ComfortMyPeople

“So, this particular idea of "waiting" does not refer to inactivity, or waiting until he becomes an actively ruling King.” – JWInsider
A very interesting point.
======
(Would also like to put a small bit of seasoning in the pot. See if it is tasty.)
Heaven is not a place of inactivity
I would like to posit some of the things Jesus did in 33CE and thereafter. .
(John 5:16, 17) . ..For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because he was doing these things during the Sabbath. 17 But he answered them: “My Father has kept working until now, and I keep working.”
Jesus continued his work in heaven; the anointed too continue their work in heaven.
Some of Jesus’ work from heaven prior to millennium rule
So his work includes empowering his disciples with holy spirit (Pentecost), drawing people, converting them (John 14:6) (Saul – Acts 9) and appointing directly and indirectly, directing (“come over into Macedonia and help us”), overseeing, settling issues (Acts 15), counseling, commending, revealing the future, etc. (Rev 2-3; Book of Revelation), preserving and disseminating the Bible, preserving the wheat-like Christians, giving insight into Bible prophecies, inspecting his spiritual temple, restoring true worship; progressive teaching and training (John 16:12); legally establishing the good news by means of court victories, subduing nations to get preaching done globally; commissioning angels directing preaching work (Rev 14:6)
Matthew 28:19, 20) Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.”
(John 14:15-17) 15 “If you love me, you will observe my commandments. 16 And I will ask the Father and he will give you another helper to be with you forever, 17 the spirit of the truth, which the world cannot receive, because it neither sees it nor knows it. You know it, because it remains with you and is in you.
(John 16:12, 13) 12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you are not able to bear them now. 13 However, when that one comes, the spirit of the truth, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak of his own initiative, but what he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things to come.
(John 14:6) Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (Acts 9:14, 15) . . .” 15 But the Lord said to him: “Go! because this man is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel.
(1 Timothy 2:7) For the purpose of this witness I was appointed a preacher and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—a teacher of nations in the matter of faith and truth.
Anointed ones who are resurrected instantaneously also work
(Revelation 14:13) 13 And I heard a voice out of heaven say, “Write: Happy are the dead who die in union with the Lord from this time onward. Yes, says the spirit, let them rest from their labors, for the things they did go right with them.”
*** re chap. 30 p. 211 pars. 20 “Babylon the Great Has Fallen!” *** “… Afterward, those of the anointed ones who die during the Lord’s day are promised a special privilege. Their resurrection to spirit life in heaven is instantaneous, “in the twinkling of an eye.” (1 Corinthians 15:52) How marvelous this is! And their works of righteousness continue right on in the heavenly realm”.

It will happen long before 2050:  Many Muslim men have 4 wives and between 5 - 8 children with each wife.  In Europe, the Europeans have a negative population growth.  Many Europeans do not marry and live alone with occasional sexual flings.  They are paying the tax for these large expanding families - and Muslims believe that "unbelievers" must support them... with Jizya.... Most believe that they will eventually rule the world....... and Satan may actually use this religion for his purposes.
Within 20 years the upcoming generation of Muslims will be voted into government and we will see changes to laws which may take away your choice of religion and you will have to pay the Jizya tax for being an unbeliever..... or if things get more violent... suffer under islam if one refuses to submit.  It will not be a matter of popularity - but one of submission. Our faith will be tested! 
Movements to this effect are already present in Europe and Canada and laws are being ratified wherein one is not allowed to criticize Islam (it is the only religion which has been singled out for this privilege!).  Islam is not a minority - they are now the most populous on earth and are the largest minorities in many countries.
This is the reason we see that far-right organizations are suddenly gaining so much political traction because people have woken up to this fact..... It is already too late ....... we know the end will come with the worst tribulation ever on the earth!   Things have been set in motion!  False religion (militant Christians of the far right and other far-right organizations) are the same as Islam because of the militant frame of mind.   
Yesterday a large, bearded man came out of his house (we knocked twice and left after receiving no answer). He ran after us in uncontrollable anger and belligerence and shouted for the entire neighborhood to hear: " I am a Muslim and if you knock at my door again I will take a knife and kill you. " ! he repeated this phrase in his anger. We apologized and left.  I knew that he saw us as "weak" because this is how these militant people think....  but I already know that Jehovah is the only one who can clean the earth of all kinds of "beastly" people.... no group of humans can do this.  We need a heavenly army of angels to do this!
False religion (which is showing its true colors) will really be riding the beast!  I saw a clip yesterday that ISIS has given its fighters permission to eat humans - this is not barbaric, it is 'beastly'.  It reminds me of the prophesy in revelation 6, which talks of the pale horse - premature death due to hunger, plagues and "beasts".

No. You are not rambling. Your points make perfect sense and show good heart.
Look, there are some who are genuinely aghast at child abuse and participate with good thoughts. But there are also some liars whose concern over chlld sexual abuse is probably not a sham, but it is clearly secondary to their greater goal. They use it to further that goal.
It's greatly time and energy consuming to battle the liars on what is a here today - gone tomorrow internet thread. They're all welcomed here, which I find - odd. Unless I am up for a brawl, I, like you, will not do it. (But sometimes I am up for a brawl)
Eventually, it's all going to go against us. We know that. Jesus followers will be hailed before courts. Why? So they can receive Good Citizenship plaques? Or will it be so as to defend themselves before persons 'lyingly saying every sort of wicked thing' about them? (Matthew 5:11) But the bad guys will always win in this system of things. When Jesus appeared before Pilate, he didn't sweet talk his way out of it, did he?

Your argument (I mean, the Bible argument) is very solid. Christ is not waiting -inactively- until the end of the millennium.

So, perhaps, the idea you and Eoin have pointed out, that Jesus Christ “has begun to reign” or “become king” could refer to some special moments in the development of God’s purposes: Da 7, Re 12 and so.

Thanks for sharing these valuable thoughts!

 

Arauna.

I subscribe your commentaries. The Watchtower recommendations about helping refugees in material sense should be seen with balance. Yes, Jesus and apostles helped poor people even with money (Jn 13:29).

My experience in this field has to do with a “fight” with my wife. She is all heart. Any refugee, or newcomer to our country she tries to help them with forms, with social counsel and so. Yes, obviously these people react with appreciation, as I would do in similar circumstances. But let me be crystal clear. Only ONE of these persons consume an enormous quantity of time (for me, most valuable than money). I mean, helping with official papers, doctors, hospitals, social rights, understanding of local law… Believe me, ONE person, ONE family, consumes a lot of resources. Well, please, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying no help, or a merely testimonial help. But we’ve found more useful to address these people to social services. They have more skills, more time and more resources than us.

Even more, we avoid the situation (very common) that these people showing interest in our message only because need material help.

Please, again, I’m not saying that we should only preach them without provide material help. But I wish to point out the same as Arauna: balance

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.”

This whole matter is likely a source of far more than embarrassment for informed and genuine Witnesses everywhere.
But let's not lose sight of the fact that, despite the whole world being seemingly appalled by this particular crime, it appears to be pandemic.
For example:
China: http://www.economist.com/news/china/21705848-china-has-millions-sexually-abused-children-it-beginning-acknowledge-their-suffering
Russia: https://themoscowtimes.com/articles/child-abuse-in-russia-is-routine-20452
Nigeria: http://www.voanews.com/a/unicef-report-child-abuse-nigeria/2955314.html
Argentina: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/4db6c687dff74f81bfee4294bf068914/argentina-investigates-alleged-sex-abuse-school
Scotland: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-39116477
The work of the various investigative bodies seems so far to have done little more than reveal that the problem is far more widespread and historic than anyone imagined...everywhere. The disbelief and denial displayed by many decent people in the face of evidence to the contrary serves to illustrate the heinousness of the crime and the challenge of eradication. The "Yes he did" and "No he didn't" chorus is another tragic feature of this whole business.
Personally, I am glad to have become more aware of the matter, particularly due to the ARC work which provides a better level of information than the vitriolic apostate ramblings, sensationalist news reporting, and other widely circulated accounts. I welcome this level of investigation into all areas and pray that the lessons learned will be applied by all involved institutions despite the fact that they are at best temporary and symptom-focussed. (The bleatings of professionals over cost and implication of measures illustrate institutional unwillingness/inadequacy to deal with the matter).
Could it be that humanity in general has failed in it's duty to protect it's young ones? Don't all answer at once! And what of the victims? Shattered personalities, ruined and even lost lives...none of this can be restored by compensation or apportioning of blame.
We are witnessing the fulfillment of Paul's words to Timothy at 2Tim.3:1-5 with self-love replacing natural affection as a feature of human society in these "last days", and none worse than among those "having an appearance of godliness but proving false to it's power.".
Only Jehovah's Kingdom in Christ's hands can eradicate this abominable practice completely and also redress the effects of the crime effectively as one stated objective puts it: 
"All the kings will bow down before him, and all the nations will serve him.  For he will rescue the poor who cry for help, also the lowly one and whoever has no helper" Ps 72 11-12
 

It’s impossible for us physical beings to even imagine what it’s like to be a spirit being. Those who will go to heaven won’t know until they get there. Obviously it’s a totally foreign dimension to us, hence anthropomorphic expressions are helpful. However most of Christendom’s adherents imagine heaven like what physical paradise earth will be; trees, streams, mountains etc.One of my Bible studies, a scientist, knew that a spirit universe couldn’t be anything like a physical universe. It’s scientifically impossible. She told me that she could never understand how people could think that when they went to heaven they would be playing cards with their grandpa.....and the harp. I guess she forgot that not everyone thinks like a scientist. The strangest thing of all is that the Mormons believe that the physical person, literally flesh and blood, will go to heaven....(and own a planet) I don't think even the Catholics think that, but they do believe they will have wings

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.”

I'm sure you are right. About the entrenched dendrites, that is. It's a very rational-sounding scenario. I also find it very appealing. Jesus is appointed, but told to sit and wait. Then 1,881 years later, he stands and begins ruling. It's as if we really can no longer imagine that a King can actually rule while sitting down on a throne (even though it's the way Jehovah is depicted when He rules as King). We have this idea entrenched that Jesus can't really begin ruling, for real, until he's allowed to stand up. It makes sense as long as we can think of Jesus as a child whose father just told him to sit there and be quiet until he tells you it's OK to stand up.
But that's kind of a "smart-aleck" reason and carries very little weight with any of us. A better reason to break away from our traditional thinking is found in the Bible itself. It's a fairly quick process:
We have to remind ourselves why Jesus is "waiting." We find the answer in the same verse that gives us the "waiting" idea in the first place: (Hebrews 10:12, 13) But this man offered one sacrifice for sins for all time and sat down at the right hand of God, from then on waiting until his enemies should be placed as a stool for his feet.
So Jesus is waiting from the time he sat down at the right hand of God. (I assume you agree this was in 33 C.E.) But for how long was he waiting? Until his enemies should be placed as a stool for his feet. And how long would that last? Obviously, until the last enemy death is brought to nothing. (I assume you agree that this is most likely at the end of the thousand-year reign, and I assume you believe that the thousand-year reign is still future.)
(1 Corinthians 15:24-28) 24 Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power. 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. 26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing. 27 For God “subjected all things under his feet.” But when he says that ‘all things have been subjected,’ it is evident that this does not include the One who subjected all things to him. 28 But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone.
(Revelation 20:14, 15) 14 And death and the Grave were hurled into the lake of fire. This means the second death, the lake of fire. 15 Furthermore, whoever was not found written in the book of life was hurled into the lake of fire.
(Revelation 20:4-6) . . .And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for 1,000 years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the 1,000 years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6 Happy and holy is anyone having part in the first resurrection; over these the second death has no authority, but they will be priests of God and of the Christ, and they will rule as kings with him for the 1,000 years.
Therefore, Jesus is still waiting until his enemies, including death, are made a footstool for his feet. He is waiting until the appropriate time when all is finished, and he can "hand over the Kingdom to his God and Father."
So, this particular idea of "waiting" does not refer to inactivity, or waiting until he becomes an actively ruling King. I would think it might be something like U.S. President Abraham Lincoln actively sending men into a "Civil War," yet at the same time also waiting until the war would be over. According to Paul, "sitting at God's right hand" is the equivalent of "ruling as king."

