AN ANALYSIS OF THE EVIDENCE MATERIAL THAT FORMED THE BASIS FOR THE SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT IN THE CASE BETWEEN JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES AND THE STATE

MY BACKGROUND

I was baptised as a Jehovah’s Witness in 1961. For 15 years I was a travelling overseer for Jehovah’s Witnesses.
In 1974 and 1975 I was a teacher at 30 two-week courses for all elders in Norway. Afterwards I was a presiding overseer and coordinator for 35 years in the Majorstua congregation in Oslo. After we moved to Stavern, I served as an elder in the Torstrand congregation in Larvik, until I was disfellowshipped in 2020 because I criticised certain decisions made by the Governing Body. I share the same faith as Jehovah’s Witnesses except for the matters in which I have criticised the leaders, and I consider myself one of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

I hold a Master’s degree in Semitic languages with Greek and Latin, and a doctorate in Semitic linguistics and culture. I have taught at the University of Oslo in various Semitic languages, and I have written 13 books and more than 300 articles.

I have written this presentation to show that I have in-depth knowledge of Jehovah’s Witnesses and an academic background that enables me to conduct studies in accordance with scientific principles. I strive to treat the material in a factual and honest manner.

My discussion of Jehovah’s Witnesses’ teachings and practices in connection with disfellowshipping and resignation has a critical aspect. However, there is no conflict of interest, because in my writings I describe Jehovah’s Witnesses in a positive way, as the only Christian denomination whose beliefs and teachings are in all essential respects directly based on the Bible.

The Religious Communities Act § 6 states:
If a religious or philosophical community, or individuals acting on behalf of the community, use violence or coercion, issue threats, violate children’s rights, breach statutory anti-discrimination laws, or otherwise seriously violate others’ rights and freedoms, the community may be denied or have reduced state subsidies. Subsidies may also be denied or reduced if the community encourages or supports such violations.

Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights:
Freedom of thought, conscience and religion
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance.
In this study I do not address issues related to negative social control and violations of children’s rights. However, I will present data from Jehovah’s Witnesses’ literature that may shed light on whether treatment of those who resign violates the right to freely leave under Article 9 of the ECHR.

There is agreement among the judges that those who resign are treated in the same way as those who have been disfellowshipped. This means that active congregation members shun those who resign, except in cases where contact is unavoidable.

Supreme Court Justice Thomas Chr. Poulsen raised three fundamental questions that may determine whether Jehovah’s Witnesses violate members’ right to freely resign:
Can the treatment of those who resign—being shunned—be perceived as punishment?

Is the treatment of those who resign based on a command or instruction from the religious community, or is it based on individual conscience?

Is the treatment so severe that it may be seen as undue pressure preventing resignation?

I will now discuss these questions in light of what Jehovah’s Witnesses’ literature states.

The conclusion is that the majority judgment is partly based on incorrect information, and a significant reason for this is that Jehovah’s Witnesses have deliberately attempted to mislead the District Court, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court.

WITNESSES WHO RESIGN ARE PUNISHED FOR THEIR ACTION

Supreme Court Justice Thomas Chr. Poulsen pointed to a relevant part of the preparatory works:
(172) The purpose of imposing negative consequences may also be relevant. As stated in the preparatory works, “punishment of persons who leave the community” is an example of violation of others’ rights.
The treatment of disfellowshipped and resigned persons is discussed together in the judgment. However, I will separately examine the purpose of shunning those who resign.

In 1952, The Watchtower contained articles stating that disfellowshipped persons should be shunned. No one should speak to them or have any contact at all. Three reasons are given in Watch Tower literature for this:
To maintain pure worship and show obedience to Jehovah.

To protect the congregation from spiritual and moral contamination.

To pressure the sinner to repent through isolation from family and friends.

The first two points concern the basis for disfellowshipping. The third concerns the treatment of disfellowshipped persons. The reason isolation must not be broken is that even minimal contact is believed to weaken the pressure placed on the disfellowshipped person.

