So much for "neutrality"

by onacruse 3 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  onacruse

  Ahhh, how that theme was beat into our heads! Not to even think a political thought, of any kind.

  Here's a little tad, from Light 1 pp. 290-91:

  Britain boasts that she rules the waves and that the sun never goes down on her domains and that she always takes the part of humanity. The American government makes the same boast concerning her liberality. British diplomacy is the last word in deceptiveness. America has tried to copy it.

  As I'm reading though this stuff, I can't believe how overtly political the diatribe is. That was supposedly the reason that Ruthy got his butt thrown into prison for in 1918, right...SS Volume 7? And then he turns around and spews out page after page after page of the same invictive for years after.

  What I referenced is just a smidgeon.

  Craig
• 

  Gopher

  The book "Thirty Years a Watchtower Slave" by William Schnell documented the Society's written support of Adolph Hitler early on (before he turned against the Bible Students/JW's) for his anti-communist stance.

  And then in 1939, apparently having decided that a little religious group like them really couldn't sway world political leaders anyhow, had their change of heart and wrote their two-part Watchtower article "Neutrality".

  Another thought... how can their decidedly pro-UN articles in the Awake magazines during the 90's (which coincided with their UN/NGO affiliation) be termed as neutrality in this world's affairs?
• 

  onacruse

  Goph, yep! How fuzzy "the lines" get when they've got a hidden (or not so hidden) agenda.

  I'm thinking that the "new light" about Romans 13 played right into the whole scene..."superior authorities" were suddenly (after some 50 years of thinking otherwise) not the civil governments, so Ruthy could play his hand without violating 'Scriptural' limitations.

  Even if so, then how can they justify it now (e.g., the UN)? James says "pray for the king"; like it or leave it, that's what the Bible says (though the WTS has done more than one spin on that one too )

  Say, U gonna be around tomorrow? I'd like to give ya a call.

  Craig
• 

  slenderdog

  The way I used to see it as a JW was that "we" were neutral in that we didn't take sides in political questions, but that "we" also knew that the world was "in the power of the wicked one," therefore critical remarks seen in WTBTS publications reflected our abhorrence of Satan's system. Like so many other issues, "neutrality" was one I silently doubted. But I suppressed my doubts because "this is the truth." Actually this acceptance of contradiction is much like that found in politics, where one must, to gain status, compromise one's beliefs and accept the "party line." The WTBTS is adept at presenting plausible doctrines and enforcing adherence to these doctrines through control of membership of and status in the organisation. While certain teachings did appeal to me when I was studying, others did not: it was (how pitiful this sounds now) the benefits of membership that helped me "accept" the teachings I did not, deep down, believe.