Anna

Ok. Let me put it this way then. When a group of people allow certain opinions regarding themselves to flourish, regardless whether that group of people has actually promoted or instigated that opinion, then they must also accept certain responsibility if others misinterpret certain things.  Many, many JWs, especially the older generation, view the GB as “almost Jesus”. This is a fact. It’s evident from what they say. I have heard it and seen it in action. So then when the GB says something, or insinuates something, especially regarding the end, then people naturally get excited. Why should they get excited if it is clear that no one knows except Jehovah and Jesus?  Precisely! Because they believe the GB has information that no one else has, from Jehovah and Jesus. So if you are going to mention ANY date, then the friends will prick their ears and listen. The society got burned a few times over this in the past, so much so that one of the GB members who gave a talk a few years back in our circuit said from the platform “Brothers, we promise you, no more dates!”  (The talk was about the refined understanding regarding the identity of the toes of the image in Daniel’s prophesy).
Of course I agree with you that none of the friends should have reacted the way they did over 1975 and should have viewed it as merely an opinion.  We have all learned our lesson I think though, and this is why now the explanation of the “overlapping generation” is viewed by many as merely an opinion.....

Ok. Let me put it this way then. When a group of people allow certain opinions regarding themselves to flourish, regardless whether that group of people has actually promoted or instigated that opinion, then they must also accept certain responsibility if others misinterpret certain things.  Many, many JWs, especially the older generation, view the GB as “almost Jesus”. This is a fact. It’s evident from what they say. I have heard it and seen it in action. So then when the GB says something, or insinuates something, especially regarding the end, then people naturally get excited. Why should they get excited if it is clear that no one knows except Jehovah and Jesus?  Precisely! Because they believe the GB has information that no one else has, from Jehovah and Jesus. So if you are going to mention ANY date, then the friends will prick their ears and listen. The society got burned a few times over this in the past, so much so that one of the GB members who gave a talk a few years back in our circuit said from the platform “Brothers, we promise you, no more dates!”  (The talk was about the refined understanding regarding the identity of the toes of the image in Daniel’s prophesy).
Of course I agree with you that none of the friends should have reacted the way they did over 1975 and should have viewed it as merely an opinion.  We have all learned our lesson I think though, and this is why now the explanation of the “overlapping generation” is viewed by many as merely an opinion.....

A very good digest, Ann.

I remember Armageddon Ernie!!!
It must be wonderful to go in field service with you!
Why do you keep trying to defend something which the GB have themselves admitted as being a mistake on their part?

It's been very interesting following Eoin and JWInsider's conversation, and some insightful thoughts from Comfortmypeople. All raised some good and valid points. This topic is probably exhausted, (and some new ones started) but I would just like to express a few thoughts. It seems clear that there is no doubt that oversight and leadership is inevitable and necessary in order for an international organization like ours to stay united in the same mind and in the same line of thought (1 Cor 1:10) otherwise we would be no different to Christendom. To believe that each congregation should be autonomous (as some opposers have suggested) is foolish because this would never work. Although congregations have their own unique personality and chemistry, the teachings are always the same. It is remarkable really, that you can travel halfway across the world and end up with same lessons like at home, just in a different language. So I would say the question isn't so much in the shepherding i.e. the organizational structure, but rather in the interpretation of scripture. Are we to follow the interpretation of scripture of a body of men, even though we know this interpretation might not be correct? This was the main thought I was trying to raise, and indeed this is one of the biggest bones of contention with our opposers, as we know.... It is understandable if we take it at face value; why should some men dictate what we are to believe?  Or why should we believe what some men are telling us to believe? Especially if we know they can err, just like any one of us can err. And we can also see where they have erred, partially by their own admission and partially from experience. JWInsider touched on this subject a number of times and brought out that this (relying exclusively and unconditionally on the words of the GB) would actually be unscriptural.  Is it not the responsibility of each Christian to make sure that they are in line with the scriptures as far as we can understand them and in the most core and fundamental areas? (make sure of all things) Do we need to have the scriptures partially digested for us and then spoon fed? Didn’t Paul say we should grow in spiritual maturity and eat solid food?  In fact we would be foolish if we were to take every utterance by the GB/Slave as “gospel truth”. But is there really a problem with that? “Witness” tried to suggest instances where the GB/Slave have caused damage by what they said. (and Comfortmypeople has mentioned some in his new topic). It’s easy to point a finger, but is there any substance to that claim, besides mere opinion? In my many years as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses I have not had any reason to be distrustful of the GB. What did change though was that as the years have gone by, I have developed a more balanced and reasonable attitude towards them.  My main issue I guess is what Comfortmypeople brings out in this topic so I will just move over there and see where it's going...

