ComfortMyPeople

Just to introduce another item into this consideration. It seems that the number 12 or its multiples in the Bible always appears as literal, never symbolic.
Jacob's 12 sons (males) were exactly 12   The 12 tribes of Israel were actually 12, not 13   The Levitical priesthood was organized in a multiple of 12, namely 24 divisions (1Chr 24: 1-19)   The recruitment of assistants and officers who served David were organized in groups of 24,000 per month, from the 12 tribes, giving a total of 288,000 soldiers. All multiples of 12, and all exact numbers, real and non-symbolic.   Also, Jesus literally chooses 12 apostles, as we know. Literally.   The following is very interesting, in my opinion. When there were only 11 faithful apostles alive, just before Pentecost, they prayed intensely to Jehovah for guidance during those days (Acts 1:14), as a result of which, it was for divine guidance that they chose a twelfth apostle again, thus when Spiritual Israel began at Pentecost there were literally 12 foundations.   And, precisely at Pentecost, how many were gathered when the nucleus of the anointed ones who would go to heaven was formed? 120. Another multiple of 12 (Acts 1:15) It is true that in Revelation numbers like 3, 4, 6, 7, 10 are symbolic. But I have my reservations for 12 or 144,000 as symbolics.
Indeed, if 144,000 is symbolic, many things are fixed, as has already been said: the large number of Christians during the past 20 centuries who will easily have exceeded that number. The problem of replacement anointed ones, and I suppose others that now escape me.
The best answer I can give is: I'm not sure, I don't know.

Just to introduce another item into this consideration. It seems that the number 12 or its multiples in the Bible always appears as literal, never symbolic.
Jacob's 12 sons (males) were exactly 12   The 12 tribes of Israel were actually 12, not 13   The Levitical priesthood was organized in a multiple of 12, namely 24 divisions (1Chr 24: 1-19)   The recruitment of assistants and officers who served David were organized in groups of 24,000 per month, from the 12 tribes, giving a total of 288,000 soldiers. All multiples of 12, and all exact numbers, real and non-symbolic.   Also, Jesus literally chooses 12 apostles, as we know. Literally.   The following is very interesting, in my opinion. When there were only 11 faithful apostles alive, just before Pentecost, they prayed intensely to Jehovah for guidance during those days (Acts 1:14), as a result of which, it was for divine guidance that they chose a twelfth apostle again, thus when Spiritual Israel began at Pentecost there were literally 12 foundations.   And, precisely at Pentecost, how many were gathered when the nucleus of the anointed ones who would go to heaven was formed? 120. Another multiple of 12 (Acts 1:15) It is true that in Revelation numbers like 3, 4, 6, 7, 10 are symbolic. But I have my reservations for 12 or 144,000 as symbolics.
Indeed, if 144,000 is symbolic, many things are fixed, as has already been said: the large number of Christians during the past 20 centuries who will easily have exceeded that number. The problem of replacement anointed ones, and I suppose others that now escape me.
The best answer I can give is: I'm not sure, I don't know.

Just to introduce another item into this consideration. It seems that the number 12 or its multiples in the Bible always appears as literal, never symbolic.
Jacob's 12 sons (males) were exactly 12   The 12 tribes of Israel were actually 12, not 13   The Levitical priesthood was organized in a multiple of 12, namely 24 divisions (1Chr 24: 1-19)   The recruitment of assistants and officers who served David were organized in groups of 24,000 per month, from the 12 tribes, giving a total of 288,000 soldiers. All multiples of 12, and all exact numbers, real and non-symbolic.   Also, Jesus literally chooses 12 apostles, as we know. Literally.   The following is very interesting, in my opinion. When there were only 11 faithful apostles alive, just before Pentecost, they prayed intensely to Jehovah for guidance during those days (Acts 1:14), as a result of which, it was for divine guidance that they chose a twelfth apostle again, thus when Spiritual Israel began at Pentecost there were literally 12 foundations.   And, precisely at Pentecost, how many were gathered when the nucleus of the anointed ones who would go to heaven was formed? 120. Another multiple of 12 (Acts 1:15) It is true that in Revelation numbers like 3, 4, 6, 7, 10 are symbolic. But I have my reservations for 12 or 144,000 as symbolics.
Indeed, if 144,000 is symbolic, many things are fixed, as has already been said: the large number of Christians during the past 20 centuries who will easily have exceeded that number. The problem of replacement anointed ones, and I suppose others that now escape me.
The best answer I can give is: I'm not sure, I don't know.

