FelixCA

Sorry Felix I have no idea whom your first paragraph was aimed at but the bit about " Knowing Butler was an Ex-JW from other sites,  " has confused me totally. Can you name the other sites that you think you know me from ? 
But once again I read more aggression. It does not bring any on us closer to God or Christ. 

Far from it. I’m busy collecting the Bible Student publications to make it into a DVD library. Halfway there. It’s all on pdf. At least from 1879-2013 The Herald of Christ Presence is the longest running BS magazine, up to 2019 and running. Which I will incorporate as an ongoing publication.


 
Even though they don’t favor the Watchtower doctrine after 1916, they don’t stab each other in the back as some do within the Watchtower Brotherhood. Case in point, having to say, you guys itching for a catfight. Best illustration ever, LOL! 😉

Good, then your not a creationist. What would the inference be with that nonsense that is taken out of context with the Watchtower 1968? Nothing more than an interpretation of man's existence starting from 4026B.C. that ends in 2975AD. Does this mean God is resting after 1975? Did Jesus not do miracles in the Sabbath?  The watchtower started a chart with the phrase "CHART OF DATES FROM MAN’S CREATION TO 7000 A.M." To some, it might be seen as a type o,  just like the thousands of type-o's, there are in the Watchtower publications. However, the implied is from Creation that, as you state has an infinite number through man's existence 7000 A.M. Therefore, that doesn't prove a darn thing. There is still a separation to those that don't distort the publication. if the bible students understood to a certain extent, it should have never been that difficult for faithful witnesses.
"The length of the day of creation is a question which heretofore no one has been able satisfactorily to answer. Many Bible students think that because Peter says "One day is with the Lord as a thousand years" that each day of creation must be of that duration. Peter however was speaking of the period between the day of creation and the day of the Lord; his language can fully apply, only to that period; and is without doubt very strong inferential proof of the theory that the period from the dominion of the first Adam to that of the second will be six thousand years, to be followed by the "Millennium" or the seventh thousand as the antitype of the Jewish Sabbath."
By the way, God rested after creation as cited in Genesis. That doesn't mean God would rest within Man's existence.

The latter part of your theory is still based on trying to defend a chronology system that attempts to put the times and the seasons in our own jurisdiction. It could be dangerous to our Christianity besides being presumptuous. Also, the premise that Peter was speaking about the period between the day of creation and the day of the Lord is without foundation.

As I believe I made clear, the Watchtower has never presented anything like a belief that the 6 creative days are the same as the 1000 years. So this idea should cause you no worries, since no one said it, and no one implied it. So hopefully you can rest a little better now. 
This reminds me of some of the logical problems we just looked at, where something is admitted to be probable or possible in some of our prior publications, but then within the space of a sentence or two, what initially "appeared" to be true, actually becomes "totally" true, and a supposedly solid conclusion is drawn from the false premise. 
You have made several other mistakes just like this, so that a reasonable person would likely have already dismissed many of those conclusions you drew about R.Franz, too. And if you really thought that what 'this person' was saying was the false idea that only you had brought up, then I think that a reasonable people would also not be able to automatically trust conclusions you derived elsewhere from reading the Watchtower, reading anything written by R.Franz, or perhaps even other people on this forum. When a person needs to resort to making up things out of thin air as you apparently just did above, then you also lose credibility when it comes to your stories and anecdotes that reveal supposedly hidden personality traits that no one else who knew these people for years has ever reported before today.
To disprove what about 1975? 1975 could still be the end of 6,000 years of man's existence, and since the Bible puts no particular significance on 6,000 years, it could also have been the same year Eve was created, just as the Watchtower once said (that Eve too had also been created that same year in 4026 B.C.E.). I fail to see what this might DISPROVE about 1975, that wasn't already disproved by the Watchtower articles.
Anyone should realize what Peter was saying from the very context of these words: that Jehovah's thoughts are higher than our thoughts and his ways are higher than our ways, and that his determination of the times and seasons will always be in his own jurisdiction, not ours. We shouldn't be toying with chronology if we think it can somehow be the key to becoming prepared for something that will come as a thief in the night. Chronology will never be the key to helping us become the kind of persons we ought to be while we await the end of this system. If anything, it would much more likely be a detriment to our true Christian conduct. We might be motivated by a time or season instead of by love for Jehovah, his patience, and of love for our neighbor.
That's absolutely correct. The Watchtower said there might be up to a two-year gap between the end of the 6,000 years of "man's creation" and the end of 6,000 years of "creation." (Both Adam and Eve.) Of course, at one point the Watchtower did actually slip up and say that Eve was also created in 4026, the same year as Adam. That was another example of the premise being built up with words like "apparently," "evidently," and "possibly" and then, within a few sentences, what was possible became supposedly demonstrable, declarative and dogmatic.
But even this slip-up that said Eve was also born in 4026, was never given as a guarantee that the Millennium would begin that same year. At that point, we only taught that it would be "appropriate" for God to act that year. The time period for the beginning of the Millennium was still relegated to the:
entire decade of the 1970's, then by the end of the 20th century, then by the end of the lifespans of currently anointed persons whose anointing overlapped with persons in an earlier group of anointed persons who saw the sign in 1914 and understood what it meant.  Rather than distort, we should want to see the truth and make sure that it keeps us humble enough to avoid further error. Israel was humbled by failures, too. That didn't automatically mean they were no longer God's people. It just meant that what befell them should be used as examples to learn from. The people that make up spiritual Israel are also human, and will also fail many times. We can learn from these examples to improve, and not make the same mistakes over and over again. We can also show all potentially interested persons that we are not so cult-like that we would defend what is wrong. We would not want to hang onto false reasoning that might blind us to what is right. This is one way that even apostate views might help us to improve:
(1 Corinthians 11:19) 19 For there will certainly also be sects among you, so that those of you who are approved may also become evident. In all seriousness, I saw that reaction coming as soon as I pointed out some of the more obvious errors you had recently made here.  For some reason, I have never seen you simply acknowledge an error, or even try to address one. Instead, you seem to repeatedly just "lash out" with new diversions you appear to just make up. I still hope to show that most Witnesses have much credibility and honesty. It's true I point out errors from our past, and some of these still effect traditional doctrines of the present, but more and more of these have been humbly acknowledged. From those taking the lead, to those of us in the "rank and file" we have made great strides in humility and made great improvements over those days of so much illogical dogmatism. We should be able to compare the brighter present with some of the actual darkness of the past. This exercise will highlight the ways in which the "dross" is filtered to keep making the gold more and more refined. I'm not trying to make fun of the dross, but I'm surprised and find it disappointing when someone thinks it necessary to keep defending the dross.

