Srecko Sostar

Yes i am sure as it is surely/doubtless that, for example,  blue color has many variations (color shades) of that same color. So, my like, my laugh, my upvote, my sadness  and other expressions of my emotions and state of mind are not fixed, concreted in only 7 possibilities, putted as options by owner of this forum, for public display of mood that some can show in life.
:)))))) only Frida i know  is a dog. 

Why would anyone have a religion they did not think was the truth?

This must be the #1 jw phrase of all time.
Even the blue bombshell referenced it.

You sure about that? Granted when it is evident of what someone likes in agreement to something and or dislikes something, favors something and or continues such as an absolute, not to mention evident and yet subtle response to said response. Example how you stated, even mocked that of could abuse and neglected services itself whereas you made claim as if it was pulled from books from JWs, when that information was pulled directly from a site that carters to educating people about abuse.
As for the Bible, I merely took up verses of Wisdom and Knowledge to be in application to people, in turn even children - granted that in Jesus' childhood days, knowledge and wisdom was very important, likewise, it should be important for us also.
That being said, he is correct and I made this remark also, thus it being correct. You cannot shift something that has already existed and even having it's own definition, and in that definition it even states (in an online context) to register an approval of or agreement with (a post or poster) by means of a particular icon - that solidifies the claim of agreeing with someone or not, with or without a response. The same goes with an expression of gratitude as with liking what is said. As for us CSE folk, the difference is over there compared to here is that you gain a reputation the more someone agrees with you, the more reputation you gain.
In this sense, you agree with anything that is spoken of, and this isn't the first time. Remember, Biblical Facts? I do.The number of times you agree with what is not true is rather telling, as with other discussions, moreover, you even agreed to the claim I am somehow misogynistic against women just for a typo error, I asked for proof that day too, yet no one deliver, thus people love to make claims they cannot cash.
The young one claims that he knows you and or has ran into you before (granted it seems you are everywhere and not just this forum i.e. of how I found out about Glasgow your comments were elsewhere too), hence referring to you as Frida. Perhaps someone or something associated with you in your life.

This hypothesis is based on the false premise that the use of a two beam cross has been established as a fact which, patently, it has  not.
We do not reject fact in preference to fiction, that is just the allegation of opposers. But we do reserve the right to support an alternative, where such exists, regardless of it being popularly accepted or not. When possibilities are established as facts, we will adjust our thinking. This is something which is not always the case with opposers, and is the subject of much of their crticism.

Sometimes ... the only way to stay sane, is to quit caring so much.

