Srecko Sostar

I thought Yeshua (Jesus) was the judge as He has 'all authority in heaven and on earth'. 
It only 'does not matter' if you are wicked enough not to care about the damage they did to other people. What Americans call collateral damage i believe. 
Well the history speaks for itself. Even all the lies about Armageddon which is part of the history ofthe JW org. 
But YHWH didn't find it in the Watchtower /  JW org. From Rusell onward they were not obediant, they were trying to run ahead of God and Christ. How can making false predictions be showing obedience ?  It has all been insults to YHWH and Yeshua. 
 

What kind of God do you worship?  One that tells lies?  No doubt. 
God would not send a messenger that presents false predictions, or calls the Pyramid of Giza, “God’s Stone Witness”. 
A messenger from God would tell the truth.  That is the pattern of prophets we see in the scriptures.  Prophets are messengers. 
Read all of Malachi 3 and 4,  to see what that messenger sent in the last days, is assigned to do.  Your leaders have done just the opposite.  
 
 

Russell did not die a martyr's death. No one beheaded him like that "real" messenger John the Baptist. Drawing parallels on the type-antitype model shows its shortcomings, again.
JWs are very disgusted at the mere mention of the word "cross". You see this as a fundamental difference between true and bad worship of God. Russell had no problems with crosses. How is it possible that he saw the truth about “hell” and the “immortal soul” and his mind remained darkened about the “cross”?
How come he didn’t see that he wasn’t FDS or GB or whatever you want to call him? A true “messenger” in the first century said he was not worthy to untie the sandals of Jesus, and Russell allowed his followers to “untie his sandals” and call him titles.
You, as collective, create legends about your religious leaders, past and present, and attribute to them positions, that are in fact, empty and useless like hollow sacks.

Russell did not die a martyr's death. No one beheaded him like that "real" messenger John the Baptist. Drawing parallels on the type-antitype model shows its shortcomings, again.
JWs are very disgusted at the mere mention of the word "cross". You see this as a fundamental difference between true and bad worship of God. Russell had no problems with crosses. How is it possible that he saw the truth about “hell” and the “immortal soul” and his mind remained darkened about the “cross”?
How come he didn’t see that he wasn’t FDS or GB or whatever you want to call him? A true “messenger” in the first century said he was not worthy to untie the sandals of Jesus, and Russell allowed his followers to “untie his sandals” and call him titles.
You, as collective, create legends about your religious leaders, past and present, and attribute to them positions, that are in fact, empty and useless like hollow sacks.

There are many interpretations to that parable, but the point is there are many places to get illumination …. But will the intensity and duration be enough?

Death spoken here is spiritual. It’s being thrown out of the synagogues/Kingdom Halls, shunned. We gotta remember, Revelation is symbolic and spoken in signs.
It about the anointed and their JW’s friends that don’t fear being disfellowshipped while losing their lives in the organization for speaking the truth in their congregations. They loved the truth more than their status, more than keeping their friends or any love of their family in organization (Matthew 10:37; Luke 14:26; Philippians 3:7-9). 
“They will put you out of the synagogues. Indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God.” John 16:2
“Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death [once you are put the death you will be shunned and hated], and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake.” Matthew 24:9
Taking a bullet to the head is the easy way out. If Putin were an enemy that would be great, but he’s just a distraction. Satan knows being called trash for the rest of your life till’ you’re physically dead for speaking the truth to an organization is much, much harsher on the back, he’s a master at this.
“We appeal gently when evil things are said about us. Yet we are treated like the world’s garbage, like everybody’s trash—right up to the present moment.” 1 Corinthians 4:13

