My questions to JW's

[Claude_Kenneson]

jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

This site claims that Paul Hoeffel, whose letter you will be directed to in a link was either lying or did not have all the facts. We will see. The WTS claims that the only reason they applied for association as an NGO in DPI (Department of Public Information) was to use the UN’s library. That will also be considered. They also full well knew what was required of them in order to be associated. Here is a press release from Feb. 1992 that clearly shows what was expected of them. “The NGOS officially recognized by DPI cooperate with the United Nations to help public understanding and support United Nations programmes and goals…To be granted association with DPI, NGOS must have national or international standing, support the Charter of the United Nations, have a broadly based membership and possess the resources necessary for effective outreach.”

randytv.com/secret/feb92dpia.jpg

Now I ask you how far different is that from what Paul Hoeffel says in his letter? You can read it along with numerous other info at

quotes-watchtower.co.uk/united_nations.html

randytv.com/secret/unitednations.htm

 

[BibleSteve]

…but don’t try to weasel around by claiming that the WTS was talking about paraphrased talks. “There were other statements PUBLISHED that implied such realization of hopes by that year was more of a probablilty than a mere possibility…All disappointed ones of Jehovah’s Witnesses, hence including persons having to do WITH THE PUBLICATION OF THE INFORMATION THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE BUILDUP OF HOPES CENTERED ON THAT DATE…” Why is it you only want to see the cautionary statements in your literature and not the other statements PUBLISHED? Please don’t be disingenuous with us. We ARE capable of reading and comprehending what is being said!

You are trying to shift the blame to those who gave talks. Nice try.

In JW lingo, any person who talks about Jehovah is a “publisher”. So statements were published verbally from various public speakers who didn’t follow the clear advice from the President of the WTS. Feel free to post any direct written quotes that say anything would definately happen in writing. Seriously, if you think you can find one, post it.

The official policy of the WTS was clearly stated by the President. The WTS publishes plenty of written material, so go looking for it. It’s not there.

What is there, are various speakers who went beyond the official statement and request of the President.

The WTS apologized that incorrect expectations were developed because of this.

Do you hold every statement of every priest anywhere in the world to the same standard? Does every single one speak exactly as the Pope specificaly requests?

 

[BibleSteve]

You are trying to shift the blame to those who gave talks. Nice try.

You speaketh incorrectly. What was written in WT publications was very clear. What was stated from the President was very clear.

The non-manuscript talks from the platform of many Kingdom Halls, Circuit Assemblies, and District Assemblies is what lead to over eager expectations.

That was a problem the WT noted, admited, and apologized for.

This is one of the reasons we now have manuscript talks at our assemblies. Manuscript meaning the entire talk is written by the WTS and read word for word by the speaker on the Assembly Program.

Much tighter management is in place to ensure speakers don’t go beyond what they should.

Steve

 

[BibleSteve]

… criticism about WT being an NGO for 10 years.

And you are similarly concerned with the Catholic Church’s role at the UN?

seechange.org/

Or, you just feel motivated to judge and criticize the WT? They chose to be an NGO for 10 years, they choose to stop being an NGO.

The only reason this is being discussed is a desire on the part of JW-critics to want to find fault.

If being an NGO/UN is REALLY a concern to you, start by telling us about your UN concerns related to the Catholic Church.

jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

If YHWH has a problem with the WT being an NGO for a period of time, he’ll take care of it, along with any and all church organizations who are NGO’s.

Until then, Matt 7:1-3 may apply.

 

[jschwehm]

And you are similarly concerned with the Catholic Church’s role at the UN?

Hi BibleSteve:

The Catholic Church is involved in the UN because this is consistent with the way in which the Catholic Church teaches and believes. The Church believes that it is her role to be a voice for those in need in the world and also to be a positive influence on the governments in the world.

The reason why the Watchtower Society’s role as a non-governmental organization (NGO) is so scandalous is that in order to become an NGO the Watchtower Society had to agree to support the goals and programmes of the UN. All of us know that the Watchtower Society has published articles identifying the UN as ‘the digusting thing’ as referred to in the Bible. They have also made it a point to say that other religious organizations that get involved in the UN do so at their peril and God’s disapproval. In other words, the Watchtower Society’s role as an NGO at the UN went against what it is that they have claimed to believe about themselves and the UN and this is why people including many active JWs were scandalized by this.

Jeff S.
www.catholicxjw.com

 

[Jaypeeto4]

The Watchtower Society did not come out and directly state,
“Armageddon is going to occur in the year 1975.”
That is true.

