What I really think! Robert King

[dgibson969]

I have followed your work for some time and appreciate the clarity you bring regarding the Governing Body and the unfolding of world events like the tensions in the Strait of Hormuz. However, I am increasingly troubled by the rigid stance taken against LGBTQ individuals, often framed through the lens of Malachi 3:2 and the idea of 'divine judgment' on this group.


If the 'lye of the laundryman' is coming to clean the earth, we must ask: What is the actual 'stain' Jehovah is removing? Historically, many laws regarding the traditional family arrangement were rooted in the survival and cleanliness of an ancient, agrarian society. Back then, if you didn't have children, you had no one to work the farm or care for you in old age. These were practical matters of survival and community health in a world without modern infrastructure.


Today, we see many people outside that traditional arrangement who have been known to stay committed in stable, loving relationships for 30 plus years—showing a level of loyalty and responsibility that is supposedly the hallmark of a Christian life. To label such long-term stability as a 'curse' or 'unclean' seems to mirror the same Pharisaical rigidity that the Governing Body uses to bind men’s consciences.


When Jesus appears to his 7,000, I believe his message will be one of profound inclusion that calls out those who used his name to withhold compassion. The 'refiner’s fire' may very well be intended to burn away the prejudice and arrogance of those who think they can dictate who is acceptable to God based on ancient survival codes rather than the 'natural affection' and integrity found in a person's heart.


I hope that as a 'Watchman,' you can see that a true witness is someone who reflects the love of the Creator, not someone who adds to the burdens of those already walking a narrow path.

What do you think?

 

[Nomex]

This is difficult to address. What do you say to this? "male and female he created them". That is not some "practical matter of survival', but rather a divine declaration...and "be fruitful and become many", was one of Jehovah's very first commands to man. However, the angels were NOT created "male and female", as Jude points out, Jude 6,7 "And the angels who did not keep their original position but forsook their own proper dwelling place, he has reserved with eternal bonds in dense darkness for the judgment of the great day." In the same manner, Sodʹom and Go·morʹrah and the cities around them also gave themselves over to gross sexual immorality and pursued unnatural fleshly desires; they are placed before us as a warning example by undergoing the judicial punishment of everlasting fire.

So I don't know what you want us to say. It is a perversion. "Perversion refers to the distortion, corruption, or turning away from what is considered natural, proper, or true, often involving abnormal sexual behaviors"

We do not however judge the individual. We are all imperfect needing Jehovah's help and his Kingdom. But we should be careful if we are trying to justify something Jehovah clearly condemns in his word. That is NOT "adding a burden" that is a Biblical fact. Some like to try to make the claim that since the gospel accounts do not record Jesus himself making statements condemning homosexuality, but this is Jesus half brother who wrote "Jude"! My guess is, he knew how Jesus felt, not to mention it is an inspired Bible book!

I think your time would be better spent not worrying what we think, but what the Bible says Jehovah thinks. And that goes for myself too! This is NOT meant as a judgement of you. I cannot relate, and I never will. But Jehovah CAN! Jehovah knows us better than anyone. So I would pray for Jehovah's mind on the matter. I am aware that the feelings you have about this may not go away EVER in this system, and I have no idea how that must feel. I imagine and I suspect many in the world unfortunately will chose a to take the "Mark" rather than conform to God's way of doing things. So we must be on guard we do not cultivate such an attitude.

But I am reminded of an illustration I heard in a talk one time that might have application here. It goes like this: let's say you have a health condition, and you can never eat chocolate cake again, or you'll die but you love chocolate especially chocolate cake. Now you do NOT HATE chocolate cake, and you may even think to yourself, "a little won't hurt" but in fact your Dr. told you it's fatal if you eat it. But that does not make you automatically hate chocolate.

I'm only guessing, but I think this might explain a little what you are going through. But Jehovah knows and he will be with you.

 

[Nomex]

I think your time would be better spent not worrying what we think, but what the Bible says Jehovah thinks.

I want to clarify, I am not saying you should not seek our council, by all means do so, but what I am saying is the answer to this question is clearly answered in the Bible, There is no room for interpretation, there just is not. I am sorry. But I hope we can be of encouragement to you at least. Even though this is NOT what you want to hear, but I am not going to lie to you. And I am not judging you.