I believe the only idiocy here is from the lack of understanding what the Watchtower is attempting to convey. It’s an unfortunate pattern from disfellowshipped members to incite, misunderstandings.

Especially when it comes by someone that threatens suicide. For one, taking something away from God is an offense upon God. Threatening Suicide is an offense against that person’s mental state.

Whatever, mental instability is being dealt with, a person that threatens suicide should be referred to their local mental institution, and have any questionable congregation matters with adequate witnesses continue in absentia.

Being suicidal is a determination of the lack of faith this person ever presented to God himself, and is entirely their own.

Does an accused person get relief or prevent an action, because they threaten suicide, from secular authority, within criminal or civil jurisprudence? Only ignorant people would think so.

Once again, the ignorance of not fully understanding scripture by disfellowshipped individuals that can’t comprehend the bible much less secular laws versus the laws of nature.

However, I’m glad the subject has shifted from “threatening” which the Watchtower is speaking of, versus the actual event of suicide.

Ephesians 2:11-22 New International Version (NIV)

Jew and Gentile Reconciled Through Christ

11 Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” by those who call themselves “the circumcision” (which is done in the body by human hands) — 12 remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

Romans 8:9 New International Version (NIV)

9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.

Simple abstract of what is a crime against God. Does this mean Judas will return? Only to those that can’t understand one simple rule of God’s law.

Exodus 20:13 New International Version (NIV)

13 “You shall not murder.

Exodus 20:13 King James Version (KJV)

13 Thou shalt not kill.

Romans 13:9 English Standard Version (ESV)

9 For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”


 
I wonder why people don’t consider suicide to be a murder only because it’s self-inflicted. What a strange way to excuse one’s behavior and justify our own action.

John 8:47 New International Version (NIV)

47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”


 
Therefore, scripture has many things to say about suicide in an indirect way from a killing point of view. A true Christian would fully understand it.

While those unrighteous will undoubtedly be resurrected by no fault of never knowing God’s purpose and promise? It does not constitute those unrighteous ones after being cleansed and the devil allowed to poison the minds won’t receive a judgment of the second death where there is no resurrection.
However, those that have taken from God’s judgment excelled to the second death. Like those that commit blasphemy against gods holy spirit. Have these righteous and unrighteous paid their debt through death?
Deuteronomy 6 New International Version (NIV)
Love the Lord Your God
6 These are the commands, decrees and laws the Lord your God directed me to teach you to observe in the land that you are crossing the Jordan to possess, 2 so that you, your children and their children after them may fear the Lord your God as long as you live by keeping all his decrees and commands that I give you, and so that you may enjoy a long life.
1 Peter 4:15 English Standard Version (ESV)
15 But let none of you suffer as a murderer or a thief or an evildoer or as a meddler.
1 Corinthians 6:19-20 English Standard Version (ESV)
19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own, 20 for you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
Therefore, no one has the right to take what God has created. In the case of suicide one's mortal soul.

Would this be before they made an attempt, and asked God for forgiveness (Repented) or is this at a point when a person commits suicide like Judas that made no attempts to reconcile his heinous crime of delivering Jesus to his enemies?

Either way, a crime against nature is something that most within Christendom view as wrong. There are circumstances to be sure, even the Watchtower acknowledges that through the Flock book.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_suicide

cf: 2282

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal.

Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to moral law.

From the Code of Canon Law and Commentary2

Regarding “Those to Whom Ecclesiastical Funeral Rites Are Denied”:

Canon 1184 –

§1. Unless they have given some signs of repentance before their death, the following are to be deprived of ecclesiastical funeral rites:

1º notorious apostates, heretics and schismatics;

2º persons who had chosen the cremation of their own bodies for reasons opposed

to the Christian faith;

3º other manifest sinners for whom ecclesiastical funeral rites cannot be granted without public scandal to the faithful;

§2. If some doubt should arise, the local ordinary is to be consulted; and his judgment is to be followed.


 
1 John 4:4 New Living Translation (NLT)

4 But you belong to God, my dear children. You have already won a victory over those people, because the Spirit who lives in you is greater than the spirit who lives in the world.

Romans 14:8 New International Version (NIV)

8 If we live, we live for the Lord; and if we die, we die for the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.

Ezekiel 18:4 New International Version (NIV)

4 For everyone belongs to me, the parent as well as the child—both alike belong to me. The one who sins is the one who will die.


 
Should those individuals that took matters into their own hands be given the opportunity to be resurrected? That belongs to God to decide, where the crime of sin would stand before God's authority to Judge that was taken away by a selfish act.

Can we also say you don’t have proof Fred Franz didn’t? Try not to overreach and backtrack on your earlier sentiment about knowing the GB when it’s obvious that’s an exaggeration.

I’m not mentally challenged spiritually to accept apostate literature that you seem to want to promote. Sorry.

“A final reason, resulting from the previous two, is that of conscience. What do you do when you see mounting evidence that people are being hurt, deeply hurt, with no real justification? What obligation does any of us have—before God and toward fellow humans—when he sees that information is withheld from people to whom it could be of the most serious consequence? These were questions with which I struggled. What follows expands on these reasons.”

How convenient to all of a sudden develop a conscience to justify his own actions as a member of the 18 Governing Body. Not only is this untrue but disingenuous as to his motive.

Perhaps you fall for sob stories, but it takes time to know a person. This person angered over being overlooked for president is a classic case of narcissism.

