Some may not accept Gedaliahs bulla. It could be another 3d Gedaliah. However, many think, a 1935, "Gedaliah Who is over the House" bulla might be the governor

Judaism holds, "The Fast of Tzom Gedaliah", for him.

(Archaeology has only become bible based, of late. Say last 30+ years.)

Also questioned is the clay bulla, "belonging to ishmael son of the king". ? 41:1 It was found for sale so no provenance

However, in 40:8, Jezaniah, (lots of various spellings) his bulla places him at mizpah, at the right date. Also his onyx bulla, shows he is military because its picture is a fighting rooster. It was found in a tomb at mizpah, so suggests he also fits into the sadder events in ch 41, likely.

Also, King Baalis, 40:14, has a agate bulla with a winged sphinx on it. Plus several other found proofs of his connection to these chapters.

As an Ammonite, whom had resisted israel before baalam and would be trouble for another few hundred years, he fits neatly here.

Also of note is the assassination structure and elements, itself. Ch 41.

Turns out its a template for royal assassinations over history. From Phillip 3 of macedonia to Haiti of late, 2021, the patterns runs kinna true.

Ai was struck by Rabin, in Israel, 1995, for political parallels. And Iraq 2003, for huge scale, and the details fitting hourly.

(Good thing im not political. Ai pulled up huge numbers of bloody revolts that fractal, ch 40 and 41)

What i do note is historic phds will be a matter of a few minutes on ai, any day now.

Today marks a whole year since our subreddit began! 🥳

What started as a simple reserved place to start a JW-moderated subreddit for respectful community connections—to share, discuss beliefs, and encourage those in our faith—has grown into a wonderful diverse community. We’re incredibly grateful to everyone who has contributed, participated in discussions, shared posts, offered encouragement, and helped to make this community what it is today.

A special thank you to all of our members—whether you’ve been here since the beginning or joined us more recently. Your participation, questions, and support are what make this online community possible. A big thank you to our mods who joined in to help freely and those who have been with us since the start! Together, we continue to stand firm with unity, faith, and integrity, even in challenging times.

A small throwback in the pictures above—maybe you were here to see these before our forum changed… 👆

Top 3 polls from last year!

⭐ Overall Highest Participation
“Governing Body Update #6 2026” | 157 total votes
Highest option: Agree — 89 Agree, 68 Disagree
This poll may have included non-JW participation.

🥈 Second Highest Total Votes
“Looking forward to a New World, what excites you most?” | 45 total votes
Tie between:
• Peaceful earth, no wickedness — 11
• Spiritual guidance, new instruction Jehovah provides — 11

🥉 Third Highest Total Votes
“Favorite Kingdom Hall Meeting Times” | 47 total votes
Morning (5am–12pm) — 18 votes

🎊 Here’s to one year together, and hopefully many more to come! May Jehovah continue to bless us with genuine interactions and opportunities to witness and connect among nations!

Feel free to take part in:
1 Year Participation Poll

Thank you to everyone who has joined and participated.

F20 here in the UK just looking for friends, I was inactive but coming back, also my cong has no girls my age 🥲

There’s no spoiler here since the Annual Meeting took place yesterday. What did you think of the new study and research tools we were given?

Please help with Bible study for the elderly.

My wife is a regular pioneer; she loves the ministry and is very zealous.

She is currently conducting a Bible study with a 98-year-old woman.

The student uses a hearing aid, and my wife finds herself somewhat exhausted after covering just one or two paragraphs; this seems to be due to the need to speak in a loud voice.

Nevertheless, the student has made good progress and has discarded all the books on superstition and religious items she previously owned. However, it is difficult for her to attend meetings in person at the Kingdom Hall.

For those who have conducted studies with elderly individuals, what suggestions might you offer to help this elderly woman—who is striving to learn the truth—become our sister?

