WTS involvement with politics/UN exaggerated?

by troubled 31 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hillary_step

  Hi Winston,

  You note:
  

  Just a side question HS, do you climb mountains?

  It would be more accurate to say that I did climb mountains ( mainly Alpine ). These days in my more senior years, the mountains tend to climb me!

  Best regards - HS
• 

  Moxy

  i would very much like more information on these subjects before drawing conclusions. in fact, im quite certain that the conclusions drawn by ex-jws regarding swaggart and CESNUR are greatly exaggerated. the NGO status is more interesting and id like to know more about this. H_S's comments about the 'appearance of evil' are interesting. how many times have you heard, "Even if you are not doing anything wrong, ask yourself what observers might think or if your brothers might be stumbled." how long ago was it that we would not even call ourselves a 'religion' because, though technically true, we did not want to be associated with other 'religions?'

  mox
• 

  Room 215

  Dear ``Troubled''
  Then why are you ``troubled?'' Apparently in your view the WTS remains above reproach in all these matters. Whether they are above reproach or not is a matter for debate (to my mind, they're reprehensible on every count, not necessarily for the actions themselves, but for what they've said about ``Babylon the Great and the UN).
  Just how keen do you think they are to have these matters brought out into the open, especially since they attributed the decision to change to a voluntary donation basis to ``our desire to separate oursleves from those who would commercialize religion?''
  Remember, these are the same people who df memebers who swim in a YMCA pool or who cut the grass at a local church as a salaried employee of a landscaper with a contract. They won't even allow the brothers to list the times and places of meetings in local yellow pages or in the newspapers under ``religious services.'' (I remember how annoying this was when I was a frequent business traveler and sought to attend a meeting).
  An an affiliation, no matter how oblique, with ``the Scarlet-Colored Wild Beast'' that stand in a ``Holy Place?"
  No big deal, right? How naive are you?
  It seems nothing they do can shake the uncritical veneration of the masses.
• 

  waiting

  Howdy y'al,

  The list of places we don't go/contribute/take part is endless - and we were taught that list by the WTBTS. And one of the most fiercesome on the list is The Image of the Wild Beast of Revelation - the United Nations. Remember? The WTBTS stated that the UN was The Disgusting Thing Standing in the Holy Place.

  It matters not how much/how little they have interfaithed with the UN. As the WTBTS has always - always - preached to their followers - it matters that it happened at all. "Can a person sin 'a little'? No. A person 'sins.' Can we vote "a little?" Give "a little" blood?

  Swaggart was a court case, the WTBTS entered a legal brief in support of the taxation cause. The United Nations is different - the WTBTS had to submit proof that they support the United Nations - in the manner that the UN dictates. The WTBTS solicitated the UN to be their "partner." Big difference - the WTBTS condemned the churches of Christendom for fornicating with the Kings of the Earth. Well, the WTBTS got into bed with the United Nations.

  Can they say, "well, we got in bed with the UN - but nothing happened." Yeah, try that one with the local elders.

  United Nations thread: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=10732&site=3#142954

  Please go to the United Nations website (in the above thread) and just read, and then read the thread again - the information is astounding in the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses have been taught to do exactly NOT what the WTBTS did.

  waiting
• 

  troubled

  Dear ``Troubled''

  You said:
  Then why are you ``troubled?'' Apparently in your view the WTS remains above reproach in all these matters.

  No, I didn't say they were above reproach. Just that I think their involvement might be exaggerated. As I said before, I'm gathering info and trying to weigh both sides. If I were 100% absolutely certain, I would not have asked the question: "Am I missing something?"

  You said:
  Just how keen do you think they are to have these matters brought out into the open, especially since they attributed the decision to change to a voluntary donation basis to ``our desire to separate oursleves from those who would commercialize religion?''

  Their withholding of info is a valid point. However, what I was specifically trying to nail down in my thread and in my research is whether or not the extent of their involvement is being overexaggerated.

