ComfortMyPeople

Sure. If you think true Christianity is measured like blood pressure then I have no wish to argue with you. I believe JW's are fairly unique among Christian denominations in this regard. Perhaps Jesus' direction in Matt 6:3 doesn't actually apply to us, and perhaps also the Bible just omitted the need to measure people by "hours of work" by accident.
If you truly believe that then I don't wish to dispute with you. Some people are suggesting that it's the right way to handle things, and I'm simply pointing out the mindset and counter-productive fruits that can result by being constantly oriented in this way.
Personally I don't feel that any scriptural instruction is for no reason, but I appreciate that others rationalize differently.

Thank you for posting such a lovely poem.  I can relate to this poem very well.  Recently (within the last few years) I was in a deep depression.  I would go to meeting arriving just as the song started, sit in the back and leave as soon as the last song and prayer were over.  I didn't have the capacity to visit and the noise afterwards was very overwhelming.   I just wanted to be in the "Satan Free Zone" as I call our meetings.   There were new friends who had moved in and probably thought I was disfellowshipped.  I was visited by 2 sisters while out in service and also the brothers made a point of visiting me on a couple of occasions.  I poured out my heart to them and they were so kind and put no pressure on me, just let me know I was valuable to Jehovah, Jesus and the congregation using scriptures and gentle words.   I love them for that, that is true shepherding (sisters included).  I have recovered now and try to pay-it-forward in service and to my brothers and sisters; giving hugs and kind words seasoned with a sense of humor when appropriate.   I make it a point to look for those who don't feel included so that I can share the love I have with them so that it may encourage them to keep going.   Why should we only be searching for sheep to come through the front door when we are losing so many out the back door?  

Surprisingly there are many people who do enjoy that, but like you Anna I personally am not one of them. My wife and I love our brothers and sisters and enjoy their company, but when we get home from a day of service, we just want to chill or use what little time is left to get stuff done. "Dropping by unannounced" is not something I've ever been cool with - although I know many others are. If someone drives past my house without "just dropping by," I view that as an act of consideration toward me - it's not too much to ask for a brief text or phone call first to ensure it's not an inopportune time. It's happened on more than one occasion for example that it's well into the evening, we have finished supper and I'm sitting on my lounger watching a favourite TV show in my PJ's with a remote in one hand and a glass of Scotch in the other...knock, knock, ding, dong...family with kids in tow "just drops by" = awkward.  

I used to when I was a teenager. Spontaneous drop ins were great as there was an excuse to take a break from homework or some other mundane task! But now our lives are so planned out, even our relaxation time, that any interruption is not really welcomed especially if you have no time to prepare physically or mentally. I thought I would personally kill the two elders that "dropped in while passing by" after I had had sinus surgery and looked like I had been severely beaten up. I was resting on my chaise, still partially drugged up,  and lo and behold, I see these two guys walking past my window. Normally I wouldn't have answered the door, but the combination of the hydrocodone and my fuzzy mind, I thought it was something important, I had no idea it was going to be one of our elders and the CO! I hadn't told anyone about the surgery, and they must have wondered why I was absent for his visit, plus it was raining and they were looking for things to do, lol. Anyway, the week after that I took that elder aside and wagging my finger at him  I jokingly but seriously told him to never ever do that to me again! I think because they are guys, brothers don't understand that women like to put themselves together before accepting visitors.

Where they disrespectful?
Ex 18:17: Moses’ father-in-law said to him: “What you are doing is not good.” A non-Israelite making amends to the greatest prophet!
2Sam 12:7: Then Nathan said to David: “You are the man! (Murderer and adulterer!)
1Chro 21:3 “But Joab said: “May Jehovah multiply his people 100 times! My lord the king, are not all of them already servants of my lord? Why does my lord want to do this? Why should he become a cause of guilt to Israel?” The anointed interpellated as causing trouble to the nation!
Gal 2:14 “But when I saw that they were not walking in step with the truth of the good news I said to Cephas before them all…” Even the behavior was anything but exemplary.
Likewise, JWInsider, me and other have scriptural evidence that disagreement is not equal to disrespect. We’re not saying the GB are persons that deceitfully want to exploit us. On the contrary, many of us think these brothers are, basically faithful and prudents. We would not want to be marked with these strong words: (Jud 8) “…despising authority, and speaking abusively of glorious ones…”
But we think the brothers in the GB are LIKE US… mere mortals, mere humans, imperfects. With their phobias and philias. They, like me, are afraid of losing authority or credibility when recognizing mistakes. They, like me, are afraid the humbles ones perhaps start thinking this is not the correct religion when seeing mistakes…
Do these commentaries make others to stumble?
Do vaccines hurt? Absolutely. The necessary hurt to get immunity. You probably are aware Native Americans almost disappeared because their bodies lacked defenses. And this is our intention (JWInsider and me). To inoculate defenses against doubts asking the similar questions these other brothers would find, sooner or later.
And don’t obviate the obvious! We’re are active JW. We’re giving support to this people. We’re following the direction of the brothers on authority… year after year, for decades.

