Jump to content

Srecko Sostar

In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Srecko Sostar -
Srecko Sostar -
52
835

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations,

    Hello guest!
 baptizing them
    Hello guest!
 in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, - Mat 28:19 nwt

WT Society have changed few times, in last 140 years, baptismal questions.

Also they stopped to respect, obey Jesus command quoted above. At some moment (perhaps about 1970's , please correct this guessing if it is wrong) JW person who immersing new member into water doing that silently. They do not repeat this Jesus words while baptizing "disciples". 

What do you think about this?  Whether the absence of spoken words (in the name of ....) is the reason why such baptism would be considered invalid? Or, that is not matter?  

Share this post


Link to post

I believe the last major change was in 1985.

Any Baptisms before that you did not swear legal fealty to the Organization.

After 1985, having subordinated yourself to the Corporation, you had no legal standing to sue them in Court if they screwed up your life.

I do not think this matters to Jehovah, because this is NEVER mentioned before you stand up and say "YES" moments before you are baptized, and the language is couched in such language as to be deliberately misleading in intent, if not actually stated.

They take advantage of the passion and happiness of the moment to "microchip" you for future control, but Jehovah knows a person's heart, and He also understands trickery, and hypnosis.

Currently, there is NO ONE on Earth who can fire the Governing Body .... and they know it!

No matter what they do .... the money just keeps rolling in.

day, after day, after day.

... even on the Weekends.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Didn't the first century Christians baptized people in Jesus' name due to the fact that Christians were to take up the teachings of the Christ concerning God? I agree with the church as is with our church fathers of old concerning what Matthew 28:19.

Share this post


Link to post

I found this yesterday.

Baptismal questions from ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REMINDERS May 2019 (section FOR THE ELDERS ONLY).

3. Baptism Questions: The two baptism questions that are reviewed with candidates at the time of their concluding discussion with the elders and that are included at the end of each baptism talk outline have been changed as follows:
(1) “Have you repented of your sins, dedicated yourself to Jehovah, and accepted his way of salvation through Jesus Christ?”
(2) “Do you understand that your baptism identifies you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with Jehovah’s organization?”
The new questions will be used starting with the baptism talks at assemblies and conventions beginning the week of May 13, 2019. Elders should update the two questions on page 209 in their copies of Organized to Do Jehovah’s Will.
Old questions:  

Baptismal questions from the Watchtower 1985 Jun 1 p.30:

(1) On the basis of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, have you repented of your sins and dedicated yourself to Jehovah to do his will?

(2) Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in association with God's spirit-directed organization?
 
... accepted his way of salvation  is also omitted
Well it seems how organization is not spirit-directed any more :))

Share this post


Link to post
11 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

What do you think about this?  Whether the absence of spoken words (in the name of ....) is the reason why such baptism would be considered invalid? Or, that is not matter?  

Does not matter a jot. The baptism is a symbol of the candidate's dedication, not that of the baptiser. 

If any words are spoken at all, they should be spoken by the one submitting to baptism, and directed to the one receiving their dedication. And, of course, such words, as evidence of a totally private and personal act of worship on the part of the individual, can, appropriately, be silently expressed.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Outta Here said:

If any words are spoken at all, they should be spoken by the one submitting to baptism, and directed to the one receiving their dedication.

Yes, i recall period of time when baptizer said those words, .. in the name of.... , to candidate in the moments, seconds before immersing him/her. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Outta Here said:

If any words are spoken at all, they should be spoken by the one submitting to baptism, and directed to the one receiving their dedication. And, of course, such words, as evidence of a totally private and personal act of worship on the part of the individual, can, appropriately, be silently expressed.

Thanks for the insight.  I never thought of it that way.

The Baptism is an outward symbol of a dedication ALREADY MADE IN IT'S TOTALITY.

Whatever you dedicated to Jehovah God is between you and God, alone ... and what the GB has done is try an "control the narrative", and add to that.

I wonder what would happen if after Baptism at an Assembly, where you stood up with many baptismal candidates that said "YES", and you did not affirm the questions asked you.  I doubt they examine the videos to make sure you did, or have someone watch to see if you did, taking notes.  Then, after perhaps several years of faithful life, casually mention that your immersion was as public as you needed, and that you never said "Yes" like all the others did.

What you had resolved in your heart to do was sufficient, and nothing needed to be added.

It's obvious that you were not there to soap up and bathe.

Or ... let's say you were on a camping trip beside a lake, and you turned to your Bible Teacher and said "What's to prevent me from being baptized ..." quoting the Ethiopian Eunuch, and you both went down to the lake, and your teacher baptized you.

As far as I know, it only takes ONE other person present to be a public expression of your dedication, and it would in actual fact be quite valid.

That brings up the next consideration .....

When you got back to your home congregations, relating the events of the camping trip, how much crap would you have to put up with from the Elders ... or would it be none at all?

 

Share this post


Link to post

I remember my ex-wife telling me about a Brother from the United States who was baptized in Peru, and later married a local Sister. A fine Brother in every way, so I hear, but he had forgotten that years before,, in the United States, he was still married.

He was believed by the Peruvian Elders, and the only solution they could find was to "Unbaptize" him by declaring his baptism null and void.  It was either that, or disfellowship him.

Having worked on a Bethel construction project down there, I found that story entirely believable, as they are a much simpler people in many respects.

I am inclined to believe that, all things considered,  what the Elders did was the correct thing to do ... under very odd circumstances.

Of course, I am only guessing.

... and, I am many thousands of miles away, and now about a quarter-century away, and I don't give a hoot, and try not to pollute.

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

He was believed by the Peruvian Elders, and the only solution they could find was to "Unbaptize" him by declaring his baptism null and void.  It was either that, or disfellowship him.

 

6 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Does not matter a jot. The baptism is a symbol of the candidate's dedication, not that of the baptiser. 

If you don't mind for connecting this two comments.

"Baptism" of this man is done because he want to "dedicate" (guess) himself to God - spiritually , not to WT Society

But - factually, he made sort of "Contract, in corporative language, with WT Society through WT Representative who immersed him in water. 

Well, if God accepted his dedication, despite fact he has two wife's (perhaps he was repentant all the time, but he chooses second wife) than his baptism, spiritually is valid. But second (hidden) part of his "dedication" - to WT Society -  is in question, and that sort of "dedication" has been possible to delete in Administrative manner, because he also was hiding some important information.      

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Currently, there is NO ONE on Earth who can fire the Governing Body .... and they know it!

No matter what they do .... the money just keeps rolling in.

