Srecko Sostar

1 hour ago, Dmitar said:

No, the false narrative of the video as indicated by @Witness is secrets. People know the Vatican has a library, that's no secret. People know the Watchtower has a library, that's no secret. If you are talking about "access" then it becomes a different topic. Something you fail to understand.

Now, the access, that woeful fool is talking about when it comes to the Bible Students can be found all over the internet and if you ask the Bible Student Association, they will arrange, to have it forwarded to you. You can even subscribe to some Bible Student monthly magazines and books they offer. Modern books and magazines, that is. Stuff with New Light.

The video talks about the public part of the JW library and the part that is not publicly available. Is that clear to you? It is clear to me.
The video also talks about “access” to publications (I add; any kind, not just magazines). And we commented on that as well.

So the theme of the video, for me, is not cramped and limited only with WT magazines written 100 or more years ago.

Does every JW have access to correspondence between HQ and assemblies, and the so-called BOE Letters? Does every JW have access to the so-called Shepherd book? And so on, and so forth.

I know they doesn't. And you know that too. Then what are we talking about? We’re talking about “secret” parts of the library (archives are next level) , and also so called "confidential" documentation that is of JW public interest. (I don’t include CSA data here, or excluded JW persons and their “sins”, that’s another topic). I am talking about records and publications that include the actions of the corporation, technical and religious administration, doctrinal twists, etc. that affects every day life of members/followers.

If the average JW members does not have access to, say, the Shepherd book, and if the vast majority of them do not know that the book exists, then the meaning of the terms "public" and "secret" has changed.

1 minute ago, Dmitar said:

Specifically or here? You should know the answer of some here that call themselves Jehovah's Witnesses. Therefore, the (all JWs) is a bit misleading.

Then you have to ask, do all Jehovah’s Witnesses understand.

You speak enigmatically, or I don't understand enough English language. Do you personally believe in the "overlapping generation"?

2 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

yet only a handful have access to the archives.

The "questionable" video talks about that. Witness and I comment on this. And you with SM are harassing us with your comments. Why, when you say this now?

2 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Sure they can. All they need to do is compare what is written with the written words of God.

So why then do you (all JWs) accept the “overlapping generation” as a true doctrine? :))

23 minutes ago, Witness said:

The fourth layer of your website gives access to all changes in doctrines over the years, for comparison reasons. 

Imagine what, those JWs who were given the task to collect and put all this material in order, think about it. I would love to see and hear their reactions they had during the work. Or were they insensitive Borgs?

Dmitar i SM, they have prejudices against anyone who comes from the JW milieu and is no longer a member of them. For two of them, ex-JW are liars. 

It’s really interesting that the two of them can so easily accuse people who have been the “most honest” people in the world for decades because they belonged to the JW religion, and that they became hardened liars so soon after leaving JWorg. A truly stunning psychological analysis by these two “artists”.

33 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

When showing the public what advancements and changes have been made to return to the first century teachings of Christ, when it had been lost for millennia, it has nothing to do with being smart, it has to do with facts. That's the kind of intelligence you lack.

One of you (SM or you, or both) is objecting to me interfering with doctrines in speaking about history. So now we can still talk about doctrines throughout the history of the WT company? :))

27 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

When you go into a museum of history, what will you find?

Collections.

But HQ is museum for collections of own religious/company history. Not about USA or World history. Or about dinosaurs.

10 hours ago, Dmitar said:

Actually, it did to secular authority.

But it’s not a break for every JW (including today’s GB) who claims to have their roots back to the 1st century. So the first president was Jesus Christ, followed by Peter as second? 

If it is not the same organization, why do the all Bethels around the world and HQ in USA have museums in which their (modern) history dates back to (starts from) the ZWTTS? Come on, you and SM, don't pretend to be too smart.

9 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

When the claim of the video was being misleading, you defended all the way through in which she stated to be a factual video. Your first contribution was in relation to the Archives, and later on the other examples.

