Srecko Sostar
-
Posts
4,638 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
75
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
World Wiki
Events
Posts posted by Srecko Sostar
-
-
On 2/8/2024 at 4:10 PM, George88 said:
Have any of the rejected religions truly followed Christ's teachings, as Christ intended?
Who knows Jesus' intention? Or God's intention? Who knows their thoughts?
On 2/8/2024 at 4:10 PM, George88 said:Did Jesus accept the teachings of the Pharisees when He was baptized? Please provide a scriptural rebuttal, not just a reference to the Watchtower.
Matt 23: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.
According to this Jesus' words, Jewish priesthood, clergy spoke the truth and interpreted the Scriptures correctly.
From this factual situation, can we assert that the Jewish religion is a true religion, but that it is being corrupted by religious leaders?
We could claim that this applies to every present-day religion in the same way, right? They teach everyone to be good and honest. But, as in the time of Jesus, the blame lies with the religious leaders. The conclusion is self-evident. If, by some miracle, we accept that every dogma in the WTJWorg is correct, then we are left with hypocritical religious leaders who exist in every religion, whose actions should not be imitated. -
-
-
12 hours ago, Many Miles said:
And what is the following if not judaization?
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1983290
In relation to the question of using human donor blood for transfusion medicine, every bit of the answer given to the question asked demands acquiescence to Judaic law since nowhere else in holy script do we find anything remotely addressing human donor blood. There is no extra-Judaic scriptural text remotely addressing human donor blood, let alone allogenic transplantation of such blood. It was Judaistic teachers Paul warned about who insisted on invoking provisions of Judaic law that no worshiper of God outside Jews had ever been held to for their worship to be accepted by God. Cornelius was no more required to bow to demands of circumcision than he was required to bow to abstain from "any sort of blood" as required under Judaic law. Cornelius need only abstain from the sort of blood God had stipulated prior to Judaic law, namely the sort of blood spelled out to Noah after the flood, which was not human donor blood.
It should be noted that in this article, "Reader's Questions", there are only 6 quotations from the NT, and for which, the authors of the article, defending their positions on the issue of blood, look for support in 28 quotations from the OT.
This is not an insignificant matter, because it indicates the existence of a parallel religion that is "true", which is the Jewish religion. JWs reject every religion that exists today, or has existed for these 2 thousand years, as wrong, false.
I already pointed out in a comment on another topic, that Jesus never publicly renounced his Jewish religion. He was born as a Jew and he died as a Jew. He was baptized in the Jordan, that's right, but he didn't leave his religious background. He did not go to the synagogue and announced that he was leaving the Jewish faith. He did not write a letter asking the priests to delete him from the genealogy and list of religious members. He did not tell others or ask them that they should renounce the Jewish faith in order to be baptized in water or in the spirit.The exact opposite of this is the practice of WTJWorg, which requires proof that a candidate for baptism has manifested himself by his public rejection of his former religion.
On 2/7/2024 at 4:40 AM, Juan Rivera said:Paul’s main concern in the letter of Galatia is the infiltration of the Judaizers.
Infiltration of Judaism? No, we can't judge it like that. Without Judaism there is no "true religion", because it is the "true religion" for all those who believe in Abraham and Jesus.
The problem arises later, in corruption. And every religion, even the "true" one, is subject to corruption and eventually becomes corrupt, whether we like it or not.
-
3 hours ago, Juan Rivera said:
What if the Watchtower went into apostasy?
https://michaeljfelker.com/2013/01/18/what-if-the-watchtower-went-into-apostasy/
quote, obviously fom WTJWorg publication:
The WT is considered to be like the eyeglass that helps one understand the true teachings from God’s word. It is however, recognized as fallible. The scriptures, as far as they are translated properly, reflect the perfect word of God and the Bible is well known to be our primary textbook. It is infallible and takes full precedent in any understanding, teaching or practice. Therefore, with the Bible at the helm, your above contrived scenario is not an issue.
JWs are on a spiritual merry-go-round, or "death train", I think that's what the Amusement Park type of ride is called.
They are caught in the trap of a religious hierarchy where, in theory, according to Geoffrey Jackson, they have the right to recognize false teaching, but in reality they must not question it because they will be excommunicated as apostates.
