The state subsidy is denied to WTJWorg in Norway

[John 12.24to28]

1 hour ago, boyle said:

What does this have to do with having God's commandments removed from scripture by those governments?

 

Well, didn't some governments try to destroy copies of the scriptures afterwards? When the nations attack religion, surely they will also target copies of the scriptures. Thankfully, governments cannot remove God's commandments from our hearts.

 

1 hour ago, boyle said:

How long has it taken for that unfaithfulness to be corrected, for our modern time?

 

Well, it hasn't happened yet, obviously! You won't have to ask me when it happens, you'll see for yourself. (There is a reason the vision in Revelation has "thunder" and "lightning" as some of the descriptors of God's judgments against false religion.)

 

1 hour ago, boyle said:

You challenge God's commandment

 

When did I challenge God's commandment? God commands us to Love. I love talking about love. Do you want me to talk about Love some more?🥰 (It is one of my favorite topics.)

 

1 hour ago, boyle said:

When did God place you above all others?

 

He didn't, @boyle, it must just your point of view is off kilter.🙂 You are taller than me, remember.

(I am lowly, my brother, like near the dirt. I'm afraid of heights.)

 

1 hour ago, boyle said:

On one of your posts, you claimed I was a false prophet because I can see your inner self by your own words and that scared you. How can you not see your own deeds as being prophetically false?

Now say what you well and laugh about it, but Jehovah knows every inch of your heart and when you fail him as a mortal being, the praise you give Jehovah while your deeds are false brings no joy or comfort to God. 

 

I don't remember you ever scaring me, and as for seeing my inner self, there's not much to see. I'm just me. 

I don't really know what you mean about "deeds being prophetically false". And I know Jehovah is pleased with me even though I am imperfect and make lots of mistakes. I do pray to bring comfort and joy to Jehovah's heart, since His heart has had to endure more pain than anybody else, and I know I am just little but even little things can bring people joy sometimes. 

(My brother @boyle, what brings you joy?)

 

48 minutes ago, boyle said:

When a questionable person warns or otherwise threatens the Bethel Family or the GB, it has no value unless that threat is perceived to be dangerous.

Therefore, I will suggest you be very careful with your wording. Free speech covers an array of things, but not direct threats.

 

I am one of Jehovah's witnesses. Does the Bethel Family consider Jehovah to be a questionable person? Does the GB consider Jehovah to be a questionable person?

 

(I already know the answer to that question. 😆 I think you know too.)

 

36 minutes ago, boyle said:

1 hour ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

Being "no part of the world" is not what they think it means at Bethel.

This implies no one knows what that means. Even non-believers have contributed to the shaping of language and meaning behind words and phrases.

Do you have a better system of interpretation you care to share? 

 

Yes, the one in the Bible, but is it appropriate to post here on this thread, or should we start a new one for that topic? You know better than me, I am newer to forum etiquette. 

 

[John 12.24to28]

1 minute ago, boyle said:

Then you should not pretend to be something your not when posting.

 

😆 That's funny, especially coming from you! ☺️ (Does anybody here even know your real name?)

[John 12.24to28]

3 minutes ago, boyle said:

39 minutes ago, AudreyAnnaNana said:

I don't remember you ever scaring me, and as for seeing my inner self, there's not much to see. I'm just me. 

Outwardly, no! Mentally, well, you'll never tell. But we both know even if it's denied.

 

I already told you I'm not scared of you. I like talking to you.🙂

[John 12.24to28]

6 minutes ago, boyle said:

Dealers Choice. By all means start a new thread and drop this dead one. That's okay by me. 😏

Iooking forward to see your personal interpreation.

 

"I need not be considered"...let's look at Jehovah's Words💖

[John 12.24to28]

7 minutes ago, boyle said:

Haha, it definitely isn't Allen! 😂

Yeah, I didn't think so🙂

[JW Insider]

23 hours ago, boyle said:

@JW Insider Not that I want you to reply, because I don't, but, did you and @BroRando do the numbers?