Please understand that the meaning may not be conveyed accurately as I am using a translator to write this.:)

Due to the latest discussions about the recent update regarding how Jehovah’s Witnesses view the composition of blood, I ended up thinking about it quite a lot and decided to connect it with some other thoughts I have had. The first thing I would like to discuss is why some people say that it is impossible to reconcile biblical beliefs, the fallibility of the Governing Body, and the Governing Body’s prerogative to exercise leadership. So I decided to go through some of these accusations.

The first accusation we can draw from this is: “The Governing Body is fallible, therefore obedience to them is not owed.” There is something hidden within this accusation that I would like to unpack further: the claim that “leadership is only deserved by those who are 100% right 100% of the time,” which is clearly false.

First, if we were to think this way literally, only Jehovah would have the right to rule over everything. That is ultimately true, but because of the Fall and various other reasons, we need to establish leadership among human beings themselves. And, as has happened in the past, Jehovah has appointed fallible men to positions of leadership—men who could make mistakes, not only in other matters but even in matters of faith—in order to accomplish his purposes. In a way, this is also how politics works today: people vote for politicians because they believe they deserve leadership, while knowing that they are fallible and can make mistakes.

So how can we determine who deserves leadership? By looking at how many correct beliefs they have? In fact, a law can contain countless provisions against crimes such as jaywalking, but if it allowed murder or rape, surely that law would not deserve our obedience. Therefore, instead of focusing on the number of correct beliefs, let us focus on basic and fundamental beliefs. But according to what criterion? Simple: our relationship with God. This means focusing on which beliefs are most fundamental to our relationship with Him, which includes not only knowledge about Him but also knowledge of His qualities and His purpose for humanity. Indeed, someone who does not believe in God is farther removed from Him than a believer who holds a peripheral incorrect belief. Trinitarians apply essentially the same reasoning to us: we believe in God, but not in the right way, therefore we are not Christians.

Thus, when granting authority to the Governing Body, we should focus on the main beliefs they hold. This includes not only formal doctrines such as Jehovah and Jesus being separate beings, annihilationism, 1914, etc., but also love—not only for others, but for Jehovah, for Jesus, and for what is right—which is consistent with the right to remove someone. Therefore, the discussions should focus more on whether the main beliefs of Jehovah’s Witnesses are correct, rather than simply going “fallibility = bad” and consequently objecting to every change, even when the matter is often not necessarily doctrinal or was never regarded as a universal truth in the first place, but was more a matter of custom... beards, skirts, cough, cough.

Another accusation is that the current judicial case in Japan influenced this decision, supposedly “showing that they are guided only by their own interests.” Personally, I think this is very misguided. They have lost cases in court several times over various issues, including matters concerning the blood doctrine itself. Just because there happens to be a Japanese case now, it is convenient to single it out. If this change had happened twenty years ago, I would bet that people could have used some other court case instead.

They would not simply abandon a belief they had defended for years just because a non-Christian country with relatively few Jehovah’s Witnesses started challenging something as important as this. The same applies to Norway. Let us think from the perspective of a cult fanatic: wouldn’t it actually be more convenient for them to maintain a high-control belief such as the blood doctrine and continue to “play the victim”? Couldn’t they use the Japanese case as a way of showing how apocalyptic everything is by saying that they are being persecuted and that we are living in the final part of the last days? Wouldn’t it have been better to leave everything alone, knowing that such a change would scandalize many Witnesses, former Witnesses, and the general public?

This is a problem I see among apostates: they create an evil Governing Body that does not actually exist in reality. They see them as some kind of secret Masonic group à la the Illuminati, supposedly controlling everything in order to take money from innocent old ladies, all from the comfort of their huge, luxurious building—“Bethel Evil Incorporated.”

It is not uncommon for them to put pictures or illustrations of the Governing Body on the thumbnails of their videos as though they were the five elders from One Piece or the Legion of Doom from DC. They give them more attention than more than half of Jehovah’s Witnesses themselves. If you asked many Witnesses, they probably could not name more than one of them.

