HollyW

I did. Did you? If you did so with any basic comprehension, you would realize that Russell was saying 'the world' as in 'Planet Earth' would "abideth forever" but that he was promoting the idea that 'the world' as people knew it would end. I.e. the world system of things, the institutions, the 'Gentile' governments would be crushed out of existence (in fulfillment of Dan. 2:44); there would be a period of world-wide anarchy; the ungodly would be done away with; and then a millennium of peaceful messianic rule would be ushered in. 
Look:

The only one looking foolish is you, Allen.

Acts 24:15 there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.

Well, you also say Jesus is a god, another god besides the only true God, the Father.  
Is the Bible telling us to sanctify another god in our hearts as Lord?

from page 232 of the bound volume:
 

The BBC television show Panorama had an episode in 2002 that featured the pedophilia problems within the Jehovah's Witness religion. They interviewed molestation survivors that went to the JW elders for help, only to be told that they did not have the required "two witnesses" that the religion demands and so were told not to call the police but to leave it "in Jehovah's hands".
They travel to America and speak to then governing body leader Ted Jaracz, who coldly tells them that the Witnesses do not "go beyond the things that are written", a quote from Paul in 1 Corinthians 4:6.
They learn that the Watchtower Organization has a secret database with over 23,000 entries containing both accused and convicted pedophiles associated with Jehovah's Witnesses.

What part of Ann's comment was scripture?  

It is my humble opinion that the generation scenario that started from Millerites, is completely wrong because takes as given that the prophecy of Jesus about the distraction of Jerusalem will have a second fulfillment. No! we do not know if there will be a generation from 1914 (or whatever date) until the end. This is not scriptural, no one knows except the Father. If someone gives dates is a false prophet. if someone says the light will be brighter ... in order to prophecy is a dangerous person. We Christians of the last days ... we are no Prophets! We must have love ... this is our characteristic.

Also:
*** ka chap. 16 p. 296 par. 7 Completion of the Foretold “Sign” Nears ***

"Counted from the year of Jesus’ prophecy on the subject, the Jewish system of things had thirty-seven years yet to go, less than a generation with a life-span of forty years." 
 
*** it-1 p. 540 Wilderness Wanderings of Israel ***

"This brought Jehovah’s swift judgment: Forty years would pass before the nation would enter the Promised Land. By then, the faithless members of that generation would have died off."
So the questions are, 
Could there be a flaw in the Org's eschatology? If so, what is it? Could there be more than one flaw? This would be a fruitful research project for you, Sarah. 
 

1 Peter 3:15  But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts,
Is the Bible telling us to sanctify an angel in our hearts as Lord?

I'm glad you appreciated the question and thank you for your very fine reply.
While I do agree with both you and Melinda, I was expecting a much different answer for the one event JWs believe is the greatest event ever to occur in the history of the world.  I was not expecting you would say Jesus' birth or death so it was a pleasant surprise to find the replies on here tending toward those events.
Thank you to all who have participated.

News 5 update. So he lied to Roman Vargas. He IS a convicted child rapists.
https://vimeo.com/179527680

It's also on Vimeo: 
 

Thanks, Melinda.  Viewing your example of "my grandmother's generation" as comparable to "this generation" that Jesus mentions, he would be including all people born around that time, believer and unbeliever alike.  I'm thinking that may be what Alexa was shooting for, too.
 

I asked this in the Controversial section, and though it was read quite a few times, no one has ventured a reply.
In the new brochure reaching out to inactive ones, there seems to be an implication that inactive Jehovah's Witnesses can confess violating WTS rules for 40 years and not be disciplined for it, but rather will be welcomed back to each congregation with open arms.  The brochure tells of one coming back after 40 years of being inactive, who during that time had celebrated holidays, gone to other churches, been involved in politics, and probably much more. 
Has something been left out of the brochure....something like 'yes, you'll be welcomed back with open arms....as soon as the elders say you can be, but until then you'll be shunned for your 40 years of sins that you just confessed to them.' ?
I ask because the articles about inactive ones returning to the Kingdom Hall have always said something about  "Loving discipline may be required." There's even been instructions to those who may be asked to study with an inactive JW, such as this in a 2008 wt:
[w08 11/15 Help Them Return Without Delay!, p.12, par.2] If they assign a publisher to study with an inactive person desiring help, what should be done if the conductor learns that the individual has committed a serious sin? Instead of giving counsel about any judicial or confidential matter, the publisher should suggest that he speak to the elders. If he fails to do so, the publisher himself should inform the elders.
But the 2015 brochure, Return to Jehovah, doesn't mention discipline being required.  If elders can question the sincerity of someone's repentance because he or she waited a month or two before confessing it to the elders, wouldn't it be even more doubtful that a person confessing after 40 years is truly repentant?
 