I’m exhausted following this topic.
I think this thread about 1914 reflects very well the negative aspects reflected in these words:
(1 Timothy 1:4) “…nor to pay attention to false stories and to genealogies. Such things end up in nothing useful but merely give rise to speculations rather than providing anything from God in connection with faith…”
1914. Only available to intelligent people.
When I was a teenager I felt very proud with myself because I was able to explain by heart the seven times prophecy. Perhaps only a third in my congregation, or less, could explain this reasonably well.
Nowadays, I doubt if a few of the brotherhood could express intelligibly why we believe in the importance of this date. So, what about this basic principle?
(1 Corinthians 1:26) “…For you see his calling of you, brothers, that there are not many wise in a fleshly way, …” I’m amazed with the struggle with different technics to determine the accuracy or lack of exactitude of 1914. Even astronomic calculus with specialized software! Thanks, JWInsider! Plus a lot of historical and archeological skills.
And, by the way. The humbler and less able to explain “deep” ideas like this, the more faith I see that these brothers have. More than me.
1914. A polysemic date.
JWInsider has explained to the satiety that from its very beginning this date was conceived with other and changing meanings. Perhaps the most important change was to think that Christ’s presence started in 1874, and 1914 would mark the end of the human domination on Earth. Our present understanding is, as you all know, that Jesus started as king and his presence at that date.
1914. We need more than the Bible
But other post, recently, has put it very clear, and I fully agree:
(2 Timothy 3:16, 17) “All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial … so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work…” But now, it turns out that I must learn Archeology and History to determine the exact date Jerusalem was conquered 2500 years ago!
1914. In opposition to the spirit and the letter of Jesus’s words.
The advice in the following passages is to live each day as if the Master could arrive in any moment. No trying to determine the length of a period of time, in order to calculate the prolongation of the “last days”,
(Matthew 24:42) “Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming…” But we officially believe Jesus really came in 1914, and from this date he is present… in fact ruling! The idea of two different kinds of arrivals (1914 as king, later as executor), this differentiation is not in the Bible. There is only ONE arrival.
 1914. It’s a date. The Christians didn’t utilize dates as a foundation of their faith
*** w14 2/15 p. 27 Questions From Readers ***
Could the first-century Jews have calculated the time of the Messiah’s arrival on the basis of the prophecy of the 70 weeks recorded at Daniel 9:24-27? While that possibility cannot be ruled out, it cannot be confirmed. The fact is that there were many conflicting interpretations of the 70 weeks in Jesus’ day, and none come close to our present understanding.
In reality, we all know no Jesus nor Paul in writing to the Hebrews made use of the dates in the 70 weeks prophecy to proof that Jesus was the Messiah. Why should we different regarding 1914?
1914. Violates the “five fingers” process.
As I’ve expressed in other post. If we take verses on each side of the Bible we are incurring in a real danger of twisting the Scriptures. Let’s see.
·        What scriptural proof is there to consider Nebuchadnezzar type of Christ? ·        What scriptural proof is there to think the Nab. kingship represents God’s kingdom? ·        What proof is there to think the madness of the king represents the situation with God’s kingdom? ·        With what authority can we apply the rule of one day for a year in Num 14:34 or Eze 4:6 to Daniel’s prophecy? ·        Could we sure the term “times” in Daniel 4 and in Lu. 21:24 apply to the same period? o   What’s the basis for this? o   Does not it seem to fit word for word Lu 21:24 and Rev. 11:2? o   Why, then, to base all our knowledge about the last days in a mere possibility? 1914 Alternatives. First Century fulfillment?
JWInsider has pointed out the idea that Jesus was crowned in the first century. Even postulating that Revelation 12 was fully fulfilled at that time. I think that to consider that important parts of Revelation were fulfilled in the first century is going to the other extreme. It’s my humble opinion.
Yes, it’s true that Revelation mention some past happenings, well direct or indirectly.
(Revelation 1:5, 6) “… who set us free from our sins by means of his own blood— and he made us to be a kingdom, priests…” And mention some of the developments as if they had already happened
(Revelation 11:15) “…The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ…” But we could reach to another explanation WITHOUT HANGING in 1914. This better explained in another place. Suffice for now to think that these happenings took place neither in the first century nor in 1914.
What problems arise with the first century fulfillment of Revelation?
Rev 11:15-18 links the start of the kingdom to the resurrection time. These verses are a preamble of the next chapters, including the vision of chapter 12.
(Revelation 11:15, 18) “…you have taken your great power and begun ruling as king …and the appointed time came for the dead to be judged and to reward your slaves the prophets and the holy ones…” (Revelation 12:10-17) “…Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the Kingdom …So the dragon became enraged at the woman and went off to wage war with the remaining ones of her offspring, ...” There are remaining ones because some of them are on heaven while other are still enduring on earth. So, the resurrection has already begun in Rev. 12 time
But the resurrection didn’t happen in the first century:
(1 Thessalonians 4:13-18) “…we do not want you to be ignorant about those who are sleeping in death …that we the living who survive to the presence of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first…”  
How many times was David crowned?
·        (2 Samuel 2:4) “…Then the men of Judah came, and there they anointed David as king over the house of Judah…”
·        (2 Samuel 5:3) “…So all the elders of Israel came to the king at Hebron, and King David made a covenant with them in Hebron before Jehovah. Then they anointed David as king over Israel.”
In the same way, why could not be possible to view Jesus crowned in the first century, when he went to heaven, as many verses seems to probe and as JWInsider has aptly showed us?
And, at the same time, why could not be possible to expect a new crowning ceremony in the future, in the Revelation time?
I find it possible, unlike JWInsider opinion, because I think he (JWI) has mentioned the riding of the horsemen of Revelation 6 starts with the resurrection of Christ in 33, and the wars, pests and famine are the habitual conditions from then. But this is hard to me to believe. Why?
Because the “second” coronation (Rev.6) is marked with victories, conquers (Rev.6:2). But what happened from the end of first century until recent times? The apostasy, the dark ages… the contrary to victory.
I’ve already presented my view, error prone obviously, that the colored horses could mean victories of the King against enemies, not society conditions.
And, finally, in this way, we have that it’s perfectly possible the modern time fulfillment of Revelation (above all chapter 12), the coronation of Jesus in 33 (mainly, but not only over his congregation ) and modern times coronation when Jehovah order Him: “conquer your enemies”
Please, please, please… it isn’t necessary 1914 at all! What if the coronation, most of the Revelation fulfillment is still future? Well, this is theme for other day…