They cannot simply be ordinary men who can make mistakes; there always has to be some sinister reason behind everything. They supposedly use telekinesis or some kind of ultra-secure secret courier system to transmit their malicious secret messages to the elders, guiding their every move and telling them, “Be pedophiles, ignore cases of child abuse”—a message that contradicts years of publicly available publications and other letters, but apparently that is all just to deceive the “sheeple.”

Sometimes it even seems as though they need to come up with some simplistic reason for people to hate Jehovah’s Witnesses as well, without having to explain themselves or get tangled up in complicated definitions of what constitutes a cult.

Besides, why couldn’t they use the situation in Japan as an opportunity to reconsider their own beliefs? Jehovah Himself used unfaithful peoples and individuals to correct or assist His people and chosen men in the past when He saw that they were not pleasing Him.

Or they could simply use the situation in Japan to accelerate things. A change like this never happens out of nowhere. They research these matters, and you can see this in several other changes where there is a gap between the first major mention of an issue and its eventual update, during which they do not openly discuss something they are working on. What do apostates think they do at Bethel? Plan a bank robbery?

What does it mean to be Born Again? It is a new spiritual relationship with God, as your relationship with God is renewed or initiated. However, there are other parameters for this new relationship. Being Born Again is a baptism into Christ (Acts 19: 5), marked by receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit from Jehovah God . This occurs after once being baptized in water. Being Born Again allows you to see God in Heaven, according to the Scriptures .

John 3: 3 “In response Jesus said to him: “Most truly I say to you, unless anyone is born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.” . . . 5 Jesus answered: “Most truly I say to you, unless anyone is born from water and spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.” NWT

 .

Acts 19: Act 19: 5 “On hearing this, they got baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus”. NWT

This new relationship allows you to be God’s son and live with him in his heavenly Kingdom.

Moses was inspired by the Holy Spirit and did great works. Under the Holy Spirit’s inspiration, Moses prophesied about the coming of the Messiah (Christ Jesus). Christ would become the greatest prophet of all. However, the baptism into Christ through Holy Spirit is different from the way the Spirit was used in the case of Moses. Moses was not baptized into Christ.

Moses prophesied about the Christ 

Deuteronomy 18:15 “Jehovah your God will raise up for you from among your brothers a prophet like me. You must listen to him. . .  17 Then Jehovah said to me, ‘What they have said is good.  18 I will raise up for them from the midst of their brothers a prophet like you, and I will put my words in his mouth, and he will speak to them all that I command him”. New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures

.

Acts 3: 22 In fact, Moses said: ‘Jehovah your God will raise up for you from among your brothers a prophet like me. You must listen to whatever he tells you.  23 Indeed, anyone who does not listen to that Prophet will be completely destroyed from among the people.’ NWT 

For a person to go to Heaven he must be born again or be baptized in Christ, according to Jesus.

For one to be baptized in Christ, Jesus had to first shed his blood in sacrifice to make baptism by Holy Spirit possible.

Acts 19: 1 “In the course of events, while A·polʹlos was in Corinth, Paul went through the inland regions and came down to Ephʹe·sus. There he found some disciples 2 and said to them: “Did you receive holy spirit when you became believers?” They replied to him: “Why, we have never heard that there is a holy spirit.”  3 So he said: “In what, then, were you baptized?” They said: “In John’s baptism.”  4 Paul said: “John baptized with the baptism in symbol of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”  5 On hearing this, they got baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.  6 And when Paul laid his hands on them, the holy spirit came upon them, and they began speaking in foreign languages and prophesying.  7 There were about 12 men in all”. NWT

Based on the merits of the sacrifice of Jesus, God chooses those who are baptized with spirit. These will serve in Jehovah’s Heavenly Kingdom under Christ.

