Srecko Sostar

Wow ... two things just happened here ... Billythekid46 gave an intelligent comment ... AND he refrained from calling someone an ignorant, uneducated apostate fool and condemning them to damnation .... both in the same post!
Mark your Calendars!
Of course, his perspective was COMPLETELY about the monetary advantage ... which is pretty normal for a Watchtower Lawyer.
However, when checking into a room at a Hotel, I have NEVER been questioned about "Are you REALLY one of Jehovah's Witnesses", to get any available discount ..... or anywhere else.

Yes, they are your infallible authority over you.
And yes, "Jehovah" DOES speak through the watchtower.
"commissioned to serve as the mouthpiece and active agent of Jehovah … commission to speak as a prophet in the name of Jehovah…" The Nations Shall Know that I am Jehovah" - How? pp.58,62
"… commission to speak as a "prophet" in His name…" Watchtower 1972 Mar 15 p.189
"The Watchtower is a magazine without equal in the earth …. This is not giving any credit to the magazine's publishers, but is due to the great Author of the Bible with it truths and prophecies, and who now interprets its prophecies." Watchtower 1943 Apr 15 p.127
"The Watchtower is not the instrument of any man or set of men, nor is it published according to the whims of men. No man's opinion is expressed in The Watchtower. God feeds his own people, and surely God uses those who love and serve him according to his own will. Those who oppose The Watchtower are not capable of discerning the truth that God is giving to the children of his organization, and this is the very strongest proof that such opposers are not of God's organization." Watchtower 1931 Nov 1 p.327

"Avoid independent thinking...questioning the counsel that is provided by God's visible organization. ( ie: the watchtower organisation )" (Watchtower, Jan. 15, 1983 pg. 22)

"Fight against independent thinking." (Watchtower, Jan. 15, 1983 pg. 27 )

 

What ARE you going on about?
So, you get "discounts" when you wear your organisation ( the watchtower ) logo?
 
red herrings, much?

The Brothers in Mexico, specifically, the Sierra Madre Mountains had the same problem with badges we have ... people expected to see them all the time.

We don't need no stinking badges!.mp4

Maybe they should have taken them off 😀

Does wearing a badge determine if one is on the path of righteousness?  Do you remember the cross and crown on the early Watchtower magazines?  It is a Masonic symbol that can be worn as a pin.  Would wearing it show you were on the path of righteousness when it was used by the Watchtower; and, would you wear it today, or is it not acceptable jewelry  for those who desire to remain on the path of righteousness?  If not, who is the apostate?  Wouldn't the apostates be your brothers and sisters from years past, who treasured this symbol as representing their "organization"?
You say, "those who leave Jehovah's organization..."  Is God and the organization inseparably linked?   Isa 46:5

 

@Jack Ryan said:How do you feel about being told that you MUST wear your badge even when out to dinner at night with your family after a convention?
Never happened yet. But if it did, I would take it off.

Ok, Ok .... just calm down, i wished to upset you ...but not so much :))))

Poor old @TrueTomHarley has to try to group people together. Even though he adds 'as individuals', he still starts with a group of people all of one type. 
I don't know Srecko's personal information and I would not ask him, but as for me, I have a wife and a son that live 'at home' with me. They are enough company for me thanks. I do not need to surround myself at home or online with a group of people.
I've just bought myself a new MP3 player with the biggest 'cans' (headphones) I could get, and I go walking along the riverside and then along the seafront all on my own. I walk past people as if they are just obstructions, I dodge round them all. People here in the UK are also fat and they get in the way, but I squeeze my slim body past them all.  
As for the idea that "Witnesses as a people have a much greater diversity of friends as regards race, social-economic, nationality, & educational letters, then do non-Witnesses."   That is probably wishful thinking. 
Witnesses do not seem to actually have any friends, just brothers and sisters. A friend is someone that can be relied upon for support and help, no matter what the circumstances. Not so with the bro's and sis, who desert people at the slightest whim. 
The fact that the JW Org is earthwide does not make all those people your friends. That's a bit like having a million friends on Facebook, they are not real friends. 
Poor Tom is still living in that dream world of his, and he won't back down, which is funny as he condemned me for not backing down on things. 
If you treat things as typical patterns it is because you don't want to 'see' the individual.  You are frightened to think of individuals having a mind and thoughts of their own, because JW's are not allowed to have a mind and thoughts of their own. 
 

