Anna

You are right in many respects and this is why it is good to get into the habit of reading around a particular scripture, (the whole chapter usually) especially with scriptures which are "popular" and used over and over again and "usually" applied one way, or the way we are used to. In my opinion this is what it means to be a deep Bible student.

You might want to show that this topic was re directed to here from this topic, so that people can follow on
"what does it mean with the April 2017 study edition of the wt? Are all who were/are baptized still bound to this vow"?

What letter do you see in the attached  photo? If you answer is an "A" well, you are right, but partially. Did you also observe the "B" close to the upper right corner? This aims to demonstrate the "evil" (side) effect of a spotlight: anything inside the focus obscures the surrounding area. And this is my question:
Have we, the JW put so much emphasis, for decades and decades, to the extended applications of some cherished, favorite verses till the point to obscure the more basic, beautiful and inspired meaning?
Only two examples:
(Proverbs 27:23) "You should know well the appearance of your flock…"
Ask any brother around the world about the meaning of this verse. "Easy: the spiritual shepherds should be familiar with the situation and problems of the brothers in the congregation." Right, this has been always the "spotlight" we've found reading our literature, hearing in the meetings and attending several schools. But this is an extended application. Not the real use for the writer of Proverbs. And this inspired meaning is, obviously more important than our "added" point.
Perhaps I'm wrong, but I've only read once in my life the exact meaning of the verse quoted:
 w91 8/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers *** What basic counsel is Proverbs 27:23 offering to spiritual shepherds as well as to Christians in general?
Follow part of the article: ======================================
"...The book of Proverbs contains many verses that stand alone as pithy statements of counsel, but Proverbs 27:23 is part of a group of verses: “You ought to know positively the appearance of your flock. Set your heart to your droves; for treasure will not be to time indefinite, nor a diadem for all generations. The green grass has departed, and the new grass has appeared, and the vegetation of the mountains has been gathered. The young rams are for your clothing, and the he-goats are the price of the field. And there is a sufficiency of goats’ milk for your food, for the food of your household, and the means of life for your girls.”—Proverbs 27:23-27.
This inspired passage extols having a life-style marked by diligence, industriousness, simplicity, and recognition of our dependence on Jehovah. It does this by highlighting the pastoral life of an Israelite shepherd, perhaps in contrast with a flamboyant life based on business deals and quick riches...."
"...Proverbs 27:26, 27 mentions one result of such labor—food and clothing. Granted, the description is not of fancy convenience foods or gourmet specialties, nor does it give a laborer reason to expect clothing in the latest designer style or the best material. But if he was willing to put forth effort, the shepherd and his family could obtain from the flock milk (and thus cheese), as well as wool for weaving sturdy garments.
So the advice: “You ought to know positively the appearance of your flock” is not primarily for spiritual overseers; it is for all Christians. It underscores the value of our being content with sustenance and covering obtained by steady, diligent work,"
====================================== End of the quote
Aren't these fine admonitions! I'm sad that this basic, genuine and inspired teaching remains blurred under the light power of the dozens of our "extended" applications.
And what now? Are we without verses to encourage to our shepherds in this regard? By no means! Perhaps Acts 20:28 "Pay attention...to all the flock?" between many others.
Any way, if we are tempted to continue with our indiscriminate custom, let's consider this wise advice:
*** w72 8/15 p. 499 Questions That Disturb You—What Should You Do? ***
Quote follows======================================
However, we should not be indiscriminate and careless in applying Bible texts, remembering, rather, that the contextual application is the primary and basic one. If it is possible to use the text in a secondary or broader application in principle, it can add force to our presentation to point out to our hearers the basic contextual sense and to make clear that we are using the text in its secondary application, applying it only in principle.
====================================== End of the quote
What do you think about my view? Ah, it remains another blatant example, but better for another post
My affection to everyone, and I apologize for my English, not my mother language.

