top of page
Search

Massive Secret Document on Disfellowshiping Exposed



This is a massive new document that was leaked accidentally recently from the ongoing court case in Norway and it can only be described as Watchtower's attempt to explain disfellowshipping and its positive impact over someone's life. It is a massive 837 pages dossier meant for counteracting arguments with officials and media to defend the disfellowshipping arrangement and was accidentally found in the case-file in Norway and leaked online.

I'm only covering the introduction to this document written by the Watchtower lawyers. Please feel free to read the whole document in the link I provide at the end of this article if you have the time.

Jehovah’s Witnesses respect the right of every individual to decide what religious beliefs he or she may have, if any. Similarly, each individual has a right to change his religion should he or she decide to do so. We do not force our beliefs on anyone. The decision to be baptized as one ofJehovah’s Witnesses is entirely voluntary, conditional on the person meeting basic scriptural requirements. We believe that people should be free to acquire knowledge so that they may make an informed choice. That is why Jehovah’s Witnesses do not practice infant baptism and confer baptism only to a mature individual who has the capacity to understand his religious commitment.

See how carefully crafted these opening comments are. They avoid the use of the word ADULT that has age specific legal restrictions, and instead they use the word MATURE which is a vague term that can be defined accordingly when the need arises in a court case. So for the real world a mature individual would be an adult over the age of 18 but by Watchtower standards it can be as young as a 5 years old, which is the age of a "mature individual" that was recently baptized in the Philipines. Of course we all know the truth that this is an outright lie because they encourage young children to get baptized. In fact, if you are a teenager and still not baptized you are viewed as problematic and not worth associating with or eligible for responsibilities in the congregation.


A person who qualifies for baptism as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses is made fully aware that violating certain Biblical standards without repentance may, in some cases, result in their expulsion (disfellowshipping) or disassociation. Anyone who does not agree with these teachings can simply choose not to be one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.Jehovah’s Witnesses do not automatically disfellowship someone who breaks the Bible’s moral standards. However, a baptized Witness who makes a practice of doing so and is unwilling to change will be disfellowshipped. This practice is based on Bible principles. All Jehovah’s Witnesses agree to live by the Bible’s moral standards when they make a conscious decision to get baptized.When a person is disfellowshipped or chooses to disassociate himself, the elders will make a brief announcement at a religious service informing the congregation that “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” Nothing else is said. Individual congregants will then decide, based on their personal religious conscience, whether to limit or cease their contact with the person, applying the principles contained in the Bible at 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 and 2 John 1:9-11.

This is another lie, next time a person gets disfellowshipped go up to the elders and tell them that according to my personal religious conscience I have to decided to continue associating with that disfellowshipped person, see how long you last as a Witness in good standing doing that.Of course we know the truth that the moment one gets disfellowshipped or disassociated this is a silent indication that no one should talk to them and penalties are imposed by the elders to anyone who decides to brake this edict.


Although most who were formerly Jehovah’s Witnesses are individuals who have been disfellowshipped, some decided to disassociate themselves (resign) of their own will. Jehovah’s Witnesses respect the right of each individual to make this decision to break with their former beliefs and associates.

How do you respect someone's right to break away from their faith when you disown them for doing so and also instruct everyone in the congregation to do the same, how does that imply respect in any way?


In like manner, disfellowshipped and disassociated persons should understand that their former fellow believers may choose to adjust or cease their contact with them based on their conscience.It is inaccurate to depict the practice of limiting contact with an expelled or disassociated person as unique to Jehovah’s Witnesses. Changes in relationships based on choices that individuals make are commonplace in society.

This is false reasoning , because other religions practise severe forms of excommunication like Islam that doesn't make it right.By the way most Christians denominations have a form of excommunication which is nowhere near the nasty and vindictive form of excommunication Jehovah's Witnesses practise.


For example, a husband might cheat on his wife and move in with another person. As a result, the betrayed wife might decide to have nothing more to do with him. His children and other family members might also decide to have nothing more to do with him. Could the unrepentant husband expect to have the same relationship with his wife and family that existed before his infidelity? Obviously not. The same phenomenon exists in many other spheres, for instance, when someone changes his political affiliation, or ideology.