I disagree. 

 

All of you who are a part of this org has that power.

 

You just have to do it, fire them, stop giving them your mind and money.

Then Poof, they no longer have that power over you. 

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, Shiwiii said:

You just have to do it, fire them, stop giving them your mind and money.

That reminds me of a Steve Martin comedy routine ( from memory ...) where he says "I am going to tell you how you can make a MILLION dollars, and never pay taxes. .... Yes I am going to tell you how to make a MILLION dollars .... and NEVER pay taxes.

First...

...get a million dollars.

THEN ...."

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

That reminds me of a Steve Martin comedy routine ( from memory ...) where he says "I am going to tell you how you can make a MILLION dollars, and never pay taxes. .... Yes I am going to tell you how to make a MILLION dollars .... and NEVER pay taxes.

First...

...get a million dollars.

THEN ...."

Wasn't that The Jerk?

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

That reminds me of a Steve Martin comedy routine ( from memory ...) where he says "I am going to tell you how you can make a MILLION dollars, and never pay taxes. .... Yes I am going to tell you how to make a MILLION dollars .... and NEVER pay taxes.

First...

...get a million dollars.

THEN ...."

I get it, it isn't real easy when that has been your whole life up to this point.  The reality of it though is that it is quite that simple and easy. 

 

I'm sure you can relate if you put it in perspective. When you were a young child in school, I'm sure you noticed the different clic's, the group of rockers, the cowboys, the preppy kids, jocks etc. When figuring out your niche, you tried to fit into a group that you thought was "you", only to find out that it wasn't worth trying to please the group and become someone you just weren't. You left hat group and continued through life without much thought. You took with you some things you liked of the group and moved on and developed your own character. We all do it, have done it.  This clic, the wt, is just like that. Take from it what you choose and drop the rest. You have the power and ability to control your own life, without excess baggage. Does this mean "leave Jehovah and make him sad" ? Quite the opposite,  it means taking control of your own life and pressing into God with all of the knowledge you have gained thus far. I mean, the gb has already stated that they are not inspired and can very well screw up with what they force the rnf to accept. Why not allow the Bible alone to guide you WITH the knowledge you have taken from the clic? Unless you truly believe that by studying the Bible alone will lead you into darkness in a matter of months

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Shiwiii said:

We all do it, have done it. 

I didn't.  I never tried to "fit in', anywhere.

Ever.

Coincidences happen .... but coincidences are not causality.

The reason I throw my hat in with Jehovah's Witnesses is that they believe the same as I do (generally) ... not that I believe the same things they do.

There is a difference.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

I didn't.  I never tried to "fit in', anywhere.

Ever.

The reason I throw my hat in with Jehovah's Witnesses is that they believe the same as I do (generally) ... not that I believe the same things they do.

There is a difference.

 

 

I get that, but to say that there is on one who can fire them, is not a true statement. 

 

I highly doubt that you throw your hat in with everything that they believe. 

 

Also, you did "fit in"  Being a self professed cowboy, renegade, man of guns, you don't quite look the part with the suit and tie in those pictures you posted. I also doubt that you put that suit on each day regardless of whether or not you are headed to the kh.  Just saying. 

Share this post


Link to post
15 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

But - factually

Instead of "factually", I would use the word "physically", or "soulically" if you want to get scriptural. You have used the term "spiritually" in contrast.

Both terms can be applied to the same set of facts,  and focus on the "eye of the beholder". In the immediate instance, the "soulical" view is that baptism is the ratification of some sort of (business?) contract with a religious "corporation". This is not the view of a spiritual mind. (Compare 1Cor.2:14).

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Instead of "factually", I would use the word "physically", or "soulically" if you want to get scriptural. You have used the term "spiritually" in contrast.

Both terms can be applied to the same set of facts,  and focus on the "eye of the beholder". In the immediate instance, the "soulical" view is that baptism is the ratification of some sort of (business?) contract with a religious "corporation". This is not the view of a spiritual mind. (Compare 1Cor.2:14).

Rank and file members aka publishers or in simple words - worldwide brotherhood, are connected spiritually with each other and with God as group of Organized Christians who are bond with particular set of doctrines, beliefs and  hope. In that sense, all relations between them have big "spiritual" aspects. Inside them, as a group, all dealings they have among them, are in some sort of "spiritual" work, reactions (of course with all physical inputs and  outputs, after all we are flesh and blood and bones). Hierarchical structure of "theocracy" appointed elders (semi clerical body) to deal/work with brotherhood. 

In WT Society, Lawyers have very significant role. Their dealings with people works in both reality. One reality is with outside world and "worldly people". Another reality is of "spiritual" nature inside "Spiritual Paradise" when they counsel elders, for example, how to respond in "sins" that outside reality considers to be "crime" or what documents bring to Court and what to tell. Inside reality speak only about sin. Sin is "spiritual" term. JW Church consider bad acts as sins, not a crimes. Because Spiritual Judicial System of JW Church accepting only Bible terminology. In this (Bible) reality,  word "crime" not existing. What exists is "sin". For that purpose WT Lawyers must explain to elders what is what and how sins inside JW organization have to be explained to "worldly" reality. 

WT Lawyers have special attitude  on JW members. For them, they are only rank and file members. They, members, representing nobody and nothingexcept their personal beliefs (beliefs determined by WT Society spiritual revelations of Bible doctrines) in God. Although JW members not representing any of Corporative Entities of WT Society, what also including Congregation he/she visiting regularly, they, as members have some sort of Free Contractual Relation with Legal Entity/Entities. That special relation coming from "Yes" on Second Baptismal Question:  

2) “Do you understand that your baptism identifies you as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses in association with Jehovah’s organization?” (from 2019)

(2) Do you understand that your dedication and baptism identify you as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in association with God's spirit-directed organization? (from 1985)

As Group of Organized Christians in Organization that has diversity of Companies with different names, they (members) receiving instructions for Christian life, not only from "spiritual" leaders aka GB and elders inside Spiritual Paradise. But members receiving instructions (in this way or another) from WT Lawyers too, who run life of many Companies/Corporations under different names (Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, is one of names).

Well in that sense, verse you bring ..... The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.

..... is interesting. WT Lawyers playing, walking between this two Realities. In that context (Dualism of sort)  it would be very important to know when Organization as Worldly Company is stronger than Organization as Spiritual Paradise and vice versa. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
26 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

In that context (Dualism of sort)  it would be very important to know when Organization as Worldly Company is stronger than Organization as Spiritual Paradise and vice versa. 

