven, not shunned. And where is the Bible does it specify this “one year” sentence? I didn’t see that in any of your quotes. :confused:
 
Hi BibleSteve,

No one here is saying the fornication isn’t a grave sin. But if the person is truly repentent they should be forgiven, not shunned. And where is the Bible does it specify this “one year” sentence? I didn’t see that in any of your quotes. :confused:
(1 Corinthians 5:9-11) In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10not [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. 11But 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.

Paul specifically says to quit mixing with the person and to not even eat with him…

How long?

That isn’t specified…

Now, let’s say you are a man with responsibility in the congregation (i.e. the priest or in our case an “elder”… and you deal with this regularly…

A person is caught… he’s lied about it… he’s tried to cover it up, but he’s caught red-handed…

Oops… “I’m sorry, I’m repentant…”

Ok, welcome back?

A few months later, he’s doing it again…

Do you think you might decide on a better way to gauge his “repentance”?

This issue had been dealt with alot in the congregation…

40,000+ are disfellowshipped each year… the majority due to fornication (i.e. sex without marriage)…

40% are reinstated… after going thorugh a period of showing they are really interested in coming back into the congregation.

Let me ask a better question.

What do Catholics do when a member is known to be having sex without marriage… Do they follow Paul’s admonition above?
 
Matthew 18
21Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?”
22Jesus answered, "I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.[a]

Jesus preaches forgiveness and compassion probably more than anything else… God will decide if the person is truly worthy of salvation, not us! 😉

Now that doesn’t take away the parents’ right to discipline a disobedient child/teenager! And it would help if our culture would recognize the value of chastity. I feel very sorry for parents today trying to raise up morally responsible children. Sexually immorality is projected everywhere: tv, movies, magazines, billboards and, unfortunately, the schools. (Don’t you love how they always want to hand out condoms instead of promoting abstinence? 😦 )
 
(1 Corinthians 5:9-11) In my letter I wrote YOU to **quit mixing in company with fornicators, **10not [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. 11But 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.

The bottom line is that Paul asked **THE CONGREGATION **to do this… and we follow it…

No JW is surprised at this. They absolutely know about this before they are baptised.

We allow a person sufficient time to show his repentance. That is usually several months to a year.

If they do, they are welcomed back into the congregation.

If a member knows that fornication was a deed that was punishable by death in the Old Testament, and they know it’s punishable by death by God’s own hand at the end… and they know that the congregation expels fornicators and doesn’t associate with them for months if they do this…

Should they really complain about not getting special treatment when they fornicate?

What ever happened to personal responsibility for one’s actions?
 
Delraek,

In the spirit of reciprocal conversation, can you tell how you and other Catholics adhere to this scripture when you know of members of your Church who are having sex without being married?

(1 Corinthians 5:9-11) In my letter I wrote YOU to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10not [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. 11But 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.
 
Hi BibleSteve,

Well, first of all, I wouldn’t know if another Catholic was having sex outside of marriage unless this person were to tell me!

The Catholic Church teaches that premarital sex is a mortal sin.
Mortal sin: *Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him. For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.” *

A Catholic who has committed a mortal sin is not to receive the Eucharist until he/she has repented and gone to the Sacrament of Reconciliaiton (confession).
1 Cor 11
27Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.

I believe Paul is referring to “unrepentant” sinners in 1 Cor 5. We do not want to condone their actions or allow their behavior to influence our spiritual growth, but we do need to pray for them to come to repentance.

Does that answer your questions? 🙂
 
1 Corinthians 7:12-16 (Contemporary English Version)

12I don’t know of anything else the Lord said about marriage. All I can do is to give you my own advice. If your wife isn’t a follower of the Lord, but is willing to stay with you, don’t divorce her. 13If your husband isn’t a follower, but is willing to stay with you, don’t divorce him. 14Your husband or wife who isn’t a follower is made holy by having you as a mate. This also makes your children holy and keeps them from being unclean in God’s sight.
15If your husband or wife isn't a follower of the Lord and decides to divorce you, then you should agree to it. You are no longer bound to that person. After all, God chose you and wants you to live at peace. 16And besides, how do you know if you will be able to save your husband or wife who isn't a follower?
 
