"BEAST that was but is not" Rev 17 original teaching 1930 not UN

by hamsterbait 2 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  hamsterbait

  I am putting this up to show how the current view of the UN and its role is merely a replacement of the failed predictions for the Hague Court prior to 1914, and the league of Nations.

  "LIGHT" in two books, Comments by J.F. Rutherford. (1930)

  Vol II p. 98:

  "In the formation of the Hague World Court and of the League of Nations Great Britain and America took the lead, and this is further proof that the Anglo-American Empire is the 'two-horned beast'. This "Siamese-twins" nation has been doing most of the talking and political prophesying concerning what the World Court, League of Nations Paris Peace Conference... and like arrangements will do for democracy, and this is proof that the 'two-horned beast is also "the false prophet." "

  p.104:

  "The eighth "beast" came into existence in 1899 as "The Hague World Court". It is a 'royal-colored beast' because made up of rulers of the world. In 1914 it went into the pit and 'was not', and came out after the war. It originated with the seventh world power in this, that the British Ambassador is the one who took the lead in the formation of the World Court at the Hague Conference and it was the British Empire ( of which America is a part, and which is the 'two-horned beast') that brought it out of the pit in the form of the League of Nations. Being the "image of the [sea] beast", and made up of the many nations of the earth, the eighth is in fact of the seven, as the prophecy states."

  Now for the Failed prediction:

  "The judgement of Jehovah is that in due time it goes into perdition. - Isa 8: 9 - 12; Ps. 2: 8,9."

  So this is why the WT was so convinced WW2 was going to lead to Armageddon - the League had Gone into perdition (as they saw it) never to re-emerge. However it DID and they had to trim their sales to the new political clamate post WW2.

  Does anybody have the WT study dealing with the "disgusting thing" in Matt 24:15 where the British mandate over Palestine ( approved by the League) after WW1 is used to prove it is in the Holy Place?

  HB
• 

  AnnOMaly

  Hi hamsterbait.

  In case you've not seen this already: http://user.tninet.se/~oof408u/fkf/english/un.htm

  I have the Light books too and was amused to see this old understanding. In fact, now that time has gone on, in a way the old one fits a little better than the present one. Could 60+ years of UN existence really be classed as 'remaining a short while'? And the UN existed before the League of Nations (strictly-speaking) 'was not' - they ran concurrently for a while - although the UN took over the League's original remit after WWII.

  Sorry, I can't help you on the British/Palestine question.
• 

  Zico

  THANK YOU Hamsterbait. I am now intending to use this information in a letter I am writing to some friends who are Jehovah's Witnesses.
  
  Nathan Knorr originally pointed to the UN as the Beast that would rise again, but thought it would be like a World Government with it's own military and strong influence over all nations. This did not materialise, the UN has no real power, but the Society have probably kept to it so they could point to it as a sucessful prophecy in the Revelation Climax book. (Which wasn't that much of a prophecy, as it was being reported in the news)