However, if a Witness resigns from the congregation, none of these three reasons apply, since the person has taken a clear stand against Jehovah’s Witnesses. Therefore, it is natural to ask why resigned persons should be shunned.

Until 1985, those who resigned were treated like all non-Witnesses, and no congregational action was taken. The change was expressed in The Watchtower of 15 July 1985.

The Aid to Bible Understanding states that “apostasy” comes from a Greek word meaning “standing away,” but also “abandoning or rebelling.” It adds that those who deliberately leave the Christian congregation become part of “Antichrist” (1 John 2:18,19).

A person who formally withdraws fits this description. By rejecting God’s congregation, he becomes an apostate. A loyal Christian should not associate with such a person.
The Bible shows that someone who rejects God’s congregation is more blameworthy than people in the world. Paul said Christians should not associate with someone claiming to be a brother who lives immorally. Peter compared such a person to a pig returning to its mire.

John said Christians should not receive such a person into their homes. Anyone greeting him becomes a sharer in his wicked works.
This text shows the basis for shunning those who resign: they are described as “antichrist,” worse than immoral people and idolaters.
Since no other reason is given, the requirement to shun them must be understood as punishment for resigning.

THE TREATMENT OF THOSE WHO RESIGN IS BASED ON A COMMAND, NOT INDIVIDUAL CONSCIENCE

Supreme Court Justice Poulsen stated that it matters whether social consequences are imposed through organisational instruction or individual choice.
There is disagreement on this issue. One judge concluded it is a rule-based directive; another that it is a matter of conscience.

In what follows, I will show that Jehovah’s Witnesses have misled the courts by presenting this as a matter of individual conscience, when in reality it is a requirement imposed by the Governing Body.

I will first explain what “conscience matter” means.
Aid to Bible Understanding explains that matters such as eating meat or observing days were conscience matters because no law existed.

Within Jehovah’s Witnesses today, however, conscience matters are only those not regulated by Scripture or by Governing Body directives.

THE BAN ON CERTAIN SEXUAL PRACTICES BETWEEN MARRIED COUPLES

For 27 years, sexual conduct within marriage was a conscience matter. Then in 1973, oral and anal sex were prohibited and became grounds for disfellowshipping.
Later policies changed repeatedly:
1974: grounds for disfellowshipping
1978: returned to conscience matter
1983: again disfellowshipping offence
2026: no longer a disfellowshipping offence
This shows that what is called a “conscience matter” depends on Governing Body decisions.

BLOOD FRACTIONS VERSUS WHOLE BLOOD

The Governing Body forbids whole blood and major components, while allowing blood fractions as a conscience matter.
However, refusal to comply can still lead to disfellowshipping, showing that the distinction is controlled by organisational authority.

DECEPTION OF THE COURTS

Jehovah’s Witness literature clearly states that disfellowshipped and resigned persons are to be shunned.
Yet in court it was argued that treatment of such persons is based on individual conscience.
No such statement exists in official literature.
Therefore, this claim is false.

JEHOVAH’S WITNESSES’ LEADERS CONFIRM THE PRACTICE

During the Australian Royal Commission (2015), leaders confirmed that those who resign or are disfellowshipped lose family and social ties.
They acknowledged that leaving the organisation can be personally devastating.
This demonstrates that resignation results in loss of social network.

IS THIS UNDUE PRESSURE?

The consequences of resignation clearly create strong pressure not to leave.
Whether this constitutes a violation of Article 9 is for the courts to decide.

FAMILY BONDS ARE NOT BROKEN – A QUALIFIED TRUTH

The court stated that family bonds are not broken.
However, while legal bonds remain, most social and emotional bonds are effectively severed or severely restricted.

IMPACT ON CHILDREN

Children who are disfellowshipped or resign experience:
social isolation
loss of friendships
loss of extended family contact
emotional distress
belief that they are condemned by God
This can have severe psychological consequences.

