Srecko Sostar

The side, not the person.

Words are the tools with which we think. 
If we use poorly crafted tools, we will have poorly crafted thinking.
Perhaps a better set of words would be "consecrate" and "un-consecrate".
 

I agree.
In the circa 1968 movie "Alice's Restaurant" Arlo Guthrie, a Hippie, goes to Stockbridge, Massachusetts to visit some old friends, and they have bought an old large church, possibly Presbyterian, and are going to turn it in to a free love and sex Hippie Commune, and the scene opens with a high angle shot of the inside of the church showing perhaps ten old congregants, and two  Presbyterian Clergy UN-DEDICATING the church and property in a ceremony, with the new owners, Alice and Ray, standing at the outside of the church, waiting for the un-consecration...
The movie also accurately represents the hippie movement in the United States during the time of the Vietnam War, and the movie was created to follow the real life experiences of Arlo Guthrie exactly as stated in his guitar 18 minute riff by the same name "Alice's Restaurant" (Alice's Restaurant Massacre).
The entire one hour and 51 minute movie is available on Youtube.  You may not be able to get it in your country, so I downloaded it, and pasted it HERE.  It's 400 MB, and this site says it has a 500 MB limit for uploads.
The part about the church un-consecration starts at 15:30  minutes.
 

1969... Alice's Restaurant.mp4

This is good explanation :)))))  Than i have suggestion.
Ceremony of "dedication" building to God after Construction team  had finished job have to be done again but in reversible meaning.  After real estate agent made new contract, Congregants will be gathered  in KH for the last time "TO UNDEDICATE" buillding, bricks, roof, grass etc, especially if new buyer is someone from false religion church.  It would not be a good thing to remain even the smallest part of God’s blessing to a new owner.     :))))

If a building is called “God’s House” would it be considered holy?  If it were truly “God’s House”, then His Spirit would dwell there and yes, it would be “holy”.  If a parent tells his child at the kingdom hall that “this is God’s House”, as a JW video already explains to children, wouldn’t they learn to have a reverential awe for that building? 
Does God agree with these dedications and the christening of a kingdom hall /assembly hall as His House?  I believe JWs cannot fathom what God would think of such a thing, even if it is a building of temporary use. It is as if God is no where to be heard, no where to give His opinion on what man do, although He certainly has through the scriptures.   So let’s do it, call it dedicated to God, then sell it off! God will understand our disregarding all scriptures concerning anything built by the hands of men.  Acts 7:49-51; 17:24,25
 He has a “building”, He has a spiritual dwelling. 1 Pet 2:5,9; Eph 2:20-22; 1 Cor 3:16,17; John 2:19-21   He has made it clear with the advent of His Son that there is only one “temple”/”building” that He accepts as His.  It was a major point  of Jesus’ coming; earthly structures to house God’s Spirit were to be abolished.  He is building His House on the anointed Body of Christ. 1 Cor 3:9  Why would He want any building dedicated to Him that has its source in Satan’s world?  James 3:15
This is called spiritual immorality.  It is practiced by false prophets – “harlots” who do exactly what they want and still claim to worship God.  Rev 13:11,15; 16:13,14; 17:1,15
If JWs were to recognize the importance of God’s “building”, they would not dare dedicate any earthly building to Him.  Instead, God’s temple/priesthood is trampled down by such teachings spoken from a Harlot, and supported by her “man of lawlessness”. Matt 24:48-51;  2 Thess 2:1-4; 9-12; Rev 13:1,2,4-7   So, your leaders dedicate buildings to “Jehovah”.  They raise the excitement in all in attendance.  It is a blessing from God!   I would guess just about everyone in such an audience has no idea what the true dedicated House/Temple of God really is, thanks to the GB Harlots.
 What God has said about His Son and His “living stones” (1 Pet 2:5,9) apparently means nothing.  Jer 4:22   And instead, JWs believe an organization and all of its buildings will lead them into the Kingdom.  IT holds primary importance for one's salvation.  
So they worshiped the dragon who gave authority to the beast; and they worshiped the beast, saying, “Who is like the beast? Who is able to make war with him?”
5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months. 6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven. 7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation. 8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear. Rev 13:4-9
 
