Evacuated

And a lack of razors!

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. 

Korean actually?

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

??? I think I said that Jehovah is happy with the overall progress of His purpose and that will always govern in what He chooses to intervene. In other words, as He always has the successful outcome of His purpose in view, He is always happy with what He allows. Of course the negative aspects and consequences of human behaviour do not make Him happy (compare Ps.119:136). Surely you know that???
He will indeed intervene in the affairs of all mankind soon. The outcome of that intervention will make him happier still, although there are some who feel otherwise.

A good man brings good out of the good treasure of his heart; for out of the heart's abundance the mouth speaks, but if it produces thorns and thistles, it is rejected and is near to being cursed, and in the end it will be burned.

We do not know what they understood. I suspect their understanding based at best on Dan.9:26 was limited at the time until it actually came to an end. Later after Pentecost some may have had more insight. It does not seem to have been that important to them as an actual time span. Just its certainty and imminence.
Nobody will know what the generation actually really is now until the fat lady sings this time round. Whatever it is, we will know soon enough. Convoluted arguments on pet theories are a waste of time. I don't care when the end actually is. I am just glad it is coming. 

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. 

No, unfortunately I have no musical talent, ESPECIALLY with banjos.

I suppose there is no need to, unless this understanding of ours became so important to us that we couldn't keep ourselves from acting.
Which brings me to this quote of yours:
I would think that it's an important thing, that direction never truly conflicts with God.  I agree with you about absolute truth, something is either black or white, however, what about this: (one of JTR's favorite images)

 
Perspective has a profound effect in how we see things. When there is a change, I prefer to see it as an "update" brought on by new perspective. I am sure you will agree there is nothing wrong with updates? After all, without "updates" we would still be using a cell phone the size of a brick.
So in summary, I think the most important thing is not the "change" but making sure the "change" is not in conflict with any core principles and "truths" (the cylinder) about God.
 

Baptisms?
 

How can you disagree with "soon"?

We do not know what they understood. I suspect their understanding based at best on Dan.9:26 was limited at the time until it actually came to an end. Later after Pentecost some may have had more insight. It does not seem to have been that important to them as an actual time span. Just its certainty and imminence.
Nobody will know what the generation actually really is now until the fat lady sings this time round. Whatever it is, we will know soon enough. Convoluted arguments on pet theories are a waste of time. I don't care when the end actually is. I am just glad it is coming. 

I understand the point you are making ... and it is a good extrapolation ... except a "soul" is someone ( OR SOME LIVING CREATURE ...) who breathes atmospheric oxygen mix.   The reason we do NOT have to bleed fish (often caught in nets by the thousands ...) is that they ARE not souls. They do not live and breathe air.
I eat clam chowder at least four times a week.
How would you bleed a clam?
They are CHANGED in the twinkling of an eye ... to another life form ... not extracted.
Uh... people, not clams.
 
 

Souls... not physical bodies will be taken up.
 

Likely due to weakness of comprehension and appreciation.
"1914", "generation", "Armageddon" carry little in the way of controversy these days, but the importance or not of the Governing Body is obviously a bone of contention with many.
I mean, "1914" has come and gone; the "generation" is as long as it is; "Armageddon"? well, it will come when it comes. What I or any one else believes makes no difference to these as realities. But the Governing Body? Well my life depends on recognising who they are and working along with what they are doing and who they represent so I am happy to have reference to them frequently and a clear understanding of their role. I don't feel inclined to bite the hand that feeds me. Apart from that, I have yet to see a viable alternative.

Likely due to weakness of comprehension and appreciation.
"1914", "generation", "Armageddon" carry little in the way of controversy these days, but the importance or not of the Governing Body is obviously a bone of contention with many.
I mean, "1914" has come and gone; the "generation" is as long as it is; "Armageddon"? well, it will come when it comes. What I or any one else believes makes no difference to these as realities. But the Governing Body? Well my life depends on recognising who they are and working along with what they are doing and who they represent so I am happy to have reference to them frequently and a clear understanding of their role. I don't feel inclined to bite the hand that feeds me. Apart from that, I have yet to see a viable alternative.

"Play with fire get burned" principle unfortunately. Elders SHOULD have looked for extenuating circumstances and presumably found none. Why would anyone in  their right mind go in  to a house, unchaperoned with a romantically involved partner, and in danger of falling asleep? They must have presented very badly to the elders involved.
 
Denied what? What they hadn't done? Their attitude is what got them disfellowshipped most likely.

