The Source of JW Persecution in Russia

[TrueTomHarley]

“I was just a boy when Stalin exiled my family to Siberia merely because we were Jehovah’s Witnesses. It is sad and reprehensible that my children and grandchildren should be facing a similar fate. Never did I expect that we would again face the threat of religious persecution in modern Russia,” says Vasiliy Kalin, as Russia petitions the Supreme Court to ban Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Of course, it’s all going to go against us eventually in this system of things. When Jesus said his followers would be hailed before courts, it wasn’t so that they could receive ‘good citizenship’ plaques. When Jesus himself was dragged before Pilate, he didn’t sweet-talk his way out of it, did he?

It’s all the doings of the ‘house’ church. Many countries have house churches, who agree to be strictly subservient to the state. Russia, once officially atheist, found they could not stamp out the urge to worship, so they settled on the house church, which they seek to harness as a force for national unity. “What can we do for you?” they ask the house church. “Take out the competition,” is the reply.

Putin doesn’t care, most likely. It’s not his thing. “Give the house church what it wants,” he reasons. “That way I keep them out of my hair.” After all, he has a country to run. It was just that way with Pilate, who tried to get Jesus off, but in the end, gave in to fanatics.

‘What are they saying about me, here?’ said Paul to the Jewish leaders in Rome. ‘Are they digging up any dirt on me?’ But there was no internet in the first century, and snail mail was snail mail. “We have not received letters about you from Judea, nor have any of the brothers who came from there reported or spoken anything bad about you. But we think it proper to hear from you what your thought are, for truly as regards this sect, we know that it is spoken against everywhere,” they told him. (Acts 28:21-22)

It is a mark of true religion today. Depend upon it to be “spoken against everywhere.”

Surely, the house church make Russia look like utter fools on the world stage. You cannot view jw.org, banned in Russia and Russia alone, and think for one moment that it is extremist. One would think that ISIS would have taught the Russians what extremism is. Still, while we hate persecution and we pray for our Russian brothers under trial, persecution does often turn out for advancement of the good news. “Why are they making trouble for the Jehovahs?” some people ask. “They’re nice people.”

"In their literature, there are some very harsh statements and very insulting statements about other faiths," says Alexander Dvorkin, a former Russian Orthodox priest who now teaches the history of religion and cult studies at St. Tikhon University in Moscow. "Of course, every religion has the right to criticize other faiths, but that should be done in a non-insulting manner, especially if you are talking about [my faith] the faith of the majority." (brackets mine)

The reason you can and should criticize other faiths is that, as any non-religious person knows, religion has historically served as chief cheerleader of war and killing. That’s why a growing number of persons would like to ban it.

“Dvorkin says that the Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian because they don't believe in the divinity of Christ.” (from NPR) Got it? It’s also violence at the hands of Trinitarians. A more intolerant bunch you will never see.

[Ann O'Maly]

5 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

“Dvorkin says that the Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian because they don't believe in the divinity of Christ.” (from NPR) Got it? It’s also violence at the hands of Trinitarians. A more intolerant bunch you will never see.

  So how come Trinitarian groups are being targeted as well?

RUSSIA: Alleged "missionary activity" prosecutions continue

July 2016 – March 2017 prosecutions ...

... Prosecutions have involved individuals or communities belonging to the following religious communities: independent Protestants – 18; Jehovah's Witnesses – 13; the Society of Krishna Consciousness (Hare Krishna devotees) – 7; Baptists – 5; Seventh-Day Adventists – 4; Buddhists – 2; New Apostolic Church – 1; Ukrainian Reformed Orthodox Church – 1; and Salvation Army – 1. One village elder who permitted an independent Protestant church to display a banner at a village festival in the Mari-El Republic was also charged.

[TrueTomHarley]

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

  So how come Trinitarian groups are being targeted as well?

RUSSIA: Alleged "missionary activity" prosecutions continue

July 2016 – March 2017 prosecutions ...

... Prosecutions have involved individuals or communities belonging to the following religious communities: independent Protestants – 18; Jehovah's Witnesses – 13; the Society of Krishna Consciousness (Hare Krishna devotees) – 7; Baptists – 5; Seventh-Day Adventists – 4; Buddhists – 2; New Apostolic Church – 1; Ukrainian Reformed Orthodox Church – 1; and Salvation Army – 1. One village elder who permitted an independent Protestant church to display a banner at a village festival in the Mari-El Republic was also charged.