 

TTH has said he has nothing to do with the running of this site. I have no proof, but I'm sure he's telling the truth. He doesn't know me, and I don't know him, and I don't know the Librarian or the admin either. What I know about them is only from what I see in the posts I get. I did get an invitation from a moderator 3 years ago inviting me to use some moderating powers to move posts to new topics, because there were a lot of topics that were started and several persons (with names like Allen Smith) were coming into these topics for no apparent reason other than to spew some vitriolic hatred, judge persons (not views) they disagreed with as apostate, Satanic and deserving of death.
I gladly accepted the moderating powers to move unrelated posts to new topics. It keeps things neater, more organized, and allows for those other ideas to grow into topics of their own. I don't use any function that allows me to delete a post, but it's a function called "Split." For anyone's post, I have a little pulldown, called Options, and in there is a function called "Split." I can start a new "empty" topic first, give it a name, and then when I click on "Split," I enter the location of the new topic, and the post ends up on that page. I have no control over the order, so they just show up by date order, the same order they showed up on the original topic. It's a bit too much effort for the value gained, and I prefer personally to just let topics go all over the place "organically." My own posts (like this one) are off-topic about as often as anyone else's (or more) so it seems like trying to exert control on a topic that is unnecessary, even if it's easier to follow.
I know that I didn't communicate with TTH or anyone else about removing anyone here. It wouldn't make any sense anyway because I'm always AGAINST removing people from any forum. No matter how badly they act, they will just continue to act that badly under another name if they are removed. We all saw that this was the case with Allen Smith, and some of his cursing and cyber-bullying became just as bad under his new names as it had been under his original name. I always spoke up for him, though, because a person can be "censured" by the others without removing his rights to speak up on the forum. Any of us can personally block someone we don't want to hear from. I don't know for sure, but I suspect I have been blocked by some who didn't want to hear what I had been saying.
So I know this is probably not about any of the original "Allen Smith" monikers. I know that I did expose the vote-spamming of @BillyTheKid46 and @Foreigner, but I just now typed their names with an @ in front of them, and they both seem to exist. (I haven't seen tweets from either of them for a couple weeks, though). Perhaps pointing out their spamming with small screen-shot snippets has resulted in a punishment of some kind, but I do not expect their removal. Besides I only pointed out a very small percentage of their spamming, as it related to my own posts. Others here pointed out that they were doing the same to their posts, too.
My own goal in pointing out their spamming was not to get either of them removed, and I hope they have not been removed. I also hate the fact that when someone is removed you can no longer see their posts, and you end up with conversations that no longer make any sense with half the conversation missing.

Who grants legitimacy?
You?
If the Governing Body can self appoint themselves as God's spokesmen ... which they have done ... who grants THEM legitimacy?

We can discuss judgment if you want. I can state how you have judged Christendom to say religion is false. I can add, how you believe the Org. is false. I could then apply your own words and scripture, about judgment. I would imagine this insight did not fail your motivation to make it a debate. The prospect of judgment falls upon your shoulder not mine. In other words, you have placed judgment upon yourself.
Perhaps by reviewing your written words, it will give you that insight.
Once again, heed your own words to refresh your memory. You claim the Org, to be false. Those churches that follow Christ, to  the letter and in his footsteps receive the same Holy Spirit as the church of Christ. Can you give me an example of which other church runs parallel to the first century church?
The church belongs to everyone who obeys God. I don't consider the church to be mine, but I am part of the church by obedience to God. There is no such thing as a Jesus Witness. Jesus however was a witness to his heavenly father to submit himself with obedience to him. I am, however, a witness of Jehovah. The creator of us all. I am proud to have Jehovah as my friend and creator.
The terminology is different. When we seek the fault of others, we will find them. Imperfection cannot be removed by man, or human condition (absolution). Testing the spirit is an action, which can be applied when we decide to make scripture convince ourselves that we are correct when indeed we are not. This would be the purpose in difference when receiving God's Holy Spirit.
Then why speak about love. You made the point, it has to be a specific human condition in order to follow Christ. How can love and hate run in sync, if not by loving the human soul and hating all that is evil within, humanity.

