tells me that this was an apparently trivial decision made in 1991 , rubber stamped on an annual basis afterward & only when hyped up by apostates did anybody actually realise the implications of the whole NGO business.
Again, Dozy, you demonstrate blithe reliance on the WTS for your fact checking of what is involved in maintaining the relationship. There is no way to "rubber stamp" this Association. There are criteria to meet on an ongoing basis for the continued renewal of accreditation.
You want have a 14-year string of decisions and misrepresentations—that continue up to and including the letter I received dated February 8, 2005—reduced to either a conspiracy or a silly botch up.
Why do you quickly rule out the other possibility? There is a possibility that it is a mix of the two.
Esau traded his inheritance for a bowl of stew. He convinced himself he need the stew very badly. The WTS compares that account specifically to committing fornication, but teaches that the specific worldly thing sought is irrelevant. If spiritual things are underappreciated in favor of secular things, it is spiritual fornication.
Entering into an Associate member status with the UN/DPI was an act of spiritual fornication according to the standards set for by the Governing Body, whether knowingly or unknowingly entered in to. Just as having sex with a married person who is not your mate is adultery whether you knows that's what it is or not. Do you deny that simple and direct statement of fact?
Keep in mind that determining whether there actually was an act of gross wrongdoing is completely separate from the examination of intent, the degree of repentance expressed. If you agree that there was an act of gross wrongdoing then we can move to the next consideration: intent. Otherwise, please explain what it was if not an act of gross wrongdoing.
The intent was without question secular and not spiritual in nature—even if the intent extends no further than that stated in Paul Gillies' letter. There is no spiritual need for facts and statistics on world affairs from the UN's library.
Now we can move to the next consideration: repentance. There are certain markers laid out by the WTS for determining repentance.
*** it-2 p. 774 Repentance ***
Thus genuine repentance has real impact, generates force, moves the person to “turn around.” (Ac 3:19) Hence Jesus could say to those in Laodicea: “Be zealous and repent.” (Re 3:19; compare Re 2:5; 3:2, 3.) There is evidence of ‘great earnestness, clearing of oneself, godly fear, longing, and righting of the wrong.’ (2Co 7:10, 11) Absence of concern for rectifying wrongs committed shows lack of true repentance.—Compare Eze 33:14, 15; Lu 19:8.
It has been suggested to me (by my father) that they did right the wrong by ceasing the Association. Stopping the wrong is evidence ONLY of fear of consequences. Righting the wrong involves active steps to CORRECT and MAKE RIGHT actual harm caused by gross wrongdoing. The concept involves acknowledging that there are harmful impacts from gross wrongdoing and working to undo (to the extent possible) any harm done as a result. Where is the evidence that this has occurred?
If you believe there was an act of gross wrongdoing, whether intentional or not, then why has the WTS never once admitted that it was an act of gross wrongdoing? Why have they not publicly apologized a single time for this choice? It is publicly known, where is the public reproof?