Did the post say anywhere that no other group was being given a hard time? Nonetheless, 'banned' is different than 'targeted.' We have been 'targeted' for a long time. Only now might it escalate to 'banned.'

[Ann O'Maly]

15 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Did the post say anywhere that no other group was being given a hard time?

The point slipped right by you. You appeared to be blaming the 'intolerant' Trinitarian bunch for the JWs' persecution in Russia. However, other Trinitarian groups are also being persecuted. Therefore, it doesn't make sense to scapegoat the Trinitarians for JWs' ills because Trinitarian groups are in the same boat. You follow?

While I disagree with the ban on JWs, I agree with this statement by Alexander Dvorkin:

"In their literature, there are some very harsh statements and very insulting statements about other faiths. Of course, every religion has the right to criticize other faiths, but that should be done in a non-insulting manner, especially if you are talking about the faith of the majority." - Source

Sometimes, the Org invites backlash by being so vitriolic about other Christian faiths (it's interesting that they don't attack Islam in the same way). Then when the Org and JWs are on the receiving end of harsh criticism, all of a sudden 'it's so unfair.' (Matt. 7:2)

[Evacuated]

1 hour ago, Ann O'Maly said:

the Org invites backlash

You mean like provocatively dressed women invite assault?

[Anna]

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

Sometimes, the Org invites backlash by being so vitriolic about other Christian faiths

I have not read or heard ANYTHING vitriolic by the Org. regarding other Christian faiths (besides perhaps Rutherford's remarks back in the 40's) Could you perhaps give a few examples?

[TrueTomHarley]

4 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

The point slipped right by you. You appeared to be blaming the 'intolerant' Trinitarian bunch for the JWs' persecution in Russia. However, other Trinitarian groups are also being persecuted. Therefore, it doesn't make sense to scapegoat the Trinitarians for JWs' ills because Trinitarian groups are in the same boat. You follow?

Yes, of course I follow, Ann. Leave it alone. It's but icing on the cake of persecutors. I never said it was the prime reason. The NPR story [not me] stated: “Dvorkin says that the Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian because they don't believe in the divinity of Christ." What do you expect his further rationale to be?

'Fine reason to leave them be, they're nice people'?      or

'All the more reason to drop a ton of bricks on them'?

[Ann O'Maly]

20 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

You mean like provocatively dressed women invite assault?

I find that remark distasteful, as well as not even remotely analogous.

17 hours ago, Anna said:

I have not read or heard ANYTHING vitriolic by the Org. regarding other Christian faiths (besides perhaps Rutherford's remarks back in the 40's) Could you perhaps give a few examples?

Just search through the WT Library. There are hundreds of examples. Christendom, its churches, its clergy, its beliefs and practices have been called 'apostate,' 'disgusting,' 'worthless,' 'deserving of destruction,' 'God-dishonoring,' 'liars,' 'pagan,' 'blasphemous,' 'faithless,' etc, etc, etc.

17 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Yes, of course I follow, Ann.

Good.

[Anna]

5 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

There are hundreds of examples. Christendom, its churches, its clergy, its beliefs and practices have been called 'apostate,' 'disgusting,' 'worthless,' 'deserving of destruction,' 'God-dishonoring,' 'liars,' 'pagan,' 'blasphemous,' 'faithless,' etc, etc, etc.

Of course, taken out of context and the way you put it may sound insulting but still NOT vitriolic. In context if the cap fits....and the truth hurts....

Regardless, would you want to retaliate in such a manner, like a child, throwing a tantrum and getting "daddy" (Putin)  to go fight your battles? "We are going to get daddy to go take care of these nasty people calling us names and converting our people, adding to the already dwindling numbers of (Orthodox) church goers. We are going to get daddy to ban all other religions so that people don't have any other choice but to chose us." It's sad, and laughable at the same time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/24/world/europe/24church.html

P.S. What about the other religions, what have they done to deserve persecution?

