ComfortMyPeople

Thank-you for your response it is encouraging to see others maintain their faith in the face of situations that may stumble most others. That is my world too. I totally agree that there are cases where direct evidence is not shareable. And of course few would experience these things themselves anyway and would have a hard to believing them - let alone deal with them. So why be too specific (at least they can tell themselves that it is something they read on the internet and is probably not true - and not be stumbled by what they can't rationalize).
I agree with your statements above and to be sure, I  have always done what was my moral obligation as to bringing attention to these matters directly and following the requirements set out both in God's Word and the clear instructions from the F&DS. Including applying Matthew 18 where appropriate. So in further reference to your very astute observation, I realized the blow back I would receive but have not been "...willing to dishonestly apologize and repent for speaking the truth." As Job stated: "It is unthinkable on my part that I should declare you men righteous! Until I expire I shall not take away my integrity from myself!"     I learned decades ago that once you have done your part, fulfilling your obligation before God to keep the congregation clean, the ball is in their court and you just have to leave matters in Jehovah's hands. Otherwise you may find yourself disfellowshipped.
To be clear, my intention is not to use a semi-anonymous forum to bring attention to mistakes, although that does happen. But when I was experiencing these things, there was no one who I could discuss my feelings with who would understand, let alone believe me - and I didn't want to go around talking about these decidedly negative matters. It is true to say that in some cases, it seemed the only ones I could really identify with were individuals like Jeremiah, Job, David, Joseph, Paul, Jesus...They became my "friends" in faith-testing times. Everyone else it seemed lived in a Disney World where these kinds of things can never happen because Jesus is micromanaging all the elders in his right hand -  and "The son of man will send his angels, and they will collect out from his Kingdom all "things" that cause stumbling and people who are doing lawlessness." (Matt. 13:41) But the reality is that people are stumbled. Does that mean the angels aren't doing their job properly? (In fact, our elder body had to reinstate one brother who was wrongly disfellowshipped for years - yet always maintaining his innocence. It appeared in proclaiming his innocence, he was "not accepting discipline from Jehovah" - but it was all a lie. That happens too often). What could be these "things" that are collected out? Is it individuals we hear about every few years being disfellowshipped? Could be, but "things" being collected out that have caused most people (billions) to stumble for thousands of years are things such as false religious doctrines and practices that dishonor and misrepresent God (hellfire,Trinity, immortal soul, Halloween, Christmas, justifiable warfare, nationalism...) Even if one were to suggest that the referencing of "people who practice lawlessness" is not the the apostate "man of lawlessness," it would still have to be taken within the context of 1Tim. 5;24,25 where some things are brought our sooner and others later. The Bible has many examples to support that and I appreciate your inclusion of that important scripture that helps explain why badness can go on for years, decades or some don't experience justice in their lifetime.
I also found 1 Cor. 11:17-19 informative (not the new Bible but the more literal Kingdom Interlinear - in fact pretty well all other translations) in it's use of "must" (dei) (it is binding; it is necessary; there have to be; ..."there "must" be also be sects among you, that the persons approved may also become manifest among you." In stating there "must" be sects/factions, God's Word isn't suggesting that Jehovah wants badness to happen or that it is part of his purpose. But rather that he allows these things to play out for the same reason he has allowed badness to exist even on a universal scale for a time: to manifest who is who. These types of situations are a revealer of hearts, motives, faith, attitudes...even of men in authority who are also accountable. And as Paul stated regarding himself and others: "...we have become a theatrical spectacle to the world, and to angels, and to men." That's what faithless men miss. They think that as long as they can fool men or control matters, they can get away with it. But faithful men recognize as true what you had quoted above in 1 Cor. 4:5 that secret things will be revealed.
While some may characterize these interchanges as negative talk, the fact is that pretending everything is rosy and nothing bad can ever happen (an exaggeration I know) and that everything men in authority do is by Jesus' direction is simply absurd in the face of plain facts. It is not "encouraging" at all. It's like telling someone in great pain with cancer how great everything is going for you and they must be imagining their situation or lying = not helpful. "Rejoice with people who rejoice; weep with people who weep." Romans 12:15. It is comforting I'm sure to any who have had to face a reality most others have not to have people care enough to offer wisdom, empathy, counsel and understanding in such a way as to help them maintain their faith despite extreme circumstances. 
I also appreciated the application you (JWI) made regarding 1 Cor. 4:5, that is an interesting perspective I had not actually considered. 
 
I totally agree with that. I've clearly seen that myself and so have many others (although few would want to say it out loud and at times there would be serious repercussions.) It seems to me that that later we get into the time of the end, the more people reveal who they are within the scope of time, pressure and opportunity. Of course, once again, these traits, although visible at times in the form of imperfection or even wickedness at times, don't characterize the majority of our brothers and sisters who are struggling to swim upstream in Satan's system, cope with their own imperfections, temptations and face the badness of others within. Still, it is there and it's only honest to acknowledge that it exists. After all, how can you protect yourself against something you believe doesn't exist or can never happen? It is good that Jehovah's Word gives us the warnings we need both in examples and in word for our protection. Romans 15:4: "For all the things that were written aforetime were written for out instruction, that through our endurance and through the comfort from the scriptures we might have hope."

I still remember days when divorce between brothers, fraud between brothers… were so strange. Sadly, nowadays the things are changed. No one should be surprised. As mentioned above, the situation in the seven congregations of Revelation were all less pleasant. With only few exceptions. 
Now, regarding the condition of the Christians, true Christians, in the last days:
(2Ti 2:16-26) […] “for they will lead to more and more ungodliness, 17 and their word will spread like gangrene. Hy·me·naeʹus and Phi·leʹtus are among them.+ 18 These men have deviated from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already occurred,+ and they are subverting the faith of some. […] 20 Now in a large housethere are utensils* not only of gold and silver but also of wood and earthenware, and some for an honorable use but others for a use lacking honor. 21 So if anyone keeps clear of the latter ones, he will be an instrument* for an honorable use, sanctified, useful to his owner, prepared for every good work. […] 25 instructing with mildness those not favorably disposed"
Was Paul advising Timothy about problems he will face with people outside or inside the congregation? WereHymenaeus and Philetus worldly persons or vessels lacking of honor in the congregations? I suppose nobody will find it difficult the answer.
Now the problem. The division in chapters. It seems that chapter three starts a new discussion. With wich base? The uninspired numeric division? Our habit in applying these words to world conditions?
Let’s focus now in the famous chapter 3:1-13
But know this, that in the last days+ critical times hard to deal with will be here. 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, disloyal, 3 having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, without love of goodness, 4 betrayers, headstrong, puffed up with pride, lovers of pleasures rather than lovers of God, 5 having an appearance of godliness but proving false to its power;+ and from these turn away.  
13 But wicked men and impostors will advance from bad to worse, misleading and being misled.+
One simple question. Who did Timothy need to turn away from (v.5)? From unbeliever neighbors? In reality, Paul was still speaking about the lack of honor ‘utensils’INSIDE the congregations.
I’m completely optimistic regarding the final result of the future events. But I believe we’re facing trouble times. And I’m not only talking about Gog’s attack.
 

I have less time lately to participate. Perhaps this night. The issues in this topic realy make feel sad, because the news are regarding my country, and I personally know some of the brothers on jail. 
EDIT '[I'm not using my normal PC, the persons I know were mentioned in other post about Spain, this that mention brothers on responsability on the Supreme Court in Spain]
At this time I only wish to point out my confidence in that this is Jehocah's people. But, why are we sure all the refination happenned in 1918? What if the "best is to come"?
Why have we applied 2Tim 3:1-5 to worldy people, when the context is with no doubt talking about situations INSIDE the congregation? In this way, when I know about this bad news in the congregations I see more proof we are living in the last days!

I have less time lately to participate. Perhaps this night. The issues in this topic realy make feel sad, because the news are regarding my country, and I personally know some of the brothers on jail. 
EDIT '[I'm not using my normal PC, the persons I know were mentioned in other post about Spain, this that mention brothers on responsability on the Supreme Court in Spain]
At this time I only wish to point out my confidence in that this is Jehocah's people. But, why are we sure all the refination happenned in 1918? What if the "best is to come"?
Why have we applied 2Tim 3:1-5 to worldy people, when the context is with no doubt talking about situations INSIDE the congregation? In this way, when I know about this bad news in the congregations I see more proof we are living in the last days!

