Another post brought to mind something I"ve wondered about before: When I began studying in 1979, a big deal was made out about how the jws were able to identify the wild beast of Revelation, the beast that was (League of Nations), was not, and was again (United Nations). It was made out to be a big deal that they were the only religion that realized the United Nations was this. And their articles at that time we so against the United Nations, calling it blasephemous because it was claiming to be able to do what only god can do, bring about world peace, etc. Then I noticed in the 1990's the difference in tone in watchtower publications concerning the U.N., and I remember more than once thinking, Gee, you'd think they were supporting the U.N. I had even considered writing to the org to ask, what gives? But I didn't. I learned early on in the org to keep yourself below the radar. I heard stories that any letter you wrote to the gb would be sent to your congregation elders. (Why stuff like that didnt' get to me more, I don't know. I mean, I felt kind of like I was in a spy organization, you couldn't do anything, as any question, without it getting sent to your local elders.) Anyway, is it me, or do younger ones, those who would have been arriving at reading age by the 1990's, find themselves not thinking so much about the U.N. thing? I wonder if that's why my daughters don't seem bothered by it. And on the story board, someone from Bethel said it didn't bother him, either. But I remember wanting to get swimming lessons for my kids and the ONLY option would have been through the YMCA, and I was told I couldn't. Heck, I was told I couldn't contribute to the United Way when I worked, you know how they deduct it from your paycheck? Some companies want to be able to boast a super high percentage (preferably 100%) of their employees give to it, and I worked for one of those, and had to refuse to give to it (only like a dollar per pay check). Now that I think of it, I was never shown any publication that said I couldn't, but the people that studied with sure insisted on it. Anyway, I just wondered about whether there was a difference in generations as far as how they viewed things like the UN involvement.
Also, when I began, the blood issue was very strong, no blood practically what-so-ever. The woman studying with me didn't have her daughter get vaccinatioins and was very against those, too. But now I wonder if, with their leniency, younger ones don't realize the contradiction from a few decades ago.
Any thoughts?
Also, when I began, the blood issue was very strong, no blood practically what-so-ever. The woman studying with me didn't have her daughter get vaccinatioins and was very against those, too. But now I wonder if, with their leniency, younger ones don't realize the contradiction from a few decades ago.
Any thoughts?