What a dreadful comparison they equate infidelity with differences in religious or political views and for any governmental official that reads that and doesn't wake up and act against the cult mind nature of such statements is nothing more than complicity to their wickedness. Do you have a friend that shares different views in religion or politics? How would they feel if you shunned them because they don't agree with you? Would they think that you are totally unreasonable and crazy if you did that? So why is the Watchtower using this argument to explain their practice of disfellowshipping?


It is important to note, though, that within the family arrangement, while the “religious ties [the disfellowshipped or disassociated person] had with his family change … blood ties remain. The marriage relationship and normal familyaffections and dealings continue.”In other words, normal family affection and association continues.

This is another lie,you know and I know that they speak with both sides of their mouth ,they tell the world on their official website that family ties remain BUT on the Watchtower Study articles they always harping on about how you should make the disfellowshipped family members life as miserable as possible so they give up and return to Jehovah.I remember when I disassociated one of the local elders was telling my wife to using a legal term "spiritual endangerment " as an excuse to divorce me. They speak with both sides of their mouth.The soft side for the public and governments and the evil nasty side for their members.


Disfellowshipped and disassociated individuals are free to attend our religious services, share in singing religious songs during those services, receive our religious publications, and receive spiritual assistance from congregation elders. The person is not abandoned or considered an apostate as some claim. They are welcomed and encouraged to return to the congregation at any time. Instead, if a person demonstrates repentance, he may request to be reinstated as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. This is based on the Witnesses’ understanding of 2 Corinthians 2:6-8, which commands congregants to “kindly forgive and comfort” the expelled person to “confirm [their] love” for him.A clear distinction is to be made when a person becomes inactive in the religious community without formally disassociating herself. Those who stop being actively involved in worship may be suffering from discouragement. Rather than distancing themselves from such ones, Jehovah’s Witnesses give them consolation and support.

Of course we know that to be a lie.I have disassociated for over 2 years now and not a single elder has called me or visited me for support because thats what they do they brand you as an apostate and tell everyone in the congregation to stop talking to you.


The experience of people who have been disfellowshipped also shows that the practice has benefits. As noted on page 4 of the brochure Jehovah’s Witnesses and Disfellowshipping, Jasmine and Matthew express gratitude for the disfellowshipping arrangement and credit it with helping them spiritually.A number of scholars have examined this religious practice of Jehovah’s Witnesses. One such scholar, Dr. Massimo Introvigne, founder and managing director of the Center for Studies on New Religions, wrote: “By defending the rights of their judicial committees to remain free from state interference when they decide whether a member should be disfellowshipped or otherwise, and their right to interpret the Bible in the sense that it mandates shunning those who had been disfellowshipped, the Jehovah’s Witnesses are, once again, defending the religious liberty of all, precisely in the area where today it is mostly under attack.”—The Journal of CESNUR, Vol. 5, No. 1, January–February 2021, pp. 54-81 (www.cesnur.org).

So apparently there are positive benefits in disfellowshipping as you well know from the hundreds of thousands of angry damaged ex jehovahs witnesses that had to go through this experience and for that they quote a scholar of shorts for whom I will dedicate a separate video soon, Dr. Massimo Introvigne, who has on previous occasion defended the right of Scientology to ostracise its own members, you know the cult that has made the headlines so many times for the cruel way they treat their members.


Courts have upheld the right to religious freedom in this area. The European Court of Human Rights ruled: “[The State] should accept the right of such communities to react, in accordance with their own rules and interests, to any dissident movements emerging within them that might pose a threat to their cohesion, image or unity. It is therefore not the task of the national authorities to act as the arbiter between religious communities and the various dissident factions that exist or may emerge within them.”—Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, Fernández Martínez v. Spain, 2014.Regarding Jehovah’s Witnesses’ religious practice of disfellowshipping, the High Court of England and Wales held: “[I]t is to be expected that a religious body which is guided by and which seeks to apply Scriptural principles will have the power to procure that in an appropriate case a sinner can be expelled. Among other things, this is sensible, if not essential, because someone who is unable or unwilling to abide by Scriptural principles not only does not properly belong as a member of such a body but also, unless removed, may have an undesirable influence on the faithful.”—Otuo v. Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain [2019] EWHC 1349 (QB) at par. 122.

LINK TO PDF DOCUMENT:





900 views0 comments

Comments


Post: Blog2_Post
bottom of page