Yes, Shiwiii, perhaps is as false as this false teaching:
(Galatians 2:11-13) “However, when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him face-to-face, because he was clearly in the wrong. For before certain men from James arrived, he used to eat with people of the nations; but when they arrived, he stopped doing this and separated himself, fearing those of the circumcised class. The rest of the Jews also joined him in putting on this pretense” Now, what if I openly declare the 1914 is a false teaching! I believe there is in the God’s word principles to guide my behavior:
(1 Corinthians 15:12) “Now if it is being preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how is it that some among you say there is no resurrection of the dead?” In this way, the Bible discourages spread different teachings between brothers. Of course, you’re saying: “it isn’t the same 1914 that the resurrection” … and you’re right.
But the Bible obliges me to refrain, to abstain to exercise some rights to benefit others: not eat meat or not make secular work on sabbath to protect the conscience of others.
(Romans 14:5-12) "One man judges one day as above another; …The one who observes the day observes it to Jehovah… the one who does not eat does not eat to Jehovah, … Not one of us, in fact, lives with regard to himself only… But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you also look down on your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. … So, then, each of us will render an account for himself to God." Even Jesus Crist follow a “false teaching” to avoid stumble others:
(Matthew 17:27) “But that we do not cause them to stumble, go to the sea, cast a fishhook, and take the first fish that comes up, and when you open its mouth, you will find a silver coin. Take that and give it to them for me and you.”  
So, my attitude is not stumble others. And regarding the person on charge of teaching to the worldwide brotherhood, well, I’ve quoted before:
“each of us will render an account for himself to God”

I find it difficult and often embarrassing to discuss with people if these times are worse than the previous ones. I dislike focusing in “bad news”, you know: these earthquakes are more bad, the wars are more bad… Above all when my interlocutor is a well-informed person. This person easily could bring to my attention data as follows (from our publications)

*** g04 5/22 pp. 4-5 The Age-Old Fight for Better Health ***
[The Black Death] Within four years, say some historians, the plague spread throughout Europe and about a third of the population lost their life—perhaps between 20 million and 30 million people. Even remote Iceland was decimated. It is said that in the Far East, the population of China slumped from 123 million at the beginning of the 13th century to 65 million during the 14th century, apparently as a result of the plague and the accompanying famine.

No previous epidemic, war, or famine had ever caused such widespread suffering. “It was a disaster without equal in human history,” notes the book Man and Microbes. “Somewhere between one-quarter and one-half of the people in Europe, North Africa, and parts of Asia perished.”
The Americas escaped the ravages of the Black Death, thanks to their isolation from the rest of the world. But oceangoing ships soon brought that isolation to an end. In the 16th century, a wave of epidemics that proved even more lethal than the plague ravaged the New World.

In 1518 an outbreak of smallpox erupted on the island of Hispaniola. Native Americans had never been exposed to smallpox before, and the effect was catastrophic. A Spanish eyewitness estimated that only a thousand people on the island survived. The epidemic soon spread to Mexico and Peru, with similar consequences.

The following century, when the Pilgrim settlers arrived in the area of Massachusetts in North America, they discovered that smallpox had practically cleared the land of inhabitants. “The natives, they are near all dead of the smallpox,” wrote Pilgrim leader John Winthrop.

Other epidemics followed smallpox. According to one source, by a century after Columbus’ arrival, imported diseases had wiped out 90 percent of the population of the New World. The population of Mexico had shrunk from 30 million to 3 million, that of Peru from 8 million to one million.
****************************
Yes, now I should mention there are more epidemies, wars and so. I, instead, prefer to discuss about the value of Bible advice, the gems about God’s personality and similar, positive ideas.

As JWI has pointed out. Christ sign would have no doubt (Matthew 24:30) “Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief” No debate, no discussion, no doubt. This was the exact answer of Jesus about the sign his disciples asked him before. 

I once heard a brother from GB, when visiting Spain, explain that there are TWO signs. The first (wars, famine, etc.) would happen on earth. The second one would be the sing of Son of Man, and this would happen on heavens.

Well, the fact is that Jesus only mention ONE sign. As impossible to deny as the flash of lightning. There is no necessity to struggle with unbelievers to try to convince them. 

What about wars, earthquakes and pestilence? Jesus, specifically said: 
 
(Matthew 24:6-8) “You are going to hear of wars and reports of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for these things must take place, but the end is not yet. “For nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be food shortages and earthquakes in one place after another. All these things are a beginning of pangs of distress” In other words. The wars, famine and calamities are proof we would be in THE BEGINNING of distress. Not a sign at all.

THE HORSEMEN

The picture well describes the universal taught about this vision: the catastrophic world conditions in the final era. We, the JW, properly view that these happenings occur after Jesus ride. Well, put it simple, I think this approximation has no scriptural base… at all. These are not world condition when Christ rules, they are, rather direct judgments of Christ against the enemies, when he starts his judgment against Babylon.

The proof? Always, always, always (three times) the Bible mention colorful horses, these meant angels, not situations:
 
(Zechariah 1:8-10) . . .“I saw a vision in the night. There was a man riding on a red horse, and he stood still among the myrtle trees in the ravine; and behind him there were red, reddish-brown, and white horses.” So I said: “Who are these, my lord?” The angel who was speaking with me replied: “I will show you who these are.” Then the man who was standing still among the myrtle trees said: “These are the ones whom Jehovah has sent out to walk about in the earth.”.  
(Zechariah 6:1-5) . . .Then I looked up again and saw four chariots coming from between two mountains, and the mountains were of copper. The first chariot had red horses, and the second chariot, black horses. The third chariot had white horses, and the fourth chariot, speckled and dappled horses. I asked the angel who was speaking with me: “What are these, my lord?” The angel answered me: “These are the four spirits of the heavens that are going out after having taken their station before the Lord of the whole earth. . . And, what we find as the mechanism using by Jehovah when punishing His enemies? These days that we’re reading Ezequiel, we are reading quite a few verses with the same idea: God will punish his enemies with: the sword of war,  famine and pest. Why not the same in the future?

