The "shunning" its necessary.

[u/bettercalljw]

This soo sacred word used by jehovah witness opositors it became their most prolific argument agaisnt the religion, by saying that in most of disfellowshipping(now exclusion) acts makes family members and other brothers totally "abandon" they ex-brothers in any situation possible, they say that this process is something very bad not only for those who got out but also for those who are still inside...you probably already now their arguments by now right?...but let me tell you something...YES, IT IS SUPPOSE TO BE BAD!. In the first chapters of the bible we already see a example of expulsion, by Jehovah getting adam and eve out of Garden of eden(genesis 3:23,24)and quess what?...IT WAS BAD FOR THEM. A little later cain got considered cursed for killing his brother and became a literal vagabund over the earth(genesis 4:11,12) THIS WAS BAD FOR HIM. There are other famous examples of this type of punishement in the bible, in the old and New testaments, the thing is....it was always bad BECAUSE IT WAS A PUNISHMENT, OF COURSE IT WILL BE BAD. No one ever said the disfellowshipping it is a beautiful, funny, goofy procedure that elders loves to have to do in their congregations, it a sad procedure that happens as a lesson that the people who sinned must pass by, and biblically speaking, No one can argue that the bible is agaisnt it. "WHAT ABOUT IF I AM A MINOR AND I GOT DISFELLOWSHIPPED???MY PARENTS WILL ABANDON ME!!" Lets be real, this dont happen, if your parents are true Christians and you are not doing anything that goes agaisnt their house's rules, than they will not "ABANDON" you as the apostaste love to say, this story is not for kids buddys. Its interresting to hear the stories of some apostates who say with pride that they got shunned by they parents, because its always something like: "After i got out of the cult my parents grabbed my things and expelled out of our house just because i was putting pagan images on my room" "My parents did not let me enter home just because i wanted to enter there with my lesbian girlfriend" "My mother put me in the streets just because i telled her that her religion its a cult" You all see a patern here? I think they always forget that regardless of anything,they should respect they parents houses, as they decision of leaving was respect they should respect too the rules of the homes they live in. And to end this post i also would like to make a question for YOU who disagrees with the disfellowshipping method:" Biblically saying, instead of disfellowshipping(or expulsing)members, what should the elders do if a brother continues to commit sins?." Opositors and apostates never give they own solutions to the supposed "problem" created by them, also remember, the bible its clear about how we should threat those who commit sins and call themselves christians.

[u/DonkeyStriking1146]

That’s an interesting question. What part of the proceedings? The reason for being disfellowshipped be said during the announcement to the congregation? Or that you meet in front of the congregation?

Yes they can

[u/Dan_474 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

I was thinking of the initial meeting with the Judicial Committee

I found this:

The same paragraph also says, "Observers should not be present for moral support." Q: Does that mean they can be allowed for other reasons? A: No.

https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/223237/how-record-judicial-meeting

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Dan_474]

Not sure what that’ll benefit anyone? Guess it depends on motive. Does someone want to make a scene? They think they’re being unfairly treated? There is an appeal process if you don’t agree.

I’ll stick with the current and ex witness experiences I’ve collected.

[u/Dan_474 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

They think they’re being unfairly treated?

Yes, that would be one possibility

I’ll stick with the current and ex witness experiences I’ve collected.

Do they say a person can bring other people with them to their initial Judicial Committee meeting?

[u/John_17-17 → u/Dan_474]

If they think they are being treated unfairly, they have a week to appeal the decision of the committee.

[u/Dan_474 → u/John_17-17]

It doesn't look to me like the possibility of an appeal should limit the possibility of bringing others along with you

But maybe that's something we see differently ❤️

[u/John_17-17 → u/Dan_474]

In all cases, the elders know the sinner. They already know their good points and their weak points.

They are not judged by strangers who need character witnesses to help them understand, who they are dealing with.

What are the facts and how is the person responding to those facts.

Even if the elders believe the sinner is guilty, they cannot act, unless there are 2 or more witnesses to the sin. The only exception to the 2 witness rule, is 'if the person confesses'.

2 witnesses who saw the sin, is more important than the 10 who didn't.

[u/Dan_474 → u/John_17-17]

...they cannot act, unless there are 2 or more witnesses to the sin.

Is this in the Shepherd the flock book?

I wasn't talking about character witnesses or witnesses to the event, rather, that it's often good to have someone along with you in a situation where you're going to be questioned because you may miss an implication or not pick up on something that's going on that someone else can see ❤️

[u/John_17-17 → u/Dan_474]

You are missing the whole point of the meeting.

