Srecko Sostar

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.

That is pretty impossible for the GB, isn't it?  They admit they are not inspired by Holy Spirit, which is the only way they could receive God's instructions.  If they were to work as one with the an entire anointed Body, then yes; they would receive instructions of truth through Christ.  Col 2:19;  1 Cor 12:21-26; Eph 4:4-6
As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him.  1 John 2:27
Holy Spirit, the source of inspiration comes from the vine - Jesus Christ.  If these men say they are not inspired, (which they have) they have not 'remained' on the vine.  
“I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing. 6 If you do not remain in me, you are like a branch that is thrown away and withers; such branches are picked up, thrown into the fire and burned. 7 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you. 8 This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples."  John 15:5-8
So, whose "instructions" are they carrying out?  2 Cor 11:4,13,14    How does Jesus truly see these men who claim they are not inspired with his truth?  
 “If you love me, keep my commands. 16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you."  John 14:15-17 
 
 

Perhaps it will be a little expensive to call few of you across the Ocean :)) .... and with my slow mind and weak English .... i think i will stay on text :)))))

It's good to question. And it's a good question: Are they promoting themselves?
A small group of men, a committee of elders, claim themselves to be the very group of men that Jesus had in mind when he gave a parable about how a faithful slave would act, as opposed to how an unfaithful slave would act. 
Did that claim arise from outside this group of men, or did they promote it about themselves? I'm guessing that you already know the answer.
Do they personally claim to be the only currently living persons that Jesus was talking about when he spoke of the one who would prove himself to be "the faithful and discreet slave"? Is this not the same as saying "we are faithful" and "we are discreet/wise" and "we are that selected/appointed slave that Jesus was referring to?"
*** ws17 February p. 21,22 Who Is Leading God’s People Today? ***
And how can we “remember those who are taking the lead” among us, especially “the faithful and discreet slave”?—Hebrews 13:7; Matthew 24:45.
JESUS LEADS THE GOVERNING BODY
...
In 1919, three years after Brother Russell’s death, Jesus appointed “the faithful and discreet slave.” . . . Even during those early years, a small group of anointed brothers at headquarters in Brooklyn, New York, provided spiritual food to Jesus’ followers. The expression “governing body” began appearing in our publications after 1940. At that time, the governing body was closely connected with directors of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. However, in 1971, it was made clear that the Governing Body was different from the Watch Tower Society, which was responsible for legal matters only. From then on, anointed brothers could become part of the Governing Body without being Society directors. . . .  The July 15, 2013, issue of The Watchtower explained that “the faithful and discreet slave” is a small group of anointed brothers who make up the Governing Body.
*** ws17 February pp. 24-26 Who Is Leading God’s People Today? ***
“WHO REALLY IS THE FAITHFUL AND DISCREET SLAVE?”
12 The Governing Body is neither inspired nor perfect. It can make mistakes when explaining the Bible or directing the organization. . . .  What evidence is there that the Governing Body is the faithful slave? Let us consider the same three things that helped the governing body in the apostles’ time.
13 Holy spirit helps the Governing Body. . . .
14 Angels help the Governing Body. . . .
15 God’s Word guides the Governing Body. . . .
“REMEMBER THOSE WHO ARE TAKING THE LEAD”
16 Read Hebrews 13:7. The Bible says to “remember those who are taking the lead.” One way we can do this is by mentioning the Governing Body in our prayers. . . .17 We can also remember the Governing Body by following its instructions and direction.
This is quite different from saying that the Governing Body strives to be faithful and discreet. That is proper.
*** w18 January p. 19 par. 12 Why Give to the One Who Has Everything? ***
With prayerful consideration, the Governing Body strives to be faithful and discreet with regard to how the organization’s funds are used.
It's slightly different when the same claim is reworded to directly claim that the Governing Body IS faithful and discreet.
*** ws18 January p. 18 par. 12 Why Give to the One Who Has Everything? ***
The Governing Body is faithful and discreet in the way the contributions are used.
But at least that is an understandable statement in the context of an article requesting that we give money and resources for various uses to further the preaching work worldwide, etc.
But it is another thing altogether to claim that they (a handful of men) are the only "faithful and discreet slave" on earth today, that Jesus appointed as a small class in 1919, and that they must be obeyed, and that they are the only source of true spiritual food.
*** w18 April p. 31 par. 1 Questions From Readers ***
Jehovah has entrusted the responsibility of providing spiritual food to “the faithful and discreet slave” alone.
*** ws11 7/15 p. 25 par. 11 Have You Entered Into God’s Rest? ***
What do you do when the faithful and discreet slave tells you to try a way of preaching that you never tried before? Do you obey . . . ?
*** ws11 7/15 p. 24 Have You Entered Into God’s Rest? ***
We need to obey the faithful and discreet slave to have Jehovah’s approval 

please remove this murdering scene !

I feel sorry for Lexi. 
Jehovah is the final Judge of all of us. Her true motivations will become known over time.
In the end we are all 'grasshoppers' before the Lord of all the Earth.
In the meantime, Advertise, Advertise The King and his Kingdom! with our field ministry.
'It will not be late'
'Stand fast and watch the Salvation of Jehovah!'
'There are more of us than there are of them'
@Jack Ryan you are on the wrong side. 'Get behind me me'.....