Where does your own religious organization fit in?
I know Catholics who are aware I believe in Jesus Christ.  They treat me as if I am a “sister”.
I know Mormons.  As a Catholic I grew up with their children.  They treat me as if I am their “sister”. 
My Baptist neighbor tells me I am her “sister in the faith”, although she knows I would never step foot in her church after my experience with “organization”. 
I know JWs.  They treat me as if I’m dead. 
Which organization, that touts “organization” more so than any other, do you believe Jesus needs to be removed from first?
“Whoever does not do what is right is not of God, especially the one who does not love his brother. 11 For this is the message you have heard from the beginning: We should love one another, 12 unlike Cain, who was of the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his works were evil, and his brother’s were righteous. 13 Do not be surprised, brothers, if the world hates you. 14 We know that we have passed from death to life because we love our brothers. The one who does not love remains in death. 15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.”  1 John 3
The “world” that hated the disciples of Christ, was the world of the Jews.  Jesus rejected that organization for rejecting TRUTH.  Today’s “Jews” are in the organization that believe it belongs to God.  They tolerate falsehoods and reject truth from those whom Jesus has sent.  (Matt 5:11,12; 23:34; Rev 18:4-8)
Who gets more press; Jesus Christ, the GB or "organization" in the Wt? Why not leave Jesus totally out of it and let the GB sail along as captains of their own organization, their own idol?  Wait, they're already doing that!  (Rom 1:25) So again, what organization does Jesus need to be removed from, first? 
Is it not true that it is said, the Wt is the greatest, the best, and will survive Armageddon?  What other religion is like that organization, what can make war with it?  (Rev 13:4)
Organized religion is physical.  Jesus said, in the last days there would NO physical "mountain", as Wt's "mountainlike organization", that God would approve.  John 4:21-24
By your example, at least there are some in the world who get this.  God's people have hardened hearts, and refuse to worship only, in spirit and in truth.  (2 Thess 2:9-12)
 
 
 
 

And actually, the Universe was specifically designed to run COMPLETELY by itself. That is why there is a Planck Constant and a specific Planck Number that never changes that is the DNA of sub-atomic quantum reactions that make the Universe EXACTLY PREDICTABLE, and allows us to make stuff that ALWAYS behaves EXACTLY the same, and allows us to make things like the phone or computer we type on, and send messages around the world, and back from Voyager 1 Space Probe, launched in 1977, and still transmitting from interstellar space.
So far, Peter Carroll, you have been wrong about everything you have said, because your thinking is agenda driven, based on repeating other people’s feel-good Ill-thought out theology ….. and woefully short on facts.
It would serve you well to get a detailed Periodic Table of the Elements, and learn what all those numbers mean, so you will understand that the Universe was actually designed to operate all by itself, without any maintenance or oversight whatsoever.
….. become an expert on understanding what a Planck Constant and Number is, and why it’s important.
You will be much happier, and MUCH more credible.
AND … lose the need to try and denegrate others as a compulsive reflex.

I noticed this specificity, but only for reasons of confusion. Because why would anyone even use this form ("G-d") when they can write "o" instead "-". First what came to my mind was, is he some sort of Mason?

A lot of modern Jewish writing uses this spelling. Dmitar quoted from several such sources that used that spelling just in the last couple of months. Very few others have ever mentioned it or made use of this spelling.

That’s why GB decided in one of his past decisions to have JWs in Mexico give up their “biblical principles and standards” in order to retain material ownership. Matter of Conscience or Hypocrisy? 

I hardly ever think of an “afterlife”
I have decided it’s more productive to try and be better at the one I know about now.

Correct, and ... "shunning practice" stands between state money and WTJWorg pocket.  

The courts of several countries have ruled differently on this matter.

quote from document:
The reasons for the decision
The Religious Society Act sets several conditions for being able to receive state support. In our investigations, we uncovered several violations of the Religious Communities Act.
1.
Right to free withdrawal according to the Religious Communities Act § 2 Persons who voluntarily leave the faith community shall be treated in the same way as excluded members. This means that remaining members, family and friends, will not have contact with the excluded. The preparatory work for the Religious Communities Act § 2 points out that the right to freedom of religion presupposes that withdrawal can take place unconditionally and without obstacles on the part of the religious or philosophical community. By having rules for how the members should relate to excluded members, we found that the religious community prevents withdrawal. We regard the practice as a violation of the Religious Communities Act § 2
2.
Baptized minors may be excluded The exclusionary practice applies not only to adults, but also to baptized minors. This means that children can be excluded if they break the rules of the religious community. We have considered this practice to be a negative social control, and that it therefore violates children's rights. The religious Society itself describes the practice as a "strong form of correction". We consider this a violation of the Religious Communities Act § 6.
3.
Minor members may be exposed to social isolation For other children in the congregation who have not yet been baptized but who are considered “unbaptized publishers,” there is a similar practice of exclusion. If unbaptized publishers violate community rules, they should be deprived of the status of publisher and congregation members should avoid contact with them. We have considered this treatment as negative social control, and in violation of the child's rights. We also regard this as a violation of the Religious Communities Act § 6.
presuda Norveškog suda o uskraćivanju državnog financiranja JW 20220330LTI_no.pdfpresuda Norveškog suda o uskraćivanju državnog financiranja JW 20220330LTI_no.pdf

In Europe alone this “new light” will mean perhaps about a hundred million dollars in tax subsidies.
That will buy a LOT of batteries!