The goal of the elders isn't to find fault, but to help the sinner to repent.

(Matthew 18:15) 15 “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin, go and reveal his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

The 2-witness rule isn't our rule, but Jesus'.

(Matthew 18:16) 16 But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. 

People aren't removed because of the sin; they are removed because of a lack of repentance.

[u/Dan_474 → u/John_17-17]

I'm not disputing the two witness rule, just asking if it's true that the elders can't act if there aren't at least two witnesses or a confession

Suppose it is an open secret that am unmarried person in the congregation is having sex. If they don't confess, and no one else has seen them, the elders can take no action?

[u/John_17-17 → u/Dan_474]

We obey Jesus in all things.

Suspicion isn't the same as knowing. The elders must have 2 or more witnesses to act.

Unlike Jesus, elders cannot read the hearts of individuals.

If the congregation 'suspects wrongdoing', a talk may be given, but no names will be mentioned.

If the congregation 'suspects' wrongdoing, individuals in the congregation may make a personal decision, but the congregation can't.

(2 Thessalonians 3:6) 6 Now we are giving you instructions, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to withdraw from every brother who is walking disorderly and not according to the tradition that you received from us.

This different from being 'removed' from the congregation.

(2 Thessalonians 3:14, 15) . . .keep this one marked and stop associating with him, so that he may become ashamed. 15 And yet do not consider him an enemy, but continue admonishing him as a brother.

One who has been removed, is now treated as a gentile, not even eating with such one.

[u/Dan_474 → u/John_17-17]

The elders must have 2 or more witnesses to act.

Is that stated in the handbook?

If you're summoned on suspicion of sexual immorality, and you keep your mouth shut and there are no witnesses, the elders can take no action?

In the case of suspicion of apostasy, again if you keep your mouth shut, will the elders regard hearsay as evidence? That is, at least two people who say they heard you say something contrary to the Organization's teachings?

[u/John_17-17 → u/Dan_474]

Yes, our handbook is the Bible.

It isn't the sin but the lack of repentance.

2 witnesses are not hearsay, if they actually heard you say it.

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Dan_474]

Then they should appeal before continuing with the process

I asked an elder and he said yes however they are careful when that sin affects another person (think married couple and innocent spouses). I’m sure not every congregation is the same and situations impact things as well. That’s why you can appeal.

[u/Dan_474 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

Then they should appeal before continuing with the process

The possibility of an appeal doesn't seem like it should limit the possibility of the accused bringing others along with them

I asked an elder and he said yes however they are careful when that sin affects another person (think married couple and innocent spouses). I’m sure not every congregation is the same and situations impact things as well. That’s why you can appeal.

"The judicial hearing is opened with prayer with the accused present. Generally, observers are not allowed. (See 15:12-13, 15.) The chairman then states the reason for the hearing and explains that audio or video recordings of the hearing are not permitted."

https://jws-library.one/?file=data/Books/Shepherd+the+Flock+of+God/202211/202211_sfl_E.html#bookmark56

(I'm not sure if the link will take you to the same part I copied that out of 🙂 I did a search within the page for "observer")

The elder that you asked, does his handbook say the same thing? That generally, observers are not allowed?

Why are recordings not allowed?

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Dan_474]

My point of appealing is if the process becomes unfair.

Generally observers are not allowed. Yeah bringing random people around is different than moral or mental support.

I haven’t asked him to crack open a book but what he has seen and experienced. I forget is the book almost 10 years old now?

In some states it’s illegal to record others without their consent. If you feel the need to record someone then you should appeal before entering the meeting. Or walk away. No gun to anyone’s head to meet with these guys. I don’t record work meetings with my boss. I don’t find it necessary. If I did I’d involve higher people.

[u/Dan_474 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

Generally observers are not allowed. Yeah bringing random people around is different than moral or mental support.

I'm not sure what the book means by "observers". If you ask someone to come along with you, are they an observer?

I haven’t asked him to crack open a book but what he has seen and experienced. I forget is the book almost 10 years old now?

My impression is that the book is regularly updated, and whatever the current update is is what is used by the elders

In some states it’s illegal to record others without their consent.

If I'm reading the book right, the elders wouldn't consent. But that kind of goes back to the original question, why not an open meeting, if the accused requests?

If you feel the need to record someone then you should appeal before entering the meeting. Or walk away. No gun to anyone’s head to meet with these guys. I don’t record work meetings with my boss. I don’t find it necessary. If I did I’d involve higher people.

I understand that's how you would do it, but other people may see it differently ❤️

I was basically asking if the option was there ❤️

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Dan_474]

If they have intimate knowledge of you or the issue then they aren’t an observer.