CONCLUSION

The study addresses three questions:
Shunning constitutes punishment
It is based on organisational command, not conscience
It creates undue pressure not to resign
Jehovah’s Witnesses have, in this view, misled the courts regarding their actual practices.

In the English version of the JW org news article about the Norwegian Supreme Court ruling they say "the government violated the religious freedom of Jehovah's Witnesses when it deregistered our national legal entity."

The Norwegian version correctly says the State deregistered the religion itself.

Those are not the same thing.

The Norwegian State did NOT dissolve a JW legal corporation. It removed JW from the state registry for religious communities because of their shunning practices involving baptized minors.

Interesting that the wording is only changed in English but not Norwegian, where locals would immediately spot the deception.

Here you can see ask the announcements regarding JW legal identity. You will see there is nothing about any deregistration of JW legal identity:

https://w2.brreg.no/kunngjoring/hent_nr.jsp?orgnr=879492742

To see for yourself, go to the article on JW org (in the News section) in Norwegian, and translate the text to English.

They know that they are lying.

https://preview.redd.it/gsre4xe34v0h1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e66f0d3471a3c669e3c48a14cdc10f236293b274

With thanks to Jan Frode Nilsen for this information.

Celebration at journey’s end

The year-long dispute between the Norwegian state and Jehovah'sWitnesses has now come to an end.

I have been a part of this entire journey, and it has been unbelievably long and eventful. I have testified in the witness box three times in three years, and now finally got to sit in the hall when everything was concluded in the Norwegian Supreme Court. 

Last Thursday we received the verdict. The Supreme Court chose 3 to 2 to annul the entire process.

I am not a lawyer, but someone who has experienced the whole process from the inside, with an upbringing and half a life as a Jehovah's Witness, and active participation in court. When I read the judgment, I note this:

• The Supreme Court has now ruled that the word "disfellowshipping and shunning" is the most descriptive words for the practice, and that Jehovah's Witnesses' own use of words undercommunicates. The Supreme Court cuts through the whitewashed language. I note that Vårt Land in its editorial chooses to follow the Supreme Court and use the word that best "expresses the consequences and seriousness". From now on, I will also use the word I grew up with, the word that describes me and my friends. Disfellowshipped and shunned.

• The Supreme Court states that there is no protection against negative social control, neither in Norwegian legislation nor in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Nor as a condition for a payment of tax money. The Supreme Court sets the list of things that are criminalized in Norway, such as honour-based violence and forced genital mutilation. Section 6 of the Religious Communities Act is thus stone dead, these are things the police should handle, not the County Governor.

• The Supreme Court points out that "the process appears more gentle than before" and cites the Watchtower's adjustment of the practice in 2024, i.e. several years after the decision from the State was made, as an argument that the same decision was wrong. There is a direct correlation between the State's decision and the adjusted practice, the adjustment came when Jehovah's Witnesses lost in the District Court in 2024, which on the contrary shows the value of the decision that the Supreme Court now annulled. 

• The Supreme Court writes "Given the potential the disfellowshipping process has to affect the mental health of minors, I will not rule out that children's rights may be considered violated in individual cases", but they call for documentation of the extent. They state that the practice can destroy children's mental health, butreject that the state can use §6 to prevent as was politically desired when the law was written. When you have a documented practice that obviously entails a risk of harm to children's mental health, which the Supreme Court "does not want to rule out", shouldn't the state have a responsibility to do something preventive, to protect these children before they become a numerical basis? The dissent argues against this by writing "it is sufficient that the society encourages such violations".

• It was the right to free withdrawal that divided the Supreme Court 3 against 2. Both parties confirm that the ECHR protects the right to free withdrawal, but the majority sets the bar high, referring to physical punishment or direct obstruction. Whipping apostates in the town square would justify intervention, to put it to the extreme. It is not enough to use family ties as an active, systematic lever for the court's majority.

