FelixCA

Okay. Still, you seem to indicate that you knew him, too. What was he like?
Yeah. That’s fair. I guess I do. I mean, he’s been where I haven’t.
Whether it’s a good idea for him to blab away as he does, I have no idea. I was livid about it at first, but I have grown used to it. The point is, he is going to do it whether I am here or not, so I just glean what I can, always keeping in mind that it is through the eyes of another. That’s why I asked about how it looks through your eyes.
I am probably one of the few here who has not read Ray’s book. I might someday but have no immediate plans. Such things are just red herrings to me, a distraction. I mean, if my books were about personalities, I would go there. But they’re not. My books are what of Jehovah’s Witnesses as a people have done, not so much the individuals in it. I tell a lot of stories, but internal ‘power struggles,’ if they are that, do not interest me.
 

I am afraid I disagree with that assessment. It takes much more than just having breakfast with the GB at Bethel to really know someone. You seem to forget, these are highly spiritual people that won't involve themselves in the daily struggles of their personal lives. They concentrate on the spiritual needs of all the worldwide brotherhood. 
That in itself is a monumental task to think of others before your own. JWI assessment is of an angry hateful person bent on maligning FRED, bottom line. Therefore, NO! it's not an honest assessment by any standard. Since you are an author, I would think your research is for the truth, not some halfbaked drawn conclusions by an individual that has made up his mind to align himself with opposers and try to persuade people he still holds the truth in his heart. I'm, sorry friend, the world doesn't revolve around JWI, for as much as you admire his limited knowledge of Bethel. I would enjoy hearing what the excuse is going to be, come judgment day.
This is another indicator:
·  Who gets called "The Oracle"?

·  Who realizes that the primary scripture  that stands in the way of his 1975 obsession was when Jesus said that no one knows the day or the hour, and then he himself toys with that very verse in a dismissive way by saying that 'now is not the time to toy with that verse'?

·  Who calls the non-governing Jehovah's Witnesses the "rank and file"? 

·  Who writes all of the explanations for parables and prophecies as if they are doctrines from on high which cannot be questioned?

·  Who claimed that even doubting 1914 was a form of apostasy whether one stated it out loud or not?

·  Who would rant angrily that Jesus can't be the mediator of "every Tom Dick and Harry" but is only the mediator of the 144,000?

·  Who would refer to the Society as if it was not only the Lord's mouthpiece, but that its pronouncements were the same as "the Lord" himself speaking? Example:

Here is how Franz put it in the July 1, 1943 Watchtower (p.205): 
Yes, it was among the favs from the apostate site free-minds. I don’t know if they are still around, but it’s an oldie but goodie by opposers. I would encourage any sensible person to read the full context of “Righteous Requirements” for themselves instead of relying on a misrepresented, snipped. Although, I have no clue if Fred was the author of that article piece, if someone lays claim to being absolute it was FRED, I would ask for proof. After all, we need to distinguish rants from one another. The only thing proven here is personal resentment and hatred for one individual. The good thing, it’s all meaningless.

*** w71 12/15 p. 760 A Governing Body as Different from a Legal Corporation ***


 
Once again, I would refer people to read the full context to understand how the presidency and the governing body worked at that time. It appears the misinformation is laying a foundation into a false claim.

*** w71 12/15 p. 755 A Governing Body as Different from a Legal Corporation ***

A Governing Body as Different from a Legal Corporation


 
I believe the topic of how the Holy Spirit works by different people has been proven by scripture which can be tied to the operation of the Watchtower. Ex’JW’s insist in combining everything to make their argument solid. It hasn’t worked yet.

Now I'm not saying the early leaders weren't direct. If you asked a stupid question, you would get a profound hard response. One thing is dealing with imperfection, it's quite another thing to say they were doing things, for themselves. Only a blind man cannot see the advances and changes the Watchtower has adapted to by generation.

What expectation do you think the first-century governing body would have to send people out to evangelize the gospel of Christ? A person they despised enough to kill. Why, would Fred mention such an irrational thought. Perhaps what is false, is your way of thinking.

