Srecko Sostar

7 hours ago, George88 said:

Great! Applying it in its proper context shouldn't pose any difficulties. God values the presence of "good" free will rather than "bad" free will. If you grasp this distinction sooner rather than later, it will lead to a better outcome for you, or not. lol!

You are truly fantastic. Now you are introducing a whole new terminology and thesis into JWs beliefs system: "good free will" vs "bad free will".

Are you perhaps in the class called "GB Helpers"? lol

18 minutes ago, George88 said:

It's important to recognize that God did not create Satan; instead, He created an Angel who chose to rebel and become Satan. These are two distinct identities arising from the same creator. The transformation from good to bad was a result of personal choice, not a direct act of God. 

As I already said, "free will". lol

1 hour ago, George88 said:

I hope that the courts will expose former witnesses for trying to distort scripture.

In court it is not about biblical quotations/scripture, but about the results, the consequences of the instructions that have been institutionally embedded through the Legal Entity aka WTJWorg and JWs.

1 hour ago, George88 said:

Only someone who disrespects and denies the existence of God would hold such a belief. This is the root of your issue - presuming that you have the authority to question God, which you don't.

JWs explain that God left Satan and Adam and Eve alive so that questions about who has the right to rule and similar questions about God's justice could be answered. Because if God immediately punished them with death, the angels would have doubts as to whether the rebels were right after all.

This actually means that God has allowed his authority to be questioned, by humans and angels, until today. So, you didn't reason correctly, and you didn't understand the answer I gave. Your comment means that if you are a JW, you haven't studied the official theology of the WTJWorg enough. And neither were they when they explained the events in Paradise that way. Because such explanation by GB open door to comment in the way i gave.

The easiest way to refute WTJWorg and Jehovah's Witnesses is their own literature. Here is another of the many examples that prove how GB loses all credibility when they wants to sue states/governments and former members of its church.

"No one should be forced to worship in a way that he finds unacceptable or be made to choose between his beliefs and his family." - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102009251

Institutional rules based on GB interpretations of the Bible have exactly this effect - forcing only one type of worship that is determined by GB theology even though the person feels threatened by it.
Compulsion to choose; or family or religion.

I hope that the Court in Oslo will expose the hypocrisy and misrepresentation of all those who represented and defended JWs in court.

33 minutes ago, George88 said:

The Watchtower adheres to secular laws in a manner that does not violate God's laws.

and in continue you said this:

34 minutes ago, George88 said:

You are promoting disobedience.

With first claim you you in fact said how WTJWorg promote disobedience against secular laws (by interpreting Bible text as they see it is fit to their understanding). lol

39 minutes ago, George88 said:

Disobedience carries consequences.

In both ways.

40 minutes ago, George88 said:

How can one possibly engage in a debate with the Almighty? When did humanity assume a position of superiority over God in your perspective? God bestowed His laws for us to embrace, while also granting us the remarkable gift of free will.

The very fact that "free will" exists allows man to be "superior" to God, in a certain way. It may sound strange, but God cannot force you to do as He wants. Well, His "omnipotence" over man is only in the possibility that God will "kill" you because you do not want to listen/obey Him. But what is actually proven by that? Only that there is someone physically stronger than an individual or the whole world.

If God "gave free will" to people, He gave them a powerful tool (weapon) against Himself. In a way, He equated them with himself, and occasionally in some situations people became, conditionally speaking, "superior" in relation to God.

When God gave free will to people, He knew what good and bad things could come from it. So, people should not be judged for choosing to use their free will. It is only a consequence of the "opportunity" given to them. No one is to blame. Neither God nor people.

Consequences of free choice? It is just the result of a consensus reached about what is considered "good" and what is "bad". And as we can see, the benchmarks, principles are changing, even at WTJWorg.

7 hours ago, George88 said:

Your recent post on freedom of religion contradicts you. It is crucial to understand that every institution has the right to worship God according to its own beliefs, and neither you nor any government should impose restrictions on how they establish their bylaws. The Watchtower, for instance, defines its principles based on scripture. Unless you have substantial evidence to challenge scripture, your activism serves no purpose.

I am of the opinion that "every institution" should primarily act in accordance with the Law that comes from "secular authorities".
JWs misinterpret the Bible when they say that world governments are under the "authority of Satan", because such an interpretation is contrary to the statement we find in the same Bible in Rom 13, which says: "1 Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. 2Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves."

If you will say that the apostles showed that one can be disobedient, because they said; "We must obey God rather than men", then let's keep in mind that the apostles were disobedient to the "religious authorities" when they said this. That is context.