Only one collateral idea. Will resurrect this persons? We have no problem to think that many of the people from ancient times who perished in that judgements, under the Babylonian or Assyrian siege will resurrect. Why not the people -or some people- during the Great Tribulation? Because is said the Hades is following the horsemen.

Well, I’m not completely sure about all of this. But I find it solves more problems than the contraire. 

WAITING… AND FIGHTING
ARchiv@L, I appreciate your advice. Very laconic, but appropriate. Only to develop a little further my attitude, let me mention David example in, perhaps, the most difficult part of his life, when persecuted by Saul.

He had the temptation (as myself sometimes) to escape and wait if Jehovah fix the situation. But Jehovah had another plan for him:
(1 Samuel 22:5) In time Gad the prophet said to David: “Do not stay in the stronghold. Go from there into the land of Judah.” So David left and went into the forest of Heʹreth” And again in the middle of the fight…

And sure you remember when the future king was forced to run away between the Philistines, even in that painful situation, he continued to support the people of God… commanded by his worst enemy.
 
(1 Samuel 27:7, 8) “The length of time that David lived in the countryside of the Phi·lisʹtines was a year and four months. David would go up with his men to raid the Geshʹur·ites, the Girʹzites, and the A·malʹek·ites, for they were inhabiting the land that extended from Teʹlam as far as Shur and down to the land of Egypt”.  These wars, in spite of the opinion of his enemies, were considered, in reality “the wars of Jehovah” (1Sa 25:28)

To meditate in this example has helped to me to wait and fight. TO FIGHT against the outer enemy: the false religions and their false teachings: hell fire, trinity and so. I don’t meant fighting holding a banner in our conventions and shouting “the 1914 teaching is untruth”.

As I consider the Congregation has a Leader more wise and powerful than me, I WAIT he will fix any situation he considers worth of change when he considers the proper moment.

(Luke 12:47, 48) . . .Then that slave who understood the will of his master but did not get ready or do what he asked will be beaten with many strokes. But the one who did not understand and yet did things deserving of strokes will be beaten with few. Indeed, everyone to whom much was given, much will be demanded of him, and the one who was put in charge of much will have more than usual demanded of him.
 
Anna, everyone of us know who has the responsability to fix the situation: "his master on coming" (Lu 12:43)
So, what can we do? Wait, be busy in the work and making fine things, and pray.
Pray for these brothers in th GB, that they have the wisdom and courage to act. Pray for the humble ones, that Jehovah grant them faith to wait without stumbling

People making the effort to come to meetings should see our weekly arrangements as an oasis from the daily cares and problems heaped upon them from Satan's system. Each of us should take it as a personal responsibility to make the meetings refreshing and something to look forward to for the rest of our spiritual family, where they will be valued, loved, comforted and appreciated. It starts with us and the love we have and the way we express it. Our elder body doesn't have any "lists" of who attends every meeting although we have a schedule to visit certain ones. But aside of that, we can do what we already know we should be doing individually. Of course, greeting new ones or those we haven't seen in a while, but more. As a memory aid, it may help to make notes during the meeting of what comments, parts etc we can sincerely express appreciation for afterwards. I need to write down what was said and how it helped me in order to say something like: "I'm glad I came to the meeting tonight. Your comment about (...) is something really helpful to me/I learned something/I never thought of it that way..." Or something like that. I learned something from serving in the foreign language field. We all love our brothers and sisters, but some cultures are more expressive in how they show it - which contributes to a warm, accepting and loving atmosphere. I have also seen cliques become a problem in some congregations and so it is important to widen out. Elders especially can set the tone for the congregation. True they have a lot of things to attend to, but it shouldn't be "all business" - only talking to other elders after the meeting - which can look like a clique in itself. True we can't speak to every individual during every meeting, but when we speak to others, our focus should be on them, even if it means pulling up a chair and sitting beside them while they express themselves (usually for older ones). When we learn about the love Jehovah and Jesus express toward us, it's natural that we would want to imitate them in how we treat our brothers and sisters. It is nice to see the concern reflected in some of the comments here of how inclusive we should be of those who are different.

It is not rocket science of course. Unfortunately there exist some members of the congregation who are a little "different" and because of that don't get included, and sometimes get outright ignored by the majority. A brother once told me about his wife and two sons. His wife had severe depression, but despite that, would come and sit at the back of the hall. From what he said, I gathered the friends pretty much ignored her. Maybe because they just didn't know what to say to her. Maybe because she was "weird". Unfortunately, it also seems that no one paid much attention to her sons either. Sadly, both her sons left the truth, and one remarked that with the true religion there is supposed to be love, and he didn't feel any love. Of course, that may have just been an excuse, but I know for a fact that there can be many cliques inside a congregation and if you happen not to fit in one, you can be very much on your own, and feel it. Cliques are a natural phenomenon. Mother's with young children hang out with other mothers with young children. Teenagers hang out with other teenagers etc. We have 3 older sisters in our congregation who ALWAYS sit together, so much so that one elder called them the 3 amigos from the platform. But there are some friends that just don't fit anywhere. That is why it's so important to "widen out" and put in special effort to include them. Which means real effort on our part, because it may mean not only inviting that "weird" family to our party, but also paying attention to them on a regular basis....

I just wanted to thank the organizers of this site. I enjoy the news and other items on a regular basis. I am also grateful that it has not been taken over by hostile people who hate JWs. On the odd occasion there have been a few nasty individuals but they are in the minority. I understand that if they allow more controversy - the owners may receive more visitors and may make more money. I am therefore more grateful that they have not allowed money to become the primary focus of this site. Thanks for some of the interesting items - although we do not always comment on them - we do notice them.