But the Society, in the 1970s,
WAS teaching that those living in 1914, and who were old enough TO SEE WITH FULL UNDERSTANDING the events of 1914, would be around plentifully when Armageddon came.
The 1968 articles were especially emphatic about this, even reminding the readers that those people were now “WELL OVER SIXTY YEARS OF AGE.” In that same context, insisting that the mature (not infant children) people of 1914 would be around in good numbers at Armageddon, the Society stressed that these people were nearing the age of 70, and that a generation according to the Bible was a lifespan of “70 years” to by special circumstances, “80 years” of age.
Jehovah’s Witnesses did the math that the Society gave them:

1. People had to be around 14 or 15 in 1914 to see clearly
   what took place in 1914.
2. These people were now in their late sixties.
3. There had to be a good number of them around at
   Armageddon when it occured.
4. It was now 1968.
5. A biblical generation’s lifespan is from 70 to 80 years.
   The conclusion (and the only logical conclusion),
   was that Armageddon was due around 1975 and
   CERTAINLY not much later than that because that would leave only a few stragglers, if any, left to witness Armageddon.

Steve, this was taught in the name of Jehovah God
as food at the proper time coming to Jehovah’s people
through His Faithful and Discreet Slave who, if you denied what they taught publicly, you would be disfellowshiped and shunned as an apostate. MANY people WERE.

This prediction, was a prediction, even though the Society did not specifically and directly state word for word that Armageddon would occur in 1975. It would, following the factors laid out by the Society in it’s publications, couldn’t possibly occur much later than the 1970s. NOT A SINGLE FAITHFUL JEHOVAHS WITNESS expected the system of things to still be here by 1985.
By 1985, the mature ones of 1914 were now 85 years old and up.
The generation, according to the biblical definition of a generation’s lifespan, had indeed passed away and the Society’s prediction and scenario had, once again, proven erroneous.
The problem is not that the Society made a mistake.
The problem is that this stuff was taught as coming straight from Jehovah by angels who caused the light (this information) to flash up in the minds of the Faithful Slave Class (in practical terms, the Governing Body), and it was considered as authoritative as if Jehovah had boomed this information in His own voice from the clouds to mankind, and those who persisted in questioning it were disfellowshiped as apostates and “opposers of the truth.”

It is now the year 2007.
Except for maybe a handful of old women in remote Siberia
who live on yogurt and Yak’s milk, the 1914 generation HAS passed away.

Does the Society stop and say,
“Hey, maybe we don’t really have such a unique hotline
to God after all, we should stop claiming to be His sole
channel of communication to mankind out of humility.” ??
Nope, they simply alter the definition of the generation and
when it began, as if what they did in God’s name claiming his full authority to do so and disfellowshipping people who disagreed,
is nothing serious at all. Doesn’t count. We’re still God’s sole
mouthpiece.

I’m sorry, but that is wrong.
And the Society has done this over and over and over and over and over and over again, since it’s very inception, and never repents.

God bless you, Steve.
Jaypeeto4
+JMJ+

 

[BibleSteve]

The reason why the Watchtower Society’s role as a non-governmental organization (NGO) is so scandalous is that in order to become an NGO the Watchtower Society had to agree to support the goals and programmes of the UN…

This is no scandle. It’s simple an excuse for JW-critics to try to find fault with the WT.

JW-critics have no issue with the Catholic Church being a NGO.

They simply want to find fault with the WT for being an NGO because they feel they have don’t something inconsistent with their own principles.

I am fully versed on the issue, and it’s not a concern to me.

The link gives all the detailed information related to the question.

jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

Have you read it in it’s entirety?

Do you express the same concern over real scandles in the Catholic Church? Which one’s concern you the most? Why not explain your feelings on some of those first?

 

[Hellisreal]

This is no scandle. It’s simple an excuse for JW-critics to try to find fault with the WT.

JW-critics have no issue with the Catholic Church being a NGO.

They simply want to find fault with the WT for being an NGO because they feel they have don’t something inconsistent with their own principles.

I am fully versed on the issue, and it’s not a concern to me.

The link gives all the detailed information related to the question.

jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

Have you read it in it’s entirety?

Do you express the same concern over real scandles in the Catholic Church? Which one’s concern you the most? Why not explain your feelings on some of those first?

Hello Bible Steve!

The Catholic Church again hey?

Did the CC print off material to its members for years and years that the UN was synonymous with Satan?

Did the WTS do so, even one time? Or multiple times over the years?

Just asking.

Go to the apologetics threads for your concerns related to scandals in the Church and you will be happy you did.