Does 2016 come up? Does your reference align to the Alpha generation and its ultimate impact?

I probably haven't kept up enough with things being said recently, so I don't really know what you're asking about.

A few months ago, I always tried to read almost everything that everyone would write on this forum. I did this for a few years here but decided it was a bit excessive even though this forum is relatively small. I have read only a very small percentage of posts for about two months now. So I don't really know what you are talking about when you ask if I and BroRando did the numbers. I don't know anything about the significance of 2016 or the "Alpha Generation." I've read that the Alpha generation refers to people born after the year 2000, who are therefore currently about 23 years old or less. I don't recall reading anything from BroRando about 2016 or the Alpha Generation.

I am hopeful that the end of this wicked system comes soon, but I have never believed in trying to tie the future fulfillment of prophecies to specific dates. I'd go so far as to say it's unchristian to get overly involved in such speculation about the times and seasons. But I do understand the desire to peer into such things and always want to learn more about the fulfillment of prophecy. I'm intrigued about whatever you mean about me "doing the numbers" "2016" "Alpha Generation" and whatever you meant by my "reference." I'm sure I didn't refer to any of those things, so I wondered what you meant by that. 

[TrueTomHarley]

21 minutes ago, boyle said:

Enjoy life to the fullest with Jehovah's Spirit guiding you. Peace!

The times they are a changing.

[JW Insider]

First of all. Thanks for the sentiments in the previous post. I don't plan to focus much on things said here anymore, so you're right that it isn't really going to matter much whether those details about 2016 are explained to me or not. 

On 5/15/2023 at 6:23 PM, boyle said:

It's not inclusive to just those pages. Read the book. I'm sure you have a copy or can get one. What is the moral of the story? The same age doesn't need to be of the same generation. Just like a descendant or individual can have a common ancestor. That is the essence of the opinion.

I've read what the editors of "DTIB" have said about genealogy and it's easy to understand. I also understand what it says about "generations" in those pages you referenced and in other parts of this same "Bible Dictionary." Also, I know that if someone did a search on the term "overlapping generations" among all the Bible commentaries and Bible dictionaries, the term almost never comes up at all except in this particular one: "Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible" (DTIB). And it only happens on page 244, the first page you quoted. Yes, it's "cool" and "unique" that someone can find a person with academic credentials who used the term "overlapping generations" but its very use here undermines the Watchtower teaching instead of helping to support it.

The problem, of course, is that the editor you recommended here (pp. 244-246), doesn't really believe the Bible's genealogies are trustworthy and accurate as actual genealogies. He prefers to see many of them as unhistorical. But that's typical of modern critical commentaries. However, he quotes Rendsburg who actually does argue that the genealogies of the Pentateuch are reliable and historical. And in that paragraph, he uses the phrase: "overlapping generations." He says that:

Rendsburg "has based his conclusions in part on the observable pattern of overlapping generations so that people of the same age need not be of the same generation."

But it's quite easy to see that this goes completely against what the Watchtower publications have tried to say about generations. In fact, it directly opposes what the Watchtower publications say.

The Watchtower publications NEVER use the expression "overlapping generations" with respect to the generation teaching, because our current teaching is the opposite. Our teaching is that even persons of widely different ages NEED to be part of the SAME GENERATION because Jesus said that "THIS GENERATION" (not "these generations") would not pass away. Our current teaching is that almost all of the people in the first part of the generation do not need to have their lives overlap with most of the people in the second part of that same generation. In fact, our current teaching is supposed to work out even if only ONE person among the thousands in that first part has a lifespan that overlaps with at least ONE person in the second part of that SAME generation. The infamous Splane chart even mentions the possibility that this ONE person might be, using a known example: Brother Frederick W. Franz. If FWF was indeed the last living person from the first group, then his lifespan, in the end, would only need to have overlapped with ONE remaining person from the second part of that same generation by the time the end of this system arrives. Our definition of the current teaching could allow for this even if that overlap had happened for only a few seconds and the overlapping person in the second group had never met or even known about FWF while FWF was alive. And then, by definition, this ONE GENERATION Jesus spoke of can only go on for as long as at least that ONE person from the second group, is still alive.