  You said:
  "Remember, these are the same people who df memebers who swim in a YMCA pool or who cut the grass at a local church as a salaried employee of a landscaper with a contract. They won't even allow the brothers to list the times and places of meetings in local yellow pages or in the newspapers under ``religious services.'' (I remember how annoying this was when I was a frequent business traveler and sought to attend a meeting). "

  Yes, the WTS has been quite strict in the application of separateness from the world to the publishers. And "what is good for the goose is good for the gander." So if a double standard is truly in place, it should be brought to light and admissions of error made. Point taken.

  You said:
  "An an affiliation, no matter how oblique, with ``the Scarlet-Colored Wild Beast'' that stand in a ``Holy Place?"
  No big deal, right? How naive are you?" It seems nothing they do can shake the uncritical veneration of the masses.

  I think a closer look at my post would reveal that, in fact, I do not have "uncritical veneration." If I did, I wouldn't be reading and researching this issue. I think of it more as "critical investigation." Making sure of things, as the Boreans did.

  Room 215,
  I found your posts thought-provoking, although the light "slam" in your last paragraph was disappointing.
• 

  Winston

  Troubled,

  When you try to make an honest observation of facts and somebody brings them to, perhaps not in the way we would like you try not to let your emotions get in the way.

  It's hard but you will get to where you want to go a lot faster.
• 

  MacHislopp

  Hello Troubled,

  thanks for your post!

  I'll keep in mind your ..name and try not to upset you.

  Read carefully the answer given by many to your post,

  from Room 215, Waiting, Moxy, Howkaw , TrevorScott etc.

  It a positive action, the fact that you read about

  this things, not dismissing them immmediately!

  Please, read again the post about Swaggart, ONU-ONG and WTS and

  similar and try ..again to reason in an impartial way!

  Personally I would use the same words of Dungbeetle

  1) For more years than I care to remember, the your 'faithful and discreet slave' has stated unequvically that the UN is 'unclean' and 'disgusting', that it is 'not to be touched'to the point where Witnesses were expected to lay down their lives rather than 'touch' it, and of course they did so. The WTBS has trumpeted these deaths loudly, as though blind unthinking obedience to 'man rather than God' is anything to be proud of.

  2) And most importantly, this information has been kept from most Jehovah's Witnesses. Some 'faith' and 'discretion'. Wonder how the surviving family members of the dead ones feel about this now."

  I did post many WTS quotes to prove their own " doctrine "
  about the U.N., for the last 50 years.

  As it was suggested, make a " critical examination ..."

  Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp

  " One who has an accurate knowledge
  of God's Word will have no problem
  in refuting false religious ideas".
• 

  waiting

  Howdy,

  We're now seeing the american flag a lot, and lots of people have red/white/blue ribbons on their shirts to show support for america and for the tremendous amount of people who have died or killed. Most people contribute to a relief fund in order to get those patriotic ribbons. Would it be ok for a jw anywhere in the world to wear such an obviously patriotic ribbon, to show support?

  Would it be ok for a jw to put an american flag in his front yard - or do as some folks - a huge bow of red/white/blue ribbons?After all, the ribbons couldn't be construed as "flag worship."

  Back to displaying a flag of any country.....remember? We were taught to be COMPLETELY IMPARTIAL to any/all countries, even if they've not been active in war, etc. That's one reason that jw's are so united, remember? We were like "ambassadors to a foreign nation".

  Above their laws (but obey them when they don't conflict with God's - jw's - laws) and totally uninvolved in their politics. JW's have a government - God's government, therefore, it would be treason to support another government.

  We were taught that, right or wrong. We were willing to die for that principle. Remember Malawi? What crime did those people die for? Because they did not buy a $.25 political card which would show them to support the country's political party.

  The WTBTS is playing both sides of the table - but the only ones betting their lives are the followers. The WTBTS is ensuring they continue as a growing religion - whatever duplicity it takes.

  If you don't think the ribbon thing is a big deal - afterall you're just contributing support - not even becoming a partner, call any elder, and just ask: "Is it ok to contribute to the Salvation Army Disaster Relief fund and then to wear the american red/white/blue ribbon on all my clothes for an extended time period - even to the congregation meetings? Can I put a huge bow of red/white/blue ribbons in my yard to show that I support the american view?"

