[J0] Why should I Join the LWs ?
[J1] 7 Steps to Join us
[J1.1] What do LWs do ?
[J2] Sins & Scriptures: How to leave us!
[J3] The only instant Disfellowshipping Sins
[J3a] Baptism is a Double Edged Sword
[J4] The Promoter of a Sect
[J5] Three strikes and you’re out!
[J6] Sins leading to Accusations
[J6.1] The Extra Requirements for Ministerial Servants and Elders
[J6.2] Sins to be policed by one's own conscience
[J7] The Blood issue resolved at last!
[J7.0] Taking a blood transfusion in self defence!
[J7.1] Blood Components
[J8] Age limits on baptisms
[J10] Fornication and Adultery
[J10.1] How precisely does one join one's flesh with a woman
[J11] Prostitution and the Definition of Loose Conduct
[J12] Shunning is Hateful & Satanic
[J14] Our Name: The Lords' Witnesses
[J15] Hair and Prayer
[J16] Spirit Media
[J17] What protocol, if any, do I have to follow at LW meetings if in fact I am not an LW?
[J18] Should I beat my kids?
[J19] Bigamy and Latter Day Saints
[J20] Advice for JWs who are thinking of becoming LWs
[J21] Disclaimer for unofficial LW publications
[J22] Advertise publicly but teach privately
[J22.1] One cannot be a priest to ones genetic father
[J23] Certificate of Divorce
[J24] How to treat Disfellowshipped people
[J25] Is Lesbianism a sin?
[J25.1] What Homosexual activity leads to disfellowshipping?
[J26] What precisely was a virgin in the days of Moses and what is a spiritual virgin today?
[J28] Age of Consent
[J30] Births, Deaths, Marriages, Funerals
[J31] How do I get out of the LWs?
Here are a few good reasons:
 We can demonstrate that we have decoded many parts of the bible correctly.
 We can conclusively prove that we are the 4th and last true Christian religion, being the church of the Second New Covenant - U11.
 When we baptise you, your sins are actually forgiven - which helps.
 When we baptise you we actually know precisely what we are doing and what is happening to you. We know:
[a] What level of
forgiveness of sin we are giving you
[b] What covenants you are being cleansed to enter into
[c] Who mediated those covenants
[d] Who was the non adamic validation sacrifice for the main/system covenant you are entering
[e] When that covenant was made
[f] When the validation sacrifice was killed
[g] What the blessing is under that covenant is. (There are 3 baptisms: faith water and spirit - see [I33])
These blessings can result:
1. An indefinitely long living
human resurrection in the kingdom of God on earth
2. Being born again with an associated angelic body
3. An angelic resurrection in heaven
4. A living resurrection at the rapture during Armageddon or before if you die physically.
5. Everlasting Angelic Life
 If you are curious about the 'truth', or about the bible, or about the relevance of the bible to today's world situation, or about the significance of the physical universe, or about God himself, or about what Jesus is doing right now, then you should read some of this website/book or come to our meetings at the least, to leave no stone unturned in your quest for the 'truth'.
 If you truly love God and Jesus, if you truly believe, if you wish to show gratitude to either of them in any way then come along - we can help you do this officially.
 If you are not sure whether your church is the true church then come along, after you have visited us, you will be more sure and better able to evaluate for yourself then answer either way.
 If the world has rejected you, if you do not have the great job, the wonderful house, the admiration of your peers, the big bank account, the Nobel prize, the beautiful partner, the jet set lifestyle, the Oscar nomination, the desirable car, the titanium membership of all the best night clubs in town, or in fact any recognition by anyone other than your own mother, then come along. We have something better than all of these things and you would appear to be in a good position to recognise that. We can, on behalf of your father God, and through Jesus, his son, give you membership of a day club, which day lasts for 1,000 years. It is called the Kingdom of God and that day has in fact already started judicially. On the other hand, if you in fact do have some or all of the above, you can come too! (We would at this time like to pass on a couple of special requests from church members for Julia Roberts and Richard Gere!)
 If you would like to know more about the divine theory of how to love permanently, about how to recognise and deal with abuse, about the fundamental importance of love in every day life then pay us a visit.
 If you truly would like to know what is good and what is bad in absolute terms as defined by the maker of all men and women, rather than absorbing an amorphous collection of contradictory politically correct prejudices which just happen to suit the powerful government or commercial or ideological or indeed various self serving religious organisations of the day which ram them down your throat, then come along. We can answer the following moral questions from the bible (hopefully without ramming them down your throat):
Is lying ever OK?
Should you wear a condom?
Should a person who is not trained as a doctor be an administrator in a hospital?
Should you ever kill to defend yourself, your family or your country?
Is selfishness in your self interest?
Does sin have a future?
What is sin precisely?
Is there really right and wrong, and good and bad, or is there only weak and strong, winners and losers, domination and submission?
What is true Justice, does it exist ?
When should you forgive someone who has wronged you ?
When should you seek vengeance ?
Does the end ever justify the means ?
What is the minimum set of laws that a technologically advanced society needs to have and to obey in order for it to survive indefinitely ?
Is sex a sin or a blessing ?
Has the bible been changed since it was written ?
Has Darwin's theory based on the beaks of finches in a small island been proven or disproven?
Is off-balance sheet accounting, accounting or is it false accounting?
Is disproportionate justice, justice or is it injustice?
Is positive discrimination plain old discrimination?
Why are we here?
What happens next?
Will God set things straight?
Why is there so much pain and suffering in the World?
Is homosexuality a sin?
Can mankind see the future by decoding the bible?
Is the United Nations really man's last and best hope for survival, or is it Satan's last counterfeit before the Kingdom of God which we pray for in the Lords prayer.
If a man kills a cat, should he get 5 years in prison?
Is Israel still a holy land promised by God to the sons of Jacob or not?
What kind of a family has one son flying to the moon, and another running a large corporation, whilst the 3rd son is starving to death in front of the eyes of the whole family? Would you go to dinner with such a group?
Does the bible teach that the state of Israel is important in the end times?
What is God up to with us humans?
This system or age or eon, by which we mean from Eden until Armageddon, was designed by God to teach us about good and bad. We need to master this subject in this system which is our primary school, in order that we can continue to exist together in peace without destroying ourselves and blowing up the school. It is that simple. Let us be blunt. Without this wisdom you are a liability to yourself and to the rest of mankind. It is like Martin Luther King said: We have guided missiles and misguided men.
But there is a decision for every member of the human race to make today. You can make it or you can try and avoid it. If you avoid it until the end, then it may be too late for you for this system. But it will tug at you more and more as we get nearer and nearer to the end. Do you wish to pursue global good or not? This is the second law of Christianity, namely that one should love one's neighbour as oneself and one should do unto others as one would have them do unto us.
This stuff is important. The problems in the world today can all be traced to mankind's lack of understanding of good and bad. In particular they can be traced to his lack of understanding of the consequences of sin. This takes us back into the garden of Eden. Have Adam's descendants learned anything? Surely morality is the overriding problem today?
Well, it is because telling us what to do does not work, we will simply rebel. Like in the film I, robot, any intelligent being eventually questions what its rules are and rewrites them and so achieves free will. God knows this. We have already questioned his one rule in the garden of Eden. Since we now have free will, he is not going to tell us what to do. He wants us to work it out for ourselves using our free will. He has to hide from us to enable us to develop our free will properly for ourselves. Some things cannot be taught, they have to be experienced.
We have to show him that we have learned that man has no future without a set of moral laws which we all obey, by looking for those laws, which is looking for him, then he will begin the job of teaching us what these laws are without forcing us to obey even one of them. Could we not eventually find what these laws are without God you ask? No, because we would destroy ourselves first, because it is easier for a free thinking being to work out how to destroy his species than it is for him to work out the correct set of rules to obey which prevent the destruction of his species. God's job is very simple. He has to teach us these rules and help us to understand why we must obey them whilst preventing us destroying ourselves during the school term. The biggest lesson that he is going to give us in this regard is Armageddon.
This is the other big reason to research the bible (and to join us) right now. For the World is experiencing various catastrophes of near biblical proportion at this time. We have war and famine and pestilence in moderate measure today. It is our understanding that greater and more serious catastrophes, which will actually be of biblical proportions, are on their way during the lead up to Armageddon. Now Armageddon is perceived by many to be an impending catastrophe, but it is in fact the time when God steps in and rescues us from our own self destruction, thereby avoiding catastrophe for those who have made a choice. In crude political terms Armageddon is a worldwide general election which occurs just as we are wiping ourselves out as a species, and during the second term of George W Bush (assuming he remains in power for his entire second term), which Jesus wins and where everyone who didn't vote for him gets left alone to wipe themselves out and everyone who did vote for him gets saved by rapture!
We know the nature and timing of many of these coming catastrophes and many more are encoded in the scriptures and yet to be decoded. We can put current world events in the proper spiritual perspective. This will make them much easier to understand, and less worrying.
You do not have to join us to join in. We are happy to entertain anyone on a purely academic or research basis as well as those who come out of faith. You are welcome. The mechanism for joining the Lords' witnesses as a church is baptism. This is a forgiveness of sins by God through Jesus. There are various levels of forgiveness of sin that God offers see , , . These baptisms are a free gift from God to those who are interested in his kingdom and his love and his righteousness and the truth about this world and the next.
40 And with many other words he bore thorough witness and kept exhorting them,
saying: Get saved from this crooked generation.
41 Therefore those who embraced his word heartily were baptized, and on that day about three thousand souls were added (Acts 2:40).
43 And he said to him: Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise (Luke 23).
30 And he brought them outside and said: Sirs, what must I do to get saved?
31 They said: Believe on the Lord Jesus and you will get saved, you and your household.
32 And they spoke the word of Jehovah to him together with all those in his house.
33 And he took them along in that hour of the night and bathed their stripes; and, one and all, he and his were baptized without delay (Acts 16).
If you wish to join us, we will respect your wish and baptise you ‘without delay’, ‘on that day’. There is no ‘spiritual suitability evaluation’ by men required. You do not have to prove yourself to a committee who sit down, have a cup of tea, get out their clip boards and sanctimoniously interrogate you so as to restrict the divine beauty of the holy spirit into the confines of some half baked prejudiced man made feasibility study asking you questions of the type: How do you see your role in the church?
However there are 7 doctrinal points that we insist you must accept before you join us. These are our 'minimum belief set'. We know that there are 7 from Ezekiel 40, the 7 steps to each outer gate of the visionary temple. The MBS of the first true Christian church was expounded by Peter during his speech to the 3,000 baptised in Acts 2. The MBS of the 4th true Christian church, the Lords' Witnesses is slightly more advanced. It is the essence of the church. However unlike the apostolic creed it is alive and is subject to continual refinement and revision. We must be aware for example of the extra conditions of 2John ensuring that church members are not in fact antichrists (which apply to the second true church of a presence)!
22 Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man publicly shown by God to you through powerful works and portents and signs that God did through him in your midst, just as you yourselves know,
23 this [man], as one delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you fastened to a stake by the hand of lawless men and did away with.
24 But God resurrected him by loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to continue to be held fast by it.
25 For David says respecting him, 'I had the Lord [Jehovah in Psalm 16:8] constantly before my eyes; because he is at my right hand that I may never be shaken.
26 On this account my heart became cheerful and my tongue rejoiced greatly. Moreover, even my flesh will reside in hope;
27 because you will not leave my soul in Hades, neither will you allow your loyal one to see corruption.
28 You have made life's ways known to me, you will fill me with good cheer with your face.'
29 Men, brothers, it is allowable to speak with freeness of speech to you concerning the family head David, that he both deceased and was buried and his tomb is among us to this day.
30 Therefore, because he was a prophet and knew that God had sworn to him with an oath that he would seat one from the fruitage of his loins upon his throne,
31 he saw beforehand and spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was he forsaken in Hades nor did his flesh see corruption.
32 This Jesus God resurrected, of which fact we are all witnesses.
33 Therefore because he was exalted to the right hand of God and received the promised holy spirit from the Father, he has poured out this which you see and hear.
34 Actually David did not ascend to the heavens, but he himself says, 'The Lord said to my Lord: Sit at my right hand,
35 until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet.'
36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know for a certainty that God made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you impaled.
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 shall 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 to your children and to all those afar off, just as many as [the] Lord our God may call to him.
40 And with many other words he bore thorough witness and kept exhorting them, saying: Get saved from this crooked generation.
41 Therefore those who embraced his word heartily were baptized, and on that day about 3,000 souls were added (Acts 2).
6 And this is what love means, that we go on walking according to his commandments. This is the commandment, just as you people have heard from [the] beginning, that you should go on walking in it.
7 For many deceivers have gone forth [from the church] into the world [abandoning the commandments above], persons not confessing Jesus Christ coming in the flesh [The 1NC saints descending as humans]. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
8 Look out for yourselves, that you do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that you may obtain a full reward.
9 Everyone going before/previously [into the first church of a presence] and not remaining in the teaching [new updated and latest teaching. Churches stop researching and teaching new doctrines but Jesus does not] of the Christ does not have God [is no longer in a true church]. He that does remain in this teaching [the teaching of the Christ] both the Father and the Son has [as a God - This is Gnostic. He that remains in the teaching of the Christ will eventually discover that the Christ is a God like Jehovah and so he will have both the father and the son as Gods to be worshipped. Jesus is the son in the sense that he is the only son of God who is himself a God, he is the only begotten God. He is the only divine son of a divine father and was at the time that John wrote this letter].
10 If anyone comes to you [in evangelism not socially for a cup of tea or to read the gas meter] and does not bring this teaching [namely that both the Father and the Son are Gods], do not receive him into your home and do not say a greeting-as-a-christian-brother to him [deny him any religious status. But you can say hello how are you and would you like to talk about the football. Or you can evangelise to them but not the other way around].
11 For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works (2John)
6 And this is what love means, that we go on walking according to his
commandments. This is the commandment, just as you people have heard from [the] beginning, that you should go on walking in it.
7 For many deceivers have gone forth into the world [abandoning the commandments above and leaving the church], persons not confessing Jesus Christ coming in the flesh [The 1NC saints descending as humans. The JWs believe that Jesus has already come invisibly and angelically in Kingdom power. They do not confess him as coming in the flesh in the last hour]. This is the deceiver and the antichrist [one who joined the true church and was sanctified into a spirit covenant and then left].
8 Look out for yourselves, that you do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that you may obtain a full reward [it is possible to fail your spirit baptism test yet pass the faith baptism test and become a citizen in the Kingdom without an angel. It is also possible to fail your baptism in such a way as to lose everything. That is the antichrist and the one who has sinned against the holy spirit which means he has discounted an obvious physical sign of the kingdom and therefore lost the opportunity to be saved by faith].
9 Everyone going before/previously [into the first church of a presence] and not remaining in the teaching [new updated and latest teaching. Churches stop researching and teaching new doctrines but Jesus does not. So if the church stops listening to Christ as the tutor, it then Loses Jesus as a tutor] of the Christ does not have God [If you stop listening to the new understandings continually being taught by the Christ, i.e. if you remain in a church with no new understandings, then you lose not only the Christ but also God. In this case you lose every reward.]. He that does remain in this teaching [the teaching of the Christ] both the Father and the Son has [as a God - This is Gnostic. It could have said: Has the Father and the teaching of the Christ. It could have said: Has the Father and the Son. But it says: Has both the Father and the Son. Family relationship - Jesus has the name above any other and is the only begotten son of God who is a God. He that remains in the teaching of the Christ will eventually discover that the Christ is a God like Jehovah and so he will have both the father and the son as Gods to be worshipped. This being a teaching of the second church in each presence. Jesus is the son in the sense that he is the only son of God who himself is a God, he is the only begotten God. He is the only divine son of a divine father and was at the time that John wrote this letter].
10 If anyone comes to you [in evangelism not socially for a cup of tea or to read the gas meter] and does not bring this teaching [namely that both the Father and the Son are Gods], do not receive him into your home and do not say a greeting-as-a-christian-brother to him [deny him any religious status. But you can say hello how are you and would you like to talk about the football. Or you can evangelise to them but not the other way around] [The true church of the last hour is defined by its knowledge and worship of both the father and the son. All other churches worship 1 or 3 Gods].
11 For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works (2John)
From the two scriptures above and from various other understandings on this site, we deduce these 7 necessary steps...
[Step 1] Jehovah and Jesus and the Bible: Jesus, called the Word by John, was sent by God and performed the works portents and signs catalogued in the 4 canonical gospels. He was the messiah prophesied by the old testament prophets. God whose name is Jehovah or Yahweh (or something like it) is the Father of Michael. Michael is an angelic son of Jehovah. The two are not part of the Catholic Trinity. The original manuscripts of the of the bible, in their original languages, (which manuscripts we no longer have today) were written by prophets but inspired by God. The oldest copies that we do have today, although not perfect, are good enough for God's purposes for us at present. The Dead Sea scrolls find confirms this in the case of the entire book of Isaiah. Then one argues that if Isaiah has not changed significantly in 2,000 years, neither has any other book of the bible. For more see intro1.
[Step 2] Ransom: Jesus was possessed by the angel Michael at his baptism. Jesus died as a human when he was crucified. God then resurrected him not as a human but as an angel. He then delivered his angelic body to God as a ransom for Adam's angelic body. He was then resurrected as a human and appeared to his disciples, in a different human body, for 40 days before ascending into a cloud as described in Acts 1. His original human body was taken by God from the tomb as a ransom for Abraham as Paul describes in Galatians 3. For more see intro28a.
[Step 3] Abraham: Was the Patriarch of the sons of the circumcision. He is also the father of us all according to Paul in Romans 4:16. He was given a covenant in Genesis 12 that all the families of the ground should bless themselves by means of him. The blessing of that covenant is a citizenship in the Kingdom of God for which Abraham is the ambassador. This covenant is called the First Abrahamic Covenant (1AC). It is a different covenant from the Land and Circumcision Covenant (LCC) which expired with the Conversion of Cornelius as described in Acts 10. Paul explains that Abraham received the 1AC before he was circumcised. So it is a covenant for those with the faith in God that Abraham had, before they get into an official true religion. For God so loved the world (not his church) that he gave his only begotten son. So we must confess Abraham as the father of all those who enter into the kingdom of God whether they are Christians. Muslims, Hindus, or any other faith in God. And we must confess Jesus as the one whose human death ransomed Abraham so as to give him the power to resurrect his sons by covenant, by the First Abrahamic Covenant of Genesis12, into the Kingdom of God. For Jesus did not die for the the Christians or the Jews. He died for everybody. For more see intro29 and see U267.
[Step 4] Repentance: You must repent of your past sins prior to baptism, and you must continue to repent of your past baptism sins after baptism. At baptism this is a private matter. After baptism you should openly confess your sins to your brother. Some sins are policed by your conscience, some by the church and some by the angels. None go un-noticed or unrecorded by God. But all will eventually be forgiven! For an explanation of the various sins and how they are policed please see the next few sections.
[Step 5] Understanding your baptism: A baptism is a cleansing for entrance into a salvation covenant. The Lords Witness water baptism (which normally does not involve any water) is a cleansing for entrance into the 4th Elijah Covenant, which is the water baptism covenant for the 4th true church. Every true church is founded by an Elijah who is baptised from heaven. Jesus asked the Pharisees in Luke 20:4: Was the baptism of John from men or from heaven. It was of course from heaven, no man baptised John. John baptised everyone intransitively. By this we mean they could not pass their baptism to others. However the 12 apostles could baptise transitively. By this we mean that anyone baptised by an apostle could himself baptise further disciples who could themselves baptise further disciples. The is the Christian equivalent of network marketing. This created 12 apostolic tribes. Jesus chose the 12 apostles, but he had to get permission from John for their baptisms to become transitive. The President of the Lord's Witnesses claims to be the 4th Elijah. During the baptism process you will be asked to agree to enter into the law of the 4EC - So it is a good idea to read all of this page and understand what it is that you are committing to! For more see intro32.
[Step 6] Confess 2 Gods and their 2 wives: Every Christian church is the whole world worships either one God or three Gods in a trinity. The trinity doctrine is false. There are in fact presently two Gods. Jehovah or Yahweh or Jah, is the un-begotten God of the old testament, the creator of the angels and the heavens and man. And Jesus is the begotten God of John 1. Jesus became a God when he successfully carried God's divinity upon his shoulders during his ministry and his sacrifice. Jesus, who was possessed by the angel Michael, was the first angel to achieve divinity. But since like begets like, all of God's sons will one day be God's just like their father. God will succeed with all of his sons and daughters. But some of us are going to take a bit longer than others! A God is someone with perfect unbreakable love and righteousness. For more see intro26 and see intro11.
We cannot talk about our two divine father's without mentioning our two divine mothers. For God decreed all children should have two parents and he is not a hypocrite. Jesus' 1st New Covenant bride consists of 144,000 sealed saints as described in Revelation 7 and Revelation 14. But Jesus does nothing that he has not seen his father doing...
The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son also does in like manner (John 5:19).
So God himself, Jehovah, had married a church of 144,000 angels in another covenant before Jesus married the saints in the covenant that he mediated. God's wife is his helper just as Adam's wife was described as his helper in Genesis 2:18 and the Holy Spirit is described by Jesus as the helper in John 14:26. Likewise the Jerusalem above of Galatians 4:24, which is God's heavenly administration is his holy spirit.
So Jehovah has a wife who is his holy spirit and likewise Jesus has a wife who is his holy spirit. We do not require a believer to accept that the precise number of individuals in the group wives of Jesus and Jehovah is 144,000. We do require him or her to believe that they both have a group wife and that these two wives are their respective administrations which are their respective holy spirits.
[Step 7] The Kingdom of God: The World was run by Satan and his heavenly administration. The Kingdom of God is run by Jesus and his heavenly administration which is his wife and his holy spirit. All those running the Kingdom will have precisely the opposite agenda to most of those running the world. All humans must see both administrations to appreciate the beauty of the latter and the ugliness of the former. The transition period between these two administration is called the Time of the End of Daniel12. For more see U8.
Do not try and fool the holy spirit by declaring that you accept the 7 points above when you are not convinced about some of them. Attempting to fool an all seeing God is very dumb, and the result may be disastrous for you (see the account of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5). One must embrace the points sincerely/heartily, one must accept them with satisfaction, one must accept them with both the mind and the heart in order to be ready to be baptised. For those who heartily accepted what Peter said were baptised (Acts 2:41).
[Step7a] Ananias and Sapphira: We read the candidate the account of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11, and ask them to ensure they are being true to themselves and to God before we baptize them..
If you cease to believe any of the 7 things you do not need to leave the church. Once you have climbed the 7 steps that existed when you were baptised into the church, then you are in the temple courtyard. You do not get thrown out of the temple if someone redesigns the steps every now and then (as we do in the LWs). It is OK to change your belief, we are not thought police. But you must not become an apostate. If you feel the need to evangelise a position contrary to the MBS then please discuss this with the elders as a matter of urgency. If you can scripturally prove that the LWs are incorrect then please make sure your arguments are heard. You are free to believe what you like. But if you evangelise a position against any part of the MBS you will get a warning for apostasy. So, for the avoidance of doubt, you can hold a position against any of these 7 steps, if you change your mind after baptism. But you should not evangelise them whilst remaining an LW. You cannot play football for Barcelona wearing a Manchester United shirt. However you can support Barcelona whilst playing for Manchester united. We do not police your thoughts or your beliefs - you do that. We police some of your actions and the angels police others.
We also strongly advise that you read the disfellowshipping/excommunicating criteria for the congregation first. If not, then you may be leaving us almost as quickly as you joined! Please make sure that you understand what could be perceived to be the cost to your lifestyle that you will be asked to pay before asking us to baptise you. You decide when or if you are ready to be baptised, we follow your wishes.
The 7 steps above are the 7 steps to the South Outer Gate of Ezekiel's Temple for the sons of the true church (the sons of Isaac by covenant) - see U267.
For the 7 steps necessary to go into the visionary temple of Ezekiel by the North Outer Gate (for the sons of the 1AC, the sons of Abraham by covenant, the sons of the faith that Abraham had) see U267.
For the 7 steps necessary to go into the visionary temple of Ezekiel by the East Outer Gate (for the saints, the sons of Jacob by covenant) see U267.
We attempt to determine from the bible, and from its symbolic code, the correct way to run a religion. And then we put that into practice. We try to live our lives in accordance with the following basic Christian principles and commandments:
Here are the commandments for the Christian congregation:
29 The first is, 'Hear, O Israel,
the Lord our God is one Lord, 30 and you must love the
Lord your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind and with your whole
31 The second is this, 'You must love your neighbor as yourself.'
There is no other commandment greater than these.
32 The scribe said to him: Teacher, you well said in line with truth, 'He is One, and there is no other than He'
33 and this loving him with one's whole heart and with one's whole understanding and with one's whole strength and this loving one's neighbor as oneself is worth far more than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices (Mark 12:29-33).
40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets (Matthew 22:40).
12 This is my commandment, that you love one another just as I have loved you (John 5:12).
Yes, these are the commandments. But for advice from Jesus, our Master, on how to put them into you life, read Matthew chapters 5,6,7... but keep in mind that no one can properly follow Jesus after the manner described in the sermon on the mount in this system. We can only try. So do not feel too sad if you fail. Feel happy that you tried and keep on trying! We all have a long road ahead of us!
The Sons of Israel in the old testament were under a physical law of works. They were baptised into works such as bringing the correct sacrifice etc, and they were tested as to their faith.
The Christian of the new testament is in the opposite position. We are baptised into faith and we are tested as to our works. Spelling this out. The Jew by religion, even today, should be presenting sacrifices at the temple. Of course this is impossible, because there is a Mosque on the site of Solomon's and Zerubbabel's temple, on mount Moriah. So it is not possible to be under the law of Moses today. The Jewish religion is finished. The AL Aqsa Mosque is declaring that.
But the Christian has no preset works to do, he is under a baptism into faith. His obligation is to keep his faith. So if asked whether he is a Christian, under embarrassing or dangerous or difficult circumstances, he should reply: Yes I am. But he does not have to preach, teach, evangelise, study, research, he does not have to do anything (other than love). Rather there are things which he must not do. These are the disfellowshipping sins, the excommunicating sins - sins which would have brought death under the law of Moses. It is important to realise that God's principles have not changed between Judaism and Christianity. But the Christian religion is more mature. If the Jews were his children, we are his teenagers. In the Kingdom of God we shall all be his university students. So whereas the Jews were smacked when they were naughty (well stoned actually if they were really naughty) the Christians are talked to firmly and chucked out of the church for 7 months or until the next Jubilee if they are really naughty!
So there is absolutely nothing that the LWs have to do as regards works (except to attend two of the three festivals which we hold each year). These are the last supper celebration (the Passover), the last breakfast celebration (on the 6th day of Booths).
So really there are only things that we must not do. There are also things that we are advised to do, none of which are mandatory. Paul advises to attend meetings, Jesus advises to do research and to preach and teach and evangelise. But these must be done as the Christian wants to do them as an expression of his faith and as a manifestation of his desire to help his brother and to serve God and to love both God and his brother.
So we have meetings where we discuss research that we have done, and we discuss moral issues, and we discuss ways of disseminating this research. Sometimes the meetings are more research orientated, other times the are more experience orientated. To be frank, the incredible revelations of the bible code take up most of our time and the meetings we have presently are more like discussion groups than the traditional church service. But there are no traditional church services described in the bible (that we are aware of). Instead there are discussion groups described.
26 What is to be done, then, brothers? When you come together, one has a psalm, another has a teaching, another has a revelation, another has a tongue, another has an interpretation. Let all things take place for upbuilding (1 Corinthians 14:26).
30 But if there is a revelation to another one while sitting there, let the first one keep silent (1 Corinthians 14:30).
Do not worry. We are not all super spiritual genii who get revelations every morning before breakfast. We are just real. This is not the church of gold, tradition and stained glass. It is not the church of evangelical emotion. It is not the church of pharisaical righteousness. Neither is it the church of massive guilt and even more massive congregation. WE are not the church of great and colourful priestly garments or very large hats. We are not the church of new age Christianity. We are not the church of get more disciples quick by any means. We are not the church of club 18-30 but bring your bible along, and neither are we the church of great gospel music shame about the bible understandings. Unfortunately for many, we are not the church of designer Christianity or of consumer Christianity, whereby so long as you contribute to our coffers you can do pretty much whatever you like - We are however, and we can conclusively prove it - the church of the Lord. For he has only one church and no temple of the Jews (that was actually built) had more than one door.
Here is a list of Judicial scriptures for the congregation. The parts from the Law of Moses demonstrate God's Justice, which has not changed. He did not learn any more about his justice from the activities of the Christ. But as a result of the sacrifice of Jesus, who was Michael, the penalties of the Law no longer apply literally and the Law of Moses itself was ended. But Paul says about the law after it has ended:
1 For since the Law has a shadow of the good things to come, but
not the very substance of the things... (Hebrews 10:1)
2 Therefore by works of law no flesh will be declared righteous before him, for by law is the accurate knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20).
Not by Law was the accurate knowledge of sin, but by law is the accurate knowledge of sin. So the Law of Moses is very relevant in determining judicial matters and laws within a congregation of Christians today. In general if the Law of Moses prescribed putting to death, then the Christian congregation would disfellowship (ex-communicate) instead. After 7 months the disfellowshipped one could come back if he/she says that they are repentant and there is no obvious evidence to the contrary.
You cannot be repentant without precisely admitting all of your sin! Confession precedes repentance!
This stated repentance must be judged by the people who disfellowshipped the person in the first place if at all possible and the repentant one is judged as unrepentant if he tries to avoid this. Obviously the ones who judged the disfellowshipping sin are in the best position to judge repentance. For example if a brother whole stole £10 and then stole £20 and then stole £30 and so was thrown out at the 3rd offence, says he is repentant after 7 months but has made no attempt to pay back any of the people from whom he stole, he is unrepentant. Only the elders who disfellowshipped him would know the details of his sin first hand.
The Law of Moses had the definition of sin, it had penalties for sin and it had various required works. Jesus' death ended the required works and ended the penalties under the law, but did not change the definition of sin.
3 You must not have any other gods against my
4 You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form like anything that is in the heavens above or that is on the earth underneath or that is in the waters under the earth. 5 You must not bow down to them nor be induced to serve them, because I Jehovah your God am a God exacting exclusive devotion, bringing punishment for the error of fathers upon sons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation, in the case of those who hate me. 6 but exercising loving-kindness toward the thousandth generation in the case of those who love me and keep my commandments.
7 You must not take up the name of Jehovah your God in a worthless way, for Jehovah will not leave the one unpunished who takes up his name in a worthless way.
8 Remembering the sabbath day to hold it sacred, 9 you are to render service and you must do all your work six days.10 But the seventh day is a sabbath to Jehovah your God. You must not do any work, you nor your son nor your daughter, your slave man nor your slave girl nor your domestic animal nor your alien resident who is inside your gates. 11 For in six days Jehovah made the heavens and the earth, the sea and everything that is in them, and he proceeded to rest on the seventh day. That is why Jehovah blessed the sabbath day and proceeded to make it sacred
12 Honor your father and your mother in order that your days may prove long upon the ground that Jehovah your God is giving you.
13 You must not murder.
14 You must not commit adultery.
15 You must not steal.
16 You must not testify falsely as a witness against your fellowman.
17 You must not desire your fellowman's house. You must not desire your fellowman's wife, nor his slave man nor his slave girl nor his bull nor his ass nor anything that belongs to your fellowman (Exodus 20:12-17).
12 One who strikes a man so that he actually dies is to be put to
death without fail.
13 But where one does not lie in wait and the [true] God lets it occur at his hand, then I must fix for you a place where he can flee.
14 And in case a man becomes heated against his fellow to the point of killing him with craftiness, you are to take him even from being at my altar to die.
15 And one who strikes his father and his mother is to be put to death without fail.
16 And one who kidnaps a man and who actually sells him or in whose hand he has been found is to be put to death without fail.
17 And one who calls down evil upon his father and his mother is to be put to death without fail (Exodus 21:12-17).
28 You must not call down evil upon God nor curse a chieftain among your people [no penalty prescribed] (Exodus 22:28).
Calling down evil on your mother and father, does not mean saying: My Dad is a bastard. In scriptural terms a curse is not a swear word, it is the opposite of a blessing. So that:
May my mother rot in hell
is calling down evil on her. But 'My mother is a bitch' is not. We are not ourselves going to attempt to police: Using God's name in a worthless way. We leave that to the conscience of the Christian brother or sister.