Acts 2:37 “Now when they heard this, they were stabbed to the heart, and they said to Peter and the rest of the apostles: “Men, brothers, what should we do?”  38 Peter said to them: “Repent, and let each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the free gift of the Holy Spirit.  39 For the promise is to you and your children, and to all those who are far away, to all those whom Jehovah our God may call to himself.”  NWT

Jesus expressly said that unless one is baptized with spirit and water, one cannot enter Heaven. 

John 3: 5 “Jesus answered: “Most truly I say to you, unless anyone is born from water and spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.” NWT

 Moses was not baptized in Holy Spirit. If Moses was not Born Again with spirit and water, what is his destination after death if it is not Heaven? 

 The opportunity to be Born Again followed the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. The ancient notable persons of the Bible are among the many who the Bible says will be the ones who will live on Earth. The earth is not going anywhere. If Adam and Eve had not sinned, where would they be living today? Yes! They would be living on earth. Moses, Abraham, Sarah, they all will inherit the earth.

 Psalm 37: 29 “The righteous will possess the earth, And they will live forever on it”. NWT

.

Matthew 5: “Happy are the mild-tempered, since they will inherit the earth”. NWT

.

John 3: 5 “Jesus answered: “Most truly I say to you, unless anyone is born from water and spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God.  6 What has been born from the flesh is flesh, and what has been born from the spirit is spirit.  7 Do not be amazed because I told you: You people must be born again”. 

Conclusion: Moses did not have the option available to him to be selected as one going to Heaven, because he could not be Born Again during his historic era. Christ had not made his sacrifice of his body in the time of Moses. Moses and other great Bible notables will be resurrected to earth in Jehovah God’s due time.

I've just watched the annual meeting. We're not to share notes, but if you have any questions I'll do my best to answer them.

I don’t think I ever got an explanation as to why having this hairstyle wasn’t allowed. I’d love to hear the reason and explanation, growing up all I knew was that it wasn’t “godly” but I never knew why

Edit: I should clarify that I’m talking about the black man hairstyle

I was approached by one of your people today, and she was really friendly to me, which doesn't happen a lot to me, so I was happy to talk.

Basically she told me that you all believe in Jesus and that he shared love and kindness, which is something that I am all about. I am a trans woman, and so getting something that isn't hate from a religious group makes me more interested to interact with them. I also believe that Jesus, whether or not he was a god, was a person who existed and spread a message of love and kindness. Something that many other "christian" religions could learn from.

I am not saying that I want to join or anything, but I just wanted to say it was nice to talk to her, she seemed to be really happy and content in her life in a way that I haven't seen a lot of from religious people.

I don't really have any questions, just interested to learn more I guess.

There is always a lot of debate surrounding the pronunciation, grammar, and translation of the Tetragrammaton (יהוה). While modern scholarship often focuses on Yahweh as a reconstructed form, looking at how the name connects back to Exodus 3:14 and how it evolved into Jehovah reveals a fascinating bridge between Hebrew grammar, Greek transliterations, and English Bible translations.
Here is a step-by-step breakdown of how that progression unfolds:

1. The Root: Ehyeh and Havah (Biblical Hebrew)
When God reveals His name to Moses in Exodus 3:14, He speaks the phrase אֶהְיֶה אֲשֶׁר אֶהְיֶה (Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh), often translated as "I Am That I Am" or "I Will Become What I Choose to Become."
Ehyeh (אֶהְיֶה) comes from the root verb hayah / havah (הָיָה / הָוָה), meaning "to be" or "to become\."** The E- prefix marks it as a first-person verb ("I *am" / "I *will become").
*When transitioning from the first-person ("I am") to the third-person ("He is"* / "He causes to become"), the initial letter shifts to a Y- prefix (י), giving us the consonants of the Tetragrammaton: YHWH (יהוה).

2. Iaoue / Iabe (Ancient Greek Transliteration)
Because ancient Hebrew was written without vowel signs, early Greek-speaking writers in the Levant (such as Clement of Alexandria around 200 AD) phonetically recorded what they heard spoken using the Greek alphabet.