Here, the minority has marked a strong dissent; "When a child knows that to opt out means that contact with their parents and any siblings... is actually radically changed—I believe that the pressure to refrain from withdrawal must be considered undue." 

 

What would you choose if you were forced? 50 lashes, or never again be able to talk to your closest family? Your own children? You tell me.

 

• The Supreme Court writes that they miss witness statements from those who have not yet dared to resign, but they forget that several of us as witnesses have actually been disfellowshipped and shun in the process. For my part, I told my story while I was still a paper member. I was then disfellowshipped shortly afterwards. There is an uninterrupted line from that process at the time and into the witness box. Witness Rolf Furuli, who triggered the first investigative case, was also disfellowshipped and shunned when he began to talk about his views. Several of us started this process as witnesses, but such things are perishable. You are disfellowshipped shortly afterwards. In other words, they demand a completely fresh victim, someone who in the witness box is willing to blow the last remnants of family ties, there and then. Those who have not resigned yet have a reason for it. By appearing as a witness, they will lose what is holding them in. I myselfknow of several who wanted to do it, but couldn't. What right does the Supreme Court have to demand such a sacrifice from individuals in life crises? Do they not understand that it is impossible to bear witness to the fear of disfellowshipping without at the same time becoming just that?  Disfellowshipped and shunned

 

There is a lot here that is difficult to read. The Supreme Court's majority has swallowed a great deal of Jehovah's Witnesses' legally adapted whitewashing of the practice, presented by skilled lawyers. They show a cold distance, without understanding of the complexity, what it is actually like to be a small human being trapped in this spiderweb with no way out. 

But there we meet a completely different understanding now, out among the people in society. And that is where the victory after this journey lies for us.

For four years, we have received the full attention of Jehovah's Witnesses, at the very top level, enough to adjust their practices and remove much of their worst material. Light that gave new light.

 

For four years, we got the media's attention. We got chronicles and interviews published, new voices were added, new fates. New voices to the choir.

 

For four years, we created a sense of unity. An arena where we found each other and lifted each other. Out of the loneliness, exclusion and shame, into a sense of pride. An identity where we own our story as disfellowshipped and shunned who dare to speak up. A whole world of shunned people came together and shared the journey with us.  

 

Not in the shame and loneliness the system is designed for, but with pride and a shared identity as people who paid a high price to get out. A cost most people in this country never have to pay for anything. A price most people cannot even picture themselves everhave to pay.

I, and those who were on the journey with me are now celebrating that we, a bunch of disfellowshipped and shunned outcasts, managed to stand tall in this storm until the end of the journey. Together.

That’s a victory nobody can take away from us.

https://preview.redd.it/81nrtckwzu0h1.jpg?width=1020&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe06e435ced1f5d50ebf202d46f0d03b58b31c9a

Imagine those Governing Body members whizzing about in space at angelic speed and meeting God! I bet they can't wait. They really can’t celebrate human achievement at all - space travel gets downgraded, with rockets and engineering treated as inferior to “angelic” travel. This article is still available in the WT online library as it is post 1950 Watchtower.

https://preview.redd.it/prj46babolzg1.jpg?width=451&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=de8b3588ec42fb1458ca30365562257809812433

https://preview.redd.it/noe72nhdclzg1.jpg?width=359&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8cbe32c57080f57e5db4ac88d55f987cb64f3bcb

(Golden Age was the previous name of Awake! magazine.)

​I am reposting some old content for all the new people visiting this subreddit, helping those questioning (PIMQ*/coming out of JW or are wanting to get out (PIMO), or even those who left a while ago (POMI) but still think that this was "the Truth", and hopefully some current JW (PIMI), to see what God's "one true channel" have said over the years. Truth doesn't change, so when we see the contradictions and the clearly crazy stuff they've said it should make us wonder, if that was the truth then, is it the truth now?)

