INTRODUCTION
Paul said that a person who is wicked must be removed from the congregation. And regarding disfellowshipping, the text of the Bible says:
No person who has stopped practicing wicked actions, who says regrets his actions and has asked Jehovah to forgive him, regardless of how serious the actions are and how long he has practiced them, should be disfellowshipped.
The elders have no biblical reason to ask him questions, so they can be convinced that he regrets his actions or ask him to prove that he has repended his actions. The only actions that count is that he has stopped practicing wicked actions.
Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians chapters 5 and 6 show that only those who at the moment practice one of the 11 disfellowshipping actions mentioned in the Bible should be disfellowshipped.
Because the Scriptural rules mentioned above have been ignored by the members of the Governing Body, during the 21st century, more than 1.5 million Witnesses have been disfellowshipped. The result is the ruined lives of tens of thousands of individuals and their families. If the Scriptural laws and principles had been followed, more than 90% of those who have been disfellowshipped should not have been disfellowshipped.
From a biblical point of view, disfellowshipping is a “mechanical” procedure and not a procedure that should be based on considerations and evaluations by the elders. The only question the elders should ask is whether the brother or sister at this moment is practicing one of the 11 disfellowshipping actions mentioned in the Bible. If the answer is yes, the person must be disfellowshipped; if the answer is no, the person must not be disfellowshipped. The elders have no right to ask about the motive of the person and consider his mindset. Only the “mechanical” question of whether he or she at the moment has stopped practicing wickedness and has asked Jehovah forgive him or her is relevant.
But is not remorse and repentance important? Absolutely! But this is something between God and the sinner and not between the elders and the sinner because only God can forgive sins. And the elders cannot read the minds of others.
A detailed discussion of the different sides of disfellowshipping is found in the chapters entitled, “The Disfellowshipping Offenses” and “The True Regime of Disfellowshipping” in my book, My Beloved Religion — And The Governing Body. This article discusses the principal points of the disfellowshipping procedure.
BIBLICAL REASONS FOR DISFELLOWSHIPPING
I would like to stress the word “biblical” in the heading. And I make two important quotes from The Watchtower to show the importance of this word.
The Watchtower of October 1, 1972, page 589 (above) and August 1, 1974, page 472 (below) say:
It would therefore be wrong in such matters to try to extract from someone else, from a body of elders or from the governing body of the Christian congregation, some rule or regulation that ‘draws the line’ on matters. Where God’s Word does not itself ‘draw the line,’ no human has the right to add to that Word by doing so.
Holding to the Scriptures, neither minimizing what they say nor reading into them something they do not say, will enable us to keep a balanced view toward disfellowshipped ones.
These two maxims or basic principles can be applied to all sides of Christian living. No one has the right to draw the line and make laws and rules for other Christians — only laws and rules directly based on the Bible are valid.
The Watchtower of August 1, 1974, had two articles about disfellowshipping with several good points. The last quotation is from this magazine, and the point is that our understanding of disfellowshipping must solely be based on the text of the Bible and not on the viewpoints of humans. Any rule or law connected with disfellowshipping that is not based on the Bible must be rejected.
There are 11 disfellowshipping offenses that are mentioned in the Bible, as seen in Table 1.1:
Table 1.1 List of the eleven disfellowshipping offenses in the Christian Greek Scriptures
pornos | A man or woman who practices sexual immorality. (1 Cor. 6:9) |
eidōlolatrēs | One who participates in idol worship. (1 Cor. 6:9) |
kleptēs | A thief. (1 Cor. 6:10) |
pleonektēs | An Exploiter (Wrongly written in the Shepherd book as “Greed,” 1 Cor. 6:10). |
methysos | A drunkard. (1 Cor. 6:10) |
loidoros | A reviler, an abusive person. (1 Cor. 6:10) |
harpax | A rapacious person, a robber. (1 Cor. 6:10) |
anatrepō | Spreading false teachings. (2 Tim. 2:18; 1 Tim 1:20) |
hairesis | Making or promoting a sect. (Titus 3:10) |
planos | Joining another religious organizations. (2 John 7, 10) |
sfazō | Manslaughter — murder. (1 John 3:12) |
In addition to the 11 disfellowshipping offenses mentioned in Table 1.1, the members of the Governing Body have created 37 other disfellowshipping offenses that are not mentioned in the Bible. Because of this, they have violated the two principles from the Watchtowers quoted above. They have added to the Word of God by drawing the line where God’s Word does not draw the line, and they have read into the text of the Bible something that is not there.
In order to show without any shadow of a doubt how the members of the Governing Body have ignored the Bible and have invented unbiblical disfellowshipping offenses, I list five of these that are mentioned the Shepherd-book:
- The use of tobacco.
- Viewing some forms of pornography that the members of the Governing Body have defined, but not other forms of pornography.
