JW Insider

This is picture of ancient letters in Hebrew and the bottom is the letters in Aramaic script - now used and recognized by everyone.    You will see far right letter (the short one) - this is Yod.......  they have it other way round on your diagram like "mirror image" because they think western people read from left... to right - this is why it is like it is.
As I said before - these four letters have the same meaning no matter what vowels you add.  If you add vowels it changes to a verb or noun or adjective..... but the meaning is basically the same.  So it does not really matter what vowels you put in .... it is the use of the name and acknowledging the name that is important. Jehovah chose this name because it has significant meaning in the outworking of his purpose  as the creator.  It is the causative form for "He causes to become" ...  He can fulfill his promises... he can prove to be by his actions....
Hope this de-confuses you...and thanks for sending the other stuff.....

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."

@Cheeto
Hi. I'll try to answer your question fairly simply.
SIMPLE ANSWER
The basic reason is a difference in methods for when an extra lunar month needs to be added. In general every lunar calendar must add about 1 extra month every 3 years to match back up to the seasonal, solar calendar. In fact it's actually not 1 out of every 3 (which is the same as 6 out of 18), but it's 7 out of 19. If it were exactly 1 out of 3, you probably wouldn't see much of a problem because it would be easy to always match up to the Jewish calendar. We'd always know exactly when the leap month was going to be added. But a 7 out of 19 pattern could be done several different ways. The first table below, shows only three of a dozen different methods that could be used, and every one of them would be exactly right again after 19 years.
Since 1929, inclusive, we (JWs) have always followed the exact method in the "Christendom" column. (Always produces the same week as Easter.)  Prior to 1929 we (JWs) always used the exact method represented in the "Jewish" column.
The column in "Method 1" is just for comparison, although it's a well-documented method that has been used by many persons who find it simpler to remember a "1 out of 3" pattern for 18 years, and then correct it with an extra in the 19th year. The problem is that the method is too erratic and unnecessarily makes Spring about 5 weeks late in the 19th year. If these "leap months" are spread out more evenly, as in the "Jewish" method, then Spring will start no more than about 17 days early or 17 days late. In fact, the "Christendom" method effectively starts "Nisan 14/15" at the first full moon after the vernal spring equinox, so that the range is no more than 15 days before, or 15 days after.) 
Every range of 19 years in the following table should contain 7 years with 13 lunar months rather than 12.
Year# Method 1 Jewish Christndm Actual Yr 1 12 lun 13 lun 12 lun 1997 2 12 lun 12 lun 13 lun 1998 3 13 lun 12 lun 12 lun 1999 4 12 lun 13 lun 13 lun 2000 5 12 lun 12 lun 12 lun 2001 6 13 lun 13 lun 12 lun 2002 7 12 lun 12 lun 13 lun 2003 8 12 lun 12 lun 12 lun 2004 9 13 lun 13 lun 12 lun 2005 10 12 lun 12 lun 13 lun 2006 11 12 lun 12 lun 12 lun 2007 12 13 lun 13 lun 12 lun 2008 13 12 lun 12 lun 13 lun 2009 14 12 lun 13 lun 12 lun 2010 15 13 lun 12 lun 13 lun 2011 16 12 lun 12 lun 12 lun 2012 17 12 lun 12 lun 12 lun 2013 18 13 lun 13 lun 13 lun 2014 19 13 lun 12 lun 12 lun 2015 20 12 lun 13 lun 12 lun 2016 21 12 lun 12 lun 13 lun 2017 21 13 lun 12 lun 12 lun 2018
 
MORE COMPLICATED ANSWER
As you know, our calendar year is usually 365 days and sometimes 366 days, so that the average is about 365.25 days. So we divide it into months of either 28, 29, 30 or 31 days. So, our average month is therefore about 30.4 days. 
But if you measure each month by the time it takes the moon to cycle through all it's phases, then the average "lunar month" is 29.5 days. That means that if you start each lunar month when you see that first sliver of a "new moon," then it could be about 30 days until the sighting of the next new month, then 29 days the next new month after that, then 30, then 29, etc.
But that means that by the time you go through 12 lunar months, you will have a "year" of only 354 days. (12x29.5=354)  That's about 11 days shorter than a standard solar year. So if you want to stay matched up to the solar seasons (Spring, Summer, Autumn, WInter) you will have to add an extra lunar cycle (i.e., an extra 29 or 30-day month) about every three years. Otherwise, if you keep losing 11 days every year, then in a few years you will find yourself trying to pick summer fruits in the middle of winter, which doesn't work very well in Israel's climate, or almost any climate in the northern hemisphere.
Also, if you work it out more exactly, you will see that you it isn't exactly 1 extra lunar month for every 3 years, but 7 every 19 years. But even if it was always as easy as just 1 out of 3, and the pattern repeated continually, there is still no absolute reason to count every three years from the same starting years. The one out of three method works out to mean that you follow a pattern of -11, -11, +19, (repeating), which will be explained below. But there is no reason that one the pattern could not be chosen as -11, +19, -11, (repeating), or +19, -11, -11 (repeating). It's as if in the following example, you arbitrarily picked 2018 or 2019 as the FIRST YEAR and started repeating the cycle in that year, instead of 2017. 
Assume the current year is correct for when it starts the month of Nisan. (2016)
FIRST YEAR: Subtract 11 days to start Nisan next year (2017) 11 days, because 12 lunar months are 354 days and this is 11 days short of 365. SECOND YEAR: Subtract 11 more days to start Nisan the year after that (2018) 11 days short again, same reason. THIRD YEAR: Add 19 days to start Nisan the year after that (2019) 19 days, because 12 lunar months is still -11 (354) but you add a 30-day month (a second Adar) so that this year will be 384 days long.384-365=19; 30 minus 11 equals 19. REPEAT CYCLE for another 3 year cycle: -11, -11, +19.  (Ths can work for up to 18 years before you will need an extra adjustment.) I made a table of all the Memorial dates since the Watchtower started in 1879 up to the present. The following table includes includes only the years 1997 to 2018. These can be used to check the years that were effectively given a 13th month (second Adar). These are the years when Memorial is about 19 days later in the year than the previous year, rather than about 11 days earlier in the year. I bolded them. Notice that Easter is always the Sunday after our Memorial. Passover is always within a day or two, or within a day or two, plus an entire month.
YEAR MEMORIAL EASTER PASSOVER 1997 3/23/1997 3/30/1997 4/22/1997 1998 4/11/1998 4/12/1998 4/11/1998 1999 4/1/1999 4/4/1999 4/1/1999 2000 4/19/2000 4/23/2000 4/20/2000 2001 4/8/2001 4/15/2001 4/8/2001 2002 3/28/2002 3/31/2002 4/28/2002 2003 4/16/2003 4/20/2003 4/17/2003 2004 4/4/2004 4/11/2004 4/6/2004 2005 3/24/2005 3/27/2005 4/24/2005 2006 4/12/2006 4/16/2006 4/13/2006 2007 4/2/2007 4/8/2007 4/3/2007 2008 3/22/2008 3/23/2008 4/20/2008 2009 4/9/2009 4/12/2009 4/9/2009 2010 3/30/2010 4/4/2010 4/30/2010 2011 4/17/2011 4/24/2011 4/19/2011 2012 4/5/2012 4/8/2012 4/7/2012 2013 3/26/2013 3/31/2013 3/26/2013 2014 4/14/2014 4/20/2014 4/15/2014 2015 4/3/2015 4/5/2015 4/4/2015 2016 3/23/2016 3/27/2016 4/23/2016 2017 4/11/2017 4/16/2017 4/11/2017 2018 4/1/2018 4/4/2018 4/1/2018  
 

