JW Insider

Very needed reminder for everyone. The poetry is poignant. Each person knows their own heart's pain. We will be fulfilling the 2 greatest commands Jesus spoke about at Matthew 22:37-39, by each one of us sincerely caring for each other. Love all those whom Jehovah loves. <3 

Yes. The graphic is written incorrectly because it labels the name of each Hebrew letter incorrectly.
Not to me. The mistake in the graphic is not a big deal. That's the reason that I said:
 

This article was very good, but the graphic is wrong.
At the top the statement is correct that Hebrew is read from right to left, but then the Hebrew letters in the graphic are written from left to right. This means that:
the Hebrew letter just above the 1st 'He" (H) is actually not "He" but "Yod" the Hebrew letter just above the "Vav" (V) is actually not "Vav" but "He" the Hebrew letter just above the 2nd "He" (H) is actually not "He" but "Vav" the Hebrew letter just above the "Vod" [sic] is actually not "Yod" but "He"  Also, of course, there is no letter "Vod" where it should say "Yod"
Also, it is misleading to say at the top
Jehovah (English) Yehovah (Hebrew) We don't have a good idea how "Jehovah" was pronounced in Hebrew, but we are almost positive that it would not have been pronounced "Yehovah."

2034: That sounds end of Last Days, his/her prep for end of preaching, start for the Great Tribulation. Stay alive 'til 2055! Sounds like the final end is put closer to that 2055 date.
Sounds like that Jesus was a pretty smart prophet:
(Matthew 24:4-27) 4 In answer Jesus said to them: “Look out that nobody misleads you, 5 for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will mislead many. . . . 11 Many false prophets will arise and mislead many; . . . 23 “Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look! Here is the Christ,’ or, ‘There!’ do not believe it. 24 For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will perform great signs and wonders so as to mislead, if possible, even the chosen ones. 25 Look! I have forewarned you. 26 Therefore, if people say to you, ‘Look! He is in the wilderness,’ do not go out; ‘Look! He is in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27 For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence of the Son of man will be.
(Matthew 24:36-44) 36 “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father. 37 For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 38 For as they were in those days before the Flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, 39 and they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be. 40 Then two men will be in the field; one will be taken along and the other abandoned. 41 Two women will be grinding at the hand mill; one will be taken along and the other abandoned. 42 Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. 43 “But know one thing: If the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 On this account, you too prove yourselves ready, because the Son of man is coming at an hour that you do not think to be it.
 
 
 

I just wanted to thank the organizers of this site. I enjoy the news and other items on a regular basis. I am also grateful that it has not been taken over by hostile people who hate JWs. On the odd occasion there have been a few nasty individuals but they are in the minority. I understand that if they allow more controversy - the owners may receive more visitors and may make more money. I am therefore more grateful that they have not allowed money to become the primary focus of this site. Thanks for some of the interesting items - although we do not always comment on them - we do notice them.

Got it. 'Took no note' alone carries the connotation that they should have. Interesting.

And by the way, there is no scripture that says that his wife or three sons and their wives were ever even counted as righteous. In fact, the Bible says it was Noah's righteousness that saved them, similar to how children of a Christian parent could be "saved," or unbelieving wives, or sisters whose only "service" at times must be the full-time raising of their family.
(1 Timothy 2:15) 15 However, she will be kept safe through childbearing, provided she continues in faith and love and holiness along with soundness of mind.
(1 Corinthians 7:14) 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in relation to his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in relation to the brother; otherwise, your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.
@JW Insider  Perhaps then however, when you looked ahead in history they didn't prove righteous. Children can also be raised and once the child rearing years are over they stand on their own. Sadly some go astray in the wrong direction. We are glad Jehovah saved righteous Noah and his children did bring on the earth their offspring. Yet, it was only through the seed  that mankind would be released from sin and death forever. To me the many truly faithful ones in the Bible prove that when we prove our faith like many did, it will be counted to Him as Righteousness. We appreciate these accounts and knowledge that Jehovah is a just God and He only can read hearts. To me that is a wonderful God to worship! 

