"Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Miles
Savant
Posts: 5179
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 434 times
Been thanked: 1614 times

"Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #1

Post by Miles »

.


To Note: This OP has came about more as an eye-opener about Jehovah's Witnesses rather than any attempt at disparagement. Recognizing that every religion, denomination, and congregation has the right to operate as best it sees fit under its particular guidelines, my presentation and comments are strictly the result of surprise and befuddlement after watching the video, Shun Your Family.


I've heard of disfellowship among Jehovah's Witnesses before, but never realized the extent it goes to as a disloyalty test. So, what is disfellowship?

"Disfellowship:
To 'remove the wicked
man' or woman from
the congregation
Watchtower 2011 Jul 15 p.23 simplified edition"

"Jehovah's Witnesses are disfellowshipped for practices such as disagreeing with Watchtower doctrine, smoking or fornication, if judged by the congregation elders as unrepentant. A disfellowshipped person is to be shunned by all family and friends, usually for the remainder of their life, and go through tremendous emotional suffering. Whilst Scriptural precedence limits association with wrongdoers, Watchtower application of disfellowshipping seriously deviates from Bible guidelines.
source


A particularly disturbing comment in the video below:

"We have to put him [Jehovah] before a father, a mother, and even our children if they're disfellowshipped. And if the disfellowshipping of our family is not bad enough, loyalty to Jehovah may mean we even have to endure reproach. We may be hurting because, 'I can't, can't talk to my family member."
(time mark 2:41)


....................


What really amazes me is that the organization refuses to take any responsibility whatsoever for a member becoming "wicked." Yet it does refuse to, and even tells its members refuse to as well. From the video:

"Now we're gonna mention three things NOT to do, and two of them are games not to play.

The first one is, don't play the blame game. Resist self-blame. We may think that we're at fault somehow. Remember that Jehovah holds sinners responsible for their actions. Even young ones that are disfellowshipped . . it's because their relationship with Jehovah was weak.

Avoid the "if only games." "If only we would have preached more, if only I would have talked to them more." "If only we would have done more in the organization. If only. . .If only . . . Don't do that to ourselves
"


It's as if every mother, father, and JW preacher knew exactly how to get through to their children and other members, and actually did so. Think that's true? I don't. I've never heard a JW preacher speak, but I have heard a fair number of other Christian ministers, several of whom were so abysmal they couldn't convince a soaking wet dog to come in out of the rain. Thing is, from time to time we all fail in our relationships with others, and despite the JW philosophy, it isn't always the other guy's fault. Sometimes it's our own, in whole or in part. As willing to listen as a Jehovah's Witness may be it's only reasonable to acknowledge the possible failure of parents and preachers to get through. We don't all come with the same set of responsive abilities. Some of us simply have to be approached from another angle before the message sinks in. So for the sake of those Jehovah's Witnesses who are on the brink of becoming one of the "wicked," as well as their families, I think it would be nice if the organization changed their blame game and acknowledged the part it plays in the failures among its membership.


SO: Do you think I have a point here or not?

.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #31

Post by JehovahsWitness »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 7:45 pm

If the entire congregation decides to shun the disassociated member, then this has the same effect it would have as if the entire organization shunned the member.
Okay in this bizzare scenerio, a Witess stops going to our meetings and stops associating with fellow Witnesses and in response the entire congregation stops ... stops what exactly...? Stops "wanting" them to come back? Stops going round to their house and begging them to come back? What action are you saying the entire congrgation actually takes. The person is already gone!

Straw grabbing is also real.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #32

Post by Purple Knight »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 8:18 pm
We_Are_VENOM wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 7:45 pm In the article, the woman stated that her disfellowshipping was sparked by her "refusal to live in an abusive relationship."
Jehovahs Witnesses do not disfellow people for leaving abusive relationships.
I read every link you post.
JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Feb 12, 2021 2:22 pm
A woman whose husband is disfellowshiped is not released from the Scriptural requirement to respect his husbandly headship over her; only death or Scriptural divorce from a husband results in such release.
If the husband is legitimately above the wife, the only ways for abuse not to result are 1) if he's not abusive in the first place 2) if someone above him comes and puts a stop to the abuse.

