Is "" telling the truth?

A Mere Conspiracy Theory?

This website is dedicated to the examination of the Watchtower's 10 year membership with the United Nation's Department of Public Information (DPI). The DPI is the United Nation's publicity department. In particular, this site serves the purpose to examine the flagship rebuttal website of this WBTS/UN association, created by an individual that goes by the name "thirdwitness". To view his website CLICK HERE

From the onset, "thirdwitness" attempts to muddy the waters by using loaded language, red herrings, and calling upon emotion well before one has been given the chance to consider the evidence. On the homepage, he has already set the reader up to consider much of this issue a conspiracy theory formulated by "crackpot" individuals and "apostates". Count how many times you see such words used on his site. Perhaps these are colors to cloud the water? Regardless of one's feelings, the WBTS reminds us that "Reasonable persons agree that the only fair method (to see the truth) is to examine the evidence on both sides, both for and against a disputed theory (1973 Awake! October 22nd pg. 6). Please keep this statement in mind before you make your final decision on the truth of the matter.

As we examine the evidence, it's important to see how the WBTS views a person joining a secular organization whose objects are contrary to the Bible. Surely the UN fits into this category. Read below...

(1983 Organized To Accomplish Our Ministry pg. 151)


NOTE: After clicking the chapter you wish to view, scroll past the above "sticky" introduction post (also chapter index below) and read just below the map. Click on images to enlarge them.

CHAPTER 1"Introduction: In the Beginning" 

"Know your NGOs!"

"Did we agree to praise the UN?"

CHAPTER 4 "Please Sign Nowhere"

CHAPTER 5 "The changing world of NGOs"

CHAPTER 6 "Following it to the Letter"

CHAPTER 7 "Hail to the Chief"

CHAPTER 8 "Principle Support"

"Did we hypocritically ‘ride the wild beast’?"

CHAPTER 10 "Awake to Propaganda?"

CHAPTER 11 "Self-condemnation?"

CHAPTER 12 "Consider the Source"

CHAPTER 13 "Conclusion: A Not-Guilty Verdict"

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Chapter 8


Though I'm not too interested in an etymological discussion of the word "support", as I feel it's rather unnecessary, but I must address this chapter nevertheless. "3W" takes the liberty to quote a small portion of the UN's charter, which is rather large containing 19 chapters. Here's the portion he quotes:

“to maintain international peace and security; to suppress acts of aggression that threaten world peace; to encourage friendly relations among nations; to protect the fundamental freedoms of all peoples without discrimination based on race, sex, language, or religion; and to achieve international cooperation in solving economic, social, and cultural problems."

In justification of supporting this he says Do we or do we not support and give “approval” to these principles? If you do not support those principles, what kind of person would you be? Indeed, if Jehovah's Witnesses as a religion did not support and approve of those principles above, what kind of horrible religion would we be members of? The question is, does the Watchtower support this part of the charter below?

(To read the full charter CLICK HERE)
" ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest..."
I think we can safely say that the WBTS would not support the cause to take up arms in order to enforce these principals. "3W" tells us The UN has not yet attacked God's people and proved itself to be an enemy of God. Did not Paul appeal to Rome when he was being persecuted? Yes — did he not use the legal system of a government which later proved to be the foretold “disgusting thing”, to advance true worship? Interesting, ask any average JW if they believe that the UN is an enemy of God. I have and they usually say yes. Why is it that the WBTS calls the UN the "disgusting thing" or the "scarlet colored beast" if it's not an enemy of Jehovah God? To see an example of how the WBTS has viewed them read below...
*** dp 267-9 15 The Rival Kings Enter the 20th Century ***
23 When the end of the second world war was in sight, another development occurred, just as God’s angel had foretold. “They will certainly put in place the disgusting thing that is causing desolation.” (Daniel 11:31b) Jesus had also spoken of “the disgusting thing.” In the first century, it proved to be the Roman army that came to Jerusalem in 66 C.E. to put down Jewish rebellion.—Matthew 24:15; Daniel 9:27.
24 What “disgusting thing” has been “put in place” in modern times? Apparently, it is a “disgusting” counterfeit of God’s Kingdom. This was the League of Nations, the scarlet-colored wild beast that went into the abyss, or ceased to exist as a world-peace organization, when World War II erupted. (Revelation 17:8) “The wild beast,” however, was “to ascend out of the abyss.” This it did when the United Nations, with 50 member nations including the former Soviet Union, was established on October 24, 1945. Thus “the disgusting thing” foretold by the angel—the United Nations—was put in place.
Also to note, "3W" talks about Paul using a "disgusting thing" to advance true worship? Really, can his situation be compared to the situation between the UN and the Watchtower? Does the WBTS use the UN to "advance true worship"?

"3W" goes on to say ...our brothers in Bethel, upon realizing the new wording of the UN’s criteria for association as a DPI NGO, and even though it may not be unscriptural to remain a DPI NGO, chose to withdraw membership rather than risk stumbling others. Is that not commendable and loving on their part? All me to address three points here:

1. They didn't suddenly realize anything after the Guardian article came out. They knew what they were doing.

2. If it's not unscriptural to be an associated NGO with the DPI, why did they leave?

3. It wasn't an issue of a loving act (by leaving) to keep from stumbling others. It was an "oh s***" moment, hence their swift retreat.

No comments:

Post a Comment