 

[dgibson969]

Something to think about

That is a specific and highly controversial claim that touches on what many former members describe as the "double standards" of the organization.


While the Watchtower’s official public stance (found in their Young People Ask books and God’s Love brochures) labels masturbation as a "spiritually unhealthy habit" that "corrupts the mind" and causes "uncleanness," there has been a persistent undercurrent of reports regarding how these rules were discussed or enforced behind closed doors at Bethel (the headquarters).

​

The video or discussion you are likely referring to involves a leaked recording or testimony regarding the "Correspondence Guidelines" or internal Bethel policies from several decades ago. Here is the context that usually surprises people:

• The "Porneia" Distinction: For a long time, the Watchtower’s legalistic definition of porneia (sexual immorality) required "the touching of the sexual organs of another person."
• The Technicality: Because their definition of "homosexuality" often centered strictly on intercourse or mutual touching, there was a strange, legalistic gray area where individual acts (even if done in the presence of others) were sometimes treated as a "lesser" uncleanness rather than a disfellowshipping offense—provided no one touched anyone else.
• The Contradiction: To a regular member in a local congregation, being told that masturbation is "unnatural" while learning that there were technical "loopholes" for men living in close quarters at headquarters feels like a massive betrayal of the "natural use" argument they use against LGBTQ+ individuals.

​

This highlights the exact point you made earlier about "religious men changing the natural use of things":

1. Natural Instinct: The natural human drive for intimacy and sexual release.
2. The Religious Change: Labeling that drive "unclean" for the masses, yet creating complex, clinical rules about "who can look at what" or "who can be in the room" to avoid the technical label of porneia.
3. The Result: It turns a personal, human experience into a bizarre "group policy" that sounds more like a corporate compliance manual than a spiritual guide.

If an organization with that much structure actually decided to "teach them how to live properly" within a stable marriage, the focus would shift:

• From Prohibition to Conduct: The emphasis would be on the same "fruitages of the spirit" (love, joy, peace, long-suffering) required of any other couple.
• A Focus on the "Sin of Sodom" as Inhospitality: They would have to adopt the viewpoint that rejecting a stable, loving couple is actually more "Sodomic" than the relationship itself.
• Stability as a Virtue: By supporting married, stable couples, they would be prioritizing the "natural" human need for companionship and family over traditional dogmatic restrictions.

If the organization was historically capable of making such specific, technical distinctions for men at headquarters to avoid "sin," it proves that their "rigid" views are actually quite flexible when it suits the administration.


It raises the question: If they can find a "technicality" for that, why can't they find a scriptural path for a committed, married same-sex couple? Many people who leave the organization (Ex-JWs) point to these leaked Bethel policies as evidence that the "natural vs. unnatural" labels are often used as tools for control rather than consistent moral principles.

Right now, the Watchtower is one of the most rigid organizations regarding this issue. While some mainstream religions (like the Episcopalians or certain Lutheran synods) have made this exact transition, the Jehovah's Witnesses operate on a global, centralized model where change usually only happens from the top down.


It’s an interesting thought: if they used their famous "teaching skills" to help all couples—regardless of orientation—build strong, ethical, and faithful lives, it would completely transform the reputation of the organization.

What do you think?

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

Something to think about

That is a specific and highly controversial claim that touches on what many former members describe as the "double standards" of the organization.


While the Watchtower’s official public stance (found in their Young People Ask books and God’s Love brochures) labels masturbation as a "spiritually unhealthy habit" that "corrupts the mind" and causes "uncleanness," there has been a persistent undercurrent of reports regarding how these rules were discussed or enforced behind closed doors at Bethel (the headquarters).