Every other example of disobedience on the part of believers (Jews or Christians) that we find in the Bible, and is connected with political, i.e. secular authorities, is only proof that the secular authorities, if the law is such, will be able to punish you without remorse. And in that case, the statement from Romans 13 will prove quite clear and logical context.

Whether any of this in life is fair or not is up for debate as much as whether "WTJWorg theology" is fair or not.

What is or will be the perception of a believer or a religious community, is their problem. Whether one of them will consider it as "persecution" or simply "punishment of a disobedient citizen or religious institution" is a matter of interpretation. And that is a wide field that can be manipulated in the public space.

God says, "if you don't obey, you will be punished". The Government says the same.

"Religious authorities" in the form of JWs elders can engage in "punishment" as part of their own "interpretations" of the Bible and other texts in their publications. But they are subordinate, lower than the Law of a state. Many religions, such as WTJWorg, because of this status, often use "theocratic methods" to circumvent the Law.
The most common method is to misrepresent the facts, distort them or completely hide them. They do this, very often, in the public space, in front of the media and in the courts and in front of other "secular" institutions.

7 hours ago, George88 said:

It is troubling to see governments and ex-witnesses condemning the Watchtower's use of the Bible as its constitution. It reminds me of Hitler and Nazi Germany. This comparison is deeply concerning and should not be taken lightly.

WTJWorg is teaming up with some political bodies to fight for "their religious freedoms" against some states where the laws are not favorable to JWs. The parallel you are talking about also exists in such a relationship between JW religion and "satanic" political bodies . You are conflicted, aren't you?

The courts are of the opinion that the existence of various religious communities is necessary for the pluralism of society. JWs have the opportunity to be registered and active because of this attitude of the state. They can exist because of "pluralism".

On the other hand, WTJWorg and consequently JWs have the view that pluralism is harmful. This can be seen in their preaching activity, i.e. "educational and humanitarian program" in which they condemn all other religions as "false religions", in which they condemn all political bodies as "satanic instruments". It is also seen in the relentless "persecution" of anyone who disagrees with GB theology.

So, hypocrisy in its full force.

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Does Jerome's opinion really matter to God?

He presented arguments from other sources. It's up to you to take them seriously.

A detail that could perhaps be important for the court in Oslo, but also globally, is this: Is ostracism towards disobedient former members the product of an institutional order, rule, doctrine, practice?

Many ex-Jws have left WTJWorg because they do not agree with JWs doctrines. Such members, we can say, actually "change their religion" in such a way. In this context, WTJWorg must not exert any kind of pressure on such persons because such behavior falls under "religiously motivated hatred and persecution" against those who do not share the same religious beliefs as JWs.

So, I think that JWs should look more deeply at the way and consequences of their own interpretations of certain biblical quotes. While WTJWorg appeals to the UN rights and freedom of belief/religion, at the same time JW religious leaders and JW members grossly violate them with their own actions.

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Even then, Lopes added, Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t force members to limit or cease association with former congregants, whether they’ve been disfellowshipped or withdrawn voluntarily—that’s up to individuals. - https://www.baptiststandard.com/news/world/jehovahs-witnesses-sue-norway-after-registration-revoked/

Real instructions found in WTJWorg publications:

Regarding everyone who “does not remain in the teaching of the Christ,” we read: “Do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.” (2 John 9-11) We do not have spiritual or social fellowship with disfellowshipped ones. The Watchtower of September 15, 1981, page 25, stated: “A simple ‘Hello’ to someone can be the first step that develops into a conversation and maybe even a friendship. Would we want to take that first step with a disfellowshiped person?”

Is strict avoidance really necessary?  Yes, for several reasons.

- https://www.jw.org/en/library/books/gods-love/disfellowshipped-person/

Conclusion is these: JW force members to limit and cease association with former members. In other words, WTJWorg representatives (members and non-members) tell untruths aka lies.

9 hours ago, George88 said:

 It's about viewing things through the lens of reality.

1. A fictional, actually false reality that is presented to "Caesar"

Even then, Lopes added, Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t force members to limit or cease association with former congregants, whether they’ve been disfellowshipped or withdrawn voluntarily—that’s up to individuals. - https://www.baptiststandard.com/news/world/jehovahs-witnesses-sue-norway-after-registration-revoked/

2. Reality and practice inside JWs congregations

"Despite our pain of heart, we must avoid normal contact with a disfellowshipped family member by telephone, text messages, letters, e-mails, or social media."