How WE see us:
How some RUSSIANS sees us:

That's a bit extreme, don't you think?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/jehovah-s-witnesses-supreme-court-jurisdiction-judgement-application-appeal-wall-1.4069481
"One of the three appeal court judges dissented — arguing that congregations are private organizations akin to bridge clubs, whose decisions 'are not enforceable promises and have limited, if any, impact outside its small circle.' "

Harley Miller. (In 1967 through 1970)
In 1967 (same year I was baptized) we pretty much knew the reason that anyone was put on probation or disfellowshipped because up until about this time the reason was sometimes announced from the platform. Depending on the nature of the "conduct unbecoming a Christian" and knowledge of the infraction within the congregation, it might be announced the same week or the next week. The brother was the "literature servant" and the "accounts servant," and yes he would lose his privileges, and then gain them back in a few months. But the seriousness of the problem (to the point of disfellowshipping) was when he was caught trying to keep it hidden, and had been in trouble for the same thing two times previously. It was hard keeping things completely hidden, however, because of the extended family (his brother, cousins, nephews, uncles) --some Witnesses, some not-- who also worked for the same boss. In a congregation of only about 45 publishers, there was also unavoidable gossip, and everyone knew each other pretty well. (We sold our house to this brother's brother.)
Some scriptures or some appropriate Watchtower comments would also be read from the platform. For example:
*** w68 8/1 p. 455 Keeping Abreast with Jehovah’s Organization ***
Since then God’s people have obtained a better understanding of many teachings. . . .They also understand better many Bible principles and requirements, such as the need to keep wholly separate from the military and religious parts of Satan’s organization even in employment.
Jehovah’s organization being a moving, progressive one, those who would keep abreast with it must also make progress. . . .  How can we who are Jehovah’s witnesses today keep abreast with God’s rapidly advancing earthly organization? A basic factor toward our doing so is obedience. . . . Of Jesus Christ while on earth it was stated that he learned obedience from the things he suffered. We too, then, must learn obedience.—Heb. 5:8; 13:17.
There are four things that we must do to perfect our obedience. . . .
So it was no secret. And because we knew, that's why I asked my father about his own labs in the electrical engineering dept of the university. They would get electronic military equipment and one of their major funding sources was a large yearly grant from the DoD. Sometimes the university would be expected to respond to requests for research the DoD needed.

I don't see that as evidence that she was lying, per se. The WTS made many people leave their jobs during the 27 years between the time she was baptized and the time she left. I once pointed out the hypocrisy of three elders in our congregation working, as professors and engineers for the University of Missouri's engineering departments where the labs, especially, were heavily supported by money coming through military budgets of the Federal Government. Yet these same elders, including my father, were repeatedly required to reprimand and finally even disfellowship a brother and some of his relatives who, as a painter and handyman, could not always maneuver his boss into letting him off the crew that once a year was assigned to paint and provide upkeep to an abandoned army base. Their usual work had nothing to do with the army base. The problem, of course, was that the brother continued losing his job and was treated to longer and longer secular probabation, and therefore it was his ability to support his family. Yet my father would accept the black box from any airline incident, military or civilian. Also, the military was able to take advantage of various semi-conductor inventions that came directly through my father's lab and even his own work. It's not that they didn't question the Society about the rules, but the rules were always in favor of white collar jobs and prejudiced against blue collar and t-shirt jobs.
This does not mean that Witnesses should be banned in Russia or anywhere else. Fortunately, the arguments by Petrova and other ex-JWs are very, very weak.
The ideas that will likely resonate the most are the arguments about separation of families and the difficulties of getting back into normal societal acceptance after leaving JWs. I don't know what the rules are in Russia about privacy of treatment for psychological disorders related to depression and alcoholism, but a Witness here in the United States tells me that it's a good thing for JWs that she can't reveal patterns she is aware of. 
Then again, it's also good to know that depression and alcoholism are not requirements of citizenship in Russia. We've been led to believe that they were.

Nigeria has a very high ratio of Witnesses in the population. The site currently has only three articles mentioning Jehovah's Witnesses, two of them from 2016, but one of them is list of the most popular religions in Nigeria, and JWs are listed 4th in a listing of 10.
10 Popular Churches In Nigeria And Their Origin
The other article is called:
See What Jehovah Witnesses Go Through When Spreading The Message (photos)
This is exactly the kind of fake news that could be seized upon by Witnesses from other countries who are not as familiar with Trump's style. I'd say that it was not designed to create confusion and uncertainty, but designed to create excitement and attention, even if short-lived (and short-sighted).

The whole point of the "Flying Spaghetti Monster Church" is to be a parody of religion, and try to get some "religious" style recognition to agnostics and atheists. My youngest son has a friend, a neighbor, who is 22 years old and still has FSM symbols on her car. What's odd is that she also believes in astrology. Go figure!
I noticed that the same site reveals that there have been other extremist groups shut down by the Russian government. I'll translate one very surprising one in the next post . . . 
 
