Srecko Sostar

For a (former) job as a police officer, he needed a very good memory. Today, for the (current) job of an elder, that is a good advantage. But unfortunately, he lacks flexibility in thinking that would amortize two different views of 1914. I wonder, how did you teach him that about 1914 that he accepted official teaching and yet could notice the difference (which has obviously worried him all this time) that made him remove you, today, from his list of friends?

I am more imperfect than you, because your argumentation is out of my ability to understand both, WTJWorg and your logic you try to defend.

1930-1985 https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200028612 1986-2021 https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200277174 On this two links we can find tens and hundreds doctrinal changes. 8 points you made looks poor. Thanks for down vote. It seems how you accepted a bad custom. You know, Bad company corrupts good character :))

The Scripture say that weeds and wheat grow together. So neither of us should be in a position to judge, but to distinguish two types of plants. Of course, now anyone can go further and challenge someone’s ability to distinguish one thing from another. :)) WTJWorg religious teachers, scholars with GB+Helpers, "revoking" past and present teachings (each time a “new light” shines on them). To prove this, you need to provide some authentic evidence of the continuity and permanence of understanding that does not change due to “human error” of past and present GB. My opinion is irrelevant, because GB claims that they were/are not inspired as apostles and some others in FDS in the First Century.

Let someone tell us; Who brought the "beliefs clarified" on the table? Were it the Those who invented and advocated “vague beliefs,” or were these new beliefs generated by some New People in the Administration? So your idea that there are “qualified people” who are the only ones authorized to revoke the authority of their predecessors does not actually bring any solution to the problem in WTJWorg. What then should the phrases mean: “know the proper context?” or “personal intent”? or "the spirit of the written" or "the biblical understanding"? Almost nothing. Or should these phrases (in your JW context) justify some and belittle others?

... do you think, "beliefs clarified" ?

Me too. But few details exist in this issue, also. I don't believe in many of the things (what) GB teach others. But JW people holds such "unbelievers" responsible for their decisions in this matter. They think they are to blame (for living organization or if they die in Armageddon, etc). They think they are to blame if they speak out against GB doctrines. That would mean, GB can say whatever they want, but it’s your fault if you respect them in their "foolishness". When JW member decide to not respect GB decisions (and perhaps he/she becomes ex-JW) is that "moral" or "immoral " decision? Some acts of "faithful" servants in the past contributed to collective punishment. And God didn't ask (did not hold a referendum) what and how every single man, woman and child feel about King's decisions and behavior. In such examples no one cared about "we or my". All nation suffered because of "my" or "we".

It is somewhat true what you say. Talking about bad things is poisonous. But should we wait for “little kids” or maybe “stones” to start talking about it?

What do you think, would it be possible not to include God in all these "right and wrong predictions" of WTJWorg?

Thanks! :)) Please, go to JWTV and 2020 Annual Meeting with Kenneth Cooke and A. Morris with their (silly) confirmation/answer they made about, who dies and who not dies at Armageddon.

Apostate lies? :))) Tom, you forget your first love aka "first truth". Association with the congregation (Organization aka WTJWorg) of Christians who recognize that God is pleased, not with rites and meaningless ceremonies, but with worship that is offered “with spirit and truth,” is vital to your salvation. - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1967880 The other sheep should never forget that their salvation depends on their active support of Christ’s anointed “brothers” ( aka GB) still on earth. - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2012205#h=2 You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth—But How? A third requirement is that we be associated with God’s channel, his organization. God has always used an organization. For example, only those in the ark in Noah’s day survived the Flood, and only those associated with the Christian congregation in the first century had God’s favor. (Acts 4:12) Similarly, Jehovah is using only one organization today to accomplish his will. To receive everlasting life in the earthly Paradise we must identify that organization and serve God as part of it. - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1983124#h=1

You went in other/different direction with conclusion, than me. She is willing to accept a “truth” that is the opposite of a JW “truth”. WTJWorg does not accept anyone's "truth", but only its "truth". Also, WTJWorg says how people who think and believe and accept all sorts of "truths" (like her), but not WTJWorg "truths" will dye in Armageddon. By that she will end up in "soon" Armageddon. Will you or other JW's try to help her to see "the truth" and be "saved" by joining the Organization? Or you (JW's) will just stay away and be satisfied that she wrote an article in your favor? Will you make the effort and try to free her from the Cesnur trap? :))

WTJWorg scholars and GB, they have constructed and deconstructed “various truths” in the last 140 years of existence. I don’t remember God decreing anywhere that only the “good” would be “happy”. And that the "evil" will die "unhappy." In other words, to claim what the WT article claims, that the "wicked" are only "outwardly" happy (superficial happiness), is nonsense.

Globalism of all sorts :))

Babylon was a gold cup in the Lord’s hand; she made the whole earth drunk The nations drank her wine; therefore they have now gone mad.

I disagree with this view. I don't feel "wronged" by WTJWorg or with my former belongings. Because they didn't "wronged" me (in strict sense) but they "wronged" things we call; truth, honesty, justice etc. And only after that we can say they "wronged" somebody personally (or individually/collectively), if such person/collective value things such as truth, honesty, justice etc.

Western Today: Of course this is a matter of perspective, but in your view as a religious scholar, is there such a thing as a “bad religion?” HF: "'Bad Religion' is a rock band from Los Angeles! Seriously, let me say that religions of all sizes and faith traditions do things all the time that I personally don’t like. But it is important to distinguish between the criminal, the ethical and the aesthetic. In both mainstream and marginal religions, things may happen that are unethical but are not technically illegal. And a religion may have beliefs or practices that I, or you, might personally find distasteful, but to which members have no objection. These are important differentiations in thinking about the behavior of a controversial group. We also need to distinguish things done by individuals who belong to a religion and acts committed by members at their religion’s direction. This is important for both fairness, and to accurately understand the way violence can occur in religious settings. Statistically, the majority of Americans are either Roman Catholic or Protestant. And so it’s technically accurate to say most murderers in the United States are either Catholic or Protestant. But it would be a stretch to argue that these religions were encouraging members to commit murder. There have definitely been instances where members of religions have committed violent crimes. Yet in some of the most inflammatory cases, like the Peoples Temple, the Order of the Solar Temple, and Aum Shinrikyo, the majority of lower-ranking members were not aware of the destructiveness perpetrated by an elite hierarchy. I think these instances hold an important insight for your question – it means that in even the most controversial religions, many if not most believers will not be “dangerous.” This definitely needs to shape how we think of religious difference." - https://westerntoday.wwu.edu/features/cults-new-christianities-and-religious-persecution-in-the-internet-age-a-qa-with-holly-folk When you or some other JW member seek/use statements from other people who defend the WTJWorg position on one issue, then you must be aware that that same person is defending the position of other religions, against which the WTJWorg has a lot to say. The tolerance of HF is greater than the tolerance of JW members and GB have to other religions. :))

Upbringing. It is a difficult task for parents. There are also mistakes in methods and types of lessons. Lessons on how to react and how to show emotions. How to stand up for another/each other and how to stand up for yourself.

I found interesting claims on JWorg about GB. The Governing Body is a small group of mature Christians who provide direction for Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide. Their work is twofold: They oversee the preparation of Bible-based instruction through the publications, meetings, and schools of Jehovah’s Witnesses.—Luke 12:42. They supervise the worldwide work of Jehovah’s Witnesses by directing our public ministry and overseeing the use of donated assets. The Governing Body follows the pattern set by “the apostles and elders in Jerusalem” in the first century, who made important decisions on behalf of the entire Christian congregation. (Acts 15:2) Like those faithful men, the members of the Governing Body are not the leaders of our organization. The Governing Body has established six committees to oversee various aspects of our work, and each member serves on one or more of these committees. - https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/governing-body-jw-helpers/ Committees job is to: ... supervises ...oversees...directs) I found this claims about "non leadership" status in WTJWorg confusing and is semantic dodge. Article says; GB are not leaders. But their roles are explained with terminology that supports leadership position. They oversee, they supervise, they make important decisions. :)) And now we have 2 quotes: Today, the Governing Body represents the faithful and discreet slave class. There was a similar arrangement in the first century. - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2009443 It seems how FDS is "represented by" two Administration bodies: with GB and with Elders. And controversy going further with this statements: The faithful slave must be made up of anointed Christians on earth. Such ones are called “a royal priesthood” .......It is only fitting that members of that “royal priesthood” have a direct share in teaching fellow believers the truth.- https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/w20130715/who-is-faithful-discreet-slave/ :)) and also tragic theology for JW members.

I didn't say that about you. :))

I know a JW brother who has done regular pioneering service for years without an appointment. But he wanted that appointment so badly, and the elders refused to give it to him. One year (1985) he went to Belgrade, then there was the Chief Bethel for Yugoslavia. After talks with the main representative, Brother Miloš, the Zagreb elders and Zagreb's Bethel were influenced, and he was finally appointed. :))) One elder in ex congregation doing similar. He came to a meeting for FS, gave a speech and then went home or for some other job :))

"First sort" of Israelites who supported "collectivism" died in wilderness while walking 40 years. And completely new generation crossed Jordan River. But same/similar scenario was repeated several times after this "river crossing". Two of them was monumental ... falls of Jerusalem for example. Mix of collectivism and individualism.

To some extent, we have established the fact that all people are equal, and that everyone is capable of doing good and doing evil. What is the common theology of the Catholic Church and WTJWorg? Love God and love your neighbor. In fact, it is the only important thread of Jesus' teaching. The practice of these principles in life is colorful. Catholics prove they are able to be at opposite ends, but JW members prove the same. Some commit “greater” sins and some “minor” sins. By the same Law, the Law does not recognize lesser and /or bigger sins, but only whether or not you have done something. Perhaps majority of JW members will never participate in murdering, but if they not give "glass of water" to someone, they can also be judged as "guilty for sin" and be punished with same sentences as murderer. In such scenario JW ideology/theology is very much irrelevant. Vectors in WTJWorg theology proves nothing, but decades of failed teachings and expectations, human instructions. It is nice to have some, few or many ideals, for sure, maybe one day we will get to that place.

JW members, perhaps not knowing or because they are not fully aware, generally, with whole hearth supports "collective responsibility idea" and by that shares "guilty" for their GB "sins" (false teachings, wrong instructions, disobeying secular laws in many cases). On other hand, Bible gave examples how looks "collective responsibility" and "collective punishment" and in some cases "individual responsibility" and "collective guilt and punishment".