Srecko Sostar

6  Jesus said to him: “I am the wayf and the truthgand the life.h No one comes to the Father except through me.
Anyone that serves God properly through Jesus Christ is a follower of truth, because Jesus is the truth. 
But many JW's use the expression 'in the truth' to mean being part of the organisation, not as belonging to God through Christ.
 Quote : "Does this not apply to everyone, who follows in Jesus footsteps?"  So does a person have to be a JW then ?
Can we say, Christian sects that support hiding Child Abuse / Pedophilia in their organisation are reputable men ?  That accounts for a large percentage too. Should honest Christians follow suit?
To quote you Billy: , There needs to be a distinction otherwise, we’d be no better for being followers of Christ and unwilling to submit to God’s authority on earth. Where will we be then? if not in the hands of the devil that separates us from the truth.
You see Billy that is what I've found. The JW Org is no better than any other one.. And when I've said about the Child Abuse within the Org, others have said, yes but it happens everywhere. And here you are saying, as I've said many times, There needs to be a distinction... 
 
 

BREAKING NEWS | Supreme Court of Canada Rules in Favor of Jehovah’s Witnesses
In a unanimous decision released on May 31, 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada recognized that the disfellowshipping arrangement should remain free from court intervention. We rejoice in this vindication of Jehovah’s righteous standards.—Isaiah 33:22.
https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/17101/index.do

ahhh this "worldly" journalist.... you can not believe them.... they speaking "lies"  about WT, JW, "the truth" :))))))

Possibly you and admin.

He is mad. Mad, I say. I keep trying to tell you, Srecko.
He keeps speaking in the third person, the pompous ass, as though he were above it all.

Where do they come up with this stuff? experience? do the governing body, is that how they get their board meetings started?
 

In the REAL world, there are many much more important things to worry about ... like Hiroshima and Nagasaki, etc.
The Governing Body Helpers have told us that two naked Bethel brothers sitting in chairs facing each other, both masturbating at the same time is NOT PORNIA.
That worries me ... not some Japanese guy with a pillow.
... a Japanese guy with a bayonet ... different story.
 

2 CHAIR pORNEA .mp4

What should a member of the JW community do?

JW TV and publications does not provide balanced news regarding events related to the WT organization and the legal aspects involved, such as court cases concerning pedophilia and failure to report such events to secular institutions.

It also forbids JW members to contact the former JW, even to say simple "hello" on street or wherever. Even when they (GB of WTJWORG) allowing a JW member to talk to their excluded family member who living in the same family (house, under same roof - literally, because if exJW not live in same family place, instructions are that JW have to cut all possible contacts), WT prohibits them from discussing so-called "spiritual things." Because they consider that the former JW could be repulsive and "fool", spoil the true JW witness with "inaccurate proofs" and "apostate teachings".

What does the magazine "Awake" say about whether to listen and to be familiar with the opposing views? Here is what WT consider as "positive". It is in context of "evolution issue" but we can see "the principle", don't we? Would you, do you use the same principle and be careful and wary about WT claims how "all is apostates lies"?! Quotes are as following;
 
Examine the Evidence
IF YOU were on trial in a court of law, would it be fair if only your opponent was allowed to present evidence? No, you would surely want the court to hear your side of the matter.
Reasonable persons agree that the only fair method is to examine the evidence on both sides, both for and against a disputed theory. That is how one arrives at the truth.
But, as physicist L. Dolphin wrote to the San Francisco Chronicle: “It is intellectually dishonest to fail to answer some of these problem areas in textbooks, and to exclude other scientifically based models on the grounds that they are merely fundamentalistic religious beliefs.”
Truly it is “intellectually dishonest” not to want any opposing views heard on such a disputed matter. It has to make reasonable persons ask, Why?
Reasonable persons also consider it unworthy of serious scholarship to try to stamp out criticism of evolution by dictatorial methods, by intimidation, or by attitudes such as that of prominent American scientist Isaac Asimov, who said that questioning the theory of evolution is like “attacking the theory of gravity.” He added: “It’s a fact, not speculation.” But gravity can be demonstrated, tested, and proved in the laboratory and elsewhere. Evolution cannot, which is why so many are challenging it. No one is challenging the idea of gravity.
Trying to insult the intelligence of critics of evolution to silence them is especially “intellectually dishonest” when many evolutionists themselves admit that the theory has not been proved.
No, it will no longer do to try to browbeat or insult persons who challenge evolution, or to imply that they are intellectually deficient. To get to the heart of the matter, we have to put the “guessing” aside and honestly analyze the facts that are available.
What happens when we do examine the facts, without the “guessing”?
 
