JW Insider

That's at least the second Witness this year killed in a terrorist attack.

Biography On vacation with her family Rhonda is originally from Lowell, Massachusetts.[14] She met her husband Jason, a minister, at Kingdom Hall, and were married for 20 years.[5] They have a 6 year-old daughter. Rhonda was employed as an experience specialist at IDEO, a creative studio in Cambridge, Massachusetts. In her free time, Rhonda enjoyed cooking for her family and friends. She loved country music and looked forward to her yearly trip to Hawaii with her family.[2] Rhonda is remembered for her contagious smile and caring nature.[14]

Not exactly. "Exoneration" is not a legal term. They were never declared innocent of all charges. But the prosecution admitted that errors had taken place during the trial. It was declared to be a kind of mistrial that needed to be retried. We were actually one of at least a dozen cases based on the new Sedition Act of 1918. (Several were from other small religions, or individual rogue preachers within a religion.) The prosecution could have renewed the case at any time, but these types of cases are not considered worth the trouble outside the context of some kind of war. *** yb75 p. 118 Part 2—United States of America *** Reversal of the eight Bible Students’ erroneous convictions on May 14, 1919, meant that they were free unless the government chose to reprosecute. But the war was over and the authorities realized that on the basis of the facts it would be impossible to get a conviction. Hence, in open court at Brooklyn, on May 5, 1920, the government’s lawyer announced withdrawal of the prosecution. The indictments were dismissed by action of nolle prosequi.

When the only reviews are negative, I've felt the same need to get in and counter with something a bit over-the-top positive. But I like to keep it honest. In truth, JW Library is an excellent technical achievement. Considering how little we knew in the 1970s about technology (at Bethel) and how the entire computer department was still having trouble getting anything finished correctly well into the 1980s, the Watchtower Library CD is an amazingly good piece of technology. The entire JW.ORG website is top-notch. The WOLJW.ORG is top notch, TV.JW.ORG is almost top notch (JW Broadcasting), and serves its purpose perfectly. So far, all the apps work perfectly, especially on Apple products. Is there bias in our translation? Yes. But not as much as most people think. But it's still a very useful translation, because many of those biases are based on the fact that the Hebrew and Greek can actually support a wider range of correct translation than most people have imagined. When I worked college/university territories around the campuses of the University of Missouri, I found it very easy to place the Kingdom Interlinear Translation for $2. It didn't matter so much how we had translated it in the margin, but I could show how the Interlinear portion worked as a primer for NT Greek. The value was excellent and the product gave us a lot of credibility. I think all of our recent forays into technology have given us a lot of credibility, even if some had a rough start.

Please excuse the formatting on the following. I just picked up some of Lewis Fulkerson's other reviews on Am a zon . com There are over 4,000 positive reviews of JW Library. The majority read like SPAM for jw.org. The most memorable had the lines: Couldn't get this to work yet. Thanks to Jehovah. Visit jw.org. Five stars. I noticed that LF also reviews movies and TV shows, especially sci-fi, with JW style phrasing in his criticisms. As far as books go, he only reviews books by JWs. I'll highlight the review portion in bold red to make it easier to find... The very last one I threw in there to show that apparently never did much with his Master's in Theology: i.e., worked the last 44 years, since 1968 on computers. (By the way, I've heard circuit overseers claim that all of us who have been reading the Watchtower for a few years have the equivalent of a Master's in Theology. And those of us who read the Awake! for a few years have the equivalent of a college education.) Anyway, I think the following says a lot about why he says that the NWT is the "best and most accurately [sic] translation." Lewis Fulkerson reviewed a product. Oct 7, 2016 The truth that leads to eternal life Staying alive Ditto - keeping the life in check - making it last Smile Lewis Fulkerson reviewed a product. Oct 7, 2016 Knowledge That Leads to Everlasting Life Staying Alive... Want to survive? Read this... NOW!!! Smile Lewis Fulkerson reviewed a product. Oct 7, 2016 e Lewis Fulkerson reviewed a product. Oct 7, 2016 Jehovah's Witnesses: Proclaimers of God's Kingdom (With Black & White and Colour Photographs) the only ones Absolutely a MUST READ! Survival Into a New Earth Staying alive Excellent reading for those who like to think e Lewis Fulkerson reviewed a product. Oct 7, 2016 Paradise Restored to Mankind Pay attention Wonderful thought, and positive way to accomplish the seemingly impossible e Lewis Fulkerson reviewed a product. Oct 22, 2014 BIBLE (NWT) Scriptural Accuracy The most accurate translation of the Bible that exists today! e Lewis Fulkerson reviewed a product. Dec 9, 2012 Network Your Computer & Devices Step by Step Best ever! I've been working on computers for 44 years (since 1968) and this is the ONLY book on networking that has made any sense and been of any value to me. What a steal at any price!

