JaniceM

Hi Holly, I think probably the last information regarding 1919 is the same, although I'm not good at keeping up with what happened when. Insider, might be a better person to research that particular aspect if he has time. Right off hand, I did locate perhaps that latest on that topic below: *** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 12 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! *** 12 At this point, it may be helpful to consider what might be viewed as a Bible parallel. Jesus Christ was anointed as the future King of God’s Kingdom in the fall of 29 C.E. Three and a half years later, in the spring of 33 C.E., he was resurrected as a mighty spirit person. Could it, then, be reasoned that since Jesus was enthroned in the fall of 1914, the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility. Although this cannot be directly confirmed in the Bible, it is not out of harmony with other scriptures that indicate that the first resurrection got under way soon after Christ’s presence began. Do you have the exact quote for what you mentioned: "The WTS says this has been taking place ever since as each spirit-anointed JW dies faithful to the teachings of the WTS. In heaven Jehovah then creates a spirit body to house what he remembers about their character and personality. ." It would be sufficient for me to say the scriptures state persons resurrected to the heavens will be given a spiritual and/or incorruptible body. I assume they they would more than likely have the same new personality they acquired once they dedicated themselves to following in Christ footsteps.

I personally would not be an expert in the subject or the exact year in time, but Jehovah Witnesses believe that after Jesus was enthroned in the kingdom, the beginning of those that would rule with Christ were resurrected. Those resurrected throughout the centuries would have begun with the apostles and many of the early disciples. If any remain on earth at the time of Christ's arrival, my understanding is that they would have to die or be baptized into the death of Christ and then instantly resurrected to join Christ and the angels in the war of Armageddon.

After thought . . . What if Jonah thought he would be labeled a false prophet if the city was not destroyed and he had prophesied so long that it would? Wanting to save face, he became haughty and arrogant failing to show humility or humbleness.

Haughtiness? . . . I'm not sure. Maybe, a bad attempt at saving face? It could be that you're right. A resume might involve some puffing up in details or credentials. There's nothing wrong with having confidence or pride in your work record or abilities, except if your history and abilities become overstated or based on fallacy. Oh, and I didn't really mean dates and times literally. (smile) You mentioned earlier the prophets surrounding King Ahab were guilty of false prophecy except Micaiah. However, if I remember correctly, the prophet Micaiah also uttered a falsehood as God's representative. I hate to say lied but it was most definitely false testimony, or what most would call a bold-face lie! " . . . At once he replied: “Go up and you will be successful; Jehovah will give it into the king’s hand.” (1 Kings 22:15) King Ahab knew he was lying and called him on it: "At that the king said to him: “How many times must I put you under oath not to speak to me anything but the truth in the name of Jehovah?” (1 Kings 22:15) Only then did Micaiah cough up the truth adding a somewhat elusive dream about seeing Jehovah on his throne questioning which angel wanted to fool the prophets. What if the King did not question Micaiah any further and just accepted what he wanted to hear as from the other prophets? Was Micaiah afraid to tell him the truth? If so, he had a right to be afraid. As a consequence, he ended up being struck and in chains. What about Adam when God asked him if he had eaten of the fruit. There is no admission of guilt, and he dodged answering directly by giving God the glorious credit of giving him a woman to feed him. (lol) I can certainly see where it is can be difficult at best to admit when we have made mistakes, said or done wrong, whether out of fear or consequence. I am though beginning to see how ego, haughtiness and arrogance might be applied if insisting that others must agree with revelations of God's appointed faithful and discreet slave even though such preconceived notions can be erroneous and not a basis or necessary for salvation. Therein lies the problem which can cause others to be labeled apostates if they don't agree. How have we come to see so clearly the falseness of others, without recognizing the rafters obstructing our vision? It does take much humility to admit being wrong.