- Immoral conversations over telephone or the Internet.
- Oral and anal copulation inside marriage.
- Being employed in a gambling enterprise.
Regardless of how we view the mentioned actions, it is clear that they are not mentioned in the Bible. Therefore, the members of the Governing Body are adding something to the Bible when they list these and the other 32 actions as disfellowshipping offenses.
THE NATURE OF THE 11 DISFELLOWSHIPPING ACTIONS
Seven of the 11 disfellowshipping actions are mentioned in 1 Corinthians chapter 6, and it is very important to note that these are expressed as nouns and not as verbs. Verbs show what people do, and nouns show what people are. And according to the words of Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10, persons should be disfellowshipped for what they are and not for what they do.
In order to illustrate the difference, I quote 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10 (above), 6:15, 16 (middle) and 10:8 (below):
9 What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators (pornos), nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards (methysos), nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom.
15 Do YOU not know that YOUR bodies are members of Christ? Shall I, then, take the members of the Christ away and make them members of a harlot (pornē) ? Never may that happen! 16 What! Do YOU not know that he who is joined to a harlot (pornē) is one body? For, “The two,” says he, “will be one flesh.”
8 Neither let us practice fornication (porneuō), as some of them committed fornication (porneuō), only to fall, twenty-three thousand [of them] in one day.
The first quotation shows disfellowshipping offenses mentioned by Paul. And I used the Greek word pornos (“fornicator”) as an example. The second quotation uses the pornē (“harlot”), which is the feminine word corresponding to the masculine pornos.
The noun pornē is defined as “prostitute” (UBS lexicon) “A woman who practices sexual immorality as a profession — ‘prostitute.’” (Louw and Nida) The word pornos is defined as “a man who practices sexual immorality.” (UBS lexicon).
In 1 Corinthians 10:8, Paul refers to what happened according to Numbers 25:1-9 in the area called Shittim on the plains of Moab. Israelite men had sexual relations with women from Moab, and these women led the men to worship the idols of Moab. Paul uses the verb porneuō to describe these actions. The women who enticed the Israelite men were they prostitutes (pornē)? The verb porneuō is Greek present, which means that the women and the men practiced unlawful sexual intercourse. But this practice occurred during the short stay of Israel on the plains of Moab. Therefore, these women could not be termed as pornē, even though they had sexual intercourse with the men several times. My point here is that to be a prostitute (pornē), a woman has to be permeated by unlawful sexual intercourse, a woman who continues to practice unlawful sexual intercourse, a woman whose profession is sexual immorality.
My point here is that to be a prostitute, a woman has to be permeated by unlawful sexual intercourse, a woman who continues to practice unlawful sexual intercourse, a prostitute.
In 1. Corinthians 6:9, the masculine form pornos describes persons who deserve to be disfellowshipped. When we realize that the feminine form pornē refers to women who are permeated by unlawful sexual intercourse, persons who are prostitutes, then we must draw the conclusion that the word pornos refers to persons who are permeated by unlawful sexual intercourse, who practice unlawful sexual intercourse.
This parallels the Greek word methysos (“drunkard”) in 1 Corinthians 6:10. A drunkard is not a person who becomes intoxicated one or two times or even ten times. But a drunkard is a person who is permeated by intoxication, a person who continually practices intoxication. In a similar way, a pornos is not a man who has sexual intercourse with someone to which he is not married one time, two times, or five times — the Moabite women who several times practiced sexual immorality could not be termed as pornē (“prostitutes”). But a pornos is a person who is permeated but unlawful sexual intercourse, one who practices this continually.
In a similar way, all the six substantives and the substantivized adjective in 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10 refer to persons who are permeated by the actions described, who continually practice these actions.
The man in Corinth who lived together with his father’s wife was permeated by unlawful sexual intercourse. But at one time he stopped living with his father’s wife, and therefore he was reinstated into the congregation. He had been a pornos, but when he stopped living with the woman, he was no longer a pornos. This example, and the meaning of the nouns describing those deserving to be disfellowshipped, shows that any person who has been permeated by one of the actions mentioned in 1 Corinthians 6:9, 10 but who has stopped practicing the action should not be disfellowshipped.
The point is that a verbal noun (a noun constructed from a verb) shows the characteristics or the occupations of the person referred to by the verbal noun. For example, the Greek word alieus(“fisherman”) comes from the verb alieuō (“to fish”) and hiereus (“priest”) comes from the verb hierateuō (“to serve as a priest”). Both alieus and hiereus show the occupation of the persons, what the persons are and not what they do. The verbal noun pornē comes from the verb porneuō, and shows that the woman is a prostitute, one who practices unlawful sexual intercourse. The noun pornos also comes from the verb porneuō and shows that the person continually is practicing unlawful sexual intercourse.[1]
When the elders at the dictation of the Governing Body disfellowship persons who has done one the disfellowshipping offenses one time, a few times, or five times, but has stopped, then the action of the elders is a gross violation of the Holy Scriptures.
