JW Insider

It does seem serious. Seems probable that the sale of large Brooklyn properties was due at least in part to a debt emergency. The buildings weren't put on the market until the absolute worst time in US History for real estate. They were fortunate in that some didn't go on the market until there was some rebounding. Most publishing houses in the world went through the same type of budget discussions due to the initial expenditures to succeed in Internet marketing as print fades away. Equipment and training and a lot of outside expenditure on a many sub-projects at once would apparently require some debt. Remember too that it was not just the sale of Kingdom Halls. It was the handing over of the value to a Trust indirectly controlled by the WTS along with a refinancing of a perpetual "loan" that could never be paid off. In other words whatever "maximum" that the congregation had been willing to contribute to the building loan to get the KH in the first place. When they were voting as a congregation to pay back something as quickly as possible along with the excitement of a new or rebuilt hall, the brothers and sisters are typically ready to stretch their budget slightly. That loan payback was dropped, but the new recommended amount to pay INDEFINITELY should now be equal to that maximum: the new contribution goal. Congregations are no longer paying anything back, but paying in perpetuity whether the Kingdom Hall loan would already have paid back or not. In listening to all the available videos, I was struck by how, except for the scriptural interludes, they sound exactly like every budget and yearly financial meeting I have been to in a large corporation for the last 15 years. All the language and definitions and reasons are the same, and the ideas and recommendations are the same. Also, I take it there is some future worry based on real pending events. There was some guessing that Geoffrey Jackson had some of this in mind at a recent Assembly Hall dedication where someone claims he made the following points. (I'll give a link, but do NOT recommend any Witness goes there because much of what he says needs to be edited out. I will copy the relevant parts here.) https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/8oatmt/geoffrey_jackson_preparing_the_rf/ This weekend in France there was the inauguration of a new Convention Hall. Since it was some "never before seen project" (because done by 3 countries together : France, Switzerland and Italy... wow what an achievement!) they had to do something special. So they Had Geoffrey Jackson giving talks and those being streamed to a lot of congregations. Lots of rank file were invited to the Convention Hall, the rest got to see it over TV. The weekend meeting was cancelled and we had two days of this 2-hour retransmissions. So he made an illustration. He made sure that everyone got the fact that it was an illustration, not an announcement (laughter in the audience, whats funny about it?). Then he said (I'm quoting him best I can remember, but you'll get the idea): "Imagine if next week I go back to US and you see in the news that the whole GB was arrested for no reason. How'd you react? Well, surely you'd say to your coworkers or neighbours: "Jesus warned us. They were arrested for no reason." You would feel bad for us but be proud because you are sure it's persecution from Satan and that we're innocent. Now that's not really possible because in the US because you can't arrest someone with no reason like in Russia. So imagine they would make up false accusations, with false witnesses and false testimonies and all the newspaper would talk about how the GB was arrested for stealing billions of $$ to their followers. How would you react when coworker talk about it? Be ashamed? Would you believe it? Well Satan will attack us using lies. Lying about our high morality. Maybe they will accuse us of covering child sexual abuser. Would you believe it? Surely we know those lies come from Satan." Both issues, the "confiscation" of billions of dollars, and accusations of covering child sexual abuse, might well be based on false accusations, but BOTH these items have already been dangerously close to becoming full-blown legal cases, class action and otherwise.