Holly
 
 
 

Thanks, Alexa.   Let me know when you do know.

Matthew 24:32-34 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near; 33 so, you too, when you see all these things, recognize that He is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place."
"This generation." Did Jesus have in mind unbelievers?

Painting by Gérôme, 1883, courtesy of Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore
From page 7 of the WTS 1990 Blood brochure.

Thank you, Eoin, for helping to adjust my view of just exactly what is meant by " the record that the “faithful and discreet slave” organization has made for the past more than 100 years"
I've been interpreting it to mean the faithful slave had been teaching the truth for the past 100 years, but the point you bring out from the article itself (and Janice's agreement) brings me to the realization that to JWs it doesn't mean the record of the faithful slave will show it has been teaching the truth for the past 100 years but that it has been continually changing and refining what it has been saying is the truth.
No wonder my referring to what has been written in the older publications has frustrated and irritated some on this forum. 
Your appeal to Acts 18:26 with Priscilla and Aquila explaining the way of God more accurately to Apollos, evidently means to you and Janice that Jehovah and Jesus have been explaining the way of God more accurately to the WTS all these years, hence the "continual refining of the body of Bible-based truth to which Jehovah’s Witnesses subscribe", as the article points out.
And this "continual refining" then causes (actually the article says "forces") you to apply to the WTS the words of Peter to Jesus:
 “Whom shall we go away to?” (John 6:66-69) "You have sayings of everlasting life. 69 We have come to know that you are the Holy One of God.” 
So its the record of a 100 years of changing its teachings that cause JWs to view the WTS as the sole channel of communication between God and mankind.  

Good points, Menrov.
Since the Apostle Paul was addressing this to Christians who all had the heavenly hope, I think the ones who would not be partaking in the first century would be those among the anointed who had unconfessed sin or were in some way unworthy to participate in the Lord's communion.
1 Corinthians 11:27 Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord. 28 But a man must examine himself, and in so doing he is to eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself if he does not judge the body rightly.
The WTS interprets this examining of oneself today to mean whether one has the heavenly hope or the earthly hope; but the Apostle Paul wrote this to only those who had the heavenly hope so he couldn't have meant that sort of an examination and probably not that sort of distinction among Christians.
There is a similar instance in Numbers 9:10 when certain Israelites were unclean or on a journey and could not take part in the Passover celebration in the first month so they were allowed to have their Passover a month later.  This could be similar to the Christians in the first century who were in some way unworthy to partake and so they refrained from the communion.

Painting by Gérôme, 1883, courtesy of Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore
From page 7 of the WTS 1990 Blood brochure.

It is not uncommon to be told by (fellow) JW's that only new magazines or books are to be used. Why? Well, for the reasons already expressed: these book contain "old light" or expressions similar to this.
Just consider this; The WBTS is the only source of the material that JW's use. So, all JW's know, believe and accept comes from that source. In other words, the WBTS is accountable for what they published as truth. (even if a JW would disagree, he runs the risk of being DF'ed).
Further: the claim is that the WBTS has been selected to act as FDS since 1919 (was 1918....). Though apparently not appointed (WT 2013) but still FDS and that God has used them (WBTS) as the ONLY channel to educate so-called Gods people. So, one might expect that at least basic doctrines would be correct, without needing one or more corrections. Would God allow people to learn WRONG things?
So, if the WBTS can be wrong, can it be that for example l am right? In other words, could I be the FDS? What scriptural proof is there that directs me to the WBTS as the source of my bible education and explanations?
And who says that what is published today is good?
I therefore believe that when the WBTS tries to block old (pre 2000) books and magazines to be used or reviewed ,it is proof they do not even believe their own material. If the Revelation contained so much truth and explanations valuable for all of us, why is it no longer vaiuable ? According to the WBTS we are close to the end, right? Would such a book then not be most useful?
Apparently not.

