вторник, 20 марта 2018 г.

Inquisition Jehovas Whitneses

Inquisition Jehovas Whitneses

     A heretic is a follower of heresy, who backed out not only of faith, but also of the Church dogmas, its rules and regulations. (Explanatorydictionary)
Every religion could exist and be affirmed in society thanks to asceticism, sincere people who used their freedom for the benefit of the Lord.
But in the future, each religion became a structure which excluded the right to think, to make a choice, and to make own decisions. (km 09.2007)


Now Sarbonna was looking for the opportunity to submit the case of Etienne (Latin name Stefanius) in the newly established Court of heresy. Etienne was well aware of the danger that loomed over him.
Publishing the Bible without a review of the theological Committee on errors was a risk. Etienne's house was searched many times, trying to find any evidence to raise a charge against him. More than 80 witnesses were interrogated...
The informants were promised a quarter of Etienne's property (appointment as bishop or elder) if they could accuse him of heresy. Yet the only evidence remaining was that Etienne openly published the Bible in his publications.


And again, the king ordered to transfer the list of Sarbona's amendments (claims) to the Privy Council. Sarbonna did not obey this order and replied: "Theologians are not accustomed to express in writing the reasons why they believe something to be heresy, but they only give an ORAL reply that must be believed ..." (This is the way the branch is always responding).
Intellectual life was paralyzed by censorship and strict control. (w1.02.90) Anyone who claimed this right had his mouth closed, initially by ignoring, but if the voice became heard — "the voice of the wilderness" the measures were taken...
  
A bureaucrat (fr.buro - office, kratos-power). The employee of the department, the official who follows the strict letter of the law,
the capitalized rules and instructions, overstates the importance of formalities, abuses his position at the expense of citizens interests and human qualities. The bureaucrat is an official who says, "We don't have time to think, we need to follow the instructions and the rules." Bureaucracy is the management system of the bureaucratic administration, which protects the interests of the dominant elite.

It is a sphere of administration that has created a special class of officials, directly and exclusively subordinated to the influence of central authority. Bureaucracy is not only reckless subjugation of centralized power, but also the unwitting admiration of it.
Not respecting these two components for centralized power is stigmatized as "apostasy".
   
The term "inquisition" is from lat. inqusitio - means. interrogation, inquiry. Itwascreatedtofightanderadicateapostasy.

At first, the identification of the heretics was not particularly difficult, as they did not hide the fact that they adhere to other religious views and opinions. However, after the first of them were executed, the remaining went underground and began to behave themselves as faithful Catholics. The inquisition encountered the problem of identifying heretics.
 
More than that, in order to execute a man for apostasy, it had to be proven. And then, with encouragement, in the form of merits to the church, the judicial system started to transform from a just one, into the one obsessed with one goal -  tomake a person by any means admit their guilt before the church. The prosecution system was as simple as possible. The population was told of signs to identify the heretics, which caused the wave of unsubstantiated and reckless inference. (“Shepherd the Flock of God” 5:27 (ks10-U), “Any denunciation, no matter of defamation way, is not a lie and exonerates anyone who carries the denunciation and to whom it was carried”.)

The church has been supportive and encouraging to denunciation. Everything was happening like this: The Inquisitor had come to a certain area or town

and the congregation had been informed in advance through the priests. On the solemn Service that has to be visited by ALL members of the congregation, he told them the purpose of his visit and announced that, within 6-10 days, they should extradite all heretics. And warned that those who had covered the "apostates" were threatened to be excommunicated. Those who, in the prescribed time, responded and extradited heretics, received an award from the Inquisitor as indulgences for the term of 3 years - a remission of moral sins for that period of time. In the same sermon, the Inquisitor announced that denunciation could be ANONYMOUS (ks10-U 5:27) for fear of friends and relatives of the accused. Church authority exonerated informers before God for lies and defamation if the accused became aware. The gold (gloss) of the temple became higher than the Temple of God with his commandments. But if this would become known to the ordinary members of the church, indignation was suppressed by intimidation and a very interesting punishment which was called apitimia - absolute silence, for whose violation the guilt was equated to the apostasy, and was in denial of all the advantages and regalia of the church. Andif they were not silent, they were proclaimed to be sowers of discord and violators of the unity of the Church and were also declared heretics.The accused one was strongly warnednot to tell anyone about the matter, even to his wife. The fear of punishment for the violation of privacy should be equal to obedience to God. Why were there such a tough measures? The fact is that using a verse from Matthew chapter 18 in case when elders   "whatever will bind on earth will be bound in heaven, » the leadership of the churches tacitly equated themselves to the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit cannot be mistaken. No one talks about this doctrine, and it is not announced on the congresses. Laughing at the acceptance of dogma of the trinity, they have made the "faithful slave"  equal to Christ and the majority in the councils of elders - equal to the Holy Spirit.