No brother or sister who have continued to violate God’s law, regardless of how serious the sins are and how long they have been practiced, but have stopped the practice, should be disfellowshipped. |
THE ROLE OF THE SINNER’S REPENTANCE
No passage in the Bible says that three elders shall consider serious sins that can lead to disfellowshipping and to decide to disfellowship the brother or not. But because Paul says that persons who are permeated by particular sins must be disfellowshipped from the congregation, elders must decide to do this. And a committee of three elders accords with the words of Paul.
But if the committee only has to make a “mechanical” decision — if a person has stopped his wrong practice and asked Jehovah to forgive him, he shall not be disfellowshipped, but if he has not stopped, he should be disfellowshipped — what about all the words in the Bible about repentance?
I will comment on Acts 3:19 (above), 8:22 (middle), and 26:20 (below):
19 “Repent, therefore, and turn around so as to get YOUR sins blotted out, that seasons of refreshing may come from the person of Jehovah.
22 Repent, therefore, of this badness of yours, and supplicate Jehovah that, if possible, the device of your heart may be forgiven you;
20 but both to those in Damascus first and to those in Jerusalem, and over all the country of Ju·deʹa, and to the nations I went bringing the message that they should repent and turn to God by doing works that befit repentance.
Peter showed in Acts 3:19 that one’s sins may be blotted out when one repents and turns around, and Paul said that persons who wanted to become Christians had to repent and do works showing that they had repented. According to Acts 8:22, Peter said to Simon, who wanted to buy God’s gifts for money, that he had to repent and pray to Jehovah for the forgiveness of sins.
None of these passages deal with Christians who have practiced serious sins but have stopped doing the sins, and who say they have repented and have prayed to Jehovah for his forgiveness. It is important to note that God is the only one who forgives sins, and the elders cannot forgive sins, except sins that are committed to them. The Greek word metanoeō (“to repent”) literally means “to change the mind.” When the elders ask the sinner many questions to find out whether he really has repented and changed his mind, and when they demand works to prove that he has repented and turned around, they are violating the Holy Scriptures.
By doing this, they are playing God because only God can read the minds and know that a person has repented and turned around. No passage in the Bible authorizes the elders to interrogate a sinner and ask him questions about his motives. And no passage in the Bible authorizes the elders to demand works from a sinner who says he has repented and asked God to forgive him to prove that. The only passage in the Christian Greek Scriptures discussing how the elders must deal with serious sins contradicts the way the members of the Governing Body have taught the elders to treat serious sins. We read James 5:13-15:
13 Is there anyone suffering evil among YOU? Let him carry on prayer. Is there anyone in good spirits? Let him sing psalms. 14 Is there anyone sick among YOU? Let him call the older men of the congregation to [him], and let them pray over him, greasing [him] with oil in the name of Jehovah. 15 And the prayer of faith will make the indisposed one well, and Jehovah will raise him up. Also, if he has committed sins, it will be forgiven him.
The situation is that a brother in the congregation is spiritual sick, and he seeks help from the elders. The Greek words in verses 19 and 20 show that the brother is guilty of serious sins.[2] What do the elders do? Do they ask several questions to find out his state of mind, whether he has repented? Or do they ask him for works proving that he has repented? No, they are greasing him with oil, which probably refers to their use of God’s word to comfort him, and they pray to Jehovah on his behalf. This shows that he has stopped with his sins. And on the basis of this prayer, Jehovah will forgive him and raise him up. The words of James are very far from what happens when a committee of elders interrogates a sinner.
The only issue for the elders to consider in order to decide whether a sinner can continue to be a part of the congregation is whether the person at the moment practices one of the 11 disfellowshipping offenses. According to Paul, a brother who is permeated by one of the 11 disfellowshipping offenses is wicked. But if he stops and Jehovah has forgiven him, he is no longer wicked.
The problem for the elders is that they cannot read the minds and hearts of the brothers. Therefore, the only way they can know if Jehovah has forgiven the sins of a brother who says he has stopped with his serious sins and asked Jehovah to forgive him is to let him remain in the congregation.
When he remains in the congregation, and his life shows that he has Jehovah’s blessing, the elders will know that Jehovah has forgiven his sins. If they disfellowship him, they cannot know if Jehovah has forgiven him, and they are risking to throw one of Jehovah’s strayed sheep into the darkness. (Matthew 18:12-14)
[1] The members of the Governing Body claim that the nouns porneia and pornos, and the verb porneuō refer to eight different sexually immoral actions. But the only meaning of the two nouns and the verb in the Christian Greek Scriptures is sexual intercourse with someone to whom one is not married. Therefore, I use the expression “unlawful sexual intercourse” and not “sexual immorality.”