That might sound complex and I'm using an extreme example. But it's an example that fits the current teaching.

I'm personally not too concerned with whether this teaching is going to hold true, time-wise. It very well might. If it does, I don't think it's necessary that it was because the teaching was right. It could just be a coincidence if the end of this system comes tomorrow.

One reason I'm not too concerned is just based on the very nature of speculative teachings. If the teaching is now correct, then this means that it is the "truth." Yet, if someone believed and promoted this "truth" back in 2004, for example, then it would have been an apostate teaching at that time. Speculative teachings are always this way: they could be an apostate teaching, then a true teaching, then they might become an apostate teaching again in the near future.

I'm not saying the Watchtower is wrong. But I'm not personally concerned with our more speculative teachings. And this one is the kind that creates a range of dates, which, to my conscience, goes against what Jesus and Paul said about not needing anything to be written to us about the times and seasons. These things are in the Father's jurisdiction, not ours.

We should be more concerned with what type of person we ought to be knowing that the end could come at any time.

[Space Merchant]

On 5/13/2023 at 5:54 PM, boyle said:

No! But I thought it would make you feel better if it was. Ask @Space Merchant to confirm. lol! 😉

To confirm what exactly?

[TrueTomHarley]

A veritable love-in between Boyle and JWI.

I never thought I’d live to see it.

[John 12.24to28]

On 5/16/2023 at 11:03 PM, JW Insider said:

We should be more concerned with what type of person we ought to be knowing that the end could come at any time.

Amen!

 

"Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things happen..."

 

The Watchtower uses their generations theory but throws out the Greek definition of the word...

 

"3. the whole multitude of men living at the same time: Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 1:48 (πᾶσαι αἱ γενεαί); ; Philippians 2:15; used especially of the Jewish race living at one and the same period: Matthew 11:16; Matthew 12:39, 41f, 45; Matthew 16:4; Matthew 23:36; Mark 8:12, 38; Luke 11:29f, 32, 50; Luke 17:25; Acts 13:36; Hebrews 3:10; ἄνθρωποι τῆς γενεάς ταύτης, Luke 7:31; ἄνδρες τῆς γενεάς ταύτης, Luke 11:31; τήν δέ γενεάν αὐτοῦ τίς διηγήσεται, who can describe the wickedness of the present generation, Acts 8:33 (from Isaiah 53:8 the Sept.) (but cf. Meyer, at the passage)."

 

https://biblehub.com/greek/1074.htm

 

"A whole multitude" is the point. Of the whole multitude of God's name people who are alive during the beginning of the great tribulation, when religion is attacked, some will survive that attack. They will not all pass away in that attack. 

 

Jesus was talking to people who were among God's name people at the time. They were going to face great tribulation when the Romans attacked. He wanted them to know that faithful ones among them would survive, and the same today. God's name people will be attacked when the religious institutions are attacked by the nations at the beginning of the "appointed times of the nations" aka "time times and half a time" or "3 1/2 years". The current way the organization operates is about to be dissolved. 

 

"Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, consider what sort of people you ought to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion..."

 

Love will remain. Truth will remain. The business parts will be gone. The Pharisee parts will be gone.

 

The "holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion" are not necessarily quantifiable things you write down on a field service report, or a meeting attendance report. The holy acts of conduct are showing love in the way that Jesus commanded, without hypocrisy.