What Witness of Jehovah could not think of their brothers in Russia when reviewing Philippians, this week’s Bible reading? 
The imprisoned Paul writes: “Now I want you to know, brothers, that my situation has actually turned out for the advancement of the good news,  so that my prison bonds for the sake of Christ have become public knowledge among all the Praetorian Guard and all the rest.  Now most of the brothers in the Lord have gained confidence because of my prison bonds, and they are showing all the more courage to speak the word of God fearlessly.” (Philippians 1:12-14)
It is the case with Witnesses in Russia, isn’t it? They are holding up pretty well, by all reports—it can be seen in the public support they give to ones punished by the state for their worship of God. As in the first century, “most of the brothers in the Lord have gained confidence,” trial-some though their circumstances are. We are proud of them, and even wonder whether we would do so well ourselves. ‘Don’t think that you can do it on your own strength,’ comes the answer, ‘and you will do fine.’
The anti-cultist mastermind, Alexander Dvorkin, did not foresee it happening this way. Just after the ban went into effect in April 2017, he was “absolutely convinced that after a few years, the number of members of the organization will decrease dramatically, two or three times, because, when one cuts off its financial foundation, its ability to freely, without hindrance, recruit other people, to rent large halls and so on, then, in fact, people will lose interest and will very quickly disperse.” Now, two years is not “just a few years,” but it is not so far apart. He did not say “generations.” He expected his results rather quickly, and it is not turning out that way at all.
One is reminded of Satan’s taunt: “Is it for nothing that Job has feared God?  Have you not put up a protective hedge around him and his house and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his livestock has spread out in the land. But, for a change, stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your very face.” (Job 1:9-11) It isn’t working out that way. Our brothers in Russia are doing us proud.
Human rights advocates widely predicted that this would happen—it is not a circumstance solely of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but of people in general who are concerned with spiritual things. Similar fortitude is shown in other faiths as well. It is Dvorkin who, fleshly man that he is, totally misjudges the power of spiritual things to motivate. “But a physical man does not accept the things of the spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot get to know them, because they are examined spiritually,” says the apostle again at 1 Corinthians 1:14.
He drinks too much of his own Kool-Aid, and thus, when things fail to turn out as he anticipated, it is due to his own self-deluded assumptions. Dvorkin is playing the role outlaws of religion have played from before he was born, using state apparatus to squash enemies, and doing so under a guise of People’s Protector. His premise is wrong: that individual Witnesses are being “manipulated” by an evil corporate outside class. Instead, the ‘outside’ class IS them, merely in the organized form that members know is necessary to best implement the faith that they have chosen. They are not like the munchkins of his imagination, delighted that the wicked witch is destroyed. They recognize his attack as the attack on Christianity that it is.
We see this all the time—enemies impose their own standards on spiritual things, and then draw wrong conclusions when things do not turn out as they have anticipated. It is seen when they make the self-determination that religious things cannot change, as secular and scientific things do, and that should Witnesses see that some teachings have “flip-flopped,” they will be outraged at having been “misled.” How can people be so nuts? They change all the time—it is called “tacking” and the “ever brightening light”—completely above board and nobody has ever said otherwise. 
Still, the changes that are made are analogous to details, roughly akin to looking at the map anew and rereading it. It happens all the time with science. Somehow, physical people have decreed that it cannot happen with spiritual things. Of course it can. It is their own presumption of everything religious being autocratic, ironclad, and unyielding, that stymies them. It may not be so fluid—‘the each his own!—as the world they have chosen, but it is far from inflexible.  Moveover, the essential building blocks of the faith—defusing the ‘immortality’ of the soul, establishing the non-Trinitarian nature of God, the reason as to why he allows suffering and evil, along with the Name that he says he wants sanctified—these things have been firmly in place for over a century.
The Russian brothers are doing very well, thank you very much—“in no way being frightened by [their] opponents. This very thing is a proof of destruction for them, but of salvation for you; and this is from God.” (Philippians 1:28)
“Surely the people are but green grass. The green grass dries up, The blossom withers, But the word of our God endures forever.” (Isaiah 40:8) So. Dvorkin thinks he will kill off the green grass, like a dog peeing on it? Time will tell. So far his dream is not coming true.

photo: persecution 2, by dr zoidberg 

Fascinating stuff. These are the issues behind the scenes that most of us know nothing about. Any chance of a more comprehensive review?

I thought you were talking about me raising the topic of the nature of God's happiness. Not the actual topic "How are we to understand the GB/Slave interpreting scripture, as the sole channel, and at the same time accept that they can err?