I agree that it makes sense and we can (and should) find lessons in the account for our own conduct, actions, and motivations. I probably sound like a curmudgeon of some sort to point this out, but it's often too easy to ALSO create a lesson that isn't really there. Or mix up one lesson for one context with a lesson that belongs in another context. These are not bad things, it's just that we should realize when we are speculating when we declare that these lessons must be the same lessons that all of us should see.
Jehovah had the right to save or destroy his creation because he is the creator. The potter can throw away a vessel fit for destruction and start over.
In response to your comments about Lot and Abraham and Noah, there were really NONE who were intrinsically righteous. Just as the scriptures in another one of your posts said: Noah's faith moved Jehovah to "count" him as righteous. Even those declared "righteous" are still intrinsically "ungodly." We are all ungodly.
(Romans 4:3-5) 3 For what does the scripture say? “Abraham put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to the man who works, his pay is not counted as an undeserved kindness but as something owed to him. 5 On the other hand, to the man who does not work but puts faith in the One who declares the ungodly one righteous, his faith is counted as righteousness.
And by the way, there is no scripture that says that his wife or three sons and their wives were ever even counted as righteous. In fact, the Bible says it was Noah's righteousness that saved them, similar to how children of a Christian parent could be "saved," or unbelieving wives, or sisters whose only "service" at times must be the full-time raising of their family.
(1 Timothy 2:15) 15 However, she will be kept safe through childbearing, provided she continues in faith and love and holiness along with soundness of mind.
(1 Corinthians 7:14) 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in relation to his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in relation to the brother; otherwise, your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.
 
 

@JW Insider
“BY FAITH NOAH, BEING DIVINELY WARNED OF THINGS NOT YET SEEN, MOVED WITH GODLY FEAR, PREPARED AN ARK FOR THE SAVING OF HIS HOUSEHOLD, BY WHICH HE CONDEMNED THE WORLD AND BECAME HEIR OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH IS ACCORDING TO FAITH.”
Like people today, almost certainly the people of Noah’s day were busy enjoying the pleasures of life and did not believe or care that judgment was coming.
During the decades of mankind’s last days, Noah was working on the Ark. As it grew, it must have been a potent symbol to those living nearby. One can imagine that Noah was often asked about his construction project. Indeed, it is likely that he was mocked for such an enterprise.
In 2 Peter 2:5, Noah is described as a “preacher of righteousness.” In what way was he a preacher? The Greek word kerux(κηρυξ) refers to a herald, or “one who announces.” Even when he wasn’t saying anything, his labor on the Ark would have been his witness. However, some Jewish scholars maintain that Noah did indeed leave some words, too. John Gill, in chapter 22 of the Pirke R. Eliezer, quotes Noah’s words according to Jewish tradition: “Be ye turned from your evil ways and works, lest the waters of the flood come upon you, and cut off all the seed of the children of men.” 
The tradition shows Noah giving both a warning and a means of salvation. If this extrabiblical source has any truth in it, then Noah is asking for people to repent, which would certainly fit with his own source of salvation through Christ. Noah was not saved because of his righteousness—at least not in a worldly sense. Hebrews 11 tells us from where Noah’s righteousness came. The Greek word is dikaiosune (δικαιοσύνη), which refers to a form of righteousness that is unattainable by law or by merit. 
Hebrews 11:7 says, “By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.”
This sort of righteousness is found only by faith. The Apostle Paul says elsewhere, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9, NKJV).
This is exactly how Noah was saved. His righteousness was unattainable; so it could only come by God’s grace, through faith. Genesis 6:8 tells us that “Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord” (NKJV). Noah’s salvation, like ours, was by grace. He could not do anything to attain righteousness for himself.
 

Nothing wrong with believing that Noah "most likely" warned his neighbors, or even "undoubtedly" warned his neighbors. I think it's a matter of being able to carefully read all the ways that writers say "we don't really know for sure." I was very surprised to learn from several people in the Watchtower's Writing Department that the expression "undoubtedly" and even "without a doubt" really means that there still is some level of doubt, even if it's something that makes a lot of sense, or we really WANT to believe it.
One way to show that we don't really know something for sure is to use the words "without doubt" as when the Watchtower says: in
I know this doesn't make a lot of sense to some people. It's much easier to see the point when the expression is more like "quite likely" as in:
Personally, I didn't see it at first, until it was explained with some examples. In the most common usage of language we don't need an expression like "undoubtedly" if we are dealing with known facts. You would say, "Two plus two is four" not "two plus two is undoubtedly four." When you are dealing with the most likely meanings that fit our way of thinking and interpretation, we use a slightly different vocabulary. We like to use the most sure language possible even though we know that "interpretation" is always subject to change. Even when we are trying to use the words like "without a doubt" or "without doubt" to sound as sure as possible, the context will often force the writer to admit that small opening of doubt. There are hundreds, if not thousands of examples in the Watchtower itself:
*** w63 1/15 p. 41 par. 3 The Challenge of the “Good News” ***
Without doubt it is your wish to live under that best of kingdoms and eternally enjoy its blessings. If this is your sincere desire . . .
Note that even though the premise is "without doubt" the next phrase must still start out with "if."
*** w72 6/15 p. 360 God Respects the Family Arrangement ***
There can be no doubt about it: Children brought up in the wrong way are almost sure to practice bad things . . .
Even though there can be no doubt, the premise is "almost" sure.
This doesn't mean that the expression is not sometimes used in the normal way, to mean it's a fact. But we have to be careful when the phrases like this refer to interpretation. For example:
*** w06 8/15 p. 17 Baruch—Jeremiah’s Faithful Secretary ***
Baruch was without doubt a sincere worshipper of Jehovah, and he “proceeded to do according to all that Jeremiah the prophet had commanded him.”
In the above example, this should immediately tell us that we have no scripture telling us that Baruch was sincere. We know it's an assumption precisely because the words "without doubt" were used here. It means that it makes sense, and it's something we would like to believe about him -- because we are giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Please don't misunderstand and think I'm saying that it's definitely not true. I'm only saying that the scriptures don't say that Noah gave a warning, and if we say that he did we should admit that we are only speculating. One way the Watchtower shows they are speculating is to use terms like "most likely," or "undoubtedly." So it's more proper to say that "most likely" Noah preached a warning.
But even if we believe this wholeheartedly, we shouldn't imply that Jesus said anything about Noah giving a warning. Jesus was making a point about how people were going on with their lives, without a care, and the judgement event came upon them suddenly and without warning. That's why Jesus said that the parousia (judgment event) would be like a thief who does not give you any warning.
(Matthew 24:43, 44) . . .If the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 On this account, you too prove yourselves ready, because the Son of man is coming at an hour that you do not think to be it.
The Bible doesn't say that Noah gave a warning, and the Watchtower articles you quoted admit that it may have only been through the action of building an ark that he "preached." The Watchtower does quote a "worldly" source whom we often disagree with to show that some non-biblical Jewish traditions have added the idea that Noah gave a warning, and we would like to believe that this is true.
 
