Patiently waiting for Truth

4Jah - You're clearly confusing your emotions w/a functioning conscience. Don't burn incense to your inner light. You don't know if the light that in you is darkness or light unless you subject it to the true light of scripture. The true light of scripture makes it clear (unless you reject Hebrews among other books) that God has and uses organization, that he delegates authority to humans in these organizations and that one must be submissive and obedient to those taking the lead. It doesn't say you'll like it. In fact the scriptures suggest the opposite. Discipline isn't fun, but it's useful.
Your job is to determine which organization you are going to be submissive to. You can't go it alone. Not scripturally.

That leaves out the Wt organization, which continually fights for their worldly rights; who cannot accept a court's decision in the case of child abuse, but must bulldoze their way back into court, to preserve their riches.  As far as religious organizations go, they are as worldly as the worst of them.  
"Pure and genuine religion in the sight of God the Father means caring for orphans and widows in their distress and refusing to let the world corrupt you." James 1:27
James 2:1-17; Exod 22:22; James 4:4-10
 

Theoretical considerations [ edit | edit code ]
In the very history of the problem of conscience we find various theories that we can reduce to four basic types:
Conscience is understood as participation in the Divine (Christian tradition, especially in Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther ) Conscience in the function of the autonomous mind ( Kant ) Conscience as a product of social-educational determination ( Locke ) Conscience is the result of moral conflict ( Freud ) Perhaps we need to learn more about these aspects for further discussion. Some idea, please.

You dodo, you are repeating an incendiary media headline. 
We can depend upon it to be stated as inflammatory as they know how, for that is how the press operates when they get ahold of something juicy. 
Nonetheless, just for the sake of argument, let us assume that everything was exactly as stated.
Do you know how many “hanging judges” were in the American West, with their counterparts even today? Do you know how many judges are incompetent even now? Do you know how many trial verdicts are reversed upon appeal because the judge did something wrong?
Any time or any place you put humans in the mix you will get errors, even shocking ones. Maybe that is the case here. In any assemblage of several million people, you will find many examples of anything.
Pray to God for his direct handling of your issues and he will say he has underlings to handle your problem. Complain to him that the underlings are imperfect and he will observe that you are no great shakes yourself. 

This is a new topic (because we are supposed to do this) based on information given by @JW Insider 
JWI gave information about someone being told NOT TO  partake of the emblems at the Memorial.
This evening is the Memorial of the last meal that Christ shared with His closest followers.
Whilst we remember how Christ gave his life I would like to share a scripture at Revelation 5 
9, And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10  and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.”
This scripture shows that Christ 'was slaughtered' for the Anointed ones.
So I have a question. Do JWs who feel they are of the Anointed have to ask the Elders for permission to partake of the Emblems ?
Q2. Does any human on this earth have the right to judge if another person can partake of those emblems ? 
 

This is a new topic (because we are supposed to do this) based on information given by @JW Insider 
JWI gave information about someone being told NOT TO  partake of the emblems at the Memorial.
This evening is the Memorial of the last meal that Christ shared with His closest followers.
Whilst we remember how Christ gave his life I would like to share a scripture at Revelation 5 
9, And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10  and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.”
This scripture shows that Christ 'was slaughtered' for the Anointed ones.
So I have a question. Do JWs who feel they are of the Anointed have to ask the Elders for permission to partake of the Emblems ?
Q2. Does any human on this earth have the right to judge if another person can partake of those emblems ? 
 

Leaders of a Jehovah's Witnesses church 'made a 15-year-old girl listen to an audio tape of her own rape for four hours for her to say it was "consensual"', Utah Supreme Court hears
It would seem that JWs use the same tactics. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8942521/Jehovah-Witnesses-leaders-girl-15-listen-recording-rape-four-hours.html

Another joke from CC but he actually hangs himself with his own rope here. God will punish me as an individual BECAUSE I have an individual conscience. God will not punish the congregation for my sins because God will not be using collective conscience.

This whole comment above is so funny that it's hard to know where to start to answer it. I presume Tom is on the wine or vodka or something. 
Of course Tom will now provide proof of God's true guidance and give names of the organisations that God used from the year 100 through to 1800. Tom will now show how God was using specific organisations when, ops, That Russell guy, he said there was no need of an Organisation, and he had plenty of people agreeing with him it seems. 
Tom also deliberately tries to hide the FACT that I am NOT Anti- organisation. Even governments are organised to a degree. Families are organised. Businesses are organied. So too, religion will be organised. 
Let's quote Tom here " If God is worth his salt, he will provide adequate human leadership."
Yes Tom, God will provide a True Anointed remnant to replace ALL false religions in good time, before the Judgement comes. 
Quote "Jehovah’s people will cut their shepherds some slack, just as was necessary in the first century,"
Yes well. the blind leading the blind. Catholics will probably cut the Pope and the priests some slack too. 
But please give me 5 examples of this 'first century' slackness, where the 'followers' cut their leaders some slack. 
Quote "But they also recognize that these ones will be relentlessly attacked simply for the Christian shepherding work that they do."
No, JWs are so blind that they believe the things they are told. Most JWs do not do research into things such as CSA. They do not research scripture from an outside viewpoint. They believe that their leaders are the ones to follow without question. And most JWs easily give up their conscience to follow orders. 
Sorry to be so blunt, but when you talk rubbish then you have to be open to a reply. 