PS because of my English :))

... know when Organization as Worldly Company shows greater influence, power over  Organization as Spiritual Paradise and vice versa. 

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Both terms can be applied to the same set of facts,  and focus on the "eye of the beholder". In the immediate instance, the "soulical" view is that baptism is the ratification of some sort of (business?) contract with a religious "corporation". This is not the view of a spiritual mind. (Compare 1Cor.2:14).

A spiritually-minded leader ("heavenly" Col 3:2) would not allow the "soulical" view ("earthly" James 3:15) to be joined together; at baptism, or at any other point in the spiritual 'upbringing' of a person.  2 Pet 3:18

 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

JW Church consider bad acts as sins, not a crimes.

Without getting bogged down in semantics here, there is no real difference between the two words. The difference may lie in whose law is actually violated. The differentiation between a violation of Jehovah's law as a sin and not a crime would be a "soulical" percepton.

We don't really care about worldly ("soulical") perceptions about laws, crimes, sins, lawyers, definitions, corporations etc. etc. Paul encapsulated the principle in his words to Timothy regarding the Mosaic Law (and by extension, law in general and all its appendages). 1Tim.1:8-10. Let those who fit his description be concerned with all the relevant definitions and arguments concerning "Law". Your complex definitions and arguments indicate your need in this regard. I hope you are getting it clear and it is enlightening for you. 😊

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

I don’t recall when John the Baptist told Jesus, I am baptizing you on your name.

According to reports on Jesus baptism, it is ok with your or anyone else's memory that it is impossible to recall such thing :))). Perhaps somebody else on forum can explain similarity and differences on Baptisms made by John and all later Baptisms made by Jesus's Followers. 

After Jesus's Resurrection they have been instructed HOW to do Baptism. One element of John's way of baptism obviously continued - immersing in water. 

Also, as i recall, John proclaims baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sin, and says another will come after him who will not baptize with water, but with the Holy Spirit. Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.....and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. - Mat 3

After desert temptations:  From that time Jesus began to proclaim, (not disciples) “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near ...Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the good news[

    Hello guest!
] of the kingdom and curing every disease and every sickness among the people.  - Mat 4

Then Jesus  summoned his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to cure every disease and every sickness..... These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans,but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. As you go, proclaim the good news,(not doing baptism)  ‘The kingdom of heaven has come near. - Mat 10

His disciples came and took the body (John the Baptist) and buried it; then they went and told Jesus. - Mat 14

After Resurrection: 

And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” - Mat 28

Well, nothing pro et contra, just chronological line on who said what to who :))

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

While it is a personal decision to dedicate oneself to God, uttering words out load or in silence would be irrelevant.

I can understand what you said, but IF Words are not spoken (in one way or another) than it is opposite  to Jesus command :))

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

In their case, simply put, just like Jesus, Paul is following Jesus footsteps by the power of the great commission. I “charge you” or I “commission you” to go forward and proclaim the good news of God’s Heavenly Kingdom. Paul understood the teachings of Christ. However, if you notice, Paul DIDN’T baptize them with water, but instead by laying his hand upon them that the Holy Spirit was granted.

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire

Well, by this verse and what you have said perhaps Jesus thought about such model of Baptism? And not with water?

Share this post


Link to post
21 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

The fact that you compare crime and sin as the same, when crime is a sin, but what constitutes punishment from God and what constitutes punishment from God’s secular authority are two distinct avenues of God’s authority

I just said how terminology in JW Church is more, often based on word "sin". In NWT Bible there is only one single word in whole book with wording - "crime". In Luke 23:4 where Pilate, as non Jew, supposedly, using word "crime".

Some other translations using word "crime" on various places in Bible. 

I just noticed how word "sin" is more popular and somehow prevailed in JW spiritual, everyday vocabulary. 

 

sin noun 
    Hello guest!
 US  /sɪn/
an 
    Hello guest!
 of 
    Hello guest!
 a 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
, or such 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 together:
    Hello guest!
 In most 
    Hello guest!
, 
    Hello guest!
 is 
    Hello guest!
 as a sin.
A sin is also anything 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
:
    Hello guest!
 It is not a sin to 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 off at 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 and 
    Hello guest!
 in the 
    Hello guest!
 to 
    Hello guest!
 a 
    Hello guest!
.
 UK  /sɪn/ US  /sɪn/
C2 the 
    Hello guest!
 of 
    Hello guest!
, or the 
    Hello guest!
 of, a 
    Hello guest!
 or 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
:
 
crime noun [ C/U ] US  /krɑɪm
an 
    Hello guest!
 or 
    Hello guest!
 that is against the 
    Hello guest!
, or 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
People say something is a crime if it is 
    Hello guest!
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 ,  an 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!

 

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Outta Here said:

The differentiation between a violation of Jehovah's law as a sin and not a crime would be a "soulical" percepton.

In the old days, people used to travel in various ways, and there were roads and also city streets. However, I do not remember that there is a divine law on traffic in the Bible or in other Jewish scriptures. :))
So, if the law did not describe or prescribe something, then that particular thing does not exist neither as a sin nor as a crime. :))
As the Bible speaks of divine law, which is a completely different category from secular law (no matter what they punished and some of the same actions by people), then we could still say that the words sin and crime have different origins and meanings. No divine law says whether or not a car driver can drive down the street and at what speed. Because of this, people, not God, have passed traffic regulations and laws. This human law has no concept of sin but an offense (traffic violation) and some others deal with concept of crime, not with sin.

Bible spoke about Secular Authority who carry "sword" and punishing violators of the Human Law, not of Divine Law. Of course, various human societies made changes through centuries and abandon biblical concept of "sin" in general, but they adopted the term "crime". Perhaps because, religion and state have to be separated.

And for that reason, JW Church was called to clear problems (especially actual issue of various child molestation made by members to other members) because of clerical ideas about elder-member privilege communication, two witness rule, Judicial Committees as Parallel Legislative System to "worldly" Legislative  and similar.

This sort/way of solving inside problems as religion community coming from Concept of Sin. On other side, JW Church as Institution, was not showed much will to report such "sinful crime" because they, generally, made distinction between "sin" and "crime". They decided how elders are appointed  to deal only with "sins", but Secular Authority with "crimes", and even if it is the same act.  (Richard Ashe  ....  

 

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

if the law did not describe or prescribe something, then that particular thing does not exist neither as a sin nor as a crime.