Is Jehovah's refence to Himself as a King anthropomorphic?
"Because we cannot see God with physical eyes, he uses certain anthropomorphic expressions to help us to understand and appreciate things about himself." Insight 1 p349
"anthropomorphic usage, that is, the attributing of physical and human characteristics to God to facilitate understanding" Insight 2 p1007

@Eoin Joyce Wow! I was just thinking about this same point last night for the current thread on Christ's power and authority. In order for us to get a sense of Jehovah's majesty, there must be some extent to which we need certain images in our head, like a crown, a throne, royal garb, a scepter, etc. Jehovah must know that these images are helpful to understand his Sovereignty. The images of a kingdom --with all the glorious splendor of a central palace, a sizable realm, along with an innumerable entourage of soldiers, servants, slaves, messengers at the king's command-- probably carries about the same meaning from the time of the earliest empires until now.
Clearly there is an element of anthropomorphism in the imagery, because a perfect spirit being needs nothing physical.
But the fact that Jehovah is a Sovereign or King is important to the concept of his Sovereignty and Kingdom. That Jehovah is at the top of a heavenly hierarchy and is all-powerful is conveyed immediately with these images.
As Jesus is also a heavenly spirit creature, the same would be true of his Kingdom, too. Obviously, many of the disciples had trouble "spiritualizing" some of the concepts about God's Kingdom through Christ. They considered the physical seat of the Kingdom to be earthly Jerusalem, rather than the Jerusalem above. He spoke of his Father's house as having many mansions, but he also had to remind them that hierarchical positions in that kingdom were not given the same meaning that they might have on earth. Heaven is a place "not made with hands."
Clearly, the same goes for the term "Bride of Christ" too. In heaven, where "in the resurrection there is neither male or female," Jesus marries a good number of "male virgins." Marriage carries with it the idea of union, love, closeness, loyalty, and an unbreakable bond. The physical concepts of marriage do not apply.
Therefore, even terms like "Father" and "Son" carry an element of anthropomorphism.

I have a friend in Australia, a very spiritual, zealous, sweet and humble sister, her husband is an elder and coordinator, and when I asked her about the general consensus of the friends there, she quoted a scripture "But there is nothing carefully concealed that will not be revealed, and nothing secret that will not become known" Luke 12:2 .
 

I don't mean to be negative, although it is a good video, in my opinion though I've always thought that depicting the "bad guy" as a monster type looking thing is a little misleading (for the children at least) because it makes it look like the "bad guy" is going to be easily identifiable, because.....well he LOOKS bad, and acts CREEPY, whereas in reality a sexual predator grooms his victims and appears very nice to the children, and others. Many times the child molester is a member of the family. The children might be looking for someone sleazy, and might be thrown off guard if the person is a "nice" brother in the congregation, a friend of the family, or even sadly a parent. I might be wrong, just my thought...