I remember Armageddon Ernie!!!
It must be wonderful to go in field service with you!
Why do you keep trying to defend something which the GB have themselves admitted as being a mistake on their part?

It's been very interesting following Eoin and JWInsider's conversation, and some insightful thoughts from Comfortmypeople. All raised some good and valid points. This topic is probably exhausted, (and some new ones started) but I would just like to express a few thoughts. It seems clear that there is no doubt that oversight and leadership is inevitable and necessary in order for an international organization like ours to stay united in the same mind and in the same line of thought (1 Cor 1:10) otherwise we would be no different to Christendom. To believe that each congregation should be autonomous (as some opposers have suggested) is foolish because this would never work. Although congregations have their own unique personality and chemistry, the teachings are always the same. It is remarkable really, that you can travel halfway across the world and end up with same lessons like at home, just in a different language. So I would say the question isn't so much in the shepherding i.e. the organizational structure, but rather in the interpretation of scripture. Are we to follow the interpretation of scripture of a body of men, even though we know this interpretation might not be correct? This was the main thought I was trying to raise, and indeed this is one of the biggest bones of contention with our opposers, as we know.... It is understandable if we take it at face value; why should some men dictate what we are to believe?  Or why should we believe what some men are telling us to believe? Especially if we know they can err, just like any one of us can err. And we can also see where they have erred, partially by their own admission and partially from experience. JWInsider touched on this subject a number of times and brought out that this (relying exclusively and unconditionally on the words of the GB) would actually be unscriptural.  Is it not the responsibility of each Christian to make sure that they are in line with the scriptures as far as we can understand them and in the most core and fundamental areas? (make sure of all things) Do we need to have the scriptures partially digested for us and then spoon fed? Didn’t Paul say we should grow in spiritual maturity and eat solid food?  In fact we would be foolish if we were to take every utterance by the GB/Slave as “gospel truth”. But is there really a problem with that? “Witness” tried to suggest instances where the GB/Slave have caused damage by what they said. (and Comfortmypeople has mentioned some in his new topic). It’s easy to point a finger, but is there any substance to that claim, besides mere opinion? In my many years as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses I have not had any reason to be distrustful of the GB. What did change though was that as the years have gone by, I have developed a more balanced and reasonable attitude towards them.  My main issue I guess is what Comfortmypeople brings out in this topic so I will just move over there and see where it's going...

I remember Armageddon Ernie!!!
It must be wonderful to go in field service with you!
Why do you keep trying to defend something which the GB have themselves admitted as being a mistake on their part?