Matthew 9:10
While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew’s house, many tax collectors and "sinners" came and ate with him and his disciples.

Proverbs 3:7
Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear the LORD and shun evil.

2 Timothy 2:16
But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13 (Contemporary English Version)

9In my other letter [a] I told you not to have anything to do with immoral people. 10But I wasn’t talking about the people of this world. You would have to leave this world to get away from everyone who is immoral or greedy or who cheats or worships idols. 11I was talking about your own people who are immoral or greedy or worship idols or curse others or get drunk or cheat. Don’t even eat with them! 12Why should I judge outsiders? Aren’t we supposed to judge only church members? 13God judges everyone else. The Scriptures say, “Chase away any of your own people who are evil.”
 
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+
:amen: :blessyou: :hug1:
 
**Would this not, in casual reading, appear to indicate that Jesus approved of sinners in that he was willing to associate with them, and criticized the Pharisees for objecting to it? Note, however, Jesus’ introductory statement: “Persons in health do not need a physician, but the ailing do.” Would this not rather suggest that Jesus’ reason for associating with them was to cure them and not simply to accept them in the ailing condition in which he found them as sinners?

Thus it is evident that Jesus was not accepting people in their sins as they were. Rather, one of the most important aspects of his ministry was to cure men of their spiritual illnesses, enabling them to be accepted by God because of their changed way of life. (1 Pet. 3:12; Mal. 3:18; Acts 10:34, 35) **

The point IS, Steve, these people WERE Jews, were MEMBERS of the Israelite CONGREGATION, they KNEW God’s law against their Sins. I agree Jesus didn’t condone their sins, not one iota.
But he knew that they needed his HELP, not the legalistic shunning practiced by the Pharisees. They came to him, and he was kind to them, and taught them with love the truths of the Lord and many other things. They were not defiant to him, like the “righteous” Pharisees were. I WAS NOT DEFIANT TO THE ELDERS, I was docile and submissive. I came to THEM. They didn’t find out about my failings, I voluntarily came to THEM for HELP. What did they do? Get together and pray over me first? NOPE. They immediately formed a “JUDICIAL COMMITTEE.” There’s the legalism again. And my complaint against the JWs system is NOT that they disfellowship people. I would even condone the SHUNNING if it were practiced against DEFIANT UNREPENTANT practicers of sin who told the elders they had no intention of betering themselves. THAT is NOT what I disapprove of. It is the way they CONTINUE TO SHUN ABJECTLY a person who has already begun repenting.
Jesus said that if your brother sins against you seven times a day and says, " I Repent," each time, you MUST give him the benefit of the doubt and FORGIVE HIM each time. Not make him wait a year under the Silent Treatment to “make sure” he is repentant.
Now a brother or sister who says to the Elders,
I’m really not sorry for what I did and I’m not going to make any effort to change, I think, SHOULD be shunned.
But as SOON as that once-defiant person manifests repentance and APOLOGIZES, the congregation has to give him or her the benefit of the doubt, because “We are Not Ignorant of Satan’s Designs” to destroy the repenant sinner.
JWs shun you for a year or more even after you repent.
If they didn’t do that, you might get 95% of your DF’d people back, instead of only 40%. Most godfearing people fall into Sin out of weakness, not malice.
And by the way, the old battleaxe who blatantly lied about me and spread around the whole congregation that I was a drug addict, an abject falsehood, didn’t even get a public rebuke.
I guess Lying and Defamation of Character don’t quality as disfellowshiping offenses in the Holy JW Society.

Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+
 
I’m sorry but JWs shun people for reasons they shouldn’t (not that I am excusing the shunning practice). My DH wasn’t DF’d when he committed fornication with some girl, actually, it was twice before we met. He wasn’t DF’d, he was only put on restriction. Then,2 yrs later, he was fully reinstated and he met me. We became engaged, and the elders decided to tell him to break off the engagement or he’d be DF’d. He refused and told them he was going to marry me whether they liked it or not because he was really in love with me. He was DF’d for over 16 months just because we got married. He never missed 1 meeting, he was always there, he always did his reading, we read the bible together, I even attended with him to make things better for him. He was about to be reinstated so I decided to stop attending. But guess what happened? As soon as I decided to not come back, the elders changed their mind and wanted to test him some more. The congregation overseer ridiculed my DH, he put him down as bad as you could put down someone, he told my DH he only married me to be rebellious and that he knew DH didn’t love me. He said that DH would never become a JW again and he was going to make sure that would never happen.

When I was attending with DH, I was told I wasn’t even allowed to speak to him, regardless of me not being a JW. They said I only had to talk to him for serving dinner, for the marital embrace and that was that. Nothing else. That I had to teach him to “behave” like a JW.

Then there is a guy who got his girlfriend pregnant, but didn’t get DF’d? Why is that?

Steve, why is it that elders try and test people? My DH felt horribly he was DF’d, he never did anything wrong. He only wanted to marry a non-JW. His sister married a non-JW and she wasn’t DF’d. My DH always preached and had 3 bible studies when we met.

When he was DF’d he had a bible study at work, but then because the elders delayed his reinstatement, he stopped attending. Then he had an accident and all of a sudden, the elders decided to bring him back in… why is that? No one was there to see if he was ok when he almost lost his hand, no one visited him, but about a week after his accident, they decided to use the accident as the excuse of his missed meetings. Right, so his accident happend in March, but he had been missing meetings since November, and they said the accident was the reason he stopped attending? He stopped attending when I stopped attending… Then we moved, and now he doesn’t go. He preached once after being reinstated but he stopped. He never had that bible study the elders set up for him…

Can you tell me one thing Steve? How long does it take for the elders to decide to DF a person who becomes inactive? How long does it have to be that a JW is considered disassociated?

Just so you know, I had posted before that because you have been nice in your replies, that you are more than welcome to answer me.
 
I’m sorry but JWs shun people for reasons they shouldn’t (not that I am excusing the shunning practice). My DH wasn’t DF’d when he committed fornication with some girl, actually, it was twice before we met. He wasn’t DF’d, he was only put on restriction. Then,2 yrs later, he was fully reinstated and he met me. We became engaged, and the elders decided to tell him to break off the engagement or he’d be DF’d. He refused and told them he was going to marry me whether they liked it or not because he was really in love with me. He was DF’d for over 16 months just because we got married. He never missed 1 meeting, he was always there, he always did his reading, we read the bible together, I even attended with him to make things better for him. He was about to be reinstated so I decided to stop attending. But guess what happened? As soon as I decided to not come back, the elders changed their mind and wanted to test him some more. The congregation overseer ridiculed my DH, he put him down as bad as you could put down someone, he told my DH he only married me to be rebellious and that he knew DH didn’t love me. He said that DH would never become a JW again and he was going to make sure that would never happen.

When I was attending with DH, I was told I wasn’t even allowed to speak to him, regardless of me not being a JW. They said I only had to talk to him for serving dinner, for the marital embrace and that was that. Nothing else. That I had to teach him to “behave” like a JW.

Then there is a guy who got his girlfriend pregnant, but didn’t get DF’d? Why is that?

Steve, why is it that elders try and test people? My DH felt horribly he was DF’d, he never did anything wrong. He only wanted to marry a non-JW. His sister married a non-JW and she wasn’t DF’d. My DH always preached and had 3 bible studies when we met.

