by undercover 16 Replies latest watchtower scandals
In 1935 Watchtower published this article about one of Jehovah’s witnesses:
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/social/current/143583/1/JW-tragedy-in-Newark-New-Jersey
I was able to view the copies at Marvin Shilmer's site.
Off topic, I was quite intrigued by the above article in the Golden Age, also from Shilmer's site.
I wonder if the Priester in the article and the Priester mentioned in the above link are related.
Small world, and all that ...
Syl
Yet what they signed was more than committing an oath, it was a renouncing of their faith. There is a difference there.
Not in Watchtower-land. Don't they have some ridiculous 'rule' now (probably for legal reasons), that if Witness accepts a blood transfusion, they're no longer "disfellowshipped" for it, but rather, they have renounced their faith and have 'disassociated themselves'? Don't they actually view a breaking of their rules without being repentent as a 'renouncing of their faith'?
Or look at it this way: A JW student goes to school where he/she tells the teacher that they can't stand up for the National Anthem because his religion views it as an 'act of worship'. The principal says "That's okay Timmy.....just sign this piece of paper with the Oath of Allegience on it and everything will be fine." Timmy doesn't know what to think so he goes home and asks his parents who in turn ask the elders if this would be acceptable. Take one guess what their answer would be? A resounding "NO!!" There's no way in hell that they'd view it as being anything different. In fact, I just might call Crooklyn one of these days, give them that scenario and see what they say.
The way it was explained to me when I was young was that the pledge states, "I pledge allegiance to the flag and to the republic..." The flag then, is also the object of allegiance not just the country, pledging allegiance to an object makes it an idol.
But that was a long time ago and I've almost forgotten all that stuff.
Is signing a one time oath the same as reciting the pledge?
By “pledge of allegiance” I think you are referring to the flag salute ceremony wherein there is a pledge of allegiance. There is a difference between this pledge and pledging the national oath of allegiance. These differences include:
-- One pledge is made to an image (a flag) and the other is not.
-- There are differences in language between the two pledges.
-- One pledge is a higher oath to the nation than the other.
The oath of allegiance pledged by Watchtower presidents is the highest oath of allegiance to the United States that is recognized historically, under law, and by non-governmental authorities. During the War Between the States pledging the oath of allegiance was the means by which a person identified themselves with one side or the other side of the conflict.
It's stated that reciting the pledge is an act of worship. Is signing the oath an act of worship?
Watchtower taught Jehovah’s Witnesses that oaths of allegiance were acts of worship. This is why we find historical and contemporary evidence of Jehovah’s Witnesses refusing to pledge the same oath of allegiance sworn to by Watchtower presidents.
Marvin Shilmer
Some more interesting observations.
Sylvia - I remember reading that piece about the Georgia JW losing his job. Interesting that this is printed in 1935, basically touting his steadfastness and loyalty to God, yet the leadership didn't have the same resolve in subsequent years. Good find.
Mary - Yea, the good ole WT... say one thing, do another, mean another when backed into a corner. I'm trying to play devil's advocate (stress: trying) in order to see how a JW might try to defend the actions of their leadership. Needless to say, it's hard to bend over that far backwards. And with that, it's apparent what my opinion is, if it were even in dobut before...
b-xjw - that, to me, is about the only argument that I can see an apologist making. The "Pledge" is an act of worship. The "Oath" is not. It falls apart quickly after that as Marvin shows.
Marvin - Thanks for adding to the discussion. The Oath of Allegiance being regarded as the highest oath is even more damning to the WT leaders. Imagine, JWs are taught to never pledge allegiance to the flag, yet the leaders who hold this standard out as a requirement to show your 'allegiance' to God instead of man's rulership go even further by signing the oath of allegiance to the US. Under their own rules, they are no longer allegiant to God, but to the US government. They have apostosized themselves.
This deserves a hefty bump.
Syl
See the article at the next link. It looks like the JWs leaders ruled against pledges and oaths except when making an identical oath for a passport (pre-1972) so the JWs could more freely travel to sell JWs leaders' literature and for whatever reason JWs leaders had to travel.
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/malawi-mexico-oath-allegiance.php
1994 "Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that saluting a flag, singing a national
anthem, and reciting a pledge of allegiance are religious acts. Their Bible-
trained conscience does not permit them to participate in such acts of worship.
(Matthew 4:10; Acts 5:29) No matter what country they live in, this is their
stand in imitation of Jesus Christ, who said that his followers would be 'no
part of the world, just as (he was) no part of the world.'—John 17:16."
("Awake!" Jan.8, 1994, p.2) (See 1935 and 1995 on p.1a.)
Malawi
"But for Jehovah’s Witnesses to buy a political card and thus join a political
party would be an open denial of what they believe and stand for.” ("Awake!"
Aug.8, 1976, p.5)
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/malawi-mexico-oath-allegiance.php
The Pledge of Allegiance of the United States is an oath of loyalty to the
national flag and the republic of the United States of America, originally
composed by Francis Bellamy in 1892.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance
An oath of allegiance is an oath whereby a subject or citizen acknowledges a
duty of allegiance and swears loyalty to monarch or country.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_allegiance