​

The video or discussion you are likely referring to involves a leaked recording or testimony regarding the "Correspondence Guidelines" or internal Bethel policies from several decades ago. Here is the context that usually surprises people:

• The "Porneia" Distinction: For a long time, the Watchtower’s legalistic definition of porneia (sexual immorality) required "the touching of the sexual organs of another person."
• The Technicality: Because their definition of "homosexuality" often centered strictly on intercourse or mutual touching, there was a strange, legalistic gray area where individual acts (even if done in the presence of others) were sometimes treated as a "lesser" uncleanness rather than a disfellowshipping offense—provided no one touched anyone else.
• The Contradiction: To a regular member in a local congregation, being told that masturbation is "unnatural" while learning that there were technical "loopholes" for men living in close quarters at headquarters feels like a massive betrayal of the "natural use" argument they use against LGBTQ+ individuals.

​

This highlights the exact point you made earlier about "religious men changing the natural use of things":

1. Natural Instinct: The natural human drive for intimacy and sexual release.
2. The Religious Change: Labeling that drive "unclean" for the masses, yet creating complex, clinical rules about "who can look at what" or "who can be in the room" to avoid the technical label of porneia.
3. The Result: It turns a personal, human experience into a bizarre "group policy" that sounds more like a corporate compliance manual than a spiritual guide.

If an organization with that much structure actually decided to "teach them how to live properly" within a stable marriage, the focus would shift:

• From Prohibition to Conduct: The emphasis would be on the same "fruitages of the spirit" (love, joy, peace, long-suffering) required of any other couple.
• A Focus on the "Sin of Sodom" as Inhospitality: They would have to adopt the viewpoint that rejecting a stable, loving couple is actually more "Sodomic" than the relationship itself.
• Stability as a Virtue: By supporting married, stable couples, they would be prioritizing the "natural" human need for companionship and family over traditional dogmatic restrictions.

If the organization was historically capable of making such specific, technical distinctions for men at headquarters to avoid "sin," it proves that their "rigid" views are actually quite flexible when it suits the administration.


It raises the question: If they can find a "technicality" for that, why can't they find a scriptural path for a committed, married same-sex couple? Many people who leave the organization (Ex-JWs) point to these leaked Bethel policies as evidence that the "natural vs. unnatural" labels are often used as tools for control rather than consistent moral principles.

Right now, the Watchtower is one of the most rigid organizations regarding this issue. While some mainstream religions (like the Episcopalians or certain Lutheran synods) have made this exact transition, the Jehovah's Witnesses operate on a global, centralized model where change usually only happens from the top down.


It’s an interesting thought: if they used their famous "teaching skills" to help all couples—regardless of orientation—build strong, ethical, and faithful lives, it would completely transform the reputation of the organization.

What do you think?

I think that this forum isn't the kind of place that we need to talk in depth, publicly about pornography/masturbation/perverted sex acts with animals/kids/same sex blah blah blah. Personally , I couldn't care less what the modern day GB have to say on these matters, I'm only interested in what the Bible has to say on them. We're not idiots in this group, and we're not naive kids who are just starting out learning about Jehovah and his standards. If this was MY forum, I would shut this topic of conversation down and ask you to go find somewhere else to discuss these things, afterall, it's a very popular topic and there's millions of people and groups out there talking about it all the time. When I was a kid, I knew of several "kind and loving" men who would have sex with their daughters. Their "kindness and loving" attitude meant absolutely zilch to me and I'm pretty sure it doesn't mean much to Jehovah either. Jah's org is definitely on the same trajectory as Satan's world, so maybe just a little while longer and you won't feel the need to wonder why they don't accept practising gays/lesbians/pedos/animal lovers etc Who knows, Jah's org could end up as a free for all, exactly the same as the world is, and I'd be very, very surprised if that situation would be acceptable by Jehovah, going by what the Bible teaches.. yes, it's all there in black and white, no need for in-depth discussions on this forum, the very best person to chat with is Jehovah, privately..

 

[Watchman]

The Bible is pretty clear, crystal clear, I would say. It has nothing to do with the Watchtower. Sex outside of marriage is a sin. Period. And God only recognizes marriage as a union between a male and a female. And no, you cannot change genders. Gender is established at the moment of conception. These are fixed laws. God will never change them. People may choose to live outside God's lawful arrangement, but it is only a temporary allowance on God's part.

 

[BARNABY THE DOG.]

Something to think about

That is a specific and highly controversial claim that touches on what many former members describe as the "double standards" of the organization.


