Do you have the pioneer spirit? Are you keeping up with or exceeding the national average for field service time? Can you increase your hours in the ministry?
It always both amused and annoyed me to see the elders pushing the publishers to "keep up with the national average" for field service time. Even when I was a JW myself, I was intelligent enough to realize that the definition of an average is that half the people fall below it. And if everybody "made the national average," then the average would go up, so that, again, 50% of the sample would fall below it. It reminds me of the time when I asked the Watchtower Study Conductor why I was not being used as a reader, though I was a man in good standing. He said that my service hours had been low, and asked me what I was averaging. I told him, probably 5 or 6 hours a month, and he replied, "Come see me when you average 7 and we'll talk about it."
Oral sex is another area where the WTS has felt the need to put restrictions on. Again this should be a matter of conscience or personal preference between a husband and wife. But just like with the movies a couple can be severely counseled and even disfellowshipped if they are known to practice oral sex.
When the 1978 WT article on sex practices within the marriage came out, liberalizing the previous policy and ending disfellowshipping for oral sex (at least until 1983 when they changed it again), there was a lot of discussion in our congregation. I had just moved from another congregation, having recently married my (now) ex-wife. I had been a ministerial servant in the other congregation.
At a friend's house where several couples were present, all JW's, the topic came up. Unknown to me, the interpretation that the local elders had placed upon the WT article was that oral sex was still strictly prohibited and considered a gross perversion; the only change was that the elders were no longer being asked to investigate and disfellowship people for this horrible sin. Several of those present expressed this view; I disagreed. To me, the article clearly established sexual practices in marriage as a matter for individual conscience, and nobody's business except the couple's.
Of course, I was promptly reported to the elders as "advocating oral sex." This led to any number of heated discussions on several occasions. On one occasion, at a meeting, where I had been pre-scheduled to say the opening prayer, the presiding overseer approached me during the song as I was preparing to walk to the platform, and asked if I was "clean" enough to ask Jehovah's blessing on behalf of the congregation. I responded that my conscience was completely clear, and, to his credit, he accepted that without pushing the matter further. I went to the platform, a bit shaken, and asked the prayer. Of course, had he done that a few years later, I'd have told him to get someone else and walked out of the Hall, but I wasn't at that independent stage at that time.
Rap and certain rock music is still another issue where the society has put limitations on. Instead of allowing the individual to use their own discretion of what might be acceptable and un-acceptable in these areas of music the WTS has made a blanket statement saying that all rap music and certain types of rock music are bad.
And before rap, it was heavy metal, and before that, disco, and before that, rock and roll, and before that, jazz. If you look back in the publications, you'll find articles condemning ALL of these musical forms. The Society has
always disapproved of whatever music is popular with young people at any given time.
In 1969, my application for regular pioneer service was denied because I listened to the Beatles' music.
A few years before I left the organization (which would place this incident in the early 90's), a sister was going around the congregation saying that we shouldn't do the Twist, because she had found a 30-year-old WT article condemning the dance, and of course, Jehovah's standards do not change.
Men are not allowed to wear beards or anything outside of short hair styles. How the WTS came up with this I have no idea. I fail to see how a man can be identified as being spiritual or not in regards to how he wears his facial hair. As long as a person is clean and presentable there should'nt be any issue with their appearance.
In truly pharisaical fashion (can you say that 3 times fast?), the WT presumes to set dress and grooming standards for its adherents, and, of course, these standards are as gelatinous as their opinions of music. I remember when colored dress shirts and wire-rim glasses would be enough to keep you off the platform. Flared pants were a major no-no. The really strange part is that there are NO principles in the Bible that impact this area. The Bible says to be modest in grooming, and that's it! Is a pink dress shirt less modest than a white one? Are wire rims less modest than horn rims? Is a beard less modest than a shaven face? How absurd!
With regard to beards, there are certainly no commands in the Bible to shave one's face (even though I prefer mine that way). If you want to be completely Biblical about it, you'd have to go back to the Old Testament where men were commanded NOT to shave. Beards were mandatory! When did God change his mind about them? And if he did, why not just stop them from growing?
The celebration of birthdays and Thanksgiving. There are no pagan origins involved in these celebrations but if it becomes known that a person celebrates these then they will be admonished or disciplined.
Where does the Bible say not to celebrate days that may have pagan origins? The wedding ring has a pagan origin, but Witnesses use them, based upon the reasoning that what is really important is the meaning of the symbol now, not what its origins were in the murky past. Well, why not apply that reasoning to celebrating Christmas or other holidays? Christmas today is regarded as a time to honor Christ. Why not accept that meaning and disregard the so-called pagan origins of the celebration? To make an allowance for others to do so would be in harmony with Romans 14:5,6:
5
One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.
6
He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.
This is the only scriptural counsel about celebrating or not celebrating certain days. It addresses the subject directly and it seems very clear to me. Why try to override it indirectly with 'principles' such as "quit touching the unclean thing" that do not and were not intended to apply to the subject at hand, when the quoted scripture is both clear and direct on the subject?
Perhaps one of the biggest issues is the use of the scripture at Proverbs 4:18. (the light keeps getting brighter) I've read that entire chapter and I fail to see how it applies to changes in doctrines in teaching. Its interesting to note that the apostles never used that scripture when they had their misunderstandings of the bible.
The context of Proverbs 4:18 clearly indicates that it is the righteous person's walk with God that is "shining ever brighter till the full light of day." But the Society needs to justify its constant doctrinal waffling, and this scripture, taken out of context, fills the bill. How sad that Jehovah's Witnesses are in no sense of the word, Bible students. If they were, more of them, like you, might see through the charade that the Watchtower Society has devised.
Tom
"The truth was obscure, too profound and too pure; to live it you had to explode." ---Bob Dylan