 
Unprecedented in the Russian judicial practice: law enforcement agencies managed to ban an underground organization of sports fans. It has been proven that football fans held extremist views by publishing the relevant positions in the network.
175 Samara fans football extremism He headed right radical community Eugene Gavrilov. It was under his leadership, members of the group Samara "Toys" for two years advocated nationalist ideas. What are they thinking now learned NTV correspondent Anton Talpa . Eugene Gavrilov, as they say in football, enough of the red card. Leader of the group of fans of "Toys" from Samara got from a judge in criminal cases - disqualification. During the beating, and appeals to racial hatred he was sent to the colony for six months. Community created by them as extremist and banned. There is a video in which Gavrilov, aka Le Havre, arranges a brawl in a nightclub. On the other - a few hours before Gavroilov with colleagues provoke unrest. There is in this story, and one more important fact. For the first time in the judicial practice of law enforcement agencies managed to disable it underground organization of fans. Samara "Toys" were not officially registered, and therefore, before starting the process, the investigators had to prove that the community it exists at all. Dmitry Salishchev , senior assistant prosecutor of the Samara region to oversee the execution of laws on federal security, interethnic relations, combating extremism and terrorism, "members of the organization held right-wing nationalist views, supported by the ideology of fascism, prosecuted for crimes of an extremist nature, including violent . These facts gave rise to the recognition of the organization's extremist and banning its activities. " On how he got into the "Toys", former member of the fan group agreed to talk only on condition that no one will know his name and did not see his face. This man confessed that he was one of the organizers of fights between fans, to bring fireworks into the stadium. By the way, he also explains what kind of order reigned in the community. According to him, in the "Toys" really promoted the ideology prohibited. More details - in a report NTV.

185,000 in both cases.
-----
The thought occurred to me that it might have been tempting for some in the Org to pray that the letter-writing campaign would backfire. Having foreigners attempt to influence judges and courts will inevitably lead to a showdown of strength and there are several countries where the outcome of such a showdown could be predictable. I believe, for example, that some persons in the Org knew in advance the most likely outcome of an old letter-writing campaign to the president of Malawi. In some cases, instead of trying to create an 'international incident' the Org chose to compromise doctrine, such as in Bulgaria and Mexico. Sometimes I do believe it's a matter choosing the battles.
But in any case, our prayers should always be for the support and encouragement of our brothers in Russia. We can pray for the ban to be lifted and pray for their freedom of movement and freedom of speech. But we should also remember, as Jesus did, that we pray not for our will, but Jehovah's will to be done. (Luke 22:42) 

Rough translation, based partly on Google:
 

I'd bet it's mostly cows, anyway. Just giving you a bum steer.
We sure have come a long way from the days when we couldn't even allow our pets to eat undrained meat. I couldn't have a pet snake because it would mean feeding them live mice without first draining the blood. 
The reason was that the feeding of pets was within our control and it didn't show proper respect for blood by "pouring it out on the ground." Now, it's considered to be a simple matter of individual conscience for an individual Witness to use blood products that require millions of gallons of donated blood to be processed in order to produce the blood product he or she might need.
And we don't raise any widespread alarms over the fact that horse blood is also processed by the millions of gallons, instead of being poured out, in order for us to enjoy our ham and bacon and pork chops.
'Vampire' horse farm where blood is used for pig hormone | Daily Mail ...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/03/horse-blood-farms-china-donkeys-wild-horses-us-mass-slaughter
Donor Horse Serum: Is it Worth the Cost? | - The Inside Rein
Vampire farms exposed: British meat in cruel horse hormone scandal ... 

News feed   [ RSS | News archive ] April 11, 2017, 11:13   Orthodox Anti-Sectarian Center of Voronezh convicted of planting Jehovah's Witnesses banned literature
During the hearing in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the suit of Justice Ministry against Jehovah's Witnesses (SI) it was revealed that one of the banned books, [supposedly] planted by a believer, belonged not to them, but to the Orthodox Anti-Sectarian Center, says a reporter from "Portal-Credo.Ru». April 7, at the court hearing, lawyers for JWs explained that almost all of the cases in which their local religious organizations (IROS) in Russia were abolished by the courts, were based on the fabrication of evidence. Believers do not distribute or even store books and journals entered in the Federal List of Extremist Literature of the Russian Federation, but law enforcement bodies themselves toss these materials of the SI, and then "find" during searches. Some incidents of this kind are recorded on video, widely available on the Internet and shown on television.
Jehovah's witnesses were able to establish that in Voronezh "extremist literature" investigators handed patterns associated with the ROC MP. On one of the books ("what the Bible actually teaches?"), which is in the case file, package no. 5, there is a box in which you can enter the name of the owner of the book. In this field the inscription «IKCMV», which means «Information-Consulting Center of St. Mitrophan of Voronezh. The planted book was "found" under a layer of carpet, on which stood a pot with flowers.

According to the vob.ru database, this center was created with the blessing of the Metropolitan of Voronezh and Borisoglebsky ROC MP Sergiy (Fomin) and is a member of the Russian Association of Centers for the Study of Religions and Sects (RACIRS). According to the website iriney.ru, the ECMMC is headed by the priest Evgeny Lishchenyuk, the well-known "sectologist" Alexander Dvorkin also helps the center. The declared goal of the Center's activities is "the development of all acceptable forms of anti-sectarian activity that do not violate Orthodox morality and do not violate secular legislation and the development of purposeful missionary programs to neutralize proselytism and religious extremism."

However, the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contains article 303: falsification of evidence and the results of operational-search activity. This article states that falsification of evidence in a civil case by a person participating in a case or his representative is punishable by a fine in the amount of 100 to 300 thousand rubles, or compulsory work up to 480 hours, or correctional labor up to 2 years, or arrest up to 4 months.
In this case there is a second copy of the same book, in the margins of which there are notes with a ballpoint pen, which are critical remarks in relation to the text of the book. Obviously, the notes were taken by a person who did not agree with the position of the JWs.
Despite the falsification of evidence, the court in Voronezh took the side of Jehovah's Witnesses and took note of evidence of planting. On March 2 of this year, the court noted the inconsistency of the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and abolished the decision of the lower regional court to liquidate the Voronezh organization of the JWs.
 
--------------------
The above is from a couple weeks ago, and might have already been covered. I didn't find out about it until a few minutes ago. If it's a duplicate I'll take it down. It's a bing translation of http://credo.press/site/?act=news&id=125236
If I have time I might correct some of the translation. I think it missed a few words. In editing, I have now replaced some portions with google translate.
Evidently the persons who planted the evidence forgot to take their own name out their copy of "What Does the Bible Really Teach?" It seems that the name in the book was the name of an organization run by Russian Orthodox priests, an Orthodox Anti-Sectarian Center that has provided assistance to Alexander Dvorkin (of 'donkey in the vegetable garden' fame).
I don't have the time or wherewithal to find out if this story is accurate, however.

Absolutely, especially if there is anything new. (He's actually Ukrainian. My sloppiness in calling him Russian.) 
It looks like you hit on the definition closest to what the MOJ was using to rationalize the suppression of JWs. We kind of knew that, but there have been many comments, from non-JWs all over the world that see it the equivalent of "radicalized fanaticism with a propensity to violence". This actually makes the disparity seem all the more ridiculous. Technically, we aren't pacifists, but from the world's point of view, we might as well be.