Just to introduce another item into this consideration. It seems that the number 12 or its multiples in the Bible always appears as literal, never symbolic.
Jacob's 12 sons (males) were exactly 12   The 12 tribes of Israel were actually 12, not 13   The Levitical priesthood was organized in a multiple of 12, namely 24 divisions (1Chr 24: 1-19)   The recruitment of assistants and officers who served David were organized in groups of 24,000 per month, from the 12 tribes, giving a total of 288,000 soldiers. All multiples of 12, and all exact numbers, real and non-symbolic.   Also, Jesus literally chooses 12 apostles, as we know. Literally.   The following is very interesting, in my opinion. When there were only 11 faithful apostles alive, just before Pentecost, they prayed intensely to Jehovah for guidance during those days (Acts 1:14), as a result of which, it was for divine guidance that they chose a twelfth apostle again, thus when Spiritual Israel began at Pentecost there were literally 12 foundations.   And, precisely at Pentecost, how many were gathered when the nucleus of the anointed ones who would go to heaven was formed? 120. Another multiple of 12 (Acts 1:15) It is true that in Revelation numbers like 3, 4, 6, 7, 10 are symbolic. But I have my reservations for 12 or 144,000 as symbolics.
Indeed, if 144,000 is symbolic, many things are fixed, as has already been said: the large number of Christians during the past 20 centuries who will easily have exceeded that number. The problem of replacement anointed ones, and I suppose others that now escape me.
The best answer I can give is: I'm not sure, I don't know.

It might sound odd, but the constraints of time, pay, and motivation were what got me to get my degree.
Before I started to study, I was working full time at TI as a computer operator (got lucky, I was working construction, cleaning carpets, delivering beauty supplies and working at Taco Bell and delivering newpapers and an opportunity came up at TI and I got in learned it all there).
I was taking classes on/off at the University, but not really going anywhere w/it. I didn't get diagnosed as having ADD until later as an adult. I just thought everyone was so slow, spoke so slow that I couldn't concentrate on what they were saying because they took so much time to say so little, so I'd space out in school or read and got good grades just because I was apparently "smart". But, unmotivated.
After I became a JW, I wanted to pioneer, but I was married and even though my wife worked, there was no way I was going to have her support me, so I began looking for work anywhere where I could get a flexible schedule. I was slated to go work the swing shift, which would mean I could go to class in the morning (I was taking 1 class at a time), then meet for field service at noon. Then work. But then I'd miss meetings. No. Can't do that. Then there were layoffs. I think I mailed about 600 copies of my resume to every place in the area that had the word "computer" or anything computer-sounding in the business name.
I got a job as a production control clerk (get it w/a schedule from 6 AM to 2 PM!) Yay!...So I signed up to regular pioneer, got accepted. I went out right after work and long weekends and evenings.
But I wanted my wife to be able to pioneer too, so I began thinking about what I could do to get paid more. The barrier wasn't my coding ability, computer admin skills or the like - simply that I didn't have a degree. Then I remember years ago reading this book by John Bear on nontraditional college degrees. There was a program through "The University of the State of New York" (now called Excelsior) which then would give you 30 hours of college credit if you could score high enough on a subject GRE. So...I thought, nothing ventured, nothing gained, lets see ...I got the course catalog, the degree requirements and the lot and studied the whole thing. It turns out that IF I got all my tests done BEFORE I registered, I wouldn't have to pay an exorbitant cost-per-credit-hour for the hours gotten via testing. So I decided on three subject GRE's and some CLEPS. I got the ARCO book on the GRE for psychology, studied it, took the prep tests in the book and it looked like I was ready. I registered for the test, went down to the University where it was proctored and a month later I got the response - YAY I scored in the top 8% of those who took the test that year! (cha-ching 30 hours). So I did the same w/Education and Sociology, took the CLEPs and essentially got 100 hours of college credit in three months. That w/other CLEPS taken before I'd enrolled (Spanish), I'd really only taken a handful of courses on campus.
That's when I had the University and ETS send my transcripts along w/my enrollment and prospective degree attempt to The University of the State of New York, for $175. They responded in about two months and said CONGRATS! Send in $375 for your completion and graduation!.
Then my current employer instead of saying constantly Xero, you're so smart, you should finish your degree, or If you WERE so smart you'd finish your degree was saying "Wow. All that coding you did really was good! This degree proves it!" (paraphrased for sarcasm).
All this done while I was pioneering and because I wanted my wife to join me.
So I eventually got a different job, w/ a more difficult schedule, but I was still able to pioneer and my wife was able to quit her job and pioneer as well.
None of this would have happened if it weren't for JWs.

