many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
Saint Satan,
If you will construct a Word file, not zipped, and send it to me, I will put it up on the web for you, and everyone will be able to read it. However, 221 KB is fairly large, so I would appreciate it if you would strip from the articles any information that is not relevant, if that's not too much trouble.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
Trevor,
You provided an incomplete quote from me to support your case. You wrote,
So now that you see articles printed by the wts that in your own words do support the UN ("obviously propaganda for the UN"), you say it's not relevant.
You asked about the UN website, and whether the listing of the Roosevelt article there means that the Watchtower knew it was writing propaganda for the UN. My answer has been (I think I've answered this before) that this article was propaganda for the Watchtower as far as the Watchtower was concerned, but was obviously propaganda for the UN as far as the UN was concerned. The articles were not written to help the UN; the fact that they did help the UN is not relevant, I believe. What matters is that the Watchtower thinks it was helped more.I stand by my earlier statement; the articles were NOT written to help the UN. Nobody thinks that was the intent of the Watchtower was to help the UN; its intent was to diminish it relative to Jehovah by showing that the UN is failing in its central mission to bring peace and happiness to the world. The UN was helped only in the sense that its missions were described and thereby made known to the Awake! readership, but all who would be reading those articles would either already know that the articles were criticisms, or would be told by the doorknockers that that's what they were. Thus, the help that the UN received pales in comparision to the harm done to it in the eyes of the typical Awake! reader. Thus, the article would be seen as help in UN headquarters, but in the kingdom halls everyone would know the opposite was true.
I'll analyze the articles you mentioned and comment on them this evening.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
I thought you got most of your stuff at Zev's site and Randy's site, so I don't know how you missed this
I'll look at these later this evening, but first I would like to know what it is I should be looking for on those web pages; you didn't say. Please give me some guidance.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
Trevor,
The article at * http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Watchtower_Propaganda.htm
explains why I think the articles I present are Watchtower propaganda; those who don't understand Watchtower theology would clearly think that these articles are pro-UN. However, I think in the examples I presented the intent of the writer was to slam the UN and promote the Watchtower. This was done by explaining that good-hearted people, sincere in their beliefs, still were--and are--unable to make a real difference; only through Jehovah and his coming Kingdom government will that happen.
You asked about the UN website, and whether the listing of the Roosevelt article there means that the Watchtower knew it was writing propaganda for the UN. My answer has been (I think I've answered this before) that this article was propaganda for the Watchtower as far as the Watchtower was concerned, but was obviously propaganda for the UN as far as the UN was concerned. The articles were not written to help the UN; the fact that they did help the UN is not relevant, I believe. What matters is that the Watchtower thinks it was helped more.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
Hawk,
I wonder if you're seeing the same thing on your browser as I am on mine: Your copy of the Gillies' letter forces the text in the other posts to overflow the margins. Since I've already placed this letter on the record on page one of this thread, could you remove your copy, or shrink it down? It would make it a lot easier to read the posts on this thread.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
In an earlier post I indicated that I'm generally unfamiliar with Watchtower doctrine regarding acceptable associations with the United Nations. One poster indicated that there's no problem with a Jehovah's Witness walking into the United Nations building and interviewing one of its officials, while another said that he would cross the street to avoid walking next to the building, implying that he would be struck dead at Armageddon otherwise. I'm wondering whether there is an unambiguous teaching regarding acceptable and unacceptable "associations" with the United Nations. Are telephone calls to the United Nations acceptable, or visits to its libraries? If the Watchtower can voluntarily register as a religious institution with the Internal Revenue Service to receive special treatment, what teaching makes it clear that it cannot voluntarily register with the Department of Public Information for special treatment?
Can anyone provide excerpts from Awake! articles or other Watchtower publications that make clear what the policy is?
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
Hawkaw writes,
Gillies was saying they needed to be "associated" to get into the UN library for researching. It gives the appearance that this is the only way to access UN library information and that is not true.I don't know what letter you're referring to. I've seen no letter in which Gillies says or implies that reason they applied for affiliation with the DPI was that that was the ONLY way they could gain access to the UN library. The letter I've seen says that the only reason they applied for registration was to gain access, not that they applied for registration because it was the only way to gain access. There's a big difference between "only reason" and the "only way." If they said that it was the "only way," then you're right: they were either lying, or mistaken.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
Rem,
You’ve mentioned the importance of honesty in the Jehovah’s Witnesses outlook, and you’ve noted that the Watchtower abruptly ended its affiliation with the Department of Public Information soon after it was revealed that affiliated NGOs were expected to accept the aims and goals of the United Nations. You’ve also pointed out the average JW doesn’t know what’s going on in the outside world, and others have led me to understand that the average JW would believe whatever the elders told them irrespective of what they heard from “worldly” sources.”
These facts present a problem for me.
If the governing body wanted to continue to gain whatever benefits you believe the Watchtower was gaining from its affiliation beyond the library access, all it had to do was stonewall this issue by merely stating that outsiders were telling lies about the Watchtower. They would have gotten away with it, because, according to you—and I believe you, the average JW will believe whatever he is told by the organization. Thus, even though they could have gotten away with lying to the world-wide body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and thereby gained certain rewards, they chose not to do this—evidently because to do so would have been an act of dishonesty, which their doctrine forbids.