 
 
 

Jehovah in English  -  Basic  statement  by  Jehovah's Witnesses:
The Hebrew Name of God יהוה rendered generally as YHWH and thought to be pronounced in Hebrew something like Yahweh or perhaps Yahoweh is properly translated into English as Jehovah.
Argument by opposers:
That is not the correct way to do it,  because Someone from the US named John who visits Mexico or Spain is not Juan;  they are   still John.
Counter-argument by Jehovah’s Witnesses:
Jesus is not God’s Son’s name either; it is properly rendered in the Hebrew as Yeshua or Yehoshua, and even the Greek is Iesous, yet the opposers do not complain about it being rendered as “Jesus”  in English.
Other Hebrew names are rendered or translated into English with no complaint.
Bibles in English use John and in Spanish Juan, etc.
To settle this problem, what we need is Biblical example. That should settle the matter to the satisfaction of all.
“But in Joppa there was a certain disciple named Tabitha, which, when translated, means Dorcas. She abounded in good deeds and gifts of mercy that she was rendering.”—Acts 9:36.
(“Dorcas” is the Greek and corresponds with “Tabitha” which is the Aramaic;  both names mean “Gazelle.”)
So, which one is her name, Tabitha or Dorcas? Let’s continue reading in Acts 9:39 & 40:
“At that Peter rose and went with them. And when he arrived, they led him up into the upper chamber; and all the widows presented themselves to him weeping and exhibiting many inner garments and outer garments that Dorcas used to make while she was with them. But Peter put everybody outside and, bending his knees, he prayed, and, turning to the body, he said: “Tabitha, rise!” She opened her eyes and, as she caught sight of Peter, she sat up.”
So, both names are used interchangeably!
Even the Apostle Peter, whose name means “A Piece of Rock,” is named in five different ways in the Scriptures: by the Hebrew “Symeon,” the Greek “Simon” (from a Hebrew root meaning “hear; listen”), “Peter” (a Greek name he alone bears in the Scriptures), its Semitic equivalent “Cephas” (perhaps related to the Hebrew kephim´ [rocks] used at Job 30:6; Jeremiah 4:29), and the combination “Simon Peter.”—Acts 15:14; Matthew 10:2; 16:16; John 1:42.
And need we even mention “Saul, who is also Paul” as stated in Acts 13:9 ?
Therefore, based upon these Scriptural precedents, the English Jehovah is as correct as the Hebrew יהוה when referring to our Almighty God, the Most High over all the earth.—Exodus 6:3; Psalm 83:18.
One thing for sure: יהוה is NOT LORD nor GOD, which is what most Bibles replace it with.
(  I  posted  that  for  our  mature  Brother's  and  Sister's....  maybe,  they  have  something  to  tell ?
 
 

The Five Fingers Rule
Sometimes I’ve tried to help others not using the Scriptures to proof any kind of idea or behavior one person could have. I’ve used what I’ve denominated “the five fingers rule”, from the weakest to the stronger evidence

 
Only one finger: the evidence is only in the same division of the Bible, Greek or Hebrew Scriptures.
This is the weakest evidence. The explanation about our verse under scrutiny is in the “other side” of the Bible. We’re trying to prove some idea based in the Hebrew Scriptures with another verse from Greek Scriptures, or vice versa. So, there are centuries of distance in the meaning, language, cultural environment and God’s dealings.
If we use this approach we should be very careful. Only if we have direct mention of some application in the Bible we should feel free to try the same, for example:
(Matthew 24:15) “…when you catch sight of the disgusting thing that causes desolation, as spoken about by Daniel the prophet…” In spite we have here one verse in the Greek against other in the Hebrew Scriptures, as we have the direct mention of Christ we can, with confidence apply the verses.
Conversely, when we read (Da 4:25) “seven times will pass over you, until you know that the Most High is Ruler in the kingdom of mankind and that he grants it to whomever he wants”, and we try to apply the seven times to Jesus words in Lu 21:24 “…Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled” we only have a weak evidence. When we read in Daniel about “times”, we cannot think any mention in the Bible about “times” share the same or related meaning. And it seems a little bit farfetched to apply the Nebuchadnezzar happenings to Christ.
Two fingers: the writer is contemporary.
Either in the Greek or Hebrew period. Well, now our evidence has more weight.
(Isaiah 37:22) “…The virgin daughter of Zion despises you…” (Jeremiah 14:17) “…For the virgin daughter of my people has been completely crushed and broken…” No problem when applying the term virgin to the nation of Israel.
Three fingers: the verses share the same writer.
But, perhaps, not the same book.
(Romans 3:20) “…no one will be declared righteous before him by works of law…” (Galatians 2:16) “…not by works of law, but only through faith…” When we develop the idea about how obtain salvation, we have strong evidence, from the same Bible writer, clarifying the meaning.
Four fingers. The evidence is in the same Bible book.
Now, the evidence is still stronger.
 (Zechariah 1:8) “…I saw a vision in the night. There was a man riding on a red horse, and he stood still among the myrtle trees in the ravine; and behind him there were red, reddish-brown, and white horses...” (Zechariah 6:2, 3) “…The first chariot had red horses, and the second chariot, black horses. The third chariot had white horses, and the fourth chariot, speckled and dappled horses…” (Rev 6:4-7) “a fiery-colored horse… a black horse… a pale horse…” We have a good foundation If we think these horsemen represent angels. Both declaration in the same book of Zechariah share the same meaning: the horsemen meant spirits. And with Revelation, there is no other place in the Bible with this kind of visions.
Five fingers: the complete evidence.
Not only the same writer in the same book of the same period, but also in the immediate context.
(1 Corinthians 2:7-9) “…But we speak God’s wisdom in a sacred secret, the hidden wisdom, … But just as it is written: “Eye has not seen and ear has not heard, nor have there been conceived in the heart of man the things that God has prepared for those who love him.”
The application, based in the same context has to do with the secret, hidden purpose of God, only revealed by His spirit.
Applying the five fingers rule
(2 John 7-11) “For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those not acknowledging Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist… The one who does remain in this teaching is the one who has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works. When we even refused to say hello to a disfellowshipped person, based in the previous word from John, are we aware than the apostle was writing about deceivers and antichrist? This is five fingers. But if we apply this radical behavior for the person being spoken in 1Cor. 5, we have only the two fingers evidence. The Corinthians received the instruction to avoid eating (fellowship).
One more example:
(Matthew 24:3) “...Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your presence…” (Matthew 24:30) “…Then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven, and all the tribes of the earth will beat themselves in grief, …” The five fingers rule determine that the sign of the presence is the same as the sing of the Son of man. By the way, a sign completely visible, as the lightning.
Obviously they will be exceptions, but we should be cautious with these exceptions.