Sometimes when things seem at their darkest, and you see that New Light Approaching faster and faster ... it's a good idea to make sure that you are not in the middle of train tracks.

Should I spell it out for you?  According to you, I am ignorant, foolish and stupid;  very unchristian-like.  Should I call you ignorant, foolish and stupid because you cannot see that I have indeed, told you who the Destroyer is, using the scriptures to prove it?
Those who are spiritual "Israel" are outlined in scripture:
Gal.6:15,16:  "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God."

Rom 2:28,29:   "For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God."

Rom 4:13:   "For the promise that he would be the heir of the world was not to Abraham or to his seed through the law, but through the righteousness of faith."

Gal 3:7: "Therefore know that only those who are of faith of Abraham, are sons of Abraham."

John 8:39:   "Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham."

Rom 4: 11:  "And Abraham received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while still uncircumcised, that he might be the father of all those who believe, though they are uncircumcised, that righteousness might be imputed to them also"

Those who are "Israel" share the faith of righteous Abraham, receiving the circumcision of the heart, by Jesus Christ.
Col  2:11: "In Him you were also circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ".
This comes upon a person, through an anointing.  With that circumcision of the heart, God's laws are written upon it. 
Heb 8:10:  "This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people."
1 Pet 2:9,10 - "But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy."
They are the anointed priesthood.  They are "Israel". 
1 Pet 2:5 -  "Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ."
As I said and which you have successfully twisted, the Great Crowd are the anointed, "called, chosen and faithful" remnant - a segment of the total "144,000" who come out of the Tribulation, upholding Truth.  If you would like to know any more (although you appear to be exceedingly confident in knowing the scriptures backwards and forward;  the invitation is to all)  go here: http://4womaninthewilderness.blogspot.com/2013/07/who-are-144000.html
(Thank you, Librarian, for allowing me to post the link)
 
 

That's an easy one. I did not wear mine two out of the three days. And guess what happened? Absolutely nothing!
I think you are a little misguided there Jack. Do you really think that some elder is going to hunt someone down for not wearing a badge? If you really think that, then you have been damaged more than I thought. I am sorry and wish I could help.

There is a quite a difference between a suggestion and a directive.
Was the direction given as a suggestion? So delegates were free not to wear it?
What would happen if one of them chose NOT to wear it?

Regarding tobacco : God's kingdom Rules Page 111 para 12 & 13  And Smoking banned in 1973
Regarding christmas :   God's Kingdom Rules  page 101 para 8  & page 102 para 9 
@Anna i hope this is to your satisfaction. 

Ok be picky if you like. They allowed smoking until 1970. Well 1973 actually it seems. 

30 years? ...this is funny i think. Issue was from Judge Rutherford era who was against Russell influence on Society. After Russell dead and after he prevailed in taking Presidency, he introducing changes (good or bad .. it is for Historians to describe) One of them is - NO beard! :))
Thanks for such deep, contemplative inspection of other people spirit and soul :))))  In just two sentences you done amazing job. Investigative Journalism?    

Now the blood shall be a sign for you on the houses where you are.And when I see the blood, I will pass over you; and the plague shall not be on you to destroy you when I strike the land of Egypt.  Exod 12:13
 For the Lord will pass through to strike the Egyptians; and when He sees the blood on the lintel and on the two doorposts, the Lord will pass over the door and not allow the destroyer to come into your houses to strike you.  Exod 12:23
The Lord (His Spirit)  passes over Israel  and passes through the Egyptians.  He allows Satan the Destroyer, to strike.   Obviously, you desire the destroyer  to be God or Jesus Christ...regardless of what the scriptures say. 
By faith he kept the Passover and the application of blood, so that the destroyer of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel.  Heb 11:28
 
 