Those are loaded questions! I find it quite fascinating reading the scriptures and our attempts to put the pieces of the puzzle together. However, try as we might, these things can be difficult to figure out as we can see from all the different dates and times. The slogan can't possibly be true. I don't think it was haughtiness or self serving, whether it's 1914, 1919, 1925 . . . but at best wishful thinking or filling in the blanks and hoping it's right. (smile) Many Catholic and Protestant denominations are guilty of the same. So it makes me wonder why JW's get stuck in the false prophecy pit or why people care to the extent that they do. The counter argument is that many lost faith, so was their faith in a date? Every 3 months or so what was written previously, is not admitted as wrong or false prophecy, but a better or more accurate understanding, whether we agree or disagree with past, present interpretations. Whereas, opponents will most definitely cite any inconsistency as false prophesy. I remember a case whereby the disciples circulated a rumor John would not die, when something entirely different was meant. Did that misunderstanding make them false prophets? I think Jesus and Jehovah understand the imperfections of man. From the original writings, we have several copies not totally consistent with each other, however not every word or letter has to be exactly perfect in order for us to understand God's will and purpose. Not every saying, understanding, or interpretation of the faithful and discreet slave will always be exactly perfect or essential in order for us to understand God's will and purpose. I hope this makes some sense.

This just keeps going from bad to worse. We'll keep praying each day for relief. I know the God of justice will exact vengeance, so I have to keep my mind off of negative things . . . really sad.

You're welcome. Good to see you too, and your very well thought out comments.

You do realize it seems like you're picking at straws again. If you read my statement carefully, I did mention God's will and purpose, and fulfillment of his Word and prophecies as the reason for not sparing persons from death including his own son.

Very good Melinda!

The verse you mentioned reads at Matthew 24:22: In fact, unless those days were cut short, no flesh would be saved; but on account of the chosen ones those days will be cut short. I can't see where God would spare those chosen ones from suffering or persecution if he didn't spare even his own son. However, there may be several reasons why God has allowed the world to continue until now for the outworking of his will and purpose, in fulfillment of word and prophecy(ies). That would allow for not only the chosen ones to receive life but many others as well. (Isaiah 55:11) So my word that goes out of my mouth will be. It will not return to me without results, But it will certainly accomplish whatever is my delight, And it will have sure success in what I send it to do. (Acts 17:31) Because he has set a day on which he purposes to judge the inhabited earth in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed, and he has provided a guarantee to all men by resurrecting him from the dead.” (2 Peter 3:9) Jehovah is not slow concerning his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire anyone to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance. (Matthew 24:14) And this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