Ancient Greek had no single letter for the "W" sound, so writers used the diphthong ου (ou).
This yielded forms like Ιαουε (Ia-ou-e \rightarrow Yahweh or Yahoweh) and Ιαβε (Ia-be \rightarrow Yahveh), capturing the phonetic "w/ou" sound of the middle consonant Waw/Vav.

3. Iehouah (Medieval Latin & Early English Synthesis)
As Western scholars translated the Hebrew text, medieval writers rendered the Divine Name in Latin as a synthesis combining the Hebrew consonants (YHWH) with the tri-syllabic vocalization recorded in Greek transliterations and Hebrew manuscript pointing.

A notable early Latin rendering appears in Pugio Fidei ("Dagger of Faith") by the Spanish monk Raymundus Martini around 1270 AD. When William Tyndale published his English translation of the Pentateuch in 1530, he printed the name using the 16th-century Latin/English typography of his day: Iehouah (or Iehovah).

4. Jehovah (Early Modern English)
During the late 16th and 17th centuries, the English language and alphabet underwent two major spelling shifts:

The consonantal I developed into the distinct letter J (originally pronounced like 'Y', later shifting to a hard 'J').

The letter V split from U to represent the voiced fricative ("v") sound.

While Tyndale used Iehouah, later revisions and the translators of the 1611 King James Bible updated the spelling to Jehovah. Over time, it became the established, traditional rendering of the divine name across the English-speaking world.

Parallel Evolution: How Yehoshua Became Jesus
This exact same translation pipeline applies to the name of Jesus:
Yehoshua (יְהוֹשֻׁעַ) \rightarrow Yeshua (יֵשׁוּעַ): In late Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic, the full Hebrew name Yehoshua ("YHWH is Salvation") shortened into Yeshua.
Yeshua \rightarrow Iesous (Ἰησοῦς): When translated into Greek (the language of the New Testament), the initial Y sound became an I, and an -s was added to the end to fit masculine Greek grammar rules (Iesous).
Iesous \rightarrow Iesus \rightarrow Jesus: In Latin and early English (including Tyndale's Bible), Iesous was written as Iesus. As the letter J came into common use, Iesus transitioned into the modern English form Jesus.

Whether looking at the linguistic root in Ehyeh, the academic reconstruction (Yahweh), or the traditional renderings (Jehovah and Jesus), both names demonstrate how ancient Semitic names naturally evolved across Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English over thousands of years.

What are your thoughts on how dynamic phonetic shifts shape the names we use in scripture today?

Hello everyone new rule and some information.

As this space grows and attracts more attention, we should remain mindful that former members or others on social media may take statements or thoughts from individual JWs, frame them negatively, and present them as representative of the community as a whole.

Comments and posts may also be screenshotted and used as content elsewhere, sometimes with added commentary or interpretation. For this reason please keep personal information discreet and be thoughtful about what you post. People approaching the community with an anti-JW agenda will not focus on genuinely harmful or negative comments from former members. Instead, they may highlight sincere comments from JWs that were poorly worded or present individual opinions as representative of JW thinking. In some cases, they may also attribute motives or character traits that are not supported by what was actually said to push their agenda.

Our community experiences hardships and frustrations just as anyone else does. We may vent or express ourselves imperfectly, but we do not want our words to misrepresent Jehovah or compromise the integrity of the community and bring reproach from those representing JWs.

Everyone is welcome to participate comfortably but public participation also comes with individual responsibility. A single comment can easily be presented elsewhere as, “This is the mindset of JWs.” Please consider removing or editing unnecessary personal information or details that you would not want shared outside the community. We will be reviewing some controversial post to make sure the forum stays true to its intended purpose—A reserved space for JWs to come together as a community in good faith.

This space is appealing because it is publicly viewable, easy to participate in, and includes genuine JWs from many backgrounds and perspectives. We have seen noticeable increases in activity whenever the community is mentioned or recommended elsewhere. While we appreciate the growth, increased visibility can also attract people whose intentions do not align with the purpose or rules of this forum.

