Jump to content
The World News Media

Srecko Sostar

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,633

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    75

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Srecko Sostar

  1. Srecko Sostar
    Maybe that's true, maybe not. Do we have any evidence for this scenario?
  2. Srecko Sostar
    And what if this forum is meant to gather information about how ex-JWs think, so that the folks at WTJWorg can prepare countermeasures? lol
  3. Srecko Sostar
    It's commendable that you can talk to everyone.
  4. Srecko Sostar
    If I am interpreting correctly, you will engage in agreement with every Catholic, Protestant, Muslim and Hindu who has not renounced their faith, beliefs, but you will not engage in agreement on anything with a former JW. .... lol Dualism is necessary, because without it we would not be able to see the opposite. If there are no lies, there is no truth. Without darkness there is no light. Etc. Everything would be a long straight line that proves nothing.
  5. Srecko Sostar
    Hiding and holding the truth out is often the hallmark of GB members and their lawyers. So I agree with you on how important this issue is. Ok. Give some interpretations, please.
  6. Srecko Sostar
    We are now on page 4 of this thread. What is the goal of the question? Did Satan become "imperfect" after the first sin? Or irreparable? Does he belong to the "prodigal son" category or not? Adam and Eve became "imperfect" because of sin. Did Satan become "imperfect"? If YHVH "punished" the people, what prevented him from punishing this wicked transgressor in the same way? And don't answer me from JWs literature. Because that is not a strong enough argument.
  7. Srecko Sostar
    You asked a good question. As far as I know from the Bible, no angel ever sounded the alarm. Were angels not present during the conversation between Satan and Eve? If they didn't, then nobody knew what was going on. If one of them listened to it and did not react, then one must ask why? Yes, since Satan initiated the process of deception, it stands to reason that all his words thereafter become suspect. However, this does not prove that he was not telling the truth before that unfortunate event. It also doesn't prove that he can't decide to start telling the truth. Because you yourself say that it's all a matter of choice.
  8. Srecko Sostar
    It can also be like this: "When did Satan start lying?" "Did the angel known by the name Satan ever speak the truth?"
  9. Srecko Sostar
    "Does Satan always tell, speak the truth?"
  10. Srecko Sostar
    Every intelligent creature created by God with free will is capable of telling truths and lies. What is unclear about that? Or what in that conclusion is contrary to the words of Jesus? Perhaps, if you want a different answer, you should ask a more adequate, more accurate question.
  11. Srecko Sostar
    Can Satan speak the truth? By George88 6 hours ago in Topics https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/can can 1 of 5 verb (1) kən, ˈkan also ˈken; dialectal ˈkin past could kəd, ˈku̇d ; present singular & plural can Synonyms of can auxiliary verb 1 a: be physically or mentally able to He can lift 200 pounds. b: know how to She can read. c—used to indicate possibility Do you think he can still be alive? Those things can happen. —sometimes used interchangeably with may d: be inherently able or designed to everything that money can buy e: be enabled by law, agreement, or custom to Congress can declare war. f: be permitted by conscience or feeling to can hardly blame her g: be made possible or probable by circumstances to He can hardly have meant that. h: be logically or axiologically able to 2 + 2 can also be written 3 + 1. 2 : have permission to —used interchangeably with may You can go now if you like. transitive verb 1 archaic : to be able to do, make, or accomplish 2 obsolete : KNOW, UNDERSTAND Answer: YES
  12. Srecko Sostar
    To "clarify" this topic for the readers. This "spiritual heritage of management" culminated in the formation of today's GB. How does GB work? It governs dogmas, instructions, supervises, governs how JWs should live. How do they come to decisions? By voting of all GB members. If 2/3 of the members outvote 1/3 of the members, then the decision is considered valid. What does this say about the activities of the HS (Jesus and God) under whose "leadership" all members of the GB are allegedly act? This tells us about several possible implications. 1. not all GB members are influenced by the "same HS" when making decisions 2. HS does not "lead" all GB members equally and simultaneously, in harmony, in unity, 3. the decisions made by the GB are not united by "one spirit", that means the HS is disunited or the GB is disunited, 4. none of the JWs have a guarantee that the decisions made by the GB are the "will of God", that is, that they are for the benefit of the believers. God's will consists in the fact that the "sheep" do not go astray, but if the decision was made only because of 2/3 who overrode, overrule 1/3, then it is not God's will but human, 5. the annulled decisions of the previous GB prove that they were "human decisions" without "guidance by HS", 6. the previous statement (No.5) proves that even the current decisions of GB do not have to be "from HS"
