Your Christian Identity

[YoursTrue]

Not all.

On top of this, Jesus was operating out of a Pharisee paradigm, thus what we read in the Gospel with his teachings are very much a part of Jewish "commentary".

Does that mean the Pharisees were right?

 

[YoursTrue]

Not all.

On top of this, Jesus was operating out of a Pharisee paradigm, thus what we read in the Gospel with his teachings are very much a part of Jewish "commentary".

Were all the Jews "operating out of a Pharisee paradigm"? Yes, he was coping with what was surrounding him, such as he did with the Samaritans.

 

[metis]

Jews were not and are not a monolithic group, especially the Pharisees.

 

[YoursTrue]

Jews were not and are not a monolithic group, especially the Pharisees.

God did certainly not approve of many beliefs or practices of the Jewish nation and of course if a person doesn't believe the Bible it would be hard to place the idea of, perhaps, the reason for the diaspora or overrun of the southern kingdom.

 

[YoursTrue]

Jews were not and are not a monolithic group, especially the Pharisees.

So do you think Jesus had a basis to contradict the pharisees or maybe you think it was just misrepresented in the Bible or not reported correctly? Or...maybe a person might teach and believe that Jesus was deluded.

 

[nPeace]

So you embrace the idea of relativism when it suits you?

No please.

No, there are some things which are universally considered psychologically and emotionally damaging. Abandoning your children for instance can scar them for life, leaving wounds which never fully heal. Abusing them as children when they are vulnerable and in your trust and care leave irreparable damage on them, and as has been shown time and again, creates another generation of child abusers themselves.

Yes please.

Shunning in extreme cases, has the same effect as a form of torture. This has been studied in various fields of psychology: Shunning - Wikipedia.

A key detrimental effect of some of the practices associated with shunning relate to their effect on relationships, especially family relationships. At its extremes, the practices may destroy marriages, break up families, and separate children and their parents. The effect of shunning can be very dramatic or even devastating on the shunned, as it can damage or destroy the shunned member's closest familial, spousal, social, emotional, and economic bonds.

Shunning contains aspects of what is known as relational aggression in psychological literature. When used by church members and member-spouse parents against excommunicant parents it contains elements of what psychologists call parental alienation. Extreme shunning may cause traumas to the shunned (and to their dependents) similar to what is studied in the psychology of torture.​

Now I ask you, what on earth is Christlike in actions towards others that has effects like that? Did Jesus ever treat other human beings like that? Then why would you if you claim to be a follower of Jesus?

Shunning in extreme cases?
Please tell me the difference between an extreme case of shunning, and a non-extreme case of shunning, so I know what you are referring to.

Read the available literature that has been researched extensively on it. The link to the Wiki article on it links several external references to it. But if you just want to dismiss the experts because you have a different idea you think came from scripture, then I'd say that you're not being honest. If you refuse to listen to the experts, then you can pretty much justify anything you want to do, like owning other human beings because you can find they that did in the Bible too.

I'm trying to understand you.
So I want you to stick to a point and discuss that. Using the words abuse and torture, is not helpful, since you can apply those words to anything... like the example I gave.
A child can feel tortured by parents' loving correction.

Here's another one of countless references you can read, should you be sincere in wanting to understand the truth about how damaging this is, and how is it considered a form of abuse, and not discipline. A form of abuse, a social death penalty: The practice of shunning and its consequences - Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières

The psychological consequences of being shunned can best be explained as a social death penalty. The immediate effects are isolation from family and the community. There is an attempt to make sense of why this is happening to them. How could the family have rejected them? The person then starts to attack their sense of self, which is also why shunning is often perceived as the death of personhood. This leads to feelings of helplessness, hopelessness and worthlessness, depression, low self-esteem, suicidal ideations and self-harming behaviours.

Also, researchers in psychology have observed a high prevalence of PTSD amongst people who have been shunned. To get a more clear idea of the pain that shunning can cause, researchers have observed that even being a bystander to shunning can have dire psychological consequences. The psychological consequences of being shunned are long. Although, externally there may not be any wounds, internally the wounds are deep and long-lasting.

Working therapeutically with people who have been shunned is very challenging. All of the negative beliefs that they hold about themselves are often, in the eyes of the victim, reinforced by the act of being shunned. Also, individuals who have been shunned live with psychological agony, often for the rest of their life. In the long term, shunning becomes a long-term psychological torture.
​

All emphasis mine. This is just the tip of the iceberg. There is a ton of information out there on this. You just have to be willing to look at it.

If you believe that the Bible is wrong, you are not alone, but have many supporters.
You however need to be able to demonstrate the superiority of man's opinions on the subject.

So, you need to demonstrate that 1) a member of a group who agrees to something, should be excused from what they agree to, because it involves them;
What Jehovah expects of us is reasonable and is a protection for us. For example, we all want to live among peaceful, decent, and honest people, and that is what we experience among our spiritual brothers and sisters. Why are they this way? Because they dedicated themselves to Jehovah and promised to live by what he says in the Bible.
2) that the scriptural direction given in the congregation is wrong, and should not be followed.

