JW Response to NGO/UN info (page 7)

hawkaw

Thanks Randy,

Remember the application form and the critera form have changed slightly from 1991 but the main points are still the same.

hawk

cornish

So in other words the ends justifies the means,shame they dont show the same line of reasoning for any other religions working with the UN,just condemnation.

ozziepost

G'day Andrew,

Yep, the JW response is typical. I was interested in this point:

Just as we do not vote, there is nothing stopping us going to our local MP and asking assistance for a problem we may have in the community.

I take it your correspondent is an aussie. As such he should know that voting in Australia is compulsory. The Australian Branch for many years has been proclaiming to congregations that JWs do not vote and so after each election there is a scramble in the Kingdom Hall after the meetings to get the 'Please Explain' notices completed and witnessed. However, aussie JWs were surprised at the Watchtower which seemingly changed the way in which Witnesses may act. In fact, however, this was not a new instruction ("new light") but a repetition of what had been in the Tower in the Fifties. It's just that the Aussie Branch obscured this. Your correspondent is out of touch, not keeping up with 'new light'.

Cheers,
Ozzie

"It's better to light a candle than to curse the darkness."
Anonymous

hillbilly

Damn- I thought true christians were 'sposed to get kicked around by the govermant?

Essan

I find it helps to clarify things for a JW who is making all sorts of excuses for the Society's voluntary association with and service to the UN by interrupting and insisting that they stick to the Watchtower's teaching on this matter while discussing it.

Have them first read Revelation 13 and 14 regarding the mark of the Beast and penalty for receiving it. Remind them the Society teaches that the UN is the Beast, a Satanic enemy of God, and then, without any further commentary, ask them to proceed with or repeat their excuses while making an adjustment of just ONE WORD: which is, to be scripturally accurate and always refer to the UN as "The Beast", as the Society has identified it.

See how far they get before they go bright red or can't continue.

If they won't do it, ask why not, is it the Beast or is it not? If there is nothing to be ashamed of, then why is employing such Scriptural accuracy a problem?

Even the most blind and dismissive JW can find sudden clarity as they feel the creeping horror of blasphemy while saying things like "We only associated with the Beast to be able to do the preaching work better." (to function - "to buy and sell" Rev 13:17-18)

What a lot of power in just one word.

leavingwt

Essan:

What a lot of power in just one word.

I really enjoyed your first post. Great idea.

Welcome to JWN!

-LWT

Essan

Thanks for the welcome.

I've tried it before and it's worked. It's easy for them to make excuses when they can avoid the doctrinal weight that the Society has loaded onto the UN, but that weight comes crashing back down on them when they use the word "Beast".

Even if they refuse to do it, you can tell by the way they flush and get flustered that, even if they won't admit it, you've penetrated their armour and given them something to think about. I suppose it might also be worthwhile taking a letter, like the one in the OP, and copying it, replacing all references to UN with "Wild Beast" or suchlike and sending their own letter back to them, as a more accurate 'mirror' of their hypocritical position.

thetrueone

If ever a debate arises to the legitimacy of the WTS. registering as a NGO it would be important to read the requirements by the UN,

the actual document and the solemn agreement when sighing up as one.

This is where a JWS would stumble themselves unavoidably.

JW Response to NGO/UN info

Share this