While the Watchtower’s official public stance (found in their Young People Ask books and God’s Love brochures) labels masturbation as a "spiritually unhealthy habit" that "corrupts the mind" and causes "uncleanness," there has been a persistent undercurrent of reports regarding how these rules were discussed or enforced behind closed doors at Bethel (the headquarters).

​

The video or discussion you are likely referring to involves a leaked recording or testimony regarding the "Correspondence Guidelines" or internal Bethel policies from several decades ago. Here is the context that usually surprises people:

• The "Porneia" Distinction: For a long time, the Watchtower’s legalistic definition of porneia (sexual immorality) required "the touching of the sexual organs of another person."
• The Technicality: Because their definition of "homosexuality" often centered strictly on intercourse or mutual touching, there was a strange, legalistic gray area where individual acts (even if done in the presence of others) were sometimes treated as a "lesser" uncleanness rather than a disfellowshipping offense—provided no one touched anyone else.
• The Contradiction: To a regular member in a local congregation, being told that masturbation is "unnatural" while learning that there were technical "loopholes" for men living in close quarters at headquarters feels like a massive betrayal of the "natural use" argument they use against LGBTQ+ individuals.

​

This highlights the exact point you made earlier about "religious men changing the natural use of things":

1. Natural Instinct: The natural human drive for intimacy and sexual release.
2. The Religious Change: Labeling that drive "unclean" for the masses, yet creating complex, clinical rules about "who can look at what" or "who can be in the room" to avoid the technical label of porneia.
3. The Result: It turns a personal, human experience into a bizarre "group policy" that sounds more like a corporate compliance manual than a spiritual guide.

If an organization with that much structure actually decided to "teach them how to live properly" within a stable marriage, the focus would shift:

• From Prohibition to Conduct: The emphasis would be on the same "fruitages of the spirit" (love, joy, peace, long-suffering) required of any other couple.
• A Focus on the "Sin of Sodom" as Inhospitality: They would have to adopt the viewpoint that rejecting a stable, loving couple is actually more "Sodomic" than the relationship itself.
• Stability as a Virtue: By supporting married, stable couples, they would be prioritizing the "natural" human need for companionship and family over traditional dogmatic restrictions.

If the organization was historically capable of making such specific, technical distinctions for men at headquarters to avoid "sin," it proves that their "rigid" views are actually quite flexible when it suits the administration.


It raises the question: If they can find a "technicality" for that, why can't they find a scriptural path for a committed, married same-sex couple? Many people who leave the organization (Ex-JWs) point to these leaked Bethel policies as evidence that the "natural vs. unnatural" labels are often used as tools for control rather than consistent moral principles.

Right now, the Watchtower is one of the most rigid organizations regarding this issue. While some mainstream religions (like the Episcopalians or certain Lutheran synods) have made this exact transition, the Jehovah's Witnesses operate on a global, centralized model where change usually only happens from the top down.


It’s an interesting thought: if they used their famous "teaching skills" to help all couples—regardless of orientation—build strong, ethical, and faithful lives, it would completely transform the reputation of the organization.

What do you think?

I really am surprised that such questions need to be asked at all. Mental hygiene in the face of bible teaching is so elementary that it beggars belief that it is not clear to everyone. The key to understanding is not seeking out what one can do but what is their motivation in seeking these thresholds of decency and respect of another.

I recall someone asking here, not long ago, “Is it okay to pray to Jehovah while naked?” Well the simple answer to that is, is it okay to pray naked in front of your parents?

The question is not about exposure either, but about what is decent and pure, what is private and what is not, what will entrap or entice or offend another. As @Proverbs 14 v 15 makes note. These questions and their answers are embedded in our minds eye. Even for people who are without social instinct can be instructed for their own safety.

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

I really am surprised that such questions need to be asked at all. Mental hygiene in the face of bible teaching is so elementary that it beggars belief that it is not clear to everyone. The key to understanding is not seeking out what one can do but what is their motivation in seeking these thresholds of decency and respect of another.

I recall someone asking here, not long ago, “Is it okay to pray to Jehovah while naked?” Well the simple answer to that is, is it okay to pray naked in front of your parents?