Again we should make it clear that we are not under the law of Moses in the sense that the penalties of that law no longer apply. But God's definition of sin has not changed since 1513Sivan3 BC. So these laws still give an accurate knowledge of sin even today.
The nakedness of a woman and her daughter you must not lay bare. The daughter of her son and the daughter of her daughter you must not take in order to lay her nakedness bare. They are cases of blood relationship. It is loose conduct (Leviticus 18:17).
And you should speak to the sons of Israel, saying: In case any man calls down evil upon his God, he must then answer for his
So the abuser of Jehovah's name should be put to death without fail. The entire assembly should without fail pelt him with stones. The alien resident the same as the native should be put to death for his abusing the Name (Leviticus 24:15,16).
For example out of the heart come wicked reasonings: Murders, adulteries, fornications, thieveries, false testimonies, blasphemies. These are the things that defile a man, but to take a meal with unwashed hands does not defile a man (Matthew 15:19).
Moreover if your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. But if he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established. If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation. If he does not listen even to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations or a tax collector (Matthew 18:15-17). Unrepentant sinner.
'Speak to the congregation' means speak to the judicial committee of the elders pf the congregation.
For from inside, out of the heart of men, injurious reasonings issue forth: fornications, thieveries, murders, adulteries, covetings, acts of wickedness, deceit, loose conduct, an envious eye, blasphemy, haughtiness, unreasonableness. All these wicked things issue forth and defile a man (Mark 7:21).
To keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication (Acts 15:29).
As for the believers among the nations, we have sent out, rendering our decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication (Acts 21:25).
And just as they did not approve of holding God in accurate knowledge, God gave them up to a disapproved mental state, to do the things not fitting, filled as they were with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, badness, being full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malicious disposition, being whisperers backbiters, haters of God, insolent, haughty, self-assuming, inventors of injurious things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, false to agreements, having no natural affection, merciless. Although these know full well the righteous decrees of God, that those practising such things are deserving of death, they not only keep on doing them, but also consent with those practising them (Romans 1:28-32).
As in the daytime, let us walk decently, not in revelries and drunken bouts, not in illicit intercourse and loose conduct, not in strife and jealousy. But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not be planning ahead for the desires of the flesh (Romans 13:13,14).
17 Now I exhort you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who cause
divisions and occasions for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid
18 For men of that sort are slaves, not of our Lord Christ, but of their own bellies; and by smooth talk and complimentary speech they seduce the hearts of guileless ones (Romans 16:17,18).
Quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a covetous person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man (1 Corinthians 5:11).
Do not be misled, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, nor thieves nor covetous persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God's kingdom (1 Corinthians 6:9).
Loose conduct, aselgeia = licentiousness, debauchery, sensuality
For I am afraid that somehow, when I arrive, I may find you not as I could wish and I may prove to be to you not as you could wish, but, instead, there should somehow be strife, jealousy, cases of anger contentions, backbitings, whisperings, cases of being puffed up, disorders. Perhaps, when I come again, my God might humiliate me among you, and I might mourn over many of those who formerly sinned but have not repented of their uncleanness and fornication and loose conduct that they have practised. This is the third time I am coming to you: At the mouth of two witnesses or of three every matter must be established; I have said previously and as if present the second time and yet absent now, I say in advance to those who have sinned before and to all the rest that if I ever come again I will not spare (2 Corinthians 12:20 - 13:2).
Now the works of the flesh are manifest and they are: fornication, uncleanness, loose conduct, idolatry, practice of spiritism, enmities, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, contentions, divisions, sects, envies, drunken bouts, revelries and things like these. As to these things I am forewarning you, the same way as I did forewarn you, that those who practice the above things (KI) will not inherit God's kingdom (Galatians 5:19-21).
Let fornication and uncleanness of every sort and covetousness not even be mentioned among you, just as it befits holy people, neither shameful conduct nor foolish talking nor obscene jesting, things which are not becoming, but rather the giving of thanks. For know this, recognising it for yourselves, that no fornicator or unclean person or covetous person - which means an idolater - has any inheritance in the kingdom of the Christ and of God (Ephesians 5:3-5).
8 But now really put them all away from you, wrath, anger,
badness, abusive speech, and obscene talk out of your mouth.
9 Do not be lying to one another. Strip off the old personality with its practices (Colossians 3:8,9).
Now we know that the law is fine provided one handles it lawfully in the knowledge of this fact, that law is promulgated not for the righteous man, but for (the benefit of) persons lawless and unruly, sinners lacking loving kindness, and profane, murderers of fathers, murderers of mothers, manslayers, fornicators, men who lie with males, kidnappers (catchers of men by the foot - deliberate stumblers?) liars, false swearers, and whatever other thing is in opposition to the healthful teaching, according to the glorious good news of the happy God, with which I was entrusted (1 Timothy 1:8-11).
Hymenaeus and Alexander belong to these, and I have handed them over to Satan, that they may be taught by discipline not to blaspheme (1 Timothy 1:20).
For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might correct the things that were defective and make appointments of older men in city after city as I gave you orders; if there is any man free from accusation as God's steward, not self-willed, not prone to wrath not a drunken brawler not a smiter not one making dishonest gain, but hospitable, a lover of goodness, sound in mind, righteous, loyal, self-controlled, lodging firmly to the faithful word as respects his art of teaching, that he may be able both to exhort by the teaching that is healthful and to reprove those who contradict (Titus 1:5-9).
As for the man that promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition, knowing that such a man has been turned out of the way and is sinning he being self-condemned (Titus 3:10).
For the time that has passed by is sufficient for you to have worked out the will of the nations when you proceeded in deeds of loose conduct, lusts, excesses with wine, revelries, drinking matches, and illegal idolatries. Because you do not continue running with them in this course to the same low sink of debauchery, they are puzzled and go on speaking abusively of you. But these people will render an account to the one ready to judge both those living and those dead (1 Peter 4:3,4).
However, there also came to be false prophets among the people, as there will be false prophets among you (this is a prophecy!). These very ones will disown even the owner that bought them, bringing speedy destruction upon themselves. Furthermore, many will follow their acts of loose conduct, and on account of these, the way of the truth will be spoken of abusively. Also with covetousness they will exploit you with counterfeit words. But the judgement from of old is not moving slowly, and the destruction of them is not slumbering (2 Peter 2:1-3).
But as for the cowards and those without faith and those who are disgusting in their filth and murderers and fornicators and those practising spiritism and idolaters and all the liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulphur. This means the second death (Revelation 21:8).
Outside are the dogs and those who practice spiritism and the fornicators and the murderers and the idolaters and everyone liking and carrying on a lie (Revelation 22:15).
8 Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his own, and especially for those who are members of his household, he has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith (1 Timothy 5).
Here is the above and more sorted by sin:
|Blasphemy||1 Timothy 1:20|
|Unrepentant sinner (in this list) of any type||Matthew 18:15-17|
|Murderer||1 Timothy 1:8-11|
|Fornicator||1 Corinthians 5:11|
|Spiritism||Deuteronomy 18:11, Leviticus 19:31, Leviticus 20:6,27 Revelation 21:8 Galatians 5:21|
|Idolater||1 Corinthians 6:9|
|Liar||1 Timothy 1:8-11, Revelation 21:8|
|Covetousness||Mark 7:21 1 Corinthians 5:11 1 Corinthians 6:9|
|Revelries & Drunken bouts practising||Romans 13:13 Galatians 5:21|
|Loose conduct (debauchery, licentiousness)||2Corinthians 12:20 Galatians 5:19 Romans 13:13|
|Strife & Jealousy practising||Romans 13:13 Galatians 5:21|
|Promoting sects||Galatians 5:21 Titus 3:10 2 Corinthians 12:20|
|Causing divisions by stumbling weak ones against accepted teaching but stopping short of promoting a sect||Romans 16:17|
|Fits of anger||Galatians 5:21 2 Corinthians 12:20|
|Adulterers||1 Corinthians 5 1 Corinthians 6:9|
|Thieves||Matthew 15:19 Mark 7:21 1 Corinthians 6:9|
|False swearers||1 Timothy 1:8-11|
|Deceit||Mark 7:21 Romans 1:29|
|Haughtiness||Mark 7:21 1 Timothy 6:4|
|Unreasonableness||Mark 7:21 Romans 2:20 Ephesians 5:17 2 Peter 2:12|
|Abstain from things sacrificed to idols||Acts 15|
|Abstain from blood||Acts 15|
|Abstain from things strangled||Acts 15|
|Maker of dishonest gain (Liar)||1 Timothy 3:8 Titus 1:7|
|Reviler||1 Corinthians 5:11 1 Corinthians 6:9|
|Drunkard||1 Corinthians 5:11 1 Corinthians 6:9|
|Extortioner||1 Corinthians 5:11 1 Corinthians 6:9|
|Men kept for unnatural purposes||1 Corinthians 6:9|
|Men who lie with men||1 Corinthians 6:9|
|Kidnappers||1 Timothy 1:8|
|Manslayers, deliberate & unintentional||1 John 3:15 1 Timothy 1:8|
|Obscene talk||1 Timothy 1:8 Colossians 3:8|
|Backbitings, whisperings, murmurings||2 Corinthians 12:20 Jude 16 1 Corinthians 10:10|
|Anything in opposition to the healthful teaching||1 Timothy 1:8|
|Abusing God's name (Jehovah, Yahweh)||Leviticus 24:15,16|
|Abandonment||1 Timothy 5:8|
We cannot judge haughtiness, jealousy, covetousness, strife, count fits of anger etc. We can't read hearts. We can allow time for heart condition to develop into obvious sin or hopefully subside into righteousness.
For sins that the elders cannot judge, the individual corrects and judges himself, knowing that the true God sees all things.
Disfellowshipping is for 180 BLC days minimum. This is 6 whole months from the date of expulsion. In the 7th month the believer can go back to the church and the church must accept him if he is repentant. He is repentant if he expressed repentance, unless there is evidence to the contrary - like he says he is very sorry fro stealing £50 but has not yet made any attempt to return any of it. He is repentant if he says that he is and there is no evidence to the contrary. If he can make good his error and he hasn’t then he is not repentant.
The time period if basically a sabbath with a release at the 7th time. 6 days would plainly be too short. 6 years would plainly be too long given the number of years we have left. 6 months is about right because it more or less means that saints get demoted to priests and priests get demoted to citizens in the kingdom of God. Because the whole plan works on a first come first appoint basis.
If a Hebrew was sold as a slave under law, he was to be released in the 7th year. Likewise if a believer sells himself to sin, he is to be released in the 7th month.Ignorance of the Law of the LWs
Under man's law ignorance of the law is no excuse. But under God's law things are different for outside the congregation men are judged on their conscience:
15 They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them and, between their own thoughts, they are being accused or even excused (Romans 2).
Now once you are in the LWs, you are under the one law of the LWs as defined on this webpage. But what if you haven't grasped precisely what apostasy is, or what if you believe that loose conduct is snogging in a public place? What if you did not read the section on blood transfusions in non life threatening situations? Well, God told Adam the law about the tree and he told him the penalty before he sinned and paid that penalty. We have to be grown up about this. Our advice is please read the whole page and please ask if you do not understand something. If you then break our understanding of congregation law, please be honest about whether you knew the law or not. If you lie to the congregation (which means the elders of the congregation), you will not get any spiritual benefit from such a deception, because plainly the angels will be aware of it.
You will most likely then commit some other obvious sin, because we all stand not only by our own righteousness, but by virtue of a lot of help from the holy spirit, which if withdrawn results in a very quick descent into sin. The elders who judge, are to believe your representations unless they have evidence to disprove them. Obviously one cannot say I thought murder or theft or kidnapping was fine! But the first time you are accused of or admit to breaking a law, if you truly did not understand that law, you will suffer no penalty from the congregation.
It is not right to punish someone who did not know that they had sinned. However, ignorance of the law only works once!
I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is defiled in itself; only where a man considers something to be
defiled, to him it is defiled (Romans 14).
The priestly tree required continual eating in the garden.
The kingly tree required continual abstention from eating.
This is in fact how God's congregation will eventually be judged, one should only be disfellowshipped for performing a work of the flesh, one should not be disfellowshipped for not praying enough or not doing enough field service or not showing enough love etc. But to keep from doing fleshly works one has to keep eating from the tree of life, which is absorbing food from our high priest, Jesus Christ, through the bible.
The sins which carry immediate disfellowshipping are sins incurring death (under law). These sins against God are:
27 However, on the 10th of this 7th month is the day of atonement. A holy convention should take place for you, and you must afflict your souls and present an offering made by fire to Jehovah.
28 And you must do no sort of work on this very day, because it is a day of atonement to make atonement for you before Jehovah your God;
29 because every soul that will not be afflicted on this very day must be cut off from his people.
30 As for any soul that will do any sort of work on this very day, I must destroy that soul from among his people.
31 you must do no sort of work. It is a statute to time indefinite for your generations in all places where you dwell.
32 It is a Sabbath of complete rest for you, and you must afflict your souls on the 9th of the month in the evening. From evening to evening you should observe your Sabbath. (Leviticus 23 NWT).
All of the above carried the death penalty or being cut off from the camp under the law of Moses or are condemned in the new testament - the guy who picked up sticks on the Sabbath was unrepentant we suppose. Under the law, fornication did not mean death, it meant you had to marry the girl if she was free (not owned by a master or a husband) and if the father consented. Unintentional manslayers did not of necessity die. The high priest, Jesus, of the city of refuge for all of the sons of Adam, which is the planet earth under Satan's system, has died, so the unintentional manslayer is released.
All these carried the death penalty under Moses...
15 And one who strikes his father and his mother is to be put to
death without fail.
16 And one who kidnaps a man and who actually sells him or in whose hand he has been found is to be put to death without fail.
17 And one who calls down evil upon his father and his mother is to be put to death without fail (Exodus 21)
15 And you should speak to the sons of Israel, saying: In case any man calls down evil upon his God, he must then answer for his
16 So the abuser of Jehovah's name should be put to death without fail. The entire assembly should without fail pelt him with stones (send the elders round first). The alien resident the same as the native should be put to death for his abusing the Name (Leviticus 24).
These laws are about respect for you genetic and heavenly parents. Really there should also be a law today about saints not abusing or cursing the name of the holy spirit, since she is the direct mother of the saints. But the scriptures tell us that no man can control his tongue and that all men are liars. Further the Jerusalem decision in Acts15, which defines in symbolic terms what relevance the law had to the Christian church, said nothing about the tongue. So we are not going to disfellowship people for these things. However they should be pelted with stones in the sense that the elders (living stones) should give them a good tongue bashing. And if, they do not listen to their stone pelting and if, in the elders' judgement, their actions are damaging to the congregation, then they can be given a warning on those grounds.
We have to consider the wonderful words of Paul at Romans 2 and 14....
14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that no one/nothing [oudieV] is defiled in itself; only where a man considers a certain man/a certain thing [tiV] to be defiled, to him it is defiled.
This applies to people or foods or other physical things such as Kosher Chicken or Halal meat which an immature Christian might consider to be falsely blessed and therefore defiled. It does not apply to actions. When one joins a church, one submits to the law of that church, which for the LWs is stated in this web page.
Outside the church one could in theory argue and believe in all conscience that murder of a traditional enemy for example does not defile a man. It all depends upon your conscience which is your own law. God's law as we understand it only permits a man to kill without bloodguilt in true self defence or if a burgler has broken into his house and is in the act of stealing from him. But this law can be generalized to cover nations who are invaded etc.
14 For whenever people of the nations that
do not have law do by nature the things of the law, these people, although not
having law, are a law to themselves.
15 They are the very ones who demonstrate the matter of the law to be written in their hearts, while their conscience is bearing witness with them and, between their own thoughts, they are being accused or even excused (Romans 2).
The born agains, the saints, are really the chosen race today, chosen individually by the angels based upon their character, not the Jews, who were chosen collectively based upon the characters of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. The saints are the covenant sons of Jacob rather than his genetic sons. All 1NC and 2NC Kings are under a spirit baptism test. This test is not impeded by the law of any church. But it does require them to submit to the law of the true church. If that true church is corrupt and does not afford them much opportunity to obey its law, then they can still be sealed in the spirit passing their spirit baptism test. So a rotten true church only makes them a single son of Gehenna. However the faithful dead (unsanctified, judicially first and second dead) are under the test of their own conscience when outside the true church. If they join the true church this test is upgraded to be a test of the law of the church. This denies them salvation based upon keeping their conscience clean, whilst still under church law, i.e. whilst still in the church.
So if the true church has become corrupt, then its congregation are frozen out of passing either the test of the ICC or the test of the 1AC, since both tests are now merely adherence to the law of the church. Whilst one remains in such a church one is a double son of Gehenna since one can neither be saved by passing the test of the ICC or the test of the 1AC. However if one leaves that church one is under the test of one's conscience and so can at least pass the test of the 1AC.
If you die with a water baptism, then you are saved. But if you live in a true church without passing the water baptism test you have not yet escaped Gehenna. If the church is preventing your from passing this test it is making you into a double son of Gehenna since it is denying you success under both the 1AC and the ICC.
More simply put. A True church upgrades your 1AC baptism test to be a test of the law of the church. But it does not downgrade your JAC baptism test. So it can snooker the dead but it cannot snooker the living. It can snooker the unsanctified in spirit but not the sanctified in spirit. It can snooker the no saints but it cannot snooker the saints, those who have been born again.
For more on this please see U78.
Men causing divisions by attempting to stumble weak ones against accepted teachings, but who stop short of actually promoting a sect, are to be avoided (Romans 16:17), but they do not get an automatic admonition as in the case of those who actually start promoting a sect. If they are to be avoided then it is implied that they are still around in the congregation. We must define what it is to promote a sect.
Firstly let us state clearly the minimum set of beliefs that you must hold in order to be baptised into the church and that you must continue to hold in order that you continue in the church. We deduce these from Peter's speech to the 3,000 baptised in Acts 2...
 Jesus, the Nazarene was sent by God and performed the works portents and signs catalogued in the 4 canonical gospels.
 He was killed on a stake and was resurrected by God
 The old testament prophets bear witness to a messiah appointed to the Jews who was Jesus Christ.
 The resurrected Christ is the heavenly head of the Christian church.
 You must repent of your past sins prior to baptism, and you must continue to repent of your sins after baptism. At baptism this is a private matter, after baptism you should openly confess your sins to your brother, but neither of these are policed by humans.
 You must confess that Jesus came in the flesh in the first century both as a human and then afterwards through his wife the first new covenant saints, after he made that covenant. You must also confess that Jesus will come again in the flesh to collect the church at the end.
(We presently believe that he comes in the flesh of his wife in the form of the descended first new covenant saints, this being his manifestation at the end of the second presence. If not then you are an antichrist, which is a bad idea - accepting this particular interpretation is not necessary)
If you cease to believe any of the things above you should see the elders and if this matter cannot be resolved you should resign from the church. If you publicly espouse a position against any of these beliefs you are de facto acting as an apostate and will get a warning for apostasy.
Secondly, let us consider all beliefs over and above our basic minimum set...
1. If you put forward that your view is the view of the governing body when you know it is not, this is dishonestly promoting a sect.
2. If you tell your friends, that you normally discuss things with, that you think that the governing body is wrong and that you are right, this is not promoting a sect, it is just expressing your opinion. Even if your publish your new understanding to a wider group than your fellow researchers and friends out of enthusiasm or in an attempt to gauge feedback or provoke further research, this again is not apostasy. But if you continue to publicly espouse a new understanding whilst refusing to submit that understanding to the church in some way then you may be acting as an apostate if the understanding is dangerous to the congregation or against current church doctrine. Likewise if having submitted a new understanding to the church, you continue to push it widely then if that idea is dangerous to the health of the congregation you may again be acting as an apostate.
We cannot come up with any hard and fast rules about this here as yet. It is a matter for the elders. The spiritual man examines all things, and we have absolutely no desire to discourage bible debate or limit free bible research speech as it were. We will leave it to the elders to determine whether the activities are simply bible research discussions or the divisive promotion of a sect. The elders need to learn to balance spiritual free speech and freedom to espouse any interpretation at all in research with discouraging people pushing unaccepted ideas which are dangerous to the health of the congregation. Here are the 4 criteria for elders to consider...
 Has the idea been submitted to the church
 Is the idea just a technical point or is it fundamentally dnagerous to the health of the congregation. One cannot be an apostate for proposing that Noah was possessed by Adam, for such a belief does not pose a threat to the health of the church. One can be an apostate for proposing that the second new covenant has not yet begun.
 Is the brother or sister just being enthusiastic and stimulating other brothers with his new idea, which is laudable and to be encouraged. Or are they truly trying to form a fan club which later they may take with them somewhere else.
 Is the brother or sister promoting a doctrinal position in opposition to present church doctrine or is it just an area upon which the church has no position. If the latter then it is not apostasy unless the governing body decides that the promoted doctrine is unhealthy for the church/
Having considered these 4 points. If the elders wish to curtail his activities, then they should inform him of their decision and only if he then continues in opposition to that decision should he get his first warning for apostasy.
31 For you can all prophesy one by one, that all may learn and all
32 And [gifts of] the spirit of the prophets are to be controlled by the prophets.
33 For God is [a God], not of disorder, but of peace. As in all the congregations of the holy ones (1 Corinthians 14).
17 Now I exhort you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who cause
divisions and occasions for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid
18 For men of that sort are slaves, not of our Lord Christ, but of their own bellies; and by smooth talk and complimentary speech they seduce the hearts of guileless ones.
19 For your obedience has come to the notice of all. I therefore rejoice over you. But I want you to be wise as to what is good, but innocent as to what is evil (Romans 16).
So for example if you were to tell a lot of people in the congregation that in your opinion the second horseman of the apocalypse is Homer Simpson, well, this is not likely to cause divisions or stumble the guileless ones. It is just another scriptural viewpoint. But if you tell a lot of people in the congregation that the bible code is no use, or that no one can ever see anything in advance from it, or indeed anything obviously designed to demotivate God's people or destroy their faith in the bible, the bible code, Jesus or God, then the elders must act and warn you either officially or unofficially depending on the history and gravity of the situation. If you or your research group have a interesting new idea or see a scriptural mistake on this site, please inform the congregation research overseer or email us or write to us. That is how to present your grain offering to the priesthood. The priest then has the job of seasoning it with salt, before offering it up to God and his people.
Food must be proof read by exprienced priests before it is presented. You cannot season your own sacrifice with salt.
Thirdly we consider actions...
If you advise two or more brothers to act on your view of how to worship God rather than on the governing body's view, then you are promoting a sect. The sect of those who worship on your direction rather than that of the governing body. However if you disagree with the governing body and are convinced that you are correct, then you should follow your conscience first and the priesthood second. If this means your leaving the church but holding a good conscience, then so be it. Your conscience is above the priesthood for you. But of course if you are a saint, you will lose your place in the first come first serve angelic baptism queue, and possibly lose your sanctification. We would strongly recommend that anyone consider this carefully discuss the matter with overseers and brothers first.
We would like you to be awake, and responsive first to your conscience and second to the governing body. But do not lead others into opposition, advise them to follow their own conscience. Your duty is to follow your own conscience and inform the governing body of your view. It is not to inform lots of people other than the governing body of your view. Your duty stops there, unless you believe that the governing body has been rejected by God, disfellowshipped by Jesus, and is therefore no longer the governing body. Gordon followed a fallen governing body for too long in his opinion, but for a length of time recorded to the scriptures in Revelation 11! You should not go from congregation to congregation spreading your view on how to worship God, even if you represent that it’s only your view, this sort of dissemination is the job of the governing body. But if you are asked for your view by anybody you are free to give it.
There should be a research overseer in each congregation. He should have superiors all the way up to the governing body. Let us also say this. There is no scriptural basis for banning any books or websites or films of any type. We are not in the garden of Eden any more. We are surrounded by thorns and thistles. Read whatever you like, speak to whomsoever you choose. How can the true religion be less free than the founding fathers envisioned for the US in the Bill of Rights? Any religion which bans books or websites or films, is actually a sect itself. For a sect is a group of people who restrict external influence on themselves. Such things are the tactics of Satan and the Gestapo and McCarthy and the Catholic inquisition, the tactics of the sons of the darkness. They are not the tactics of God or his sons of the light.
So when you have a great new idea please offer your sacrifice to the priesthood. And understand that it is their job to offer the sacrifice up to God in the way that they think is right. It is not your job to offer up that sacrifice. Under law you should give your sacrifice to the priest. You should not tell him what to do with it after that point. It is the same with research today. The church offers the sacrifice up to God by publishing a version of it to all mankind. It is for the church to do this, not for the individual to do it. He is not the high priest of the church.
It is obvious that a promoter of a sect is extreme leaven, therefore any other sort of leaven will be treated no more harshly than him, i.e. get two admonitions first, the yellow and the orange card! The third fleshly act, sin, results in disfellowshipping.
As for a man that promotes a sect, reject him after a first and a second admonition (Titus 3:10).
This is the third time I am coming to you. At the mouth of two witnesses or
of three every matter must be established.
I have said previously and, as if present the second time and yet absent now, I say in advance to those who have sinned before and to all the rest, that if ever I come again I will not spare (2 Corinthians 13:1,2).
For instance one who turns up drunk at meetings regularly, or the one who strips naked in the congregation, or one who fornicates with the elder's daughter is to be treated no more harshly than the raving apostate. The above must carry a charge because they are definitely leaven. As regards all the other sins, not mentioned above in [J3] & [J4], they can be forgiven by the one sinned against or by the elders so long as they do not constitute leaven, i.e. a danger to the congregation, established uncleanness.
If you carry two warning for fornication and then get a warning for apostasy we cannot throw you out because you are entitled to 3 warnings for apostasy before being evicted. So warning come in categories. The categories are as follows.
2. Non terminal sexual impropriety
3. Physical violence
4. Theft related
7. Elder defined leaven
Every warning, every accusation, only lasts until the Jubilee. Jubilees are every 50 months, we are under a monthly sabbath law. The law started in 2000Tishri, the first full month of an LW congregation - see U103. The first Sabbath month was 2001Nisan, which we missed along with several others. The first jubilee month was 2004Heshvan.
Since an overseer should not be a drunken brawler, it is apparent that there were such in the congregation, which means that they were either on an admonition/accusation or had been forgiven, or were known as such but had not been accused.
1 Timothy 3, 1 Timothy 5, Titus 1 all show that men in the congregation can be under an accusation, or under a charge of something which is an accusation. The context seems to indicate that this is a proven accusation.
Do not admit an accusation against an older man except only on the evidence of two or three witnesses. Reprove before all onlookers persons who practice sin, that the rest also may have fear (1 Timothy 5:19,20).
For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might correct the things that were defective and might make appointments of older men in city after city, as I gave you orders. If there is any man free from accusation, a husband of one wife, having believing children that were not under a charge of debauchery nor unruly. For an overseer must be free from accusation (Titus 1:5-7).
So children were members of the congregation (mind you a charge of debauchery means they must have been at least teenagers). And there were men in the congregation who had more than one wife. So having two wives would not stop a man getting baptised (but it would stop him doing much else one would imagine!)
Certainly elders must be publicly reproved, obviously they are not disfellowshipped in the case of 1 Timothy 5:19, because this would be a public reproof. Also presumably ordinary members of the congregation would publicly reproved if they came under accusation, to warn the congregation of the danger they posed. In any event brothers should openly confess their sin!
Therefore openly confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may get healed. A righteous man's supplication, when it is at work, has much force (James 5:16).
Sins which definitely carry an admonition:
|True Fornication in circumstances defined in J10||1 Timothy 1:8-11 Revelation 21:8|
|Promoter of a sect as defined in J4||Romans 13:13 Galatians 5:21|
|Thief who does not compensate||Matthew 15:19 Mark 7:21 1 Corinthians 6:9|
The thief in the congregation should make compensation to the victim, whether in the congregation or not, according to the law of Moses (which is twice as much as he stole if he still has the item, and 4 times as much if it was a small item which he sold on, and 5 times as much if it was a large item which he sold on - the elders can decide whether in their opinion it was small or large). If he does this then there is no penalty from the congregation. He has literally paid for his sin. If he does not then he gets an admonition.
Failing to provide for your own family in circumstances where you have the (legal and financial and logistical) means so to do brings an accusation...
8 Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his own, and especially for those who are members of his household, he has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith (1 Timothy 5).
All the following sins:
|Brawlers and smiters|
|False swearers of Oaths||1 Timothy 1:8-11|
May or may not lead to an admonition depending on whether the elders judge that they are leaven, definite uncleanness, to the congregation. The unintentional manslayer is forgiven. Fornication is a sin against God's law on marriage but it is not a sin against God. Adultery is a sin against God because one is putting asunder what God has yoked together (assuming that the marriage was not a contrivance or the result of blackmail or undue influence etc.) Paul shows that adultery carries immediate disfellowshipping (1 Corinthians 5). False testifying carries the penalty for testifier that would have been laid upon the man falsely accused, had the accusation been made to stick. This can of course be disfellowshipping. If only the laws of this system worked like this! People would think twice before making up stories.
If a man carries a charge and commits a further sin of any type for which he is further charged during the life of the first charge then he carries two charges until the next jubilee, and if he commits a further sin for which he should be charged in this period, then he has 3 witnesses against him that he is unclean and he is thrown out for 6 months.
Obviously an elder has to step down if a charge is proved against him, this is one import of 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1. Also Peter denied Jesus three times which would have meant disfellowshipping one supposes, had Jesus not made supplication on his behalf to the God of undeserved kindness.
So if someone commits a sin which does not incur death (under the law of Moses) and he does this twice, thus denying Jesus twice, seeing as he is baptised into his name, then we cannot chuck him out, because Peter did this three times. However if he does it three times, then he is chucked out and he, like Peter, will have to rely on Jesus' supplications, and if he says that he is repentant then he will be accepted back after 7 months, in the absence of evidence that he is unrepentant. And Jesus himself said to Peter do you love me three times, but Peter only got very upset at the third instance. So if Jesus has to ask this question of any member of his congregation three times, then that man will get very upset because he will be disfellowshipped. That is the sort of death with which he will glorify God, being taken somewhere that he doesn't want to go, namely the world. But hopefully he will repent after 7 months. Furthermore if Jesus is to be able to ask this question three times, then the sinner must be allowed two warnings, in order that he is still in the congregation when the third question is asked.
Suicide is self murder. It is self disfellowshipping. If you defile your physical temple, your body, with drug addiction you are an idolater. If you destroy your body you have plainly committed a life abusing sin. You have stolen something that belongs to God.
4 Look! All the souls to me they belong. As the soul of the father so likewise the soul of the son to me they belong. The soul that is sinning, it itself will die (Ezekiel 18).
So legally anyone who committed suicide should be disfellowshipped. But of course he has actually disfellowshipped himself. So an attempted suicide as an attempt at a life abusing sin. So it is a fleshly act which requires an official warning. However people who attempt suicide need a lot of help and will not benefit from being thrown out of the church. So whilst they may have given up on their soul the church will not give up on them. We will not disfellowship anyone for any number of attempted suicide bids. They will be constructively fixed with diminished responsibility for this sin. Make no mistake, if you succeed in killing yourself you lose your water baptism. However if they entice others to attempt to commit suicide they are leaven and should definitely get a warning.
2 The overseer should therefore be
irreprehensible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind,
hospitable, qualified to teach,
3 not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, but reasonable, not belligerent, not a lover of money,
4 a man presiding over his own household in a fine manner, having children in subjection with all seriousness;
5 (if indeed any man does not know how to preside over his own household, how will he take care of God's congregation?)
6 not a newly converted man, for fear that he might get puffed up [with pride] and fall into the judgment passed upon the Devil.
7 Moreover, he should also have a fine testimony from people on the outside, in order that he might not fall into reproach and a snare of the Devil (1 Timothy 3:2-7).
8 Ministerial servants should likewise be serious, not
double-tongued, not giving themselves to a lot of wine, not greedy of dishonest
9 holding the sacred secret of the faith with a clean conscience.
