Originally posted by galveston75What about disagreeing with elders over bible interpretation?
Some of the offenses that could merit disfellowshipping from the Christian congregation are fornication, adultery, homosexuality, greed, extortion, thievery, lying, drunkenness, reviling, spiritism, murder, idolatry, apostasy, and the causing of divisions in the congregation.
"Why Some Are Disfellowshipped"
God’s servants study the Bible and Christian publications. Jehovah’s standards are discussed at their meetings, assemblies, and conventions. So Christians are in a position to know what Jehovah requires of them. Disfellowshipping takes place only if a member of the congregation unrepentantly engages in gross sin.
Consider a Scriptural example of disfellowshipping. The congregation in Corinth tolerated “such fornication as [was] not even among the nations, that a wife a certain man [had] of his father.” Paul urged the Corinthians to “hand such a man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, in order that the spirit may be saved.” (1 Corinthians 5:1-5) When disfellowshipped and thus handed over to Satan, the sinner was again part of the Devil’s world. (1 John 5:19) His expulsion removed an evil fleshly element from the congregation and preserved its godly “spirit,” or dominant attitude.—2 Timothy 4:22; 1 Corinthians 5:11-13.
Before a very long time had passed, Paul urged the Christians in Corinth to reinstate the wrongdoer. Why? It was so that they might not be “overreached by Satan,” said the apostle. The sinner had evidently repented and cleaned up his life. (2 Corinthians 2:8-11) If the Corinthians refused to reinstate the repentant man, Satan would overreach them in that they would be as hard and unforgiving as the Devil wanted them to be. Very likely, they soon did “forgive and comfort” the penitent man.—2 Corinthians 2:5-7.
What is accomplished by disfellowshipping? It keeps Jehovah’s holy name clear of reproach and protects the fine reputation of his people. (1 Peter 1:14-16) Removing an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation upholds God’s standards and preserves the congregation’s spiritual cleanness. It may also bring the unrepentant one to his senses.
Originally posted by FMF"Suppose that a person finds a Scriptural teaching hard to understand and accept. He may have done research in the Bible and in publications available through the congregation and sought help from mature fellow Christians, even elders. Still, he has a hard time grasping or accepting the point. What can he do? Something similar developed about a year before Jesus died. He said that he was “the bread of life” and that to live forever a person had to “eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood.” That shocked some of his disciples. Rather than seek an explanation or simply wait in faith, many disciples “would no longer walk with [Jesus].” (John 6:35, 41-66) Again, had we been there, what would we have done?
What about disagreeing with elders over bible interpretation?
15 In modern times, some have ceased associating with the local congregation, feeling that they will serve God on their own. They may say that it is because their feelings were hurt, they think a wrong is not being corrected, or they cannot accept some teaching. How reasonable is their course? While it is true that each Christian should have a personal relationship with God, we cannot deny that he is using a worldwide congregation, as he did in the apostles’ day. Furthermore, Jehovah used and blessed local congregations in the first century, arranging for qualified elders and ministerial servants to benefit the congregations. That is also true today." Watchtower 2007.
Originally posted by galveston75Thanks. these copy/paste dumps emphasise the control that the JW corporation has over you. A real victim of the cult that you are enslaved to speaks out in the forum and what do you do, completely ignore the poor fellow in line with the nasty doctrine you proport to be defending.
"Suppose that a person finds a Scriptural teaching hard to understand and accept. He may have done research in the Bible and in publications available through the congregation and sought help from mature fellow Christians, even elders. Still, he has a hard time grasping or accepting the point. What can he do? Something similar developed about a year befo ...[text shortened]... d ministerial servants to benefit the congregations. That is also true today." Watchtower 2007.
Brilliant.
Originally quoted by galveston75What if it isn't a case of having "a hard time grasping or accepting the point" but is instead a case of him or her being right and the elders being wrong? Is there a mechanism for changing or renewing the corporate line ~ as opposed to defending/preserving the corporate line by ostracising the person with the new and better interpretation?
Suppose that a person finds a Scriptural teaching hard to understand and accept. He may have done research in the Bible and in publications available through the congregation and sought help from mature fellow Christians, even elders. Still, he has a hard time grasping or accepting the point. What can he do?