- https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-october-2017/truth-brings-not-peace-but-sword/

"If, however, a baptized Witness makes a practice of breaking the Bible’s moral code and does not repent, he or she will be shunned or disfellowshipped."

-  https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/

@George88 Let's not equate "distancing" from WTJWorg and its doctrines and practices with circumstances that lead to the creation of a different dynamic in mutual relations with people with whom we were previously "hung out" as members of the JWs community.
There will be various and varied reactions. Some will completely reject the possibility of contact with ex-JW, others will at least be polite and say hello on the road, and some will sometimes want to talk about anything.
Some ex-JWs really miss contact with family or friends who have remained JWs. Some other ex-JWs are bothered by the lack of culture when they happen to meet former "brothers". For some it ceases to matter and they can deal with "fanatical JWs", who consistently adhere to the WTJWorg's institutional instructions to completely cut off relations with ex-JWs, without much trouble.

Jesus had no problem communicating with all kinds of people, from little children to decent people to hardened lawbreakers. We, ordinary people, generally cannot imitate that way of dealing with other people. And we are not even obligated, because we have the free will to choose who we want or don't want to deal with.
I respect that "choice". What I don't want to appreciate and respect is the "hate by GB decree" that imposes "shunning".

25 minutes ago, Manuel Boyet Enicola said:

I fully agree with doctrinal unity. But uniformity? Mmmm, creation shows us to leave room for variability. 

WTJWorg aka GB has no "doctrinal unity" going back 140 years until today. Nor does today's composition of the "Main Ecclesial  Body" aka GB, which leads JWs all over the world, show "unity of doctrine". Every now and then they "abandon, reformulate or clarify" the previous "firmly established Biblical Truth".

But that's why GB makes an extraordinary effort to create and maintain "uniformity".

Avoidance and ostracism (shunning) of former family members is a mandatory rule in WTJWorg. The same rule must be applied to all other former JW members.

quotes:

"Despite our pain of heart, we must avoid normal contact with a disfellowshipped family member by telephone, text messages, letters, e-mails, or social media."

- https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-october-2017/truth-brings-not-peace-but-sword/

"If, however, a baptized Witness makes a practice of breaking the Bible’s moral code and does not repent, he or she will be shunned or disfellowshipped."

-  https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/shunning/

Article from Baptist Standard

Jehovah’s Witnesses sue Norway after registration revoked

JANUARY 18, 2024

https://www.baptiststandard.com/news/world/jehovahs-witnesses-sue-norway-after-registration-revoked/

quote from article:

Clarifying stance on disfellowship

In an email to RNS, Jehovah’s Witnesses spokesperson Jarrod Lopes said Witnesses only disfellowship an unrepentant member who “makes a practice” of serious violations of “the Bible’s moral code.”

Even then, Lopes added, Jehovah’s Witnesses don’t force members to limit or cease association with former congregants, whether they’ve been disfellowshipped or withdrawn voluntarily—that’s up to individuals.

“Congregation elders do not police the personal lives of congregants, nor do they exercise control over the faith of individual Jehovah’s Witnesses,” Lopes wrote.

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

The behavior of the official representatives of JWs is more and more riddled with deceptions with which they lie to the public and to the courts. Obviously, the time will come for "clarification" within the congregations as well, like these "clarifications" for these poor "godless people" who live "without God" in this "satanic" world.

7 hours ago, George88 said:

Perhaps you and JWinsider could elucidate to the visitor how the figurative Jew incurred God's disfavor by failing to uphold their commitment to serve Him. In a similar vein, certain individuals among the witnesses tend to exhibit this habit of self-contradiction as they identify themselves as witnesses. Or has this intriguing piece of information somehow slipped away from our awareness?

Personal responsibility is not in question here. But rank and file members do not generate theology. Religious leaders (GB) are the creators of doctrines and they are the ones who change these doctrines and introduce the direction of how the members will worship God and what practices they will apply. So, we know who bears the greatest responsibility, that is, the blame for the downfall of the "herd".

7 hours ago, George88 said:

Let's focus on the subject you initially addressed and refrain from derailing your post by implying that there is justification for Norway receiving subsidies from the Watchtower.

Agree.

1 hour ago, George88 said:

Examine and comprehend various passages explaining why the Pharisees and anyone who advocates for God with insincere intentions would not find favor with God. Matthew, 1 John, 2 Peter, 2 Corinthians, 2 Timothy, Romans, Mark, Colossians, Galatians, Jude, Acts, Deuteronomy, lamentations, Jeremiah, Ezekial, Revelations, etc.