That's ok I like it when you get carried away
Yes, the example you present would be perfect, because as you say, dogmatic explanations are SO susceptible to revisions, so much so that it is not really a prudent thing to do.....and references would be great for those who wish to "make sure of all things". I think @ComfortMyPeoplementioned once that it would be nice to have more of a commentary style for some of our publications and use more expressions such as "perhaps", "most likely",  "it would be reasonable to conclude", ....etc. But that has not been the style of the society (although improving a little) and my theory is, and I have mentioned this before, that the GB feel like they must speak with authority, otherwise they may lose respect and trust, i.e. the parent/child model. However, this has backfired in more ways than one quite a number of times...
P.S. I think one particular book had quite a few overt dogmatic statements on things that no one could possibly know for sure, it was one of the prophetic books we studied at our book study, either Isaiah, Ezekiel or Daniel. I remember one mature, studious sister got a little upset and exclaimed; how can they know that! I wish I could remember what it was...

It's a little dated. But it does fit the theme of an updated Revelation book:
http://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2007/07/will-the-real-a.html

@Anna I'd love to see a new Revelation book, too. I don't think it would remove types and anti-types completely, because I agree with @TrueTomHarley that Revelation "fairly begs" for these applications. Besides, the new "rule" on avoiding speculative types/anti-types doesn't cover prophecy; it only covers narratives and parables. (We also can make an anti-type prophecy from Nebuchadnezzar's tree dream in Daniel 4, because it shows up in Daniel, a book of prophecy, although we do not make a prophecy out of the "Lion's Den" narrative, or the "Three Hebrew 'Children'" narrative. Also we make an exception for parables that immediately follow a prophecy such as the end of Matthew 24, which is evidently why we treat the "faithful and discreet slave" parable as a prophecy about the Governing Body starting in 1919, although here, too, we make no prophecy out of the specific features of "two women grinding at a mill, one left, the other taken away, etc.")
I would love to see a book on Revelation that is done in the style of a standard commentary, so that it contains several possibilities for the meaning of each verse, instead of dogmatic explanations that effectively make the entire book obsolete as soon as something changes. I'd like to see a style that is heavier on expressions like the following (where the ** refers to scripture citations, footnotes, or other references):
"This verse in Revelation 11:1 is clearly alluding to similar verses in Ezekiel and Zechariah where the context of those verses discusses the preparations for rebuilding an earlier temple at Jerusalem which was destroyed by the Babylonian king, Nebuchadnezzar.** The rebuilt temple lasted from the time of Zechariah** until Herod the Great expanded it in the decades before Jesus was born.** That temple was destroyed in a horrific holocaust by the Romans in 70 C.E. Through the centuries, many have believed that this verse is an indication that a new physical temple will literally be built in Jerusalem before the final visitation of judgment on the world. It was while Herod's expanded temple was still standing that Jesus said: "Tear down this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." ** In fact, Paul speaks of Christians themselves as each one a temple** and all being built up together into a holy temple**. Therefore, it appears that we could look for a spiritual, rather than a physical application of the temple spoken of here. Note, too, that there is a specific time element associated with the temple preparation.**ref 1,260 etc** This could be an indication that the verse applies to some specific event in the time period leading up to the final judgment of the world. Perhaps it is a time period that we can identify within the recent history of God's people.** Perhaps it is something we will come to understand in the very near future! Some commentators have even applied it to events that would have been clear to the hearers of this vision who had lived in the first century. Recall that many in that generation had just experienced the traumatic event in 70 CE, seeing Jerusalem and its temple destroyed in a war that took well over a million lives.** In fact, a specific length of 1,260 days might have reminded them of the time period between [etc. etc. etc.]
The next verses, however, may shed more light on the meaning of this and give evidence that the fulfillment is not limited to a first century application . . . etc etc etc...
Sorry, got carried away.