Just to introduce another item into this consideration. It seems that the number 12 or its multiples in the Bible always appears as literal, never symbolic.
Jacob's 12 sons (males) were exactly 12   The 12 tribes of Israel were actually 12, not 13   The Levitical priesthood was organized in a multiple of 12, namely 24 divisions (1Chr 24: 1-19)   The recruitment of assistants and officers who served David were organized in groups of 24,000 per month, from the 12 tribes, giving a total of 288,000 soldiers. All multiples of 12, and all exact numbers, real and non-symbolic.   Also, Jesus literally chooses 12 apostles, as we know. Literally.   The following is very interesting, in my opinion. When there were only 11 faithful apostles alive, just before Pentecost, they prayed intensely to Jehovah for guidance during those days (Acts 1:14), as a result of which, it was for divine guidance that they chose a twelfth apostle again, thus when Spiritual Israel began at Pentecost there were literally 12 foundations.   And, precisely at Pentecost, how many were gathered when the nucleus of the anointed ones who would go to heaven was formed? 120. Another multiple of 12 (Acts 1:15) It is true that in Revelation numbers like 3, 4, 6, 7, 10 are symbolic. But I have my reservations for 12 or 144,000 as symbolics.
Indeed, if 144,000 is symbolic, many things are fixed, as has already been said: the large number of Christians during the past 20 centuries who will easily have exceeded that number. The problem of replacement anointed ones, and I suppose others that now escape me.
The best answer I can give is: I'm not sure, I don't know.

In general, that statement is true. Except when this particular mystery doctrine was being explained by Russell. For example, in Volume VI of Studies in the Scriptures, page 239, Russell showed that the 144,000 were "Joint-sacrificers" with Jesus Christ.

As I mentioned above, these 144,000 joint-sacrificers are correctly referred to as "gods," per Russell:

[also, Volume VI of Studies in the Scriptures, p.239]

This is correct. Russell never took the place of Christ before his Church. Christ was the Head of the Body, and Russell would never consider himself the "Head" of the Body of Christ. This doesn't mean that Russell would ever have admitted that any other person could be God's "mouthpiece." Russell only said this about himself, and no one else. Also Russell printed letters that addressed himself as "the faithful and wise servant." He printed no letters that identified anyone else as that "faithful and wise servant." He did this while teaching that this "servant" could only be ONE INDIVIDUAL, and not a class of individuals.

No. I don't think he ever took it back. The teaching survived into Rutherford's period of leadership, and there were still echoes of it during the time of Knorr and Franz. I don't recall exactly when it was rejected in print, but some say that Franz, while giving the Memorial talk, would quote the verse from 1 Cor 12:12 and then follow up with an odd statement to the effect that "only the 144,000 share the flesh and blood of the Christ, even though Jesus himself no longer shares flesh and blood." It's scriptural but by putting emphasis on the word "share" he made it sound odd, perhaps invoking John 6.
There's even an echo of it in the expression, "he is one of 'the anointed.'"
Originally this "mystery doctrine" led to some awkward sounding statements from Russell too. For example, he said in 1914 (Watchtower, p.83):
https://archive.org/details/1914WatchTower/mode/2up?q=sum+total
"The word Christ signifies anointed. God has declared that He will have an anointed King and High Priest to be His Agent in the blessing of the world. He has declared that that great King is, primarily, the Lord Jesus Christ. He also declares that instead of the Lord Jesus being the sum-total of the Anointed One, it is His good pleasure that there shall be members added to Him. And the adding of these members has been the completing of this Anointed One."
But if all the anointed were "The Christ" this had led to him also claiming that the anointed 144,000, including himself, were also the "Mighty God" and the "Eternal Father." (Isaiah 9) And his explanations seemed strained.
"Soon follows the power which will, under him as our head, constitute the whole body of Christ the "Mighty God" to rule and bless the nations - and the body with the head, shall share in the work of restoring the life lost in Adam, and therefore be members of that company which as a whole will be the Everlasting Father to the restored race." - (WT November 1881: 298)
Rutherford called this body of Christ: "the Great Messiah." This followed consistently on Russell's statements such as another from the same 1914 Watchtower:
"And as we further study, we find that this is the Mystery mentioned in the Scriptures: to wit, that the great Messiah so long promised should be composed of many individuals;
But I think it was only Russell who delved into statements that would show that this doctrine proved that when Jesus said "Ye are gods" in John 10, that this also had reference to the 144,001. I'm sure that to some, this would have sounded too similar to Mormon teaching.