Thanks. I have never heard about opposers promulgating this. I can't see how it would add anything or take away anything from our reputation. It's not something that we as Witnesses would promote as part of our history, but it shows why it's important to keep a legal distinction that defines membership. Several denominations handle baptism very similarly.
To help avoid too much off-topic discussion here, I've added a new question on this subject of Rutherford's influence:
 

Arrogance, self-righteousness also has adverse effects on others and sometimes more devastating. IT leaves othes with feeling worthlessness and pain for being rejected. 
  YEsterday we learnt that we should rather let ourselves be wronged- this is not just regarding money - it is about the way we live.   WE need to cultivate a self-sacrificing spirit like Jesus - who gave everything he had for us.  
When we comfort others we are comforted by the Holy Spirit... when we give we receive so much more back from others together with Jehovah's blessing.  I speak of experience.  I have given attention to those whom others avoid and have found that these people need kind attention to be healed - not avoidance.
Self-righteousness is at war not with the person within themselves but is at war with Jehovah's Spirit.  Job fell into the sin of self-righteousness. SAtan displayed  pride - that was his sin.  
YEs we can fight the war in ourselves- to keep ourselves pure from this world and resist eveything it offers- even resist negative attitudes displYed by others  in a kind way- not by being superior but by being humble and comforting to all... not judgmental but give  acceptance And love.
how can we say we love God if we cannot overcome the evil by means of the love for our neighbour?

Anna:
Sometimes some hide who they are, This happened to me, a respected and loved elder and pioneer was and hiding who he was to me and all. Be careful we know that Satan is trying to weaken us all and leave the worship of the true God Jehovah. His actions lead him to be DF and proved he was just hiding his bad conduct and no fears Jehovah sees those that are doing these things and hiding to others. Keep on the watch, many more will come in sheep's covering. Keep strong and focused and pray for protection from these type of predators. We are very close to the end, it will not be late! 

I do not agree with this statement offered above - it is words of a man.  I have not seen a statement in the bible which sAys that we should avoid those at war with themselves.  HOw does one define the outward symptoms of being at war with yourself? WE are all at war with the fleshly part of our existence as apposed to being perfectly in line with JehovAh and his spirit - as duly noted by one of the replies.  WE must be cAreful not to judge those who have emotional issues because the bible says we must deal tenderly with those who are experiencing distress.  I can imagine the stress a person must feel when they are at war with themselves - whatever the personAl baggage that has brought this about.  
Being deceitful,  indecisive about serving Jehovah whole-souled, being stupid (according to the bible this means that one acts outside the "knowledge of Jehovah"  and NOT the definition of being at war with yourself) now this is a different matter.  I do however  agree that we must be cAreful that  associations  do not influence us negatively. 
Be careful of self-righteousness - this  can cause even greater dAmage in a congregation. I knew a sister who was always avoiding people becAuse they were doing things that she deemed unworthy of association.  It caused tremendous uneasiness when people were Around her and she hurt many feelings- tHis is the otherr side of the coin.  
I did not write this to start a debate but merely do make my fellow worshipers think about their words And actions - imperfection and injustice can make us condemn where condemnation is not needed.  AN anointed sister once gave me the best advice EVER!  SHe said: when in doubt About what to do - show love.  WE can assist the weak and help strenghen those around us who are suffering and having issues.  WIth patience And love we can win And support them And help them adjust their attitude. LOve nevr fails! IT hopes all things. 
USually the elders will guide us to mark those who need adjustment. WE should not be going around indiscriminately marking people inside the congregation.   THose outside the congregation is of course are not our associates.
 

“People at war with themselves will always cause collateral damage in the lives of those around them.” ― John Mark Green
My favorite "poetic quote" from John Mark Green is this:
“One by one she slew her fears, and then planted a flower garden over their graves.”
― John Mark Green
But I can't find a good scripture text to go with it. There's always that passage about Jezebel and Naboth's vineyard....nah!

Or, from a different perspective . . . Be careful who you associate with. Those who are at war with themselves have a a better appreciation and empathy for those around them. (Less chance of collateral damage.)
(Romans 7:22-25) 22 I really delight in the law of God according to the man I am within, 23 but I see in my body another law warring against the law of my mind and leading me captive to sin’s law that is in my body. 24 Miserable man that I am! Who will rescue me from the body undergoing this death? 25 Thanks to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So, then, with my mind I myself am a slave to God’s law, but with my flesh to sin’s law.
(ESV) "But I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members."
 

Be careful who you            associate with...people 
at war with themselves 
will always cause collateral 
damage in the lives of 
those around them.....
4 "I do not associate 
with deceitful men,
And I avoid those who 
hide what they are."
        (Psalm 26:4)
          jw.org

I think that Anna is on the right track as to how Jehovah's Witnesses understand the first question to be the near equivalent of the supposed "formula" in Matthew 28:19. And therefore, the primary meaning of the second question is merely a re-iteration of the desire to be a dedicated Christian associated with the world-wide brotherhood of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Although, I agree that it is not a "formula," I wonder what makes all the speakers at baptism talks (and/or administrators of Witness baptisms) around the world think they need to treat the Watchtower's words as an exact formula, and repeat them exactly as they have been translated by the Watch Tower Society into their local language?
Witness, I agree with you that it's not just a coincidence that the the Father, Son, and holy spirit are mentioned in Matthew, and that Jehovah, Jesus and the spirit-directed organization are mentioned in the Watch Tower's version of a baptismal formula.
We have already discussed how the expression "spirit-directed organization" is not meant to be limited to the earthly, visible part Jehovah's universal organization. That's from an overall doctrinal perspective. But in this particular case, I would have to agree that the addition was evidently with the earthly part of the organization in mind. I say this because I had learned that the addition was done for legal purposes.
I don't mean that the overall purpose was legal instead of spiritual, but that the legal ability for the earthly organization to remove persons from its membership roles without fear of lawsuits or repercussions has become an important practical means to keep the earthly organization clean. (Eoin and others have already begin discussing this.)
The idea that Jehovah directs the earthly, visible organization (through his spirit) is often stated in the Watchtower as integral to the idea of our dedication. I won't deny that most Witnesses are thinking primarily and sometimes only about the Watchtower Society when they think of the words: "spirit-directed organization." The idea reaches back to well before the "FDS"/"GB." For many years they were so blatant, they were almost embarrassing. The old version of the "Kingdom Ministry" when it was called "Bulletin" and "Informant" would sometimes include statements like, Brother Rutherford has been appointed by the Lord, and not following instructions coming from him would be like disobeying the Lord.
I remember another one, but can't remember which issue where it said basically that if the Lord says that pioneers should make "x" hours per month, then that's what the Lord wants. (Ironic in that the hourly quotas change every few years.) In more recent times, the idea is more subtle, but ubiquitous, as the following types of examples can be multiplied hundreds of times over:
*** w06 7/1 p. 19 They Delight to Do God’s Will ***
Graduates Andrew and Anna said: “We dedicated our life to Jehovah. We made a promise to Jehovah to do anything he asks of us. It just so happens that Jehovah has asked us to go to Cameroon, Africa.”
*** w01 1/15 p. 9 “A Masterpiece of a Project” ***
“The ‘Photo-Drama’ was a masterpiece of a project, when we consider the small number of Bible Students and the proportionately small amount of finances available. It really had Jehovah’s spirit behind it!”
*** w00 10/1 p. 29 Blessed With a Special Heritage ***
The two months we spent in Patterson as Paul received training was the highlight of our life so far. Observing Jehovah’s earthly organization up close reaffirmed a conviction passed on to me as part of my precious spiritual heritage: This is indeed God’s organization. [Italics in original 10/1/2000 Watchtower]
The legal reason was similar to the reason that the name "Jehovah's witnesses" was changed to "Jehovah's Witnesses" in the early 1970's. The first version without a capital "w" was purposely ambiguous, but that ambiguity could be taken advantage of in international copyright or intentional or misleading identification with those of similar names. The "Bible students" under Russell had similar problems with the various "Bible student" associations. "Allen Smith" has pointed out examples, in some of his posts. The split-offs of both Russell-styled Bible Students and Rutherford-styled Bible Students (and even Jehovah's Witnesses in a few cases) have been springing up for years. There has been a long-standing problem with dozens of such splinter groups and self-styled prophets in Africa, for example, that make use of the Watchtower publications as a foundation. Rutherford's doctrines have even been traced as a factor in the growth of the Black Muslim [Nation of Islam] movement in the United States.
The "apostasy of 1980-1983" became a catalyst to finally adding the reference to a specific organization into the "formula." When I was baptized, this was not included, and the Watchtower had even explained why it should not be included.
 

Perhaps he will continue jogging.
It's hard to fight a megaphone. But sometimes it works against them. People say 'why is he making trouble for the Jehovah's? They're nice people.'

