Originally posted by snowinscotlandThat is a human trait, if someone gets accused of an act you are
re the papers: - so where lies the truth? As sentient beings we all make a judgement; some will favour the middle east version, other the states version; but somewhere in the middle is much more probable.
I think it is funny too: in this way. All these religions have all these major differences that are 'important' and it's the minor, 'stupid littl ...[text shortened]... r her children.
How important is it that how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
going to have some right away believe they did it, and some that
don't think they did. That does not mean the people in the middle
who want to wait and see how the information about the crime
right! Unlike opinions that were discussed here, events and truth
are what they are, while opinions can be accurate, wrong, or
indifferent.
Kelly
The other thing I think people sometimes miss is this... what possible motive would a loving god have for not allowing people to take blood? Perhaps there's something science hasn't discovered yet about transfusions that make them unsafe. For every supposed 'death by refusal' I'd bet there are 10 'death by bad blood' cases.
Bloodless surgery is better anyways 🙂.
Originally posted by ih8sensWhat scripture do you use, or believe is valid for such a belief that
The other thing I think people sometimes miss is this... what possible motive would a loving god have for not allowing people to take blood? Perhaps there's something science hasn't discovered yet about transfusions that make them unsafe. For every supposed 'death by refusal' I'd bet there are 10 'death by bad blood' cases.
Bloodless surgery is better anyways 🙂.
God does not want us to do such things. I'm aware of a few that might
get me there, but what say you?
Kelly
Originally posted by ih8sensThere is: blood transmitted diseases: HIV, Hepatitis, etc. When God said that he was already thinking in our safety. If you die, it's because he called you to his presence.
The other thing I think people sometimes miss is this... what possible motive would a loving god have for not allowing people to take blood? Perhaps there's something science hasn't discovered yet about transfusions that make them unsafe. For every supposed 'death by refusal' I'd bet there are 10 'death by bad blood' cases.
Bloodless surgery is better anyways 🙂.
Originally posted by serigadowell... Ecclesiastes (sp?) 9:11 makes a bit more sense to me rather than 'called into his presence'.. It's not really 'just' for a righteous god to take someone away from friends and family just for himself. sometimes blind chance is all it is.
There is: blood transmitted diseases: HIV, Hepatitis, etc. When God said that he was already thinking in our safety. If you die, it's because he called you to his presence.
Originally posted by no1marauderGlad you're here to read my mind and get the details of the stories I've heard.
So what? If somebody marries or associates with devout JW's and THEN decides to not follow an important directive of the faith they suffer consequences. They know this going in. You act like it's some outrageous and totally capricious result when it is part of the package.
Go take a leak on the altar of any Christian Church and see if you're not kicked out of the Church!
What actually happens is this: family starts out non-JW; a large number of them convert; the few who do not convert, or do not stick with the faith, are disfellowshipped and/or shunned.
And no, even those who marries or associates with devout JW's does not necessarily "know this going in", for two reasons:
1) If he talks about it at all, the JW will almost certainly describe disfellowship in the rosiest possible terms - just look at ih8sens' quote from the Watchtower site.
2) If a complete inspection of your potential mate's theology was required, nobody could ever marry a catholic [for example].
Go take a leak on the altar of any Christian Church and see if you're not kicked out of the Church!
What an inflammatory example. It takes far less of an offense to get disfellowshipped, and the consequences are far more broad than simple removal from the church property. I don't know how many ways I can say this. The shunning is complete. No phone calls. No visits. No contact of any kind, except maybe 5 minutes for the JW to persuade the 'outsider' to turn JW.
Originally posted by no1marauderThat article is perfectly consistent with the stories I've heard.
This statement is incorrect and a gross exaggerration as regards JW disfellowship. From the Wiki article on Jehovah's Witnesses:
After one is disfellowshipped, all baptized members would cut off all association with that person. They would not speak to such a one, or acknowledge him or her.[51] There are two exceptions. First if a member was forced to ...[text shortened]... y members living outside the home who are disfellowshipped, would have minimal contact.[54][55]
This statement is especially apt:
"After one is disfellowshipped, all baptized members would cut off all association with that person." (emphasis added)
The two exceptional cases given by Wiki didn't apply in the stories.
This one is also right on target:
"Family members living outside the home who are disfellowshipped, would have minimal contact."'Minimal' means that they will only talk to you long enough to shill their faith.
you try so hard to make it sound like you know what you're talking about swiss 🙄
The fact is that JW's don't get disfellowshipped for minor things... it isn't the severity of the act that matters at all... it's the unrepentant attitude.