Yes. We have long held onto the tradition that the Parousia is invisible and covers a period of time. We have said it is not the same as the final set of judgment events referred to as the coming/advent/revelation/manifestation. It is interesting then, that all these scriptures can be just as easily explained (perhaps even more easily explained) by proposing that the original speakers of "New Testament Greek" knew what the word Parousia meant. The Greek "New Testament" Bible was translated into Latin, Syriac, Aramaic and Coptic from the original Greek while koine Greek was still being spoken as a living language. Also, some of the early "Church Fathers" whom we often quote in our publications, spoke some of these languages in addition to Greek. So while it would be a bit off topic to turn this into another full-fledged discussion of Parousia, I find it interesting to notice that a sensible explanation of this verse about Peace and Security can be seen to fit Jesus words, rather than contradict them. I had even noticed a tendency to make them say quite the opposite of what they actually say, and this is a direct result, I think, of our conflicted traditional doctrine about the Parousia. Here's an example: Notice how this is almost an opposite interpretation of the one that fits the context. (Where Paul parallels the idea of people taking note of "Peace and Security" with the idea that the end will come as a surprise the them, without warning, just a thief in the night.) But it is opposite because we are also taught that it was Satan's anger in 1914 at having "a short period of time" that caused WW I to rage out of control. WW II was even worse than WW I. And we half-expect a WW III to begin escalating as a way to explain the fact that the wars since WW II seem almost mild by comparison (to some). We think, how can this be if Satan must surely have an even shorter period of time now than he had in 1914. If we were right about WW I then Satan should be starting 10 times as many wars just as big as WW I and WW II.

With some creativity, I suppose some of the so-called "Top 40" Star Wars quotes might be worked into the imagined conversation: “In time, the suffering of your people will persuade you to see our point of view.” — Nute Gunray “I find your lack of faith disturbing.” — Darth Vader “What if I told you that the Republic was now under the control of a Dark Lord of the Sith?” — Count Dooku “I’m one with the Force. The Force is with me.” — Chirrut Îmwe “Well, if droids could think, there’d be none of us here, would there?” — Obi-Wan Kenobi

This came up before and I only answered it because this very thing was done. Except that in our case, all of us do represent ourselves as ministers, which to the world is pretty much the equivalent of clergy. And all of us will have contact with children in our preaching activity. Also, most of the cases among Witnesses involve other Witnesses, as we often limit our circle of trust to primarily Witnesses anyway. The last 20 or so that I heard about were primarily about teachers in some of the local elementary schools and a high school, and of course a few clergy and ministers, too. But the religious affiliation of the teachers was not part of the story, who quite possibly had no religious affiliation anyway. Someone sent me a list of articles from Australia showing me that the ARC has begun to turn over several of the incidents to local police authorities. A few of the articles did NOT include the fact that these were about JWs and in a couple of cases disfellowshipped JWs. I had to do some further searching and questioning to verify that these were Witness cases, and not just cases from other ARC investigations. In most cases I was able to verify it.