I believe the substantiated evidence comes from your personal thoughts and rhetoric. Unless you are blind to your own words, there’s no further need to share the evidence that is before you. If you want to justify the means, that’s not a defense from your conduct unbecoming a Christian. Philippians 1:27
Referring to the same obsession you have about Fred. How does the same type of obsession work? Fred’s obsession as you call it was for the 6000 years. What is your obsession against Fred? Romans 8:6-16
How do you see the many thousands that continued to college after high school at that time? Witnesses were encouraged to seek first the kingdom of God. This has always been a calling from the Watchtower. Should we think any less of those that went to college? Should we be thinking any less of those that decided not to be part of Bethel? It seems you harbor some kind of resentment for not having pursued a different course in your life you clearly hoped you had, instead of having spent time pioneering and spending time at Bethel. That shows more about your character, with personal ambition.
If you think you lost out on something, it was never too late to attend college or some type of vocational to earn a better skill, and better pay if you’re into materialism.  I entered college in my 30’s. So, don’t blame the Watchtower for the personal decisions you have made throughout your life.
Hebrews 13:5 New International Version (NIV)
5 Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said,
“Never will I leave you;
    never will I forsake you.
I have a college degree, but I guarantee you, I live a poorer life than you. Therefore, a piece of paper shouldn't make or break a person.
How different was that with Raymond that thought the same way? Fred believed he could handle the responsibility given him. I wouldn’t characterize him as negative as you make him out to be, and evil self-righteous individual, but some of us knew Fred in a personal level. I will be the first to dispute your character assassination attempt. Proverbs 26:24-25, Ephesians 4:29-32
Once again, this says more about you than those you have disdain for since the subject about administrative responsibilities were for maintaining spiritual food. The process is the same even though it has changed from a presidency to the governing body. As president Fred still delegated certain responsibilities to others. No different from today.
Wasn’t he referring to the first century governing bodies that didn’t think about sending out people to teach Christ gospel?  What part of that is false? Remember don’t confuse the objective.
It appears you are reading too much into the article. There is nothing between the lines. You misread your own tea leaves. That doesn’t help your cause just like it doesn’t help the cause, coming from apostates.
*** w68 5/1 p. 271 par. 5 Making Wise Use of the Remaining Time ***
5 Therefore, God’s seventh day and the time man has been on earth apparently run parallel. To calculate where man is in the stream of time relative to God’s seventh day of 7,000 years, we need to determine how long a time has elapsed from the year of Adam and Eve’s creation in 4026 B.C.E. From the autumn of that year to the autumn of 1 B.C.E., there would be 4,025 years. From the autumn of 1 B.C.E. to the autumn of 1 C.E. is one year (there was no zero year). From the autumn of 1 C.E. to the autumn of 1967 is a total of 1,966 years. Adding 4,025 and 1 and 1,966, we get 5,992 years from the autumn of 4026 B.C.E. to the autumn of 1967. Thus, eight years remain to account for a full 6,000 years of the seventh day. Eight years from the autumn of 1967 would bring us to the autumn of 1975, fully 6,000 years into God’s seventh day, his rest day.
*** w68 5/1 pp. 272-273 par. 8 Making Wise Use of the Remaining Time ***
8 Does this mean that the year 1975 will bring the battle of Armageddon? No one can say with certainty what any particular year will bring. Jesus said: “Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows.” (Mark 13:32) Sufficient is it for God’s servants to know for a certainty that, for this system under Satan, time is running out rapidly. How foolish a person would be not to be awake and alert to the limited time remaining, to the earthshaking events soon to take place, and to the need to work out one’s salvation!
Wasn’t that the same assumption apostate’s use for Pastor Russell? That he, in a subtle way was saying the end of the world would come in 1914 when he never directly or indirectly made that claim. It was a wait and see. That’s always been a Christian view for staying alert to the signs. 1975 just happen to be just another sign of how humanity would become worse if God was resting. What part of humanity increasing lawlessness, corruption, frequent natural disaster, economy, etc. isn't a sign? Matthew 24:42-43
 
