Evacuated

Not sure how large the lunch would be, but there are some quite basic reasons in the case of a reception hosted by bereaved Jehovah's Witnesses ion the occasion of a funeral of a loved one who has served Jehovah faithfully.
"A good name is better than good oil, and the day of death is better than the day of birth." Ecc7:1. The remembrance of a live well-lived in faithfulness is entirely appropriate.
"Moreover, brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who are sleeping in death, so that you may not sorrow as the rest do who have no hope." 1Thess. 4:13. It is a time to comfort one another with the wonderful resurrection hope and forms part of the healing of the sting death causes.
"But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect." 1Pet.3:15. It is an opportunity to share discreetly the hope of the deceased with unbeleiving friends and relatives of the deceased, where tasteful and appropriate. On occasion, this is an express wish of the deceased.
"Follow the course of hospitality". Rom12:13. Funerals are lengthy and stressful affairs for a variety of reasons. People travel considerable distances to attend at short notice as death does not come by appointment. The provision of hospitality is virtually incumbent.
At the very least, hospitality arrangements that follow the principle expressed by Jesus at Luke 10:42: "A few things, though, are needed, or just one" are quite appropriate in connection with Jehovah's Witness funerals, regardless of the status of the deceased

Actually, there are 15 archangels, according to how many chassis styles Ford Motor Company has.
Gimme a break .... equating how many archangels there are according to the 12 signs of the zodiac ... which are artificial constructs that vary from culture to culture?
Tradition says that no matter which way Mickey Mouse turns his head, the ears always face  the viewer.
If the Bible does not say... everything else is conjecture .....
... ONLY.

Did you know that Adonai (Lord) used of Jesus in Psalm 110:1 is also used of the Father in Exodus 23:17, Deuteronomy 10:17, Joshua 3:11?
 And Abraham: Genesis 18:12; Esau: Genesis 32:4; Joseph: Genesis 42:10; Boaz: Ruth 2:13 Saul: 1Samuel 4:28 An angel: Daniel 10:16 and many more. As Paul said, there are "many lords" .
Good job "the LORD" who said to "my lord" has given His name in scripture so we do not have to rely on just the capitals. Although, like the scribes, (as shown below Is. 3:16) many still  have problems deciding on this matter don't they?

Anyway,  the Catholic Living Bible seems to have got it right...this time:

Why do JWs have huge lunches / dinners after funerals?
...because they are really, really hungry?

Not sure how large the lunch would be, but there are some quite basic reasons in the case of a reception hosted by bereaved Jehovah's Witnesses ion the occasion of a funeral of a loved one who has served Jehovah faithfully.
"A good name is better than good oil, and the day of death is better than the day of birth." Ecc7:1. The remembrance of a live well-lived in faithfulness is entirely appropriate.
"Moreover, brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who are sleeping in death, so that you may not sorrow as the rest do who have no hope." 1Thess. 4:13. It is a time to comfort one another with the wonderful resurrection hope and forms part of the healing of the sting death causes.
"But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect." 1Pet.3:15. It is an opportunity to share discreetly the hope of the deceased with unbeleiving friends and relatives of the deceased, where tasteful and appropriate. On occasion, this is an express wish of the deceased.
"Follow the course of hospitality". Rom12:13. Funerals are lengthy and stressful affairs for a variety of reasons. People travel considerable distances to attend at short notice as death does not come by appointment. The provision of hospitality is virtually incumbent.
At the very least, hospitality arrangements that follow the principle expressed by Jesus at Luke 10:42: "A few things, though, are needed, or just one" are quite appropriate in connection with Jehovah's Witness funerals, regardless of the status of the deceased

Don't be silly. "Truth" is not the sole province of any human.

Actually, had she passed on the Summer Olympics, the verbiage you favor would be close to appropriate. Wasn't it a couple hundred of those young girls who were molested by the team doctor, now serving several lifetimes in prison?
Imagine, the sister passing on such a priviledge. What in the world is wrong with her, Jack?

@JackRyan get real man! (I think?)
Surely this is how you view everyone? You posted it!

