Jehovah's Witnesses about to be banned in Russia

[Logically]

The Russian Federation is in the process of banning the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
(Like they did in the Soviet era.)

As they put it: **“Russia’s Supreme Court on April 5 will consider the Justice Ministry’s request for declaring Jehovah’s Witnesses an extremist organization and banning and terminating its activities in the country.” **

Yes, Extremism.
Despite being non-political, non-violent and insisting all members live by the Bible’s moral standards (including obeying the law) - we are apparently pretty much the same as ISIS!

Below is an article in the Guardian newspaper about it. (one of many mentions in international newspapers)

theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2017/mar/09/in-russia-the-persecution-of-jehovahs-witnesses-begins-all-over-again

This has actually been building up for years.
Russia is the only country in the world where our official website (JW.org) is blocked.
One by one, pretty much all our literature has been banned as extremist over the last few years. Did you see that Watchtower article last month about dealing with teen depression? - illegal in Russia. The “How to make your Family life happy” book - banned.
And not content with that, the Police have been raiding Kingdom Halls and there is video footage of the authorities planting copies of the banned literature and “discovering it” a few moments later!
Below is an example on JW.org. (So if you are in Russia you won’t be able to open it)

jw.org/en/news/legal/by-region/russia/police-planting-evidence-video/

Jehovah’s Witnesses were banned for most of the Soviet era. Stalin deported us to Siberian work camps, yet when the Soviet Union collapsed there were 10,000 JW’s in Russia. There are 170,000 now.

It will be interesting to see where this goes.

Any thoughts?

 

[dshix]

It is very troubling to see this kind of religious persecution going on. Even though I am strongly in opposition to JW doctrines, it is still terrible to see this happening to them.

 

[Logically]

It is very troubling to see this kind of religious persecution going on. Even though I am strongly in opposition to JW doctrines, it is still terrible to see this happening to them.

Thank you.

 

[Eruvande]

It’s most unfortunate, to say the least. While I do not agree with Witness teachings, I have always welcomed them in for a conversation about our respective beliefs and found them to be friendly and courteous. I think their teachings are spiritually questionable, but it’s not the state’s job to mind the souls of it’s citizens.

 

[Kielbasi]

I think their teachings are spiritually questionable, but it’s not the state’s job to mind the souls of it’s citizens.

Russia is a secular state, the “souls of their citizens” isn’t their priority.

The problems they have with the JW’s are their refusal of military service, their “extreme” missionary methods, and the fact that the JW’s are excessively critical of the Orthodox Church in the way other minority religions in the Russian Federation (Catholics and Protestants) aren’t.

 

[Eruvande]

I’m aware of that. They are still a politically neutral organization primarily concerned with religious matters. But yes, Russia has it’s own agenda, and ultimately it doesn’t much matter what I in the West thinks about what they legislate for.

 

[adf417]

Persecution is wrong no mater the reasons, no mater who the target! It is simply terrible.

On the other hand, if it is like it is here in the US where there are JW’s receiving military pensions from their spouses military survice, I can see the double standard and this too is equally wrong.

Peace!!!

 

[PseuTonym]

if it is like it is here in the US where there are JW’s receiving military pensions from their spouses military service, I can see the double standard and this too is equally wrong.

Can you explain what the situation is, and explain why the phrase “double standard” is appropriate?

Are you saying that the US military pension system takes into consideration the religion of the spouse of military personnel, and that it shouldn’t take into consideration that religion?

Or are you saying that the US military pension system doesn’t take into consideration the religion of the spouse of military personnel, and that it ought to take into consideration that religion?

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan asserted in his book that the war in Iraq was “largely about oil.” Now, if Greenspan was correct, and if the US military generates money via plunder, then anybody who as a matter of principle opposes military activities could be considered as potentially reducing the material wealth generated by military activities.

On the other hand, if the word “defense” in the following website address is honestly descriptive rather than a deceptive euphemism …

defense.gov/
The official web site for the Department of Defense and the starting point for finding U.S. military information

… then taxpayers pay for military pensions, and military personnel earn pensions for themselves and their spouses by defending the lives and property of taxpayers.

It’s difficult for me to imagine a box on an income tax form in the USA that requires you to specify a code identifying your spouse’s religion, with an effect on the income tax payable.

Does the US military pension system actually work like that? Or are you saying that the US military pension system doesn’t work like that, but that you believe it should?

 

[PseuTonym]

Yes, Extremism.
Despite being non-political, non-violent and insisting all members live by the Bible’s moral standards (including obeying the law) - we are apparently pretty much the same as ISIS!

Suppose you worked for a corrupt government office where bribes are routinely requested and received, and suppose that you personally refused to accept any share of the bribe money. How would people deal with you? They might be pleased that their share is bigger because none goes to you. However, they might consider the surplus as not enough to compensate for the possibility that you will eventually report their illegal activities. Also, they may be offended in the sense that a refusal to accept bribe money creates a contrast and draws attention to the fact that they are accepting bribe money.

After the long introduction here is the obvious idea: they may accuse you of accepting bribe money, first to each other, and then later to outsiders. The idea would be to send a message. They identify bribe money, the actual issue, and simply reverse the roles. After all, they cannot harm your reputation by saying that you don’t accept bribe money. So they rehearse the accusation that you do accept bribe money, hinting that they will begin to spread the accusation beyond the circle of the government department.