Well, his shirt is accurate. (1 Timothy 4:8)  For bodily training is beneficial for a little; but godly devotion is beneficial for all things, as it holds promise of the life now and that which is to come. Jogging is beneficial, but even that can only prolong life for so long. Godly devotion last forever and can preserve your life forever. 

It could be, if you believe there is no basis for a positive future.

Of course it applies to child molesters
If you are going to make these statements then please back them up with evidence. How do you know known molesters are being treated the same way as they were before they were found out? How do you know nothing is done?
Indeed. If there is no proof of murder, drunkenness or fornication then not even the Law can do anything about it. The congregation leaves it in Jehovah's hands until there is evidence. You now the saying, "innocent until proven guilty".
How is that policing???

Of course it applies to child molesters
If you are going to make these statements then please back them up with evidence. How do you know known molesters are being treated the same way as they were before they were found out? How do you know nothing is done?
Indeed. If there is no proof of murder, drunkenness or fornication then not even the Law can do anything about it. The congregation leaves it in Jehovah's hands until there is evidence. You now the saying, "innocent until proven guilty".
How is that policing???

The article is looking at it from different angle to what you assume. What it is saying is that a person cannot go back on their baptism using it as an excuse that they didn't know what they were doing, therefor their baptism didn't count. There must have been cases where a baptized Witness has claimed their baptism wasn't valid in order to avoid being disfellowshipped. So what the article is saying, that if you have once made a dedication and got baptized  and now have "tired of serving Jehovah or of living a Christian way of life" and want to go and fornicate etc. you will be disfellowshipped. What it boils down to is that someone who is known in the community as being one of Jehovah's Witnesses, and is also known to be fornicating, can no longer be called one of Jehovah's Witnesses, they are held accountable not only before Jehovah but before the congregation also. However, there exist situations where a Witness has faded and stopped associating with the congregation, and is no longer known as one of Jehovah's Witnesses in the community. Neither the elder nor members of the congregation go around policing those who no longer associate and so it is very unlikely that it will discover that this person is now living an immoral life and is celebrating all the holidays. In such a situation, they will no longer be held accountable before the congregation, but of course they will remain accountable to Jehovah (Romans 13:10 -12) Living an immoral life etc. does not undo what has already been done i.e. dedication and baptism. 
As for child baptism, Eoin has addressed that.

No one should get baptized and be ignorant of what they are doing, what with the 100 or so questions, and the elders going through the questions making sure the person has a clear understanding of what they are committing to.
I suppose if someone wanted to go back on their dedication, and no longer wanting to be identified as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, it wouldn't be because of ignorance, but rather because the person changed their mind and no longer believes what they believed when they got baptized....even if they were a child.

True. And you may be on to something!
I remember this WT study very well, including this particular paragraph and the sentence I underscored. It was the first time that something written in the WT really bothered me. I just had this weird feeling about it, that it just didn't sound right. In my mind I asked myself how was that meant, "communicating divine truths" ? And why would the resurrected ones communicate only some divine truths, and leave others out? This whole idea made it sound like the GB were getting some kind of visions, or ideas put in their heads (by the other members of the GB who had died). This did not sound right at all since the only helper Jesus said his father would give us was the holy spirit. And we can all be the beneficiaries of that, not just the GB. And we don't get visions or dreams so why would the GB get exclusive treatment when still on earth? The only time they differ from "us" is that they have "been called to heaven", I am not aware of any scripture which indicates that the GB would "receive divine truths" by some communication from heaven. In fact they have to work hard at discerning Bible truths, as they themselves have indicated.  This whole communication idea just sounded off and out of sinc with everything else. And in any case, I do not understand why there is any relevance placed on when the first resurrection began. I am thinking, who cares? How does this affect anything else? Jehovah knows when he resurrects, why do we need to know?
It will be interesting to see if we are given a new understanding of the identity of the 24 elders. If they are no longer seen as the 144'000, then perhaps Rev 7:13-14 will remove the need to think that the anointed in heaven are communicating with those still on earth.
Thankfully our reasoning on many matters such as the ones you mention has become so much more reasonable. But I agree, it definitely looks like there might be some change in the pipeline and this WT study might be a kind of " trial balloon" .
I am not sure I think this has some kind of significance. I understand this to mean simply that we shouldn't idolize them as if they were angels, because they are not.