I agree that it makes sense and we can (and should) find lessons in the account for our own conduct, actions, and motivations. I probably sound like a curmudgeon of some sort to point this out, but it's often too easy to ALSO create a lesson that isn't really there. Or mix up one lesson for one context with a lesson that belongs in another context. These are not bad things, it's just that we should realize when we are speculating when we declare that these lessons must be the same lessons that all of us should see.
Jehovah had the right to save or destroy his creation because he is the creator. The potter can throw away a vessel fit for destruction and start over.
In response to your comments about Lot and Abraham and Noah, there were really NONE who were intrinsically righteous. Just as the scriptures in another one of your posts said: Noah's faith moved Jehovah to "count" him as righteous. Even those declared "righteous" are still intrinsically "ungodly." We are all ungodly.
(Romans 4:3-5) 3 For what does the scripture say? “Abraham put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to the man who works, his pay is not counted as an undeserved kindness but as something owed to him. 5 On the other hand, to the man who does not work but puts faith in the One who declares the ungodly one righteous, his faith is counted as righteousness.
And by the way, there is no scripture that says that his wife or three sons and their wives were ever even counted as righteous. In fact, the Bible says it was Noah's righteousness that saved them, similar to how children of a Christian parent could be "saved," or unbelieving wives, or sisters whose only "service" at times must be the full-time raising of their family.
(1 Timothy 2:15) 15 However, she will be kept safe through childbearing, provided she continues in faith and love and holiness along with soundness of mind.
(1 Corinthians 7:14) 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in relation to his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in relation to the brother; otherwise, your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.
 
 

@JW Insider
“BY FAITH NOAH, BEING DIVINELY WARNED OF THINGS NOT YET SEEN, MOVED WITH GODLY FEAR, PREPARED AN ARK FOR THE SAVING OF HIS HOUSEHOLD, BY WHICH HE CONDEMNED THE WORLD AND BECAME HEIR OF THE RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH IS ACCORDING TO FAITH.”
Like people today, almost certainly the people of Noah’s day were busy enjoying the pleasures of life and did not believe or care that judgment was coming.
During the decades of mankind’s last days, Noah was working on the Ark. As it grew, it must have been a potent symbol to those living nearby. One can imagine that Noah was often asked about his construction project. Indeed, it is likely that he was mocked for such an enterprise.
In 2 Peter 2:5, Noah is described as a “preacher of righteousness.” In what way was he a preacher? The Greek word kerux(κηρυξ) refers to a herald, or “one who announces.” Even when he wasn’t saying anything, his labor on the Ark would have been his witness. However, some Jewish scholars maintain that Noah did indeed leave some words, too. John Gill, in chapter 22 of the Pirke R. Eliezer, quotes Noah’s words according to Jewish tradition: “Be ye turned from your evil ways and works, lest the waters of the flood come upon you, and cut off all the seed of the children of men.” 
The tradition shows Noah giving both a warning and a means of salvation. If this extrabiblical source has any truth in it, then Noah is asking for people to repent, which would certainly fit with his own source of salvation through Christ. Noah was not saved because of his righteousness—at least not in a worldly sense. Hebrews 11 tells us from where Noah’s righteousness came. The Greek word is dikaiosune (δικαιοσύνη), which refers to a form of righteousness that is unattainable by law or by merit. 
Hebrews 11:7 says, “By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.”
This sort of righteousness is found only by faith. The Apostle Paul says elsewhere, “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9, NKJV).
This is exactly how Noah was saved. His righteousness was unattainable; so it could only come by God’s grace, through faith. Genesis 6:8 tells us that “Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord” (NKJV). Noah’s salvation, like ours, was by grace. He could not do anything to attain righteousness for himself.
 

