Srecko Sostar

To whom more is given, more will be demanded' - this is fine proverb. What i see in this verse is not how "classes" come to existence. 
You open interesting question. Does some "rules" are obligated to specific "class" of people inside same group of people. Or, are they "same group" if they have "classes"? Is JW one "flock" with two separate groups? It can depends on Who is the Source and Creator of structure and how He/They imagined it have to look like...... and so on.
To be inside topic, we should ask your question in this way: Does practice of shunning is only mandatory for one sort of people, "class" of JW (elders for example)? And how other JW's are not obligated to follow such strict rule in this subject?

Oh? 
And you have moved beyond the limits of the flesh to speak, not just things that you believe to be true, but things that ARE true?
Next thing you know, you will be joining Witness in claiming to be the “true” anointed

I tend to think on things as being the tip of an iceberg  
And to be boring, this brings us back to that Database they are withholding.  Oh what wonderful information must be in that 20 + year Database. 

@James Thomas Rook Jr.
I believe this 'Rule Book' shifts the goal posts quite often, with updates on certain matters. 
Also as you say it is Elder's eyes only. So how do the congregants know proper the 'rules' then ? 
Surely each Elder could 'translate' the rules according to His own needs. 
And as you say 'Most JWs don't even know about that book. 
What does that show ? It shows that congregants are naive and blindly follow the words of the Elders. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate comment 
@Srecko Sostar
John 10:16 Jesus said :-
"I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd."
So there are two folds it seems. A fold can be a hollow in the ground, or a group of people. 
I always thought a 'fold' was a fenced area in a field or farm yard. 
My point is that i think the Greek scriptures are for the Anointed to follow more closely. The Anointed are in one fold, the earthly class in a different fold. But are one flock because they follow the one shepherd, Jesus Christ. However, i think God and Christ demand much more from the Anointed because this is the testing ground of the Anointed, here and now.  The earthly class will get a thousand years to grow back to perfection, and then a final test. 

To whom more is given, more will be demanded' - this is fine proverb. What i see in this verse is not how "classes" come to existence. 
You open interesting question. Does some "rules" are obligated to specific "class" of people inside same group of people. Or, are they "same group" if they have "classes"? Is JW one "flock" with two separate groups? It can depends on Who is the Source and Creator of structure and how He/They imagined it have to look like...... and so on.
To be inside topic, we should ask your question in this way: Does practice of shunning is only mandatory for one sort of people, "class" of JW (elders for example)? And how other JW's are not obligated to follow such strict rule in this subject?

I used Google translator for all text this time, perhaps that is the reason :)))))) Do you want my Croatian original?
Examples, instructions and advises are published on many places in WT magazine study articles mainly, and some specifics are in "Flock" rule book. All we need is time and patient to find it and make a list of them (by chronology, by subject...)

