Jehovah's Witnesses and the UN..again. I'm in a quandry.

by isnrblog 12 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  isnrblog

  The UN thing was my first post and thank you all for the answers and the welcome. This seems to be a great site. Are there many Witnesses that participate? That always makes things fun. I think I saw some "Witness Moles" commenting.

  I have several questions that I have been pondering and I know I can get some good answers here. I've done a ton more research on the JW/UN thing and they just compound their deceit with more lies. The "library card" claim is bogus as you do not have the be an NGO to get access to the UN library. Also, to be an NGO at the time they were, they had to pledge to support the UN charter. There is alot more at these two links;
  
  http://www.randytv.com/secret/NGOrequirements.htm

  and http://www.randytv.com/secret/unitednations.htm

  I'm sorry if you guys already know this.

  The Big Question is WHY? What could the Society possibly gain by being an NGO? There's got to be a reason and I bet thats a bigger story than the fact that they were an NGO. The fact that they were an NGO was public, the could have used the library without being an NGO, someone was bound to find out. Why did they do it? Sure, they could BS the membership with the library card excuse but they did and will lose some membership and credibility. There seems to be a much bigger thing going on here. It makes no sense. On the surface, they had nothing to gain. What am I missing?
• 

  onesong

  Someone brought up the point here that they could've gotten tremendous savings on airfare for missionaries by taking U.N. sponsered flights.

  Don't know if it's true at all but may be possible.
• 

  144001

  I believe that among other things being an NGO gave them additional clout in their efforts to overturn adverse court rulings in countries such as France that have denied them tax exempt status for certain taxes. The WT is primarily concerned with money.
• 

  journey-on

  There seems to be a much bigger thing going on here.

  Without a doubt, there's something bigger going on. I'll bet there's $$$$$ involved somewhere in the form of grants, etc. But, how will their flock ever know?

  The WTBTS is so non-transparent, that it would take someone on the inside turning tail. Whatever the reason, they "whored" around with the "image of the beast."

  That's a fact Jack!
• 

  startingover

  I think they did it for political clout. They got perks from being involved as an NGOin other countries, like Africa. I saw a picture once of a baptismal pool at a JW assembly in Africa that had UN symbols on it. I'm sure it was just something available to use, but can you imagine doing that here in the US. When I visited NY we visited the UN, or should I say we walked by and checked out the plowshares thing in the front. We wouldn't have even dared to enter the building.
• 

  Poztate

  On the surface, they had nothing to gain. What am I missing?

  They had political influence with world leaders and governments to gain.

  They acted as nothing more as a lobbyist group just as all the OTHER churches had been doing.

  Stay clean and apart from the "WORLD"............BULLSHIT
• 

  journey-on

  Can someone with access to the literature answer this question? When was the last derogatory statement made against the UN?

  Do the WT publications still call them the image of the beast and condemn them? Just curious as to when was the last thing written about them

  negatively?
• 

  changeling

  This was my wake up issue. I wrote the Society and asked very pointed questions. None were answered, not even alluded to. They sent me a condescending fluff letter.

  You are right, there has to be a good reason for their involvement. The library card answer does not hold water.

  changeling
• 

  jelcat8224

  changeling: I got that same condescending fluff letter in response to MY letter regarding the medical issues!!! They like those fluff letters ... I'm looking forward to getting another one soon!!

  jelcat
• 

  isnrblog

  The two links on my original post show that during this time that they were a NGO they published some "fluff" articles that were favorable of the UN. There are several examples of this on these sites.

  Fred, ww.isnrblog.com