In all those parts with which I commented on the video, I believe that I am right and in that way I agree with the accuracy of the points made in the video. Since I did not comment on the video until the end of what is left, I now refrain from expressing an opinion on the rest.
It is clear to me that the main theme of the video is in a question; who has access to which part of the information (text, images, video) and how much information within the official applications of WTJWorg, which is the owner and provider of published materials, can be accessed under certain conditions.

4 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

When the claim of the video was being misleading, you defended all the way through in which she stated to be a factual video. Your first contribution was in relation to the Archives, and later on the other examples. You were shown to have reacted in agreeance with Witness, and she did the same for you, likewise with the one known as @Kick_Faceinator. That is why it was also brought up, you and them didn't know what the video contains only after the notation were brought up for a refutation, you were even called a YES MAN, and it was for a reason, not the first time you were called that either.

You think too much. That is why you persistently claim that other people thought or said this or that, and they did not. What do you care if I vote for someone else's comments or they vote for mine? You see where that got you. To your own misconceptions and misconceptions about others. Maybe we are just collecting points on the forum :))))))

2 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Then why did both you and @Witness agree with the video

You really have reading  problem about what things i sad i agree and/or about I not said agree or disagree. 

14 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Just make sure your facts are straight since, the first two are relative to the Bible Students and the Zion Watchtower publishing house. Their association shifted after 1896 to the Watchtower 

bible and track society. That's the point of incorporation.

Thanks. The legal sequence has not been interrupted. It is about the same continuity.

27 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

To make it simpler for you, was the EXJW correct when he said Bible Students were Racists?

I don't know if he's (moderator of video) right or wrong. I can say that I do not believe that the BS were racists as a group. But I can also believe that some BS actions (individually or as group) could have been “racist” or bordered on “racism”. The existence of all-white and all-black assemblies in the United States will certainly not be in favor of their defense. Neither your's.

21 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

No it isn't. It is more inline with riddles. As a debater over the years whenever someone does this, it 100% deems one thing - being uncomfortable with the question in of itself.

Yes, and? 

8 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

This stems beyond the GB, but then again, you do not know the second leader of your faith which contradicts your assertions.

:)))) SM

Perhaps we should start with this order and the title that does not list "leaders", but the presidents of the WT.
1. W.H. Conley
2. C.T. Russell
3. J.F. Rutherford
etc.

4 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

This depends on how you want to interpret your own context.

Context of USA. Period of slavery in USA. Period of racism in USA. 

17 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Can We Have It Both Ways?

If the Christian truth option cannot be objectified—which of course I think it can—then the same lack of objectification holds for all other systems of thought. One cannot have it both ways. You cannot presume relativism when it's convenient and then make exclusive claims for your own truth option. If stealing another's possessions is wrong, it is always wrong. It cannot be right when I steal your jacket but wrong when you steal mine. Either all truth is relative or no truth is relative. I argue for the latter. Truth is never relative; truth is truth. by Craig A. Localzo

Clearly, Jehovah did not approve of ‘man dominating man’ through abusive slavery. But did not God later allow slavery among his people? Yes, he did. However, the slavery that existed in Israel was vastly different from the tyrannical forms of slavery that have existed throughout history............Slavery was part of the economic system of the Roman Empire, under which first-century Christians lived. Hence, some Christians were slaves, and others had slaves. (1 Corinthians 7:21, 22) But does this mean that disciples of Jesus were abusive slave owners? Hardly! Regardless of what Roman law permitted, we can be confident that Christians did not mistreat those under their authority. The apostle Paul even encouraged Philemon to treat his slave Onesimus, who had become a Christian, as “a brother.” *—Philemon 10-17. - https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/g20010908/Did-God-Condone-the-Slave-Trade/

To summarize this part. Imitating the early Christians today, would mean that JW's would have permission from God to have "slaves" if some of JW decide to have human force to labor for him. Controversial, isn't it? 