Probably more than half the time, I'm guessing. That's because if it happens within a religious institution like the Roman Catholic Church or a Jewish Temple, the religious institution is part of the story. Just as if it were a football coach or a gymnastics coach it can reflect on the college, university or sports organization that hired the abuser.

The idea that she hoped they would learn God's Word too is never included in the story. She had obviously given up hope if she already wondered who would replace them in the New System. (At this point in the story, she is already 10 years old.) Yes. We do. Not all of course, and we don't judge specific individuals, but we definitely teach that there will be persons who will die because they didn't learn the Truth. And it's obvious that it's so common to believe this, that even a member of the Governing Body hadn't considered it wrong to tell a story that centers on exactly this idea. Note that no one is trying to correct the girl for having a misapprehension. The pull of the story is that the little girl died still "knowing" that her parents, in their current situation, would be either killed by Jehovah or forgotten forever by Jehovah. That's the point. The little girl judged her parents as worthy of death. And no part of the story, as told here, corrects that point. The story works if they were worthy of death UNTIL they learned the Truth after their daughter died. (This, by the way, is seen as child abuse in a psychological sense, which I'm sure we'd be quick to see if it was a Muslim girl with a Muslim Auntie who was being taught this same thing about her Buddhist parents.) Then you understand why she should not have judged them. I don't understand this at all. Why would her joy be very great if sadness happened?

It's a tear touching story, but it's also sad that a child learns so early to be so judgmental of her parents that she believes Jehovah will kill them at Armageddon and/or that they will not be resurrected to an opportunity to life on earth when they die. A little girl had to compartmentalize a fear and even a kind of judgmental "hatred" of her own parents in the resignation that they would be eternally destroyed by her God.

Yes. We had it made!! This book went like hotcakes. It's the expression we heard a lot, and it was true. It was the pioneer's bread and butter somedays. Also, in those days, there was no request to put the "profit" back in the contribution box, because the buyers of the book were not contributing to the Kingdom work, they were actually contributing to our ability to continue pioneering.

Over the years, I bought several hundred of these at only a nickel apiece. Placed them for 25 cents apiece. Every two placed was another gallon of gas for pioneering. Only have about 2 left. I was baptized the year before it was released. Since this came out in 1968 it pushed the 1975 date in a couple of places, as a time when the world would reach a peak of crises and catastrophes. The book was updated in 1981 to get rid of the 1975 date. This was an excellent style for studying. We didn't spend too long on any subject, and there were a lot of scriptures packed into the material that were just cited and not quoted. So a study could go long or short and still cover the material depending on the preference of the person we were studying with. Millions became Witnesses based on this book, especially former Catholics. But I think it had about equal appeal to people of many backgrounds.

I've seen the same many times. Part of it is undoubtedly based on the possible pretension that the verse speaks of a "CRY" of Peace and Security, and that exclamation point that the NWT puts at the end of it. The Bible says nothing about a "cry" of Peace and Security. There is no reason to make it a quotation or put an exclamation mark after it. If this were true, then this would be a sign of the parousia, which contradicts the fact that the parousia comes as a thief, and a thief does not give a sign before he robs a house.