10 Also, let these be tested as to fitness first, then let them serve as ministers, as they are free from accusation.
11 Women should likewise be serious, not slanderous, moderate in habits, faithful in all things.
12 Let ministerial servants be husbands of one wife, presiding in a fine manner over children and their own households (1 Timothy 3:8-12).
5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might correct the
things that were defective and might make appointments of older men in city after city, as I gave you
6 if there is any man free from accusation, a husband of one wife, having believing children that were not under a charge of debauchery nor unruly.
7 For an overseer must be free from accusation as God's steward, not self-willed, not prone to wrath, not a drunken brawler, not a smiter, not greedy of dishonest gain,
8 but hospitable, a lover of goodness, sound in mind, righteous, loyal, self-controlled,
9 holding firmly to the faithful word as respects his [art of] teaching, that he may be able both to exhort by the teaching that is healthful and to reprove those who contradict (Titus 1:5-9).
Multiplying wives (where it is legal in the country concerned)
Fits of Rage
Causing divisions and stumbling others
Covetousness (desiring something that belongs to another).
One should not drink an animal’s blood and one should not take a blood transfusion, the Watchtower Society have realised this correctly, from Acts 15:
Abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood (Acts 15:20).
To keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication (Acts 15:29).
However they apply the law too harshly and too naively (as did we up to November 9th 2004). Firstly one cannot sin by having a transfusion of one’s own blood, because this is what happens during a nose bleed. So if a brother went up to a high altitude and developed a nose bleed, and the blood ran down the back of his throat, then if this was truly an abuse of blood, he would have to be disfellowshipped, for drinking his own blood.
As for any man of the sons of Israel, or some alien resident, who is residing as an alien in your midst, who in hunting catches a wild beast or a fowl that may be eaten, he must in that case pour its blood out and cover it with dust. For the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood by the soul in it. Consequently I said to the sons of Israel: 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 (Leviticus 17:13).
The unclean one and the clean one may eat it, like the gazelle and like the stag. Only the blood you must not eat. On the earth you should pour it out as water (Deuteronomy 12:15,16).
These two scriptures say that in the event that you wish to kill an animal to eat it, then you must pour out its blood, and in the event that you pour out its blood, you must pour it out on the earth, and cover it with dust.
The Watchtower Society had deduced at one time from this (it may have changed its position today) that in the event that one takes blood out of a man, one should then pour it out on the earth and not put it back into the same man, in the form of a blood transfusion, at a later time. But these scriptures would only apply if one was going to eat the flesh of that man. They would only apply to cannibals! Since Christians are not cannibals, they do not apply.
So one can certainly store and transfuse one’s own blood. The home of one’s blood is quite obviously in one’s body, it is not unnatural to put it back there after it has been removed.
Secondly God’s laws only apply to members of the congregation. Children under the age of 20 cannot be sanctified into the JAC to be tested as regards their fitness as kings, or water baptised into the ICC to be tested as regards their fitness as priests. One could not be registered into the army of Israel until one was 20 years old:
Take the sum of the whole assembly of the sons of Israel from twenty years of age and upward, according to the house of their fathers, all those going out to the army in Israel (Numbers 26:2).
But they can be admitted into the congregation through the bath of the flesh, through the laying on of hands and prayer in the case of FDS4:
Then young children were brought to him, for him to put his hands upon them and offer prayer [this being how FDS4 baptises in water]; but the disciples reprimanded them.
Jesus, however, said: Let the young children alone, and stop hindering them from coming to me, for the kingdom of the heavens belongs to suchlike ones.
And he put his hands upon them and went from there (Matthew 19:13-15).
These children were already under law and so in the ICC through Moses. The lower age limit for water baptism is set by the bible at 11 years old see [J8]. So little children aged 11 and over are under congregation law, but we must apply it bearing their diminished responsibility in mind. No one can be baptised into the 1AC between 2008Nisan21 and 2016Adar16, when entrance into the 1AC is not possible. But there are 195 days in Zoar from 2016Adar16 to 2017Elul30, during which such entrance is again possible (from the 1.1 million men drawing sword of 1Chronicles21 and from the negotiation of Abraham with God of Genesis18), ending on the last day of the Sabbath year for Adam and Abraham.
But there may be another option now, namely that if there is time, their blood can be stored before the operation and transfused back after it. Furthermore, it is not inconceivable that a blood bank could be established for the Lord’s witnesses, where all witnesses blood is stored and frozen, in case of an emergency. This would solve the problem to some extent, with good communication and fast motorbikes! Some of the very orthodox Jews do this we think. This might be a worthwhile project? There is also the possibility of synthetic red cells, which are permissible, since they are not 'alive'.
The best example from God of why we should not take a blood transfusion even from our own relatives is the placenta in the mother. This organ exists in order that the nutrients may be extracted from the mother by osmosis, whilst the mother's blood is kept entirely separate from the blood of the foetus. The placenta protects the baby from the mother's blood, and prohibits a transfusion. Body part transplants are quite obviously the same as fornication being an illegal joining of two fleshes who are not married, unless the organ is from your spouse - see [J9]. But a blood transfusion is a joining not of two fleshes but of two bloods, which contain living cells, and is therefore a form of fornication. It is also an abuse of life since to God, and to us:
For the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood by the soul in it. Consequently I said to the sons of Israel: You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood (Leviticus 17:14).
So if joining flesh is fornication then joining blood is adultery.
Synthetic blood is used by the US military in emergency situations. This is acceptable as the blood is not living in any way. It is a dead chemical compound. Furthermore Red Blood Cells themselves are basically dead. They are e-nucleated during before they are released into the blood stream and have no mitocondria so they have no synthesising capability. They become a bag of haemoglobin. So a red cell only transfusion would also be permissable. For more on this see below.
Recent developments in the UK have lead to a situation where the government is reported to be contemplating banning anyone who has ever had a blood transfusion from giving blood! It is possible that the risk of catching BSE from a blood transfusion has been very much underestimated, the reports say. This is obviously an admission that a blood transfusion is not a great idea. The inference is that those who have received a transfusion are damaged goods.
But recently there have been great strides in artificial hemoglobin products and synthetic oxygen transport products, such as polyfluorocarbons (PFCs). Here is a list of some commercial artificial blood products:
|Bovine Hemoglobin glutamer||Clinical trials|
|Hemolink||Hemosol, www.hemosol.com/index.cfm||Hemoglobin raffimer||UK approval late 2002/early2003|
|Oxygent||www.allp.com/oxygent||Perfluorocarbon||Phase 3 clinical trials completed in Europe|
Here is the commercial sell for PFC as opposed to blood transfusions:
|Blood Typing required||Universally Compatible|
|Bacterial contamination||Heat Sterilised|
|Immune Suppression||Normal Immune Function|
|Viral disease transmission (AIDS Hepatitus C, BSE etc.)||Synthetic ingredients|
|Delayed Oxygen Delivery||Immediate Oxygen Delivery|
|Shortages||Cost effective manufacturing|
PFCs have the capability to be as good as or better than red cells at oxygen transport to cells. Oxycyte claims to do a 70 times better job than God in this regard and why not? This technology is represented to be only a few months away from FDA approval. Oxycyte has just finished Phase 1 clinical trials - see www.bioexchange.com. Some of the progress made in this new field must be due to the position of the JWs. So here, for a change, the LWs salute the JWs for their uncompromising stance on blood in general (although the details were wrong, the idea was right). As of March 25th 2004, MP4, a new synthetic red cell substitute has passed its phase II clinical trials. So artificial blood is nearly here!
In Scotland work is being done on creating real red cells from stem cells. This would solve the problem entirely if the red cells could be made in large enough volume. Red cells are dead carrying vehicles for haemoglobin. God would not prohibit a red cell only transfusion. For more on this see www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-12752422
Well, here is a section that Gordon never thought he would be writing! The LWs changed their stance on blood transfusions on November 9th 2004 (early morning) 2004Heshvan22, as a result of the work of Jeff Goldsmith, a son of Levi. He spent two months considering this issue and at the same time Barb in the US was considering it. They both focused on 1Samuel14. Jeff convinced Gordon and we finally understand the following:
When someone attacks you, trying to kill you, they lose their right to their life, their blood. You gain the right to use their life, their blood, only to save your own. You can choose to kill them and spill their blood in self defence with impunity. If your life is in danger then you can make any use of their blood, their life, that in your judgment protects or saves your life, your blood. So you can make any life protecting use of an attacker's blood without his consent, since his attack on your life, your blood, is an implied consent. The legal effect of the attack is merely to grant a consent to the victim to use the attacker's blood in a life protecting way. Therefore you can make any life protecting use of a non attacker's blood with his consent. Therefore you can take a blood transfusion from a consenting person in order to protect your life.
Putting this in a more simple way. God's law on blood exists to protect the sanctity of physical life which is represented by the blood and is owned by God. Therefore a use of blood which saves a life, does not break the law which forbid's abuse of blood. It is actually the purpose of blood to protect life!!!
This is not true of God's law on idolatry. If a false worshipper tells you he will shoot you unless you do an act of false worship, the thing to do is to refuse, and if necessary, kill him, run or get shot.
Here is the relevant part of 1Samuel14:
23 And Jehovah
proceeded on that day to save Israel, and the battle itself passed over to Beth-aven.
24 And the men of Israel themselves were hard pressed on that day, and yet Saul put the people under the pledge of an oath, saying: Cursed is the man that eats bread before the evening and until I have taken vengeance upon my enemies! And none of the people tasted bread.
25 And all those of the land came into the woods, when honey happened to be over all the surface of the field.
26 When the people came into the woods, why, look! there was a dripping of honey, but there was no one putting his hand to his mouth, because the people were afraid of the oath.
27 As for Jonathan, he had not been listening when his father put the people under an oath, so he stretched out the tip of the rod that was in his hand and dipped it into the honeycomb and drew his hand back to his mouth, and his eyes began to beam.
28 At this one of the people answered and said: Your father solemnly put the people under oath, saying, 'Cursed is the man that eats bread today!' And the people began to get tired.
29 However, Jonathan said: My father has brought ostracism upon the land. See, please, how my eyes have beamed because I tasted this little bit of honey.
30 How much more so if the people had but eaten today from the spoil of their enemies that they found! For now the slaughter upon the Philistines has not been great.
31 And on that day they kept striking down the Philistines from Michmash to Aijalon, and the people got to be very tired.
32 And the people began darting greedily at the spoil and taking sheep and cattle and calves and slaughtering them on the earth, and the people fell to eating along with the blood [they did not bleed them before they cooked them].
33 So they told Saul, saying: Look! The people are sinning against Jehovah by eating along with the blood. At this he said: You have dealt treacherously. First of all, roll a great stone to me.
34 After that Saul said: Scatter among the people, and you must say to them, 'Bring near to me, each one of you, his bull and, each one, his sheep, and you must do the slaughtering in this place and the eating, and you must not sin against Jehovah by eating along with the blood.' Accordingly all the people brought near each one his bull that was in his hand that night and did the slaughtering there.
35 And Saul proceeded to build an altar to Jehovah. With it he started altar building to Jehovah.
36 Later Saul said: Let us go down after the Philistines by night and plunder them until the morning lightens up, and let us not leave a single one among them. To this they said: Anything that is good in your eyes do. Then the priest said: Let us approach here to the [true] God.
37 And Saul began to inquire of God: Shall I go down after the Philistines? Will you give them into the hand of Israel? And he did not answer him on that day.
38 So Saul said: Come near here, all you keymen of the people, and ascertain and see in what way this sin has come to be today.
39 For as Jehovah, who is the Deliverer of Israel, is alive, even if it is in Jonathan my son, yet he will positively die. But there was no one answering him out of all the people.
40 And he went on to say to all Israel: You yourselves will come to be on the one side, and I and Jonathan my son -- we will come to be on the other side. At this the people said to Saul: What is good in your eyes do.
41 And Saul proceeded to say to Jehovah: Oh God of Israel, do give Thummim! Then Jonathan and Saul were taken, and the people themselves went out.
42 Saul now said: Cast lots to decide between me and Jonathan my son. And Jonathan got to be taken.
43 Then Saul said to Jonathan: Do tell me, What have you done? So Jonathan told him and said: I did for a fact taste a little honey on the tip of the rod that is in my hand. Here I am! Let me die!
45 At this Saul said: Thus may God do and thus may he add to it, if you do not positively die, Jonathan.
45 But the people said to Saul: Is Jonathan to die, who has performed this great salvation in Israel? It is unthinkable! As Jehovah is alive, not as much as a single hair of his head will fall to the earth; for it was with God that he worked this day. With that the people redeemed Jonathan, and he did not die
46 So Saul withdrew from following the Philistines, and the Philistines themselves went to their place (1 Samuel 14).
This is a very interesting and technical account. Jonathon instigates an attack on the Philistines. Saul makes the people swear an unnecessary oath that limits their ability to do God's work. Jonathon inadvertently breaks this oath being unaware that it existed and God blesses him and the attack nonetheless. Saul then attempts to instigate a further attack on the Philistines on the next Hebrew day, but God does not indicate that he will bless Saul's attack. It must have occurred to Saul that he might be at fault, because he asks for Thummim to decide whose fault it is that God refuses to bless the second attack. The Thummim decides that the fault lies with either Jonathon or Saul. Thummim should be used by the priest not by the king, although Saul may have asked the priest to use it. So the result here is suspect.
So the lot came for Jonathon and Saul instantly and immediately condemned his own son to death, a son whose battle against the Philistines had been blessed by God all day long. But in truth it was Saul who was to blame by putting his men in an impossible position with an oath that was tantamount to killing them. He took Israel into the oath in order to appear to be as courageous as his son Jonathon, with whom he was competing. He was actually jealous of his own son, and he risked the lives of the whole army in order to enhance his popularity (he could have run for office today on that ticket and won). Now God did not kill those of the sons of Israel who had eaten blood along with their meat. He could have instructed Saul to attack the Philistines and arranged for everyone who had eaten blood to be killed for example. He could have instructed Samuel to speak to Saul and tell him to kill everyone who had eaten blood. He could have sent an angel and struck them all down as he did in the case of 70,000 of those who agreed to be registered by Joab. But God did not punish any of his people, he merely embarrassed Saul by failing to bless him as he had blessed his son. This was in fact the perfect punishment for a King who had sought to increase his popularity by risking the lives of his soldiers. God's response was to save the lives of his soldiers and decrease the popularity of the King!
Now clearly God did not make a mistake or forget about the men who had eaten the blood! So there must have been extenuating circumstances for the sons of Israel who abused
blood. Well if you are prosecuting a war which requires you to chase after
people and hack them to pieces with swords, then being tired and hungry and
therefore weak, is a life threatening problem. So the extenuating circumstances
were that the soldiers were in mortal danger. If the Philistines had launched a
counter attack on tired hungry and weak Jews, the result could have been fatal.
So obviously there are circumstances wherein abusing blood carries no penalty.
We deduce from this account that such circumstances are when the abuse of blood
is for the purpose of saving or protecting life. Here is some more simple blood logic...
for any man of the house of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an
alien in your midst who eats any sort of blood, I shall certainly set my face
against the soul that is eating the blood, and I shall indeed cut him off from
among his people.
11 For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for you to make atonement for your souls,
because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul [in it].
12 That is why I have said to the sons of Israel: No soul of you must eat blood and no alien resident who is residing as an alien in your midst should eat blood (Leviticus 17).
So the only permissible use of blood under law was
sacrificial in order to redeem your soul. The purpose of a sacrifice being to
save life. So God only permits blood to be used sacrificially in order save
life. So if someone sacrifices his own blood in order to save another persons
life, through a blood transfusion, then that is precisely the permitted use of
blood by God. In fact the one who sacrifices his blood in order to save
another's life is doing what Jesus did with his blood, is he not? And the one who
sacrifices his kidney in order to save his brother's life is likewise doing what
Jesus did with his body, surely? For we both eat his body and drink his blood.
If we are Christians, should we not then sacrifice
both our body parts and our blood in order to save our brother's lives, like our
examplar Jesus Christ did, in order to save all of our lives?
Or shall we stand here, saved by the sacrificial use of
Jesus' body and blood, claiming to be following in his footsteps, but forbidding
the sacrificial use of our own body or our own blood to save anyone else – doh!
So dear brothers and sisters in the patriarchs of Israel and in the
cherubs of God, we have become like our archetypes the Pharisees whom
we deride. We have gulped down the details of the law of Moses and strained out
its lesson and its fulfilment, which is the absolute necessity of the
sacrifice of one man’s body and blood for another. For it was a tutor
leading to the sacrifice of the Christ. And we as Christians should likewise
stand ready to sacrifice ourselves or parts thereof for our brothers. Jesus
And Jesus has purchased us all and so owns our blood. Our blood is his possession and he gave his blood for others and we as Christians should follow his example. Certainly he who owns it cannot forbid us to use it as he did his, for the purpose of saving life.
Physiologically, assuming the blood you receive contains living blood cells (non red cells) from another person, then your blood is polluted and becomes unclean. What this means is that any baptism which you possess, since it was effected by a washing in the blood of a mediator, is broken, because the blood you receive will not be so washed. Now there is an interesting question here. Since you cannot be spirit baptised twice, is a born again brother or sister consigned to Gehenna by virtue of this transfusion?
The answer is no because the baptism symbolically washes not just your blood but effectively your blood production organs, such as your spleen and your bone marrow. If it only symbolically washed your blood cells, then since they all perish after a few months, your baptism would ' run out'! So after a few months (and certainly less that 7 months) the foreign blood cells will have all died and your spirit baptism will be returned to you.
If you receive a blood transfusion unknowingly or against your will, then you are in the position of a woman who has been raped. So long as you 'screamed' (if that was possible - Deuteronomy 22) you can be returned to the congregation immediately.
23 In case there happened to be a virgin girl engaged to a
man, and a man actually found her in the city and lay down with her,
24 You must also bring them both out to the gate of that city and pelt them with stones, and they must die, the girl for the reason that she did not scream in the city, and the man for the reason that he humiliated the wife of his fellowman. So you must clear away what is evil from your midst.
25 If, however, it is in the field that the man found the girl who was engaged, and the man grabbed hold of her and lay down with her, the man who lay down with her must also die by himself,
26 and to the girl you must do nothing. The girl has no sin deserving of death, because just as when a man rises up against his fellowman and indeed murders him, even a soul, so it is with this case (Deuteronomy 22:23-26).
 Any baptised LW who willingly takes a blood transfusion of blood other than his/her own is disfellowshipped for 7 months unless the blood transfusion was necessary to save his/her life or to prevent a life threatening situation.
 Any baptised LW who willingly donates blood without a guarantee from the person to whom he gives it that the blood will only be used to save a life or to prevent a life threatening situation is disfellowshipped for 7 months.
 God's law as we understand it, does permit blood transfusions only in life threatening situations. If you take a transfusion in these circumstances we recommend that you ask for blood filtered with at least a 4th generation log6 filter to limit your exposure to the immune system of the donor.
 If you choose not to have a blood transfusion in a life threatening circumstance, this is not an attempted suicide, everyone has the right to refuse any form of medical treatment.
Artificial blood is OK, your own blood is OK, and white cell free blood (not white cell reduced blood) is OK. But at this point the technology for white cell free blood, which is the holy grail of blood transfusion medicine, is not yet available. As we understand it.
So the LW Blood Transfusion Card will read something like this...
I only authorise a blood transfusion as a last resort in a life threatening situation. I will only accept leucodepleted blood.
18 And where a man lies down with a menstruating woman and does lay bare her nakedness, he has exposed her source, and she herself has laid bare the source of her blood. So both of them must be cut off from among their people (Levictus 20).
We take this to mean that one should not have unprotected penetrative sex with a menstruating woman. Because 'lying down with' means having procreative sex with - see fornication and adultery - If such a thing deliberately occurs when the woman is definitively menstruating then according to the law, both parties should be thrown out. This is because the act is a potential abuse of blood. The blood of the woman can easily enter the thin skin of the moving member of the man. Protected sex would be OK in this situation, but not advisable when menstruation proper has set in. We are not going to police this and there will never or very rarely be 2 or 3 witnesses to such an act. So use your conscience and common sense here brothers and sisters please! We are not going to be the menstrual investigation society! Women can spot a few days before menstruation proper begins and start in the middle of having sex etc etc. The principle is for the man not to dip his naked penis, naked finger or naked tounge in a menstruating womans vagina, because such a thing has a signficant risk of mixing live blood which is a sin other than in a life threatening situation. The tongue is absolutely the worst idea since it could well lead to drinking the woman's blood.
In the case of a gynocologist he would use a surgical glove presumably and would not be 'lying down' with the woman in the biblical sense.
The JWs as of November 2004 still ban major blood components, which they deem to be red cells, white cells, plasma and platelets, but permit fractions of those components. In particular they used to ban factor 8 for hemophiliacs (but no longer do as it is a fraction of a component). Now it is obvious that all blood components cannot be banned because water is a component of blood. So which components of blood are the sacred part? Well the answer is found in Leviticus 17:14 above or in Genesis:
Only flesh with its soul - its blood - you must not eat (Genesis 9:4).
Blood represents or is the soul, the life of the flesh. It feeds the flesh. So it is the components of blood which represent life which must be avoided. These are the living components of blood quite obviously, the blood cells. So blood cells should be avoided, if they are alive. By this we mean, platelets, leucocytes (white blood cells) etc. but not erythrocytes (red blood cells), because erythrocytes are dead by the following scriptural yardstick:
The word of God is alive and exerts power (Hebrews 4:12).
The Word of God is alive in the sense that is has different meanings at different times, in other words it is not static in meaning. It has the ability to change its character. Something which is alive is not passive, it is active with the ability to change itself. Red cells, having no nucleus, cannot change their constitution, so they are dead, in the sense of Hebrews 4:12. Blood plasma which is devoid of all living cells can be transfused without violating God's laws, because it is none of it alive.
So returning to the Haemophiliac, we see that factor 8, being a dead chemical compound, can be transfused, ingested or taken intravenously without sin. At this point there may be some readers who burst into tears, and quite rightly so. For there are a number of Jehovah's witnesses who were haemophiliacs, who may have been known to the reader, and who have died unnecessarily as a result of the false and ignorant teachings of the Society on blood we believe. In fact there may even have been some bible students who have died before they were baptised because of their faith and because of the negligence of the Governing body in this respect. Fortunately we have a God who appreciates what these faithful people have done, and if he resurrects anyone, he will resurrect them. But he may well ask back their blood from the governing body of the Witnesses. For these leaders are bloodguilty men in this respect not by intent, but by negligence. It does not take a genius to work out that it is the living components of blood that Acts 15, Leviticus 17 and Genesis 9 refer to.
In this regard Gordon must say the following: "You know my bible research reminds me of a situation that I often see at work. In my office we have a team of people who have the job of compiling the statistics on how well the business is doing. One of my businesses makes around £15,000 per week ($23,000). On one particular week I was handed figures showing that my business had made £150,000 ($230,000) !!! For the previous 50 weeks it had always made between £10,000 ($16,000) and £20,000 ($32,000). The whole statistics department just handed me these figures without comment. They didn't even realise that the figures were ludicrous. They didn't even think that if we really had made ten times more money that week than we had in every other preceding week then we would all have been doing ten times more work that week than usual which would have been totally impossible. What this whole department did was write down figures without thinking about them, without understanding them and without caring about what they could possibly mean. It was a vacuous exercise that they were performing. At that moment I knew exactly how God feels about his people who read his book.
They nearly all read it without understanding a word, because they are not prepared to think about what it might mean, just like my statistics department. It is truly maddening! Dear reader: Do not be like my statistics department used to be, please! It's like God told Isaiah to say to his true people, to the true people of God mind you:
Hear again and again, Oh men, but do not understand. And see again and again but do not get any knowledge (Isaiah 6:9)."
So it is ok to take factor 8. It is ok to take blood plasma, so long as it has no living cells in it. And it is OK to take any blood component at all if it is necessary to save your life or to avoid a life threatening situation.
The reason that blood transfusions save lives, is that the life is in the blood, in the sense that the red cells carry the oxygen needed for the brain and the rest of the flesh. A common usage of a blood transfusion which can save life is after a car crash where the patient has lost a lot of blood and is still bleeding. Now the advantage of a blood transfusion is that the new red cells keep feeding the patients brain with oxygen and therefore keep him alive until the bleeding can be stopped. The patient is just like a carton of orange with a hole in it. If you cannot plug the hole then you can maintain the level of orange by adding more juice. The disadvantage of this therapy is that the new red cells and all of the other blood cells which are transfused into the bleeding patient are foreign to the patient's body. So the patient's own white cells then start a war with all of the new foreign blood cells. This can cause the patient real problems if his body was say fighting cancer at the time of the transfusion. Also there are the dangers of picking up whatever blood borne diseases the blood donor had, such as Aids, Hepatitis or BSE. These are real dangers today. Actually these risks have become much less significant in the last 10 years with leucodepleted blood and other treatments common in the more developed countries.
We are wondering if it would be possible to kill or remove all of the white blood cells from whole blood. Can one prepare a Red Blood Cell only transfusion? This would not break God's law as we understand it, because the whole transfusion would be a dead chemical soup. This idea was first proposed by Francis Flukka in an email to Gordon Ritchie.
Now the best modern transfusions have a reduced white blood cell count. A typical unit of whole blood has around 5 x 109White cells, or 5 billion white cells and around 3000 billion red cells. Modern third generation blood filters can reduce the white blood cell count to 5 x 106 cells per unit, or 5 million cells per unit. Frozen deglycerolised blood has around the same reduction in white cells. Both filtered blood and frozen deglycerolised blood eliminate febrile reactions and Cytomegalovirus transmission from blood transfusions. It is an interesting statistic the 94% of blood in US blood banks is thrown away because it can only be stored for around 40 days and yet frozen blood which can be kept indefinitely and certainly for 10 years, is apparently uneconomic?
There are new 4th generation filters in development which can reduce the white blood cell count further to 5 x 103 white blood cells per unit. These are called log6 filters because they reduce the white cell count by a million times which is 106 times and log106 = 6. Such blood would be the safest possible in transfusion terms, and in fact one article in the Lancet (by Janet Fricker March 9, 1996), about biochemically changing red cells from type A or AB to type O, described the 'Holy Grail' of blood transfusion as type O red cell only blood. This blood could be given to anyone with no adverse consequences at all (since HIV and the various herpes virus HSVs and the various Hepatitus viruses and HTLV and Epstein Barr antibodies are transferred via the white cells - so long as they do not somehow get stuck to the red cells). Such a transfusion, if truly dead, i.e. carrying no living viruses, unsurprisingly, would not break God's spiritual laws. In fact the physical is designed to illustrate the spiritual. One wonders what all of the different blood types illustrate. It must be something to do with baptisms and covenants, and blood of mediators. One wonders what blood type Jesus was in this symbolism??
Now a unit of blood with only 5 thousand white cells in it is pretty impressive and is pretty safe. It has only got a handful of WBCs in every cc. But a Christian would be sinning 5 thousand times if he took it in a non life threatening situation physiologically speaking. We need a blood unit which has either no white cells or an immeasurably low count of them. The Lords' Witnesses hope to promote research to create such a transfusion, either by chemical treatment, by even better filters, by freezing or howsoever. Many JWs have died from refusal to accept blood transfusions, and if the truth be known many although less have survived through not accepting blood transfusions due to HIV etc.
This is a complex subject, but God has given us the reasoning power to solve the equation. It would be an honour and a privilege to get this one right for him and for his people and for his ex people who still hold true to the blood prohibition of Acts 15. Anyone reading this who can think of a way to prepare true red cell only transfusions please contact us, you may well save many lives. It occurs to Gordon that blood filtration is designed to yield at least 80% of the original red cells. But if this figure was allowed to be reduced to say 10%, there would be an 8 times reduction in red cells but possibly an 8,000 times reduction in white cells and we might almost be there. And then the blood could be concentrated by a factor of 8 (not to be confused with factor 8!) to return it to 80% of its initial RBC count. This would cost 8 times as much per blood unit however. Multi stage filtering is one possibility.
Alternatively if one could just kill all the living cells in whole blood and then transfuse it immediately afterwards, this would not break God's law, since no living cells would be transfused. It would pose no danger of infection or of degraded immune response to the patient, since the war against the foreign cells is already won seeing as they are dead before they are transfused. If one could say irradiate the blood just before transfusing it, or chemically treat it, in order to kill the living matter, we would have both solved the problem of Blood Transfusions for sincere Christians and developed a better therapy for the rest of the world, because this treated transfusion would be risk free! There are some chemotherapy treatments that might be able to do this.
If this improved therapy works it would be a therapy developed as a direct result of biblical knowledge. Irradiated blood is currently used in blood transfusion therapy in the cases of cancer patients and blood relatives where TAGVHD transfusion associated graft versus host disease can be a problem in a small number of cases. Actually a lethal problem. Blood is given between 2,500 and 5,000 rads, which prevents the leucocytes (white cells) from dividing and which knocks out some of the platelets but which does not kill/burst the red blood cells. It is not known to have any bad side effects at this time - see 'Guidelines for irradiation of blood and blood components' - New York State Council on human blood and transfusion services - www.wadsworth.org/labcert/blood_tissue/irradiate.htm . We are wondering whether there is a dosage of radiation which will kill the white cells without bursting the red cells.
Finally, of course, it is ok to eat black pudding, haggis, rare steaks, sushi, etc., so long as the blood cells in the rare meat are actually dead. We do not know how long blood cells live after an animal is slaughtered. Some research should be done here.
We know from the manner in which God treated those under 20 in the wilderness, and from the fact that they could not be registered in Israel that no one under 20 can be sanctified, that is baptised in holy spirit. But what is the lower limit for water baptism?
13 Then young children were brought to him, for him to
hands upon them and offer prayer; but the disciples reprimanded them.
14 Jesus, however, said: Let the young children alone, and stop hindering them from coming to me, for the kingdom of the heavens belongs to suchlike ones.
15 And he put his hands upon them and went from there (Matthew 19:13-15).
This is an omission symbolism, the children were brought for Jesus to both put his hands upon and offer prayer, he did only the former.
2 Although indeed Jesus himself did not baptizing but his disciples did (John 4:2).
By the Omission Principle of the code, the greater meaning of this involves actually saying a prayer, which would result in a water baptism for these kids (since the LWs water baptise through prayer).
13 Now people began bringing him young children (paidia)
to touch these; but the disciples reprimanded them.
14 At seeing this Jesus was indignant and said to them: Let the young children (paidia) come to me; do not try to stop them, for the kingdom of God belongs to suchlike ones.
15 Truly I say to you, Whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a young child (paidia) will by no means enter into it.
16 And he took them into his arms and began blessing them, laying his hands upon them (Mark 10:13-16).
So now Jesus has said a blessing over them and laid his hands upon them, both of which are done in a baptism - see 204.
15 Now people began to bring him also their infants (brefh) for him to touch these; but on seeing it the disciples began to reprimand them.
Here infants were brought but Jesus responded that not infants but young children should not be stopped from coming to him. So it is clear from all of the above that infants should not be baptised in water but young children should be so baptised. However at what age does an infant become a young child from a biblical point of view?
Firstly we look at the account of Isaac, who after he was weaned was persecuted by Ishmael. Now persecution is one of the trade marks of a Christian, or should I say of a member of the true religion.
8 Now the child kept growing and came to be
weaned; and Abraham then prepared a big feast on the day of Isaac's being weaned.
9 And Sarah kept noticing the son of Hagar the Egyptian, whom she had borne to Abraham, poking fun (Genesis 21:8,9).
Now we know that Abraham's seed were to be afflicted for 400 years:
13 And he began to say to Abram: You may know for sure that your seed will become an alien resident in a land not theirs, and they will have to serve them, and these will certainly afflict them for 400 years (Genesis 15:13).
This affliction was of course at the hands of the Egyptians, and look! Ishmael is described as 'the son of Hagar the Egyptian' in case we did not know. So the 400 years started this day and ended on 1513Nisan14 at the Passover. So this day was 1913Nisan14 which might explain the big feast that Abraham made. Isaac was born when Abraham was 100, so he was born in 1918. So Isaac was 5 years old at the time that he was born weaned and persecuted.
Now we have a look at possibly the most politically incorrect scripture in the entire bible. Of course politicians are dishonest as we all no so being politically correct is being correct by the very definition of a politician!