end of quotes from https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101973762    Awake 22 10 1973, page 7.
How do you feel about this? "Old truth" but truth :))))
 

Yes I agree with your last sentence. I first learnt the JW teachings from my brother. I had always believed and relied on my 'big' brother for advice as he always seemed sensible and balanced. My father died, at age 49, when i was only 20, so my brother acted as a father to me in many ways.  So, I took what my brother said as 'truth' in many matters .... However, now I've grown older and have more experience in life, i have come to realise that not all things my brother said were 'truth', to the point that i now know that he would use things to his own advantage. 
And as I've said before the JW Org have a way of telling congregants not to question anything they say. And once again when a person gets older or wiser, then they do their own research, they find that not all JW teachings are true. 

Bad things happens to all of us, in home, kindergarten, school, workplace, on holidays ....etc.
Well, choice to doing "normal" stuff as going to higher education is, have to be matter of your personal choice and NOT RESULT OF DOGMATIC TEACHING, INSTRUCTION, ADVICE, COMMENDATION of Church Leaders. 
About "stupidity". There is two sort of that connected to comment i made. One came from naivete , inexperience, or natural lack of reasoning for some stuff. Other came because we alone make us (and with help of others people too) to believe something and have strong feeling how we make best decision.
Religion (and not only religion) have that power to make us so sure in wrong things. Don't you think the same?      

The Twist is not seen at festivals of Jehovah's Witnesses ever since the Watchtower denounced this dance as immoral back in the 1960's
@JW Insider might remember which article specifically.

I can laugh as I'm retired so no work. Well old age has to have something good  I was 69 on Friday.
Oh dear next year I'll be 70.  That will be my three score year and ten. Then lights out maybe. 

ing.

Comedy is all about Tim

short intermezzo to relax before working Monday 

Thanks ones more time John. Patience? haha, sometimes i have more, sometimes less, but yes it can be said how i enduring some situations too long or longer than other people. Who knows why? :)))
With more or less success from my side , but it can be tell how it is given to me this skill, gift to present or give some thoughts on certainly subject. Not always of course, in rare moments for sure :)))) It would be easier for me to speak on my language in compare to written words in Croatian too. In English with help of G+translator or some grammar page, dictionary - but tenses are primary deficiency on my part.
Greetings from Zagreb!     

If I correctly label a (farm animal) Jackass as a Jackass, have I insulted them?
If I correctly label  a child rapist as a pedophile evil person, have I insulted them?
If I correctly label a midget as a midget, have I insulted them?
If I correctly label someone as mentally retarded, have I insulted them?
If I correctly label someone as stupid, is it an insult  ...or merely a fact of life?
The solution to stupidity in many cases is education, experiences ... AND CONFLICT.
IRON SHARPENS IRON
Snowflake liberal sensitivity is NOT a mental health survival trait.
STOP THINKING LIKE PETULANT CHILDREN !

I worry you do i billy ? That you want me removed. I've already said what Twat means in the English. Remember I'm not American. 
If you are offended then why oh why are you on this forum ? Wasn't this forum once called something else, related to trouble ? 
Take a lesson here from Jesus, at John 1, v 45 - 47
5  Philip found Na·thanʹa·elc and said to him: “We have found the one of whom Moses, in the Law, and the Prophets wrote:dJesus, the son of Joseph,e from Nazʹa·reth.” 46  But Na·thanʹa·el said to him: “Can anything good come out of Nazʹa·reth?”f Philip said to him: “Come and see.”47  Jesus saw Na·thanʹa·el coming toward him and said about him: “See, truly an Israelite in whom there is no deceit.”
Jesus seems to have found what Nathanael said as funny. Whereas he could have found it offensive.  Learn from it. 

They were probably referring to version 2.2, in the definition posted above ... a common malady suffered by about 40% of the Earth's population. 
The problem is with being stupid, it is somewhat like being dead, in  that those afflicted by stupidity or death  do not know they are stupid or dead .. . it does however, create problems for those around them.
They might have meant to type TWIT.