A complete breakdown of the system in which the mental health of believers is put at risk. But that is why the established system of manipulation is very well guarded. -
36 minutes ago, George88 said:
it's essential to have a deep understanding of the legal aspects, which you may not possess.
I don't run away from my ignorance. But that is also the reason why I express my opinion on a Forum, and not at a University. lol
40 minutes ago, George88 said:Once again, who do you think you are to state that religion is incapable of interpreting scripture per God's laws? Once again, your arrogance is evident in your disregard for others.
My disagreement (and supposed activism) towards JWs is much less intense and completely free of, without fanaticism, compared to JWs stubborn claim that all other religions are false and therefore will be destroyed soon, and that the JW religion is the only true one in this world.
52 minutes ago, George88 said:How foolish it is for a government to go to such extremes as changing its laws to justify violating the rights of certain religions! If you don't comprehend this, take a thorough look at their laws and see which specific law Norway's constitution was violated by in the case of commerce. Educate yourself before making nonsensical posts.
Funny. For decades GB has done violence to the rights of those members who wanted to have a beard. GB, as direct representatives of "Kingdom Government", violated "Bible Constitution". lol
So, every "government" is unjust. Why should we be surprised on that fact? -
2 hours ago, George88 said:
Why do you think it's up to churches to decide how to apply theology when you continually instruct the Watchtower on what to do? Your contradictory assertions are quite perplexing.
... lol.... I am not instructing anyone what kind of theology should be applied. I just have a critical review of the state of affairs at WTJWorg.
The interpretations carried out by religious communities belongs to their freedom of thought and freedom of religion. This is something that JWs strongly advocate for in human rights courts. They file lawsuits if they feel threatened in their quest to freely interpret the Bible. So WTJWorg is very assertive in seeking its religious rights and freedoms.
2 hours ago, George88 said:To clarify, you initially mentioned that churches should be able to determine how they practice theology, but now you seem to imply that the Norwegian government has the authority to interfere in that decision. In order to eliminate this confusion and properly apply your theory, consider whether it is the Watchtower or the Bible itself that prohibits homosexual acts.
That right (to punish lawbreakers*) belongs to them based on Romans, chapter 13. JWs interpret this scripture in such way.
*lawbreakers, violators of the secular laws in particular country (not violators of laws made by WTJWorg interpretations of Bible text)
-
9 hours ago, George88 said:
Who do you think pays the kingdom hall bills, the government, lol!
What motivates JWs to sue Norway? Well, money, right?
9 hours ago, George88 said:In addition to the expansion of spreading the good news globally, the Watchtower should consider investing* in other areas that align with its mission.
Do you justify that a "humanitarian organization" deals with investing?
*the bolding is mine
9 hours ago, George88 said:Should sincere Christians support Christian sects, such as the Vatican, that endorse "same-sex unions" simply due to their parishioners' contributions to the needy?
It is a matter of theology and the choice of a church how it will deal with such questions. Whether a certain worldview or theological interpretation is accepted by believers and those who are not, or whether the doctrine needs to be critically reexamined, is a matter of our perception and position on an issue. WTJWorg also has unacceptable theology on some subjects, so by the same standard should JWs be restricted because of that, or?
The Norwegian government is doing just that. It is unacceptable to them that former members are being ignored in the organized way that WTJWorg is doing. The Catholic Church has no such practice. That is why they are not in court.
JWs have similar/same practices as Mormons when it comes to homosexuals. JWs allow someone in the congregation to be homosexual, but they are not allowed to practice their sexual needs.9 hours ago, George88 said:It's time you started proving your lies.
I don't remember anywhere claiming that GB members take donation money and put it into their private accounts. If you have proof that I claimed that, please show it.
-
4 hours ago, Juan Rivera said:
Any unity or society established by men is natural.
If I understand correctly, we have this situation:
1. WTJWorg ("only true Christian Congregation") is a "supernatural organization" because it was established by Jesus, who came from "Heaven".
2. Every other religion, political creation, and commercial system is also a "supernatural organization" because, according to WTJWorg theology, their "father" is Satan. Satan is also from "Heaven".