I suppose you believe the accounts of Genesis is unscriptural. I guess the words of the psalmist, and Peter is unscriptural and false as well. When did God give you this new light that we should add to scripture with your understanding? Or is it just a problem you have with a fellow Christian that makes it unchristian to harbor such ideology among Christians.
Perhaps you had more loyalty to Raymond, but once again you are simply using conjecture to justify your behavior. This obsession with Fred’s obsession about 1975 was to confirm the theory of the 6000 years, not the end of the world, as you speculate indirectly. Whatever, was going on in the minds of your parents and your own, should have been on how to best serve Jehovah, since, if the 6000 years was a true indicator of worse thing to come, it would be better to serve as righteous people than to allow the deteriorating conditions soon to follow, distract us from our mission. If millions understood, why, should the actions of a few be exalted?
Titus 3:3-7 New International Version (NIV)
3 At one time we too were foolish, disobedient, deceived and enslaved by all kinds of passions and pleasures. We lived in malice and envy, being hated and hating one another. 4 But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life.
Therefore, there is still no justification you can offer for your attitude and responsibility. This bears witness on how careless your words have been.
However, it is pointless to argue an account with a closed mind. A person that has already become a judge. Romans 14:10

word. This is not a classroom and you are not a teacher to correct. If anything, correct your own mistakes first, just like it states in scripture.

Matthew 7:5

5You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

Your behavior is a subtle way of poking fun at people you want to quietly want to degrade. My evidence was to prove your own fallacy. We should always keep an eye on the prize no matter what. Philippians 3. If God doesn’t reveal something to us, it’s because we have become unworthy. Then it becomes as Jesus stated in Matthew 22.

That’s good you see your grammar mistakes in order to stop your attempts of degrading others as well as their word usage even if it’s a common word. You don’t have control over certain words to make nonsensical corrections. Let that be a listen to you, that we are all imperfect and your writings skill “fail” just like the rest of us.
 


Then I would have to say not only are you lying to others, your lying to yourself. This is a good example of not trusting you as a man.
Especially when you forced yourself to come to the wrong conclusion by your expressed statement about quietly criticizing Fred Franz a man you obviously never really knew, but through some interviews and Watchtower publications you clearly distort.

What does the *** w75 11/1 p. 671 Graduates of Gilead’s 59th Class Urged to Stick to the Work ***

Graduates of Gilead’s 59th Class Urged to Stick to the Work

What does the 59th Gilead class have to do with some witnesses failing to understand what was really happening in 1975? I hope you have personal experience with living that year as many of us did. It was even brought up in the congregation just last week, and it’s on video on how some mistakenly took the value and significance of 1975.

Perhaps you could have learned something when the same kind of hysteria was shown by some delusional witnesses in Canada last year. That type of hysteria also started in Canada for 1975 end of the world nonsense.

What people should really look at is the motive of certain people like this apostate M. James Penton that could have curved the misinformation but instead kept quiet to make it a talking point in his book, apocalypse delayed. The same kind of distorted rhetoric offered by Raymond Franz.


 
A personal friend turned missionary in central America was encouraged to maintain their due course to continue their fine works given them through the Holy Spirit instead of thinking it was a directive coming from the Watchtower headquarters.
There’s nothing wrong to give the same illustration given by Jesus action to send people out to evangelize through him and not the high priest that new the laws but didn’t practice what they preached.

Luke 10:1-23 New International Version (NIV)

Jesus Sends Out the Seventy-Two

10 After this the Lord appointed seventy-two[a] others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go. 2 He told them, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field. 3 Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. 4 Do not take a purse or bag or sandals; and do not greet anyone on the road.


 
That is an inconclusive argument in your part to show bias, not actual wisdom since the Watchtower does adhere to the inspired word.

Therefore, Fred Franz was correct is saying Jesus had their back and support. Its written in scripture for those who dedicate their lives to God through the true gospel of Christ.

Romans 12 GOD’S WORD Translation (GW)

Dedicate Your Lives to God

12 Brothers and sisters, in view of all we have just shared about God’s compassion, I encourage you to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, dedicated to God and pleasing to him. This kind of worship is appropriate for you. 2 Don’t become like the people of this world. Instead, change the way you think. Then you will always be able to determine what God really wants—what is good, pleasing, and perfect.

With your illustration, it is more evident, the Watchtower expectation went beyond 1975. Therefore, the evidence itself contradicts your claim and argument.

Now with your rambling on with CTR, I fail to see what the “end of the gentile times” in 1914 have to do with obscuring the year 1975 by some that didn’t understand the 6000 years.

Once again, by your insinuation, you hold the Watchtower personally responsible for the lack of understanding some had, apparently along with your view.

CTR had a presence of mind to understand what 1914 held with the enthronement of Christ as king in the heavens. He had no other expectation by his writings. So their early expectation about the 6000 years was 1873, not 1975. However, there are still some competing thoughts by the Bible Students as to the 6000 years. Redeker still holds the position of 1873 while other Bible Students have changed their chronology to 2043AD. None of which belong to the Jehovah’s witnesses understanding of 1975.