In the OT, there is a direct command, “Thou shalt not kill (murder)!” This command should contain God's view of human life, which emphasizes that life is holy, sacred before God, but also that people must have the same feeling about the lives of other people around them.
By reading the Bible, which describes the events before and after the occurrence of this commandment, we can see that this commandment has no absolute power. Within the same set of legal provisions, there are other commandments that were binding on the Israelites, too. For example, commands like; "Don't steal, don't lie, don't commit fornication ...". These commandments should never have been ignored or mitigated by some extraordinary circumstances.
The specificity of this commandment, "You shall not kill," is evident in the fact that it was not of valid, obligation for all men and for all circumstances. Powerful individuals in Israel sometimes making their own decisions to go on military campaigns against others (Israelis and non-Israelis) The law also justified killing for revenge.
In some other places, God commands the death penalty against an individual. Also, the Bible describes that God instituted great actions that justified killing of other people. These were most often military actions aimed at killing soldiers of the enemy army, but also their families. The killings of these other tribes and people were justified on the basis of several facts: 1) they were not Israelis  2) they lived in territory that the Israel nation were to conquer for themselves, 3) they belonged to other religions.
The execution of the death penalty for a crime still exists today in some societies and legal systems. Obviously, the death penalty decision is based on balance. The one who killed must be killed. But from some other biblical examples we have seen that murder is not the only crime punishable by death. The disobedient child was also sentenced to death. Different religious affiliations or different religious beliefs also led to the death penalty. Adultery was punished by death.
From what we have described so far, we can see how the command, "shall not kill," had a stretched meaning. It is therefore necessary to look at religious practices that are not new but may draw some parallels in symbolism and meaning. As you may already guessed, it is about an act of symbolic "killing" that is carried out in such a way to exclude (disfellowship) another person from a particular social (religious) group in a specific way - by ignoring aka shunning. Shunning (this is about JW organization in particular) can be made because of two conclusions.
The first conclusion is reached by an individual JW member who believes that another member of the congregation has wronged/sinned against the Bible and its principles to the extent that he / she personally presents a spiritual anomaly (in the form of a spiritual illness or threat) and decides to "label" particular person as inappropriate for him to have socializing contacts. He seeks to avoid contact and minimize any literal and spiritual communion.
In second conclusion, the conviction of the inappropriateness of a member is made by the body of the elders. The judgment may be based on the morally inappropriate behavior of an individual member, or it may be that an individual no longer agrees with the ideological and organizational structure or with the theological solutions of the organization what made him/her as "hostile element".
This is when a person is removed from congregational members aka "spiritually killed" in such a way to excommunicate (dfd) them (he,she) from the community and impose a ban on almost every contact with the dfd person. The ban has few variations and interpretations of how the shunning should be carried out. But the very core of such a demand not to contact the excluded person is evident from the widespread practice that JW members have consistently implemented - the excluded (dfd) is not even greeted with the simplest “Good afternoon” greeting (hallo) on the street.
JW's want to be peaceful people who go to jail in some countries because not want even to carry weapon in mandatory military service. They don't want take self-defense courses even for protect themselves when attacked. But they are motivated to be active in using spiritual weapons and warfare against ex members who are in a disagreement with doctrinal issues. And "killing" them with shunning.  
What are your thoughts? 
 
 
 

From time to time there is some TV program here, where some young Catholic are proud to say how they respect marriage as Bible talking about. I don't know is it good to talk about people of any religious belongings as more or less "moral" than in some other religious group. 
Compare this two practices: JW dfd members who are sexually immoral. In some other religion they kill them. Does second religious group show more zeal for "purity" inside their religion? Do they act as "god's servant who carry sword and punishing all who brake the law according to authority god gave them"?
When whole World will be coming JW congregation, would/will sinners be dfd or killed? And, who will execute the judgment?  

That's only about 17% of the Governing Body being homosexual or homosexual child molesters.
I remember a survey the Catholic Church did about 35 years ago, (about the same time period ...) and  among catholic clergy, 20%  were homosexuals (no age preference was stated), 20% were sexually active heterosexuals (no age preference was stated), and 60% were celibate.  My memory may be faulty, as my brain is made mostly of old fat, and I fear the sound of frying bacon.
This proves we are FAR superior to them, and can exult in our smugness.
Of course, that does not count any clergy (which we have repeatedly claimed to be in numerous court cases, demanding clergy-penitent privilege ...) that WE have, below the level of GB.
But then again, since we are all considered Ordained Ministers, that makes our pool over 8 million clergy, even the baptized six year olds.
See?
It all depends on, like President Bill Clinton said during the "Monica Lewinsky" years, "It all depends on what your definition of "is", is."

IF holy spirit reached anyone in the JW Org it would be a great surprise to me.  
IF holy spirit reached the congregants then would they carry on serving the GB and the Org ?
IF holy spirit reached the congregants then would they still go into the 'ministry work' teaching the LIES to other people ?
Would congregants take on Bible Studies and teach LIES of men from books, by not using the Bible properly ? 
Would congregants encourage families into the K H knowing that there may be a paedophile in there ?
Well the congregants would know about the paedophile situation, if  the congregants were blessed with holy spirit. 
No, there is no holy spirit in the JW Org. If ever there was, which I cannot now believe, it has vanished. Almighty God has turned the 'tap' off. And you, Mr Rook, will know this more than I. Because you see the faults and lies, the injustice and lack of love, the lack of mercy, the man made rules as a heavy burden (as you mentioned). 
 
 
 

I believe it does, on an individual and as a group.
Nevertheless, being a Barbarian at heart, I appreciate MANY things I could not have learned elsewhere, even though it was accompanied by heavy unnecessary burdens based solely on the opinions of pontificators.
One of those MAJOR things is that I did not go to Vietnam, and kill people for a national political agenda.
I wanted to go there as a photojournalist, which was probably a bad idea, as I am so large that my nickname might have been "Bullet Catcher", as it was for 63 photojournalists that died there.