  Afterall, the WTBTS joined the UN and agreed to support their views - as a bonifide "partner."

  waiting
• 

  AlanF

  Lots of good answers so far, but I want to say something about CESNUR. This outfit claims to be quite neutral with regard to what it euphemistically calls "New Religious Movements", but in fact it gets some of its funding from these religious organizations. For example, the Church of Scientology has several times funded meetings led by prominent CESNUR members in places like Hawaii. Such leaders include J. Gordon Melton and Massimo Introvigne. I don't believe it's possible for a group like CESNUR to remain neutral when it is funded to such an extent by the very organizations it is supposed to be objectively studying.

  The very practice of calling nasty religions like Scientology by a neutral term like "New Religious Movement" that obscures their purpose should tell one a lot about the objectivity and, even the level of common sense, of such "researchers" as Melton and Introvigne. According to them, the various "New Religious Movements" that have killed plenty of people recently are no big deal.

  So when the Watchtower Society gets involved with groups like CESNUR, you know something is wrong. And the Society knows it is wrong. A couple of years ago the Society scheduled some of its spokesmen, such as one of its top lawyers Carolyn Wah, to address a CESNUR meeting in Italy. An ex-JW named David Reed, who had long published a little booklet Comments from the Friends, got wind of the meeting and publicized it in his booklet. A lot of discussion appeared on various Net forums and then the Society's spokesmen all cancelled their appearance due to "personal reasons". Yeah right. Obviously they had thought that as long as their participation was relatively unknown, they were ok. But the publicity obviously made them back out.

  As various posters have said, there's nothing wrong with participating in various political arenas. But there is something very wrong with condemning such participation and then participating anyway. It becomes obvious that Watchtower officials are willing to compromise their stated principles in order to attain political ends. That's hypocrisy.

  Last year a top Watchtower lawyer, Phillip Brumley I believe, addressed a special meeting of a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives about how "religious freedom" was being eroded in parts of Europe. I remember that one of Brumley's main complaints was that Sweden was beginning to tax members of various religious groups on the value of services they had until recently received for free. In particular, members of the Swedish Bethel were being taxed on the value of the room, board and other services they received as members of the Bethel Staff. Of course, such taxes would have to be paid by the Society itself since the staff members have little income from regular jobs, and the Society abhors paying taxes. But according to everything I ever learned about "compromise" when growing up as a JW, McCabe's attempt to influence politics is certainly a compromise.

  On the Jimmy Swaggart thing, I agree that the Society was not wrong in filing a brief with the court. They were completely out of line, though, in telling the JW community that the switch to a donation arrangement was due to a desire to "simplify" and to more easily get "Bible based literature" into the hands of people. The fact that the donation arrangement applied only in relatively wealthy lands proves that it was a tax avoidance matter, nothing more. Such deception is inappropriate for Christians and it proves conclusively that JW leaders are lousy Christians.

  A friend who was in Bethel back when the donation arrangement was first instituted told me that there was a mad scramble to put it in place, which started the moment they heard that Swaggart had lost his case. Bethelites know perfectly well what the motivations were. How they can remain silent is a mystery to anyone with a conscience.

  AlanF
• 

  MacHislopp

  Hello Alan F.,

  excellents comments!

  All to show simply the difference between a lie and the

  truth, between sincerity and hypocrisy.

  Btw , I hope that many read the talk given by the

  WTS attorney to the HoR of USA! Correct about Sweden,
  - where it was mentioned the - monastic arrangement of
  our society/office - Can you imagine?

  But as usual you are 100% correct in your statement,

  when it get publicity...then the WTS doesn't like and

  most of the R&F don't even know 10% of all the true FACTS

  posted here!

  Alan, I do appreciate your effort!

  Greetings, J.C.MacHislopp

  " One who has an accurate knowledge
  of God's Word will have no problem
  in refuting false religious ideas".