by thirdwitness 597 Replies latest watchtower scandals
Oh my, this is rich! The person who made this post "Oh Happy Day" has the same IP address as ThirdWitness.Talk about desperation! He is now answering his own posts
Well spotted Gary. That is very devious of you t-wit, I thought for a minute there you actually had a supporter.
I still think this picture sums up the wts realationship with the UN very well.
thirdwitness,
You never answered any of my questions about the similarities between the Malawi issue, and the UN issue. You just picked up one point from a long post and spoke about Nazis. You completely ignored 98% of the rest of what I wrote.
For your convenience, I'll post it again:
Having a Party Card, does NOT mean that you support the Party.
You support a Party by VOTING for it, or doing other things that HELP the Party. The Witnesses in Malawi had to carry a Party Card by law. They did NOT have to vote for a party. There should be nothing wrong with this. As I already stated:
"I’m on the voting register, I’m eligible to vote, I’ve never voted though, as it doesn’t mean I have to vote, but credit card and loan companies may look at the voting register to help them decide whether or not they want to give you loans or cards, so it’s useful to be on there, and the Society don’t say that you can’t do this, I asked an elder if it was ok, and he said it was fine. In some countries you have enforced voting. The Society doesn’t tell you to go to prison and refuse to go to polling stations, they let you go to the polling stations, but ask that you don’t actually vote, just spoil the ballet or something, so why was a Party Card so bad?"
The Party Card was just a symbol. Similarly, a Heil Hitler is just a symbol. Every person who did it, did not necessarily support the Nazis.
I also said:
"A Party Card may have convinced the Party that they showed support for them, but it didn’t necessarily mean that the individual carrying the card supported them, as they didn’t vote for them. Similarly, the Society had to submit articles to the UN that had to convince them that they supported them. Even if this did not necessarily mean that did support the UN as you believe it didn’t, surely you can agree the purpose was to convince the UN that they supported them?
Do you realise that some Organisations have had applications to become DPI associates rejected? This isn’t a recent thing, this has been happening since 1991/2 when the Society joined. Why do you think they were rejected? There MUST be a reason. The UN/DPI aren’t just going to be picking the names out of a hat, if they are rejecting Organisations, it would seem like they would only want associates who they believe are going to be of benefit to them. So, surely the articles the Watchtower Society provided the UN/DPI with, convinced them that the Watchtower Society would help them to spread information about their charter, and thus be a support to them?" THIRDWITNESS - IF you do not agree that the UN/DPI rejected some applications from NGOs who they did not think were beneficial to them, then please could you offer another reason why the UN/DPI would reject some applications.
What did the Party Card actually mean? As Steve posted, a quote from a 1976 Watchtower said this about Malawi:
There all citizens have been required to become members of the country’s only existing political party, the "Malawi Congress Party." A membership card costing about twenty-five cents (U.S.) identifies the bearer as ‘acquiescing to the principles of the ruling political party,’ especially to the Life President, Dr. H. Kamuzu Banda. How are the people of Malawi to view the purchase of a "Party Card"? An official circular issued on August 27, 1975, says: "This is the one way in which we people of this country can show appreciation to our Life Leader, the Ngwazi [Dr. Banda] for developing this country of Malawi."
A membership card, like a library card, shows suggests that the members agree with the principles of the people who issued the card. If there was nothing wrong with the library card suggesting that they supported the UN, why was having a Party Card which suggested they supported the Party so wrong? If having a library card did not mean that the Society agreed to support the principles of the UN, why does having a Party Card?
Fact is that these issues are very similar. SO, the Society were either wrong to associate with the UN/DPI, they were wrong about how they dealt with the Malawi issues, or they were wrong about both. Which is it Thirdwitness?
Please could you address these issues. And can I also ask you why Witnesses in Mexico were not allowed to pray at or sing Kingdom songs at meetings, or use the bible in preaching work, at the same time Jehovah's Witnesses in Malawi were being sent to prison or killed for refusing to buy a party card?
In fact Thirdwitness, once you are finished with the UN debate, I challenge you to get into a debate about the Mexico/Malawi issues. If you accept, I will start a thread about it, and you can post in there and try to defend how the Governing Body dealt with these issues, but I don't think you will, because, unless you are completely stupid, you will realise, that the Mexico/Malawi ordeal can NOT be defended.
Zico
How many times have the ‘faithful and discreet slave’ told us that the mere appearance of wrongdoing should keep us from certain paths of conduct lest we bring reproach on Jehovah’s name? I ask this, if this was completely innocent and yet the Society will not come forward with printed information to all the R & F, whose hands are the blood of the stumbled ones on? I think I recall something about a millstone.
thirdwitness / ohhappyday
Still nothing new !
Your arguments have already been dealt with by many people in this thread.
Try again.
steve
Sorry to disappoint everyone but I am not ohhappydays nor do I know ohhappyday nor has he or anyone used my computer today except me. I have PMed him and ask him why the ip address is the same. Look at his other posts and you will see how his ip address keeps on changing. This is obviously someone who has the ability to freak the system. Perhaps the administration knows. Or maybe this is a scheme to finally get rid of thirdwitness for his exposing the apostates.
I agree with zico, for me as a witness Malawi case defined it where WTBS stands in terms of "neutrality" and as such MUST, simply MUST be explained in light of WTBS own reaction to not so dramatic situation of having to join formally to a political entity in order to get something out of it; or as they claim only access card to UN library. Either way, it was a compromise and WTBS dancing around the issue will just inflame more nerves then they will be able to heal. Eventually body dies.
To add: Looking back I cannot believe that while still there I would have done the same thing even if it meant loosing my life. I mean, WTBS representatives, whoever you are, if that is a trivial thing for you then that just show how, in reality, you little think of people under your care, hence no wonder you are loosing more and more of them.
Or maybe this is a scheme to finally get rid of thirdwitness for his exposing the apostates.
Exposing the apostates???? Exposing them to what???
You have simply got to get over yourself.
You know, for an org. that so nit-picks the behaviors of it's members and repeatedly warns against even the appearance of wrong-doing (don't drive that single sister home after the meeting brother, even though she isfifty years your senior) it comes across as hypocritical to cozy up to the U.N. for any reason, much less a "library card".
No offense to any 80+ year old women out there...
I have not read all the posts on this topic. I am still "in" and am being completely up front. I am truly wondering why ----
1. If this is a non issue, but concerns many, why doesn't the WTS just explain, say, in a special needs part, why the controversy, why they connected themselves in any way with the UN, and why they dissasociated themselves if there was nothing wrong in the first place. ----If the fact that their name in any way was seen in the same place as Catholics and other religious groups on documents belonging to the UN, it is obviously a concern to many. Couldn't they just set the record straight, so that those who question would have answers?
2. If this is a non issue, why are some being reproved or even disfellowshipped for merely publicly stating the fact that the WT Society was indeed connected in some way with the UN organization? The decision to disfellowship is forwarded to the WT Society for APPROVAL. At this point they could send back a reply to the congregation that the fact is true and to reverse the decision. They do not do this. Why?
3. As the one who started this post, do you have some special privelege to discuss this with others? How is it that you are not accused of apostacy for discussing this and others have been told they were influenced by Satan for merely reading about it?
Thirdwitness said several posts ago,
I will make one last attempt even though much of this is a repeat of previous points covered. But for the sake of truth seekers I will do it again.
If that was you last attempt, why do you continue to post? Liar, liar... pants on fire! Welcome to the Apostate Club!