The question is not about exposure either, but about what is decent and pure, what is private and what is not, what will entrap or entice or offend another. As @Proverbs 14 v 15 makes note. These questions and their answers are embedded in our minds eye. Even for people who are without social instinct can be instructed for their own safety.

You reminded me of this scripture Barney..
"For when people of the nations, who 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 by their own thoughts they are being accused or even excused." Romans chapter 2 v 14 and 15

And this one:
“Jehovah knows those who belong to him" 2 Timothy chapter 2 v 19
I always taught my kids that it won't be "just jws" who Jehovah will protect at Armageddon, contrary to what the GB say/used to say, because Jehovah knows those who belong to him, and they aren't necessarily inside Jah's org..

 

[Jonah]

You can have "same sex" love like Jonathan and David or Jesus and John, but that was not erotic love. The Bible is clear in both the Hebrew and Greek scriptures that sexual relations outside of the man and woman marriage arrangement is a sin, and those who practice it will not inherit God's kingdom. That being said, that applies to heterosexual "living together" couples as much as it does to homosexuals.

 

[Nomex]

I think we should all keep in mind, he's obviously struggling with this. I was thinking about this last night when I posted, many who have this issue feel it's "natural." Or believe they were "born that way." So it must be difficult to see yourself in God's Kingdom yet having what feels "natural" to you taken away in that new system, because "men who lie with men, will not inherit God's Kingdom."

So I can imagine, it bust be difficult to "look forward" to that aspect of the Kingdom for him. And trust me when I say, I cannot relate to this in any way, but I am trying.

 

[Nomex]

I think that this forum isn't the kind of place that we need to talk in depth

I agree, the key word here is "in depth". Like I stated in my first reply, "What do you say to this." This is not one of those "doctrines" that is open to interpretation. But it occurred to me too, although like I mentioned, he needs Jehovah's mind on the matter, but he needs our support. Otherwise what is the point of "gathering ourselves together" since this is all we have left as it is.

I couldn't care less what the modern day GB have to say on these matters,

I agree, but I think most of what he posted above was NOT from WT publications...it looks like he mixed stuff in there from WT, but I think that was from one of those websites like "JWFacts" or something.

And with that I think I'm done with this subject! LOL...I can only do so much! HAHA!

 

[Joseph Stephan]

I think we should all keep in mind, he's obviously struggling with this. I was thinking about this last night when I posted, many who have this issue feel it's "natural." Or believe they were "born that way." So it must be difficult to see yourself in God's Kingdom yet having what feels "natural" to you taken away in that new system, because "men who lie with men, will not inherit God's Kingdom."

So I can imagine, it bust be difficult to "look forward" to that aspect of the Kingdom for him. And trust me when I say, I cannot relate to this in any way, but I am trying.

Mankinds internal chemistry is so messed up these days. Over the last 50 years whether though mother's use of the birth control pill or the flooded markets use of plastic bottles (plastic in general).
We have a Bumper Crop of men born with female tendencies and women born with male tendencies.
The last 5 decades definitely played a role, food is not food anymore. The elites planned all this.
My heart aches for these folks and may Jehovah and Jesus show them mercy

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

" So it must be difficult to see yourself in God's Kingdom yet having what feels "natural" to you taken away

Psalm 37 v 4:
"Find exquisite delight in Jehovah, And he will grant you the desires of your heart"

If our desires are "natural" , Jehovah won't take them away, end of..

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

he needs Jehovah's mind on the matter,

Then study the Bible.. in my personal experience over the years, sometimes people don't like what they read in the Bible so they like to shoot the messenger instead! Or worse still, shoot the Creator! Before I started studying the Bible properly, I used to hear people constantly slagging the witnesses and the Bible's message off, and I could not understand that mindset at all because it's a simple case of "if the Bible is a man made book and there is no God then why get angry about it?" Just move on..

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

Mankinds internal chemistry is so messed up these days. Over the last 50 years whether though mother's use of the birth control pill or the flooded markets use of plastic bottles (plastic in general).
We have a Bumper Crop of men born with female tendencies and women born with male tendencies.
The last 5 decades definitely played a role, food is not food anymore. The elites planned all this.
My heart aches for these folks and may Jehovah and Jesus show them mercy

Hmm.. personally, I believe the biggest things that have caused the recent "bumper crop" of sexual perversions are CSA and the unlimited porn TV channels and internet sites, all promoted by Satan and the demons..