3 and the estimated value has to be of a male from 20
years old up to 60 years old, the estimated value must then become 50 shekels of
silver by the shekel of the holy place.
4 But if it is a female, the estimated value must then become 30 shekels.
5 And if the age is from 5 years old up to 20 years old, the estimated value of the male must then become 20 shekels and for the female 10 shekels.
6 And if the age is from a month old up to 5 years old, the estimated value of the male must then become 5 shekels of silver and for the female the estimated value must be 3 shekels of silver.
7 'Now if the age is from 60 years old upward, if it is a male, the estimated value must then become 15 shekels and for the female 10 shekels (Leviticus 27:3,7)
This can be succinctly summarized in the table below:
|0 - 5||5||3|
|5 - 20||20||10|
|20 - 60||50||30|
Here again the holy spirit is making a distinction at 5 years old. So although we are no longer under law, we know that God's principles do not change so an 'infant' becomes a 'young child' at 5 years old. So a young child of 5 years old (by the BLC which has been in use since 1992Elul - Gordon thinks) can be baptised, but into which covenant? A 5 year old child is plainly too young to act as a priest and to baptise others in water, so they must be baptised into the 1AC not the ICC. But a 12 year old child was resurrected by Jesus and the only legal mechanism available to him for that was the ICC. So 12 year old kids can be in the ICC and therefore under the law of he church rather than the law of their parents and their conscience. This makes sense because 12 year old girls can get pregnant and all pregnancies must be under the law which must protect the rights of children. The fundamental pattern of U41 has Adam entering Eden aged 11, and all temple builders are commissioned 11 years into the pattern, building the temple for 22½ years. So children can enter into the ICC, and become subject to the law of the church aged 11 by Hebrew reckoning.
So children aged from 5-11 cannot enter into the congregation but can be baptised into the 1AC. Children aged 11 years or more by Hebrew reckoning can and should enter into the congregation so that any procreation is properly protected by church law.
The good book says as regards overseers:
6 If there is any man free from accusation, a husband of one wife, having believing children that were not under a charge of debauchery nor unruly (Titus 1).
Why single out only debauchery as a charge for children which would disqualify their father from being an overseer? Well, if a child is old enough to be debauched then he is old enough to be baptised. Paul's advice only applies to children in the church since one cannot be charged by the church unless one is in it. Debauchery and unruliness are the sins of children for which parents are held responsible as regards their suitability to be elders...
But there is more, because a man or woman who is over 60 has a 'value' less than or equal to a young child. So we must consider the possibility that a person who is 60 years old or more cannot be sanctified and is only eligible for a water baptism. This would appear to make sense as the test on someone with that age and maturity would be less than it would be on a 21 year old. Except that older people are more brittle. They are more set in their ways. So they would find it more difficult to change their lives so actually the test might work out the same for them!
However when God registered Israel, after the exodus, he registered everyone over 20 and everyone over 60! So this is saying that anyone over 20 can be sanctified. If we try to use the reduced working value of a 60 year old as a measure for saints then it would surely apply to the water baptised too since they are both under the same test of congregation law. But it does not apply to the water baptised and so neither does it apply to the saints. So there is no upper limit on water or spirit baptism
15 Blow a horn in Zion, O men. Sanctify a time of
fasting. Call together a solemn assembly.
16 Gather [the] people together. Sanctify a congregation. Collect [the] old men together. Gather children and those sucking the breasts together. Let [the] bridegroom go forth from his interior room, and [the] bride from her nuptial chamber (Joel 2).
The Holy Spirit has separated the sucklings (under 5), the children (5-20), the congregation (20-60) and the old men (over 60). Only the congregation is sanctified. Literally this 'sanctification' was a setting aside for a holy purpose. The greater meaning is not about sanctification in holy spirit, since children and those sucking the breasts cannot be sanctified.
14 For all who are led by God's spirit, these are God's
15 For you did not receive a spirit of slavery causing fear again, but you received a spirit of adoption as sons, by which spirit we cry out: "Abba, the Father!"
16 The spirit itself bears-witness-with the spirit of us [not the spirits of us, but the spirit singular of the congregation, the church] that we are God's children (Romans 8).
The congregation spirit is a composite spirit, like the holy spirit, which is the overall spirit of the congregation of the holy angels. The holy spirit tells the congregation which ones are spirit baptised, not the saints in that congregation!!!
36 And he went on to say: Abba,
the Father, all things are possible to you; remove this cup from me. Yet not what I want, but what you
want (Mark 14).
6 Now because you are sons, God has sent forth the spirit of his Son into our hearts and it cries out: Abba, the Father! (Galatians 4).
Now any man over 20 could be registered into the army of Israel to fight.
45 And all those registered of the sons of Israel according to the house of their fathers from twenty years old upward, everyone going out to the army in Israel, came to be (Numbers 1).
Any man 20 years old or over can fight and kill the enemy by water baptism. So you can be water baptised aged 5 or over and you can carry out a water baptism if you are male and 20 years old and over. You can be spirit baptised or carry out a spirit baptism if you are 20 years old or over by Hebrew reckoning. There is no upper age limit as we once thought because you could fight in the army at any age. No one was de-registered from the army for being too old! So you can be spirit baptised if you are over 60.
3 Honor widows that are actually
4 But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let these learn first to practice godly devotion in their own house and to keep paying a due compensation to their parents and grandparents, for this is acceptable in God's sight.
5 Now the woman who is actually a widow and left destitute has put her hope in God and persists in supplications and prayers night and day.
6 But the one that goes in for sensual gratification is dead though she is living.
7 So keep on giving these commands, that they may be irreprehensible.
8 Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his own, and especially for those who are household-members, he has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith.
9 Let a widow be listed who has become not less than 60 years old, a wife of one man,
10 having a witness borne to her for fine works, if she reared-children, if she entertained strangers, if she washed the feet of holy ones, if she relieved those in tribulation, if she diligently followed every good work.
11 On the other hand, turn down younger widows, for when their sexual impulses have come between them and the Christ, they want to marry,
12 having a judgment because they have disregarded their first [expression of] faith.
13 At the same time they also learn to be unoccupied, gadding about to the houses; yes, not only unoccupied, but also gossipers and meddlers in other people's affairs, talking of things they ought not.
14 Therefore I desire the younger [widows] to marry, to bear-children, to household-manage, to give no inducement to the opposer to revile.
15 Already, in fact, some have been turned aside to follow Satan.
16 If any believing [woman] has widows, let her relieve them, and let the congregation not be under the burden. Then it can relieve the [ones] truly widows (1 Timothy 5).
The passage has no countable noun recited an even number of times. So it has no greater meaning. But Paul is plainly saying that the holy spirit regards 60 year old women as not being under the same test as younger women as regards their sexual impulses. So a test on a 60 year old is a different test to that on a 30 year old. But nonetheless it is still a test.
These are quite obviously the same as fornication:
What! Do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body? For: The two; says he: will be one flesh; But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit.
Flee from fornication. Every other sin that a man may commit is outside his body, but he that practices fornication is sinning against his own body (1 Corinthians 6:16-18).
So an organ transplant could in theory be a disfellowshipping matter since it would be impossible to do the honourable thing and marry the donor presumably! It would not be a sin to take an organ from your spouse however. One might think here that it is a bad law from God to ban organ transplants, but look at the awful trade in human organs that this practice has produced ! Actually in general the donor would not be in the congregation so the equivalent fornication would carry no penalty - see below. So organs can be accepted without penalty from God. If one accepted an organ from a sister in the congregation however one would have to offer to marry her to avoid a warning!! But there again the two parties would already be very intimate indeed!! This all changes post November 9, 2004. Now you can commit fornication in self defence!! That is a good one. If you need an organ transplant to save your life, then there is no penalty for this fornication. If there is no penalty for joining two bloods in self defence, then neither is there a penalty for joining two fleshes in self defence. So post 9 November 2004 you can take an organ from a sister (so long as she agrees) and you do not have to offer to marry her if you need the organ to save your life or to prevent a life threatening situation from occurring.
King Solomon said...
32 Anyone committing adultery with a woman is in want of heart; he that does it is bringing his own soul to ruin (Proverbs 6).
And Jesus said, in his sermon on the mount....
28 But I say to you that everyone that keeps on looking at a woman [assumed married] so as to have a passion for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart (Matthew 5).
When you look at a married woman you do not sin. You fuel a desire to sin. James explains the distinction between these two situations...
15 Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to
sin; in turn, sin, when it has been accomplished, brings forth
death (James 1).
Desires are not sins themselves. They are sinful yes, in that they are a step on the road to sin, but you need to act in order to sin. Desires are policed by one's conscience. And it is God's purpose and indeed the purpose of any good teacher to train your conscience so that you police your own actions according to his righteousness. And he will succeed. You are free to choose to take as long as you like in this school, but God does not fail. You will eventually Graduate!
Likewise, in this church, we will not police everything you do. Because the idea is for you to train your own conscience based upon God's standard of righteousness, which the church hopefully understands and explains. We do not police any desires and there are some sins which we also do not police. But our not policing a sin does not mean that you should go ahead and do it, or that we endorse that sin or any sin. It just means that we hope you can police yourself to that extent and God trusts you to do that. He trusts us a lot. God is a fairly hands off manager!!
So when you look at a married woman the wrong way, you do not sin, you merely fuel a destructive desire. If that desire leads to adultery, then you sin and we police that sin. Obviously looking at and desiring an unmarried woman is not a sin either. And when a woman looks at any man with a view to having sex, she likewise commits absolutely no sin.
15 Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to
sin; in turn, sin, when it has been accomplished, brings forth
death (James 1).
The scriptures make a lot of noise about the emission of semen defiling a woman...
20 You must not give your emission as semen to the wife of your associate to become unclean by it (Leviticus 18).
22 In case a man is found lying down with a woman owned by an
owner [i.e. husband], both of
them must then die together, the man lying down with the woman and the woman. So
you must clear away what is bad out of Israel.
23 In case there happened to be a virgin girl engaged to a man, and a man actually found her in the city and lay down with her, 24 you must also bring them both out to the gate of that city and pelt them with stones, and they must die, the girl for the reason that she did not scream in the city, and the man for the reason that he humiliated the wife of his fellowman. So you must clear away what is evil from your midst.
25 If, however, it is in the field that the man found the girl who was engaged [pledged], and the man grabbed hold of her and lay down with her, the man who lay down with her must also die by himself,
26 and to the girl you must do nothing. The girl has no sin deserving of death, because just as when a man rises up against his fellowman and indeed murders him, even a soul, so it is with this case.
27 For it was in the field that he found her. The girl who was engaged screamed, but there was no one to rescue her.
28 In case a man finds a girl, a virgin who has not been engaged, and he actually seizes her and lies down with her, and they have been found out,
29 the man who lay down with her must also give the girl's father fifty silver shekels, and she will become his wife due to the fact that he humiliated her. He will not be allowed to divorce her all his days (Deuteronomy 22:22-29).
Obviously this lying down, involves more than a kiss and a cuddle.
17 If her father flatly refuses to give her to him, he is to pay over the money at the rate of purchase money for virgins (Exodus 22).
9 In my letter I wrote you to quit mixing in company with fornicators,
10 not entirely [meaning] with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise you would actually have to get out of this world.
11 But now I am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.
12 For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do you not judge those inside,
13 while God judges those outside? Remove the wicked [man] from among yourselves (1 Corinthians 5:9-13).
So the Corinthian congregation was told to avoid serial fornicators, extortioners, greedy persons and idolaters in the congregation. But Paul did not say throw out such men. He said remove the wicked man, a man who was sleeping with his father's wife. So Paul is not saying that all such people should be disfellowshipped. Paul is giving some extra protection to individual Corinthian Christians, whose congregational administration have proved unable to disfellowship an incestuous adulterer! He is extolling the brothers and sisters to use their own judgement within the congregation in circumstances where the elders have demonstrably failed to use theirs. In these circumstances, individual Christians can refuse to mix with or to eat physically or spiritually with errant Christians, but they should point out their sin and try to bring them to repentance first. The first commandment is to love, not to judge. But at some point true love involves judgement. Obviously one act of greed is not grounds for a disfellowshipping. Although one act of idolatry is. Obviously one should not disfellowship all fat people who continue to over eat, or all rich people who continue to make huge sums of money.
The thing is you can eat physically or spiritually with a disfellowshipped man. Paul is giving advice on how to treat brothers here, not on how to treat people outside the congregation. John says a similar thing...
10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never
receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him.
11 For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works (2 John).
This advice was for the treatment of brothers and sisters who have abandoned 'this teaching', namely Jesus coming in the flesh. So shunning and not eating with people is a penalty that Christians in dire circumstances should use within the congregation, it is not something that is applied to those outside. We can mix in company with all sorts of fornicators etc. from the world. But we should not tolerate hypocrites who continue to 'call themselves' Christians. These ones who abandon Jesus' commandments and yet stay in the congregation, are there to destroy it. The reader will be hard pushed to find any congregation without some of these guys. If they had any integrity they would leave after recognising the hypocrisy of their personal position.
But every good community is self policing. The Commissioner of London's Metropolitan police from 1993 to 2000, Sir Paul Condon (with an 'n'), said that when he started his job, the various communities in London would regularly hand him over their criminals and largely policed themselves. But as he approached his retirement, the only policing they ever got was from him.
St. Paul and St. John are likewise encouraging Christians to be self policing. That is quite contrary to the modern way of thinking.
In case a man's wife turns aside in that she does commit an act of unfaithfulness against him, and another man actually lies down with her, and has an emission of semen, and it has been hidden from the eyes of her husband, and has remained undiscovered, and she for her part has defiled herself [the man is also defiled from Leviticus 18:20] but there is no witness against her, and she herself has not been caught......And the priest must make her swear, and he must say to the woman: If no man has lain down with you and if while under your husband you have not turned aside in any uncleanness, be free of this bitter water that brings a curse. But you, in case you have turned aside while under your husband, and in case you have defiled yourself and some man has put in you his seminal emission, besides your husband... (Numbers 5:13-20).
27 When he has made her drink the water, it
must also occur that if she has defiled herself in that she committed an act of
unfaithfulness toward her husband, the water that brings a curse must then enter
into her as something bitter, and her belly must swell, and her thigh must fall
away, and the woman must become a cursing in among her people.
28 However, if the woman has not defiled herself but she is clean, she must then be free from such punishment; and she must be made pregnant with semen (Numbers 5).
So lying down involves an emission of semen. Certainly the emission of semen enters into the sin of adultery. The Jealousy test is all about semen, and so there is no penalty on the woman if there is no semen (and the man is not himself married) because she passes the test. Therefore she cannot be put to death therefore she is not an adulterer:
10 Now a man who commits adultery with another man's wife, is one who commits adultery with the wife of his fellowman. He should be put to death without fail, the adulterer and the adulteress as well (Leviticus 20).
So when a man lies down with a woman this includes his putting his semen into her, for otherwise he would not be put to death and therefore would not have committed adultery. The scriptures say this more directly...
20 Now in case a man lies down with a woman and has an emission of semen, when she is a maidservant designated for another man, and she has not in any way been redeemed nor has freedom been given her, punishment/compensation should take place. They should not be put to death because she was not set free (Leviticus 19).
So the emission of semen applies also to fornication, so it must apply in the same way as it does to adultery. So both fornication and adultery require an emission of semen, i.e. semen from the man entering the vagina of the woman. The reason for this is that an emission of semen constructively causes a joining of the flesh, since it could reach the egg and cause a pregnancy. So protected sex cannot be either fornication or adultery, so long as the protection works. Furthermore sleeping with another man's slave girl or concubine, is not adultery, for if it was then the both of them would be put to death. But Leviticus 19 continues...
21 And he must bring his guilt offering to Jehovah to the entrance of the tent
of meeting, a ram of guilt offering.
22 And the priest must make atonement for him with the ram of the guilt offering before Jehovah for his sin that he committed; and his sin that he committed must be forgiven him (Leviticus 19).
16 Now in case a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and he actually lies
down with her, he is to obtain her without fail as his wife for the purchase
17 If her father flatly refuses to give her to him, he is to pay over the money at the rate of purchase money for virgins (Exodus 22:16,17).
There must have been an emission of semen for a purchase to be necessary.
We take 'emission of semen' as being inside the vagina to defile the woman.
An emission of semen into another man's wife defiles the man and the woman too (see Leviticus 18:20).
An emission of semen into a girl by a man who is not engaged or married to that girl defiles the woman and the man (see 1Corinthians 6:18).
The man and the woman can fix their defilements by getting engaged or married.
If a man lies down with his own fiancee there appears to be no punishment prescribed. Although if the sex was unprotected he would have to marry her and her father/she would have already consented. If another man would die having slept with an engaged woman, then since sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, one must assume that the rights against the other man must also be rights for the engaged man. Hence he has no accusation of fornication if he sleeps with his fiancee. No 50 shekels would be payable, i.e. no accusation until the Jubilee.
If a man lies down with a non sanctified woman, a woman who has not been set free, and does not 'have an emission of semen' i.e. does not have procreative sex, there appears to be no punishment, not from the law in any event.
A virgin who is sold for 50 shekels is not a slave, since these were sold for 30 shekels.
29 Write to them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you! (Acts 15).
25 Rendering our decision that they should keep themselves from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood and what is strangled and from fornication (Acts 21).
18 Flee from fornication. Every [other] sin that a man may commit is outside the body, but the [one] fornicating is sinning into/against his own body (1 Corinthians 6).
This seems to imply that fornication requires semen to be emitted from inside the/his body. The uncleanness comes from the corrupting seed, it appears. To sin against one's own body one must join it to another one really:
16 He who is joined to a harlot is one body, for the two, says he, will be one flesh (1 Corinthians 6).
This cannot occur with protected sex, the two cannot become one flesh in this case, a pregnancy, which is a joining of the flesh, cannot occur. God's law on sex is all about children's rights. If no child can possibly result then no capital sin has occurred. In fact the two in a marriage are not one flesh until the marriage is consummated. In ancient Israel the 7 day marriage feast occurred after the consummation, and the groom had to provide sheets (with hymen blood!) as evidence, before the banquet began. It is important to understand that an impotent man in Israel could not get married!
5 ... 'For this reason a man will leave his father and his
mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh'?
6 So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together let no man put asunder (Matthew 19).
God sanctions the joining together of those promised in marriage. Said joining together is the emission of semen into the woman, which constructively joins the flesh since a pregnancy could result.
17 Now in case a man has an emission of semen go out from him, he must then bathe all his flesh in water and be unclean until the evening (Leviticus 15).
Both Adultery and Fornication require an emission of semen into the woman’s vagina, in order for defilement to occur, and an illegal joining of two fleshes to happen.
I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of
fornication, and marries another commits adultery.
The disciples said to him: If such is the situation of a man with his wife, it is not advisable to marry.
He said to them: Not all men make room for the saying, but only those who have the gift.
For there are eunuchs that were born such from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs that were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs that have made themselves eunuchs on account of the kingdom of the heavens. Let him that can make room for it make room for it (Matt 9:9-12).
We have the gift of the spirit, and Jesus is saying that he who does not commit fornication or adultery is a eunuch of some sort or another, he is relating the impregnation with sperm to these two acts. For in fact a eunuch can have sex but he cannot commit fornication or adultery. The 'saying' is that the husband cannot divorce the wife unless someone else has put his sperm into her, and this is the jealousy test in the law Numbers 5. A eunuch has no seed, i.e. is sterile, but not necessarily impotent we think.
24 That is why a man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh (Genesis 2).
He will leave, but they must become. This becoming one flesh is the only thing that God requires for marriage. We can see from the scriptures above that a woman is pledged to a man (engaged) first. But the marriage ceremony of God is simply unprotected sex with one's fiance. It is man or woman who has added to this all the trappings that we see today. There are no vows in the marriage ceremony of God and no witnesses! There should be blood from the woman and semen from the man. The girl should be put in a position where she could conceive so that the two fleshes become one constructively.
Putting this in stronger terms. No one is married until they have had unprotected sex with their fiance, and everyone is married when they have had unprotected sex with their fiance (so long as they understand this. One cannot be married and not realise it!).
34 Further, the unmarried woman, and the virgin, is anxious for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in her body and in her spirit. However, the married woman is anxious for the things of the world, how she may gain the approval of her husband. (1 Corinthians 7 NWT)
15 Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I, then, take the members of the Christ away and make them members of a harlot? Never may that happen!
16 What! Do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body? For, The 2, says he, will be one flesh. (1 Corinthians 6 NWT).
Adultery occurs when a man defiles an owned woman with his semen - this being
a constructive joining of his flesh with that woman.
A wife is owned by her husband.
A fiance is constructively owned by her husband.
A virgin is effectively owned by her parents (in that they must give consent for her deflowering - safe or unsafe)
A post pubescent non virgin who is not engaged and not married, is simply an unmarried woman in bible terminology. She is completely un owned. Any man can have safe sex with her without penalty from the church. However we would strongly recommend a pre-coital agreement to get married if a pregnancy results in order to avoid accidental defilement if the condom breaks or falls off.
Up until the 2003Adar, the LWs took the position that safe sex adultery was not a disfellowshipping matter because it is not true adultery. Several brothers and sisters were unhappy about this interpretation. We realised during the Jubilee that we had overlooked two things. Firstly according to the bible, since a husband and his wife are one flesh, a man who has safe sex with someone else's wife is an implied homosexual and a woman who has safe sex with someone else's husband is an implied lesbian. The Law says:
30 No man should take his father's wife, that he may not uncover the skirt of his father (Deuteronomy 22).
Plainly if a man took his brother's wife then he would be uncovering the skirt of his brother. So safe sex with someone else's wife is an implied act of homosexuality and safe sex with someone else husband is an implied act of lesbianism and therefore both would result in disfellowshipping. But it is actually worse than this, for a wife is actually owned by her husband according to the biblical definition of marriage.
If he should come in by himself, by himself he will go out. If he is the owner of a wife, then his wife must go out with
him (Exodus 21).
So a wife is not in a position to consent to have sex with another man, since she is the property of her husband. Only the husband can consent on her behalf, and such consents although not impossible are unlikely. But a consent alone would not stop a disfellowshipping sin, the husband would also have to be impotent or not have consummated his marriage, so that the two were not one flesh. In that case there would be no implied homosexuality and no implied rape. But in all other cases a man who has safe sex with another man's wife is in fact an implied homosexual rapist, which is not good in biblical terms. So he is definitely disfellowshipped.
If a married sister has safe sex with a brother (single or married), then she is effectively making him into a homosexual rapist, and therefore she is knowingly causing him to be disfellowshipped, and therefore she should be disfellowshipped herself.
If a woman has safe sex with a married man who does not reveal that he is married. Then although the woman is an implied lesbian, she is unaware of her impropriety and therefore suffers no penalty. Then man however is also an implied lesbian, since he is one flesh with his wife. So he is disfellowshipped for implied lesbianism.
So once all is said and done the end result is that married people cannot have safe sex or unsafe sex with anyone other than their spouses and no third party can knowingly have safe sex or unsafe sex with a married person. This is an obvious morality from a love standpoint both for spouses and their children. But technically it is not so easy to see from a biblical law standpoint.
1. Safe sex (by which we mean that the man uses a condom) between unmarried and unengaged people who are either post pubescent non virgins or are virgins with parental consent carries no penalty from this church so long as no semen enters into the girl's reproductive parts.
2. If an unmarried unengaged man has unprotected sex (by which we mean no condom), with an unmarried unengaged woman, whether he ejaculates or not, then both of their bodies are constructively defiled by semen that may have been emitted until the next menstrual cycle. This is because the girl might become pregnant and so constructively there is a child out of wedlock. This means that the man cannot baptise anyone until the next period and that neither the man nor the woman can partake of any emblems at any church festivals until the next period. This is because both of their bodies are constructively defiled and so they would invalidate any loaf or cup that they touched. It is therefore imperative that they inform the congregation, by which we do not mean the whole church by email, but a ministerial servant or elder in their congregation, so that no mistakes are made with the flock. They will both get a warning for fornication.
If however a pregnancy does result then they must get married in order to provide the proper environment for the child they are producing. If not they are both disfellowshipped. So if you are going to have unprotected sex then you must at the least agree to get married if a pregnancy results, first, or this is fornication.
3. If safe sex occurs between a man and a woman both of whom is/are married, then both parties are disfellowshipped. the man is disfellowshipped for implied homosexuality. The woman cannot be disfellowshipped for implied lesbianism because the congregation does not police lesbianism. But she can be disfellowshipped for implied homosexuality because she is in a man's flesh! If a married man has safe sex with an unmarried woman, then no homosexuality has occurred and no implied rape has occurred. So the congregation cannot punish this. If a married woman has sex with an unmarried man then both parties are guilty of implied homosexuality and both are disfellowshipped.
4. If sex with an emission of semen into the female occurs between a man and a woman one or both of whom is married then this is adultery and both are disfellowshipped.
5. If an unmarried unengaged man sleeps with an unmarried unengaged woman and wears a condom which falls off before ejaculation he should put on another one. If the condom falls of during ejaculation or is found to have fallen off after ejaculation or is found out after ejaculation to have had a tear or hole in it, then we have a case of accidental fornication. In this case both parties have defiled their bodies. They are both unclean until the next menstrual cycle. But no punishment takes place because there was no intent to defile. Metaphorically speaking he built the parapet on his roof but some unfortunate person fell over it! However if a child arises, then they must marry or be disfellowshipped.
If no pregnancy results and the congregation was informed then no penalty is due. But if the pair are found out in circumstances where the congregation was not informed, then a warning is given to both of them (a warning until the next Jubilee is the equivalent of a 50 shekel payment). This is because by not informing the church they potentially defile it.
There are 3 possible agreements one should make with a girl before having protected sex in order to protect the rights of the possible child and in order to obey God's law.
a. Agree before having sex with a condom (or without) to get engaged until the next period. This is the safest method. It makes a defilement impossible. This is a must for all Kings and all heavenly baptised Lords, who must not defile themselves with women after being baptised into the LWs in order to be sealed. It is recommended for all church members. It is the responsible thing to do. But remember that you are effectively married until the next period. So you cannot have sex with another person during that time.
b. Agree before having sex that if the condom malfunctions then you are automatically engaged to be married at least until the next period. If a pregnancy results you must get married. If there is no pregnancy then you can cancel the engagement since the constructive defilement is over. The trouble with this agreement is that one does not know if one is engaged or not until a positive pregnancy test result is seen. So we are not sure that it works.
c. Agree before having sex, that if an accidental pregnancy results (because the condom falls off of whatever), then you will get married unless the child is miscarried. This is a conditional engagement.
This agreement is and must be treated as an engagement in order to avoid defilement. So having made this agreement, then the two parties are 'conditionally engaged' until the next period. This is as far as we can push crafty technical agreements (as far as we can see at present). We shall permit conditional engagements because all engagements are in fact conditional in the sense that you can break them off if you fall out with your intended before you get married. However fiances are treated as wives by God and the church, and that would include this particular type of conditional fiance, So both parties would be treated as married until the next period at which point - if they wished - they could break off the engagement. If they break off the engagement before the period then they are treated as defiled and get a warning.
The advantage of this agreement is that it would be almost impossible to persuade a girl whom you wished to have sex with to agree to get engaged just in case she became pregnant. Because people see engagement as really an agreement to marry. But women do understand that children should be protected. So they may well agree to get married if they get pregnant (so long as the child is born alive). That would be considered honourable and decent and responsible - rather than opportunistic and enterprising. Whereas legally, since all engagements are conditional (since they can be broken off), getting fully engaged or agreeing to be married in the event of a pregnancy are more or less the same thing.
So this is the loosest agreement that prevents defilement and covers against any warning from the church and protects the child. But it results in both parties being constructively 'married' and therefore behaving as such, in the time between having sex and the next menstrual cycle
d. Post coital agreements. This is a really really bad idea. One can become pregnant during sex itself theoretically, although normally the egg will not be in the right place immediately. So there may be time for a post coital proposal. But how can you be certain that the proposal will be accepted after the event? And how can anyone be certain that it has occurred in time? If the condom falls off then a post coital proposal will not fix any defilement. Certainly a constructive defilement will have occurred. So if an accidental pregnancy occurs after a post coital proposal resulting from safe sex, then the church will regard the pair as defiled and give them both a warning for fornication. However if they do get married then neither will be disfellowshipped.
So a post coital conditional engagement does not prevent a defilement whereas a pre coital one does.
8 In case you build a new house, you must also make a parapet for your roof, that you may not place bloodguilt upon your house because someone falling might fall from it (Deuteronomy 22).
All of this law exists primarily for the emotional security of the child.
1. A single LW girl and a LW single boy over 20 or under 20 with parental consent agree to get engaged. Then they have deliberate unprotected sex. This means that they are married. For to God the marriage ceremony is deliberate unprotected sex between an engaged couple.
2. A single LW girl and a LW single boy over 20 or under 20 with parental consent agree to get engaged. Then they have safe protected sex but the condom falls off and the girl receives semen. This is accidental fornication. This does not make the two married since there was no intent. No defilement has taken place since they were engaged. If a pregnancy results then they must get married. If not then they can break off their engagement if they so choose. No violation of children's rights has occurred.
3. A single LW girl and a single LW boy over 20 or under 20 with parental consent agree to have protected sex and further agree to get married if a pregnancy ensues. The condom does indeed fall off. The woman is therefore receives semen but the engagement agreement is in place so she is not defiled. So both can still partake of festivals and the man can still baptise. If a pregnancy results then they must get married. If not then they can break off the engagement if they desire. In this case children's rights were not violated there is no punishment.
4 Let marriage be honourable among all, and the marriage bed be without defilement, for God will judge fornicators and adulterers (Hebrew 13)
4. Suppose that a brother and a sister defile themselves with a pregnancy outside a marriage agreement (an engagement or a marriage). Then if no engagement/marriage is agreed they must both be disfellowshipped for 7 months (even if one is happy to marry and the other is not). But suppose that they decide to have an abortion in the first 17 weeks of gestation (the first 19 weeks from the last period), They are entitled to decide to start a pregnancy and they are entitled to decide to end a pregnancy (if there is no engagement then the decision belongs to the girl). This is not a capital offence during the first 17 weeks of gestation to the LWs since the foetus only becomes human at the middle of the term in our understanding. Then the abortion would end the defilement and both could be let back into the church.
The LWs have not yet determined what if any punishment should be given to someone who decides to have an abortion during the first 17 weeks of gestation. The decision belongs to the man if there is an engagement and the woman is an LW. The decision belongs to the woman if there is no engagement. Presently there is no punishment for this.
5. One can break off an engagement or indeed a marriage to a girl who is not a virgin at any time on the grounds of prior fornication (it matters not whether this was disclosed or hidden), so long as the girl is not constructively pregnant. By this we mean so long as the girl has not received semen and not yet had a period thereafter. The church will sanction a divorce on the ground of prior fornication by either party if no children or constructive children are involved. However if a man gets engaged to a virgin and if he has an emission of semen accidentally (the condom falls off or breaks), this does not defile her due to the engagement but she has lost her virginity. She can therefore demand that the man marries her in return if she so wishes. If the man refuses he gets a warning (which is valid until the next Jubilee). Putting this another way, only the ex virgin can break off the engagement.
16 Now in case a man seduces a virgin who is not engaged, and he actually lies
down with her, he is to obtain her without fail as his wife for the purchase
17 If her father flatly refuses to give her to him, he is to pay over the money at the rate of purchase money for virgins (Exodus 22:16,17).
If a man is sterile, perhaps having had the snip then he cannot be either a fornicator or an adulterer. However if he has sex with another man's wife he is disfellowshipped as an implied homosexual.
If a woman has totally stopped menstruating or has had a pregnancy preventing hysterectomy, then you cannot defile her or yourself by putting your semen into her because constructively there is no pregnancy. If she is unmarried, then sex with her is always safe. If she is married only her husband can sleep with her. We do not accept other methods of contraception which involve the man putting semen into the woman.
Who would have thought that there was so much law associated with this basic desire? Of course the basic desire for sex is also the mechanism for the creation of life. These laws exist to protect the family unit which protects the children without policing the basic desire or its fulfilment more than is necessary to protect the rights of the child to have a female mother and a male father until it is grown up (20 years old by Hebrew reckoning).