P.P.S They like to use a lot of words, and emotive language, but what do those words actually mean?? Example:

“We deplore those who are led astray — those Jehovah’s Witnesses, Baptists, evangelicals, Pentecostals and many others who cut Christ’s robes like bandits, who are like the soldiers who crucified Christ, who ripped apart Christ’s holy coat,” declared the priest, the Rev. Aleksei D. Zorin.

[Evacuated]

9 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

I find that remark distasteful, as well as not even remotely analogous.

Thanks for sharing your feelings and your viewpoint. 

[TrueTomHarley]

10 hours ago, Ann O'Maly said:

There are hundreds of examples. Christendom, its churches, its clergy, its beliefs and practices have been called 'apostate,' 'disgusting,' 'worthless,' 'deserving of destruction,' 'God-dishonoring,' 'liars,' 'pagan,' 'blasphemous,' 'faithless,' etc, etc, etc.

At the non-Witness church, they neglect to teach what happens to the dead / the hope for those who have died. They like the 'immortal soul' model. When an infant dies, they say it's because God has an opening in his beautiful garden and only your baby can fill it. Surely you'll be comforted by that! What's that? You're not? Tough.

Ann has no problem with this.

At the non-Witness church, they neglect to teach the reason for evil and suffering. When people reel from atrocity, they say 'Shit happens. God works in mysterious ways. Had you voted another political party, it may not have been that way.

Ann has no problem with this. 

When war breaks out, the non-Witness church resumes its unfailing role as cheerleader. Could the World Wars have been fought without clergy herding parishioners on both sides into the war machine? Could Hitler have gotten off the ground without enthusiastic backing of the church? Even to have said 'no' probably would have stopped him in his tracks

Presumably, Ann does have at least a slight problem with that and would think criticism appropriate, but it must be respectful. It must be polite. Don't be vitriolic.

Even on her self-proclaimed cause of safeguarding children, Ann is conflicted. Does she have a problem with children being deluged with violence and perversion aimed at them as entertainment? Does she have a problem with children targeted with 24/7 advertising, even employing AI to do it? Does she have a problem with an adult world that profits from loading students up with tens of thousands of dollars of debt, crippling their future freedoms? She doesn't seen to, because she strives with all her might to take down the organization most proactive in safeguarding their youth from these things. 

How tiresome Ann is as she ignores everything to flail away at her single-focus issue - take down the 'org!'

"the dog has returned to his own vomit," Peter writes.

"Wow! Vomit! How cool is that?!" apostates say. "Let's roll in it!"

 

 

[JW Insider]

On 3/20/2017 at 4:06 PM, Anna said:

I have not read or heard ANYTHING vitriolic by the Org. regarding other Christian faiths (besides perhaps Rutherford's remarks back in the 40's) Could you perhaps give a few examples?

One problem might be the continuing support of Rutherford's remarks. Note how we understand expressions like "a third of the sea became as blood" in Revelation 8:8,9:

*** re chap. 21 pp. 134-135 pars. 21-22 Jehovah’s Plagues on Christendom ***
21 “And the second angel blew his trumpet. And something like a great mountain burning with fire was hurled into the sea. And a third of the sea became blood; and a third of the creatures that are in the sea which have souls died, and a third of the boats were wrecked.” (Revelation 8:8, 9) What does this frightful scene picture?
22 We may best understand it against the background of the convention of Jehovah’s people held in Los Angeles, California, U.S.A., on August 18-26, 1923. The featured Saturday afternoon talk by J. F. Rutherford was on the topic “Sheep and Goats.” The “sheep” were clearly identified as those righteously disposed persons who would inherit the earthly realm of God’s Kingdom. A resolution that followed drew attention to the hypocrisy of “apostate clergymen and ‘the principal of their flocks,’ who are worldly men of strong financial and political influence.” It called on the “multitude of the peace and order loving ones in the denominational churches . . . to withdraw themselves from the unrighteous ecclesiastical systems designated by the Lord as ‘Babylon’” and to ready themselves “to receive the blessings of God’s kingdom.” . . . Meantime, with the blast of the second trumpet, Jehovah pronounces judgment against a third of it—the unruly part that is in the realm of Christendom herself.

In the context of our current beliefs about Revelation, we are quick to include what amounts to death threats especially to all of Christendom's denominations, and continue to believe that when Revelation speaks of "trumpets" and "plagues" and "woes" that these often came through the very words of Rutherford. That's current belief, not past belief.