I think that if you understood the whole picture of Russell's attempt (and the difficulties) to make all scripture fit into one complete view, you would never call it blasphemy. In fact, I don't think you could even provide any "proof" that he was wrong. Take the following two passages from 1 Corinthians for example:
(1 Corinthians 12:12) For just as the body is one but has many members, and all the members of that body, although many, are one body, so too is the Christ.
(1 Corinthians 6:15) Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?
Paul could easily be interpreted as saying that each and every one of the "Anointed" (which is an English word for the Greek word "Christ") are therefore all included in the "Anointed." Therefore this interpretation was imposed back upon Ephesians 1:9, so that the very doctrine of all 144,000 being gathered into the Christ, was considered to be the "mystery" or the "sacred secret:"
(Ephesians 1:9, 10) 9 by making known to us the sacred secret of his will. It is according to his good pleasure that he himself purposed 10 for an administration at the full limit of the appointed times, to gather all things together in the Christ, the things in the heavens and the things on the earth. . . .
The better understanding, of course, is that the 144,000 are in close union with Christ, and only the primary one, the Head, should be called "The Christ" or the "Anointed One."
(Galatians 3:16) . . .. It says, not: “And to seeds,” as in the case of many such, but as in the case of one: “And to your seed,” who is Christ.
 

It is a difficult doctrine for me to accept, yes, however, I am not saying it can't be true. The organization is obviously convinced it is true. If one day there is sufficient evidence for them to stop being so dogmatic about it, they may change their opinion. They have done it before with other things. If that happens, then it won't change my opinion about Jws. It will remain the same as it is today because I do not hang my faith on the 1914 doctrine.

All true. It is hard waiting in expectation. I've found it better if I keep looking at the Bible from as many different viewpoints as I can find. This makes the truth stand out by way of comparison. Even false expectations by other groups can be oddly encouraging. I was  watching this four part movie "Noah" on Amazon and the first part was pretty good. It dealt w/all the various evidences for the flood.  The next part made it clear that the guy who was producing the film was a seventh day adventist, and quite sincere and though I found fault with a number of things, I didn't find fault with the desire to get right with God and try to understand prophesy in a more than cursory manner.  Fortunately the WT index had a 1997 article on SDA's and their interpretations. Still a lot of what was said in the movie I found myself resonating to. Much like when I read how certain Jewish holidays aren't required, but in and of themselves aren't sinful - any more than trying to follow the law (as an exercise, though not a requirement) could be an interesting and useful exercise. Even people like Mike Heiser say things and write things I've found of interest (though obviously I'm not a devotee). Or say the Portland, Oregon group that puts together the animated youtube series. "The Bible Project". I've found these interesting as well. I know others aren't interested in these things to the same degree and even would find it odd (or dangerous), I still read all of it - even when it's like nails on a chalkboard to listen to some of the arguments. I just want to know where people are coming from in their faith (or lack thereof).

In all the years as a JW (over 35) I have yet to find something intrinsically bad written in any of our publications. Mistakes yes, but nothing that would make you sin against God. The way Witness and others go on makes it sound like the organization is a harlot. By being unreasonable, these oposers lose credit. She mentions wrong expectations as something horribly sinful, and calls it false prophesying. And yet all the ones that have been hurt by it are those who have put more faith in men than in God. Yes, it is difficult sometimes to go against the grain. I have heard stories about how those who weren't buying into 1975 were looked down on and told they have little faith. (they must have felt pretty vindicated when nothing happened in 75). But what really was the problem? It was something good to look forward to and although some were skeptical I am sure they wouldn't have been upset if they were wrong and paradise had really come in 75. JWs have not stopped looking forward to it (the new world). That is part of being a Christian, looking forward to the paradise. Today many are anticipating something might happen very soon. Some are speculating covid-19 might be the beginning of the GT. We can only hope. But if nothing happens even up to the day we die, what has been lost? Jehovah promises thst his loyal servants will not be forgotten. And who is trying to encourage all to live by Bible standards, keep Jehovah on their mind with everything they do in life and preach the Good News, so that they are not forgotten?  The very organization that Witnesss hates, and says is so evil. @Witness all your criticism is about the imperfections of man. You might as well criticize all those who failed in Bible times as well. Criticize Moses for his presumtiousness, criticize Aaron for his weakness and excuses, criticize Job for his wrong thoughts, criticize David for his lack of control, criticize Jonah for his disobedience, criticize all of Jesus' disciples.
You are like a modern day Diotrephese.