LOL! You are even pickier than I was about this phrase. Immediately after writing it, I looked back on it and literally said to myself, "Wait, I can't use the word 'similar' because @Outta Here might even point out that Origen referred to successful pronouncers of Jesus' name and Acts/Luke refers to failed pronouncers of Jesus' name." (Or words to that effect.)
In fact, I nearly re-edited the word "similar" on the spot to "related" but didn't because I had said:
Similar idea in Acts from the seven sons of Sceva. This idea "from" the seven sons of Sceva is that they, too, wanted to be successful and effective pronouncers of Jesus' name. And, of course, the Origen quote that you offered is from the same article that's attached to the picture of the coin-like amulet. And this particular quote from Origen starts immediately after the quote from Acts about the sons of Sceva. (Both references start 4 to 7 lines further down in the article from the point where the picture left off, but still seen here: https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2011/10/13/the-staurogram-correcting-errors/)
In any case, I was offering a point about how we do not immediately deny the accuracy of all information that comes from mystical or apostate sources. As you indicate, we might even expect that someone transforming themselves into an "angel of light" may get a lot of things right, while misusing and misapplying other things.
I believe you are here admitting that this is a similar idea between both Origen's examples and the seven sons of Sceva.
And the same point again that one of those apostate legends might have been that Jesus had been executed on a crux simplex, as the Watchtower has promoted for several years now. This does not mean that the Watchtower itself is apostate, but that we must always be on the lookout for mistakes in our teachings that might have been tainted by false or apostate thinking. Otherwise we would not need the following admonition:
(Colossians 4:17) . . .“Pay attention to the ministry that you accepted in the Lord. . . (1 Timothy 4:16) Pay constant attention to yourself and to your teaching.. . . (Hebrews 2:1) . . . That is why it is necessary for us to pay more than the usual attention to the things we have heard, so that we never drift away. (Philippians 4:5) Let your reasonableness become known to all men.. . . True. But standing for something that is right and then drifting away from that stand is the basic, simplest definition of "apostasy" based on the meaning of the word in Biblical Greek ("standing from").  We don't have to be an apostate to be affected by apostasy. You will recall that we now believe that when the Watch Tower publications promoted the celebration of Christmas and birthdays that they were not being apostate, but that it was a matter of getting something wrong due to the long effects of apostasy. Also, recall that you had said:
"And whether consciously or not, given the spirit behind apostates, the inroads are far too subtle for humans to discern strategically. " You were speaking of the writer of the Letter of Barnabas specifically and pointing out the possibility that he could have been consciously or unconsciously transforming himself into an angel of light, and therefore we would expect that misleading or false information would be combined with information that was very true. But your statement just quoted shows the difficulty in discerning such subtle inroads. Therefore, I never claimed that Rutherford was apostate, but that he got clearly got some things wrong due in part to the supposedly indiscernible inroads of apostasy. If they are not humanly discernible, then we must even more carefully follow those "pay attention" scriptures just quoted, and perhaps that's the best we can do. Your logic admits that there may still be much humanly indiscernible apostasy anywhere. 
Personally, I have stated my belief that choosing between one or the other direction based on the preponderance of evidence is merely a choice that comes out of "letting our reasonableness be known" "guarding our hearts and our mental powers" and "paying close attention to ourselves and our teaching." It does not mean that either choice is an apostate choice, yet you did bring up that one of the choices might be related to apostasy. So I merely state the obvious: that if it's humanly indiscernible, then we don't really know which set of evidence is the one that might be leading us in that direction. But we do know that by paying closer attention the Watch Tower publications could have avoided being led astray from a more correct stand on Azazel,* pyramids, the superior authorities, the "generation that will not pass away," 1874, 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1925, the 6000 years, the Elder arrangement, the Gentile Times, Zionism in Palestine, the identity of the faithful and discreet slave, etc. And who is to say how many issues remain, if they are truly indiscernible?
*Azazel was just an example that "Letter of Barnabas" evidently had right, then J H Paton got wrong in Russell's Watch Tower magazine, then Russell himself came closer to our current teaching, then Rutherford drifted back in the direction of Paton's teaching, and now, today, by coincidence, we are closer to the "Letter of Barnabas" in our current teaching.

@Space Merchant Quote : I do not care about real terms? You have stated yourself such things is of an idea as if it does not exist, you show yourself to be a means to the problem to think of such in this way, which is the same case with those who profess the same attitude as you do, and thus problem ensues. People who are concern and caring take into account of any such persons with this based minded mentality, some to an extent, a mob mentality.
So, by making a problem known you say i am causing a problem ? 
If a house was on fire and i made it known, would you then say I caused the fire ? 
The JW Org is a danger to young children and i will continue to make that known. And I'm proud that I make it known too.
The GB, as you have said, are not inspired, and it would seem they are not even guided by Holy Spirit either. 
Remember, by their works you will know them. I am judging the GB by their works. 
What would be the point of that scripture if it was not for us to judge them ?  Matthew 7 v 15 through 23.
15  “Be on the watch for the false prophets who come to you in sheep’s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. 16  By their fruits you will recognize them. Never do people gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? 17  Likewise, every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces worthless fruit. 18  A good tree cannot bear worthless fruit, nor can a rotten tree produce fine fruit. 19  Every tree not producing fine fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20  Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those men.21  “Not everyone saying to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of my Father who is in the heavens will.22  Many will say to me in that day: ‘Lord, Lord did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23  And then I will declare to them: ‘I never knew* you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’
I think Jesus made it clear enough here.  

Wow, reliable info then. We can really trust such judgement, I don't think so 

Can you at least get the research right when you do this sort of stuff....please
Yes
Watchtower 7/1879 page 8
 
No
Watchtower Oct 15 1936 p313
 
Yes
Watchtower Jan 1 1939 p13.
 
