Great post Auldsoul!
Tor
Great news. The WTS did not commit spiritual prostitution with UN.
by thirdwitness 597 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
toreador
-
cabasilas
Thirdwitness,
I just want to recap a discussion we had earlier. You’d stated:
I, thirdwitness, share these ideals. Just what are those ideals of the UN? “to maintain international peace and security; to suppress acts of aggression that threaten world peace; to encourage friendly relations among nations; to protect the fundamental freedoms of all peoples without discrimination based on race, sex, language, or religion ; and to achieve international cooperation in solving economic, social, and cultural problems." Does the Watchtower Society and Jehovah's Witnesses share those same ideals ? They most certainly do — and have done so for years before the UN formed! It is understandable why NGOs should share these same ideals, for the UN would not want to assist or help any organization which promotes contrary ideas. Do you share these ideals? Or are you for war, discrimination, genocide, curtailing of freedom and liberties, religious intolerance etc etc?
I followed with these questions:
You highlighted some of the ideals and did not highlight others. Do you share the UN ideal to "maintain international peace and security" and "to acheive international cooperation in solving economic, social, and cultural problems"? Don't Jehovah's Witnesses believe that only God's Kingdom can do those things and that the UN is guilty of acting as a counterfeit of what only God's Kingdom can truly achieve?
In your next reply you tried to establish that associated NGOs could reject basic UN Charter ideals:
And as respects sharing the 'ideals of the UN' you are overlooking one little thing. Even the 1996 resolution by the ECOSOC concerning an ECOSOC NGO’s support of the UN makes the following statement about that type of NGO (remember, the Society was not an ECOSOC NGO): “3. The organization shall undertake to support the work of the United Nations and to promote knowledge of its principles and activities, in accordance with its own aims and purposes and the nature and scope of its competence and activities.” Note that even an ECOSOC NGO, which is in a consultative relationship with the UN, isn't even obligated to support all the work of the UN . It says its support must be “in accordance with its own aims and purposes”. This means that the particular ECOSOC NGO would not support all the aims of the UN, but only those “aims and purposes” in the “scope of its competence and activities.”
In my next reply I took issue with your interpretation:
There's a difference between supporting the "work of the UN" and agreeing to support the ideals of the UN Charter. A particular NGO might object to a facet of a certain programme being undertaken by one of the agencies of the UN. But, basic to its affiliation would be support for the basic ideals of the UN Charter. An affiliated NGO cannot pick and choose which ideals of the UN Charter it will accept and which ones it will reject. Implicit with affiliation with the DPI/UN was a committment to support the UN Charter's ideals--all of them. Now, an affiliated NGO might object to a particular "work" of the UN--such as support of abortion rights or some other controversial issue. That does not permit an affiliated NGO to reject basic UN Charter goals, however.
Going back to those basic ideals of the UN Charter. The complete listing is here:
http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter1.htm
The Purposes of the United Nations are:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
Think about this: You said you believed an associated NGO could be permitted to reject some of these ideals. Do you believe that an NGO which supported genocide or slavery or rejected human rights would be allowed to associate with a part of the UN because it would be “in accordance with its own aims and purposes ” ? Could a neo-Nazi NGO affiliate with the DPI of the UN? There is no “loophole” to allow for associated NGOs to pick and choose which ideals of the Charter they accept.
Your website cites page 6 of a 1994 brochure of the UN/DPI which asks the question: "Who are eligible for association with DPI? Non-profit organizations which..." See here:
http://www.jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/thechangingworldofngos.html
Yet, it does not cite page 7 of the same 1994 brochure which can be found here:
http://www.randytv.com/secret/DPI%20NGO%20Brochure%201994%20page%207.jpg
Page 7 goes on to say of these associating organizations: "can prove during the initial 2 years of association with DPI, that they support the United Nations by featuring U.N. information in their publications and outreach activities."
From Internet Archive is this link dated June 19, 1997 which contains the brochure "NGOs and the Department of Information." (This site says the brochure was published in October, 1995):
http://web.archive.org/web/19970619033202/http://www.un.org/MoreInfo/ngolink/brochure.htm
As to reponsibilities of those associating with the DPI, it says:
"Since the founding days of the United Nations in San Francisco, NGOs have made valuable contributions to the international community by drawing attention to issues, suggesting ideas and programmes, disseminating information and mobilizing public opinion in support of the United Nations and its specialized agencies. Association with DPI constitutes a commitment to that effect. Associated NGOs are expected to devote a portion of their information programmes to promoting knowledge of the United Nations' principles and activities. They are also expected to keep the DPI/NGO Section abreast of their activities by regularly providing samples of information materials." (Emphasis added)
Press releases from the DPI in 1992 stated this: "To be granted association with the DPI, NGO's must have national or international standing, support the Charter of the United Nations, have a broadly based membership and possess the resources necessary for effective outreach." See:
http://www.randytv.com/secret/feb92dpia.jpg http://www.randytv.com/secret/feb92dpib.jpg http://www.randytv.com/secret/aug92dpic.jpg
This same terminology used in 1992 was used in the 2001 letter from the UN DPI which explained the disassociation of the Watchtower Society ("support and respect for the principles of the Charter of the United Nations"):
http://www.randytv.com/secret/unfax.jpg This apparently is how the UN DPI viewed things as early as 1992, as the above cited press releases indicate. Did the Watchtower Society really misunderstand all of this?