Matters not how this topic of sin v crime is reasoned/wrangled/presented by you and others who reflect your view. Regardless of religious/moral/ ethical persuasions or stance, this the soulical perception of matters. You seem to think that what lies in the mind of man is what determines the existence of sin or crime. This is a soulical perception. You are effectively demonstrating what Paul descibed regarding this matter, although I am not sure if that is your intention.

Share this post


Link to post

Sin vs Crime

Picture can look as this version 1:

JW members in Russia committed no Sin against nobody.....,

 

In version 2, picture is changed by Bible verses:

JW members done Crime against Secular Authority who Governed with JHVH permission and against what God set in place .... And by that committed a Sin against God. 

... 

    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which is from God. The authorities that exist have been appointed by God. Consequently, the one who resists authority is opposing what God has set in place, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

 

In version 3, picture is changed by next Bible verse:

    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 "We must obey 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 
    Hello guest!
 

 

In version 4, picture is paint by GB decisions and interpretations in particular case.

for example: Mexico, Malawi, Bulgaria, Russia, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

It sounds sillycal.

But like "cynical"

 

2 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Is "soulical" even a real word?

Depends what language you speak.

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Therefore, The Holy spirit with Jesus became a visual effect, rather than those that receive God’s Holy Spirit.

When the day of Pentecost came, they were all together in one place. Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. - Acts 2

very visual effects :)))

 

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

After all, judgment day is a reality.

 

35 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

earth back to paradise with "sinless" people.

After judgment day (Armageddon) JW waiting, all people will stay to be sinful ..... for at least 1000 years :)) 

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/10/2019 at 11:23 PM, Outta Here said:

Without getting bogged down in semantics here, there is no real difference between the two words

I just have listen about new suit against WT Society and reporter of KOAT TV reported how WT spokesperson said: 

"Jehovah's Witnesses abhor child abuse as a sin and crime. Our policies on child protection ..."

Well, i believe how he know what he speaking about or he was instructed to tell this from WT lawyers. Sin and crime are two different words in JW organization. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Sin and crime are two different words in JW organization

Of course they are, but their meaning (dare I say...) overlaps.

The key to understanding is to consider against who the crime or sin is committed. The word sin is traditionally viewed by those of the soulical world as relating to the violating of God's laws or standards, whereas the word crime is understood by many of that same designation as referencing a violation of the requirements or laws of the secular state.

Really, in the spiritual world there is no difference between a crime and a sin as any violation of God's laws or principles constitues a crime or sin. To sin is a criminal act.

But we have no problem in speaking the language of the world if that is what they understand.

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/12/2019 at 4:12 PM, BillyTheKid46 said:

Sorry about that. I keep forgetting you take people's words literally when my words were to be used as ultimately. I guess you are one of those that use the "young literal bible" to exploit word for word, ideology. You've been here long enough to know what people are actually saying Srecko. Don't spoil it!

In the 7th grade I was taught how to diagram sentences to be able to ascertain exactly what a sentence was really saying.

How should your words be used ultimately?

And when you say "Don't spoil it!",  what do you mean?

What is "it"?

If I printed out what you say, should it ultimately go in the filing cabinet .... or ultimately go in the shredder?

As one guy in the Army from Alabama once said ... "Spreek Engrich Thoops."

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

 I guess to stupid people as yourself, I would have to consider writing things in some other language in order to be understood. Once again, your idiocy in grammar is such an idiotic way to prove you as ignorant and unintelligent. Retire as a half-idiot, not a blathering one.

You are a truly amazing person, Billy ... with your own words you continuously prove against yourself of what you accuse others.

dt190813.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

As many things are , Billy, it is available on YouTube ... just type in "Diagramming Sentences."

Being able to analyze EXACTLY what a sentence was saying, and be able to prove it .... whether or not the writer intended it to be that way or not ... has served me well my entire life, since the 7th grade.  After a while you develop instantaneous analytical skills when reading ambiguous text. or even in normal conversation.

.... and although I did not count then, there are PERHAPS a hundred videos teaching someone how to diagram sentences.

 

 

 

Diagramming Sentences.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
13 hours ago, Outta Here said:

The key to understanding is to consider against who the crime or sin is committed.

against who .... is the key for understanding 

As i understand teachings of Bible (and perhaps teachings of JW Organization too), everything that is against "our neighbor" is also against God, because all people was made in the image of God. Well, doing something against That Image of God is same as doing something against Origin/Author of Image. In that relations i do not know how "the key" you talking about, making issue to be more understandable. We can go further with this. If human doing something that is bad for nature and animal world, we can say also how this is against God also, because He is Creator and  Author of that Nature. 

13 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Really, in the spiritual world there is no difference between a crime and a sin as any violation of God's laws or principles constitues a crime or sin. To sin is a criminal act.

If that is as you say, why GB and JW Lawyers complicate this issue? If JW Elders want to Judge only sins (specific list of things that are not crimes in the eye of Secular Authorities) than let them to handled such sins. Perhaps this idea can be some sort of New Policy until some "New Light" would bring more Clarifications on Issue. :)) But when something inside JW Organization happen what is not just "a sin", would it be "key" to call Secular Authorities to deal with it?

If, there is no difference between a crime and a sin, as you suggest in comment, than JW Organization have no need for Judicial Committees of Elders. All can be handled by Secular Authorities. :))

In both way of reasoning, something not working well in JW "Spiritual Paradise". I am expecting that future (with new generation of overlapping lawyers) bring some positive results on this. :))

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

JW Organization have no need for Judicial Committees of Elders. All can be handled by Secular Authorities

I don't follow your (presumably) reasoning that if crime and sin are synonymous then Secular Authorities could handle all "judicial matters", unless your are presenting it from a soulical perspective.

Do you therefore think that the secular definition of sin and crime is the same as the sacred and that sacred and secular authority is synonymous in these matters?

Share this post


Link to post

 

37 minutes ago, Outta Here said:

I don't follow your (presumably) reasoning that if crime and sin are synonymous then Secular Authorities could handle all "judicial matters", unless your are presenting it from a soulical perspective.

Do you therefore think that the secular definition of sin and crime is the same as the sacred and that sacred and secular authority is synonymous in these matters?

I just made few way of possible reasoning on issue. And as result, each of this different views on matter can, may bring various outcomes on handling with JW people who done something that this religious organization not allow.