@TrueTom   You make some very valid points in your post. I wouldn't argue against any of it.
There is also considerable overlap between bullying and sexual abuse. Sexual abuse often becomes just another type of bullying, and those in the "herd" who have been weakened emotionally by either/or will often find themselves targeted (picked off) by abusers (predators) for the rest of their lives. After looking at 4,500 cases of reported sexual abuse in the Catholic Church between 1950 and 2015, (and looking at more statistically significant reporting especially since 1985) The Australian Royal Commission (ARC) reported that about 7% of Catholic priests have been accused. But it was lower in the Catholic schools run by nuns dealing with children, and much higher in the places where males in authority dealt with children (average age was 10 and 11). 30% of the crimes were committed by Catholic "brothers," (those usually assigned to various "orders") another 30% of the crimes were by priests themselves, and 5% by Catholic "sisters" (generally, nuns). It was highest in the "Order of St. John of God" where a full 40% of those in authority there were accused of child abuse. The reason, it shouldn't surprise us, is that these men worked specifically with emotionally disturbed children. Easy picking! One person I listened to on the BBC made it clear that any organization anywhere in the world that had such a high rate of accused and convicted child abusers would be considered a "criminal organization."
I agree that all of us want to do all we can. But our own track record was awful, especially in those early years when expensive lawsuits were being covered up long before the very first article about protecting children came out. And members of our own Governing Body fought against printing articles and information on the subject. Just as in other organizations, we didn't want to admit that it was even possible in our own organization, because this would bring such reproach on Jehovah's name and organization. It would give opposers something to point to. My own father in his capacity as a congregation elder, counseled my sister to avoid going to the hospital after abuse by her husband to avoid bringing reproach on the congregation. "What if they asked you what happened, what are you going to tell them?" "What kind of witness would it give to the community if it got out that a minister in the congregation had to go to jail?" "Don't you think it would be more appropriate to try again, but be more humble and conforming and win him with a mild manner?" "Spending more time in prayer and study and service is surely the best counsel." 
My sister came back to the congregation, but she was disfellowshipped for defying this counsel. (She said she would separate and NOT try to get back in her husband's good graces.) I agree that we can always say that it was her unrepentant attitude and anger at the counsel that got her disfellowshipped. I also agree that she was never told NOT to go to the authorities or to specifically LIE to the authorities who might ask her questions at the hospital. But she was definitely pressured for years not to go to authorities and professionals, and even to "lie" through omission of facts if she did go. And she was definitely punished for reacting negatively to the counsel and authority of the elders.
I know about similar cases, and even of a case of child abuse that was covered up in the same way through not-so-subtle pressures to "do the right thing" when it comes to the issue of reproach and even "mandatory reporting." But the case of my sister, I know first-hand. I even offered to give my brother-in-law a taste of his own medicine, which was not the Christian thing to do, but I thought it was a pretty fair interpretation of Matthew 18:15 at the time.
Another point to remember before we start putting our own organization on too high a pedestal here is that if you count the Catholic population and the reported cases in those districts in Australia and compare them to the population of Jehovah's Witnesses and the reported cases in the same districts, then you see that our problem might even be many times worse than the Catholics. I can't say that it really is worse, because this is also a factor of how accurately such accusations are reported. 
Also, if you watched the videos from the previous ARC hearings, you might also be surprised to learn who the abusers were in several of the 1,000+ cases reported among Witnesses. I had heard that at least one of these abusers would be revealed in a separate case by November 2016, but that case is evidently under some kind of gag order, or otherwise delayed under some slow-moving wheels. So please strike what I said and forget I said anything about it. But I am almost certain that the plan is to engage some of these cases in public courts. (Partly because some lawyers involuntarily salivate when money is involved.) I don't think too many Australian Witnesses are holding their heads very high when the topic is brought up during witnessing activities.

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.
 
 
 
 

I must recognize, this is an "entrenched truth" for me. I find it difficult change my mind because, after a lot of years, my neurons and dendrites have a lot of highways in the direction of thinking that:

·        Jesus went to heaven and sat down (waiting, not actively ruling)
·        Jesus would be crowned, and his kingdom would begin at a later date
But your arguments (JWI) seem to be very solid, and the ideas contribute by Eoin vey valids.

Well, let’s try to find a “connecting link” between positions.

First, and foremost, I suppose the most important (and foundational, core, unchangeable) truths are:

·        Christ is the appointed king.
·        His kingdom would begin, logically, at some moment after his resurrection.
·        His kingdom would gradually conquer to all his enemies
·        There is a climax, when the king would wage a final war
If we can agree with the above points, I think we can build from a solid foundation, cannot we? Then, the point at issue seems to be the precise moment when the king is crowned and, consequently, the kingdom begins.

“I see Satan already fallen” (Lu 10:18)

We all agree these words, expressed in a past tense, would have a future fulfillment. So, I tend to think that some of the 50 verses or more JWI aptly quote could have the same meaning: The certainly of the rulership is so high that is expressed as already happened. Melinda has also quote similar statements in Revelation. How, otherwise, could we understand the words (Eph 2:6) “he raised us up together and seated us together in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus”? I found reasonable the explanations:

·        *** sl chap. 8 p. 132 par. 6 A Spiritual Paradise on a Polluted Earth *** Figuratively, Paul was already seated with fellow Christians on earth “in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus.”
·        *** it-1 pp. 1064-1065 Heaven *** How can persons in “heavenly places” still be on earth? The apostle Paul in his letter to the Ephesians speaks of Christians then living on earth as though they were already enjoying a heavenly position, being raised up and “seated . . . together in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus.” (Eph 1:3; 2:6) The context shows that anointed Christians are so viewed by God because of his having ‘assigned them as heirs’ with his Son in the heavenly inheritance. While yet on earth, they have been exalted, or ‘lifted up,’ by such assignment. (Eph 1:11, 18-20; 2:4-7, 22) Ephesians 2:6
·        *** w15 8/15 p. 13 par. 14 Meditate on Jehovah’s Enduring Love *** Paul described anointed Christians as having been ‘raised up and seated together in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus.’ (Eph. 2:6) They occupy this spiritual position because they have been ‘sealed with the promised holy spirit, which is a token in advance of their inheritance,’ that is, ‘the hope reserved for them in the heavens.’—Eph. 1:13, 14; Col. 1:5.
In a similar way, why don’t think the same regarding Christ’s Kingdom? Perhaps the many verses speaking as he was already King in the 1st century could be seen as HOW GOD CONSIDER his victorious Son from that time forward: the king. But the beginning of the kingdom could be future.

Eoin also mention the undeniable fact we all believe that in spite Jehovah is the Eternal King, the Bible mentions that when his sovereignty reaches some special achievement, He “becomes to reign” in some other special way. Thus, he expresses the idea that Christ would be king when resurrected, and that some subsequent events would be “begins to rule” in new ways. Well, I assume this is a resume of his position.

I think all our pillar or column beliefs would be the same either way, whether Christ had begun to reign in 33, 1914 or any other date.

Anyway, I hope nobody consider inappropriate or inopportune if I point out some ideas.