What happened at a practical level is exactly that: "Russian government's actions targeting and repressing . . . Jehovah's Witnesses, under the pretense of combating extremism." At some level this happens in the U.S.A. too. A local police department used 9/11 funding to put in millions of dollars in surveillance equipment that floods our suburb, block by block, reaching into the back yards of law-abiding citizens. It can't be admitted to exist, and can't even be used in open courts to prosecute crime, but it is still used to help solve crimes and track crime. And it has been used indirectly for confiscation of property. But it is not used for anything related to extremism or terrorism. Other police forces bought more visible items: tanks and "battering rams" and  military equipment that can never be of much use in a low-crime suburb of 10,000 unless they all decide to start rioting against the next town over, I guess.
But I've asked a Russian brother to translate some interesting commentary internal to Russia, and I've talked to him about it. I'm hoping to get a better sense of what an average Russian citizen might feel about the JW situation. Or at least what various media outlets want us to think they are feeling, or, perhaps, what they are supposed to think about it.
I noticed that the usnews article links to an RT article, which has some comments that run in the same direction as what we are seeing in Russian "public" commentary.
Evidently, many Russian people are not linking the word extremism the same way all of us are. It is not linked with terrorism or violence, but merely "cult-like" behavior. If it's a "sect" like the "Scientologists" then it's extreme. As was shown in earlier comments in other threads on the subject, it's more about the control of lifestyle and life choices. Of course, this is still a load of hypocrisy, because all religions have a right to do this to some extent, and there is no such thing as "totlal control" which is the specter. Some people become fanatical and totally controlled in any religion or ideology. But there is no total control of a whole group of people.
It's probably the fear of choice that is driving this suppression of JWs and others, not the fear of total control. There is a fear that anyone, a poor person, a rich person, a less educated person, or even a scientist, can make a choice to leave the state-sanctioned religion and general ideologies. These persons, especially if it's your mother or son or cousin who converts to become a JW, can cause you embarrassment in a state that expects a high level of conformity among the class of people who work in government careers.
 
The US News article had this line: The Justice Ministry showed pamphlets from the group that it argued posed "a threat to health."
The link goes to RT here: https://www.rt.com/news/385539-jehovah-witnesses-ban-russia/ specifically these points:
 
Blood policy, education policies, mental health, and the idea that the "chief managing organization" takes marching orders from New York were points that were forefront in the minds of some Russians but did not come across in the review on JW Broadcasting. Evidently the lawyers had a hard time convincing the MOJ that they were really "autonomous."
I'll grab a few of the comments in English, before they disappear from the RT article (comments are not necessarily from Russians, however). Also, where the indentation worked it does not mean that these are dialogues; I left off the names but they are from random people even if appears these might be back-and-forth comments. Some are likely JWs:
 

Some of the ones I thought were most interesting already disappeared from another page I was tracking yesterday.
Edited to add a couple more:
Why? It is no secret that Russia has banned or made all foreign NGO's register as foreign agents, these guys are no different and there is more than just this lot coming under the same controls. The door to door activities may be seen as trying to openly subvert the population and with the US's history in doing so I can't blame them. I laugh when people say that it must be removed because its a western import. I think the only item in Russia that is not a Western import is the Vodka! lol
Not a good move. Jehovah's are known around the globe as pacifists. I'm sure Russia isn't going to be winning any points with the Human Rights Council when it starts persecuting them.
 

People should get their story straight when it comes to practicing high-degree Freemasons. Notice this "true" story:
That the most powerful Masons are actually reptilian shape shifters that drink human blood and eat human flesh.
 - That I demonstrated characteristics of someone with incredible survival instincts and that I was attempting to be the alpha male at work by dominating other men and trying to possess nearly every attractive woman in the workplace, which are reptilian characteristics.
 - That the Masonic initiation ritual I would go through would activate my reptilian DNA.
 - That the blood drinking, flesh eating orgies that I would participate in have roots in the ancient mystery religion of the Egyptians. - See more at: https://www.henrymakow.com/freemasonry.html#sthash.hTMw0qVB.dpuf That the most powerful Masons are actually reptilian shape shifters that drink human blood and eat human flesh.
 - That I demonstrated characteristics of someone with incredible survival instincts and that I was attempting to be the alpha male at work by dominating other men and trying to possess nearly every attractive woman in the workplace, which are reptilian characteristics.
 - That the Masonic initiation ritual I would go through would activate my reptilian DNA.
 - That the blood drinking, flesh eating orgies that I would participate in have roots in the ancient mystery religion of the Egyptians. - See more at: https://www.henrymakow.com/freemasonry.html
Charles Taze Russell was not a Freemason at all, much less a 33rd degree Freemason. No one has yet been able to offer any evidence that he was. Also, there was never a time when the 10,000 or so partakers under Russell's leadership had a secondary passover. With the large number of defectors from Russell who spoke out against him after leaving the various Bible Students associations, none of them ever mentioned such a practice. Not even any of the supposed eye-witnesses that you have heard from have ever presented any evidence. "Recalling accounts" is not evidence. [For example, I recall an account where Richard Nixon said he was innocent of any involvement in Watergate. That does not mean that I have evidence that Richard Nixon was innocent of any involvement in Watergate -- yet I really do recall the account where he actually said this himself. It's even on video.]
Under Russell, the "great crowd of other sheep" were actually of the anointed. Under Russell, the great crowd of other sheep were also of the heavenly hope.
Under Rutherford this great crowd remained exactly as they were under Russell, until the early 1930's, when they were seen as less spiritual than the 144,000. They were soon seen as persons who had squandered their hope of getting into heaven by being materialistic. After they were defined as people who would live on earth (by 1935) they were not even allowed to come to the Memorial, and they were told that they were no longer anointed. They were not even called Jehovah's witnesses. The "great multitude" would join the "Jonadab" class. The expression referring to all the persons associated with the Watch Tower was: "Jehovah's witnesses and their associates, the Jonadabs." This meant the same thing as "the anointed and the non-anointed." (Only the anointed could be called Jehovah's witnesses.)
Only when the Jonadabs were finally invited to the Memorial did there come a time when persons would be in the audience who passed up the emblems and did not partake. But at that time (in some congregations) it was just as high a percentage who partook compared with the percentage who did not. It was only over the years as the number of Jonadabs significantly outnumbered the anointed, that it appeared that the Memorial was a 'ritual' where everyone seemed to pass up the emblems.
 
