Evacuated

Up to the individual. Neither required nor paticularly appropriate. We can all speak in our hearts and be heard .

All under your "inspired" topics and threads.

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

Nice try, and excellent selection of quotations. But, there is no point in Jesus mentioning the men of the nations and the tax collectors treatment as a consequence for wrongdoing if there was no significant difference in the way his followers were to treat unrepentant wrong doers. Your multiple selection of quotes are in connection with those who were acting as those who knew not what they were doing. This is not the case with the subjects of Jesus' Matthew 18 direction. Proposing the notion that other Bible writers contradicted Jesus' direction on this matter is based on the false premise that their direction was not inspired by the same inspirator of Jesus.

Isn't the scripture clear? They would banish, treat as tax collector, avoid, hand to Satan, stop keeping company, not even eating with, remove, neither greet nor receive into their homes or say a greeting to. Do you need more? Ezra 10:8."he would be banished from the congregation of the exiled people." (For comparison). Matthew 18:17 "let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector" Rom.16:17 "keep your eye on those who create divisions and causes for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid them." 1Cor.5:5 "hand such a man over to Satan" 1Cor.5:9, 11 "stop keeping company", "not even eating with such a man." 1Cor.5:13 "Remove the wicked person from among yourselves.”" 1Tim.1:18 "Hy·me·naeʹus and Alexander are among these, and I have handed them over to Satan so that they may be taught by discipline not to blaspheme." As stated above: 2John v11 So work it out and apply it, if you are a Christian that is. It doesn't have any application to those who are not. Oh, and remember though, there is a purpose in it as alluded to by Jesus at Matt.18:11 "If he listens to you, you have gained your brother", and directed by Paul at 2Cor.5:6-7 "This rebuke given by the majority is sufficient for such a man; now you should instead kindly forgive and comfort him". You should be able to work an application process from this.

I don’t think that’s true " For she keeps saying in her heart: 'I sit as a queen and am no widow, and I will never see mourning' " Rev. 18:7 "The U.S.-headquartered Jehovah’s Witnesses have been under pressure for years in Russia, where the dominant Orthodox Church is championed by President Vladimir Putin. Orthodox scholars have cast them as a dangerous foreign sect that erodes state institutions and traditional values, allegations they reject." Reuters The activity of Alexander Dvorkin is well documented. In 1993, with the blessing of Patriarch Alexy II, he established a Russian anti-cult organization currently called Association of Centres for the Study of Religions and Sects (RATsIRS). From that time on he has been extremely active in opposing cults and new religious movements through his publications. (Wikipedia) Finally, in making an appearance at the 1999 trial hearings, which aimed at eliminating the Moscow community of Jehovah's Witnesses, this Alexander Dvorkin recounted stories about a Jehovah's Witness known to him personally, who allegedly dreamed of taking a machine gun to kill everyone who disagreed with him. However, Dvorkin was unable to answer a single specific question about the activities of Jehovah's Witnesses. Anyone who underestimates the guile, malice, and influence of the "man of lawlessness", despite its spectacular fall from grace in the eyes of many who were formerly dominated by it's intrigues is, sadly, under it's spell. 2Thess.2:9-11

I see your point Tom, but I incline more to the view that the modern day "atheist class" is more a result of the activity of the same old "man of lawlessness" that appeared over the 1st-3rd centuries. This class is just an inevitable expression of the "lovers of self" characteristic, spawned by the modern day reaction to apostate religion, particularly (but not exclusively) in Christendom. I wouldn't honour it with the status even of "man of lawlessness". The application of the term "man of lawlessness" to Christendom's clergy, as you have described that we make, is quite sufficient for me. Jesus warned of the weeds sown in with the wheat in secret, and a subsequent revelation of their activity and presence in the last days. Matt.13:36-43. Also Paul and Peter warned about their springing from within the congregation, from among those entrusted with the care of the flock. Acts 20:29-30; 2Pet.2:1-3. Paul's reference to a restraint that would get "out of the way", (2Thess.2:7), fits well with the notion of the passing in death of the original apostles.The state of affairs during the time of the last remaining one, John substantiates this development both in the Revelation report by the head of the congregation (Rev. Chap.2-3), and in his letter (1John 2:18-19). The current pusilanimous state of the clergy of Christendom in many (not all) parts of the world is no indicator of the need for an emergence of a "new" man of lawlessness. The effects on society of the degraded belief system, practices, and results on laity of the apostate parasitic fungus known as "Christendom's clergy class" are well described by Paul at 2Tim 3:1-7 as a sign of the "last days". This is clear both historically and currently to all who care and, albeit without spiritual significance, equally to those who do not. The power of the clergy is broken, the" man of lawlessness" has been revealed, and much to "his" chagrin, it is true Christians, now known as Jehovah's Witnesses, that have been instrumental in setting in motion this exposure and subsequent withering of power, particularly since 1914CE. (Comp. 2Thess.2:8). But we cannot overlook the fact that the now defunct and exposed clergy class still rears its ugly sting to inflict vindictive damage on true servants of God if possible (See the Russian affair). The foul scorpion has been trampled, but is not yet dead! The chorus of wailing accompanying your suggestions on this forum reminds me of the "goat songs" of ancient Greece, and I suppose are a rather fitting accompaniment to the inevitable demise of this apostate, self-promotIng demigod of Christendom's clergy in the tradition of the culture "he" so greatly admired. As for the "temple" reference in v4, this fits well with the application to a false Christian congregation in view of the illustration of the true anointed Christian congregation as a "temple" Eph.2:20-22. Rather like the Pharisees and scribes who sat themselves in the "seat of Moses"(Matt.23:2), the apostate clergy of Christendom are a counterfeit light to the world. In my opinion, of course.