I'm sure I am not the only one who appreciates your attitude toward these types of things, things we may witness first hand, but which cannot be shared. I believe I have been where you are, and I can share some of the scriptural points that have helped me.
If we are concerned to do our best to help keep the local and the world-wide congregation clean, there are cases where direct evidence is not shareable.  We often must focus on general principles or even "lesser" issues or different issues, which may only be similar in their effect or the way in which they show that corruption can be insidious or reach to surprising levels of authority.
I have no idea how it happens, in your case, that elders from all over the place might be asking you about a specific situation. This tells me that whatever the problems, they might have already been sufficiently exposed - as far as it depends upon you.
(Ephesians 5:10-13) 10 Keep on making sure of what is acceptable to the Lord; 11 and stop sharing in the unfruitful works that belong to the darkness; rather, expose them for what they are. 12 For the things they do in secret are shameful even to mention. 13 Now all the things that are being exposed are made evident by the light, for everything that is being made evident is light.
Of course, I have no idea if it is sufficient to follow the Bible's counsel to expose by trying to bring attention to mistakes in a semi-anonymous forum, with a random audience of readers. I'm sure it's not sufficient for my own conscience. But I also realize that if I were to speak out in the congregation itself, I would lose not only privileges, which matter very little in the long run, but would also lose all further opportunities for fellowship with the brotherhood -- that is, unless I was also willing to dishonestly apologize and repent  for speaking the truth.
To the extent possible, I believe that we need to address issues first with the person(s) responsible for the wrongdoing, especially in light of Matthew 18, when we are a party or direct witness to the wrongdoing. If he doesn't listen then we take it to the congregation, whether the global congregation or the local congregation, whichever is more appropriate. Then there comes a point when you might realize you have done all you can. "As far as it depends upon you...."
(1 Timothy 5:24, 25) 24 The sins of some men are publicly known, leading directly to judgment, but those of other men become evident later. 25 In the same way also, the fine works are publicly known and those that are otherwise cannot be kept hidden.
Some Witnesses keep things hidden only for the short-term reputation of the congregation, but this does nothing for both the short-term and the long-term protection of the congregation. If there is any question or doubt about whether an issue needs to be exposed, however, we can apply what Paul said here:
(1 Corinthians 4:5) 5 Therefore, do not judge anything before the due time, until the Lord comes. He will bring the secret things of darkness to light and make known the intentions of the hearts, and then each one will receive his praise from God.
We need not carry a burden of guilt that we did not personally expose something, or bring it to light. We can throw such burdens on Jehovah.

I am a faithful believer and have "privileges" in the organization. I am also aware of things that most people are not aware of and wouldn't believe even if I told them. (And no, I don't come by this by way of apostate websites and such. I am there at ground zero with eyes on the ground, in first person testimony). These are the types of things that you will never read about in our publications - and for good reason. People would be stumbled - some things are just too outside their field of experience to rationalize within the context of their faith and they wouldn't thank you for knowing about it anyway because they don't want to know. (It would be like asking: "Can you tell me something that's going to kill me?") And yet, none of these things should come as a surprise. The Bible clearly warns us of "wicked men and imposters," men who would advance from bad to worse. Sometimes the things that happen are so "out there" that the only ones you would be able to identify with are faithful men described in God's Word who have experienced similar things that some of us experience in a spiritual sense today. Yes, some men in authority - "stars in Jesus' right hand" are not what they appear to be even though they may appear righteous to men and have a badge of authority. Of course, most people expect imperfection, but there are times when you have to call it what it is: wickedness. (I can't say whether that applies in the case referred to above here since I don't know all the facts and wasn't personally there - even though it looks bad). No, but as referenced above, we "shouldn't be too surprised considering the other kinds of hidden crimes that we already know about." I get elders asking me from all over the place about these things and I respond the best way I can, always honestly, but in a way that will help them maintain their faith in Jehovah and respect for his organization - with the proviso that sometimes that respect is for the authority men may have, but not for who they are. (i.e.. David's respect for Saul, even though Saul, using theocratic resources, was orchestrating a murderous campaign against a faithful servant of Jehovah that went on for years).  
 The short answer is that, our relationship and dedication to Jehovah God should never be dictated by the decisions other humans make, regardless of what "position" they have, or how much we may fell hurt by them. Even when that "position" is viewed by many as being righteous. Power can have a corrupting influence and when men aren't held to account quickly, they can become hardened to do bad. Especially when they have the authority to control matters to hide and protect themselves. To be clear I'm an not pointing or accusing the Governing Body as such - (although there have been some disturbing issues in the past), but rather pointing out the fact that there is no level within the Organization where corruption has not existed at one time or another. (in what year was corruption no longer allowed?  Not yet anyway...) It is also important not to paint with too wide a brush as if the whole organization was bad - based on the choices of a "relatively" few bad apples. When you think about the people you associate with at meetings, the ministry and at conventions, you see that most JW's are good at heart, happy, kind people who want to do what is right and please Jehovah despite their imperfections - just like we are. 

It seems like everyone who studies this subject in any depth, realizes the same thing.
 
 
 
And the Watch Tower publications have said pretty much the same thing on many occasions. For example:
 
So, seriously, does this mean the Watch Tower publications were being dishonest, or just sloppy when they said the following in 1995?
*** w95 5/15 p. 20 par. 20 Part 1—Flashes of Light—Great and Small ***
20 The book Riches, published by the Society in 1936, made clear that Jesus Christ was executed, not on a cross, but on an upright pole, or stake.
Or this in 2008:
 
Or this in 1975:
*** yb75 pp. 148-149 Part 2—United States of America ***
A few years later Jehovah’s people first learned that Jesus Christ did not die on a T-shaped cross. On January 31, 1936, Brother Rutherford released to the Brooklyn Bethel family the new book Riches. Scripturally, it said, in part, on page 27: “Jesus was crucified, not on a cross of wood, such as is exhibited in many images and pictures, and which images are made and exhibited by men; Jesus was crucified by nailing his body to a tree.”
1992
*** w92 11/15 p. 7 The Cross—Symbol of Christianity? ***
The Bible shows that Jesus was not executed on a conventional cross at all but, rather, on a simple stake, or stau·rosʹ.
Or this is 1972:
*** w72 9/15 p. 572 Christendom—Fighter Against God ***
Tammuz was represented by the first letter of his name, which is an ancient tau, a cross. The “sign of the cross” was the religious symbol of Tammuz. . . . The cross, on which Christendom’s religions claim Christ was put to death (though it was actually a stake), is considered the foremost symbol of Christianity.
On the issue of whether "Tammuz was represented by the first letter of his name, which is an ancient tau" [Greek letter] we have this interesting piece of evidence for why the same could not be true of Jesus:
*** g76 11/22 pp. 27-28 Does Christianity Have a Visible Symbol? ***
The writer of this apocryphal work claims that IH represents the first two letters of “Jesus” in Greek. The T is viewed as the shape of Jesus’ death stake.
Concerning this passage, M’Clintock and Strong’s Cyclopædia states: “The writer evidently was unacquainted with the Hebrew Scriptures, and has [also] committed the blunder of supposing that Abraham was familiar with the Greek alphabet some centuries before it existed.”
I find it amazing that a researcher could notice this in 1976, yet not think to correct the Watchtower from just a couple years earlier in 1972.
The same article says:
*** g76 11/22 p. 27 Does Christianity Have a Visible Symbol? ***
But do not writers early in the Common Era claim that Jesus died on a cross? For example, Justin Martyr (114-167 C.E.) described in this way what he believed to be the type of stake upon which Jesus died: “For the one beam is placed upright, from which the highest extremity is raised up into a horn, when the other beam is fitted on to it, and the ends appear on both sides as horns joined on to the one horn.” This indicates that Justin himself believed that Jesus died on a cross.
This means that Watch Tower researchers already knew in 1976 that some Christians might have thought that Jesus had died on a two-beamed cross, long before the 4th century.
 

