Srecko Sostar

As I said, I respect your opinion, although I do not agree with your point of view. Okay, so you're talking about bones. I'm talking about meat around the bones.

I respect your opinion. SM also expressed his opinion on this. I just expressed my opinion. A) the witness of the event may have skipped those details while recounting the experience (why would he have done that?) or b) perhaps the editor of the article omitted that part of the testimony (why, if he have done that?) What man with the rifle think and what he planed or not planed to do with the rifle confronting the mob is in our imagination.

Perhaps armed neighbor was an atheist? It is ok for me if that make you happy.

Comment on part of the video that moderator named as "Example 1". In this part of the video, the moderator illustrates a claim he made in a previous part called “3 Layers”. And he managed to show that most JWs do not have access to that part of the library that is outside the online library. I have proved by the example of the JW library (Croatian) that the JW online library does not have an older publication than 1981 and one brochure from 1976. The English-speaking area has access a little further into the past. Of course, his statement that he "randomly picked up material" from the year 1900 is ridiculous. If he was preparing material for making such a presentation, he had to prepare it all in advance. But I guess that part of his “scenography” is for the purposes of presentation and the tension of anticipation. If someone wants to blame him for that thing, they can, and I won't defend him in that thing. The JW publication on the subject (racism and segregation) is an illustration in which he tries to prove that today's younger JW generations (including the older ones, of course) are unable to access older editions of WT written material and therefore do not know what happened in the real historical situations that their organization and their fraternity went through. The video in this part shows; 1) doctrinal interpretation and interpretation of the biblical text 2) the attitudes of the WT administration about the social and educational condition of a (black) part of the church 3)colored congregations There are probably as many as a hundred colored brethren on the Watch Tower lists, some of them very clear in the truth, and very earnest in its service, financially and otherwise. We have received letters from several of these, who had intended engaging in the Volunteer work, expressing surprise that in the call for Volunteers in the March 1st issue we restricted the inquiry to white Protestant churches. They rightly realized that we have not the slightest of race prejudice, and that we love the colored brethren with just the same warmth of heart that we love the white, and they queried therefore why such a distinction should be made in the call. The reason is that so far as we are able to judge, colored people have less education than whites— many of them quite insufficient to permit them to profit by such reading as we have to give forth. Our conclusion therefore is based upon the supposition that reading matter distributed to a colored congregation would more than half of it be utterly wasted, and a very small percentage indeed likely to yield good results. We advise, therefore, that where the Watch Tower literature is introduced to colored people it be not by promiscuous circulation, but only to those who give evidence of some ear for the truth. We avoid, so far as possible, putting the pearls of present truth into the hands of the vicious and depraved, whites as well as blacks. - https://archive.org/details/1900ZionsWatchTower/page/n258/mode/1up?q=april+15 appendix: 4) white skin for all humans (possible solution how Lord will remove race and color distinction) DEAR BROTHER RUSSELL:-Possibly you may remember that when I was in Milwaukee some months ago I sent you a newspaper clipping regarding a colored man in Wilmington who had turned from black to white, through the loss of the pigment under his skin. I now enclose a clipping from the New York World of Sept. 9th, regarding a similar case at Parkersburg, W. Va. Do you not think these may possibly be granted as illustrations of how the Lord purposes to remove race and color distinctions during the "age of the ages"? - https://archive.org/details/1900ZionsWatchTower/page/n617/mode/1up?q=colored+brethren There are no controversial issues in this part of the presentation, because the events were part of WT history, which can be concluded from the available WT text. I guess there are fewer racial prejudices within JW congregations in America today. I guess this can also be attributed to the laws that allow people with different skin color to mix and to social climate in general (on other hand deep problems exists). Some of you are defending, the historical fact, the segregation of WT congregations as necessity, in that part of American history, because they were conditioned by the state of American society and the laws that existed at the time. Of course, this is important to know. What is also important to know is the aspiration of WT in that time, and today, that one should listen to God more than people, even at the cost of one's own life. If we look from this aspect of the theology and doctrine of the WT organization, then we can comment that the then religious leadership, and thus the believers themselves as personally responsible for their behavior, still failed because they allowed themselves to be governed by circumstances, not by biblical principles. But that is all for human, isn't it?

excerpt from the article: About the same time, Brother Arthur Claus, who was white, made a courageous decision.........Arthur and the neighbor successfully protected the property against the looters. Given today’s WTJWorg theology, about the “separation of true Christians from the rest of society,” this historical example is interesting because two people (from opposite religious poles) banded together to oppose a third group of people and to protect property of neighbor. What is next curiosity? Article stated previously: Arriving at Brother Hill’s home, he encountered a white neighbor holding a rifle. The neighbor, also a friend of Brother Hill’s,... Here we see a bare-handed “righteous man” (Bible Student) and an armed “unrighteous man” (false Christian) as they “yoke” together in the same job. Really interesting report. What can this historical example and experience from the time of Bible Students teach today's JW?

So why didn't you say before that it was an obstacle for you. From now on, I will write slowly.

Hi JWI. On page 10, SM wrote: Example 3 [1925] - Now for example 3, it is the same reused, washed and rinsed rhetoric about Pastor Rutherford's Millions will Never Die... I reacted with: I’m not petty, but I’m surprised that such an informed and knowledgeable debater like you mistakenly names historical figures from the WT.Russell was called Pastor, and Rutherford was called Judge. Then two of our esteemed colleagues joined forces and performed a whole litany on what the word judge means and what the word pastor means. And so on. As i respond to Dmitar, i have no problem if Russell's brethren using word "elder" in communication with Russell. My quote from JW library article just showed WHY Bible Students started to call Russell with title "Pastor". * If my grammar contribute to misunderstanding, this would be easy to resolve. But I think the two of them have other needs. If I may say this too: I am not making this comment to you in order for you to get involved in proving this or that reality. I simply respect you for what I think of you based on previous acquaintances through forum discussions. *PS Pastor Russell but not Judge Russell vs Judge Rutherford but not Pastor Rutherford

@Space MerchantDon’t think I’m insulting you, but I have no other explanation given your last few comments, which are: You must have been shone with some “new light”.