jw.org evidence for gods kingdom not based on faith but scientific evidence.mp4

Judging? :))

Her motivations ?? 
If she wants "money" for suffer, what is wrong with that?! If she wants "justice", what is wrong with that? If she want the public "to know" what happened, what is wrong with that?
It is not about her motivations, it is about JW Organization, WT Society and GB who, with a little help of WT Lawyers,  making policy and instruct elders what to do in cases like this.
Please, would you reconsider and reevaluate your emotions.  Because "motivation" is in emotions. By asking about  her "motivations" we entering in judging privilege that is reserved only to .......
If you believe in this above, about JHVH as final Judge, than i am surprised about even your idea to be suspicious about her "motivations"..... as Human Pretrial of JHVH Trial. :))

.... is this: Love God and Love People  as yourself! 
Clear and Simple.
All other theology is less important, or, in many cases (as it was presented) completely useless.
Did Jesus died on cross or stake, do you have or not have immortal soul, hell, idols, etc... loosing ALL meanings if you have No Love.
What if some day in the future God command people to make ... idols of something and to have it on the top of the refrigerator? Would that be "clarification, refinements" or else?  Laws and doctrines and theology is nothing, worth nothing .... in Comparison to Love - The Elementary Thing.
Well, all this what we discuss here and there about this and that subject, bring us little, on one hand. But on other hand bring us a lot, because discussion like this help us to see religious fraud.
Stay well! Wish you health and prosperity!      

As it turns out, of the twenty chickens my wife bought, 12 are roosters, and they fight all day, chasing all the hens around, and each other. I have an indoor chicken hospital for the injured.
I could really use a 175 pound old hen, to make them behave, but alas, the chickens cannot read, and know NOTHING about the Dewey Decimal System.

Maybe (in secret) they are interpreting it literally.  It was just brought to my attention; when has anyone seen one of the “144,000” portrayed as female in WT pictures?
Samuel Herd made mention once, that women’s brains are 10 percent smaller than men.  Obviously, he can’t envision women ruling as “kings” and priests in the Kingdom.  Gal 3:28; Rev 5:9,10   
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9cGBPvfOYI
 
And, in this picture, these guys are all clones of each other.
 

 

True, (actually, it would be Christ who has been given that authority , John 5:22) but what was the true motivation of WT attorney, Joel Taylor?   Isn't it more important at this point to consider why a representative of the organization, would clearly tell a lie?

To fully understand what has been going on, you need to read George Orwell's famous book "1984" and pay particular attention to the "new light" that the main character Winston Smith was charged with archiving.
It might even be a good idea to see the movie, also, which is not as good as the book, but it is a terrific movie.
The chilling conclusion to the book is a goal that most Witnesses have been taught to seek, to have peace in the Congregations, and harmonious unity of thought.
One of the most serious and heartbreaking paragraphs in all of human literature.
" He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother."
 