Srecko, you are much better than me at explaining this and it seems you have more patience too.
Well done. 
And yes, the reason the GB and the JW Org don't want witnesses to talk to ex - witnesses is because they don't want the congregations finding out the real truth about things such as Pedophilia, or past failures, wrong predictions etc.  

You can not resist to "correct" people, to giving lessons,  don't you?
I am very well aware of difference, but rhyme is so,  so good and as "cryptic" message it suits to me well.
But why trying to, attempt to  explain..... when you know almost everything :)))))))))))))))  

What should a member of the JW community do?

JW TV and publications does not provide balanced news regarding events related to the WT organization and the legal aspects involved, such as court cases concerning pedophilia and failure to report such events to secular institutions.

It also forbids JW members to contact the former JW, even to say simple "hello" on street or wherever. Even when they (GB of WTJWORG) allowing a JW member to talk to their excluded family member who living in the same family (house, under same roof - literally, because if exJW not live in same family place, instructions are that JW have to cut all possible contacts), WT prohibits them from discussing so-called "spiritual things." Because they consider that the former JW could be repulsive and "fool", spoil the true JW witness with "inaccurate proofs" and "apostate teachings".

What does the magazine "Awake" say about whether to listen and to be familiar with the opposing views? Here is what WT consider as "positive". It is in context of "evolution issue" but we can see "the principle", don't we? Would you, do you use the same principle and be careful and wary about WT claims how "all is apostates lies"?! Quotes are as following;
 
Examine the Evidence
IF YOU were on trial in a court of law, would it be fair if only your opponent was allowed to present evidence? No, you would surely want the court to hear your side of the matter.
Reasonable persons agree that the only fair method is to examine the evidence on both sides, both for and against a disputed theory. That is how one arrives at the truth.
But, as physicist L. Dolphin wrote to the San Francisco Chronicle: “It is intellectually dishonest to fail to answer some of these problem areas in textbooks, and to exclude other scientifically based models on the grounds that they are merely fundamentalistic religious beliefs.”
Truly it is “intellectually dishonest” not to want any opposing views heard on such a disputed matter. It has to make reasonable persons ask, Why?
Reasonable persons also consider it unworthy of serious scholarship to try to stamp out criticism of evolution by dictatorial methods, by intimidation, or by attitudes such as that of prominent American scientist Isaac Asimov, who said that questioning the theory of evolution is like “attacking the theory of gravity.” He added: “It’s a fact, not speculation.” But gravity can be demonstrated, tested, and proved in the laboratory and elsewhere. Evolution cannot, which is why so many are challenging it. No one is challenging the idea of gravity.
Trying to insult the intelligence of critics of evolution to silence them is especially “intellectually dishonest” when many evolutionists themselves admit that the theory has not been proved.
No, it will no longer do to try to browbeat or insult persons who challenge evolution, or to imply that they are intellectually deficient. To get to the heart of the matter, we have to put the “guessing” aside and honestly analyze the facts that are available.
What happens when we do examine the facts, without the “guessing”?
 
end of quotes from https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101973762    Awake 22 10 1973, page 7.
How do you feel about this? "Old truth" but truth :))))
 

Anna , i am not laughing at your post. But must laugh on situation that took place. It can be that old man collect gun artifacts, but if it is forbidden by law, it is funny, strange, against her conscience maybe, but also normal on other hand (she living with him), that his wife, JW sister, not reported to police this "criminal behavior" of her husband :)))))

Higher Education is useless according to Jehovah's Witnesses

Not really. It says that the question of deletion will be raised if a member of his family is pursuing a university education. The question arises as to whether the elder supported the decision emotionally or financially while the child was (or is) still under his roof. In cases where the elder makes it clear that the child will be living on their own immediately after college, and that it was their own "adult" decision, he might still be considered as not having his "household in subjection." Still, if his reputation as a family head is intact, and his counsel is still respected by other families -- because they know he himself opposes university education and did what he could, then he will not be deleted. If it is clear that others will say, "Why can't my child go to the university, after all, your child is going?" then he cannot serve as a good example. As you can imagine, this is not consistently applied, which creates further accusations of injustice.
There have been cases where the spouse of an elder goes, and the elder was not dismissed. This was more of an unwritten rule for the past several years, so it's possible that the Circuit Overseer's have stricter instructions as of 2017.