It's been very interesting following Eoin and JWInsider's conversation, and some insightful thoughts from Comfortmypeople. All raised some good and valid points. This topic is probably exhausted, (and some new ones started) but I would just like to express a few thoughts. It seems clear that there is no doubt that oversight and leadership is inevitable and necessary in order for an international organization like ours to stay united in the same mind and in the same line of thought (1 Cor 1:10) otherwise we would be no different to Christendom. To believe that each congregation should be autonomous (as some opposers have suggested) is foolish because this would never work. Although congregations have their own unique personality and chemistry, the teachings are always the same. It is remarkable really, that you can travel halfway across the world and end up with same lessons like at home, just in a different language. So I would say the question isn't so much in the shepherding i.e. the organizational structure, but rather in the interpretation of scripture. Are we to follow the interpretation of scripture of a body of men, even though we know this interpretation might not be correct? This was the main thought I was trying to raise, and indeed this is one of the biggest bones of contention with our opposers, as we know.... It is understandable if we take it at face value; why should some men dictate what we are to believe?  Or why should we believe what some men are telling us to believe? Especially if we know they can err, just like any one of us can err. And we can also see where they have erred, partially by their own admission and partially from experience. JWInsider touched on this subject a number of times and brought out that this (relying exclusively and unconditionally on the words of the GB) would actually be unscriptural.  Is it not the responsibility of each Christian to make sure that they are in line with the scriptures as far as we can understand them and in the most core and fundamental areas? (make sure of all things) Do we need to have the scriptures partially digested for us and then spoon fed? Didn’t Paul say we should grow in spiritual maturity and eat solid food?  In fact we would be foolish if we were to take every utterance by the GB/Slave as “gospel truth”. But is there really a problem with that? “Witness” tried to suggest instances where the GB/Slave have caused damage by what they said. (and Comfortmypeople has mentioned some in his new topic). It’s easy to point a finger, but is there any substance to that claim, besides mere opinion? In my many years as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses I have not had any reason to be distrustful of the GB. What did change though was that as the years have gone by, I have developed a more balanced and reasonable attitude towards them.  My main issue I guess is what Comfortmypeople brings out in this topic so I will just move over there and see where it's going...

It's been very interesting following Eoin and JWInsider's conversation, and some insightful thoughts from Comfortmypeople. All raised some good and valid points. This topic is probably exhausted, (and some new ones started) but I would just like to express a few thoughts. It seems clear that there is no doubt that oversight and leadership is inevitable and necessary in order for an international organization like ours to stay united in the same mind and in the same line of thought (1 Cor 1:10) otherwise we would be no different to Christendom. To believe that each congregation should be autonomous (as some opposers have suggested) is foolish because this would never work. Although congregations have their own unique personality and chemistry, the teachings are always the same. It is remarkable really, that you can travel halfway across the world and end up with same lessons like at home, just in a different language. So I would say the question isn't so much in the shepherding i.e. the organizational structure, but rather in the interpretation of scripture. Are we to follow the interpretation of scripture of a body of men, even though we know this interpretation might not be correct? This was the main thought I was trying to raise, and indeed this is one of the biggest bones of contention with our opposers, as we know.... It is understandable if we take it at face value; why should some men dictate what we are to believe?  Or why should we believe what some men are telling us to believe? Especially if we know they can err, just like any one of us can err. And we can also see where they have erred, partially by their own admission and partially from experience. JWInsider touched on this subject a number of times and brought out that this (relying exclusively and unconditionally on the words of the GB) would actually be unscriptural.  Is it not the responsibility of each Christian to make sure that they are in line with the scriptures as far as we can understand them and in the most core and fundamental areas? (make sure of all things) Do we need to have the scriptures partially digested for us and then spoon fed? Didn’t Paul say we should grow in spiritual maturity and eat solid food?  In fact we would be foolish if we were to take every utterance by the GB/Slave as “gospel truth”. But is there really a problem with that? “Witness” tried to suggest instances where the GB/Slave have caused damage by what they said. (and Comfortmypeople has mentioned some in his new topic). It’s easy to point a finger, but is there any substance to that claim, besides mere opinion? In my many years as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses I have not had any reason to be distrustful of the GB. What did change though was that as the years have gone by, I have developed a more balanced and reasonable attitude towards them.  My main issue I guess is what Comfortmypeople brings out in this topic so I will just move over there and see where it's going...

Melinda. I always enyoy your illustrations!

