Jehovah's Witnesses or Jehovah's witnesses?

[The Librarian]

Part of a series on:

We didn't capitalize the "w" until the 1970's except in a title or a quotation from someone who didn't know the "rule."

At the Bethel Library when it was at 124 Columbia Heights (before it moved to 25 and then Patterson) there was about 20 feet of shelf space dedicated to Jw court cases, and even on the outside cover you would see titles like "Supreme Court Cases of Jehovah's witnesses" and the outer spine of the cover would have it abbreviated as "Jw's" or "J.w.'s."

Although my day-to-day assignment at Bethel was to do artwork, I sometimes 
helped out the proofreaders and it turned out that the year I came to Bethel was the same year we made the change from J.w.'s to J.W.'s. Some of the writers weren't used to it yet, and there were also translation issues. There was a legal reason behind the change, too.

If you check the Watchtower Library CD, you'll see that the change happened between the printing of the March 15 and April 1 issues of The Watchtower in 1976. (And between the March 8 and the March 22, 1976 Awake!) The lower case "w" rarely shows up any more unless a new publication is directly quoting an older publication in a place that has it, and even then we will sometimes go ahead and capitalize it in the quotation.

For those who find such trivia interesting, here is a reference from that time period. Note the only exception to the rule in the following 6 examples:

*** g76 3/8 pp. 21-22 A Conspiracy Thwarted in “the Land Down Under” ***
He had written on behalf of the Methodist people of his district, who had . . . supported a Tasmanian government request . . . that Jehovah’s witnesses be declared illegal. . . . Another Australian clergyman, objecting to the zealous public preaching of Jehovah’s witnesses, wrote to Mr. W. M. Hughes, then Attorney-General of Australia: “The sect calling themselves Jehovah’s Witnesses are a distinctly disloyal lot of people and in my estimation ought to be declared as such.”
These letters from clergymen did not contain any evidence of subversive or illegal acts on the part of Jehovah’s witnesses. . . ."
The Commonwealth Archives show that the Attorney-General had been pressured also by the Catholic clergy to suppress freedom of religion enjoyed by Jehovah’s witnesses. However, in a direct reply to the then Catholic archbishop of Sydney, N. T. Gilroy (later elevated to be a cardinal), the Attorney-General confirmed that the government had no legal grounds to restrain the Christian activity of Jehovah’s witnesses.

*** end of quote ***

via @JW Insider Link

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

There is another legal reason .... Jehovah's witnesses can be from any religion or walk of life, and can obey the dictates of their own consciences and can come from any age or epoch in the past.

Abraham was one of Jehovah's witnesses , as were many others, named and un-named, known and unknown over the centuries.

I can just visualize in my mind in the New System, when Abraham is resurrected, and he is looking through books about what has happened since he died, .... and stumbles across a David Splane Chart about the "Overlapping Generations".

As one of Jehovah's witnesses, the GB could not legally disfellowship Abraham for heresy, and apostasy against the teachings of the Governing Body of today.

..... As one of Jehovah's Witnesses ....

.... they could.

Presuming of course they survived Armageddon, not being judged for doing such things now.

On 2/8/2018 at 4:04 PM, The Librarian said:

The Commonwealth Archives show that the Attorney-General had been pressured also by the Catholic clergy to suppress freedom of religion enjoyed by Jehovah’s witnesses. However, in a direct reply to the then Catholic archbishop of Sydney, N. T. Gilroy (later elevated to be a cardinal), the Attorney-General confirmed that the government had no legal grounds to restrain the Christian activity of Jehovah’s witnesses.

 

We treat each other, by virtue of legalese, worse than the Russian Federation is doing.

We are our own worst enemy.

 

[Evacuated]

13 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

As one of Jehovah's Witnesses

There won't be any of Jehovah's Witnesses after Armageddon. only Jehovah's witnesses, presumably

And as for Abraham and David Splane's chart, I am sure he will be as interested in this as all of us are in Jacob's selective breeding theories. Gen.30:37-43.