ComfortMyPeople

@JW Insiderthank you for all the references to quotes and photos of quotes. A lot of work there. I think you deserve to pour yourself a drink now!

Russell's references to apologies and the topic of apologies
In the last few days, I have at least skimmed and mostly re-read every article in the WT that referred to one of Barbour's and Russell's chronology and dates. I have done the same with almost every paragraph in his books, and most of his Sermons. But I have also "cheated" by using a single text-searchable file containing every article of every Watch Tower written under Russell's supervision. (1879-1916). I have another one for his books. I made use of it to search for every form of the word apology, apologized, apologies, regret(s), regretted, error(s), err(ed)(ing), mistake(s)(n), (a)shame(d), wrong(s)(ly), stumble(s)(d), revise(s)(d), retract(ion)(s)(ed), etc., etc., etc.
This exercise surprised me in that some of those word groups (like, "mistake*") are used over 1,000 times, which could give someone the wrong impression that "mistakes" were the primary subject of the magazine.
It also helped that I still have my notebooks that I kept from work I did at Bethel on the topic of Russell's chronology and other doctrines. And I usually re-read parts of Russell's original sources before making any comment about Russell on the forum, so that much of the information I have been looking at had already been reviewed in the last couple of years. (But that's not saying much for a 64-year-old memory of someone who also tends to rush, and skim and skip through any number of subjects in a day.)
When Russell used any of those forms or synonyms for "apology" it was usually about others. Of course, there also a few apologies for not answering letters sooner, or a delay in publishing a promised tract, article, or book. But literally hundreds of cases are in the published letters to Russell where the writer apologizes for not doing more, not being able send more money, or for having doubted Russell on a specific topic, or "uncharitable thoughts" toward Russell, or having once rejected his books and teachings. Similarly, Russell often quoted other religious leaders who apologized for incorrect views, or not being able to defend their views very well. There are so many of these, that someone (else) could create a kind of psychological study, I'm sure.
And several other types of exceptions were in the context that God's true servants don't have to apologize, because they are workmen with nothing to be ashamed of.  There are a surprising number of phrases against apologies which say something like:
God doesn't have to apologize and neither do his ambassadors, his true servants . . . [WT p.R921] This is meat in due season for the household of faith and I won't apologize for it. "We need offer no apology for the interest which we feel in this grand subject, which is the center upon which all the testimony of divine grace, through all the holy prophets, is focused. Rather do they need to apologize who, knowing that the second coming of the Lord and the resurrection of the dead hold the most important places in the Scriptures." [WT p.R2359, repeated on p.R2973] Russell also gave more experiences than I had remembered where others had slandered him or disagreed with his handling of a matter. In several of these Russell added, in his (and their) defense, that the person later apologized to him. Russell also accused more than one person of slander and asked for an apology.
But to the point, Russell many times correctly published that any Christian who had said or done anything wrong should always apologize to the person wronged, at least in private. This is consistent throughout his writings from 1879 to 1916. Here's an example published from one of the first issues in 1879:
"I wonder who among those who are making this new application, and say they have as much confidence in it as in any part of the application, will be honorable enough to confess as publicly as the former application was made that they were mistaken? "We thought that was light, we thought the Lord led us into it, but we were mistaken, and it was all darkness." Certainly if one position is light the other must be darkness. Does the Lord lead his people in opposite directions? Would it not be wise to be less dogmatic, and less severe with those who cannot see as we do? We may all safely learn a lesson from this sad affair. Those who have advanced light can afford to be patient." [WT, October 1879 p.R40]
[In the above case the article is about how others should apologize. The article below is the general correct counsel for all.]
"We understand that it is the Lord's will respecting us that we should carefully scrutinize our thoughts, words and actions. If we find that we have injured another with our tongue or in any manner, we should go to that person, and to any to whom we have spoken, and make it right, make proper apologies, putting a penalty upon ourselves --a penalty that we shall not forget. If the penalty requires considerable humility, so much the better. If we neglect to punish ourselves, this would show that we are not in the proper condition; and the best thing the Lord could do for us would be to give us a severe chastisement." WT, p. R5519