If you’re a person that is looking for excuses to fade or leave, promote this book if you must, just keep the Watchtower and faithful followers of Christ out. Perhaps JW only would be more suitable to discuss this among yourselves since no one will be able to refute misguided understanding.

I believe the context you are looking for is found 1 Corinthians 4:5, Philippians 3:13. This, however, can be seen depending on the Bible translation.

1 Corinthians 4:5 New International Version (NIV)

5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of the heart. At that time each will receive their praise from God.

1 Corinthians 4:5 the Message (MSG)

5 So don’t get ahead of the Master and jump to conclusions with your judgments before all the evidence is in. When he comes, he will bring out in the open and place in evidence all kinds of things we never even dreamed of—inner motives and purposes and prayers. Only then will any one of us get to hear the “Well done!” of God.


 
Philippians 3:13 New International Version (NIV)
13 Brothers and sisters, I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead,


It’s interesting the perception you have about apostasy. Is it just afore dawn conclusion it’s only meant to “depart” from one's belief or is it also an action taken by one's heart.

James 1:26 ESV

If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless.


 
Matthew 5:22 ESV
But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.

As you stated, enough of attempting to justify other people’s behavior by their personal actions. Let's move on.

Unfortunately, Raymond developed the same obscured understanding, when the Watchtower has kept in line with Bible understanding. To some extent, some within Christendom have kept the fundamental understanding of John’s vision, but yet fail to see the reality within John's vision. The same problem Raymond inherited.
Therefore, there is no reason for the Watchtower to redefine scripture for the sake of some blind faithful.
I asked Raymond how he could see the great crowd celebrating God’s triumphant victory if in that since it was to be literal upon mount Zion, with his updated understanding. The same reason Raymond's books are theologically useless.
The misguided understanding comes by not subjecting the vision in its proper context. 144,000 thousand from all the nations is literal, which Jesus presence along with the saints end up being a symbolic endeavor.
Those that remain will see Jesus victory and God’s glory in the heavens.
 
                           *** w15 7/15 p. 19 pars. 17-18 “Your Deliverance Is Getting Near”! ***
17 The resulting war of Armageddon will lead to the magnifying of Jehovah’s holy name. (Rev. 16:16) At that time, all goatlike ones “will depart into everlasting cutting-off.” The earth will finally be cleansed of all wickedness, and the great crowd will pass through the final part of the great tribulation. With all preparations completed, the climax of the book of Revelation, the marriage of the Lamb, can take place. (Rev. 21:1-4) All those surviving on the earth will bask in God’s favor and experience bounteous expressions of his love. What a marriage feast that will be! Do we not look forward to that day with eager expectation?—Read 2 Peter 3:13.
18 With these exciting events ahead of us, what should each of us now be doing? The apostle Peter was inspired to write: “Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, consider what sort of people you ought to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion, as you await and keep close in mind the presence of the day of Jehovah
 
         *** w51 12/15 pp. 751-752 pars. 13-14 Release Under Way to the Ends of the Earth ***
 
13 This joyful prophecy extends now to the Shepherd’s “other sheep” who must be rescued from Babylon before Armageddon. That fact is revealed to us in the Revelation. John the apostle first describes his vision of the gathering and sealing of the 144,000 members of the twelve tribes of spiritual Israel. Then he says: “After these things I saw, and, look! a great crowd, which no man was able to number, out of all nations and tribes and peoples and tongues.” That makes this a Gentile crowd, when compared with the 144,000 spiritual Israelites. But they are where, and what are they doing? “Standing before the throne and before the Lamb, dressed in white robes, and there were palm branches in their hands. And they keep on crying with a loud voice, saying: ‘Salvation we owe to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb.’”
14 Have this “great crowd” come to Zion and submitted to the theocratic rule of Jehovah who is seated on the heavenly throne? They have; for one of the elderly persons identifies the crowd to John and says: “These are the ones that come out of the great tribulation [this locates their coming between 1919 and Armageddon], and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
ii. Great Multitude in Heaven (7:9–17)
 
The saints who are sealed on earth are next seen in heaven (see arguments below) wearing the white robes of triumph and holding palm branches in a reenactment of the Feast of Tabernacles (7:9). Draper (1983: 135–38) develops this imagery, asserting that the scene builds on Zech. 14:1–21. There the feast is connected with the pilgrimage of the Gentiles to Jerusalem in the last days, and here the great multitude have white robes (= the purity of the feast) and palm branches. They celebrate the great victory of God and the Lamb (7:10) and then are joined by the heavenly host, who sing another sevenfold praise reminiscent of chapters 4–5 (7:11–12). This obviously causes John considerable confusion, for one of the celestial elders tells John both the identity and origin (7:13) of those with the white robes: they are the saints who have emerged victorious from the “great tribulation” and have kept themselves pure (7:14). Their reward is to serve God continually as priests (7:15a) and to experience both the Shekinah presence of God and the shepherding activity of the Lamb (7:15b, 17a). As a result they will never again suffer the deprivations of this life (7:16, 17b).[1]
 
 
 
 

I will not quarrel over the meaning of the words “abusive” versus “obnoxious” since I’m sure its use is meant to justify the wrongful act of another.

I would think a witness would welcome a defender from abusive rhetoric like Butler and this person by the name of James Thomas Rook Jr.

Therefore, I see this as an unconstructive action on how the Pharisees tried to justify the persecution of Jesus, by removing an obstacle of righteousness from within their populous.  No difference here.

As you stated, this is something we are all guilty of by being here, including the librarian. Ephesians 5:1

Walk in Love

5, therefore, be imitators of God, as beloved children. 2 And walk in love, as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us, a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God.

3 But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. 4 Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. 5 For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. 6 wLet no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.


 
By your explanation, there was no good reason to have removed Allen, and what is offered, is another form of unjust, justification to retain those that are abusive and against the Watchtower for the sake of revenue. Therefore, apostasy sells.

Then it becomes a matter of what side we're on.