@JW Insider Is not the "proof in the pudding?" People watch they look, we keep building our way to gain that new world ?, some ask some don't want to know. We preach (as we have Jehovah's complete words) as Noah a "Preacher of Righteousness" had only Jehovah's commission to build and what would happen, he was not gaining souls, he was being obedient and knew Survival was essential. He had FAITH! I'm sure they wondered why he was building that structure as many photos show. He only could say why he was building it. A message Jehovah gave him. He obeyed, listened and did exactly as Jehovah requested. As it said in scripture, only Noah and his family survived the flood. Only 8 survivors that were Righteous in God's eyes. In Lot's case he asked Jehovah to save the Righteous if only they were 40,30,20,10? Well, gladly Jehovah listened though he ALREADY KNEW THERE WASN'T ANY! "Is not a "Just" God going to do what's right?" Of course! Yet, the whole world suffered destruction. So that tells us whatever Noah did we have God's own words. Obey, Listen, Act on Faith, and Be Blessed! Thank you for your encouragement! Jehovah bless,
? ????

Nothing wrong with believing that Noah "most likely" warned his neighbors, or even "undoubtedly" warned his neighbors. I think it's a matter of being able to carefully read all the ways that writers say "we don't really know for sure." I was very surprised to learn from several people in the Watchtower's Writing Department that the expression "undoubtedly" and even "without a doubt" really means that there still is some level of doubt, even if it's something that makes a lot of sense, or we really WANT to believe it.
One way to show that we don't really know something for sure is to use the words "without doubt" as when the Watchtower says: in
I know this doesn't make a lot of sense to some people. It's much easier to see the point when the expression is more like "quite likely" as in:
Personally, I didn't see it at first, until it was explained with some examples. In the most common usage of language we don't need an expression like "undoubtedly" if we are dealing with known facts. You would say, "Two plus two is four" not "two plus two is undoubtedly four." When you are dealing with the most likely meanings that fit our way of thinking and interpretation, we use a slightly different vocabulary. We like to use the most sure language possible even though we know that "interpretation" is always subject to change. Even when we are trying to use the words like "without a doubt" or "without doubt" to sound as sure as possible, the context will often force the writer to admit that small opening of doubt. There are hundreds, if not thousands of examples in the Watchtower itself:
*** w63 1/15 p. 41 par. 3 The Challenge of the “Good News” ***
Without doubt it is your wish to live under that best of kingdoms and eternally enjoy its blessings. If this is your sincere desire . . .
Note that even though the premise is "without doubt" the next phrase must still start out with "if."
*** w72 6/15 p. 360 God Respects the Family Arrangement ***
There can be no doubt about it: Children brought up in the wrong way are almost sure to practice bad things . . .
Even though there can be no doubt, the premise is "almost" sure.
This doesn't mean that the expression is not sometimes used in the normal way, to mean it's a fact. But we have to be careful when the phrases like this refer to interpretation. For example:
*** w06 8/15 p. 17 Baruch—Jeremiah’s Faithful Secretary ***
Baruch was without doubt a sincere worshipper of Jehovah, and he “proceeded to do according to all that Jeremiah the prophet had commanded him.”
In the above example, this should immediately tell us that we have no scripture telling us that Baruch was sincere. We know it's an assumption precisely because the words "without doubt" were used here. It means that it makes sense, and it's something we would like to believe about him -- because we are giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Please don't misunderstand and think I'm saying that it's definitely not true. I'm only saying that the scriptures don't say that Noah gave a warning, and if we say that he did we should admit that we are only speculating. One way the Watchtower shows they are speculating is to use terms like "most likely," or "undoubtedly." So it's more proper to say that "most likely" Noah preached a warning.
But even if we believe this wholeheartedly, we shouldn't imply that Jesus said anything about Noah giving a warning. Jesus was making a point about how people were going on with their lives, without a care, and the judgement event came upon them suddenly and without warning. That's why Jesus said that the parousia (judgment event) would be like a thief who does not give you any warning.
(Matthew 24:43, 44) . . .If the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 On this account, you too prove yourselves ready, because the Son of man is coming at an hour that you do not think to be it.
The Bible doesn't say that Noah gave a warning, and the Watchtower articles you quoted admit that it may have only been through the action of building an ark that he "preached." The Watchtower does quote a "worldly" source whom we often disagree with to show that some non-biblical Jewish traditions have added the idea that Noah gave a warning, and we would like to believe that this is true.
 