On looking back, it looks as though everyone was given some kind of bait so that they could ramp up their zeal for the end of this system. But not exactly. They said they were "not saying".   See quote in previous comments.
People at that time including JWs were not so independent in their thinking; they were glad to have someone to follow - in this case a large worldwide organization. In fact, independent thinking is not encouraged up until now. So we can agree that it was wishful thinking - most people wanted to believe that a group of men could know when Jehovah would bring the end to this system - although Jesus had clearly said (and they had read it themselves)that "no one knows the day of the hour - neither the angels of the heavens or the Son but only the Father". And they wanted to see it in THEIR lifetime regardless of who were in danger!
(Despite everything we are still  hearing shouts of the last memorial and the last convention!)
Well, I was not deceived about 1975 but I used to deny that any kind of bait was given. I would tell people that all that was said in the chart on page 31 of the book, "Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God" was that it said that 6000 years of man's existence will end in 1975. That's all!! But recently I saw some other quotes. Well I was young and interested and I read everything but I did not have the time to digest things as I do now.
JWInsider said his father used to laugh, but I remember a fairly heated discussion with my mother and my quoting the scripture at Matthew 24:36 to her. She agreed that the Bible said that, but went on to say that the Witnesses were right in 1914 (referring to the War and world change) and that they could be right again (about 1975 being the end). (I wonder how many Witnesses know that other Bible students arrived at that chronology leading to 1914 and not just the Bible students associated with Russell.) Well the best of us can be misled if we are not thinking clearly.
There is no point dwelling on that now, but we can press ahead and prepare for what Jesus actually said:
Matthew 24:42-44: "Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming. But know one thing, that if the householder had known in what watch the thief was coming, he would have kept awake and not allowed his house to be broken into. On this account you too prove yourselves ready, because at an hour that YOU do not think to be it, the Son of man is coming".
But why would He allow us to be able to work out the year? It is simple, Jehovah does not want us to know. Respect that. But he gave some signs through his Son and told us to be ready. In other words serve him out of love every day. That is what we say we will be doing in the new system forever.
So it is clear that even his true followers will be surprised when it comes. So we cannot go back to sleep we need to improve every day and keep serving with right motives - not thinking of economics, convenience, etc., but simply being ready every day. Serving Jehovah out of love - like Comfort said a few days ago. If we are ready every day, we will be ready when He comes. That is not to say we are no longer interested in the end or that we don't care when it comes. It is like a worker at his workplace. If he really knows and enjoys his work and keeps his work area tidy he will not be embarrassed if the boss brings a high executive rom the Headquarters of the company to sit near his desk, or asks him to explain his function for the benefit of the visitor. Neither would he be a clock watcher. In other words we will have nothing to be ashamed of.
Meanwhile we continue to pursue excellence in every thing we do and continue to apply these two scriptures:
Revelation 3:2: Become watchful, and strengthen the things remaining that were ready to die, for I have not found your deeds fully performed before my God".
Yes, Jesus commended the congregations where they merited commendation and encouragement. But he said the above words which apply to all of us. Jehovah has lovingly allowed us the time to strengthen ourselves and others, to improve where we are weak so we will be workmen with nothing to be ashamed of. We need to have our deeds fully performed before Jehovah, Jesus' God.
The apostle Paul was also loving in his advice at Ephesians 4:23,24: (Ephesians 4:23, 24) "And you should CONTINUE to be made new in your dominant mental attitude, 24 and should put on the new personality that was created according to God’s will in true righteousness and loyalty."
Yes, we have a lot of work to do on our personalities. We are a work in progress that Jehovah is molding. He is allowing time for this, because he said he is not slow concerning his promise but he is patient with us because he does not wish to destroy us but desires us to attain to repentance so he will find us finally spotless, without blemish and in peace. He also said to consider his patience as our salvation. (2 Peter 3:14,15)
So we need this time to help ourselves and others so we can be found approved by Him. Let's show by our actions that we appreciate his patience and that we love others who have not yet come to know him through no fault of their own. He is the Master of the Harvest and he knows when the harvest will be over. Agape.

Well...we won't find fanaticism listed in Gal 5:22-24, although fanatics might say zeal is not there either.