You must realise by now that Jehovah's Witnesses today don't actually care about stuff like this? People like you cannot actually provide anything positively alternative to that which you constantlly attack. Just the same old rehashed griping. Can't you play a different tune? Or isn't there one?

Why would true Christians expect fair treatment? 
“Happy are you when people reproach you and persecute you and lyingly say every sort of wicked thing against you for my sake." Matt.5:11

So it was! And now, it's changed again!!! Yippee!!

This doesn't appear to be a problem? I don't let people take my details without permission so ........Good ? What else can you say?

Isn't there a big difference between active condemnation or criticism of the LGBT community and a mere non support of it? Isn't being forced to support that movement or being criticized/ostracized for not supporting it actually interfering with human rights?

It just isn't possible to understand the Bible's code of conduct unless you accept it as of divine origin and obligatory. With that as a basis, then personal difficulties with it's requirements remain in that context, as a problem for the individual to resolve, not a problem with the requirement.
It just isn't possible to compromise the Bible's view on specific LBGT behavioural issues, despite the attempts of various religionists. So there will always be conflict between those who reject the Bible standard for sexual behaviour and those who adhere to and promote it. This conflict extends into the legal arena as the conflict has been blended with a human rights issue which basically excludes a consideration of God's will on the matter.
The Bible does not always give the reasons for why a course of conduct is right or wrong in God's eyes. That determination is left to the individual and may either be deduced by logic or by observation, over time. (Why circumcision on the 8th day? Also, see the book "None of These Diseases").
The basic, ubiquitous reason given for keeping God's requirements is the rather generally stated: "That it may go well for you" but this is just not enough of a reason for many. In fact, no reason is sufficient for those who just do not want to live by the Bible's code of conduct. What is most puzzling however is the fact that those who "do not" seek to impose by force an acceptance of that preference on those who "do". This takes the conflict into the thorny area of state control v freedom of religious expression.
Nevertheless, this conflict will continue. The fact remains that Jehovah's Witnesses do not discriminate against those who describe themselves in the terms of the LBGT movement. However they do discriminate, vigorously, against the sexual practices that identify such ones, and that will never change.
There's nothing new about rejection of the standards of the God of the Bible, and there's nothing new about the attempts on one group or another to introduce a reversal of those standards, even to the point of asserting that the practice once abhorred is now promoted by God. It follows the pattern of behaviour prevalent at the time of the prophet Isaiah and expressed at Isaiah 5:20:
"Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"

It just isn't possible to understand the Bible's code of conduct unless you accept it as of divine origin and obligatory. With that as a basis, then personal difficulties with it's requirements remain in that context, as a problem for the individual to resolve, not a problem with the requirement.
It just isn't possible to compromise the Bible's view on specific LBGT behavioural issues, despite the attempts of various religionists. So there will always be conflict between those who reject the Bible standard for sexual behaviour and those who adhere to and promote it. This conflict extends into the legal arena as the conflict has been blended with a human rights issue which basically excludes a consideration of God's will on the matter.
The Bible does not always give the reasons for why a course of conduct is right or wrong in God's eyes. That determination is left to the individual and may either be deduced by logic or by observation, over time. (Why circumcision on the 8th day? Also, see the book "None of These Diseases").
The basic, ubiquitous reason given for keeping God's requirements is the rather generally stated: "That it may go well for you" but this is just not enough of a reason for many. In fact, no reason is sufficient for those who just do not want to live by the Bible's code of conduct. What is most puzzling however is the fact that those who "do not" seek to impose by force an acceptance of that preference on those who "do". This takes the conflict into the thorny area of state control v freedom of religious expression.
Nevertheless, this conflict will continue. The fact remains that Jehovah's Witnesses do not discriminate against those who describe themselves in the terms of the LBGT movement. However they do discriminate, vigorously, against the sexual practices that identify such ones, and that will never change.
There's nothing new about rejection of the standards of the God of the Bible, and there's nothing new about the attempts on one group or another to introduce a reversal of those standards, even to the point of asserting that the practice once abhorred is now promoted by God. It follows the pattern of behaviour prevalent at the time of the prophet Isaiah and expressed at Isaiah 5:20:
"Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"