 
 
 

Nothing wrong with believing that Noah "most likely" warned his neighbors, or even "undoubtedly" warned his neighbors. I think it's a matter of being able to carefully read all the ways that writers say "we don't really know for sure." I was very surprised to learn from several people in the Watchtower's Writing Department that the expression "undoubtedly" and even "without a doubt" really means that there still is some level of doubt, even if it's something that makes a lot of sense, or we really WANT to believe it.
One way to show that we don't really know something for sure is to use the words "without doubt" as when the Watchtower says: in
I know this doesn't make a lot of sense to some people. It's much easier to see the point when the expression is more like "quite likely" as in:
Personally, I didn't see it at first, until it was explained with some examples. In the most common usage of language we don't need an expression like "undoubtedly" if we are dealing with known facts. You would say, "Two plus two is four" not "two plus two is undoubtedly four." When you are dealing with the most likely meanings that fit our way of thinking and interpretation, we use a slightly different vocabulary. We like to use the most sure language possible even though we know that "interpretation" is always subject to change. Even when we are trying to use the words like "without a doubt" or "without doubt" to sound as sure as possible, the context will often force the writer to admit that small opening of doubt. There are hundreds, if not thousands of examples in the Watchtower itself:
*** w63 1/15 p. 41 par. 3 The Challenge of the “Good News” ***
Without doubt it is your wish to live under that best of kingdoms and eternally enjoy its blessings. If this is your sincere desire . . .
Note that even though the premise is "without doubt" the next phrase must still start out with "if."
*** w72 6/15 p. 360 God Respects the Family Arrangement ***
There can be no doubt about it: Children brought up in the wrong way are almost sure to practice bad things . . .
Even though there can be no doubt, the premise is "almost" sure.
This doesn't mean that the expression is not sometimes used in the normal way, to mean it's a fact. But we have to be careful when the phrases like this refer to interpretation. For example:
*** w06 8/15 p. 17 Baruch—Jeremiah’s Faithful Secretary ***
Baruch was without doubt a sincere worshipper of Jehovah, and he “proceeded to do according to all that Jeremiah the prophet had commanded him.”
In the above example, this should immediately tell us that we have no scripture telling us that Baruch was sincere. We know it's an assumption precisely because the words "without doubt" were used here. It means that it makes sense, and it's something we would like to believe about him -- because we are giving him the benefit of the doubt.
Please don't misunderstand and think I'm saying that it's definitely not true. I'm only saying that the scriptures don't say that Noah gave a warning, and if we say that he did we should admit that we are only speculating. One way the Watchtower shows they are speculating is to use terms like "most likely," or "undoubtedly." So it's more proper to say that "most likely" Noah preached a warning.
But even if we believe this wholeheartedly, we shouldn't imply that Jesus said anything about Noah giving a warning. Jesus was making a point about how people were going on with their lives, without a care, and the judgement event came upon them suddenly and without warning. That's why Jesus said that the parousia (judgment event) would be like a thief who does not give you any warning.
(Matthew 24:43, 44) . . .If the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. 44 On this account, you too prove yourselves ready, because the Son of man is coming at an hour that you do not think to be it.
The Bible doesn't say that Noah gave a warning, and the Watchtower articles you quoted admit that it may have only been through the action of building an ark that he "preached." The Watchtower does quote a "worldly" source whom we often disagree with to show that some non-biblical Jewish traditions have added the idea that Noah gave a warning, and we would like to believe that this is true.
 