I was an atheist visiting the KH w/my gf who was studying, and I observed them for months and also went to a day of a district convention when it struck me what was most different about JW's was that their behavior improved to the extent that they got together as a group. This I contrasted with every other group I'd been with. To the extent the group grew in size, to that extent it became unruly and more badly behaved.

No scorn came from me. I merely quoted scriptures associated with those who would try to make predictions about the times and seasons. If you felt scorn, perhaps that is why the scriptures speak of the Word as "sharper than any two edged sword:"
(Hebrews 4:12) For the word of God is alive and exerts power and is sharper than any two-edged sword and pierces even to the dividing of soul and spirit, and of joints from the marrow, and is able to discern thoughts and intentions of the heart.
Your words on this topic fit a pattern of unhealthy words that most of us have seen from others either working from door-to-door, or on the street. And these patterns are all the more prevalent online. Personally, I have seen about a dozen persons who have presented themselves as some kind of prophet, with the same strong assurances as you that they are 100% correct in their predictions about the near future. Specifically, of course, there is nothing wrong with the idea that the end of the parousia could come before 2034. It could come today, or it could come at any time Jehovah wills. If we are "awake" to this fact, we will be patient and be more concerned about our Christian personality, not making predictions which show ourselves to be presumptuous.
(James 5:7-11) . . .Be patient then, brothers, until the presence of the Lord. Look! The farmer keeps waiting for the precious fruit of the earth, exercising patience over it until the early rain and the late rain arrive. 8 You too exercise patience; make your hearts firm, because the presence of the Lord has drawn close. 9 Do not grumble against one another, brothers, so that you do not get judged. Look! The Judge is standing before the doors. 10 Brothers, take as a pattern of the suffering of evil and the exercising of patience the prophets who spoke in the name of Jehovah. 11 Look! We consider happy those who have endured. You have heard of the endurance of Job and have seen the outcome Jehovah gave, that Jehovah is very tender in affection and merciful.
Even if the end of the parousia were 1,000 years off, the instructions for those who stay spiritually "awake" do not change. If we are in the "dark" we will be trying to make predictions, and trying to focus on the "times and seasons" which are not in our jurisdiction. But we are not in the dark about those things we should focus on instead.
When 2 Peter 3:17 speaks of having "advance knowledge" it is important to note that this "advance knowledge" is the knowledge that it would come as a thief, unpredictably, whether immediately or 1,000 years from now. That's exactly the opposite of trying to put a time prediction on the parousia. Second Peter says that people even in his day were already ridiculing the fact that this day of judgment (parousia) hadn't come yet. Were Christians supposed to answer this ridicule by assuring naysayers that they knew it would come within a few short years?
(2 Peter 3:8-18) 8 However, do not let this escape your notice, beloved ones, that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. 9 Jehovah is not slow concerning his promise, as some people consider slowness, but he is patient with you because he does not desire anyone to be destroyed but desires all to attain to repentance. 10 But Jehovah’s day will come as a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar, but the elements being intensely hot will be dissolved, and earth and the works in it will be exposed. 11 Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, consider what sort of people you ought to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion, 12 as you await and keep close in mind the presence [parousia] of the day of Jehovah,. . . 14 Therefore, beloved ones, since you are awaiting these things, do your utmost to be found finally by him spotless and unblemished and in peace. 15 Furthermore, consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you according to the wisdom given him, 16 speaking about these things as he does in all his letters. However, some things in them are hard to understand, and these things the ignorant and unstable are twisting, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. 17 You, therefore, beloved ones, having this advance knowledge, be on your guard so that you may not be led astray with them by the error of the lawless people and fall from your own steadfastness. 18 No, but go on growing in the undeserved kindness and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. . . .
Similarly, the letters of Timothy put the emphasis on healthful words, which help us avoid being puffed up with presumptuousness, or abusive speech, or wicked suspicions.
(1 Timothy 6:2-8) . . .Keep on teaching these things and giving these exhortations. 3 If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, 4 he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, 5 violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth, thinking that godly devotion is a means of gain. 6 To be sure, it is a means of great gain, [this] godly devotion along with self-sufficiency. 7 For we have brought nothing into the world, and neither can we carry anything out. 8 So, having sustenance and covering, we shall be content with these things.
(2 Timothy 1:12-14) . . .For I know the one whom I have believed, and I am confident he is able to guard what I have laid up in trust with him until that day. 13 Keep holding the pattern of healthful words that you heard from me with the faith and love that are in connection with Christ Jesus. 14 This fine trust guard through the holy spirit which is dwelling in us.
(Acts 15:29) . . .Good health to you!”
 