A lot of these older quotes I share are often dismissed as “old light” from earlier periods, but they form part of the organization’s development over time. Dismissing older literature as “old light” plays into the organization’s framing, because it shuts down critical thinking around examining how teachings have changed with shifting worldviews and political contexts of the time (sometimes complete reversals, and how the organization has arrived at its current doctrinal positions. Really, the organization, if chosen by, and directed by Jesus as they claim, should never have been influenced by world-views at all!)

We need to look at the organization’s historical material both to avoid being misled and to see what has actually been said over the years, including some extremely questionable statements.

You have to know the past to understand the present.

*PIMQ= Physically In (JW) Mentally Questioning

PIMO= Physically In (JW) Mentally Out

POMI= Physically Out (JW) Mentally In

PIMI=  Physically In (JW) Mentally In

I have seen a leaked letter to the elders in Brazil for May 2026. In it they are updated on donations in Brazil. In the last 2 years the donations haven't been sufficient to cover expenses and monthly financial support is being received from the world headquarters.

Elders are told no announcement is to be made to congregations, and that nobody should be pressured to donate, but elders are to "be positive in reminding publishers, when appropriate, of the privilege each one has of "honoring Jehovah with their valuable things" and of contributing "as he has resolved in the heart."

The elders are thanked for their collaboration on this important matter.

In the words of George Orwell:

All history was a palimpsest, scraped clean and reinscribed exactly as often as was necessary

But The Wayback machine remembers...

https://preview.redd.it/bd8gyh9h0iyg1.jpg?width=1272&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b7c684dab709f39afd2589c169e97f8a3fc5f0c4

When you look at the same page now, you'll see what's missing:

https://preview.redd.it/6vgtik2j0iyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=32a9c78e5b64a611b915bc016e80c84f268bf3f2

You can do a search for blood, or blood fractions etc and get the reference to this Kingdom Ministry...

https://preview.redd.it/k2hculgx0iyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e99bd9535e63281b84c8d310f70f23ff42af0c51

https://preview.redd.it/wmyaos4y0iyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=06e9cd40e4a3b9697ef7044e21eca080a1bb2a53

But what happens when you click on the references?...

THIS:

Yes that's a blank page

More references to the document, which lead to a blank page:

https://preview.redd.it/48jz03z53iyg1.jpg?width=860&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9d4bca5dcd031f598da2eb394392a150951a65a6

You can also still find this reference to it on JW org:

https://preview.redd.it/ek9u3iz41iyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7142090f3db96953555c3501e4a10461c426845a

But what do you get when you click on the link?

THIS:

https://preview.redd.it/gyq0f9071iyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=635daa932185ede2c9f396812288305e78005fb2

Ironically the now deleted insert had the instruction to "SAVE" it!

https://preview.redd.it/l3a8frr34iyg1.jpg?width=1139&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=31740aa3e8d8e4c82bf1c46cb00ef2449efd474f

You won't find this anymore

More words from George Orwell's 1984

The past was erased, the erasure was forgotten, the lie became truth

So if you want a copy, it's here, just scroll down to the November edition:

http://www.watchtowerwayback.org/jw-wb/English/Our%20Kingdom%20Ministry/2006%20Our%20Kingdom%20Ministry.pdf

I wonder what will disappear next...

One more Orwell quote to conclude:

Who controls the past controls the future: who

controls the present controls the past

We can assume the latest episodes of the JW video series The Good News According to Jesus will be scary for kids. 

Mark Sanderson says episodes 4-6 which will be played at the 2026 convention, are available to view and download on the JW website and app from today. He says they’re leaving it up to each family to decide whether to watch them before the convention.

He says “This adjustment” allows parents the chance to talk over what’s in the videos with their children in advance. 

He says that parents should read the Bible accounts with their children, perhaps during family worship and to remind them that these bible accounts are there to show how Jesus is more powerful than demons and that there is nothing to fear from wicked spirits.