 

The Appearance of the King


 

The appearance of Christ inspecting the 7 congregations:

·        (Re 1:13-16) “and in the midst of the lampstands someone like a son of man, clothed in a garment that reached down to the feet and wearing a golden sash around his chest. Moreover, his head and his hair were white as white wool, as snow, and his eyes were like a fiery flame, and his feet were like fine copper when glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars, and out of his mouth a sharp, long, two-edged sword was protruding, and his countenance was like the sun when it shines at its brightest”.
The appearance of Christ in cavalry charge:

·        (Re 19:12-16) “His eyes are a fiery flame, and on his head are many diadems. He has a name written that no one knows but he himself, and he is clothed with an outer garment stained with blood, and he is called by the name The Word of God. Also, the armies in heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in white, clean, fine linen. And out of his mouth protrudes a sharp, long sword with which to strike the nations, and he will shepherd them with a rod of iron. Moreover, he treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his outer garment, yes, on his thigh, he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.”
I’d like to point out the similarities in the appearance, as reflected in the pictures, in both situations: when inspecting the congregations and in his final war against the enemies. But there is a paramount difference: the crown.

The inspection visit occurs, obviously, sometime after his resurrection. We can observe him as the glorious person he is. But in this period of time he doesn’t wear any crown. Could this indicate he is the appointed king, but still not working as such?

The three times he is seen with crown in the Scriptures

Errors and omissions excepted, there are only three accounts where Jesus is seen crowned.

·        (Re 6:2) “And I saw, and look! a white horse, 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.”
·        (Re 14:14-16) “Then I saw, and look! a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was someone like a son of man, with a golden crown on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand. Another angel emerged from the temple sanctuary, calling with a loud voice to the one seated on the cloud: “Put your sickle in and reap, because the hour has come to reap, for the harvest of the earth is fully ripe.” And the one seated on the cloud thrust his sickle into the earth, and the earth was reaped.
·        (Re 19:11-16) “I saw heaven opened, and look! a white horse […] on his head are many diadems […] he treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty […] he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.”
A meticulous reading of the passages could indicate us the following:

·        Obviously, is Christ
·        He is already crowned as king
·        His kingship is related to his victory against the enemies
About the white horse of Re 6, what I found very meaningful is the fact that points out the moment of the coronation: “and a crown was given him”. And, immediately after this event, it is mentioned he starts to win over the enemies. Now, I question: did it happen in 33 C.E.? Did Christ begin to win in that year over his enemies? How to fit the parable of the wheat and weed? Didn’t the apostasy win over Christianism at those days? But the ride of the king is without any defeat: “conquering and to complete his conquest”. I am unclear this could happen in 33.

In the other two accounts (Re 14 and 19), the king is seen crowned. If we link all three accounts I think we can get a comprehensive picture pointing out the fact that, when the king gets its crown begins to conquer without interruption till the end.

The day of the coronation, Daniel account.

I assume that the majority of us see the coronation day of one monarch as a very exciting event, especially if he is our king. I think the Bible reflected these proper feelings when cover the coronation, the crowning of the Jehovah’s designed king.

The vision itself:

·        (Daniel 7:8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14) “And look! there were eyes like human eyes in this horn, and there was a mouth speaking arrogantly. I kept watching until thrones were set in place and the Ancient of Days sat down […] The Court took its seat, and books were opened […] I kept watching at that time because of the sound of the arrogant words that the horn was speaking; I watched until the beast was killed and its body was destroyed […] look! with the clouds of the heavens, someone like a son of man was coming; and he gained access to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him up close before that One. And to him there were given rulership, honor, and a kingdom”
Known account, isn’t it? Daniel asked to the angel and he provides him more information

The angel’s explanation

·        (Daniel 7:21, 22, 26, 27) “I kept watching as that horn made war on the holy ones, and it was prevailing against them, until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was rendered in favor of the holy ones of the Supreme One, and the appointed time arrived for the holy ones to take possession of the kingdom […] But the Court sat, and they took away his rulership, in order to annihilate him and to destroy him completely […] ‘And the kingdom and the rulership and the grandeur of the kingdoms under all the heavens were given to the people who are the holy ones of the Supreme One”
Logically, what the angel said as explanation couldn’t be at odds with the vision itself, right? Now, let’s merge both accounts, trying to get an order of the events:

1 The horn speaks arrogantly against the saints, made war on them.
2   As a result of this malicious action, one Court is formed, presided by the Ancient of Days. A sentence of destruction is decreed. Who will execute this judgment?
3.      The son of man approaches. The kingdom is given to him
4.      The holy ones receive a favorable judgment, but the horn is destroyed
5.      The holy ones also receive the kingdom
If this order is correct, I can’t see this being fulfilled in that year (33). A basic proof is the fact the horn had not yet came into existence!

The day of the coronation, John account.

I think the most enlightening account about this matter under our consideration is Revelation 12 (and its context, the chapter 11). Because it describes the beginning of the kingdom as the birth of a child. Something completely new, not starting centuries ago. And the verses, all of us will agree, only could apply to the last era.

John account also fits with Daniel, because true worshippers are described under attack from enemies. They are protected by God. The kingdom starts. The child begins his life.

Final thoughts

As I’ve mention before, perhaps we are not so distant in our views. Many times I’ve think about the day when Christ went to heaven. I suppose an enormous happiness happened. In human terms, cheering, hugs and, probably, formal declarations from Jehovah. I imagine a general assembly, with all the angels of the heaven. God is receiving His beloved son again! This, offering his blood as ransom. Then, he sat down in the closest possible position to his Father. He received “all authority” at this moment. His disciples can, appropriately, begin to preach about a new king, a future king. But so safe his kingdom would come, that the Scriptures could talk as if the king already was ruling.

