JWs and Neutrality

by Vidqun 11 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Vidqun

  JWs have always had a problem with neutrality:

  1) During WW I they encouraged via the magazines to buy War Bonds, i.e., Liberty Bonds, as it was then known, thus actively supporting the war effort (Search, under "War Bonds").

  2) During WW II, the Australian Branch also invested heavily in War Bonds in order for the ban to be lifted. After the war, they had to repent, before Jehovah could bless their efforts again.

  3) More recently the WTS has invested in companies with Defense contracts.

  4) Membership of the UN as NGO (1992-2001). Brothers forming NGOs in different countries to assist those in wartorn lands, e.g., Aid Afrique.

  I went through the information on "neutrality" in the Proclaimers-book. They are definitely not practicing what they are preaching. This is "theocratic warfare" at its best. If they continue on this path, things will unravel fast. Not even the most thick of the R&F will swallow all that. I am sure some of you will have some input on the subject to assist us newbies in our quest for freedom.
• 

  Vidqun

  No takers. Let me bump the thread.

  In Chapter 14 "They Are No Part of the World" of the Proclaimers-book they compare JWs with 1st century Christians. Their lapses during the First World Wars they ascribe to their understanding of Rom. 13:1, that the authorities were "ordained by God". That's why they encouraged their fellow Bible Students to buy war bonds and prey for an Allied victory.

  Then the book goes on to say: "But then, at the end of World War I, another situation arose that called on religious groups to show where their loyalties were." They then discuss the formation of the League, the UN, the UN charter and their endorsement by religious groups. They conclude: "To observers of these developments, it was plain who wanted to be "a friend of the world" and who was endeavouring to be "no part of the world," as Jesus said would be true of his disciples.-Jas. 4:4; John 17:14."

  Now fast-forward to 1992, and they join the UN as NGO. Interestingly, this is also the year that the Proclaimers-book was published and Fred W. Franz died. For some reason, their neutrality wheels came off then. What would have caused them to affect such a change from established JW doctrine? It boggles the mind.
• 

  sir82

  Never heard of the WWII - Australia incdent. What is the source for that?
• 

  blondie

  http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/malawi-mexico-oath-allegiance.php
• 

  blondie

  http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/141513/1/W-W-2-1940s-Australia-Bethel-helps-out-war-effort

  I would check the Proclaimers book and WTs from the 1950's as well as the 1975 YB.
• 

  criticalwitness

  the imprisonment of gb on sedition when they later ordered pages of a book to be ripped out to hopefully not go to jail i just pray that something like this happens again if the gov got them before it can again! and i dont think org would last this time with all doubting r??ank and file the internet and power hungry elders
• 

  Disillusioned Lost-Lamb

  Neutral? Um no.

  The WTBT$ and GB have their fingers in just about everything, they just don't want you to know about it. They only preach the neutrality issue because they know, if you get yourself involved in a cause you might not spend every waking minute, and dime, on them, you just might learn something and the more you know, well we all know where that leads, right out the door.
• 

  carla

  I know my jw has said he was neutral about things then go on to give his opinion on the matter. They do not understand the meaning of the word.
• 

  QueenWitch

  Being neutral is being ignorant. After I realized that I do indeed have opinions about the US govt that I live under, I became more alert to world affairs. I don't vote but I identify as Libertarian.
• 

  apostatethunder

  I vote as I consider it not only a right but an obligation as a citizen. If you don’t vote you let others decide for you. That’s what the witnesses are brainwashed to do in every aspect of their lives.

  I think they are everything but neutral, but what they support I don't know. Saying that nobody is truly neutral. Being neutral in the midst of an injustice is the equivalent of condoning it.