This is a statement implying uncertainty in the accuracy of what follows. This is no way to present the accusatory remarks that you make. It shows that at best they are only your opinion and that you yourself have doubt in their validity. How different from the example we have been set.

True. Tell me, how do you "gird up your loins?" Job 40:7. Eph.6:14 Enlightening, So, although you sound like a myriad of others, you see yourself as an individual. You are doing yourself an injustice then in the way you communicate. It might help if every time you use the word "they" in a negative sense, you preface with the words "I think that". Then your rather parochial 50 year span of experience might at least reflect a semblance of the individuality you crave. This in turn might help some to avoid the misjudgement you refer to above.

By the way, Lloyd Evans figures highly in the representation with this group. Some here may have more than a passing acquaintance with this individual.

WT has been pretty clear on the requirement to comply with reporting regulations in these matters for a number of years. (1988 is the earliest reference I could find, relating to the situation in Canada). Where there is legal clarity, the obligation is clearly ststed. Where there is legal inconsistency, the branch office will direct. Individual elders confuse matters by not following direction, the whole matter is complicated further by allegations made by victims regarding mishandling. Reporting is still not generally mandatory in Britain although the JW policy stipulates that victims and their families are clearly informed of their right to unrestricted reporting. The whole matter is surrounded by fear which impedes proper care of the victims. The IICSA had it's preliminary hearing on child protection in religious organisations including Jehovah's Witnesses yesterday (23/07/2019). An organisation called Ex-JW Advocates Opposing Crimes Against Children is represented there with Jehovah's Witnesses's representatives providing a response. Hopefully, further legal clarity will ensue. https://www.iicsa.org.uk/key-documents/12997/view/preliminary-hearing-transcript-23-july-2019-.pdf

@Jack Ryan said:How do you feel about being told that you MUST wear your badge even when out to dinner at night with your family after a convention? Never happened yet. But if it did, I would take it off.

Glurp! And I thought the British were "conservative"! (In their views).

SOME congregations. We don't have a beard restriction. Neat, tidy, well-groomed, free of food debris, vermin etc. is important, but having one is personal.

And a lack of razors!

More drivel! She is probably not a "Friday morning person" and was still a little bleary. Have you shown her 1Cor.3:19 yet?

They will lose the lot fairly soon.

Korean actually?

https://www.rainn.org/news/how-does-your-state-define-consent https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent

There seems to be myth being addressed in this discussion hence the erroneous and void conclusions. Fact: Rape by definition takes place when force or the threat of force is used to gain sexual penetration, of any kind whatsoever, against a person's will. It is the rapist's use of force against an unwilling victim that makes him a rapist. Thus, a rape victim is not guilty of fornication. Like an incest victim, they may be forced to submit to an act they doesn't want because of the perceived power held over them by another person. In some cases this coercion could be very subtle, but nevertheless, coercion it is. When a person is forced to submit to a rapist out of terror or disorientation, it does not mean that they consent to the act. Consent is based on choice without threat and is active, not passive.

To what end? And if the donkey doesn't see the carrot..................? Or maybe less facetiously, are you saying this is an illustration to placate "end of this system" oriented Christians to keep plodding on? How many of them do you think there are?

Then this reading is superficial, the question is preposterous.

Do you think Timothy was part of that "generation"? Or Eutychus?

Perhaps it is. I appreciate the references but I have a more than sneaky feeling that we just do not know what the mechanics of this transference of life really entail. I have no problem at all in accepting the fact that these things have occurred or will occur, but the attempted explanations of how I find inadequate. There are a number of instances. Enoch's transference so as not to "see death". The materialisation of fully fleshly human bodies by spirit creatures The restoration of life to a corpse The transfer of Jesus from heaven to earth, from spirit to human form The resurrection of Jesus from human death to spirit life The 3rd heaven experience of Paul The resurrection of humans from human death to spirit life in the heavens The instantaneous transference of humans from human life on earth to spirit life in heaven The resurrection of humans from death to human life on earth across the passage of time The releasing of Satan from the abyss. "Above my pay grade" is the best I can do with these matters up to now. And I am happy with that.

How can you disagree with "soon"?