"Conscience" matters

by Lady Lee 19 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  jeeprube

  The legalism of the WTS, the unbending rules and regulations, both written and unwritten, the judging of people for made up "sins" (like the length of someone's hair, having a beard, the length of a skirt, having a 2-door car) is nothing more than a form of modern-day Judaism.

  I couldn't agree more. The WTS has become a modern day "pharasee class." Their judicial commitees a recreation of the Jewish Sanhedrin. That which they hold up as detestable, they emulate. By their actions they condem themselves.

  I have no doubt that if Jesus where here today he would throw them from the "temple".
• 

  Scully

  This is an essay on the concept of Conscientious Objection that I wrote a couple of years ago:

  JWs & the Concept of Conscientious Objection

  Here's what I think is the crux of the matter:

  The dilemma, it appears, is that while conscientious decisions, by definition, are firmly held convictions based on an individual's thought processes interacting with their belief system, Jehovah's Witnesses' "conscientious decisions" are the result of whatever happens to be the 'doctrine du jour' as published in the Watchtower Society's literature, meaning that someone who steadfastly refused to accept blood fractions or organ transplants one day because "Jehovah's Witnesses do not accept" them, will read "new light" in an up-to-date issue of the Watchtower and suddenly realize that they no longer need to refuse these treatments, because they will no longer be punished by their church for accepting them. So the question becomes, Are these "conscientious decisions" really the result of firmly held convictions? If they can so easily be cast aside, upon the reading of a sentence or two in a periodical, without any other thought process in the matter, it would appear that the concept of "firm convictions" and "deeply held beliefs" is over-ruled by convenience and the removal of any negative spiritual or social result for the person claiming the decision.
• 

  talesin

  During one of our many conversations on why some people can do one thing, and others can't, my mother told me this last year, uncategorically and straight from the 'horse's mouth" ...

  "EVERYTHING IS NOW A CONSCIENCE MATTER."

  The biggest flip-flop I ever heard!!!!!

  So, I asked her why they are still DFing people for so-called 'conscience matters'. Well, then, they must have a 'rebellious spirit'.

  tal
• 

  JH

  My conscience is very wide and elastic. The way I reason is, "Will my actions hurt someone", if not, I do it.
• 

  mrsjones5

  So since everything is now a CONSCIENCE MATTER, jws can celebrate birthdays and holidays, play the lottery, engage in sexual pleasures deemed "homosexual", have "worldly" folks as friends, marry outside of the organisation, vote, take blood even? Interesting...all bets are off folks.
• 

  talesin

  Jonesy,

  It's just crazy, isn't it? They are believing two completely opposite rules at the same time ... she even said that it would apply to blood --- BLOOD!!! The 'society' only sets guidelines, you know!

  tal

  * boggled mind * class
• 

  Junction-Guy

  Conscience matter is just another one of their deceitful terms. They tell you how to believe, at the same time you believe its your own decision, when in fact its the WT telling you what to do. What gives them the right to tell you what your conscience should think? Mind controlling hypocrites is what they are.

  Dave
• 

  crazyblondeb

  Defd-

  If the blood is a "matter of conscience" then why a couple years ago did I have to help get a court order in order for a toddler's life to be saved? The blood was a "life and death" matter. The parents wanted to consent, but the elders were there pressuring them NOT to. Going as far as trying to get them to sneak the child out. They were making such asses of themselves I had to have security escort them out, and then restrict visitors. The parents were thankful to have the court intervene. To me it looks as if the "conscience decisions" have to be what the elders dictate at that time.

  shelley
• 

  caligirl

  Lots of good points in this thread!

  I agree that if these things (voting, birthday's etc) were truly up to the individuals conscience as a witness, then every time the question came up about whether it is OK to do these things, the only answer printed would be " These are up to each individual to decide based on their OWN personal bible research." Period. .

  There would be no long winded answers that start out saying that it is a conscience matter, then going on to list out scriptures and stories and WT articles about how all these things are bad and evil and if you do them, you are dead buzzard fodder, but you can go ahead and use your conscience and decide for yourself.

  The second they go on to give an interpretation under the guise of giving out referneces, they are telling the reader what conclusion SHOULD be drawn, and well trained minds will not bother to go and research the context of whatever scriptures, if any, are used in the actual article becasue all that pesky time consuming research has already been done for them! If memory serves me, the only scriptures they ever really use to attempt to back up their opinion are ones to do with obedience and following commands, etc because there are no scripures to back up things like this.

  From what I understand of the bible, if a subject is not directly addressed, then whatever it is wasn't important enough to waste time writing about and each person is responsible to use the grey matter between their ears to decide if it is acceptable to them.
• 

  Ingenuous

  When the term "conscience matter" is used within the Org - among JWs - it refers to those areas that the Org has given JWs permission to use their consciences on.

  When the term is used outside the Org and in matters of discipline, it refers to an individual's general freedom and ability to make a choice, but the unspoken caveat is that one of those choices will carry with it sanctions levelled by the Org.

  "Freedom of conscience" is only "properly" exercised when it results in the outcome determined by the Org as acceptable.

  *** w93 2/1 pp. 15-16 What Godly Subjection Requires of Us ***

  Subjection to God’s Organization

  6

  Jehovah God has not left it entirely up to us to decide individually how we are to apply Bible principles to our lives. From the beginning of mankind’s history, God has used humans as channels of communication. ...

  7 With the coming of the Messiah, Jesus Christ, God used him and his immediate apostles and disciples to serve as His spokesmen. Later, the anointed faithful followers of Jesus Christ were to serve as a "faithful and discreet slave" in communicating to Jehovah’s people how to apply Bible principles in their lives. Godly subjection meant recognizing the instrument Jehovah God was using.—Matthew 24:45-47; Ephesians 4:11-14.

  8

  The facts show that today "the faithful and discreet slave" is associated with Jehovah’s Witnesses and represented by the Governing Body of these Witnesses. That body, in turn, appoints overseers in various capacities—such as elders and traveling representatives—to direct the work on a local level. Godly subjection requires each dedicated Witness to be in subjection to these overseers in keeping with Hebrews 13:17: "Be obedient to those who are taking the lead among you and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over your souls as those who will render an account; that they may do this with joy and not with sighing, for this would be damaging to you."

  This was why I was especially angered when the Org published a quote concerning conscience in the How Can Blood Save our Life? brochure as if they agreed with it

  *** hb p. 31 Blood: Whose Choice and Whose Conscience? ***

  Respecting the religious consciences of Witness patients may challenge our skills. But as we meet this challenge, we underscore valuable liberties that all of us cherish. As John Stuart Mill aptly wrote: "No society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government . . . Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental and spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest."