Srecko Sostar

I had to look that up……

BTK59 …. Your writing is one continuous stream of theological theory in vague, nebulous, fuzzy generalizations that use recursive loop logic, which ALWAYS fails … BECAUSE … you never supply any hard facts to back up your suppositions.
For a change, add some hard facts, real life examples, and SPECIFICS to your arguements.
A MATRIX OF WORDS IS NOT A FACT.
Disneyland is a multi- billion dollar real enterprise in California … but the basis for the “House Of Mouse”, is a carefully constructed fantasy.
…. like your non-specific wish list of nattering nebulosity.
… like perhaps the greatest Science Fiction book of all time, “The Stars My Destination”, by Alfred Bester. I feel very strongly about that, but human teleportation is not a real thing, and although I could spend several pages gushing about it, it would be ONLY my strongly held opinion about a fantasy.
….. like your carefully constructed word salad fantasy about what is really going on.

…BTK59:
Before you get into your “wish list” of how your imagination perceives things happen, take a short side trip through REALITY .. . the way things really are.

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"

I am having trouble with the concept that humans sinning against God reflects badly on the reputation of God.
That assumes weakness and vulnerability..
Humans can never “get it right” anyway.
The Dinosaurs failed at spirituality, and the whole thing just didn’t work out.
Did their failure reflect badly on God?

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.
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.
 

I suspect there are a lot of mislabeled “apostates” (actually heretics) that are not evil in any way whatsoever. Honorable men and women in a tough spot.
They just expect their religion to be as advertised, and not demand something that is flat, be recognized as being round.
Remember what just recently occurred ….
It was those nasty evil “apostates” incessantly hammering on the Watchtower for 60 years about beards that created the Liberty and Freedom the Brotherhood now enjoys.
It was like tightly compressed spring being released!
Defend TRUTH, and wonderful things happen.
 

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".
 
 

"So the disciples came and said to him: “Why do you speak to them by the use of illustrations?”  In reply he said: “To you it is granted to understand the sacred secrets of the Kingdom of the heavens, but to them it is not granted.  For whoever has, more will be given him, and he will be made to abound; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken from him.  That is why I speak to them by the use of illustrations; for looking, they look in vain, and hearing, they hear in vain, nor do they get the sense of it.  And the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled in their case. It says: ‘You will indeed hear but by no means get the sense of it, and you will indeed look but by no means see.  For the heart of this people has grown unreceptive, and with their ears they have heard without response, and they have shut their eyes, so that they might never see with their eyes and hear with their ears and get the sense of it with their hearts and turn back and I heal them."
 
When people didn't understand him, Jesus taught via illustrations. 
 
The following two videos are wonderful illustrations by "Kevin McFree" that helps to explain why disfellowshipping and other related manmade traditions are antichrist. (I do not agree with everything Kevin believes, but I do agree that his illustration is accurate and exposes the hypocrisy of shunning in the congregation.)
 
 

@EsADmf, are you related to Massimo Introvigne? You seem to have a similar writing style. This nice brother analyzed Massimo's works and I can see a resemblance in the kinds of ad hominem attacks and slander that Massimo uses and that you use. I do not agree with everything Jonas believes in, but I do agree with him on much of what he states in this video. Shunning is not loving. He is right. People who tell the truth are not "apostates" just for telling the truth. And people who call themselves "Jehovah's Witnesses" but who don't act like Jehovah's witnesses, well, they are actually the real apostates, aren't they.  
 

I. Greek influence on early apostate Christians
II. Disfellowshipping is a form of Ostracism from Greek culture
III. Jesus did not adhere to apostate Greek philosophies
 
(From "Mankind's Search for God" chap. 3 pp. 54-55 par. 25 Common Threads in Mythology)
"The Greek mythology of the soul went on to influence the Roman concept, and the Greek philosophers, such as Plato (about 427-347 B.C.E.), strongly influenced early apostate Christian thinkers who accepted the immortal soul teaching into their doctrine, even though it had no Biblical basis."
 
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101990035#h=32
 
Just as Greek philosophy influenced religious ideas regarding the soul, so Greek philosophy also influenced congregation doctrines of the early apostate Christian thinkers.
 
"os·tra·cism
/ˈästrəˌsiz(ə)m/
noun
noun: ostracism
(1) exclusion from a society or group."the family suffered social ostracism"  
Similar: exclusion, rejection, repudiation, shunning, spurning, the cold shoulder, cold-shouldering, boycotting, blackballing, blacklisting, snubbing, avoidance, barring, banishment, exile, expulsion, disfellowship, excommunication

Opposite: acceptance, welcome

(2) (in ancient Greece) temporary banishment from a city by popular vote." (Dictionary, Oxford Languages)
 
"Ostracism was crucially different from Athenian law at the time; there was no charge and no defense could be mounted by the person expelled. The two stages of the procedure ran in the reverse order from that used under almost any trial system—it is as if a jury were first asked "Do you want to find someone guilty?", and subsequently asked "Whom do you wish to accuse?". The judicial framework is perhaps the institution's most peculiar feature: it can take place at most once a year, and only for one person. It resembles the Greek pharmakos or scapegoat—though in contrast, pharmakos generally ejected a lowly member of the community.[13]
A further distinction between these two modes (and not obvious from a modern perspective) is that ostracism was an automatic procedure that required no initiative from any individual, with the vote simply occurring on the wish of the electorate—a diffuse exercise of power. By contrast, an Athenian trial needed the initiative of a particular citizen-prosecutor. While prosecution often led to a counterattack (or was a counterattack itself), no such response was possible in the case of ostracism as responsibility lay with the polity as a whole. In contrast to a trial, ostracism generally reduced political tension rather than increased it."
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism
 
The Pharisaical Jews were tossing people out of the synagogue while Jesus was on earth, ostracizing them. 
 
They led the formerly blind man to the Pharisees...And again they said to the blind man: “What do you say about him, since it was your eyes that he opened?” The man said: “He is a prophet.” However, the Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had gained sight, until they called the parents of the man who could now see.  And they asked them: “Is this your son who you say was born blind? How, then, does he now see?”  His parents answered: “We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. But how it is that he now sees, we do not know; or who opened his eyes, we do not know. Ask him. He is of age. He must speak for himself.”  His parents said these things because they were in fear of the Jews, for the Jews had already come to an agreement that if anyone acknowledged him as Christ, that person should be expelled from the synagogue... The man answered them: “This is certainly amazing, that you do not know where he is from, and yet he opened my eyes...If this man were not from God, he could do nothing at all.”  In answer they said to him: “You were altogether born in sin, and yet are you teaching us?” And they threw him out! Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, and on finding him, he said: “Are you putting faith in the Son of man?”  The man answered: “And who is he, sir, so that I may put faith in him?”  Jesus said to him: “You have seen him, and in fact, he is the one speaking with you."
 
People feared disfellowshipping. When honest-hearted ones obeyed God, they were sometimes disfellowshipped. Jesus spoke with the man the elders disfellowshipped.
 
"Now one of the Pharisees kept asking him to dine with him. So he entered the house of the Pharisee and reclined at the table. And look! a woman who was known in the city to be a sinner learned that he was dining in the house of the Pharisee, and she brought an alabaster jar of perfumed oil...Seeing this, the Pharisee who had invited him said to himself: “If this man were really a prophet, he would know who and what kind of woman it is who is touching him, that she is a sinner.”...With that he turned to the woman and said to Simon: “Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave me no water for my feet. But this woman wet my feet with her tears and wiped them off with her hair.  You gave me no kiss, but this woman, from the hour that I came in, did not stop tenderly kissing my feet.  You did not pour oil on my head, but this woman poured perfumed oil on my feet.  Because of this, I tell you, her sins, many though they are, are forgiven, because she loved much. But the one who is forgiven little, loves little.”  Then he said to her: “Your sins are forgiven.”  Those reclining at the table with him started to say among themselves: “Who is this man who even forgives sins?”  But he said to the woman: “Your faith has saved you; go in peace."
 
The elders had written the woman off as one to be spurned, given the cold shoulder, shunned. Jesus talked to her. Compassionately. Now she's in the Bible as an example for us to imitate. "She loves much." The one who is forgiven much loves much. (We are all forgiven much.)
 
As far as eating with sinners goes..."Now a man named Zac·chaeʹus was there; he was a chief tax collector, and he was rich...Now when Jesus got to the place, he looked up and said to him: “Zac·chaeʹus, hurry and get down, for today I must stay in your house.”  With that he hurried down and joyfully welcomed him as a guest.  When they saw this, they were all muttering: “He went as a guest to the house of a man who is a sinner.”  But Zac·chaeʹus stood up and said to the Lord: “Look! The half of my belongings, Lord, I am giving to the poor, and whatever I extorted from anyone, I am restoring four times over.”  At this Jesus said to him: “Today salvation has come to this house, because he too is a son of Abraham.  For the Son of man came to seek and to save what was lost.”
 
Zacchaeus was an extortioner. Jesus knew it. Jesus didn't wait for Zacchaeus to repent before eating with him. Jesus didn't wait for Zacchaeus to make amends before eating with him. Jesus initiated the request to eat with a known sinner, who was guilty of serious sin, extortion, before the man stopped the bad behavior.
 
"For the Son of man came to seek and to save what was lost."
 
Jesus said: "My sheep listen to my voice, and I know them, and they follow me."
 
"...let us by love grow up in all things into him who is the head, Christ."💖

Could you imagine how much charity you could provide with 27 million dollars. A 27 million dollar kingdom hall is outrageous.

@BTK59 ( @George88 ) ( @BillyTheKid-55 ) ( @Allen Smith ) ( @AllenSmith35 ), etc., etc., etc., etc. --
and @Pudgy ( @James Thomas Rook Jr. ),
I once got in trouble from an Admin here for revealing that @TrueTomHarley was from Rochester, based on the assumption that I had used a moderator's ability to read I.P. addresses. I got out of trouble by showing that TTH had himself made posts claiming he was from Rochester.
It is considered very bad forum etiquette to reveal information or attempt to reveal personal information about a forum participant that isn't something they bring up about themselves. If it is specifically to reveal something negative, it is clearly malicious. Because it also goes against the rules of the forum, BTK59 and his cohorts might end up getting banned. I don't want to see BTK banned, for all the reasons I've stated before: 
Banning is meaningless on a forum like this one, because anyone can come back under a different name. Banning is a form of shunning, which can have serious and unintended psychological consequences. Banning can involve erasing all of a person's writing here, into which they may have put a lot of time and research. Banning a person who shows signs of maliciousness and viciousness and paranoia usually will motivate the person to come back only to seek vengeance on everyone they think was involved in their "excommunication" or "disfellowshipping" from the forum. In practice that has meant attacks on persons who were not even interested in the matter.  So, for these reasons, I recommend the following so that BTK and cohorts are not banned. I recommend that the posts related to the malicious attempt to expose personal legal issues and troubles be removed.
I will remove all related posts within 24 hours, unless both parties to this matter request that they remain. 

My overall point is that most Witnesses I know in the United States are very political and don't even know it. Often much more political than their neighbors who vote. There are certain limits to what we will say about our political views, but I think we don't recognize that those political views often come out inadvertently in other ways.
In fact, I've seen strong political views among Witnesses who only use the line "we don't take sides in politics" when they wish to shut down an argument they disagree with.
My parents and many relatives were of the type that said they wouldn't be fooled by all the lies and exaggerations from MS-NBC supposedly on the "progressive left." Nor the lies and exaggerations from FOX News on the supposedly "conservative right." But that didn't stop them from being fooled by thinking that CNN was not mostly "state-sponsored media" that would cherry-pick stories now and then to keep up the ruse that they weren't. As long as they continued to support corporate sponsors, including "Big Pharma" and "Big Military Industrial Complex," it was clear what side they were going to take. And although Trump was golden to all networks for his ability to spout controversy, one of his biggest sins for CNN was the fact that he went 4 years without getting the USA involved in any new wars. 
We were watching CNN once, not on purpose, and although many segments were introduced with "Brought to you by Pfizer" one was introduced "Brought to you by McDonnell-Douglas." As if any of us watching were about to go out and buy McDonnell-Douglas fighter jets and missiles for accessories. Of course, even the segments brought to you by Pfizer weren't really for any of us to be swayed in our pharmacy choices, either. As with all corporate media, those ads are really just payments to CNN; they are all just a way for corporations to PAY (bribe) the news writers and commentators to realize on which side their bread is buttered. They are merely buying influence.
----
All this was probably just my own rationale to excuse my own tendency to throw in opinions about politics, politicians, and the mainstream corporate media. There are no easy answers to how someone should go about getting their news, or how to feed their own opinions. But I would be happy to hear about the various sources people use when trying to find the "truth" about various world events. 

…. and because you clearly do not know the difference, BTK 59, as an off-subtopic aside, an apostate is someone who renounces or abandons their religious or political beliefs, whereas a heretic is someone who holds beliefs contrary to the official or orthodox teachings of a religion or ideology. So, while both involve deviating from established beliefs, apostasy is more about abandoning beliefs altogether, while heresy is about holding beliefs that are seen as incorrect or contrary to the mainstream.
I hold JW core beliefs, but reject the made-up self-agrandizing and irrelevant crap.
That makes me a disfellowshipped heretic, not a disfellowshipped apostate.
……

You, BTK, are so divorced from reality it’s truly amazing your brain has enough intact circuitry to make your legs work. 
Two words describe the entirety of your written opinions:
Egocentric narcissism.

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?
 

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/

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?
 

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?
 

That is the best example of egocentric arrogant word salad I have read since … um … Ever!.
NO ONE on this planet cares obout what you percieve as an insult, or are disheartened about … except you.
…  maybe your Mom.
Governments do what governments do … THEY have the bayonets. Get used to it.
If you accept their money, it’s “the golden rule”.
“Dem dat gota da gold, maka da rules”
 

Soon it won’t matter …. the generation that knew the Truth will have all died off, and agenda driven people will win.
… as “history” is beaten to fit, and painted to match, one detail at a time.
Double-Plus Ungood … but that’s how it goes.
(Sixty years from now all JWs will know that JW men NEVER had a problem with beards, and no one will have any idea what the “Overlapping Generations  Chart “ was.)
… but that’s how it goes.
 
 

What makes you believe you will, lol! People need to be written in the scroll of life. Do you truly believe that you will succeed with everything you have said and done? You must face the reality that you have defied God beyond the possibility of redemption. So, enjoy life.
 

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.

… but don’t forget ….
The Governing Body LOVES you!!