I must recognize, this is an "entrenched truth" for me. I find it difficult change my mind because, after a lot of years, my neurons and dendrites have a lot of highways in the direction of thinking that:

·        Jesus went to heaven and sat down (waiting, not actively ruling)
·        Jesus would be crowned, and his kingdom would begin at a later date
But your arguments (JWI) seem to be very solid, and the ideas contribute by Eoin vey valids.

Well, let’s try to find a “connecting link” between positions.

First, and foremost, I suppose the most important (and foundational, core, unchangeable) truths are:

·        Christ is the appointed king.
·        His kingdom would begin, logically, at some moment after his resurrection.
·        His kingdom would gradually conquer to all his enemies
·        There is a climax, when the king would wage a final war
If we can agree with the above points, I think we can build from a solid foundation, cannot we? Then, the point at issue seems to be the precise moment when the king is crowned and, consequently, the kingdom begins.

“I see Satan already fallen” (Lu 10:18)

We all agree these words, expressed in a past tense, would have a future fulfillment. So, I tend to think that some of the 50 verses or more JWI aptly quote could have the same meaning: The certainly of the rulership is so high that is expressed as already happened. Melinda has also quote similar statements in Revelation. How, otherwise, could we understand the words (Eph 2:6) “he raised us up together and seated us together in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus”? I found reasonable the explanations:

·        *** sl chap. 8 p. 132 par. 6 A Spiritual Paradise on a Polluted Earth *** Figuratively, Paul was already seated with fellow Christians on earth “in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus.”
·        *** it-1 pp. 1064-1065 Heaven *** How can persons in “heavenly places” still be on earth? The apostle Paul in his letter to the Ephesians speaks of Christians then living on earth as though they were already enjoying a heavenly position, being raised up and “seated . . . together in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus.” (Eph 1:3; 2:6) The context shows that anointed Christians are so viewed by God because of his having ‘assigned them as heirs’ with his Son in the heavenly inheritance. While yet on earth, they have been exalted, or ‘lifted up,’ by such assignment. (Eph 1:11, 18-20; 2:4-7, 22) Ephesians 2:6
·        *** w15 8/15 p. 13 par. 14 Meditate on Jehovah’s Enduring Love *** Paul described anointed Christians as having been ‘raised up and seated together in the heavenly places in union with Christ Jesus.’ (Eph. 2:6) They occupy this spiritual position because they have been ‘sealed with the promised holy spirit, which is a token in advance of their inheritance,’ that is, ‘the hope reserved for them in the heavens.’—Eph. 1:13, 14; Col. 1:5.
In a similar way, why don’t think the same regarding Christ’s Kingdom? Perhaps the many verses speaking as he was already King in the 1st century could be seen as HOW GOD CONSIDER his victorious Son from that time forward: the king. But the beginning of the kingdom could be future.

Eoin also mention the undeniable fact we all believe that in spite Jehovah is the Eternal King, the Bible mentions that when his sovereignty reaches some special achievement, He “becomes to reign” in some other special way. Thus, he expresses the idea that Christ would be king when resurrected, and that some subsequent events would be “begins to rule” in new ways. Well, I assume this is a resume of his position.

I think all our pillar or column beliefs would be the same either way, whether Christ had begun to reign in 33, 1914 or any other date.

Anyway, I hope nobody consider inappropriate or inopportune if I point out some ideas.

 

The Appearance of the King


 

The appearance of Christ inspecting the 7 congregations:

·        (Re 1:13-16) “and in the midst of the lampstands someone like a son of man, clothed in a garment that reached down to the feet and wearing a golden sash around his chest. Moreover, his head and his hair were white as white wool, as snow, and his eyes were like a fiery flame, and his feet were like fine copper when glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars, and out of his mouth a sharp, long, two-edged sword was protruding, and his countenance was like the sun when it shines at its brightest”.
The appearance of Christ in cavalry charge:

·        (Re 19:12-16) “His eyes are a fiery flame, and on his head are many diadems. He has a name written that no one knows but he himself, and he is clothed with an outer garment stained with blood, and he is called by the name The Word of God. Also, the armies in heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in white, clean, fine linen. And out of his mouth protrudes a sharp, long sword with which to strike the nations, and he will shepherd them with a rod of iron. Moreover, he treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty. On his outer garment, yes, on his thigh, he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.”
I’d like to point out the similarities in the appearance, as reflected in the pictures, in both situations: when inspecting the congregations and in his final war against the enemies. But there is a paramount difference: the crown.

The inspection visit occurs, obviously, sometime after his resurrection. We can observe him as the glorious person he is. But in this period of time he doesn’t wear any crown. Could this indicate he is the appointed king, but still not working as such?

The three times he is seen with crown in the Scriptures

Errors and omissions excepted, there are only three accounts where Jesus is seen crowned.

