Evacuated

2 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

This phrase is never used outside of the JW world either

Interesting observation.

It appears that the English word "reproach" has often been used to translate the Hebrew noun cher·pah? and the Greek word o·nei·di·smos?. (Psalm 69:9 is quoted at Rom.15:3)

Looking at some Hebrew scripture texts where the word is used is interesting. (In the NWT Reference Bible, "reproach" is used in each verse.)

2Chr 32:17. Here it is used of the demoralising content of letters written to Hezekiah by Sennacherib the Assyrian. NWT 2013 renders this as "insult".

Ps 74:18, 22. Here it refers to the disrespect of foolish ones for God's name shown in their attitude and behaviour. NWT 2013 renders this word here as "taunt(s)".

Ps 79:12. Again with "taunts" as the current rendering, it refers to the behaviour of the nations in their triumph over the destruction of Jerusalem and the captivity of Israel,

Hosea 12:14. The behaviour of the Northern kingdom of Israel brings "reproach" on Jehovah, rendering them objects of Jehovah's unfavourable judgement. The rendering is retained here.

So it would seem that Jehovah was affected, in the past,  by the delusional reproach resulting from unfaithful and contemptous conduct on the part of those who claim to be His worshippers, and additionally, by the actions of those who are not His worshippers exemplified in their treatment of those who are. (Ps.69:9, Rom.15:3). The graphic image recorded at Zephaniah 2:8 shows that Jehovah is indeed affected by the actions of those who would heap reproach on His people. He takes it personally.

There is no reason to think that this is not still the case (Mal.3:6). After all, the cry  "If there was a loving God, he wouldn't allow all this wickedness" is commonly heard everywhere today, and His impending action through the Messianic kingdom will be addressing this matter. (Ps.37:34)

Of course , quite rightly, there is nothing that Satan, or those he influences, can do to even "tarnish one iota the reputation of the Sovereign of the UNIVERSE" in reality, just as there is nothing that any of Jehovah's worshippers can do to add to His holiness or any other of His matchless qualities, or His position as Sovereign. However as the continual accuser (reproacher) of Christ's brothers, (Rev 12:17), Satan certainly works day and night to create an illusion of reproach in the minds of those whom he blinds (2Cor.4:4). Jesus' concern over an even wrongful impression of reproach on Jehovah over the course he had to take agonised him in the last moments before his arrest (Luke 22:44). The common use of the cited expression amongst Jehovah's true witnesses today is a reflection of the same concern.

Just a thought on the phrase being exclusive to "the JW world". The absoluteness of this statement may be open to dispute. However, it is very likely that concern for honouring Jehovah's name rather than reproaching it may well be higher amongst Jehovah's true witnesses than any other group.

However, the word and related expressions like "reproachful" appears some 118 times in the KJV and was a word quite commonly used in times past by many others than Jehovah's witnesses. However the useful google word usage graph indicates a definite tailing off in it's use generally in more modern times.

The NWT 1986 has "reproach" based words about 100 times and NWT 2013 about 50, confirming that even amongst witnesses, more modern synonyms are replacing this rather archaic expression.

2 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

JW phrase used by 90% of all JW public speakers.

in the US most like.

8 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

wish I could be so cavalier

Don't misjudge. I have given it considerable consideration over many years.

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I guess it depends on how seriously we consider "honesty" and "truth" to be in our teaching:

I agree this should be a prime concern, "we wish to conduct ourselves honestly in all things" Heb 13:11

Of course hindsight is a great instructor, and a good principle is that found in 1Corinthians 13:7 "love believes all things"

So, as long as we keep in mind Jehovah's role in all these matters: "all things are naked and openly exposed to the eyes of the one to whom we must give an account." Heb.4:13.

This will save us becoming "overly righteous" regarding the mistakes of others.

15 hours ago, JW Insider said:

very close Witness relatives in responsible positions who lived through it but now believe that the Society "never really said anything about 1975," and that it was started by some of the brothers on their own.