-
stevenyc
thirdwitnoid: you want me off because I am proving that you and others or trying to mislead unwary ones and are publishing false information against JWs. And the more you believe that, the more you will help readers realise what they are part of. Like I said, I DO NOT WANT YOU OFF! How plain can I make it for you? I don't want you simply cut'n'pasting from your web site and blog site as an answer to possed questions. I don't want you promoting, advertising, your site CONTINUOUSLY, and against direction from the moderators. These are the rules you continually break: Rule 1:Insulting, threatening or provoking language Rule 2: Inciting hatred on the basis of ... religion, Rule 4:but please help us to avoid breaching copyright by naming its author and publication. Rule 5:Please don't add the same comment to more than one forum. Rule 6:Advertising, Your purpose is to PROMOTE YOUR website. Rule 11: Publicly disputing or arguing about moderator decisions. Once again I'll state, for the upteenth time, I do NOT want you to leave this discussion board. I honestly believe you are performing a valuble service to the community of thinking Jehovah's witnesses. I am only requesting that you post within the guidlines. As a show of good faith, in that you understand me, how about a debate on a topic NOT part of either your web site or blog? Would you like that? steve
-
hillary_step
The irony is that while these arguments regarding the minutiae of WTS interpretation of scripture and its behavior where the UN is concerned rage on, page after page, a thread which would make all these issues moot is not being addressed by ThirdWitness. In fact I suspect that he will not even attempt to enter into debate in these sort of threads, realizing that he is completely out of his depth.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/12/119655/1.ashx
Why do such threads make all these debates with ThirdWitness needless? Well, ThirdWitness relies on his belief in a dependable Bible on which to base all his arguments. If the Bible is proved not to be defendable as a book of chronology and science, he has nothing on which to base any of his arguments. Both he, and the WTS collapse in smoke and ashes.
Readers and lurkers may note that I have repeatedly invited ThirdWitness and for that matter Scholar to a debate that has as its theme whether the Bible can be relied on as a book of science and chronology. They have both completely ignored these frequent invitations. Why? Well, because they know that they will be be left holding a very damaged theological psyche which might demand of them and honest appraisal of their present belief system.
The intellectual dishonesty in ignoring such debates, when they are prepared to argue ridiculous issues of interpretation of the Bible for weeks and weeks is evidence of their real motive - fear of truth. This fear mixed with a bold arrogance, is a dangerous mix on which the WTS relies to keep its adherents in a prison of ignorance.
HS
-
AuldSoul
In a nutshell, thirdwitness, here are my chief concerns over the entire UN/DPI association issue:
(1) The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. applied to join the UN/DPI in the fall of 1991 and their application was accepted in February of 1992. As a token of their having become part of thge UN/DPI, they received membership credentials which granted specific privileges not available to organizations not associated to the UN/DPI. They maintained that relationship until October 2001. This relationship stands in direct violation of the standards on political neutrality (with specific regard to voluntary membership relationships) set out in Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry (1983) and Organized to Do Jehovah's Will (2005).
I quoted both paragraphs in an earlier post and invited you to demonstrate why these paragraphs did not apply to the relationship we were discussing. You chose not to do so.
(2) The Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses (CCJW) intentionally confuses the nature of the relationship in answering publisher's concerns on the matter through their lack of candor. The following would be sufficient as a statement to explain the entire situation with candor.
Dear [Brother/Sister] X,
We understand the dismay you must be experiencing at having learned these facts. Please allow us to apologize and explain.
The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. has always been a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO). In the fall of 1991, we applied to associate the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. to the United Nations Department of Public Information (UN/DPI). Since we are an NGO we could not and did not become part of the UN. However, we did become part of the UN/DPI. This relationship was one that should never have taken place and for which we are deeply remorseful. A series of oversights and misunderstandings led to the formation of the relationship and as soon as we realized what had actually happened, we immediately requested to dissolve the inappropriate relationship with the UN/DPI.
It is our hope that our temporary relationship with the UN/DPI will not stumble you or throw you off course.That is candor. Of the variety that one expects from an organization claiming to be directed by Holy Spirit.
(3) The lack of any semblance of a demonstration of remorse or even frank admission of culpability on the part of the CCJW demonstrates a gross lack of repentance over their actions.
(4) The attempt to shift blame away from themselves for the wrongdoing they never even directly admit having committeed shows a further lack of humility and a lack of repentance on their part.
(5) There has been no attempt to right the wrong done or to accept responsibility for causing the stumbling of hundred of JWs.