  13. Srecko Sostar
    The authority to judge lies with God, not the GB. While God has the ability to see into the hearts and minds of people, the Governing Body lacks this capability. Repentance can be found in the genuine willingness of an individual to demonstrate it through their actions and behavior. Nevertheless, there is no assurance, as the human heart is capable of deceit. If you think like that, then it is also clear to you that GB has no justification for making decisions about who can and who cannot be greeted. This depends on who is making the observation. If this mindset originates from an apostate perspective, it is futile. Apostasy is the conscious denial of something valuable, a value that profoundly reflects on God. Believing that one's former religion holds no value to God renders apostasy meaningless. The crucial point here is true worship, not false religion. You contradict yourself again and again, because you stated that only God sees the true situation. This means that you have admitted that GB, and also that you personally, do not know who is an "apostate" and who is not. Because, you say, the point is who makes the observation. Since the observation is made by "imperfect" people, their assessment of who is a "renegade, apostate" is based on shaky, unreliable, inaccurate and biased conclusions. GB regularly confirms, with their nonsensical instructions, that they have placed themselves at that level of power.
  14. Srecko Sostar
    Do you and GB believe that a repentant JW who is a murderer, thief, liar, etc. is in a better position than an unrepentant JW who has stopped believing in GB interpretations and openly admits it? How is it possible for someone to be an "apostate" in a religion that is "apostate" in itself? To briefly explain why I used the term "apostate religion" for JWs. Other religions that are "older" than WTJWorg claim that JWs broke away from the "true" Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox and similar Christian religions. On the other hand JWs claim the same for them. In all religions there are dogmas that are incorrect. WTJWorg also proved with their theological changes that they are not a "true" religion, because they should not change their dogmas if they were correct and true. If they changed the previous dogmas that were untrue, it also gives an acceptable conclusion that they will change the current dogmas as well, because practice and experience show that nothing guarantees that the current ones are correct. A paradox simply arises; What authority do the apostates who run WTJWorg have (from God) to call other members of their church by the same name "apostates"? In which arrangement, in which organizational structure does one class of apostates have a legitimate right to condemn another class of apostates? lol
  15. Srecko Sostar
    Massimo Introvigne is a lobbyist for WTJWorg. So it's interesting to hear how an ex-JW from Norway comments on this lobbyist that WTJWorg likes to use for its defense. The most interesting is the new thesis of GB in which it creates a categorization of former members. According to their latest instruction, you can greet a former member (but only to a limited extent, without socialization) who wants to come to a meeting in KH. But another "type", labeled as "apostate" of ex-JW should not be welcomed. So, GB sinks deeper and deeper into their instructions that "make sense only from their point of view", while ordinary JWs mostly cannot understand them, but are obliged to obey, because these are the "last days".
  16. Srecko Sostar
    In such a future of yours, the original JWs could have two sources of information; official WTJWorg site and Court Documents. They wouldn't watch these others because GB would declare it "hostile reading". lol
  17. Srecko Sostar
    You want to say that only those arguments with which you agree are acceptable (to you)? Yes indeed, a good argument. Who wouldn't accept it. lol Is this an insult?
  18. Srecko Sostar
    COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLE: “JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES IN NORWAY: WHY THE OSLO DISTRICT COURT IS WRONG” Av Rolf Furuli 8. March 2024 https://mybelovedreligion.no/2024/03/08/comments-on-the-article-jehovahs-witnesses-in-norway-why-the-oslo-district-court-is-wrong/
  19. Srecko Sostar
    We will ask Jesus about everything when we see him,........... at least that's what GB Geoffrey Jackson says in his public testimony under oath. lol
  20. Srecko Sostar
    19 My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, 20 remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins. JWs preaching to sinners. How does it look? What do the JWs preach to them? That now men are allowed to wear beards and women are allowed to wear trousers. And according to you, that is "the truth"? lol How will telling the truth or inaccuracy, errors, whatever, save you from all kinds of sin, when the Bible also says that you reap what you sow? Preaching interpretations from GB will certainly not cover your or anyone else's personal sins. In addition, if Jesus has redeemed you from sin, original and any other you commit, then works do not save, but faith and Jesus' sacrifice. On the other hand, good deeds are not done to redeem yourself from your sins and mistakes, because the redeemer is Jesus, not man alone. Some do "good deeds" because they are haunted by their own conscience or are under the impression of some (own or other's) belief.