 
 

It’s not so much that you should be. It’s that he shouldn’t have been. It is anything goes here. That’s just the way it is.
The one-sided action favors the perception that The Librarian, that old hen, is in bed with apostates. ( Yeccchhhh)

Glad you're here. Your points made are very good. And, fwiw, I agreed with every single word you said above, except for one sentence. And even in that one sentence I would only change one word. I would change the word "must" to "would likely." And to be consistent, then, I would also insert two more instances of "likely" further on in that same paragraph.
It's because everything you say about spiritual Israel is true. And you make an excellent Biblical argument to tie that spiritual/symbolic meaning to Revelation 7 & 14. But everything you are saying need not reflect the specific literalness of the number, although I'm not personally arguing that you're wrong. It very well could be literal. I'm just saying that we can't say it MUST be literal. And there are several good Biblical reasons why we should avoid saying "must' here.
This particular explanation of the passage in Revelation has stood the test of time among Witnesses for 80-some years. Still, there are many parts of it that are difficult to defend as "absolutes" in their specific Biblical context. And there have been a few arguments in favor of our interpretation that have made use of false reasoning. Whenever that happens, it doesn't mean it's wrong, but false reasoning should always perk up our senses to 'make sure of all things.' We need to know that it does not depend on false reasoning.
I'm sure you are personally aware of the points I refer to. But I'll be happy to play "The Bible's Advocate" here and point out some of the scriptural difficulties and false reasoning employed in support of the teaching.
Revelation is very symbolic, and therefore it seems that we definitely ought to consider whether any reference to Israel could refer to "symbolic" Israel, or "spiritual" Israel. Of course, if Israel is symbolic, this might be an argument for considering all the numbers in this context to be symbolic: 12, 12,000, 12,000, 12,000, 12,000, 12,000, 12,000 12,000, 12,000, 12,000, 12,000, 12,000, 12,000, and 144,000. Of the dozens of numbers referenced in Revelation, we already consider about 90 percent of them to be symbolic. We consider:
24 elders to be symbolic, (and 24 harps, and 24 incense bowls), the 3 and 1/2 days to be symbolic, the 7,000 persons killed to be symbolic, the 1,600 stadia to be symbolic, the number 666 to be symbolic, the 7 mountains to be symbolic, the 7 horns of the Lamb to be symbolic, the 7 eyes of the Lamb to be symbolic, the 2 witnesses to be symbolic, the 12 stars to be symbolic, the 1/10th of the city to be symbolic, the 1/3rd of the stars hurled to earth to be symbolic, the 1/3rd of the people killed to be symbolic, the 1/3rd of the ships, 1/3rd of the sun, 1/3rd of the moon, 1/3rd of the earth, etc., the 12 gates made of 12 pearls with 12 angels at the gates to be symbolic, the 12,000 stadia to be symbolic, the 12 crops of fruit to be symbolic, the 12 foundation stones to be partially symbolic (of the 12 apostles), the 12 crops of fruit to be symbolic, and the 144 cubits to be symbolic. I've never made a chart of all of the numbers, but there are dozens of them in the book of Revelation, but we take only a very few of them to be literal.
The basic point from Revelation 7, and its context, without any attempt to interpret for the moment is this:
John sees 4 angels holding back the 4 destructive winds from the 4 corners of the earth. Then he sees an angel come out of the East with a God's "seal" and that angel tells the 4 angels to keep the destructive winds back until [all] God's slaves are sealed. John heard that the number of those who were sealed was 144,000 out of every tribe of the sons of Israel. He hears that there are 12,000 out of each tribe, so that the number 12,000 is repeated here 12 times. (A list where the tribe of Levi replaces the tribe of Dan, and the tribe of Ephraim is called by his father's name.) Then John sees a great crowd that no man could number out of every nation/tribe/people/tongue. These ones, unlike what is said about the 144,000, are: standing before God's throne standing before the Lamb dressed in white robes waving palm branches, shouting: "Salvation we owe to our God, seated on the throne, and to the Lamb." John also sees, not just the great crowd, but also all the angels around God's throne, along with the [24] elders, and 4 living creatures, and they also shout in praise, not because they owe their salvation to God, but to offer God a prayer of thanks, praise and honor for his glory, wisdom, power, and strength. John is asked by one of the [24] elders who and from where are these ones that are "dressed in white robes." The elder does not say "Where is this 'great crowd' from?" The important distinguishing feature is that they are "dressed in white robes." John defers to the elder who gives John more information about them: they come out of the great tribulation they have washed their robes, made white in the blood of the Lamb, which is why they can stand before God's throne they render God sacred service day and night in his Temple (Greek, "naos," often referring to the most sacred and holy part of the temple, where only the priests could render sacred service.) God will spread his tent over them so that they will neither hunger, thirst, nor be scorched by heat, because the Lamb in the midst of the throne, will shepherd them, and guide them to springs of waters of life, and God will wipe every tear from their eyes. ==================
So immediately, we see that the Watch Tower's version has a couple of problems that must be overcome through interpretation so that the uninterpreted verses don't continue to give the impression that it's the "great crowd" and not the 144,000 who are standing before the heavenly throne. Somehow we need to put the 144,000 up there in heaven, too. And then we need to re-interpret this heavenly scene where John is viewing things in heaven, and talking to one of the 24 elders in heaven. We need to keep the "great crowd" on earth. We also need to diminish the meaning of the "white robes" because this is how the 24 elders are dressed, and also is the mark of those dead awaiting under the altar "crying out" for those still alive on earth until their full number was filled:
(Revelation 6:11) . . .And a white robe was given to each of them, and they were told to rest a little while longer, until the number was filled of their fellow slaves and their brothers who were about to be killed as they had been.
(Revelation 19:14) . . .Also, the armies in heaven were following him on white horses, and they were clothed in white, clean, fine linen.
The white robes are mindful of the requirements for priestly garments, but it seems to refer to the clean standing required of heavenly beings so that they can stand before God and his throne, and perform sacred service in his heavenly temple. The 144,000 are not shown to be in these heavenly garments. The 144,000 are not said to be performing sacred service in the Temple. The NAOS, which often refers only to the inner chambers of the temple, as opposed to the outer courtyards, or courtyard of the gentiles, for example, is only mentioned with reference to the "great crowd."
Both these "issues" are resolved by two basic interpretations unique to the Watch Tower publications:
The Watchtower makes the 24 elders refer to the 144,000 The Watchtower teaches that the NAOS can refer to the outer courtyards of the temple There's more, of course. But this post needs to be broken up.