·        (Re 6:2) “And I saw, and look! a white horse, 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.”
·        (Re 14:14-16) “Then I saw, and look! a white cloud, and seated on the cloud was someone like a son of man, with a golden crown on his head and a sharp sickle in his hand. Another angel emerged from the temple sanctuary, calling with a loud voice to the one seated on the cloud: “Put your sickle in and reap, because the hour has come to reap, for the harvest of the earth is fully ripe.” And the one seated on the cloud thrust his sickle into the earth, and the earth was reaped.
·        (Re 19:11-16) “I saw heaven opened, and look! a white horse […] on his head are many diadems […] he treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty […] he has a name written, King of kings and Lord of lords.”
A meticulous reading of the passages could indicate us the following:

·        Obviously, is Christ
·        He is already crowned as king
·        His kingship is related to his victory against the enemies
About the white horse of Re 6, what I found very meaningful is the fact that points out the moment of the coronation: “and a crown was given him”. And, immediately after this event, it is mentioned he starts to win over the enemies. Now, I question: did it happen in 33 C.E.? Did Christ begin to win in that year over his enemies? How to fit the parable of the wheat and weed? Didn’t the apostasy win over Christianism at those days? But the ride of the king is without any defeat: “conquering and to complete his conquest”. I am unclear this could happen in 33.

In the other two accounts (Re 14 and 19), the king is seen crowned. If we link all three accounts I think we can get a comprehensive picture pointing out the fact that, when the king gets its crown begins to conquer without interruption till the end.

The day of the coronation, Daniel account.

I assume that the majority of us see the coronation day of one monarch as a very exciting event, especially if he is our king. I think the Bible reflected these proper feelings when cover the coronation, the crowning of the Jehovah’s designed king.

The vision itself:

·        (Daniel 7:8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14) “And look! there were eyes like human eyes in this horn, and there was a mouth speaking arrogantly. I kept watching until thrones were set in place and the Ancient of Days sat down […] The Court took its seat, and books were opened […] I kept watching at that time because of the sound of the arrogant words that the horn was speaking; I watched until the beast was killed and its body was destroyed […] look! with the clouds of the heavens, someone like a son of man was coming; and he gained access to the Ancient of Days, and they brought him up close before that One. And to him there were given rulership, honor, and a kingdom”
Known account, isn’t it? Daniel asked to the angel and he provides him more information

The angel’s explanation

·        (Daniel 7:21, 22, 26, 27) “I kept watching as that horn made war on the holy ones, and it was prevailing against them, until the Ancient of Days came and judgment was rendered in favor of the holy ones of the Supreme One, and the appointed time arrived for the holy ones to take possession of the kingdom […] But the Court sat, and they took away his rulership, in order to annihilate him and to destroy him completely […] ‘And the kingdom and the rulership and the grandeur of the kingdoms under all the heavens were given to the people who are the holy ones of the Supreme One”
Logically, what the angel said as explanation couldn’t be at odds with the vision itself, right? Now, let’s merge both accounts, trying to get an order of the events:

1 The horn speaks arrogantly against the saints, made war on them.
2   As a result of this malicious action, one Court is formed, presided by the Ancient of Days. A sentence of destruction is decreed. Who will execute this judgment?
3.      The son of man approaches. The kingdom is given to him
4.      The holy ones receive a favorable judgment, but the horn is destroyed
5.      The holy ones also receive the kingdom
If this order is correct, I can’t see this being fulfilled in that year (33). A basic proof is the fact the horn had not yet came into existence!

The day of the coronation, John account.

I think the most enlightening account about this matter under our consideration is Revelation 12 (and its context, the chapter 11). Because it describes the beginning of the kingdom as the birth of a child. Something completely new, not starting centuries ago. And the verses, all of us will agree, only could apply to the last era.

John account also fits with Daniel, because true worshippers are described under attack from enemies. They are protected by God. The kingdom starts. The child begins his life.

Final thoughts

As I’ve mention before, perhaps we are not so distant in our views. Many times I’ve think about the day when Christ went to heaven. I suppose an enormous happiness happened. In human terms, cheering, hugs and, probably, formal declarations from Jehovah. I imagine a general assembly, with all the angels of the heaven. God is receiving His beloved son again! This, offering his blood as ransom. Then, he sat down in the closest possible position to his Father. He received “all authority” at this moment. His disciples can, appropriately, begin to preach about a new king, a future king. But so safe his kingdom would come, that the Scriptures could talk as if the king already was ruling.

Eoin. Fantastic points!
I apologize my low-level intelligence but, in spite your words sound very clear and fine exposed, I can't finally grasp if your position is:
Was Jesus King as soon as he went to heaven? Would Jesus be King later? Please, Eoin, I'm not being ironic, simple I'm quite clumsy!
 

CMP, I'm glad you are leaving 1914 out of it for now. I'm sure it will come up out of necessity, but I agree that focusing on what we know about the time of Jesus kingship in 33 CE is a key to understanding, because "33 CE" is mentioned so often in the scriptures as the time when Jesus was resurrected and ascended to heaven. (I understand that some scholars would put this at 30 CE based on evidence from Josephus linked with Luke, especially. But I'm fine with just calling it "33 CE" as long as we all know that we mean especially the time of Jesus resurrection and/or ascension.)
What I was saying in the quote above was that there really are a couple of verses that should make us reconsider if Jesus kingship in 33 CE is the full explanation of what the scriptures mean by his kingship.
I believe that Eoin has just pointed them out perfectly. I wasn't trying to completely dismiss your points from Daniel 2, 7 and Rev 11. I was just trying to show that we couldn't rely on them to dismiss the "real" kingship that started in 33 CE. I agree that all of them could have referred to the Kingdom at any of its "milestone" events or accomplishments. But the fact is that we already know the Kingdom could have started in 33 CE according to the many scriptures that indicate that it did. With that in mind none of those additional references actually contradicted this. All of them could be seen as agreeing that the Kingdom started in 33 CE and then, over time, there could be any number of events that might be seen as highlights of the manifestation of that kingdom. Any one of those highlighted times or events could correctly be seen as a time when the "Jehovah became King" or "Jesus took the throne" or the "Kingdom began," or the "Kingdom would arrive" (as in "Let your Kingdom come.")
I think we should get back to the points about Daniel and Revelation. But if you don't mind, I think that Eoin's post provides a stronger replacement to the argument you were making from Romans 4:17. Either one would allow us to resolve the scriptures that indicate that Jesus kingship began in 33 AND the idea that we could claim that it also starts at a later time. Eoin's solution appears to be that both ideas can (and should) be true.
Are you OK with this particular direction to the discussion, that Eoin has presented? Perhaps you still wanted to go into more detail with the original point you were making. I'm sure you were just outlining the discussion anyway, and might have been ready to add many more good reasons to continue in the original direction.
 