John Redwood's Quick and Fast Essay about 'The Montana Supreme Court - Child Sex Abuse - Jehovah's Witnesses Organization.'
The Montana Supreme Court
I would like to thank everyone with their patience in getting some information about what happened in Billings Montana today. The Supreme Court arguments only took two hours, but the rest of my day was spent with the attorneys and the plaintiffs.
And I must say, when I have the opportunity to choose between spending time with these fine people and writing up a summary, I choose to be with these incredible people every single time.
The summary, the analysis, the social media posts- all of that can come later. I know others have watched the proceedings online, and there has also been some media coverage of this event. But let me say this- it's is a very complex case, and it will not be decided for a minimum of 4-6 months- although resolution can come sooner or later.
That being said I will offer a few observations.
Today was a special day for the State of Montana. The Capitol of Montana is Helena, but for a number of important reasons, the Supreme Court for the State heard oral arguments today in a conference room at the Northern Hotel in Billings.
Unlike the small courtroom in Thompson Falls Montana one year ago, today there were hundreds of attorneys present. Most were there to attend the Montana Trial Lawyers conference. The Nunez v Watchtower appeal was the focal point of the day.
Professor Cynthia Ford opened up the appeal hearing by discussing the details of the case. She explained upfront that this is a very complicated case, but summarized the key components very well.
Because of the complexity of this case I am only going to mention a few points, then discuss what happened in greater detail in the near future.
This is not an open and shut case. It involves many issues, from things which happened before, during and after the trial which took place a year ago next week.
Watchtower attorney Joel Taylor lied to the Montana Supreme Court.
Taylor was asked whether the Watchtower or CCJW organization would penalize someone (an elder) who decided to follow his own conscience and report allegations of child sexual abuse to the authorities.
Taylor said such persons would make their own "conscience-based decision on whether to report and that they would not be penalized. He said that would be a decision between them and God. [We all know how God treats elders who disobey]
Not only was this an outright lie, but it contradicts testimony from the trial itself, where Watchtower representative Doug Chappel acknowledged that elders must comply with Watchtower policy- or they will not be elders.
Aside from lying to the Montana Supreme court, Watchtower has made many other claims, including the claim that Watchtower and CCJW had no duty to protect Lexi Nunez, and that they did not even know of her "existence."
They claim that Lexi is not even among the class of persons which the Montana reporting law was designed to protect.
If anything infuriates Lexi, it's the fact that she was treated like a non-existent entity to Watchtower. An invisible peon deserving of no attention or protection from a multi-billion dollar religious corporation.
Trust me, Watchtower knows who Lexi is now. And Holly. And Ivy. They picked the wrong women to ignore.
Of course, the law was designed to do exactly that- to protect children from abuse when allegations become known. If Watchtower had permitted elders to do the right thing and phone the authorities regarding the abuse of Holly and Peter, it's clear we would not be sitting before the Supreme Court today, and the threat to Lexi would have been mitigated.
One of Watchtower's loudest claims in this and all other abuse cases is that they have every right not to report child abuse (to keep it confidential) because it violates their "established church practice."
This means that Watchtower wants to claim that all of their elders' meetings, discussions with other elders locally and at Watchtower in New York, and anyone else they designate are all covered by their religious confidentiality.
Watchtower desires complete religious autonomy with no respect for the mandatory reporting laws which are in place for a reason. They place their perceived right to define confidentiality as a right greater than than the rights of the victims.
The reality is that they wish to control the flow of information about child abuse and direct it to their lawyers and their service department, bypassing State authorities. They have expanded the definition to include anyone and everyone, including the child molester themselves.
Another issue raised today was the constitutionality of the 10 million dollars Montana punitive damages cap. I won't spend a lot of time of this because it pales in comparison with the fact that a jury already decided that Watchtower was guilty of negligence and malice.
So at the end of the day, whatever happens, Lexi won her case, and she has the support of Montana's citizens - the jurors who spent their week listening to testimony and who made the right decision to hold Watchtower accountable.
Whether it ends up being 3 million or 35 million- either way, what people think about this religious corporation is priceless.
We are hoping the Montana Supreme Court justices agree that the cap is unconstitutional, as it limits the ability of a plaintiff to send a powerful message to a multi-billion dollar corporation which controls the lives of millions. We want Watchtower to get that message. They have been settling lawsuits for decades now, a few million here, a few million there.
They are not getting the message, which is why the cap needs to be removed. The jury felt this way, and so did Judge Manley from the original trial court. In a few months, we will find out.
I'd like to comment more as so many things happened today. But as I said before, the best part was spending time with all of these people, whom I consider family. And they welcomed me into their circle, for which I am very grateful.
I will do my best to answer any questions you might have, and if I don't have the answer immediately, I will get it.
It's been a long day, and I will be driving a long way tomorrow, then catching two different flights to get home.
It was all worth it.
John Redwood
https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=2512181392334107&id=100006268126035

Source:https://www.wgal.com/article/silent-no-more-part-4-the-justices/29040023