Why did they join the UN/DPI? Who gives a flying sh-ugar coated waffle?

by AuldSoul 13 Replies latest jw friends

  • AuldSoul

    Much has been made over possible motives behind the Watchtower Society joining the UN/DPI. My response is currently the same as it was in my first letter to them, "Who cares why [they] did it?" Really, this matter is so simple it can be summed up by answering two teensy little questions:

    (1) Is the UN/DPI (as distinguished from the UN) a "secular organization that has objectives contrary to the Bible", hence, "under judgment by Jehovah God"? Yes.

    (2) Did the WTS "[choose] to join" the UN/DPI (as distinguished from the UN) as an Associate member? Yes.

    Concerning those who renounced their Christian faith in his day, the apostle John wrote: “They went out from us, but they were not of our sort; for if they had been of our sort, they would have remained with us.” (1 John 2:19) For example, a person might renounce his place in the Christian congregation by his actions, such as by becoming part of a secular organization that has objectives contrary to the Bible and, hence, is under judgment by Jehovah God. (Isa. 2:4; Rev. 19:17-21) If a person who is a Christian chooses to join those who are disapproved by God, a brief announcement is made to the congregation, stating: “[Name of person] is no longer one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.” Such a person is treated in the same way as a disfellowshipped person. The presiding overseer should approve this announcement.—Organized to Do Jehovah's Will (2005) p. 155 par. 2

    There you go! Tied up neatly, pretty bow and all. In my opinion, since they chose to become a member for something as trivial as library access that makes it even worse than if they had some nobler objective they were pursuing in a misguided way.

    Genesis 25:27-34—And the boys got bigger, and E´sau became a man knowing how to hunt, a man of the field, but Jacob a blameless man, dwelling in tents. 28 And Isaac had love for E´sau, because it meant game in his mouth, whereas Re·bek´ah was a lover of Jacob. 29 Once Jacob was boiling up some stew, when E´sau came along from the field and he was tired. 30 So E´sau said to Jacob: “Quick, please, give me a swallow of the red—the red there, for I am tired!” That is why his name was called E´dom. 31 To this Jacob said: “Sell me, first of all, your right as firstborn!” 32 And E´sau continued: “Here I am simply going to die, and of what benefit to me is a birthright?” 33 And Jacob added: “Swear to me first of all!” And he proceeded to swear to him and to sell his right as firstborn to Jacob. 34 And Jacob gave E´sau bread and lentil stew, and he went to eating and drinking. Then he got up and went his way. So E´sau despised the birthright.

    For such a trifling benefit to commit spiritual fornication!

    re chap. 29 pp. 201-203
    Singing the Triumphal New Song
    Followers of the Lamb
    12 Continuing his description of the 144,000 who are “bought from the earth,” John tells us: “These are the ones that did not defile themselves with women; in fact, they are virgins. These are the ones that keep following the Lamb no matter where he goes. These were bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb, and no falsehood was found in their mouths; they are without blemish.” (Revelation 14:4, 5) The fact that the 144,000 “are virgins” does not mean that members of this class are necessarily unmarried in the flesh. The apostle Paul wrote to Christians who had a heavenly calling that, whereas there are advantages to Christian singleness, marriage is preferable under certain circumstances. (1 Corinthians 7:1, 2, 36, 37) What characterizes this class is a spiritual virginity. They have avoided spiritual adultery with worldly politics and with false religion. (James 4:4; Revelation 17:5) As the betrothed bride of Christ, they have kept themselves pure, “without a blemish in among a crooked and twisted generation.”—Philippians 2:15.

    But was this really spiritual adultery?

    w76 10/15 p. 633
    The Worship of the “Wild Beast”—Why True Christians Refuse
    The book of Revelation reveals that pressures would be applied to earth’s inhabitants to become worshipers of the Devil-controlled “wild beast.” We are informed that all persons would be put under compulsion—“the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free and the slaves, that they should give these a mark in their right hand or upon their forehead, and that nobody might be able to buy or sell except a person having the mark, the name of the wild beast or the number of its name.”—Rev. 13:16, 17.
    The “mark” of the beast would identify the one having it as belonging to that “wild beast,” giving it full support. Ellicott’s Bible Commentary notes that the mark ‘surely means the acquiescence to the principles of this tyrannical world-power.’