That was a contingency fund for just the 2016 service year, but already just about spent, the speaker says. I imagine that they will feel a need for a similar amount every year, so that over 10 years this would be $250,000,000 or a quarter billion. But a contingency is only for the likely percentage of error in forecasting and budgeting the future. It takes longer than planned to wind down a construction project and re-negotiate contracts accordingly. It takes longer to complete projects than predicted. When Trump brags about so many of his projects that were "on time and under budget" it turned out that meant that they were only off by 100% to 200% in scheduling and they only ran over by a few $100,000,000 -- or they were a complete failure and resulted in a half-billion dollars lost. So it's just assumed that "on time and under budget" doesn't really happen in any real life project. So it could be that a budget line for legal expenses was already considered to need $25,000,000 per year and therefore the contingency budget of ANOTHER $25,000,000 would be spent on legal expenses if those costs and liabilities were higher, or for other areas of mis-judged future expenses. The WTS had already been paying out many millions in legal expenses for child abuse cases long before the first articles began coming out on Child Abuse in the 1990's. They probably overpaid because they were overly concerned with buying silence prior to learning so many other available maneuvers practiced in more recent cases.

There is a surprising nuanced qualification to most of the items that are listed by @The Librarian above as doctrinal topics that are unchanged since 1879 (or at least since they were first mentioned. I'd think you are right that the copyists' errors and blatant falsifications such as in 1 John 5 were at the top of Rutherford's thinking. Still, Rutherford said surprising things about evolution. Russell said surprising things even about the Ransom that have been dropped or changed over the years. "God's name is Jehovah" is actually not a teaching of the Watchtower. The earliest Forward to NWT and supporting Watchtower articles documented that "Yahweh" was considered to be the preferred choice to be closer to the Hebrew, but that Jehovah is used because it is more commonly known. The fourth bullet point about what Russell taught about determining Christ's presence through the chronology of the 6,000 years and the "Gentile Times" is completely false. The 6,000 years was ended initially in 1872, and the Gentile Times were ended in 1914 and then 1915 and then 1914 again. So none of this tied to the fact that he started the "presence" in 1874. There is actually a point to be made on every one of those bullet points supposedly representing unchanged doctrine, but I'm sure that wouldn't interest too many. Back to the issue of the Bible contains mistakes. This is kind of an obvious point as you made it. But the logic Rutherford used would have been a mistake on an LSAT or even some "Bar Exam" questions for barristers/lawyers. He mixes apples and oranges by NOT speaking of those types of problems (copyists errors and deliberate falsifications) in the 7th volume. Rutherford says he is referring to misapplications and misunderstandings. Reading the full quote without leaving anything out of that context, shows this: Watch Tower, April 1, 1920, p.103: "The Finished Mystery," as one of the series of seven previously announced by Brother Russell. The doctrines therein set forth are in exact harmony with those announced by the other six. That it contains some mistakes is freely admitted. Even the Bible contains some. By mistake we mean a misunderstanding or misapplication. It does not contain any erroneous doctrines. It does attempt to carry and, we will be pardoned for saying, succeeds in a measure at least, the measure which seems to be contemplated by the commission given to the six described in Ezekiel 9. The Society in its annual official meeting adopted it as Volume VII of the series of STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES when, by an overwhelming majority, it required each officer to be elected to state that he accepted it as Volume VII: It was therefore in exact harmony with this that any ecclesia subsequently would ask its prospective elders and officers : "Do you accept the Seventh Volume and are you willing to teach it?" . . . We prefer to have someone to teach us who is in harmony with the Society and its work." Anyone who reads the Seventh Volume today will be surprised that you cannot go even two pages anywhere in the book without finding something else that you could be disfellowshipped for insisting upon today. There are literally hundreds of false teachings. Many more of its teachings are considered false today than those that might still be considered true.

This is supposedly a doctrine that has been unchanged since 1879, and it's mostly right. But look at the following quote from the Watch Tower, April 1, 1920, p.103: "The Finished Mystery," as one of the series of seven previously announced by Brother Russell. The doctrines therein set forth are in exact harmony with those announced by the other six. That it contains some mistakes is freely admitted. Even the Bible contains some. Here is another from the Watch Tower April 15, 1928, p. 126: QUESTION: Is it proper for those who have been in the truth only a short while to go out and sell the Society's books? . . . Sometimes a member of a class will refuse to engage in the canvassing for the books because there are some mistakes in the books, and says his conscience will not permit him to put books in which there are mistakes into the hands of the people. Of course this is another method that the enemy adopts to confuse the minds and furnish an excuse for not being faithful to the Lord. As every one knows, there are mistakes in the Bible and there never has been a book written yet that is perfect that has been written by any human hand. . . .Those who engage in the service work are not supposed to stand on the street and preach, nor to give a technical explanation of the Scriptures.