The number of current translations that insert the "a" in John 1:1 would not be as important as those translations that were made back when koine "NT" Greek was still a spoken and living language. For that we would look to early Latin, Coptic, Syriac, or Aramaic translations. Unfortunately some of these languages, just like NT Greek, didn't use the word "a." You could choose to put a "the" in front of a noun or entity, or you could leave off the "the" on purpose, and that could sometimes (not always) imply the word "a."
For example, if you were pointing to a rock, you could say "This is the rock" or "This is rock." If you didn't use the "the" you might mean:
"this is the rock" or "this is a rock" or "this is rock [not wood, not just a clod of dirt, not styrofoam, not paper, not scissors -- but it is made up of the substance we identify with rock/rockiness/rocky"]. All three of those choices are possible linguistically in NT Greek when the "the" is left off. And it would have been was very easy in NT Greek to repeat the word "the" which had already appeared just before it in "the word was with the god." (No capitalization in the Greek text.) In English, the phrase "the god" is simply translated as God, not "the God." But then you lose the differentiation between "the god" and "god." Adding an "a" to "god," and a capital "G" to "the god" is one way to do this.
Fortunately there is an early translation from the time that NT Greek was still a living language in speech and writing. And that language did make use of a word equivalent to the word "a." It's the Sahidic Coptic translation of John 1:1:
https://www.scribd.com/document/14960597/Coptic-John-1-1
https://www.scribd.com/document/25496486/Translating-Sahidic-Coptic-John-1-1
The Coptic translators rendered John 1:1 in this way (Transliterated):
1. a. Hn te.houeite ne.f.shoop ngi p.shaje
1. b. Auw p.shaje ne.f.shoop n.nahrm p.noute
1. c. Auw ne.u.noute pe p.shaje
Literally, the Coptic says:
1. a. In the beginning existed the word
1. b. And the word existed in the presence of the god
1. c. And a god was the word

(Luke 21:8) . . .He said: “Look out that you are not misled, for many will come on the basis of my name, saying, ‘I am he,’ and, ‘The due time is near.’ Do not go after them.
(Mark 13:32, 33) 32 “Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father. 33 Keep looking, keep awake, for you do not know when the appointed time is.
(Luke 12:46) the master of that slave will come on a day that he is not expecting him and at an hour that he does not know. . .
(Acts 1:7) . . .He said to them: “It does not belong to you to know the times or seasons that the Father has placed in his own jurisdiction.
(Matthew 24:36)  “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.
(2 Thessalonians 2:1-3) . . .However, brothers, concerning the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you 2 not to be quickly shaken from your reason nor to be alarmed either by an inspired statement or by a spoken message or by a letter appearing to be from us, to the effect that the day of Jehovah is here. 3 Let no one lead you astray . . .
(1 Thessalonians 5:1, 2) . . .Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night.
 
 

I think we all know of a suicide or two among the brothers. But if your anecdotal example is about someone jumping in front of a train, it was a story about someone else I know nothing about. The two I know of related to Bethelites were not train-related. And they were many years apart. Overall, I'd say that Bethel did not have much of a problem at all in this regard. The US Army, on the other hand . . . or even New York University (NYU) has had as many suicides in a year, as Bethel has had in four decades.

