Srecko Sostar

15 minutes ago, Witness said:

whereas whoever says, ‘You despicable fool!’ will be liable to the fiery Ge·henʹna.”   Matt 5:21-22

My goodness, did Mr. Morris ever play into that one!

In searching for meaning of "despicable fool" i found this:

Watchtower 2006 2/15,  Questions From Readers

What three dangers was Jesus warning against at Matthew 5:22 ?

.... What, then, did the expression “despicable fool” signify? The word used here sounded similar to a Hebrew term that means “rebellious,” or “mutinous.” It designates a person as morally worthless, an apostate and a rebel against God. So the person addressing his fellow as a “despicable fool” is as much as saying that his brother should receive a punishment fit for a rebel against God, everlasting destruction. From God’s standpoint, the one uttering such a condemnation against another could merit that severe sentence—everlasting destruction—himself.—Deuteronomy 19:17-19.

Consequently, Jesus was setting a higher standard for his followers than that found in the principles behind the Mosaic Law. While people believed that a murderer would be “accountable to the court of justice,” Jesus went further. He taught that his followers should avoid even harboring animosity against their brothers.—Matthew 5:21, 22. - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2006127

... and one comment 9 years ago from fading JW who noticed the connection: 

Calling someone an “apostate”, “empty well” or “mentally diseased” among other things as they did in the 2011 9/11 Watchtower Study is the same as calling them a “despicable fool”. They clearly established that in their above comments. Even if it were true Jesus made no allowance for such judgmental harsh words. They are bitter because God has not made the words of these “servants” come true. Isaiah 44:26 , “the One making the word of his servant come true, and the One that carries out completely the counsel of his own messengers.”

8 hours ago, Emma Rose said:

he is a remarkable example of keeping his integrity

Agree!

2 hours ago, Emma Rose said:

Job wasn't aware why he was suffering.  

I am sure how he had some ideas (interpretations) about it :))

1 hour ago, Anna said:

For example the rape of Lot by his daughters.

I am not sure could we say how that was "rape". We can talk about incest or sexual relationships between close kin. In biblical terminology, rape can only be committed by a man, over another man or woman, or over a minor (in today’s conception on who is considered as minor).

1 hour ago, Anna said:

Also, I have noticed that sometimes the Bible writer is not corrected and is allowed to write what he actually feels.

This is very important thought. Considering the biblical text and its writers from this aspect, brings at least two possibilities.

First is, that no biblical writer can be objected to for the content and manner of his writing about events. They (writers) were "inspired" to describe the event in just such a way, inspired way, and the inspiration came from a higher source, as believers believe. Well, the Spirit "wanted", that particular text should have been written that way and in no other way. Is there someone who are delegated and entitled to "correct" what Spirit chooses to be written? From this aspect, we need to "accept" the feelings of writers, because they had a "right" to feel the way they did.  

Also, if Spirit "allowed" them to have, not only specific and private feelings but also specific and private "understanding" and own perception about events they described (under "inspiration" too) than it is not simple solution to "confront" particular standpoints of various bible writers because we have problem today to understand their reasoning and feelings, and than adapt their views to our today's doctrines and viewpoints. That would mean, to force the use of those, particular biblical passages that, allegedly,  "support" current understanding about something. 

Second is, what is actually meant by the phrase “everything written is inspired by God”? because as you said:   I have noticed that sometimes the Bible writer is not corrected and is allowed to write what he actually feels. And here we can continue with serious JW's doctrine-interpretation mentioned before: "God allowed ....", because this belief would also support possibility how God allowed that corrupted ideas or incorrectly described events find their place within the Bible and in various translations. After reading Bible text describing some past events in Israel nation/organization , it shows how this possibility is reality.  

14 minutes ago, Emma Rose said:

James 1:13

 But he said to her: “You are talking like one of the senseless women. Should we accept only what is good from the true God and not accept also what is bad?”+ In all of this, Job did not sin with his lips.+

Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

I hope nobody suggesting how there is "contradiction" in this two statements :))

17 hours ago, Anna said:

"Witness" is a she by the way.

Not only that, but all good things come from Jehovah, so if the weather is destructive, Jehovah merely allows it, he doesn't cause it, @Srecko Sostar Jehovah only causes good things to happen.