Don't know whether it's right, but there is a completely different way to understand this verse. You get an idea of it by looking at 1 Thess 5:3 in some other translations: NLT: When people are saying, “Everything is peaceful and secure,” then disaster will fall on them as suddenly as a pregnant woman’s labor pains begin. And there will be no escape. ESV: While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. NET: Now when they are saying, "There is peace and security," then sudden destruction comes on them, like labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will surely not escape. I think we sometimes get this impression that the final generation of the last days will see almost constant wars and rumors of wars in various places in the world, with very few days of real peace. But then, we seem to figure, that the UN or some political institution or coalition of governments will, for some reason, cry out something to the effect of "Peace and Security!" as if they would like some attention for have finally been instrumental at creating a few weeks of peace amidst the near daily wars around the world. But it seems just as likely that the actual meaning, or even the actual translation of the verse should be closer to: While some people are talking about how everything seems to be peaceful and secure, they will find themselves undergoing sudden disaster, just as unexpectedly as the beginning of a pregnant woman's labor pains. And they won't be able to escape. This is not necessarily a quotation of what they will be saying out loud anywhere. The expression is just one symbolic way of telling us what some people will no doubt be saying and thinking just before the time when Jehovah's judgment day comes upon them just as surprisingly as a thief in the night could come upon them. In context, this is what it seems to be saying. It's about the "PAROUSIA," which is sometimes called the "Day of the Lord" or the "Day of Jehovah." In context, it's about WHAT to expect about the PAROUSIA (presence) and WHEN to expect the PAROUSIA (presence): (1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:5) . . .For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word, that we the living who survive to the presence [PAROUSIA] of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death [before the PAROUSIA]; 16 because [AT THE PAROUSIA] the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward [or, THEN] we the living who are surviving will, together with them [or Greek, AT THE SAME TIME], be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we will always be with the Lord. 18 So keep comforting one another with these words. 5:1 Now as for the times and the seasons [of the PAROUSIA], brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day [the PAROUSIA] is coming exactly as a thief in the night. 3 Whenever it is that they are saying, “Peace and security!” then sudden destruction is to be instantly on them, just like birth pains on a pregnant woman, and they will by no means escape. 4 But you, brothers, you are not in darkness, so that the day should overtake you as it would thieves, 5 for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We belong neither to night nor to darkness. Granted, this isn't the way we currently understand it officially, but it fits all the other scriptures just as well. The expression about saying there is peace and security is a parallel to the idea that the Parousia will come as a thief in the night. It will be surprising, and even painful and disastrous. There will be no way to predict it (by pointing out increasing wars and earthquakes and disasters, for example). Therefore Paul had nothing to say to them about the timing of the Parousia (the times and seasons) -- 1 Thess 5:1. This matches the idea that Jesus gave when he said that people would be going on about their daily routines, two men in a field, two women at a grinding mill, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage just as they were in Noah's day. Until suddenly the judgment event (parousia) came upon them as if without any warning. Peter was saying the same thing when he said that people would ridicule the belief that the Parousia was coming, because things seemed to be going on as they always had been. Peter didn't say that the answer would be that the Parousia was really there all along but just invisible. Instead Peter said: (2 Peter 3:5-7) 5 For they deliberately ignore this fact, that long ago there were heavens and an earth standing firmly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; 6 and that by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was flooded with water. 7 But by the same word the heavens and the earth that now exist are reserved for fire and are being kept until the day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly people. In other words, they are ignoring the fact that just like in Noah's generation, people also likely ridiculed the fact that there was no evidence of an imminent judgment day, yet that judgment event (parousia) came upon them as quickly as Jehovah released the waters upon them. In the same way the current heavens and earth will exist as they are being kept just as they now exist UNTIL THE DAY OF JUDGMENT (until the Parousia).