And if anyone sees a decision, when a majority in the council of elders decides, for example, to take money from the church cash collection, and believe that it is not stealing, or when it is committed to them (not to God) that prostitution or homosexuality in some meetings - is not prostitution, or that it is necessary to forgive pedophiles, than it is not possible for God to change that decision, there is no mechanism for reconsidering such decisions.And if you, God forbid, see such decisions, you may run in front of them for thousand years showing verses and norms from the Bible, it won't help! Because they set down with their own seat, not only on the place of Moses, but on the place of God! And if "salt is not salty, it is not needed, and if there's no fire in the church, who will go there?" The only way to save yourself from the "abominable devastation of the holy place" is confidentiality, and repressions of those who know ...  Then the Church took all the possessions belonging to the heretics, detracting from them all past merits, and it often happened even when the prosecutor tortured by conscience had given up his denunciation. The rules of inquisition took always previous chargesinto account, than subsequent acquittals. It was officially possible to bring up denunciation from the age of 12, but in fact, even the smallest children's testimonies were accepted.


The inquisition could suspect anybody of heresy, from a pregnant woman and a small child, to an old man. Pressing out testimonies - was a manifestation of faith, which subsequently began to justify listening, surveillance, reading of personal letters, and over time blackmailing and even torture. All this is done under the mask of the biblical verse: "If a man is innocent, the Lord will not let him be pledged beyond his powers." The Soviet Union also brightly implemented this system, when the Minister of Justice, Vyshinsky abolished the presumption of innocence. It was not investigator who was supposed to prove the guilt of the defendant, but the accused one had to prove he was not guilty. As it was under the Soviet power, for example: - are you against the soviet authority? - No, of course not! -Than, prove it? - I can't, I'm innocent, here's my party ticket .. - But the right explanations are still waited from you, without asking any questions, but taking away all the advantage and privileges waiting for you to say the right questions, "but my dissatisfaction may have been caused by the fact that I was not happy and did not clap at the party meeting?" (Mathew 11:16,17), but believe me this does not mean that I am against..." - and if admitted that you are unhappy, you are spreading criticism, you're a dissident.

Another interesting interpretation of truth was expressed in the intentional statement in publications in recent years of the "infallibility of its church power". It is claimed that all imperfect leaders may be mistaken, but they do not say that an offense against power is regarded as division and apostasy. If you're offended, it is seen, because if it is not seen, it's not an offense. And this is undermining of the credibility of the Jehovah, and the congregation, especially the eyewitnesses of the abuse of power, have no choice but to forgive and without grumble to accept any unjust decision, with any lawlessness that may be allowed.  Because, it's all for "unity". And the offense is "discontent, separation," and the decision is taken by those who have offended. That is why the redaction in the book ks10-U came in, that "children victims of pedophiles" are obliged to forgive, even decades later, and in any way not to "take out the dirty linen". And what will you say about collecting "evidence" against disgruntled with listening, denunciations, breaking in and reading personal mail? When Brooklyn was filled up with complains about this practice, many asked: can this practice be considered blackmail and extortion? (1 Cor. 6:10) and finally, in the w 15.11.2011, they replied that "extortion is a requirement not only for transfer of someone else's property, but also for anything not belonging to another person".  But the decision to do so should have been taken by those who did it. And the founder of the tap-in and the gathering of denunciations was the Bethel, where such practice had always existed to deal with disgruntled with "power".

Following this article, the question appeared accordingly: can the elders for such a practice take steps of Matthew 18, since "extortion" is a sin?And here’s the truth, the true face of those who represent the power of the "highest apostles" was revealed.  The branch's response was: The steps of Matthew can be made by anyone, but not by those representing the power of Bethel, because they judge.

Just as in parliaments: those enacting laws are exempt from its compliance. This is the caste and the division into "the top" and "the lower". John 7:49 But this crowd that does not know the law is accursed. This is the main difference between religious courts and even the ordinary governmental judicial system.

When a number of social organizations sued the head of the pharmaceutical company in the USA, for raising the price of a cure for AIDS by 500%, after listening in court  to a multitude of allegations that he had lost consciousness, he said to the prosecutors: "Taking advantage of God's right not to say anything that could testify against me, I choose the right to be silent, and I leave you with the right to prove my guilt."

It was impossible to prove the guilt and the court hearing was closed. That is why, the purpose of religious courts is always to speak out to the victim in order to make a conviction from their own words. 

It is very easy if the victim speaks, because there are no prosecutors or lawyers in the religious courts, and church leaders always act as judges without the slightest idea of jurisprudence.

