___
Watchtower’s Governing Body[1-2] lectures a great deal about faithfulness to Christian neutrality, yet demonstrates unfaithfulness to its own teaching.
Historically Watchtower banned Witnesses from accepting alternative civilian service in lieu of mandatory military duty. Those who accepted such alternative service were branded as unfaithful to Christianity.
Jehovah's Witnesses took this teaching seriously, some even suffering execution as a result.
According to Watchtower, there was no middle ground on this issue for “faithful Christians”![3]
Watchtower’s Governing Body[1-2] lectures a great deal about faithfulness to Christian neutrality, yet demonstrates unfaithfulness to its own teaching.
Historically Watchtower banned Witnesses from accepting alternative civilian service in lieu of mandatory military duty. Those who accepted such alternative service were branded as unfaithful to Christianity.
Jehovah's Witnesses took this teaching seriously, some even suffering execution as a result.
According to Watchtower, there was no middle ground on this issue for “faithful Christians”![3]
As of 1996 Watchtower’s Governing Body no longer had Jehovah’s Witnesses treated as unfaithful Christians for accepting alternative civilian service in lieu of mandatory military duty.[4-6]
Unlike the “faithful Christians” who had found no middle ground on this issue, in 1996 Watchtower’s Governing Body found middle ground.
Hence the question: Who is faithful?
Marvin Shilmer
______________
References
1. Watchtower’s Governing Body.
2. Governing Body Represents Who?.
3. The Watchtower, September 1, 1986, p. 20.
4. The Watchtower, May 1, 1996, p. 19.
5. Tenets of faith — and GROPING!.
6. Schroeder, Judah B, The Role of Jehovah’s Witnesses in the emergent Right of Conscientious Objection to Military Service in International Law, Kirchliche Zeitgeschichte, 2011/24,1: 169-206. (Excerpt available in the article Watchtower — Faith — Compromise? (unabridged).
___
0 comments:
Post a Comment