It just isn't possible to understand the Bible's code of conduct unless you accept it as of divine origin and obligatory. With that as a basis, then personal difficulties with it's requirements remain in that context, as a problem for the individual to resolve, not a problem with the requirement.
It just isn't possible to compromise the Bible's view on specific LBGT behavioural issues, despite the attempts of various religionists. So there will always be conflict between those who reject the Bible standard for sexual behaviour and those who adhere to and promote it. This conflict extends into the legal arena as the conflict has been blended with a human rights issue which basically excludes a consideration of God's will on the matter.
The Bible does not always give the reasons for why a course of conduct is right or wrong in God's eyes. That determination is left to the individual and may either be deduced by logic or by observation, over time. (Why circumcision on the 8th day? Also, see the book "None of These Diseases").
The basic, ubiquitous reason given for keeping God's requirements is the rather generally stated: "That it may go well for you" but this is just not enough of a reason for many. In fact, no reason is sufficient for those who just do not want to live by the Bible's code of conduct. What is most puzzling however is the fact that those who "do not" seek to impose by force an acceptance of that preference on those who "do". This takes the conflict into the thorny area of state control v freedom of religious expression.
Nevertheless, this conflict will continue. The fact remains that Jehovah's Witnesses do not discriminate against those who describe themselves in the terms of the LBGT movement. However they do discriminate, vigorously, against the sexual practices that identify such ones, and that will never change.
There's nothing new about rejection of the standards of the God of the Bible, and there's nothing new about the attempts on one group or another to introduce a reversal of those standards, even to the point of asserting that the practice once abhorred is now promoted by God. It follows the pattern of behaviour prevalent at the time of the prophet Isaiah and expressed at Isaiah 5:20:
"Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"

Specular rather than diffuse reflection due to smooth rather than rough surface

I wonder why they would choose that theme?
Yeah, like how police have shown up in Russia, typically in full riot gear, to arrest members of the faith.

Did you?

I agree. Underestimating the position and role of Jesus  is definitely a hazard for those who seek to combat the attempts made by those who seek to overestimate it. The Scriptures were simply not written for that purpose, as stated by John the apostle: 
"But these have been written down so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and because of believing, you may have life by means of his name." John 20:31

I agree. Underestimating the position and role of Jesus  is definitely a hazard for those who seek to combat the attempts made by those who seek to overestimate it. The Scriptures were simply not written for that purpose, as stated by John the apostle: 
"But these have been written down so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and because of believing, you may have life by means of his name." John 20:31

I suppose it really is a "take it or leave it" scenario as you suggest. Whatever one's opinion of the "communication conduit" or "media channel", it remains that a large group of people have a peception, based on the Bible, that there is a strong possibility of surviving a world cataclysm to life on a cleansed earth. And they have learned about this from a rather smaller group of people who are convinced of themselves having a rather more immediate destiny in the heavens as rulers with Christ.
Now they didn't make it all up themselves. Clarity on the idea and detail on it's connection with Bible teachings and prophecy was shared with them to a greater or lesser degree. Some, like myself, were able to discern the bare bones of a concept of people living on earth forever, by resurrection or survival, from the Bible,  and certainly rejected the notion of "all good people go to heaven" long before associating with Jehovah's Witnesses. It was refreshing to come across an organised approach to sharing this Bible based view with other people, and to get a lot more detail on the whole concept of it.
Granted, there is a measure of human imagination thrown in as is always the case in matters of understanding God's Word. But, fanciful ideas  have a way of being skimmed off in time, whilst the genuine core concepts remain. There are plenty of critics and criticisms around, exhibiting varying degrees of emotion toward both groups amongst the Witnesses, ranging from a sort of benign and patronising disbelief through to plain vitriolic hatred. Rather like the "intellectual" Greeks at the Areopagus (Acts 17:32) and the hate-driven Jewish leaders at  Jerusalem (John 11:53)., and all manner of in-between shades.
Really, it is simply a case of "take it or leave it". You either believe or don't believe, accept ot don't accept. It is presented as an invitation in Scripture, so there is no compulsion, other than it's appeal, which has persuasive power, but not to everyone to the same degree. It seems, judging from the forum comments, there are even those who have a better understanding intellectually of the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses on this matter than do some Witnesses themselves. Yet to them, this only spurs an active disbelief and rejection.
But notwithstanding, the invitation to both groups remains and there is still a response to it. It seems that Jesus's words in connection with the kingdom invitation at the time of his preaching still have a very real application in the current period of time.
"From the days of John the Baptist until now, the Kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it."  John 11:12

