Srecko Sostar
-
Posts
4,638 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
75
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
World Wiki
Events
Posts posted by Srecko Sostar
-
-
8 hours ago, BTK59 said:
You are aware that this is a global issue, one that affects all institutions around the world, including those located in your own country or place of origin as well.
Are JWs aware that the "global issue" has long been global in WTJWorg, with failed GB procedures that harm the victims in KH ?
-
9 hours ago, George88 said:
Given that the ARC was attempting corrosion by the language they were using and the fact Jackson could see through that manipulation, it was not appropriate to use that term either, as the commission's purpose was not to gather facts rather than assign blame. Any inexperienced lawyer could confirm this. However, since you are not a lawyer, how could you understand? You are only searching for words and relying on assumptions.
"Any inexperienced JW can confirm where the WTJWorg heavenly chariot is going". lol
-
8 hours ago, George88 said:
Here we witness the distortion spread by Srecko and Pudgy, endorsed by a renowned apostate known as "witness" who overlooks the absence of the word "apology" in the argument. This misrepresentation is a classic example of cherry-picking and distorting information to fit a particular narrative. It's important to consider the entirety of the document from the AU and the context in which it was written before drawing conclusions.
In the Australian case, a Governing Body member showed empathy towards a victim who was identified as BCG. He acknowledged that more should have been done to support that individual and repeatedly aligned himself with the stance presented by BCG's lawyer. Therefore, attempting to create a negative impression from apostates only serves to provide further grounds for governments to resist being influenced by them.
"I don't know your client, but please, could you convey an expression of my love and concern and reassure her that obviously she has had an opportunity to speak about how she feels, and hopefully this will help the policies and procedures to improve."
Someone who shows this much empathy in their heart definitely feels sorry for the victim. I can sense a hint of remorse for the fact that more hadn't been done.
The question is: Who wrote the government's privacy laws that the branch office had to rely on?
The GB member even went as far as suggesting that if the AU government made it mandatory for all accusations to be reported to the police, regardless of how trivial they may seem, it would be more advantageous for the Watchtower. This would effectively remove the responsibility from their hands entirely.
What was the Australian government's response? We will make some adjustments to our laws, but we will uphold the clergy privilege, and any form of reporting needs to be proven factual first. What sets apart the burden of proof standards between the Watchtower and the standard placed by the AU?
What about the sheer hypocrisy displayed by that commission when they initially "rejected" the idea of investigating the Australian Detention Centers for child abuse? It is truly astounding to think that even the prime minister at that time had passed a new law, forbidding doctors, nurses, or employees from speaking out against these horrific acts.This flawed attempt to mislead others by the uneducated is yet another example of falsehoods being spread due to the omission of just one word, according to them.
I find it disappointing that some here misrepresent the facts presented by apostates and endorsed by witnesses.
Thanks for reminding me and other of GJ's statement. Can you see real grief from these words? Is there any remorse for inaction, remorse for bad GB instructions? Is there a personal desire to know the victim and show compassion? She is "Client" in GJ's eyes. Not one of "Jesus' sheep, one of the least", one of child in KH who went through horrors ?
GJ's statement was given in court because of the publicity and because of questions from lawyers and the court. The GJ statement was "given under pressure" from the public and the process. Should we consider it a deep feeling from the heart and conscience? We are not naive, if others are. -
57 minutes ago, BTK59 said:
I never pay any mind to ex-witnesses, hence they simply do not bother me. When it comes to their lies, my focus lies on emphasizing the undeniable truth, completely detached from the former members' inclination to twist it to their advantage.
So, why does it matter if a Catholic lawyer is supporting the Watchtower? Are you suggesting that they shouldn't? Religion stands strong in the face of manipulative governments and the spread of falsehoods and exaggerations by former members, especially when it's time to take a stand.
Remember, there are people here who identify themselves as witnesses and are willing to embrace your perspectives, even if they may be biased. Why? Because some of them, especially females, possess a misguided loyalty. Instead of recognizing the ways in which Satan manipulates humanity through the suffering of children, they become fixated on their own personal emotions.
If someone truly grasps the essence of scripture, it would be a misguided loyalty to turn a blind eye to the devious manipulation of Satan and the individuals he employs to sow division among God's people. No matter how strongly someone believes they are a devout Christian, if they fail to recognize this larger scheme, they cannot consider themselves faithful followers of Christ, let alone true witnesses.
I think you are definitely wrong because of your imprecise and non-objective view of the problems at WTJWorg. I get the impression, from the comments, that religions like Catholic and JW are under attack from the secular government. So it's as if you're denying the reality of pedophilia within church structures, about which the atheistic-satanic structure is planting false information, slander. You don't mean it? Or? Yes, you really mean it. Terrible.