As a Witness, I have realized that we JWs are just about the only group who are vexed about the seventy years, because there are very few others who have any kind of a doctrinal stake or tradition that requires a specific interpretation of the 70 years. Naturally, there are a variety of interpretations of any Biblical passage. Not all scholars and commentaries believe it was a full 70 years. Neither do we as Jehovah's Witnesses since we like to end it a year or two after 2 Chronicles ends it.
(2 Chronicles 36:20-22) . . .He carried off captive to Babylon those who escaped the sword, and they became servants to him and his sons until the kingdom of Persia began to reign, 21 to fulfill Jehovah’s word spoken by Jeremiah, until the land had paid off its sabbaths. All the days it lay desolate it kept sabbath, to fulfill 70 years. 22 In the first year of King Cyrus of Persia, in order that Jehovah’s word spoken by Jeremiah would be fulfilled. . .
We believe that the kingdom of Persia began in 539, but believe the 70 years ended in 537. We needed two extra years because we have a doctrinal stake in keeping 607 instead of claiming, for example, that the Fall of Jerusalem actually happened in 608 or 609. 70 years prior to the first year of the King Cyrus.
This is like the much bigger problem that scholars and commentaries and our own Watch Tower publications have with Isaiah's words about Tyre, already mentioned above, when Isaiah says that "Tyre will be forgotten for 70 years." But we, as JWs, don't believe it was a full 70 years that Tyre was forgotten. In fact, our publications indicate that it was a much shorter period.
*** it-2 p. 179 Kittim ***
Similarly, many from Tyre evidently sought haven in Cyprus during Nebuchadnezzar’s 13-year siege of Tyre, in fulfillment of Isaiah’s proclamation.
*** it-2 p. 1136 Tyre ***
Since the nations mentioned in the prophecy of Jeremiah were to “serve the king of Babylon seventy years” (Jer 25:8-11), this suggests that both the prophecy of Isaiah and that of Jeremiah related to Nebuchadnezzar’s campaign against Tyre. Also through Ezekiel, a contemporary of Jeremiah, Jehovah pointed to calamity for Tyre at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar. (Eze 26:1–28:19) . . .(Eze 29:17-20) According to the Jewish historian Josephus, the siege lasted 13 years (Against Apion, I, 156 [21]), and it cost the Babylonians a great deal. Secular history does not record exactly how thorough or effective Nebuchadnezzar’s efforts were. But the loss in lives and property to the Tyrians must have been great.—Eze 26:7-12.
When the Israelites returned from Babylonian exile, however, the Tyrians were able to assist in supplying cedar timbers from Lebanon for a second temple, and they resumed their trade with the rebuilt city of Jerusalem.—Ezr 3:7; Ne 13:16.
*** w77 7/1 p. 389 How History Was Written Centuries in Advance ***
Secular history reports that Nebuchadnezzar began a siege of Tyre sometime after destroying Jerusalem and the temple of Jehovah’s worship in 607 B.C.E. The Jewish historian Josephus, drawing upon Phoenician annals and other previously written history, states that Nebuchadnezzar’s siege against Tyre lasted thirteen years.
So if you have read this closely, and noticed the scriptures from Ezekiel you will see that the following secular dates would fit this 13-year period, when Tyre was forgotten. These particular dates can be found in many places. I pulled them from Livius.org based on an understanding of various chronicles and texts. http://www.livius.org/articles/person/nebuchadnezzar-ii/
598: Beginning of the siege of Tyre?
597: First capture of Jerusalem; king Jehoiachin is replaced by king Zedekiah
596: Campaign against Elam
595: Renewed campaigning in the west
587 (or 586): Second capture of Jerusalem; deportation of the Judaean elite
585: Peace with Tyre, after a siege that had lasted thirteen years
  Of course, you can just add 20 years to each of those dates to get the Watch Tower version of most secular dates in this period. Therefore 618 to 605 would be the Watch Tower dates of the same 13 year siege. Notice how this is completely contradictory to the claim made in the Insight book which claims it was started after the fall of Jerusalem when even our own date for it would have mapped to 618. .
*** w77 7/1 p. 389 How History Was Written Centuries in Advance ***
Secular history reports that Nebuchadnezzar began a siege of Tyre sometime after destroying Jerusalem and the temple of Jehovah’s worship. . .
And while we are on the subject, notice that Ezekiel can also help to date the fall of Jerusalem. Ezekiel dates his prophecies to the year of king Jehoiachin's exile, which started in 597 [617 Watch Tower]. This is why for example, our publications say the following:
*** it-1 p. 795 Ezekiel, Book of ***
In the 25th year of his exile (593 B.C.E.) Ezekiel had a remarkable vision . . . (Eze 40:1–48:35)
(Ezekiel 40:1) . . .In the 25th year of our exile, at the beginning of the year, on the tenth day of the month, in the 14th year after the city had fallen,. . .
and we know the end of the siege had to be completed in or before the 27th year because Ezekiel puts it in the past tense:
(Ezekiel 29:17, 18) 17 Now in the 27th year, in the first month, on the first day of the month, the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 18 “Son of man, King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon made his army labor greatly against Tyre. Every head became bald, and every shoulder was rubbed bare. But he and his army received no wages for the labor he expended on Tyre.
Note that this, when combined with other Biblical and archaeological sources, also provides a bit of additional evidence for the 587/6 date for the fall of Jerusalem. The city had fallen in the 14th year, but it was now two years later when the Tyre siege had been put in the past tense in year 27, in the 16th year after the city had fallen. That siege ended in 585, putting a likely time for Jerusalem's fall in 587, no more than 2 years earlier.
The Watch Tower solved this particular "vexation" by saying that these 13 years of siege fulfilled the '70 years of being forgotten' referring to the 70 years for Babylon, even though it wasn't a full 70 years for Tyre itself. Isn't it amazing that this is the solution for Tyre? Yet we still hold out on Judah, even if it requires pseudo-archaeology to accomplish it.
(Jeremiah 25:11, 12) 11 And all this land will be reduced to ruins and will become an object of horror, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years.”’ 12 “‘But when 70 years have been fulfilled, I will call to account the king of Babylon and that nation for their error. . .
In order to support our tradition about 607, we have gone so far as to mis-translate Jeremiah 29:10.
(Jeremiah 29:10) 10 “For this is what Jehovah says, ‘When 70 years at Babylon are fulfilled, I will turn my attention to you,and I will make good my promise by bringing you back to this place.’
The Hebrew in all our manuscripts says for Babylon, not at. Even the NWT translates the same Hebrew preposition as for elsewhere in such a situation, not at. Only here is it so important to mistranslate the Hebrew. And yet, oddly, we give it the meaning of "for" when similar language is used about Tyre. Also, only for would fit the previous mention of the 70 years quoted above from chapter 25.
This should give us an idea about just how vexed the Watch Tower has become over the 70 years. What's worse, is that Watch Tower publications don't even teach that exiles were in Babylon for 70 years. If we start from the first exiles, including Daniel, it could be upwards of nearly 90 years according to Watch Tower chronology, but this would make the 70 years with respect to Tyre a full 90 years long, not 70. If we start from the time the Watch Tower says that Jerusalem was destroyed, then those exiles from a destroyed Jerusalem could only have been "at" Babylon for 67 to 68 years. 607/6 to 539. Very vexing indeed in the Watch Tower's chronology attempts.
But it's not vexing at all if we look at the Bible and realize that, on this topic, the Bible has also been vindicated again by secular archaeology.

@AllenSmith enough is enough with you guys here in JW land.... cease and desist.
I've warned you before to stick to the issues and leave the personal attacks elsewhere.
 

“Although I was making every effort to write you about” when did Jesus secure full kingdom power… and lately my time is sparser than habitual, in spite of this I wish to point out several points about this serious matter.

First, thank you JWI for your investigation about blood, components, fractions and similar matters.
If I’ve understood well, JWI has a more serious or stricter view than many of us regarding blood utilization. I mean that many of us perhaps consider the use of some fractions. But JWI (and also James Thomas Rook Jr share this view, I think) point out the fact the Bible forbids BLOOD, without specifying little or much. Well, this is what I call it WHITE position. No pale grey, nor dark grey, but white. And this is fine. No one of us should think these brothers suffer from weak faith (oh, well, JTR does suffer high blood pressure!)

I must admit I’m not an expert in these matters. But, as my faith (and life) is involved, I need some level of knowledge, without which my position would seem fanatical to doctors or third persons.

By the way, I personally know brothers that when deciding about the chart in the KM about fractions and procedures they marked NO for everything. And others just the opposite.

 HYPOTETTICAL SITUATION IN THE HOSPITAL’S RESTAURANT

My wife is in the hospital room, waiting for some surgical intervention the next day. I had some difficulties with her anesthesiologist because her recommendation about the use of some blood’s fraction in the intervention. In spite of this, I feel very confident and take the opportunity to enjoy a big steak with salad.

While I’m eating alone in my table, the anesthesiologist approaches me and says:

 
·        “You’re eating more blood than your wife has not allowed us to use with her”

Don’t confuse the red juice in raw red meat with blood, it’s a muscle’s protein, the myoglobin.

 


HOW MUCH WHOLE BOOD AM I EATING WITH MY MEAT?

I’m not a specialist, so I’ve made some investigation. I’ve found this surprising data:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6495586?report=abstract

Exsanguination of animals at slaughter and the residual blood content of meat.

Abstract

About 40 to 60 per cent of the total blood volume is lost at exsanguination. The loss can be influenced slightly by differences in traditional slaughter techniques and is considerably reduced after cardiac arrest in sheep and cattle. Blood not lost at sticking is probably largely retained in the viscera rather than the carcase. The residual blood content of lean meat is 2 to 9 ml/kg muscle. There is no evidence that this amount is affected by different slaughter methods or that large amounts of residual blood influence the microbiology of meat.

And this more recent and very comprehensive source states in almost 20 ml/kg of hemoglobin in the meat, depending of the slaughter method.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4093272


If this is correct, in the slaughterhouse, during slaughter,

·        ONLY HALF OF THE BLOOD IS SPILLED!

·        ALMOST THE OTHER HALF REMAINS IN THE VISCERA

·        FROM 2 TO 9 ml/Kg REMAINS IN THE MEAT WE EAT (12-18 mg/kg hemoglobin according the second study)


CONSIDERATIONS

In the Moses’s Law, Jehovah didn’t forbid the use of viscera for feeding (I'm not sure regarding this)

·        (Lev 3:10, 11) “He will also remove the appendage of the liver along with the kidneys. And the priest will make it smoke on the altar as food, an offering made by fire to Jehovah.”
But Jehovah knew perfectly that in the viscera remained much blood of the animal. And these weren’t forbidden nor for Jews nor for Christians.

And, regarding lean meat, we can conclude, obviously, that Jehovah knew some blood remains in it. In spite of this fact, His own Son ate meat, as we do.

All of this make me think that our position about blood fractions have some logical.

ARBITRARINESS

I must admit that our position about the four main blood components (forbidden) and the other minor ones (allowed according the conscience of each one) is arbitrary. Would have been perfectly possible to determine the white/black not focusing in the importance of the components (plasma, red cells, white cells, platelets) but in the percentage of these fractions related to the whole blood. But this is incongruous. As JWI perfectly explains in his post (and with charts!) if I admit albumin (4% of plasma) or immunoglobulins (3% of plasma), I admit more proportion of blood that when I refuse platelets.

