My old friend Marvin and sir82 are correct in their explanations. I am certain that what is being reinforced to elders is that it is not the SIN that mandates a disfellowshipping but rather a person's stubbornness in advocating it in the congregation if it's against a principle (voting, smoking, alternate ways of doing meetings or arranging field service, etc) or extreme continuance of a gross sin such as fornication (a one-night stand might be excused with a reproof but a 3 year adulterous relationship likely would not).
i called bethel RE: voting...
by in a new york bethel minute 51 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
yaddayadda
I'd draw a box and vote for 'The Watchtower Society' cuz they share the same ideals as the UN
-
willyloman
"Observing a JW go to a voting station and caste a ballot is no longer sufficient evidence for congregational judicial action. The only evidence sufficient to bring judicial action for breach of political neutrality is confession of a JW that he or she voted for a secular official to fill a political position."
Discussing that famous WT article with other elders in the congo at the time, one said, "This means a Witness could vote for a school bond, for example, and that would be a conscience matter. It's not really involvment in politics, it's about building school facilities with tax dollars." He didn't get much argument but I could tell from body language that a couple of guys were struggling with the concept. However, it was clear to me the conversation was abstract -- none of these guys was going to go downtown and register to vote.
-
mamochan13
But if a JW were to vote on a non-politcal issue (examples: should a school levy be passed? vote for bonds to pay for an new park?), that would be OK. The vote is to determine where money is allocated, and has nothing to do with neutrality (i.e., not voting and in effect saying "I place my trust in this elected official"
yes, this was the case when I was younger. Our community had a plebiscite on flouridation of water and my mother was told she could vote since it had nothing to do with government operations.
Never really understood the distinction. Do you vote for the guy who promises not to put flouride in your water or do you vote for the decision he & his elected colleagues make to not put flouride in the water once they are already in office?
-
Gretchen956
Folks, whenever you call into the "help desk," you should try and record the conversation if at all possible. It would be pretty cool to put up a collection of recordings on the web. HQ would probably stop taking calls if that happened...
Just a reminder, taping a phone conversation where one party is not aware that his/her conversation is being taped is illegal (in the US) and can land you in jail. Please don't hand the society ammunition.
Sherry
-
sir82
Just a reminder, taping a phone conversation where one party is not aware that his/her conversation is being taped is illegal (in the US) and can land you in jail
I'm certainly no lawyer, but as I recall, taping a phone conversation where both parties are unaware it is being recorded is illegal; however, if just one of the parties knows it is being recorded, it is perfectly legal.
Or I could be hallucinating again.
-
jula71
w99 11/1 p. 29 Questions From Readers ***
***In such a case, each Witness is responsible to make a conscientious, Bible-based decision about how to handle the situation. If someone decides to go to the polling booth, that is his decision. What he does in the polling booth is between him and his Creator.
The November 15, 1950, issue of The Watchtower, on pages 445 and 446, said: "Where Caesar makes it compulsory for citizens to vote . . . [Witnesses] can go to the polls and enter the voting booths. It is here that they are called upon to mark the ballot or write in what they stand for. The voters do what they will with their ballots. So here in the presence of God is where his witnesses must act in harmony with his commandments and in accordance with their faith. It is not our responsibility to instruct them what to do with the ballot."
What if a Christian woman’s unbelieving husband insists that she present herself to vote? Well, she is subject to her husband, just as Christians are subject to the superior authorities. (Ephesians 5:22; 1 Peter 2:13-17) If she obeys her husband and goes to the polling booth, that is her personal decision. No one should criticize her.—Compare Romans 14:4.
What of a country where voting is not mandated by law but feelings run high against those who do not go to the voting booth—perhaps they are exposed to physical danger? Or what if individuals, while not legally obliged to vote, are severely penalized in some way if they do not go to the polling booth? In these and similar situations, a Christian has to make his own decision. "Each one will carry his own load."—Galatians 6:5.
There may be people who are stumbled when they observe that during an election in their country, some Witnesses of Jehovah go to the polling booth and others do not. They may say, ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses are not consistent.’ People should recognize, though, that in matters of individual conscience such as this, each Christian has to make his own decision before Jehovah God.—Romans 14:12.
Whatever personal decisions Jehovah’s Witnesses make in the face of different situations, they take care to preserve their Christian neutrality and freeness of speech. In all things, they rely on Jehovah God to strengthen them, give them wisdom, and help them avoid compromising their faith in any way. Thus they show confidence in the words of the psalmist: "You are my crag and my stronghold; and for the sake of your name you will lead me and conduct me."—Psalm 31:3.
Call me crazy, but that sounds like a classic conscience matter. -
defd
Does Jesus have a running mate?
Yes he does. It is Satan!
D.
-
gumby
As long as it's not in print most dubs will do what the WT says and use their conscience.
The November 95 Watchtower article stated in no less than 6 times, that if one of Jehovahs Witnesses conscience allowed them to vote....other publishers should not pass judgment on them for doing so.
In the very same article.....countless examples of DOUBLESPEAK (talking out of both sides of their big mouths) is set out clearly for "loyal worshippers" to abide by. They basically say if your a "real" christian witnesss of Jehovah, you won't vote.....but if your a weak loser witness, your conscience might allow it and others shouldn't ostracise you.........but will view you as a piece of crap as far as a "real" witness goes.
Gumby
-
Jourles
It all depends on which state you live in. There are one and two party notification states. If you call from a one party state, you can record the conversation without telling the other party - i.e. calling from Arkansas to bethel, NY. Bethel can do the same to you likewise. NY is a one party state. The brother fielding the calls does not have to tell you that they are recording your conversation either.
Bill Bowen went on Dateline with a one party recording that he made from Kentucky to New York. Did he get into legal trouble for that? Nope.
Of course, there are many ways to appear that you are calling from a one party state. With the new VoIP providers you can request a number from any state or even many different countries. In reality, you are calling from within the geographic boundries of your state. But if you really don't care about upholding the law in this particular instance, subscribing to a number that is assigned to a one party state is an alternative. But you're on your own here.