Are there any threads or web pages that give some feedback on the reaction to the downgrading of military alternative service from No-No to "conscience matter" in '96? (I've read Franz's comments on the change.) If I had been in prison for 2 or 3 "prime" years on the back of a policy that then subsequently changed , I would have been furious. Obviously the WT article had little effect in countries like USA & UK , but was the reaction from the R&F in countries like France where this had been a major issue?
Alternative Service "New Light" 1996 - Reaction
by dozy 12 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
luna2
I don't know that this "new light" had little impact here in the states...both Terry and uninformed went to prison as young men because they refused alternative service. Its a huge black mark against the WTS. You don't jerk around with people's lives like that and then change your mind without so much as one word of apology. Of course, the Society just skips over their mistakes and pretends that the light is getting progressively brighter and that's the reason for their about-faces because if they really examined their own history they'd have to conclude that they are no more Jehovah's people than a troupe of monkies. edited to include link to thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/23/109974/1.ashx
-
blondie
Enough to prompt this followup in a WT study article implying that it had always been a matter of conscience and not a matter of disfellowshipping. They compare the WTS policies to the Law.
*** w98 8/15 p. 17 Strengthening Our Confidence in God’s Righteousness ***
Feelings of Having Suffered Needlessly
6 In the past, some Witnesses have suffered for refusing to share in an activity that their conscience now might permit. For example, this might have been their choice years ago as to certain types of civilian service. A brother might now feel that he could conscientiously perform such without overstepping his Christian neutrality regarding the present system of things.
7 Was it unrighteous on Jehovah’s part to allow him to suffer for rejecting what he now might do without consequences? Most who have had that experience would not think so. Rather, they rejoice that they had the opportunity of demonstrating publicly and clearly that they were determined to be firm on the issue of universal sovereignty. (Compare Job 27:5.) What reason could anyone have to regret having followed his conscience in taking a firm stand for Jehovah? By loyally upholding Christian principles as they understood them or by responding to the proddings of conscience, they proved worthy of Jehovah’s friendship. Certainly, it is wise to avoid a course that would disturb one’s conscience or that would likely cause others to be stumbled. We can think in this regard of the example that the apostle Paul set.—1 Corinthians 8:12, 13; 10:31-33.
8 In order to please Jehovah, the Jews were required to obey the Ten Commandments and also a wide variety of about 600 additional laws. Later, under the Christian arrangement, obedience to these laws as such was no longer a requirement for serving Jehovah, not even for fleshly Jews. The laws no longer binding included those dealing with circumcision, keeping the Sabbath, offering animal sacrifices, and observing certain dietary restrictions. (1 Corinthians 7:19; 10:25; Colossians 2:16, 17; Hebrews 10:1, 11-14) Jews—including the apostles—who became Christians were released from the obligation to keep laws that they were required to obey when they were under the Law covenant. Did they complain that God’s arrangement was unrighteous in having formerly required of them things that were no longer necessary? No, they rejoiced in the broadened understanding of Jehovah’s purposes.—Acts 16:4, 5.
9 In modern times, there have been some Witnesses who were very strict in their view of what they would or would not do. For that reason they suffered more than others. Later, increased knowledge helped them to expand their view of matters. But they have no reason to regret having earlier acted in harmony with their conscience, even when this possibly brought extra suffering. It truly is commendable that they demonstrated their willingness to suffer in faithfulness to Jehovah, to "do all things for the sake of the good news." Jehovah blesses that kind of godly devotion. (1 Corinthians 9:23; Hebrews 6:10) The apostle Peter wrote with insight: "If, when you are doing good and you suffer, you endure it, this is a thing agreeable with God."—1 Peter 2:20.
It is just like the blood issue, they say it is your choice although if you choose to have blood, the WTS policy is now to view that person as having disassociated themselves from the organization. Looks like choosing alternative service would mean they are choosing not to be a Christian, really choosing not to be one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
*** w86 9/1 p. 20 Christian Neutrals in a Bloodstained World ***
Whether the issue was shedding blood, noncombatant military work, alternative service, or saluting an image such as a national flag, faithful Christians took the position that there was no middle ground. In some cases they were executed because of this stand.—Matthew 24:9; Revelation 2:10.
After reading this article, what JW would choose alternative service?
*** g74 12/8 p. 23 The Netherlands Frees Imprisoned Witnesses ***
, three representatives of Jehovah’s witnesses met with a forum representing the ministries of Defense and Justice. The discussion lasted two and a half hours.
One of the first points of discussion presented by the forum was this: "That you wish no part in performing military service is clear and needs no further explanation. But what really is your objection to civil, alternative service?"
The Witnesses explained that it is not that they are opposed to civil service as such, but, rather, it is a matter of strict neutrality. Therefore, any work that is merely a substitute for military service would be unacceptable to Jehovah’s witnesses.