  21. Srecko Sostar
    error
  22. Srecko Sostar
    What quotient should be the intelligence of a person to accept Jesus? I'm interested in how you measure the quality or quantity of that something in the heart, and I guess that would be a prerequisite for a person to accept Jesus, too? What category does mind fall into in all of this? Intelligence, heart, mind = ?.., transformation? Can a person with reduced intelligence carry out the transformation?
  23. Srecko Sostar
    lol You're on the wrong track with your reasoning. Since the dilemma of "true and false faith" is a religious question, not an intellectual one. So, Jesus invites all people, regardless of their IQ, to join him. In his sermons, Jesus appeals to the heart, not to the intelligence. So, if you want to defend your position with the Bible, then it is not a "sin" but a "failure". Please look at the map of Europe and the country where I live. It is not Orthodox but Catholic. You don't need to "attack" something that I don't defend, because that doesn't make sense for discussion.
  24. Srecko Sostar
    Intelligence is not the only quality that can save a person from fraud. JWs, along with many other religious people, are proof of this. Word Origin When someone has the same opinions and beliefs as those held by most other people, these opinions are usually considered the "right" opinions to have. In English such opinions might be called "orthodox." The English word orthodox comes originally from the Greek words orthos, meaning "right, true" and doxa, meaning "opinion." These two words were combined to form the Greek verb orthodoxein, meaning "to have the right opinion." From orthodoxein came the Greek adjective orthodoxos, which was borrowed into Latin as orthodoxus. The English adjective orthodox comes from this Latin adjective. - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/orthodox Considering that I do not belong to any religion, your statement makes no sense. Another thing that needs to be said for objective accuracy is the term "orthodoxy". Every religion is orthodox in its essence, even when it changes in its doctrines. The country I live in is historically Catholic. JWs are orthodox because they do not accept religious change unless approved by their GB. So JWs are completely orthodox as long as they believe that they are the only ones right in claiming that their Christianity is "original" and is "only true". God is as successful as his creation. Considering that God said that everything created is "good", then every person today is also "success" because he/she is the inheritor of the original act of creation. Also, God nowhere indicated that any child born of Adam and Eve is/was "failure". If you want to use a religiously colored term for something that designates me or you in some moral category, then it is the word "sinful", not "failure".
  25. Srecko Sostar
    If WTJWorg wanted to prove its "unwavering commitment" in dealing with CSA, then it should not, as in the case of the Australian branch, hide from its own public the large number of pedophiles who ran rampant in JW congregations all those 60 years and more. Moreover, the GB instructions contributed to the ineffectiveness of elders handling CSA claims within the congregation. Instead of cooperating with the civil authorities, they kept everything secret and even prevented the victims from fighting for minimal justice. GB has already proven its "transformative" role. After a decades of banning beards and trousers, a "successful transformation" has been carried out. Does anyone who sees only this sliver of reality about GB expect that these are the people "of unwavering morality" who will be the foundation of the NWO you speak so passionately about? GB people who bring bans and permits about beards and pants, about monthly reports, about greeting and not greeting former JWs, etc. are not the base or foundation of some imaginary new and healthy human society. This type of individuals who are united in a specific group of manipulators of other people's faith and conscience does not deserve trust. Are you waiting for a transformation? Transformation will not happen tomorrow or in the future. If it didn't start happening in the past or today, then it won't happen. While an individual lives, he/she is or is not part of the transformation. In which transformation are we personally participating? Will there be a transformation due to our activity or passivity? Changes happen with us or without us, that's clear. Don't wait for the NWO, because some other people will live in it. You and I already live in a form of the NWO created by people from the past. To put it simply.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.