The best we can do is maybe consider the principles of God law as to what would be considered right or wrong for Christians today. The above links are very informative in regard the subjects you brought up. Below are additional commentaries and scripture(s): *** it-1 p. 28 Abortion *** Deliberately to induce abortion or miscarriage by artificial means, by the use of drugs, or by medical operation, the sole purpose of which is to avoid the birth of an unwanted child, is an act of high crime in the sight of God. Life as a precious gift from God is sacred. Hence God’s law to Moses protected the life of an unborn baby against more than criminal abortion, for if in a fracas between men a pregnant woman suffered an accident fatal to her or the child, “then you must give soul for soul.” (Ex 21:22-25) Of course, before applying that penalty, the circumstances and degree of deliberateness were taken into consideration by the judges. (Compare Nu 35:22-24, 31.) But emphasizing the seriousness of any deliberate attempt to cause injury, Dr. J. Glenn comments: “The viable embryo in the uterus IS a human individual, and therefore destroying it, is a violation of the sixth commandment.”—The Bible and Modern Medicine, 1963, p. 176. (Exodus 21:22-25) “If men should struggle with each other and they hurt a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but no fatality results, the offender must pay the damages imposed on him by the husband of the woman; and he must pay it through the judges. 23 But if a fatality does occur, then you must give life for life, 24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25 burn for burn, wound for wound, blow for blow. https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/abortion-bible-view/ The Bible’s answer Life is sacred to God, and he views even an embryo as a distinct, living being. About God, King David was inspired to write: “Your eyes saw even the embryo of me.” (Psalm 139:16) God stated that a person would be called to account for injuring an unborn child. So, in his eyes, killing an unborn child is murder.—Exodus 20:13; 21:22, 23. What, though, if an emergency situation at the time of childbirth forces a couple to choose between letting the mother live and the baby die or vice versa? In that case, the couple would have to decide which life to try to save. - END Quote - You did however, ask a very thought provoking question. We had discussed the issue of blood transfusions quite thoroughly in the previous forum. Listed below is the commentary from one of the links above: https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/bible-about-blood-transfusion/ What Does the Bible Say About Blood Transfusions The Bible’s answer The Bible commands that we not ingest blood. So we should not accept whole blood or its primary components in any form, whether offered as food or as a transfusion. Note the following scriptures: Genesis 9:4. God allowed Noah and his family to add animal flesh to their diet after the Flood but commanded them not to eat the blood. God told Noah: “Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.” This command applies to all mankind from that time on because all are descendants of Noah. Leviticus 17:14. “You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood. Anyone eating it will be cut off.” God viewed the soul, or life, as being in the blood and belonging to him. Although this law was given only to the nation of Israel, it shows how seriously God viewed the law against eating blood. Acts 15:20. “Abstain . . . from blood.” God gave Christians the same command that he had given to Noah. History shows that early Christians refused to consume whole blood or even to use it for medical reasons. Why does God command us to abstain from blood? There are sound medical reasons to avoid blood transfusions. More important, though, God commands that we abstain from blood because what it represents is sacred to him.—Leviticus 17:11; Colossians 1:20. -END Of Quoted Text- There are several aspects to consider: 1. The Bible does not directly mention blood transfusions since the practice did not exist at that time although people may have drank blood of others or during religious rituals; 2. The Bible does not state do not eat or drink whole blood components; 3. The Bible does state, you must not eat blood of any flesh; you must abstain from blood; The facts are: 1. We do eat blood from animals or cooked meat with blood (whether whole blood or fractions of blood), after it has been drained or bled as far as possible. Many people, including JW's, eat their meat rare which may include whole blood components. 2. It has been reported that some vaccines, antidotes are made from whole blood components of animals and/or humans as well as blood alternatives/substitutes accepted by JW's for treatment. (Albeit, it would be such a small fraction of blood by the time it is purified and manufactured for human consumption.); 3. There has been a case made that an unborn child while in the womb receives a transfusion of blood from the mother; 4. The Israelites drained or bled animals for sacrifice and/or communal sacrifice, in which we can also assume they cooked and/or ate some amount of whole/fraction of blood; 5. Men in battle sinned by eating the blood of animals which had not been bled and yet the sin did not appear to be considered a deliberate crime, or one were the death penalty was imposed; (1 Sam 14:31 On that day they kept striking down the Phi·lisʹtines from Michʹmash to Aiʹja·lon, and the people became very tired. 32 So the people began rushing greedily at the spoil, and they took sheep and cattle and calves and slaughtered them on the ground, and they ate the meat along with the blood. 33 So it was reported to Saul: “Look! The people are sinning against Jehovah by eating meat with the blood.” At this he said: “You have acted faithlessly. Roll a large stone to me immediately.” 34 Saul then said: “Spread out among the people and say to them, ‘Each of you must bring his bull and his sheep and slaughter them here and then eat them. Do not sin against Jehovah by eating meat with the blood.’” So each of them brought his bull with him that night and slaughtered it there. 35 And Saul built an altar to Jehovah. This was the first altar he built to Jehovah.) Summary: I've recognized that often words/scriptures can have a deeper meaning that what we read on the surface and sometimes a completely different understanding according to the original context or ancient language(s). At any rate, it appears an exception is made in the case of abortion if the mother's life is in danger, and; 1. After much consideration, including the context and passages of Tertullian, along with others, I am of the opinion that abstaining from blood meant the bleeding of the animal although perhaps a great deal of blood would still remain. Also abstaining from blood could mean murder in which God commanded Noah anyone shedding man's blood, by man his own blood be shed or God asks for the murderer's blood in return; 2. I was also left with the opinion that blood transfusion is a matter of conscience for the individual/families along with prayer, although considering that blood can be very contagious, it is best to seek alternative treatments. This is just my two cents, maybe others can share their opinions, although I'm sure they may have run out of steam regarding this issue.