Yes. That works for many Witnesses. I personally don't think it's honest to simply redefine all types of changes as "refinements." But I'm more concerned with the fact that it can reflect a lack of humility that expects us to merely accept false doctrines as doctrines that simply needed refinement. The teaching might be a complete turnaround or rejection of a former teaching, or it might just be a minor adjustment, but even in the latter case it does not mean that the previous teaching is still true.
For example, there was a change that happened in 1943 that changed the time for Christ's presence from 1874 to 1914. In the long run that is just a minor adjustment of 40 years. But it doesn't mean that 1874 is still a true doctrine. 536 BCE for the destruction of Babylon was changed to 539 BCE, even a smaller change, but this doesn't mean that 536 BCE is still a true teaching. Yes it's a type of "refinement," but a "refinement" that must still admit that the previous teaching is false. 
For example, the Watch Tower publications once taught, under Russell, that the "superior authorities" were not the secular authorities, but were God and Christ. Then, in Rutherford's time, the WT changed the view to just the opposite. Then, in Knorr's/Franz' time, the WT changed the view to the opposite again, so that it was right back to what Russell had taught. The Watchtower treated this as an adjustment, a refinement, and even claimed that there were advantages to having been wrong (without using the word "wrong" of course). This is clearly a matter of just not wanting to admit that a false doctrine was ever "false." Haughty people don't like admitting they are wrong, so this gives the impression of haughtiness.
So was Naboth a prophetic type of Jesus or the anointed? Is it the case that this is true, and that the only reason we don't teach it that way is because it's too complicated to tell the whole truth? If it's still true, then someone should say that it's still true and we won't hold back from telling you "all the truth"? Of course, if it's actually a change in "understanding" then we are admitting that the former understanding is wrong, therefore it is no longer true. As you tacitly admitted, as Witnesses, we can never admit to having had a false doctrine. So we use different words. False doctrines must be re-worded as "refinements" "improvements" "clarifications" etc.
We see this type of explanation in the very articles that explained the changes to "types" and "antitypes" which had no Biblical basis to be treated as prophecies. The article appeared not to admit that these had ever been wrong. Only that the:
"faithful and discreet slave" was becoming steadily more discreet. discretion was leading to "greater caution" these older explanation were unduly difficult to grasp the details can be hard to remember and apply the former explanation tended to obscure more important moral lessons None of those points actually admits that the former explanations were wrong, only that we were now being more careful, more cautious, more discreet, more simple and clear. Watch very carefully how this was done:
*** w15 3/15 pp. 9-10 pars. 10-11 “This Is the Way You Approved” ***
As we might expect, over the years Jehovah has helped “the faithful and discreet slave” to become steadily more discreet. Discretion has led to greater caution when it comes to calling a Bible account a prophetic drama unless there is a clear Scriptural basis for doing so. Additionally, it has been found that some of the older explanations about types and antitypes are unduly difficult for many to grasp. The details of such teachings—who pictures whom and why—can be hard to keep straight, to remember, and to apply. Of even greater concern, though, is that the moral and practical lessons of the Bible accounts under examination may be obscured or lost in all the scrutiny of possible antitypical fulfillments. Thus, we find that our literature today focuses more on the simple, practical lessons about faith, endurance, godly devotion, and other vital qualities that we learn about from Bible accounts.
11 How, then, do we now understand the account about Naboth? In much clearer, simpler terms. That righteous man died, not because he was a prophetic type of Jesus or of the anointed, but because he was an integrity keeper.
Notice how even the idea that we no longer understand it the same way is worded in such a way as to be very ambiguous about whether the previous understanding was actually wrong. This is one of dozens of such ambiguous wordings, and I can show you cases where this exact kind of wording apparently "fooled" the translator into creating inconsistent (less ambiguous) results in Simplified English, French, German and Greek. And I'm sure there are several other examples I don't even know about.

Oh my.  It would be life threatening to think like the GB; to walk in their shoes, taking their twisted path of continually seeking "new light", and prominence over their spiritual brothers.  Matt 24:48-51  That would be glorifying men; and you've taken it up another notch by suggesting our thinking should not only be like God, but like the GB.   Simply,  blasphemy.  
We should think like Christ.  We should walk only his path.  1 Cor 2:16; 1 Pet 2:21
 
A voice of one calling:
“In the wilderness prepare
    the way for the Lord;
make straight in the desert
    a highway for our God.
4 Every valley shall be raised up,
    every mountain and hill made low;
the rough ground shall become level,
    the rugged places a plain.
5 And the glory of the Lord will be revealed,
    and all people will see it together.
For the mouth of the Lord has spoken.”  Isa 40:3-5
 
 
 
 
 
 

For me, this was a matter of prayerfully considering and meditating on the full meaning of the 2014 talk by Brother Splane when he admitted that many teachings were all being dropped at once because they were based on an old extra-Biblical tradition of creating types and antitypes when there was no specific scriptural basis for doing so.
This actually turned out to refer to literally over ONE HUNDRED teachings that we were now admitting had no scriptural basis. All at once, we were DROPPING at least ONE HUNDRED TWENTY teachings.