I suppose it really is a "take it or leave it" scenario as you suggest. Whatever one's opinion of the "communication conduit" or "media channel", it remains that a large group of people have a peception, based on the Bible, that there is a strong possibility of surviving a world cataclysm to life on a cleansed earth. And they have learned about this from a rather smaller group of people who are convinced of themselves having a rather more immediate destiny in the heavens as rulers with Christ.
Now they didn't make it all up themselves. Clarity on the idea and detail on it's connection with Bible teachings and prophecy was shared with them to a greater or lesser degree. Some, like myself, were able to discern the bare bones of a concept of people living on earth forever, by resurrection or survival, from the Bible,  and certainly rejected the notion of "all good people go to heaven" long before associating with Jehovah's Witnesses. It was refreshing to come across an organised approach to sharing this Bible based view with other people, and to get a lot more detail on the whole concept of it.
Granted, there is a measure of human imagination thrown in as is always the case in matters of understanding God's Word. But, fanciful ideas  have a way of being skimmed off in time, whilst the genuine core concepts remain. There are plenty of critics and criticisms around, exhibiting varying degrees of emotion toward both groups amongst the Witnesses, ranging from a sort of benign and patronising disbelief through to plain vitriolic hatred. Rather like the "intellectual" Greeks at the Areopagus (Acts 17:32) and the hate-driven Jewish leaders at  Jerusalem (John 11:53)., and all manner of in-between shades.
Really, it is simply a case of "take it or leave it". You either believe or don't believe, accept ot don't accept. It is presented as an invitation in Scripture, so there is no compulsion, other than it's appeal, which has persuasive power, but not to everyone to the same degree. It seems, judging from the forum comments, there are even those who have a better understanding intellectually of the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses on this matter than do some Witnesses themselves. Yet to them, this only spurs an active disbelief and rejection.
But notwithstanding, the invitation to both groups remains and there is still a response to it. It seems that Jesus's words in connection with the kingdom invitation at the time of his preaching still have a very real application in the current period of time.
"From the days of John the Baptist until now, the Kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it."  John 11:12

What's the issue here? A group of Christians go to heaven? No issue. A large group of Christians are going to live on earth? No issue.
"an exclusive group have access to this divine insight?" It's in the Bible. Who's this exclusive group? You just reccounted it yourself didn't you?

Not sure how large the lunch would be, but there are some quite basic reasons in the case of a reception hosted by bereaved Jehovah's Witnesses ion the occasion of a funeral of a loved one who has served Jehovah faithfully.
"A good name is better than good oil, and the day of death is better than the day of birth." Ecc7:1. The remembrance of a live well-lived in faithfulness is entirely appropriate.
"Moreover, brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who are sleeping in death, so that you may not sorrow as the rest do who have no hope." 1Thess. 4:13. It is a time to comfort one another with the wonderful resurrection hope and forms part of the healing of the sting death causes.
"But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect." 1Pet.3:15. It is an opportunity to share discreetly the hope of the deceased with unbeleiving friends and relatives of the deceased, where tasteful and appropriate. On occasion, this is an express wish of the deceased.
"Follow the course of hospitality". Rom12:13. Funerals are lengthy and stressful affairs for a variety of reasons. People travel considerable distances to attend at short notice as death does not come by appointment. The provision of hospitality is virtually incumbent.
At the very least, hospitality arrangements that follow the principle expressed by Jesus at Luke 10:42: "A few things, though, are needed, or just one" are quite appropriate in connection with Jehovah's Witness funerals, regardless of the status of the deceased