    Now...the last paragraph says "full support" and then the commentary cited says "acquiescence to the principles." Interestingly, the ECOSOC Resolution that Dozy keeps going on about requires AS A BARE MINIMUM acquiescence to the principles of the UN. The Criteria for Association to the UN/DPI required more than mere acquiescence when application was first made in 1991. It required support for the principles of the UN Charter.

    Dozy keeps confusing the principles (of which there are 7) with the purposes. Dozy doesn't even list all the purposes of the UN, only the first. However, since supporting the principles requires supporting the purposes, I will list both sets here in their entirety.

    Article 1
    The Purposes of the United Nations are:
    1. To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
    2. To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;
    3. To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and
    4. To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.
    Article 2
    The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.
    1. The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.
    2. All Members, in order to ensure to all of them the rights and benefits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations assumed by them in accordance with the present Charter.
    3. All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
    4. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.
    5. All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any state against which the United Nations is taking preventive or enforcement action.
    6. The Organization shall ensure that states which are not Members of the United Nations act in accordance with these Principles so far as may be necessary for the maintenance of international peace and security.
    7. Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter; but this principle shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures under Chapter Vll.

    Obviously, one of Jehovah's Witnesses could not even nominally support these principles, since throughout the requirement is clear that the UN be the agency which will see these conditions achieved.


  • james_woods

    Did it ever occur to all the apologist writers, that:

    A: There was nothing at all wrong with being an NGO or using the Library in the first place. If it could help third world people, why not?

    B. The actual "wrong part" was the hypocrisy of bitching about the scarlet harlot all these years and going and doing this in secret.

    Apologise for that, riders of the beast...

  • AuldSoul

    Of course there was nothing wrong with being a non-governmental organization (NGO). There was also nothing wrong with using the library.

    According to the Governing Body's published rules for Jehovah's Witnesses, there was something grossly wrong with JOINING a secular organization that has objectives contrary to the Bible and that is under judgement by God, for library access, for swimming pool or gym privileges, to look at artwork, or for any other reason.


  • james_woods

    Exactly the point,

    & good to hear it directly from you, my friend.

  • Jourles

    I think this question was best answered by the PO from my last congo. During my "trials," I brought up the UN issue to both the PO and secretary when they began their investigation of me. Without denying the fact that the WTS joined, the PO mentioned that one of the reasons for them joining as an NGO could have been to help them gain access to the newly opened, former USSR. Paraphrasing him, he said, "It's possible that the brothers used their NGO status to gain access to the former Soviet Union after the Iron Curtain fell." At the time, I almost fell out of my chair because for one, I didn't expect him to believe that they would have joined the UN, and two, he offered a reason that had never occurred to me before.

    To this day, I feel that the reason given by my old PO is the best I have ever heard. I bet in the WTS eyes, the former USSR was going to be the perfect breeding ground for new growth. I'm sure they don't think the same way these days though...

  • Legolas

    Yep when the elders came over in June, after I sent them all the stuff I had put together, I had the OM book there and showed them what it had said...well all they did was just repeat themselves the whole damn time saying...'Oh they made a mistake a corrected it by leaving.'.......An I just kept correcting them by saying ..."Oh no..They only left AFTER it made headlines and everybody found out what hypocrites they are!'...I also kept saying that the JW knew for YEARS what the UN was (what they believe) that this was not 'new light'.

    The damn hypocrites!

  • Leolaia

    I love the comparison between the library card excuse and Esau giving up his birthright for a bowl of soup. LOL!!! I wonder if E-Watchman refers to the Society as the "antitypical Esau"?

  • AuldSoul

    Heh-heh, perhaps I should send him an email?


  • Kristofer


    Like..the simple way you presented this.

  • greendawn

    This would have been a non issue had the WTS not been playing with double standards by doing something that they strictly forbid their members to do. But for me the Malawi-Mexico contradiction is by far the worst example in their political hypocrisy. A lot of JWs were tortured and killed because the GB forbade them to buy a card whereas in Mexico they were allowed.

Share this