Well, now, the Lord may have something of that character for us, and for all I know the Church may be here during that time of trouble or during a portion of that time of trouble. There is nothing in the Bible that says just as soon as the Gentile times are ended all the Church will be glorified. The Church may be here after the trouble is begun, perhaps. Perhaps. It is possible. We'll see. And we'll be content whatever we see, won't we! That is the situation, dear friends! "Content, whatever lot I see, since 'tis my God that leadeth me." Could we be otherwise than content with God's leading? We may be sure that all the leadings of our Heavenly Father and of our Heavenly Lord will all be for good, that we will have every reason to enjoy His leadings.

This shows you are combining to separate understandings to fabricate an unconscionable situation. I believe, Raymond called it a crisis even though he created that crisis by his erred understanding. He shoulda stuck with the truth instead of listening to a failed man’s treatise, only to ruin his heavenly hope.


https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17703483 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/sep/24/teenagers-generation-in-crisis

It would stand to reason that after 1975 6000 years if humanity would be entering into the 7th day when God rested, there would be evidence of, more chaos. I believe humanity has proven that point and has not disappointed a true chronologist.

Perhaps someday you should pay “close” attention to your own words to find the same deception you think Fred Franz was offering without clinging to the word “assumption” to make your case about 1975, "while not quite saying it."
Upvoting what is clearly a misguided view by “witness” understanding just made my case stand on solid ground. If no one has ever asked you to resign, let me be the first to offer it.
It is better to have never known righteousness. 2 Peter 2:22
You already have everything in common with Srecko, Bulter, witness and all that oppose the Org. Being lukewarm for the sake of fear is no defense.
 
by the way "fact that he never every claimed" your choice of grammar here makes no sense.
 

Let me take a stab at this. Your claim is you don't have any reservation on the validity of Fred Franz talk. You mention your proof is not the manipulated version that can be found in any apostate site, most common AD1914. It seems to be the favorite with a greater amount of lies and nonsense.
My question JWinsider, What did you mean by this statement, then?
"I listened again this morning and got a slightly different opinion of it. I realize that Frederick W Franz was actually using deception, pure and simple, to get people to think he was saying one thing while not quite saying it, saying something only slightly different. And it was working very well. He had a good part of the audience "reading between the lines" as you can tell by their applause."
 
What kind of a double standard are you claiming to have if the same result you think Fred was doing, you are doing also, meaning, being deceptive? Does this make sense with your updated explanation?
 
Where's this Allen Smith comments to get a fair perspective.

Who is this newcomer so skilled in verbiage...
 
and strange tongues?  

I believe you probably have seen such a list.
But I never made such a list. I could try, but I'd probably only get about 14 of them right. Still, I imagine it would be difficult to track and manage all of these personas without a list of some kind. So I wouldn't doubt your claim. 

Since you like to insinuate, allow me to state, 
If doctoral theology or ecclesiastical endorsement means nothing to a person that professes to have Bible knowledge, there is really nothing more that can be added for the wisdom of such a person. The exegesis defines and intellectuals understanding. Perhaps it’s beyond the comprehension for some.
To some, it is clear what is meant in Romans 12:2
Can I take it to mean Anna and JWinsider are husband and wife? since you have the same form of writing style? or is it just another overreach in your part. Perhaps other things are far more important than personal silliness.

Since you like to insinuate, allow me to state, 
If doctoral theology or ecclesiastical endorsement means nothing to a person that professes to have Bible knowledge, there is really nothing more that can be added for the wisdom of such a person. The exegesis defines and intellectuals understanding. Perhaps it’s beyond the comprehension for some.
To some, it is clear what is meant in Romans 12:2
Can I take it to mean Anna and JWinsider are husband and wife? since you have the same form of writing style? or is it just another overreach in your part. Perhaps other things are far more important than personal silliness.

Since you like to insinuate, allow me to state, 
If doctoral theology or ecclesiastical endorsement means nothing to a person that professes to have Bible knowledge, there is really nothing more that can be added for the wisdom of such a person. The exegesis defines and intellectuals understanding. Perhaps it’s beyond the comprehension for some.
To some, it is clear what is meant in Romans 12:2
Can I take it to mean Anna and JWinsider are husband and wife? since you have the same form of writing style? or is it just another overreach in your part. Perhaps other things are far more important than personal silliness.