I guess that would be the point TOM. What part of apostate views can be accepted? Especially when those same ideas are found in apostate sites. Where can we compromise as not to be seen hypocritical by NOT practicing what we preach? James 1:22–25 How can this marvel be seen different just because JWI explains it the same way as opposers. Where’s the intellectual capability with mistaken loyalty.

That in itself makes no ecclesiastical sense. In this case, there is no persuading those that honor God, not to have things seen, contrary to bible standards. Sorry. 😉

But, as you state in such an indirect way. JWI is a power player here and he can say whatever he wants. When he gets challenged by showing those areas of error, people get deleted, which decides where the greater influence lies. I get that, thanks for the warning, I’m on the verge of being erased, by Tom, Anna, JWinsider.

That being said, I do agree it’s your world TOM, the slave must conform to the master. 🤔

Now just because I used the phrase, “that being said” doesn’t automatically make me Space Merchant. JWinsider, LOL! 😄

Then your exegesis is flawed. While the Israelites do hold some of the 144,000 saints it is conclusive with Jesus mandate by God’s Holy Spirit that the none-Jew (Gentiles) be included. Therefore, when scripture mentions all the tribes of Israel, it can’t be seen other than the descendants of all the tribes that have gotten mixed throughout the generations.

The same flaw found with Raymond. The same ill-conceived argument, when he failed to consider if Jesus was really a Jew because of his Parents. Raymond, just like about everyone doesn’t consider that Jesus was conceived by God’s Holy Spirit, therefore, Jesus was ALL nations (ADAM), not just the heritage of his parents. Was he clinging to his heritage, or was he framing how the Jews and none-Jews would be included?  He was the first Christian, meaning the first none-Jew, by a proclamation not by heritage. If we consider Raymond’s argument, with that logic, where does it leave Apostle Paul?

To that extent, the 144,000 would have the same proclamation. So, don’t think too much into the heritage that the Jews ultimately lost favor for, defying God so many millennia, ago.

Let’s not confuse the original Israelites that Jesus himself claimed to be Matthew 1:1–17 with the Jews in his time. Why else would Paul make a distinction with Romans 11:1 as to the Remnant of Israel? Paul demonstrated that Israel followed God by works instead of faith. That’s why those Jews refused to believe in Jesus and accept him as the Messiah. Had Jesus been born in the time of the Israelites, what do you think would have happened, seeing the son of God present.

We’d be having a different conversation if any, however, the makeup of humanity wouldn’t have been this evil. The same outcome present-day Israel is trying to do by building their own righteousness and their own sovereign state (Kingdom).

With Raymond’s understanding and yours, the 144,000 are already collected by heritage, way before Jesus was born, and serving as kings and priest, presently. This would leave out all the gentiles and converted Jews to Christianity. That is a distention the Watchtower makes when it refers to the false teachings of Christendom.

I imagine you have dismissed the OPED I submitted, with how many in charge would be frank and open with their responses. Raymond was no different in private. Perhaps his behavior was more polished in public but that would be something people that liked him would only see.
There are two sides to a coin, and I got to experience both sides. It really didn’t matter to me, since adults at that times were by and large as you stated “child abuse” oriented by today’s standards, not so much by the signs of that time. Perhaps, this is the problem people have today.
They look at every situation with today’s ideology rather than being intellectual and cite with the past.
The ecclesiastical determination allows viewing scripture correctly. The understanding of rapture is defined by how God’s Holy Spirit can and will operate. I believe that has been discussed before.
The inference that Fred was not involved in translating scripture to other languages when at that time there were around 109 languages if memory serves, is not an adequate characterization of Fred’s abilities. I believe that was something that was challenged in court.
While the word “framer” is taken out of context, it was the foundation for best practices for having a judicial system through the congregations, Committee. Which Fred had a fair amount of input on how this committee should be conducted, with various scriptural conditions to support it?
Once again, perhaps this is why you hold loyalty to Raymond. In an ecclesiastical level, there was no one more qualified than Fred Franz.
This, however, will remain one opinion over another. The “actions” of both subjects speak for themselves.
This is why I don’t see how you can effectively contradict arrangements that weren’t part of the Watchtower after 1931.
Before that, each congregation ran independently of each other. There was no central system, even though some continue to insist, Bethel was Pastor Russell main hub when it wasn’t.
Elders in each congregation had the ability to choose for themselves what was best for their congregants. Another reason why other denominations were welcomed to speak at their church meeting. Traveling preachers. If they had internal matters within local congregations, they would form an Ecclesia body of Elders.
“We write to apprise you of the fact that a class of Bible Students of this town have organized as an Ecclesia--24 members --Brother W. Sargent of Halifax officiating; and have voted you in as Pastor and Elder.”
“We have heard of cases in which an Elder refused to speak to one of the Congregation because the latter had not voted for him”
Dear Brethren:
I am writing you this to testify my appreciation of the visit it of dear - Pilgrim Brother Blackburn. I so much enjoyed his sweet fellowship. He seemed so, charged with the Message of love-the Gospel of Glad Tidings­ that there was no room for malevolent backbiting and -slander of fellow-servants . . . Brother Blackburn, in all his discourses, emphasized the possessing of the spirit of -Christ Jesus as the all-important, qualification of Christian character . . . Ali! how can those 'Who have tasted of the heavenly gift be so lacking in the spirit of love as to smite brethren who cannot accept every wild speculation and vagary thrust before them! If those who do such things are thereby manifesting the spirit of the Lord, then I have read the Divine Word in vain.
If the Associated Bible Students were offering "strange fire" when they preach the Truth independently of the Society, not only would their efforts come to naught but they themselves would be cut short, even as your article suggests. But, instead of this, the Lord is richly blessing their efforts, and many have come to a knowledge of the Truth and into full relationship with the Lord as a result of these ministries outside of the Society.
 