@Gone Away, I don't get it. It's actually much harder to be a back-seat driver when you are not in the same car.

Before looking into this further, I was a doubter, but you are right. The sale of hundreds of USA Kingdom Halls was rushed so that millions were left on the table in order to meet some budgeting goals in the WTS timeline. Also the methods used for turning over the ownership of the KH's to the "Trusts" handled sometimes by inexperienced, sometimes young loyal brothers reporting to headquarters is odd. I hear that in some places the ownership of Kingdom Halls has been handed over to a Circuit Overseer. (Legally this is more "arms length" from HQ, although HQ still gets the complete control of ownership.) I had not wanted to use the term "confiscation" but I realize now that in some countries the method has turned out out to be illegal, and the kinks are still being worked out. The method of "confiscation" really does appear unethical by either corporate or charity standards, but I doubt there will be any lawsuits. You don't bite the hand that feeds you.

WOW! Israel has long been a fascist state. Israel was once proud of being a terrorist state, and often admitted even in writing that it's early 20th century founders excelled at terrorism. Now, it has the support of at least one overriding vote in the UN, so that the people whom it terrorizes are the only ones who are officially called terrorists. Most Palestinians are now in a national "concentration camp." [Just testing the limits for discussing controversial politics here.] On the topic at hand, this church looks to be 3rd century at the earliest, but even the first century Christians accepted that Jesus was "the only-begotten God" just not "the God."

Yes, I found that on most of the videos. They were not all complete.

I'm getting all three from here. Just started listening 5 minutes ago. Assume they are still on YouTube.

I thought the biggest problem it showed was that the elders had a chance to apply the two-witness rule since a second person went to the elders along with Romy who had also been abused by the same person. But the elder they went to, shut them down by evidently (per Romy) slamming down his fist, yelling, calling Romy a liar, and telling her never to speak badly about this brother again. (The case, after the A&E report, is also reported here: http://www.times-standard.com/article/NJ/20180531/NEWS/180539957 ) Unfortunately, in most of these cases from a decade or more ago, many elders, perhaps even most, were still doing everything they could to protect the reputation of their congregation, their friends, and the organization by discouraging families from reporting. It's a recurring theme. I hope to soon start hearing about more cases where the elders encouraged the family to report the crime so that children in the congregation would be protected from further abuse. I have not seen that shift yet in these news stories. Anecdotally, I have heard of two more recent cases, not yet in the news, which might indicate another disturbing trend. They are cases where a Witness who is a minor (e.g. 16-y.o) had sex with an older Witness and have been deemed "consensual" by the elders, and therefore supposedly not subject to reporting laws.

I haven't figured out why they say that donations have never been higher, and donations are down at the same time. It was evidently only after the May broadcast that donations of $30,000,000 created a situation where donations have never been higher, yet the general donations settled back to their normal levels around July. So he must have been referring to the service year from Sept 2015 through August 2015. But he adds (in pt 4): "However, until the general donation picture changes substantially the organization will need to hold to the course set by the Governing Body with respect to spending, not only this year but in the coming years as well." The minimizing of the effect of selling off 3,000 properties that "need" to be sold is surprising considering that the total is on the order of Billions, not Millions.

I only recognized one of the seven. And don't really know anything about these men. They make it sound like the GB (from behind the scenes) is still leading the decisions at the financial end of the organization, something that had supposedly changed in 2000. But this might be wise and prudent after all. And of course, the way it is presented, it's all tied into doctrinal and Biblical understandings anyway.