It is biased to say that some categories of people are more susceptible to disloyalty than others. To say that women are susceptible to the influence of deception and their own wrong feelings means that men are not, because that is your stated claim, it only speaks in favor of your bias. That way you lose originality and credibility. You are drowned in a mass of people who think like you. The kind of people who will never contribute to progress, but to enslavement by already seen stale prejudices.
The deviations you speak of, have thrived in WTJWorg since the very beginning, so they are no different than those in the Catholic Church. They just alternate with each other in their visibility and perversity.
-
12 minutes ago, BTK59 said:
It is concerning that governments are swayed by the testimonies of former witnesses, leading to the overturning of decisions made by lower courts, as seen in the case of Cardinal Pell in Australia, along with dozens of others.
No true witness should be swayed by negative comments from former witnesses and their agenda along with any disfellowshipped. That's no better.
What really bothers you? Former members or so-called "negative comments"?
And what do you think are "negative comments"? Are the "negative comments" something that is incorrect or is it what exposes religious hypocrisy? -
Divine Instructions in 1993. JWs standards are changing for the better? Or are they being lowered? It's a matter of perception, some say. The so-called "Worldlings" used to be too casually dressed in the year 1993, so the JWs showed that they dress better for their meetings and conventions. Today, JWs should be more casually dressed because they were advised so by GB members. So, like "worldlings" it 1993. Is today's WTJWorg fashion policy a back to the future or a back to the past?
"Dress and grooming: During the time we are attending a convention, we should not consider ourselves to be on vacation. Rather, we are presenting ourselves to Jehovah to be taught by him. Since that is the case, should we not dress as we would when attending meetings at the Kingdom Hall? (1 Tim. 2:9, 10) In addition, we should give careful thought to what we will wear after the sessions are over. Upon returning to our accommodations, would it be consistent for us, whatever our age, to exchange our modest, dignified convention attire for clothing that would give us the appearance of slovenly dressed and unkempt worldlings? Would this not give the impression that our meeting clothes are nothing more than a costume rather than a reflection of our way of life? Remember, we are bearing the name of Jehovah, and each of us must see to it that legitimate accusation is not brought against the way of the truth." - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/201993166
-
During the 2015 ARC process in Australia, not a single JW elder expressed regret for the victims. Not a single one, and among them was a member of GB who did not show grief for the victims of "his" elders.
The same happened in other court processes where JW elders were present.
The uniform response speaks of the unity of these JW elders. Commendable, isn't it? And where is the "biblically trained conscience"? Obviously, the permission did not arrive from the GB for the conscience to react and act. Shameful!
-
-
Attorney Matt Haverstick confirmed recently that his law firm is representing Jehovah’s Witnesses congregations around Pennsylvania on unspecified matters that are “very active right now.”
- article from 2023: https://www.denverpost.com/2023/04/19/charges-put-focus-on-jehovahs-witnesses-handling-of-abuse-2/
quote from article: The 140-member Ivy Hill congregation sued Pennsylvania’s Department of Human Services, asking Commonwealth Court to clarify whether elders are mandated reporters if they learn of child abuse through a confidential confession. Human Services runs the state’s ChildLine abuse hotline.
- article from 2018 about same Attorney Matt Haverstick: https://www.npr.org/2018/08/16/639149699/lawyer-for-2-catholic-dioceses-weighs-in-on-pa-grand-jury-report
quote from article: HAVERSTICK: Well, I think they start by apologizing for what happened. And they have. I mean, bear in mind, it is awful. It's a horrible read. It's shocking. But it is, by and large, as the grand jury found, literally from the last century. That's a church that doesn't exist anymore. The church today is deeply sorry for those events. But they don't do things that way anymore.
Until now, the eminent leading men in WTJWorg claim that no apology is necessary for anything, what GB said and did. So all other JWs elders are not obliged to apologize for their words and decisions either. An interesting point of view is represented by these JWs religious leaders. Obviously they should have some biblical quotes to support this kind of thesis? No, they don't. But that's why they CLAIM that this is the way YHVH works.
Indeed, that is reason enough to trust them. lolvideo source:
-
14 hours ago, George88 said:
Once more, we encounter the perspective of someone consumed by hatred. I can't help but question whether this person would have objected if Jesus and his apostles had confronted the unjust actions of the ruling authorities of their time. In this instance, I am inclined to support the GW translation. Mark 11:27-33, Luke 20:1-8
I am not convinced by the idea that Jesus would confront the Roman authorities. Just the opposite. Jesus repeatedly clashed with the Jew Religious Leaders of his time, and this is a model for today's JWs, who should face their GB.
