WTS successfully refutes bogus UN conspiracy theory/hoax

by trthskr 121 Replies latest watchtower scandals

• 

  thetrueone

  I think the WTS. was trying to use the UN library facilities vicariously under the very eye of the UN organization itself.

  Sort of like a thief taking things out and away from the UN covered up in a representative UN uniform,

  wanting to use the library for their own means but doing so as a secretive false supporter of the UN and its adjoining

  NGO organizations.

  So they deceptively and deceivingly signed on as a NGO to accomplish this feat.

  Would they've been granted status and approval as an NGO if the people who were doing the review of the organization were

  well informed to the WTS. long standing Anti UN stance, taken in print and also through public speaking, probably not.

  For example if the people who were reviewing the WTS. as a possible candidate for NGO status had all the written demeaning

  and derogatory articles that the WTS. had previously written about the UN, right in front of them , do you think they would

  been given approval as a NGO ?

  I kind of hardly think so.
• 

  trthskr

  The refutations were bogus. As soon as the WTS learned that the requirements (entailing UN support) had changed, they immediately withdrew their membership. It's plain and simple. How that can not sink in is beyond me.
• 

  breakfast of champions

  Didn't I see just recently the WTS was participating in UN events/conferences having to do with religious freedom in eastern Europe? Not sure, but not motivated enough to go searching.

  Oh! And as a funny aside...

  When I was in HS, my mom wouldn't let me take a class trip to the UN because it was the wild beast!
• 

  ScenicViewer

  As soon as the WTS learned that the requirements (entailing UN support) had changed, they immediately withdrew their membership.

  No they didn't. They applied for disassociation as soon as they were exposed in the press; when the information went public and they couldn't hide it anymore. This in itself is a sign of guilt. Any judicial committee would tell you that.
• 

  N.drew

  What did the beast have that the Governing Body needed but couldn't get from their communication with the Christ?
• 

  jwfacts

  The refutations were bogus. As soon as the WTS learned that the requirements (entailing UN support) had changed, they immediately withdrew their membership. It's plain and simple. How that can not sink in is beyond me.

  1. Prove that they had changed - they had not.
  2. How does that negate that association with the UN regardless of requirements and reasons is a disfellowshipping offence

  How that can not sink in is beyond me.
• 

  poopsiecakes

  There are none so blind as those who will not see.
• 

  trthskr

  The first seven-headed beast represents the governments/empires of the world but JW's all reside within them don't they? Some people don't like certain places or buildings but are required to go there to obtain information or whatever reason. You're being too rigid and inflexable about things. Everything isn't black and white in the world.
• 

  ScenicViewer

  You're being too rigid and inflexable about things. Everything isn't black and white in the world.

  You could say the same thing about swimming at the YMCA, but that is a disfellowshipping offense. It's the Watchtower that makes inflexible rules. Then violates them at it's own convenience. It's a grotesque double standard. Why can't you see that?
• 

  N.drew

  OMG They are being rigid. If you are a baptised JW there are some brothers and sisters that will be "stumbled" if your child joins the YMCA or if you attend a secular meeting IN a church.