Jesus said that “wisdom is proved righteous by its results.” Matthew 11:19

Why it is a wise decision to disfellowship a person if they do not repent:
Disfellowshipping

1. protects Jehovah’s name from dishonor
2. keeps the Christian congregation clean
3. may help the sinner realize he is wrong

So, please tell me if obeying these scriptures is wrong. 1 Corinthians 5:11; 2 John 10, 11

That is not a fact that shunning is not abusive. Abuse is not the same thing as discipline. Any spouse-beating, child-abusing parent seizes up that same verse to vindicate their mistreatment of others as biblical, and you should know that. "This is for you own good, because you need to learn that according to God, the man is supposed to be the head of the household!," the wife-beater says to his wife whom he just blackened both her eyes and cracked her jaw with his fists!

You might as well say any rapist uses the Bible to condone rape.
These comparison are meaningless. They do nothing for conversation, other than serve as a biased argument against something someone does not agree with.
So please can you stick to what we are discussing, and avoid throwing in unrelated comparisons.

It's not discipline to beat your wife or your children. It's not discipline to shun them. It's abuse. It causes them psychological and emotional damage that will scar them for life. That is NOT an act of Love! It is an act of aggression and violence. That verse cannot be used to justify abuse. Ask any judge who throws the child-beating parent into jail when they quote that verse in court to defend themselves at trial.

It's not abuse.
You have yet to demonstrate that it is.
Perhaps you will do so, by answering the questions above.

You can try to use scripture to defend anything you want, like owning other human beings, but is that the Spirit of Love you find in the Jesus of scripture? Does he ever act that way, or teach others to do that?

The loving Jesus of the Bible said this...

• (Matthew 15:7-9) 7 You hypocrites, Isaiah aptly prophesied about you when he said: 8 ‘This people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far removed from me. 9 It is in vain that they keep worshipping me, for they teach commands of men as doctrines.’”
• (Matthew 22:18) . . .“Why do you put me to the test, hypocrites?
• (Matthew 23:24) . . .Blind guides. . .

I can hear the man who stuck his wife on the jaw when she talked back to him in an argument. "You just needed a 'jolt to come to your senses' [as you put it], wife!". BS. Abuse is never Christian. Jesus never beats his sheep, kicks, them, threatens them, makes them feel unloved and unwanted, never casts them out into the street and tells them they are no longer his children in order to "discipline" them. That isn't Christian. It's Satanic. It's abusive.

These unrelated comparisons you are throwing in there in an effort to strengthen your argument, are only showing up your argument for what it is - weak.

The Bible does not condone abuse in any form -
(Ephesians 5:23-30) 23. . .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. 25 Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation and gave himself up for it, 26 in order that he might sanctify it, cleansing it with the bath of water by means of the word, 27 so that he might present the congregation to himself in its splendor, without a spot or a wrinkle or any of such things, but holy and without blemish. 28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. A man who loves his wife loves himself, 29 for no man ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cherishes it, just as the Christ does the congregation, 30 because we are members of his body.

You would not need this unrelated foreign material, if you felt you had a reasonable argument.

 

[nPeace]

What do you consider "gross sin"? Doubting their beliefs? Having a different opinion about God?

No. Did you read the scriptures I posted?
A person who agrees to live by Bible standards, makes that agreement on their own accord.
Doubting beliefs and having a different opinion about God, doesn't factor in here.
However, if a person did change their mind about their vow to God, why sin and be unrepentant? Why not just leave the congregation?
If the person wants to stick around, what would be the purpose - to corrupt the congregation; influence others; ...?

So the church is more interested in its image to others, than it is about the psychological and emotional wellbeing of human beings? How is that being like Jesus? Is that how Jesus acted, narcissistically worried about protecting his self-image to others at all costs?

Jesus is more interested in his father's name, than any of us are.
Here, look.
(Matthew 21:12) Jesus entered the temple and threw out all those selling and buying in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.

(Mark 11:15-16) 15 They now came to Jerusalem. There he entered the temple and started to throw out those selling and buying in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves, 16 and he would not let anyone carry a utensil through the temple.

(Luke 19:45) Then he entered the temple and started to throw out those who were selling,

(John 2:14-16) 14 He found in the temple those selling cattle and sheep and doves, and the money brokers in their seats. 15 So after making a whip of ropes, he drove all those with the sheep and cattle out of the temple, and he poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables. 16 And he said to those selling the doves: “Take these things away from here! Stop making the house of my Father a house of commerce!”

Was Jesus being unreasonable, abusive... "more interested in its image to others, than it is about the psychological and emotional wellbeing of human beings?"

Wow. To cut them off from God, huh? Wow. And you think the Catholics are evil? Wow. Just wow.