Now we did hash this out before, and this was the result. We never agreed on the degree of submission required from a wife to a husband, when the Bible says "Submit yourselves to your husbands as you do to the Lord." This was the meat of it for anyone who's interested.
JehovahsWitness wrote: Sun Nov 28, 2021 7:49 pmAs the verse says wives should submit to their husbands. Where, however, does that give permission to the husbands to rape her? She should indeed submit to Her husband in "everything"* but where do you get the idea the husband can do ANYTHING?

Can you not see there is a difference between "You can eat everything on the menu" and ..."We can serve you anything we like"?

Image

How often would you eat out if you didn't think there was a difference between the two ?

" All you [the customer] can eat!" is NOT permission for them [the restaurant owners] to cook and serve everything that exists including EXCREMENT or poison. In the same way an instruction for wives to submit in everything does not equate to permission for husbands to submit them to everything that exists including rape, abuse or murder!

*all Christian submission is in fact relative.
Purple Knight wrote: Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:08 pmIt instructs the wife to submit to anything. You're right that this doesn't mean the husband may do anything, but this is where effective permission comes in. If he does it anyway, she has to submit to it. Effective permission to beat your wife is worrying enough.

Even if God never says it's okay to beat your wife.

Even if God sends you to Hell if you beat your wife.

Even if God flat-out says, "Don't beat your wife."

It's still worrying enough because God also told the wife to submit to it if the husband does it.

This is where your crudburger graphic is appropriate. If the menu forces you to eat everything served to you, you do have to start worrying what if they serve you a crudburger, because you now have to eat it. If they have some rule that says don't serve that, good for them, but people don't always follow all the rules.
JehovahsWitness wrote: Thu Dec 02, 2021 3:43 pm
EPHESIANS 5

Be in subjection to one another in fear of Christ. 22 Let wives be in subjection to their husbands+ as to the Lord, 23 because a husband is head of his wife+ just as the Christ is head of the congregation,+ he being a savior of this body. 24 In fact, as the congregation is in subjection to the Christ, wives should also be to their husbands in everything.
Purple Knight wrote: Wed Dec 01, 2021 4:15 pm But I don't think it makes a difference whether Jesus or God is limited ...
Scripturally it makes a great deal of difference, since subjection to Christ is relative and subjection to God is not. Since a wife' s subjection to her husband is in the same manner as her subjection to Christ (not God), we can logically conclude her subjection to her husband is also relative NOT absolute.

Ego she is under no obligation to submit to absolutely anything her husband chooses to impose on her, but only that which he has a right to impose in obedience to his (the husband's) head.
Some posts have been condensed for brevity. I tried to get the meat of the argument. I really liked the crudburger. I think about it every time I see an avocado. Yeah, if it was a choice, the crudburger, 100%.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #33

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Purple Knight wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 9:21 pm
I tried to get the meat of the argument.
Well the bottom line (as related to this thread) the argument that wifely submission is biblically absolute is nonsense.

All scriptural submission, except to Almighty is relative meaning no human has the right to command what God prohibits and physical, emotional or sexual abuse is a violation of bible law (something God hates). Nobody (including a wife or children) is scripturally obliged to submit to to what God hates, and the fact that we do not disfellowship those that escape abuse is evidence that the above is the Jehovahs Witnesses position.



JW
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #34

Post by Purple Knight »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:00 amWell the bottom line (as related to this thread) the argument that wifely submission is biblically absolute is nonsense.
Oddly I agree with you more in this thread than I do in the other, because there's at least a chance for the organisation to take the side of the wife and not allow her to be beaten - there is a party present that can overrule the husband. I don't think that ideal happens every time but it probably happens most of the time or the governments that want to dissolve their JW organisations would have already done so.

If there is not such a party present I still imagine a wife and a husband having the exact same conversation we did, and it simply ending with, well, who is the head here, whose interpretation goes? And then, if I'm the wife and I really believe in this lore 100%, it's all true, and if there is any speck of doubt then I had better be safe and take my beating.

That doesn't have much bearing on what is scripturally correct, but it certainly has bearing on what happens as a result of scripture. It's only slightly different than being mad at a company that makes hammers because some people beat their wives with hammers, but it is different because it's been made easy. I would look at the hammer differently if it had a button you could press to get a killamajig to pop out and the company said, oh, we don't endorse pressing that. Now imagine the company is long gone and there's no way to know why they really made that button, and that's a bit how I look at Ephesians 5:22.

