New Reduced Reinstatement Time Explained

As I have previously said while the jws are busy watching Jesus videos in this year's conventions the Watchtower has slipped in quietly2 Watchtower editions that of August 2024 that was originally uploaded and then removed for over a month for nefarious reasons and September 2024. Both Watchtowers are dealing with the Biblical basis of all the recent changes on disfellowshiping and I made quite few videos on this changes but today we the new reduced reinstatement time and how they use verses to explain it.

So it is the box in Study Article 33 and under the title "When Was the Man in Corinth Reinstated?" They make their Scriptural take on how long would someone remain disfellowshipped before they are considered for reinstatement because as you know in the past you would have to endure the walk of shame as you had to wait at least a year and attend every meeting before you were considered worthy of being reinstated. It was all about shame and control but now that they are losing their registration and funds in Europe it is all about love and handling the disfellowshipped ones with empathy and kindness. So here is the new Scriptural

basis for the change in this box in Article 33 of Watchtower August 2024. Now before we read it let's consider the background. There was a man in the congregation of ancient Corinth that was in a relationship with his mother...I know gross right? but that's ancient Greece for you. Back in those gentil times there was no arrangement for disfellowshiping, so when Paul found out, of course he freaked out and instructed the Corinthians to remove the man from the congregation, here is what happened next we read in the box, and pay attention to the wording:

It appears that the man discussed in 1 Corinthians chapter 5 was reinstated in a relatively short time after he was removed. What factors have led to this conclusion?Consider when Paul’s two letters to the Corinthians were written. He evidently wrote the first one during his third missionary tour, probably in early 55 C.E. It seems likely that he wrote the second letter later that same year, perhaps in late summer or early autumn of 55 C.E.Consider also that in Paul’s first letter, he had given instructions on contributing to a relief effort for Judean Christians who were suffering from famine. Because lives were at stake, Paul surely followed up quickly with his second letter, in which he asked the congregation to prepare their donations for delivery.​—1 Cor. 16:1; 2 Cor. 9:5.Paul had another good reason to write his second letter as soon as possible. He had received reports about the man’s repentance. In those days, it would have taken some time for a letter to be delivered. So Paul likely wrote again soon in order to direct the congregation on what to do next.With such factors in mind, it seems reasonable to conclude that Paul urged the congregation to reinstate the repentant wrongdoer just a short time​—perhaps only months—​after he had been removed from the congregation

Did you notice the wording? "Relative short period of time...perhaps only months".This article sets the stage for the reduced time sentence you're given everytime you get disfellowshipped. Instead o waiting over a year ,attending all the meetings and then endure the condensending reinstatement elders committee who may or may not let you back in .now it's all easy street, you do the dirty ,you wait for 3 to 6 months and then you are back in, it remains to be seen how many meetings you will have to attend to prove your repentance. It is like McDonalds now , fast tracked and generic without the drama.

Does this new understanding make sense? Yes I don't find anything wrong about this new understanding, do you? But here what is conspicuously missing, the words "we are sorry" sorry for having so harshly disfellowshipped for decades hundreds of thousands or even millions of people using methods that these new articles are trying to erase and given enough time they will distance themselves from this dark spot in their history blaming the elders of being harsh or the congregations themselves for not forgiving the sinner. They did before with 1975 blaming the rank and file spreading rumours. It was not them writing articles upon articles that the end will come in 1975 it was YOU the publisher who spread rumours about the word coming to an end. Their lack of accountability and the the whitewashing of their history is simply astonishing!