Great comments and reviews!

Yes, I see what you mean. I guess it would depend upon the laws or jurisdiction he lives in whether going to the store or walking down the street, he would have to be careful befriending young ones. I know he would probably not be permitted to regularly walk near a school or playground where children frequent. I'm not sure about private homes where he may be able to develop a friendship with the householder or children of the household. The householder would surely need to know to safeguard any minors within the home.

Thanks Kurt

Interestingly, growing up in the churches, we considered the first verses of chapter 16 in Luke to be a parable or illustration: Luke 16:1 Then he went on to say also to the disciples: “A certain man was rich and he had a steward, and this one was accused to him as handling his goods wastefully. 2 So he called him and said to him, ‘What is this I hear about you Hand in the account of your stewardship, for you can no longer manage the house.’ The second illustration of Jesus' discourse starts out the same way: 'A certain man was rich'. However, the vast majority of Christendom do not understand its meaning to be also as such. Lazarus 16:19 “But a certain man was rich, and he used to deck himself with purple and linen, enjoying himself from day to day with magnificence. 20 But a certain beggar named Lazarus used to be put at his gate, full of ulcers Communicating with the dead was against the law. Apparently, the imposters are not acutally dead but wicked spirits, and enemies of God and truth. Psalm 115:17 The dead themselves do not praise Jah, Nor do any going down into silence. 18 But we ourselves will bless Jah From now on and to time indefinite. Praise Jah, YOU people! Deu 18:10 There should not be found in you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, anyone who employs divination, a practicer of magic or anyone who looks for omens or a sorcerer, 11 or one who binds others with a spell or anyone who consults a spirit medium or a professional foreteller of events or anyone who inquires of the dead. 12 For everybody doing these things is something detestable to Jehovah, and on account of these detestable things Jehovah your God is driving them away from before you. 13 You should prove yourself faultless with Jehovah your God. 1 Chron 10:13 Thus Saul died for his unfaithfulness with which he had acted faithlessly against Jehovah concerning the word of Jehovah that he had not kept and also for asking of a spirit medium to make inquiry. 14 And he did not inquire of Jehovah. Consequently he put him to death and turned the kingship over to David the son of Jes'se.

This was a nice article

Ooooh Joyce! That was quite amazing . . . . lol

Thank you Joyce so much for taking the time to respond or clarify. It would appear there must have been some type of immorality on the part of the angels for Jude to compare their conduct with the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Their wicked presence at the time of Noah probably added to the violence on earth. I don't consider the book of Enoch as authentic but I think I saw some excerpts where it mentions the angels marrying woman, committing bestiality, eating animals, etc. It also appears from scriptures, the angels were punished or in some type of imprisoned state or estrangement. Some relevant verses are below: (Jude 6, 7) And the angels that did not keep their original position but forsook their own proper dwelling place he has reserved with eternal bonds under dense darkness for the judgment of the great day. 7 So too Sod′om and Go·mor′rah and the cities about them, after they in the same manner as the foregoing ones had committed fornication excessively and gone out after flesh for unnatural use, are placed before [us] as a [warning] example by undergoing the judicial punishment of everlasting fire. (2 Peter 2:4) Certainly if God did not hold back from punishing the angels that sinned, but, by throwing them into Tar′ta·rus, delivered them to pits of dense darkness to be reserved for judgment;