Hmmmm....perhaps this is why the older generation views the GB/Slave as having some special direct communication with God, tantamount to inspiration. My Mother in law said as much. I didn't want to argue with her, after all, she is 86. There just isn't any point. And this is why perhaps in recent years, especially very recently via the WT articles we have been discussing, the GB are trying to correct that concept....
P.S. To be honest, I too held this view similar to my mother in law 20 years or so ago.

My thoughts too

"It will be interesting to see if we are given a new understanding of the identity of the 24 elders. If they are no longer seen as the 144'000, then perhaps Rev 7:13-14 will remove the need to think that the anointed in heaven are communicating with those still on earth. "  Great point, Anna
Very interesting discussion so far, JWI. I appreciate the time and research you put into bringing these points to our attention.
 However, I am not usually bothered by these things. These are the points that I read and I sometimes forget them, because if something does not add up or is not convincing enough I know no one will or can force me to believe it. So it just does not stick.  God is in charge and he will use the holy spirit to teach us what is necessary.
Agape to you all.
 

True. And you may be on to something!
I remember this WT study very well, including this particular paragraph and the sentence I underscored. It was the first time that something written in the WT really bothered me. I just had this weird feeling about it, that it just didn't sound right. In my mind I asked myself how was that meant, "communicating divine truths" ? And why would the resurrected ones communicate only some divine truths, and leave others out? This whole idea made it sound like the GB were getting some kind of visions, or ideas put in their heads (by the other members of the GB who had died). This did not sound right at all since the only helper Jesus said his father would give us was the holy spirit. And we can all be the beneficiaries of that, not just the GB. And we don't get visions or dreams so why would the GB get exclusive treatment when still on earth? The only time they differ from "us" is that they have "been called to heaven", I am not aware of any scripture which indicates that the GB would "receive divine truths" by some communication from heaven. In fact they have to work hard at discerning Bible truths, as they themselves have indicated.  This whole communication idea just sounded off and out of sinc with everything else. And in any case, I do not understand why there is any relevance placed on when the first resurrection began. I am thinking, who cares? How does this affect anything else? Jehovah knows when he resurrects, why do we need to know?
It will be interesting to see if we are given a new understanding of the identity of the 24 elders. If they are no longer seen as the 144'000, then perhaps Rev 7:13-14 will remove the need to think that the anointed in heaven are communicating with those still on earth.
Thankfully our reasoning on many matters such as the ones you mention has become so much more reasonable. But I agree, it definitely looks like there might be some change in the pipeline and this WT study might be a kind of " trial balloon" .
I am not sure I think this has some kind of significance. I understand this to mean simply that we shouldn't idolize them as if they were angels, because they are not.

This is actually another point to reconsider. Looking back, the Watchtower might appear to be consistent because we can find several of these reminders in the WT going back to Bible Student days. But there is actually a fairly consistent pattern that highlights how inconsistent these reminders have been. The pattern goes like this:
STEP 1: Early on, when the chronology doctrine is first presented, it's rather tentative, and might have some reminders about not speculating and the need for caution. STEP 2: Then as the doctrine has been out there a few years and gets brought up a few more times, it tends to become more sure, and almost gets set in stone. STEP 3: As the time period approaches more closely and it seems unlikely that all the expectations surrounding the time period could really come true in time, then we see cautious statements again, and either just before or just after the failure has past, we sometimes get outright denials that any of the things said in STEP 2, were actually said.  When we are defending our past chronology doctrines, and non-prophet status, we will point to the statements from STEP 1 and STEP 3.
Ex-JWs and "opposers" are more likely to only quote from STEP 2. This is the time period when the dates start becoming, as Russell said, "God's dates, not ours." And we see statements about how nothing can be moved by even one year without throwing off the entire plan. Or we see claims that some of these "pyramid inches" have been measured to within a fraction of an inch. Or that 1925 is even more well established than 1914. And this is of course when the period surrounding 1975 becomes more of a probability than a possibility. 1975 becomes, in effect, an "appropriate time for God to act." If we bring up the fact that Jesus said no one knows the day or the hour, we might get a snarky response that "now is not the time to be toying with Jesus' words." Etc., etc., etc.

I cannot read what his shirt says, but like so many opposes they are quick to criticize us, yet have nothing uplifting or meaningful to offer as an alternative. He shows by his use of a megaphone that he is not interested in what anybody else has to say, but is only interested in making sure that he is heard.