As we see from various statements made by JW Representatives, this "sin - crime" issue is also "foggy" to them... Or it is not?!  They said how Elders are to deal only with "sin" and Secular Authority to deal with "crime". But in cases of child abuse, it is obvious how such differentiation in 1) Terminology and in 2) Division of duties (among Elders and Worldly Officers) is bad for victims. Don't you agree? If victims suffer because Administrative Ideology and rules and protocols, than people in charge must CHANGE what they now doing. As Jesus said, when your animal falls in into a pit or into a hole at Sabbath - would you brake Sabbath Law and provide help or waiting for next day? Jesus was obviously showed "rebellious" solution :))) Would you allow for Children to wait on some Clark in JW Office to find time and way how to solve this problem?! Do you think that GB need to change attitude and brake "Sabbath Law" about this?! I hope you will say: no, on first and yes, on second.   

Share this post


Link to post
On 8/15/2019 at 8:27 PM, Srecko Sostar said:

As we see from various statements made by JW Representatives, this "sin - crime" issue is also "foggy" to them... Or it is not?!  They said how Elders are to deal only with "sin" and Secular Authority to deal with "crime". But in cases of child abuse, it is obvious how such differentiation in 1) Terminology and in 2) Division of duties (among Elders and Worldly Officers) is bad for victims. Don't you agree? If victims suffer because Administrative Ideology and rules and protocols, than people in charge must CHANGE what they now doing. As Jesus said, when your animal falls in into a pit or into a hole at Sabbath - would you brake Sabbath Law and provide help or waiting for next day? Jesus was obviously showed "rebellious" solution :))) Would you allow for Children to wait on some Clark in JW Office to find time and way how to solve this problem?! Do you think that GB need to change attitude and brake "Sabbath Law" about this?! I hope you will say: no, on first and yes, on second. 

More complicated stuff!

I presume you are trying to make a case for the need to speed up action in the case of Child Abuse crimes??? If that is the case, then it is a worthy cause, regardless of context. And one I agree with wholeheartedly, across the board.

However, I don't think I could really comment on your hypothetical generalities unfortunately.  Specific cases from a host of backgrounds where they have been brought to light in a legal context, appear to have been commented on extensively in the public domain by those qualified to do so. Where there are genuine reasons for criticising the handling of such cases and these have been dealt with, then presumably these instances have then been handled as appropriately as possible by the correct authorities? Any exposure of mishandling in specific cases then serves to inform all parties presumably.

Quite how you have managed to morph a discussion on baptism questions into one on handling of Child Abuse allegations would be an interesting study in itself, but not one I have the inclination to unravel at this point of time.

Anyway, if the topic manages to get back on track and any further points meriting discussion appear, I will be back. But for now, excuse me if I turn to other areas of interest. :)

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Catholic Priests molest children, its always boys .  ALWAYS boys.

I think this is based primarily on two factors. One is the fact that many priests choose the profession because they are already homosexual. Rather than live a life of scandal, they believe that the priesthood is a kind of penance for their proclivities, and that it's a sacrifice pleasing to God which will draw them closer to God and away from their tendencies. Of course, this rarely works. Especially because of the second factor: the most available and vulnerable victims of their proclivities are young males in priest-run Catholic schools, and of course, "altar boys."

But nuns who run Catholic schools for girls are more likely to sexually molest girls.

Also, all reports about "general" abuse by priests also include girls. A wikipedia article on the topic includes references in support of plenty of abuse of girls:

    Hello guest!

Here are a few excerpts:

Cases of 

    Hello guest!
 by 
    Hello guest!
, 
    Hello guest!
 and members of 
    Hello guest!
 in the 20th and 21st centuries have led to many allegations, investigations, trials and convictions as well as revelations about decades of attempts by Church officials to cover up reported incidents.
    Hello guest!
 The abused include mostly boys but also girls, some as young as three years old, with the majority between the ages of 11 and 14.
    Hello guest!
    Hello guest!
    Hello guest!
    Hello guest!

The 

    Hello guest!
 instituted the 
    Hello guest!
 in 2013.
    Hello guest!
    Hello guest!
 The Commission reported that 7% of all Catholic priests in Australia were "alleged perpetrators of child sex abuse;" the children's average age at the time of the abuse was 11.5 for boys and 10.5 for girls.
    Hello guest!
 

In August 2006, Father Charles Henry Sylvestre of Belle River, Ontario pleaded guilty to 47 counts of sexual abuse of females, aged between nine and fourteen years old, between 1952 and 1989.

    Hello guest!

On May 11, 2019, Polak issued an apology on behalf of the entire Catholic Church in Poland.

    Hello guest!
    Hello guest!
 The same day, 
    Hello guest!
, a documentary detailing accounts of sex abuse by Catholic Church clergy in Poland, went viral, reaching 8.1 million viewers on 
    Hello guest!
 by May 13.
    Hello guest!
 Among many, the film featured a priest known as Father Jan A., whose case is being reviewed by the 
    Hello guest!
, who confessed to molesting many young girls.
    Hello guest!
 The film also alleges that Rev. Dariusz Olejniczak, a priest who was sentenced for molesting 7-year-old girls, was allowed to continue working with young people despite his conviction
    Hello guest!
 O

Female victims of sexual abuse by Catholic priests tended to be younger than the males. Data analyzed by John Jay researchers, shows that the number and proportion of sexual misconduct directed at girls under 8 years old was higher than that directed at boys the same age.

    Hello guest!

https://cruxnow.com/church-in-europe/2019/05/15/polish-lawmaker-panned-for-excusing-priest-who-abused-girls/

"newsweek/2010/04/14/what-about-the-girls". thedailybeast.com. Retrieved 14 September 2014.

Cartor, Cimbolic & Tallon (2008) found that 6 percent of the cleric offenders in the 

    Hello guest!
 are pedophiles, 32 percent ephebophiles, 15 percent attracted to 11 and 12 year olds only (both male and female), 20 percent indiscriminate, and 27 percent mildly indiscriminate.
    Hello guest!

The statistical analysis shows that more homosexual men in the priesthood was strongly correlated with more overall abuse and more boys abused compared to girls.

    Hello guest!
    Hello guest!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Therefore, to those witnesses wanting to stick their two cents where it doesn’t belong, get off it! You’re neither qualified as an expert nor qualified under the directions of scripture.

For ex-witnesses trying to change the argument now, the Watchtower hide those accounts when the BOE letters state otherwise, learn to understand humanity starting with you first before thinking your opinion matters.

I think that these last two posts of yours are informative and thought provoking. I can't say whether I completely agree with your conclusions because I can't figure out your actual position on some of the material you included. But I thought the input was useful at any rate.