As of July 20 this year, and ordinary Russian citizens and foreigners residing in Russia, faced with huge fines for publicly display their beliefs, even if they allow it at home. This reflected a new level of repression of freedom of expression and civil society in post-Soviet Russia. According to the observations of the Centre for Humanitarian Technologies government restrictions on free religion in Russia in recent years, constantly being tightened, bringing the country to the top of the bar in a number of violators of religious freedom. Today, restrictions have been placed on the fact that religious people can not speak, even within their own home, so that Russia is already included in a number of countries, such as Vietnam, which also prohibits the exchange of religious beliefs outside places of worship. Mikhail Odintsov, who until recently was responsible for the protection of the rights of believers in the Russian Federation to the Ombudsman, noted that "in the religious policy, we have come to the norms of the USSR." In July, the new bill (known colloquially named after one of its authors as "the law of Spring") was introduced a number of amendments to the "anti-extremist legislation". The provisions relating to religion were introduced into it five days before the second reading and adopted without public discussion, despite the expression of a wide public protest. Despite the fact that the law is determined by name, as the anti-extremist, he is best suited for use in order to strengthen the ongoing crackdown on civil society in Russia. In recent years there has been the introduction of increasingly repressive amendments to the laws on Russian non-profit and religious organizations, as well as designed to unconstitutional methods to discriminate against religious minorities, NGOs and journalists ... In accordance with the current legislation on extremism, for example, it opened a criminal case against the followers of Jehovah's Witnesses and at the border confiscated their religious literature, preparing the ground for the liquidation of a religious organization. While violence by extremists on religious or other motivations of their actions is, as everywhere, a real problem in Russia, the concept of "extremism" is used as a shortcut for hanging it on the unpopular from a group of administrators who pose no threat to the state .. . Height of repression against civil society, combined with the spread of frightening rumors about "predatory foreign religions" form a toxic mix. After the fall of the Soviet Union in Russia expressed concern over the perception of wealthy foreigners coming into the country to create their own religious communities at the expense of Russian Orthodoxy and weakened the Soviet system. After 70 years of state persecution of people for their religious beliefs and all religions it is, perhaps, was understandable. However, "the protection of Orthodoxy" is now perceived as matching a strategic national interests. In 2000, the Russian federal official made a statement on national security policy, saying that the priorities "of the Russian Federation's national security also include the protection of the. . . spiritual and moral heritage "and" opposition to suggest the negative influence of foreign religious organizations and missionaries. " Spring Act expands the definition of extremism and combines it with a "national security" in the form of protection from the preaching work. It is an extensive ban on most forms of missionary activity, including joint confession of their beliefs in private homes of citizens. Missionary activity, defined as "activities of religious organizations aimed at the dissemination of information about his teaching (including the exchange of information online) among non-participants" can be carried out by persons with documented authorized by their religious associations and proof that their organizations registered. Authorized representatives can participate in missionary activity only in the church and preach in the territory of the region, which registered respective religious organization or group. The same actions are prohibited in residential areas as well as an attempt to circumvent the law, by the conversion of residential premises in the target - for religious use. Persons who violate the law must pay a fine of 5000 to 50 000 (in the amount of six weeks, the average wage, or US $ 780). Organizations are responsible for the violations committed by its members and may be fined from 100 000 to 1 000 000 and eliminated. Participation of foreign missionaries, the new law also limited: they can be invited to the country of the religious organization with which they shall be an agreement, and representative offices of foreign religious organizations (foreign religions that do not receive local or national registration) may not engage in missionary activity. Article vaguely formulated law is unclear and it is not clear how they can be interpreted. The law includes a ban on any missionary activity, which is aimed at "disturbing public security and public order; extremist activity, coercion into destroying the family "," damage morals "and" the conviction of persons to refuse to perform civil duties established by law. " The offer is so broad categories is impossible for people to be able to clearly define what they can do. "Refuses to perform civil obligations", for example, is a broad category, is used in Soviet times for the imprisonment of religious dissidents. Many ambiguities. What is illegal missionary work, if the "missionary" does not belong to a registered religious organization? What activities are missionary - "church services" or "religious rites and sacraments" (which are permitted in residential buildings), and the conditions under which this activity is illegal "missionary"? Several people in different regions of the country have been prosecuted under the law, and these precedents suggest that the law will be interpreted broadly. For example, a citizen of Ghana, was convicted on August 1 for the baptism in the pool, rented in the resort, although it is claimed that does not seek to attract new members. Independent American Baptist preacher was fined August 14 for holding a prayer meeting at his home, because he was allegedly told about it on the bulletin board in the backyard. In connection with the controversy of the new law of the Constitution it is hoped that it will be canceled. The law clearly violates Russia's constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and religion, as well as international commitments of the Russian Federation on freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Russian legislation and international standards provide every opportunity for the formation of laws that would protect the state from the real threats of violence but prohibits citizens exchange views Spring Law expressly directed against religious expression and harm law-abiding citizens. Mikhail Fedotov, chairman of the Civil Society and Human Rights Development Council under the Russian President, personally protested Putin said that the law "creates an unreasonable and excessive restrictions on the freedom of conscience of believers of all religions, and encroaches on the fundamental constitutional principle of non-interference in the internal structure of religious associations ". Elizabeth A. CLARK - Doctor of Law, Professor, Deputy Director of the International Center for Law and Religious Studies of the University of Brigham Young. http://www.religiopolis.org/ https://translate.google.com/

