James Thomas Rook Jr.

I believe the last major change was in 1985.
Any Baptisms before that you did not swear legal fealty to the Organization.
After 1985, having subordinated yourself to the Corporation, you had no legal standing to sue them in Court if they screwed up your life.
I do not think this matters to Jehovah, because this is NEVER mentioned before you stand up and say "YES" moments before you are baptized, and the language is couched in such language as to be deliberately misleading in intent, if not actually stated.
They take advantage of the passion and happiness of the moment to "microchip" you for future control, but Jehovah knows a person's heart, and He also understands trickery, and hypnosis.
Currently, there is NO ONE on Earth who can fire the Governing Body .... and they know it!
No matter what they do .... the money just keeps rolling in.
day, after day, after day.
... even on the Weekends.
 
 
 
 

.... ANOTHER, of many news comments concerning the movie "THE HUNT".
 
 
THE HUNT NEWS CLIP 2.wmv

Engineers are SUPPOSED to see things as they really are ....
Some say that they actually INVENTED sarcasm.
 

Just another opinion here, but I can't see any connection. Breaking the ice with one of these nuclear powered ice-breakers touches such a minute fraction of the ice and does virtually nothing to the temperature of the water, or the ice.
Also, nuclear power is about the most efficient type of power for producing green energy with no additional greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere. Of course, due to a couple near disasters and real disasters (3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima) the "Green" crowd will usually fight against this form of "green" energy."

From the Babylon Bee News Network:
 

UNIVERSAL CITY, CA—To show his hard stance against guns and encourage a national discussion on gun control, Matt Damon has collaborated with Universal Pictures to remake the entire Jason Bourne series but with bananas instead of guns.
"People often pointed out how I was against guns but was in these really violent movies where I shoot everyone," Damon told reporters. "But no longer. Now, Jason Bourne will take on those dastardly CIA conspirators with healthy, organic fruits instead of firearms."
Bourne will point at the bad guys and say "Blam blam" or "Pew Pew Pew" while pretending to shoot the banana. Whenever he uses an explosive or throws a grenade he will instead lob a bunch of bananas. The bananas will create all kinds of wacky hijinks where characters slip on them, while cars that drive over the peels will spin out and sometimes fall into the water, having to be fished out by a Lakitu.
In one iconic scene that's been remastered in the rerelease of The Bourne Supremacy, Damon's character talks on the phone to the CIA's deputy director, Pamela Landy. Finally, he reveals he's been watching the CIA from a nearby rooftop for the entire conversation through a high-powered scope attached to a giant, GMO-laced banana. "Get some rest, Pam," he says. "You look tired." The CIA office then freaks out, realizing how much danger they were in.
"We could have been a banana split," Landy says as the hunt for Bourne resumes.
Other Hollywood studios are following suit in order to remain consistent with their far-left position on guns, as John Wick, The Matrix, Mission Impossible, and hundreds of other franchises will all be getting an all-banana reboot.
 

I took the story at face value, based on my experience.
What REALLY might have happened is too variable for me to consider without a MUCH larger head.

I remember my ex-wife telling me about a Brother from the United States who was baptized in Peru, and later married a local Sister. A fine Brother in every way, so I hear, but he had forgotten that years before,, in the United States, he was still married.
He was believed by the Peruvian Elders, and the only solution they could find was to "Unbaptize" him by declaring his baptism null and void.  It was either that, or disfellowship him.
Having worked on a Bethel construction project down there, I found that story entirely believable, as they are a much simpler people in many respects.
I am inclined to believe that, all things considered,  what the Elders did was the correct thing to do ... under very odd circumstances.
Of course, I am only guessing.
... and, I am many thousands of miles away, and now about a quarter-century away, and I don't give a hoot, and try not to pollute.

Agree with inefficiency of the battery powered car for the type of travel we are used to. I notice in Paris and London that a lot of parking spots have the charger hookup and they are constantly in use.
The Chevy Bolt hardly even works on standard 110v (typically 15 Amp). You need an electrician to hook up a 240v 32 Amp line just as they would for an electric dryer or electric stove. Even then it's about 25 miles for every hour, thus 8 hours would get you 200 miles. and 9.5 hours would get you the full 238 miles that it's battery can make use of before recharging.
You could only get 5 miles for every hour on a 110v. 8 hours on 110v should get you 40 miles.
(That's about the same difference between 110v and 220vas many electric dryers. They run on 220/240, but if you don't have that hookup, you can plug many models into a 110v standard plug and it will take about four times as long to dry clothes as a 240v.)
There are public DC-to-DC charging stations (for money) that can give you an additional 90 mile range in 30 minutes.
Reminds me that my youngest son built some experimental DIY solar panels which each produce about 60 Watts and keep a stack of 4 deep-cycle batteries powered in the garage. We had to use them during hurricane Sandy (and a separate outage from a tornado) for low powered items (laptops, fish tanks, lights, clocks, radios, small TVs, phone charging) but to run my refrigerator I needed a generator, and since I don't have one, I hooked up one of the two cars with an inverter and used it as a generator.

