i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
This why interpreting this stuff fails
It does not give direct support for, nor does it directly oppose, God’s Kingdom IN THE CHARTER, which this is about.
Watchtower claims otherwise, as shown on the quote i pasted on previous post. Any claims of peace seeking coming from the UN are blasphemous. No need to interpret it. It's pretty direct.
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
This will be spelled out in the charter/contract.
None of the references to peace within the charter invoke God's kingdom. Instead, it outlines the general policies and procedures it would take on it's own.
Even Watchtower understands this:
Great expectations were held out for it, and it was given designations that were really blasphemous from the standpoint of the Holy Bible. How so? In that to this wild beast powers were ascribed and tasks were assigned that really belong to Gods kingdom and its Messiah or its Christ. Watchtower 1963 Nov 15 p.697
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
I think my police analogy was appropriate.
No, it was not, for various reasons:
1) The police departments are not attempting to reach "world peace and security", a goal WT claims belongs only to God's kingdom.
2) The WT has repeatedly written that the UN is a beast that blasphemes against God. What is the "blasphemy" in question? Seeking world peace through means other than the kingdom. WT has never claimed the same about police depts.
3) By WT "signing the paper", it wasn't agreeing with just a generic goal of achieving peace, it was agreeing with the "blasphemous" goal of seeking such world peace without God.
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
You haven’t proven your case. You went from the YMCA, to blood banks, to your interpretation of principles, to agreeing they support peace, to agreeing with me that they don’t look to the UN, etc
Your ineptitude in deciphering and analyzing my arguments is not a valid counter-argument. You have nothing left.
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
You obviously have nothing left.
-The principle behind the YMCA quote applies to the UN. As per WT's own word, no association or link whatsoever should exist between a servant of God and these "wicked" organizations. Your claim that since WT didn't specifically write about the UN it wouldn't be wrong to associate oneself with it is both frivolous and blatantly dishonest.
-The WT does support peace, but it's publications claim it absolutely abhors the idea behind the UN's goal of peace without God's kingdom.
Keep the lies coming, you are doing great service for lurkers here!
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
No matter how you try to spin it, Watchtower publications show it would NOT agree with the goals of the UN of achieving peace WITHOUT God's kingdom. In fact, it demonizes such a goal and labels it blasphemy against God. Keep the lies coming.Vouching support for the UN to achieve its goals, and agreeing with it goals (the same ones you have) are really not nearly the same thing.
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
Yes, they do. WT magazines say God will do the exact same things the UN claims it can.
JWs support God as being the source of that. DPI NGOs were not obligated to give support to the UN as being the source.
Your dishonesty shines though again. Interestingly, you refute your own claim. WT indeed does support peace through God's kingdom, but not through the UN. Any claim made by the UN to achieving peace is viewed as a direct insult to God's kingdom, as per WT's own writing, which I previously quoted.
Will you continue lying?
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
The goals of the UN is not in violation of JW beliefs.
They absolutely agree with those goals.
No, they absolutely do not. As per my previous post, watchtower views any UN claims of seeking peace as blasphemous, a direct insult to God's kingdom. Your dishonesty is transparent.
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
NVM
..right.
i would like as many people that can, to respond to this appeal as i am sure their are many examples out their that may help lurkers and fence sitters to make a decision on where they stand regarding the "truth".
i look forward to your comments either negative or plus..
Doubter:All you really have to do is show that they agreed with things in the charter that violated their beliefs in 92.
The very first point of the charter would be something WT claimed was blasphemous and wicked proclamation:
The Purposes of the United Nations are
- To maintain international peace and security, to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace
This is in direct conflict with WT belief. WT claims the UN is the symbolic beast that slanders God and promises what only his "kingdom" can deliver: Peace. Here's a direct quote from WT:
"Such dwellers on earth wondered admiringly at the revived scarlet wild beast. Much reliance was placed in its ability to be a power for world peace and security. Great expectations were held out for it, and it was given designations that were really blasphemous from the standpoint of the Holy Bible. How so? In that to this wild beast powers were ascribed and tasks were assigned that really belong to Gods kingdom and its Messiah or its Christ. Back in 1919 the scarlet League of Nations had been seriously called the political expression of the Kingdom of God on earth. And now the United Nations, the successor of that League, has been called the best means for peace, yes, even more than that, the last hope for peace. So today we can see in actuality what the apostle John saw in symbol, that that scarlet-colored wild beast is full of blasphemous names. Those expressions of admiration for it turn false religionists, not to the worship of Jehovah God the Creator, but to idolatry of a man-made creation, the worship of a political image, the worship of an international organization for world peace and security. Rev. 17:3." Watchtower 1963 Nov 15 p.697