The Bible gives no indication that the enslavement of humans by other humans was part of God’s original purpose for mankind. Furthermore, no Bible prophecies allude to humans owning fellow humans through slavery in God’s new world. Rather, in that coming Paradise, righteous ones “will actually sit, each one under his vine and under his fig tree, and there will be no one making them tremble.”—Micah 4:4. - https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/g20010908/Did-God-Condone-the-Slave-Trade/

Can we have it both ways? ...... it seems we can.

39 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Clisthenes changed the constitution and introduced the practice of ostracism.

Be kind, so tell us. Has “ostracism,” of any kind, in the BS community in the past and today at JW, been/is proper way of behavior?

25 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Let's start to bring this Bible Student perspective down to its proper place. While the use of the words "racist" can be found in general everywhere, the proper etiquette for the Bible Students of that time was to use the word "ostracism" or "social ostracism,"

If you want, that expression is also good to use. Whatever we want to express, the reality of that time speaks to the positive and negative things about the WT.

Now we just miss our colleague SM and his explanation. Which will appear very soon.  

8 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

You were given the question, to answer a question with a question is a show of avoiding your own conveyed response.

No, that's just one way of debating.

27 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

If you haven't learned the lingo from the Bible Student Era, and almost everyone here misinterprets it, what makes you think, they will get what past literature articulated? Is it nonsense, NO! What was written in the past was for that time period. Things change, and so should the understanding for the next generation. In this case, much simpler way of understanding. Modern Society doesn't retain as much info because of electronics as past generation did without gadgets.

What was written in the past WTJWorg called as "new light" aka "The Truth". However, every “new light” that subsequently appeared on the pages of WTJWorg publications unequivocally declared the “old truths” to be lies.

27 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

How much mental retention do you possess? If you didn't have access to electronics, and your mindset wasn't really on reading, how would you process other people's thoughts about scripture?

The thoughts of other people, like GB people, are expressed in the text of all published publications. And we all see where it's going and where all those magazines and books are now. Discarded and rejected without any value for JW today.

25 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Can you give one example of Racism committed by the Bible Students against blacks between the years 1920-1930?

Can you guarantee that racism and segregation did not happen?

8 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

He attested that this was unknown information, which it is not.

Of course the information is no longer unknown. Why? Because he quoted it in a video, and made known to all YouTube viewers, from an outdated WT publication that JW no longer uses today, for several reasons. One reason is that it is not on the JW Library or Internet WT Library. And you keep claiming it is? 

21 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

If former Jehovah's Witnesses misinterpret more recent literature, what makes you think they will have a better understanding when the literature was more difficult to understand? Present members have a hard time connecting the dots. A reason why the Watchtower has simplified many areas for the new generation.

Are you saying that it is difficult for today's JWs to understand old publications, because those previous ones were incomprehensibly written, because they have an outdated way of expression, or simply because many things are nonsense?
What has been simplified in today’s JW literature to such an extent that it can be read by people with reduced intellectual abilities? Is that what you mean? What is more understandable to today's JW? That one generation lasts 70-80 years or that one generation can overlap as needed and much longer?

33 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

In regards to Example 1, everything you said does not prove anything to what the video attest to the events of 1900s in which he deem the Bible Student Racist.

As @Witness has already told you, the video does not analyze details on racism issue, but confirms the existence of several levels of access to JW library or inability to access WT organization publications by JW members or other people on the official JW library website. He gave example on his claim. He could also use examples that show what changed attitudes on medical issues WT has offered through publications at various periods of time.

The moderator's indication of racism within WTJWorg is not a lie, as similar warnings about the harmfulness of the phenomenon can be read and heard regularly on WTJWorg's "spiritual food" programs, which also address racism. Not every JW congregation may have that problem, but it is still present. Like any other harmful thing in any society, WTJWorg is not exempt from sin and injustice.
Your persistent denial that such a thing is possible within WTJWorg only confirms your inability to accept the reality of today and the fact that WTJWorg has the same kinds of problems as any other religion.