Thanks Anna, i also wish to agree in your way of reasoning how all good things are from God. We need to believe in such reasoning. 

God bears responsibility in how He using His free will. And we are small, to question His free will. But if His servant Job, (under inspiration ?), said how all good and bad is from God, and how Moses or Solomon, under inspiration, wrote this same quote, than we are coming to some perspectives about issue.  

Should we accept only what is good from the true God and not accept also what is bad?”k In all of this, Job did not sin with his lips.l

Here we have "naked truth", out of any interpretations. Pure and simple understanding of one old faithful servant, and nobody corrected his statement, ever. Nor his "three friends", nor Moses or Solomon, neither "spirit" who was involved in producing this information to Moses or Solomon, or any other Bible writer after Moses and Solomon. Conclusion of Job statement was certified with claim: In all of this, Job did not sin with his lips. This should means how Job did not sin in understanding how all good or bad coming from God. Do JW's want to believe how Job didn't know about satan and demons and Adam and Eve and all essential things about "right and wrong", "truth and lie"? 

It is not unacceptable to say how in his case, bad did come from God through devil. Because, for if God had not allowed evil, evil would not have touched Job, no matter how much efforts satan would put in his attempts. 

It could be that there are two kinds of God’s permission for evil to exist. General permission that affects all humankind (people formed after Adam and Eve fail) and specific, private motivated permission for evil, as in example with Job. I said, Private Motivated, because of specific way how God and devil directed the course of their conversation about Job. It turns out they were competing over who was more right. :))

1 hour ago, Emma Rose said:

To Srecko Sostar

There is a substantial difference between Jehovah 'withdrawing' his protection and Satan then testing Job with all sorts of problems and your slant on matters.  This is the issue before all mankind, including you, chafing against it is not going to make it go away    I am tested constantly by the arch-enemy and his minions, that is fine by me as it provides an opportunity for me to prove that I don't serve Jehovah for what I can get and I can make Him rejoice.  Job actually didn't know who was behind what was happening and he still kept his integrity, what a wonderful brother, looking forward to meeting him in the new system, along with his now '20' children and wife.  

None of what you say detracts from everything belonging to Jehovah, he provides both rain and sun for all.

There is a substantial difference between Jehovah 'withdrawing' his protection and Satan then testing Job ...

In this explanation i see another need to ask this: Did JHVH "withdraw" his protection on Eve and then on Adam to make it possible for devil to "seduce and test" them with The Fruit?

you, chafing against it is not going to make it go away  

No matter of what you or me will/would say about it, will not make thing go away  

 I am tested constantly by the arch-enemy and his minions

Bible also say how:  "No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind." Well, i am really not sure what "testing arch-enemy and his minions" putting on you. 

he provides both rain and sun for all

Whether it includes too much heat sometimes and too much rain sometimes? God is God, and we are down on Earth.

On 10/13/2020 at 11:39 PM, Emma Rose said:

Top down, everything belongs to Jehovah to begin with, so anything distributed is provided by Him.  Matt 5:45

Then Jehovah said to Satan: “Look! Everything that he has is in your hand.*(under your control) 

Here we can see how JHVH gave power of control, intentionally, to person who will use this power of control to, intentionally, doing harm to innocent person. Would you do the same? Would you let your loving person to be under control of criminal person? Would you hand over your power to someone who is evil? Knowing in advance that he will be free to do evil because you have decided  to be so?  

Should we accept only what is good from the true God and not accept also what is bad?”k In all of this, Job did not sin with his lips.l

It seems how Job made good conclusion and understanding when he said how good and bad coming from god JHVH. Of course, we have theological problem, because some other Bible verses speaking otherwise.

Perhaps this is not closely connected to "food boxes", in first sight,...... but as in Job example:

Who is the "source of distribution"? And who is "channel for distribution"? in broader sense. :))

46 minutes ago, César Chávez said:

How do you define the "core teachings"

Perhaps @TrueTomHarley have idea how to answer on this. Don't ask me, i am not "inventor" of such phrase.

