Srecko Sostar

26 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

The rest is not important from a spiritual perspective.

As I said, I respect your opinion, although I do not agree with your point of view.

28 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

The point of the article was about unity within the brotherhood.

Okay, so you're talking about bones. I'm talking about meat around the bones.

12 hours ago, Dmitar said:

This just means you didn't understand the article. Just because there was a person with a rifle doesn't mean, that rifle was used to deter looters.

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.

12 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

The religous backing of the rifle baring neighbor was never cited, so assuming he is Christian, be it true or false, is not wise.

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?

16 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Granted both of you often times go to JW.org, here you go - https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-october-2021/1921-One-Hundred-Years-Ago/

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?

10 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

JWI is aware of that because of a typo I made from responding to numerous responses you made in a 3 min span.

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

10 hours ago, JW Insider said:

And I'm not sure what Srecko's point was about thinking that Pastor Russell was not called "Elder." I didn't go back into the conversation to find out.

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”.

1 hour ago, Dmitar said:

On the basis of the Bible Student literature I just provided as proof. Therefore, your conclusion is wrong.

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.

2 hours ago, Dmitar said:

Sad to say, when it comes to the Bible Student History, you are among many here that don't know that history very well. That's why using articles from that era is moot, and it becomes nonsense, since it reflects on what you just proved, "I just conclude based on what I know."

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.

2 hours ago, Dmitar said:

I have to ask, why are you here, then?

Good question. :)) I will let you know when i find answer.

2 hours ago, Dmitar said:

You seem to indicate this is something not supported by scripture. Have you read the portions that do relate to your kind?

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. :))

18 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

You're the former Jehovah's Witness, do not tell me suddenly your faith opponents is now above you

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. :))))

18 hours ago, Space Merchant said:

I do not lead institutions nor do I think of doing so. 

Good for you, even better for others. 

But by the way. Do you act like a "pastor" with respect to the people around you?

19 hours ago, Dmitar said:

The Jehovah's Witnesses headquarters runs under a different schism now.

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

17 hours ago, Dmitar said:

Another mistake you made, thinking Pastor Russell wasn't called ELDER.

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)

13 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Does it look like a lead a church, former Deacon, you, of Restorationism?

The fact that you asked, putting yourself in another compromising situation:

Who was Pastor Russell's Pastoral Successor to lead the Bible Students?

Granted of your previous remarks, in a debate situation, you deliberately put yourself between a rock and a hard place.

 

Perhaps or only in your mind.

52 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Does it make a difference what the title is @Srecko Sostar? Ministers go by many names. 

https://ordained.satanicministry.com/

I have been called a Reverend in the past. 

Once Reverend, always Reverend.  

2 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Actually they are aware of roots. Why else do you think they attest to Hebrew and Greek Text, your own quotation even gave an example, which is equated to Shepperd like. as is with Churches, despite not using the rooted term, the remark is represented in their place of worship.

That being said, once again, you've been shut down, as is your deniability of events surrounding even that of the Holocaust.

Are you a Pastor?

38 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Actually the term Pastor is as rooted as their terms for Elder and Servant

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

19 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

To correct you

Pastor - A minister in charge of a Christian church or congregation. [Noun]; be pastor of (a church or congregation). [Verb]

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.

1 hour ago, Space Merchant said:

about Pastor Rutherford's Millions will Never Die...

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.

12 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

20 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

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

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.  

8 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

 

, this is the 4th time .

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

12 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Seems to me that's not how you are treating things now, is it. Everything former Jehovah's Witnesses offer on the internet is spectacular, even though it's just a dry nut.

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? 

2 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

But they do have access to archives of their choice. Hence the question addressed to you.

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?

3 minutes ago, Dmitar said:

Wow, a library is not an archive, even though some material is no longer displayed. I wonder how the Vatican Library and the library of congress feels about this gem? We are really making up for lost time, here.

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. 

20 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

Yet examples were already presented. As with the facts, I didn't give my own word to anything, it is known facts that are always used as with alluding to Scripture. I haven't changed on that notation for the time I have been here, even here in this thread.

Therefore, regarding the Holocaust, is this true or not in regards to the video, this pretains to the 1930s source of which you attest JWs do not know about.

Seems to be you are attempting to deviate, if you need a reminder of what was posed, read the below

You even coined the term Agenda. The question posed will show the truth of the matter.

Hypotehically speaking, if the JWs didn't know, then their notation of the Holocause would be different, more so, if the events played out different in the Segregation Era, Jehovah's Witnesses would most certainly not have existed, perhaps their HQ in Warwick would have been an ara where the American Dream would have been built, who knows. Both you and Witness might have become Durbinites, possibly.

That being said, facts were presented for the archives, you do atetst otherwise, shows you adhere to falsehood, granted, everyone is aware of these old publications, the predesscor of JWs were around to even publish such material.

This I can tell you, one of the reasons I am Anti-agenda is in regards to those who try to re-write the history, namely anything related to the Holocaust. The Agenda shifts the history so much so to fool people, therefore, people sucha s myself, see this as a problem, as is with historical events in history be it in the US or outside of it. As we speak  cesnorship fo truth is already a problem and in regards to censorship, it not only hides information but removed/alters archives in an attempt to shift the narrative. A really bad look.

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

5 minutes ago, Space Merchant said:

An Archive is a collection of historical documents or records providing information about a place, institution, or group of people; they are also interconnected in some way shape or form, even if the legitmate information is no longer present in some domain or median. Archives can be in form of Data, reasons why I mentioned Network Instrutures and Domains. Therefore impossible to prove otherwise of which you are doing.

This ifnormation is not ailen to anyone, even JWs, i.e. their facinsation of a specific Archive mentioned already.

That being said, I believe someone was asked of you, it pretains to the archive source about WW II.

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.