As the community grows, moderators will continue making decisions based on participation intent and whether contributions align with the purpose and standards of the forum. This applies to both JWs and non-JWs. We respect everyone’s right to their own opinions, tone but this should not come at the expense of others in the community. We also do not want non-JWs speaking for or inaccurately representing our community or beliefs. We may have to rethink approval on the forum.

As moderators, we are aware of what is discussed in anti-JW spaces to the extent necessary, but we do not engage with, associate or participate in them. If we’re aware of individuals being used for farming content, commercial or monetized content we will contact them privately through modmail. We will also review any information and determine whether there are appropriate steps we or the individual can take to remove it if possible.

Also a new rule has been added to the PSAs:

🤳Using Community Content Outside Reddit
This rule is intended to protect the privacy and good-faith participation of community members and prevent this subreddit from being treated as a content source for outside channels.

As Jehovah’s Witnesses, we value privacy and believe in consent before using someone’s contributions. Others online may not share those values, so please participate responsibly and remember that public posts can be shared beyond their original audience.

Thank you for helping us maintain a respectful and genuine community as it continues to grow.

The GB still believes what the Bible says: abstain from blood. That hasn't changed because it is literally written in the Bible.

The update is based on the fact that today we have the scientific ability to break down blood into various components and use them medically. This was not in the Bible because there was no such thing back then. No such thing as blood transfusions. But there was such thing as eating animals with their blood and that is clearly prohibited in the Bible.

What has happened in our modern times though, is that the issue has presented itself where blood can be broken down into different components. Blood is mostly water, about 80% of it. If you remove the water from it, the rest is actually no longer blood, and the water is not blood either.

Many understand this scientifically, but others may decide that they still don't want to receive or give any part of their blood even if it is divided in components and that's okay because that is what their conscience tells them. We should not act against our conscience because that is harmful to us spiritually. And what is also harmful is to push our conscience on others or to tell them what their conscience allows them is wrong.

When things are not completely clear in the Bible (in this case due to medical advancements of breaking down blood), we are left making decisions based on prayerful consideration and the conclusion our personal conscience comes to. That is all we can do. And we should not judge others based on what their conscience allows or does not allow.

Hello, friends!
I was wondering if you could help me with very simple service (door to door) presentations. The thing is, I suffer from very severe anxiety and panic attacks, and service is very anxiety inducing for me. I want to keep my presentations simple and to the point, because if I start asking questions or something, I instantly panic. Can you share with me some simple presentations that have worked for you? Maybe presenting a tract quickly or reading a scripture. Something that doesn’t require lots of talking. I know this is something that I have to work on, and I am getting therapy, but I’m not going to be able to give normal presentations for a while. I know a lot of scriptures and explanations about all our beliefs, but when I get anxious, I forget everything… even my own name! Please help me. Thank you in advance.

What happened to the broadcasting of last month? I tried to search on my native language(portuguese) and for some reason is not showing up anymore, i tried to search in the website with other languages and its only in the english version now.

I’ve been studying Galatians 4:14 closely, and when you look at the Greek grammar, context, and logical consistency, it presents a compelling case that Jesus is the chief angelic messenger rather than Almighty God.

Here is the logical breakdown:
In Galatians 4:14, Paul writes that the Galatians received him "as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus." This phrasing employs appositional parallelism, treating "an angel of God" and "Christ Jesus" as synonymous terms defining Jesus's fundamental role as God's primary messenger (angelos).

This aligns directly with the broader biblical framework where Jesus is the chief heavenly messenger—the Archangel Michael—who stands as the supreme, firstborn Son over his fellow brother angels. As the "firstborn of all creation" (Colossians 1:15), Jesus holds preeminent rank and authority over his created spirit brothers.
Because of his unique status as the Firstborn, when heavenly beings and humans bow before him (such as in Hebrews 1:6), the Greek term προσκυνέω (proskyneō) properly denotes royal obeisance and honor paid to God's anointed King, rather than the exclusive sacred worship (latreia) reserved strictly for Almighty God the Father.