The result: there is almost nothing "normally natural" on Earth.
Should we laugh at all this or should we cry? -
2 hours ago, George88 said:
These organizations require extra funds from their followers in order to create a certain appearance of benevolence. The Watchtower requests donations from its members to sustain worship and avoid being equated with the Pharisees. Just as a reminder, other Christian denominations allocate some of these donated funds to "compensate" their clergy.
WTJWorg has affiliate organizations all over the world. The smallest of them are called by the name - congregation. Congregations are part of, under the administration of a national body registered in a particular country. Shortened, colloquial name - Betel. Each such religious registered body receives a certain amount of money from its state and thus has financial support for its activities. It may also have some other financial benefits, such as exemption from tax on purchases and the like.
In addition to donations from its own membership and government money, WTJWorg buys, sells and builds real estate. So organization (GB) is also involved in the real estate business. I guess that's what Jesus recommended. lol
Furthermore, WTJWor goes so far as to sue the state if it wants to be denied its "annual appanage."
- Pudgy and Manuel Boyet Enicola
-
1
-
1
-
-
58 minutes ago, George88 said:
Keep in mind that the Bible serves as the Watchtower's constitution, making it the foundation for everyday Christian life.
Which parts of the Bible are the so-called Constitution for WTJWorg?
Perhaps the one from Matthew 18 where it says that the entire congregation participates in "legal proceedings" against offenders from among their ranks?
Why then does WTJWorg determine guilt/innocence by its own 3-elder procedure? This is a gross violation of the article from the "Constitution".
-
34 minutes ago, George88 said:
Everyone has the right to express their thoughts and opinions freely. Unfortunately, I have witnessed cases where individuals were silenced in the past for speaking their minds. So, I am curious to know if you have ever spoken out against such censorship since it seems that people often find disgruntled individuals more captivating to listen to.
Is your criticism informed by a deep understanding of the Bible or is it based on a flawed interpretation? Keep in mind that the Bible serves as the Watchtower's constitution, making it the foundation for everyday Christian life. Therefore, any critique of the Watchtower's application of biblical principles is essentially a critique of God's teachings.
Ask yourself this: will God be on your side? If not, why do you think witnesses should support you?
Whose "deception" should be revealed: those who oppose God, or those whose voices are being silenced because people refuse to acknowledge the truth by supporting that deception of flawed individuals who are expressing a false narrative and interpretation to the public?
WTJWorg is a Legal Body, registered under the existing laws of a particular country. They are obliged to work according to something called The Charter.
The thesis with the Bible as if it is the Watchtower's Constitution is a story for naive people. WTJWorg is a company, a so-called humanitarian organization.
Christianity, as a movement or type of worship based on the teachings of Jesus, is not as people today think when speaking about humanitarian organization. Although some teachings of Jesus Christ can be considered to have a humanitarian character, it is still something different from what today falls under the activity of a humanitarian organizations.
Today, humanitarian organizations deal with health, cultural, social, sport and humanitarian services.
In the narrower sense, humanitarian organizations, foundations and citizen associations were created on the idea of philanthropic assistance to people in need, the elderly, the poor, the disabled, widows, children without one or both parents, and the like.WTJWrg is far from such forms of humanitarian activities. If it helps in any of these things, then it is aimed primarily at his own members, and helping people of other religious affiliations is a big exception and appears only as part of an additional action, by the way/incidentally, when primarily helping his own members is provided.
Does WTJWorg organize public kitchens, or shelters for women victims of violence or for the homeless? Not. So WTJWorg is not that kind of humanitarian organization.
Does WTJWorg run an education program for learning to read and write? Yes, if you study the Bible and JWs publications with them. Otherwise, no. -
10 hours ago, Juan Rivera said:
As I have mentioned, the Congregation Jesus established was a new supernatural society capable of growing and adapting within human society, across cultural and linguistic boundaries.
Supernatural society?
If they were to claim that Jesus came from heaven in the form of a human child, this could mean that his birth from a human mother was "supernatural".
If they were to claim that the man Jesus established a new society consisting of human imperfect individuals whom he found living at the same time as him, then I see nothing "supernatural" about it.This same JWs "supernatural society" does such stupid things that it nullifies all the effects of the "supernatural".