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #35

Post by JehovahsWitness »

Purple Knight wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 2:59 pm
That doesn't have much bearing on what is scripturally correct, but it certainly has bearing on what happens as a result of scripture.
Well I can safely assume it doesn't happen with us, and probably anywhere outside of people who clinically insane. This is because people instinctively know that being in submission to someone is never absolute. People do not need to consult a book to know where to tell their husband to go if he told them to rob a bank, rape a child or stab their baby in the throat and cook it up for supper. I think we both know that very few people would say, "Well, I promised to love, honour and obey.... so yes Your Honor , I did assasinate the President!"

If you were not on a website trying to have the last word, I feel confident you would admit to the notion that "up to a point" is implicit in all human submission after which one looks to one's own conscience, or (if you believe in Him), Almighty God. If all Christian wives do not know this, Jehovah's Witness wives certainly do.
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Fri Feb 04, 2022 9:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

User avatar
Purple Knight
Prodigy
Posts: 3465
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 6:00 pm
Has thanked: 1129 times
Been thanked: 729 times

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #36

Post by Purple Knight »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:44 pmafter which one looks to one's own conscience, or (if you believe in Him), Almighty God. If all Christian wives do not know this, Jehovah's Witness wives certainly do.
JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:44 pmI think we both know that very few people would say, "Well, I promised to love, honour and obey.... so yes Your Honor , I did assassinate the President!"
Very few yes, but in those few, I would imagine the religious would be over-represented, because of the power of this concept you have called God. It can be a great power for good but people also do, not terribly infrequently, use it to justify imposing their will on others. I do realise that "up to a point" is implicit (though I personally have a lot of trouble gauging that line exactly) but the concept of God Says can very well override that natural instinct. Have you really never had your conscience tell you something different than the Bible? And which do you trust then?
JehovahsWitness wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 3:44 pmIf you were not on a website trying to have the last word, I feel confident you would admit to the notion that "up to a point" is implicit in all human submission
Not nearly as much as you might think. While I do concede this idea of "up to a point" sometimes, I always dislike having to, and when I was younger I didn't at all. Mostly I only do it because I have to, because this is just how the world works. I hate that none of the rules we have are perfect (or even that good) and we have to default to common sense it seems like 90% of the time, because somebody is always figuring out some way to technically follow a rule while essentially getting away with murder, but then we all have to agree, yeah what that person did was wrong.

It always ruffles my feathers because of the innocent people caught in the crossfire between terrible rules and crafty exploiters: People who actually are trying very hard not to do anything wrong, and, as a consequence of "up to a point" have no idea what they can and cannot do. These people don't have the charisma of the true exploiter, so they will never be able to do quite as much as the exploiter does. The true exploiter will always be able to push further, skirt just under the rule, sometimes even break it, explain himself and be seen as righteous, while the person actually trying to do the right thing half the time just follows the other fellow's footsteps and finds he's stepped out of line. This is inequality at its finest, and I hate it, and I have a greater need than most for the rules to actually be the rules.

User avatar
onewithhim
Savant
Posts: 8904
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:56 pm
Location: Norwich, CT
Has thanked: 1217 times
Been thanked: 305 times

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #37

Post by onewithhim »

[Replying to Purple Knight in post #17]

I was disfellowshipped for 5 years some time ago. I always understood that I was responsible for my own actions, and I knew they had to disfellowship me for my fornication. That is one serious sin that is not tolerated, along with the things listed, for example, at I Corinthians 6:9,10. A person that is disfellowshipped learns from the "shunning," that he must be an upstanding person, and he knows that he can be reinstated whenever he stops doing the sin for which he was disfellowshipped.

Let me assure you that the brothers are kind and loving when they counsel someone who has committed a serious sin. They find out what has happened and try to steer that person back to the fold, if you will, by reminding them of Bible principles and laws, and appealing to their heart. They were very kind with me, trying to get me to change my mind to go ahead and be disfellowshipped. All I had to do was stop having illicit sex, which is an act severely unbecoming to a Christian. The brothers don't want anyone to be cast out, and they try hard to reason with a person.

Whoever resents being disfellowshipped is not taking responsibility for their unchristian actions.