I suppose you’re aware your comments are most derogatory and, in my opinion, unfortunate.
For we, the JW's, one of the most reprehensible sins is to be considered as apostate. The Insight book declares under this term:
“…a withdrawal or abandonment of the true cause, worship, and service of God, and hence an abandonment of what one has previously professed and a total desertion of principles or faith. I don’t view myself as apostate, I’ve not abandoned my faith nor my religion.
You probably are worried, sincerely worried and indignant because some in this forum should ponder these principles:
·        Jud 8 “despising authority, and speaking abusively of glorious ones” ·        1Cor 1:10 “you should all speak in agreement and that there should be no divisions among you, but that you may be completely united in the same mind and in the same line of thought.” Quoting the Insight-Jonah reference:
“Another evidence testifying to the authenticity of this Bible book is its candor. Jonah’s improper attitude toward his commission and concerning God’s action in sparing the Ninevites is not covered over” This candor is one of the evidences the Bible is the book of God. There is no cover over any sin, mistake or lack of judgment of the anointed ones leading the people.
Where have we learned that Noah got drunk, or David killed Uriah? In false religion’s books of that period?
How did we have knowledge about the fight between Paul and Barnabas, or the lack of judgment of Peter? Through Simon the magician posts?
Why Jehovah didn’t consider it proper to cover these mistakes? You don’t think the Bible is an apostate book because is full with faults of God’s people in all ages, do you?
And these mistakes were presented as such, as errors. Not in the style: “well, we, despite all almost hit the mark.”
The situation is that if we read in the Bible about errors this is proof of their humility. But if we read or talk about our present day mistakes, we’re apostates.
The motivation @JW Insider, me and others share is, precisely avoiding others have the necessity to reach to poisonous places to find some facts we have denied. We have denied because are hidden or “colored”
Regarding the coloration process @JW Insider has provided a lot of PROOFS. I just wish to recall one I’ve written about. Recently we study in our Watchtower study there were errors in last century, for example when the Watchtower gave support to the peace initiative of president Wilson. But, in reality, the petition in our magazine not was a petition to pray for peace, instead, to pray for USA would win the war.
Now, what is it better, to hide this (lack of sincerity / half-truth)? But the information, the real information is spread all around the world. You can easily find the President Wilson exact petition and the word by word article in the 1918 Watchtower.
Regarding the late point. Why have I had to reach “dangerous” sites to get all the Watchtower articles, from 1879? Why my religion didn’t provide a “safe” place to download absolutely all this older literature?
If you read our posts with other glasses you easily see that we’re trying to justify the brothers on charge. But no describing them as “almost-inspired” but as they really are: mere humans.
Now, you mention “unrepentant ones should not be disfellowshipped” but I never have mention this. Expulsion has Bible basis. But the “mechanism” to dealt with has been subject to changes. Do you grant the possibility of new changes? If so, these new changes will try to fix injustices or problems with our position. Meanwhile, what should we do with these injustices? These problems are openly seen by the world and by a lot of loyal brothers.
You also mention that if I don’t believe that Christ begun to rule in 1914 I should leave my religion! Should have I abandon when the 1975 affair?
What backbone, determinant, core teaching is 1914 for you! But not hundreds, nor thousands, but hundreds of thousands of brothers can’t explain which is the Bible basis for this teaching!! Should they leave their religion?
I and other with this posture firmly believe we’re serving with the people Jehovah is using for His purpose. But, remember, @bruceq, sometimes God’s people has needed cleaning. Why not now? Is, perhaps, more relevant the role of the present-day GB than the older times apostles? If Christ had to clean the seven congregations (in spite of the apostles influence) why in these days is impossible a new cleaning, in spite of the GB influence?

Well I wasn't going to go into a detailed explanation right here, because I was hoping for a new thread, but since you've already carried on, all I have to say is; I go along pretty much the same lines as you.  I like to go by not what they say, so much, but by the testimony and overall history and reputation of what has been achieved while these men have been in office as the FDS, (regardless of whether some believe that or not). Although inevitable blunders and embarrassments have been apparent, on the WHOLE, because of evidence, I believe the organization of Jehovah’s witnesses is definitely keeping itself morally and spiritually clean, seems to have Jehovah’s backing, and last but not least  we owe this organization (with the GB at the helm) our thanks, because without them we might still be believing that we will burn in hell, that God has three heads and no name, and that, if we are lucky, we will float off  someplace to play the harp for all eternity, after dying of lung cancer or some complication due to a dubious life style....I am sure I could think of many more but this will suffice for now...actually True Tom has already mentioned most.

(Ezekiel 44:25, 26) “They should not approach any dead human, or they will become unclean. However, they may make themselves unclean for their father, mother, son, daughter, brother, or an unmarried sister. And after the purification of a priest, they should count off seven days for him”
 
The priest should not contact any dead human… except his nearest relatives. Jehovah is very reasonable and comprehensive when dictating rules.
Would not it be fine to apply the same principle when we deal with disfellowshipped people? Why Paul doesn’t mention these exceptions in 1Cor 5? Why Ezekiel doesn’t mention the priest’s wife? Perhaps, because the common sense would guide the application. It isn’t the same my cousin than my father, it is?
Other reference:
(Leviticus 21:1, 2) “Jehovah went on to say to Moses: “Talk to the priests, Aaron’s sons, and say to them, ‘No one should defile himself for a dead person among his people. But he may do so for a close blood relative, for his mother, his father, his son, his daughter, his brother,…”

I really like this.
When I used to use buses to get home at night as a teenager, there were no electronic schedule indicators. Just a printed sheet on the stop, if it had not been vandalised. It was notoriously difficult to figure out the schedule. The print was too small, the light too dim, the mind too clouded, the need to relieve nature too pressing. And the schedule always contained exceptions to scheduling for late hours and weekends in even tinier print, indicated by impossibly small asterisks and the like. And if the bus number was different for the out-of-hours service.......! It was so easy to misinterpret and a frustrating excercise. But what a relief it was when a bus actually came! On time, as far as the driver was concerned. The schedule? No longer of any real interest. Maybe I'd check on the bus to see where I had got it wrong. So easy in retrospect. The important thing? I was at the stop to get the bus when it came.
I think there's an illustration in there somewhere. I'll have to figure it out when I get time...........maybe something about the driver choosing the passengers....................Hmmm....