In July 1985 The Watchtower stated that 2 John 10 had 'a wider application' than to false teachers, so that Christians 'ought not even greet' with 'a common "good-day"' an expelled wrongdoer or one who rejected the congregation; in August 2024 the organisation stated that 2 John 9-11 'refers to apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct' and that Paul 'did not state that they must never say a simple greeting'.
Claim ID claim-shunning-1985-2-john-10-wider-applicationConcerns 15 July 1985Later reinterpretation
In July 1985 The Watchtower stated that 2 John 10 had 'a wider application' than to false teachers, so that Christians 'ought not even greet' with 'a common "good-day"' an expelled wrongdoer or one who rejected the congregation; in August 2024 the organisation stated that 2 John 9-11 'refers to apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct' and that Paul 'did not state that they must never say a simple greeting'. Source: The Watchtower, 15 July 1985Source: The Watchtower, 15 April 1988Source: The Watchtower (Study Edition), August 2024
The organisation’s position or later explanation: The 2024 box 'Were John and Paul Discussing the Same Kind of Sin?' presents the narrower reading as the correct exegesis without acknowledging the 1985 position.
15 July 1985 · pp.30-31 · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“But the Bible elsewhere shows that this had a wider application. ... John was saying that they ought not even greet such an individual with khaiʹro, a common “good-day.””
Extends 2 John 10-11 beyond false teachers to 'an expelled wrongdoer or ... one who rejected His congregation'; explains khairo vs aspazomai. Reversed in substance by the August 2024 study article box, which restricts 2 John 9-11 to apostates and promoters of wrongdoing.
15 April 1988 · pp.26-31 · par. 3, 13-14, 17, 20, 23; footnote a · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“The situation is different if the disfellowshipped or disassociated one is a relative living outside the immediate family circle and home. It might be possible to have almost no contact at all with the relative. Even if there were some family matters requiring contact, this certainly would be kept to a minimum”
Household relatives: 'normal family affections and dealings can continue' (par. 13). Reports the outcome of Paul v. Watchtower and concludes a shunned person 'cannot recover damages ... the person is feeling a loss brought on by his or her own actions' (par. 20). Footnote a: 2 John 11 'could well mean not to say even "hello" to such ones'.
August 2024 · pp.26-31 · par. 3-6, 10-15; footnote b; box · Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania
“In the past, we would not greet such a person. Here again, each Christian needs to use his Bible-trained conscience in this matter. Some may feel comfortable with greeting or welcoming the person to the meeting. However, we would not have an extended conversation or socialize with the individual.”
Footnote b retires 'disfellowshipped' for 'removed from the congregation'; par. 4 keeps the announcement 'no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses'; par. 13 keeps 'stop keeping company ... not even eating'; par. 15 and the box restrict 2 John 9-11 to 'apostates and others who actively promote wrong conduct'; par. 6, 10-12 on follow-up visits and reinstatement. No revised guidance on relatives outside the household.
A direct link to this claim is https://jwtruth.org/evidence/claim-shunning-1985-2-john-10-wider-application/. Every source above opens the original document or the best available copy. If you believe the wording, date or context is wrong, report an error.