Well said.
The publications not too long ago made much ado about Solomon’s temple dedication speech:
Individuals of “your people Israel, because they know each one his own plague and his own pain; [would] actually spread out his palms toward this house, then may you yourself hear from the heavens, the place of your dwelling, and you must forgive and give to each one according to all his ways, because you know his heart.” (2 Chronicles 6:29-30)
We will never know it all with any given person. But he does. And he uses the knowledge for good.
I’m sure you have taken notice how frequently the verse of Job’s “wild talk” comes up for play, after decades of never hearing of it at all. “If a brother or sister engages in some “wild talk,” don’t be quick to jump to conclusions. You don’t know what they have gone through.” Counsel along such lines has become frequent. 
Before you came along, @Thinkingtold how David Splane had said something to the effect of, “there are those who engage in wild talk, and we may just have to put up with it, because they have been injured and It’s part of their healing process.” I didn’t hear it myself. Thinking may have inadvertently skewed it. But I regard her as a reliable source, and I suspect she is spot-on. It certainly is in keeping with 2 Chronicles 6:29).
 
 
 
 

You know Tom, I'm sure you've known a lot of brothers & sisters who had issues. I remember one family who were quite musical, the boys did well in school and the congregation, but the mother apparently was passing on adult-onset schizophrenia and I remember when it happened to one of the young brothers. He'd worry about whether Jehovah wanted him to wash with hot water and then cold water or the other way around. We'd go over the scripture that it wasn't what went into you that made you unclean but what came out of you. Then he'd calm down. I'd work w/him in service during the week. He was real sweet and sincere (Rob). Fortunately his younger brother Em. was spared the bulk of the hallucinations, though he'd tell me he couldn't look at certain paintings because things would start to move around in them. The father kept the family together while he was alive. I remember sitting in the living room when the oldest brother (St) started to get a schizoid episode and F. just decked him. I was surprised to say the least, but having just finished an empanada made out of pumpkin road-kill (I asked where they got the pumpkin and F said they found it on the side of the road) I just took it in stride. F was a simple guy, but he loved Jehovah and did the best he could w/his family. The sad part was when he died of a heart attack, the family had issues (St was incapable, Em. took care of his mom, but Rob was a diff story). I'd moved away and I googled the members of the family and found that Rob was committed after he apparently bashed his roommate in the back of his head after his roommate said something derogatory about his mother.
Another young sister used to call me up at work (another case of schizophrenia) and told me she felt she was seeing important things and wanted to share them w/the cong. I told her I couldn't speak or deny whatever it was she was experiencing, but suggested that if she was somewhere and she wondered whether she was the only one who was hearing or seeing certain things, that she should look around to see if anyone else looked like they were seeing or hearing these things and if it was just her then she should probably not share.
She's OK today as she grew out of it.
So you don't ever know what's going on w/people. I know I can't judge.

Me too! And I've noticed that the majority of those who leave, stop using it. To me that says a lot.

I actually think the statement is a little clunky—for it doesn’t account for the reversal— and that i could have written it better, along the lines I have already said. 
Still, it is such a white-hot issue, and some are trying to milk it for various reasons, that maybe it is just as well not to risk looking “defensive”—state what has been stated, and move on. 
It is a good deal to have resolved. I am sure they are happy to do that. I am sure victims are happy, too. That is the nature of any reconciliation. People are happy when it is done.
I liked how Holly Folk did not shirk from taking on lawyers. Essentially, if you have money, someone will devise a means to take some of it. It will not be a completely fictional means, for that will seldom produce results. It will be something that is real, but overstated, exaggerated, and legitimate cases will be mixed with more dubious ones. It is in lawyers’ interests to portray people as victims, whatever happened to them was not their fault. Accordingly the “cult” mantra is hugely popular with them. At times, one wonders if they to some degree have invented the idea, for they surely benefit from it.
It is not just CSA. That is but a tiny part of the iceberg. In my community, there are about twenty legal firms that advertise on media, and some of them do it virtually non-stop. I can remember a time when manufacturers were the prime sponsors of TV shows. Now they are sidled aside by lawyers. What does that tell you as to the nature of society?  It amounts to a global society-wide transfer of funds, with barristers netting a third.
I was a defendent in such a case. I don’t think many people have not had some such experience, unless they have taken care never to do anything in life. This one involved a house I rented out. Insurance kicks in and you have little to do with it, but if you don’t know that in advance, it is very disconcerting. Even knowing it in advance, it is not comfortable. The suit was for $6 million and the settlement was for $200K. “How can the insurance companies afford this?” I asked my agent. “They can’t,” was the reply. “They just keep raising their rates.”
”My lawyer got me 5 million dollars, 18 times what the insurance company offered.” Such ads are staples on TV. In satire, I append the following to them: “All my neighbors rejoiced with me. Then they opened their premium bills.”
My teenage daughter’s car was hit—not her fault—and within days the other insurance company was hounding me to “settle.” Settle what? I was not accustomed to this new normal. They offered thousands of dollars if only I would settle. Finally I told them, “I don’t think this is going to cost you a dime. Pay a few chiropractic bills and that will be the end of it. But I am not signing anything away, for I don’t know what the finale will be.” They paid a few bills. I never did settle. There was never any reason to. I was probably a chump. I probably should have hit them up for as many thousands as I could. I just didn’t know that mindset, and concepts like “honesty” got in the way. The latest prompting from TV lawyers is that you call them immediately after your doctor to find out what “your accident is worth.” I am of the generation where you didn’t call them at all. You had insurance, the other party had insurance, you relied upon them for fair compensation, and were seldom dissatisfied with the result.