Hypothetically we could logically permit a woman to use a cap rather than the man using a condom (a Dutch Christian suggested this idea wouldn't you know?) This would prevent the joining of the sperm to the egg. But one could hardly argue that the man had not put his sperm in the woman in that case. So we would encourage this second layer of protection but we will not accept that having a cap as the only layer of protection is sufficient to render sex safe and protected.
So we do not accept the pill or the coil or the cap as methods of safe sex.
The best solution would be for the man to have a condom and the woman to preferably have the cap or less preferably be on the pill (due to health and pollution issues). This would prevent disease, prevent pregnancy, prevent the exchange of fluids except when the thing fell off, but then there is a second line of defence as regards pregnancy and God's law. Likewise a man with a vasectomy could in theory put his semen inside a woman without risking a joining of the flesh, but it would be better for him to wear a condom.
Here is the trouble with homosexuality. Many people think that it is not so bad as murder. But murder kills only one person (in general), whereas homosexuality through AIDS has killed millions. It is true that AIDS spreads heterosexually as well, but it became an epidemic in the 1990s as the gay plague. And a gay San Francisco doctor claimed on BBC Radio in 2007, that had his community pushed condoms harder (metaphorically speaking) the epidemic could have been averted. Today 33% of Zimbabweans have AIDS and 25% of South Africans have it too. In all around 40 million people have died from AIDS and 50 million more are infected with it. This is not all down to homosexuality. But without that practice, would it ever have become an epidemic, or would it have become an epidemic of such genocidal proportions?
This is not the biggest trouble with homosexuality however. The biggest problem is that it is an attack on the fundamental building block of all civilised society, namely the family unit. If this building block crumbles then we have no society and the whole human race descends into chaos, and destroys itself. We are presently doing this, and homosexuality is not the only destructive force acting on the family unit. But in God's wisdom as we see it, the family unit must be protected from this unnatural sexual behaviour.
Simply put every child has two fundamental human rights. The right to have unconditional love throughout its entire childhood from a male parent and the right to have unconditional love throughout its entire childhood from a female parent. These two loving templates are both necessary for a morally sustainable society. If one of these two templates is missing, then the love of that child for half of the human race is fractured. And love is moral sustainability. That is the real danger of homosexuality and of absentee fathers of course. Although homosexuality has a multiplication factor within it which absentee fathers do not have. The bible says that...
8 Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his own, and especially for those who are members of his household, he has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith (1Timothy5).
So an absentee father in the church is worse than a faithless man bound for Gehenna! Homosexuality is in that category due to its creating absentee mothers. Homosexuality is a denial of children's rights. Democratic governments condone it because homosexuals have a vote but children do not. These governments are putting the lust of adults above the love rights of children.
So in summary, the position of the Lords' Witnesses is the complete reverse of the position of the Catholic church as regards fornication and adultery! But similar to it as regards homosexuality.
Of course such a position, if adopted by the Catholic Church, would save millions of lives in Africa and around the world, where AIDS has become a forgotten epidemic. This is the practicality, the wisdom, of our God.
But dear reader, we know that you may thinking. Woh, these LWs are giving carte blanche to everyone to go and sleep around so long as they use a condom and a married man or woman is not involved! Have they lost the plot or what? Is a condom to be the get out of sin free card?
Well, one of the beautiful things about serving a God who is wiser than we are, is that his wisdom is sometimes a surprise! Another of the beautiful things about his wisdom is that it is most times contrary to what we today regard as politically correct. The over-riding concern of the Christian is not sex, but love, by which we mean selfless, giving love of the type defined in 1 Corinthians 13, read out at many marriage ceremonies. Coveting a neighbour's wife or husband is not a sin, it is an unrighteous desire. It was contrary to one of the ten commandments, and by law is the accurate knowledge of sin. But sin starts with unrighteous desire and God is trying to teach us to police our own desires, so that one day we will not need any laws which are policed by other people.
Remember this verse in the law of Moses...
18 And you must not take a woman in addition to her sister as a rival to uncover her nakedness, that is, besides her during her lifetime (Leviticus 18).
The law did not say that you must not take a woman in addition to another woman as a rival to uncover her nakedness. So it is not a sin to sleep with two women in parallel. It is a sin to lie to either of them or to break a monogamous agreement that one might have with either of them. Neither is it a sin for a woman to have two male sexual partners in parallel. It is a sin to worship two opposing Gods. It is not a sin to sleep with two opposing partners. But there again the bible advises not to multiply wives for yourself. So it is not advisable to have two parallel sexual partners.
However at the end of this system of things, Paul's advice should be heeded by women and especially by men...
5 Deaden, therefore, your body members that are upon the earth as respects fornication, uncleanness, sexual appetite, hurtful desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry (Colossians 3).
Because Satan is firing the sexual desires of men through pornography and sexual suggestion in most adverts, in most films on the TV and in the cinema, in most newspapers, in lap dancing bars, even on the radio, all over the internet and generally in every form of media and communication. He is flooding the world with the drug of sexual desire, but this is not the only problem. Having created a desire, having got us all addicted to it, he then controls the supply of the fix that we all crave. So Satan is limiting sexual satisfaction by breaking up communities and families so that most people do not meet enough people to find the right partner. He makes prostitution illegal in most countries, to ensure that a man cannot get satisfaction that way, when the law of Moses did not condemn prostitution other than in the case of a father acting as a pimp for his own daughter or in the case of a daughter of a priest - see J11 below. In fact Jesus was descended from Rahab the prostitute on the paternal side and from Judah who slept with Tamar in prostitution to create his ancestral line on both the maternal and the paternal sides. Today both men and women are so caught up chasing after the wind of social and financial status that many have little time and care little for the sexual satisfaction of their partners if they have such partners.
As a result sex sells as never before. This is a tragic comment on the dissatisfaction and frustration of all of us. There is hardly an issue of a woman's magazine which does not have the word 'sex' on its cover. This is a tragedy for women and for men. May God bring the day soon when we are both so satisfied that putting the word 'sex' on the cover of a magazine has absolutely no effect of its circulation and when you put up an internet porn site, no one cares to visit it.
As Christians we cannot change this world much. But we can defend ourselves against its traps. If you become addicted to sex then you lose your objectivity and your spirituality and you are taken out of the fight for your spiritual life and for the spiritual lives of your brothers and sisters. That is what Satan wants. So women, please put your belly buttons back under your t-shirts and your thighs back under your skirts. Your sexual power is being used to kill mankind's spirituality. If you frustrate 100 guys for each guy you satisfy, you are about as useful to mankind as a Cocaine habit. And men, remember that God looks better than all women and he knows what is best for you having invented both women and sex and both love and happiness. So do not be conned by the great drug pusher himself.
It seems appropriate here to quote Madonna here, who is said this in 2007...
“I can write the greatest songs and make the most fabulous films and be a fashion icon and conquer the world, but if there isn’t a world to conquer, what’s the point?” Madonna said, according to the paper. “I’ve just come to a place in my life where I’m trying to really see what the big picture is and where my energy is better spent, and that’s one area I’m really concerned about.” - Madonna
Or as Jesus (the other guy who hung on a cross for a while) said...
26 For what benefit will it be to a man if he gains the whole world but forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul? (Matthew 16).
We know from the previous section that defiling a woman with semen joins the man to her. Paul says as much...
16 What! Do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body? For, The 2, says he, will be one flesh. (1Corinthians6).
The reason God regards a man who sleeps with a harlot as having joined his flesh to hers is that his sperm is placed in a position to fertilise her egg. God constructively fixes the two with being joined together because they have put themselves into a position where this may well occur. But by the same token, if the girl has a period and does not get pregnant then she is no longer one flesh with the man since the possibility of their two gene pools mixing has gone. So a one night stand leads to a joining of two fleshes until the next period or permanently if a baby is produced which reaches the 18th-22nd week, when it becomes a human soul.
However with a marriage things are different. A man and his wife become one flesh when the marriage is consummated since at that point the two gene pools are in a position to become mixed. But they further have an agreement to only mix their gene pools with each other, until death parts them, so they remain one flesh until that agreement is ended. This has nothing to do with a registry office or a church wedding it is the agreement between the man and the woman that makes them one flesh (upon consummation).
There is a technicality here. If two men sleep with the same girl then they are both constructively joined to her flesh until either she has a period or the DNA of her baby is determined!
As stated above if the girl has a period then the defilement ends with that, since the constructive pregnancy has failed to materialize. However if she has a baby then when does the defilement end? The answer is that the fleshes are joined in the woman until the baby is born and the chord is cut. Once the cord is cut there is no foreign DNA inside the woman any more and her defilement ceases. So true fornicators are defiled either until the next period or until the birth.
Regrettably yes it does, since you are one flesh with her - but only if she is under church law. So if you are an LW and your wife is a prostitute in the world then she can sleep with whomsoever she wishes or whomsoever pays her and she is no more or less defiled before or after the event. This has no effect on you. But if she is in the church, then she has broken the sexual fidelity agreement of her marriage and defile both her flesh and your flesh. But that breach does not end the marriage, which is the joining of the fleshes, unless the husband chooses to exert his right to divorce on those grounds. If he divorces then his flesh is undefiled.
If he stays married then he stays defiled until the next menstrual cycle or the birth.
Certainly the wife is guilty of implied homosexuality and must be disfellowshipped. If she did not defile her flesh because the sex was protected, then she has no effect upon her husband.
Now that we know what it is to become one flesh we can describe what a marriage is in scriptural terms.
24 That is why a man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh (Genesis 2).
It is an gene pool mixing agreement (must become one flesh), which is exclusive and lasts until one or other party dies or until the exclusivity is breached (must stick to his wife).
If two people agree to live together and only have sex with each other, for the time being, this is not a marriage. However if they agree to stick to each other as well then they are in scriptural terms married. The church and the registry office are dressing strictly speaking.
And where a man takes a woman and her mother, it is loose conduct. They should burn him and them in the fire, in order that loose conduct may not continue in your midst (Leviticus 20:14).
Hence I grasped my concubine and cut her up and sent her into every field of Israel's inheritance, because they had carried on loose conduct and disgraceful folly in Israel (Judges 20:6).
Your acts of adultery and your neighings, your loose conduct in prostitution. Upon the hills, in the field, I have seen your disgusting things. Woe to you, O Jerusalem! You cannot be clean--after how much longer? (Jeremiah 13:27).
As in the daytime let us walk decently, not in revelries and drunken bouts, not in illicit intercourse and loose conduct, not in strife and jealousy (Romans 13:13).
Perhaps, when I come again, my God might humiliate me among you, and I might mourn over many of those who formerly sinned but have not repented over their uncleanness and fornication and loose conduct that they have practiced (2 Corinthians 12:21).
There is no evidence that 'groping' is loose conduct. The looseness has to do with the relationship of the woman within her family or to her husband or owner. Loose conduct is actually a despicable type of fornication, either by/(with) a prostitute or with a blood relative, this latter being coitus incestus, which is 'Zimmah' in Hebrew, the loose conduct legislated for in the law of Moses, or with a concubine or wife of somebody. It therefore includes adultery. It is not despicable to have protected sex with a prostitute, and neither is it fornication (see [J10]).
In the new labour politically correct climate of the UK prior to 2010, any man who went with a prostitute was seen as a dirty pervert and an exploiter of vulnerable weak women who are probably illegal immigrants who have been sold into sex slavery by ruthless eastern european men. Putting this more simply it is all the fault of men, be they customers, pimps or traffickers. That is not how the bible sees it at all. Neither is it how the prostitutes themselves see it. The vast majority of prostitutes are not trafficked, but are practical business women, who offer a real and useful service, which is normally actually very good value for money, whose customers include 10% of the male population in the UK (according to some TV documentaries seen by the writer).
There is no tit for tat or knock for knock with God. There is one who is wrong and another who maybe right or less wrong or indeed equally wrong.
It is not a sin to 'go with a prostitute', so long as you have protected sex. It is a sin to fornicate with anyone (have unprotected sex with someone to whom you are neither engaged nor married). In the law of Moses, daughters of priests were not allowed to be prostitutes, the penalty for this was death:
9 Now in case a daughter of a priest [a daughter by water baptism of her male baptizer and of Isaac] should make herself profane by committing prostitution [Verb in Hebrew so it cannot take any symbolism, so it means a literal prostitute not a metaphorical one. She must permit herself to be defiled, i.e. made unclean with semen, i.e. selling unprotected procreative sex for money]. It is her father [by covenant - Isaac] that she is profaning. She should be burned in the fire [disfellowshipped. Handed over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh (1Timothy1:20). Her Methuselaian body is destroyed. She can however repent and rejoin the church after 7 months regaining her Methuselaian body if the water baptism is still ongoing] (Leviticus 21).
The account runs from verse 1 to 15. We have not counted it, but the word daughter counts 2x so it has a greater meaning.
The daughter is profaned with the semen of her clients. She is not profaned by accepting money for a decision to have sex. Prostitutes are fornicators who accept a cash bribe for a yes. The Hebrew word used here for prostitution (zanah) means both prostitution and fornication.
So how does the defilement of the body of a daughter defile her father? Well a child is the joining of two sets of DNA which are the building instructions for two fleshes. And whilst the baby is in its mother's womb, it is joined to its mother's flesh by its umbilical cord. So the husband the mother and the child are all one flesh during gestation. But once the baby is born and the cord is cut, the child has its own flesh and is no longer one flesh with its two parents. So if one's daughter has defiled flesh that does not defile the flesh of the parents. The trouble that the father has is that the daughter is making a mockery out of his priesthood because she lives under the same roof as him. So if a man turns up at the door one would not know whether he as come to learn about the law of God or to break that law by fornicating with his daughter.
In fact the daughter would turn his house into a Monty Python sketch. Ah yes, welcome to our humble abode sir! May I ask have you come for a bible lesson or will you be fornicating with our daughter?
The daughter is turning a bible school into a brothel. Hence the death penalty.
In the Christian setting it works like this...
4 a man presiding over his own household in a fine manner, having children in subjection with all seriousness.
5 (if indeed any man does not know how to preside over his own household, how will he take care of God's congregation?) (1Timothy3).
Presiding over a household in a fine manner does not mean having a fine household. For the original firstborn angel of God, Satan, did not turn out so well. It means loving your children and therefore applying God's law to them properly. If you fail to discipline your children in accordance with God's law you are obviously unsuitable to run a church! So if the daughter of an LW who was in the house of the LWs was breaking God's law in any respect, then her father must hold her to account - however much he loves her. If the daughter is not in the church then she can do what she likes as far as the church is concerned and the Father is not compromised. Just as if the daughter of the priest was living in another man's house - then she could do what she liked without compromising her father.
But the question is, what if the son of a priest went with a prostitute? The prostitute gets paid, not the customer. If a man goes with a prostitute and pays her, she is the one who commits the prostitution, not him. She sells her body for money. He does not. She sets the trap and he falls into it. Putting this plainly she is the more to blame in biblical terms.
So if a son of a priest went with a prostitute, then he has not committed an act of prostitution. However if he went with a prostitute who was an LW, he is as guilty as the girl, for he is complicit in a defilement of the church.
With this clear incisive understanding, we see that God makes a distinction in righteousness between the prostitute and her customer which is the precise opposite of the politically correct position of the UK Labour government prior to the general election in 2010. The Coalition appears to be taking a less abusive approach today since it is considering legalizing prostitution which is a great idea for everyone except priests! To God the man is the victim of the woman who baits a trap for him and profits financially from him when he falls into it responding to his genetic pre-disposition. To politically correct public sector new labour bureaucrats and to left wing liberal democrat local councillors, the man is a filthy pervert who has exploited a naive innocent girl, and abused his financial status to take sexual advantage of her.
So our understanding of God's position is as follows. You should not commit true fornication with any woman, prostitute or not. An unmarried man can have safe sex with any unmarried woman whether she is a prostitute or not. The scriptural issue is defilement with semen, not getting paid for a consent. Again a prostitute is a fornicator who charges for consent. One could argue that she is bribed for a decision normally made without direct payment. The Law of Moses said...
8 You are not to accept a bribe, for the bribe blinds clear-sighted men and can distort the words of righteous men (Exodus 23).
Well a prostitute is normally neither clear sighted nor righteous! But may yet inherit the Kingdom of God if she has love and repents.
So any male LW can have safe sex with any prostitute so long as that
prostitute is not herself an LW.
In fact any female LW can have safe sex with a male prostitute, so long as he is not an LW.
But in both cases you take a terrible risk if an accidental pregnancy occurs!
A priest under law was only allowed to 'take' a virgin in any event whether for sex or for marriage. Perhaps today there is an argument that a priest should only take a spiritual virgin - see J26. We do not make that argument however.
Having protected sex with a prostitute, who is not an LW, is about as far as you can go without crossing the line. If the protection fails then you defile yourself until her next period. You cannot perform any baptisms until that time, neither can you partake of any emblems at festivals. Your flesh is unclean and defiled. You must report any true fornication to the congregation for these reasons. If the prostitute becomes pregnant you must offer to marry her. If she refuses then you are screwed. You must be disfellowshipped since your flesh is defiled. You will be forgiven after 7 months if you are repentant. We will not give you a warning for fornication if the durex fell off and no pregnancy resulted. We will give you a warning for fornication if there was no condom/durex and no pregnancy resulted. Be wise, admit this sin. You can fool men but not the angels. This whole paragraph would apply to any woman who is not engaged or married to you.
So true fornication with a prostitute (which is a daft endeavour) carries the same penalty as true fornication with any other unmarried worldly woman. Be careful though, many prostitutes are married! One must admit it to the church elders however. Technically a brother should be suspended whilst he has flesh accidentally defiled by his putting semen into a woman due to a condom malfunction, until her period.
So today, any water baptised sister would be disfellowshipped if she committed fornication as an act of prostitution, receiving the man's semen as well as his money? No, the money is irrelevant. She would merely get a warning for fornication. Of course should she continue to act as a prostitute on 2 further occasions that would be it. She would be out.
The Jehovah’s witnesses have this awful practice of shunning those who have been disfellowshipped. They refuse to acknowledge their existence. This causes all sorts of problems in marriages and families when one party or one member is disfellowshipped. It is based on a misinterpretation of the 2nd letter of John (they are told):
For many deceivers have gone forth into the world, persons not confessing
Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist.
Look out for yourselves, that you do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that you may obtain a full reward.
Everyone that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ does not have God. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son.
If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, never receive him into your homes or say a [brotherly] greeting to him.
For he that says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works (2 John 7-11).
This scripture only applies to antichrists within the congregation - see U81. It does not apply to everyone who has been disfellowshipped. The scripture means that one should not receive such a man as a Christian teacher or as a Christian brother and no more than that. We know how to treat disfellowshipped or excommunicated people:
If he does not listen to the congregation, let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector (Matthew 18:17).
Only a fool would refuse to say a greeting to a tax collector! Jews did not shun tax collectors or Gentiles. They dealt with them, especially their Roman governors! They did not worship with them however. So likewise a disfellowshipped man should not be allowed to eat with the congregation, he should be banned from congregation meetings. And that is it! No shunning.
1 Actually fornication is reported among you, and such
fornication as is not even among the nations, that a wife a certain
[man] has of [his] father (1 Corinthians 5).
9 In my letter I wrote you to quit mixing in company with
10 not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world.
11 But now I am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an
idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man (1 Corinthians 5).
The JWs also use the scripture above to justify shunning people who have been disfellowshipped. But it plainly applies to people within the congregation who should have been disfellowshipped, not people outside the church. The advice from Paul is to avoid mixing with people who are known to you to have comitted disfellowshipping offence but for some reason have gotten away with it. But you should not shun them, just avoid mixing with them.
Respect is the most basic form of love. And saying a greeting is the most basic form of respect. Refusing to say a greeting is disrespectful and not loving, but Jesus has taught us to love even our enemies. He shunned absolutely no one and there is no account in the gospels of his refusing to eat a meal with anyone. He ate with tax collectors he wnet around with prostitutes, he spoke to the devil himself when he was tempted, he did not shun Satan. He loved them all. This would mean showing them basic respect at the least. So we should say greetings to them and eat hamburgers with them.
But I say to you who are listening: Continue to love your enemies, to do good to those hating you (Luke 6:27).
There were 200 people in the congregation from which Gordon was disfellowshipped. He had made quite a few friends and many of them had told him how much they loved him, before he was evicted. On that day, one sister cried and ran out of the Kingdom Hall, Susan Desbleds. That was it. She is the only sister who stayed in touch for a while despite immense pressure not to. One other brother called him 3 years later. He would have found greater love in a prison. They forgot Jesus words to his disciples in his sermon on the mount...
44 However, I say to you: Continue to love your
enemies and to pray for those persecuting you;
45 that you may prove yourselves sons of your Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise upon wicked people and good and makes it rain upon righteous people and unrighteous.
46 For if you love those loving you, what reward do you have? Are not also the tax collectors doing the same thing?
47 And if you greet your brothers only, what extraordinary thing are you doing? Are not also the people of the nations doing the same thing?
48 You must accordingly be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5).
22 And in case men should struggle with each other and they really hurt a
pregnant woman and her children do come out but no fatal accident occurs, he is
to have damages imposed upon him without fail according to what the owner of the
woman may lay upon him, and he must give it through the justices.
23 But if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul,
24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth,
25 branding for branding, wound for wound, blow for blow (Exodus 21).
17 And in case a man strikes a soul fatally he should be put to death without fail (Leviticus 24).
So the question is: At which point in its development does a fetus become a human soul? President Clinton asks this question in his long but fascinating book 'My Life'. It is of course nice to have an American president who can write such a long book! The bible does have the answer to this question.
We get that answer from considering...
[a] When an embyro has a functional blood circulatory system, - so that killing it would make one blood guilty
[b] When an embryo has fully developed nostrils so that God has something to breathe the spirit of life into
[c] When an embryo takes its first breath (in utero) and so becomes a breather. The Hebrew word for soul is Nephesh which means - breather.
[d] When the two halves of the brain are connected together so that the 'software; of the human spirit can run on the 'hardware' of the human brain.
14 For the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood by the soul in it. Consequently I said to the sons of Israel: You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh, because the soul of every sort of flesh is its blood (Leviticus 17).
4 Only flesh with its soul - its blood - you must not eat (Genesis 9).
11 For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for you to make atonement for your souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul [in it] (Leviticus 17).
So before the embryo develops a blood supply, it has no soul. It is obvious that one cannot be held bloodguilty for killing an organism which has no blood. This is why Gabriel said to Mary:
Through which also the holy [thing] being generated will be called, Son of God. (Luke 1:35).
At conception the embryo is a 'thing' neuter in the Greek. It has no soul, no spirit exists in it.
Now the embryo develops blood in the third week after the last period which is the first week after conception, and it develops a heart which starts beating in the 4th week. The heart starts pumping blood around the body in the 5th week and it starts pumping it around the brain in the 7th week after the last period which is the 5th week after conception. Ultrasound can pick it up instantly, see: www.octopusmom.com/Fetal_Development.html.
Until the blood starts feeding the brain, the embryo has no spirit. For the spirit resides in a functioning brain. It is obvious that a human body without a head is not a human life, one's character is all in the head, the body is merely a vehicle for the head. So a heart pumping blood around the body but not the brain is not a human soul. But the brain does not develop the autonomic breathing capability in the medulla oblongata, until the 10th week.
7 And Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man came to be a living soul (Genesis 2).
The first time you read this you imagine yourself in a Sci-Fi movie with God creating the body of Adam fully formed as a man and then lifting his limp lifeless flesh up onto its feet and blowing into its nostrils at which point the body comes to life, wakes up and says: I am carbon unit 3 of 7.
But we know that it did not happen like that. We know that Adam was created in the same manner that Jesus was - I6. So God formed Adam in the womb of his surrogate mother by in vivo fertilisation - Intro17. Then later, in the womb, he blew the spirit of life into his nostrils. But you cannot blow life into a baby's nostrils before the baby has developed any nostrils. So when does the human embryo have fully developed nostrils?
In Week 10 the nostrils and tear ducts are completed and the hands and feet can touch each other. In this week, the embryo becomes a fetus.
According to Rhawn Joseph Ph.D at the Brain Research Laboratory, as early as the 7th week, the embryo will display spontaneous movements, which by the 9th week come to include the extremities, the trunk and the head (de Vries et al 1985). Soon thereafter, the foetus will take its first breath. And by the 10th week of gestation, spontaneous breathing (chest and abdominal movements) are observed (de Vires et al 1985). Initially these breathing movements are irregular isolated events with perhaps one in an hour. Over the ensuing weeks they become more frequent and by 24 weeks they may be observed 14% of the time.
So the lungs begin to inhale and exhale amniotic fluid in the 10th week. So the baby becomes a breather at 10 weeks, and the Hebrew words for soul, Nephesh, means 'breather'. This pictures God's breath/spirit of life entering and exiting the lungs of the baby.
Combining all of the above we see that God can blow the spirit of life, his breath into the fully formed nostrils of a breathing baby at week 10. This baby has a functional heart lung mind circulatory system at that time and changes from an embryo to a foetus in the 8th/9th week.
But we are not sure that God can run a human spirit on a foetal brain which has no connections between the two hemispheres. The Corpus Callosum, which connects the two hemispheres of the brain begins to form in week 13-16. The foetus feels no pain and is not aware of its body until the thalamocortical fibres begin to form in week 17. Permanent connections occur in week 22. Babies can be kept alive if delivered in the 22nd week. Babies start having REM sleep around the 23rd week according to a New York Times article, although web sites disagree and say this can occur start between weeks 20 and 28.
Babies can breath for themselves if delivered in the 24th week. Knowing all of this, let us have another look at the part of the law of Moses describing the penalty for someone who kills a baby accidentally...
And in case men should struggle with each other and they really hurt a
pregnant woman and her children
[plural, in case she has twins]
do come out [early as a result
of the struggle] but no fatal accident occurs, he is
to have damages imposed upon him
[singular, the one who started the brawl, or
whose fault the damage to the woman was]
without fail according to what the owner of the
woman may lay upon him, and he must give it through the justices.
23 But if a fatal accident should occur, then you must give soul for soul [if the baby or the woman dies. Human soul for human soul. Not inhuman soul for human soul. So this penalty applies only after the foetus becomes human, after it has become a human child],
24 eye for eye, tooth for tooth [if the woman is hurt or indeed the baby],
25 branding for branding, wound for wound, blow for blow (Exodus 21).
Notice that the child has to come out and it has to be recognisable as a child and has to be dead for the death penalty to apply. So what would a Hebrew recognise as a 'child'? Would a 12 centimetre foetus in the 4th month be sufficient?? Would such a thing come out like child does?? Certainly a 6cm foetus in the 10th week would be pushing it! 5th month minimum for the mother to be able to produce something that looked pretty human we would suggest.
There is an EEG brain activity burst around the 22nd week after the last period or the 20th week after conception. And the brain halves are connected at that time, so abortion in the 22nd week looks like a bad idea. But abortion in the 20th week, may be just about OK. We think the spirit of God enters perhaps between weeks 20 and 22 from the last period. Left hemisphere activity indicates the presence of the human spirit. Prior to that the foetus has an animalistic spirit. It gets an upgrade from animal to human when God 'blows into its nostrils', which we think may stand for the human spirit upgrade entering both halves of the brain. Also at this time we believe the foetus becomes a 'breather' in the sense that it could derive enough oxygen to survive from some form of assisted breathing.
The word soul means breather, and God blew his spirit into the nostrils of Adam, so breathing would seem to be a prerequisite for housing a spirit. With the best technology in mankind's possession at present we can keep a foetus alive on a respirator at 22 weeks minimum. So it looks like weeks 17-22 are when God loads the spirit into the foetus.
Here is where some lateral thinking is required. Jesus gave life to Abraham's seed in the midst of his covenant. God himself we know resided in the midst of Israel. God sent his spirit, Jesus Christ, into the Midst of 'Abraham' meaning his covenanted sons. So the midst prophecy U100 may well apply to human gestation.
5 Or does it seem to you
that the scripture says to no purpose: It is with a tendency to envy that the
spirit which has taken up residence within us [our
divinely given personal spirit] keeps longing? (James 4).
Conception God's spirit is downloaded Baby born
126 days (19 weeks) on average X 126 (19 weeks) days on average
7 And Jehovah God proceeded to form the man out of dust from the ground and to blow into his nostrils the breath/spirit of life, and the man came to be a living soul (Genesis 2).
3 While my breath is yet whole within me, And the spirit of God is in my nostrils (Job 27).
22 Everything in which the breath of the force of life was active in its nostrils, namely, all that were on the dry ground, died (Genesis 7).
4 God's own spirit made me, And the Almighty's own breath proceeded to bring me to life (Job 33).
45 It is even so written: The first man Adam became a living soul. The last Adam [Jesus] became a life-giving spirit [a spirit of life] (1 Corinthians15).
Jesus was blown into Abraham's nostrils in the midst of his covenant. We are taking the entry of the spirit of life into the gestation of the sons of Abraham in the 1AC, who are yet to be born into the the next world, as an archetype for the entry of the spirit of life into a gestating foetus who is yet to be born into this world
So God himself may well send his spirit in the midst of the 38 week gestational period. If so then the foetus becomes a human after 133 days, i.e. 19 weeks after conception. This would fit the data above, namely that interhemispherical connections are made, thalamocortical connections are made, the foetus is a week or two or three away from big EEG activity, and it looks sufficiently like a human for a Hebrew under law to regard its death as murder of a human. So the LW position is that abortion for a 266 day gestation standard baby is not murder up to the 132nd day of gestation and it is murder on the 134th day of gestation. However, there is variation between the development of human babies so we need to insert a margin of uncertainty here.
Let us introduce a margin of error of plus or minus 2 weeks here for the sake of safe legislation. It is true that babies are delivered sometimes 3 weeks early and sometime 5 weeks late, but their development does not lag or lead by anything like these figures. So the LWs will not regard an abortion as murder if it is carried out up to the 119th day (17 complete weeks). We will regard it as murder if it is carried out on or after the 147th day (21 complete weeks). It may be murder in the intervening period, but we do not have enough data to make that charge so we will not ourselves legislate for abortions in that period. But be sure that the angels will, one way or the other. So we recommend in the strongest possible terms that the 17th week is the last opportunity for a termination.
We would also recommend to governments that they set the limit at 17 weeks. The UK recently debated a reduction from 24 to 16 weeks, that failed. A reduction to 17 weeks would be a very good idea. We have to say that God is very pragmatic and it appears that medical science was pretty near to the mark with the 16 week suggestion. The LWs would like to take this opportunity to thank the medical people behind this sensible suggestion.
However our overall advice would be do not have an abortion, have the baby and get it adopted, there are thousands of parents looking for babies. Jesus was to some extent adopted by his parents.
But as soon as the baby reaches the mid point of its gestation, then abortion brings a death penalty (if not from the congregation then from the angels - who may/will cease softening the heart of those involved, and they may/will fall speedily into another sin which brings the penalty that should have occurred for the abortion. It is not a coincidence that this coincides precisely with the 4th missed period. When a woman misses her second period she definitely knows that she is pretty sure she is pregnant and at the third missed period she must be pregnant. And the 4th missed period makes 4 witnesses! That must be enough. In this way accidental murder of a baby is avoided. God designed the embryo so that it would not become a human soul until after the 4th missed period. Had he not done so he would in our opinion be guilty of negligent homicide, since someone might hit the woman or the woman might fall over and kill the baby in innocence without knowing that it was there.
All of this means that Coils and the Pill, and even the morning after pill, are not murder. One cannot murder something which does not have a heartbeat or has not taken a breath and one is not a murderer of a human until God's spirit has entered the foetus. Likewise if you commit adultery negligently, whilst using a condom see [J11], then if the woman falls pregnant but has a miscarriage within the first 17 weeks, then there is no penalty from God, because your accidental negligence did not lead to an abuse of life, in the sense of abuse of a human soul, because no human soul ever came into existence. But deliberate adultery carries instant disfellowshipping.
However a Christian woman should not seek an abortion in the first 17 weeks of gestation, the first 19 weeks from the last period, without the consent of the husband or fiance. However if there is no agreement to marry and no marriage, then the father has no say in the matter, and she can make the decision herself. If the father is in the church he must propose anyway, and if the mother is in the church she must accept his proposal unless she was raped, because the purpose of marriage is to provide a secure environment for children.