Then there were 80 more of these types of teachings, which were reviewed in a 1981 Watchtower
*** w81 3/1 p. 27 Do You Appreciate the “Faithful and Discreet Slave”? ***
OVERWHELMING CREDENTIALS
The “faithful and discreet slave” has abundant credentials. Following is a partial list of Scriptural and prophetic designations applying to or being represented in the remnant of Jesus Christ’s anointed followers since the notable year 1919:
(1) Noah’s wife, Gen. 7:7; (2) angels sent to Lot, Gen. 19:15; (3) Rebekah, Gen. 24:64; (4) Joseph and Benjamin, Gen. 45:14; (5) gleanings left behind, Lev. 19:9; (6) two spies to Rahab, Josh. 2:4; (7) Barak, Judg. 4:14; (8) Jephthah, Judg. 11:34; (9) Naomi and Ruth, Ruth 2:2; (10) David’s Israelite warriors, 2 Sam. 18:1; (11) Jehu, 2 Ki. 10:11, 15; (12) Mordecai and Esther, Esther 4:13; (13) Job, Job 42:10, 13; (14) King’s daughter, Ps. 45:13; (15) men of loving-kindness, Ps. 50:5; (16) intimate group, Ps. 89:7; (17) Shear-jashub, Isa. 7:3; (18) light of the nations, Isa. 60:3; (19) big trees of righteousness, Isa. 61:3; (20) ministers of our God, Isa. 61:6; (21) cluster preserved, Isa. 65:8; (22) servants called by another name, Isa. 65:15; (23) men trembling at God’s word, Isa. 66:5; (24) new nation born, Isa. 66:8; (25) Jeremiah, Jer. 1:10; (26) Jehovah’s people in the new covenant, Jer. 31:33; (27) enduring watchman, Ezek. 3:16-27; (28) man in linen, Ezek. 9:2; (29) cleansed people, Ezek. 36:29-32; (30) dwellers in center of earth, Ezek. 38:12; (31) the host of heaven, Dan. 8:10; (32) sanctuary restored (cleansed), Dan. 8:14; (33) they that are wise, Dan. 11:33; (34) the happy one who is keeping in expectation, Dan. 12:12; (35) all flesh receiving the spirit, Joel 2:28; (36) Jonah, Jon. 3:1-3; (37) apple of Jehovah’s eye, Zech. 2:8; (38) liberated remnant, Zech. 2:7; (39) a Jew, Zech. 8:23; (40) sons of Levi, Mal. 3:3; (41) wheat, Matt. 13:25; (42) sons of the kingdom, Matt. 13:38; (43) workers for the vineyard, Matt. 20:1; (44) those invited to marriage feast, Matt. 22:3-14; (45) chosen ones, Matt. 24:22; (46) eagles, Matt. 24:28; (47) faithful and discreet slave, Matt. 24:45; (48) discreet virgins, Matt. 25:2; (49) brothers of the king, Matt. 25:40; (50) little flock of sheep, Luke 12:32; (51) beggar Lazarus, Luke 16:20; (52) sheep in “this fold,” John 10:1-16; (53) branches of the vine, John 15:4; (54) royal palace of David, Acts 15:16; (55) heirs with Christ, Rom. 8:17; (56) the remnant, Rom. 11:5; (57) branches in the olive tree, Rom. 11:24; (58) holy ones or saints, 1 Cor. 6:2; Rev. 16:6; (59) temple, 1 Cor. 6:19; (60) new creation, 2 Cor. 5:17; (61) ambassadors for Christ, 2 Cor. 5:20; (62) congregation of God, Gal. 1:13; (63) part of Abraham’s seed, Gal. 3:29; (64) Israel of God, Gal. 6:16; (65) body of Christ, Eph. 1:22, 23; (66) soldiers of Christ Jesus, 2 Tim. 2:3; (67) house under Christ, Heb. 3:6; (68) holy priesthood, 1 Pet. 2:5; (69) holy nation, 1 Pet. 2:9; (70) association of brothers, 1 Pet. 2:17; (71) seven congregations, Rev. 1:20; (72) twenty-four persons of advanced age, Rev. 4:4; (73) spiritual Israel, Rev. 7:4; (74) locusts, Rev. 9:3; (75) two witnesses, Rev. 11:3; (76) two olive trees, Rev. 11:4; (77) seed of the woman, Rev. 12:17; (78) New Jerusalem, Rev. 21:2; (79) the bride of Christ, Rev. 22:17; 19:7; (80) Jehovah’s witnesses, Isa. 43:10.