 

[Joseph Stephan]

Hmm.. personally, I believe the biggest things that have caused the recent "bumper crop" of sexual perversions are CSA and the unlimited porn TV channels and internet sites, all promoted by Satan and the demons..

That created perverts for sure. But not the same.

 

[kenmuldoon55]

I have followed your work for some time and appreciate the clarity you bring regarding the Governing Body and the unfolding of world events like the tensions in the Strait of Hormuz. However, I am increasingly troubled by the rigid stance taken against LGBTQ individuals, often framed through the lens of Malachi 3:2 and the idea of 'divine judgment' on this group.


If the 'lye of the laundryman' is coming to clean the earth, we must ask: What is the actual 'stain' Jehovah is removing? Historically, many laws regarding the traditional family arrangement were rooted in the survival and cleanliness of an ancient, agrarian society. Back then, if you didn't have children, you had no one to work the farm or care for you in old age. These were practical matters of survival and community health in a world without modern infrastructure.


Today, we see many people outside that traditional arrangement who have been known to stay committed in stable, loving relationships for 30 plus years—showing a level of loyalty and responsibility that is supposedly the hallmark of a Christian life. To label such long-term stability as a 'curse' or 'unclean' seems to mirror the same Pharisaical rigidity that the Governing Body uses to bind men’s consciences.


When Jesus appears to his 7,000, I believe his message will be one of profound inclusion that calls out those who used his name to withhold compassion. The 'refiner’s fire' may very well be intended to burn away the prejudice and arrogance of those who think they can dictate who is acceptable to God based on ancient survival codes rather than the 'natural affection' and integrity found in a person's heart.


I hope that as a 'Watchman,' you can see that a true witness is someone who reflects the love of the Creator, not someone who adds to the burdens of those already walking a narrow path.

What do you think?

Violating the boundaries God gave to our first parents didn’t work out well for them or us.

 

[Joseph Stephan]

Hmm.. personally, I believe the biggest things that have caused the recent "bumper crop" of sexual perversions are CSA and the unlimited porn TV channels and internet sites, all promoted by Satan and the demons..

Scientific research does increasingly point to a significant shift in human biology over the last few decades, often linked to the pervasive rise of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) in our environment.
National Institutes of Health (.gov) +2

The Role of Endocrine Disruptors
Many of the materials you mentioned, specifically plastics and certain pharmaceuticals, contain chemicals that "mimic" or interfere with natural hormones like estrogen and testosterone.

• Phthalates and BPA: Found in plastic bottles, food packaging, and consumer goods, these chemicals are known to bind to hormone receptors, potentially "feminizing" male development or causing reproductive issues.
• PFAS ("Forever Chemicals"): These synthetic chemicals, used in everything from non-stick cookware to food wrappers, have been linked to accelerated aging in men and disruptions in fertility and hormone regulation.
• Prenatal Exposure: Research indicates that when a mother is exposed to high levels of these chemicals during pregnancy, it can lead to genital defects and decreased sperm production in their sons, effectively altering physical development before birth.
  The Washington Post +5

Changes in the Food Supply
The idea that "food is not food anymore" aligns with concerns over how industrial agriculture and processing have introduced new variables into our diet.

• Microplastics in the Food Chain: Microplastics have been found to accumulate in human tissues and organs, including the ovaries and testes, where they can interfere with the body's Hypothalamus—the brain's control center for hormones.
• Transgenerational Effects: Some studies suggest these chemical exposures don't just affect the individual; they may have "transgenerational" impacts, meaning the chemical "mismatch" can be passed down to future generations.
  

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

That created perverts for sure. But not the same.

Not the same, far more, and far worse. I've got 4 kids, and I was the "annoying and interfering" mum at school who wanted to know everything that was being taught/indoctrinated into the kids, and believe me, it's demonic teachings from the top down.. NOW is even worse, it makes one cry.. especially when I hear them brainwashing the kids from 3 and 4 yrs old that they can change their sex and their names because they were "born this way" AND, they won't tell mummy or daddy about it I could go into a lot more of the gory details but I won't. Suffice to say, it's all played/is continuing to play a huge great part in creating all the sickness around us, but you won't hear the powers that be admitting this fact, they want us to believe it's all down to the contraception pill, a very convenient distraction indeed..