Back in the May 2020 JW Broadcasting, Stephen Lett said they’d had a few parents writing in expressing concern about their videos depicting scenes that could have an effect on children (and then kinda blames the parents for shielding them from seeing anything portraying acts of violence!)

https://reddit.com/link/1t0onhm/video/4uil7uo5vhyg1/player

This was  later reiterated by Anthony Morris III in 2020.

https://preview.redd.it/5f94vv27vhyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3d3cdc4a3489cb942d51948e7db1da9eb1dc554c

In Sweden, a Jehovah’s Witness convention in 2018 included the public screening of dramatized Bible videos to audiences that included children. Authorities argued the material should have been submitted to the Swedish Media Council (Statens medieråd) for age classification under national film law. The case went to court, where it was found that the videos had been shown publicly without the required classification. The conviction was upheld on appeal, with the court concluding that applying film classification rules in this context did not violate protections for freedom of religion or expression, since the material was being publicly exhibited in a way comparable to film screenings under Swedish law.

Translate in browser 

https://www.domstol.se/en/nyheter/2020/02/dom-i-mal-om-offentlig-visning-av-film-for-barn/

In Quebec, a similar case involving a convention drama (“The Story of Josiah: Love Jehovah, Hate Evil”) initially resulted in a fine for failing to submit the video for film classification. However, in 2023 the Court of Quebec ruled in favor of Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Canada, finding that applying film classification law to religious teaching videos shown during worship would infringe constitutional protections for freedom of religion, expression, and parental rights.

Translate in browser:

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1989856/temoins-jehovah-loi-cinema-quebec

The organization has put out some pretty terrifying content for kids in recent years. These are screenshots from 2017's Remember the Wife of Lot, played at conventions.

https://preview.redd.it/tmijqmzjxhyg1.jpg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ebd8065c62f915670b4e801c369ecbe095ffe99f

https://preview.redd.it/dx4no6rkxhyg1.jpg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1efb794676884e152cccb660376acb28f9379de9

I guess we find out later today if the new Jesus videos are as scary as this!

The ruling is 38 pages long and there is a 20 image limit on posts here on Reddit. I'll share the first 20 here and the rest in the comments.

Here's a quote:

“In my opinion, the interference entailed by the refusal of registration is proportionate. First, I emphasize that the interference is not particularly far-reaching. It does not entail any ban on the activities of Jehovah's Witnesses in Norway, which may continue as before. Nor does it deprive the religious community of its status as an independent legal entity or its legal capacity. Although the refusal of registration means that Jehovah's Witnesses no longer have the right to perform marriages, it is still possible to enter into a religious marriage within the congregation. The fact that the rules on confidentiality regarding confessions do not apply carries some weight, but this too cannot be considered particularly burdensome. I have also noted that the government is considering proposing changes to the regulations on this point, so that the duty of confidentiality will also apply to religious communities that have lost their registration, cf. the Ministry of Children and Families' consultation paper of August 18, 2025, section 4.2.2.

On the other hand, consideration for the rights of others that is, the right to leave a religious community-must carry significant weight. The right to leave a religious community is part of the freedom of religion, which enjoys particularly strong protection. The practices of Jehovah's Witnesses involve using close relationships as a means of pressure to prevent members from leaving. This is particularly problematic when it comes to children.”