Ok, I'll try

As of July 20 this year, and ordinary Russian citizens and foreigners residing in Russia, faced with huge fines for publicly display their beliefs, even if they allow it at home. This reflected a new level of repression of freedom of expression and civil society in post-Soviet Russia. According to the observations of the Centre for Humanitarian Technologies government restrictions on free religion in Russia in recent years, constantly being tightened, bringing the country to the top of the bar in a number of violators of religious freedom. Today, restrictions have been placed on the fact that religious people can not speak, even within their own home, so that Russia is already included in a number of countries, such as Vietnam, which also prohibits the exchange of religious beliefs outside places of worship. Mikhail Odintsov, who until recently was responsible for the protection of the rights of believers in the Russian Federation to the Ombudsman, noted that "in the religious policy, we have come to the norms of the USSR." In July, the new bill (known colloquially named after one of its authors as "the law of Spring") was introduced a number of amendments to the "anti-extremist legislation". The provisions relating to religion were introduced into it five days before the second reading and adopted without public discussion, despite the expression of a wide public protest. Despite the fact that the law is determined by name, as the anti-extremist, he is best suited for use in order to strengthen the ongoing crackdown on civil society in Russia. In recent years there has been the introduction of increasingly repressive amendments to the laws on Russian non-profit and religious organizations, as well as designed to unconstitutional methods to discriminate against religious minorities, NGOs and journalists ... In accordance with the current legislation on extremism, for example, it opened a criminal case against the followers of Jehovah's Witnesses and at the border confiscated their religious literature, preparing the ground for the liquidation of a religious organization. While violence by extremists on religious or other motivations of their actions is, as everywhere, a real problem in Russia, the concept of "extremism" is used as a shortcut for hanging it on the unpopular from a group of administrators who pose no threat to the state .. . Height of repression against civil society, combined with the spread of frightening rumors about "predatory foreign religions" form a toxic mix. After the fall of the Soviet Union in Russia expressed concern over the perception of wealthy foreigners coming into the country to create their own religious communities at the expense of Russian Orthodoxy and weakened the Soviet system. After 70 years of state persecution of people for their religious beliefs and all religions it is, perhaps, was understandable. However, "the protection of Orthodoxy" is now perceived as matching a strategic national interests. In 2000, the Russian federal official made a statement on national security policy, saying that the priorities "of the Russian Federation's national security also include the protection of the. . . spiritual and moral heritage "and" opposition to suggest the negative influence of foreign religious organizations and missionaries. " Spring Act expands the definition of extremism and combines it with a "national security" in the form of protection from the preaching work. It is an extensive ban on most forms of missionary activity, including joint confession of their beliefs in private homes of citizens. Missionary activity, defined as "activities of religious organizations aimed at the dissemination of information about his teaching (including the exchange of information online) among non-participants" can be carried out by persons with documented authorized by their religious associations and proof that their organizations registered. Authorized representatives can participate in missionary activity only in the church and preach in the territory of the region, which registered respective religious organization or group. The same actions are prohibited in residential areas as well as an attempt to circumvent the law, by the conversion of residential premises in the target - for religious use. Persons who violate the law must pay a fine of 5000 to 50 000 (in the amount of six weeks, the average wage, or US $ 780). Organizations are responsible for the violations committed by its members and may