I think we have always pretty much stated what the Insight Book states: *** it-2 p. 969 Sin, I *** Jesus said they had “no excuse for their sin” because they were witnesses of the powerful words and works proceeding from him as the result of God’s spirit on him. (Joh 15:22-24; Lu 4:18) Those who, either in word or by their course of action, willfully and knowingly blasphemed God’s spirit thus manifested would be “guilty of everlasting sin,” with no forgiveness possible. (Mt 12:31, 32; Mr 3:28-30; compare Joh 15:26; 16:7, 8.) This could be the case with some who came to be Christians and then deliberately turned from God’s pure worship. Hebrews 10:26, 27 states that “if we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, but there is a certain fearful expectation of judgment and there is a fiery jealousy that is going to consume those in opposition.” And this from the early 1950's: *** w52 2/15 p. 126 Questions From Readers *** What is the unforgivable sin against the holy spirit that Jesus spoke about?—B. E., New York. Jesus had just cured a demon-possessed man who was blind and dumb. The crowds marveled, but the Pharisees scoffed and said Jesus did it by means of Beelzebub. Jesus refuted their claim by showing that if Satan expelled Satan he would be divided against himself and his kingdom could not stand. Also, if Jesus expelled demons by means of Beelzebub, by whose means did their sons expel them? Then he said: “Every kind of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the spirit will not be forgiven. For example, whoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the holy spirit, it will not be forgiven him, no, not in the present system of things nor in that to come.”—Matt. 12:22-32, NW. Therefore, the clearest example would be seeing Jesus perform a miracle, know for sure that such a good evidence of the holy spirit could only have come from the power of God, and then claiming that his power must have come from Satan or his demons. When we think about the only possible motivations for anyone saying such a thing when they KNOW otherwise, we get a sense of how serious the "unforgivable sin" would be. One could try to extrapolate that the GB are direct proof of the miraculous power and evidence of God's holy spirit. If someone truly believed this and then claimed that the GB's "power" actually comes from Satan or his demons, then I suppose you could stretch the analogy. But since there is no claimed miraculous power, and no claims of direct inspiration from Jehovah's holy spirit, the entire idea seems non-applicable to me. Still, I have heard it. It's part of fear of apostates. Some are in mortal fear of learning what an apostate might be thinking or accidentally seeing one of their publications or websites. Pretty much the Witness definition of an apostate is that they are persons who no longer accept what the GB says, and are therefore rejecting the GB as God's only appointed channel. Of course, for some reason Geoffrey Jackson himself said it would be presumptuous if the GB were to claim to be Jehovah's only channel of communication for Christians today. Similar things have been said more recently in Watchtower articles that followed up on this idea. Therefore, by that same definition, if it were true, then a current member of the GB may have just committed the unforgivable sin. The irony is that this was said under circumstances that were quite similar to the following: (Matthew 10:19, 20) 19 However, when they hand you over, do not become anxious about how or what you are to speak, for what you are to speak will be given you in that hour; 20 for the ones speaking are not just you, but it is the spirit of your Father that speaks by you. So, if we believed that way, we might have to accept that it was the holy spirit that made it clear the GB are not always led by holy spirit.

Not really. It says that the question of deletion will be raised if a member of his family is pursuing a university education. The question arises as to whether the elder supported the decision emotionally or financially while the child was (or is) still under his roof. In cases where the elder makes it clear that the child will be living on their own immediately after college, and that it was their own "adult" decision, he might still be considered as not having his "household in subjection." Still, if his reputation as a family head is intact, and his counsel is still respected by other families -- because they know he himself opposes university education and did what he could, then he will not be deleted. If it is clear that others will say, "Why can't my child go to the university, after all, your child is going?" then he cannot serve as a good example. As you can imagine, this is not consistently applied, which creates further accusations of injustice. There have been cases where the spouse of an elder goes, and the elder was not dismissed. This was more of an unwritten rule for the past several years, so it's possible that the Circuit Overseer's have stricter instructions as of 2017.