I knew that we had spent hundreds of hours studying these in Congregation Book Studies from the time I can remember my very first Tuesday night meetings. Then, at Bethel, in 1980, I became a study partner with a Gilead student who lived next door to me on the third floor of the 107 building. My own set of Gilead Notes (I have 2 full sets) contained MONTHS worth of study of these specific kinds of teachings, and some students fretted that they could not keep track of them all.
But what caught my attention in Brother Splane's talk is that they were being compared to the Pyramid doctrines under Russell and Rutherford. Brother Splane admitted that Brother Bert Schroeder (died 2006) had already come up with this change and had provided the current definition now being published in the 2015 Watchtower.
*** w15 3/15 p. 9 par. 7 “This Is the Way You Approved” ***
In times past, it was more common for our literature to take what might be called a type-antitype approach to Scriptural accounts. The Bible narrative was considered the type, and any prophetic fulfillment of the story was the antitype.
*** w15 3/15 p. 18 par. 3 Questions From Readers ***
If such interpretations seem far-fetched, you can understand the dilemma. Humans cannot know which Bible accounts are shadows of things to come and which are not. The clearest course is this: Where the Scriptures teach that an individual, an event, or an object is typical of something else, we accept it as such. Otherwise, we ought to be reluctant to assign an antitypical application to a certain person or account if there is no specific Scriptural basis for doing so.
The questionableness of such doctrines had already been discussed in a Watchtower from back in 1972, where even though it came very close to admitting just how questionable such teachings were, the decision was made to keep teaching them.
*** w72 8/15 pp. 502-503 God Readjusts the Thinking of His People ***
Another thing that has given rise to questions is the use by Jehovah’s witnesses of parallels or prophetic types, applying these to circumstances and to groups or classes of people today. Many people who read the Bible view its accounts all as simply history, but when they begin to study with Jehovah’s witnesses a readjustment of viewpoint takes place as they see that there is more to the accounts than history. For example,. . . .[long example skipped]
The question that is sometimes asked is, Did Jehovah stage that ‘dramatic’ event, so that we would have a warning now? Well, would he cause such bad things to happen? Would he maneuver them himself? No.
The real answer was obvious, but before that article was complete, the writers had found some twisted reasoning to be able to keep these dozens and dozens of false teachings that we had come to accept from old traditions. Brother Splane gave the example of the brother(s) who really loved the Pyramid doctrines and how they had to have the humility to suddenly change their viewpoint when Rutherford dropped it. (Rutherford said these teachings were ultimately from Satan.) It almost sounded as if Brother Splane was saying that these "antitype" doctrines could not be changed until certain people who still loved them had dropped off the scene. When he mentioned that this "new" way of looking at it had already been stated so well many years earlier by Brother Schroeder, this was another hint that this change had been in the works for quite a while.