This is weird. And it helps me to understand the sensitivity (approaching bitterness) some obviously have on this matter.

For me, the idea that fireworks would start in 1975 was great news, for about 18 months, between 1972 and early 1974.

I came into the truth literally from the street. All I had,  I carried. Everything in life was a bonus from that day on, so as I didn't have anything to give up or cut back on at the time,  it was all good to me.

I can remember the sarcastic comment one of my worldly friends made in 1973 when I mentioned the closelness of the end. He said "When I see you on the street in 1976, I will be laughing like a drain!" My response at the time was a lame  "Well, at least we'll both still be here!"

I must admit I felt awkward when I did see him from a bus window after 1975. He fulfilled his promise as he caught sight of me. By then I had improved my understanding of matters as previously discussed. So I didn't get "off the bus" figuratively speaking, like the many Koreans cited in the '88 yearbook account. I was just glad that abandoning date-oriented thinking occurred early on in my development as a Christian, particularly prior to '75, as the non-event served as a vindication rather than an embarrassment or disappointment. Actually, I wonder how many of those who did get off the bus at the wrong stop managed to get on again as the years passed? It would be interesting to see a contribution here from someone who did that.

But "Society" bashing over dates seems Quixotic to me. The "Society" is just an instrument people use to get a job done in today's world.

The people are the problem, with their quaint mix of attitudes. Who cares really if the people behind the "Society" got something wrong about dates, 43 years ago? "They" certainly don't really, do they? "They" have moved on, and so have many others. And who really cares if some of the written accounts have been subjected to some selective editing? I have my personal experience to balance the exaggeration on both sides. Quite frankly, if you weren't there, why care? There is no doubt that Jehovah will bring an end to this system, and every day that passes in the current one is a day nearer it's (or my) end. As Paul said:

"Do not owe anything to anyone except to love one another;...................do this because you know the season, that it is already the hour for you to awake from sleep, for now our salvation is nearer than at the time when we became believers." Rom. 13.8;11.

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

they have asked us to obey in the future even if it does seem unreasonable

Some probably thought these instructions were unreasonable (at the time):  

 “So Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves." John 6:53

Or this: "After these things the Lord designated seventy others and sent them forth by twos in advance of him into every city and place to which he himself was going to come." Luke 10:1.

Or even this :"Let the man on the housetop not come down to take the goods out of his house; and let the man in the field not return to the house to pick up his outer garment." Matt.24:17-18.

4 hours ago, Melinda Mills said:

Let marriage be honorable among all

The article seems to be more about getting interfering busybodies to keep their noses out of other people's affairs, and to let them make thier own decisions about what they wish to do regarding their own marriages. i can't read any more into it than that really.

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

But is it honest?

Isn't all of this just a person (s) stating what they believe at the time of writing? Why all the hot air regarding honesty?

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

several references as late as 1989

That's a bit better. 29 years ago.

As for this:

8 hours ago, JW Insider said:

We must consider that all of us are some 6,000 years removed from the human perfection that existed in Eden. (quote from Sep 7 Day text, of course)

Are we not?

7 hours ago, JW Insider said:

he said it's for measuring urine samples.

Which (with respect)  is what you are taking, judging from some of the comments here.

On 6/23/2018 at 1:18 AM, Jesus.defender said:

Past tense since the watchtower predicted armageddon so many times?

Any thing more recent than 50 years ago?

On 9/5/2018 at 5:30 PM, Anna said:

disfellowshipped relatives are to be shunned

Probably the word "shun" is the problem. It seems to mean "abhor" in it's etymology. That's a word with quite specific and unpleasant connotations and used quite infrequently in Scripture. Is it to be appllied indiscriminately to disfellowshipped persons?

5 hours ago, JW Insider said:

 "recognized the ring of truth" 

It appears difficult to actually get the origin of the expression definitively without a depth of research I do not have time or resource for at present.