Russia Supreme Court proceedings.

Just heard it on A&E -- On Demand. Apparently it's going to be some series on "cults." Evidently there has already been an initial episode and this was the second one. If you're watching "On Demand" be prepared to have something to do after it gets half-way through. The commercials started seeming like 10 in a row back-to-back. And this happened 3 or 4 times. "Romy's" case, depicted, is a case from Fortuna, California. The producers interviewed Barbara Anderson, too, and took Romy to Tennessee to meet with her. It's a terrible case, and I think it's one of those which will happen much less often now that several of the procedures have improved. I believe that B.Anderson was absolutely right about Leviticus 5:1. For cases like child abuse, the verse apparently says pretty much the opposite of what the WTS has tried to make it say. Many of the best Bible Commentaries would also agree with her. They wasted their time getting all the supposed "expertise" about the JWs from a "cult expert" who seems to be a "professional" in that she can exaggerate without it sounding like she's exaggerating. I heard B.Anderson make one inaccurate statement. I heard this other "cult professional" make about 10 mistakes. The interviewer/moderator makes a few mistakes too, but it's also obvious that she was in on the agenda, to make sure that it became a supposed story about a cult where no elders can be trusted. It should have been about the common problem of abuse in religious institutions, where power and control is a common element in the crime. It should have focused on what the JWs have done to make things better. And it should have had some words of advice for people who have suffered. The episode mentions the most recent changes, but gives no credit, as if updated procedures wouldn't change anything anyway. The episode gives the impression that there has been no improvement since the latest changes went into effect. Also contains a very unflattering view of Warwick Headquarters that was completely unfair as they tried to get some dramatic footage. A strange mistake that "Romy" makes is memorable. She remembered as a girl, or even now, that Armageddon would be a time when people would be up to their necks in urine, out of fear. Obviously she was mis-remembering the blood up to the bridles on the horses. I would not recommend the episode, except to Witnesses who want to know the type of things the world will be seeing, and prepare for another "ding" in our reputation.