Is it Holy Spirit or the result of living by the basic Bible teachings at the level you describe? There are many who are not JWs that fit that category -  either as individuals or part of an independent “Christian” congregation, that may not be under the authority of an organization or a ruling class of leaders.  But, they appear to live by the basic Bible teachings and are seemingly “good” people.    Does Holy Spirit fall like rain on the righteous and the unrighteous?  Matt 5:45
 

We have had a very detailed policy and rule book, organizationally, since 2010, if memory serves, ."Shepharding the Flock of God"
Unfortunately it is only "Elder Eyes Only", and Sisters are not supposed to read it.
Most JWs do not even know this book exists.

It would be nice to see any written 'rules' made by the GB or others in regard to shunning a person that has left the JW Org. Maybe JW congregants should be issued with a GB rule book of do's and don'ts. That way every one would know exactly what procedure is right when serving the GB and it's Org.  
My feeling is that in the first century, all those that became true Christians, serving God through Christ, were of the Anointed, heavenly calling. Therefore it was more important for them to be 'without spot from the world'.  So stricter discipline would be more acceptable to those of the Anointed class. 'To whom more is given, more will be demanded'.  Hence IMO, the scriptures are written for the Anointed, and then the Anointed should teach the earthly class. (The GB are not of the anointed. By their works you will know them).  So then @Srecko Sostar the questions would be more complicated. Should stricter rules apply to the Anointed than to the earthly class ?  The Anointed should be inspired of holy spirit and capable of more self control........ All those scriptures were written by Anointed ones for Anointed ones at that time.  
 

They are that these are not your words. Who wrote this?

You must have noticed that she's barefoot on stage. When the program manager returned, they gave a warm hug each other. Angelina was so genuinely surprised by the gift and gave her another tender hug. 
.... anyway, she is talent and sensible performer. Still, how to connect lyrics with such young person. I found further songs she singing here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhmLra5lAlk&feature=emb_rel_pause
 

What a voice!

In the OT, there is a direct command, “Thou shalt not kill (murder)!” This command should contain God's view of human life, which emphasizes that life is holy, sacred before God, but also that people must have the same feeling about the lives of other people around them.
By reading the Bible, which describes the events before and after the occurrence of this commandment, we can see that this commandment has no absolute power. Within the same set of legal provisions, there are other commandments that were binding on the Israelites, too. For example, commands like; "Don't steal, don't lie, don't commit fornication ...". These commandments should never have been ignored or mitigated by some extraordinary circumstances.
The specificity of this commandment, "You shall not kill," is evident in the fact that it was not of valid, obligation for all men and for all circumstances. Powerful individuals in Israel sometimes making their own decisions to go on military campaigns against others (Israelis and non-Israelis) The law also justified killing for revenge.
In some other places, God commands the death penalty against an individual. Also, the Bible describes that God instituted great actions that justified killing of other people. These were most often military actions aimed at killing soldiers of the enemy army, but also their families. The killings of these other tribes and people were justified on the basis of several facts: 1) they were not Israelis  2) they lived in territory that the Israel nation were to conquer for themselves, 3) they belonged to other religions.
The execution of the death penalty for a crime still exists today in some societies and legal systems. Obviously, the death penalty decision is based on balance. The one who killed must be killed. But from some other biblical examples we have seen that murder is not the only crime punishable by death. The disobedient child was also sentenced to death. Different religious affiliations or different religious beliefs also led to the death penalty. Adultery was punished by death.
From what we have described so far, we can see how the command, "shall not kill," had a stretched meaning. It is therefore necessary to look at religious practices that are not new but may draw some parallels in symbolism and meaning. As you may already guessed, it is about an act of symbolic "killing" that is carried out in such a way to exclude (disfellowship) another person from a particular social (religious) group in a specific way - by ignoring aka shunning. Shunning (this is about JW organization in particular) can be made because of two conclusions.
The first conclusion is reached by an individual JW member who believes that another member of the congregation has wronged/sinned against the Bible and its principles to the extent that he / she personally presents a spiritual anomaly (in the form of a spiritual illness or threat) and decides to "label" particular person as inappropriate for him to have socializing contacts. He seeks to avoid contact and minimize any literal and spiritual communion.
In second conclusion, the conviction of the inappropriateness of a member is made by the body of the elders. The judgment may be based on the morally inappropriate behavior of an individual member, or it may be that an individual no longer agrees with the ideological and organizational structure or with the theological solutions of the organization what made him/her as "hostile element".
This is when a person is removed from congregational members aka "spiritually killed" in such a way to excommunicate (dfd) them (he,she) from the community and impose a ban on almost every contact with the dfd person. The ban has few variations and interpretations of how the shunning should be carried out. But the very core of such a demand not to contact the excluded person is evident from the widespread practice that JW members have consistently implemented - the excluded (dfd) is not even greeted with the simplest “Good afternoon” greeting (hallo) on the street.
JW's want to be peaceful people who go to jail in some countries because not want even to carry weapon in mandatory military service. They don't want take self-defense courses even for protect themselves when attacked. But they are motivated to be active in using spiritual weapons and warfare against ex members who are in a disagreement with doctrinal issues. And "killing" them with shunning.  
What are your thoughts? 
 