Therefore, because the Watchtowers are prepared about six months in advance, and when “new light” on this matter is reconsidered by the Society’s lawyers and accountants, who nowadays are the Puppet Masters, and it is discovered that the Scriptures “really say” that disfellowshipping, voting, and shunning etc. are a PERSONAL MATTER OF CONSCIENCE, the entire process will take a minimum of two years.
The only downside is a lot of Society Lawyers will no longer be needed at Colony Park, NY, and they will have to begrudgingly slink home to be with their nagging wives, 24 hours a day.

quote from document:
Our assessment of the complaint
The denomination writes in section 42 of the complaint that members who withdraw from the denomination are respected for their decision, and it is up to each individual who is affiliated with the congregation to use their personal religious conscience to decide whether they want to limit or completely avoid contact with that person.
As the State Administrator has pointed out in the decision of 27.01.2022, the religious community, in «Organized to do Jehovah's will” page 153, writes on the other hand that “… if a Christian person chooses to withdraw, a brief notice is given to the congregation which reads: ‘[The person's name] is no longer one of Jehovah's Witnesses.’ Such a person is treated in the same way as someone who is excluded.” We know that exclusion means that you should not have contact with or associate with the person in question. The religious community here encourages members to avoid contact with the excluded.
In this context, we will also refer to chapter 12 in the book "Shepherd the Flock of God", which deals with typical cases that may lead to the body of elders appointing a judicial committee. Point 17 deals with "shameless behaviour" and points out that unnecessary contact with the excluded or those who have withdrawn can be grounds for appointing a judicial committee. If the Body of Elders concludes that a judicial committee will not be appointed, it may nevertheless have consequences for whether the member is qualified to receive privileges in the congregation. The religious community shows here that defying the call to avoid the excluded can have consequences for members.
The allegations that only the members themselves decide who they want to have contact with do not agree with the religious community's own rules. The religious community in reality has a ban on contact with excluded members.
Page 2/3
The consequences of opting out of the religious community may therefore be to lose contact with family and social networks. For the State Administrator, this scheme appears as a form of sanction imposed on society by those who opt out.
We understand that the individual person can decide for themselves how much contact they want to have with people who no longer share the same values as themselves. However, the contact is not something the religious community can sanction without hindering the right to free withdrawal according to ECHR art. 9. Article 9 of the ECHR precisely protects the right to change one's religion or belief.
The Religious Communities Act shall, among other things, ensure that the right to free registration is safeguarded for the members of registered religious communities. We therefore maintain our assessment that the practice entails a breach of the Religious Communities Act § 2.
Furthermore, the religious community states that there is no violation of the Religious Communities Act § 6. In sections 86-87 of the complaint, the religious community points out that the children who are baptized are mature enough to understand the consequences of being a Jehovah's Witness, including that they are aware that Baptism means that you must follow certain rules and that you can be expelled if you break the rules and do not regret it.
In addition, we would like to note that section 6 of the Religious Communities Act is intended to protect all children, even those who are considered by the religious community to be mature teenagers.
In sections 88-89, society states that there can be no violation of § 6 if the State Administrator cannot refer to a specific incident where a child has been excluded and has been harmed by this. Furthermore, the religious community points out that today only one person under the age of 18 is excluded.
Regardless of how many children are excluded from the religious community today, it is problematic that the religious community has a scheme where it is possible to exclude children. The threat of being ostracized and losing contact with family and friends appears to the State Administrator to be serious for a child. As we have referred to in the decision of 27.01.2022, the scheme is in our assessment negative social control.
In section 98, the religious community points out that it is up to the individual to decide whether they want to have contact with an excluded child. To this end, we will show our assessment above, which shows that the religious community has rules that in reality prohibit just such contact.
In section 110, the denomination states that unbaptized minor publishers are in no way socially isolated. However, as we pointed out in the resolution of 27.01.2022, the denomination writes this in “Organized to Do Jehovah's Will,” pp. 154-155:
“If an unbaptized offender does not repent after two elders have met with him and tried to help him, it is necessary to inform the congregation. A brief statement is made that reads: ‘[The person's name] is no longer recognized as an unbaptized publisher.’ The congregation will then regard the transgressor as a worldly person. Even if he is not excluded, Christians will be careful to associate with him. (1 Corinthians 15:33) The congregation will not accept any field service reports from him."
We understand the passage as the child being socially isolated from the congregation, and that this is done in response to the child's behaviour. We therefore maintain our assessment that this treatment is also regarded as negative social control on the part of the religious community and that the treatment violates the child's rights, cf. the Religious Society Act § 6.
Page 2/4
With regard to the allegations that the decision of 27.01.2022 violates the Constitution §§ 16 and 101, and ECHR art. 9 and 11, we would like to point out that the decision applies to the religious community's requirements for subsidy funds, and not whether the religious community should be able to operate as a religious community in Norway, nor does it limit how the religious community should be able to practice its religion. The decision also does not include or restrict the religious community's freedom of assembly. The Religious Communities Act is a subsidy law, where the state has set certain conditions for religious communities to be able to receive public financial support. The state is free to choose how one wants to support religious communities and has no positive obligations under ECHR art. 9 in the case of government grants. We would also like to remind you that the ECHR has stated that access to financial support does not affect the individual's right to express their religion.
The rules in the Religious Communities Act apply to all registered religious communities in Norway.
Regarding the allegations about the State Administrator's case processing in section 146 of the complaint, we will refer to the letter dated 15.09.2021 with notification of the investigation case and the letter dated 25.10.2021 with answers to the religious community's questions about the prior notice. We announced that we were initiating an investigation on the basis of an inquiry from the Ministry of Children and Family Affairs. The inquiry contained the warnings from Furuli and the statement of Jehovah's Witnesses. In a letter dated 15.09.2021, we explained which inquiries, statements and notices were the background for the investigation case, and which provisions in the Religious Communities Act authorized our right to initiate an investigation case, and which provisions we investigated if the religious community had violated based on the mentioned inquiries, statements and notices. We were also clear that we did not instruct the religious community to answer further questions in this round as the religious community had already commented on several occasions on precisely these inquiries and warnings. The religious community nevertheless had the opportunity to express themselves and chose to do so in a letter dated 19.11.2021. This statement also forms the basis for our decision of 27.01.2022. We will maintain that we have given prior notice in accordance with the Public Administration Act § 16 and that the case was well enough informed before a decision was made, cf. the Public Administration Act § 17.
After a review of the complaint, the State Administrator cannot see that new and significant information has been added to the case. We uphold the decision.
The case is sent to the Ministry of Children and Family Affairs for a final decision.
A copy of the case documents and other relevant attachments is included with the complaint.
It sounds like a Christian theology in which Jesus calls people to accept God’s grace.