I recognize that, at some point, the GB could reconsider this incongruence and change the KM chart. In the meantime, this position is not going to make sin against God’s law about blood. It remains to me avoiding albumin, immunoglobulins and other fractions. The problem is the opposite: perhaps I would admit platelets if the focus was different. Here we are with another “vaccination” issue!

God grant them wisdom!!

 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2017/mar/09/in-russia-the-persecution-of-jehovahs-witnesses-begins-all-over-again

The article that changed everything
In my opinion, it was the Watchtower 10/1/2005, “Parents—What Future Do You Want for Your Children?” A close friend of me working in Brooklyn Bethel at those days mention that the brother (I think he was from the GB) presiding the Monday Family Worship said regarding the article under study: “well, this is the same point of view as always”, but not everyone nodded. Let’s review why.
Summarizing the advises from 1990-2005, this quote could be a typical example:
·        *** g94 8/22 p. 5 Additional Schooling or not? *** Supplementary Education. The Watchtower of November 1, 1992, noted concerning Jehovah’s Witnesses and the full-time ministry: “The general trend in many lands is that the level of schooling required to earn decent wages is now higher than it was a few years ago. . . . It is difficult to find jobs with decent wages after completing simply the minimum schooling required by law . . .  “What is meant by ‘decent wages’? . . . Their wages might be termed ‘adequate,’ or ‘satisfactory,’ if what they earn allows them to live decently while leaving them sufficient time and strength to accomplish their Christian ministry.”   So The Watchtower said: “No hard-and-fast rules should be made either for or against extra education. In spite of the above reference, in general, advanced education was always presented in a way not recommended, for its dangers, as immorality, materialism, proud and so.
But, when this 2005 article was studied in the congregation, we couldn’t find any possibility do chose going to University and to be an exemplar brother. And this position was forced in several schools of elders and additional instructions regarding choosing speakers for assemblies and other exemplar Christians.
But there was this small sentence in the article:
·        *** w05 10/1 p. 30 par. 13 Parents—What Future Do You Want for Your Children? *** “Of course, immorality, bad behavior, and pressures are by no means limited to the college or university campus” Of course! Every JW is well aware of this reality. A young Christian of 16 years must face also to temptations and pressures in his secular job, if he chooses leave studies and start to work. And, this is the reality in my country, the immorality in Professional Schools (not sure the translation in English, I mean places where you learn some skill), are WORST, and the atmosphere is WORST than in Universities. Why? Because in my country, in general only good students go to University, and most of them concentrate on studying. On the other hand, a lot of unmotivated youth assist to these other schools only to passing the time.
To whom correspond the decision? All those involved, not the elders, not the congregation. When should react the congregation? (Gal 6:1) “Brothers, even if a man takes a false step before he is aware of it, you who have spiritual qualifications try to readjust such a man in a spirit of mildness” In other words, if we see the brother takes a dangerous path, the loving way is to advise him. For example:
·        The young must leave the home and go to another city, staying with worldly people ·        The debts are so high that will force to the Christian to spend all his time work hard to cancel Love and spiritual motivates us to give advice. Perhaps the lack of judgment could lead to losing the privileges. But not (is my opinion) as a general rule. But let’s consider next situations:
·        What (as in my city) there are several universities, avoiding the necessity to leave home? ·        What if my son eats at home, sleeps at home? ·        What if, for these reasons, I have the opportunity to talk with my son every day, and see the different situations he’s coping in his daily life? ·        What if the workload in his studies are quite similar to those that would have working? ·        What if I can move to the city where the University is located, to oversee my son? ·        What if I can delay the finalization of the career, in the interest that my son would have less workload, and, in this way, more freedom for his spiritual activities? ·        What if I can take over the debts ·        What if…? The 2005 article did not consider these possibilities at all. Simply, if you go to University, you’ll face all these dangers.
What has happened since then?
I have a good friend. He’s a very known elder. His three sons have gone to University (living at home). The outcome:
·        The three are -at this time- in full time ministry. One of them was several years in Bethel. ·        One of them is a very humble and nice elder (because before he went to University he already was so) ·        Two of them are not so humble (because before they went to University they already were this way) I’ve seen a lot of other youth not going to University. The outcome
·        The humble ones, still are. ·        The proud ones, still are. Yes, I’ve heard a lot of times the experience of someone going to University and leaving the truth, or becoming more proud, or more materialist. But I’ve seen the same in many brothers without superior studies. For me, the relevant factor is:
Has contributed the superior studies to this spiritual outcome?
My personal experience.
I learnt the truth in the 1975 generation. Imagine. I start as pioneer the same day when I was baptized, when I was 16. In spite my parents pressure (I’m alone as JW) and my love for Science and Chemistry, I started the regular at 17 accepting any kind o partial time job, and when I was 18 was sent as special pioneer to another region. Later, I got married and about 30 had to leave full time service.
My situation was anything but easy. My only skill with 30 years was to preach. I struggled a lot studying for myself computer sciences after exhausting workdays. As I gained skills I could get better jobs. Over time I founded my own company related with software development. All my employees have University degree but, invariably, I had to teach them a lot of skills.
Do I think I lost my time when I was pioneer? I’m about 60, Do I think I could have attended University and, later, start as pioneer? What if, instead of doing well things, economically, at this moment I had a poor paid job, with no good holidays, no good car, do I still think it was a bad decision, not going to Chemistry University?
I would never exchange those wonderful years serving as pioneer and helping humble people to learn the truth, helping to establish new congregations, depending of God’s hand… No car, no big house, no holidays is better than serving in this special way.
So, what I think about these persons that now realized they wasted part of their life not attending superior studies?
As several of you have mention, if we hold the kingdom first, no sacrifice we could have done is perceived as such. But this does not mean that our position regarding superior studies are, at some degree, an imposition, not a personal decision.
 
 
 
 

The European union has been forcing nations to take refugees.  Some smaller countries cannot deal with all the refugees.  The far-left EU government is ignoring any complaints regarding instability.  It is pressing the economies to the hilt.... where must all the money come from to support these people?  Most cannot speak the language and cannot work.  So the opposition  has a fear for the future and now a populist movement is growing to counteract the EU actions - which has banned anyone from saying anything about Islam.  But the EU recently removed Le pen's immunity from prosecution.  She is facing jail time for posting an ISIS photo of a non-believer being beheaded!
It is so bad now in Europe that they are suppressing any negative news regarding this immigration - even though the crime rate of rape (to mention only this one crime) has spiralled uncontrollably high.  Many refugees are not from Iraq and Syria where the war is raging - most from Africa - Somalia, morocco and other African countries as well as Afganistan.  They all have one ideology in common: they are 'superior' to other nations and in the "final days" they must fight to take over the world  - this is if they follow the example of the perfect man - Mohammad - which one can find in the Siri and Hadith  (Qur'an only 26% of the trilogy of books regarding this religion). Mohammad raped many women which were non-believers and took slaves - so this is not viewed as morally wrong in Islam.
Analyses: we are seeing a tide of political entities turning against a major religion of the world because they believe they must lift the sword to fight for their religion - this leads to a situation that is very explosive.  How far we are into the end? it seems to be the beginning of a new tide. Christians are militant too and are starting propaganda against Islam.  The people will easily take up arms.....and get involved in the political issues - they do not understand the term: neutrality.  
 
The coalition against her is too strong -  other parties will form a coalition against Le Pen - she mayl only win some seats.... but it is unpredictable.
Here is a 'true' situation in Sweden -  2017- short  video.   "They say there is peace - where there is no peace"

You (JWI and Eoin) are absolutely right! Regarding this, I like the conceptual design selected in our “Revelation…climax” book, where the heavenly Jerusalem is drawn as a modern city, with skyscrapers, do you remember? I conveys the idea of complexity and advanced organization, as in a modern city. And this has scriptural base: (Heb. 11:10) “For he was awaiting the city having real foundations, whose designer and builder is God.”

The easier situation

Let’s assume in the next class with my bible student he raises the parable of the woman and the leaven. Then, I teach him that, according our present view it represents the unhidden and beneficial effect of our preaching, or something similar. But, let’s suppose I personally prefer the older explanation, that the illustration prefigures the corruption of the Christianism. I face in front of several “teaching options”, I will exaggerate a little bit the arguments.

·        Dear student: The Bible clearly and without any hesitation shows… {present explanation}
·        Dear student: Our literature teaches this parable in this way… {but I, as a very clever person have this other explanation… {older explanation}  
·        Dear student: For years we thought this parable had this meaning… {old explanation} and these were the reasons… {about the old explanation}. But, after studying now we see… {new explanation} because of these proofs {about the new explanation}. Jehovah doesn’t teach the brothers preparing the information miraculously so, perhaps over time we should have to move our view.
I think the third approach is the best one.  As I always mention, this is not necessary with our “core”, main, basic teachings.  These practically never change. An added benefit is that we show more humility, and, if the understanding varies it would be seen as normal in our learning process. I think so.

Besides, no one of the explanations conveys any wrong idea. I mean, both applications transmit good points. My bible student is not going to worship idols because one or another explanation.

In the 140 Gilead Graduation, the brother William Samuelson was interviewed for he had to leave his position as Gilead teacher for the age. The successor showed appreciation for the fact the brother Samuelson had knowledge about the progressive understanding in our beliefs, and you could go to ask him about these developments. So, it isn’t bad to present the evolution of our teachings, in this way showing our process to adopt or prefer one side or the other. (140 Gilead video, part II, min. 54:00 approx.)