 All in all, we choose to believe what Satan has placed before us. If we refuse to acknowledge that effort, we will always play into his handy work. To distort the facts by distorting the truth.
For the Watchtower history, it’s been clear, the framers besides Raymond and former apostates like him, fell in a trap of their own device. Self-destruction by opening their hearts to Satan. Another evidence of this was the writing department in Raymond’s time. Conflict within, what a shame and wasted effort.
 
TTH, it is true some consideration should be given to some that still consider themselves as being part of this organization, but NOT when we are dealing with apostasy. If Raymond resigned and then disfellowshipped for it, how much more slack do you think people here should have? Therefore, you have the same conflict the writing department had back then with misplaced loyalty. But, that's between you and our creator.
 

Unfortunately, I don’t share your views and value about, bad association. I am not here for the association but rather show how Ex’JW’s distort Watchtower publications to benefit what is clearly a misapplication of them. The 1943 Watchtower that was posted by Anna comes to show, how vital it is to have good expectations rather than try to satisfy the status quo.
It also appears this is being done with the claim of being an active member whereas if these thoughts and outdrawn misguided conclusions were set before the congregation, they would have nothing to do with such ideology.
Therefore, this place has become a bully pulpit for misinformation, nothing more. I can understand your need to receive opposition input to frame your own books, however, that in itself is no excuse to malign, or distort the truth.
Another area of how the early brethren dealt with issues, was by being direct and frank. A characterization of Fred, seen as a hardnose can be applied to Raymond in private since he was hypocritical in public, but how the early Bible Students which Fred was baptized under and the Jehovah Witnesses that took a different direction.
This example on an exchange comes to mind.
Dear Brother Woodworth:-
Your editorial of July 8, 1931, entitled "Bible Students Radio Echo", has been read with much interest. Both you and I have often gloried in the privilege of scripturally refuting the audacious claims of the various Babylonian sects who boast that they constitute the only divine channel and repository of all truth. How often have you punctured the pompous pretensions of popes, priests, and ministers who have said that they possess God-given authority to judge and excommunicate all dissenters from their views, no matter how conscientious and devout such "heretics" might be!
We have both known and long taught that the Christian is called unto liberty, and that every child of God is divinely authorized to preach the Truth as he sees it. Is it possible that we are forgetting these past sound teachings and have come to ignore that precious heritage of Christian liberty that has long been ours? Are we now willing to adopt the "human ordination" arguments policies of the clergy whom we have so strenuously condemned?

Are we now ready to consign to everlasting destruction sincere Christians who have done no wrong greater than that of proclaiming Christ's Kingdom without first having been authorized by man or by a man-made organization? I cannot bring myself to believe, dear Brother Woodworth, that you and thousands of other Bible Students or Witnesses of Jehovah are giving your willing assent to such God-dishonoring theories and practices as your article implies. Hence, in the spirit of the Golden Rule, and with no thought whatsoever of retaliation, I write this letter in the hope that I may help you to arouse yourself from the spiritual stupor into which circumstances seem to have gradually forced you, manifestly against your better judgment.

In your attack against brethren who are preaching the Kingdom message without authority from the Society, you make no attempt to show that they are teaching error. Your argument is that the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society is the only instrument that the Lord would possibly use to proclaim Christ's Kingdom (although no scriptural reason for such a conclusion is given); and upon this premise you reason that any independent effort to proclaim the Truth is displeasing to the Lord, no matter how sincere or how effective such an effort may be, and that the Lord will vengefully visit upon such tellers of His Truth swift and lasting destruction.
You will agree, I am sure, that Jesus is the Head of His church, and that all laws governing that
body must come from Him. In spite of this, you have lent your name to a wholesale condemnation of consecrated Christians--your brethren--who are proclaiming the Kingdom message because they love it; and in support of your rash action you have not attempted to produce any authorization from the divinely-appointed Head of the church-evidently for the very obvious reason that no such authorization exists.
Haman Class seek to Monopolize
Both you and I well know that after the apostles fell asleep the early church departed from the faith and from the freedom in Christ which the Lord and His apostles had instituted. Priests and bishops then began to usurp authority; to claim a monopoly of the Truth, and to assert an autocratic control over believers. They claimed infallibility for the pope; all independent Bible study and teaching was banned; the priceless heritage of Christian liberty was taken away; and thus was brought about that dark, dismal period in the church's history during which thousands of Christians were burned at the stake or otherwise cruelly mistreated, when they tried to break away from that unauthorized, unchristian bondage of men and claim the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free.

Finally, a successful break for liberty was made and the Protestant Reformation was launched. But one after another of the Protestant sects soon fell away to the very same error against which they had protested; boastingly to assert that they had the power to open and shut the doors of heaven to whomsoever they would. Is history again repeating itself?
This is the kind of openness the Watchtower framers had. Did, it make these people less qualified for their openness, and direct approach? Perhaps, you yourself would suggest this can be seen as a bad association. If this is the case, it would be applied to justify the end means, not the truth. This type of OPED’s can be seen throughout the Watchtower history, including the Zion Tower.
Also, with this illustration, it should be able to give more clarity to other issues.