I get it, it isn't real easy when that has been your whole life up to this point.  The reality of it though is that it is quite that simple and easy. 
 
I'm sure you can relate if you put it in perspective. When you were a young child in school, I'm sure you noticed the different clic's, the group of rockers, the cowboys, the preppy kids, jocks etc. When figuring out your niche, you tried to fit into a group that you thought was "you", only to find out that it wasn't worth trying to please the group and become someone you just weren't. You left hat group and continued through life without much thought. You took with you some things you liked of the group and moved on and developed your own character. We all do it, have done it.  This clic, the wt, is just like that. Take from it what you choose and drop the rest. You have the power and ability to control your own life, without excess baggage. Does this mean "leave Jehovah and make him sad" ? Quite the opposite,  it means taking control of your own life and pressing into God with all of the knowledge you have gained thus far. I mean, the gb has already stated that they are not inspired and can very well screw up with what they force the rnf to accept. Why not allow the Bible alone to guide you WITH the knowledge you have taken from the clic? Unless you truly believe that by studying the Bible alone will lead you into darkness in a matter of months? 

.... let me know when they have a battery powered Airliner.
The reason the WHOLE world runs off of petroleum is the amount of calolries that are available to do work, per unit of volume, and weight.
To have the same automobile range you would need a U-Haul trailer for a battery, and the battery would cost more than the car.

Not enough
 

For the past week, large and small headlines on all the Internet News sources have been hyping the controversy of a new movie by NBC ( The "Nobody But Clinton" ) network/ Universal Studios, about rich elite liberals kidnapping conservatives (the ones Hildabilly Clinton called "Deplorables" and putting them on an estate to be hunted like animals, for "sport". 
It is SUPPOSED to be a satire ... and that is how it is being marketed, on political trends now operating in America, if they continue on the track they are now headed ... but others say it is just an evil movie,. 
The movie is the 2019  "THE HUNT"
I suppose some people will appreciate the satire, some the bloodshed, some the story line, or any number of factors, as varied as there are humans with different viewpoints. Some will despise the movie, for the same, or very different reasons.
Satires push things to absurd scenarios and conclusions to get you to think, but many people cannot recognize satire without someone holding up a sign in front of them that says "SATIRE".
I have not seen the movie, and may not see it ... certainly not at box office prices ... but about 65% of the people of the United States are mad as hell about SOME aspect of the movie.
It might be worth the effort to actually know ... about what.
My guess it is a Thriller Movie, about a possible future civil war. 
But ... I am speaking now from complete ignorance, and LAWDY, Ah hates being ignorant!
Since if you keep up with daily news, it is impossible to avoid learning about all the hub-bub surrounding this movie, which will be out September 27, perhaps you may be interested in one EXTREMELY intelligent and common sensical man's viewpoint, Mark Steyn.
 
 
Mark Steyn on 2019 movie The Hunt.wmv

Thanks for the insight.  I never thought of it that way.
The Baptism is an outward symbol of a dedication ALREADY MADE IN IT'S TOTALITY.
Whatever you dedicated to Jehovah God is between you and God, alone ... and what the GB has done is try an "control the narrative", and add to that.
I wonder what would happen if after Baptism at an Assembly, where you stood up with many baptismal candidates that said "YES", and you did not affirm the questions asked you.  I doubt they examine the videos to make sure you did, or have someone watch to see if you did, taking notes.  Then, after perhaps several years of faithful life, casually mention that your immersion was as public as you needed, and that you never said "Yes" like all the others did.
What you had resolved in your heart to do was sufficient, and nothing needed to be added.
It's obvious that you were not there to soap up and bathe.
Or ... let's say you were on a camping trip beside a lake, and you turned to your Bible Teacher and said "What's to prevent me from being baptized ..." quoting the Ethiopian Eunuch, and you both went down to the lake, and your teacher baptized you.
As far as I know, it only takes ONE other person present to be a public expression of your dedication, and it would in actual fact be quite valid.
That brings up the next consideration .....
When you got back to your home congregations, relating the events of the camping trip, how much crap would you have to put up with from the Elders ... or would it be none at all?
 