I would agree with your first statement. After all:
(John 6:54-58) 54 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood has everlasting life, and I will resurrect him on the last day; 55 for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. 56 Whoever feeds on my flesh and drinks my blood remains in union with me, and I in union with him. 57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will live because of me. 58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. It is not as when your forefathers ate and yet died. Whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”
Jesus did not say that only those of a heavenly hope should partake. But we don't need to partake of anything in a physical ritual. The ritual is there as a Memorial. Any claim that we must participate only in a specific manner is the same as creating specific acts (or works) of law. But mentally we must understand that Jesus is the bread from heaven and that his blood means life for us. Whether we put the glass to our lips or add our saliva to a piece of bread and swallow it during a ritual is not what is truly important. Besides, if we hold to an earthly hope, then we would merely be confusing others who might take our participation as a declaration that we are of a heavenly hope. As JWs we have imbued the emblems with a different meaning than Jesus gave them, but we are not judged by our action with respect to physical emblems. Other humans might judge us and even be offended and think it is "unclean" to partake if we have an earthly hope. But, overall, the emblems are just "food" so it doesn't matter.
(Romans 14:14-17) 14 I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself; only where a man considers something to be unclean, to him it is unclean. 15 For if your brother is being offended because of food, you are no longer walking according to love. Do not by your food ruin that one for whom Christ died. 16 Therefore, do not let the good you do be spoken of as bad. 17 For the Kingdom of God does not mean eating and drinking,. . .
The point about two folds of sheep being all part of the same flock has been known for a long time. When Jesus said he had "other sheep" who were not of this fold, I would have to agree that he meant "Gentiles." (Even the "great crowd" in Revelation come out of all nations, while the 144,000 come out of the tribes of Israel.) Russell understood this, and several members of the Governing Body still understood it this way through the 1970's and 1980's. Some Governing Body members might still see it this way. But the understanding has been "spiritualized" so that these are spiritual Gentiles and the 144,000 are spiritual Jews. It's not an impossible doctrinal construction. In other words, even if we changed our doctrine back to claiming that the "other sheep" referred to physical Gentiles [non-Jews], and that non-Jews (like Cornelius) would be brought into the same pen after Jesus died, this doesn't mean that anything would necessarily change with respect to who physically partakes at the Memorial.

Agree. This was going to be a win for the Witnesses no matter which way the court had ruled. Even the European Union had a statement in favor of the Witnesses. (Rejected for inclusion, of course.)
Putin, although he is far from fulfilling the role, has been projected as a kind of "hitler" recently in US mainstream news. It was a perfect time for persecution by his state if we were looking for publicity. For Witnesses personally, both worldwide and in Russia, this also energizes even the most inactive among us as persecution anywhere always does. All that is really lost is some of the material benefits of having a religious organization. Spiritual ties can grow even stronger under such circumstances.
But this is high profile publicity. The world has taken notice. Furthermore, as the recent post from Ann O'maly shows, it will hardly have any effect on the Russian Witnesses themselves, who will likely grow at the same rate or better.
 

If authorities told you to stop using dozens of books, booklets, videos and tracts, and you had lots of these publications, then it would be very easy to make a mistake and accidentally bring a copy of one with you to a meeting or out in service. But the brothers at the Hall went to the trouble to put up a list of all the banned material so that there would be very few mistakes.
The brothers were so compliant that the authorities weren't able to build a case against them by catching Witnesses here and there who made a mistake. The brothers were extra compliant with the law, too compliant for the authorities to build the case they wanted against the brothers.
I don't know if you saw the videos, but they proved to be an embarrassment to the people who planted the evidence, and the fact that they are shown worldwide on jw.org makes them an embarrassment worldwide. That was one of the reasons to post the videos, to embarrass the authorities who had to cheat to create evidence against the JWs. There are at least three such incidents, and you can see video here:
https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/by-region/russia/police-planting-evidence-video/
 

I'm glad. I always thought that the "evidence-planting" videos should be the most important piece of evidence in the case. Shows that the JWs are being too compliant and not giving local authorities the ammunition to play out their own prejudices against the JWs.
Also, they recognize that these videos have produced an embarrassment worldwide. No matter what the outcome, the jw.org site did all JWs a favor (worldwide) by putting these videos on the site.

This is interesting. But it is based on the idea that a religion can be declared extremist for the following types of issues, and I suppose it would fall under 'failure to fulfill their civic duty.' This brings it right back to the problem in the United States of "JWs" in 1917 (WTBTS) when the updated Espionage Act was enforced in 1918.
I thought the following was potentially important.
The prosecutors are probably concerned about setting precedents that could be used against religions more generally. The Ministry of Justice SHOULD be just as concerned, but are obviously not thinking about the implications of this ruling about "extremism" on any ad-hoc group of Russian Orthodox believers who might want to meet and discuss a specific area of interest that arises from Bible Study. Imagine if a group of Russian Orthodox believers prints summaries of their Bible studies that highlight new things they learned that are not being highlighted in the tenets of the Russian Orthodox church. Or what if their studies lead them to start a charity to care for injured Russian veterans but then, in promoting how wonderful their charity is, they compare themselves with other religions who have ignored the opportunity to create such a useful charity. They have just undermined the respect for other religions, and made themselves extremist. The prosecutors appear that they understand how this could backfire, and the MoJ seems not to care about being so careful -- knowing, I assume, that the Russian Orthodox church will always be legally untouchable. Yet, very secular leaders in their recent past have already proved that nothing is untouchable.