https://preview.redd.it/f88l4k3hpcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bd0769e450e3f4c15dc3c0cd0626acceeafa2a01

https://preview.redd.it/9pwovwohpcyg1.jpg?width=1251&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3d8050f2c980e61e06745ac5e9c17d20b32ac4a4

https://preview.redd.it/75csk3oipcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5e156a369dd22d284068c69e28aac080c480061c

https://preview.redd.it/7yb7cwcjpcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f540ad75f9a7dc662ccce83b1363a58477e420e8

https://preview.redd.it/oq3qpp4kpcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ceb7c47314edf19332b4c08a084eea24e302fb21

https://preview.redd.it/ln6a1c4lpcyg1.jpg?width=1263&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1ec58a2c3828b4767ea0b19d8aef20734d265797

https://preview.redd.it/ijo415olpcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8829f820f256634b6959a6fe0f78b647b4f9fbbe

https://preview.redd.it/u1trubempcyg1.jpg?width=1275&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=afea5c1c2ffe0335a009a5d3bf15f9d80098bce7

https://preview.redd.it/fgkiljxmpcyg1.jpg?width=1262&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c48725ad672ac9a2d115357268d9e4539ffc3a1c

https://preview.redd.it/fhx1ueynpcyg1.jpg?width=1247&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4a3681b33c21f96c334527707ff8fd11011b889f

https://preview.redd.it/mahzkg8ppcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ba9aca94373301616a6ddf11577e22d47c379d9

https://preview.redd.it/c27bf2gqpcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=78d36f5d6349952145e313d68d3782c34afa3108

https://preview.redd.it/uhvqjf6rpcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8ce42d8e338450549111b663f88a690179f2d7a3

https://preview.redd.it/gzy4skvrpcyg1.jpg?width=1255&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d4d8d2adc66e1f1f17bdb2d103bce78dcb1069df

https://preview.redd.it/wxmkplhspcyg1.jpg?width=1259&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9120cd48651bc2e1e6f6ce6254efc47f70c5924a

https://preview.redd.it/eejhoa8tpcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=36cb211c8ce22087e267a6a5d5695aad43b029f9

https://preview.redd.it/wwnbanstpcyg1.jpg?width=1263&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1a7f93e0b659712f2c2fd63ae8b74e7b3a13a3f9

https://preview.redd.it/3oy488cupcyg1.jpg?width=1260&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ac91a926bce7f23116260ab3d96505949864c4bb

https://preview.redd.it/tgp7d5wupcyg1.jpg?width=1256&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5f61a6fbf5454ca6fdb19491a8b5e6df03e4d22e

https://preview.redd.it/6hx7glgvpcyg1.jpg?width=1217&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=211cb22e8e62821ca85b950685bb893a71db0063

See comments below for 18 more images

https://preview.redd.it/hce7mmiomcyg1.jpg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=09217cb3181c445c15d96550d145b0f65ceede8b

PUBLISHED 3/04/26 - 12:51

LAST UPDATED 3/26/04 - 3:25 PM

- "It's disappointing," says former Jehovah's Witness Jan Frode Nilsen.

He reads aloud from the ruling while on the phone with Dagen.

- It was two judges to three, so a very narrow margin. But it's very disappointing, Nilsen repeats.

The prominent Jehovah's Witnesses critic is known for having come forward with stories of social isolation and broken family ties after he left the religious community in 2019.

He must now acknowledge that there was no victory in the Supreme Court.

- It comes down to the burden of proof-that is, there is insufficient evidence that children's rights are being violated.

Government Attorney Liv-Inger Gone Gabrielsen, who represented the state in the case, also emphasizes that two justices dissented from the Supreme Court's ruling.

The Ministry of Children and Families is pleased that the case has been thoroughly reviewed by the Supreme Court. The fact that the ruling was not unanimous shows that the case was not straightforward. The Ministry and the State Administrator will now begin work on preparing new decisions in accordance with the ruling, Gabrielsen writes in an email to Dagen.

A Positive Note

Nilsen has been a key voice in the process that led to Jehovah's Witnesses losing state funding in Norway, and he has testified in court cases against the religious community three times.

The critic is nevertheless not entirely surprised by the outcome:

- "It's a difficult case. When two judges issue dissenting opinions, it's a very close call. And in that sense, this is an acknowledgment," says Nilsen.