be fined from 100 000 to 1 000 000 and eliminated. Participation of foreign missionaries, the new law also limited: they can be invited to the country of the religious organization with which they shall be an agreement, and representative offices of foreign religious organizations (foreign religions that do not receive local or national registration) may not engage in missionary activity. Article vaguely formulated law is unclear and it is not clear how they can be interpreted. The law includes a ban on any missionary activity, which is aimed at "disturbing public security and public order; extremist activity, coercion into destroying the family "," damage morals "and" the conviction of persons to refuse to perform civil duties established by law. " The offer is so broad categories is impossible for people to be able to clearly define what they can do. "Refuses to perform civil obligations", for example, is a broad category, is used in Soviet times for the imprisonment of religious dissidents. Many ambiguities. What is illegal missionary work, if the "missionary" does not belong to a registered religious organization? What activities are missionary - "church services" or "religious rites and sacraments" (which are permitted in residential buildings), and the conditions under which this activity is illegal "missionary"? Several people in different regions of the country have been prosecuted under the law, and these precedents suggest that the law will be interpreted broadly. For example, a citizen of Ghana, was convicted on August 1 for the baptism in the pool, rented in the resort, although it is claimed that does not seek to attract new members. Independent American Baptist preacher was fined August 14 for holding a prayer meeting at his home, because he was allegedly told about it on the bulletin board in the backyard. In connection with the controversy of the new law of the Constitution it is hoped that it will be canceled. The law clearly violates Russia's constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech and religion, as well as international commitments of the Russian Federation on freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Russian legislation and international standards provide every opportunity for the formation of laws that would protect the state from the real threats of violence but prohibits citizens exchange views Spring Law expressly directed against religious expression and harm law-abiding citizens. Mikhail Fedotov, chairman of the Civil Society and Human Rights Development Council under the Russian President, personally protested Putin said that the law "creates an unreasonable and excessive restrictions on the freedom of conscience of believers of all religions, and encroaches on the fundamental constitutional principle of non-interference in the internal structure of religious associations ". Elizabeth A. CLARK - Doctor of Law, Professor, Deputy Director of the International Center for Law and Religious Studies of the University of Brigham Young. http://www.religiopolis.org/ https://translate.google.com/

This was a good clarification.

It is thought that most of the 144,000 virgins have probably already been resurrected to heaven as kings/priests to rule with Christ in the heavens. Those that are still alive on earth at the time of armageddon will join Christ at that time. The first ones of the virgin class would have been the 12 apostles of which Judas Iscariot was replaced. They are clean and undefiled from the world and have not committed fornication with the kings of the earth as the harlot or Babylon the Great. (Hope this helps) Rev 14:4 "These are the ones that did not defile themselves with women; in fact, they are virgins. These are the ones that keep following the Lamb no matter where he goes. These were bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb, 5 and no falsehood was found in their mouths; they are without blemish. 6 And I saw another angel flying in midheaven, and he had everlasting good news to declare as glad tidings to those who dwell on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people, 7 saying in a loud voice: “FEAR God and give him glory, because the hour of the judgment by him has arrived, and so worship the One who made the heaven and the earth and sea and fountains of waters.” 8 And another, a second angel, followed, saying: “She has fallen! Babylon the Great has fallen, she who made all the nations drink of the wine of the anger of her fornication!”