I agree that even us non-experts, like you and me and others, are not qualified as experts, nor are any of us completely qualified under the directions of scripture. But I don't think that should stop you or me or others from wanting to stick our two cents in. A discussion forum means any of us should be able to stick in our two cents because a discussion forum is exactly where those opinions belong. You don't have to be an expert, and I'm sure that like me, you aren't, and yet your opinion should matter.

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Outta Here said:

Quite how you have managed to morph a discussion on baptism questions into one on handling of Child Abuse allegations would be an interesting study in itself, but not one I have the inclination to unravel at this point of time.

Anyway, if the topic manages to get back on track and any further points meriting discussion appear, I will be back. But for now, excuse me if I turn to other areas of interest. :)

Some participants  made comments on this and on that, what "helped" or contributing to going in some sort of different subjects.

But, at the end of any subject or issue we speaking, about WT Society and JW Organization actions, ending exactly in this wording - "In the name of .....", because, in declarative way, everything what this Organization doing and speaking, supposedly IT IS in The Name of .....GOD. :)).

 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

Suddenly the Watchtower needed to be cops, psychologist, therapist, etc to appease the world and the critics within the Watchtower. They never claimed such expertise, you did! Therefore, they cannot add something that was "forced' upon the Watchtower. 😉

Needed to be? WT Representatives aka Elders already acting in similar kind. They, according to WT articles, fulfill the role of those who are:   

The shepherds and dukes (or, “princes,” NEB) in this implausible army are the congregation elders. (

    Hello guest!
) Today, Jehovah certainly has provided an abundance of spiritual men to shepherd his precious sheep, to strengthen his people for the future attack of the modern-day “Assyrian.” 
    Hello guest!
   

Elders who are reading this article can draw some useful conclusions from the account we have just considered: (1) The most practical step that we can take to prepare for the coming attack of “the Assyrian” is that of strengthening our faith in God and helping our brothers to do the same. (2) When “the Assyrian” attacks, the elders must be absolutely convinced that Jehovah will deliver us. (3) At that time, the life-saving direction that we receive from Jehovah’s organization may not appear practical from a human standpoint. All of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether these appear sound from a strategic or human standpoint or not. (4) Now is the time for any who may be putting their trust in secular education, material things, or human institutions to adjust their thinking. The elders must stand ready to help any who may now be wavering in their faith.

    Hello guest!

3 hours ago, BillyTheKid46 said:

They never claimed such expertise

Article claimed how GB (Organization) will provide Life-Saving Direction through Elders. And Elders must stand ready to help...... Well, somebody here have Expertise of sort :)))

Share this post


Link to post

  • Similar Content

    • By Srecko Sostar
      When GB member Geoffrey Jackson made "clarification" about this question: "Do you see yourselves as Jehovah God's Spokespeople on Earth??
      with answer:
      "Aaa, that I think would seem to be quite presumptuous to say that we are the only Spokesperson that God is using."
      ....questions arise: 
      What other individuals or groups Mr. Jackson had in mind that are also used by this same God to fulfill His will here on Earth? 
      Are they inside WT Society and JWorg, as some illegal FDS GB Body, and are part of Plan B?
      Or perhaps this "spokesperson"  is/are in some other religion, institution or are completely outside of any group and organization?
      What do you think about it, JW people or anyone else?!
       
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      Geoffrey Jackson in his talk comparing GB with "watch dog who barking for no reason in a middle of the night" in 3:04 of this video. He send message how watch dog and FDS have similar "enthusiasm". :))
      It is funny, but also very concerning if you are member of organization under such religious Leaders.
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      GB member Stephen Lett went "in deep" explanation about climate changes and weather on Earth. He said how JHVH lovingly control of weather for His people blessings stopped in long past (I think Mr Lett had Adam and Eve time period in mind). After, satan became ultimate cause for natural disasters until today. Obviously with, at least, one exception - Noah Flood. That was for sure "so called natural disaster" caused by God. Or by satan? Who will know that after Mr Lett "clarification".
      Also, Jesus mentioned something about his Father who giving sun and rain (natural phenomena that contribute in regulating weather and to "so called natural disasters") to both good and bad people, to righteous and unrighteous. I wonder, what Jesus could say about his Father's "weather control" . According to Bible, it seems how his Father giving bad and good weather to both group of people, and He doing this without exemption.  
      Now, who you will trust, who you need to trust?
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      In view of the foregoing, what can we conclude? When Jesus comes for judgment during the great tribulation, he will find that the faithful slave has been loyally dispensing timely spiritual food to the domestics. Jesus will then delight in making the second appointment—over all his belongings. Those who make up the faithful slave will get this appointment when they receive their heavenly reward, becoming corulers with Christ. -  Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
      “All his belongings” over which the “faithful and discreet slave” class is appointed must refer to all the spiritual things that belong to him on earth in connection with his established heavenly kingdom - 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.    
      1) members ??
      2) real estate and money ??
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      Dear reader.
      You have often come across terms, God's holy spirit and God's love.
      You have also often prayed for the favor of God, among other things asking that God's holy spirit help you, guide you, to have a spirit. Some Bible passages say that God gives something to people.
      We find expressions that say how God gives:
      - his spirit without measure - John 3:34.
      - a certain measure of faith - Rom 12: 3
      - a measure of grace - Eph. 4: 7
      - measure of authority - 2 Cor. 10:13
      - a double measure of blessing - Isaiah 61: 7
      - double measure of inheritance - Deut 21:17
      - double measure for bad deeds - Rev. 18: 6
      Also how a man seeks or receives from another man:
      - double measure of spirit - 2 Cr. 2: 9
      - double honor - 1 Tim. 5:17
       
      There are also allegations relating to love. How love is given or received and under what circumstances:
      And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him. ”- John 14:21
      For God loved the world, - John 3:16
      I love those who love me - Prov 8:17
      Your love, O LORD, reaches to the heavens - Psalm 36: 5 -7
      I have loved you with everlasting love; - Jer 31: 3
       
      From these statements we can see that love also works under certain circumstances. Sometimes it's eternal, going to heaven. Sometimes it is conditioned because he says: I will love you if you love me", "if you obey, listen me".
      Based on the paragraphs that speak of giving / receiving a spirit, I could conclude that God gives the holy spirit to those who seek it, and those whose hearts are pure receive that spirit from God. When GB claims that they make mistakes in word and deed because they are not perfect and because they are not "spirit-inspired," then that is just an excuse. When they claim that they are not "inspired by the spirit of God," that would mean that God does not give his spirit to anyone, not even to them. So, if they, as "God's elected," "anointed," cannot be "inspired," then they are actually sending the message that no one else can be "inspired." And then such a claim has the consequence, meaning, that God and his spirit are not able to be active. God works through his spirit, doesn't he? Well, he created the universe with his spirit ?! He wrote the Bible with his spirit ?! He uttered prophecies with his spirit ?! And today the spirit is unable to act on the few people sitting in Warwick?
      Does God lie when he says, "... for God gives the Spirit without limit. - John. 3:34
      Is the problem in the spirit of God? Or is it a problem in humans? :))
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      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? 
       