I prefer to present this more humble view of ourselves. No as if we were the receptors of almost divine revelations or flashes.

A more difficult situation

I’ve already mention it. Let’s keep going. Now, in our next Watchtower we found a study article with the title: “New light about the higher authorities.” And yes, the article explains a number of reasons to believe these authorities are Jehovah and Jesus Christ. The difficulty with this situation is that, in contrast with the example with the parable of the leaven and the woman, where I had some doubts or reluctances, in this case I’m completely sure the Watchtower is wrong and my view is correct. What now?

Following this (I hope) hypothetical situation:

First. Is it incorrect to think about God and Jesus as the ‘Supremes’ authorities? Any bad behavior from this ‘new light’ would arise? I only would see, as a damage, the lack of correct understanding about one verse.

So, again, the possibilities if I were the person directing the Watchtower study this day:

·        As the “slave” has shown in this article, the Bible teaches us crystal clear this {new understanding}
·        The “slave” has said this {new understanding} but there are a lot of feebleness, and the {old understanding} was better.
·        Until now we believed this {old understanding} for these reasons. Now, after studying the matter, this {new understanding} is what we think for these other reasons. Perhaps in the future more study will improve our perception.
I, without a doubt, would opt for the third option. I definitely would refuse the second one.

The worst scenario

A new hypothetical Watchtower article is published with the title: “Now it is appropriate to worship idols!”

This supposed “new light” would convey any bad behavior? Naturally! It would not be just a matter of bad understanding of some verses. It would be contrary to God’s law!

Well, we can obviate the options. Only one option should be the correct:

·        (Galatians 1:8) “However, even if we or an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond the good news we declared to you, let him be accursed”

Oh, yes, it would make me feel like in the Paradise! I’ve included a new post regarding some collateral ideas. Your answer inspired me to write another post I had in my mind for a while: Our problem with the humility.

Had the supposed first century GB secrets meetings?

·        (Acts 15:7-25) “After much intense discussion had taken place, Peter rose and said to them:[…]10 So why are you now making a test of God by imposing on the neck of the disciples a yoke that neither our forefathers nor we were capable of bearing? […] 12 At that the entire group became silent […] 22 Then the apostles and the elders, together with the whole congregation, decided to […] 24 Since we have heard that some went out from among us and caused you trouble with what they have said, trying to subvert you, although we did not give them any instructions, 25 we have come to a unanimous decision to…”

We can observe from this account about the transcendental meeting:

·        The difficulty to arrive to the final accord – “intense discussion”

·        The different contributions for his name – “Peter, Paul, James…”

·        The dissimilar opinions – “you… imposing on the neck of the disciples a yoke”

·        The lack of secrecy – “decided to… etc.”

What added benefits we would find?

Let’s take, for example, the “other sheep” parable. (By the way, JWI, your exposition about the two congregations was in the way in try to teach others, but most of the time I find it difficult or impossible, I’ll explain it later). If we maintain both possibilities open:

·        We wouldn’t have to change once and again about meanings.

·        We wouldn’t have to expel brothers for sectaries.

·        We, mainly the GB, would show more humility.

The problem is, in my opinion, that the “slave class” has converted in core doctrines what are, in reality, explanations, applications “interpretations” –yes, I know this is a taboo word in our dictionary. Many times I mention to brothers with doubts: “the core teachings brother Russell started to teach are the same we are believing at this precisely time: dead condition, hell, soul, trinity, life on earth and so.” Our failure are the prophecies and similar.

It’s a matter of loyalty

When I read Rev 1 to 3 I found something shocking. Most of the congregations were in very bad condition… but Christ had them in his very hand, overseeing them. So, if I was in one of those congregations what should I have to do with the attitudes and actions of the body of elders on those congregations? Would I like to direct my “bible students” of those days to my congregation, attending the meetings?

Yes, if some elders influenced by Jezebels would have to influence me to consent sexual immorality, I’ll try to refuse his bad influence. But, in spite my despair, trying to correct the body of elders wouldn’t be my war, but Christ’s. Let me put modern examples.

Do you remember the short period (perhaps in the 80, I don’t remember) when were given instructions to report TWICE each month? I’m not sure how long was this arrangement, perhaps only months! Now, I’m an elder in the congregation on those days and I feel this disposition is completely silly (well, it was), and I begin to discourage the brother to inform two times monthly.

Is it the same to report our ministry twice each month than teach others to commit sexual Immorality? Rev 2:20?

So, in spite I disagree with some dispositions or teachings from the GB, I let the things in the hands of the Master. Is His responsibility, not mine.

Why Uzzah had to hold the Ark? (1Chr.13:9) Yes, it was a fault from the GB of those days, but it was a problem between Jehovah and His anointed.

I find no way to teach in my congregation in this open way if the GB don’t show the way to make this way. Sometimes, nevertheless the brothers on charge of the teaching have been close to this:

·        *** ip-1 chap. 18 pp. 241-243 par. 21-23 Shebna’s experience reminds us that among those who claim to worship God, those who accept privileges of service should use them to serve others and to bring praise to Jehovah. They should not abuse their position in order to enrich themselves or gain personal prominence. For example, Christendom has long promoted herself as an appointed steward, the earthly representative of Jesus Christ. However, just as Shebna brought dishonor on his father by seeking his own glory, Christendom’s leaders have brought dishonor on the Creator by amassing riches and power for themselves. Hence, when the time of judgment “to start with the house of God” came in 1918, Jehovah removed Christendom

·        23 What happens to Shebna? We have no record of how the prophecy about him, recorded at Isaiah 22:18, was fulfilled. When he exalts himself and is then disgraced, he resembles Christendom, but he may have learned from the discipline. In this, he is very different from Christendom. […] What a fine lesson for those who lose positions of service in God’s organization!

A fine example! Two opens applications!

Another one: how to flight when the disgusting thing starts to stand where it should not be?

*** w99 5/1 p. 19 par. 22 “We cannot presently have full details about the great tribulation, but we can logically conclude that for us the flight Jesus spoke of will not be in a geographic sense. God’s people are already around the globe, virtually in every corner. We can be sure, though, that when flight is necessary, Christians will have to continue to maintain a clear distinction between themselves and false religious organizations. It is also significant that Jesus warned about not going back to one’s house to retrieve garments or other goods.”

In other words: the GB is not sure about the fulfillment and let it clear his lack of knowledge. Perfect! For me, what wonderful it’ll be if a lot of applications and meanings about the Scriptures the GB would have this attitude. “We have no full details, we aren’t sure, both possibilities fits this prophecy.”

To finalize, I prefer the older explanation about the meaning of the illustration of the leaven and the woman (Mat.13:33) Obviously, I teach others the modern one. But what damage would happen if the GB would have said “both applications are possible?”

So, JW Insider, summarizing. Of course I’d like the GB would show more humility, that he would be more open indicating his own doubts in form of possibilities, not “lights or flashes.” But if they need to be corrected, they have a Master. I pray this Master guide them, so the Master hadn’t to punish them!

 

 

 

And yes, I should be expulsed. The Bible orders this:

·        (Titus 3:10, 11) “As for a man who promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition, 11 knowing that such a man has deviated from the way and is sinning and is self-condemned.”
·        (Romans 16:17, 18) “Now I urge you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who create divisions and causes for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid them. 18 For men of that sort are slaves, not of our Lord Christ, but of their own appetites.”
This is not a rule of JW, nor the GB, is in the Bible.

Sometimes I consider some teaching from the “slave” is not viable, or lacks biblical base, or is bad focused. What would happen if begin to teach others according my view? What would happen if all of us do this way? Imagine attending the meeting in your congregation and listening some teaching about the, let’s say the “other sheep.” Now, you attend next weekend another congregation and listen just the opposite. What a mess! How could we follow the scriptural advice in 1 Cor.1:10 “Now I urge you, brothers, through the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that 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.”

What I do is, regarding this kind of matters I personally have another view is teach them as in the Watchtower is showed. Why?

·        After all, I could be wrong (most of the times, really)
·        This is no my responsibility to direct God’s people, but Christ’s. I let Christ the responsibility to direct the brothers on charge of His work.
As I mentioned in other comments, I prefer using expressions like “we believe this [doctrine] means this.” If my interlocutor replies “but I believe other way”, I can tell him “well, perhaps you’re right, with time and study perhaps we should move our understanding, but at this moment we all view this matter in this way.”