 
 
 

Although we can be sure that Noah would have been required to explain to many persons why he was building such a huge boat, we shouldn't try to make Jesus say something in Matthew 24 that Jesus never said. Jesus never said that Noah warned anyone about the coming flood. The Bible never says that he warned people about a coming flood. So why do we add the idea that Noah WARNED them? 
It's true that some people might get the idea from the way in which the NWT adds the words "took no note:"
(Matthew 24:39) and they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.
But these words are not in the original Greek, so we shouldn't try to make them imply something that the Bible doesn't say. Below are all the translations, for example, that are provided at blueletterbible.org: https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/mat/24/36/t_bibles_953039
So even if there was some preaching about God's righteousness (2 Peter 2:5), which could have been through Noah's example (as implied in Hebrews 11:7), rather than any kind of warning campaign, Jesus was not making any point about a warning, because he had just spent the entire previous part of the chapter saying that there would be no warning. The disciples wanted a warning sign about the judgment event on Jerusalem and Jesus said that there would be no advance warning sign, otherwise how could the parousia come as a thief in the night. So what Jesus says about Noah, should fit what he says about the way the parousia (judgment event) came upon the generation of Noah's day.
KJV And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. © Info
NKJV “and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. © Info
NLT People didn’t realize what was going to happen until the flood came and swept them all away. That is the way it will be when the Son of Man comes. © Info
NIV and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. © Info
ESV and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. © Info
HCSB They didn’t know until the flood came and swept them all away. So this is the way the coming of the Son of Man will be:
© Info
RVR60 y no entendieron hasta que vino el diluvio y se los llevó a todos, así será también la venida del Hijo del Hombre. © Info
NASB and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be. © Info
NET And they knew nothing until the flood came and took them all away. It will be the same at the coming of the Son of Man. © Info
RSV and they did not know until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of man. © Info
ASV and they knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall be the coming of the Son of man. © Info
YLT and they did not know till the flood came and took all away; so shall be also the presence of the Son of Man. © Info
DBY and they knew not till the flood came and took all away; thus also shall be the coming of the Son of man. © Info
WEB And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away: so also will be the coming of the Son of man. © Info
HNV and they didn't know until the flood came, and took them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. © Info

Although we can be sure that Noah would have been required to explain to many persons why he was building such a huge boat, we shouldn't try to make Jesus say something in Matthew 24 that Jesus never said. Jesus never said that Noah warned anyone about the coming flood. The Bible never says that he warned people about a coming flood. So why do we add the idea that Noah WARNED them? 
It's true that some people might get the idea from the way in which the NWT adds the words "took no note:"
(Matthew 24:39) and they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.
But these words are not in the original Greek, so we shouldn't try to make them imply something that the Bible doesn't say. Below are all the translations, for example, that are provided at blueletterbible.org: https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/mat/24/36/t_bibles_953039
So even if there was some preaching about God's righteousness (2 Peter 2:5), which could have been through Noah's example (as implied in Hebrews 11:7), rather than any kind of warning campaign, Jesus was not making any point about a warning, because he had just spent the entire previous part of the chapter saying that there would be no warning. The disciples wanted a warning sign about the judgment event on Jerusalem and Jesus said that there would be no advance warning sign, otherwise how could the parousia come as a thief in the night. So what Jesus says about Noah, should fit what he says about the way the parousia (judgment event) came upon the generation of Noah's day.
KJV And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. © Info
NKJV “and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. © Info
NLT People didn’t realize what was going to happen until the flood came and swept them all away. That is the way it will be when the Son of Man comes. © Info
NIV and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. © Info
ESV and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. © Info
HCSB They didn’t know until the flood came and swept them all away. So this is the way the coming of the Son of Man will be:
© Info
RVR60 y no entendieron hasta que vino el diluvio y se los llevó a todos, así será también la venida del Hijo del Hombre. © Info
NASB and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be. © Info
NET And they knew nothing until the flood came and took them all away. It will be the same at the coming of the Son of Man. © Info
RSV and they did not know until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of man. © Info
ASV and they knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall be the coming of the Son of man. © Info
YLT and they did not know till the flood came and took all away; so shall be also the presence of the Son of Man. © Info
DBY and they knew not till the flood came and took all away; thus also shall be the coming of the Son of man. © Info
WEB And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away: so also will be the coming of the Son of man. © Info
HNV and they didn't know until the flood came, and took them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. © Info

This is not true. Apparently somebody was sleeping at the latest regional convention when they specifically stated that there is nothing wrong with going to a medical professional for mental problems. They explicitly stated that some people have physical problems due to imperfection and seeding medical help is appropriate. 

