Military Service Objection: What was the motive of the Watchtower Society?

by james_woods 23 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  james_woods

  I have spent some time puzzling over this every so often. Of course, I have to admit I was affected more, as I was draft age in the VietNam era. I barely escaped going to prison over this issue, and had numerous friends who were not so lucky.

  On a fundamental viewpoint - what exactly is the "biblical" standpoint for absolute abstention from military service? It seems to me that the Bible itself has plenty of armies and battles being talked about in the OT, and even the NT mentions soldiers and military officers without much seeming opposition to them. I don't see any more bible support for this idea than smoking or the flag or blood transfusions.

  I understand the "personal conscience" idea (like a Quaker), but the Society went way beyond that by making this an edict. Could they really have wanted to just be "different" that much? - or was there perhaps a hidden sinister component here; i.e. forcing "persecution" to get notoriety?

  On a practical standpoint - what exactly was wrong with just accepting a "conscientous objector" status as the US provided, and working in some charitable cause or hospital? Forcing "prison time" on us young guys to make a bigger and more vain-glorious statement to the world?

  The reason I brought this up again is obvious: what if the Draft returns...what effect is that going to have on witnesses, especially faders?

  James
• 

  Jourles

  forcing "persecution" to get notoriety?

  This was probably the primary motive from the beginning. Even Ray Franz wrote about a time where a 2/3's vote was achieved, but soon after, a GB member changed his vote which allowed the decades old policy to stand. I believe 1995 was the year of the alternative service "180."

  I still remember being at one of my mom's best friends house in Kingman, AZ during the first gulf war(this sister also happened to be one of the GB's secretary back in the 70's/80's). We were watching CNN or some other news station and the sister asked me what would I do if the USA instituted the draft. As a teenager at the time, I said, "I would probably go work in a hospital instead." You should have seen their eyes widen right up. It was as if I just said Satan was my best pal. I honestly didn't know that alternative service, such as working in a hospital, was against the "rules" of the WTS at that time. They both went on to lecture me that any service that was merely a substitute of military duty was WRONG WRONG WRONG. Funny, 3-4 years later, I wonder if they recalled our little conversation? I sure did, and always will.
• 

  blondie

  In order to be legally recognized in some countries, the WTS made adjustments. In one case was in Bulgaria regarding blood transfusions and minors . This is another policy that the WTS has tried to twist to its advantage. In all cases they try to make it seem to be an individual choice when we know that if JWs make the "wrong" choice they will be "disciplined" and shunned.

  http://www.ajwrb.org/basics/abandon.shtml
• 

  james_woods

  Exactly right on that bootleg turn on the C.O. jobs, Jourles. I did not even know they slipped this in until I started posting here last year.

  Real convenient, wasn't it, that they waited until long after the draft was a faded memory to make the change? Sure hope all the guys my age that did 5 years federal time over this (some getting assaulted or knifed) appreciated the new "food" from the Governing Body - in "due time as it was needed".

  And let's not forget that in my day there was a little trick to be played - certain U.S. judges were known to be sentencing JW objectors to go work in a V.A. hospital, just like being an ordinary C.O. They were allowed to do it, because the court ordered it! Of course, if you were in Mexico, you could just buy a "get out of jail free" card.

  I submit this: the history of the WTBTS society is full of cases where they willingly serve up their members as "sacrificial lambs" in the interest of their perverse policy of highlighting "persecution" to get publicity.

  The letter campaign to Germany and Malawi are both prime examples of deliberately enraging an angry government against their own. I think they cold-heartedly did this in the U.S. as well.

  However, I was also kind of hoping on some comment on the biblical basis for outlawing military service completely in the first place? As I said, I understand people with a conscious feeling on this - but I don't get the "biblical basis" for this in a totalitarian way like the WTS does.
• 

  garybuss

  james_woods, What did you think of Ray Franz's discussion of "substation equals equivalency" in Crisis of Conscience? What were your thoughts on the equivalency issue so succulently explained by Ray in In Search of Christian Freedom?
  
  
• 

  james_woods

  Gary, it has been so long since I read "Crisis" that I can't talk sense about it until you remind me of the whole context.

  Would you mind, please?
• 

  garybuss

  The whole issue is tied to the principle that "substation equals equivalency". It's a segment size component of both books. In my 1992 first printing of the second edition of COC, Ray predicts the change in the practice, and that prediction came true which makes Ray a true prophet:-)
  
  I think Ray did a great job filleting the topic, worth a re-read.
  
  
  
• 

  Jourles

  I was also kind of hoping on some comment on the biblical basis for outlawing military service completely in the first place?

  That depends on if you want to support the military or refuse to enter into service. Refer to the Old Testament for pro-military arguments, and for the hippie types, brush up on the "turn the other cheek" Jesus quotes. Jehovah was a big-time God-of-War back in the glory days. Jesus' apostles ran from every little skirmish they happened to be in.(OK, maybe the severed ear could count as being pro-war)

  But for the best "scriptural" reference, I'm sure Blondie has plenty of solid Watchtower material she can dig up.
• 

  GermanXJW

  >I believe 1995 was the year of the alternative service "180." It was the Watchtower 1st May, 1996.
• 

  Jourles

  Here is what Ray had to say:

  The official position of the Watch Tower Society, developed during the Second, World War, is that if one of Jehovah's Witnesses accepts such alternative service he has "compromised", has broken integrity with God. ...Since it [alternative service] is offered in place of military service and since military service involves (potentially at least) the shedding of blood, then anyone accepting the substitute becomes "bloodguilty"... In obedience to this policy over the years literally thousands of Jehovah's Witnesses in different countries around the world have gone to prison rather than accept provisions for alternative service. There are Witnesses in prison right now in for this reason. Failure to adhere to the Society's policy would mean being viewed automatically as "disassociated" and being treated the same as being disfellowshiped...

  From...November 1977 until February 1980 the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses had tried on six separate occasions to resolve the issue without success...the inability of the Governing Body to achieve that indispensable two-thirds majority meant that male Jehovah's Witnesses in any country who acted according to their conscience and accepted alternate service as a proper government requirement, could still do so only at the cost of being viewed as outside the organization, equivalent to expelled persons.
  (pp. 101, 102, 131)