2timothy316
Under Probation
Posts: 4161
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 10:51 am
Has thanked: 175 times
Been thanked: 457 times

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #38

Post by 2timothy316 »

onewithhim wrote: Fri Feb 04, 2022 8:57 pm [Replying to Purple Knight in post #17]

I was disfellowshipped for 5 years some time ago. I always understood that I was responsible for my own actions, and I knew they had to disfellowship me for my fornication. That is one serious sin that is not tolerated, along with the things listed, for example, at I Corinthians 6:9,10. A person that is disfellowshipped learns from the "shunning," that he must be an upstanding person, and he knows that he can be reinstated whenever he stops doing the sin for which he was disfellowshipped.

Let me assure you that the brothers are kind and loving when they counsel someone who has committed a serious sin. They find out what has happened and try to steer that person back to the fold, if you will, by reminding them of Bible principles and laws, and appealing to their heart. They were very kind with me, trying to get me to change my mind to go ahead and be disfellowshipped. All I had to do was stop having illicit sex, which is an act severely unbecoming to a Christian. The brothers don't want anyone to be cast out, and they try hard to reason with a person.

Whoever resents being disfellowshipped is not taking responsibility for their unchristian actions.
Now because of your humility and wisdom you have Jehovah's favor, put your life on a better course and have preserved your life for the real life coming so very soon. Bravo! This folks is real strength.

User avatar
We_Are_VENOM
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1632
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:33 am
Has thanked: 76 times
Been thanked: 58 times

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #39

Post by We_Are_VENOM »

JehovahsWitness wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 8:40 pm
Okay in this bizzare scenerio, a Witess stops going to our meetings and stops associating with fellow Witnesses and in response the entire congregation stops ... stops what exactly...?
"Stops what exactly"??

Stop ASSOCIATING with the person, that's what.

After all, that is what shunning is all about, isn't it?
JehovahsWitness wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 8:40 pm Stops "wanting" them to come back? Stops going round to their house and begging them to come back?
"Stops" associating with them, PERIOD.

If an active JW sees a disassociated member at the grocery store, the JW will walk pass the person and not say anything...not even acknowledge the person.

The extent of any conversation is; "are you coming back to the truth?".

"Do you want to come back to Jehovah's organization"?

Besides those "we are here if you want to come back" claims...disassociated members get nothing but..

"............"
JehovahsWitness wrote: Thu Feb 03, 2022 8:40 pm What action are you saying the entire congrgation actually takes. The person is already gone!
Straw grabbing is also real.
The action the congregation takes is SHUNNING the ex member!!
Venni Vetti Vecci!!

User avatar
JehovahsWitness
Savant
Posts: 21073
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 6:03 am
Has thanked: 790 times
Been thanked: 1114 times
Contact:

Re: "Shocking Jehovah's Witness Convention Talk Telling Parents To Shun Children"

Post #40

Post by JehovahsWitness »

We_Are_VENOM wrote: Sat Feb 05, 2022 12:31 pm

The action the congregation takes is SHUNNING the ex member!!
Lets get a few things straight :

1) Someone that disassociates themselves has withdrawn their assication from their congregation, if certain ones choose to give them the space they request that is a sign of respect.

2) Since someone that has disassociated themselves is still our spiritual brother or sister, there is absolutely no reason not to greet the person or frequent their business as such

3) Individuals who knows and are directly concerned are like anyone free to decide how they are going to react but if they are Christians they will do so in a wise and loving fashion .
Mere disassociation does not indicate wrongdoing and although personal relationship may be damaged by their decision , no Witness in good standing should treat such a person disfellowshipped as they do not the authority to judge in this capacity.
4) It is absolutely unheard of for an entire congregation to unilaterally "unofficially" shun a member and if it did happen this would indicate something was profoundly wrong with their theocratic process which would demand intervention from outside disciplinary measures.

So these wild strawman arguments are pure conjecture with a generous sprinkling of fantasy with no basis for a realistic criticism on JW policy or practice.


JW




RELATED POSTS

How do Jehovah's Witnesses ensure published policy is carried out?
viewtopic.php?p=1065143#p1065143

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES , DISFELLOWSHIPPING/SHUNNING and ... ORGANISATIONAL INFALLIBILITY
Last edited by JehovahsWitness on Sun Feb 27, 2022 5:45 am, edited 2 times in total.
INDEX: More bible based ANSWERS
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 81#p826681


"For if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah" -
Romans 14:8

Post Reply