[2] See my article, “Jehovah’s way of treating those who have committed serious sins.”
KEEPING THE CONGREGATION CLEAN
But what would be the effect on the congregation if the elders do not make sure that the sinner has repented and if they do not demand works to prove that he has repented? Could this not have a detrimental effect on the members of the congregation? The catchword of the Governing Body of “keeping the congregation clean” has been greatly overstated.
All the congregation members are imperfect, and often they sin against Jehovah and each other. But usually, that will not create problems in the congregation. And there is nothing in the Bible indicating that if the congregation shows mercy to a person who has practiced serious sins but who has stopped and who says that he has asked Jehovah to forgive him, they are doing something wrong. On the contrary, only if he remains in the congregation, the elders can see if Jehovah is blessing him.
But what if a person who for a long time has practiced serious sins but has stopped and repented and who says that he has asked Jehovah to forgive him again starts to do his serious sin? Even in such a situation the brother should not automatically be disfellowshipped because there are many factors that should be taken into consideration.
I will discuss the situation of a brother who have been on hard drugs but has worked hard to quit his bad habit. Most persons who become drug abusers have not planned it. It may happen when a young person in a moment of thoughtlessness accepts a drug, and later accepts another drug, and then becomes hooked. Or it may happen when a person for medical reasons is in need of painkillers, and this use leads to addiction.
It is extremely difficult to quit the addiction of hard drugs. There are four factors that can help a person to succeed quitting hard drugs:
- A medical doctor who is an expert of drug abuse supervises the drug addict and helps him medically and psychologically.
- Close family members support the one addicted, and they do not give up if there are relapses.
- Close friends support the one addicted in the same way as close family members do.
- The drug addict makes use of methadone, which do not cause intoxication but acts on the same receptors in the brain that heroin and other hard drugs acts. Methadone is a very good medicine for those who have quit their addiction.
The treatment of brothers and sisters who have been disfellowshipped because of drug addiction is absolutely the darkest side of the actions of the members of the Governing Body. The members of the Governing Body have denied drug abusers all the four points above that could have helped the abuser overcome his addiction.
Because of the invention of shunning and totally isolating disfellowshipped persons, which is a violation of the words of Paul, close family members and close friends have been, and still are forbidden to support disfellowshipped drug abusers. The use of a doctor for the drug abuser is not forbidden. But the treatment of a doctor will hardly succeed without the support of close family members and friends. From 1973, and for 40 years, until 2013, the members of the Governing Body had forbidden the use of methadone for drug addicts.
I was one of those who helped a disfellowshipped drug abuser to quit his habit, and he succeeded. But a year later he died from an overdose, and it is very likely that if he had been allowed to use methadone, he would not have died.
How should the elders view a situation where a brother had quitted his drug habit and asked Jehovah to forgive him, but after some time again has used hard drugs? Should he be disfellowshipped? And will the congregation be unclean if he is not disfellowshipped? Most elders are not qualified to treat sinners, and I expect that most elders would disfellowship a brother in the mentioned situation.
Experts who are trained in helping drug addicts to quit their habits, expect to see one or more relapses on the road to become clean. So, the issue for the elders should be: Is there hope? Is the addict determined to quit his habit, and is the relapse an incident he will overcome?
The situation of drug addicts is a special example. But it can illuminate any situation when a brother has practiced serious sins and has stopped, but then starts again. The elders should consider the circumstances for the relapse and ask: Is there hope? Jehovah God will never abandon his sinning earthly children as long as there is hope. And the elders should not abandon a sinner as long as there is hope. But unfortunately, the many rules the members of Governing body have invented in connection with the treatment of sinners, works in the opposite direction. Sinners are often treated in a heartless and cruel way contrary to Jehovah’s principles.
CONCLUSION
When I started as a circuit servant in 1965, I received the book, Questions in Connection with the Service of the Kingdom (1961). The book has 84 pages, and in addition to issues related to marriage, divorce, and polygamy, only seven different actions that might lead to disfellowshipping are listed. In 1977, there was a course for elders, and a book with 96 pages entitled “Pay Attention to Yourselves and to All the Flock” along with printed highlights from the course was published. In this book, I count 18 disfellowshipping offenses. In 2019, the book for elders “Shepherd the Flock of God” was released, and I count 46 disfellowshipping offenses.
Not only have the members of the Governing Body invented more and more disfellowshipping offenses. But the treatment of sinners has also become stricter and stricter, to the point where persons who have committed a sin one time can be disfellowshipped.
During the 21st century, more than 1.5 million Witnesses have been disfellowshipped. This has resulted in tens of thousands of ruined lives of the disfellowshipped ones and their families. If the instructions regarding disfellowshipping in the Bible had been followed, more than 90% of those who have been disfellowshipped should not have been disfellowshipped.