So now we can look more closely at those dates which Russell himself had promoted a specific future expectations, and which were not fulfilled. So, if there were any apologies for jumping ahead of Jehovah's timeline, or inadvertently misleading others, we might expect to find an apology attached shortly only after any of the following dates: 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, 1915.
1878
[p.124] But we did expect translation . . . And as we journey on a little further, deliverance may come any time between this and the end of the “harvest,” in 1878.  . . .  [p.143]With this message the “the mystery of God will be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.” And from August, 1840, to the spring of 1878, or 37 and a-half years, will consummate this part of the work. Then look out for “angry nations,” “and the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest reward thy servants the prophets, and the saints . . . . [The Three Worlds, written by Barbour in 1876-77, and financially promoted by Russell beginning in 1877.]
The year A.D. 1878 . . .clearly marks the time for the actual assuming of power as King of kings, by our present spiritual invisible Lord -- the time of his taking to himself his great power to reign. [The Time is at Hand (1889), SiS, v.3, p.239]
If the contention of his [Russell's] opponents concerning chronology is right, then . . . the tenure of office of Israel's kings must be changed in order to agree with some historians who were agents of Satan. Such a change would put out of joint all our chronology, and destroy the value of the dates 1874, 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, and 1918. [WT, 5/1/1922, p.139.]
1878 was also the year identified for the "first resurrection" (3.5 years after October 1874), which later changed to 1918 (3.5 years after October 1914). The brackets around the term "[from 1878]" in the next reference are in the original:
"...blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from henceforth [from 1878] ; ... they rest from their labors [from the toil and weariness of Labor], but their works follow with them." They shall not asleep, but they shall be changed instantaneously from the human to a glorious spiritual body.-Revelation 14:13, 1 Corinthians 15: 51, 52. [1878 bracketed in the original, WT 1922, p.207.
This date (1878) was therefore kept as prophetically significant by Russell until his death and was referenced by Rutherford as correct even in the 1920's. The expectations for this date were the catalyst that influenced Russell to sell many of his business interests (the year prior) to help finance the publishing of Barbour's work that explained those important expectations for 1878, as the "end of the harvest," and the "end of the gospel age." When these expectations failed, Barbour would again run out of money, and Russell struck out on his own with Zion's Watch Tower in July 1879.
Among all the things Russell said about 1878, I see no record of any specific apology by Russell for helping to create and promote the expectation that Christians would see their "change" from physical bodies to glorious spiritual bodies during the spring of 1878. Russell had promoted that date in publishing "The Three Worlds" even though he didn't write it personally.
The WT publications today, still indicate that Russell and his associates taught that they would receive their heavenly reward in 1878:
*** jv [Proclaimers book] chap. 28 p. 632 Testing and Sifting From Within ***
Based on the premise that events of the first century might find parallels in related events later, they also concluded that if Jesus’ baptism and anointing in the autumn of 29 C.E. paralleled the beginning of an invisible presence in 1874, then his riding into Jerusalem as King in the spring of 33 C.E. would point to the spring of 1878 as the time when he would assume his power as heavenly King. They also thought they would be given their heavenly reward at that time. When that did not occur, they concluded that since Jesus’ anointed followers were to share with him in the Kingdom, the resurrection to spirit life of those already sleeping in death began then. It was also reasoned that the end of God’s special favor to natural Israel down to 36 C.E. might point to 1881 as the time when the special opportunity to become part of spiritual Israel would close.
Although Russell didn't write it, Russell published an article by contributor, J.H.Paton that did present a kind of apology about the mistaken promotion of the 1878 date. This will be the topic of one of the next posts. Russell himself, wrote about the expectations for 1878 in the 1879 supplement to the first issue of the Watch Tower.
Before getting to the details of that, I noticed some interesting things about Russell's many references to apologies.

To be a little more comprehensive, let's start with a quick review of Russell's 19th century dates, and also try to get a sense of Russell's attitude towards them. For comparison, and reference, we might also want to look at the WTS attitude toward some of these dates after Russell died in 1916.
1799
"The time of the end" embraces a period from 1799 A.D., as above indicated, to the time of the complete overthrow of Satan's empire and the establishment of the kingdom of the Messiah. [1921 Harp, p.231]
"The indisputable facts therefore show that the time of the end began in 1799." [WT 3/1/22, p.73]
So 1799 was defined as the beginning of the "time of the end" from Russell's day until well after Russell's death, and until Rutherford changed it (in 1929) to the year 1914. Russell's view on it never changed, and we would therefore not expect an apology.
1700's - 1859
For the same reasons, we can pretty much skip certain other dates which were also only seen to have been prophetically important in the past:
November 1, 1766 (the great earthquake in Lisbon) May 19, 1780 (when the "sky darkened" and the moon "turned to blood") November 13, 1833 (stars fell from heaven - a meteor shower) 1844 (the unwise virgins of the Millerite movement) 1859 (the "midnight cry" of Matthew 25). Russell only spoke about these dates occasionally, and since these "fulfillments" happened before Russell's own time, we shouldn't have to check for apologies about them. He apparently accepted them from Barbour and Russell kept believing them for the rest of his life. (Russell actually did stop publishing any defense of the 1859 date as the specific date for the "the midnight cry," probably because it was supposedly fulfilled in specific events in Nelson Barbour's life. It was later spoken of as a more general date between 1844 and 1874, not the midpoint between the two.)
1872
This volume presents evidences that:--Six Thousand Years from Adam ended in A.D. 1872 [The Time is at Hand (1889), SiS, v.3, Intro.]
The end of the 6,000 years of man's existence. This was later adjusted to 1873, but with no explanation I have seen, and therefore no apology. Expectations for the "end" had been set to 1873 by Barbour, especially, but this was before Russell was directly involved with those expectations. See below.
1873
"The great Seventh Day, the thousand years of Christ's Reign, began in 1873."  [The Time is at Hand (1889), SiS, v.3, p.ii]
Since this was 6,000 years from Adam's creation, Armageddon was expected to begin in Barbour's view, and the 7th "Millennium" was said to have already begun to dawn in 1873. Therefore, they were still in the Millennial "Dawn" as light from the "Day-Star" would rise more and more visibly.
The Second Adventists who had associated through Barbour also initially expected 1873 to be the time of their "change" to the a glorious, immortal "spirit" body. When nothing happened in 1873, more emphasis was placed on 1874. The same thing had happened to the original Millerite Second Adventists which had predicted 1843, and then created even more emphasis on 1844. There was no Watch Tower back in 1873, and Russell personally had nothing to apologize for, but these events were reviewed in the February 1881 WT, p.R188:
Looking back to 1871, we see that many of our company were what are known as Second Adventists, . . . that there would be a second advent of Jesus-- that he would come to bless and immortalize the saints. . . . This, they claimed would occur in 1873, because the 6,000 years from the creation of Adam were complete then. Well 1873 came . . . but prophecies were found which pointed positively to 1874 as the time when Jesus was due to be present,and the resurrection of Daniel was also due as proved by the ending of jubilee cycles and the 1335 days of Dan. 12.
1874
After the failure of 1873, Russell says he was still not convinced of the chronology that moved it to 1874, and he indicates that he was not involved in promoting the "change" in 1874. Russell distances himself from those who did promote it as an "end" date. We only know for sure from Russell's own words that he was strongly defending the 1874 date as the year of Jesus' invisible presence. But that wasn't until 1876, not in advance of 1874.
"They are, we believe God's dates not ours." [WT, July 15, 1894, p. R1677]. Russell was referencing 1874 along with 1878, 1881, and 1914.
"Our Lord, the appointed king, is now present, since October 1874 A.D." Day of Vengeance/Battle of Armageddon (1897), p.621)
"The Scriptural proof is that the second presence of the Lord Jesus Christ began in 1874 A.D."  [Rutherford, not Russell, in Prophecy, 1929]
Bible prophecy shows that the Lord was due to appear for the second time in the year 1874. Fulfilled prophecy shows beyond a doubt that he did appear in 1874. Fulfilled prophecy is otherwise designated the physical facts; and these facts are indisputable. [WT November 1, 1922, p.233 - Rutherford, not Russell]
Russel believed that Christ's invisible presence had begun in 1874, and he kept this belief until his death, and even Rutherford and Frederick Franz continued to accept this as a proven fact until the 1940's, so then there is no reason to expect that Russell ever would have reason to apologize for this date. It's true that people, especially Second Adventists were disappointed, but Russell had nothing to apologize for, as he had not begun writing for publications until 1876. He had apparently never promoted it as a date for the "change" or "translation" from physical to spiritual bodies.
What Russell was accepting about 1874 was that it must be more than just a coincidence that so many chronology pointers surrounded 1874. (The "6,000 years" in 1873, the 70th Jubilee in 1875, the Great Pyramid measurements, the Zionist movements clearing the way for Jews to return to Palestine which would end the Gentile Times, the 1260/1290/1335 days(years) of Daniel, and the "doubles" of the Jewish Age and the Gospel Age.)  [Those "doubles" referred to the parallel dispensations that mapped events in the Jewish age to events of equal length to the Gospel (Christian) age.]
1875
It was not just the closeness of October 1874 to the year 1875 that allowed Barbour and Russell to reference 1875 and 1874 almost interchangeably. Barbour and Russell usually counted Jewish years from fall to fall, but sometimes they found reason to count years from spring to spring, as expressed here in "The Three Worlds" p 102:

The special use of 1875 was often mentioned as a supporting factor to 1874 because it was connected to the 70th Jubilee Cycle, each individual cycle lasting 50 years (or 49 years)* --creating a kind of "Jubliee of Jubilees!" The Jubilees were to have started when Israel crossed the Jordan which was about 50x49=3,450 years prior to 1875 (Therefore a 50-year Jubilee could be identified with 1875, then 50 years later in 1925, and even 50 years later in 1975.)
----Interesting side point: CTR said Jesus was here on earth in 1874, not in heaven-----
Russell believed Jesus' invisible presence was not about being invisibly present as king in heaven on a heavenly throne. Jesus was invisibly present on earth. Note one of these places where that is mentioned in the August 1880 WT:
The "Jubilee Cycles" prove that the great jubilee or "times of restitution of all things" was due to begin in 1875. It is a clear,strong argument based upon both "the Law" and the Prophets; No one has ever yet been able to overthrow it. I believe that no one can overthrow it, nor even show a weak point in it, because it is of the Lord. Now, remembering this, turn to Acts 3:21, and hear Peter under inspiration, say: The heavens shall receive Jesus until the times of restitution of all things. Now, is it not clear that if the restitution times began in 1875, the heavens do no longer retain Him. He is here present? Q.--That is strong, surely; but, are there any evidences that the restitution work began in 1875? A.--Yes; we understand that before the human family are restored or even begin to be blessed the present kingdoms of earth which now bind and oppress mankind will all be overturned and that the kingdom of God will assume control and that the blessing and restitution come through the new kingdom.The work of demolishing human empire is beginning.
Therefore, Russell's direct involvement in promoting dates with the express purpose of influencing the expectations of others was for the dates: 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, and 1915. Apparently, these are the only dates for which he personally created or promoted unfulfilled expectations, and which might have therefore become the subject of an apology.
-----An interesting, but mostly unrelated point about the jubilees--------
*Just for reference, note that the Jubilee cycles were either considered to be 49 years or 50 years, depending on the interpretation of the jubilee as the 7th of 7 yearly sabbaths (7x7=49 years), or a pointer to a jubilee year that happened immediately after the 49th year (49+1=50 years). In putting his name on "The Three Worlds" Russell was promoting a hybrid solution that included a mix of some 49-year jubilees and some 50-year jubilees.

We should also look for statements about some of the other dates that Russell made claims for. For example, @Srecko Sostar made some statements about Russell's dates, which included the following quotes from Russell:
@Thinking responded to Srecko as follows:
In an earlier statement @Thinking had also indicated that it was not the 1914 date, specifically, but one of those other dates:,  
So I'll be looking for any apologies by Russell for dates around 1874, which will include 1878, 1881, 1910, and 1914 itself, for good measure.

I'd first like to begin with BroRando's statement from that post linked above.
In reality Russell did think 1914 would be an end date. He predicted for many years that the year 1914 would finally see would be the "end " of the day of vengeance, etc. He had stated that point many times. In fact, he indicated that it would be the "end of the world" but not in the sense that many religions understood this. He made sure that he clarified that it would not be the so-called "burning" of the world that many expected. Even well after 1914 (and Russell) passed, Rutherford would call 1914, "the end of Satan's system."
Throughout most of his writings, Russell taught that 1914 would be the farthest limit of man's rule, and that 1914 would see the "end of the time of trouble, not the beginning" of it. But about a decade before 1914, he started to teach that the 40-year harvest work from 1874 to 1914 should go on without much interference by this time of trouble, so the time of trouble was moved from pre-October-1914 to post-October-1914. It was therefore supposed to begin in October 1914 and go on for several months, and he indicated that it would likely finish by the end of the calendar year 1915 (later changed to 1916) in a time of chaos when no more earthly governments would be in power. (Except for a Jewish based government in Palestine that would have Jehovah's blessing.)
However, there were a few months between November 1913 and July 1914 when Russell admitted that he was questioning his own expectations about 1914, and he even suggested that perhaps things could just go on for another century, and he wondered what people might think of all these predictions "100 years from now" (which would be 2014). Another time he mentioned what things might still be like if the time of trouble went on for 120 years (which would bring one to 2034).
A review of what Russell stated after the failure of all the 1914 expectations should make it clear that Russell did not really think anything specific was supposed to happen in either 2014 or 2034. Russell gave no specific significance to those periods except to make the point that he no longer had as much confidence in the 1914 date. In late 1913 and early 1914 Russell suggested that there quite probably just wasn't enough time for all these preliminary expectations to come true in the remaining few months before October 1914. He spoke about pushing the date to 1915 or even 1916, and if it didn't happen at all, wondered what things might be like a century or more from now.
Those statements should be some of the ones we look at with respect to Russell's response to failed dates and failed expectations, since Russell was already bringing up the clear possibility of their failure as early as November 15, 1913. In that context, however, Russell made it very clear that, even if 1914 failed to come true, that he would feel no reason to apologize. In fact, he happily reported about how people would still be putting just as much faith in himself (Russell) as ever, and mentioned that, even if 1914 failed, he still expected people to be reading his books with interest in 2014. 
After expressing his doubts about 1914 in the November 15, 1913 Watchtower, Russell presented this letter from someone who was responding to those doubts (in the January 15, 1914 Watchtower):
“…we passed a resolution assuring you of our steadfast faith in you and your leadings. We got the thought from reading the Nov. 15th WATCH TOWER, the article on “What Course Should We Take?” that you had almost decided that the things we have been expecting in 1914 would not come to pass on time–since you said it is possible, but not probable. Now, dear Brother, if these things do not come to pass until 2014, instead of 1914, our faith in you will be as great as it ever has been….”
Another letter about Russell's doubts was published along with Russell's answer to it in the July 1, 1914 issue. The question was about whether the WTS will continue to publish and distribute Russell's books if October 1914 failed. It even questioned whether it was right to distribute them in the midst of Russell's doubts:
How shall we do respecting the STUDIES IN THE SCRIPTURES after October, 1914? Will the Society continue to publish them? Will the Colporteurs and others continue to circulate them? Is it right to circulate them now, since you have some doubt respecting the full accomplishment of all expected by or before October, 1914?
Russell responded as follows:
It is our thought that these books will be on sale and read for years in the future . . . . That will be an interesting matter a hundred years from now [2014]; and if he can figure or reason better, he will still be interested in what we have presented.

Note: An entire 30-page topic about "The disgusting thing that causes desolation" was recently deleted. The topic contained hundreds of posts, and they were from most of the usual participants here. I messaged the Librarian about it and he said he didn't know anything about how or why it got deleted, but would look into it. It's possible that the person who starts a thread has the ability to delete it, which is something else he'll look into.
In that topic there were several posts concerning Charles Taze Russell brought up initially by @BroRando and commented on by @Thinking, @Srecko Sostar, @Arauna, @TrueTomHarley, @Anna, KF, Pudgy, PWfT, and others.
There were several comments I wanted to respond to, especially the idea first brought up by @BroRando that C.T.Russell (early in 1914) spoke about some kind of fulfillment in 2034, which I believe is simply not true. And I will explain in this topic.
When @BroRando brought up Russell's date references, @Thinking responded to him that she remembered reading where Russell had apologized for trying to rush Jehovah's timetable with man's timetable, or words to that effect. To that I responded that I had not remembered an apology like that. @Thinking responded that I have made many false and misleading statements about Russell. If this is true, I would like to correct those errors. Since @Thinking has not yet offered any specifics about any of those statements of mine, and because I was asked by @Thinking to look through Russell's statements myself, I have agreed to follow up on this idea.
Another point was brought up by @TrueTomHarley which partially responds to @Thinking and her point about Russell's apology. It was one example of several times when Russell was refreshingly non-dogmatic about the chronology. It was from the January 1, 1908 Watch Tower where Russell says "We are not prophesying, we are merely giving our surmises." It also highlighted the statement: "We do not even aver that there are no mistakes in our interpretation of prophecy and our calculations of chronology." Of course, there were other times when Russell sounded much more sure and dogmatic, but there are enough statements on each side to give a much better picture of Russell's overall attitude toward dates, predictions, and his response when expectations failed.  I believe we are able to "reconcile" both the dogmatic and the non-dogmatic in a fair way towards Russell himself. We have to consider both Russell's personal perspective, the historical perspective of the times, and Russell's own changes and growth and influences through the period. It may help us not to give too much weight to statements on either end of the spectrum.
In any case, I'm all for giving Russell the benefit of the doubt on the question of "dogmatism," but from what I remember, some of the Russell's statements which are sometimes utilized to defend Russell's supposedly apologetic nature are quite different from what I would call an apology. Again, I can explain the results of an exhaustive search. (By exhaustive, I wish I meant comprehensive, but I only mean that I'm exhausted from so much reading.)
@BroRando had commented about how Russell made some supposedly significant comments about chronology in the year 1914, even suggesting that Russell proposed we add 120 years to 1914 which would bring us to 2034. 2034 is a date considered very significant by @BroRando. It appears to me that too much significance is still being given to Russell's dates, and judging by other comments, too much focus on the overall continuing relevance of Russell, even claiming that his work prophetically fulfilled the work of Elijah and/or John the Baptist. However, I've done a lot more reviewing of Russell's views and I'll share much of what I found because I think it answers all three of the major points I wanted to respond to:
1. Did Russell really think anything prophetically significant might happen in 2014 or 2034? 2. DId Russell apologize for stepping ahead of God's timetable with his personal views? 3. Can we get a more balanced view of Russell's attitude and response toward dates and expectations?

. There is mitochondrial DNA and the number of generations can be counted. It is from this they determine that all people on earth are related through one woman. 
 
Pudgy, evolutionist theorists always give big numbers for hunter gatherer epochs - without much evidence. Then they also put the start of agriculture in a long period - whatever suits their theory.  However, urbanization (meaning cities and civilization)  goes back only 6000 years, some say 8000 at most.  This is much in line with the start of city- states next to large rivers and canals to plant food such as Sumerian culture, Babylon and Harappa cultures. Even Egypt existed next to a large river which gave food to cities and transport.  Close to  cities one found diversity of jobs such as a priest class, scribes, and those who manufactured pottery, textiles and of course animal husbandry.  Cities brought wealth. We see in time of Lot that 5 kings from the east came and carried Lott and his family away..... Abraham took his 300 slaves and went after them in war. To get them back. Cities brought large wars and eventually empires.. . After the flood, in Abraham's time there were many cities but the nomadic lifestyle was still viable with abundant  free open land. Later it became more crowded as isaac experienced some problems with the wells his father had built. Groups of people were encroaching on each other. After abraham left Ur it was destroyed. Early history is filled with war and peoples taken captive as slaves. Pottery and items in trash is still a good way to identify civilizations and how they traded with each other. 

What a caring husband you are! Thanks for the information. Yes, I also believe in empowering myself with knowledge of natural medicine because most doctors were raised on the mothers milk of big pharma.  Doctors who believe in natural supplementation etc are now called quacks..... and the situation in the world  is such that they are openly making war on natural health products and doctors who speak truth - with the help of big tech.  Cancelling  articles and even books which can save lives...
The world is in Satan's control more than ever before!

FYI - If you ever have a loved one get hospitalized for some cardiac situation and the cardiologist prescribes colchicine to reduce fluid buildup around the pericardium, be aware of side effects the doctor's themselves may not be aware of.
Colchicine has been used for hundreds of years for gout and recently has been used to reduce cardiac inflammation. It may also do other things if the patient stays on it too long.
In my case my wife was on it for a few months, but in that time and unbeknownst to me because of her polymyalgia rheumatica situation I didn't realize it was damaging her nerves, her muscles and her brain. She lost thirty pounds in this time, couldn't eat, would vomit, became weak and incontinent, was in deep muscle pain and neither the rheumatologist nor the primary care physician made the connection. In fact it was ignored when I mentioned it to her primary care physician.
So rather than watch my wife die, I took her off the colchicine and to deal with the pain I gave her 500 mg of acetominophen w/600 mg of N-Acetyl-Cysteine (3 x a Day) (an amino acid given to counter the potential liver damage from the acetominophen). I suspected the colchicine was the culprit. True the symptoms didn't come on quickly, but colchicine can build up in a person's system. She couldn't sit up in bed, I had to help her get on and off the commode and wipe her. I had to shower her. She didn't know at times what day of the week it was.
After a week and a half off the colchicine, the muscle pain went away, but the extreme weakness and all the other things associated w/colchicine poisoning existed.  I googled and tried to pack in every possible supplement associated w/assisting people w/alzheimers or traumatic brain injury or nerve damage.
Alpha-GPC, CDP-choline, Co-Q10, NAD+, Vinpocetine, Phenylpiracetam, Noopept, Acetyl-L-Carnitine, L-Carnosine, Fish Oil, Sulbuitamine (just to list a few). I shelled all these and packed them into a protein shake (w/creatine, and hmb) and argued w/her to drink at least this once a day. I used red light therapy on her head as well.
It's three months now and she's back to better than normal. (Although as soon as she really started to improve dramatically, her hair started to fall out - apparently hair will go dormant under stress and when the stress is gone, it sheds....right now she has "zombie-hair" but we can see it's growing back in.
She's not taking everything that I packed into her shake every day now, but now I can actually leave the house w/o worry. Before this I couldn't leave 20 minutes w/o worrying that I'd find her on the bathroom floor.
 
Anyway, just know that no one is as interested in your health or the health of your loved ones as you are. You're ultimately responsible. Doctors aren't necessarily geniuses.

It truly is a ridiculous notion, but unfortunately it also happens to be a true notion.
I have never banned anyone, nor do I wish to, nor do I have the power to do that.
No, of course not. But you are most definitely the same person who uses the account @César Chávez, @WyattEarp @Allen_Smith, @TheNonstoptheo etc., etc.
I am not the the Librarian. I only have one account here.
BTW, In addition to the way your log-ins and log-outs show up in the "Recently Browsing" portion of the page, you also give "yourselves" away in several other ways, too.
For example, look how you spelled the word "too" as "to" just on this very same page:
Also, note your unique style of adding a few extra, unnecessary commas, which has given many people pause in almost every one of the accounts I mentioned along with about 20 additional accounts over the past few years, too.

This reminded me of something that I have found recently. Although the claim is not about the signs in heavens etc. it does pinpoint the time when these and similar things were to take place. I think it's one of the places where the 20th century has not been replaced by a more generic "in our time".
1971 "The nations shall know that I am Jehovah" ch.12 p 116 par 9:
"Shortly, within our twentieth century, the “battle in the day of Jehovah” will begin against the modern antitype of Jerusalem, Christendom". 
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101971012

I remember reading about something like this in Franz's book but I don't think it was a decision regarding the signs in the heavens but a decision about something else that impacted a lot of people, negatively unfortunately. All because of one person changing his mind...

You appear to have conflated two different GB meetings. In 1980 (when there were about 15 active GB members) only 3 GB members had their names on the memo to discuss moving the beginning of the "generation that will not pass away" from October 4, 1914 to October 4, 1957. It was the "brain-child" of Bro. Bert Schroeder, and my guess is that the other two GB members whose names are on the memo were only included because Bert Schroeder was the chairman of that committee and the others (Booth and Suiter, if I recall) happened to be on the same committee. It's not like the other two signed or promoted the idea. It was just brought to the table for discussion. Bert Schroeder was serious about it, but if you knew Suiter and Booth, I don't think they would have been strong advocates of it or even had much of an opinion about it.
The idea that such things as satellites and rockets in space could be signs in heavens was already hinted at during the study of the book "Your Will Be Done on Earth."  The book was written in 1958, but it's still on the jw.org website, because that book was reprinted in the Watchtowers from November 1958 to June 1960. And those articles are on the site. But the most similar ideas to this (before 1980) were the talks that sometimes tied the verses in Luke 21 to the fear of the nuclear age and the new dangers of combining the space race with the nuclear age. Sputnik itself was usually treated in the publications as not a specific threat. Even though Sputnik was also mentioned in the same 1959 article that mentioned the signs in the sun moon and stars, below, no direct connection had been drawn from Sputnik to the "signs:"
*** w59 6/1 p. 335 par. 46 “Look! I Am Making All Things New” ***
“ [“Also, there will be signs in the sun and moon and stars] On the earth anguish of nations, not knowing the way out . . . , while men become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth.”
Nuclear fears increased in the early 1960's (e.g. Bay of Pigs, Cuba, 1961) and an even closer connection was then drawn between Luke 21:25,26 and these "signs in the heavens." But they were tied to the generation starting in 1914, of course:
*** w62 3/1 pp. 131-132 God’s New World in Our Generation ***
Today in this nuclear, space age there is indeed “anguish of nations, not knowing the way out.” There is no need for proof of this; it is apparent to anyone who observes world events.
But when did this period of distress of nations begin? With this generation! That is why the new world comes within our generation! World War I marked the beginning of worldwide “anguish of nations.”
That exact same idea was repeated in the May 15 and October 15 Watchtowers of the same year, 1962. And then again in 1965:
*** w65 5/1 pp. 261-262 Cheer amid World Fear ***
Now, too, man has succeeded in sending his space vehicles around and onto the moon, even obtaining remarkable close-up photographs of the lunar surface. The thrill of such scientific achievement, however, is not without widespread feeling of uneasiness, for it is well known that both of the great blocs of nations now confronting each other in cold-war array are planning to be the first to plant a military mission on the moon and use it to scrutinize the installations and movements of the enemy. So the moon is no longer just a gently beaming light for the night sky. It has become a cause for deepening anxiety. And what may yet be discovered, as man turns his attention to nearby planets, is likewise certain to promote the dread feeling of insecurity and uncertainty.
. . .
WORLD FEAR FORETOLD
Nineteen hundred years ago Christ Jesus foresaw this fear-gripped generation, and pointed to the immediate cause: “There will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth anguish of nations, not knowing the way out because of the roaring of the sea and its agitation, while men become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth; for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.” (Luke 21:25, 26)
The material in the 1968 Truth book pointing to 1975 also brought up the connection again. After that the idea seemed to have been dropped from publications for over a decade (1968-1982).
Since 1982, it's been common to see a general connection between the signs in the heavens and military capabilities in the sky and space, but not in a way that could limit the sign to just the nuclear age or the space age. The following statement (with the inclusion of military planes and rockets) could have application to the time from about WWI to now, or even perhaps going further back in time (e.g. the rockets red glare, and bombs bursting in air):
*** w82 5/15 p. 14 par. 10 The Signs of the Times—What Do They Mean to You? ***
With the stockpiling of armaments racing beyond the control of the nations, the literal sea itself is filled with war equipment in the form of ships and submarines capable of carrying deadly nuclear warheads that can wipe out millions of people with a single missile. Indeed, the sea is roaring and ‘agitated.’ And what about the sky and space above us? True to Jesus’ words, ‘the powers of the heavens have been shaken’ in that war planes, rockets, ballistic missiles and the like, can streak through space, across oceans and continents to strike enemy targets.
 

The Governing Body has a procedure on how they decide "New Light".
Someone comes up with an idea, and they discuss it among themselves, and then they vote on the adoption of the "New Light" 
It takes a 2/3 majority to carry the proposal.
That means if there are eight GB members then at least 5.333 have to be for the idea for it to become official doctrine.  Say, six members.
In 1957 when Sputnik was launched the above idea was proposed, that artificial satellites, and Sputnik in particular, would be the fulfillment of Bible Prophesy as regards "signs in the heavens", etc.
I do not remember how many GB members there were back then, as I was just a Puppy, but a 2/3 majority did not carry the day. If memory serves (?) it did pass, but one GB member went to the restroom, and when he came back, he changed his vote.
 

I realize that I am not as smart as humans, but I am smart enough to realize that EVERYBODY, without exception has been wrong 100% of the time about the fulfillment of Biblical prophesy in modern times.
Interpreting invisible things without a shred of evidence is a tough gig.

Without even opening the Video posted, I can tell the speaker is wrong.
.... he has a beard.

It's really a simple topic for most people to reason on, and should not really be that contentious as @scholar JW claims, and not really as complex as @xero has made it out to be in other threads/topics. Personally, I don't want to discuss it again until about 2022. But that shouldn't stop anyone else from finally trying to respond to the Biblical and secular evidence about 607 BCE, much of which has already been presented elsewhere on this forum.

My vision is that the G.B. Please note that the format that we have followed for decades is not the only one. I mean: since there were 3 big annual meetings in Israel, we had three big meetings -assemblies-.
Kissing, hugging, touching, "sniffing" us is biblical and appropriate. But during the week the meeting ends late, the children have to go to school early, they have to have dinner ... Well, why not the meeting during the week for zoom, and the face-to-face weekend, at the k.h.?
Large assemblies could be made voluntary. Brothers eager to meet others, to meet, to embrace, to take photos, to meet potential future spouses... These meetings could be prepared and voluntarily attended (as now international ones)
But those of us who want to listen, learn, those of us who do not have much money, or many children, or sick family members, and who attend an assembly lasting several days involves a great effort and small returns (in terms of learning), because we could have those assemblies in the zoom format, for several weekends, like lately.
It follows from the above that all assembly halls could be sold. Send home hundreds of brothers who are employed to support them. Save thousands of hours of volunteer work preparing assemblies worldwide, save money ...
To keep it short: we would use the best of both worlds. Face-to-face + zoom.
(Sometimes I ask Jehovah to "enlighten the C.G. on this - sure, but I suppose that many, many factors escape me ,,,)

ABOUT WHERE IT'S BEING HEARD...
@JW Insider has referred some comments for others. I have other sources as well. A Bethelite with many years at the world headquarters tells me that when they meet by chance some members of the G.B. half jokingly, half seriously, they comment aloud things like "how well the zoom meetings work, how well everything is working" or the like. I know that these brothers want the G.B. keep thinking that there is a new approach to celebrate meetings, that they consider it.
WEEKLY IN-HOUSE MEETINGS
The face-to-face meetings, held in a physical location, I see as absolutely essential. There are emotional, delicate and uplifting conversations that I myself cannot have with some brothers because I cannot touch or see them up close (perhaps things from my Mediterranean culture). This is only one of the negative effects of not having face-to-face meetings, among many others that could be cited. Now, where in the Bible does it say that there are to be one, two, or three weekly meetings? Do biblical principles prevent some of these meetings from being in an online format?
Real -positive- cases that are occurring due to the zoom meetings:
A brother who comes home late from work, often missed the meeting or was late, because it is not enough for him to just get home, he has to fix himself, go back to the K.H., park the car ... Now He says he's arriving, puts on his tie, and you're done!
Young couples with small children who used to return late from the meeting on weekdays. When he returned, it was his turn to feed the children and fix them for bed. Now he saves a lot of time.
Brothers who at the time of the meeting have some discomfort or another and do not see themselves with the strength to go to the meeting. Being less expensive (even if they look bad for health they turn off the video) they don't miss the zoom meeting at home.
Saving effort, time, money ... well, there would be more, but not to extend myself.
THE ASSEMBLIES
I think it is another anachronism: as Israel had three major annual conventions, so did we. As I have said before, many brothers attend the assembly and find out absolutely nothing: they take care of young children or relatives in poor health. They get up early every day to get ready and be at the assembly hall on time. They invest money in this process. Then you are asked to spend about 5 hours of attentive program, taking notes and everything.
The benefits of zoom assemblies have been impressive. We can listen, repeat the videos, absorb the information much better, save effort, money.
On the latter, thousands and thousands of brothers have invested hours of work for the preparations of the assemblies, or for the weekly care of the premises in the case of the assembly halls. Many of us have missed entire programs doing essential work for the operation of the program.
And isn't it nice that we see thousands of brothers in a beautiful assembly hall? Yes of course! That is why I say that, following the format of international assemblies, these face-to-face assemblies should be scheduled each year. Families and siblings whose personal and financial circumstances allow them to attend in a given year would simply sign up to attend. The rest would see the assembly at home, or in kingdom halls, in short, in zoom format, like last year.
THE PERSECUTION
The JWs believe that we will soon face a worldwide violent persecution that will affect our meetings (as now in Russia, but all over the world). Therefore, the ideal would be to continue having experience in this type of online format.
Well, I better not extend myself further. I don't know what you think. I'm sure that I left things in the pipeline, and I don't think I have the absolute truth, let me know!
 

I am 68 years old.  I worked hard in my lifetime - so I now relax and do what I like - such as field service.

We'll never stop needing to get together as far as I can see.
A physical inspection of the sheep and how the sheep interact with each other in groups is essential to knowing if they are physically, spiritually and emotionally healthy.
People can easily hide and even in meetings, but it's hard to hide in perpetuity if you're regular in meeting attendance IN PERSON.
 