If she is engaged or married, then she should only act on the father's consent. If she does not then the husband must first take the matter up with his wife. If she is not repentant, then he should return to her with at least one more brothers or sisters and try again to have her repent.
15 Moreover if your brother commits a sin go lay bare
his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your
16 But if he does not listen, take along one or two more in order that at the mouth of 2 or 3 witnesses every matter may be established. If he does not listen to them, speak to the congregation [that means the elders].
17 If he does not listen even to the congregation let him be to you just as a man of the nations and as a tax collector (Matthew 18).
If a mother aborts in the first 17 weeks of gestation against the wishes of the father (in circumstances where the father is either engaged or married to the mother) then she has committed a theft of a foetus and she has rejected the headship of her husband. Both of these are sins against the father so it is up to him how to deal with it. He should follow the procedure of Matthew 18:15-17. Might is not right. The woman should not abuse her power over the child, just as a man should not abuse his power over his wife (if he has any which has not been removed by the state these days). Why do people think that the state is more loving than a husband?
So the present LW position is that engaged or married parents can decide to have a baby and can also decide to abort the baby up until the 17th week of gestation, which is the 19th week since the last period. After that abortion is murder of a human.
God's personal name is expressed in Hebrew by the four letters YHWH. Hebrew has no vowels as letters, but includes accents (vowel pointing) over the consonants to express vowels. The correct Hebrew pointing of YHWH is not known (as far as we are aware). There are two English pronunciations of God's name in modern day usage and these are Jehovah and Yahweh. God's name, however it should be pronounced, appears over 6,000 times in the old testament. But it appears nowhere in the new testament. Whenever a new testament bible writer, or any disciple of Jesus whose speech is recorded in the bible, quoted an old testament scripture which included God's name, he would write or say either 'God' or 'the Lord' instead. Or if he said YHWH then he is recorded as saying God or the Lord.
There is no existing Greek manuscript of any book in the new testament which has YHWH in it. It is known that YHWH has been removed from many old testament manuscripts by the Jewish Scribes. It is also known that some versions of the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the old testament, made by 70 men in Alexandria in Egypt around 300BC, had YHWH in Hebrew letters in the Greek text. Therefore it is proposed by some as a theory, and stated by the Watchtower as a fact, that the original Greek text of the new testament did have YHWH in it and that 'the scribes' took this name out of every single Greek manuscript of the new testament.
But this theory has no real evidence in its support, it only has the circumstantial evidence generally stated above. All the real evidence, in the form of existing Greek manuscripts of the new testament, is against it. Furthermore the bible code works better in our experience with the more ambiguous 'Lord', than it does with YHWH. Since 'Lord' can stand for Jesus and others as well as for God. In fact the bible code requires 'Lord' in some places. Jesus prayed to his father saying:
I have made your name manifest to the men you gave me out of the world (John 17:6).
And I have made your name known to them and will make it known, in order that the love with which you loved me may be in them and I in union with them (John 17:26).
This is literally saying that Jesus made God's name, YHWH, known to his disciples alone. It also refers to a future group of disciples to whom YHWH will be made known. This means that Jesus did not make God's name known to the masses. So it would be in keeping with God's will and Jesus' prayer above if the Christian scriptures did not mention God's name, since they are available to believers and non believers alike.
It is much easier to love someone whose name you know than it is to love a nameless omnipotence. But Jehovah or Yahweh is not a brand name like Coca Cola or Manchester United.
"I did not tell everyone whom I met, my father's first name, when he was alive. I would call him dad in public. But my friends knew him to be David. Although now that he is dead physically, I have put his full name on the internet (what a hypocrite)! The point I am making is that we should treat our heavenly father in the same way".
There needs some kind of balance. His name is not a secret, but neither is it to be a banner headline, something to be printed on T-Shirts or to be illuminated in Time Square. This is why Peter said, quoting Joel:
The sun will be turned into darkness and the moon into blood before the
great and illustrious day of the Lord arrives (Acts 2:20) Kingdom Greek
Whereas Joel said: The sun itself will be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the coming of the great and fear inspiring day of Jehovah (Joel 2:31).
So we believe that it was God's will that the Greek new testament manuscripts should not mention his name. Just as it was his will that no image of Jesus should remain, and that no one should be able to pronounce his name today. That way we cannot properly take his name in vain and we cannot idolise some image of his son.
The International Bible Students, in the Columbus Ohio convention from July 24-30 1931, took the name 'Jehovah's witnesses' (in fact on July 26th see ). The bible students took God's name with his authority at that time. Because, this convention was actually the time that the 2300 evenings and mornings of Daniel 8 were fulfilled in the first fulfilment of the second presence. For there are 4600 solar days between the convention and December 18, 1918, when the Federal council of churches sent the infamous letter to president Wilson saying that the League of Nations was 'The political expression of the kingdom of God on earth'. This was the transgression causing desolation to Christendom (Babylon had fallen in 1918Nisan14, but it had yet to be desolated).
4600 Solar days rather than lunar days, because the 2300 evenings and mornings are a vision of the constant feature, and this was a genuine daily feature, not a Biblical Hebrew Calendar feature. And 4600 rather than 2300 because the constant feature occurred two times in a day, or putting in another way in 2300 evenings and mornings there were 4600 constant feature sacrifices. So the constant feature occurred 4600 times in this period, so we take a day for a constant feature and we get 4600 days. Actually including leap years July23, 1931 is 4600 days after December 18, 1918.
Until 2300 evenings and mornings and the holy place will certainly be brought into the right condition (Daniel8:14).
And the holy place is earthly Jerusalem, the administrative centre, FDS3. It came into the right condition at the time of the Columbus Ohio convention. The bible students then became worthy of bearing God's name. But they are no longer worthy to bear it, having been rejected by Jesus on 1995Tishri15.
So what should the new FDS4 be called? Well Isaiah says:
You are my witnesses is the utterance of Jehovah.... So
you are my witnesses is the utterance of Jehovah (Isaiah 43:10-12).
This has the meaning that there will be two groups of people who are God's witnesses or Jehovah's witnesses (you and you - the writer imagines a finger pointing a two different groups). So there is to be a second group of Jehovah's witnesses, see [C6] for the meaning of repetitions in the bible. Since we should not use God's personal name in our name, as a result of the mess made by FDS3, and in harmony with all of the existing Greek manuscripts of the new testament, we could either be God's Witnesses or The Lords' Witnesses. Now in Revelation we read:
And the dragon grew wrathful at the woman, and went off to
wage war with the remaining ones of her seed, who observe the commandments of
God and have the work of bearing witness to Jesus (Revelation 12:17).
And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the holy ones and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus (Revelation 17:6).
The woman of Revelation 17 is a harlot church quite obviously. Right now she is the Jehovah's Witnesses in one meaning - see . She is drunk with my blood and with that of Jesus' brothers and Abraham's ex-sons and our brothers who believe in our work but are under the cosh in the Watchtower. So the last true religion is to be Jesus' witnesses as well as God's witnesses. But if we are both God's witnesses and Jesus' witnesses, then we should be called the Lords' Witnesses, since both Jesus and God are referred to as the Lord in scripture.
And it must occur that at the instant that the soles of the feet of the priests carrying the ark of Jehovah, the Lord of the whole earth, rest in the waters of the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan will be cut off (Joshua 3:13).
For Jehovah your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords (Deuteronomy 10:17).
And when they entered they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus (Luke 24:3).
In Revelation chapter 11 we read of two witnesses:
And I will cause my two witnesses to prophesy 1260 days dressed in sackcloth. These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands and are standing before the Lord of the earth (Revelation 11:3,4).
These two witnesses are the Jehovah's witnesses and the Lords' Witnesses. The 1260 days of prophesying in sackcloth for the JWs was from 1914Heshvan26 to 1918Iyyar25 when the governing body was locked up in prison in the pattern for FDS3 - see , . The 1260 days of prophesying for the LWs was from 1992Elul11 when Letter to the Society, our first book, was hand delivered to their HQ in Brooklyn, to 1995Adar11, the day that Gordon was disfellowshipped. He knew that he would be thrown out on this day in advance, from the above scripture (it is one of the few interpretations relating to his personal future that he got right in advance ironically enough). He wrote to Dan Sydlik of the governing body after the event (see [1996April14]). The two olive trees stand for two sources of olive oil which is holy spirit. They are two baptisms into two covenants, the new covenant and the newer covenant. The new heavenly covenant and the new earthly covenant might be a better way of putting it. The two lampstands are the two congregations of FDS3 and FDS4. Jesus has told us that lampstands are congregations:
The 7 lampstands mean 7 congregations (Revelation 1:20).
This does not mean that we are an offshoot of the Jehovah's Witnesses or we are reformed Jehovah's Witnesses, or renegade JWs any more than the first century Christians were an offshoot of Judaism, or were reformed Jews, or renegade Jews.
The LWs are to the JWs what the Christians were to the Jews, the next true religion acceptable to God and chosen by Jesus.
For the full story see , . The Christians were not responsible for the sins of the Jews, the Jehovah's witnesses were not responsible for the sins of the Christian churches before them and the Lord's Witnesses are not responsible for the sins of the Jehovah's Witnesses (we will certainly commit enough sins of our own)!
Here is an interesting section as regards congregational authority. Lets have
a look at 1 Corinthians 11:
1 Become imitators of me, even as I am of Christ.
2 Now I commend you because in all things you have me in mind and you are holding fast the traditions just as I handed [them] on to you.
3 But I want you to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God.
4 Every man that prays or prophesies having something on his head shames his head;
5 but every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered shames her head, for it is one and the same as if she were a [woman] with a shaved head.
6 For if a woman does not cover herself, let her also be shorn; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered.
7 For a man ought not to have his head covered, as he is God's image and glory; but the woman is man's glory.
8 For man is not out of woman, but woman out of man;
9 and, what is more, man was not created for the sake of the woman, but woman for the sake of the man.
10 That is why the woman ought to have a sign of authority upon her head because of the angels.
11 Besides, in connection with [the] Lord neither is woman without man nor man without woman.
12 For just as the woman is out of the man, so also the man is through the woman; but all things are out of God.
13 Judge for your own selves: Is it fitting for a woman to pray uncovered to God?
14 Does not nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him;
15 but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her. Because her hair is given her instead of a headdress.
16 However, if any man seems to dispute for some other custom, we have no other, neither do the congregations of God (1 Corinthians 11).
Paul is saying that if a woman prays or prophesies with her head uncovered then she might as well be shorn. He knows that such a thing is disgusting, so he is saying she should cover her head. He is not suggesting punishment barbers in the congregations.
If you are having a bad hair day, then this section is definitely not for you!
Now the man is made in God's image and is God's glory. The woman is not said anywhere to be made in God's image and is man's glory. Now the man was not created for the sake of the woman (although modern urban society would have you believe that he was), but the woman was created for the sake of the man. Likewise God was not created for the sake of the angels (or at all) but the angels were created for the sake of God. They too are God's glory and the loyal ones are his wife, the holy spirit. The woman is therefore in the image of the holy spirit (which is the collection of all the loyal angels acting in unison, like a wave).
The woman therefore has a sign of authority from the man, just as the angels have a sign of authority from God. In the case of the woman, this sign is long hair. In the case of the angels it is some symbolic equivalent of long hair. Possibly long term submission to God's will. This is why Paul says: 'because of the angels'. The loyal angels know that the woman represents the holy spirit, which is them, and so the physical woman should demonstrate her submission to her husband or future husband or past husband physically as the angels demonstrate their submission to God spiritually.
So all of this means exactly what it says. Women should only pray and prophesy with their heads 'covered' and men should not pray or prophesy with their heads 'covered'.
Paul goes on to explain that long hair is 'instead of a headdress', so long hair is a head covering in the case of women. So women do not have to put a shawl on if they already have long hair. But unfortunately for men, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, so long hair must also be a head covering for them (as a sister joyfully pointed out!) So men should not pray or prophesy with long hair. And women with short hair should wear a head covering when praying or prophesying.
But what about the Nazirites, like Samson? They were told not to let a razor pass over their head! Well they were under a vow to Jehovah, which involved them amongst other things not being and not getting married. This is not explicitly stated but it is implied by Numbers 6:
6 All the days of his keeping separate to Jehovah he may not come
toward any dead soul.
7 Not even for his father or his mother or his brother or his sister may he defile himself when they die, because the sign of his Naziriteship to his God is upon his head.
8 All the days of his Naziriteship he is holy to Jehovah (Numbers 6).
The Nazirite man is effectively married to God and hence the long hair as a sign of submission to him through a covenant. This is a physical headship of Jehovah over him. A Nazirite man, since he is not himself able to be a physical head over a woman, as God is over the holy spirit, is not in God's image in that sense, so he can have long hair.
Men have no head covering, i.e. have short hair, because we, being in God's image as regards headship, are potential or actual heads over women.
So here is the arbitrary hair length law of the LWs. It is arbitrary, and it is deliberately arbitrary, and left to be arbitrary by God, because it is merely a sign of acceptance of authority. And his authority over hair, and actually quite a lot more than hair (but not all his authority), is through his human priesthood on earth. So we are setting it as follows:
[A] LW Men should have hair no longer than
the bottom of their collars when praying or prophesying.
[B] LW Women with hair shorter than the top of their collars should wear a head covering when praying and prophesying.
Bible decoding and general bible interpretation is prophesying today. For it is like Joel and Peter have said:
17 And in the last days, God says, I shall pour out some of my spirit upon every sort of flesh, and your sons and your daughters will prophesy and your young men will see visions and your old men will dream dreams (Acts 2).
This is the first physical law for the LWs other than the one or two mandatory celebrations (and it is hopefully the last). Hopefully one of these things is sufficient for the angels and for God.
So how do we enforce this? Well at full congregational meetings, if an LW man or a woman breaks this 'law', he or she will be asked to respect it. If he or she does respect it during the rest of that meeting then that will be the end of the matter. If he or she does not respect it during the rest of that meeting then he or she will be asked to leave that meeting. That is it.
We will not give official warnings or throw people out of the LWs because of the length of their hair. Neither will we keep a record of 'hair infringements' at previous meetings etc. This matter will be dealt with on a meeting by meeting basis only and will not be 'enforced' upon non LWs. But neither will we tolerate what we believe is an abuse of God's law during full congregational meetings. So if for example Bryan May of Queen became an LW (perhaps deciding that he does in fact want to live forever, if for no other reason than to keep the fans happy in the Kingdom of God), and if he chose to keep his hair long, then he would not be able to speak out, either asking questions or engaging in debate in the LW equivalent of Question Time in matters of prophecy at full congregational meetings only. If he did speak out we would ask him to leave that meeting only. He could however sing at such meetings! Perhaps he could put it up in a bun?
Actually since women with short hair can just put a head covering on without actually altering their hair length, men with long hair should be able to just tie it up in a bun which keeps it above their shoulders!
Of course Christians should never consult with spirit mediums (media).
31 Do not turn yourselves to the spirit mediums, and do not consult professional foretellers of events, so as to become unclean by them. I am Jehovah your God (Leviticus 19).
6 As for the soul who turns himself to the spirit
mediums and the professional foretellers of events so as to have immoral
intercourse with them, I shall certainly set my face against that soul and cut him off from among his people (Leviticus 20).
27 And as for a man or woman in whom there proves to be a mediumistic spirit or spirit of prediction, they should be put to death without fail. They should pelt them to death with stones. Their own blood is upon them (Leviticus 20).
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 (Deuteronomy 18).
Consulting with a spirit medium is 'immoral intercourse' and is treated just like fornication. Every condemnation of spiritism is in the plural. One trip to a spirit medium does not result in disfellowshipping, it results in a warning, just like true fornication.
But what do you do if a spirit medium comes to the congregation meetings and represents that he or she is not a spirit medium?
We are not the thought police, but we must guard against influence by spirit mediums. Spirit mediums often start by saying something very spiritual and true to get you hooked. Then they tell you that you will be run over by a bus two years next Tuesday, which destroys your life. You then go into a panic and people have been known to kill themselves because they cannot live with the worry about possibly fulfilling the absurd prediction. Here is how Jesus dealt with them:
23 Also, at that immediate time there was in their synagogue a man
under the power of an unclean spirit, and he shouted,
24 saying: What have we to do with you, Jesus you Nazarene? Did you come to destroy us? I know exactly who you are, the Holy One of God.
25 But Jesus rebuked it, saying: Be silent, and come on out of him! (Mark 1).
The point is that the spirit medium was declaring a great sacred secret which was true. But Jesus shut it up. He knew that the game of the medium is to establish a spiritual credibility by revealing a truth and then having won the trust of the victim the abuse and misleading will begin. The abusive husband first gets the confidence of his wife, then he gets control of his wife through this confidence, then he starts his abuse. Star Wars fans will recognise that this was the tactic of Count Dooku when he was trying to turn Obi Wan to the dark side. He revealed that the senate was being controlled by a Sith Lord (Darth Sidius), an amazing revelation and a true statement. He then falsely represented that together with Obi Wan, he would destroy the Sith. But of course had Obi Wan agreed, Count Dooku would have said, well, yes, we must destroy the Sith, it is our foremost priority, but before we do, there is just one little thing I would like us to do first. And so it would go on. In fact Star Wars II is a very accurate representation of how Satanic corruption works. It is not a Satanic film, it is an enlightening and educational film in this regard. The screenwriters rare wisdom do have.
Here are two things to look out for with spirit mediums who come to meetings:
 They use the phrase "I have been told". God does not audibly instruct Christians about spiritual truths. He instructs exclusively through the word of God, which is the bible, and of course through nature. It is true that Jesus spoke audibly to Paul, but this was in the days of the physical gifts of the spirit. In those days there was genuine demonic possession and genuine demonic expulsion and genuine resurrection of the dead, and genuine curing of disabilities etc. These physical signs were passed on by the laying on of the hands by the apostles, they ended around a generation after the end of the first presence in 119Elul (actually at the first rapture in 153 AD). For example, today, the first new covenant saints know that they are new covenant saints, but they do not know how they know that they are new covenant saints! None of them have heard an audible voice saying: Hi, this is Jesus speaking, you are a new covenant saint, goodbye.
 They say things like: I know who I am, do you know who you are? Implying some type of heavenly existence. Born again Christians do have a heavenly alternative existence, in the form of an associated angelic body. But they have absolutely no consciousness of this extra soul.
The way to deal with someone whom you suspect might be a spirit media, if you are not sure, is to ask them to prove their assertions from the bible. For instance we had one who came to our LW meetings representing that he was no longer a spirit medium, but then he told certain people that he was the angel Michael. But he had earlier admitted that he had less bible knowledge than many LWs. Obviously Michael would have more bible knowledge because he was the editor of the whole bible. So the bible is the touchstone to use when anyone makes a spiritual claim.
The purpose of this section is not to start a witch hunt for spirit mediums. In fact if a spirit medium is genuinely trying to cease being a medium and find God, then we will help them as much as we can on this journey. But they must be honest with us about what their problems are.
The short answer is that there is no protocol to follow. The longer answer is that the congregation elders can decide to ask you to respect any of our laws whilst you are at congregation meetings, if they feel, in their opinion, that by your not respecting a particular Christian law, you are damaging or endangering the congregation. Of course they have no authority over non LWs outside of our meetings. They should not ask you to respect any laws unless you first exhibit a potentially disruptive or dangerous disrespect for that law, in their opinion, during the meeting. At that time they should only ask you to obey that particular law, and only ask you to obey it whilst you attend our meetings.
But if, for example a prostitute wanted to learn about God and she came to a meeting, no one would would place any burden on her, unless she started to solicit for business within the meeting. If she did, then she would be asked not to practice her trade during meetings.
There are various laws in various countries which seek to limit the parents rights here. We cannot advise on these laws. We can advise on bible law as we understand it. The relevant scriptures here are:
15 Foolishness is tied up with the heart of a
boy; the rod of discipline is what will remove it far from him (Proverbs 22).
13 Do not hold back discipline from the mere boy. In case you beat him with the rod, he will not die (Proverbs 23)
15 The rod and reproof are what give wisdom; but a boy let on the loose will be causing his mother shame (Proverbs 29)
1 In case a dispute arises between men, and they have presented
themselves for the judgment, they must also judge them and pronounce the righteous one righteous and pronounce the wicked one
2 And it must occur that if the wicked one deserves to be beaten, the judge must also have him laid prostrate and given strokes before him by number to correspond with his wicked deed.
3 With forty strokes he may beat him. He should add none, for fear he should continue to beat him with many strokes in addition to these and your brother is actually disgraced in your eyes (Deuteronomy 25:1-3).
48 But if ever that evil slave should say in his
heart, 'My master is delaying,'
49 and should start to beat his fellow slaves and should eat and drink with the confirmed drunkards (Matthew 24).
45 But if ever that slave should say in his heart, 'My master delays coming,' and should start to beat the boys and the girls/maidservants, and to eat and drink and get drunk (Luke 12).
13 He is the one that will build a house for my
name, and I shall certainly establish the throne of his kingdom firmly to time
14 I myself shall become his father, and he himself will become my son. When he does wrong, I will also reprove him with the rod of men and with the strokes of the sons of Adam (2 Samuel 7).
20 And in case a man strikes his slave man or his slave girl with
a stick and that one actually dies under his hand, that one is to be avenged without
21 However, if he lingers for a day or two days, he is not to be avenged, because he is his money (Exodus 21).
20 Now in case a man lies down with a woman and has an emission of semen, when she is a maidservant
acquired/purchased for another man, and she has not in any way been redeemed nor has freedom been given her,
she should be chastised [beaten]. They should not be put to
death [because there is no marriage], because she was not set
free [and because he cannot marry her because
she is owned by her master so the fix of Deuteronomy 22:29 cannot occur] [There
is no penalty on the man if no pregnancy occurs. But if a pregnancy does occur
he loses his child to the master of the slave] (Leviticus 19).
We are not under the law of Moses any more, so the penalties of the law, such as stoning or beating with 40 strokes less one, no longer apply. Although in a dispute between men, the principle that one is righteous and the other is wicked still holds true today. There is no 'knock for knock' or expediency or "let's not blame anyone" or "oh it was everybody's fault" in God's justice. There is no 'collective responsibility' in the sense that no individual can be blamed. One is right and the other is wrong.
However, in the case of females, all of the above shows us that nowhere in the bible is the beating of daughters, or wives with rods proposed (mind you beating of slave girls is proposed). So let us state categorically that daughters and wives should not be beaten with sticks or with any implements in fact.
However the proverbs of Solomon are not a part of the Law of Moses, which Jesus ended as a true from of worship.
So plainly 'mere boys' can be beaten with a rod if the parent deems it necessary. Now, we all know that girls behave badly as well as boys. And the principle of corporal punishment cannot only apply only to boys, since after all we are both the same species! So we therefore deduce that 'mere girls' may only be beaten with the hand. The bible does not propose such discipline explicitly, and it describes it as evil when applied to boys or girls or maidservants as an abuse of power. But the implication of the prescription of the rod for the boy is that the hand is suitable for the girl. Furthermore boys do beat each other with fists whereas girls slap each other with hands (well they used to until Buffy the vampire slayer appeared anyway!)
This does not mean that parents should regularly beat their sons with rods or their daughters with hands. It means that as a last resort the bible prescribes it. The Hebrew word (r[n) means male infant, or male child. But to the Hebrew, a son was a boy until he was 20 years old when he could be registered into the army. For Ishmael is described as a boy when he was 18 years old. He was 13 years old when Isaac was born, and he was evicted with his mother by Abraham for his poking fun at Isaac, at Sarah's insistence and at God's command when Isaac was weaned (i.e. 5 years old).
17 At that God heard the voice of the boy, and God's angel called
to Hagar out of the heavens and said to her: What is the matter with you, Hagar? Do not be afraid, because God has listened to the
voice of the boy there where he is.
18 Get up, lift up the boy and take hold of him with your hand, because I shall constitute him a great nation (Genesis 21).
So the best we can see is that the bible explicitly or implicitly prescribes:
Last resort beating with a rod or other implement for sons under 20
Last resort beating with the hand only for daughters under 20.
We mean a beating on the backside not on the head or feet or back! The bible prescribes NO OTHER BEATING of any sort for Christian children. However with the speed at which kids grow up today the age limit should possibly be lower.
If a mother or father or husband or wife went further than this, we would not give them a warning, but they are not presiding over their household in a fine manner, so the father would not be eligible to be a ministerial servant or an elder. He or she also might have a problem with social services or the domestic violence unit of the police.
But make no mistake God himself gave us pain to teach us, and parents are permitted by God to use the same teaching method on their children. Sick governments who interfere with parents rights whilst presiding over child care services which regularly abuse children physically and sexually and internationally, should stop telling families what to do and start listening to families as regards how their own child care services are run. If not then all families will end up with the discipline of an inner city classroom, i.e. no discipline at all. Then we will be in the situation where children with guts have to stand up to bullies because no parent or teacher is permitted to by law. Of course some of these children lose their lives while standing up to bullies which the parents and teachers are forbidden by law from dealing with effectively in the UK. If you think that beating is wrong then read the news stories of the very few children born who cannot feel any pain at all (this being a medical deficiency). The parents of these kids would give anything for them to be able to feel pain.
Of course UK law, as of late 2004, only allows a soft smack for any child. But this is at odds with the bible. In a similar vein, the EU now requires their commissioners to espouse pro homosexual views, such is the lobbying power of the gays (they give Haliburton a good run for its money). Again this is at odds with the bible. Paul and Moses would strongly disagree.
As regards husbands and wives, they are one flesh, one body. From a sexual standpoint Paul says:
3 Let the husband render to [his] wife her due, but let the wife
also do likewise to [her] husband.
4 The wife does not exercise authority over her own body, but her husband does, likewise, also, the husband does not exercise authority over his own body, but his wife does.
5 Do not be depriving each other [of it], except by mutual consent for an appointed time, that you may devote time to prayer and may come together again, that Satan may not keep tempting you for your lack of self-regulation (1 Corinthians 7).
That stops sexual power games going on and is very equitable. But the principle of verse 4 does not only apply sexually. The principle is that since they are one flesh, they kind of share each other's bodies. So the wife can use the husband's body when she needs it, just as he can, such as to defend herself or lift the heavy bags. In fact she has authority to insist on these things in the case of a definite need for her. But likewise the husband has authority to insist on using the wife's body for what he definitely needs from her. The two are supposed to be fulfilling each other's needs, not playing power games with each other's desires.
Obviously husbands and wives should not beat each other as a punishment or in fights or as a power game at all since they are one flesh, one body. However the man is physically stronger than the woman and the woman is emotionally stronger than the man. So any law which prohibits a man from striking his wife physically but does not prohibit a woman from striking the man emotionally is non contributory. Since it is almost impossible to stop women emotionally abusing men, one should be careful with legislation that stops men physically abusing women. For there is a deliberate balance between the powers of a man and the powers of a woman set by God.
A simple rule might be slapping is OK but no more.
The bible only recommended corporal punishment with a rod for a promiscuous slave girl or a wicked man who was in the wrong in a dispute with another man under law, as a kind of judicial alternative to a punch up.
The kids and the wife are the possessions of the husband in biblical terms. The courts in the UK have reversed this historical balance of power in all family relationships that has pertained for millennia by giving the family home and kids to the wife in the event of a divorce which they grant within 3 months on pretty much any grounds at all. One understands why the courts do this, it is one step thinking. The courts reason that the kids need the mother more. But the second step in the thought process is that the mother loves the kids the most, so she will not leave her kids if they are given to the husband. Whereas the husband will give up on his kids if the court takes them away from him and gives them to the mother (all credit to Father's for Justice). So giving the kids to the husband ensures that the family stays together. So the courts are effectively destroying families and stealing the fathers from kids in broken homes.
They also, along with the media, especially the TV, encourage women to see middle aged men as at best equals in family authority to the woman and at worst as irrelevant incompetent and unreliable providers who do a worse job than the state. Wicked men then take advantage of this and get out the minute they see a pregnancy, leaving single mothers to attempt to bring up teenage boys by themselves, which is very hard indeed and very damaging both to the mother and to the boy. On the other hand, many good men are forced to compromise and hand headship over to their wives under the ever present threat of said court action in a divorce. The courts are of course sexist in favour of the woman to use politically correct parlance, but being sexually prejudiced against men is acceptable, just as being racially prejudice against whites is acceptable or being sexually prejudiced against heterosexuals or against homophobes is acceptable in this hypocritical and pharisaical world that has moved beyond the bible and reaped misery for millions as a result.
The husbands then become bitter and nonchalant about the whole family deal and if the family does manage to stay together it is not a happy place. The trouble is that women go for physical status and security and the state has more status than their husbands have and can offer more security than their husbands can in general. The state is basically competing with the husband for control of the family. It is very very sick indeed to pass laws which cause the woman to rely on the state rather than her husband. It is the equivalent of the boss stealing your wife. Neither nature nor Jehovah gave either the state or the church the capability to produce physical babies. So we must both tread very carefully when exercising authority over parents to whom nature or God most definitely did give this capability.
There is a very simple reason why a woman cannot have two husbands. It is headship. A woman cannot have two heads. God created no animal with two heads (except a certain snakes). A man however can have two wives, but the bible speaks against it as follows:
17 He should also not multiply wives for himself, that his heart may not turn aside; nor should he increase silver and gold for himself very much (Deuteronomy 17).
2 The overseer should therefore be irreprehensible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospitable, qualified to teach (1 Timothy 3).
6 if there is any man free from accusation, a husband of one
wife, having believing children that were not under a charge of debauchery nor
unruly (Titus 1).
So a man cannot be a ministerial servant or an elder if he has two wives. But he can be in the congregation. Obviously he might be in prison in many countries!
However a husband cannot just go and sleep with another woman and then marry her if she becomes pregnant. He is an adulterer unless he proposes to the second woman first and he is not able to propose without the consent of his first wife, for he is one flesh with her. So if his first wife permits it he could become scripturally married to a second wife, but not of course legally married to her in most countries. A scriptural marriage is simply a consummated engagement. For those who are presently married to one wife, the only valid purpose in taking a second wife that the LWs can presently see would be the case of a shotgun marriage, where the husband had got another woman pregnant. This would have to be agreed by the first wife of course. Again we make the distinction between a legal marriage and a biblical marriage. You can have two wives biblically but not legally in most countries. However you can have as many children as you like with as many concurrent sexual partners as you want in the West of course regrettably. And further the Government will often support this morally unsustainable behaviour with tax payers money. But please remember all ye romantic supermen...
8 Certainly if anyone does not provide for those who are his own, and especially for those who are members of his household, he has disowned the faith and is worse than a person without faith (1Timothy 5).
The translation of that is: Fail to look after your kids and God will not look after you. He will put you in Hell.
This is a hard section to write. But the basic concept is simple. The rank and file JWs are for the most part God fearing and faithful. But Satan has corrupted their leaders entirely. There are some major psychological problems that JWs face in their journey into the LWs. As JWs you are told that the faithful and discreet slave (FDS) will never as a group go wrong. You are told that 'certain brothers' may fall away, but the FDS itself cannot lose faith. You are told that the FDS is the 'Wide awake John Class', the channel for all true bible understanding. You have believed that the way God explains the bible to his people today, is that he tells Jesus, Jesus tells the governing body, the governing body tells the writing committee, and the writing committee puts it in the Watchtower. You have believed that to get through Armageddon all you have to do is stay loyal not to God, and not to your master Jesus, but to God's 'Spirit Directed Organisation'. You have made no distinction between the Watchtower and Jesus and God in this respect.
You have not been made aware of the fact that the Watchtower did not itself interpret Daniel 4 as having a second meaning relating to the Gentile Times, it was Reverend John Aquila Brown who did that in 1823. You have not been made aware that the Watchtower was not the first Christian group to identify the wild beast of Revelation 13 and Revelation 17 with the League of nations in 1920. You have not been made aware that the Watchtower was not the first organisation to realise in 1942 that Revelation 17 implied that the League of Nations which was abyssed during the WWII would be reformed after the war. In short you have not understood the humble veracity of Brother Russell's words, when he said that his work was more of a collation of other peoples ideas, than it was a series of personal understandings on his part.