Do you believe that JWs are being led astray and are being encouraged to worship false Gods? The passage "testing the spirit" is meant to discern the spirit of insincere individuals, not those who faithfully uphold God's words and commands. Such as the Pharisees. Engaging in such critical thinking is a grave offense against God, as His faithful ought to discern the spirits that require examination.

If that were true, we would be forced to scrutinize Christ, the apostles, and even Paul. However, it is inconceivable that Christ, who is seen as a flawless figure, would have allowed such suspicion to overshadow their authority. This would not have been accepted even in heaven, let alone by God. Rejecting these chosen individuals, who have been appointed to guide his flock, would resemble the treatment that ancient Israel showed to the prophets.

The Jewish system of worship was established by God (the Jewish God). JWs say his name is YHVH. Thus, Judaism is at its root a correct, true religion.
People who want to become members of the JW religion must renounce their previous religion, if they were believers of any church. As far as I know, Jesus never renounced his Jewish religion.

Jesus, like you in your commentary, condemned the corruption of the religious leaders within his Jewish religion. Jesus did not despise Judaism and own belonging to Judaism, the religion/faith of his fathers, but he despised the religious hypocrisy of the people of his time.

As far as I know, Jesus kept all the customs of his Jewish faith. He never told his followers to stop keeping the "law of Moses". Moreover, he taught them to do everything the "Pharisees" told them, but not to act hypocritically like the Pharisees.
This tells us that Jesus was not advocating the rejection of Judaism as the true religion. The establishment of the "new covenant" does not exclude the very essence and truth, truthfulness of the Jewish religion.

2 hours ago, George88 said:

Did Jesus not embrace the synagogues as places of worship and God's house? Why would you condemn Jesus and God for establishing places of worship? Matthew 21:13, Genesis 28:16, Exodus 23:19, 1 Kings 9:6 etc.

So, didn't JWs reject Judaism?

10 hours ago, George88 said:

Are you suggesting that the Watchtower is the sole publisher of spiritual content?

No.

10 hours ago, George88 said:

Do you think that Christian sects, who openly express their support for gay rights and endorse acts of violence through war, are still considered to have God's approval?

No.

10 hours ago, George88 said:

Are you suggesting that only God has that authority, and he can't delegate it to someone on earth?

What does the "delegation" process look like?
When did it start?
Who were the first people whom God "delegated" to interpret his Word?

10 hours ago, George88 said:

Didn't God give Joseph the ability to interpret the pharaoh's dream?

Joseph did not found/establish a religion like WTJWorg did. I don't recall any record of him imposing his interpretations on other people.

4 hours ago, George88 said:

Who possesses the superior ability to accurately interpret the publications of the Watchtower?

This is how I could answer the matter.
GB claims to be the "guardian of the doctrine" and the only one who correctly interprets the Bible.
The lawyer claims that only GB can correctly interpret WTJWorg's publications.

First thing. If anyone could agree that GB is the only one who can relevantly explain what is the meaning of what is written in the WTJWorg editions, because at the end of the day, all the text within 140+ years is nothing but the product and imagination of the people at WTJWorg. So it can be said that they are, also, the intellectual owners of what was written in WTJWorg publications. Of course, a bunch of theology has long since been discarded by themselves, so that speaks volumes for the intellectual and spiritual value of a large number of WTJWorg publications.
 
Another thing, GB has no authority to interpret the Bible because they are not the ones who wrote the Bible.

According to the previously presented logic, only God has the right to interpret his Word aka the Bible. "Do Not Interpretations Belong to God?", Gen 40:8.

I think we have clearly rounded up the result, that is, GB is not authorized to interpret the Bible. And if GB still wants to explain the meaning of the biblical text, it only means that their interpretation is not binding on anyone.

14 hours ago, George88 said:

Are we now changing the subject to something unrelated to interpreting scripture from the NWT?

Not. We only used the new illustration. Mr. lawyer who is apparently the head of the legal team representing WTJWorg (in the photo 3rd person on the right) made the claim that only the JW organization is authorized to interpret the content of its publications that were presented in court by the defense attorney of the Norwegian state.
So we know two things; 1. GB considers itself the only one authorized to interpret the Bible and 2. GB is the only one who can correctly explain the meaning of its own interpretations.
Consequently, this would mean that no one in this world has the right to think and say that WTJWorg's interpretations are wrong. That's nonsense.