@JWInsider
Don't misunderstand me either. My apparent escape from "1975-ism" does not mean I see it as a minority fad amongst more irrational eccentrics in the congregation. Not at all. Your description of your own experience shows how one could be "embedded" in a "world" governed by this particular attitude. In your case, it appears all-encompassing, with ancestry, family, peers and role models, religious environment, career and education path, all governed by this thinking on the end time. It also illustrates to me also the world of difference in experience between those who are born into the world of Jehovah's Witness and those, like myself, who have sought out the movement as an adult. Something like the difference between the man and the travelling merchant at Matt.13:44-45.
I am well aware of the tendency among many brothers to sensationalise endtime speculation. This is reflected in the rather clumsily constructed 1968 WT expression you quoted above "one should be keenly aware that the end of this system of things is rapidly coming to its violent end." I can almost hear the accompanying table thump! Even lately I have encountered responsible brothers who press for my agreement with the view that we will be unlikely to have our next Regional Convention in this system of things. And this in the face of the fact that the Society is already arranging the bookings for those delegates attending the 2017 Special Coventions abroad!
This 1974 article was not specific on a "1975"  reason for postponing child rearing and showed that many had made such a decision for secular reasons. However, there will of course be those who did let a date unduly factor in their life strategy and who may well have made sacrifices on the basis of a faulty criteria. But there are also those who made, and still make, similar sacrifices without undue influence from a distorted view of "times and seasons". There are still others who chose not to make such sacrifices but who continue to serve Jehovah acceptably.
Jepthah had not considered the full implications of his vow had he? And as for his daughter? (Judges 11:30-40).
Notwithstanding the reasons any have for serving Jehovah to whatever extent they do, surely Solomon's words hold true, and this is how we should encourage our brothers: 
*** Ec 8:12-13 ***
I am aware that it will turn out well for those who fear the true God, because they fear him. 13 But it will not turn out well for the wicked one, nor will he prolong his days that are like a shadow, because he does not fear God.
Hmm. "Incited" or "inflamed" more like.
Perhaps a new topic could be "What is the difference between zeal and fanaticism. Illustrate."

You made some very good points. I was not referring to the type of people who cancel a life insurance policy, or stop paying their loans back on time, sold their homes, or put off all dental appointments and elective surgery, etc. I did know about people who claimed they were putting off the dentist for the next couple of years, but this was often said in jest. I knew of only one person who took that a little too seriously (the Gilead missionary) and I remember it because my father had hired him to work in one of the engineering labs at the university. I often hung out in the electronics labs in the afternoons after pioneering, and this brother's enthusiasm for 1975 was a little too embarrassing for my father. He had to tell him to tone it down, and I then heard them get into a discussion that turned toward the idea of why everyone else had faith in the "1970's  date." But "many" according to the Awake! made significant life-altering decisions:
*** g74 11/8 p. 11 Is This the Time to Have Children? ***
The evidence is that Jesus’ prophecy will shortly have a major fulfillment, upon this entire system of things. This has been a major factor in influencing many couples to decide not to have children at this time. They have chosen to remain childless so that they would be less encumbered to carry out the instructions of Jesus Christ to preach the good news of God’s kingdom earth wide before the end of this system comes.
 
Even my own parents sold their house to move into a rental near the Kingdom Hall. They also talked my brother out of using a full scholarship to a nearby university (he was good at electronics) so that he ultimately opened up an office cleaning business instead. But this might have happened anyway, and I still never think of this as related to 1975.
For myself, I was to graduate in 1975 and was allowed to quit school if I passed the GED (high school equivalency) to start pioneering in May 1973. I know full well that my own experience was related directly to 1975, because I had a serious discussion about it with my parents who were split on whether I should finish high school or not. My mother was not a fanatic about it, but often said she believed it was more likely to come in 1974 since everyone would be looking for it in 1975 and after. My father, the congregation's presiding overseer at the time, spoke about living a reasonably ordinary life because we hoped the end would come as soon as possible, perhaps even tomorrow, but we can only know that it will come within this generation, which could last from 1914 to 1994 for all we knew.
My father had been given district assembly parts in the past, but had not even been assigned a circuit assembly talk ever since he was disciplined by a district overseer for toning down a pro-1975 talk at a 1970 or 1971 circuit assembly. (These assignments started up immediately again in 1976 or 1977.) I heard my father discuss that experience with my uncle who was a circuit overseer in another circuit at the time. I know that the discipline was based specifically on his addition of Matthew 24:36 to the talk, and he was reminded about the Watchtower's comments:
*** w68 8/15 pp. 500-501 par. 35 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
This is not the time to be toying with the words of Jesus that “concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Matt. 24:36) To the contrary, it is a time when one should be keenly aware that the end of this system of things is rapidly coming to its violent end.
 