Other questions narrowed the issue down still further. "When a person objects to military service," the government’s agents declared, "he passes from military jurisdiction on to civil jurisdiction and from that moment has nothing at all to do with the military. Why, then, is the accepting of such civil service still so objectionable?"
Willingly accepting such work is objectionable to the Christian because of what God’s law says about the matter: "You were bought with a price; stop becoming slaves of men." (1 Cor. 7:23) Civilian servitude as a substitute for military service would be just as objectionable to the Christian. In effect, he would thereby become a part of the world instead of keeping separate as Jesus commanded.—John 15:19; 17:14-16.
http://www.geocities.com/le_thanh_y/Quit_files/AlternatServ.htm
BTW, I know of 3 JWs that spent time in prison. When this came out they were upset...they haven't left but they have stepped down from all their "privileges" and miss meetings, doing what they want recreationally on the weekends. They would leave totally except for the need to look after older parents.
Blondie
-
donkey
Are there any threads or web pages that give some feedback on the reaction to the downgrading of military alternative service from No-No to "conscience matter" in '96? (I've read Franz's comments on the change.) If I had been in prison for 2 or 3 "prime" years on the back of a policy that then subsequently changed , I would have been furious. Obviously the WT article had little effect in countries like USA & UK , but was the reaction from the R&F in countries like France where this had been a major issue?
I spent years in prison over this issue. We were to be NEUTRAL. Since finding out about the deception with the UN committed by the Little Whore (the Watctower Society) I am truly angry. The Watchtower by becoming the Little Whore has proven they are WORSE than Jimmy Swaggert who sought the services of a prostitute. Why? Swaggert asked for forgiveness over his philandering ways. The Watchtower Society just lies about it and deny it ever took place. Bin Laden's pilots hit the wrong buildings in New York!!
-
Dismembered
Bin Laden's pilots hit the wrong buildings in New York!!
TOUCHE! Donkey Dismembered
-
MadTiger
Are there any threads or web pages that give some feedback on the reaction to the downgrading of military alternative service from No-No to "conscience matter" in '96? (I've read Franz's comments on the change.) If I had been in prison for 2 or 3 "prime" years on the back of a policy that then subsequently changed , I would have been furious. Obviously the WT article had little effect in countries like USA & UK , but was the reaction from the R&F in countries like France where this had been a major issue?
I spent years in prison over this issue. We were to be NEUTRAL. Since finding out about the deception with the UN committed by the Little Whore (the Watctower Society) I am truly angry. The Watchtower by becoming the Little Whore has proven they are WORSE than Jimmy Swaggert who sought the services of a prostitute. Why? Swaggert asked for forgiveness over his philandering ways. The Watchtower Society just lies about it and deny it ever took place. Bin Laden's pilots hit the wrong buildings in New York!!This is what kills me: I probably never would have become inactive and started fading if they had just admitted they were wrong, and moved on. I realize now it would never happen.
-
dozy
6 In the past, some Witnesses have suffered for refusing to share in an activity that their conscience now might permit. For example, this might have been their choice years ago as to certain types of civilian service. A brother might now feel that he could conscientiously perform such without overstepping his Christian neutrality regarding the present system of things.
An awful (and sadly typical) reference to "New Light". I can never fathom how a Watchtower writer could possibly , in good conscience , pen such a paragraph.
-
slimboyfat
I have a story about this. There was a brother in my girlfriend's congregation in 1995 who heard about the change coming through the grapevine that alternative service was going to become a conscience matter. Reasonably, he though, "great, that means I don't need to face going to jail" - but no. He was told by the local branch that, although the reports about the coming change may be accuarate, he had to wait on Jehovah's chariot and refuse the alternative service until the article with the change was released. Needless to say, he did not see the sense in that and left the Witnesses. So did some others over the same point.
-
Bonnie_Clyde
I didn't notice the "New Light" in 1996 article. However, I became aware of it later. When I read the article in the 8-15-98 WT article that Blondie just posted, I laid it down and said to Clyde, "If I had to go to jail for two or three years and later found out that it really wasn't necessary, I think I would be pissed." I had been having doubts up until that article, but from that point on I started reading the magazines much more critically and it wasn't long before I went onto the Internet. I had no idea how much information was out there and how much was being hidden from us.
-
Oroborus21
I rememer when we were discussing this in my congregation, (the subject of the watchtower study was essentially to do one's civic duty if your conscience allowed and that we should do our civic duty) that my comment was that although we don't have Alternative Military Service requirements in this country, that we do have a comparable situation of jury duty and that in light of this information we should each make sure that we do jury duty unless of course the matter is something our conscience would not permit us to be jurors on (e.g. capital crime).
that went over like a lead balloon and the next comment was from an elder who said that we had some past articles on jury duty already...
-Eduardo