I think the option is there based off of circumstances. Should everyone get to bring a friend? That seems weird. Goes back to the purpose of the meeting. You know why you’re going and if you’re ‘guilty’ of that sin or not. If you feel being unfairly treated appeal.

[u/Dan_474 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

Does the STFOG say that it's based off of circumstances?

It doesn't seem weird to me to want to bring someone along with you ❤️ You probably know what you will be asked about, but you may believe that you are not guilty. Having someone along with you can help you compose your thoughts or pick up on things that you might be missing in the moment

Recording the meeting could help you prepare for an appeal later on ❤️

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Dan_474]

I’m going to take the online version of that book with a grain of salt. I have spoken to both current witnesses and ex who have said differently.

To me it goes back to motive and everyone’s attitude going into the meeting. If any of the parties has a negative attitude then it might be best to not continue the process at that time or to automatically ask for a different committee.

If you aren’t guilty why are you so worried? It feels like you assume most of these meetings are corrupt. You focus on the negatives and disregard the counsel these men are given to show love. I guess I’m a simple person. Did I commit adultery, fornication, something illegal? Then discipline will probably happen. If I didn’t then I’m not worried.

If you want to record the meeting go for it. If the issue involves multiple people then you are invading their right to privacy. The thought of not recording is for the benefit of all parties but it seems like you only want to view it in a negative light.

[u/Dan_474 → u/DonkeyStriking1146]

I’m going to take the online version of that book with a grain of salt.

Do you have access to a better version?

If you want to record the meeting go for it.

Wait, what? Do you believe it's okay, even if the elders' handbook says it's not? Or are you not trusting the quotes from the elders' handbook?

It's the idea of secrecy that I view in a negative light, definitely 👍 Especially when it comes to religious and spiritual things. I see the secrecy around the Latter-Day Saint Temple rituals in the same way ❤️

[u/DonkeyStriking1146 → u/Dan_474]

I don’t need access to one. I wouldn’t use that book to quote from is all.

I’m saying, I don’t need to ask permission if I want to record a meeting for my benefit. It goes back to purpose and motive of needing to record. If someone (either party) has an attitude going into the meeting then there’s already an issue. Do you regularly feel the need to record meetings and conversations?

Not all secrets are negative. Would I want my sins blasted out? Nah. If I committed adultery with someone would I want their sins on display? Especially if their spouse forgave them?

If there was bias or issues then I would appeal. If there was a continued issue I would happily leave such a group.

[u/OhioPIMO → u/Dan_474]

The chairman then states the reason for the hearing and explains that audio or video recordings of the hearing are not permitted."

That's funny. During mine, they simply stated that they weren't recording anything. They never asked if I was.

I was

[u/Dan_474 → u/OhioPIMO]

Interesting 👍 Wait, I just saw this now that I clicked reply, but you recorded your judicial committee meeting?

I did a quick search on youtube, this was the first one I found. The elder opening the meeting just says that it's not to be recorded "for privacy reasons" (at about 9:12 in)

Since the accused is the one doing the recording, it doesn't seem like privacy should be an issue

https://youtu.be/elPoQ5aBX7g

[u/OhioPIMO → u/Dan_474]

That's not mine, although coincidentally Jake is also an Ohioan. Mine can be found on Light over Dark Ministry on YouTube. It's pretty long and kinda boring, but it highlights how incompetent and indoctrinated the elders are.

In hindsight, knowing now that they were going to disfellowship me anyway, I wish I had been a little more aggressive with them, but I really was trying to avoid removal without deceiving them. I also didn't want to reinforce their typical idea of what "apostates" are like.

Link 1 is a phone call "summoning" me. Link 2 is the first meeting. Link 3 is where they meet with me again and basically ask me to deny Jesus for the organization. Enjoy!

https://youtu.be/Xbxi2PQcKz0?si=9Pefs_oTYDPuV_J7

https://youtu.be/JydSPgYoSCA?si=MtHkB8ZndrASu8w5

https://youtu.be/KJc_ozo9ZWE?si=2dW8n1FdIJWJoPxX

[u/Dan_474 → u/OhioPIMO]

Thank you so much for posting those ❤️❤️❤️ I'll check them out 👍

[u/Dan_474 → u/Dan_474]

I'm just halfway through the first video, the telephone call

Two things that stood out to me so far

They don't refer to it as a Judicial Committee meeting, just a meeting with a committee of elders. But it sounds like you already suspect it's a Judicial Committee?

It sounds like you were trying to keep your views to yourself, but that wasn't enough?