Anytime, but that being said, you still need to voice your claims, and every single time you avoid and run from the very things you said.
Ok let's see what you have to say. And I am a debater, not a judge of a debate, for what I link are tell tale signs of a losing debater, and only the loser.
And I love debates, be it in them or watching, I mentioned this before...
In a debate, even those on the winning side can spit a few insults, unfortunately I am not on the losing end. I suggest you look into some debates, a notable debater being Ben Shapiro, Br. Myatt, Masur, etc.
The irony is in a debate, one can see who actually wins by means of 2 points:
[1] Contextualizing what it means to meet your burden of proof, i.e. arguing in favor of a framing device that acts as an evaluative mechanism for proving the truth or falsity of the resolution or topic statement. [2] Proving that the topic itself meets that contextualization, i.e. that it meets the criteria you've set up for proving the resolution true. I even told you from the very beginning, even a seasoned debater can be unpredictable and can insult their challenger, but evidently not to the extreme, for me, I merely played on your Biblical Intelligence, for even the Bible speaks of stupid persons concerning what is true and what is false, what is wise and what is unwise, etc.
Therefore, you can be called as such if you are making absurd claims that are not even Biblical.
That being said you missed 3 points that fits you perfectly lol:
#3: False equivalence aka comparing a counter-argument with something abhorrent #4: Tu quoque or “What about-ism” - straying away from the topic and saying “look at this”, “but what about that”; a diversionary tactic. #5: Appeal to motive - implying that the opponent seeks to gain something due to their stand on the issue You fit all 3 of such while being on the losing end, so much you cannot speak a single thing without using JWs to help you out. More so, you stated I am using articles, I am using Interfaith Dialogue (I got quite the laugh out of this one granted the source linked by me proved you wrong), etc, with no evidence to claim, therefore, if a debater can call you ignorant, or stupid, or silly, etc. Then what they are saying is true. You also show anger and frustration granted that

A - you voted down someone who was speaking to me and only me and
B - you had copied and paste your idiot filled claims elsewhere.
The fact you willfully shot down a spectator/onlooker shows you have lost from the get go.

That being said, the article is indeed correct, when a person loses a debate, such points showed by them by their words etc.
And to this day, we still never found out your claim about donkeys preaching the Christ, the most sillies thing I had ever heard.
This one is a nice one, also you do not even know what Deux [Deus] Ex Machina even is, which makes it all the more amusing to see you struggle in this debate.
So I ask you this question: Can you point out and quote ANY of my fallacies regarding our debate? As a bonus, I want you to quote the so called "interfaith dialogue" I am speaking. as well as the "article" claim made by you.
This I got to see, especially with my history of fighting the interfaith, I want to see from an ignorant person, you, of this so called claim you speak of. Let's have at it Srecko.
I can quote some of your fallacies, here they are:
NOTE: Before we start, let me tell you what a fallacy is. A fallacy is a mistaken belief, especially one based on unsound argument. It also means a failure in reasoning which renders an argument invalid or faulty reasoning; misleading or unsound argument.
Then show us this evidence regarding the Donkey and the stones preaching the gospel truth, Screko.
You said according to the Bible, so surely to you, you may have something to say rather than run away from the very words that you said. I an assure you, even this claim of yours sounds very stupid when read out loud.
So show us your evidence that a Snake was preaching some sort of gospel, Srecko, otherwise unfounded claims such as this shows us, no, it exposes you to be nothing more than an ignorant lair concerning the Bible of which you lack.
The word gospel as defined:
[1] the age concerning Christ, the kingdom of God, and salvation. [2] one of the first four New Testament books telling of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ [3] an interpretation of the Christian message As we can see, the snake has never preached about the Christ let alone speak of the good news gospel, more so, the snake was not spreading a Christian message and or a doctrine. The truth of the matter, according to the Bible, according to the book of Genesis (Torah) is that Satan had used the snake to deceive the first woman, Eve, resulting in her and Adam's disobedience.
You said I suggested whatever it is you are referring to, this so called simplified edition article editions you speak of when all that I said comes merely from an ESV Bible, and my 2 minor sources being Wikipedia, and an English Dictionary (evidence of this is on page 2-4 of regarding our debate), and nothing more. Can you quote anything from me in this debate that I had suggested simplified edition articles as you claim? If not, you must make Satan very proud to add words to someone's mouth. As a man of God, I do not add nor do I take from God's Word, and had been very vocal of Deut. 4:2.
That being said, show me, Srecko Sostar your claim.
Let's see it, show me any of my quotes in this debate that shows "Interfaith Dialogue" when from the get-go I am only using the Bible. That being said, we can see earlier you tried to steer into the direction of the WT and JWs in order to not be focused on solely a Bible discussion, for you had been exposed for the simple fact that without JWs in your dialogue, you have nothing - and it shows.
If you cannot answer what you yourself had said, well, that link only proves to everyone here that you not just started a debate, but you lost it by not in mere defeat, but throwing yourself into your own ruin and peril of depravity, so much so you resort to a copy/paste shenanigans elsewhere by means of your own fumes.
That being said, address the questions posed in light orange.
Check mate

If "Tight Pants" are so risque, and get certain Brothers all hot and bothered, and  distracting them from their Theocratic duties,  Tight Pants Tony would have an absolute stroke over THIS outfit!
Perhaps there should be a Watchtower Policy Statement that Kilts have to go down to the ANKLE!, and not have Mylar pillows or spherical orb designs bouncing around on the genital area as the brother walks along.
If you ask me, if you are going to wear that outfit outside of Scotland, you better damn well have a sword!
Forget the Badges at the Restaurants! 
We have a full scale "TPT" CRISIS here!
By the way... that pillow thingey in front, the Sister is pointing to with astonishment, is called a "TPT Conundrum".
 