:) 

Happy birthday, anniversary or what other name this day of your have :))

11 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

All could have been avoided by leaving the car parked and doing nothing. None are the core teachings of JWs

...or people can decide to not buy cars and go by foot :)) so they will not have problem with parking cars on wrong places.

This mantra about "core teachings". What is the real meaning of that phrase? What this have to do with JW's spiritual and real position inside WT Corporative Religion System? Do you obligated to listen and believe in some doctrines and/but not to others that are less "core"? Does your "unity" depend only on "core teachings" or on all doctrines that are "unique" only to JW Religion?

How you make choices and decisions that some teachings are core and other are not?

What about "to be faithful in small and large things"?

11 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

This is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘Here I am saving my people from the lands of the east and the west.  8 And I will bring them in, and they will reside in Jerusalem; and they will become my people, and I will become their God in truth and in righteousness.’”

What GB doing in Warwick? :))

11 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

“For this is what Jehovah of armies says, ‘“Just as I had determined to bring calamity on you because your forefathers made me indignant,” says Jehovah of armies, “and I felt no regret,  15 so at this time I have determined to do good to Jerusalem and to the house of Judah. Do not be afraid!”’

Russell, Rutherford and similar "fathers" ? Or today's  "fathers"? Does this time "of not to be afraid" is passed or will come in the future?

11 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

6 “‘These are the things you should do: Speak the truth with one another, and the judgments in your gates must promote truth and peace.  17 Do not scheme calamity against one another in your hearts, and do not love any false oath; for these are all things that I hate,’ declares Jehovah.”

WT Lawyers and other Representatives"will be brought before kings and rulers for My name's sake", and give false, mislead and semi-true testimonies and claims. 

11 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

And many peoples and mighty nations will come to seek Jehovah of armies in Jerusalem and to beg for the favor of Jehovah.’

Where GB beg for favor? UN, OSCE, Human Rights Institutions, Courts, Ambassadors,  Secular Presidents ..., etc?

Terrible things.

3) We do not lobby, vote in political elections, run for government office, or try to change governments. …Otherwise, how could we have a clean conscience when we preach the good news that only God’s Kingdom can solve mankind’s problems? source: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2016288#h=36

lobby verb [ I or T ]  UK  /ˈlɒb.i/ US  /ˈlɑː.bi/

C2 to try to persuade a politician, the government, or an official group that a particular thing should or should not happen, or that a law should be changed:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/lobby

Recent example how WT Company and JW members participated in "lobbying" was writing letters to Russian Government and their politicians. 

- https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/70001-is-writing-letters-to-the-russian-authorities-lobbying-or-preaching/

9 hours ago, Anna said:

First Amendment

First Amendment Annotated

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. - https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/

Can the question be asked: Is criticism of religion and pointing out the questionability of its dogmas the right of every believer in the US? or elsewhere? Or is it "hate speech"? When victims of abuse protest in front of a religious institution and seek answers and change is it reprehensible?

Why does the representative of the WT, who represents the only true religion that represents The Truth, not want to answer the question but refer to the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution?

9 hours ago, Anna said:

She would be referring to religious freedom that does not violate human rights, or takes another persons life.

JW "religious freedom" speaking about how all people who do not accept JW "Truth" are part of "God's enemies" and belong to "satan' world", and deserved to be destroyed. And how all JW's who left "organization" are mentally diseased", "despicable apostates", "bad society" and similar expressions, must be  "shunned" and will be destroyed because they are even worse than "worldly people". Is this sort of "free speech" also inside "full religious freedom"?

WT and JW members read text of Bible and they took the right to produce "judgement" on people in the name of God. Just like many believers before them, in various religions. 

Please be realistic. What would the future of people in the "New World", who would not accept JW learning, look like?

from link you put:

The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom held a virtual hearing in September on religious liberty in Russia and Central Asia. Several participants, including Emily B. Baran, a history professor at Middle Tennessee State University, cited persecution of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia.

“Russia cannot be said to have full religious freedom, a cornerstone of a democratic society, as long as Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot practice their faith within its borders,” she said in written testimony.

Can somebody please explain; what is and how looks like the "Full Religious Freedom" ? 

5 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

What is happening to JWs in Russia and a few other places is horrible, but it is not just JWs that are suffering in this world.