Theygivetheiropinionasfacts.

And God forbid the criticism of religious leadership. The example of Jesus shows what happens if you choose silence - their further actions. They catch you at night, sending "the right people". They gather all those who, under the cover of darkness, want to scare you for you to lose courage, run, and then in a dark dead-end give a "correct answer," where witnesses are no longer needed, because you will testify against yourself. But if you keep your mouth shut, they'll beat you like Paul in Sanhedrin, you may not be literally beaten, but intimidated as a blind healed by Christ with following words:

"Why is that you're so not happy? Maybe you are an apostate?" And for final verification, after denunciations, hypocrisies, "lies for the truth," they kiss you in cheek and wait ... wait ... for until you open your mouth ...: A heretic is a man who negatively speaks of his church leadership, claiming that his church is spoilt ... Yet any power can exist along with an opposite opinion. However,it’s one thing when you have unjustified criticism, and another case is when it is really this way. However, if there is already a second case, then there is the transformation of power, its metamorphosis, and this is when inquisition appears–

Hydra that exists only because of new victims, repressions and intimidation, but which in these repressions and executions ultimately falls on those who drive it. The highest achievement was considered if the heretic himself would come and confess in his unlawfulness, renouncing his OPINIONS and extradite those accomplices who had gone against the "authority" of the Church, its rules and postulates. This was considered a manifestation of the Holy Spirit. The verse of Judah that "such souls must be caught out of the fire" has undergone a diabolical interpretation, the recognition of guilt before church power on the day of death — did not absolve from punishment, but legitimized joyful verdicts. As in jail – apology admitting your guilt. And if you are a heretic, then forgiveness of the church power is impossible, neither in this century nor in the following one, there is only one choice before you — a confession of your sin in front of a church that interprets and equates it to sin against God.

And there are many examples in history. Did the protestant reformer Jean Calvin differ from the catholic clergy? When Miguel Servet escaped from persecution by the clergy to Geneva, Switzerland, Calvin's community had already been there for a long time, where, over time, everything was also subordinated to its central authority.

Since Servet denied Trinity, Calvin achieved what the Catholic Inquisition could not do. Servetwas captured, charged as a heretic and sentenced to death at the fire. Calvin became such a one who he accused - intolerant of anyone who represented a threat to his authority. When there is a threat of outflows of the fellow believer masses, any Christian community would try to find non-internal causes, not faults of its leadership and dirty deeds, but external allegedly causes. The problems of the church are vile apostates that destroy the faith of the simple-minded. For any statehood, including the one claiming to the Kingdom of God - theocratic, there has always been a need for an external war, like a universal key, to repair its fractured statehood. The fires of the Inquisition, of any form - is a way to hold that power. And this is clear: it becomes possible for the authorities to massively dig the access, to raise the necessary without hesitating and totally please the stupid ... w 1.2.90 What was the situation of people under the domination of such clergy? No one was free to serve God as they wanted or to express opinions contrary the opinions of the clergy.

This clerical intolerance throughout Europe has created an atmosphere of fear. (km 09.2007 box of questions) The church carried denunciation, espionage, and a religious court - an inquisition, to eliminate people who dare to hold different views. They began to be considered to be heretics and were led to the inquisitors, who, by any means, tried to talk them out, and whether by torturing or "kissing" to confess their guilt. Intellectual life was paralyzed by censorship and intolerance and by measures of separation from the church, which were applied to everyone who protested against official theology and accepted not only doctrines, but also explanations, decisions and new clarifications. All of this smashed the personal liberties.. Quoting this Watchtower, astonishing her hypocritical leadership. In public, in front of everybody, so publicly, to condemn the inquisition, and in secret from everybody (ks10-U 5:27 "extortion" w15.11.2011), to use its methods so conveniently. However,lawlessness therefore is lawlessness, it clings, and it rejoices if it happens, but it only lives due to it. It is investigating the statements of those who oppose it, rejoicing of it as an anti-advertising and continues to look for ways not only of their lives, but also of the destruction of those who see it.

1 комментарий:

  1. The inquisitorial committees of Jehovah's Witnesses known as Judicial Committees undoubtedly come from the apostate Christianity that arose from the 2nd century AD as a means of suppressing any dissent in Christianity. If today, with the help of the Inquisition, Jehovah's Witnesses shut their mouths to anyone who doubts the teachings of the Watchtower Society, depriving them of the right to comment at meetings of the assembly, and prohibiting all sectarians from communicating with them, then earlier such people in Christianity were simply killed. But does this circumstance make Jehovah's Witnesses followers of Jesus Christ, who denounced the religious hierarchy and its leaders who forced people to worship Jehovah God according to their instructions and rules?

    ОтветитьУдалить