why are there

by sad and lonely 12 Replies latest jw friends

  • OldSoul
    OldSoul

    sad and lonely,

    If you follow the directions at 1 John 4:1 you will question uncomfortable things to question and decide some things uncomfortable to decide. In my opinion, your question shows that you have begun to think of an organization as Christ's brothers. It appears that you view our posts challenging that organization and its behavior as beating up on the brothers of Christ.

    However, it is not beating up on them to examine their actions for evidence of love without hypocrisy and share our findings with others. We have posting here one "Schizm," an advocate for the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, who tells us that what looks like hypocrisy, carries the fetid stench of hypocrisy, behaves exactly like hypocrisy, is not hypocrisy. He uses a different name for it: Theocratic Warfare.

    The term "Theocratic Warfare" is an organizational excuse for hypocrisy. It is a contrived carte blanche for the organization to stumble anyone without any reprimand from the person of Jehovah. It is the best example I can think of as proof of a lack of faith.

    There is nothing in the Bible that would indicate that it is alright for any "Christian" organization to voluntarily attach as an Affiliate to any government. Yet, I received a letter from "Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses" that admits the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society did exactly that for 10 years - a full one-fifteenth (1/15) of the "modern-day" existence of the Bible Students/Jehovah's Witnesses. Of course, without any admission of wrongdoing the letter also says that as soon as they realized the Criteria for Association included criteria a Christian could not adopt they disassociated themselves.

    Now, that admission is interesting. The first and primary criterion is, "The NGO must support and respect the principles of the Charter of the UN and have a clear mission statement that is consistent with those principles." This has been the primary criterion since 1968, it isn't new. If you were deciding whether this would be a criterion you could accept as a Christian, would you find it an appropriate Association to enter into?

    The purpose of affiliation to the UN/DPI is very simple: Disseminating information about the UN. It is obvious that the UN would only admit organizations that it believed were capable of and willing to accomplish that objective. It is impossible to stretch the imagination to the point of believing that materials submitted along with the preliminary or the subsequent formal application included articles painting the UN as the Image of the Wild Beast or the disgusting thing that causes desolation.

    So the first and most logically obvious criterion would prevent any loyal Jehovah's Witness from Affiliating to the UN/DPI, but affiliate the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society did! In the very year that Watchtower printed an article exposing Christendom's representation at the UN ("Their Refuge-A Lie!" 1991). What kind of relationship did Christendom have to the UN? Why they were NGO Affiliates to the UN/DPI! (see the new OD book, page 155, regarding behaviors indicating Disassociation from Christianity)

    Is stating facts a form of abuse? I say, rather, hiding facts from those who deserve to know is a form of abuse. It is also a sign of secrecy, which Schizm seems proud of. However, secrecy is the soul of the word "cult," a name s/he would be quick to throw off from Jehovah's Witnesses.

    Outright hypocrisy is not something one woud expect to see in the recent history of an organization claiming spirit-direction in the final part of the Last Days. If this organization is a central part of the mountain of the house of Jehovah that has been lifted up, why is it still dirtying itself with political elements of this old system?

    The light growing brighter in the 50s and 60s led to a 1963 Resolution forever denouncing the UN and stating that "[this organization] will never" become part of it. Did the light suddenly go dim in November 1991 only to brighten again in 2001? Odd behavior for light that gets increasingly brighter, don't you think?

    So, in closing, I do not abuse individual Jehovah's Witnesses. More often, I pity them. They are sheep without their shepherd, slaving under a Pharisaical system. Just like Jesus, I rail against the system they are slaving under. (Matthew 23) And I won't apologize for doing so. I have no doubt at all that Jesus would have long since been disfellowshipped for apostasy in any congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses.

    Respectfully,
    OldSoul

  • talesin
    talesin
    oops! misread post, have nothing to say. hehehe
  • OldSoul
    OldSoul

    Thought to ponder:

    Suppose you camped overnight by a stream. The next day an old mountaineer trudges down from upstream telling you that the source of that stream was a cool crystal clear mountain spring and that the water was totally safe to drink. You feel your mouth begin to salivate at the idea of fresh water. You begin drinking from the stream and it is indeed very refreshing.

    As the man comes back up the mountain, he is in a very foul mood. He regales you with a tale about another group of campers downstream that he found. They were very disrespectful of nature. They were also disrespectful of his age and experience. They all shot him birds when he told them they could safely drink from that stream. He walked on in a huff.

    That afternoon you decide to hike upstream to find the source. Along the way, you catch sight of that same old man urinating directly into the stream. You mention how you think that is an awful thing to do and that it makes you suspect he was trying to trick you into drinking from the stream. The old man just gives you a conspiritorial wink and tells you he was really just trying to pollute the water source for those downstream.

    The question: Would you keep drinking from downstream, or would you try to camp by the source and drink from there?

    I was advised that the Devil was behind my being stumbled over this NGO issue. There was no apology, there was no repentance of any kind exhibited, there was no candid admission of error. Only an inference that I was spiritually lacking and that I must be looking for a reason to doubt.

    That is the opposite of what the scriptures teach regarding responsibility to avoid stumbling others. Jesus said it would better for someone to have a millstone tied around their neck and be pitched into the sea than for them to stumble a little one. Apparently, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society doesn't think those consequences for behavior apply to them. Apparently, Schizm and others would rather overlook any and all impropriety than correct and clean the organization. That appears hypocritical to me.

    Respectfully,
    OldSoul

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit