If the organization did not actually prophesy the end in 1925 and 1975, then how come so many Witnesses left the faith immediately afterwards?

[Anna]

12 hours ago, Gone Away said:

we need to find the "sweet spot"

Yes! In other word balance.

[Anna]

17 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

17 hours ago, JW Insider said:

At least internally, we should all be bitterly weeping at such things. 

Amen to that.

... but NO ONE at Warwick is !

NO ONE!

Honestly how can you know?

[Evacuated]

1 hour ago, Gone Away said:

We merely inferred it

And I think the "merely " refers to the comparison between what the Lord says and what men infer, not to the relative seriousness of the inference.

[Anna]

Often expressions such as “enduring these difficult times”  “enduring disappointment”  “ a sad year”  “hopes were dashed”  “time of test” and others  are used in conjunction with the disappointments of certain anticipated dates in WT history. As Proverbs 13:12 says: “Expectation postponed makes the heart sick”. These tests or disappointments were never caused by Jehovah of course, but man, specifically those who were in charge of giving food at the proper time. This brings me to a sobering thought; could this be tantamount to “beating their fellow slave” ?? (Matt. 24:29) Certainly not all of the time, but specifically at those times under discussion, and especially when this caused some to be stumbled.

[Evacuated]

1 minute ago, Anna said:

beating their fellow slave

Not really. They are beating themselves.

[Anna]

Just now, Gone Away said:

Not really. They are beating themselves.

Who do you mean by "they"

[Evacuated]

1 minute ago, Anna said:

Who do you mean by "they"

Those who make erroneous assertions. These could be faithful nonetheless.

[Anna]

3 minutes ago, Gone Away said:

Those who make erroneous assertions. These could be faithful nonetheless.

But perhaps not very discreet

[Evacuated]

Just now, Anna said:

But perhaps not very discreet

At times not, but hey ho...good job the Head knows what he is doing. John 21:15-17.

[JW Insider]

3 minutes ago, Anna said:

This brings me to a sobering thought; could this be tantamount to “beating their fellow slave” ?? (Matt. 24:29) Certainly not all of the time, but specifically at those times under discussion, and especially when this caused some to be stumbled.

This makes perfect sense to me. And it should not cause us to disrespect the Governing Body. Jesus said that the stumbling blocks would surely come. Anyone at some time, could be a stumbling block, and they can also be forgiven.

• (Matthew 16:23) 23 But turning his back, he said to Peter: “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, because you think, not God’s thoughts, but those of men.”
• (Matthew 18:7) . . .Of course, it is inevitable that stumbling blocks will come, but woe to the man through whom the stumbling block comes!
• (Luke 17:1-4) 17 Then he said to his disciples: “It is unavoidable that causes for stumbling should come. Nevertheless, woe to the one through whom they come! 2 It would be more advantageous for him if a millstone were hung from his neck and he were thrown into the sea than for him to stumble one of these little ones. 3 Pay attention to yourselves. If your brother commits a sin, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him. 4 Even if he sins seven times a day against you and he comes back to you seven times, saying, ‘I repent,’ you must forgive him.”
• (1 Corinthians 11:18, 19) 18 For first of all, I hear that when you come together in a congregation, divisions exist among you; and to an extent I believe it. 19 For there will certainly also be sects among you, so that those of you who are approved may also become evident.

But teachers will receive heavier judgment because it is their job to keep the little ones from stumbling, like a good shepherd keeps the sheep on the right path to green pastures. Still, if our brother commits a sin that stumbles others --even a sin of pride, haughtiness and presumptuousness, or beating fellow slave -- we are still to rebuke that brother. If that brother is an elder or governing body member, this should make no difference, as we are not to show favoritism. However, we should still hold back and perhaps wait until the second offense before seeing to it that an accusation is lodged.

• (1 Timothy 5:1) 5 Do not severely criticize an older man. . . .

• (1 Timothy 5:17-19) 17 Let the elders who preside in a fine way be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard in speaking and teaching. . . . 19 Do not accept an accusation against an older man except on the evidence of two or three witnesses.

 

This does not mean we should avoid our responsibility to rebuke a person who sins publicly, even if they be on the Governing Body. But we should present our evidence to the brother(s) first, before presenting it to the congregation. After all, we might easily be wrong, and they should have an opportunity to present counter-evidence or an explanation.

[Anna]

3 hours ago, Gone Away said:

As an organisation of believers use the Watchtower medium as a channel, then it could be said to reflect the collective views of it's members. So in voicing blame for it's members having erroneous ideas, surely it is blaming itself?

Yes, I agree. It's just that if someone already has a negative perspective on the whole situation they can't but help interpret  wrongly. And I think this could be because it was all termed so ambiguously, that there was room for interpretation. We have to remember that we are an organization that has a head, Jesus. But apparently Jesus uses the Slave as a channel of communication, so short of blaming Jesus, who else can we blame, logically? It can't be the ordinary publisher can it? And not even those in the writing department since everything has to be approved by the Slave first. I feel there would have been no room for misunderstanding had the WT clearly said that the Slave, aka those in charge of dispensing spiritual food were to blame. But this has never been the custom, to be straight up about things like this. I have never heard, and I am sure you haven't either, a straightforward apology from the GB/Slave/those dispensing spiritual food. It's as if they are afraid they may lose the trust and respect of the congregation if they were to be candid about their failings. Because it is the Slave who interpret scripture for us, nothing that we know of the Truth comes from our own interpretation of the scriptures. So if the scriptures are interpreted wrongly, whose fault is it? We know whose fault it is. But it would be nice to have it spelled out black on white at times, and not insinuated in an evasive manner. The Bible writers were so upfront about their failings, "miserable man that I am!". One of the characteristics of the Bible is its candor. If only WT leadership could emulate this in their publications....

As a side issue, but still relevant to the discussion, does anyone know how the "millions now living will never die" has been explained away?

 

4 hours ago, Gone Away said:

I have been on field service with one of the anointed who shouted through the letter box that an uninterested  householder would be destroyed at Armageddon. Haven't you?

Yes! I wonder, was it perhaps the same person!

4 hours ago, Gone Away said:

"Read the Bible Daily" was the best bit of advice I was ever given. I have come across some odd ideas (and people) over the years, but nothing where I couldn't sort out the sense from the nonsense, with the help of the one who flicked the wheels off Egyptian chariots (Ex.14:25).

Same here!

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

It is my understanding that the "Millions now living will never die!" fantasy was actually a typo.

It should have been "Millions  now living will never dye !" and it was talking about washing your robes white, with non-chlorine bleach.

The is, of course ..... several OTHER other explanations ....... none of the above are scriptual, or even sane.