However the idea of glass making a duller sound than crystal when tapped, gold and silver coins having a more distinctive "tinkle" than baser metal, a bell striking a true note when struck, (even the tuning of musical instrument strings), all share the thought of a sound test for accuracy or trueness or even genuineness. There is also the thought that an explanation or reason might have a convincing or plausible nature.

All these definitions seem to imply an accepted standard which enables a measurement of genuiness. Scriptural references such as John 10:4-5; Romans 2:14-15; 2Tim.1:13 all come to mind in connection with "the ring of truth". ?

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

Justice and mercy properly meted out.... only comes directly from God.

"Love and mercy, that's what you need tonight
Love and mercy to you and your friends tonight"

BW.1988.

14 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

I don’t recall ever hearing it referred to as the ring of truth before

Whilst not exclusively a WT magazine expression, it seems to have been used there fairly consistently in a similar context since March 1st 1951.

6 hours ago, Anna said:

shunning family members

I thought disfellowshipping was a congregational and spiritual measure taken in the case of an individual who is unrepentant regarding serious sin.

It seems that many problems result from those who make up their own rules and definitions on this matter 

Better get a battery charger in the good old go-bag!

21 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

I'll tell you what bothers me just as much: our cong has somehow developed the awesome habit of clapping after every single video.

You must be American.

4 hours ago, The Librarian said:

Mr Parry said : "From the Jehovah's Witness point of view there's only one way a couple can separate - it's adultery

That's probably D-I-V-O-R-C-E

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

Which outcome?

On 6/23/2018 at 4:45 AM, Jack Ryan said:

We are already seeing the drying up of Watchtower funds, selling of thier KH's and branches for $ and the lack of baptismal candidates in most of the world.

 

On 6/23/2018 at 4:45 AM, Jack Ryan said:

We are already seeing the drying up of Watchtower funds, selling of thier KH's and branches for $ and the lack of baptismal candidates in most of the world.

Has anyone ever considered that this could be a desired outcome?

6 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

current updates

lvs. Jan 2018: "Also, Jehovah’s people make a personal decision not to vote for any political party or candidate. This is because we have already taken the side of God’s government.—Matthew 22:21; John 15:19; 18:36."

lv. April 2016: "Voting in political elections.

True Christians respect the right of others to vote. They do not campaign against elections, and they cooperate with elected authorities. However, they remain resolutely neutral with regard to the political affairs of the nations. (Matthew 22:21; 1 Peter 3:16) What should a Christian do in lands where voting is compulsory or in a situation where feelings run high against those who do not go to the voting booth? Remembering that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego went as far as the plain of Dura, a Christian, under similar circumstances, may decide to go to the booth if his conscience permits. However, he will take care not to violate his neutrality. He should take into account the following six principles:

1. Jesus’ followers are “no part of the world.”—John 15:19.
2. Christians represent Christ and his Kingdom.—John 18:36; 2 Corinthians 5:20.
3. The Christian congregation is united in belief, and its members are bound together by Christlike love.—1 Corinthians 1:10; Colossians 3:14.
4. Those who elect a certain official share responsibility for what he does.—Note the principles behind the words recorded at 1 Samuel 8:5, 10-18 and 1 Timothy 5:22.
5. Jehovah viewed Israel’s desire for a visible ruler as a sign that they had rejected Him.—1 Samuel 8:7.
6. Christians must have freeness of speech when speaking to people of all political persuasions about God’s Kingdom government.—Matthew 24:14; 28:19, 20; Hebrews 10:35."

5 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

CAN A PERSON ... OR SHOULD A PERSON  …. BE DISFELLOWSHIPPED IN ABSTENSIA?

In absentia. Theoretical answer is "Yes". (Matt.23:33)

Individual cases? No comment.

3 hours ago, Anna said:

I also wish someone could explain what the difference was between what happened in Malawi versus what happened in Mexico.

An interesting topic indeed. This may provide you with some useful background despite it's specific agenda if you haven't seen it before: 

https://settingtherecordstraight.wordpress.com/2010/01/12/the-truth-of-the-mexican-military-jehovahs-witnesses/