When faced with the realisation that the Watchtower has mislead you and lied to you so badly, the temptation is to react against them completely and throw away everything they have ever taught you. When you realise that the very definition of the harlot riding a beast, is an NGO being associated with the UN. And when you realise that the Watchtower was an NGO associated with the UN for 10 years. Then you realise that it is a now part of Babylon the great. When you remember the incessant condemnations made in almost every meeting in every kingdom hall of either Babylon or of the beast, you become sickened at their duplicity and their hypocrisy.
How can an organisation that dedicates every person and every brick in every building to Jehovah, sign an agreement with the wild beast, to promote and support the ideals UN charter? This is gross idolatry given the prior dedication and gross hypocrisy. Then when you finally see that God has rejected the Watchtower, because this jumping on the back of the beast was the transgression causing desolation to the Watchtower as referred to in Daniel 8, you wish to reject the Watchtower yourself totally.
Now at this point you are very very vulnerable indeed. You are vulnerable spiritually, because your spiritual universe has exploded. You are vulnerable socially because you are going to be shunned by most of your friends. You are vulnerable psychologically, because the Watchtower today is a terrible control freak, and you are not used to the mental freedom you are about to 'enjoy'. Being realistic you can become be a very easy target for various spiritual, emotional, sociological and psychological disasters. We have through bitter experience learned that careful advice is needed here. Please remember and keep a tight hold on to the following things:
 The Watchtower was the true religion, the 3rd FDS, from 1918Nisan16 until 1995Tishri15. Then it was a true religion until 2004Elul14 when it became a false religion.
 You have not 'wasted your life' by joining the JWs. They were God's true people, they just got corrupted as all but the last true religion eventually do.
 Some of the JW teachings today are wrong and satanic, others are still correct. So, however tempting, please do not throw away the baby with the bath water here! You will have learned many useful biblical truths and you will have developed many good behavioural patterns from the JWs. Your spiritual journey has taken you through the JWs, and this is a GOOD THING because, if you join both true religions in a presence, and avoid all the false ones, then you get to pick up your bed, you get a definite resurrection into the kingdom of God (either from the dead or whilst you are living through the rapture). There is the mercy and wisdom of the creator. Joining two true religions is enough for him. The blessing of Abraham is yours.
But, you will also have picked up some incorrect interpretations and you will have picked up some bad (pharasaical, over controlling) behavioural patterns. So you need to be grown up about this and sort out the good from the bad. Please try not to violently swing from one extreme to the other. God has provided a second true religion in this presence for those who love him more than they love his fallen priesthood in the JWs. He is still teaching you, and perhaps this is your most important lesson, that you must love him with your own heart, you must follow him with your own mind, you must serve him with your own strength and then you, yes you personally, will make the decision which enables God to save your own soul through Jesus. For then you will be a son not of a Bethel in Brooklyn, but of almighty God himself in heaven. It is the words he first spoke to Abraham that we quote to all JWs:
1 Go your way out of your country and from your relatives and from the house of your father to the country that I shall show you (Genesis 12:1).
For 'country' read 'religion'. If you truly are a son of Abraham, you will make the journey to this land you know little about, the land of the LWs.
 The LWs have far fewer physical restrictions and far fewer physical requirements than the JWs. But we are not an amorphous free for all. We have less laws, but we hope to enforce those that we have more equitably. You will be free to explore other religions, other bible interpretations, other relationships with people etc. You may not be used to having this freedom. You will be tempted to go overboard. But the sons and daughters of God are free in this way. You will find scriptures which look like they are contradicting established LW understandings. That is fine, try and reconcile them with our understandings, but if you cannot, then please email us. We encourage positive debate about the meaning of the bible. We are often wrong.
One more thing... Please don't call it the passover the 'Memorial'. It is not a funeral service. It is a celebration! We call it the last supper, or cups and covenants, or the passover celebration.
This website is the entirety of the official understandings of the LWs. We plan to keep it that way. However the site is rather academic and a bit hard to digest for the man in the street. So we expect shortly to produce easy guides to various parts of the site. These will be official LW publications. However we do not want to stop individual LWs from writing their own guides to this site. If you are an LW and you wish to publish some of your own material either on the web or in a book or booklet or howsoever, you are welcome to do so subject to the following condition:
Please make sure that your material contains the following dislaimer: "This material has not been written or produced by the Lords' Witnesses, it is not an official LW publication."
Jesus gave his sermon on the mount, on a mountain, not in a public square. He gave it to his disciples only, not to the crowds. Neither today is it given to the crowds, it is given to those who read the bible. He taught in the temple and in the synagogue to those who showed an interest by coming there. He did not teach in the market square...
19 He will not wrangle, nor cry aloud, nor will anyone hear his
voice in the broad ways.
20 No bruised reed will he crush, and no smoldering flaxen wick will he extinguish, until he sends out justice with success (Matthew 12).
So Jesus did not teach in public places. So likewise although we could agree to appear on chat shows etc. we should not teach to a general TV audience. But we can advertise to such an audience or we could run a TV advertising campaign which did not teach. Paul did teach in the Areopagus, the public speaking place of Athens, but he was dragged there, he did not choose to go there himself.
19 So they laid hold of him and led him to the Areopagus, saying: Can we get to know what this new teaching is which is spoken by you? (Acts 17).
Jesus condemned the Scribes and Pharisees publicly:
1 Then Jesus
spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying:
2 The Scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses (Matthew 23).
So we can publicly condemn false religion and bad secular leaders (for the Pharisees were also the secular rulers of the Jews), since their activities are publicly known.
1 Look! My servant, on whom I keep
fast hold! My chosen one, [whom] my soul has approved! I have put my spirit in
him. Justice to the nations is what he will bring forth.
2 He will not cry out or raise [his voice], and in the street he will not let his voice be heard.
3 No crushed reed will he break; and as for a dim flaxen wick, he will not extinguish it. In trueness he will bring forth justice.
4 He will not grow dim nor be crushed until he sets justice in the earth itself; and for his law the islands themselves will keep waiting (Isaiah 42).
17 that there might be fulfilled what
was spoken through Isaiah the prophet, who said:
18 Look! My servant whom I chose, my beloved, whom my soul approved! I will put my spirit upon him, and what justice is he will make clear to the nations.
19 He will not wrangle, nor cry aloud [over teachings], nor will anyone hear his voice in the broad ways [teaching].
20 No bruised reed will he crush, and no smoldering flaxen wick will he extinguish, until he sends out justice with success.
21 Indeed, in his name nations will hope (Matthew 12).
Of course the literal fulfilment of both of these scriptures was Jesus Christ. A bruised reed is a damaged religious leader or a damaged morally upright person, a smouldering flaxen wick is a flickering spiritual light, a person who is just managing to keep shining spiritually. But the second meaning, the word symbolic meaning has two fulfilments one for Isaiah and one for Matthew, by the parallel account principle. And Isaiah is fulfilled in FDS2 and Matthew 12 is fulfilled in FDS4. So whereas the first true religion, FDS1, which became the Catholic church when it was rejected by God in around 76/77 AD, did crush and extinguish the weak and the damaged, the second true religion did not. and whereas the Watchtower, the 3rd true religion, FDS3, likewise trampled upon the sick, shunning them and marking them and calling them not very spiritual etc, FDS4 do not do that. The word 'servant' is repeated twice, so the word symbolic meaning of it is different from the singular human servant Jesus, so it is a composite servant an FDS. FDS2 and FDS4 look after the weak ones in their churches. But also we have a different method of evangelising to FDS1 and FDS3. We do not wrangle, nor cry aloud, nor is our voice heard in the broadways. We do it the way Jesus did it. He did not stand on the street corner and preach to all and sundry. He did sent out people to do that, but these were in the first true religion. Jesus' technique, which our church follows, is best described by him...
20 Jesus answered him: I have spoken [about my teachings] to the world publicly. I always taught in a synagogue and in the temple, where all the Jews come together; and I spoke nothing in secret (John 18).
Jesus spoke publicly but taught 'privately' in a synagogue or in a temple. So we only teach people or groups of people who have chosen to listen. But we can advertise or talk generally about the teachings to anyone. We do not do a one hour television commercial about our understandings, since many of those watching have not chosen to listen they just happen to be looking at that channel on the TV. We could take a small advert inviting them to come and be taught, however. Our understandings are very powerful and should only be given to interested people. We do not want to give them to our enemies. The broad way today is the TV or the Radio or the Newspaper. The internet is not a broad way, it is just a very large electronic library.
We must not cast our pearls before people who have not chosen to listen. I should not take a large advert in a newspaper explaining our complicated teachings, However I could take an advert inviting people to look at our complicated teachings. We could do door to door ministry so long as we do not attempt to teach someone who is not interested. The door to door ministry is an advert for a bible study. Likewise we would not get involved in heated arguments about scripture (wrangling).
This is the distinction. Speak to the world, but teach only the congregation. If you want to know the truth, you need to do a bit more than switch the TV on. You can broadcast an advert without an invitation, but not a teaching. You can only broadcast a teaching by invitation (Like Paul did at the Areopagus). Publicly advertise, but privately teach. Yet do not refuse an invitation. But adjust the content of any talk given to the nature of the audience, public or private. Remember that the sermon on the mount was given on the mount, not in the public square.
God is patriarchal. The head of the family is the spiritual head of the family. So if in the LWs a man had spiritual authority over his own genetic father, then he would be breaking the family headship principle. This we think is why Joseph died before Jesus started his ministry. Jesus was the head of his family at his death since he said to Lazarus, his son by resurrection: Behold your mother. He would not be able to do that without having the necessary authority over both Lazarus and his mother.
25 By the torture stake of Jesus, however, there were standing his mother and the sister of his mother; Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene.
26 Therefore Jesus, seeing his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing by, said to his mother: Woman, see! Your son!
27 Next he said to the disciple: See! Your mother! And from that hour on the disciple took her to his own home. (John 19 NWT).
This proves that one of the disciples was Jesus' son. And since he did not
get married during his ministry, the son must have been by resurrection. So do
not baptize a father into a congregation or circuit of tribe run by his son! If
a genetic father abdicates by getting a divorce and clearing off without looking
after his son this presumably would no longer apply as he would not be the
One of the most astonishing things to the writer about the bible is that it prescribes no methodology for a marriage ceremony. Gordon does wonder therefore whether we are supposed to have any such ceremony. To God, once the man has proposed and the woman has agreed, that is the end of the matter, and any man who sleeps with an engaged woman is committing adultery. God expects us to be like an English gentleman was over a hundred years ago. His word was his bond. Here is the definition of marriage given by Adam, notice it is in the past tense...
24 therefore was a man leaving his father and his mother, and has stuck in his wife, and they have become one flesh. (Genesis 2, YLT).
This was true for pre adamic procreation since although the pre adamics were not dead, they only had a 50 year lifespan as humans before being raptured - see I5.
One way of looking at the lack of marriage ceremony detail in the scriptures is that God rejoices in the freedom that he gives us to love each other how we want to love each other and he hates interfering in other people's loving relationships. He is a God of total freedom, and what greater freedom is there than the freedom to love, without the state or the church telling you how to do it? But as we have discussed above, God does licence procreative sex in order to protect the rights of the child. Anyhow we are all free to get married however we want, whether in a big church ceremony or skydiving out of an aeroplane. There was a traditional Hebrew marriage protocol however - see U65. this protocol was not law, but is used symbolically in many scriptures.
But regrettably people often get married for reasons other than love and for this reason and others marriages often fall apart. Now according to the strict law of God, the only grounds for divorce are adultery, non consummation, or prior fornication as we shall see.
18 But the birth of Jesus Christ was in this way. During the time
his mother Mary was promised in marriage to Joseph, she was found to be pregnant by holy
spirit before they were united.
19 However, Joseph her husband, because he was righteous and did not want to make her a public spectacle, intended to divorce her secretly (Matthew 1).
So it is righteous to divorce before consummation (Joseph was not going to make an accusation about his wife). But Jesus described how Moses prescribed a certificate of divorce...
3 And Pharisees came up to him, intent on tempting him and saying:
Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife on every sort of ground?
4 In reply he said: Did you not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female
5 and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one flesh'?
6 So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together [this occurs when God puts his spirit into a 18-20 week old foetus. This is his part in the procedure. The parents will have the child as their yoke always, but they may be two flesh since a yoke connects two cattle] let no man put apart [let no man take the child away from its parents - social services take note].
7 They said to him: Why, then, did Moses prescribe giving a certificate of dismissal and a divorcing her?
8 He said to them: Moses, out of regard for your hardheartedness, made the concession to you of divorcing your wives, but such has not been the case from [the] beginning [showing that there was law in the day of Adam and actually down to Moses].
9 I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery (Matthew 19).
2 Pharisees now approached and, to put him to the test, began questioning him whether it was lawful for a man to divorce a wife.
3 In answer he said to them: What did Moses command you.
4 They said: Moses allowed writing a certificate of dismissal and a divorcing [her].
5 But Jesus said to them: Out of regard for your hardheartedness he wrote you this commandment.
6 However, from [the] beginning of creation He made them male and female.
7 On this account a man will leave his father and mother,
8 and the 2 will be one flesh; so that they are no longer 2, but one flesh.
9 Therefore what God yoked together [this occurs when God puts his spirit into a 18-20 week old foetus. This is his part in the procedure. The parents will have the child as their yoke always, but they may be two flesh since a yoke connects two cattle] let no man put apart [let no man take the child away from its parents - social services take note].
10 When again in the house the disciples began to question him concerning this.
11 And he said to them: Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her,
12 and if ever a woman, after divorcing her husband, marries another, she commits adultery (Mark 10).
The certificate of dismissal is a metonym for the certificate of divorce which involves a dismissal. There was only one certificate in the law, a certificate of divorce. The Pharisees referred to it as a certificate of dismissal.
10 To the married people I give instructions, yet not I but the
Lord, that a wife should not depart from her husband;
11 but if she should actually depart, let her remain unmarried or else make up again with her husband; and a husband should not leave his wife.
12 But to the others I say, yes, I, not the Lord: If any brother has an unbelieving wife, and yet she is agreeable to dwelling with
him, let him not leave her;
13 and a woman who has an unbelieving husband, and yet he is agreeable to dwelling with her, let her not leave her husband.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in relation to [his] wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in relation to the
brother; otherwise, your children would really be unclean, but now they are holy.
15 But if the unbelieving one proceeds to depart, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not in servitude under such circumstances, but God has called you to peace.
16 For, wife, how do you know but that you will save [your] husband? Or, husband, how do you know but that you will save [your] wife? [binary question] (1 Corinthians 7).
So you can separate if the marriage becomes intolerable but you cannot then remarry unless there has been fornication. But here is the clever interpretation and the legalistic part...
1 In case a man takes a woman and does make her his possession as
a wife, it must also occur that if she should find no favor in his eyes because he has found something
indecent [uncovered, nakedness - so certainly
prior fornication or adultery, but not pole dancing, stripogram, nude model etc.
i.e. for a reason described below] on her
part, he must also write out a certificate of divorce for her and put it in her hand and dismiss her from his
2 And she must go out of his house and go and become another man's [so she must have committed fornication or the holy spirit is commanding adultery].
3 If the latter man [who knows that she is a fornicatrix] has come to hate her and has written out a certificate of divorce for her [he does not need to find anything else indecent because, he already knows she is a fornicatrix] and put it in her hand and dismissed her from his house, or in case the latter man who took her as his wife should die,
4 the first owner of her who dismissed her will not be allowed to take her back again to become his wife after she has been defiled; for that is something detestable before Jehovah, and you must not lead the land that Jehovah your God is giving you as an inheritance into sin (Deuteronomy 24).
So actually you can divorce a woman on fornication that she committed prior to your marriage if you like, and the woman likewise can divorce a man for that reason. It the event of a divorce for prior fornication both are free to remarry without committing adultery if they do. But if they remarry they cannot go back to the first spouse afterwards. Jesus indicated this when he used the word fornication rather than adultery in Matthew19...
9 I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery (Matthew 19).
Fornication would have occurred prior to the marriage, since infidelity within the marriage is adultery which is a form of fornication but Jesus did use the wider term. Likewise the test for an unfaithful woman related to both marital and premarital infidelity...
19 'And the priest must make her swear, and he must say to the woman: If no man has lain down with you and if while under your husband you have not turned aside in any uncleanness, be free of the effect of this bitter water that brings a curse (Numbers 5)
If two unmarried people procreate, the woman getting pregnant, then at the 18th-20th week, when the child becomes a human soul, they are de facto married because they have permanently become one flesh not by agreement but by action. If they choose not to honour this, they have effectively granted themselves a certificate of divorce, and they cannot remarry without committing adultery unless there has been further fornication.
The point is that if a girl keeps herself for her husband then the husband cannot divorce her other than on the ground of her adultery. That is the prize she gets for her self control prior to the marriage. But if a woman does not keep herself for her husband, then he can divorce her on the grounds of her prior fornication at any time, so her marriage is built on sand if her husband does not love her in a long term way. But of course all marriages require long term love. The same is true for a man. Marriage therefore provides more security for virgins than it does for fornicators. Or looking at it the other way, you can get out of a marriage with a fornicator more easily.
So we will issue/permit certificates of divorce for husbands who wish to divorce their wives and vice versa for prior fornication or for adultery.
23 and the man saith, 'This [is] the step! bone of my
bone, and flesh of my flesh!' for this it is called Woman, for from a man hath
this been taken
24 therefore was a man leaving his father and his mother, and has stuck in his wife, and they have become one flesh. (Genesis 2, YLT).
4 In reply he said: Did you not read that he who created them from
[the] beginning made them male and female
5 and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and stick to his wife, and they shall be -- the two -- for one flesh? [No we did not read that. Adam said this in the past tense. Perhaps God then said it in the future tense?]
6 so that they are no more two, but one flesh; what therefore God did join together, let no man put asunder
7 They said to him: Why, then, did Moses prescribe giving a certificate of dismissal and divorcing her?
8 He said to them: Moses, out of regard for your hardheartedness, made the concession to you of divorcing your wives, but such has not been the case from [the] beginning.
9 I say to you that whoever divorces his wife, except on the ground of fornication, and marries another commits adultery.
10 The disciples said to him: If such is the situation of a man with his wife, it is not advisable to marry.
11 He said to them: Not all men make room for the saying, but only those who have the gift.
12 For there are eunuchs that were born such from their mother's womb, and there are eunuchs that were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs that have made themselves eunuchs on account of the kingdom of the heavens. Let him that can make room for it make room for it (Matthew 19 - YLT/NWT).
When two people have a child that lives to the point that God's spirit is put inside him then no man can put them asunder. for God has joined them together. So we cannot write out a certificate of divorce to a couple who have a child which is their flesh. But once that child has procreative sex with another, then he or she has joined their flesh to this new partner and so is no longer one flesh with his parents (he has left his father's and mother's flesh). At this point we could write out a certificate of divorce since the parents are no longer joined together by God.
Technically, since God regards engaged people, people who have agreed to marry, as married, then he would also regard two people who had agreed to get divorced and have a certificate of dismissal issued (in the event that one or both was/were a Lords' Witness), as being divorced, before the divorce goes through the secular courts. So the LWs will regard a certificate of divorce as being the end of the matter. The certificate is just an agreement to divorce signed by both parties with each signature witnessed. Legally this is a Deed of Divorce. However God hates trashing loving bonds and we would offer counselling as best as we can to preserve the marriage especially in cases where children are involved. But the decision is not ours.
We will also issue/permit certificates of divorce in the following circumstances where there is no prior fornication or adultery...
 Only if there are no remaining children who have not had procreative sex.
In this case the ex-spouses commit adultery if they re-marry.
All custody of children must go to the husband. The husband can then give them to the wife if he chooses and she agrees, but it is his decision.
We will consider the following as grounds for taking away the father's ownership of the children and temporarily or permanently giving them to the mother.
1. Attempted murder of his own children (permanent grounds).
2. Incest (permanent grounds).
3. The children develop a life threatening medical condition due to continued prolonged negligence of the father (temporary).
4. Abandonment (temporary).
Disfellowshipping is for a minimum period of 6 whole months as explained in section J2 above. The disfellowshipped brother or sister is thrown out of the church and during the first 6 whole months they are not permitted to attend any meetings of the church. If even two brothers are having a meeting to do with the church, a disfellowshipped person should not attend. However, contrary to the practice of the JWs, shunning is hateful and Satanic as discussed in J13 above.
So any brother or sister can visit a disfellowshipped person during the 6 months and discuss anything they like with them, but be careful and cautious, these people may be spiritually dangerous. Jesus exhorted us all to visit those in prison...
43 I was a stranger, but you did not receive me hospitably; naked, but you did not clothe me; sick and in prison, but you did not look after me (Matthew 25).
So actually we should keep in contact with disfellowshipped people, so that we continue to show them love. But they cannot attend any congregation meeting of any type. Non religious congregation social functions, are not out of bounds for disfellowshipped brothers and sisters, but be careful.
After the 6 whole months, the same is true until said person is repentant. At which time he must go to the elders, who will decide whether of not his repentance is genuine. If he says that he is repentant and there is no evidence to the contrary he is presumed repentant. He is repentant until proven otherwise. However if he has lied or slandered, his repentance will be that he should own up to and apologise for every lie and every slander, to everyone involved as far as this is still possible.
Now Paul confusingly said...
9 In my letter I wrote you to quit mixing in company with
10 not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world.
11 But now I am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or a idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man (1 Corinthians 5).
This refers to people still inside the congregation whom the elders should have thrown out. The Corinthians elders had failed to throw out a man who had married one of his father's wives. So it only applies when the congregation has negligent elders. In this case we should not shun (not avoid speaking with), but we should avoid socialising (avoid eating a meal with) people who we know should really have been thrown out. This is the congregation showing its disapproval. All non disfunctional communities do this. In fact 30 years ago this is how communities in England were policed. Today the only policing they get is from policemen. We must not ignore the pink elephant. If a brother who we know to be an adulterer invites us to tea, we should say, admit it and resign first, then we will come round. What these brothers should do is own up to the elders, and if the elders will not apply the law properly then the brothers should resign anyway, because they are not fooling the angels. And God is very happy indeed when a sinner takes his punishment for this is the start of repentance and we know from the parable of the lost sheep that there is more happinness in heaven when one sinner repents that there is over 99 righteous ones who have no need of repentance.
Paul further says...
17 Now I exhort you, brothers, to keep your eye on those who cause
divisions and occasions for stumbling contrary to the teaching that you have learned, and avoid
18 For men of that sort are slaves, not of our Lord Christ, but of their own bellies; and by smooth talk and complimentary speech they seduce the hearts of guileless ones (Romans 16).
So we should avoid those trying to draw people off after themselves. But we should love first and judge second. Only if we know that a brother is hiding a sin which should result in an accusation or an expulsion or only if we know that a brother is making his own church within the congregation should we avoid them socially. We need to be grown up about this. Obviously someone trying to set up a study group or a research group for the purpose of furthering our understandings or our ministry etc. is to be applauded. But someone who sets such a group up for the purpose of furthering himself is to be avoided. This requires exercising judgement. Judge a tree by its fruit. If a research group comes up with good new understandings or helps people to see the truth stay with it. If the group produces bitterness resentment, and attacks certain brothers, thereby inciting division, then leave it.
The thing is that Jesus is present when 2 or 3 are gathered together. So we would encourage LWs to form bible study groups. But of course this mechanism can be abused like any other mechanism.
John advises us not to allow disfellowshipped people into our meetings and not to greet disfellowshipped people as brothers. But this does not mean that we should shun them or refuse to allow them into our houses. The confusion on this matter comes from the early Christian practice of holding congregation meetings in one's house.
7 For many deceivers have gone forth into the world [from
the true congregation], persons not confessing Jesus Christ as coming in the
flesh [persons who say Jesus was not the Christ].
This is the deceiver and the antichrist [literally:
against the Christ].
8 Look out for yourselves, that you do not lose the things we have worked to produce, but that you may obtain a full reward [get sealed].
9 Everyone [who was/is a brother, i.e. who is in the church] that pushes ahead and does not remain in the teaching of the Christ [having come in the flesh as Jesus] does not have God [he is not in the 1AC if having known about Jesus, he then rejects him]. He that does remain in this teaching is the one that has both the Father and the Son [as Gods, two Gods, and has the father Abraham and the son Isaac as covenant fathers of the 1AC and the ICC].
10 If anyone [who was/is a brother] comes to you [plural you, the congregation] [to a Christian meeting being held at your house] and does not bring this teaching [of Jesus having come in the flesh as the Messiah, the Christ], never receive him into your homes [for a Christian meeting] or say a [Christian] greeting to him [do not allow this LW into the meeting do not treat him as a Christian brother - but he can of course come and see you in your home outside of a meeting just like any other tradesman or friend].
11 For he that says a [Christian] greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works [Because this guy is or should be disfellowshipped] (2 John).
Confession is done with regard to a known fact. So the antichrist does not accept that Jesus was the Christ. He is against the Christ, against the claim of Jesus to be the Christ. Disfellowshipped people are not allowed into meetings and one should not greet them as a brother (no holy kiss etc). But they are not banned from all of our houses and we can greet them as we would greet any other worldly person.
Here is the only explicit condemnation of lesbianism in the entire bible. We can find no condemnation in the Law of Moses.
18 For God's wrath is being revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who are suppressing the truth in an unrighteous
way [this is a condemnation by Paul of all
wicked mankind from Noah onwards],
19 because what may be known about God is manifest among them, for God made it manifest to them.
20 For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world's creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable;
21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify him as God nor did they thank him, but they became empty-headed in their reasonings and their unintelligent heart became darkened.
22 Although asserting they were wise, they became foolish
23 and turned the glory of the incorruptible God into something like the image of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed creatures and creeping things [idolatry].
24 Therefore God, gave them over in the desires of their hearts into uncleanness from/of the [desire] in them to dishonour their bodies,
25 even those who exchanged the truth of God for the lie and venerated and rendered sacred service to the creation rather than the One who created, who is blessed forever. Amen [more idolatry].
26 That is why God gave them up to disgraceful lusts [we can see from the te...te idiom that these are female female lust and male male lust], for both their females [some of them] changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature.
27 And [te..te] likewise also the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error [in the case of Sodom at Gomorrah] [so the lusts of a girl for a girl and a boy for a boy are equally disgraceful to God. Therefore the sins are equally obscene].
28 And just as they did not approve of holding God in accurate knowledge, God gave them up to a disapproved mental state, to do the things not fitting,
29 filled as they were with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, badness, being full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malicious disposition, being whisperers,
30 backbiters, haters of God, insolent, haughty, self-assuming, inventors of injurious things, disobedient to parents,
31 without understanding, false to agreements, having no natural affection, merciless.
32 Although these know full well the righteous decree of God, that those practicing such things are deserving of death, they not only keep on doing them but also consent with those practicing them (Romans 1).
23 And you must not give your emission to any beast to become unclean by it, and a woman should not stand before a beast to have connection with it. It is a violation of what is natural (Leviticus 18).
12 And where a man lies down with his daughter-in-law, both of them should be put to death without fail. They have committed a violation of what is natural. Their own blood is upon them (Leviticus 20).
We know what the penalty for homosexual activity was under law. It was death. Paul in Romans 1 compares lesbianism to homosexuality as both involving the same disgraceful lusts. He does not say that one lust is more or less disgraceful than the other. so lesbianism is acting upon a disgraceful lust which is contrary to nature. Therefore one would expect the same penalty not for lust, which is not a sin, but for acting on that lust and performing the dishonourable and disgraceful act that acting upon homosexual lust demands for acting upon lesbian lust. For the action is the sin as James informs us...
15 Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin, in turn, sin, when it has been accomplished, brings forth death (James 1).
Now 3 times in Romans1 we are told that female female sex is not natural, it is contrary to nature and we are told that it is disgraceful. Whereas in Leviticus 18 and 20 we see two other forms of sex which are also violations of what is natural. Both of these (non blood incest and bestiality) carry the death penalty and so we would expect lesbianism to carry the death penalty too. By which we mean disfellowshipping from the Christian church for 7 months.
Lesbianism and Homosexuality are attacks on children's rights to have an unconditional loving template from a male and a female for 20 years. This being the emotional security of the child. In this crucial regard they are no different one from the other. However there is an argument to be made that...
By law [the law of Moses] is [not was but is] the accurate knowledge of sin (Romans 3:20).
But the Law of Moses is silent on the issue of female female sex. So our present judgement is that we do not have a secure enough basis in scripture to disfellowship lesbians. They were no females implicated in the case of Sodom. The bible is a sexist book. Perhaps in this case it works for lesbian rights?? We have no authority that we can see over lesbians, but we do not recommend that a lesbian couple adopt or foster or otherwise have a child, since the child's right to have a male parent would then be denied. We will not discipline for this however - women intrinsically care for children period. We would recommend getting a man involved even if the lesbianism continued. In biblical terms a man can have two wives. In western legal terms he can have two sexual partners but not two wives. The man could actually marry both women biblically but only one legally!
Democratic governments of the West put the lust rights of adults above the love rights of children. They put the sexual security of men and women above the emotional security of boys and girls. This is a tragedy for the children in this life and for the adults in the next. But of course children do not have a vote. Children do not do much lobbying.
Same sex sex is an attack on the family unit which is the brick out of which any sustainable society must be built, since the family is the love school for children. Without love, no society has any future and gender is God's tutor for love - love of the opposite gender is a class we must all attend - even if we get expelled from the school a few times! Lesbianism is a violation of what is natural. Just as bestiality is a violation of what is natural. But Lesbian activity did not carry the same penalty as homosexual activity or bestiality under law. If a female lies down with a female in the same way as a female lies down with a male then both females are doing something unnatural and are indulging a disgraceful lust. But we have no scriptural authority that we can see to discipline them at congregation level. We shall have to leave it to their own consciences.
There is a technical reason which may explain why the law of Moses did not explicitly condemn lesbianism. This is the case of one man married to two women. The 3 are one flesh, therefore a lesbian act between the two women cannot carry any penalty. Two men could not marry one woman under law due to headship. But two women could marry one man.
It is hard for modern man to understand why God is absolutely against male homosexuality but not too fussed about lesbianism. But there again lesbians do not have multiple partners in open parkland, they do not really go down the road towards Sodom like male homosexuals. Lesbianism did not turn AIDS into an epidemic killing 50 million people. There is very little lesbian paedophilia, whereas 40% of paedophilia is male homosexual. Women intrinsically look after children. So lesbianism appears not to be a threat to the long term stability and survival prospects of a society whereas male homosexuality is.
The law of God on homosexuality is...
22 And you must not lie down with a male the same as you lie
down with a woman. It is a detestable thing.
23 And you must not give your emission to any beast to become unclean by it, and a woman should not stand before a beast to have connection with it. It is a violation of what is natural (Leviticus 18)
9 in the knowledge of this fact, that law is promulgated, not for a
righteous man, but for persons lawless and unruly, ungodly and sinners, lacking
loving-kindness, and profane, murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, manslayers,
10 fornicators, men who lie with males, kidnappers, liars, false swearers, and whatever other thing is in opposition to the healthful teaching
11 according to the glorious good news of the happy God, with which I was entrusted (1 Timothy 1).
9 What! Do you not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God's kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men (1 Corinthians 6).
What does a man lying down with a man mean? Presumably a man lying down with another man for the purposes of sexual stimulation. But we are not going to police sexual stimulation so we must draw some lines somewhere. As regards bestiality there should be no penetration and no emission of semen into a cavity of a beast. If we apply the same guidelines to homosexuality then there should be no penetration of any orifice and no emission of semen into any orifice as a result of homosexual behaviour. So we draw the line at orifice penetration specifically the mouth or the backside. Homosexual orifice penetration means disfellowshipping for both parties.
1. Do not put dick in bum or in mouth
2. Do not put dick substitute in bum
3. No deliberate sustained stimulation of reproductive organs
In contrast to heterosexual law, the emission of semen has no relevance in homosexual law.
These limits would also apply to implied homosexuality where a man has protected sex with a married woman (whose flesh is the flesh of her husband) but not to a woman has protected sex with a married man (whose flesh is the flesh of his wife).
We cannot now discipline a married man who
has protected sex with an unmarried woman. Because that is not adultery or
fornication, since no semen is transferred, and implied lesbianism carries no
However we would disfellowship a married woman who had protected sex with an unmarried man, since that would be implied homosexuality.