We were in Missouri at the time, but yearly we visited my uncle who was a circuit overseer in California, and he was of the opinion that 1975 should be promoted strongly (this was in 1973) because even if the end doesn't come in 1975, we still know that it will be here before the end of the 1970's (1979). I didn't get involved too much in the conversation, but I must have believed about the same thing, because I remember thinking that even if it didn't come by then, I would like to apply to Bethel, and could even be there from 1976 and beyond the four years I had originally intended.
Immediately after the 1976 Watchtower, however, ideas changed completely, and everyone's view seemed to suddenly normalize. My mother claimed to never have put any weight on 1975. My uncle said it was never really emphasized that much anyway. It was surreal to me, and by the time I got to Bethel, there was absolutely no talk of working the rest of our careers at Bethel, this side of Armageddon. Mentioning 1975 was a taboo, and the July 15 issue quoted was one of the very first issues we studied for the Bethel Watchtower study after I got there. The comments by the conductor were just as surreal about putting the blame on the brothers who read too much into the "Life Everlasting" book. 
But my point was that, if you were spiritually mature, you were expected to make changes in your life based on the idea that the 1970's would bring the end of the generation, and that this idea, along with the end of the 6,000 years, would make it the "appropriate time for God to act." If you had Bible students you were expected to give them an ultimatum about making up their mind within 6 months. If you didn't believe the end would be here by the end of the 1970's you were pretty much required to believe it would be here by the end of the century (1999/2000).  
Our family also knew Brother Toutjian in California and we laughed at the way his own experience was toned down from a "1975 rootin'-tootin' Toutjian" to the way he states his own experience in a 1984 Watchtower:
*** w84 2/15 p. 25 Always Ready for the End ***
Decades of expanded activity passed quickly, and the question now was, What will the 1970’s bring? My two sons, Duane and Jonathan, and my daughter, Carmel—a fourth generation—were grown and had families of their own. We were expecting that 6,000 years of man’s existence would be reached in 1975. Would this date bring us to the start of Christ’s Millennial Reign? That possibility intrigued us.
Now we can look back on that year and appreciate that the words of Jesus at Matthew 24:36 do not allow us to fix a date for the end. 
At the time, 1984, my father admitted to me that he laughed at that line about how "that possibility intrigued us." By then my mother, still pioneering, had forgotten all memories of 1975 fever, and was already claiming that the Society never said anything about 1975 even being a possibility, even though Brother Toutjian was probably still on tape somewhere (from a 15-year-old assembly talk) embarrassing himself. 

Dear Eoin Joyce, I fully agree with your words, when you mention that we’re all enjoying of a spiritual banquet. For example, the last regional convention with its videos, our new Life and Ministry Meeting, the Broadcasting… and many others. And I also think you’re completely right when you think about some of us as a little bit children if we concentrate on the icing, the dressing and so. Ten points my brother -you make me smile while reading your words-
And, in agreeing more with your statements, if we focus in the cake, the meat, the salad in our spiritual table, any other things pale. And what you probably mean with the “meat of our banquet” well, I feel myself privileged, as we all JW should feel. The teachings of the “slave” class in the last century and more, have had an enormous influence in our lives. Positive influence. And I’m not only talking about the Bible and God’s help (obviously the main factors), but also the help of the brothers on charge of the worldwide work. I would be ungrateful, very unfair if I did not acknowledge that.
Now, let me point out one example, following your argument, with which I agree. Take us the example of the resurrection. I think we, the JW, should be grateful to the teaching of brothers, from Russell epoch until now, because in spite the Bible is the universal book any Christian church read, all these churches believe in life after dead, hell fire, soul immortality and many other false teachings that invalidate the basic, wonderful truth about the resurrection. Truth that, therefore, I thank first to Jehovah, but also to his servants responsible to discover these truths and teach them to the brotherhood. Do we agree?
Perfect. This is the meat. Now, here they come these individuals (perhaps myself, or JWI) with our worries, perhaps, what I’ve mention in my post regarding the adjustment about the resurrection of unborn babies. My complaint in this post is the lack of humility I found in the brothers with responsibilities in producing the information. Yes, of course, I am the main example of pride! How I dare to criticize! What I was trying to say is that if, for example, I offend you in my post, you correctly would expect I apologize, right? Then, my complain is, if some of our information, our teaching has produced some unnoticed damage, why not recognize it? Yes, perhaps is the icing.