For me at least it matters not how far references go back either in Watchtower (WT) or any publications cited in these postings. I quoted from an 1823 publication in a recent post myself because I felt it relevant to a point I was making.
I suppose I have an advantage over some in that I am able to check the context of any of the old WT quotes because I have a pretty extensive archive of publications, although of course anyone can build or access a pretty comprehensive electronic library these days if they wish.
I suppose what is more important than the vintage of the quoted references is the point they are being used to substantiate and I suspect that this would be more the cause of irritation for some rather than the age of the quotes themselves.
I think the point  referenced in the WT of 2/15/1981 which is quoted above is relevant: "at times, it has been necessary, as understanding became clearer, to correct views. (Prov. 4:18) However, this has resulted in a continual refining of the body of Bible-based truth to which Jehovah’s Witnesses subscribe."
Corrected views? I see it as a continuation of the process described at Acts 18:26 regarding Apollos "Pris·cilʹla and Aqʹui·la heard him, they took him into their company and explained the way of God more accurately to him" and similar to what Paul said at 1Cor 9-13 "For we have partial knowledge and we prophesy partially,"
So for me, apart from satisfying my curiosity in the development of understanding amongst Jehovah's Witnesses and it's historical context, little more is gained from these "hoary, old chestnuts" of WT quotes apart from proof of the italicised statement above. They are often used to support veiled or overt inferences to some sort of conspiracy theory scenario enacted by "old men in Brooklyn" (not so old these days). These arguments abound on the internet and their appearance on a public forum such as this is unsurprising. But even this designation will need a refinement soon to "old men in Warwick" won't it? These innuendos I do find offensive, but then I can choose to ignore them quite easily.
Let freedom of expression prevail, but if you do claim to represent the Master Teacher, let his style of expression dominate also:
"And they all began to give favorable witness about him and to be amazed at the gracious words coming out of his mouth"    Luke 4:22

Hi, thanks for raising. A few things are not clear to me. I hope you can explain. 
1)  he term “born again” refers to a new beginning in the relationship between God and the person who is born again
based on what scriptures is this based? Jesus had already a relationship and was already a child of His Father.
2) the word translated in NWT with again can also mean From Above. I feel the latter is more correct as it would fit Jesus that He was "born" from above. Your view?
3)  When Jesus discussed the subject, he said that those born again would be “born from water and spirit.” (John 3:5) This expression refers to baptism in water followed by baptism with holy spirit.
I am not sure Jesus meant a sequence as there is only one baptism, not two. This note is also of interest:
Jesus’ somewhat enigmatic statement points to the necessity of being born “from above,” becausewater and wind/spirit/Spirit come from above. Isaiah 44:3-5 and Ezek 37:9-10 are pertinent examples ofwater and wind as life-giving symbols of the Spirit of God in his work among people. Both occur in contexts that deal with the future restoration of Israel as a nation prior to the establishment of the messianic kingdom. It is therefore particularly appropriate that Jesus should introduce them in a conversation about entering the kingdom of God. Note that the Greek word πνεύματος is anarthrous (has no article) in v. 5. This does not mean that spirit in the verse should be read as a direct reference to the Holy Spirit, but that both water and wind are figures (based on passages in the OT, which Nicodemus, the teacher of Israel should have known) that represent the regenerating work of the Spirit in the lives of men and women. . 
4)  That second group of Christians have the 
I understand that this is the official doctrine of the WBTS but was just wondering if you can support this view? I got always confused with this view as Jesus taught that there will be one flock and one shepherd. There are always two opposites: good/evil, flesh/spirit, dark/light, believer/unbeliever, goat/sheep etc.
Thanks

It is always good to read the context. Paul is talking to the entire congregation. they gathered and ate. But they did not eat with respect. They ate because they were hungry and some got drunk.
Objective of the meal: 1 Cor. 11:26 For every time you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.
So, does this mean that all WHO DO NOT eat nor drink are NOT proclaiming the Lord's death? If one is in the congregation but does not eat or drink, according to Paul, is not supporting the arrangement. You can ask yourself: why be present?
It is not being an observer but objective was to participate.
Verse 33 explains: 33 So then, my brothers and sisters,12 when you come together to eat, wait for one another. 34 If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, so that when you assemble it does not lead to judgment. I will give directions about other matters when I come.
Unfortunately, the WBTS teaches not to gather to eat but actually to deny the bread and wine and only be there to observe. I cannot find a verse or verses that supports this.
Anyone?