ABOUT WHERE IT'S BEING HEARD...
@JW Insider has referred some comments for others. I have other sources as well. A Bethelite with many years at the world headquarters tells me that when they meet by chance some members of the G.B. half jokingly, half seriously, they comment aloud things like "how well the zoom meetings work, how well everything is working" or the like. I know that these brothers want the G.B. keep thinking that there is a new approach to celebrate meetings, that they consider it.
WEEKLY IN-HOUSE MEETINGS
The face-to-face meetings, held in a physical location, I see as absolutely essential. There are emotional, delicate and uplifting conversations that I myself cannot have with some brothers because I cannot touch or see them up close (perhaps things from my Mediterranean culture). This is only one of the negative effects of not having face-to-face meetings, among many others that could be cited. Now, where in the Bible does it say that there are to be one, two, or three weekly meetings? Do biblical principles prevent some of these meetings from being in an online format?
Real -positive- cases that are occurring due to the zoom meetings:
A brother who comes home late from work, often missed the meeting or was late, because it is not enough for him to just get home, he has to fix himself, go back to the K.H., park the car ... Now He says he's arriving, puts on his tie, and you're done!
Young couples with small children who used to return late from the meeting on weekdays. When he returned, it was his turn to feed the children and fix them for bed. Now he saves a lot of time.
Brothers who at the time of the meeting have some discomfort or another and do not see themselves with the strength to go to the meeting. Being less expensive (even if they look bad for health they turn off the video) they don't miss the zoom meeting at home.
Saving effort, time, money ... well, there would be more, but not to extend myself.
THE ASSEMBLIES
I think it is another anachronism: as Israel had three major annual conventions, so did we. As I have said before, many brothers attend the assembly and find out absolutely nothing: they take care of young children or relatives in poor health. They get up early every day to get ready and be at the assembly hall on time. They invest money in this process. Then you are asked to spend about 5 hours of attentive program, taking notes and everything.
The benefits of zoom assemblies have been impressive. We can listen, repeat the videos, absorb the information much better, save effort, money.
On the latter, thousands and thousands of brothers have invested hours of work for the preparations of the assemblies, or for the weekly care of the premises in the case of the assembly halls. Many of us have missed entire programs doing essential work for the operation of the program.
And isn't it nice that we see thousands of brothers in a beautiful assembly hall? Yes of course! That is why I say that, following the format of international assemblies, these face-to-face assemblies should be scheduled each year. Families and siblings whose personal and financial circumstances allow them to attend in a given year would simply sign up to attend. The rest would see the assembly at home, or in kingdom halls, in short, in zoom format, like last year.
THE PERSECUTION
The JWs believe that we will soon face a worldwide violent persecution that will affect our meetings (as now in Russia, but all over the world). Therefore, the ideal would be to continue having experience in this type of online format.
Well, I better not extend myself further. I don't know what you think. I'm sure that I left things in the pipeline, and I don't think I have the absolute truth, let me know!
 

It doesn't surprise me. I've been for years meditating on the kinds of personalities necessary to generate a new religious group vs those required to grow the religious group vs those who wish to maintain the status quo.
I realize that I don't have the kind of personality which would gather a group for any purpose. I've always had the attitude of "Go about your affairs. Pursue your interests. The ones whom you run into along the way who are motivated will join in the manner of their choosing." - Clearly we wouldn't have the Bible or any religious organizations if everyone were like me.
I used to irritate this one sister who was a control freak about everything. Our circuit overseer's wife (Bro Rainer) was talking with my wife and she (Bro Rainer's wife) mentioned this diet "blood type diet" by Dr. D'Adamo. Anyway we both sortof got into it for a while and of course since we're all about knowing about blood I did a bunch of research and found while researching that the Japanese and Korean cultures are really big on blood types and personalities associated with them. (In Korea they made a movie entitled "My Boyfriend is type B") and so a bunch of people began to get into it. She, of course because the word "blood" was in the name of the diet was highly suspicious of the whole thing even after she realized it wasn't about eating blood pudding or blood sausages.
Anyway when I mentioned the blood type and personality thing it sortof tickled me that she was so irritated by the whole thing (she said "There are more than four types of people in the world!"), I paused and asked her what blood type she was and she "Replied A" and I said "Ohhhhh! That makes sense now." and she says "What do you mean?" and I say "Well as it turns out, people with blood type A are more likely to get stressed out over perceived ambiguity or perceived disorder because their brains produce more cortisol in response to stress and the way this is manifested when they try to reduce these levels is by trying to control their environment as well as the people around them.....pause...you see"
That annoyed her even more.
I'll bet Klein was blood type A for sure.

In the 1970's it was common for Bethelites to order Bible commentaries like Matthew Henry's and Barnes' Notes on the NT and various Bible translations. Later, they also allowed orders for Jay Green's Hebrew Interlinear and William Whiston's Josephus. Bethelites paid for them, but the price was fairly low because all requests were ordered through a one of Dean Songer's assistants.
Then there was a meeting in 1979, and all such books became impossible to order, and anyone who already had them in their rooms (except for Bible translations) would be looked at suspiciously. In 1980, housekeepers would report to their overseers if these types of books were found, and many Bethelites who owned them would be questioned by an interrogation committee. Within a matter of months, they moved the entire Bethel Library out of reach of all Bethelites by moving the entire Writing Department --along with the library-- out of 124 CH and onto a locked floor down at 25 CH.
Also, even before it moved, no Bethel tours allowed visitors to see the Bethel Library beyond a quick peek from the doorway to the "facing" shelves which were almost all WT material along with a couple sets of encyclopedias and dictionaries. All commentaries and books from other religions were were kept in the rows of shelves behind the first "facing" shelves, and could not be seen. Even the tours at Patterson in the 2000's only allowed a doorway glimpse of a small corner of the Library from the main hallway, about 40 feet from the nearest book.
I remember once when Brother Klein railed against commentaries one morning at breakfast. And he was one of the GB members in the Writing Department. At another meeting he said that using them was "sucking at the teat of Christendom." Now, of course, there is a much more reasonable approach, and I think that most of the brothers are at least partially aware that this is where most of the information in the Insight book comes from. They might be less aware that this is also where we get many of the spiritual gems and treasures in the meeting workbooks, and of course the footnotes in the Study Bible, all those interesting comments about Hebrew and Greek words, etc.