i noticed we have been dealing a lot with united nations issues.
so i thought i would share something that doesnt seem to be found anywhere with respect to the united nations or its predecessor the league of nations and the watchtower.. since september 1919 at cedar point, j.f.
rutherford (past president) and the watchtower have condemned the league of nations and now the united nations.
thanks,
for month i am trying to re-organize, can not handle anymore papers right now, I will be moving too. You know how that is.
keep on digging
the elite thing was a joke, IBM, Olympic and other ex-type writers manufactures know what i mean.
have to go now
i noticed we have been dealing a lot with united nations issues.
so i thought i would share something that doesnt seem to be found anywhere with respect to the united nations or its predecessor the league of nations and the watchtower.. since september 1919 at cedar point, j.f.
rutherford (past president) and the watchtower have condemned the league of nations and now the united nations.
If you consider the FCCC was probably more in line with scripture than WT.
Rom 13:1.9] Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
Rom 13:2.6] Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment.
[Rom 13:7.25] Pay all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.
I dont recall the first century "GB" talking so badly about other institutions
The WT "honoring" anyone? I got to see that yet.
Hawkaw, I think you belong to the 'elite'.
My word processor do not even have that TYPE, cant compete.
i noticed we have been dealing a lot with united nations issues.
so i thought i would share something that doesnt seem to be found anywhere with respect to the united nations or its predecessor the league of nations and the watchtower.. since september 1919 at cedar point, j.f.
rutherford (past president) and the watchtower have condemned the league of nations and now the united nations.
WT writers of specific UN articles do not seem to be in 'sync' with other WT writers that mention the UN on other articles.
The 'other ariticles' writers may not even know about the NGO/UN association.
It is like the WT publication about the bible book of James published over two decades ago. It was a totally different type of publication, as far as content. Much later I got an idea about who wrote it, no wonder.
About the FCCC, the WT has always quoted basically the same, out of context, portion you mention I have read such a quotation a thousand times from the WT, they really like it.
In my opinion this UN issue is very important, the WT has said so much about the UN. I used to be a "book study" conductor using the book that explained all the UN "revelation". I think it was titled "babylon the grape..." it was a red book by the way.
Most jw did not understood the book, there are three (3) beast mentioned with 'seven head' each, 21 heads and 30 horns to talk about, not to mention other animals here and there. hehehe
Like I said before just quoting or displaying WT and UN documents plus some individual experiences with the WT should do the job.
when an employer resorts to comments like 'who sign's your check?
' or 'are you biting the hand that feed's you?
', it is normally due to some perceived or overt violation of loyalty, or simply to shut the employee up regarding the subject matter at hand.. i don't like the tactic, because it is rarely used in a one on one situaltion, but generally in the ear shot of other's, to squelch the matter.
Simon,
Why dont you reate a section for those who like or need to 'fight.?
anytime a topic develops into a 'fight' , it is moved tothat section.
a subsection for active fights or something like that, get the idea?
We sometime start reading a innocent topic to find out it gets nowhere but a fight.
also what about voting to delete posters, whole topics, specific posts etc
I know, more work for you, cant you delegate?
when an employer resorts to comments like 'who sign's your check?
' or 'are you biting the hand that feed's you?
', it is normally due to some perceived or overt violation of loyalty, or simply to shut the employee up regarding the subject matter at hand.. i don't like the tactic, because it is rarely used in a one on one situaltion, but generally in the ear shot of other's, to squelch the matter.
I dont think there are any lawyers on this board.
Nor many with debating abilities.
But some of us get into debates just to get burn.
Debating requires skills most of us dont have, or need. More so on written debates...
Are you here only to debate or what?
Is so much so called debate (fights)scaring some to joint the board, i was.
when an employer resorts to comments like 'who sign's your check?
' or 'are you biting the hand that feed's you?
', it is normally due to some perceived or overt violation of loyalty, or simply to shut the employee up regarding the subject matter at hand.. i don't like the tactic, because it is rarely used in a one on one situaltion, but generally in the ear shot of other's, to squelch the matter.
shocking topic,
I am very surprised that the quotes below are from FARKEL out this topic.
Based on how he (and others) reacted to my first few post not having the FACTS he alwasy claim he has at hand.
"I pray to God that you would never sit on a jury to adjudge me. You would convict on "implications" and "insinuations" instead of FACTS."
"People who present arguments based upon emotion are almost always wrong. "
"I have a very low tolerance level for people who always talk around an issue and claim that proof exists, but won't produce it in the extremely simple fashion ..."
the gb grapevine news is that one of the older gb members conscientiously no longer feels he is one of the anointed (yeah i guess there's still one or two who still have a conscience) .
not a big news item but i found it very interesting, the "cracking" at the top continues!.
iw
iw,
i feel like i have been conditioned to beleve anything from the gb (negative of course)
first of all id like to say hello to everyone on this website, and to thank and acknowledge each and every one of you for your individuality, personal experience, and in some cases, commitment to truth.. having read some of the heartfelt topics and posts here have served to be a great encouragement to me, more than some could imagine.
my name is jason, and i am a recovering ex-jw.. i guess this would be an ideal time to tell my life story as an abbreviated version, so here goes.. i was "born into, or raised" in the organization.
my grandfather was an elder for 45 years, and served as one of the very first jw in the south chicagoland suburbs.
Jason,
dont pay attention to 'everything'
or were you asking for opinions and wheter we beleive your story or not?
I dont think so
You seem to be an very intelligent person,
anything you want to learn about human relations etc has been written, so why pay a 'counselor' read read read the 'right' material and you will find your way out.
i came across this quote in a 1981 wt article today.
thought i would post it in light of the un thing:.
*** w81 9/15 23 disfellowshiping-how to view it ***.
Great,
quotes from their publications is great to prove their contradictions.
I am very sure anyone with a cd can find a lot of contradictions about the UN thing, just searchng "united nations".
What was the purpose of publishing a lot of info about the UN lately?.
More importan, why they did not CONDEMN the UN right on the same article as they used to do?
Those on this board who argue that the WT just made an innocent mistake to get a library card please EXPLAIN how you see the whole picture.
in 1975 jws had several things going for them.
the ex-jws that left because of earlier prophetic failures had no real way to reach us.
most jws were of a newer generation, eager for something to happen given the times we lived in.
erich,
you and your jw friends around 1975 were apostates if you did not beleive the 1975 thing, it was clear all over their literature.
BTW
can you elaboreate how is it that you measure distance using either two rf or acoustical transmitters and a moving receiver between the two points.
why a moving receiver? an static receiver can do the job without so much trouble
what application you had in mind?
have you made any money with that patent?
------------------------
Amazing,,
what you have to say about Helsinki conferece, about "peace and security" in 1975 ex- President F. Ford was there. Oil embargado AND that later conference scared me.