RUSSEL SAYS HE WANTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE TERM "THE CHRIST" Russell taught a special doctrine called the Mystery Doctrine. The mystery doctrine claimed that Russell along with only a few other Christians alive in his day, were "The Christ". He said that not just Jesus, but that he, Russell, and those who strove to be on the same "higher plane," were also "The Christ," "The Messiah". He said that Jesus himself was NOT the complete Christ, just the Head, and that the Christ, the Messiah, included not just the Head but the Body. There was no complete Christ until the last member of the Church was chosen. Throughout history, Russell included the previously chosen members of the 144,000 including the apostles and early Christian martyrs, as included in "The Christ." He would include men like Waldo, Luther, Tyndale, Wycliffe, etc. A lot of people don't even know about this teaching, but it's not like they tried to hide it at the time. Here are some examples: It has also been shown from time to time that the Christ of scripture is a complex being, presented to our minds by the figure of a man—Head and Body— Jesus Himself being the Head and believers being the many members of the one body. This being true it follows that there is a progressive development of Christ from Jesus in the flesh, until the last member of his body is exalted to glory. (Watch Tower, November 1880, p160 R) Very shortly now, this mystery of God, this company of divinely-begotten sons, will be FINISHED—completed: “The church of the first born,” of which Jesus is the head. will soon cease to be, God manifest in the flesh. The entire company shall be glorified together, and “shall shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” (Malt. 13:43.) They shall arise in power and strength to bless all the nations of the earth. (Watch Tower, July 1882, p369 R) [Yes, you heard that right, Russell and company are not just Christ, they are also "God manifest in the flesh" -- that therefore includes Russell -- God manifest in the flesh, along with other specially consecrated believers, not all Christians, of course, but those with the "higher calling."] Paul declares (Col. 1:27) that this mystery which hath been hid front ages and from generations, now made manifest to his saints, is “CHRIST IN YOU. THE HOPE OF GLORY.” This is the great mystery of God which has been hidden from all previous ages, and is still hidden from all except a special class—the saints, or consecrated believers. But what is meant by ‘Christ in you”? ... the Apostle John says that the anointing, which we (consecrated believers) have received abideth in us. (I John 2:27.) Thus the saints of this Gospel age are an anointed company—anointed to be kings and priests unto God (2 Cor. 1:21, 1 Peter 2:9); and together with Jesus, their chief and Lord, they constitute Jehovah’s anointed—the Christ. ( Divine Plan of the Ages, p.81-82) This was truly a mystery never before thought of—that God intends to raise up not only a deliverer, but a deliverer of many members. This the “high calling” to which the consecrated believers of the Gospel age are privileged to attain. (84) [You can see that Russell never got too far away from a Trinity Doctrine, but his Trinity was that God was made of The Father, The Son and the 144,000 , the rest of God manifest in the Flesh, the consecrated anointed believers of the high calling, the 144,000.] "this is the mystery mentioned in the scriptures; to wit, that the great Messiah so long promised should be composed of many individuals." (Watch Tower, February 1, 1914, R p5392) ...that is to say, members of the Christ, the anointed, are the Christ. (Convention Report Sermons, p.460). THE promised Messiah, the Deliverer of the World, ...the Great Prophet, Priest and King, ...is not our Lord Jesus Christ alone...but also the little flock...these unitedly are the Christ, the Messiah. (Watch Tower, May 1903, R p.3191) There are literally dozens of other Watchtower articles and publications to this same point, but it's curious that this made Russell claim that he, along with Jesus and the rest of the 144,000 could also go by the name "God manifest in the flesh" "partakers of divine nature" "Everlasting Father" "The Great Prophet" "Immanuel" "Lifegiver" "Gods" (with a capital "g") "The Prophet Like Unto Moses." We conclude then that the titles, Mighty God, and Everlasting Father, are titles which fully understood, are very appropriate to Our Lord Jesus Christ. And we might add that so perfectly is his Bride--body--church, associated with him, both in filling up the measure of the sufferings-- being joined in sacrifice and also in the Glory that shall follow, that the same titles are applicable to the Church as his body--for "He that hath freely given us Christ, shall he not with him also freely give us all things?" "Therefore all things are yours, and ye are Christ's and Christ is God's." (Watch Tower, October 1881, R p.298) Under the heading "YE ARE GODS" (Watch Tower, November/December 1881, p.301) "I have said ye are Gods; and all of you are children of the Most High. But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes" [literally heads]. Psa. 82:6. Our high calling is so great, so much above the comprehension of men, that they feel that we are guilty of blasphemy when we speak of being "new creatures"--not any longer human, but "partakers of the divine nature." When we claim on the scriptural warrant, that we are begotten of a divine nature and that Jehovah is thus our father, it is claiming that we are divine beings--hence all such are Gods. Thus we have a family of Gods, Jehovah being our father, and all his sons being brethren and joint-heirs: Jesus being the chief, or first-born." The Watchtower printed its last article in support of the Trinity doctrine in 1880, but here in 1881 (Nov/Dec), we have a new family of Gods, Jehovah the Father, all his sons and joint-heirs, and Jesus being the chief. Father, Son and 144,000. 144,002 Gods in one family of Gods.