 

[Srecko Sostar]

I came across this article. Interesting questions and dilemmas arise in the relationship between the state and religious communities. "When does freedom become totalitarian?"
Also in the case of JW in Norway, a dilemma arises:

What to do with those who break the law and use the law as a justification for breaking it.

https://norgeskristnerad.no/2023/08/17/nar-blir-frihet-totaltaert/

 

Google translation of Letter: Decision on loss of registration

 chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.statsforvalteren.no/siteassets/fm-oslo-og-viken/folk-og-samfunn/tros--og-livssynssamfunn/vedtak-om-tap-av-registrering.pdf

 

JEHOVA'S WITNESSES Røyskattveien 25 1914 YTRE ENEBAKK Att. Tage-André Olsen

Decision on loss of registration

We refer to the notice of possible loss of registration of 25/10/2022. In the notice, Jehovah's Witnesses were given a period of four weeks to respond to whether you wanted to rectify the conditions that led to the refusal of state subsidies for 2021 in the decision on 27.01.2022.

In a letter dated 09/11/2022, Jehovah's Witnesses asked for a postponement of the deadline by a further four weeks. The deadline was set for 20.12.2022. However, we informed in a letter of 12/12/2022 that the answer had to be available by 15/12/2022 if we were to have the opportunity to process the case before the end of the year. We received a response from the community on 15/12/2022 by letter dated 14/12/2022.

Jehovah's Witnesses were registered with the State Administrator on 15/10/1985, and are registered until 01/01/2023 according to the transitional rules in the new Religious Communities Act § 23 second paragraph. On 21 October 2022, we received an application for registration under the new Religious Communities Act. We also process the application in this decision.

Resolution

We withdraw the registration of Jehovah's Witnesses as a religious community, cf. the Religious Communities Act § 4 third paragraph cf. the same act § 6, cf. the Religious Communities Regulations 6 first paragraph. We reject new registration of Jehovah's Witnesses as a religious community, cf. the Religious Communities Act § 4 third paragraph, cf. the Religious Communities Regulations § 4 fourth paragraph.

Background of the case

On 15 April 2021, the State Administrator in Oslo and Viken received an inquiry from the Ministry of Children and Families regarding Jehovah's Witnesses. We were asked to assess whether the inquiry from Rolf Furuli contained information of importance for the registration of and state subsidies to Jehovah's Witnesses, cf. the Religious Communities Act § 6. We were also asked to assess the need to carry out further investigations, cf. the Religious Communities Regulations § 10.

In a decision of 27/01/2022, the State Administrator refused grants for 2021 for Jehovah's Witnesses on the basis of the information that emerged in our investigations.

The Ministry of Children and Families confirmed our decision to refuse state subsidies on 30 September 2022. The state administrator sent a notice of possible loss of registration on 25 October 2022. In the notice, we asked for feedback on whether society wants to correct the conditions that led to the refusal of state subsidies for 2021. As a result of the notice, Jehovah's Witnesses asked for a meeting with the State Administrator. The meeting was held on 01.12.22.

The community wanted to tell about its exclusion practice. We stated that our case management is in writing, and that what emerges in the meeting, and which Jehovah's Witnesses believe is relevant to the case, must also be sent to us in writing. In a letter dated 14/12/2022, Jehovah's Witnesses responded to a notice of possible loss of registration.

The society does not want to correct the conditions that led to the refusal of state subsidies for 2021, and disagrees with the decision of 27/10/2022. The society asked for deferred implementation of any decision on loss of registration, cf. Section 42 of the Public Administration Act.

Legal basis

Section 4, third paragraph of the Religious Societies Act reads as follows: "Section 4. Registration of religious and religious societies The religious or religious society can be refused registration, or the registration can be withdrawn, if one or more of the conditions for refusing grants in § 6 are met." Section 6 first paragraph of the Religious Communities Act reads as follows: "Section 6.

Grounds for refusing grants

If a religious or religious community, or individuals acting on behalf of the community, use violence or coercion, make threats, violate children's rights, violate statutory prohibitions on discrimination or in other ways seriously violates the rights and freedoms of others, the society may be denied a grant or the grant may be curtailed. Grants can also be refused or cut short if society encourages or supports violations mentioned in this section. (...) Grants can also be refused if the faith or belief community does not meet the requirements that follow from the law. (…)"