For the true "newbies" out there:
We are told to “test the spirits to see whether they are from God”. 1 John 4:1  This is our responsibility as Christians.  Jesus gave us guidelines to know if an anointed one speaks from the Spirit of Christ or from another spirit.  He told us that by their fruits, their teachings, we would know if one is inspired by the Spirit of Truth.  Those who remain in Christ would produce fruit that “lasts”, that remains, just as the teachings of Christ have remained to this day. 
You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you.  John 15:16
This means one’s teachings would not rot away, or be changed out for new “truth”.  It’s a pretty simple guideline that we can either embrace, or blindly ignore.  If we choose to ignore it and eat “fruit”/teachings from an anointed one that has a history of producing failed, “rotten” teachings, then…we make Jesus out to be a liar.  Matt 7:17-19  We put more stock in what men say, than what Christ has told us. 
To receive “God’s instructions” would require inspiration from Holy Spirit.  Yet, this is what your GB stated, and how they lean on a fabrication called “beliefs clarified” to justify their rotten fruit.
 The Governing Body is neither inspired nor infallible. Therefore, it can err in doctrinal matters or in organizational direction. In fact, the Watch Tower Publications Index includes the heading “Beliefs Clarified,” which lists adjustments in our Scriptural understanding since 1870. Of course, Jesus did not tell us that his faithful slave would produce perfect spiritual food. w17 February p. 26-27
Was God instructing your leaders in these failed doctrines?  Would Christ who is Truth, produce imperfection? Ps 18:30; John 14:6
This statement certainly demeans Jesus Christ’s teachings, since he did say a faithful slave would produce perfect spiritual food that would last, as long as that one “remains” on the vine.  John 15:1-4; Luke 8:15
"Don't work for the food that perishes (that needs continual adjustment)  but for the food that lasts for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set his seal of approval on him."  John 6:27
So, the “opposition” would be making excuses for his failed teachings, and convincing the majority with false promises that no matter what, Jesus will give his approval.  We know from scripture that this isn’t the case.
 “Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or else make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for a tree is known by its fruit. 34 Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. 35 A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. 36 But I say to you that for every idle word (“inactive,useless”) men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. 37 For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”  Matt 12:33-37
Good things from the heart of an anointed one, are “good fruit”, that remains.   “Evil things” are deceiving, “rotten fruit” that an “evil slave” would expect one to tolerate – with no questions asked.
We choose to uphold Christ’s teachings about testing each bit of “fruit” offered us by anointed ones, or we listen to men who can have a negative influence on our spirituality by failing to provide lasting fruit/teachings.  If 8 men, who have convinced you they are “faithful” and “discreet”, but are not faithful to these simple guidelines given us by Jesus Christ, then their “inspiration” is from another spirit. They have lost  God’s Spirit.  Matt 24:24; 2 Pet 3:17,18; 1 John 2:19  The apostles were led by Holy Spirit because they were “inspired”, and they acted upon it.   Holy Spirit cannot continue to “dwell” in an anointed one’s heart and not inspire them also…to speak truth, as defined by God, and not men.  1 Cor 3:16,17; 2 Cor 6:16; 1 Thess 4:7,8; 2 Tim 1:14
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

@Sean Migos you are not "newbie".  :)))
Please go to G. Jackson testimony before  Australia Royal Commission. He said something that whole word was heard - you are free  to disobey GB instructions and doctrines, if you, as one of JW member, find in  your personal reading  of your own Bible something that your understanding and conscience  tell you is different than GB has said. 
Of course, you will be dfd because of that at the end of a day :))) 
BUT he, as Legal Representative of WT, JW  and GB said, you are NOT obligated to obey Them IF YOU THINKING DIFFERENTLY. In other word you are free to Think in Critical way of Thinking. In other words - to testing spirits -  this wording is for those who have issue or problem, if  hear words "Critical Thinking"

When someone forbids JW members to be critical on WT articles, or not to hear opposite view about JW Organization and GB, under treat of rebuke, shunning and dfd, than that can be understand as intention or reality of idea - "rule over others".   

I am glad you removed that GIF of the man killing a cow with a sledgehammer.
It was very upsetting.
That's why I get my hamburger as God intended ... on a Styrofoam tray wrapped with cellophane.

@Matthew9969 @Srecko Sostar  video clip removed

Yes I agree, this video is inappropriate.