Quite true. At first, I wondered if I should have started out with this same point about what it means to be "devoted" to something. In the original verse, the idea of devotion is just as well translated without even using the word "devotion." It could also have been properly translated: "And they continued steadfastly [proskarteréō] with the instructions of the apostles."  (Acts 2:42) or perhaps, "And they persevered  [proskarteréō] in the instructions of the apostles..."
In fact, the New World Translation does not usually use the word "devoted" when translating this word:
(Acts 1:14) With one purpose all of these were persisting [proskarteréō] in prayer, together with some women and Mary the mother of Jesus and with his brothers.
(Acts 2:46) 46 And day after day they were in constant [proskarteréō] attendance in the temple with a united purpose,. . .
(Acts 8:13) 13 Simon himself also became a believer, and after being baptized, he continued [proskarteréō] with Philip; and he was amazed at seeing the signs and great powerful works taking place.
(Colossians 4:2) 2 Persevere [proskarteréō] in prayer, remaining awake in it with thanksgiving.
But this is still a very useful point about being "devoted" to your wife, and a wife being "devoted" to her husband. You could even argue that slaves should be devoted to their masters, and children be devoted to their parents. In Acts 2:46 these same brothers we have been talking about were also "devoted" to their attendance at the temple. And in Acts 8:13, Simon, the former magician, was "devoted" to Philip. But the point about "devotion" to one's spouse is especially useful here, specifically because of the immediate context of Ephesians 5 & 6:
(Ephesians 5:21-6:5) 21 Be in subjection to one another in fear of Christ.22 Let wives be in subjection to their husbands as to the Lord, 23 because a husband is head of his wife just as the Christ is head of the congregation, he being a savior of this body. 24 In fact, as the congregation is in subjection to the Christ, wives should also be to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, continue loving your wives, just as the Christ also loved the congregation and gave himself up for it, . . .  28 In the same way husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. A man who loves his wife loves himself, 29 for no man ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cherishes it, just as the Christ does the congregation, 30 because we are members of his body. . . .  33 Nevertheless, each one of you must love his wife as he does himself; on the other hand, the wife should have deep respect for her husband. 6 Children, be obedient to your parents in union with the Lord, for this is righteous. . . .  5 Slaves, be obedient to your human masters,. . .
It's very true that this sense of devotion does include a kind of "subjection to the lead" of another person, just as you imply that we should be in a kind of devoted subjection and obedience to imperfect men. But notice one more verse in that same passage that I didn't highlight yet:
(Ephesians 5:21) 21 Be in subjection to one another . . .
In other words, the way in which you should be in subjection to the Governing Body and other elders, for example, is in the same way that each member of the Governing Body should be in subjection to you. That's the way it is with all fellow members of the congregation. We are in subjection to each other.
This is why, even among Jehovah's Witnesses, it should not be possible for us to think of a certain group as if they make up a group of human leaders.
(Luke 22:25-27) 25 But he said to them: “The kings of the nations lord it over them, and those having authority over them are called Benefactors. 26 You, though, are not to be that way. But let the one who is the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the one taking the lead as the one ministering. 27 For which one is greater, the one dining or the one serving? Is it not the one dining? But I am among you as the one serving.
Our "food" -- our spiritual nourishment -- is doing Jehovah's will with respect to each other; it's especially the encouragement, comfort and support we all give to one another. (John 4:34; Hebrews 10:24,25) This encouragement and spiritual food can include instruction and guidance and counsel and information from the elders, and therefore also from the Governing Body. We respect all that counsel deeply.  But we don't devote ourselves to the Governing Body, except in the same sense that the Governing Body members also devote themselves to you. There is no separate Body within the Body. They are not in the position of a husband over the congregation, and we are not in the position of a wife in the congregation. We are all a part of the body of the whole congregation. But Jesus Christ is the Leader and Head (and Husband) and the rest of us are slaves serving each other. Some are shepherds and stewards, but this does not make those ones our Leader, in any sense.
In fact, as a shepherd, every elder takes on the responsibility of being "God's steward:"
(Titus 1:7)  For as God’s steward, an overseer must be free from accusation. . .
And it is every steward's responsibility to be faithful and discreet:
(1 Corinthians 4:2) In this regard, what is expected of stewards is that they be found faithful.
(Ephesians 5:15-17) 15 So keep strict watch that how you walk is not as unwise but as wise persons . . . keep perceiving what the will of Jehovah is.
 

I know you weren't trying to be argumentative. If anything, it was my response that probably seemed so. But I did it because of something very subtle that should be pointed out when it happens. Here was what I responded to more precisely:
The first sentence is absolutely true. The second sentence is a form of idolatry. We are not devoted to the Governing Body, just as the early Christians were not devoted to the apostles.
Moses was the leader of the Israelites. The Israelites could be "devoted" to Moses as the representative of Jehovah's authority. And by being the representative Lawgiver he was even the master of their "faith." The Governing Body should not be the leaders of Jehovah's people. Jesus, as Lawgiver, gave an entirely new commandment that replaced the Mosaic system.
(Matthew 23:10) 10 Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ.
This doesn't mean we don't need persons who can lead by their example and their faith, but we don't want any to be called leaders, masters, governors. The congregation can have many teachers, but we don't look to just one place for those teachers, unless it's Jesus Christ.
(2 Corinthians 1:23, 24) . . .. 24 Not that we are the masters over your faith, but we are fellow workers for your joy, for it is by your faith that you are standing.
Our faith and salvation must depend on no man, because in the Christian congregation, it must run directly from Jesus to our own heart and mouth.
(Romans 10:5-10) 5 For Moses writes about the righteousness that is by the Law: “The man who does these things will live by means of them.” 6 But the righteousness resulting from faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ that is, to bring Christ down, 7 or, ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ that is, to bring Christ up from the dead.” 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your own mouth and in your own heart”; that is, “the word” of faith, which we are preaching. 9 For if you publicly declare with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and exercise faith in your heart that God raised him up from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one exercises faith for righteousness, but with the mouth one makes public declaration for salvation.
(1 Corinthians 10:2-4) 2 and all got baptized into Moses by means of the cloud and of the sea, 3 and all ate the same spiritual food 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they used to drink from the spiritual rock that followed them, and that rock meant the Christ.
(Hebrews 3:4-6) . . .. 5 Now Moses was faithful as an attendant in all the house of that One as a testimony of the things that were to be spoken afterward, 6 but Christ was faithful as a son over God’s house. We are His house if, indeed, we hold on firmly to our freeness of speech and the hope of which we boast down to the end.
Moses was not a pattern for the Governing Body, or even the apostles. Moses was a pattern for Christ, where under a new covenant, there was no need for any other go-betweens. There is no tent set up by man. There is no need for each one to teach his fellow citizen.
(Hebrews 8:1-11) 8 Now this is the main point of what we are saying: We have such a high priest as this, and he has sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, 2 a minister of the holy place and of the true tent, which Jehovah set up, and not man. . . .  6 But now Jesus has obtained a more excellent ministry because he is also the mediator of a correspondingly better covenant, which has been legally established on better promises. . . . : “‘Look! The days are coming,’ says Jehovah, ‘when I will make with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah a new covenant. . . . 10 “‘For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days,’ says Jehovah. ‘I will put my laws in their mind, and in their hearts I will write them. And I will become their God, and they will become my people. 11 “‘And they will no longer teach each one his fellow citizen and each one his brother, saying: “Know Jehovah!” For they will all know me, from the least to the greatest of them.
The ones taking the lead could include the elders making up a governing body. But it's every elder in every congregation who takes the lead by speaking to us, encouraging us, and showing faith and conduct that we can imitate -- and so every elder, by that definition, is therefore a "governing one."
(Hebrews 13:7, 17) . . .Remember those who are taking the lead among you, who have spoken the word of God to you, and as you contemplate how their conduct turns out, imitate their faith. . . . Be obedient to those who are taking the lead among you and be submissive, for they are keeping watch over you
(1 Peter 5:1-4) . . .I make this appeal to the elders among you: 2 Shepherd the flock of God under your care, serving as overseers, not under compulsion, but willingly before God; not for love of dishonest gain, but eagerly; 3 not lording it over those who are God’s inheritance, but becoming examples to the flock. 4 And when the chief shepherd has been made manifest, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.
It appears that elders do not take the lead by governing, because that is a form of "lording it over" (same as the words for "master over" as in "we are not masters over your faith.") Elders, and therefore every governing body member and member of any council of elders, leads by being examples to the flock. We submit to the counsel of elders when their advice is based on Christian experience, faith and conduct. We follow their example of hard work, and the loving and humble way in which they preside, and their manner of teaching.