When he was DF’d he had a bible study at work, but then because the elders delayed his reinstatement, he stopped attending. Then he had an accident and all of a sudden, the elders decided to bring him back in… why is that? No one was there to see if he was ok when he almost lost his hand, no one visited him, but about a week after his accident, they decided to use the accident as the excuse of his missed meetings. Right, so his accident happend in March, but he had been missing meetings since November, and they said the accident was the reason he stopped attending? He stopped attending when I stopped attending… Then we moved, and now he doesn’t go. He preached once after being reinstated but he stopped. He never had that bible study the elders set up for him…

Can you tell me one thing Steve? How long does it take for the elders to decide to DF a person who becomes inactive? How long does it have to be that a JW is considered disassociated?

Just so you know, I had posted before that because you have been nice in your replies, that you are more than welcome to answer me.
does he even have any desire to go back to the meetings yessi?
i wouldn’t be surprised if he just didn’t want to go back. be thankful that he is not going. praise God for it, because this might be a sign from God that his road is not on the path to being a jw. perhaps, after some long thought on his part, or just time away from the falsetower, he might become Catholic. never count it out because with God, all things are possible. all things. i remember when you first came here and told us about it, and you said you were going to the meetings to see what they taught and so on. i think that is what you mentioned last year correct?

iam delighted that you and he are at home together, and believe it or not, iam not in the slightest bit surprised at how they treated your husband. not at all. man alive, iam glad i got out! what a relief!! no more mind control! remember last year yessi when i first mentioned the word, falsetower? well i came up with that word after reading that fabulous book, answering jehovah’s witnesses by jason evert. ( it was not in his book, it was something i made up) that word summarizes in a nutshell what the society really is, false. pretty much sums it up doesn’t it?
indeed.
 
does he even have any desire to go back to the meetings yessi?
i wouldn’t be surprised if he just didn’t want to go back.

Well, sometimes I think he doesn’t want to go back but if he doesn’t, he will not admit to it to me. I don’t know if he doesn’t want to go because I won’t attend with him, or if it’s what he’s said a few times before: that he stays home to be with me. Now that his meetings are on Wed, Fri, & Sun. Fridays we go to Retrouvaille meetings, so he misses his Friday meeting. Wednesdays I’m not home, I go to school after work and get home around 9:45pm, but instead of going to the meetings, he goes fishing with my uncle. 😃 Sundays, he either goes fishing in the morning or he sleeps in, so there goes the Sunday meeting. 😛 Yesterday he was going to go because I had EMHC training and he said he was going to attend an English meeting since he missed the morning one in Spanish, and guess what? He stayed home and cleaned and downloaded audio jokes for work.

be thankful that he is not going. praise God for it, because this might be a sign from God that his road is not on the path to being a jw. perhaps, after some long thought on his part, or just time away from the falsetower, he might become Catholic. never count it out because with God, all things are possible. all things.

I think it could be that my prayers are being answered. I pray every single day that if it’s God’s will and it’s for our good, that DH will revert to the CC. It might happen. He’s been missing meetings for a very long time, he probably will become Catholic now that I am even more involved in ministries. And I am more than thankful!

i remember when you first came here and told us about it, and you said you were going to the meetings to see what they taught and so on. i think that is what you mentioned last year correct?
great memory you have there!

iam delighted that you and he are at home together, and believe it or not, iam not in the slightest bit surprised at how they treated your husband. not at all. man alive, iam glad i got out! what a relief!! no more mind control!
It’s horrible to hear how they get treated. I’ve met several ex-JWs here that come with similar stories. Glad you’re not one any more and you found the Truth!

remember last year yessi when i first mentioned the word, falsetower? well i came up with that word after reading that fabulous book, answering jehovah’s witnesses by jason evert. ( it was not in his book, it was something i made up) that word summarizes in a nutshell what the society really is, false. pretty much sums it up doesn’t it?
indeed.
So that’s where we got the word from? I was trying to remember just the other day where it is it came from, you’re the culprit! 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top