This is essential to understand. Victims are victims, and abusers are abusers.

What with violent behavior in shape of shunning? If JW members use bullying behavior in the form of shunning, "social distance" toward ex members or "spiritually weak" members, we can name it as abusers/victims relation. If third party see this and want to stop such relations between them, what tool will they use? Legal, semi legal, illegal? Some western courts decided that JW internal policies (dogmas) are not of concerns for secular authorities and their citizens. Russian courts said opposite. Both decisions are legal according to different courts understanding and their laws. 

What looks like understanding of individuals inside and outside JWorg? According to JW's belief system in "final day" god will violently destroy all violent people. And spare all victims? This illustration (in form of JW hope) shows how "violence" is justified if you used it against "abusers".

JW people are "neutral" in question of wars, revolutions and other "violent" changes inside societies. And want to be "peaceful", but resolutely refuse to change their "shunning policy" parallel with some other questionable directives and instructions. 

Who is who in Russia or in US, Europe etc? 

A Kingdom Hall is a building dedicated to Jehovah. Therefore, it cannot rightly be said to belong to any individual or congregation, whatever its legal title may indicate. Christian principles dictate that we cooperate fully to make sure that this building measures up to the purpose for which it was built. All in the congregation can contribute to that end by showing appropriate respect for our places of worship, by making donations for new construction, and by volunteering their time and energy to keep existing Kingdom Halls properly cleaned and maintained. By supporting these efforts, we show our zeal for Jehovah’s place of pure worship, as Jesus did.—John 2:17. - https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/w20150715/respect-kingdom-hall-clean-maintained/

WTJWorg is convinced that the construction of KH is God’s will and that the construction  was accomplished “with God”. Does it make sense, is it useful to contradict someone’s beliefs or misconceptions? If JW people truly believe that JHVH support all and every KH construction and all and every sell off of particular KH and Branch office around the world, let it be.

If people who don't believe in God's existence truly believe that they can promote and accomplish "good life" for humankind with own efforts, or "without god" as believers would say, it would only mean that there are two kinds of belief, two different concepts of faith.

Based on experience to date, we rightly conclude that both concepts have flaws and have often proven to be unreliable and even more so, that they can be extremely harmful. 

Religious leaders, in our example - GB, have constantly invoked God and do so today. They claim that everything achieved in the “organization”, all promoted projects (literal and spiritual)  are reflection of God’s will and great faith in it, in Him  from all members of the JW.

Whether we are talking about spiritual or physical projects, and whether they are pious or non-pious organizations, there can be only one measure for all.

21 hours ago, Isabella said:

the CESNUR statement

Signers include conference speakers J Gordon Melton of Baylor University in Waco, Texas; Massimo Introvigne of CESNUR in Torino, Italy; Raffaella Di Marzio of the Center for Studies on Freedom of Belief, Religion and Conscience in Rome; and other international scholars of religion.

------------------------------

ABOUT US

Sight Magazine is an editorially independent, Australian-based website covering local and global news and issues from a Christian perspective. ....................For a concise statement of our Christian beliefs, we refer to the Nicene Creed.

------------------------------

Massimo Introvigne (born June 14, 1955, in Rome) is an Italian sociologist of religion[1] and intellectual property attorney.[2][3] He is a founder and the managing director of the Center for Studies on New Religions (CESNUR), a Turin-based organization which has been described as "the highest profile lobbying and information group for controversial religions".[4] .................In 1972, he joined conservative Catholic group Alleanza Cattolica.[8][better source needed] From 2008 to 2016 he has served as vice-president of the group................. he advocates doctrinaire positions that favour groups like Scientology."[4]  In the mid-1990s, Introvigne testified on behalf of Scientologists in a criminal trial in Lyon.[4]................journalists described Introvigne as a "cult apologist", saying he was tied to the Catholic Alliance and Silvio Berlusconi's then ruling party.[22] Introvigne responded that his scholarly and political activities were not connected................He was the Italian director of the Transylvanian Society of Dracula,............In 1997, J. Gordon Melton and Introvigne organized an event at the Westin Hotel in Los Angeles where 1,500 attendees came dressed as vampires,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

?????? and JW's accepts his "concerns" about their future in Russia :))

21 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

The man who has learnt to fish is then independent, but the GB does not want people to be independent.. 