It's true. I remember when some Bethelites began betting on when certain non-anointed brothers at Bethel would start partaking of the emblems publicly before the older members of the Governing Body started dying off. Seriously!!
And @Bible Speaks is also right about "chess." When I first wanted to play chess with some of the guys who set up a table around NYC parks, I realized that this was intended to be a money-making scheme for those with the tables. Even a side-bet is possible with some of them.

Excellent point. When I worked in the Art Department at Bethel I first realized that "food at the proper time" for English readers was at about two months earlier than Spanish readers and between 6 and 8 months earlier than the average audience for other languages. For some of the books, the delay could be several years.

There is a lot of disrespect on these pages, good sister, and some outright apostacy. It is not the Assembly Hall. Technically speaking, I should not be here, nor anyone seriously attempting to follow counsel on cultivating fine association even on social media. I have tried to escape but each time find myself trapped in the vortex and drawn back into doing battle with a handful of persons whom I consider ignoramuses. (allowing for the premise, which some feel is doubtful, that I myself am one of the 'good guys') It is too late for me, but not too late for others to flee to the mountains.
Seriously, Maid in UK, I mean no disrespect to the theocratic interests. (I mean plenty of disrespect to some others) Not everyone appreciates 'zany' and some who do appreciate it think it inappropriate to apply to kingdom interests. I beg forgiveness in that case. If you can put up with an idiosyncrasy, I assure you that in my circuit I don't think there is a soul who does not like me, for I am, first of all, a peacemaker and I am not wound up too tight.
Unfortunately, I am also a communicator and I gots to communicate.

Excellent point. When I worked in the Art Department at Bethel I first realized that "food at the proper time" for English readers was at about two months earlier than Spanish readers and between 6 and 8 months earlier than the average audience for other languages. For some of the books, the delay could be several years.