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      JW's preach about Kingdom, Armageddon, and Eternal Life. This eternal life shall be in the future, after the last ordeal/exam at the end of the Kingdom of Christ, that is, at the end of 1000 years of that Kingdom.
      The concept of eternity and therefore of eternal life for man is great desire of all people. No one wants to die, unless he is very old and infirm or severely ill or in great suffering. But many people, even under such circumstances, have desire to survive and live. 
       
      JWs are not sure, will they get eternal life. But they have great hope for it, if they remain faithful to God, as they say.
      Because of such stand, it is interesting to note the famous words written in the Bible. "And this is an eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." - Mat 17
      This is where we meet the equalization of terms. Knowing God and Jesus = Eternal Life. Conversely, eternal life = the knowledge of God and Jesus.

      What JW's doing to get knowledge of God (and eternal life as result)? They read the Bible, they read WT publications, they listen to lectures, going preaching ..etc. The program for getting to know God and Jesus consists of, for the newcomers, in the Bible study system, attending meetings, preaching, and baptism. Consecration and baptism should mean that these new members have had by then, to that moment (cca 6 months  or 1 year) came to know God and Jesus enough to give their lives to Them .... and to have hope for future eternal life.
      Further question applies to both, newly baptized and those who have been "in the knowledge of God and Jesus" for decades. Do you have eternal life? Do you have it now? 
      JW's are very sure how they know the truth and Them, now.  What is the truth? To know Them. Jesus also said: I am The Way, The Truth and The Life. What Life? Eternal Life or some other Life? As result of what JW's know, we should, supposedly, conclude how JW's have: The way, the truth and the eternal life, because of how this facts are presented by them, about knowledge they have. 

      JW's will say how they will get it (eternal life), after the end of 1000th year Kingdom. But Jesus said how eternal life IS knowing Them. When?.... when you/they will know Them? In 1 century, after every Jesus' lessons and speech? Or after teaching that people received by Apostles who had been "inspired"? Or after people have been educated by Russell' publications, and get to know Them in such way? Or through preaching methods incorporated by JW organization?  
      Well, if JW's say how they will get eternal life in the future, that would mean how they don't know God and Jesus today. Jesus spoke about different logic: To know Them means you have eternal life. Do you know Them now? If you say, Yes, this would mean you have eternal life now. 
      But i see another issue here, too. God (and Jesus) living from eternity to eternity. In that sense, all what is connected about knowing Them is outside life span of every human. Possibility to know God and Jesus is impossible to human, because we are not eternal. Even with future aspect that some of us will live forever, it is not enough time to be in position to collect (with mind and heart) all what is possible to know about Them. In our position today, as people who lives 70-90 years, it is also impossible to know Them in such short period.
      We coming to these questions too:
      About what knowledge (in quality and quantity) Jesus spoke?
      About what eternal life (when and what sort of life....You will be in paradise with me, today, or after 1914, or after Kingdom ends... etc.) Jesus spoke? 
      ... or you can suggest some other questions too :))
    • By Srecko Sostar
      The WT Society interprets that JW elders have the right not to disclose secrets to the police and to other government agencies regarding child abuse when members of the organization give them information, whether they are victims or perpetrators.
      In this appeal, WT lawyers defend this right by invoking the Catholic Church and their clergy. In fact, although the WT Society and JWorg claim to have no priestly class as the Catholic Church, they do want the same privileges for their elders, before the bodies of the law, as Catholic priests do.
      What is the doctrine in the Catholic Church regarding "confession"? What is the doctrine of the WT and JW Organization regarding "confession"?
      The Catholic Church allows their priests to listen to the voluntary confessions of their believers and to give them comfort and forgiveness in the name of God as part of Christian mercy. Priests must never reveal to anyone the confession secrets they have heard from believers.
      The WT JW organization teaching that the believers of their religion should also confess their sins to their "priests", who are the elders. Although in the formal every day language, words "confession of sin" are viewed in different way, different picture than it is in Catholic church, it can be said that it is formally the similar idea as in the Catholic Church. Awareness of one's sin may come to elders in two ways: as a voluntary confession of one's sins before one or more elders or when a member of the Assembly declared the sin of another member of the organization.
      There are two outcomes for a JW believer after the elders find out about a sin. He will either be allowed to remain as full member of the assembly, or be expelled/dfd from the organization.
      What does that tell us? Although the WT JW organization claims that it is incorrect and unbiblical when a Catholic priest forgives sins to a Catholic believer, we are free to observe that in their treating, JW elders towards their member, they act in the same way as a Catholic priest. By allowing JW sinner to remain to be a member of the congregation, they, as the Judges of the JW Church, forgave him. They forgave him on their's behalf, on behalf of the injured party, and on behalf of the assembly. In the event that they had excluded sinners, it would mean that no one had forgiven him. This kind of treatment denies the allegations regarding the Catholic Church about who have right to "forgive sins".
      Certain Bible passages teaching assembly members to be prepared to forgive the sins of other members. This actually means that there is a basis on which one sinner can forgive sins of a another sinner. If so, then it means that some sin can be forgiven, not just by the directly injured party, but by any other member of the congregation. Every member can, if he wants and wish, but he is not forced if he does not want to.
      But in the Catholic Church, a believer who has the burden of sin and wants to confess it in his church, goes to only one priest, not two or three, and confesses his sin only to him. In this case, sin is confessed to only one person. And that forms the basis for the "secret" in the Catholic Church. Because the secret is revealed to only one person.
      In the JW congregation, "confession of sin" gets another level of "secrecy." The secret does not remain verbally spoken between two people, but the "secret" extends to 3 or 4 people, maybe more. However, it is very important to note that the "confession" is also documented in writing. According to what i know, a Catholic priest does not making (mandatory) written record for the sins of his believers. JW elders, by contrast, must make a "confidential file" kept in the archives and / or destroyed if it would be said so by the authority of the higher hierarchy body.
       