If you don't mind for connecting this two comments.
"Baptism" of this man is done because he want to "dedicate" (guess) himself to God - spiritually , not to WT Society. 
But - factually, he made sort of "Contract, in corporative language, with WT Society through WT Representative who immersed him in water. 
Well, if God accepted his dedication, despite fact he has two wife's (perhaps he was repentant all the time, but he chooses second wife) than his baptism, spiritually is valid. But second (hidden) part of his "dedication" - to WT Society -  is in question, and that sort of "dedication" has been possible to delete in Administrative manner, because he also was hiding some important information.      

Thanks for the insight.  I never thought of it that way.
The Baptism is an outward symbol of a dedication ALREADY MADE IN IT'S TOTALITY.
Whatever you dedicated to Jehovah God is between you and God, alone ... and what the GB has done is try an "control the narrative", and add to that.
I wonder what would happen if after Baptism at an Assembly, where you stood up with many baptismal candidates that said "YES", and you did not affirm the questions asked you.  I doubt they examine the videos to make sure you did, or have someone watch to see if you did, taking notes.  Then, after perhaps several years of faithful life, casually mention that your immersion was as public as you needed, and that you never said "Yes" like all the others did.
What you had resolved in your heart to do was sufficient, and nothing needed to be added.
It's obvious that you were not there to soap up and bathe.
Or ... let's say you were on a camping trip beside a lake, and you turned to your Bible Teacher and said "What's to prevent me from being baptized ..." quoting the Ethiopian Eunuch, and you both went down to the lake, and your teacher baptized you.
As far as I know, it only takes ONE other person present to be a public expression of your dedication, and it would in actual fact be quite valid.
That brings up the next consideration .....
When you got back to your home congregations, relating the events of the camping trip, how much crap would you have to put up with from the Elders ... or would it be none at all?
 

Does not matter a jot. The baptism is a symbol of the candidate's dedication, not that of the baptiser. 
If any words are spoken at all, they should be spoken by the one submitting to baptism, and directed to the one receiving their dedication. And, of course, such words, as evidence of a totally private and personal act of worship on the part of the individual, can, appropriately, be silently expressed.

I believe the last major change was in 1985.
Any Baptisms before that you did not swear legal fealty to the Organization.
After 1985, having subordinated yourself to the Corporation, you had no legal standing to sue them in Court if they screwed up your life.
I do not think this matters to Jehovah, because this is NEVER mentioned before you stand up and say "YES" moments before you are baptized, and the language is couched in such language as to be deliberately misleading in intent, if not actually stated.
They take advantage of the passion and happiness of the moment to "microchip" you for future control, but Jehovah knows a person's heart, and He also understands trickery, and hypnosis.
Currently, there is NO ONE on Earth who can fire the Governing Body .... and they know it!
No matter what they do .... the money just keeps rolling in.
day, after day, after day.
... even on the Weekends.
 
 
 
 

Wrong Question:
Was this INSTITUTIONAL disfellowshipping against as it is practiced today ... destroying whole family relationships, up and down generational lines, and across extended families?
NO!   .... That would be as the Russians view it ... an EXTREME view ... on a slippery slope to  societal ruin.
There may be mitigating circumstances that Elders cannot even comprehend ... or wrap their minds around.
If I unrepentedly shot my mother to death , I should be disfellowshipped forever .. but by WHO?
If I unrepentedly  shot her because she was burning to death in a car fire, and there was no way to get her out ... all sane people would exonerate me ... except Pharisee types divorced from reality.
The world is full of INFINITE VARIETY, and NO ONE can evaluate it all correctly.
Justice we get from Jehovah God ... all else is due process .... ONLY!
Institutionally, we should get out of the judge, jury, and "execution" business, leaving punishment to Jehovah, and the properly trained consciences of those professing True Christianity, as individuals.
OR WHY HAVE A TRAINED CONSCIENCE AT ALL! ?
Institutional disfellowishipping only has one REAL purpose ... the way it is handled today ... to inspire fear of rebellion against the authority that has self-appointed themselves into as much ultimate power as the State will allow ... for NOW.

I played with the alliteration “gloating over my Glock” but ultimately discarded it. 
Oh, did I ever tell you that I am not an expert on weapons?

Too true!

Too true!

I rest my case.

To bring this blood discussion more directly in line with the topic, one should consider that almost the exact same thing was done by WT lawyers in the Bulgaria case, where the WTS legal team came up with a way to appease the officials who were determining the status of our work in Bulgaria (by publicly denying that there would be religious repercussions for accepting a blood transfusion). Then, to clarify, internal communications from the WTS to the congregations stated that nothing had changed, and that there would definitely continue to be religious repercussions for accepting a blood transfusion.
https://www.watchman.org/articles/jehovahs-witnesses/new-watchtower-blood-transfusion-policy/

You know, if it wasn’t so cumbersome a process requiring yet another email address, I think I would introduce a character AllenSmith2000, or maybe even (taking inspiration from the postal service) AllenSmithForever