I know that a few of us have probably "snuck" a listen or two to the televangelists and radio preachers who so often ask (beg) for money. This doesn't bother me as much as those who try to ask for money in more subtle ways like the way they comment on a scripture and repeatedly throw in a phrase like "showing our appreciation for Him by giving to Him in every way possible." Even more irritating are prayers that are supposed to be to God, but really just continue to preach and obliquely request money through similar ruses: "Oh God, I just know that everyone who can hear this prayer today through this broadcast is ready and willing to show their appreciation for you by giving, in every way possible." So I kind of cringe when I hear a song (or prayer) to Jehovah that gives the impression that we are bragging to Jehovah about how much money and time we are giving to the building of Kingdom Halls and Assembly Halls. "Jehovah . . . from your own hand, we've given all that we offer you . . . . we are grateful . . . you knew what we wanted . . . . So we offer the best of our time and possessions." I'm not saying there is anything wrong with these words. I'm as happy as anyone to give to the ministry in every way possible. It's just that I'm sensitive to the way that others might take some of our songs and see a kind of solicitation in them, in the same way that I have seen it in televangelists. The very song makes me start wondering if we are trying to emphasize "Temple" giving rather than "people" giving. I start thinking of what it means that we walk by faith not by sight, when I hear a song that says: "For you’ve made our hope reality With this place." And when it says: ". . . But your spirit can here remain. Adorning this center of worship are people who walk in your light." it also reminds me of: (John 4:21-24) . . . the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. . . . 23 Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth. Of course, this doesn't mean that any of the words are wrong. We can worship in spirit and truth inside a physical place just as we can worship in spirit and truth when we are at home or at work or on vacation. Having a physical place is wonderful, but emphasis on one as "making our hope reality" or "what we wanted" can reach a point where we begin walking by sight, not by faith.

I don't see how we would ever know when such a new period of time started. As far as we can tell it started immediately after the tribulation in those days. (i.e., immediately after the tribulation on Jerusalem and its final parousia/synteleia in 70 C.E.)

True, but not about the people in the picture. It was true of the number of generations in Matthew chapter 1. 14+14+14=42 (Unless these three people are galaxy hitchhikers.)

Of course, Jesus never said anything about these things happening either in greater, more terrifying, or more "concentrated measure." So even if earthquakes, for example, really had started to happen in "concentrated measure" in 1914 (they didn't!) this would still have nothing to do with the sign of Matthew 24. All Jesus said was that great earthquakes, for example, would happen and therefore not to be misled by them, because these are not signs that the end is imminent. ("Do not be misled . . . the end is not yet!"). Of course, what you are talking about would still be the common reasoning, even if we somehow found a way to restart the generation with the start of the Governing Body around 1972, or the apostasy in 1980, or AIDS, or cart witnessing, or the re-assignment of the Governing Body as "guardians of doctrine" around 2000, or even some brand new unexpected event in 2018. So I brought up the point about the sign in Matthew 24 to propose that we would still be wrong to try to find new reasons to claim that earthquakes and wars were somehow more "concentrated" after a new starting date -- even if they WERE!

I think I've presented the following alternative suggestion before (a couple of times): It makes sense that when Jesus refers to "all these things" he is referring to the same "all these things" that the disciples asked him about: (Mark 13:4) 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are to come to a conclusion?” In context, of course, "all these things" referred to the judgment on Jerusalem and therefore the toppling of the Temple buildings. (Mark 13:1-4) As he was going out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him: “Teacher, see! what wonderful stones and buildings!” 2 However, Jesus said to him: “Do you see these great buildings? By no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.” 3 As he was sitting on the Mount of Olives with the temple in view, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately: 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are to come to a conclusion?” Since the word "synteleia" can refer to a final destruction and the word "parousia" can refer to a final judgment event, the disciples no doubt thought that these events were part of the final parousia/synteleia on the whole world. After all, Jerusalem represented the whole world to them. Therefore, Jesus' words to them started out "Do not be misled." or "Look out that nobody misleads you." For you are going to see a lot of things in this generation that you might think will be a sign of that final end, but remember that all these things are going to take place. A lot of things might fool you into thinking you are seeing that final sign. You will go through a lot of trials and tribulations. But don't be misled. The final end cannot happen until AFTER the only sign, which is what you will see come upon Jerusalem. Jesus' prophecy about Jerusalem, of course, also contains a lot of good counsel about how easy it would be to also be fooled into thinking that this or that is a sign for the final parousia too. It's also easy for us to be fooled into thinking that wars, and earthquakes, and famines are a "sign" of the final parousia, when really we know that, even though all these things will take place, people will also be talking about peace and security right up to the end. People will be eating and drinking and marrying and going on with their lives right up to the end. People will be ridiculing the fact that all things are still going on just like they have been from the beginning, right up until the final end.