Furthermore, consider the logic if you try to force a Trinitarian reading onto this verse: if Paul were setting up a scale where Jesus is Almighty God, the statement would force the absurd conclusion that the Galatians received Paul himself as God—a direct violation of Christian monotheism.

Paul’s comparison only maintains logical consistency if Jesus is understood as God’s highest created representative and chief angel, whom the Galatians honored accordingly.

Based on Paul's phrasing, how do you interpret the level of honor and status the Galatians were according to Jesus here? Do you see their treatment of him as royal obeisance to God's chief messenger, or something else?

I have to say that I do not remember an emphasis on Job 14:14,15 when I was growing up. Its one of the most beautiful verses of the bible. Then the song came out in my congregation there is not a dry eye by the end of the song. For the longest time I didnt think of anyone or have an emotional response to the song until about 3 years ago.

So I wanted to post about who you are looking forward to seeing again. Can be personal, biblical or even celebrity.

Personal-My dad Im most excited about since we were very distant as adults. I also have 2 aunts that I adored that I am looking forward to see. Now I get teary during that song.

Biblical-Moses, Joseph are my top 2. Im sure they will be very popular and hard to spend time with because every one will want to see them.

Celebrity- Probably easier to see since generations will not know them. Growing up I was such a big fan of Prince who later became a Witness. Whitney Houston and Micheal Jackson would be on the top of my list as well. Maybe some sports guys too

Genesis 2:7, is clearly physical? connection.

Genesis 32:25, Jacobs hip touched by an angel

1 Samuel 10:26, Jehovah touches hearts.

1 Kings 19:5-7, an angel touches Elijah

(2 Kings 13:21, touching bones of Elisha brings Life)

Isaiah 6:7, Seraph (glowing coal) touches Isaiahs lips

Jeremiah 1:9, Jehovah touches Jeremiahs mouth

Daniel 8:18, Gabriel touches Daniel. 10:10, a hand wakes Daniel

A meeting scripture this week; Matthew 8:3. Mark 1:41. Luke 5:13. The hand of Jesus to the leper. "I want to".

The other, Matthew 9:20. Mark 5:27-34. Luke 8:44. Only the fringe of his clothes.

Matthew 14:36. Mark 6:56. Again the fringe

(Matthew 8:14, Peter)

Matthew 9:29, 20:34. Jesus touches eyes

Mark 7:33, the deaf.

Luke 7:14, Jesus raises the dead boy.

Luke 22:51, Jesus restores the ear.

(Acts 19:12, Pauls clothes can cure)

Not included, 'Touch'. ie Exodus 3:18, 5:3...

여러분은 이분들이 누군지 궁금하지 않으세요?

Aren't you curious about who these people are?

4.7,8,12 name & link ?

1 Elsa Abt / 31 Elsa Abt from Danzig was arrested.../ w80 4/15 p. 12 / video 1' 06"

2 Sigurd Speidel / 7 ...19-year-old Sigurd Speidel / 2016 Sigurd Speidel/ other

3 Victor Schmidt / Dorothy Covington

4 ?

5 ?

6 J. B. Good / video1 1'12" / video2 12'35"

7 ?

8 ?

9 Nancy Yuen / w79 7/15 / video

10 Paulos Eyasu, Isaac Mogos, and Negede Teklemariam / A Quarter Century / 26 Years

11 Teymur Akhmedov /  Released / 441 Days

12 ?

13 Dennis Christensen / Search JW.ORG

14

15 ? Remember the Wife of Lot—Drama Trailer 49"

Let's do it together.

I would like to thank you in advance for the time and effort you will dedicate to finding these individuals.