Yes. I remember the "rule" but I never remember anyone ever speaking about specific "anointed" persons actually invoking it. Vaguely remember hearing about a natural disaster somewhere that forced the entire Memorial to be cancelled and then handled a month later, but I think even this became frowned up, especially after a formal announcement in the KM in 1999.
*** w60 4/1 p. 224 Questions From Readers ***
Of course, an exception should be made in the case of those of the remnant who, because of infirmity or sickness, are unable to attend. Individual portions are to be supplied to these, regardless of their age or physical condition, by a brother competent to discuss the occasion with them briefly. Such are to be considered as both attenders and partakers. Disfellowshiped persons are not welcome. Should they attend and partake, they would not be counted. Likewise, if any newcomers who are not yet baptized partake of the emblems, they should not be counted.
What if any professing to be of the remnant should, due to circumstances beyond their control, be absolutely prevented from observing the Memorial and partaking of the emblems? It would seem that the merciful and loving provision that Jehovah made for celebrating the Passover a month later by those Jews ceremonially unclean on Nisan 14 would apply in their case. The individual member of the remnant would therefore observe a personal memorial of Christ’s death on the fourteenth day of the following month, Iyar according to the Jewish calendar, or just thirty days later.—Num. 9:9-14.
In the 1999 KM it was announced that everything possible would be done to avoid this, by having elders take the Memorial emblems to anointed persons confined to their homes, etc. Also it was stated that it was NOT necessary for "other sheep" to make any additional arrangements for a missed meeting.
*** w93 2/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers ***
If a Christian is sick or is traveling and thus not able to be at the Memorial celebration, should he celebrate it a month later?
. . . If one who has each year been partaking is this year confined to a sickbed at home or in a hospital, elders of the local congregation will arrange for one of them to take some of the bread and wine to the sick one, discuss appropriate Bible texts on the subject, and serve the emblems. If an anointed Christian is away from his home congregation, he should arrange to go to a congregation in the area where he will be on that date.
In view of this, it would only be under very exceptional circumstances that an anointed Christian would have to celebrate the Lord’s Evening Meal 30 days later (one lunar month), in line with the command at Numbers 9:10, 11 and the example at 2 Chronicles 30:1-3, 15.
Those who are of Jesus’ “other sheep” class, with the hope of everlasting life on a paradise earth, are not under command to partake of the bread and the wine. (John 10:16) It is important to attend the annual celebration, but they do not partake of the emblems. So if one of them is sick or is traveling and thus not with any congregation that evening, he or she could privately read over appropriate scriptures (including the account of Jesus’ instituting the celebration) and pray for Jehovah’s blessing on the event worldwide. But in this case there is no need for any additional arrangement for a meeting or a special Biblical discussion a month later.
I believe the KM had first began to regularly mention this arrangement for going to the partakers who were confined to home, hospital, etc., in 1987. (As it is already mentioned in 1960.) But I recall that this practice might have fallen off somewhat at least in the late 70s and early 80s, and that there might have been some announcement to bring it back into full effect in 1984, because this is when our congregation began making these arrangements, instead of still making special arrangements to bring infirm, anointed brothers to the Hall. This had proved to be a lot of stress for an elderly person for which my own family had provided the transportation, and I remember the switch-over very well that year. [Not important, but I'd be interested if this was the case for any others prior to 1984, in case it was just a couple congregations in my area who seemed to change their arrangements at that time.]
*** km 3/87 p. 3 Preparation for a Special Occasion ***
Are arrangements complete to help older and infirm brothers and sisters? Are arrangements made to serve any of the anointed who may be confined and unable to attend?
That 1993 WT article was brought up again in the KMS assignments in 1999 when Numbers 9 was part of the Bible Reading. But the main point was not about accommodating anointed with the one-month-later celebration, but only to make sure that it was understood that NO special arrangements were to be made for "other sheep" to have a special meeting one month later.
The "Written Review" in December 1999 said:
If a Christian of the other sheep class is not able to attend the Memorial of Jesus’ death, he should celebrate it a month later in harmony with the principle stated at Numbers 9:10, 11. (John 10:16) [Weekly Bible reading; see w93 2/1 p. 31 par. 9.]
The correct answer was FALSE (he should NOT celebrate it one month later).

The great tragedy of 'group' drowning deaths is that good swimmers often get tired out and pulled down by trying to save the ones who cannot swim. Survivors are often haunted by the fact that the only reason they survived is that they decided to swim away and not help their drowning friends.

The great tragedy of 'group' drowning deaths is that good swimmers often get tired out and pulled down by trying to save the ones who cannot swim. Survivors are often haunted by the fact that the only reason they survived is that they decided to swim away and not help their drowning friends.

The great tragedy of 'group' drowning deaths is that good swimmers often get tired out and pulled down by trying to save the ones who cannot swim. Survivors are often haunted by the fact that the only reason they survived is that they decided to swim away and not help their drowning friends.

It's true. I remember when some Bethelites began betting on when certain non-anointed brothers at Bethel would start partaking of the emblems publicly before the older members of the Governing Body started dying off. Seriously!!
And @Bible Speaks is also right about "chess." When I first wanted to play chess with some of the guys who set up a table around NYC parks, I realized that this was intended to be a money-making scheme for those with the tables. Even a side-bet is possible with some of them.

The great tragedy of 'group' drowning deaths is that good swimmers often get tired out and pulled down by trying to save the ones who cannot swim. Survivors are often haunted by the fact that the only reason they survived is that they decided to swim away and not help their drowning friends.