I’m sorry to read about this personal experience. A dangerous one indeed. That just shows not all witnesses live a sheltered life like outsiders think they do. Confused witnesses are free to leave the organization whenever they want, and not be stocked like they do with Scientology. Just like it is anyone’s free will, NOT to associate with anybody that doesn’t share the SAME values of being Christ true followers with Christian ethics and faith. Example, If my brother became a drug addict, why would I want to associate with him? I would want him to repent and clean himself up. Raymond thought shunning a derogatory remark was unloving. How could he account for millions of outsiders that do the same?

Raymond Franz lost the mission as a disciple in favor of friendship and wanting personal power. A few examples on how perception, of some, can become clouded by following the same pattern of insincere ideals. They call it, “in search for the truth by understanding facts.” The problem there, the more facts are gathered the more confused the original research becomes. I wonder, what will Raymond say when he is judged by Christ. Not about himself, but when asked, did your book prevent anyone from knowing the gospel of Christ? Or interfered enough to prevent a soul from knowing the one true God according to my instructions left in the inspired books that became known as the Holy Bible. 2 Peter 2:20-22

Unfortunately, this is what happens when people confuse the administrative roles of the GB with doctoral understanding.

Stay safe my brother. Always remember with situations such as these, which I know only too well, Matthew 10:28.

Great answer!

True. That had a lot to do with the original practice, which appeared to leave conscience out of it. (Of course, other scriptures said the same thing as Romans 13). But by 1962 that should not have got in the way any longer. Still, once something gets stuck, it's hard to get it unstuck.
 

Can't you see this as the perfect setup for a "Wicked Slave" to wield authority over Christ's other slaves?  Matt 24:48-51  It shows the organization for the scam it is; not only are the anointed scattered, they CANNOT bond, according to your magazines.  They cannot reveal their identity as one of Christ's slaves.    That would threaten the rule of the GB.  Yes, it is clever how the anointed in the organization are unable to "dispense spiritual food", even if by letter form to the ruling authority.  Luke 22:24-27  It is easier to throw them out, rather than let them gather and bring their own spiritual food to the table.  John 16:2    
 

@JW Insider  Quote "(Romans 13 could be invoked as "the sword" of the authorities -- paying back Caesar's things to Caesar, etc.)"
Are but problem there was, Romans 13 was being misused at the time, to mean God and Jesus Christ. 

@JW Insider  Quote " Surely if the Bible says be no part of the world, and love your enemy, etc., anyone could easily interpret this to mean that support of the military is support of the "enemy" which is Satan's world and it's machinations. "
I totally disagree with you on this, but as I've mentioned to @Anna that the Society / GB were misusing the Superior Authority scripture in Romans 13. 
If the Romans scripture had been used correctly then it would have meant they would have been submitting to those Superior Authorities that God had put in place. If it was 'orders from', then it was not showing 'support for', it was just being 'obedient to'. Big difference in my humble opinion. 

Yes, that is truly sad. It helps me to think of a few scriptures, this one particularly with reference to to the conscientious objectors:
"For it is agreeable when someone endures hardship and suffers unjustly because of conscience toward God. For what merit is there if you are beaten for sinning and you endure it? But if you endure suffering because of doing good, this is an agreeable thing to God". (1Peter 2:19)
For God is not unrighteous so as to forget your work and the love you showed for his name by ministering and continuing to minister to the holy ones. (Hebrews 6:10)
And these in general:
"Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, knowing that we will receive heavier judgment". (James 3:1) and  
"But the one who did not understand and yet did things deserving of strokes will be beaten with few. Indeed, everyone to whom much was given, much will be demanded of him, and the one who was put in charge of much will have more than usual demanded of him" Luke 12:48
"For we must all appear before the judgment seat of the Christ, so that each one may be repaid according to the things he has practiced while in the body, whether good or bad". 2 Corinthians 5:10
"For the true God will judge every deed, including every hidden thing, as to whether it is good or bad". (Ecclesiastes 12:14)
"So, then, each of us will render an account for himself to God" (Romans 14:12) etc...

As usual. Once again, you are wrong to think I have any input on what others were saying. So, don’t put words in my mouth to make an insulting conclusion.