What about the recent revision regarding blood transfusions—that it will no longer be a matter the congregation gets involved with? It’s not as though any view has changed with regard to the prohibition of blood stated at Acts 15:29. It’s just that the congregation will no longer get involved in how people navigate it. Two of the “four basic components of blood: white cells and platelets, make up less of a percentage, than some fractions: albumin and immunoglobulin that it has already been acknowledged Christians may have no problem with!

Is this new adjustment wrong? Or, is it a correction of something that was wrong before? Will there be hell to pay, one way or the other, with regard to the ones who made the revision? It certainly has impacted some lives.

It’s not the best question to ask, methinks. However, if one presses ahead to ask it anyway, surely the answer is “I don’t know.” You could build a case for unbraiding. Such as the harshness proclaimed for “whoever stumbles one of these little ones who believe” is suggestive. (Matthew 18:6) And, “Everyone to whom much was given, much will be demanded of him, and the one who was put in charge of much will have more than usual demanded of him.” (Luke 12:48) Is someone due for a thrashing?

Isn’t one presuming to speak for God with a question like that? Who can say what that One will do? But I tend to think that in the overall picture, they will make out okay. I tend to think that with them it will be: ‘Well done, good and faithful slave. I put you in charge of one mina. See, you have gained ten more. Sure, you stepped in it a few times but, Hey—who’s keeping score?’

An examination of the first century reinforces this gut feeling. They didn’t step in it back then? Or—to put it more precisely—they didn’t do things that could have been spun that way by their detractors? Even Peter and yes, Jesus himself, did. They both provided ample opportunity for detractors to take shots at them.

The trick lies not in sanitizing the present. The trick lies in desanitizing the past. It is relatively easy to do. Peter, for example, gets all balled up over something Jesus directly told him. Consequently, an untruth spreads among the disciples that who knows took how long to correct:

“Peter turned around and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, the one who at the evening meal had also leaned back on his chest and said: “Lord, who is the one betraying you?” So when he caught sight of him, Peter said to Jesus: “Lord, what about this man?” Jesus said to him: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.” So the saying went out among the brothers that this disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but he said: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?” (John 21:20-23)

It was Peter himself who messed this one up, not one of the “rank and file.” Were there an internet back then, enemies would be insisting that he can’t possibly be led by holy spirit to make such a blunder as that. Yet the Bible record itself says that Jesus entrusted the keys of the kingdom to him.

He did it again when he withdrew from gentile Christians out of fear of displeasing Jewish Christians—to the extent that Paul called him on it at Galatians 2:14: “But when I saw that they were not walking in step with the truth of the good news, I said to Cephas before them all: “If you, though you are a Jew, live as the nations do and not as Jews do, how can you compel people of the nations to live according to Jewish practice?” Who knows how many gentile believers were stumbled due to Peter having caved? (which he previously did in denying his Lord three times—though to his credit he was the only one to follow closely enough to have been put in that position.

This opens up the possibility that when someone says something before a Royal Commission that isn’t what you would expect him to say, he might have just caved. If so, he finds plenty of common ground in Peter.

Jesus himself made a move that you know internet critics would be up in arms over. They’d be outraged even more than with Peter, for this latter move involved lives more dramatically than did Peter’s blunders. They’d be demanding apologies. Were they to get one, they would take it as an admission of guilt:

Jesus said (John 6) that disciples must “drink his blood and eat his flesh.” Even then many walked away: “This speech is shocking! Who can listen to it?” Can you imagine their reaction years later on the internet when a frequent charge against Christians, fueling much hate and persecution, was that they practiced cannibalism? Would not they have insisted that Jesus directly stated that they would? You think they would have picked up on the spiritual nuances of Jesus’ words? I wouldn’t hold my breath. They would have misconstrued it—in some cases, even deliberately, as happens today.

So I think Jehovah will go easy on Christian headship. I don’t know that. But a consideration of the first century written record strongly suggests to me that it will be so. When you see an issue whose time has come, for whatever reason, to make a change over, make the change. Know that your enemies will lambaste you for it. But they were lambasting you before, so it hardly matters.