12/15/2001 WT; Christmas ok if married to non-JW?

by Alleymom 17 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Alleymom

  Outnfree ---

  Thanks so much for the full text .... your annotated version is hilarious!

  I was very interested in the "proof texts" given in the article. I note that they didn't include the story of Naaman and Elisha from 2 Kings 5.

  Do you remember the part where, after Naaman is healed of leprosy, he asks Elisha if it's ok if he continues to bow down in the temple of Rimmon because his master, who is leaning on his arm, bows down and he has to bow down, too? And Elisha says, go in peace.

  Maybe next year the JW wife whose non-JW husband walks with a cane can go to midnight Christmas mass with him because he has to lean on her arm. Maybe she can even hold the candle for him when they sing "Silent night" <g>.

  Thanks again for typing in the text of the article for me!
  Marjorie
• 

  Alleymom

  Xena --

  >>> all I would have had to do was blame Tim...that man you gave me made me do it!!!!! <<<<<

  LOL!

  Thanks to you and the others who responded to my request. The board here is threaded differently than the Compuserve forums I am used to, so I am not sure if the protocol is that I answer each one separately.

  Marjorie
• 

  Alleymom

  I've been corresponding with a Witness who claims that the primary reason JW's do not celebrate Christmas is because of the pagan origins, etc.

  I told him that it seems to me that the PRIMARY reason modern JW's do not celebrate Christmas is because the GB has flip flopped on the issue.

  After all, they USED to celebrate Christmas, and it's not as if Russell and the Bible students were acting in ignorance and then all of the sudden they got "new light" and found out about all the supposed pagan associations.

  At the time Russell and the others were cheerfully exchanging gifts and celebrating Christmas, there were thousands of 19th century evangelical Christians, especially those of Puritan descent, who refused to celebrate Christmas. I have collections of Spurgeon's sermons, including a volume of Christmas sermons, and it's very interesting that, although he preached sermons on the topic of our Lord's nativity, he rejected the idea of celebrating the "mass" of Christ. Even earlier, in this country, Christmas was frowned upon for many years. The Boston public schools were even open on Christmas Day for some years (what a bummer for those kids, hunh?)

  Anyway, the reason I wanted the 12/15 article was because I had heard about it, and some people seem to think it indicates a softening of attitude.

  If, in the future, further allowances are made for the exercise of Christian conscience and freedom, it seems to me that it will be a return to Russell's attitude concerning Christmas.

  Marjorie
• 

  bluesapphire

  This PISSES me off! I was that JW woman married to an abusive unbelieving husband.

  Guess what I got for refusing to go to Christmas dinner with his family, buy presents he put on a list and cook rice for birthday parties. I got locked in a closet; pushed against a wall; pushed down on the floor and kicked, etc. etc.

  But I was told I was doing it for Jehovah. I was a martyr. And now they come out with this article! SHIT I AM PISSED! I want to go throw up now!
• 

  bluesapphire

  I'm still fuming and had to make another post.

  I think that they are trying to ease the way for "sisters" to marry outside of the "truth." Think about it. Numbers are declining and we all know that those that convert are usually because they marry someone already in or other relative connections. So if one of those knock-out young pioneer sisters marries say a lawyer, doctor, architect, etc. who is not a JW, she can woooo him into dubdom by appearing to be "balanced."

  They might just be realizing that they are going to have to soften up on these issues if they are going to attract any more converts.

  I can just see my poor sister now after she was encouraged to dump her fiance and told how difficult her life would be married to an unbelieving mate due to thing such as this. Now she's reading this article and seeing that it wouldn't have been so hard after all - 4 years too late!

  Instead she's getting older each year and still a spinster with virtually no chance of finding a mate seeing her competition grow each year with more and more pretty young sisters graduating high school and becoming "eligible" for marriage.

  I just detest this SEXIST organization more every day and look forward to its downfall! The sooner the better!
• 

  twvsnt

  Bluesaphire

  You made a good point there about the society trying to increase its numbers. With more women being converted into sisters and less brothers coming into the organization they're trying to break even with this new rule they've created. For many years seeking higher education made you look spritually weak but with the decrease in hours being reported and a crippling economy that's constantly dwindling all of a sudden going to school prior to graduating from high school was a good thing. It enables one to afford to pioneer and work and take care of the need of "his household". But despite this change I see alot of the friends give young ones a hard time for going to college and because of this I see alot of the friends giving sisters who are married to unbelieving mate a hard time as well. One reason is because they married someone worldly another because they're buying christmas items for their mates , attending christmas dinners with their mate so on and so forth.

  Bluesaphire is cool user name what gave you the idea to use this as a username I'm curious?
• 

  Shutterbug

  I think if you are a cashier in a store (other than a smoke shop..lol) it is a 'conscience matter', since you are not actually "selling" the cigarettes, but merely doing your job an employee filling an order. You have no choice what your employer chooses to sell in his/her store.

  This brings up an interesting question. What if the store owner were selling the services of hookers ??
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  Shutterbug said:
  

  This brings up an interesting question. What if the store owner were selling the services of hookers ??

  VERY GOOD QUESTION!

  How about this Quote:

  The Watchtower November 15th 1964 Issue, Pages 680-683:

  "Some doctors who are Jehovah's witnesses have administered blood transfusions to persons of the world upon request. However, they do not do so in the case of one of Jehovah's dedicated witnesses. In harmony with Deuteronomy 14:21, the administering of blood upon request to worldly persons is left to the Christian doctor's own conscience. This is similar to the situation facing a Christian butcher or grocer who must decide whether he can conscientiously sell blood sausage to a worldly person."