This is a new topic (because we are supposed to do this) based on information given by @JW Insider 
JWI gave information about someone being told NOT TO  partake of the emblems at the Memorial.
This evening is the Memorial of the last meal that Christ shared with His closest followers.
Whilst we remember how Christ gave his life I would like to share a scripture at Revelation 5 
9, And they sing a new song, saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10  and you made them to be a kingdom and priests to our God, and they are to rule as kings over the earth.”
This scripture shows that Christ 'was slaughtered' for the Anointed ones.
So I have a question. Do JWs who feel they are of the Anointed have to ask the Elders for permission to partake of the Emblems ?
Q2. Does any human on this earth have the right to judge if another person can partake of those emblems ? 
 

I like this. You made excellent quote. WTJWorg publications only contain the claim that there were always people who worshiped YHVH between the 1st century and the appearance of Russell.
Not once did they name any "organization." So we have no indication, no evidence from WTJWrg, that God used any organized system (organization) and people who would be part of that system as believers / members.

Thanks.
I was exaggerating, of course, but I just noticed that you posted a few minutes ago in the topic: https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/topic/86713-modern-society-and-censorship/
The admin's post included the following about censorship:
This was in a non-religious part of the forum, posted by someone who probably knows comparatively little about JWs. So, months ago, you responded to that post with:
You see what I'm talking about?

It says that tradition does not choose its "victims".
Cesar, you sound like burdened church member. Obsessed with phantasms. Please, use your argumentation about topic, you are better in that, and .... i like to discuss with you.    

“It used to be that being crazy meant something. Nowadays, everyone is crazy” - Charles Manson

Everything is wrong with this picture.
Everything.
The distressed sister was preventing another member of the Body to “partake”. Perhaps she was enjoying her presumed prestige she experienced in that congregation?  She couldn’t tolerate a rival.  The sister who went to the elder is equally guilty, if she listened to him and did not partake.  Her first inclination should have been to approach the distressed sister with scriptures, who should have been over the moon knowing another anointed had joined her. (1 Cor 12:15-26; 11:33)  Perhaps it is only in her own mind that the distressed one had put herself upon a pedestal…sort of like her example, Tony Morris.   
The elder, is also guilty.  He is not the mediator between Jesus Christ and the members of his body. (1 Tim 2:5)   But, that is the setup of the organization, and it is blasphemy.  Rev 13:5-8)  They have the power to rule over a spiritual nation, the “special possession” of God, and the anointed allow it.  Whenever this has happened in the past with Israel, it is because of their sins.  The anointed have left Jesus Christ and allowed men to dictate their every move.
Gal 1:10 - For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ.
Obviously, the example provided shows this. 
The elders, “represent the royal priesthood”, which means, they are an active representation of God’s priests.  They are acting in the capacity of priests.  On the other hand, the members of God’s authentic priesthood are told they cannot act as priests until the Kingdom.  In actuality, they are treated no different than any other JW.  But their representatives are treated with honor.  Every JW is told they must submit to their decrees.  This has made it convenient, for men to rule over and trample the anointed.  The power of the holy ones (aside of any who may be anointed within the GB at present) does not exist.  (Dan 12:7; Matt 24:15,16; 2 Thess 2:3,4) And, the GB's power does not come from Jesus Christ anyway.  (Matt 24:24; Rev 13:11,12)
Mal 2:7 - “For the lips of a priest ought to preserve knowledge, because he is the messenger of the Lord Almighty and people seek instruction from his mouth.”
The dichotomy to Mal 2:7 is this:
The lips of the elders who “represent the royal priesthood” ought to preserve knowledge, because he is the messenger of the GB, and JWs seek instruction from his mouth.
 
 

I'm sure that whenever someone admits a fault about themselves, or the organization they are associated with, or a fault among the first century anointed apostles and disciples, we are already aware that some persons will be anxious to jump on those faults to either trash the confessor, the associated organization, or even to trash the anointed apostles of Jesus themselves. It all depends on the themes that people wish to focus on. Your themes are well-known. But I think most people can see through an obsession for trashing the WTS organization with any excuse possible.
I expect that if a non-Witness participant here writes something about Bitcoin, you would look for a way to say:
"Just like your GB because they cover up CSA, and we should wait for a True Anointed to tell us whether we should use Bitcoin."
Yes, that was facetious and insulting, but I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't already happened in parts of the forum that I don't bother to read.

Ever wonder from where the reports came that early Christians went in for cannibalism? 
“He that feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him. ...
Therefore many of his disciples, when they heard this, said: “This speech is shocking; who can listen to it?”  (From John 6)
Jesus faithful disciples cut him slack for that statement.. 
And that is with a perfect man. Don’t get me going with the imperfect ones, which I will not assemble for you, because you will, as usual, find them “all so funny.”