I find this experience regarding the 1975 furore quite intriguing. Although I did pick up on excitement about the end of 6000 years earlier, (probably 1972 was my first encounter with a brother who had cancelled his life insurance on that basis), this kind of thinking I found to be the exception rather than the rule in my (possibly) narrow field of experience.
Of course there were those who expressed their conviction centred on that date. In fact, there was one prominent brother, know affectionately as "Armageddon Ernie", who had made very strong statements about the proximity of the end for years, earning that nick-name. But these type of views were seen rather as eccentricities than doctorine in my circle.
I was aware of the statements that are now collected as lists by those who still harp on about the Society making false prophecies about 1975. My first encounter with that date was the chart in the ‘Life Everlasting—in Freedom of the Sons of God,’  book which, apparently, when released by Bro. Knorr at an assembly in Toronto caused discussion of 1975 to overshadow just about everything else. Bro Franz views about the same time were published in the WT: 
*** w66 10/15 p. 631 Rejoicing over “God’s Sons of Liberty” Spiritual Feast ***
‘What about the year 1975? What is it going to mean, dear friends?’ asked Brother Franz. ‘Does it mean that Armageddon is going to be finished, with Satan bound, by 1975? It could! It could! All things are possible with God. Does it mean that Babylon the Great is going to go down by 1975? It could. Does it mean that the attack of Gog of Magog is going to be made on Jehovah’s witnesses to wipe them out, then Gog himself will be put out of action? It could. But we are not saying. All things are possible with God. But we are not saying. And don’t any of you be specific in saying anything that is going to happen between now and 1975. But the big point of it all is this, dear friends: Time is short. Time is running out, no question about that. 
Later though, there was this comment:
*** w68 5/1 pp. 272-273 par. 8 Making Wise Use of the Remaining Time ***
Does this mean that the year 1975 will bring the battle of Armageddon? No one can say with certainty what any particular year will bring. Jesus said: “Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows.” 
James put it plainly in his letter when he said at 3:8 that "no human can tame the tongue". And Pro.10:19 states the simple truth that "When words are many, transgression cannot be avoided". And it cannot be successfully argued that Jehovah's Witnesses are short on words  in any respect, official or otherwise! So there are bound to be mistakes, over-emphasis, etc. Add to that the tendency of humans  to hear what they want to hear, and to seek "official" confrimation for "pet" theories!
So it seems to me there are those who became unecessarily frothed up over the prospect of a date for the end of the system, and there are those who did not. And all sorts of in-betweens. And that on the basis of the same information. 
We are all feeding at the same spiritual table, and that includes the WT writers and GB members. And are we not all agreed that, despite adjustments and changes and developments related to the spiritual food served at that table, it still constitutes: "a banquet of rich dishes, a banquet of fine wine, of rich dishes filled with marrow, of fine, filtered wine." Is 25:6.
But regardless of clever argument, fascinating detail etc.,  it is only the word of God that is alive and exerting power in all that spiritual food. (Heb 4:12). Concentrating on anything else would be like eating the icing and ignoring the cake, drinking the gravy and leaving the meat, lapping up the dressing and leaving the salad! Bit like children (compare Heb 5:14). 


