We have all read info here and elsewhere exposing the W.T. Society's involvement with the U.N. I have found a site which is trying to minimize the damage that has been wrought. I hope many of you will read it and offer your viewpoints or critiques.
JW's United Defend W.T.'s Relationship With U.N.
by Kenneson 52 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
-
lilbit
L
-
kls
K ?
-
-
kls
L,AND I BEAT YOU ALL THIS TIME...........
-
lilbit
N
-
Kenneson
Sorry we got off to a wrong start. I hope we can get back on track.
-
jst2laws
Thanks Kenneson,
Excellent find. This guy has produced an attractive site and is taking on a tough subject to defend.
I only skimmed but it appears he says "poor JWs, they are always picked on", as if there is no real conflict with JW teachings and what he acknowledges they have done.
I hope to read more tomorrow and maybe comment further. This issue is indefensible for the WT. In fact I think we might be able to use this site to help show that.
Jst2laws
-
Aztec
Kenneson, lots to read there. Interesting site.
I've spotted a few logical fallacies (inconsistancies?) already. Not that that is shocking coming from active dub or jw apologist.
Some object to criticisms of the UN published in Watch Tower Publications, usually in commentaries of the prophetic books of Daniel and Revelation, as well as Christ's end-time prophecy recorded in Matthew 24, etc. They find it offensive that the UN is identified with the 'disgusting thing that causes desolation,' the 'scarlet-colored wild beast', and 'the image of the beast'.
Others protest that Jehovah's Witnesses have been excessively friendly towards the United Nations, publishing what they consider to be UN propaganda. They claim that there has been an unusually large number of references to the United Nations and its activities, particularly in Awake! magazine.
No. The same people protest about the hypocrisy of the Watchtower claiming one thing and then doing an about face when they joined the UN as an NGO.
Of course, the majority of those who leave Jehovah's Witnesses - or who are disfellowshipped - simply get on with their lives. Not a few of them later return to the Organization later on, and even many of those who do not continue to defend Jehovah's Witnesses as good people, or even as having the truth. There is, however, another breed of ex-member, one who seeks to do as much damage as possible to the Jehovah's Witness cause
Followed by:
Bryan Wilson, Emeritus Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford University, England, has made the following comment about the reliability of the testimony of former members of religious groups who go on to speak out against their former associates:
Neither the objective sociological researcher nor the court of law can readily regard a defector as a credible or reliable source of evidence. He must always be seen as one whose personal history predisposes him to bias against both his previous religious commitment and his former associates.
So which group is more reliable? The ones who have left but still support the Watchtower or those who have left and find it's teachings and practices reprehensible?
I'm going to go read the rest...
Sorry about all the highlighting. This site is f**ked up sometimes. Sheesh!
Oops! Some of it didn't post the first time.