Can you cut anyone off from God?
I'm sorry, but JWs don't believe they have the ability to cut anyone off from God.
From the congregation? Yes. The unrepentant individual does that, by unrepentantly violating the very commands the agreed to - vowed to live by... which no one forced them to do.
They also knew the consequences of unrepentant wrongdoing... and agreed to that too.

How is any of that anything like the Jesus of scripture? Is this how your own parents treated you growing up? Cutting you off from their love if you failed to please them?? You don't have to answer that, but just think long and hard about that one. That is not what the Love of God is like, I can guarantee you that.

(Luke 19:45-46) 45 Then he entered the temple and started to throw out those who were selling, 46 saying to them: “It is written, ‘My house will be a house of prayer,’ but you have made it a cave of robbers.”

Jesus was firm when necessary.
He understood that love is not telling people what they want to hear, or allowing them to do whatever they want to.
We imitate him. Can't say the same for some people.

No. It is based upon the tons of research that has been done in the various fields of psychology that show how it is universally damaging to the human psyche. Unless you just wish to disregard the sciences and claim you know better because you're a "bible expert", or some other nonsense.

You are free to follow what you believe in.
I believe the scriptures are God's word. I follow that, and live by those standards.
So do all of JWs.
When one of JWs decides to break his or her vow to live by those standards, they are removed from the congregation. They know this is the scriptural direction.
(1 Corinthians 5:12-13) 12 For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do you not judge those inside, 13 while God judges those outside? “Remove the wicked person from among yourselves.”

They also knew what to expect.
(1 Corinthians 5:11) 11 But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.
(2 John 1:10-11) 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. 11 For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.

You haven't answered my question though.
Is obeying these scriptures un-Christian?

No. It doesn't mean that. I asked you specifically how did Jesus treat the pagans and tax collectors. And you did not answer me. You dodged over to that verse in 2 Thes, instead of answering.

Windwalker said: ↑
Bonus question. When the Bible says we should treat those who refuse to listen to the church as "pagans and tax collectors", what specifically does that mean to you? Shunning them? Calling them unclean and hiding your righteous face from them? Please explain.

I'm sorry, you should have said, "What does that mean to Windwalker? Please explain how Windwalker wants it to be", so that I would understand you didn't mean what you asked.
I answered what you wrote. Sorry, I couldn't read your mind.

I'll answer it for you. He treated them with love and compassion. He NEVER shunned them. Ever. All you need to do is read the gospels, and you will never see him disowning them. So when Jesus says you should treat them as "pagans and tax-collectors", he is saying you should treat them with compassion and love, not shunning them, and saying "You are unworthy of me! I shall not acknowledge your existence".

You answered for yourself. Not me. You cannot answer for anyone, but yourself.
I don't know where you got that answer from, but if I were a gambling man, I could bet my house you can't provide a single scripture that supports your idea.
In fact, you haven't.

The scriptures do not support anything you said here, at all.

(Luke 13:24-28) 24 “Exert yourselves vigorously to get in through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will seek to get in but will not be able. 25 When the householder gets up and locks the door, you will stand outside knocking at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us.’ But in answer he will say to you: ‘I do not know where you are from.’ 26 Then you will start saying, ‘We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our main streets.’ 27 But he will say to you, ‘I do not know where you are from. Get away from me, all you workers of unrighteousness!’ 28 There is where your weeping and the gnashing of your teeth will be. . .

(Matthew 7:21-23) 21 “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will. 22 Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’

(Matthew 10:32-39) 32 “Everyone, then, who acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father who is in the heavens. 33 But whoever disowns me before men, I will also disown him before my Father who is in the heavens. 34 Do not think I came to bring peace to the earth; I came to bring, not peace, but a sword. 35 For I came to cause division, with a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 Indeed, a man’s enemies will be those of his own household. 37 Whoever has greater affection for father or mother than for me is not worthy of me; and whoever has greater affection for son or daughter than for me is not worthy of me. 38 And whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his soul will lose it, and whoever loses his soul for my sake will find it.

Only those who stick with Jesus, who remain loyal, are those he does not deny.
(2 Timothy 2:12) if we go on enduring, we will also rule together as kings; if we deny, he will also deny us;

So yes. Jesus does shun persons who turn away from / leave / abandon / reject his teachings.
JWs are under Christ's direction. They are following his arrangement. Hence, why unrepentant ones are removed from the congregation. John 8:31-32

Why talk about Jesus if you are not in favor of accepting and obeying the scriptures though.
I don't understand. Can you please explain?

We'll see if you are listening. And then I'll help you understand once you show a willingness to hear.

If there is one thing I do very well, it's listen.
I am good at that.

 

[Muffled]

It's actually a scriptural command. 1 Corinthians 5:11; 2 John 1:10, which was communicated, by letter, to the Christian congregations.

I once visited a person who was out of communion but I was not aware of it until he told me. He had hooked his girlfriend on drugs and the church had a problem with that. I believe my visit may have helped him and I did find him at church years later when I was visiting from out of state.