      It is unacceptable that the WT JW organization invokes the Catholic Church and their "penitent privilege", or "confessional secrets" between believers and chaplains (soul carrier, shepherd), as the basis by which it operates within its own organization and regulates the spiritual life of believers in the JW Church.
      The "confessional secret" in the Catholic Church  and "confession of sin" before the elders in the JW assembly are two things.
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      JW members are instructed by this GB member to trust their leaders aka Governing Body. On other side Bible has many verses that warning people about that issue. Well, it seems how human influence and even manipulation is on work. Just few Bible verses as evidence: 
       My dear brothers, do not trust every spirit. But test the spirits to see if they belong to God. - 1 John
      Do not rely on a friend; do not trust in a companion. Seal the doors of your mouth from her who lies in your arms - Micah 7
      Do not put your trust in princes, in human beings, who cannot save. - Psalm 146
      For your own sakes, quit trusting in mere man,Who is only the breath in his nostrils. Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Why should he be taken into account? - Isaiah 2
       
       
    • By Srecko Sostar
      TEACHING BOX 16A - 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Is Christendom the Antitypical Jerusalem?
      In the past, our literature has referred to Christendom as the antitype of apostate Jerusalem. The conditions in unfaithful Jerusalem—including idolatry and widespread corruption—certainly remind us of what is happening in Christendom. However, in recent years our publications, including the one you are now reading, have not taken the type-antitype approach to prophecy except where the Bible provides a clear basis for doing so. Is there a solid Scriptural basis for referring to Christendom as the antitypical Jerusalem? No.
      Consider the following: Jerusalem was at one time a center of pure worship; later, its inhabitants turned apostate. By contrast, Christendom has never practiced pure worship. Right from its inception in the fourth century C.E., Christendom has always taught false doctrine.
      In addition, after Jerusalem was destroyed by the Babylonians, Jehovah restored the city to his favor and it again became the center of true worship. Christendom, on the other hand, has never had God’s favor, and once it is destroyed during the great tribulation, it will never rise again.
      In view of the foregoing, what may we conclude? When we examine Bible prophecies that were fulfilled on unfaithful Jerusalem, we may say, ‘This or that reminds us of what we see in Christendom today.’ But there appears to be no Scriptural basis for referring to Christendom as the antitypical Jerusalem.
       
      First, perhaps is about Lexicon, Vocabulary  in JW Culture. When JW Church and members talking about "Christendom" they refer firstly or mostly to Roman Catholic Church and all Churches and Denominations that believe In Jesus Christ...but in wrong, false and idolatrous way. But JW consider themselves to be Christians too, but not part of "Christendom" (by this they quote can be consider as Christendom.  "....we are Christians who do our best to follow the example set by Jesus Christ and to live by his teachings." - Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
      Why this linguistic distinction is so important to JW? To be, sometimes, called with name "Christians" but want to run miles away from word "Christendom"?
      Christendom -  Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
       noun - English Language Learners Definition of Christendom
      : people who are Christians
      : the part of the world where most people are Christians
      But another thing is of bigger importance. Do you remember how many articles and books and magazines taught you all, over such long period of decades, on so many meetings and congregations baked up with so many Bible verses and Study paragraphs about who is Jerusalem and who is Christendom and all that stuff??!!
      And now they figured up, they rowed deep, Under Spirit Motivation and Guidance, to tell you how Now there is No Single One Solid Scriptural Basis to believe in that teaching, doctrine, dogma! 
      Do You really believe how Church Leaders and Guardians of Doctrine in WTJWORG know what they are talking about , as those who watch for your souls?! 
        
    • By Srecko Sostar
      Many people wish, want to know what is, how looks Context about some issue. That is because of reason to be able to understand more and better some issue, and if they have to make some decision about to be sure they will make good choice.  
      Here is example how WT "scribes" manipulates with Context !!!!!! 
      Reasoning from the Scriptures, page 89, Cross; The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·rosʹ], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. . . . Even amongst the Romans the crux(from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole.”—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.   Text in red color is missing text in Reasoning book. Very important CONTEXT. Oh, context always problem with you:))) _____________________________________________________ The Imperial Bible-Dictionary acknowledges this, saying: “The Greek word for cross, [stau·rosʹ], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground. But a modification was introduced as the dominion and usages of Rome extended themselves through Greek speaking countries. Even amongst the Romans the crux (from which our cross is derived) appears to have been originally an upright pole and this always reminded the more prominent part. But from the time that it began to be used as an instrument of punishment a transverse piece of wood was commonly added; not, however, always even than.....  The following text continues, describing the types of crosses and the ways in which the convicts were murdered...,others extending their arms on a patibulum. There can be no doubt, however, that the later sort was the more common and that about the period of the gospel age crucifixion was usually accomplished by suspending the criminal on a cross piece of wood. But this does not itself determine the precise form of the cross; ....  the text continues to describe 3 types of crosses.—Edited by P. Fairbairn (London, 1874), Vol. I, p. 376.   Please, if you know some more examples about similar "intellectual dishonest" give example   
    • By Srecko Sostar
      Just one of many changes WT made in recent years. 
      19 In review, what have we learned? In the beginning of this article, we raised three “when” questions. We first considered that the great tribulation did not begin in 1914 but will start when the United Nations attacks Babylon the Great. Then, we reviewed why Jesus’ judgment of the sheep and the goats did not begin in 1914 but will occur during the great tribulation. Finally, we examined why Jesus’ arrival to appoint the faithful slave over all his belongings did not occur in 1919 but will take place during the great tribulation. So, then, all three “whens” apply to the same future time period—the great tribulation. How does this adjusted view further affect our understanding of the illustration of the faithful slave? Also, how does it affect our understanding of other parables, or illustrations, of Jesus that are being fulfilled during this time of the end? These important questions will be considered in the following articles.
      source of paragraph:  Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
       
      Here in this paragraph we see just some of many changes from past teachings in Watchtower ideology.
      Well, questions are as follow:
      What is The Truth?
      Can The Truth Stop To Be True?
      Does The Truth have the Owner?
      Why do some people like to claim that Only They know a Certain Truth?
      Does some Truth exists outside of our awareness of the existence of such truth?
      Why do we argue how some Truth or Truths can never change?
      Why can not we name The Truth, which has ceased to be true, that it is a Lie or at least Not The Truth?
      Do these truths from paragraph 19 cease to be true on the day of publication in the Watchtower Journal on July 15 2013 or are they, in fact, have never been The Truth?
       
  • Forum Statistics

    62,411
    Total Topics
    118,090
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,584
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Vespucci Languages Private Limited
    Newest Member
    Vespucci Languages Private Limited
    Joined

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.