That's actually very simple. Jesus used similar expressions a few times. They even matched the context of Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. (Matthew 23:36-38) 36 Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. 37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her—how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. 38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you. So a judgment day was coming upon Jerusalem, and it would come during the same time period in the lives of people who were contemporaries of Jesus, during the lives of the very same audience he was speaking with, the people who were alive at the same time as Jesus. We know that Jesus said this in about 33 CE and that "all these things" came about just as predicted. Jerusalem's judgment day came in 70 C.E. (which was about 37 years later). A great tribulation for many Christians in Jerusalem started around 66 C.E., which was 33 years later. The same idea can be seen in the expressions: (Matthew 16:28) 28 Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom.” (Mark 9:1) Furthermore, he said to them: “Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Kingdom of God already having come in power.” (Luke 9:27) 27 But I tell you truly, there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Kingdom of God.” (Matthew 10:23) 23 When they persecute you in one city, flee to another; for truly I say to you, you will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of Israel until the Son of man arrives. So the idea was that when people who were contemporaries of Jesus heard him make a promise, they would know it would happen in their lifetime, and they could therefore be happy and lift their heads up, knowing that the promise was close enough that most of them would live to see it. In the case of the promise that "some" would live to see Jesus coming in FULL kingdom power, Jesus made this come true for them just a week later through a vision on the "Mount of Transfiguration." But it proves the same point -- that it had to happen within the lifetime of the contemporaries within Jesus audience. And that's exactly what happened with the promise in Matthew 24 and Luke 21, etc, when the disciples asked about when all these things related to Jerusalem's judgment day would occur. (Every one of the temple buildings' stones being toppled!) They could be happy that it was close enough to be within the lifetime of at least some of those standing there. Of course, it would have been some kind of a cruel joke if the prophecy had meant that it would finally get down to just the last few survivors before anyone could see the fulfillment. How could Jesus have said that "when you see these things, lift your heads up because you know that your deliverance is getting near" if he really meant something like this: I know I said you should lift up your heads, but what I really meant is that almost all of you listeners are going to die first, and perhaps only a couple of people might still be alive when this generation is just about to finally die out. In about 50 years, if Jerusalem has not seen her judgment day by that time, you might want to remember who were the youngest persons in the audience when I made the uplifting promise, and then figure out about how much longer those young persons might live. Let's say there were a couple of 15 year-olds and they might survive until about age 80, which is 65 years after I am making this encouraging and uplifting promise that your deliverance is getting near. This means that, not you, but people who are alive 65 years from now might want to start watching these youngsters very closely in 65 years, when they will be 80 year old, to see just how long they are going to live. When the last one is about to die, you will know that I am just about to bring Jerusalem's judgment day. If the last one starts to die, you will even at that point know the day and the hour, too! Even though this is ludicrous, for those who might have thought that the words about Jerusalem's judgment day also applied to his full and complete judgment day on the whole world, this could have resulted in something very much like that scenario. In fact, there is a kind of warning not to fall for this kind of thinking. It's at the end of John's gospel: (John 21:21-23) . . .“Lord, what about this man?” 22 Jesus said to him: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.” 23 So the saying went out among the brothers that this disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but he said: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?” Jesus had already implied that "this generation" could die out completely before the final judgment day on the world. Note: (Matthew 12:41, 42) 41 Men of Ninʹe·veh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, because they repented at what Joʹnah preached. But look! something more than Joʹnah is here. 42 The queen of the south will beraised up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solʹo·mon. But look! something more than Solʹo·mon is here. Notice the brilliant way in which Jesus would not tell them that the final judgment would NOT also come in their same generation, but had still been clear that the judgment day on Jerusalem would come within their generation.

At least it looks like you are getting some of your hair back.