Well, what conclusion are we to reach? If the honesty doctrine led the governing body after the revelation not to lie to maintain a beneficial relationship with the United Nations, then it logically it would also not lie about the reasons for its registration with the Department of Public Information. If the Watchtower refuses to lie on principle in one case, should we not expect it not to lie in other situations? Thus, it seems that the evidence points to a Watchtower which was not aware it was doing wrong—if indeed it was wrong, and which was being honest with the membership when it explained what happened. Where’s the wrong? They made a mistake, but how and why do you disfellowship the governing body for an honest mistake?
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
This is where it stands, in my opinion:
1. Some branches of the UN library require no pass to enter, but the best, and most extensive information the UN has is at the main library; for that library, one must have a "ground pass" to get by the guard.
One way to get a ground pass is to register as an NGO with the Department of Public Information, and then submit a request for a pass on "raised letterhead" stationary. There are other ways to be given a pass besides becoming registering with the DPI. The Watchtower chose to register. While it's possible that the Watchtower might have had other reasons for wanting to register as a non-governmental organization, they said they did so only because they wanted full access to the UN library. A ground pass to Dag Hammerskold Library would do that. This is the explanation that Paul Gillies has given, but many have declared him to be a liar, but the evidence of lying seems entirely circumstantial, and is likely not to upset many people, not even former JWs, in my opinion.
2. There is no evidence that the Watchtower ever agreed to support the aims, goals, and principles of the United Nations. The Watchtower may--or may not--have known that the UN expected the Watchtower to accept principles of the UN; the evidence against the Watchtower in this matter is also circumstantial, and is again unlikely to bother many current or even many former JWs.
3. The Watchtower clearly knew that it was expected to provide evidence that its writings described the UN's activities. I won't go so far as to say that the Watchtower thought that it was "promoting" the UN's activities, though it is easy to see how the UN--and most others--would think that is exactly what they were doing. However, writing about the UN's activities doesn't go against Watchtower doctrine, but perhaps some will say the act of providing examples of its writings to the UN is a problem. I'm guessing that few JWs would see much of a problem in this, however. The Watchtower was describing the UN's failures in its writings, and who cares if they gave copies of the writings to the UN in order to continue their registration with the DPI? That's what most JWs would say, I'm guessing. Thus, once again, this is not a big problem, in my opinion.
4. It's been noted time and time again that by far the biggest problem forum members have with this situation is that the Watchtower has "associated" itself in one way, or the other, with the "purple beast." The revelation that this has happened should be like a kick in the stomach to many of those who have treated the United Nations as if it manufactured the Ebola virus and shoveled it daily out its doors; any contact with the UN made one immediately unusable to Jehovah. Any contact whatsoever was virtually the same as sleeping with Satan to some JWs.
If this attitude toward the United Nations IS fostered by Watchtower teachings, I certainly would agree that even if all they did was go up to the 29th floor of the UN building to interview someone for an article, they would have been commiting a crime against Jehovah. Case closed; there would be no need to debate the other issues, such as whether Gillies lied.
Readers will have noted that I emphasized the word "is" above; that's because I don't know whether the Watchtower has, in fact, presented doctrine in its writings which clearly states that all association, connections, or contacts with the United Nations or its affiliates are to be avoided under penalty of disfellowshipping. Current and former JWs are in a position to answer this question; I am not, since I've never been a JW.
I would like to know which Watchtower teachings--which articles in Awake!--make it clear that, say, agreeing to write about the United Nations, or walking into the United Nations building, goes against Jehovah. Naturally, I'm not looking for the words which spell such scenarios out specifically; just clear teachings against virtually any type of "association." Will someone supply those passages? If they exist, then I will then be able to understand why so many on this forum have insisted that the main thing is the "association," no matter how slight.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
many have argued that articles in awake!
in recent years show that watchtower was letting itself be told what do by the purple beast, namely, promote the united nations in its writings.
i can understand how many might quickly find support for this claim, for there are, indeed, many articles in awake!
Rem notes,
My father and my in-laws still believe the UN website was hacked. Why do they think this? Because to them, average witnesses they are, any association between the WTBS and the UN would be unthinkable and must be the work of apostates.I would think that all you would have to do to convince them that there is at least some "association" with the United Nations is have them dig out their copy of Awake!, November 22, 1998, and have them look at page 6.
A copy of this page is found on the web page at * http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Watchtower_Propaganda.htm
There they will find a photograph of the High Commissioner of Human rights, taken by a United Nations Department of Public Information photographer, J. Isaac. Such photos are publishable only with permission of the UN; how else would the Awake! editor have obtained such a photo if not by asking the UN for it? Furthermore, how would your father and in-laws explain away the fact that a Jehovah's Witness--the writer for Awake! --actually walked up into the very symbol of the beast itself, way up onto the 29th floor of the United Nations building? If this is not a type of "association"--rubbing shoulders with representatives of the purple beast--then what else would it be called?
Many other Awake! articles would serve equally well to convince your family that connections to the United Nations have existed at least since 1998. Once they see that evidence, ask them again whether they think the UN website was hacked; I'd like to know what they have to say.
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