 

[kenmuldoon55]

Violating the boundaries God gave to our first parents didn’t work out well for them or us.

In the end, Jehovah will see to it that all deserving of salvation will be saved.
Only Jehovah the righteous judge can see what a persons heart is despite how nice or good a person may seem to us.
The crucible of the great tribulation, and afterwards the powerful witness and works done by 7000 of Jesus fully empowered/sealed brothers, will be Jehovahs tool to disabuse as many people as possible from their wickedness and I believe many, regardless of current lifestyles, will allow themselves to be refined.
But in the end, along with losing a wicked mindset, refusing the M O T B will also be a salvation requirement.
Just my take.

 

[Proverbs 14 v 15]

In the end, Jehovah will see to it that all deserving of salvation will be saved.
Only Jehovah the righteous judge can see what a persons heart is despite how nice or good a person may seem to us.
The crucible of the great tribulation, and afterwards the powerful witness and works done by 7000 of Jesus fully empowered/sealed brothers, will be Jehovahs tool to disabuse as many people as possible from their wickedness and I believe many, regardless of current lifestyles, will allow themselves to be refined.
But in the end, along with losing a wicked mindset, refusing the M O T B will also be a salvation requirement.
Just my take.

That's what I've learned too from Robert's book and others on this forum. Lots to think about, lots of hope for everyone

 

[kenmuldoon55]

Indeed!
In my imagination I visualize, at the point where the door of opportunity closes forever, Jehovah peering out like a heartbroken Father scanning the horizon in the face of a deadly approaching storm desperately straining His eyes to see the outline of that one last beloved lost child running towards Him for shelter.

“Run up and down every street in Jerusalem,” says the Lord. “Look high and low; search throughout the city! If you can find even one just and honest person, I will not destroy the city.
Jeremiah 5:1

 

[Ms_ladyblue]

This is difficult to address. What do you say to this? "male and female he created them". That is not some "practical matter of survival', but rather a divine declaration...and "be fruitful and become many", was one of Jehovah's very first commands to man. However, the angels were NOT created "male and female", as Jude points out, Jude 6,7 "And the angels who did not keep their original position but forsook their own proper dwelling place, he has reserved with eternal bonds in dense darkness for the judgment of the great day." In the same manner, Sodʹom and Go·morʹrah and the cities around them also gave themselves over to gross sexual immorality and pursued unnatural fleshly desires; they are placed before us as a warning example by undergoing the judicial punishment of everlasting fire.

So I don't know what you want us to say. It is a perversion. "Perversion refers to the distortion, corruption, or turning away from what is considered natural, proper, or true, often involving abnormal sexual behaviors"

We do not however judge the individual. We are all imperfect needing Jehovah's help and his Kingdom. But we should be careful if we are trying to justify something Jehovah clearly condemns in his word. That is NOT "adding a burden" that is a Biblical fact. Some like to try to make the claim that since the gospel accounts do not record Jesus himself making statements condemning homosexuality, but this is Jesus half brother who wrote "Jude"! My guess is, he knew how Jesus felt, not to mention it is an inspired Bible book!

I think your time would be better spent not worrying what we think, but what the Bible says Jehovah thinks. And that goes for myself too! This is NOT meant as a judgement of you. I cannot relate, and I never will. But Jehovah CAN! Jehovah knows us better than anyone. So I would pray for Jehovah's mind on the matter. I am aware that the feelings you have about this may not go away EVER in this system, and I have no idea how that must feel. I imagine and I suspect many in the world unfortunately will chose a to take the "Mark" rather than conform to God's way of doing things. So we must be on guard we do not cultivate such an attitude.

But I am reminded of an illustration I heard in a talk one time that might have application here. It goes like this: let's say you have a health condition, and you can never eat chocolate cake again, or you'll die but you love chocolate especially chocolate cake. Now you do NOT HATE chocolate cake, and you may even think to yourself, "a little won't hurt" but in fact your Dr. told you it's fatal if you eat it. But that does not make you automatically hate chocolate.