Both    

I'm not into movies - watch them now and then... as cinema-therapy or biographic movies of people who really existed.  So I am not prone to see life through the lens of movies as many Americans do.  Saw only one matrix movie and I thought it was good.  But I met a man the other day (and I am sure there are many more matrix fans who think this way) who think that the end of 'everything' is going to be that we all will live in a Matrix-like utopia....forever ..... that each person will have their own wishes fulfilled in this way ....god will bring this to mankind... yea... well... how far can one get from reality!
The reality is that Satan wants to rule the world - literally.  He is using authoritarian worldly governments, greed for money, secret organizations, and false religion (religions who want to rule the entire world and make everyone submit to their form of religion through violence) to accomplish this.  
Humans are going to suffer terribly in future when the full impact of satanic rule takes over - under human governments and political false religion (all 666 - triple emphasis). Up till now the democratic elements and the basic decency of humans have curbed satanic influence - but this is rapidly disappearing!  It depends on how far Jehovah will allow it to go.   But we have been warned that many would lose their faith due to the tremendous suffering "the great tribulation" will bring (the worst the world has ever seen).
This is peculation of course - but as things are unfolding - it is almost the only way to think ahead about the future..... with one exception- the predictions in the Bible: that mankind will ruin the earth; that a most terrible time under satanic rule is coming ... One thing is sure: Jehovah will take over at the correct moment in human history - once He has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Satan (and whatever human organizations he chooses to use) cannot rule the earth successfully.  Independent rule from Jehovah only brings great misery..... 
It is ironic that in 'advanced' societies (such as Sweden/Germany/France/)  where philosophies such as humanism and secularism is replacing the bible and God - they are totally blind to what awaits them in future  for example: I see that the far left militant woman's organizations are having rallies together with Muslim women and wearing hijabs in political solidarity to this religion - they have ignored the fact that these muslim leaders (several have terrorist connections) have all publically said that they want Sharia law implemented (sharia has no respect for women) and yet they form an "alliance"?  Satan is truly "blinding" the eyes of people.  The world has really gone crazy.... and more to come.

I think that's just "old" speak, maybe wanting to sound a little Shakespearean perhaps? "Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. Of all the wonders that I yet have heard, it seems to me most strange that men should fear; Seeing that death, a necessary end, will come when it will come"......
But then guess what, I found this!
http://prestwickhouse.blogspot.com/2009/12/plain-english-how-yoda-helps-students.htmlo
So I wasn't too far off the mark after all
 

Now I see that my sentence was ambiguous. I was trying to be ironic. When you said that you listened to Fred Franz speak like Yoda, I meant "higher studies"

It’s always easy to see what should have been done after the fact. It’s not always the case when you’ve been thrown head first into a situation, one perhaps you have never encountered.  Reminded me of the  movie Sully (about the pilot who landed his plane in the Hudson) where he is being accused by the transport safety board of a bad decision;  for not having taken the plane to LaGuardia, as all the flight simulations showed he could have landed the plane there quite safely. Instead, he opted for the risky landing on the Hudson. In the hearing, Sully reminds the Board that the flight simulations, although using live pilots, are devoid of the human factor. The pilots in the simulation already knew what they were going to do, they knew that immediately after the bird strike they would turn the plane around and head straight for the airport. They had practiced this 17 times! However, in real life, this would have never happen of course. A pilot confronted with this situation would need time to decide what his best options were and he would only have one shot at it. To take this into account, the Board gives Sully 35 seconds to allow for this human factor. Needless to say, in the revised simulations, the plane never makes it, and crashes. Also, the preliminary investigation of the engines showed that one engine was still functioning. This was later found to be false, both engines were rendered useless by the bird strike.  Sully got away with being a hero, and rightly so. However, had the Board not been generous in admitting the human factor, and had the second engine not been found, his eventuality may have been quite different. He could have been charged with pilot error, and of needlessly putting the lives of 150 people at risk. Had some lives been lost, he would have been held responsible.
Child sexual abuse is much more complex than people would like to believe. One can never be sure of exactly what happened and the situation surrounding it. There is no black box or flight recordings.  Many of these cases are brought to light many years later.  There may be all kinds of evidence, but there is no guarantee that this evidence is wholly true or is fool proof. Many times elders involved in these cases have encountered them for the first time and due to human factor have not reacted perfectly or according to the book. On top of that, secular attitudes and laws keep changing.  What doesn’t help in the case of Jehovah’s Witnesses is that most of the abuse occurs in the home, and many times in dysfunctional families.  The world hasn’t got it right either. Hence the institutional investigations. These will hopefully improve the way child sexual abuse is handled across the board in all institutions, and thus will help to safeguard as many children as possible.....
The whole world does not know about this at all. It's not as important to many people as you think. (And I mean non JW people). Besides commissions set up to investigate this problem, the people it interests most are journalists, Lawyers, opposers, ex-JWs and JWs who know about it.
 
Don't put JWs in the same basket. You should know better than that JTR