No
Watchtower December 1 1941. p367
 
No
Watchtower July 15 1948 p219
 
No
Watchtower 6/1/52 page 338
 
Yes
Watchtower 8/1/65, page 479 
 
Yes
Aid to Bible Understanding 1971 page 1519
 
Yes
Live Forever (old Ed.)1982  page 179 p9,10.
 
No
Live Forever (new Ed. 1982) chap. 21 p. 179 par. 9
 
No
Watchtower 6/1/88, page 31
 
Yes
Insight, vol. 2.,1988 page 985
 
No
Revelation book, 1988 page 273
 
No
Insight, vol. 2., page 985 revised 2017
 

... or a lion that is convinced he has to be a sheep.

If someone cutting firewood accidentally kills me with an ax ... I could as I was dying forgive him for his error, which I would in fact do ... but how much better is it to not be too close to careless people who think they are God's gift to chopping wood.
(Let the reader use discernment ....)
Its better to be a live dog than a dead lion ...... but better still to be a live lion.
... AND A LOT EASIER.
There is the eternal question "How much wood would a Woodchuck chuck, if a Woodchuck could chuck wood?"
Probably none at all ... as they have other concerns.
And who was that Masked Man ... I never even got to thank him!

Regardless of the terminology and methodology we use to logically lay the foundations of what is true or false, with a mistake
or without a mistake, correctly understood or incorrectly understood, and so on ... there is one more thing to be taken into account. That is: self-persuasion and self-deception.
Most of people, of us,  will think/thinks about self with believing that they are among those who are healthy, beautiful, smart, good, ... belonging to the right, true group, religion, politics, family, nation... etc.
And with more self persuasion and self deception we are more sure in fictitious, wrong, err, distorted picture about yourself, who we are, what we are, and by that about other people, who are belong or not belong in "our group" or in "our idea" of how other people should  be look like, think like, act like and all other likes.
Good thing in such "self" can be self confidence and similar "selfie" that help us to survive in society.
Bad thing is this. If we are wrong, and many times we are :)))), we are, because of our self persuasion and self deception in position to deceive other people because they can see our sincerity and our faith in "story" we talking about. Some will be sceptious but some will accept "our faith in truth", but  that is in fact "faith in error, misrepresentation, misunderstanding, mistake, misapplication ...". :))

That might be true, but then we'd have to be concerned if this was not also true of Rutherford who promoted the idea that Azazel referred to Satan instead of Jesus. Or even the idea promoted more recently that the stauros associated with the execution of Jesus was not a two-beamed stauros, but a ("cheap shot" alert) simple, phallic-shaped pole.

Thank you Srecko for your concern. This is a very tactful and correct way to ask for a reason for something. 
I will probably be very concise and to the point. But why I really mentioned this was because you implied that not believing the claim made by the GB, that Jesus did not die on a cross, would get me in some kind of trouble, and I was saying no, it would not.

The picture in the book might be right. Based on the usual rules of evidence and logic, it is probably wrong (in my opinion, of course). I disagree with you that the Greek word with the basic meaning of hand cannot also include the wrist. I disagree that if the meaning of the term for "hand" can include the wrist that the translators must use the term "wrist" just because they think it's more likely to refer to the wrist portion of the hand. This is because it is not obvious that the term could ONLY have meant the wrist and not the rest of the hand. Sometimes in English we have these ambiguities between terms, and we may not understand that these ambiguities sometimes occur with words in other languages where they would not occur in English.
For example, we have the terms for fingers and thumbs. You have 5 fingers on a hand, so if we learned that someone in history had chopped off a finger, should we think of the possibility that it was the thumb? If a non-English speaker believes there was a 90% chance it was the thumb, should he translate it thumb, when finger is still accurate 100% of the time? The wrist could be included with the Greek "hand" in the same way that the thumb could be included with the English "fingers."
What is WRONG, in my opinion, is to make a statement that "Jesus died on an upright stake that did not have a crossbeam." Again, this might be true. But it is false and wrong to claim that it is true. It is false to even imply that there is no depiction of Jesus on a two-beamed cross until the 4th or 5th century, when there is evidence to the contrary.