When was it ever anything else?
From my point of view, that is almost the sole purpose of this site. 
Come, come, we must not squabble. We have the same goal, even if we go about it in different ways. I will allow that I am probably too flippant, and post in that spirit what you take seriously. For example, I did a quick & fictional snippet of Fred. That is my bad, and I apologize.
JWI deals with egghead stuff that I only skim. Things dealing with dates are not my thing. These are not the ‘motivating’ things that cause people to develop a bad heart. Rather, if some have already developed a bad heart, they latch onto the fact that people ‘at the top’ disagree (Duh) and make maximum hay out of it. Or they find that there has been much hashing out over what eventually comes out as a unified whole, and they bail on that account.
The one of good heart sees such disagreement & says ‘Ah, well, they’ll figure it out,’ and carries on without undo fuss. Since we have been wrong many times before, it seems a little foolish to insist that it will never happen again. ‘If they are on the wrong side of this or that bit of prophesy, they’ll figure it out and get on the right side,’ says the one of good heart.
No. I don’t care about such things. Why some do I’ll never know, but it’s a good thing that they do. Everyone has a gift. I like to focus on what I think is more relevant  - the qualities attributed to ‘apostates’ in Jude and 2Peter—an insistence on self-determination, and a disdain for authority. I am in my element when I get to kick back at those who would capitalize on genuine tragedies, such as CSA, to seek to destroy the ones preaching the good news.
With a major ‘reform,’ making clear that there is absolutely no reproach in reporting vile things to the authorities, some of the most virulent of our critics lose something huge to them - a little like ‘what is Tom Brady going to do with himself after he retires?’ Some face withering away like Roger Chillingsworth. They almost have no choice but to find some pissy little thing that could conceivably allow something bad to yet happen and harp on that to the cows come home.
Since I don’t care about the aspects of theocratic life that you do, I have probably overstepped in some places and drawn your reproof. I apologize. One of the prime things Jehovah hates is anyone spreading contentions among brothers. I won’t do it. When I once ‘liked’ a post of Captain Zipzeronada, a brother who was solid but rigid was stumbled. I apologized to him and didn’t do it again for the longest time - until the old pork chop said something to reveal that beneath his breathtaking pig-headedness, he was  likable in some respects and I couldn’t resist.
Our people do not typically do well online. They take shots at each other for not toeing the line in this or that aspect of service. Or they say: “This is what Jehovah has said:” to people who don’t necessarily care what he has said. They look ridiculous as they try to make the Internet behave like the congregation. As much as I appreciate your goal, if you told your circuit overseer that you were having a hard time purifying the Internet, what do you think he would say?
You have to cut brothers some slack online. If they shouldn’t be here to say it, you shouldn’t be here to hear it. You know very well that Bethel isn’t thrilled about any of us being here.

It appears you have the same reservation as Raymond when it comes to fully understand scripture on an ecclesiastical level. Perhaps that’s why you hate Fred so much.
Let’s take your comment about the 144,000 thousand that isn’t mentioned in scripture as a literal number. We both know this comment is a flat lie. But let’s see where you fail to understand the exegesis. Let’s take 14th part C of Revelation.
We know the saints (anointed) were purchased for the lamb, would amount to men gathered from the earth that wasn’t tainted and loyal to Christ. This, of course, doesn’t mean sinless just in case you want to misapply my words as you usually attempt to do to confuse the narrative.
These men are composed to reflect the 12 tribes of Israel. A symbolic initiative with literal numbers. Meaning, after Christ included others rather than just the Jews, ALL nations on earth were given that opportunity to serve in heaven as saints, and all the nations would receive the opportunity to be saved. Of course about the 12 tribes, we are referring to this literal number of 144,000 saints (anointed).
Shouldn’t these saints be positioned in a specific place somewhere in the new heavenly kingdom of Jerusalem? Just wondering with the other numbers mentioned.
I guess I would have to ask if you believe that we will get to see Jesus and the 144,000 saints in mount Zion, even though if we take that as a literal meaning, it wouldn’t be possible for millions that weren’t around a certain part of the world at that time to marvel and witness the Glory of Christ, since it would be impossible to literally see it from another part of the world. Ezekiel 37:22
Therefore, I guess all the nations that would stand to see Christ glory and victory from heaven is false, and shouldn’t be included in scripture. Perhaps I can see where you might agree with Raymond. A quiet man in public, but just as loud as Fred in private.
Revelation 7:9 King James Version (KJV)
9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
I guess that would be the difference, Fred was not a hypocrite to hide his true nature like Raymond. Did it make him any less qualified? I wonder when I read the historical facts about  PETER and PAUL.
Since we all should know, 144,000 thousand saints is a literal number, my question to Raymond and Fred early on in my life, was, if some saints were still earthbound, would these saints be the ones to automatically be raptured into heaven to complete the cycle. After all, everything would have to be complete and set in place in heaven so the heavenly kingdom would have full control of all the earthbound survivors.
Now, I appreciated Fred’s answer even though it wasn’t an answer. If the Holy Spirit truly dwells in you, there is no question as to what scripture means. Perhaps I didn’t quite understand then because of my age, but it sunk in as I grew older.
On the other hand, when Raymond set me aside, he expressed an opinion with regard to rapture. This is when I asked him to elaborate since scripture clearly states the accounts of Enoch, Genesis 5:24 and Elijah, Second Kings 2:11.  After his comment, this is why stupid children need to grow up to understand, I left it alone. I’m assuming here since he never had kids of his own he had no patience with children.
This, however, would be a good argument for the final rapture of the saints “if” there are still some left. Now, not everyone who partakes will eventually be of the anointed class.
I had a second cousin that started partaking of the emblems. That was a joke since we knew what kind of person he was. That just means there are some that have a passion to believe. He eventually stopped.
Now, all my nephews and nieces that attended Bethel, are successful and righteous in serving Jehovah without reservations whatsoever. They don’t dwell in the past and keep their eye on the prize, promised by God.
So, which 12,000 do you think we should do away with?
Luke 12:32 King James Version (KJV)
32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.
John 10:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.
Revelation 7:3-8 New International Version (NIV)
3 “Do not harm the land or the sea or the trees until we put a seal on the foreheads of the servants of our God.” 4 Then I heard the number of those who were sealed: 144,000 from all the tribes of Israel.
5 From the tribe of Judah 12,000 were sealed,
from the tribe of Reuben 12,000,
from the tribe of Gad 12,000,
6 from the tribe of Asher 12,000,
from the tribe of Naphtali 12,000,
from the tribe of Manasseh 12,000,
7 from the tribe of Simeon 12,000,
from the tribe of Levi 12,000,
from the tribe of Issachar 12,000,
8 from the tribe of Zebulun 12,000,
from the tribe of Joseph 12,000,
from the tribe of Benjamin 12,000.
Since you seem to be the favorite of True Tom and Anna with ecclesiastic wizardry, how far back do you wish to argue the interpretation of scripture?  I say this because you are so good with grammar and words that people tend to admire someone for the wrong reason. Well, at least TTH.
So, which ones should we dismiss, or where would you like to ADD to scripture to allow others aside from the 144,000 thousand anointed to rule in heaven as kings and priest?
Now, don’t respond with Watchtower literature. I’ve had enough distortion on the subject. Stick to scripture if it’s at all possible.
Just like the obsession you have with the 6000 years. Maybe if you look at it by someone else’s perspective. It’s pretty drawn clear you don’t trust or care for the Watchtower literature unless you find something to criticize about it. Perhaps this is the objective of this site and always has been.
To find the same kind of people with no faith and a weak heart.
HA1423
Similarly the pseudo- Barnabas, a very ancient though Apocryphal writer: "Consider, my children, what that signifies, He finished them in six days. The meaning is, that in 6000 years the Lord will bring all things to an end," &c.
The same expectation as to the six days of creation typifying 6000 years, as the term of the present world's duration,
continued, as we have seen, (see p. 230, &c, supra) even among the anti- premillennarian fathers of the fourth and fifth centuries. Only they explained the sabbatical seventh day as typical, not of a seventh sabbatical Millennium of rest, but an eternal Sabbath: - - a view generally adopted afterwards.