So true. I was killed once (not kidding) for a couple of minutes. As a pedestrian, I was standing on the curb but with one foot in the crosswalk waiting for the light to change when a man who wanted to get through the "long yellow" in time angrily sped around a car that was stopping for the yellow. I was thrown across the street, and his windshield hit me in the chest in a way that stopped my heart for a minute or so and produced lots of broken ribs and a bilateral pneumothorax as a bonus. I even had the out of body experience in the ambulance remembering from "above" seeing them remove my tie and cut off my shirt and T-shirt with a pair of scissors. I was hit only 3 blocks from the hospital they drove me to.
I got $10,000 from his insurance. But we never bothered to push for more. I admit to being about one foot into the crosswalk even though the driver actually came up slightly on the curb. Brothers still chide me for leaving so much "on the table."
But my son was hit very softly by a car that partially sideswiped his car, and they both got out and saw there was no damage. My son, a lawyer, even took pictures of the non-damage. A few months later he gets hit by a lawsuit that puts another passenger in the offending car and claims that there were serious injuries. Our insurance (Geico) got all the details and photos from my son, who showed them how this suit was baseless and frivolous. We were sure they would fight it. But they paid the party some amount under $10,000! We couldn't believe it.
I'm seeing a couple of law offices that advertise for CSA lawsuits with hour-long commercials on TV. I understand that the primary lawyer who takes on cases against the WTS (Zalkin) has a backlog of over 100 cases in the US. Also, they will hardly take on cases that only involve rank and file because it is harder to prove "agency" to the WTS which is considered the source of the money. They only want MS and elders. This way even if the WTS did nothing wrong, they still can claim "agency" to the WTS (where the money is).

@Srecko Sostar asked how it was that I got through the material with him in the first place, and this is the key. During a study with someone I don't think it's my place to tell him where I might think differently, or why certain material may be questionable. But I don't have to go against my own conscience by saying things I don't believe. I can emphasize the points of agreement and defend, to a large extent, the basic concepts of the 1914 doctrine. And I end up in pretty much the same place: that we are in the last days, that Jesus is reigning, that Jesus is invisibly present, and that we are undergoing critical times hard to deal with. But when I go through Daniel 4, I present the 7 times as one of those ideas that might even point to our own time period.  (I believe it does point to our time period in the sense that it shows Jehovah still has everything under control, no matter how chaotic the effects of world governments are.)
I will typically add a bit of scriptural balance by pointing out what Jesus said about knowing the day and hour, and what Jesus said about the times and seasons being in the Father's jurisdiction, and Paul saying that we don't need to have anything more written to us about the times and seasons, or even the parousia itself, for the reasons he gave. But it is natural for us to want to see whatever we think is possible to see, and we live in times when it is important to keep our hope alive during an age of fear and distress upon all nations. This is especially true of times that can see conflicts escalate into world wars. When half a nation will take sides against the other half, or half a world will take sides against the other half.
What I think is obviously quite different than what appears in the WT, and I can't blame his own conscience. I am surprised that it came up years later, but fortunate enough that I am not "turned in" for my own conscientious beliefs. (I can believe that something made him doubt the chronology himself to trigger his dredging it up and then choosing to dig in his heels.) But it is sad to lose good friend.

Grrrrr, that is so sad, and I would say unnecessary. But of course we are not masters of an other's conscience, so no one can judge him for that (I am not saying you are ) and say it was totally unnecessary. But, the ironic thing is, how was his conscience formed? Was it through the Bible, or was it through the interpretation and understanding of some men who have erred in the past over a number of things? It's obviously the latter, and that's the sad frustrating, and unnecessary part.  I know, I know....I'm preaching to the choir...