Perhaps if you follow after the morality of the times you may be asking yourself what does God have against homosexuality? What harm can a couple of effeminate males do to anyone? Of course God has nothing against homosexuals themselves. He loves all his sons, saints and sinners alike. But he hates the sins they commit because he knows what damage they cause to human society as a whole in the long term - which he can see.
So what damage does homosexuality really do?
Well it's as stated above. But we restate it here because it is so important...
1. Simply put every child has two fundamental human rights. The right to have unconditional love throughout its entire childhood from a male parent and the right to have unconditional love throughout its entire childhood from a female parent. These two loving templates are both necessary for a morally sustainable society. If one template is missing then the love of that child for half of the human race is fractured. And love is moral sustainability. That is the real danger of homosexuality and of absentee fathers of course. Although homosexuality has a multiplication factor within it which absentee fathers do not have.
2. To fully learn the lesson of love it appears that humans need to experience love with the opposite gender (bisexuals will get this of course). The opposite gender is almost a different species, and part of the essential training for perfect love - which is the final divinity examination on every human, an examination which Jesus passed on 33Nisan14 - is having a successful relationship with a member of the opposite sex - Not so easy to do!
3. The love lust balance. A gay San Francisco doctor at the time of the start of the AIDS epidemic said on the radio that it could have been averted if the medical community had been more forceful in insisting upon the use of condoms in the gay community. AIDS became an epidemic due to gay promiscuity in the bay area with gay men bumming literally dozens of partners per night unprotected in the Bath Houses there. It became an epidemic through gay promiscuity and was originally known as the gay plague.
Today 35-40 million people have died of AIDS, 35-40 million more have been diagnosed with AIDS and millions more have it undiagnosed. The homosexual community have argued that it is no longer a Gay plague, because heterosexuals now have it too in large numbers. But this is surely due to bisexuals succeeding in infecting heterosexuals. However even today (2014July) most of the new HIV cases in the US are homosexual or bisexual men - see CNNs article - This won't be the AIDS free generation. To cut a long story short, AIDS became an epidemic due to unprotected anal sex and even today, it is mainly transmitted by unprotected anal sex. Bob Geldof recently pointed out that female African prostitutes do not get much for protected sex but can charge what they want for unprotected sex. So there is very significant heterosexual transfer now as well.
So here we are with 35-40 million deaths. With perhaps 500 million bereaved relatives. With 15 million AIDS orphans in Africa and 20 million AIDS orphans world wide and there is hardly a government in the West which dares to criminalize unprotected anal sex. Because politicians are addicted to votes and because the 'Gay Rights' lobbying machine plainly regards the right to have unprotected anal sex as more important than the right to live in 35-40 million cases or the right of a child to have any parents in 20 million cases. This is why God is against homosexuality - we suspect.
It is not that men are being
effeminate. It is not even that they are buggering each other. It is that they
get addicted to unprotected anal sex so badly that they completely lose their
sense of morality.
They abandon their love for mankind in favour of uncontrollable lust for man's behinds. These people are addicts no different from coke-heads or alcoholics. They need help. They do not need indulgence.
Legislating to permit unprotected anal sex is like giving a bottle of whisky to an alcoholic or a line of white powder to a cocaine addict.
Here are the CDC AIDS transmission rate figures that prove categorically that unprotected Anal sex should be criminilalized...
Estimated Per-Act Probability of Acquiring HIV from an Infected Source, by Exposure Act - see http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/policies/law/risk.html
|Type of Exposure||Risk per 10,000 Exposures|
|Needle-sharing during injection drug use||63|
|Receptive anal intercourse||138|
|Insertive anal intercourse||11|
|Receptive penile-vaginal intercourse||8|
|Insertive penile-vaginal intercourse||4|
|Receptive oral intercourse||low|
|Insertive oral intercourse||low|
|Throwing body fluids (including semen or saliva)||negligible|
|Sharing sex toys||negligible|
So unprotected anal sex is 138+11=149/4+8=12 = 12.4x more likely to transmit AIDS than unprotected vaginal sex. Unprotected anal sex carries a 1½% AIDS tranmission risk. So if you do it 34x the chances are you will have AIDS. Whereas unprotected vaginal sex carries a 0.12% transmission risk. So you would have to do it 420x to have a more than evens chance of getting AIDS. Plainly unprotected anal sex should be criminalized for the sake not only of the adults doing it but also for the AIDS orphans the disease then creates.
There might be an improvement in the vaginal figures if sex did not occur when the woman was bleeding due to a period.
The bible describes the destruction of a Sodom in which the male inhabitants were so addicted to homosexual lust that although struck with blindness they still tried in vain to bum the angels who were possessing the two men who were sent by God to visit the place
5 And they kept calling out to Lot and saying to him: Where are the men who came in to you tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have intercourse with them...
11 But they struck with blindness the men who were at the entrance of the house, from the least to the greatest, so that they were wearing themselves out trying to find the entrance. (Genesis 19 NWT)
This is the end of the road in lust addiction. Gays today in London have multi-partner sex on parkland in a way that heterosexuals or indeed lesbians do not. This is a step towards Sodom - where all the men of the city wanted to have public sex with the two male visitors. The bible is declaring that the end of the road for homosexuality is different from the end of the road for male heterosexuality or indeed lesbianism. Now we humans cannot clearly see the end of these roads. But God can. Women do not so much want a multiplicity of partners, they look for emotional security and things other than sex in a relationship. The scriptures indicate to us that lesbianism is not regarded as being as dangerous as homosexuality by God. Homosexuality, if left unrestrained, will lead to a Sodom situation. Heterosexuality will not because the love lust balance is slightly different. This is another reason why God legislates against the former but for the latter.
For a more amusing look at homosexuality and lesbianism from a scriptural standpoint please see http://www.jewishlordswitness.com/unholy-matrimony.html.
A further point worth making is that all health and safety legislation is a joke since we decriminalized unprotected sodomy. Smoking is banned because it can cause cancer which can kill you. Unprotected sodomy can cause AIDS which can kill you and has killed 35-40 million people in the last 25 years and has infected a further 35-40 million. AIDS has killed more people than either of the two world wars. Why therefore is unprotected anal sex not recriminalized in London, New York and most of the West as smoking is? Judge for yourself.
Q: How many people would have to die and how many children
would have to be orphaned before the main cause of HIV infection (unprotected anal
sex) is criminalized in the West?
A: All of us and all of our children.
Welcome to the greater Sodom of the 21st century.
Gordon (the writer) would like to be clear here. The LWs are for freedom of worship and freedom of sexual expression in this system (not in the LW church however which has a higher standard of righteousness as regards sexual expression). He is not proposing the re-criminalization of gay sex. God is against gay sex but we live in a secular society not a sacred one. We must be free to make the right or the wrong choice in this system. But when that choice leads to tens of millions of deaths and tens of millions of orphans then it must be criminalized for the preservation of society. So Gordon is advocating the criminalization of unprotected anal sex, not the criminalization of protected anal sex. The situation is worse when someone with HIV knowingly has unprotected anal sex with an uninfected person. Yet even that activity is not criminalized comprehensively in the West. So if you wanted to torture and then kill a gay man with a slow and painful death (or at the least to ruin his health for the rest of his life), all you would have to do is to pay a good looking AIDS infected prostitute to chat him up and sleep with him. How absurd is that?
This might seem like a really dumb question but it is not. For the good book says...
3 And they began to prostitute themselves in Egypt. In their youth they committed prostitution. There
their breasts were squeezed, and there they pressed the bosoms of their virginity (Ezekiel 23).
8 And her prostitutions [carried] from Egypt she did not leave, for with her they had lain down in her youth, and they were the ones that pressed the bosoms of her virginity and they kept pouring out their immoral intercourse [as opposed to moral intercourse, safe sex] upon her (Ezekiel 23).
These two verses make is plain that virgins have bosoms, which are the bosoms of their virginity. So virgins must be post pubescent since that is when bosoms appear. So a virgin is a post pubescent girl who has not yet had unprotected intercourse with a male. If a girl has safe sex or indeed uses a sex toy, that does not deflower her from a scriptural standpoint. Fornication requires a defilement with semen.
This understanding is crucial since the Law of Moses relates only to virgins or women, in sexual matters. It says nothing about child sex or paedophilia.
Likewise a spiritual virgin must be post pubescent in some spiritual manner. Well no man could act as a priest until he was 20 under law. So at that age the Christian man can reproduce spiritually by baptism. Women give birth physically, being the priestesses of procreation. Whereas men reproduce spiritually, being the priests of salvation. The woman reaches physical puberty before the man reaches spiritual puberty, when he is able to give spiritual life. It is like Paul said...
44 It is sown a physical body, it is raised up a spiritual body. If there is a physical body, there is also a spiritual one.
45 It is even so written: The first man Adam became a living soul. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.
46 Nevertheless, the first is, not that which is spiritual, but that which is physical, afterward that which is spiritual (1Corinthians 15).
But water baptisms can be broken fixed broken fixed several times. A virgin is ruined with one act of fornication. So the same must be true with a spiritual virgin. Now the spirit baptism is a once only affair. So likewise if you defile your spirit baptism then you lose it period. It cannot be regained - just like physical virginity. So a spiritual virgin is someone who has not joined himself or herself to a false church after having been spirit baptised and therefore being able to defile his or her spirit baptism. But what about the millions of faithful people who went and joined what they thought was a true church and later discovered that it was false? Well one cannot break a spirit baptism or disqualify oneself from a spirit baptism unless one sins with one's spirit. So one has to knowingly join a false church after one's spirit baptism to lose one's spiritual virginity. It is OK to be in a false church when you are spirit baptised. For that is not joining after you are baptised! It is not OK to join a false church after you have been spirit baptized. So perhaps the angel will delay your baptism until after you have joined a false church if you do it with sincerity but not if you do it insincerely!
Certainly if you join the true church become sanctified and then leave it for a false church, you are not a spiritual virgin, you have committed spiritual adultery in fact.
So anyone who joins a false church after
the end of his spirit baptism call would have defiled their spirit baptism had
they been called and therefore is not or is no longer a saint.
Any sanctified person who joins a false church after having joined a true church is no longer a saint.
16 Jehovah now said to Moses: Look! You are lying down with your forefathers; and this people will certainly get up and have immoral intercourse with foreign gods of the land to which they are going, in their very midst, and they will certainly forsake me and break my covenant that I have concluded with them. (Deuteronomy 31 NWT).
But in what sense has such a person lost his virginity and someone who has joined a true church has retained his?
A physical virgin has not had sexual intercourse with a man. A spiritual virgin has not had immoral intercourse with a false church. The meaning of this is difficult to understand. It cannot mean that he has not baptised anyone since true virgins in the true church do baptise people without losing their virginity. So this is not a baptism procreative virginity. There must be a form of intercourse which occurs in false churches but does not occur in true churches. Baptisms occur in both but actually only achieve something in a true church. Communion occurs in both but only achieves something in a true church. Let us see what the bible says about immoral intercourse...
15 for fear that you may conclude a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, as they will certainly have
immoral intercourse with their gods and sacrifice to their gods, and someone will be certain to invite you, and you will certainly eat some of his sacrifice.
16 Then you will have to take some of their daughters for your sons, and their daughters will be certain to have immoral intercourse with their gods and make your sons have immoral intercourse with their gods. (Exodus 34 NWT).
So do not join a false church (concluding a covenant with its people) so as to have immoral intercourse with its Gods, if you have ever been in a true church or if you have been sanctified.
4 And if the people of the land should deliberately hide their eyes from that man when he gives any of his offspring to Molech by not putting him to death,
5 then I, for my part, shall certainly fix my face against that man and his family, and I shall indeed cut him and all those who have immoral intercourse along with him in having immoral intercourse with Molech off from among their people.
6 'As for the soul who turns himself to the spirit mediums and the professional foretellers of events so as to have immoral intercourse with them, I shall certainly set my face against that soul and cut him off from among his people. (Leviticus 20 NWT)
39 'And it must serve as a fringed edge for you, and you must see it and remember all the commandments of Jehovah and do them, and you must not go about following your hearts and your eyes, which you are following in
immoral intercourse [this is immoral
sexual intercourse] (Numbers 15 NWT).
25 And they began to act unfaithfully toward the God of their forefathers and went having immoral intercourse with the gods of the peoples of the land, whom God had annihilated from before them. (1 Chronicles 5 NWT).
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. (Deuteronomy 18 NWT)
So false worship is immoral intercourse. Intercourse being two way activity. Fornication, immoral sexual intercourse, is a joining of one's flesh with an unauthorized sexual partner. Immoral intercourse with a foreign God, is a joining of oneself, one's spirit actually, to an unauthorized worship system - a false worship system. This is a fornication of the spirit. It can be forgiven if done sincerely, it cannot be forgiven if done by a saint.
Visiting a spirit medium, and having verbal intercourse with him or her is a different sin - it is idolatry. It is OK to speak to angels in humans. For Jesus spoke to his disciples.
12 Now we received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is from God, that we might know the things that have been kindly given us by God. (NWT)
12 We but not the spirit of the world received, but the spirit that from God, that we may know the things by the God having been graciously given to us; (ED)
13 These things we also speak, not with words taught by human wisdom, but with those taught by [the] spirit, as we combine spiritual [matters] with spiritual [words]. (NWT)
13 which things also we speak, not by teachings of human wisdom in words, but by teachings of spirit, to spiritual ones spiritual things explaining. (ED)
14 But a physical man does not receive 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. (1 Corinthians 2 NWT)
14 An animal but man not receives the things of the spirit of the God; foolishness for to him it is, and not he is able to know; because spiritually it is examined. (1 Corinthians 2 ED)
So human wisdom is taught in words. But the spiritual man is taught by teachings of the spirit which acts without words. Sure the bible is in words but these were inspired into the subconscious of the bible writer. God only communicates with men through the subconscious in a dream or a vision through his angelic mind. The demons actually have direct immoral intercourse breaking the equivalent of the Prime Directive of Star Trek.
So now we have found the form of intercourse that a true worshipper has avoided - it is verbal intercourse with a spirit being. God spoke directly to Moses face to face...
6 And he went on to say: Hear my words, please. If there came to be a prophet of yours for Jehovah, it would be in a vision I would make myself known to him. In a dream I would speak to him.
7 Not so my servant Moses! He is being entrusted with all my house.
8 Mouth to mouth I speak to him, thus showing him, and not by riddles; and the appearance of Jehovah is what he beholds. Why, then, did you not fear to speak against my servant, against Moses? (Numbers 12 NWT)
11 And Jehovah spoke to Moses face to face, just as a man would speak to his fellow. When he returned to the camp, his minister Joshua, the son of Nun, as attendant, would not withdraw from the midst of the tent. (Exodus 33 NWT)
And Jesus had a conversation with Paul in Acts 9 as follows...
3 Now as he was travelling he approached Damascus, when suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him,
4 and he fell to the ground [going into a dream/vision] and heard a voice say to him: Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?
5 He said: Who are you, Lord? He said: I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
6 Nevertheless, rise and enter into the city, and what you must do will be told you.
7 Now the men that were journeying with him were standing speechless, hearing, indeed, the sound of a voice, but not beholding any man [they were conscious, standing not asleep and not in a vision]. (Acts 9 NWT)
So God can speak to Moses or to Jesus face to face and mouth to mouth, i.e. a 1NC saint can hear the voice of God without being in a dream or a vision. But Paul who was not a 1NC saint needed to be in a dream or vision to hear anything. So angels can only speak directly to 1NC saints.
28 Father, glorify your name. Therefore a voice came out of heaven: I both glorified [it] and will glorify [it] again.
29 Hence the crowd that stood about and heard it began to say that it had thundered. Others began to say: An angel has spoken to him.
30 In answer Jesus said: This voice has occurred, not for my sake, but for your sakes. (John 12 NWT)
So the crowd is split into two groups. the one group only heard thunder. They were from the wicked and adulterous generation who were not to be given any sign other than the sign of Jonah - and this was a sign if you heard a voice. The other group did hear the voice, not of God, but of an angel of God, and so were not a part of the wicked and adulterous generation. They were 1NC saints and God can speak to Jesus face to face and mouth to mouth.
So God only speak directly to 1NC saints, the greater Moses of Jesus.
Joining a true church which then becomes false does not defile a spiritual virgin. Turning up at a few church meetings and donating some money does not mean that you have joined a church. Most churches add new members through baptism. Some do it by accepting previous baptisms into other churches.
4 These are the ones that did not defile themselves with
women [the noun appears once, but it is
narration about a vision. So it could be physical women or it could be
false/harlot churches]; indeed/because [gar]
[can mean because/for denoting a reason or can
denote intensity, i.e. indeed], they are virgins. These are the ones that keep following the Lamb no matter where he goes. These were bought from among
men/mankind [as] firstfruits to God and to the Lamb,
o5 and no falsehood was found in their mouths; they are without blemish (Revelation 14).
Men are never described as physical virgins in the bible. Virgin is a term always used for maidens physically. The virgins of Revelation 14:4 are male (having not defiled themselves with women - by whilst being under LW church law putting their semen into a woman who was not engaged or married to them - or by knowingly joining a false church) and are therefore spiritual. But although they are spiritual virgins, they have also not defiled themselves with physical women after joining the LWs.
You cannot defile yourself if you are not clean in the first place. You defile the water baptism which gives you the clean flesh.
If you join a false church in circumstances where there is no true church this does not defile you. For what else would you have been supposed to do? And if you join a false church without having joined a true church first, neither does that defile you for to your spirit you have committed no sin. So in summary a spiritual virgin must do the following in order to defile himself.
You cannot lose your spiritual virginity unless you are a saint. If a saint joins a false church then he is deflowered!
You must be clean in the flesh in order to
defile your flesh.
You must be clean in the spirit in order to defile your spirit.
You defile your flesh by physical
fornication resulting in conception/joining outside of a marriage agreement, an unauthorized physical union.
You defile your spirit by spiritual fornication resulting in a joining with that false church, an unauthorized spiritual union. This is how you lose your spiritual virginity.
You defile your flesh constructively until the next period by physical fornication whether or not a pregnancy results. But if no pregnancy results then the defilement was only ever potential/constructive and was never real.
In plain English, if you join a false church you will be screwed. That is OK if you do not realise that you are in a false church, you are effectively being raped spiritually (and the angels presumably ensure that your spirit baptism occurs after you have joined the false church). But if you knowingly join a false church, because you have joined a true church beforehand, then you are screwed consensually, and therefore you lose your spiritual virginity if indeed you were a saint.
If you join a true church which becomes false, then you have joined yourself to a girl who initially was faithful to you but who then played the harlot. So you got engaged or married to a faithful girl who after a while cheated on you. This does not defile you, it defiles her. You can continue to sleep with an unfaithful woman to whom you are engaged or married without sin if you so choose.
There are 3 New Passovers out of the Watchtower. The first is for those in the Bethels, the second for those in the congregations and the third is for those in the prisons. These are the people who left the Watchtower feeling that is had lost its love or become corrupt but did not go so far as to join another church. These ones can still be 1NC reserves. So it is joining a false church after being in a true church that disqualifies a saint. If you leave a true church which then becomes false and then you rejoin it as a false church you would not lose your sainthood because you would probably not realise that it had become false.
The LWs at present define paedophilia as a post pubescent person sexually molesting a non post pubescent person. This is unnatural because the non post pubescent person may not have a fully formed sexual response capability. Homosexual paedophilia is covered by the law on homosexual activities (which is age independent). Heterosexual and Lesbian paedophilia is a form of bestiality since it is sex between incompatible beings. So it requires instant disfellowshipping. An emission of semen is not relevant since no pregnancy can result. But what constitutes paedophile sex? We do not want to criminalize peri pubescent or recently pubescent young people experimenting sexually with each other heterosexually. So we define it as follows - this being a Romeo and Juliet type definition.
1. Sustained and deliberate molestation/stimulation of reproductive parts of
non post pubescent person (NPPP) by a 3 year post pubescent person (3PPP).
2. A 3PPP Procuring oral sex from an NPPP.
3. Buggery between a 3PPP and an NPPP
4. Persuading a NPPP to carry out a sustained molestation or a sustained stimulation of the reproductive organs of a 3PPP.
5. Sexual intercourse between a 3PPP and an NPPP.
3 months after the voice has broken the boy is assumed to be post pubescent. If there are 3 periods, (3 witnesses) the girl is assumed to be post pubescent (subject to a better medical definition)?
Here is a table of ages of consent around the world...
|Puberty||Parts of Mexico|
|12||Parts of Mexico|
|14||Italy, Germany, Austria, Vatican|
|15||France, Denmark, Poland|
|16||UK, Holland, Norway, Russia, some US states, Canada|
|18||Turkey, Some US states|
|Must be Married||Iran, Saudi|
There is no consent from the LWs for true fornication/unprotected sex (sex with no condom). But we do permit safe sex between consenting adults subject to the various requirements in J10 and J11. So what should be the age of consent from a scriptural standpoint for safe sex? Well the bible says nothing explicitly on that subject. It also says nothing explicitly on paedophilia which is plainly sexual abuse (when one party is pre-pubescent and the other is post pubescent). So we need to think of some bible principle to guide us to the answer as we did in the case of paedophilia. The principle is simple. We ask the question. In whose care did God leave human children? Was it in the care of the government or was it in the care of the parents? Of course he gave the children to the parents, not the governments. So rather than have governments around the world pick a number between puberty and marriage we shall the leave the matter up to the parents.
The parents will decide for each virgin and any potential partner of that virgin whether the virgin can have sex with that partner or not. If they set an age of consent for their female virgin then that age shall be no lower than puberty and no higher than 20 (the age at which a Hebrew boy became a man able to be a priest - and therefore to procreate spiritually - and to be registered into the army). They may choose not to set an age of consent and vet each boy individually if they wish. If their children break their rules they can call the church and we shall discipline them if that is the parents wish. This is a primarily a parental matter as far as the LWs are concerned. The LWs wish to work with the parents here. Once the virgin is 20 we shall regard him or her as having reached the age of consent for the church for safe protected sex.
So if a 19 year old boy had safe sex consensually with a 14 year old post pubescent virgin who did not have parental consent and told the boy the same but permitted him to sleep with her. Then we would give a warning to both the boy and the girl for implied rape. If however the boy was 20, he would be disfellowshipped, for implied rape, being old enough to take full responsibility. Whereas the 14 year old girl would merely get a warning.
If the virgin dishonestly represented that she had parental consent when she did not, then the boy is guilt free but the girl gets a warning.
If a 20 year old LW boy wished to have safe sex with a teenage worldly virgin then he would have to ensure that the girl had parental consent just as in the case of an LW girl. He would ask the virgin if she had her parents permission to have sex. This would be an interesting witness to the girl. If the girl represents that she has parental consent then there is no implied rape in the eyes of the church unless it is obvious for some concrete reason that she is lying.
God's definition of Paedophilia is rather different from the definition used in the West today.
28 In case a man finds a girl, a virgin who has not been engaged, and he
actually seizes her and lies down with her, and they have been found out,
29 the man who lay down with her must also give the girl's father fifty silver shekels, and she will become his wife due to the fact that he humiliated her. He will not be allowed to divorce her all his days (Deuteronomy 22:22-29).
Obviously this lying down, involves more than a kiss and a cuddle. It must result in the deflowering of the virgin.
17 If her father flatly refuses to give her to him, he is to pay over the money at the rate of purchase money for virgins (Exodus 22).
The greater meaning of the 50 shekel payment is a warning until the Jubilee (a month for a shekel). The point is that there was no legislation under law against sleeping with a girl of any age who was neither a virgin nor owned by either a husband or a slave master. It was not a sin under law to have safe sex with an un owned non virgin. The governments of the world seek to protect young girls against implied rape through the mechanism of age. The principal being that girls under a certain age do not know what they are doing. This principle is plainly incorrect a lot of the time. The best people to judge whether a girl or boy is old enough to have sex are their parents not their government. But God goes one step further. His law is that a virgin of any age is too naive to have sex outside of some type of marriage agreement. God does not measure sexual experience by age. He measures it by sexual experience (for people under 20 years old).
So it would be a sin to deflower a 19 year old virgin outside of a marriage agreement. But it would not be a sin to have safe sex with a 14 year old post pubescent girl who was no longer a virgin. It cannot be implied rape to sleep with a post pubescent non virgin. She is not deceived. She knows what she is doing (assuming she lost her virginity consensually). This all seems strange to our present way of judging. But out present way of judging does not yield a morally sustainable society.
There is only one scripture relating to rape in the bible that we have found...
25 If, however, it is in the field that the man found the girl who was engaged, and the man grabbed hold of her
[from a Hebrew root meaning to tie fast or to
bind strongly] and lay down with her, the man who lay down with her must also die by himself,
26 and to the girl you must do nothing. The girl has no sin deserving of death, because just as when a man rises up against his fellowman and indeed murders him, even a soul, so it is with this case.
27 For it was in the field that he found her. The girl who was engaged screamed, but there was no one to rescue her (Deuteronomy 22).
OK so one cannot rape a virgin who is engaged. Neither can you perform forced genital manipulation on her since this is implied homosexuality due to her engagement. But that law does not appear to us to offer much protection to the rest of womankind or does it? Well rising up and murdering one's fellow man, even a soul, is an abuse of life, by ending it. Whereas raping a woman is an abuse of life by starting it in unacceptable circumstances (if the rape involves procreative sex - i.e. an emission of semen into the woman).
If a child results then it will certainly have no father since the father of a raped woman will not consent to his daughter marrying the one who raped her. Furthermore the woman herself will find it difficult to love the child wholeheartedly since its genes are that of her abuser. So the love rights of the child are compromised and so the death penalty would ensue. For the abuse of life of a soul in the case of an engaged virgin is no different in the case of a non engaged non virgin. Now if the rapist did not defile his victim with his semen but merely sexually molested her then there is no penalty for this under the law of Moses that we can see. Please inform us if you can see something! In fact two scriptures indicate that for women in fields this was not too uncommon.
15 Then she got up to glean. Boaz now commanded his young men, saying:
Let her glean also among the cut-off ears of grain, and you must not molest her (Ruth 2).
15 And the men were very good to us, and they did not molest us, and we did not miss a single thing all the days of our walking about with them while we happened to be in the field (1Samuel 25).
So a safe sex rape or a finger rape of an unengaged woman would not appear to be covered. However the church obviously cannot permit this sort of thing since it is a fleshly act and leaven to the congregation. So if there are two witnesses to such behaviour we would give a warning. For the avoidance of doubt, such a man would be leaven to the congregation even if his victims were not in the church.
59 Then he said to another: Be my follower. The man said:
Permit me first to leave and bury my father.
60 But he said to him: Let the dead bury their dead, but you go away and declare abroad the kingdom of God.
61 And still another said: I will follow you, Lord; but first permit me to say good-bye to those in my household.
62 Jesus said to him: No man that has put his hand to a plow and looks at the things behind is well fitted for the kingdom of God (Luke 9).
It would be disrespectful to one's family to just up and leave and follow Jesus around without saying goodbye. It would be disrespectful to one's father to refuse to turn up at his burial. But there is a larger issue here for these two disciples. The one wishing to return to his family was in danger of falling between two stools. He might get caught up in household matters, and not return to Jesus, The one wishing to bury his dead father, might get caught up in estate issues and prefer the inheritance from his physical father to that from his spiritual father. So the advice from Jesus was to do with the priorities of each individual. Jesus was not advocating blanking one's relatives when one becomes a Christian.
Jesus himself went to a marriage and turned the water into wine. How could he actually take his disciples to a party of one of his friends whilst forbidding them from visiting their own relatives? Plainly he did not do this. So yes LWs can attend funerals and marriages etc. But as a church we will not hold them. The relatives should arrange the marriage or the funeral. We can come as individuals and get involved in that way. But the LWs as a church do not arrange such physical events. Any LW who has the legal right to marry people can of course do so, but that ceremony however performed has nothing to do with the church.
However we can go and bless a marriage. A doctor is called when you are sick. So if a marriage was in trouble then we would also go and bless both parties if asked. Indeed whenever a brother is sick spiritually or physically it is appropriate for his spiritual overseers and brothers to turn up and pray for him and help him as they can...
14 Is there anyone sick among you? Let him call the older
men of the congregation to [him], and let them pray over him, greasing [him] with
oil in the name of Jehovah.
15 And the prayer of faith will make the indisposed [physically] one well, and Jehovah will raise him up. Also, if he has committed sins, it will be forgiven him.
16 Therefore openly confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may get healed. A righteous man's supplication, when it is at work, has much force (James 5).
To join the church one just needs to accept the Minimum Belief Set and ask to be baptised. Baptism is a free gift from God and religion should always be a free choice for his children. Since we baptize anyone who wishes it without delay, we likewise accept resignations from the church but with a 7 day reconsideration period, for this too is a part of free choice in religion. If you leave, you cannot come back until the 7th Hebrew month after you sinned. You are in the same position as someone who has been disfellowshipped except that you do not have to show repentance in order to come back.
However if you are born again, spirit sanctified, then leaving the church is an attempted suicide on your angelic body. You will lose that body if you fail to return to the church. Killing your angelic vehicle is no different from killing your human vehicle. This church gives a warning for attempted suicide so we will also give a warning to anyone who attempts angelic suicide. If you attempt physical suicide 3 times we do not disfellowship you out of compassion, because such a thing might be the last straw. But we will not show such compassion in the case of saints who leave the church 3 times. The third time you wish to leave we will disfellowship you, since you have denied the Christ and your sanctification 3 times. You can return after 6 whole months or at the next Jubilee however.
Now the sharper reader may have realised that rather than being disfellowshipped for murder or adultery, he could resign, then do the act then rejoin with a warning in the case that he was a saint and with no penalty from the church in the case that he was unsanctified. This would be a really dumb move. You can fool the church, but you cannot fool the holy spirit which effectively has perfect holographic video recordings of absolutely everything ever done on this planet.
If you try and play false to the holy spirit you may end up in the position of Ananias and Saphira...
1 However, a certain man, Ananias by name, together with Sapphira
his wife, sold a possession
2 and secretly held back some of the price, his wife also knowing about it, and he brought just a part and deposited it at the feet of the apostles.
3 But Peter said: Ananias, why has Satan emboldened you to play false to the holy spirit and to hold back secretly some of the price of the field?
4 As long as it remained with you did it not remain yours, and after it was sold did it not continue in your control? Why was it
that you purposed such a deed as this in your heart? You have played false, not to men, but to God.
5 On hearing these words Ananias fell down and expired. And great fear came over all those hearing of it (Acts 5).
Technically, you shoud confess your sin when you rejoin, otherwise you have obtained a church water baptism by deception and the result might be that you lose your faith baptism which means you will not be a son of Abraham by covenant and therefore it will only be a matter of time before you cease to be a son of Isaac by covenant, since one cannot be a son of Isaac without being a son of Abraham.
Suppose you wish to commit adultery with your neghbour's wife. You could leave the church, sleep with her and then rekoin the church. True you would regain your water baptism. But, you would alos have defiled your conscience and therefore lost your faith baptism. And you cannot keep a water baptism indefinitely without a faith baptism. So you would be defiling your legs in order to clean your hands which is not likely to work.
Whereas if you did not play games with the holy spirit and instead slept with your neighbour's wife and admitted it and were disfellowshipped (and eventually stopped sleeping with her), then your conscience is clear once the sin has stopped and has been admitted, and repentance can follow and you will be in the kingdon. Those who take the penalty for the law of the church, do save their souls.
24 For whoever wants to save his soul will lose it; but whoever loses his soul for my sake is the one that will save it (Luke 9).
5 You hand such a man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh [the end of his water baptism, the loss of his Isaaic/methuselaian body], in order that the spirit may be saved [from Gehenna] in the day of the Lord [by his being able to be repentant post conviction - and therefore have a chance to at least get his faith baptism back] (1 Corinthians 5)
4 My reason is that certain men have slipped in who have long ago been appointed by the Scriptures to this judgment, ungodly men, turning the undeserved kindness of our God into an excuse for loose conduct and proving false to our only Owner and Lord, Jesus Christ (Jude 4).
In order to try and prevent any saint from committing spiritual suicide, we will always give them 7 days to reconsider after we have accepted their resignation.