What does selective service have to do with anything Raymond corrupted because of his action? It appears you continue to evade the issue on why the claim of apostasy was levied on him.

If he was an innocent man, why did he evade having to justify what he referred to about 3 simple principles?

1.       144,000 interpretation

2.       33AD interpretation

3.       1914 interpretation

Initially, he had the first meeting taped, even though he claimed he was wronged by not getting a copy. He wasn’t wronged as he stated since the first committee didn’t involve the allegation of GOSSIP, by many Bethel members.

He could have simply stated his position but instead evaded. This is when a member referenced he resign. An innocent man would not have resigned.

That just shows, either he was too proud, or the claims were true, not just on his position of rejecting those 3 claims, but also being involved in the Gossip of certain high ranking members teaching such a doctrine at the kingdom halls.

So, your attempts of proof to justify Raymond’s actions are meant to obscure what really went on at Bethel, just as you are attempting to sway the same ideology for him. Therefore, your submissions are inconsequential.

As usual. Once again, you are wrong to think I have any input on what others were saying. So, don’t put words in my mouth to make an insulting conclusion.

What does selective service have to do with anything Raymond corrupted because of his action? It appears you continue to evade the issue on why the claim of apostasy was levied on him.

If he was an innocent man, why did he evade having to justify what he referred to about 3 simple principles?

1.       144,000 interpretation

2.       33AD interpretation

3.       1914 interpretation

Initially, he had the first meeting taped, even though he claimed he was wronged by not getting a copy. He wasn’t wronged as he stated since the first committee didn’t involve the allegation of GOSSIP, by many Bethel members.

He could have simply stated his position but instead evaded. This is when a member referenced he resign. An innocent man would not have resigned.

That just shows, either he was too proud, or the claims were true, not just on his position of rejecting those 3 claims, but also being involved in the Gossip of certain high ranking members teaching such a doctrine at the kingdom halls.

So, your attempts of proof to justify Raymond’s actions are meant to obscure what really went on at Bethel, just as you are attempting to sway the same ideology for him. Therefore, your submissions are inconsequential.

Hermano. Por eso me niego a aceptar cualquier cosa tangible de los sitios apóstatas. Sobre todo viniendo de Peter Gregersons. 😉

 

I didn’t mean to imply anything negative. I have no knowledge of your personal relationships. If I made you feel uncomfortable, my apologies.

Cynthia passed away supporting her husband to the very end. Any good wife would. Right or wrong.

This is why Raymond left a bad taste on some peoples mouth. Being conflicted when he shouldn’t have been.

 
 

I figured you would use wordplay here. I had to swallow my pride to show your bias, with Raymond’s books. That doesn’t mean I will continue to indulge you in promoting a failed man’s ideals. 😉

The End: Eschatological Re-Enchantment 295

“They 'seemed stunned but refused to admit that they and they alone were responsible for the cognitive dissonance that was now so common among Jehovah's Witnesses worldwide'.'07 Later, in 1976, Raymond Franz, who was to become President of the organization on 7 June 1977, conceded that there had been a prophecy, but explained its apparent failure to a large gathering in a way that distanced the leadership from blame: 'It was because you expected something to happen.' In other words, as Penton says, 'since Jesus had predicted that no one would know "the day or hour" of his coming to judge mankind, the Witnesses should not have believed that they could know that it would occur in 1975.'108 The leadership also provided an exegetical explanation for the failure: 'The answer has been to recognise that 6000 years since the creation of man may have properly begun, not with Adam, but only when creation was complete - when God made Adam and Eve.'109 Noting that prior to Eve's creation, Adam had been naming the animals for an unspecified amount of time, it was argued that this time should now be added and considered 'extra time' for evangelism prior to Armageddon. That said, although the prophetic failure of 1975 was explained, and while it did not lead to an overall collapse of belief, the growth rate of the…”

 

Why would such nonsense be written by others if Raymond believed on what he held as the truth? He was well aware the society was referring to the 6000 years of mankind, yet he conceded to a wide erroneous assumption that he ended admitting to. Once again, who was this man to decide to place the organization in such a bad light, if he knew full well what the writing department meant through the Watchtower publication? That means he was wrong to concede on an idea that wasn’t there, THE END OF THE WORLD IN 1975. That means you are wrong also. It’s clear you never really knew the man, just through his books.