 
 

In the OT, there is a direct command, “Thou shalt not kill (murder)!” This command should contain God's view of human life, which emphasizes that life is holy, sacred before God, but also that people must have the same feeling about the lives of other people around them.
By reading the Bible, which describes the events before and after the occurrence of this commandment, we can see that this commandment has no absolute power. Within the same set of legal provisions, there are other commandments that were binding on the Israelites, too. For example, commands like; "Don't steal, don't lie, don't commit fornication ...". These commandments should never have been ignored or mitigated by some extraordinary circumstances.
The specificity of this commandment, "You shall not kill," is evident in the fact that it was not of valid, obligation for all men and for all circumstances. Powerful individuals in Israel sometimes making their own decisions to go on military campaigns against others (Israelis and non-Israelis) The law also justified killing for revenge.
In some other places, God commands the death penalty against an individual. Also, the Bible describes that God instituted great actions that justified killing of other people. These were most often military actions aimed at killing soldiers of the enemy army, but also their families. The killings of these other tribes and people were justified on the basis of several facts: 1) they were not Israelis  2) they lived in territory that the Israel nation were to conquer for themselves, 3) they belonged to other religions.
The execution of the death penalty for a crime still exists today in some societies and legal systems. Obviously, the death penalty decision is based on balance. The one who killed must be killed. But from some other biblical examples we have seen that murder is not the only crime punishable by death. The disobedient child was also sentenced to death. Different religious affiliations or different religious beliefs also led to the death penalty. Adultery was punished by death.
From what we have described so far, we can see how the command, "shall not kill," had a stretched meaning. It is therefore necessary to look at religious practices that are not new but may draw some parallels in symbolism and meaning. As you may already guessed, it is about an act of symbolic "killing" that is carried out in such a way to exclude (disfellowship) another person from a particular social (religious) group in a specific way - by ignoring aka shunning. Shunning (this is about JW organization in particular) can be made because of two conclusions.
The first conclusion is reached by an individual JW member who believes that another member of the congregation has wronged/sinned against the Bible and its principles to the extent that he / she personally presents a spiritual anomaly (in the form of a spiritual illness or threat) and decides to "label" particular person as inappropriate for him to have socializing contacts. He seeks to avoid contact and minimize any literal and spiritual communion.
In second conclusion, the conviction of the inappropriateness of a member is made by the body of the elders. The judgment may be based on the morally inappropriate behavior of an individual member, or it may be that an individual no longer agrees with the ideological and organizational structure or with the theological solutions of the organization what made him/her as "hostile element".
This is when a person is removed from congregational members aka "spiritually killed" in such a way to excommunicate (dfd) them (he,she) from the community and impose a ban on almost every contact with the dfd person. The ban has few variations and interpretations of how the shunning should be carried out. But the very core of such a demand not to contact the excluded person is evident from the widespread practice that JW members have consistently implemented - the excluded (dfd) is not even greeted with the simplest “Good afternoon” greeting (hallo) on the street.
JW's want to be peaceful people who go to jail in some countries because not want even to carry weapon in mandatory military service. They don't want take self-defense courses even for protect themselves when attacked. But they are motivated to be active in using spiritual weapons and warfare against ex members who are in a disagreement with doctrinal issues. And "killing" them with shunning.  
What are your thoughts? 
 
 
 

Thanks! If you go to listen and watch some other videos, you will also notice how she, Lara, going  complètement  with emotions through song while singing.   

Thanks! If you go to listen and watch some other videos, you will also notice how she, Lara, going  complètement  with emotions through song while singing.   

ma nouvelle chanteuse française préférée

Absolutament incroyable!