Paul was a kind of "smart guy" of the Pharisee type who confronted the Roman authorities by referring to his "rights as a Roman citizen". Are JWs "Roman Citizens"? -
37 minutes ago, Pudgy said:
However, I do not have any proof the WTB&TS is deliberately lying … if you believe something and tell that to someone else, it may be wrong, but it is not a lie.
My observation refers to;
- court cases in which "tactics" of deliberate "deception" are applied that are unworthy of those who claim to be bearers of the Divine Light,
-some theological "nonsense" that GB produces as "errors", but many of which have very serious consequences,
- other theological moves as an attempt to justify and support what is "unbiblical teaching", but trying to maintain "reputation",etc.
-
JWs members are media dependent on only one source and that is WTJWorg. This means that they are subject to the influence of one (only) current opinion (read misinformation) that occurs within the WTJWorg Information Department (superior to them is the Ministry of Truth managed by the GB).
As for "fake news" or misinformation (and sometimes disinformation), WTJWorg is full of it. What to call all abandoned dogmas, changed theses and teachings? Simply. Misinformation! (.., and occasionally disinformation) -
-
-
JWs have always had and will continue to have, as can be seen from everything, problems to harmonize the so-called "biblical principles", "lists of rules" and "bible-trained conscience". Basically, it turns out that it's best for JWs "to stick" to what GB says, because that way they won't "make mistakes" and won't "stumble" anyone. lol
-
There are really countless meaningless instructions here that are still valid today.
"Spiritual instructions in 1963".
Family Responsibilities in Keeping Jehovah’s Worship Pure - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1963526
-
-
-
-
-
If you really believe that GB acrobatics are "Divine teachings" .., go on, continue. lol
-
-
The responsibility, and the full responsibility, rests with GB. Why? Because they dared to control the conscience of other people. You mention free will. What is more important or necessary for correct behavior? Free will or free conscience?
Free will was enslaved by GB, because GB claims that man has a tendency to abuse free will. They enslaved the natural conscience because GB claims that the conscience is insufficient to make correct decisions and distinguish between good and evil. They also enslaved the so-called "Bible-trained conscience" because it was clearly expressed in the latest public address of the GB representative that only the GB is authorized to allow, limit and direct when and how the so-called "Bible-trained conscience" should be used by JW.
Bizarre GB politic.
-
Similar to the time when the generations of those who traveled in the desert died out and never saw the New World of the Jewish Paradise, so today there are generations of JWs who do not know what was taught in 1952, or before or after that year regarding those who cease to be JWs, as well as in other matters when it comes to dogma or administrative procedures.
You are now introducing the issue of business relations between former and current JWs. Your GB still needs to redefine the protocols with regard to the "new instructions" about dfd. As far as I understand, 3 categories of problematic JWs are mentioned. Excluded, apostates and minor baptized members.The current practice does not mention the reason why someone was excluded or left the membership on their own. What are the reasons for not making it public?
If you can clarify for me and other readers, please comment and give source the information. Thank you!Furthermore, in order for an ordinary JW to "decide independently" which person to say "hello" to, and which one not to, he/she must have enough information to make a decision. What information should there be about a dfd or diss person? May the elders and the congregation treat people who have committed the "same sin" but are not the same age, differently? How can this be explained through Jesus' teaching? No interpretations by GB, just the pure statement of Jesus, not the opinion of the WTJWorg administration and lawyers.
If it will be publicly announced in the congregation why someone is excommunicated, then this will cause some new elements that will not be "biblically justified", because the current practice shows that today's procedure carried out by the JC is "the only correct one". Abandoning the current procedure would mean that this existing practice is "unbiblical." "Shoot yourself in the foot." lol
Will reading names and revealing private information also be illegal due to existing regulations, laws on information that relates to individuals and should not be publicly available?
GB is starting to fear the effects of world courts, such as Norway, and these new changes are just a reflection of pragmatism, not genuine concern for the membership.
Lawyers who defended Catholic pedophiles are now defending JWs pedophiles
in Topics
Posted
JWs should definitely, and urgently, open new perspectives. They need that more than licenses to wear beards and pants.
Don't pay attention to my expectations, they are my problem, not yours. lol Some statements and testimonies of JWs in the courts confirmed the fact that a man should not be expected to be principled and truthful in his own claims and self-praise that he is a "True Christian". If falsehood and deception are uttered, then it is the product of either one's own false belief in the fictions of (religious) ideology, or they are the product of conscious lying in order to protect some personal, social position in that network of (religious) deception in favor of a certain institution.
JWs have a more serious problem than fear of ex-JWs and their activism or criticism. JWs, today more than ever before, are able to distinguish falsehood from truth within their own religion. If they fail to recognize this and make important decisions based on this, then they are at a loss.