-
4 hours ago, George88 said:
So, are you implying that witnesses should have no problem with the use of illegal substances? Is it your intention to deliberately expose witnesses to potential arrest?
No.
4 hours ago, George88 said:How many times must one clarify the significance of personal choice and circumstance? What's the connection between open dialogue and personal preference?
Why would anyone willingly subject themselves to an unrepentant individual, even after making persistent efforts to convince a closed-minded person that there is still an opportunity for redemption? Once someone has firmly resolved to defy God, it becomes their predicament. Even if an individual repents, but persists in criticizing and blaming others for the regrettable decisions they made, it is inconsequential to God what they attempt to conceal from the community.
Many ex-JWs still believe in God and the Bible. What they did was simply change their religion, which they have every right to do because of their free will. For that they should not be declared apostates by WTJWorg.
Do ex-JWs have free will to talk about their former religion and what happened there? Yes, because it belongs to the freedom of expression and opinion. Are ex-JWs free to argue criticism with help of WTJWorg official literature, and other digital material? Yes, because that is the best way to expose the deception.
-
10 hours ago, George88 said:21 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:
Should a "perfect" man and an "imperfect" man be judged according to the same standards and rules?
Although some may find the concept strange, the undeniable proof lies within the consequences of Adam's judgment in the garden, and the subsequent fallout. Was it part of God's plan for this to occur? No! However, as imperfect beings, we are now burdened with living with the consequences. Therefore, we have lost the privilege and distinction of being perfect like the man whom imperfect humans unjustly killed.
Sorry, but I really don't see any answer, to the question, in this comment.
-
-
9 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:
Should a "perfect" man and an "imperfect" man be judged according to the same standards and rules?
Let's take a hypothetical situation. In Eden, Adam and Eve have children. Now there are almost 100 perfect of them in Eden. At one point one begins to steal, another begins to lie, a third kills his neighbor, a fourth commits adultery, and a fifth begins to worship the moon when the night is clear.
What will God do? If it is assumed according to the Biblical record, He will drive them out, expel, of Paradise.
How God deals with lawbreakers who are imperfect. According to the Law of Moses, the punishment for most transgressions is death or severe retribution.
An observer would conclude that the punishment is lighter for perfect offenders and heavier for imperfect offenders. -
18 minutes ago, George88 said:
Imperfections
Should a "perfect" man and an "imperfect" man be judged according to the same standards and rules?
-
19 minutes ago, George88 said:
Doesn't this depend on the preferences of the residents? What would happen if you are married and your spouse dislikes that color? This assumption is too general.
Yes, that's what I'm talking about. The term "free will" or "choice" has general as well as specific applications.
21 minutes ago, George88 said:Does this illustration depict the difference between a child doing something wrong and a parent simply feeling overwhelmed by the challenges of daily life? You are outlining two separate perspectives.
Well, you don't think that little troublemakers always do wrong, do you?
Even when they make a bit of a mess in the house because of their game?Have adults forgotten their childhood?
lol
-
11 minutes ago, George88 said:
Are you suggesting that there's an issue with drinking alcohol without getting intoxicated? It's important to recognize that people have different alcohol tolerances, and individuals need to be aware of their limits. While one individual may be able to comfortably consume 6 beers without feeling impaired, another person might feel impaired with just consuming 2. There is no specific standard as you are suggesting.
Yes, the concept of "free will" can be applied here as well, related to setting benchmarks and standards, eg a person's weight and percentage of alcohol. If we want to be realistic, all alcohol is an intoxicant. Tobacco is an intoxicant, as are some other types of plants that some people take for "mood". Some intoxicants are legal and others are illegal.
I know some JWs were bothered when some other JWs could drink a lot. Whose "free will" should we "silence"? Those who drink a lot because "you can't see on them" that they drank a lot? Or those whose conscience is offended when they see others drinking a lot?22 minutes ago, George88 said:What problem do you have with people having fun? Are you now going to complain about how witnesses, eat, sleep and work?
None. No.
23 minutes ago, George88 said:I frequently engage in conversations with former witnesses, and there is no issue until they start imposing their uninformed biblical beliefs. If you haven't noticed, I'm doing that with you. Disprove it? Therefore, your claim of a "ban" holds no truth and is therefore baseless.