Originally posted by divegeester“Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks,” said Jesus Christ. (Mt 12:34) Consequently, what one usually talks about is an index of that on which his heart is set. The Scriptures urge us to safeguard the heart and to think on and speak of the things that are true, serious, righteous, chaste, lovable, well spoken of, virtuous, and praiseworthy. (Pr 4:23; Php 4:8) Jesus Christ said, “It is what proceeds out of his mouth that defiles a man,” and he went on to name “wicked reasonings” and “false testimonies” among the things that proceed from the mouth but actually are out of the heart.—Mt 15:11, 19. "it" book. Pages 989-991
Thanks. these copy/paste dumps emphasise the control that the JW corporation has over you. A real victim of the cult that you are enslaved to speaks out in the forum and what do you do, completely ignore the poor fellow in line with the nasty doctrine you proport to be defending.
Brilliant.
Originally posted by FMFOne could write to the WTS.
What if it isn't a case of having "a hard time grasping or accepting the point" but is instead a case of him or her being right and the elders being wrong? Is there a mechanism for changing or renewing the corporate line ~ as opposed to defending/preserving the corporate line by ostracising the person with the new and better interpretation?
Originally posted by FMFWhat seems to be being missed here is that our two warm and charming JWs robbie carrobie and Galveston75 have said repeatedly, albeit not consistently, that taking blood in a transfusion is "matter of personal conscience". Clearly it isn't or beauroberts would not have been disfellowshipped.
What if it isn't a case of having "a hard time grasping or accepting the point" but is instead a case of him or her being right and the elders being wrong? Is there a mechanism for changing or renewing the corporate line ~ as opposed to defending/preserving the corporate line by ostracising the person with the new and better interpretation?
Originally posted by galveston75What if the advocacy of the bible interpretation that differs from or contradicts your corporation's current policy/interpretation isn't wrongdoing or isn't unclean or doesn't warrant repentance in your God figure's eyes?
Removing an unrepentant wrongdoer from the congregation upholds God’s standards and preserves the congregation’s spiritual cleanness. It may also bring the unrepentant one to his senses.
Originally posted by galveston75Out of my mouth speaks human compassion for a man and his wife (and his children) who in their time of greatest need have been treated abominably by the leaders in their local church; ostracised and abandoned when they needed support, comfort and spiritual fortitude from their friends. So please don't throw scripture at me Galveston75, when you support this abhorrent behaviour, and for what? Taking a blood transfusion. Your organisation disgusts me.
“Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks,” said Jesus Christ. (Mt 12:34) Consequently, what one usually talks about is an index of that on which his heart is set. The Scriptures urge us to safeguard the heart and to think on and speak of the things that are true, serious, righteous, chaste, lovable, well spoken of, virtuous, and praiseworthy. ...[text shortened]... roceed from the mouth but actually are out of the heart.—Mt 15:11, 19. "it" book. Pages 989-991
Originally quoted by galveston75What if the disagreement over interpretation is not "wicked" or "false" and does not "defile" anyone but is instead well-reasoned, offered in good faith and has merit?
It is what proceeds out of his mouth that defiles a man,” and he went on to name “wicked reasonings” and “false testimonies” among the things that proceed from the mouth but actually are out of the heart.
The subject here is blood transfusions. There is no interpretation on this as the bible says more then once to "abstain from blood."
If one feels they need to ignor this command, that is their decision. But one has to answer to the congregations elder arrangement and depending on the circumstances and the attitude of ones involved, it is the command from God to remove anyone who could be a danger to the spiritual cleaness of the congregation.
It is sad that many do not have the faith in Gods laws and the wisdom behind them and in the promise of a resurrection in the future.
If Adam and Eve would have listended to God in the Garden of Eden then all the problems of the world would not exist now.
Listen and obey God's LAWS. Abstain from blood!!
Goodnight......
Originally posted by divegeesterI know it disgust you. Only proves to me that ones like you show this is God's organization which the Bible confirms would be "hated by all the nations".
Out of my mouth speaks human compassion for a man and his wife (and his children) who in their time of greatest need have been treated abominably by the leaders in their local church; ostracised and abandoned when they needed support, comfort and spiritual fortitude from their friends. So please don't throw scripture at me Galveston75, when you support t ...[text shortened]... is abhorrent behaviour, and for what? Taking a blood transfusion. Your organisation disgusts me.
Originally posted by galveston75But you've never made the case here in this forum. You have used the Bible to show that consumption of animal blood and animal sacrifice and blood rituals were not permitted, but you have never been able to show how the Bible can be used to forbid live saving blood transfusions.
The subject here is blood transfusions. There is no interpretation on this as the bible says more then once to "abstain from blood." If one feels they need to ignor this command, that is their decision.