 

 

Who is more loyal?
This is a real conversation I had with a brother. He insisted I should follow some instructions in our congregation. I agreed but I also mentioned this arrangement was silly. Then, he insisted, if I were more loyal I would not think it was silly. So, I gave him one example:
One person is blind, and his master demand him: “take this envelop and deliver it in the house at the end of this road.” So, he does, helping himself with a walking stick, happy whistling while is serving his chief.
What the blind servant ignores is that the road is flanked, surrounded with deep cliffs. But as he didn’t see anything was very happy and confident.
Now. The boss orders to another employee doing the same thing, but this time the servant see perfectly the riffs. And still worst, he is afraid of heights.  But this second servant also obeys the master. This time without whistles, but swallowing saliva and sometimes closing the eyes.
Then, I asked to my interlocutor: who is more loyal?
And he insisted, “both sowed the same loyalty.” What’s the opinion of you, the reader? Who was more loyal?
A very difficult situation.
Sometimes, I putted myself in the next situation.  I am one of the men following David when he was persecuted by Saul. Then I get shocked, the anointed of Jehovah I admire give a very strange order: “let’s kill all Nabal’s house.” I immediately think this is a terrible injustice but, I ride the horse with the other 400 and obey the anointed. What a relief when Abigail stops him!
Years later I’m serving in the army under Joab. Then, my general give me strange orders from the King: Uriah must be abandoned in the middle of the fight. I think: “what, this is a murder.” But, of course, the order comes from the king anointed by Jehovah, sure the king has more information than me. Perhaps Uriah is a traitor. I feel terribly wrong, but I obey.
What I’m proposing is: if I want to be loyal, must always agree with the instructions from the “slave” class? Have I the right to think some orders, explanations, directions from these brothers are silly, sometimes completely wrong?
I follow these teachings, of course, but, please, don’t force me to always agree with them!

Holly, I'm afraid I do not subscribe to the beliefs of Christendom. To me, their leaders are counterfeit Christians, and most of who follow them, or profess to be Christians are such in name only.

Thanks for your comments. I see you have a lot of first hand information. Very interesting all you mention about these different matters. And I'm glad I understood more or less accurately!
The same you mention about the brothers in the headquarters is the same I've seen in my own country, regarding some deeds of our branch. I find it normal, because I've done the same myself as elder. Yes, we're humans... 
 

I know it is probably my bad, but I don't care about these things. What's the present understanding? I'll spin it that way out of loyalty. Should the understanding change someday, I'll spin it the new way. It doesn't affect my basic relationship with Jehovah or his Son.
I don't recommend that attitude, or hold it out as some example. But I just can't get too worked up over such things. They are 'cool' but not essential.

But you have to remember that the returnees, or those in exile, were not commanded to return to Jerusalem. That was left up to the individual. This was much different than the release from Egypt, when the Israelites were slaves, held under compulsory service. But as exiles from their homeland, many were given service in the government, some even became wealthy doing business in the territory. So when Babylon fell and the Word came to return, many may have weighed that call against what they had gained. But it was a false assumption, because again they were not putting spiritual things first.
Their return was not for their relief, but to rebuild the temple and Jehovah's named worship center. Not their own relief and homelife, which was what Nehemiah found when the work slacked, but their own homes were decked out. So those whose heart was true to true worship as Isaiah wrote, for righteousness would be on this road, being protected by Jehovah on the trek back home.
So some indeed stayed, but those 'seeking first' spiritual things left to return to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple and the wall and gate of the city, which had been burned by fire.

But we won't stop trying ....will we??

Of course this is the ideal situation and assumes that both sets of parents are spiritually mature, emotionally stable and promote a healthy and functional family environment. In such cases a predator has no chance and he knows it. The problem is that where either or both parents are spiritually immature, mentally unstable and the general family environment is unstable and dysfunctional (as was the case of the family of Candace Conti discussed above) then 1.They will fail in the three key responsibilities you mentioned, and 2.these kind of families are ideal targets for predators. They are the very families the predator will seek out. So already we have a problem, the stage is set for abuse.
So although I more than agree with the above, because it's a great recipe for prevention, and what's better than prevention instead of a cure...BUT it will not always work. Realistically, in this system, one will still be left with the "cure" and how to handle cases of child abuse focusing on helping the victim and protecting others from further abuse....