The Religious Communities Regulations

Section 6 first paragraph reads as follows: "Section 6. Loss of registration

If the religious or religious community no longer fulfills the registration conditions or other conditions and requirements laid down in or based on the Religious Communities Act, the state administrator can decide to withdraw the registration. The community must be notified in writing and with a deadline of at least four weeks to rectify the situation. The rules on the state administrator's investigations in section 10 apply. In the assessment of whether a community should be deprived of registration due to conditions mentioned in the Religious Communities Act § 6 first to third paragraph, particular emphasis must be placed on measures the religious or life-view community has implemented to prevent such conditions. Emphasis must also be placed on how serious the relationship is and whether it appears intentional. Systematic, persistent or intentional violations mentioned in section 6 first paragraph of the Act shall, as a general rule, result in the registration being withdrawn.

The state administrator's assessment

According to § 4 third paragraph of the Religious Communities Act, registration can be withdrawn if the religious community has violated § 6 of the Religious Communities Act. In our decision of 27.01.2022 we refused state subsidies on the basis that the religious community had violated §§ 2 and 6 of the Religious Communities Act.

As we concluded that the conditions to refuse grants was fulfilled, the society's registration as a religious community can also be withdrawn. This was the background for the notice of possible loss of registration in the letter of 25 October 2022. In the assessment of whether a community should be deprived of registration due to conditions mentioned in the Religious Communities Act § 6 first to third paragraph, particular emphasis must be placed on measures the religious or life-view community has implemented to prevent such conditions. Emphasis must also be placed on how serious the relationship is and whether it appears intentional.

Systematic, persistent or intentional violations mentioned in the Act § 6 first paragraph shall, as a general rule, lead to the withdrawal of the registration, cf. the religious community regulations § 6 second paragraph.

Our letter of 25/10/2022 was answered by Jehovah's Witnesses in a letter dated 14/12/2022. In the letter, the society states that they do not wish to rectify the conditions that led to the refusal of state subsidies in the decision of 27.01.2022, cf. page 4, point 23 of the letter.

Quote from the letter: "We want to make it absolutely clear that Jehovah's Witnesses will not change their religious beliefs and practices in Norway in response to the State Administrator's decision dated 27 January 2022."

In our decision of 27/01/2022, there were two factors that led to the refusal of grants. The first was that, in our opinion, the society prevents free expression for its members. This contravenes the Religious Communities Act § 2, the Basic Law § 16 and ECHR art. 9. We refer to our decision of 27/01/2022: Jehovah's Witnesses have previously explained their exclusion practice in a letter of 04/03/2021 to the Ministry of Children and Families by then Minister Kjell Ingolf Ropstad. The letter was attached to the Jehovah's Witness statement received here on 23/06/2021.

In the letter, questions are asked "whether Jehovah's Witnesses try to avoid those who no longer belong to the religious community". In their answer it is stated that: "Those who have been baptized as Jehovah's Witnesses, but who no longer preach to others and who may also have stopped coming together with their fellow believers, we do not stay away from. Someone who violates the Bible's moral standards is not automatically excluded. But if a baptized Jehovah's Witness makes it a habit to break the moral standards of the Bible and does not want to change himself, he or she is excluded, and we stay away from that person. This practice is based on the teachings of the Bible. All Jehovah's Witnesses accept to live by these standards when they make a well-considered choice to be baptized.” (letter to Ropstad 04.03.21)

However, it appears in the book "Organised to do Jehovah's will" that a member who has chosen to withdraw is treated in the same way as one who is excluded: "The expression "to withdraw" denotes that a baptized Jehovah's Witness deliberately refuses to acknowledge a Christian position by declaring that he no longer wishes to be known as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. Or he may renounce his place in the Christian congregation by his actions, for example by becoming part of a worldly organization whose purposes are contrary to the Bible, and therefore condemned by Jehovah God. But if a Christian person chooses to withdraw, a brief notice is given to the congregation that reads: "[Person's name] is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses." Such a person is treated in the same way as someone who is excluded."

1 The consequence of leaving the congregation is that the person concerned is no longer allowed to have contact with family and friends in the congregation. The religious community is clear that members should not have contact with excluded members. 2 As we see in the section above, this also applies to members who have withdrawn. This practice can mean that members feel pressured to remain in the religious community.