Who is more loyal?
This is a real conversation I had with a brother. He insisted I should follow some instructions in our congregation. I agreed but I also mentioned this arrangement was silly. Then, he insisted, if I were more loyal I would not think it was silly. So, I gave him one example:
One person is blind, and his master demand him: “take this envelop and deliver it in the house at the end of this road.” So, he does, helping himself with a walking stick, happy whistling while is serving his chief.
What the blind servant ignores is that the road is flanked, surrounded with deep cliffs. But as he didn’t see anything was very happy and confident.
Now. The boss orders to another employee doing the same thing, but this time the servant see perfectly the riffs. And still worst, he is afraid of heights.  But this second servant also obeys the master. This time without whistles, but swallowing saliva and sometimes closing the eyes.
Then, I asked to my interlocutor: who is more loyal?
And he insisted, “both sowed the same loyalty.” What’s the opinion of you, the reader? Who was more loyal?
A very difficult situation.
Sometimes, I putted myself in the next situation.  I am one of the men following David when he was persecuted by Saul. Then I get shocked, the anointed of Jehovah I admire give a very strange order: “let’s kill all Nabal’s house.” I immediately think this is a terrible injustice but, I ride the horse with the other 400 and obey the anointed. What a relief when Abigail stops him!
Years later I’m serving in the army under Joab. Then, my general give me strange orders from the King: Uriah must be abandoned in the middle of the fight. I think: “what, this is a murder.” But, of course, the order comes from the king anointed by Jehovah, sure the king has more information than me. Perhaps Uriah is a traitor. I feel terribly wrong, but I obey.
What I’m proposing is: if I want to be loyal, must always agree with the instructions from the “slave” class? Have I the right to think some orders, explanations, directions from these brothers are silly, sometimes completely wrong?
I follow these teachings, of course, but, please, don’t force me to always agree with them!

Allow me to play devil’s advocate. Re-reading several posts of JW Insider, I extract two main points.

One. JW Insider respect the GB. He considers these brothers as carrying an enormous responsibility. For him they are some kind of body of elders with global, worldwide concerns.

Derived from this view, we should respect them and obey them, following the Heb.13:17 counsel: “Be obedient to those who are taking the lead among you and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over you as those who will render an account”
Two. JW Insider disagree with the application of the slave’s parable to these brothers.

Well, and what’s the matter? It isn’t the main point to obey the brothers leading the congregation, even the universal congregation? Does this obedience depend of the meaning of one parable? What if (our understanding of) the meaning changes? Should we then, stop obeying them?

I’m completely sure the GB is very conscious of the special meaning of the next verses to all of them:

·        (James 3:1) “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, knowing that we will receive heavier judgment”
·        (Luke 12:48) “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”
·        (Luke 19:22) “He said to him, ‘By your own words I judge you”
I don’t envy them. They deserve our respect and prayers. Regarding the last verse I’ve quoted, as it applies to the bad slave, I’m not saying the GB is this bad slave. I mean that according Jesus words, if one person or collective claims to be something will be judged according his affirmations.

And I don’t think any presumptuousness about them, rather they had the same attitude -I think so-  of Isaiah when he said: (Isaiah 6:8) “Here I am! Send me!” In other words, they have seen the responsibility to oversee the worldwide congregation and don’t refuse to accomplish.

Sorry if after this defense JW Insider goes to hail!!

Anna, I think your question is a very valid one. Let me share with you this point: Antioch congregation and Peter.

Quoting partly (some comments and emphasis added) from *** w78 6/15 p. 7

“When Barnabas and Paul brought this letter [from Jerusalem, resolving the circumcision issue] back to Antioch, there was great rejoicing in the congregation. —Acts 15:3-31.

It may have been after this that Peter visited the Antioch congregation and freely associated with uncircumcised Gentile believers. But, then, when certain Jewish brothers came down from Jerusalem [perhaps, again, teaching about the obligation of circumcision -Acts 15:1 -], Peter withdrew from associating with Gentile converts and spent time exclusively with Jewish brothers. Even Barnabas got unbalanced and did the same thing. But all responded properly when Paul reproved Peter, making clear how wrong such a course was. —Gal. 2:11-14.  

Well, it was clear that these two prominent brothers err in their judgment seriously. What I’ve never heard is the fact, I believe, that perhaps this was not a matter of declining some invitations for lunch. Imagine you’re a gentile sister in the middle of that congregation. You feel so happy because have the chance to preach with so valuable brothers, Paul, Barnabas and, imagine, Peter is going to visit your congregation. More speeches, more opportunities to preach with, perhaps, the most famous of the apostles.

As soon Peter arrives you make arrangements to go to some visits with him, he agrees and you enjoy listen his conversation. Later, you also enjoy hearing him giving speeches in the “kingdom hall.” But as you know, as soon the jews brothers arrived, Peter began to ‘withdrew from associating WITH YOU.’ Next congregation meeting arrives and you can feel the tension. The apostle Peter takes the word and you start to hallucinate. He’s is trying to justify his actions, even with scriptural basis, as the brothers from Jerusalem did: (Acts 15:1) ‘began to teach the brothers: “Unless you get circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.”’ Thank goodness Paul had the courage to resist him!

So far so good. I mean this is very known. But what happened 15 years later approx.? God inspires Peter to write his letters. Now theses letters arrive to Antioch y you are in the middle of the meeting, listening their reading. Now, you have two options.

1. How is supposed follow the advice in the letters from this man that everyone in the congregation knows committed a manifest judgment error? How is it possible God continues to use him?

2. Well, Jehovah has forgiven him. So, the same should I do.

I’m not sure if you’ll find these comments meaningful. Nevertheless, it still remains an important point: Peter’s letters were inspired, GB not. But, for now, my time is running out, I’ll try later.

I am not writing this to cause a debate - I'm actually tired of people who have the education to gather a lot of  'information' but have not learnt to think about all sides of an issue and put it in perspective.  They become stuck on the information and then they judge everything on this one-sided information and become belligerent.
1.  Sexual abuse of children is in every organization on earth - wherever there are children. This is why we see government institutions intermittently in the media where children were found to have been abused - the tip of the iceberg - even though the perpetrators know the penalty if caught .  This practice is insidious and 'hidden' and it is hard to pinpoint and it is prevalent amongst  ALL levels of society - judges, doctors, policemen, gardeners. People can also be falsely accused - but one should always act to protect the child.
2. People who react so nasty to religious child abuse (whatever the church or organization) - look back at time with "modern" views. They know that it is not accepted by law -  now - but what about 50 years ago?  Most people do not look at the history of the 'laws' against child abuse.  
3.  Governments are now launching inquiries so they can be seen to be 'doing something about the issue" and trying to understand the issue.  Why only now?  Because decent laws to protect children have only been in place for a relative short period of time - in most first world countries. Children have been suffering for a very long time, long before this overwhelming outcry, cases coming forward, and media attention been given to it in the past 30 years.  Why were governments negligent to bring laws against child sexual abuse for such a long time and why was the media complicit in its silence?
Only 50 years ago - only the first world countries - started to look at this problem.  Before this - society was closed and it was a taboo subject to talk about.  The sixties brought a sexual revolution when people started to talk openly about sex but it took another 15 years before people started to mention this taboo subject in public. I also know that reporters did not write much about the issues regarding this.  Some countries had insufficient laws and procedures which made it impossible to prosecute a child molester.
I was working for a newspaper myself (not an English one) and a case came up where the entire nation was shocked because a child molester had stolen kids and murdered them.  I told my friend, who was a reputable reporter, to use this time of media attention - to bring to the attention of society - that most people could not take a child molester to court because a child could be cross-examined in court.  This meant that even a small child had to become a "victim" a second time by having to face the perpetrator in court and then be cross-examined. Most often a conviction could not be had. The way evidence was collected also did not favor the child.
I know that a law (to protect the child during court proceedings in America) was only ratified as late as 2003.  Consequently - if I were a lawyer in a court case where millions was to be paid out - I will point to finger to the lawmakers (congress) - who were supposed to be the protectors of its people.   If there were not proper laws in place to get a proper conviction - why would an organization put themselves out there and fight the legal system - whatever the organization? 
After all these inquiries (Australia, England) into child abuse and the procedures followed by religious organizations - hopefully these governments will bring in laws to cover the holes still left in the legal system and provide clarity to (religious and other) organizations on proper government procedures to follow when someone is accused of child abuse.
 4.  There are many countries with laws against child abuse - but the age of consent is between 12 - 14 years. Belgium comes to mind (13).  Most pedophiles travel to Thailand and other countries to indulge in pedophilia.  There are many countries across the world with strong laws against child abuse but it is never enforced because child abuse is not viewed as an important issue - they have more pressing problems such as hunger or socio-economic problems.  It is part of daily life in some third world countries.  What this indicates to me is that world-wide organizations, who have children in their midst at any time, have to try to adapt to the many different laws (in many countries - child marriage is still allowed) and cultures regarding this issue.
5.  We expect religious organizations to have 'higher' standards - but in the past no-one spoke of these things and people did not know how to deal with it....with lawmakers and media complicit.  The Watchtower organization has not been perfect but it has adjusted and put the best possible procedures in place for every country (but it will never be fool-proof, perfect or sufficient).  Child molestation is not an easy crime to determine.  One needs experts to examine each case - and even experts can be fooled. 
6. Religious organizations cannot ban people - so child molesters can attend meetings if they wished.  This is why it is important for brothers and sisters to obey instructions to take their own children to the toilet, to let their children only visit with supervision etc. An unbelieving relative like a grand-father can perpetrate this crime (happened to a friend of mine).   So to sum up - parents are responsible for the safety of those in its family unit - and it has never been easy to intervene in family affairs if the father is the perpetrator. This is why it is better that it becomes the government's responsibility!  It seems that governments are now doing enquiries into the procedures of organizations - so they can put proper laws and procedures in place to take up this responsibility in a proper way -  at last!
In the end - it is only Jehovah who will do the final judging of all people who have lived on earth. He is justice personified and he is the one who sees the things that go on in secret. He promises that all suffering will be done away with under his future government and it will not even come to mind of the victim!
I live in Sweden now (who is in denial of all the rapes going on) and I read recently that a case was thrown out of court - a young woman who was raped by six refugees. The reason: she must have consented. My husband made the comment that even a woman who makes her money by this way of life will not consent to violent sexual actions by 6 different men.... but this is where our world is heading now.  No More justice....
 