If you remember, there is plenty of information about the official position of WTJWorg which prohibits that kind of communication. You and the like are a good example of how "doctrinal unity" does not influence some individuals to act "uniformly". lol
26 minutes ago, George88 said:Could you please explain how a sheep could coexist with a pack of wolves without becoming their prey?
So isn't that already explained?
Even in the 1st century, Jesus said that the wolves were in his flock. -
7 hours ago, George88 said:
Put it simply, Srecko, if the terms of punishment are established in secular law, they are also established in God's law. Replace the term "free will" that you are advocating with the term "choice."
Free Will -- Harris, Sam [Harris, Sam] -- 2012
Moral Responsibility
The belief in free will has given us both the religious conception of “sin” and our commitment to retributive justice. The U.S. Supreme Court has called free will a “universal and persistent” foundation for our system of law, distinct from “a deterministic view of human conduct that is inconsistent with the underlying precepts of our criminal justice system” (United States. esv Grayson)1978). Any intellectual developments that threatened free will would seem to put the ethics of punishing people for their bad behavior in question.
The great worry, of course, is that an honest discussion of the underlying causes of human behavior appears to leave no room for moral responsibility. If we view people as neuronal weather patterns, how can we coherently speak about right and wrong or good and evil? These notions seem to depend upon people being able to freely choose how to think and act. And if we remain committed to seeing people as people, we must find some notion of personal responsibility that fits the facts.
The only remaining question to consider in each instance is, to what extent.Yes, I believe we are a little under-capacitated, not intentionally, when we speaking about the term "free will". Mostly, in fact always, we equate "free will" with "choice".
I have never thought deeply about this topic, but I have a feeling that behind the term "free will" there is something else, something more that we do not see or know.
We have accepted the basic concept, that free will equals a choice between two or more things, as the only definition of free will.For example, the comment you posted talks about an aspect of free will that is associated with "moral responsibility", with "sin", with "punishment", with "good and evil", with "right and wrong".
However, if one chooses to paint the walls of one's room blue rather than another color, then no human or divine "law" can be applied to sanction one's "choice". Because in this case it's not about whether someone has a sense of "right and wrong", it's about someone's taste for colors. And that taste for colors can be subject to the judgment of other people too, but that enters into another dimension of "condemnation or approval".
I have only illustrated how the term "free will" has a different meaning than the one used in the religious or criminal-law context of past and present humanity.Or for example this. The parent returns home from work. He is tired, not everything went as planned at work, traffic jams and nervousness. He enters the house, the children have their needs, they ask to eat, they are hungry or they have made a mess in the house because of the game. The parent starts making noise and maybe punishes the children with a slap or hits them. Is it this only about the concept of the parent's basic "free will" to react that way, or did a combination of circumstances lead the parent to a mental and emotional state that led him to make a "bad choice"?
-
7 hours ago, George88 said:
Believers exhibit, with general features of resemblance, considerable personal differences;
Yes, there is that diversity among JWs.
In my many years of association with JWs, I encountered individuals who liked to have fun in a society where a lot of alcoholic beverages were consumed.
There was also a competitive spirit when the JW brothers met to play football.
Now I come across individuals who make contact with ex-JWs despite the general ban on contacting ex-members.In one video from the ex-Mormons, they spoke highly of the unity that was seen in immediately encountering the hospitality of like-minded people, Mormons, in other countries. This is a significant characteristic of JWs as well. It was enough to say you are a JW and you would be accepted by almost every other JW anywhere in the world. This is a positive aspect of "unity", beyond any doubt.
But this example only proves that "the truth" is not only found among JWs. Here, Mormons have the same kind of "truth" about fellowship and unity, and I believe other religious communities as well. -
Montana Court Sanctions Watchtower/Jehovah's Witnesses
in Topics
Posted
If we rule out the JWs "persecution syndrome", how everyone in the world is against them and wants to destroy them, then we are left with the fact that the religious leaders aka GB are responsible for why the JWs are disgraced in court and in front of the public, due to the fact that they acted against the law, and now bear sanctions because of their bad decisions.