Any elder, if presented with conduct of a similar nature following gross wrongdoing, would be unable to find evidence of repentance in the actions of the CCJW pursuant to the wrongdoing committeed. Stopping wrong conduct is not all that is required Scripturally for a determination of repentance. This is, in short, the summary of my main issues with the CCJW regarding their 10-year membership to the UN/DPI. I suggest that you cannot demonstrate where I am even partly wrong on any of these 5 points. And when you find that you can't prove me wrong there are really only two alternatives left open to you: Continue misrepresenting the organization in a more favorable light than the facts allow for, or stop lying in favor of the organization.
The only question for you becomes, for how much did they really sell the field? (Acts 5:1-11) If you choose to represent it as anything other than reality, you will share their fate.
AuldSoul
-
cabasilas
AuldSoul,
I agree with your post and that's an interesting construction of a more appropriate response from the WTS on the issue. I would still find it hard to believe, however, that it would have all been a misunderstanding. I think they knew what they were doing but did it to achieve a better relationship with various UN agencies to further their concerns about human rights (i.e., the persecution of JWs in various countries). But, that would be the best response they could have given.
-
AuldSoul
cabasilas,
I think they knew what they were doing but did it to achieve a better relationship with various UN agencies to further their concerns about human rights (i.e., the persecution of JWs in various countries).
While I now agree with you I cannot prove it, so it is just speculation on my part. My speculation is strengthened by their idiotic, knee-jerk reaction to the discovery whole thing. It certainly creates the impression there was something to hide beyond library access.
But if they had responded to inquiries along the lines of my suggestion they would have impressed the hell out of most JWs, including myself, who came to know of the situation. If they'd become even more proactive and published an admission and apology similar to the one I wrote in a little box in the Watchtower magazine they would have convinced me even moreso of their humility and candor, the two qualities that I associate MOST readily to the operation of holy spirit on individuals.
I do not know for sure that my suggested response is not 100% truthful. But I do know for sure that their many responses fired off to inquirers after this issue are NOT 100% truthful. Or even 50% truthful. thirdwitness knows it, too. He defends it because he feels he must out of loyalty, but it is plainly indefensible.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul -
hillary_step
The WTS has joined the UN is delivering much needed goods for those living in crisis areas in Africa. The only stipulation made was that their own goods be unmarked by any logos etc.
If you search back in the Boards history, you will find my posts and evidence for this.
All this information has been done to death in the past. If the search facility is not working on the site, try Google.
HS
-
AuldSoul
Organized to Accomplish Our Ministry (1983) p. 151, par. 1
Concerning those who renounced their Christian faith in his day, the apostle John wrote: “They went out from us, but they were not of our sort; for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us.” (1 John 2:19) Also, a person might renounce his place in the Christian congregation by his actions, such as by becoming part of a secular organization the objective of which is contrary to the Bible and, hence, is under judgment by Jehovah God. (Compare Revelation 19:17-21; Isaiah 2:4) So if a person who is a Christian chooses to join those who are disapproved by God, it would be fitting for the congregation to acknowledge by a brief announcement that he has disassociated himself and is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Such a person would be viewed in the same way as a disfellowshipped person.Organized to Do Jehovah's Will (2005) p. 155, par. 2
Concerning those who renounced their Christian faith in his day, the apostle John wrote: “They went out from us, but they were not of our sort; for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us.” (1 John 2:19) For example, a person might renounce his place in the Christian congregation by his actions, such as by becoming part of a secular organization that has objectives contrary to the Bible and, hence, is under judgment by Jehovah God. (Isa. 2:4; Rev. 19:17-21) If a person who is a Christian chooses to join those who are disapproved by God, a brief announcement is made to the congregation, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” Such a person is treated in the same way as a disfellowshipped person. The presiding overseer should approve this announcement.For your convenience in considering the above posts, thirdwitness. Note that these paragraphs specifically discuss voluntary attachments to SECULAR organizations. They do not address attachments to RELIGIOUS organizations. Please restrain your comments to the arena of SECULAR organizations and stop raising your overused strawman.
I have a few specific questions for you about these paragraphs, thirdwitness. I want you to pay SPECIAL attention to the fact that I do NOT intimate that the WTS joined the UN in answering these questions:
(1) Is the UN/DPI a secular (as opposed to religious) organization?
(2) According to JWs, does the UN/DPI have any objectives contrary to the Bible?
(3) According to JWs, is the UN/DPI under judgment by Jehovah God?
(4) Did the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. become part of the the UN/DPI?
(5) According to JWs, is the UN/DPI approved or diapproved by God?
(6) According to JWs, are any of the the other members of the UN/DPI disapproved by God?
As soon as you answer these, you will know why this is a big deal to me. I suspect you have already figured it out. I suspect you now know I am right. I suspect you already know your arguments on your Web site do not accurately represent the relationship or the nature of the wrongdoing they actually committed.
I look forward to what will hopefully be a considered reply.
AuldSoul
-
badboy
QUESTION TO 3W, IS NOT THE UN SUPPOSED TO THE THE BEAST 666?