Sometimes Lawyers wear some pretty strange clothing, depending on the Venue.

@Anna 
You got me!
Really it's because I have issues stemming from decades of mind control from the JW's.... So I am not a good example.
Other people should save themselves and future generations from this radioactive titanic religious cult if they don't want their children discussing whether they are allowed to wear beards in 50 years from now.
I would rather they study science, medicine or technology and actually do something to help mankind rather than spread hate toward apostates who don't agree with their version / translation of some 5,000 year old camel riding desert sands God's words to an extinct people.

Hey critical thinker, why are you on here?

@TrueTomHarley  The only reason you think of me as being unhinged is so that it makes you feel easier about my comments. To use the excuse that you think someone has a mental problem, just because they tell the truth and you don't like it, well that's pretty poor Tom. But if it makes your life easier then ok go for it. 
JW Insider. Now is he still a JW ? I think so. Hence if he brings up a situation he does not want it to look too serious for the JW Org. 'that he regards is quite rare' does not mean it actually is 'quite rare' it just means that is his opinion. PUT NOT YOUR TRUST IN EARTHLING MAN. 
As for the CSA thing. In my opinion it is easier for me to relate to such things that others have suffered as i have suffered similar things.  It's not about me Tom, it's about ALL THOSE THAT HAVE SUFFERED CSA AND OTHER ABUSES IN THE JW ORG.. But as I've said before most people just see it as collateral damage... 
The comments i see as funny are funny to me. The reason most are funny is because they are only a person's opinion, and in most cases are nowhere near true. So you see i have a sense of humour. i don't always moan about comments i laugh at some. 
As for Srecko, i think he does fantastically well with his English as it is not his first language. And maybe he has a similar sense of humour to me. 
I have a comment on my FB page somewhere and it says 
'The first thing you have to know about me is that i am not you'.  Do you get the sense of that comment Tom ?
Stop judging me because i am not you. I do not think like you, act like you or even want to be like you Tom. 

@Anna  Quote "it was not what the elders said, but it was what the Bible said."
Yes love that. But it has never said in the Bible that men have to wear a suit and tie.
Imagine Jesus getting to the sea shore and saying to those fishermen ' Guys I would have let you be my followers but you are not wearing a suit and tie' 
And back with the beards thing too. ' You guys have beards, you cannot follow me and preach'.   .
And I'm sure there are a few more such things. I was even told by an old brother, an Elder in fact, that years before paisley ties were forbidden. 
In my last congregation if an Elder 'told me off' for anything, i would say show me three scriptures to back up what you are saying. It came from the idea that the Org use to teach repetition for emphasis... 
Quote,  The funny thing is, they blame the org..   Maybe it's because Elders make the worst parents sometimes. (even involved in CSA) And other Elders will not take notice of a child if said child is the child of an Elder. So the child cannot get help from anyone. 
By the way, I'm glad you had a good childhood. Mine was horrible, with a wicked mother committing adultery and her 'boyfriend' nearly drowning my dad in the family pond. My dad suffered with TB (and had one of his lungs collapsed so my brother tells me). Then the children's home episode.  Dad died aged 49 when i was around 20. So of course my outlook is 'slightly' different to yours. 

In the Armed forces in UK and USA there are rules WRITTEN DOWN for soldiers to follow strictly. 
Yet it has been proved that in many cases those soldiers did not follow the rules. 
It is also the same in the JW Org. However in the JW Org, it would seem as if the elders are told not to follow the rules that are written down.
The GB believe they have the right to tell lies and they call it spiritual warfare. So what is the point of them writing down rules which they know they will deliberately break. The point is, for people like BtK and Space Merchant to point to the written rules and say 'Look i told you so'. How blind are those people ? Anyone can write rules, but it does not mean anyone will live by them.