 

[BibleSteve]

The Watchtower Society did not come out and directly state,
“Armageddon is going to occur in the year 1975.”
That is true.

Thank you for confirming this.

There is no doubt that many read more into the comments than was intended. That is human nature.

So many arguments and disputes are over words, their meaning, and what one person THINKS the other person said, or what they meant when they said something.

There is no escaping this problem… It’s fundamental to human communication.

As for the entire 1914, chronology debate. At its fundamental core, it’s all about subjective interpretation of prophecy. The fact that something is subjective means it can’t be objectively proved.

So engaging in arguments about it is fundamentally useless.

Is Jesus the Messiah? Objective to all christians.

What do all the references to number of days mean in the prophecies? Ultimately Subjective.

So normal humans will fight for their subjective views and others will argue against these subjective views.

I stand on the outside of this and watch the silliness. I hold fundamental core doctrinal views I view to be objective. And, as for subjective things, I let everyone else get all hot and bothered about whether they are true or not.

1914? does it mean something or not? It’s interesting to learn what people think on both sides of the question.

I don’t serve YHWH because of a date. It doesn’t matter to me.

Unfortunately, many other peoples faith is based on subjective things like dates, or who has authority to tell them what they should believe.

I don’t go for that.

Arguing about dates is silly.

 

[jschwehm]

Do you express the same concern over real scandles in the Catholic Church? Which one’s concern you the most? Why not explain your feelings on some of those first?

Hi BibleSteve:

The issue being discussed was not the scandals that have occurred within the Catholic Church. If you wish to discuss these, start another thread in the appropriate area of this discussion board and invite me there and I will express my opinion on those.

The issue that is being discussed in this thread is the scandal that occurred when people discovered that the Watchtower Society was a UN NGO and that the requirements that are required for an organization to become an NGO violated the beliefs of the JWs.

I know of several active JWs that left the JWs over this event and I also know that as soon as it got out that the Watchtower Society was serving as an NGO that the Watchtower Society gave up this position with the excuse that they did it so they could have access to the UN’s library system. This may or may not be true but the reality is that as far as Catholics are concerned there is no scandal for the Church to be an NGO as it does not go against the teachings of the Church to support an organization like the UN in principle. It is and has been against the teachings of the Watchtower Society for JWs to support the UN in this regard and the fact that the Watchtower Society did this for whatever reason really did stumble and scandalize many JWs.

Jeff S.
www.catholicxjw.com

 

[jschwehm]

As for the entire 1914, chronology debate. At its fundamental core, it’s all about subjective interpretation of prophecy. The fact that something is subjective means it can’t be objectively proved.

Hi BibleSteve:

I find your comments above interesting in that if what you say above is true, then the authority of the Watchtower’s leaders is on massively shaky ground. You know and I know that the leaders of the Watchtower Society claim to have been appointed Jesus’ “faithful and discreet slave” in the year 1919 A.D. and that this claim is based mainly on the 1914 chronology.

For example, if 1914 is wrong, then 1919 is wrong and then the leaders of the Watchtower Society are not Jesus’ “faithful and discreet slave” and therefore they have no authority to be making the grand claims that they have made about themselves through the years.

Jeff S.
www.catholicxjw.com

 

[BibleSteve]

The Catholic Church again hey?.

Hello Hellisreal,

I often see people want to criticize another church for behavior they view as acceptable in their own church.

I don’t see the logic.

My church does this and I’m fine with it, but yours does it and and I want to complain about it.

A JW critic who criticizes the WT for being an NGO doesn’t think being an NGO is bad, he just feels motivated to be judgmental about the WT because of his feelings about them.

The WTS became an NGO for certain reasons they’ve explained. They opted out of being an NGO because of reasons they’ve explained.

Read the link, understand both sides of the issues, and then decide if you want to assume the position of a judge or to leave it in the hands of YHWH in line with Jesus request at Matt 7:1-3

 

[BibleSteve]

Hi BibleSteve:
The issue being discussed was not the scandals that have occurred within the Catholic Church. If you wish to discuss these, start another thread in the appropriate area of this discussion board and invite me there and I will express my opinion on those.

My intention of bringing it up wasn’t because I had any interest in slinging mud at the Catholic Church.

I just have my own personal feelings about those throwing mud against another church without first commenting on their churches own shortcomings.

 

[Hellisreal]

Hello Hellisreal,

I often see people want to criticize another church for behavior they view as acceptable in their own church.

I don’t see the logic.

My church does this and I’m fine with it, but yours does it and and I want to complain about it.