 

[Note: Several of the ideas presented below are not in accord with current Watch Tower publications.]
Clearly, the overall purpose of Revelation is to show things that must shortly take place. The goal is to help Christians conquer through this final era of time (the last days) when they may face imminent death, persecution, long prison terms, or even a long life filled with temptation to join sinners or, perhaps, to merely leave the love they had at first, by not keeping that day "close in mind." Imminent.
(Revelation 2:3, 4) 3 You are also showing endurance, and you have persevered for the sake of my name and have not grown weary. 4 Nevertheless, I hold this against you, that you have left the love you had at first.
(Revelation 2:10) . . .Look! The Devil will keep on throwing some of you into prison so that you may be fully put to the test, and you will have tribulation for ten days. Prove yourself faithful even to death, and I will give you the crown of life.
Christians in all ages must deal with the fact that we have but one lifetime, or less, before we are "instantly" and "immediately" in the presence of Jesus. Yet he could also return at any time in these last days, too, "interrupting" our lifetime. Hebrews starts out with the same phrase: "in these last days." Paul warned Timothy that the reason he would be seeing such problems in the congregation was because they were in the last days. Peter in Acts tells the crowd at Pentecost that the holy spirit's presence was because they were now in the last days. The letters of Peter and Jude warn Christians that this was the reason they were seeing ridiculers with their ridicule about the delay of the parousia, because this is what they were told to expect during the last days. Yet Peter also implied that the parousia might not begin for thousands of years, because each of those "last days" could be as much as 1,000 years in Jehovah's eyes.
But as to the Revelation including a sweeping history of Christianity there is the following as evidence, from the very start of Revelation. Even before we can make use of Revelation 1:10 to claim that John was swept into some future "Lord's Day" we are given a setting that includes the past. Notice that Jesus had already proven himself to be the "The Faithful Witness." Notice that Jesus was already named: 
(Revelation 1:5,6) . . .“the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth.” To him who loves us and who set us free from our sins by means of his own blood— 6 and he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father—yes, to him be the glory and the might forever. Amen.
Revelation speaks of Jesus as the "Lamb" 29 times, referring back to 33 CE. That's more times than he is referred to as either "Jesus" or "Christ" combined!  Although the goal of the book is to show that the promises must shortly take place, it is also made up of familiar scenes that had already taken place, and were still in progress, as God's Kingdom by Christ Jesus went on conquering in the midst of his enemies. Note also that an historical sense is found even in the titles of Jesus and Jehovah in names like "Alpha and Omega" and "the First and the Last." Notice the sweep of history:
(Revelation 1:4) . . .May you have undeserved kindness and peace from “the One who is and who was and who is coming,” . . .
(Revelation 1:17-19) . . .I am the First and the Last, 18 and the living one, and I became dead, but look! I am living forever and ever, and I have the keys of death and of the Grave. 19 So write down the things you saw, and the things that are, and the things that will take place after these.
In the past, various revelations had included a revealing of what was going on "behind the scenes" which gave Jehovah's people a sense that even if things seemed out of control on earth, there was a method and purpose behind it. Here are some examples of a revelation of something that went on in heaven to explain something that happened in the recent past:
(1 Kings 22:19) 19 Mi·caiʹah then said: “Therefore, hear the word of Jehovah: I saw Jehovah sitting on his throne and all the army of the heavens standing by him, to his right and to his left.
Also in the book of Job, the "curtain is pulled back" so that the events in Job's life are explained by recent past and current events taking place in heaven.
(Job 2:1) Afterward the day came when the sons of the true God entered to take their station before Jehovah, and Satan also entered among them to take his station before Jehovah.
The vision of Stephen was a revealing of what was going on in heaven to prove to him that Jesus was indeed already standing at God's right hand.
(Acts 7:55, 56) But he, being full of holy spirit, gazed into heaven and caught sight of God’s glory and of Jesus standing at God’s right hand, and he said: “Look! I see the heavens opened up and the Son of man standing at God’s right hand.”
I'll give one example from Revelation, since we are referencing chapter 11. The first readers of Revelation were Christians who were about to be swept up into the effects of woes and plagues and tribulations, and they were dealing with the very recent trauma of a devastation on Jerusalem, an entire religious system of things, which was 1,000 times worse than our "9/11" in New York and D.C.  Revelation 11 appears to deal with this trauma by reminding the readers that Jesus had predicted it, by referring to Jesus words:
(Luke 21:23, 24) . . .For there will be great distress on the land and wrath against this people. 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled.
(Revelation 11:1-4) . . .“Get up and measure the temple sanctuary of God and the altar and those worshipping in it. 2 But as for the courtyard that is outside the temple sanctuary, leave it out and do not measure it, because it has been given to the nations, and they will trample the holy city underfoot for 42 months. 3 I will cause my two witnesses to prophesy for 1,260 days dressed in sackcloth.” 4 These are symbolized by the two olive trees and the two lampstands and are standing before the Lord of the earth.
Early Christians would have had very little trouble, I think, identifying the point being made about the two lampstands, the two witnesses, and the two olive trees. Yet they knew that this woe would pass and would only prove to be a part of the ongoing evidence that Jehovah was in control, and all would be right with the world, in time.
(Romans 11:13-26) . . Seeing that I am an apostle to the nations, . . . For if their being cast away means reconciliation for the world, what will the acceptance of them mean but life from the dead? . . . 17 However, if some of the branches were broken off and you, although being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became a sharer of the richness of the olive’s root, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches. . . . That is true! For their lack of faith, they were broken off, but you are standing by faith. Do not be haughty, but be in fear. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22 Consider, therefore, God’s kindness and severity. There is severity toward those who fell, but toward you there is God’s kindness, provided you remain in his kindness; otherwise, you too will be lopped off. . . . 24 For if you were cut out of the olive tree that is wild by nature and were grafted contrary to nature into the garden olive tree, how much more will these who are natural branches be grafted back into their own olive tree! 25 For I do not want you to be unaware of this sacred secret, brothers, so that you do not become wise in your own eyes: A partial dulling of senses has come upon Israel until the full number of people of the nations has come in, 26 and in this manner all Israel will be saved. . . .
Jerusalem's fall (their being cast away) was a time for both the witness to the nations (wild olive tree) and the witness to Israel (native olive tree) to carry on in sackcloth (partial dulling) for a time. But ultimately would result in life (life from the dead) for a full number of both. 
These first readers of Revelation were also dealing with death and war and pestilence and food shortages and earthquakes. How could they "square" that with the fact that Jesus was already ruling from God's right hand? Chapter 6 gave an image of how Jesus was ruling and conquering in the midst of these enemies (including the last enemy death, of course).
(Revelation 6:2) . . .and the one seated on it had a bow; and a crown was given him, and he went out conquering and to complete his conquest. Jesus begins his conquest from the first century, right alongside these death-dealing enemies. This was a perfect parallel to what Jesus had told them to expect in the first century while they anticipated his coming parousia.  (Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21) If that wasn't clear enough to the readers, additional references to the Olivet Discourse were included as a reminder of his coming parousia:
(Revelation 6:12, 13) . . .And I saw when he opened the sixth seal, and a great earthquake occurred; and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the entire moon became as blood, 13 and the stars of heaven fell to the earth as when a fig tree shaken by a high wind drops its unripe figs.
Yet, they had been reminded that they would still have to wait a while:
(Revelation 6:11) . . .And a white robe was given to each of them, and they were told to rest a little while longer, until the number was filled of their fellow slaves and their brothers . . .
And of course, chapter 7 shows how this would turn out, using a symbolic way of presenting how the "number was filled" both of Israel (Romans 11:12) and of the nations (see Romans 11:25, quoted above). 
(Romans 11:12) 12 Now if their [Israel's] false step means riches to the world and their decrease means riches to people of the nations, how much more will their full number mean!
They were being reminded that the delay was nothing to worry about because it meant salvation for more persons:
(2 Peter 3:14, 15) 14 Therefore, beloved ones, since you are awaiting these things, do your utmost to be found finally by him spotless and unblemished and in peace. 15 Furthermore, consider the patience of our Lord as salvation. . .
(Revelation 7:9, 10) 9 After this I saw, and look! a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, dressed in white robes; and there were palm branches in their hands. 10 And they keep shouting with a loud voice, saying: “Salvation we owe to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb.”
So I'm not saying we are wrong to read various parts of Revelation with a special meaning we give it for our own day, but we should not forget that they also had an urgent and special meaning for Christians throughout all ages.