 

True. And neither am I aware of any successful challenge to the view depicted in the earliest known writings, descriptions and depictions of the stauros.
The earliest known view of Jesus' execution refers to the Tau shape. That's from the first or second century "Letter of Barnabas." All other subsequent references to the shape of Jesus' execution stauros also describe a T shape and/or a T shape with a lower crossbar.
All the Biblical references (which do not describe the shape) make perfect sense if it is depicting a T shape or a T shape with a lowered crossbeam. I am referring not only to the use of term "nails in his hands" but also the fact that the 'King of the Jews' sign was depicted as above his head, not above (or below) his hands. Also the fact that the description of the execution procession closely matches the Roman punitive use of the patibulum which invariably refers to the arms being stretched out to each side, perpendicular to the body.
So far, no one has successfully challenged this earliest known view. Also, it appears there are not even any hints of anyone ever attempting to challenge that view from any of the earliest centuries C.E. up until very recently. And we would have to say that the Watchtower has also been unable to successfully challenge that view due to apparently depending on statements which can be shown to be false, in order to reach that view. A successful challenge cannot be dependent on false statements.

Funny you should mention that, Sreko Sostar ... the WTB&TS is currently building a data base, called "Publishers ID",  where everything about every Jehovah's Witness on Earth is planned to be assembled ... they are working on it now, or possibly completed the database structure.

JW.org _Publisher ID_ - leaked video 1-of-4.mp4 As time goes on, of course, many Publishers will try to avoid the .BORG ... er .. .ORG knowing everything about them, and will try evasive tactics, such as assuming new names, so it may become necessary to tattoo their Publisher's I.D. Numbers on the inside of their left forearms.
Resistance will be futile.
 

4 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said: ....... they announced from the platforms that it was I who had been disfellowshipped.
 
To prevent such errors, elders should tell also date of bird and ID number, his nick name if he has such.... and of course name of mother and father of particular person....., perhaps it would not be bad idea also to give names of other family members, wife, children ... to prevent any mistakes about who they speaking about.   
:)))))))))) 
 

TTH:
These are general principles that ALWAYS must be used to test interactions between humans.  If you don't ... like being on a muddy steep slope to the edge of a cliff, we may loose our footing and find ourselves having a wonderful ride down that slippery slope ... to the hard rocks at the bottom of the cliff.
It's one thing to have that wild ride by accident, or misadventure, and be broken up or killed by your own devices .... it is quite another to killed or broken up because someone speaking as a declared Watchman over your soul gives you bad advice, and it is because of that bad advice you slide, and fall to your peril.
The price of Liberty and Freedom depends on each individual maintaining eternal vigilance ... and ALWAYS test the credibility of any advice we are given by ANYBODY.
When I was a young man, I was floating down the James River and came downstream to Bosher's Dam, a few miles upstream of Richmond Virginia.  There were others already on the dam, which had about four inches of water overflowing the top, and beneath the water you could see the rust spots where steel rebar had once been across the top.  The others were jumping off the dam, and some were playing below at the base, among the water and large rocks, and some were jumping off to the water below.  I asked someone what was a safe space to jump off, and he said to count seven rebar spots from the side of the dam, and it was safe. 
I took him at his word, and counted seven rust spots, and jumped off to a pool below, surfaced, and continued my float trip.  Today I would have watched, to see who ELSE jumped at that spot before I did.
I have missed death and being mangled perhaps a hundred times in my life.... by pure, dumb accident.  Not a very smart philosophy. I "lucked out" ...so far.
That same summer I went to a pool party at the Presiding Overseers house, (I forget what we used to call them back then ...) and walked into the back yard to see all my friends in the pool, talking and laughing, with their arms hooked behind them on the edge of the pool. I asked my best friend, also named Tom, how deep the water was and he said "Nine Feet".
I proceeded to the diving board, made a high bounce, and went in head first.  At nine feet deep, my custom was to do an immediate flip under water so my feet hit the pool bottom first, and I would spring to the surface like a breaching submarine.  Unfortunately the pool was a uniform three feet deep, and I landed HARD flat on my back, which knocked out my air, and I surfaced far less dramatically.
Had it NOT have been my custom to flip underwater, I would have landed on my skull, and been maimed for life, or killed.  This was about 1965.  Because I was not hurt, everybody laughed, and I laughed too.
A few years later (sometimes I am quite slow...) I was thinking about that, and realized how CLOSE I came to being severely paralyzed or killed. I have an outrageous sense of humor, but that  ceased being funny.
I added the following line to my working philosophy "Never trust anyone at face value... but ESPECIALLY your best friends, and those that apparently have your best interests at heart." 
It took me about eight years or so to firm up that philosophy, which was consolidated when that same best friend ran off with my first wife ...they were married, and she died of Cystic Fibrosis while married to him.
The Congregations were "fine" with their marriage, which I found out about later ... until I wrote detailed letters, certified mail, return receipt requested ( the "green card") to every Congregation in the Richmond area, and to the then World HQ in Brooklyn. 
At some Congregations in the Richmond area, when they announced his disfellowshipping, because he had been a Bethelite, a Pioneer, and was "Brother Watchtower". and I was a known Barbarian, and because our names sound very similar phonetically ......
....... they announced from the platforms that it was I who had been disfellowshipped.
It was then I permanently lost all the friends I had grown up with in the "Truth", but I was working in California, and did not find out until I returned home, to Richmond, Virginia.
Sometimes ... you (meaning me) just have to consistently be a horse's ass to keep from being run over by happy, well-intentioned, flower bedecked rainbow ponies ... with sharp steel hooves.
 

