Watchtower deception in the New Tract.........

AK - Jeff

Of course they always use 'loaded language' and assertions out the ass - but on page 3 is what I consider a blatant omission.

On the right margin is a artist rendition of the 'Scarlet colored wild beast' of Revelation chapter 17. We all know that this beast is considered to be the United Nations organization - and that she will turn and devour the harlot in time.

Yet the paragraghs on that page never use the term 'UN' or 'United Nations' - not once!

Instead they use the term 'the world's political powers'.

Now you would think that a message of this import should not be cloaking anything that serious, wouldn't one? Could it be that mention of the UN in print in this context evokes fear that those at the door may call to mind that the publishers jumped smack in bed with that 'beastlike organization' for over 10 years.

Like a man who claims to have repented of a ten year fling with a beastly whore, he might recoil at the very mention of the word 'whore' or 'affair' or 'unfaithful' or 'Lying scumbag false religious organization'.? Perhaps the WTS still feels wood at times when she is mentioned?

Just a thought.

Jeff

lawrence

Having been the wild beast's temporary paramour, I believe the WTS should use the word "harlot" very sparingly.

The WTS is a harlot! The WTS is a lying bitch!

Finally-Free

Instead they use the term 'the world's political powers'.

They're keeping their options open. Give them a few years, and they'll eventually downgrade it to "worldly elements". References to the UN will be blamed on the wild speculations of weak publishers.

W

fullofdoubtnow

We have these apologists like thirdwitness coming on here telling us the wts did nothing wrong in associating with the UN, yet they don't get a mention on a page with a picture that has long been used to depict them!

That seems more than a little suspicious to me, like the wts don't want to encourage any questions about that period.

JimWood

the GB will soon approve the following for print,

" Although we are the 'mouth piece' of the only true god and we make every attempt to stay the course, it is sad to see how over zealous members can 'read' into our publishing's. Some have even suggested that we considered the scarlet colored wild beast the United Nations, just looking at our history, as god's organization, how could this be. We have even allowed the UN to regard us as an NGO for a period of time in the 90's. Sadly though, some did not see how this remained in line with current teachings of the organization."

nelly1

I beleive after spending 13 years in that organisation and being totally mislead by the so many self righteous pharrisitical elders and co's I beleive that the watchtower society and all it stands for is lumped in with the religions that god tells us "get out of her my people if you do not want to share in her sin or have part of her plagues" tha WBTS is included in that dont you agree????

garybuss

The Society knows if they named the brochure beast picture "The United Nations", at least a hundred copies of the brochure and the picture would be delivered to the United Nations the day after the piece of literature came out.

Naaaaa! They're not gonna do that. They aren't done with The United Nations. They've shown that by their inter-political-faith associations since the publications of the facts since the year 2001.

They don't really care about (other) false religions either. The literature and the soliciting promotions are for the benefit of the members, not the public. I read their tract. Who's the audience? First of all the tract is so ambiguous, catch phrase loaded, and double talking, that after reading it three times I can't figure out what they are trying to say, and I speak the language.

Message #1. Jehovah's Witnesses hate all (other) false religions and Jehovah's Witnesses hate all (other) governments. That's the message! Yeah, what's new about that?

Message #2. Jehovah's Witnesses think something bad's gonna happen . . . but they don't know when . . . but pretty soon. What's new about that?

No news is: Jehovah's Witnesses can't write a simple tract in plain English.