That’s why GB decided in one of his past decisions to have JWs in Mexico give up their “biblical principles and standards” in order to retain material ownership. Matter of Conscience or Hypocrisy? 

M. Introvigne is not one of those who I would consider as objective critics and who would impress me with his opinion. When he says, I quote: "They are simply excluded from the family's religious activities, but otherwise the normal family relationships, including the marital relationship between husband and wife, continue", he repeats the mantra from the WT publication, which obscures the real state of life of such spiritually separated families.
I have already stated in another topic that three children suffered severe emotional suffering because the mother under the influence of the elders prevented the children from keeping up with the excluded father, who no longer lived with them in the same household. The elders called the children to account when they found out about "illegal" contacts, in several occasions. The youngest child had suicidal thoughts, self-harm and was in fact completely mentally incapable of life. If the father has left his family this is enough for a negative effect on the children, and if the elders and religion forbid them to associate with the father, then the church leaders take responsibility for everything after that.
Another example is one “awakened JW” whom his wife managed to “blackmail” to break her “rebellious spirit”. Now that man is PIMO (physically inside mentally outside). If a wife has to respect her husband within the marital union, why does one JW sister blackmail her husband into not becoming an “apostate”? Is she doing it (blackmail) under the influence of her conscience or is she under the influence of the “cult” of religion?