In the Assessment Administrator's assessment, the practice is an obstacle to the members' right to free expression, and in violation of the Norwegian Religious Communities Act, section 2, second paragraph. According to section 11 d) of the religious community regulations, this can provide grounds for denying the religious community a grant.

If a member of Jehovah's Witnesses changes their religious beliefs and wishes to leave the religious community, the person concerned shall, according to the above, be treated as if they were excluded. This means that the members can no longer have contact with family and friends in the religious community without this having consequences for the remaining members.

We refer to "Be shepherds of God's flock" ("Eldsteboken") chapter 12 point 17 (1) on "Unnecessary association with excluded or those who have withdrawn". In our opinion, this practice constitutes a form of sanctioning of both former members and remaining members. Against this background, the religious community has not ensured that a withdrawal can take place unconditionally and without obstacles from the religious community's side, cf. the preparations for the Religious Communities Act § 2, page 254.

Since our decision of 27/01/2022, we have received several inquiries from members and former members of Jehovah's Witnesses. Among these are inquiries from members who support the practice of Jehovah's Witnesses and who disagree with the decision, and from members who state that they want to leave the religious community, but choose to stay because they do not want to break with family and friends. The latter group of members say that their choice to leave the congregation will mean that friends and family cannot have contact with them, even if they leave the congregation voluntarily, and not because of exclusion. They state that this is what makes them stay in the congregation. They also say that Jehovah's Witnesses encourage members to "keep an eye on" each other and inform "the elders" (the management) if they know that someone in the religious community is in contact with disaffected or excluded people.

The second factor that led to the refusal of state subsidies for 2021 in the decision of 27/01/2022 was that children's rights were violated by the exercise of negative social control of children in the congregation, including due to the exclusion rules for under-age baptized children, and social isolation of unbaptized children who do not behave in line with society's rules. This contravenes the Religious Communities Act § 6 first paragraph, the Constitution § 104 third paragraph and the Convention on the Rights of the Child art. 19.

We refer to the decision of 27/01/2022: Exclusion of underage baptized preachers In a letter from the ministry, the State Administrator was asked to take a closer look at Jehovah's Witnesses' exclusion practice of children. In a letter to the then Minister for Children and Families Kjell Ingolf Ropstad dated 04/03/2021, the society has explained how the society treats an underage baptized preacher who breaks the society's rules. "If a baptized Jehovah's Witness, regardless of age, makes it a habit to break the moral standards of the Bible and does not repent, the same practice as previously mentioned applies."

In the quote above, Jehovah's Witnesses refer to the practice of exclusion described earlier in the same letter. The book "Organized to do Jehovah's will" elaborates on how baptized minors are treated: "When baptized minors commit serious sins, the elders should be informed of this. When the elders deal with cases of serious sins committed by a minor, it is best that the young person's baptized parents are present. They should cooperate with the sentencing committee and not try to shield the young offender from necessary disciplinary measures. The sentencing committee will step in to reprimand him and reinstate him, as they do when dealing with cases involving adult offenders. But if the minor does not repent, he is excluded."3 A decision on exclusion is made by the Council of Elders in the congregation. An exclusion means that the person concerned is no longer considered a Jehovah's Witness. This decision is notified to the congregation where the person is a member, and the congregation is told to stop "associating with the person concerned". The society describes exclusion as a "strong form of correction".

In the preparations for the Religious Communities Act § 6, negative social control of children is used as an example of a violation of children's rights that can provide grounds for refusing grants.5 The state administrator understands the concept of negative social control as various forms of supervision, pressure, threats and coercion which is exercised to ensure that individuals live in line with the family's or the group's norms.

The control is characterized by the fact that it is systematic and can violate the individual's rights in accordance with, among other things, the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Norwegian law.6 The religious community itself describes this practice as a strong form of correction. Children in the congregation must follow a number of rules, and the consequence of not following them is being ostracized by the congregation, including being isolated from family and friends who are told not to associate with the excluded.