The other thing is that people who have not been baptized as a JW cannot be disfellowshipped being as they were never considered a JW in the first place. JW's do not perform infant baptism, everyone must choose what to do w/ their own life.
Originally posted by ih8sensThe fact is that JW's don't get disfellowshipped for minor things... it isn't the severity of the act that matters at all... it's the unrepentant attitude.
you try so hard to make it sound like you know what you're talking about swiss 🙄
The fact is that JW's don't get disfellowshipped for minor things... it isn't the severity of the act that matters at all... it's the unrepentant attitude.
The other thing is that people who have not been baptized as a JW cannot be disfellowshipped being as they were neve ...[text shortened]... e. JW's do not perform infant baptism, everyone must choose what to do w/ their own life.
In other words, they can indeed get disfellowshipped for minor things, if they dare to take a different stand on them than the church leadership.
The other thing is that people who have not been baptized as a JW cannot be disfellowshipped being as they were never considered a JW in the first place. JW's do not perform infant baptism, everyone must choose what to do w/ their own life.
Whether they are disfellowshipped or not, the stories I've heard, and the Wiki quoted by no1, show that the result [shunning] is the same.
3 edits
Originally posted by SwissGambitlol yes because we all trust wikipedia.. how about I go edit it for ya?
[b]The fact is that JW's don't get disfellowshipped for minor things... it isn't the severity of the act that matters at all... it's the unrepentant attitude.
In other words, they can indeed get disfellowshipped for minor things, if they dare to take a different stand on them than the church leadership.
The other thing is that people who hav ories I've heard, and the Wiki quoted by no1, show that the result [shunning] is the same.
... and it's called a Kingdom Hall, not a church 😀.
And, considering how you like to debate... and I'm considering becoming a Lawyer 🙂...
You mentioned earlier that those who did not conform to JW standards were disfellowshipped... now you say they are not disfellowshipped but shunned. Please elaborate.
2 edits
Originally posted by ih8senslol yes because we all trust wikipedia.. how about I go edit it for ya?
lol yes because we all trust wikipedia.. how about I go edit it for ya?
... and it's called a Kingdom Hall, not a church 😀.
And, considering how you like to debate... and I'm considering becoming a Lawyer 🙂...
You mentioned earlier that those who did not conform to JW standards were disfellowshipped... now you say they are not disfellowshipped but shunned. Please elaborate.
Here's a news flash for ya...any chowderhead can put up a web page. I use the same caution reading Wiki that I would for any site. [And please, take your own advice about cynicism.]
You mentioned earlier that those who did not conform to JW standards were disfellowshipped... now you say they are not disfellowshipped but shunned. Please elaborate.
No, I don't say that they are not disfellowshipped. Let me clarify.
Those who are already JW are disfellowshipped and shunned. This applies to the lady from OP's story.
The people in my stories were in families that converted to JW. Technically, they were not disfellowshipped, because they had not been JW to begin with, but they were still shunned.
The fact that there is more than one path to being shunned is of small comfort to the shunned.
Originally posted by ih8sensOriginally posted by ih8sens
No form of discipline is meant to be happy. I personally know a JW who was disfellowshipped and has since been 'reinstated'... it worked.
Disfellowshipping is the single best method of keeping a congregation clean and disciplining unrepentant sinners in the hopes of a return.
I don't understand why the word 'disfellowship' has such a powerful effect on people.
Seems like you figured it out after all. And they say nobody learns anything on this forum! 😀
Originally posted by SwissGambitI presume you've run out of points and have taken to stabbing my intelligence?
Originally posted by ih8sens
[b]I don't understand why the word 'disfellowship' has such a powerful effect on people.
Seems like you figured it out after all. And they say nobody learns anything on this forum! 😀[/b]
I didn't say the act of disfellowshipping.. I understand that.. I said the word, there are more significant beliefs in any religion than the (somewhat) simple procedure of disfellowshipping.
Originally posted by ih8sensI presume you've run out of points
I presume you've run out of points and have taken to stabbing my intelligence?
I didn't say the act of disfellowshipping.. I understand that.. I said the word, there are more significant beliefs in any religion than the (somewhat) simple procedure of disfellowshipping.
Good arguments are all about quantity of points.
and have taken to stabbing my intelligence?
[In my best spanish accent] Right through the brain, bro!
I didn't say the act of disfellowshipping.. I understand that.. I said the word, there are more significant beliefs in any religion than the (somewhat) simple procedure of disfellowshipping.
You're saying it's only a word that people are afraid of? I think my stab hit nothing but air.