If we take Luke 21:28 to mean that a person might come in Christ's name and claim that he is representing Jesus Christ then I think Russell covered that possibility. After all, as alluded to above, Russell said: "If the six volumes of SCRIPTURE STUDIES are practically the Bible, topically arranged with Bible proof texts given, we might not improperly name the volumes THE BIBLE IN AN ARRANGED FORM. That is to say, they are not mere comments on the Bible, but they are practically the Bible itself…Furthermore, not only do we find that people cannot see the divine plan in studying the Bible by itself, but we see, also, that if anyone lays the SCRIPTURE STUDIES aside, even after he has used them, after he has become familiar with them, after he has read them for ten years- if he then lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible alone, though he has understood his Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years he goes into darkness. On the other hand, if he had merely read the SCRIPTURE STUDIES with their references, and had not read a page of the Bible, as such, he would be in the light at the end of two years, because he would have the light of the Scriptures" (Watchtower, September 15, 1910, p.298). Well, if you claim to be speaking for Christ, in his name, that's good start: Tell people that if you read the Bible alone, if you read what Jesus said directly, you won't get the light of the Scriptures, but if you read Russell's books (including "The Time Is At Hand!") and not read a page of the Bible, you'd have the "light of the Scriptures" by the end of two years. And even if you've studied the Bible for 10 years, you will go into darkness within 2 years if you continue to just study the Bible. But what about taking this further. Is there any way of Russell actually coming closer to saying that he is the Christ? Doesn't seem likely, even if he set himself up as God's mouthpiece and the representative and only channel of the present truth then available to the body of Christ. Russell made it clear he was the ONLY channel speaking for Jesus: The Lord at the time indicated would especially use one member of his church as the channel or instrument through which he would send the appropriate messages.” (Watchtower, April 15. 1904, p. 125.) I AM THE CHRIST Obviously, we aren't going to find Russell using those words, "I am the Christ." But let's look at what he does say about the Christ: [Next post]