JW people are not independent in spirituality. And they accept this ideological aspect in their church, because independence is viewed as wrong and against God.

But :))), male members can choose, independently, colors of tie, .... but tie is mandatory. There is no negotiation about tie. If you want be on stage that will not be possible without tie. Or perhaps to give comment at meeting without tie as baptized member.   Teaching people how to "fish" independently, can be dangerous for teachers in WTJWorg :)) 

4 hours ago, 4Jah2me said:

a very wet and windy England. Keep safe. 

Here we had severe weather, hail, much rain, strong wind, again, last night. 

3 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

I have no idea where this comes from. I think Witness just made it up. It is not in any of the articles cited and if there are any statements about food being discarded, they are not associated with JWs. At the same time, if there were to be found any instances of this I would hardly be shocked. Have you ever had food in the fridge go bad because you did not eat it (or distribute it to someone else) in time? But on a large scale? No.

Have to ask: What @Witness made up? Food boxes? Food boxes distribution to JW members? Circumstances around distribution inside JWorg? Additional "Letter" from "JW Disaster Relief Committee"? Content of that "letter"? etc.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

spirit of Jesus' words here were not taken to heart

What a spirit guided this JW elder, Shawn Bartlett, who gave instruction and instruction to other elders as to why personal notes and other data should be destroyed. Why? According to what he said it is in this "spirit" --------- To Not be responsible for past actions. If there are no records of past events, then the events did not even happen, "legal world says" he explained.  ..... be as shrewd as snakes ??

9 hours ago, Witness said:

Elders offer to throw the food away, instead of offering it to other organizations in need.  Is that doing it "better"?

It is not. One thing flied through my mind about "throwing the food away". You can imagine the following situation: You work in a company, you are a hard worker, diligent, responsible and so on. The situation around you is such that other workers are waiting for their time to pass, they are not interested in the job, they do not have self-initiative, they do not care. Company management does not run a firm in a good way. After a lot of time in such a work environment, a diligent worker has had enough of everything and says: so what am I trying to do, why am I annoyed because of someone else's reluctance? And then because of that he raises his hands and lets some damage happen in the company or some work is not done. Perhaps some of these elders are also in such a mental state that they don’t care why the food box is thrown away.

Charity means helping. Each JW assembly is a "charity company". Not only do they help themselves but also others who are not "theirs".

15 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

Seriously, would that not constitute a violation of neutrality, to be praying for the success of human schemes? It is enough not to be praying against them.

What sort of "neutrality"? "Neutrality concept" made by WT understanding?

15 hours ago, TrueTomHarley said:

What sticks in my craw about all these human goals is theIr assumption that it is head education (without mention moral sense) that is most needed. 

"My people will be silenced,(*destroyed) because there is no knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge," - Hosea 4:6

May we say how lack of education in "knowledge" about secular and spiritual things is good way to be ruined? 

Lack of knowledge about, what is and what is not "neutrality", is good example of this.

6 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I don't think the scripture meant that we need to pray out any particular persons or schemes, only that the men in high positions who make decisions that might affect us, and our preaching work, will make decisions that result in the kind of peace and security that have a net positive effect.

JW members made prayers to God about... and letters, to Russian's "secular authorities".  I don't know what was content of their prayers. And don't know what was content of those letters. Perhaps somebody who have time and information would/will make comparison and comment about it.

Of course, if prophecies (i.e. interpretations) are correct about that, that JW members are and will be under attack of secular governments (in this case Russia) in the "last days of last days" than what is purpose and benefit of "prayers" for JW members and for attackers in high position?

What if "prophecy" is more powerful than "prayers"? Than JW "prayers" means nothing. They will not be "listened". 

And vice versa, if "prayers" of faithful JW members can delete (or delay) fulfillment of "prophecy" about "last days" and attacks on them, than when "end" will come?

In third scenario, two parallel "kingdoms" can live together and forever. Everybody looks for their own business. :))

3 hours ago, Witness said:

This is not new light.  You’re just trying to fix an error that you made.”

Very well said!