I have no doubt whatsoever that we should NOT be devoted to imperfect men. The early congregation during the time of apostles was NOT supposed to be devoted to the apostles, only to the teachings of the apostles. The teachings of the apostles formed the foundation of the first century congregation. This is the very reason we need no apostles today, and it is why we have no apostles in the congregation today.
(1 Corinthians 12:28, 29) 28 And God has assigned the respective ones in the congregation: first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then powerful works; then gifts of healings; helpful services; abilities to direct; different tongues. 29 Not all are apostles, are they?. . .
(Ephesians 2:19, 20) 19 So you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens of the holy ones and are members of the household of God, 20 and you have been built up on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, while Christ Jesus himself is the foundation cornerstone.
(Ephesians 3:5) In other generations this secret was not made known to the sons of men as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by spirit,
(John 16:13) 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.
So one could also say that there are no new teachings, or new truths, to be learned after the time of the apostles. This does not mean that we should not have older men and teachers in the congregation, but they should be here to help lead the work, and encourage faithfulness, not make new teachings. New circumstances arise and therefore good teachers will help us make better application of the existing teachings in the Bible. But the Governing Body does NOT need to make new teachings, they are basically asking to be "keepers" or "guardians" of the doctrine that already exists in the Bible.
If they come up with something new, such as an application of a Biblical prophecy to our own time, then this is a suggestion that we can keep in mind and watch for and hope for. These men have collectively studied the Bible much longer than any of us have, and they have access to a range of information about various situations from around the world that the rest of us do not have. But if they give us guidance for the end times, it's a suggestion about how they may believe the prophecy will likely play out. But we should never be "devoted" to their teaching. (Much less "devoted" to them.)
Remember, too, what happened when a Council at Jerusalem (including apostles) decided to offer Bible-based counsel to all the congregations who had been affected by a serious error that members of the Jerusalem congregation had been perpetrating. (Prejudice against the uncircumcised Gentile converts to Christianity.)  Paul accepted this counsel, and even though apostles were involved in promoting it, Paul treated it as only limited. For example, they said to:
(Acts 15:29) 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols (εἰδωλοθύτων ),. . .
But Paul, evidently realizing the limited scope of this counsel, used the exact same word explaining the limited nature of their counsel:
(1 Corinthians 8:4,8) Now concerning the eating of food offered to idols ( εἰδωλοθύτων), we know that an idol is nothing. . . we are no worse off if we do not eat, nor better off if we eat.
Paul said it best when referring to the very men who made up that Jerusalem council:
(Galatians 2:4-12) 4 But that matter came up because of the false brothers brought in quietly, who slipped in to spy on the freedom we enjoy in union with Christ Jesus, so that they might completely enslave us; 5 we did not yield in submission to them, no, not for a moment, so that the truth of the good news might continue with you. 6 But regarding those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me, for God does not go by a man’s outward appearance—those highly regarded men imparted nothing new to me. 7 . . .  9 and when they recognized the undeserved kindness that was given me, James and Ceʹphas and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars, gave Barʹna·bas and me the right hand of fellowship, . . . . 11 However, when Ceʹphas came to Antioch, I resisted him face-to-face, because he was clearly in the wrong. 12 For before certain men from James arrived, he used to eat with people of the nations; but when they arrived, he stopped doing this and separated himself, fearing those of the circumcised class.
And getting back to the idea of being "devoted to imperfect men" Paul had already explained his reasons for disagreeing with such a notion, in the wider context of Galatians 1 and 2, while minimizing any rumors about his contact with or dependence on or even "devotion to the teaching" of the apostles who came before him:
(Galatians 1:10) . . . Is it, in fact, men I am now trying to persuade or God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I would not be Christ’s slave. . . .  I did not immediately consult with any human; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before I was, but I went to Arabia . . . Then three years later I went up to Jerusalem to visit Ceʹphas, and I stayed with him for 15 days. 19 But I did not see any of the other apostles, only James the brother of the Lord. 20 Now regarding the things I am writing you, I assure you before God that I am not lying. . . . Then after 14 years I again went up to Jerusalem with Barʹna·bas, also taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up as a result of a revelation, and I presented to them the good news that I am preaching among the nations. This was done privately, however, before the men who were highly regarded, . . . But regarding those who seemed to be important—whatever they were makes no difference to me, for God does not go by a man’s outward appearance—those highly regarded men imparted nothing new to me. . . . James and Ceʹphas and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars . . . .
So, to what extent are we supposed learn from Paul's example and teaching?
(1 Corinthians 4:1-17) . . .A man should regard us as attendants of Christ and stewards of God’s sacred secrets.  In this regard, what is expected of stewards is that they be found faithful.  Now to me it is of very little importance to be examined by you or by a human tribunal.. . .  Therefore, do not judge anything before the due time, until the Lord comes. He will bring the secret things of darkness to light and make known the intentions of the hearts, and then each one will receive his praise from God. . . .“Do not go beyond the things that are written,” so that you may not be puffed up with pride, favoring one against the other.  For who makes you different from another? . . . Have you begun ruling as kings without us? I really wish that you had begun ruling as kings, so that we also might rule with you as kings.  For it seems to me that God has put us the apostles last on exhibition as men condemned to death, . . . For though you may have 10,000 guardians in Christ, you certainly do not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus, I have become your father through the good news. 16 I urge you, therefore, become imitators of me. 17 That is why I am sending Timothy to you, because he is my beloved and faithful child in the Lord. He will remind you of my methods in connection with Christ Jesus, just as I am teaching everywhere in every congregation.
Note that Paul considered himself a faithful and discreet steward, or guardian, but that there would be no need for any human tribunal to judge anyone "until the Lord comes." There was no need to go beyond the things written. Therefore, there was no need to favor any persons over other persons. No one should begin governing before the time came. While there may be 10,000 faithful and discreet stewards, or guardians, of the apostle's teaching, it was the apostle's teaching itself that provided the foundation to the congreation -- and thus Paul was like a father, a source of their learning from his teaching. In the future, even if Paul or another apostle never visited them again, people like Timothy would not teach anything new, but remind them of Paul's methods. Anyone who tries to "govern" or "rule" in advance -- in the area of doctrine -- is going beyond the things written.
Obviously, you read these verses a little differently. I think we can apply these verses and still be very appreciative of the counsel, encouragement and guidance given by the Governing Body.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Not that it matters, but I'd like to add my own opinion that a third world war is just as UNlikely today as it was 10 years ago and 20 years ago. (It is also just as likely.) Things can change again quickly, of course, and a potential stand-off due to USA-Korea "posturing" raised a red flag last night, but it likely not going to flare up again for a while.
We are probably supposed to get all worked up whenever the general climate of the world becomes more on edge and it probably sounds wrong not to go along with the idea that the whole world could blow up at any minute. I don't think the Biblical end of this system has much to do with the kinds of multi-pronged tensions that the world continues to face. The end can happen at any time, with or without any specific cry for "peace and security" and with or without any specific interpretation of Bible prophecy that we have anticipated.