I'm not speaking for any of the other persons who have questioned it, but the only scripture that was used is this: (Exodus 1:6) 6 Joseph eventually died, and also all his brothers and all that generation. The problem is that this scripture does not support what Brother Splane is saying. In fact, it more likely says exactly the opposite. Just look at the context to see that "all that generation" refers to Joseph and his brothers and all those who were alive at the same time as all of Joseph's brothers. It did not include all of Joseph's parent's generation, or his children's generation, or his grandchildren's generation. In fact, if you back up just 10 verses in the Pentateuch, you read in Genesis 50:23: (Genesis 50:23) Joseph saw the third generation of Eʹphra·im’s sons, also the sons of Maʹchir, Ma·nasʹseh’s son. They were born upon Joseph’s knees. The third generation was contemporary with Joseph "born upon Joseph's knees, in fact. But they were not in the same generation as Joseph. They were, just as it says, the "third generation." But first there is an even clearer reason to see that this explanation is wrong. In fact, Brother Splane accidentally ruined his entire explanation using his own words in the talk. Listen closely to the video above from the point marked 2m:38s to 2m:53s. These fifteen seconds prove that his reasoning is false. He says: But now what did Joseph and his brothers all have in common? They were all contemporaries. They had all lived at the same time. They were part of the same generation. So a quick test: Was Joseph Rutherford part of that first group? Was A. H. MacMillan? Was W. E. Van Amburgh? The answer is YES, according to Brother Splane, at the point from 7m:38s to 7m:54s in the video above. Who else was part of that second group? At 11m:16s to 11m:28s, he adds: "...in addition, there are Karl Klein, John Barr, Albert Schroeder. All the current members of the Governing Body are also part of 'this generation.'" Now it's easy to see what's wrong with this picture, and why Exodus 1:6 actually disproves the currently proposed theory: Were the current members of the Governing Body contemporaries of Rutherford, MacMillan and Van Amburgh? NO!! Of course, not! Rutherford died in 1942 Brother Sanderson was born February 4, 1965. He was baptized just days after he turned 10, on February 9, 1975. So it's not likely that he became "anointed" (a requirement to be in the second group) until 1975 or after. That's 33 years after Rutherford died! So this alone proves that they were not all contemporaries. The same is true of all members of the current Governing Body. They were not all contemporaries with the persons in the first group. We could paraphrase what Brother Splane said about Exodus 1:6: But now what did the members of this first and second group of brothers all have in common? They were NOT all contemporaries. They had NOT all lived at the same time. So they were NOT part of the same generation. In order get this flaw in the logic past us without too many people noticing, some "sleight of hand" was necessary. It was important to interrupt the identification of the first group with their obvious contemporaries while still under the definition based on Exodus 1:6 that they ALL had to be contemporaries. Then the word "all" was changed to "some" and was slipped in quickly without any emphasis on the word "some" at the 8m:20s mark. Then the word "some" was slipped in again with just slightly more emphasis at around the 9m:40s mark. Here's how: He does OK up to 7m:54s while still speaking of real and actual contemporaries in the "first group." Then, at 8m:20s into the video Brother Splane gives away the first clue that shows where the reasoning went wrong. In speaking of the second group and mentioning Knorr, Swingle, Suiter, Henschel and Gangas, he says that "They were anointed contemporaries of some in the first group." He does it again at 9m:40s to 9m:54s, where he says: "In order to be part of this generation, someone would have had to have been anointed before 1992, because he would have to have been a contemporary of some of the first group."

I love what both of you are doing. Very positive attitude and a lot of good work that many people can enjoy. I think it's great that some people post as much as they can. All of us make mistakes, but there is always more that's right compared to what's sometimes wrong.

I haven't seen the original of this, which I assume is in Spanish, but I suspect that the word "estimates" here is actually an error based on the word "estimado" or a related word which in this context would have referred to "holding dear" or "esteeming." (In other words, the Lord esteems [dearly appreciates] even a small donation.)