I think opposite, how your conclusion (about me) is wrong. But as i said, i am fine with your claim how BS titled Russell with "elder" too. If we start from the fact that I put an excerpt from the official JWorg site that confirms why BS called Russell a “Pastor,” then this statement of yours goes in the direction; that the official WTJWorg publication makes a false statement, that it deceives its readers. Also, that readers of WTJWorg publications cannot find out the exact historical facts, because better connoisseurs of history, like you, claim that readers of WTJWorg publications (JW and ex-JW and others) will not be able to understand what is true and what is not without correction of people like you . This may, of course, be somewhat true, as WTJWorg literature tends to skip historical facts or misrepresent them or, like you in this case, claim that readers misunderstand the text read. All of this could mean that someone in WTJWorg is engaging in intrigue while writing “spiritual food”. Or that you are engaged in manipulations. Either way, many of you don’t seem to be trusted. Good question. :)) I will let you know when i find answer. According to your opinion (or their opinion) , what is "my kind"? Although your words are “dry letters” on internet paper, I feel a negative vibration through the monitor screen. :))

How my former fellow believers feel about me is their problem. It's not mine, and I don't think it's your concern either, is it? Or you still care, given the comment you made. What is your need to find out how JW feels about me? Well, if you’re interested, please read their publications and listen to what they say about former members, so you’ll know how they feel and what they think about ex-JW. Satisfied? I have no inferiority complex, so to think that JWs are better than other people, ex-JW or me. :)))) Good for you, even better for others. But by the way. Do you act like a "pastor" with respect to the people around you?

I would love to read more about this, from you.

Sorry, on what basis did you come to the conclusion that I mean this or that around the name "elder" and Russell? Virtually all JW literature calls Russell a "pastor." If they call him "elder" somewhere, I don't mind, but I don't know. Maybe you have the proper link to a WTJWorg publication that shows and proves. Mistake from me? Not for now. I just conclude based on what I know. And that never can be wrong. hahahhahaha (Translation: joke, for those who don't understand my humorous expressions)

Perhaps or only in your mind.

Once Reverend, always Reverend.

Are you a Pastor?

I have no problem with your explanation, but your JW friends have.

Let us hear how official publication explained why Russell has been called "pastor". WTJWorg source link is: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1996043?q=pastor+russell&p=par Jesus gave the congregation “gifts in men,” some as “pastors,” or shepherds, who treat Jehovah’s flock in a tender way. (Ephesians 4:8, 11; King James Version) One of these men was Charles T. Russell, the Watch Tower Society’s first president. He was called Pastor Russell because of his loving and compassionate activities in shepherding the flock under the Chief Shepherd, Jesus Christ. Today, Christian elders are appointed by the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses, and care is exercised not to use such terms as “pastor,” “elder,” or “teacher” as titles. (Matthew 23:8-12) Yet, present-day elders do a pastoral, or shepherding, work for the benefit of the sheep of Jehovah’s pasturage. JW members do not use the term "pastor" for their elders, regardless of the fact that you gave an explanation of the term pastor, so it would follow that it is the same type of activity. Although today's JWs consider Russell a forerunner of the representatives of the true God and also the founder of their religion and organization, they have renounced the use of the term as "pastor" and the like because such terms are in use by other religious communities that, JWs claim, are part of "false religion". The term “Pastor Russell” was the exclusive name for only one and unique man of the time and as far as I read WTJWorg publications BS and JW did not use the word pastor for anyone other than Russell. Thus, it is a matter of the historical context of the use of the name, not the meaning of the noun pastor. JW refuse to call their elders pastors. Whenever the word “pastor” appears in a WTJWorg text the publication refers to priests of “false religions”. The only use of the term “Pastor” in a positive context is only in the historical figure of CT Russell. Sure, that attitude of JW members is ridiculous, but it’s because they want it that way.

I’m not petty, but I’m surprised that such an informed and knowledgeable debater like you mistakenly names historical figures from the WT. Russell was called Pastor, and Rutherford was called Judge.

Then you reaveled yourself to believe that the Nazi Regime started with Jehvaoh's Witnesses prior to the Jews and everyone else - since you are in agreeance with the video in question likewise with Witness who conisder the video to be factucal. Your logic and connecting non-existent statements is fascinating. You set a thesis and if someone on the forum does not react to it, then you attribute to him imaginary motives, imaginary attitudes, imaginary conclusions. Just keep going, you're doing well, but you're not going anywhere.

Keep counting. If you do not sleep but count, you will go far in counting.

About who you speaking about? What former JW? About author of article on web site (culture trip) i put link? I don't know is this female person JW, ex-JW or Klingon?

JW members have no access to JW archive. Because public JW Archive not exists. They have access only to JW Library What is hard to understand in this?

What is "wow" here? I already stated what you now finally admit. There is difference with library and archive. JW ordinary members have a access only to JW Library.

Plenty of words. Nothing more. Admit, please, that JW members have a JW library, not a JW Archive.

You can say what you want. And you can continue too. :)) Ordinary JW members do not have access to the JW archive, but only to the JW library.