From a medical point of view, I would submit that it is not just the children, but very few JW parents themselves could "demonstrate an ability to understand the implications of the consequences of refusing treatment." I would also posit that very few JW parents have even fully considered the Biblical point of view on blood transfusions for themselves either. We can surmise this from the fact that the vast majority of JWs accepted what the Watchtower said about rejecting all organ transplants as final, right up until the time the Watchtower changed its position on them. Immediately, the vast majority of JWs accepted the opposite position about accepting all organ transplants as final. Clearly, JWs had not considered the matter for themselves, and had not been using their own thinking abilities or even their own conscience in the matter.
If any have had any dealings at length with persons on the Hospital Liaison Committees (HLCs) in various congregations, then it is likely obvious to that JWs do not generally make up their own mind on the matter of blood, either. We merely submit to the "mind" of the Watchtower. JWs continually consult with the Society or HLC members about what blood-related therapies could be acceptable to their conscience and which ones are not allowed to be acceptable to their conscience.
(Romans 14:1-5) 1 Welcome the man having weaknesses in his faith, but do not pass judgment on differing opinions. 2 One man has faith to eat everything, but the man who is weak eats only vegetables. 3 Let the one eating not look down on the one not eating, and let the one not eating not judge the one eating, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for Jehovah can make him stand. 5 One man judges one day as above another; another judges one day the same as all others; let each one be fully convinced in his own mind.
There is a relatively new problem that medical professionals and medical authorities have been dealing with and this is finally being considered in the laws of the "superior authorities." (Romans 13:1-5)
(Romans 13:1-5) 1 Let every person be in subjection to the superior authorities, for there is no authority except by God; the existing authorities stand placed in their relative positions by God. 2 Therefore, whoever opposes the authority has taken a stand against the arrangement of God; those who have taken a stand against it will bring judgment against themselves. . . . 5 There is therefore compelling reason for you to be in subjection, not only on account of that wrath but also on account of your conscience.
The new problem is that there are now several Jehovah's Witnesses who have "surprised" the medical professionals and medical authorities by asking that they or their child be treated as an exception to the general rule for Jehovah's Witnesses. They will accept blood or otherwise "forbidden fractions" for themselves or children and make this a matter of conscience. These Witnesses make this decision in spite of the risk to their spirituality and/or the risk to their standing and acceptance in the congregation. This new problem has already been discussed in several respected medical journals. It's difficult to imagine the complication that this can cause for hospital professionals, even where the HLC has done its best to explain the Watch Tower's position. (The medical journals even discuss the legal implications of keeping the final decision of the parent or child from getting back to the HLC or other representative from the congregation.)
Even putting aside the Biblical aspect for the moment (i.e., consideration about prospects for eternal life), many JWs simply reject that there is ever a time when a blood transfusion offers the best chance of saving (i.e., extending) the life of the patient. There are supposed to always be alternatives, and even if not available, the risks of blood transfusion have been so magnified that many JWs often believe that the medical risk of accepting always overrides potentially life-saving medical benefits.
But the Society has admitted that blood transfusions (and other blood therapies that JWs do not accept) are often actually life-saving (from a medical viewpoint, not a spiritual viewpoint). 
To understand the complications, therefore, let's assume that there are times when the Society is right and the medical authorities are right, and that there really are times when a blood transfusion (or related therapy) is the best chance for saving the life of the patient. We are only considering those types of cases below.
Now consider the Law, for example and consider what should be the JW view toward the "superior authorities" in the following circumstances? How much effort should the HLC (or other consulted elders) put into convincing parents or child to conform to current "Watch Tower" policy in these situations?
What is listed below are 28 different situations with the following "variables:"
The person faced with the question is either:
6 or 16 years of age  (6/16) - the 6-year-old is only considered in these cases with JW parents. Baptized or Unbaptized (B/U)  - only applied to the 16 year old, where a 16 year old may be associating with Witnesses even though the parents are not JWs Parents are JW or not JW (PJW/NJW) - "mixed" marriage where only one spouse is JW is not included in any scenario. The child herself either wants to Accept, Reject or is Unconscious [and without directive] (A/R/U) The parent of the child either wants to agree with the child's decision or disagree (PA/PD) - note that if child is unconscious, then disagreement with a stated decision does not apply (although it is possible that a child carries a blood directive that JW parents reject at time of emergency) In other words, as an example, case #1 means that the child is 16, unbaptized, parents are JW, but the child wants to accept a blood transfusion, and the JW parents agree that she can choose to accept it. Case #28 is a 6-year-old unbaptized child with JW parents, where the child wants to reject a transfusion, but the parents disagree, and want her to accept it in this case.
16,U,PJW,A,PA  16,U,PJW,A,PD 16,B,PJW,A,PA 16,B,PJW,A,PD 16,U,PJW,R,PA 16,U,PJW,R,PD 16,B,PJW,R,PA 16,B,PJW,R,PD 16,U,PJW,U,PA 16,U,PJW,U,PD 16,B,PJW,U,PA 16,B,PJW,U,PD 16,U,NJW,A,PA 16,U,NJW,A,PD 16,B,NJW,A,PA 16,B,NJW,A,PD 16,U,NJW,R,PA 16,U,NJW,R,PD 16,B,NJW,R,PA 16,B,NJW,R,PD 16,U,NJW,U,PA 16,U,NJW,U,PD 16,B,NJW,U,PA 16,B,NJW,U,PD 6,U,PJW,A,PA 6,U,PJW,A,PD 6,U,PJW,R,PA 6,U,PJW,R,PD The complication of a child having one JW parent and one non-JW parent, is not considered at all here, and might be further complicated by the acceptance of gender roles, where, for example, a husband who is a non-JW demands that he be accepted as the "scriptural" spiritual head of the family. Also, even where the parent and child are in agreement, they may still be at odds with either the medical professionals or the HLC. The "law" of the superior authorities can also become a concern, and may also be a concern that the JW parent (or child) will see differently than the HLC based on their conscience. All these scenarios might be a clue as to why the Apostle Paul rejected the kind of Pharisaism that would try to account for all the various scenarios and merely left "legal" matters up to each individual conscience.