[Note: Several of the ideas presented below are not in accord with current Watch Tower publications.]
Why? It's quite possible you are right, but the Scriptures seem to point away from a distant fulfillment in the future.
Just for the record, I see no reason to deny Jesus' words here. Yes, it's true that the full destruction of Satan would come at a later date, but there is no reason to believe that Satan had not fallen based specifically on the accomplishment of Jesus' ministry. Jesus' ministry was for the very purpose of breaking the power of Satan, and that ministry was accomplished.
Is there a scripture that says that this falling, or casting down of Satan from heaven was scheduled for some time far in the future?
Satan's rule of sin was broken because Jehovah could now view sinners as if righteous. Men of goodwill now had a proper means of approach to God and a means, therefore, of taking back what Satan had taken away. Jesus took away the sin of the world. 
A part of the symbolism about the power over Satan was the fact that powerful works performed by Jesus and his early disciples included proof positive that Jesus was conquering Satan's power. Jesus had given the disciples authority over the demons. But the primary accomplishment of his ministry was that Jesus saved mankind from the spiritually paralyzing effects of sin. Satan would still be here to tempt us and would still be the "god of this system" just as he was in 1815, 1915 and 2015. Clearly Satan's power over us was brought low, because, through Christ's ministry Christians now have power to conquer -- to get the mastery over sin. Satan lost his "rule" over us, even though he continued his rule over the world. We know from Hebrews that this ministry was fully accomplished at Jesus' death and resurrection. Note:
(John 12:31-33) 31 Now there is a judging of this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out. 32 And yet I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all sorts of men to myself.” 33 This he was really saying to indicate what sort of death he was about to die.
(Hebrews 2:14) . . .so that through his death he might bring to nothing the one having the means to cause death, that is, the Devil,
(John 14:30) 30 I will not speak with you much more, for the ruler of the world is coming, and he has no hold on me.
The spread of that Kingdom in 33 CE, starting at Pentecost was also a key part of the ministry of Jesus through the pouring out of the holy spirit:
(John 16:8-11) . . .And when that one comes, [holy spirit] he will give the world convincing evidence concerning sin and concerning righteousness and concerning judgment: 9 first concerning sin, because they are not exercising faith in me; 10 then concerning righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you will see me no longer; 11 then concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged.
(Acts 26:17, 18) 17 And I will rescue you from this people and from the nations, to whom I am sending you 18 to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light and from the authority of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those sanctified by their faith in me.’
And of course, this whole argument comes "full circle" again, explaining how the Kingdom is already at work:
(Ephesians 2:1-6) 2 Furthermore, God made you alive, though you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2 in which you at one time walked according to the system of things of this world, according to the ruler of the authority of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience. 3 Yes, among them we all at one time conducted ourselves in harmony with the desires of our flesh, carrying out the will of the flesh and of our thoughts, and we were naturally children of wrath just as the rest. 4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of his great love with which he loved us, 5 made us alive together with the Christ, even when we were dead in trespasses—by undeserved kindness you have been saved. 6 Moreover, he raised us up together and seated us together in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus,
Surely, it was in this same way that Satan was cast down knowing he had a short period of time, seeking to devour, just as he is depicted in Revelation 12:
(1 Peter 5:8) . . .Your adversary, the Devil, walks about like a roaring lion, seeking to devour someone.
(Revelation 2:10) . . .Look! The Devil will keep on throwing some of you into prison so that you may be fully put to the test, and you will have tribulation for ten days. Prove yourself faithful even to death, and I will give you the crown of life.
(Revelation 12:9-12) 9 So down the great dragon was hurled, the original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him. 10 I heard a loud voice in heaven say: “Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the Kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our God! 11 And they conquered him because of the blood of the Lamb and because of the word of their witnessing, and they did not love their souls even in the face of death. 12 On this account be glad, you heavens and you who reside in them! Woe for the earth and for the sea, because the Devil has come down to you, having great anger, knowing that he has a short period of time.”
In 2016, Satan was surely aware that his time was even shorter than it was in 1916, yet there is no specific evidence that Satan's anger was any less visceral during Nero's day, or back when Peter said that Satan was already walking about like a roaring lion, seeking to devour someone. Therefore, I would take Jesus at his word, and not place this event of Satan's falling or "casting out" as something that occurs thousands of years later.

The issue of the "crown" is probably one of those issues that perfectly fits the point that Eoin made. By the way, I still agree that the argument you were making from Romans 4:17 will be important to the discussion, and the verses that you and Melinda applied to that argument are valid. I'm not dismissing it, even though I didn't think that Romans 4:17 was the right verse to find the foundation of that idea. But that was a trivial side point. Still, it made more sense to start with this idea that Eoin presented, because it is a better bridge for resolving the apparent contradiction that Jesus begins a kingship in 33 and the kingdom also comes at a later date, too. As Eoin put it, this was not an "either-or" situation. 
That said, a king receiving a crown even after he has been declared the king is possible even among human kings, and likely would provide a scenario that indicates the exact idea of a special occasion when the Kingdom achieves a special milestone. This is exactly the idea behind "Jehovah becoming King" even though it was obvious he is already an eternal King.
You did leave out a mention of a crown that I think is crucial to getting a truer picture:
(Hebrews 1:2-4,8; 2:5,9) 2 Now at the end of these days he has spoken to us by means of a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the systems of things. 3 He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact representation of his very being, and he sustains all things by the word of his power. And after he had made a purification for our sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high. 4 So he has become better than the angels to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs. . . . 8 But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your Kingdom is the scepter of uprightness. . . . 2:5 For it is not to angels that he has subjected the inhabited earth to come, about which we are speaking. . . .9 But we do see Jesus, who was made a little lower than angels, now crowned with glory and honor for having suffered death,
I believe our traditional teaching makes it too easy for us to miss the point that even words like "subject" "obeisance" and "Christ" [Messiah] were also references to kingship. In Jesus' day, the term Christ (Messiah) was exclusively tied to the royal heir of King David, of the tribe of Judah. See Peter's speech in Acts 2, for example. Or, more simply:
(Matthew 22:42) “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him: “David’s.. . ."
The book of Hebrews clearly includes a commentary on Psalm 110 and appropriately expands on the glorious royal imagery of a throne, a crown, a scepter, glorious garments, and royal "subjects" (angels subject to him as ministers, doing obeisance to him). That's the basis of the first two chapters. Later chapters explain how this king can also be a priest according to the manner of Melchizedek based on Psalm 110:4. It was already understood from chapters one and two that Jesus was a King. So here's what Hebrews says about Melchizedek:
(Hebrews 7:2, 14) . . .First, his name is translated “King of Righteousness,” and then also king of Saʹlem, that is, “King of Peace.” . . . 14 For it is clear that our Lord has descended from Judah, yet Moses said nothing about priests coming from that tribe.
So it was clear that Jesus was king, but less clear how "Scripturally" he could also be a priest. What is the conclusion after the first few chapters of Hebrews show that this King is also a priest?
(Hebrews 8:1)  Now this is the main point of what we are saying: We have such a high priest as this, and he has sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens,
I wanted to mention that, based on the idea from Romans 4:17 (or elsewhere), that it really doesn't matter so much about the exact chronology of saying that the Kingdom was among them in Jesus' day, or when he sat down with God as his throne in 33 CE, or when he again arrives to be seen in the Kingdom "present" or Kingdom "coming." But based on the language of Hebrews 1 through 8 for example, it doesn't seem right to minimize the kingdom in 33 and then highlight the Kingdom as being so much more important at a later date. To me the question boils down to whether we really need to minimize the meaning of Matthew 28:18 (among other verses). In effect, we say that Jesus didn't really mean to use the word "all" here:
(Matthew 28:18) . . .: “All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth.
And for further consideration:
(John 17:1-5) . . .Jesus spoke these things, and raising his eyes to heaven, he said: “Father, the hour has come. Glorify your son so that your son may glorify you, 2 just as you have given him authority over all flesh [authority over all mankind, NWT footnote], so that he may give everlasting life to all those whom you have given to him. 3 This means everlasting life, their coming to know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ. 4 I have glorified you on the earth, having finished the work you have given me to do. 5 So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory that I had alongside you before the world was.

You misunderstood me. I did say (reporting child abuse) "will free the elders to concentrate more on helping the victim spiritually, and leave the rest to the authorities". I did not mean elders would investigate the crime. If, lets say a parent, suspicious of their child being sexually abused by someone, approaches an elder with that concern, it is logical that the elders should ask some questions. (Unless of course the parent already volunteers enough information which convinces the elders something might be going on). It wouldn't be right for the elders to contact the authorities with every allegation of child abuse  (read this paper) unless they have a reasonable evidence themselves to suspect something (whether that is based on information from a parent/other member of the congregation or the victim) Of course the parent/other member of the congregation can bypass the elders and go straight to the police. Once the allegation is reported to the relevant authority, by the elders or others, then if the alleged perpetrator is a congregation member, and especially if they hold some responsibility, the elders do have to act in a congregational manner since the alleged perpetrator is now no longer "irreprehensible" even if the accusations are eventually proved wrong. What about the victim and their family? Do the elders have to wait until what the authorities establish? This may take months. In the meantime, surely the elders should be able to perform pastoral work, especially at a time where it might be needed the most. I understand why it is important not to interfere with professional work, but the elders cannot just ignore the family and the victim. No doubt there will be guidelines published on what the elders should and what they shouldn't talk about so as not to inadvertently hamper investigation.....
Policies are no good if they don't work in practice. Read this interesting report (first posted by CMP)
Because the right and responsible thing might not necessarily be to report every allegation of child sexual abuse. Why do you think it has taken states this long to make reporting mandatory? Think about it.