I'm only guessing, but I think this might explain a little what you are going through. But Jehovah knows and he will be with you.

@dgibson969

Romans 1:24-27 clearly speaks out against homosexuality. “Therefore, God, in keeping with the desires of their hearts, gave them up to uncleanness, so that their bodies might be dishonored among them. 25 They exchanged the truth of God for the lie and venerated and rendered sacred service to the creation rather than the Creator, who is praised forever. Amen. 26 That is why God gave them over to disgraceful sexual passion, for their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature; 27 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 penalty,which was due for their error.”

If he’s going to say “Historically, many laws regarding the traditional family arrangement were rooted in the survival and cleanliness of an ancient, agrarian society. Back then, if you didn't have children, you had no one to work the farm or care for you in old age. These were practical matters of survival and community health in a world without modern infrastructure.”

You might as well throw your Bible out because it doesn’t make sense to try and justify homosexuality as being good in God’s eyes because of this being an ancient practice.
What the heck are you talking about?? How can he be so naive? You’re right Nomex about everything you said. This is just a practice that is being pushed today that serves no good purpose but to downgrade society and particularly plays right into the devil’s hands.

And I am not judging you either. I don’t know you. I’m only defending what the Bible says on this matter.

 

[JulioG]

I have followed your work for some time and appreciate the clarity you bring regarding the Governing Body and the unfolding of world events like the tensions in the Strait of Hormuz. However, I am increasingly troubled by the rigid stance taken against LGBTQ individuals, often framed through the lens of Malachi 3:2 and the idea of 'divine judgment' on this group.


If the 'lye of the laundryman' is coming to clean the earth, we must ask: What is the actual 'stain' Jehovah is removing? Historically, many laws regarding the traditional family arrangement were rooted in the survival and cleanliness of an ancient, agrarian society. Back then, if you didn't have children, you had no one to work the farm or care for you in old age. These were practical matters of survival and community health in a world without modern infrastructure.


Today, we see many people outside that traditional arrangement who have been known to stay committed in stable, loving relationships for 30 plus years—showing a level of loyalty and responsibility that is supposedly the hallmark of a Christian life. To label such long-term stability as a 'curse' or 'unclean' seems to mirror the same Pharisaical rigidity that the Governing Body uses to bind men’s consciences.


When Jesus appears to his 7,000, I believe his message will be one of profound inclusion that calls out those who used his name to withhold compassion. The 'refiner’s fire' may very well be intended to burn away the prejudice and arrogance of those who think they can dictate who is acceptable to God based on ancient survival codes rather than the 'natural affection' and integrity found in a person's heart.


I hope that as a 'Watchman,' you can see that a true witness is someone who reflects the love of the Creator, not someone who adds to the burdens of those already walking a narrow path.

What do you think?

Parese que estas confundido en cuanto a lo que limpiara la legia del lavandero y del mensaje que se dara...el reino que viene es un gobierno real y no algo que esta en nuestros corazones y que lo alcanzaremos con nuestro propio esfuerzo buscando transformar el mundo en amor y tolerancia.

 

[Jahrule]

Today everything is about identity, particularly sexual identity. There is a group of people nowadays that makes sexual identity their entire life. It's not just homosexuality. Sexual sin is rampant. I've personally struggled with pornography countless times. The issue isn't simply hatred against certain classes of people, gay, straight, trans, etc. It's about upholding God's standards for sexual expression. We are told to love one another. That's true. Just because somebody is gay or trans doesn't mean I'm going to hate them. That's simply how the world categorizes classifying those seeing sexual immorality as sin. Just because I see homosexuality as sin doesn't mean I hate them. Premarital sex is sin too. That doesn't mean I hate everyone who has sex outside marriage, despite that also being a sin. Sexual sin is by far the most common sin. It's important to have compassion for sinners. However, that doesn't take away from the fact that sexual sin is in fact sinful. Simply acknowledging that in this world is often perceived as hatred, when in reality it is an act of love. It's the same way disciplining a child is an act of love, yet we all know there is a difference between discipline and child abuse.