What would you do if you were someone who took very seriously the idea that Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 were speaking about the time we are living in, especially the time surrounding the year 1914? You are someone who believes strongly that the time period you live in is the the one that will see Armageddon, and you believe it's important that others learn this truth, too. How would you go about convincing people? We know that we, as Jehovah's Witnesses, still carry on the legacy of someone who took that idea very seriously: Charles Taze Russell. I know that his time period produced a lot of people like him, but I was thinking about the sheer unlikelihood that anyone would be able to start a following with his specific beliefs when we compare them to Matthew 24, etc. I think this is why his success is sometimes looked at as proof that God blessed his efforts in spite of his doctrines, not because of them. He started publishing a magazine, tracts and books that taught that some of the most important events that most Christians had been waiting and praying for, had already occurred, but that they had missed them: He taught that Jesus had already returned in 1874. He taught that this long-awaited PAROUSIA, which they thought to be a bright manifestation like lightning, had actually been invisible to everyone in the world. He taught that Jesus, as King of God's Kingdom, had already begun when Jesus became king and started reigning in 1878. He taught that William Miller, the man who started a movement that ended in the "Great Disappointment," was actually being used by God to begin drawing attention to proper issues of chronology, and to lay a true foundation of this chronology, back in 1844. He taught that since 1799 his contemporaries were in the "last days" and would remain so until the last days ended in 1914. But there were many more specific issues with this religious movement he is credited with starting. These seem so counter-intuitive, as if they were exactly the wrong way to go about starting a following that would be focused so much on Matthew 24, etc. For example: We can still pray for his Kingdom to Come, but "in truth" it had just come a few years ago and they missed. (see above) Jesus said it would be as visible and surprising as lightning shining from one end of the heavens to the other end, but "in truth" it had been invisible. (see above) Jesus implied that wars, earthquakes, famines and pestilence would be seen during the final generation, but in truth Russell taught that these were not "signs" and that they had nothing to do with the final generation, but were merely the experiences of humans over the last 1,800 years. Jesus implied that a great witness work would lead people out of all nations but "in truth" Russell taught that all the people who would be part of Christ's Bride, the Body of Christ, the Church, the 144,000 had already been selected and the door was shut back in 1881. (Russell thought the preaching work was generally useful for witnessing to only a "lower plane" of Christians who would not serve as kings and priests with Jesus, even though they'd still make it to heaven because that's where all Christians went, according to Russell. But, as odd as these things might have seemed, we can look at even more specific lines in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 to see a few more ways in which Russell, you might think, would have been working against getting people to listen to him. He seemed to purposely go out of his way to "do the opposite." You'd think that this might have turned more people against his teachings. For example: Matthew 24:45 speaks of a "faithful and discreet slave" and we usually think of someone who is discreet as not just wise, but careful never to come across as haughty or presumptuous. Yet Russell who had seen his former publishing partner try to claim that he, Barbour, was that faithful, discreet slave, Russell soon began publishing material that pointed to only himself as that "faithful and discreet slave." He began publishing letters to himself that addressed him as that faithful and discreet slave, and referred to some of his writings as "food at the proper time" (meat in due season). He called himself "God's mouthpiece" and referred to his writings as more effective than the Bible itself at bringing someone into the truth of God's word, adding that someone who read his works for just a few months would learn the truth, but if a person just read the Bible for a few months they would go back into darkness. Matthew 24:26 said (KJV) "Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not." ASV (and NWT) used the term "inner chambers" instead of "secret chambers." Jesus was evidently helping the disciples to avoid the mistake that would be made if someone said Jesus had indeed returned, but that he was currently not visible to them, yet this person claimed special knowledge about where he actually was. Russell already taught that Jesus Parousia had been invisible, so how could Russell find a further way for people to "believe it not" in this matter? Simple, Russell accepted the idea that God's supernatural witness, his prediction of Jesus' Parousia, had been found in the desert, inside the Great Pyramid. In fact, not just in the desert, but also in the secret, inner chambers of that pyramid. Luke 21:8 in the translations that Russell usually used, says: "And he said, Take heed that ye be not led astray: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am he; and, The time is at hand: go ye not after them." (ASV). It was almost like Russell said to himself, "Hmmm . . . Jesus said that no one should go after anyone who says, 'The time is at hand.' " "Hmmm... I got it!" Russell says, "I will write a book to distribute around the world and call it: 'The Time Is At Hand.' " It was one of Russell's best selling books, and it showed how chronology would let people know the times and the seasons, even the very month and year when Christ's presence and kingship began. But how would Russell prove himself to be a person not to be followed based on the first part? Was there any way that Russell could come in the name of Jesus and say "I am he"? How close could Russell get to saying "I am he" or as the the KJV words it: "I am Christ"? [The KJV puts the word Christ in italics to indicate that it is not in the original Greek.] Turns out that he was able to get much closer than most people think. As I'll get to in the next post.

No, never heard of her. I'd like to hear more, although I give full disclosure below about my leanings in most of these matters: I have recently seen that a lot of fundamentalist religious groups and others, too, have had pseudo-religious conspiracy theories surrounding the League of Nations, and more recently, of course, concerning the United Nations (or both). I have become a serious doubter of most of these ideas, mostly due to the nature of conspiracy theories. There are dozens of competing theories, and none of them can ever be proven wrong, which is pretty much the nature and definition of religious conspiracy theories.

Some do, some don't. There is no prohibition against it. My guess is that, in general, most JWs drink a lot less than people of their same demographic around them. I have a big wine cellar, but I never get around to drinking anything anymore. It takes extra time to choose and serve, but the worse thing is that I end up falling asleep before 2am when I have a glass of wine.

I do, and I know many other couples who do.

Pretty much exactly what anyone else does. Listen to a talk and think about the deceased, the sadness of death in general, and the potential joy in the resurrection hope.

Yes.

The Catholic Chuch still handles several aspects of it wrong, even though they have also put in place (on paper) much better processes that are more just and proper. An ex-JW who was involved in exposing the wrong aspects of our own processes was invited to the Vatican and met with several people there who were involved in the job of fixing their broken processes. The Australian commission found the JWs to be the slowest of several religions to take action, but the JWs finally did what other religions they investigated had already begun to do. So I'd be more careful about these claims that use expressions like "nobody" and "never."