I am a firm believer that Good will EVENTUALLY win out over evil .... always.
But it may take a forest of slaves, a mountain of corpses, and oceans of blood before that happens..
The ONLY thing necessary for evil to always win, is good men to accept the status quo ... and do nothing.
...and it usually takes a hundred years of tyranny for the sleeping giants to awaken.

Multiply Kosonen’s experience hundreds of times over, and you, SM, will see why the GB’s apparent contrite, humble words that they are not inspired,and can ( I say “prone” to) err in doctrine…..IS A BIG DEAL. 
You have spent much time covering inspired prophets vs. uninspired prophets.  As I said, among His people, God doesn’t make a distinction.  He calls His prophets, “prophets”.  If they “proclaim” a message in His name and it doesn’t come true, He refers to them as “false prophets”.   Deut 18:20-22; Matt 7:15-20
Straight and simple. 
Are you neglecting the weightier matters of the law of Christ: justice and mercy and faith, as the GB and elder body have?
“These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone.”
The organization’s leadership are blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel! 
Look at the broader picture, SM, and the damage done to those who follow blind, empty teachings, that leaves one in the DARK.   Matt 23:23,24; 1 John 1:5
 
 
 
 
 
 

Before I was baptized I thought that you can always question every JW doctrine and that the Watchtower will always have scripturaly based answers for their doctrines. So I felt safe to be baptized. But I did not know that after you are baptized you have no more right to question the truthfulness of any doctine. And if you don't understand their explanation you have to comply anyway. 
If I had known that the WT-organization works like that, I doubt I had been baptized. 
To the contrary I heard the circuit overseer explain how honest and sincere the WT organization is. He claimed in a speech that if a person finds a fault in WT doctine and can show it from the Bible, then absolutely the WT organization will change the doctrine. 
It was with this mind I was baptized. But it became evident that that is not how the WT org works. When I had found scriptural evidence against some WT doctrines I wanted to show my elders. They came to my place, but they refused to look at my findings. They refused to look at the scriptures I wanted to show them. They were not going to examine the scriptures. I was amazed, what was going on? Now I understand that elders act according to WT procedures. They don't think about what is right or true. The only thing that matters to them is to obey the GB. The Bible and the truth comes always on the second place. 
That is the moment when the truth has ceased to be the truth. 
Actually the elders even openly at the meerings said that the unity is more important than the truth. They justify that with saying that Jehovah will anyway later correct everything.
But where will the elders and GB be when Jehovah corrects what it wrong? They might as well find themselves in trouble. 
As Bible-history shows, those who opposed truth tellers in the past got in trouble.

This is an interesting statement because it begs (for me) the question as to what is "accurate knowledge" as opposed to "knowledge"? And also are "false" or "wrong" necessarily antonyms of "accurate" in connection with knowledge?
I suppose the principles behind statements such as:
1Cor 8:1"If anyone thinks he knows something, he does not yet know it as he should know it." 1Cor.13:8 "For we have partial knowledge" would have a part to play in answering these questions, as well as a comprehension of the Greek word "epignosko".
Ah well, no time to toss it around now. Maybe better in it's own thread.  🌙ZZZZZZZZZZZ...............