It could be, that’s the problem. Loyalty. I wouldn’t lose my personal relationship with God, for the sake of writing a book that is being collaborated by someone who is clearly a bad association and influence my decision to have an input of that book, right or wrong. Proverbs 3:3-13, 1 Corinthians 15:33

Too much of that kind have, authored books about the Watchtower, that allowed misinterpreted claims to stand. Raymond was one of them. 1 Corinthians 5:11

That just means, the desire of this world still dwells in the heart and minds of many Christians, instead of willfully trusting in Jehovah for guidance if they have a desire to print. 2 Corinthians 6:14

Could this be the reason TrueTom and JWinsider conspired to remove this Allen Smith JWI is so obsessed about? When it seems people like Butler can be more obnoxious yet still hold an account here? That would lead me to believe this person was proving some false claims here. That type of action should be embarrassing and shameful.

This would depend on how you see the operation of the Presidency versus the Governing Body. Who is anointed, and who worked closely with the anointed enough though they were not part of the anointed class.
People seem to forget Brother F. Franz knew C.T. Russell. What CTR administrative obligations were and what he would delegate to a board of directors. Did F.Franz proofread the writing department articles to see if they were consistent with scripture, or was that a responsibility he passes on to the GB? The GB does that now.
I can recall an assembly talk where Fred stated, that's what the book says, its here in print. NO one really truly knew the Presidents just like they don't really know the GB. Those are hypotheticals by witnesses that "interact" at some point with them. Therefore no one has the right to speak about someone they truly don't know. That's the bottom line if you want to continue calling ourselves Christian.
The problem with Bethel at that time was a cleansing of apostates. Perhaps JWI lost a good friend by being disfellowshipped. But still, that's no excuse under God's law. Yes, Fred was the framer on how elders should conduct a committee to ensure the congregation would be maintained clean under scriptural bases. That didn't make him a hardnose, or an inhumane person to stick with the bylaws of scripture.
That was part of the Bethel gossip along with his ability to understand scripture. Some people thought he wasn't qualified. That was a question I asked JWI. Fred was more qualified than anyone at that time. That's why he enjoyed translating scripture into different languages.
There is far more that can be said, it would take a book to yield such information.

This would depend on how you see the operation of the Presidency versus the Governing Body. Who is anointed, and who worked closely with the anointed enough though they were not part of the anointed class.
People seem to forget Brother F. Franz knew C.T. Russell. What CTR administrative obligations were and what he would delegate to a board of directors. Did F.Franz proofread the writing department articles to see if they were consistent with scripture, or was that a responsibility he passes on to the GB? The GB does that now.
I can recall an assembly talk where Fred stated, that's what the book says, its here in print. NO one really truly knew the Presidents just like they don't really know the GB. Those are hypotheticals by witnesses that "interact" at some point with them. Therefore no one has the right to speak about someone they truly don't know. That's the bottom line if you want to continue calling ourselves Christian.
The problem with Bethel at that time was a cleansing of apostates. Perhaps JWI lost a good friend by being disfellowshipped. But still, that's no excuse under God's law. Yes, Fred was the framer on how elders should conduct a committee to ensure the congregation would be maintained clean under scriptural bases. That didn't make him a hardnose, or an inhumane person to stick with the bylaws of scripture.
That was part of the Bethel gossip along with his ability to understand scripture. Some people thought he wasn't qualified. That was a question I asked JWI. Fred was more qualified than anyone at that time. That's why he enjoyed translating scripture into different languages.
There is far more that can be said, it would take a book to yield such information.

Yes, I can understand your sarcasm and your obsession with Fred and the year 1975. I'm sure your motive goes beyond this site into others that share the same view as you do. It was a very interesting year that brought many changes to humanity. This, of course, was the urgency Fred was referring to. Time was of the essence to prepare the faithful sheep for hard times too difficult to deal with. By god, if that revelation didn’t come true if we are here arguing about 1975. 2 Timothy 3:1-17


 
Therefore, your subtle perspective is still only your opinion, based on how you are viewing the information cited.

Therefore, how can you justify Raymond Franz blatant disregard for Bible truth when he cited that others besides the 144,000 would join Christ in heaven. Give a scriptural example? You might as well tell people once they die, they go to heaven as Michael waits to welcome them at the pearly gates of heaven.

If you knew Raymond, you don't need to read his book. 😉