It appears in their statement of 19/11/2021 in section 19 that the family bond does not end with exclusion, as long as they live in the same household. However, we understand it to mean that the child cannot have contact with other close family (including grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins) or friends. This comes as a reaction to the child having broken the religious community's own rules. We believe that this can be experienced as pressure or coercion to make children behave in a certain way. We therefore consider the consequence of breaking the rules to be a form of punishment.

On this background, exclusion of baptized minor members is to be considered negative social control and a violation of children's rights according to § 6 of the Religious Communities Act. According to the Religious Communities Regulations § 11 first paragraph a) this can provide grounds for denying the religious community a subsidy.

Exclusion, social isolation of unbaptised minors (unbaptised preacher)

Children who have not yet been baptised, but who are members of the congregation, can be given the status of "unbaptised preacher". If an unbaptized preacher commits a serious sin, these children can also be "banned" from the fellowship of the congregation. The child is not excluded, but the congregation is told that they must be careful about associating with the child. In the book "Organized to do Jehovah's will" the following is written about minor unbaptized preachers: "Children can also be qualified to become preachers of the good news. …. "It would be appropriate for one of the parents to approach one of the elders in the congregation's service committee to discuss whether the child is qualified to be a preacher. The coordinator for the council of elders arranges for two elders (including one who is on the service committee) to have a meeting with the child and his believing parent(s) or guardian. If the child has basic knowledge of the truth of the Bible and shows that he wants to take part in the service, this shows good progress. After the two elders have considered these and other factors that correspond to what applies to adults, they can decide whether the child can be recognized as an unbaptized preacher." 7

The society's handling of the fact that an unbaptised preacher has committed a "serious sin" is further explained: "If an unbaptised transgressor does not repent after two elders have had a meeting with him and have tried to help him, it is necessary to inform the congregation. A brief statement is given that reads: "[Person's name] is no longer recognized as an unbaptized preacher." The congregation will then consider the transgressor as a worldly person. Although he is not excluded, the Christians will be careful to associate with him. (1 Cor 15:33) The congregation will not accept any field service reports from him.” 8

The state administrator considers that this practice is also to be regarded as negative social control. We consider social isolation to be a form of punishment against the child. We believe this is a violation of children's rights according to § 6 of the Religious Communities Act. According to the Religious Communities Regulations § 11 first paragraph a) this can provide grounds for denying the religious community a subsidy.

When assessing whether a community should be deprived of registration due to conditions mentioned in the Religious Communities Act § 6 first to third paragraphs, particular emphasis must be placed on measures the religious or life-view community has implemented to prevent such conditions, cf. the Religious Communities Regulations § 6 second paragraph.

We further refer to the preparations for the regulations for the Religious Communities Act: "The third paragraph concerns the assessment of whether a religious or religious community should be deprived of registration when there are such violations as mentioned in the Religious Communities Act § 6, first paragraph.

In such cases, there must be a higher threshold for withdrawing registration than for refusing subsidies. This means that even if there are serious violations, it is conceivable that it would be unreasonably intrusive to deprive society of registration. In the assessment, the county governor must look in particular at measures that the faith or belief community has taken to prevent the serious conditions, for example by rectifying the relationship, changing routines, etc. Consideration must also be given to the seriousness of the relationship and whether it appears to be a deliberate breach of the law's requirements. Particularly serious or persistent conditions shall lead to loss of registration. The latter is an expression that in some serious cases it would be unreasonable if the society remained registered."9

Furthermore, we refer to our assessment in decision of 27.01.2022: "We believe that the offences, which both violate the right to freedom of religion and children's right to protection against violence, are to be considered serious. The aforementioned practices are documented in books and in study articles published by the religious community. The religious community has also recorded detailed rules for how a judgment committee works and how the committee must decide on questions of exclusion.10 The practice is systematically followed up by the religious community, and is communicated to the members through several channels. Against this background, we find that the offenses appear to be intentional."