And he believes that the legal process has had a positive impact on the religious community.

https://preview.redd.it/4doq84nzmcyg1.jpg?width=1219&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b5248c197a631cf87f9f2789f38e3fd20d764f7d

- Jehovah's Witnesses say they have adjusted a good deal of their practices. There are still problematic issues, but the entire international community of former Witnesses sees the changes that have been made in Norway.

- "Perhaps it's because they see that it has created legal problems, but perhaps some within Jehovah's Witnesses have also realized that this is going too far and that they can't stand behind it," Nilsen wonders.

-The most important change they've made is to move away from having a disciplinary committee deal with children under 18.

Now it's the parents who are supposed to have these conversations with their children, and that was completely unthinkable a few years ago, says Nilsen.

- Can't say it out loud

Sigrid Olsen grew up without Christmas celebrations or birthdays because her mother joined the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Olsen wrote the novel "When You Pick a Flower*, published in 2020-- not long before Jehovah's Witnesses were denied state funding and registration as a religious community.

While working on the book, she interviewed several former Jehovah's Witnesses-including one of the witnesses from the earlier court cases.

Sigrid Olsen, former member

When she heard the news about the Supreme Court's decision, she got angry.

- "My first thought was a bad word, in proper Nynorsk, but I can't say it out loud here," Olsen tells Dagen.

She believes, however, that it was not unexpected.

- I followed the case in the Supreme Court and saw that not all the justices agreed.

Seeing the impact of the trial

Olsen nevertheless believes that the trial in Norway has influenced the worldwide organization in several areas.

- While the trial has been ongoing, Jehovah's Witnesses have relaxed several requirements. You are allowed to say hello to outcasts and you can use your own blood for planned surgeries, to name a few. It is quite clear that this is a consequence of the case in Norway.

Governing Body Update #3 comes out tomorrow…

Mark Sanderson hosts

No big announcements, just:

-The convention videos for “The Good News According to Jesus” series will be released.

-Persecution in Russia is discussed.

-A new school building in Denmark (probably that expensive hotel they bought recently) is revealed.

I don’t have any more detail than this.

Correction: said “Norway’s” in the title, meant “Denmark’s”! (Posted Norway too many times today!)

Jehovah's Witnesses in Norway have won a sensational case in the country's Supreme Court, securing the movement both state support and continued recognition as a religious community.

This is stated in a decision from the Supreme Court of Norway, which Ekstra Bladet has in its possession.

'Decisions to deny Jehovah's Witnesses state support and registration are invalid,' the judgment states, among other things.

Continue reading (no paywall, translate in browser):

https://ekstrabladet.dk/nyheder/samfund/jehovas-vidner-i-norge-vinder-sag-i-hoejesteret-det-er-trist/11163947

The glandular activity of Noah's children is discussed and that the humid warmth of the Edenic world would have kept the glands of men from Adam to Noah in a womblike state.

Racial differences are due to disease aggravated by a change in climate, variation in food, and intermarriage!

https://preview.redd.it/00el8jjn17yg1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=46dcea16a1e50c6f3c4234ab8723da5e41045143

The article goes on to discuss vegetarianism - "Perhaps one of Noah's sons loved animals greatly and could not eat the flesh of his pets" - this led to eventual animal worship.

Meanwhile another drive lived on meat and produced body heat at a faster rate.

https://preview.redd.it/ldsb9d4m37yg1.jpg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b01901ba454e28e104c421bf09163c1d594df0da

The article concludes by emphasizing degeneration, not evolution, and how after Babel, intermarriage between races intensified came to be looked upon as criminal.

Remember this is from the same organization who believed "colored brethren” would be restored to the “grand original standard” of perfection? -The Watch Tower April 1,1914:

https://preview.redd.it/o1d8tn0z47yg1.jpg?width=702&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0bc29766143a8a8848c10fdd0962ef82adbcd46b

A belief that still appears to linger even now:

Don't worry, it's gonna be all white - Watchtower, August 2020