Located some explanations below: *** it-1 p. 1089 Herald *** Ke·rys′so, in general, means “proclaim” (good or bad news), as distinguished from eu·ag·ge·li′zo·mai, “declare good news.” Noah was a preacher (or herald, ke′ryx) to the antediluvian world, warning them. (2Pe 2:5) Christ preached (like a herald) to the spirits in prison, but not the good news.—1Pe 3:18, 19. *** it-2 p. 492 Nephilim *** The Bible states that the disobedient angels are now “spirits in prison,” having been ‘thrown into Tartarus’ and “reserved with eternal bonds under dense darkness for the judgment of the great day.” This seems to indicate that they are greatly restricted, unable again to materialize as they did prior to the Flood.—1Pe 3:19; 2Pe 2:4; Jude 6. *** rs p. 163 Heaven *** Did Jesus open the way to heaven for those who had died before his own death? What does 1 Peter 3:19, 20 mean? “In this state [in the spirit, following his resurrection] also he [Jesus] went his way and preached to the spirits in prison, who had once been disobedient when the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days, while the ark was being constructed, in which a few people, that is, eight souls [“souls,” KJ, Dy; “people,” TEV, JB; “persons,” RS], were carried safely through the water.” (Were those “spirits in prison” the souls of the humans who had refused to take heed to Noah’s preaching before the Flood, and was the way now open for them to go to heaven? Comparison of 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 with Genesis 6:2-4 shows that these spirits were angelic sons of God that had materialized and married in Noah’s day. At 1 Peter 3:19, 20 the Greek word for “spirits” is pneu′ma·sin, while the word rendered “souls” is psy·khai′. The “spirits” were not disembodied souls but disobedient angels; the “souls” here referred to were living people, humans, Noah and his household. What was preached to “spirits in prison” must therefore have been a message of judgment.)

I'm not sure I can explain correctly but I think it means that although humans and angels are dependent upon God for life, those given immortality are given their own incorruptible, indestructible self-sustaining bodies. However, they are not almighty in power and can be destroyed by their Creator. A few excerpts are below: Questions from Readers: *** w84 4/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers *** Still, the Bible does not provide much detail about the quality of life termed immortality. We do know that mortal humans—even perfect humans having the prospect of endless life on earth—must eat and drink to maintain life, or they die and their bodies experience corruption. (Genesis 2:9, 15, 16) No doubt immortality involves a quality of life that does not need to be sustained like that. Thus it could be said that all who become immortal are not subject to death or that ‘death is master over them no more.’ That would harmonize, too, with their receiving incorruptibility, indicating that their spirit body or organism is inherently beyond decay, ruin or corruption. (Compare 2 Corinthians 5:1; Revelation 20:6.) In these ways a difference might be seen between immortality and everlasting human life. *** it-1 pp. 1197-1198 Incorruption *** Raised to Immortality and Incorruption. Christ Jesus entered into immortality upon his resurrection from the dead, thereafter possessing “an indestructible life.” (1Ti 6:15, 16; Heb 7:15-17) As the “exact representation of [the] very being” of his Father, who is the incorruptible God (Heb 1:3; 1Ti 1:17), the resurrected Jesus also enjoys incorruptibility. United with Jesus in the likeness of his resurrection, his joint heirs also are resurrected not merely to everlasting life as spirit creatures but to immortality and incorruption. Having lived, served faithfully, and died in corruptible human bodies, they now receive incorruptible spirit bodies, as Paul clearly states at 1 Corinthians 15:42-54. Immortality therefore evidently refers to the quality of the life they enjoy, its endlessness and indestructibility, whereas incorruption apparently relates to the organism or body that God gives them, one that is inherently beyond decay, ruin, or destruction. It therefore appears that God grants them the power to be self-sustaining, not dependent upon outside sources of energy as are his other creatures, fleshly and spirit. This is a stirring evidence of God’s confidence in them. Such independent and indestructible existence, however, does not remove them from God’s control; and they, like their Head Christ Jesus, continue subject to their Father’s will and directions.—1Co 15:23-28; see IMMORTALITY; SOUL.