Similarly, the non-violence of JWs is precisely the issue. The government of Russia wants its citizens to participate in organized, extreme violence. “Extremism” is a code-word for violence.

ISIS could learn from the tactics of the government of Russia. ISIS could draw attention to the case of Anders Behring Breivik, and classify documents that describe criminal law in Norway as “extremist literature.” If Breivik had done to members of ISIS what he did to people in Norway, then he would probably receive many deep wounds from a knife that hasn’t been sharpened in a long time.

 

[ClearWater]

I’m sorry to hear about them being banned.

 

[Logically]

…
Similarly, the non-violence of JWs is precisely the issue. The government of Russia wants its citizens to participate in organized, extreme violence. “Extremism” is a code-word for violence…

So is the principle found at 1 Peter 4:4 at work here?

- “They are puzzled that you do not continue running with them in the same decadant course of debauchery, so they speak abusively of you.”

 

[josh987654321]

Any thoughts?

Yes, very disappointing and concerning. One might believe JW to be extremist, but to ban or outlaw it when it poses no threat to ordinary citizens is something irrational and unjust. I have not seen any JW’s commit any acts of terror or attack ordinary citizens.

I think JW’s are misguided and mistaken in some of their beliefs, but they are certainly not a danger to society to be outlawed.

What are their reasons for declaring it an extremist organization and feeling like they need to outlaw it? I hope it doesn’t succeed, because this appears very irrational and unjust and alarming if it does get passed in Russia.

I hope this has helped

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Jomann]

I was a JW and their doctrine of shunning and blood are awful.

But I don’t agree in banning them through government.

Their own doctrines alone would be a reason to anybody logically ban them.

 

[josh987654321]

I was a JW and their doctrine of shunning and blood are awful.

Shunning could be wrong depending on what it is and the extremity of it (Very subjective on exactly what that is), but certainly not a reason to ban, blood on the other hand, I have not heard of this before, could you please elaborate?

But I don’t agree in banning them through government.

I agree.

Their own doctrines alone would be a reason to anybody logically ban them.

Could you please elaborate?

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[MartinJordan]

Here’s another perspective from my side of the woods.

According to the US state dept about my country regarding JWs :

There was no change in the status of respect for religious freedom during the period covered by this report. The Government has banned the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Unification Church. The Government does not tolerate speech or actions that it deems could adversely affect racial or religious harmony.

Source : state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2005/51529.htm

MJ

 

[Logically]

Shunning could be wrong depending on what it is and the extremity of it (Very subjective on exactly what that is), but certainly not a reason to ban, blood on the other hand, I have not heard of this before, could you please elaborate?
…
God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh

The comment on shunning would be to do with our following scriptures like 1 corinthians 5:11. *…“stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral…not even eating with such a man.” *

Here is our official take on this:
jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/

The comment on “blood” will be to do with our stand on bloodless medicine because of what the apostles said at Acts 15:20.* “abstain from blood” *

Again, here is the official reasoning:
jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/bible-about-blood-transfusion/

(Both links to JW.org, so not available for anyone wanting clarification of this in Russia)

Thanks for your comments Josh.

 

[josh987654321]

The comment on shunning would be to do with our following scriptures like 1 corinthians 5:11. *…“stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral…not even eating with such a man.” *

Here is our official take on this:
jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/

Oh okay, I knew of that one, I think JW’s take that to an extreme, but certainly not justification to ban JW.

The comment on “blood” will be to do with our stand on bloodless medicine because of what the apostles said at Acts 15:20.* “abstain from blood” *

Again, here is the official reasoning:
jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/bible-about-blood-transfusion/

I knew of that one too, sad when an old testament passage like that is taken to the extreme (I would also argue out of context) and one is denied life saving treatment.

Nevertheless, if that’s what the poster meant by Shunning and Blood, than I still stand by my original comments.

Thanks for your comments Josh.

No worries

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Lea101]

they are banned here in one way or the other in my country as well bc of military and such (as mentioned by the other poster)

I don’t know how to feel about it because I can see both sides clearly, but it’s a pity because I have seen many lovely jws

 

[josh987654321]

they are banned here in one way or the other in my country as well bc of military and such (as mentioned by the other poster)

I don’t know how to feel about it because I can see both sides clearly, but it’s a pity because I have seen many lovely jws

In relation to the other side, JW’s have never really been a majority and it’s not like banning them will all of a sudden make them abandon their beliefs and join the military if needed. So In all aspects, I can’t understand the rationality behind banning them, unless of course people use JW to get out of military service, in which I think making the military mandatory or things like conscription unjust anyway. They also don’t vote, so it’s not like politicians would be worrying about that front either.

I hope this has helped

God Bless You

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[Vonsalza]

Russia is a secular state, the “souls of their citizens” isn’t their priority.

Not particularly true. They may have a technically secular constitution, but it’s no secret that Russia sees itself as the heir of fallen Orthodox Byzantium.

I make no effort to hide my disdain for the JW. But to be jailed for your religion? Nonsense.