I'd say it was more of a mental condition, referring to the metaphorical difference between heart and mind. I am just admitting that the elders likely made a mistake, probably because they assumed that neither of these were truly anointed, because of traditional conditioning around previous teachings. (Assumptions about the "Replacement doctrine," "seniority," worthiness, etc.)
 

There is a scene in a Netflix show I just watched a few days ago where "Reporter Jack" asks Jerry Rubin a loaded question containing a false supposition, and Jerry Rubin answers: "You've posed that question in the form of a lie."
It's a variant of a classic example often used as a joke. I.e., "Do you still beat your wife?"
If person answers with the reflexive "No, of course not!" then the person who asked still has one "Aha!" jab left, even though it was based on a lie in the mind of the questioner.
For the record, I have never beaten my wife, and I have never sent a hidden message to Srecko. And I have never emailed Srecko, or privately messaged Srecko. Now, when a person becomes obsessed with finding a mistake, it's usually better not to answer questions that are posed in the form of a lie, because the questioner will merely look for loopholes still available to them in the answer. (Such as "Aha! He didn't deny telephoning him!" or "He didn't deny inserting hidden messages into the regular forum responses directed to him.") Of course, they may also pretend that a non-answer is an admission of guilt, which is the reason I went ahead and answered the "lie."

I suppose not, but he probably had fear about what would people talking about.  
This could mean that the issue of circumcision was resolved in two different (Timothy vs Titus) ways and that the dilemma around it was still a stumbling block.
This is the second time you have mentioned @JW Insider and me in a non-existent context. What is your problem? :))

Every so often I should probably repeat the following, though none of it sinks in:
It is part of the package. If God is worth his salt, he will provide adequate human leadership. He will not leave his worshipers rudderless, each prey to whatever worldly trends are cresting in their particular time and area. He will provide adequate shepherding. Go to the world of churches if you want rudderless, if you are content with each one simply building his own personal relationship with God, and enjoy whatever “unity” you find there.
Jehovah’s people will cut their shepherds some slack, just as was necessary in the first century, because they are human. But they also recognize that these ones will be relentlessly attacked simply for the Christian shepherding work that they do.
 

Unfortunately, we have some examples in which God does not punish the individual who has wronged, but the entire nation. This is easy to notice in the examples of the kings of Israel. One of the prominent events is when the people are counted, by the king's order, even though it was forbidden to do so. Thus, none of the individuals opposed the king’s command. Their individual conscience was suppressed by the king's command. After all, people feared for their lives if they disobeyed the king.
Parallel? JW members are willing to suppress their conscience because of GB’s “commands”. The existence of a “Collective Consciousness”* is often so strong that it threatens an “Individual Conscience” of person and prevents her/him from acting on his own sense of good and bad.
*“Collective Consciousness” - in context of this phrase, it denotes/refers to rules and standards set by prominent members (leaders) of how followers should behave and what standards they should follow. Deviation from them brings condemnation of the collective, because the collective consciousness  is formed in accordance with the set rules.
The change of rules in a group does not happen because of the "troubled conscience of an individual", but because of intellectual-doctrinal-ideological reasons. Eg. excommunication was an inconceivable way of dealing with individuals in WTJWorg (article in Awake 1947). The conscience of the individual was subject to the rules tailored by the leaders of the collective. As leaders changed their decisions, the “Collective consciousness” on the same issues also began to change.
Determining what is good and what is evil has ceased to be a privilege of God, back in Eden. Because God himself concluded there: "now man has become like us and knows what is good and what is evil." - Gen 3:22
In the case of WTJWorg, the individual agrees to the third model. He renounces his own right to determine the good and evil provided by Adam and Eve, so he decided to leave that right, not to God, but to people who claims to represent God.
PS - We also introduce a "new" terminology: “collective guilt”. Who is to blame for obeying the king's bad command? These are close associates (lower hierarchy- aka elders) who were to carry out the (wrong) command to count the people. Who bore the consequences of the proceedings? According to the biblical account everyone in the country. Why couldn’t a “judicial council” be formed to consider the matter and make a fair decision? Why did they wait for God to pass a "judgment", when they could prevent the process of "counting the people", on their own, and/or when they could "punish" the king for his bad decision, after counting, on their own?

I am not aware of "many accounts" but if we're honest, I'd bet that most of us here know of at least one case in any average sized congregation. I just wrote up a related experience of a sister who I think no one would consider mentally imbalanced, but who was told to hold off a few years partaking in public because awareness of her "calling" was causing distress for another sister who was then only one in that congregation who partook. I just removed the long-winded version of the experience because it's too easy to figure out who these ones were.

You are not aware of the many accounts, I suppose, of anointed who have approached the elders saying they are anointed, yet the elders say they aren't?   How many "mentally imbalanced" anointed are told they are not anointed and cannot partake?  Only God knows, right?
Are you saying that the GB are liars about not approving of the anointed to bond and study the Bible together?

None of this is true at all