A JW critic who criticizes the WT for being an NGO doesn’t think being an NGO is bad, he just feels motivated to be judgmental about the WT because of his feelings about them.

The WTS became an NGO for certain reasons they’ve explained. They opted out of being an NGO because of reasons they’ve explained.

Read the link, understand both sides of the issues, and then decide if you want to assume the position of a judge or to leave it in the hands of YHWH in line with Jesus request at Matt 7:1-3

Not judging here Bible Steve. Asking.

And staying on topic with the thread too.

You can bring up CC percieved inconsistancies in another thread.
This one is not for that purpose.

I am still waiting for you to answer my questions, about this.

The JW literature over the years has constantly shown the UN as synonyomous with Satan.

Once? Twice? or More?

 

[Hellisreal]

My intention of bringing it up wasn’t because I had any interest in slinging mud at the Catholic Church.

I just have my own personal feelings about those throwing mud against another church without first commenting on their churches own shortcomings.

I cant comment on your percieved thoughts on what the CC is or has fallen short of.

And, I can not ask it of you on this thread.

Start one, and I will be there to help you get facts and not fiction.

 

[TraditionalCath]

This is no scandle. It’s simple an excuse for JW-critics to try to find fault with the WT.

JW-critics have no issue with the Catholic Church being a NGO.

They simply want to find fault with the WT for being an NGO because they feel they have don’t something inconsistent with their own principles.

I am fully versed on the issue, and it’s not a concern to me.

The link gives all the detailed information related to the question.

jehovahsjudgment.co.uk/watchtower-un-ngo/

Have you read it in it’s entirety?

Do you express the same concern over real scandles in the Catholic Church? Which one’s concern you the most? Why not explain your feelings on some of those first?

are you saying there is and never has been ANY scandal in the society? no cover ups perhaps?

 

[BibleSteve]

For example, if 1914 is wrong, then 1919 is wrong and then the leaders of the Watchtower Society are not Jesus’ “faithful and discreet slave” and therefore they have no authority to be making the grand claims that they have made about themselves through the years.

I find this argument shallow. No offense, I just do.

Would you agree the entire authority of the Catholic Church rests on the proper interpretation of this scripture:

(Matthew 16:13-20) Now when he had come into the parts of Caes·a·re′a Phi·lip′pi, Jesus went asking his disciples: “Who are men saying the Son of man is?” 14They said: “Some say John the Baptist, others E·li′jah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15He said to them: “YOU, though, who do YOU say I am?” 16In answer Simon Peter said: “**You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” **17In response Jesus said to him: “Happy you are, Simon son of Jo′nah, because flesh and blood did not reveal [it] to you, but my Father who is in the heavens did. 18Also, I say to you, You are Peter, and **on this rock-mass I will build my congregation, **and the gates of Ha′des will not overpower it. 19I will give you the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatever you may bind on earth will be the thing bound in the heavens, and whatever you may loose on earth will be the thing loosed in the heavens.” 20*Then he sternly charged the disciples not to say to anybody that he was the Christ.

Catholics believe “this rock-mass” meant Peter. However, when you have multiple nouns being discused in a sentence or paragraph, ambiguity occurs. What if Jesus wasn’t talking about Peter but was talking about the answer to the question in verse 16?

Was the Church built on Peter or Jesus? Would you abandon your entire belief system if you decided this scripture had been misunderstood? I doubt it. If the church wasn’t built on Peter would your faith crumble? No Peter, No Apostolic Succession?

The argument you present about 1914 being so important that everything hinges on it, is silly.

I believe what I do, not based on any date, or trying to decide who to believe has authority to decide what is true. I read the Bible and decide what I believe is true. I then associate with the group who most closely matches what I believe to be true, and am reasonably lienent with the needs of others to base their faith on dates or authorities.

 

[Hellisreal]

Reporting this to mods for violating forum rules.
sorry, I asked you and Jeff did to stop derailing.

If you post this in apologetics I will see you there.

I find this argument shallow. No offense, I just do.

 

[BibleSteve]

are you saying there is and never has been ANY scandal in the society? no cover ups perhaps?

I am not aware of any man or woman that is sin-free.

I find that JW-critics are overly intent to find fault with others.

I don’t believe that is the mindset Jesus had in mind at Matt 7:1-3

 

[BibleSteve]

Reporting this to mods for violating forum rules.
sorry, I asked you and Jeff did to stop derailing.

If you post this in apologetics I will see you there.
BibleSteve;2329981:

I find this argument shallow. No offense, I just do.

Huh?

I’m just trying to answer questions people bring up here.

Are we having a discussion here?