The fact that a religious community violates its members' right to freedom of expression and thus violates the right to freedom of religion is considered particularly serious. The same applies to the negative social control of children, which violates children's human rights protection under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

However, as the preparations for the religious community regulations indicate, the State Administrator must, even in the case of serious violations, check whether the community has taken measures to prevent the violations from continuing. As mentioned in the letter of 14/12/2022, Jehovah's Witnesses state that practice will not be changed. Society will therefore not take measures to prevent the conditions that led to refusal.

This means that the conditions are persistent. After the above preparatory work, particularly serious or persistent conditions shall lead to loss of registration. On this background, we have assessed that the conditions for withdrawing the registration of Jehovah's Witnesses as a registered religious community have been met, cf. the Religious Communities Act, Section 4, third paragraph, cf. the same Act, Section 6, cf. the Religious Communities Regulations, 4, first paragraph.

New application for registration under the Religious Communities Act We received on 21 October 2022 a new application for registration under the Religious Communities Act. According to § 4 third paragraph of the Religious Communities Act, a religious community can be refused registration if one or more of the conditions for denying grants in § 6 are met. According to the religious communities regulations § 4 fourth paragraph, societies that do not meet the conditions in the Religious Communities Act § 1 second paragraph and § 4 first paragraph must be refused registration. The same applies if conditions exist as mentioned in the Religious Communities Act § 6 first paragraph.

In the preparatory work for the religious community regulations, it is stated that: "In the ministry's view, religious and life-view communities that commit, encourage or provide support for such serious violations as mentioned in section 6, first paragraph of the act, should not be able to be registered."11 As mentioned earlier, Jehovah's Witnesses violate § 6 of the Religious Communities Act. We have considered that the old registration should be withdrawn on this basis, cf. § 4 third paragraph of the Religious Communities Act. It is on this basis that the new application for registration is also rejected, cf. the Religious Communities Act § 4 third paragraph, cf. the Religious Communities Regulations § 4 fourth paragraph.

Request for deferred implementation In a letter dated 02.12.2022 and in response to a notice dated 14.12.2022, Jehovah's Witnesses by lawyer Anders Ryssdal has asked the State Administrator to consider deferred implementation according to section 42 of the Administration Act if we withdraw the registration to the society. The rule on deferred implementation follows from Section 42 of the Public Administration Act. The provision states, among other things, that: "The sub-instance, appeal body or other superior body may decide that the decision shall not be implemented until the appeal period has expired or the appeal has been decided. (…)" Jehovah's Witnesses intend to sue on the validity of the decision on refusal of state subsidies of 27/01/2022.

In a letter of 02/12/2022, and in a letter of 15/02/2022, Jehovah's Witnesses ask for deferred implementation until the case has been dealt with in the administration or there is a final judgment. This means that Jehovah's Witnesses wish to remain registered, retain the right to marry and be able to claim state subsidies until any appeals have been processed, or a court case has finally been decided.

It is the State Administrator's assessment that there is no basis for delaying implementation of the decision.

The religious community has been registered on a transitional arrangement according to the old Religious Communities Act, cf. Religious Communities Act § 23. This transitional arrangement lasts until 01.01.2023. The Religious Communities Act opens not for the possibility of an extended transition period, and the State Administrator does not have the competence to extend this arrangement either. The state administrator does not grant deferred implementation of this decision.

The consequences of the loss of registration

Loss of registration means that the community no longer has the right to submit claims for government subsidies. Loss of registration also results in the society losing authority to marry. We remind you that the Religious Communities Act is essentially a subsidy act. The community is still free to practice its religion and its activities regardless of a public registration.

Right of appeal

You can appeal this decision to the Ministry of Children and Families. Then you must appeal within 3 weeks after you have received the decision. Any complaint must be sent to the State Administrator. Upload it to the digital solution by selecting "Complaint about decision" under the attachment function: "Submit additional information". Sections 18 and 19 of the Administration Act contain the regulations on viewing the case's documents.