ComfortMyPeople

The letter that Rutherford wrote to Hitler around June 25, 1933 uses pretty much the same logic that the Watchtower had used for supporting the League of Nations. The idea is that the Bible Students stood for the same ethical goals as the Nazi government under Hitler, and that they were in full agreement with them. Hitler's goals were just a political expression of purely religious goals of the Bible Students. The letter says:
The conference of five thousand delegates also noted - as is expressed in the declaration - that the Bible Researchers of Germany are fighting for the very same high ethical goals and ideals which also the national government of the German Reich proclaimed respecting the relationship of humans to God, namely: honesty of the created being towards its creator.

The conference came to the conclusion that there are no contradictions when it comes to the relationship between the Bible Researchers of Germany to the national government of the German Reich. To the contrary, referring to the purely religious and unpolitical goals and efforts of the Bible Researchers, it can be said that these are in full agreement with the identical goals of the national government of the German Reich.
Of course, Hitler and his government had done very little by that point in 1933 to show how they would go about executing those "same ethical goals." But it was risky for Rutherford to claim they were identical. It's like giving Obama a Nobel Peace Prize just before he expands the current wars and takes the United States into some new ones.

(Revelation 17:8, NWT 1984)  The wild beast that you saw was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction. And when they see how the wild beast was, but is not, and yet will be present, those who dwell on the earth will wonder admiringly, but their names have not been written upon the scroll of life from the founding of the world.
The NWT says above that some would "wonder admiringly" about this beast. The Watchtower in 1919 came out with an article that appears to be a commentary on that same phrase the Federal Council of Churches had used, but they also managed to use words that showed they "wondered admiringly" calling the ideals of this League both wonderful and admirable. But the Watchtower article also compared the League's ideals to show that they were essentially the same as the ideals of God's kingdom, and was even suggesting that this League might be involved in the initiation of the outworking of God's kingdom on earth. Just as the Federation of Churches had done, however, the Watchtower was not saying it was the same as God's kingdom, only that it was a "political" expression of those goals. Just like many in the Federation of Churches, it was realized that it would take more than political goals to actually achieve the full outworking of God's kingdom.
Here are some snippets from the first, last and a middle paragraph of a short article in the Watch Tower,  February 15, 1919,  p.51, with a more complete text of the article below:

 

 
We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President’s idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble.
So the Watchtower claimed that the Peace Conference and the "virtual reality" of the League of Nations were not merely the evolution of human progress, but were were strides of Jehovah's divine providence. They were a part of Jehovah's day of preparation for the Messianic Kingdom. In a small way this idealistic League of Nations was a political expression of what God's Kingdom would complete on earth.
In fact, one point of the article is that the wonderful and admirable League of Nations is more than just a political expression of God's kingdom, but a social and economic expression of the ideals of God's kingdom on earth, too.

There is always some truth in half-truths, and conspiracy theorists always deal in half-truths. I have usually found, or I should say "always found" that whenever I hear about the dangers of a certain UN initiative, that the person promoting the theory is often virtually unacquainted with the original documents, and is getting their information from another place, rather than the UN source.
I think that any human organization can be dangerous, even inadvertently. People make stupid and dangerous decisions without thinking of consequences. It happens all the more with persons of influence and power who make dangerous decisions, sometimes on purpose, and sometimes while trying to do the right thing. So I'm not at all surprised about bad things coming out of the UN, NATO, the EU, the White House, Russia, China, etc.
And I'm not surprised that persons, even Rutherford, in 1918 on up through 1940, '41, '42, '43, '44, '45, etc., also held conspiratorial views of the League of Nations and the UN, and that these views influenced some of those extremely inaccurate predictions about them. Inaccurate predictions about them are found in the Watch Tower publications and also on the pages of many other religions and political, secular organizations, too.  
Initially, of course, the Watchtower praised the League of Nations, as if it were some sort of political expression of God's kingdom on earth, just as Rutherford initially praised Hitler's Nazi government as if it were some sort of political expression of God's kingdom on earth. Of course, in neither case did this view last very long, and it was never expressed as if these two political expressions (the League and Hitler) could ever be looked upon as any kind of replacement of God's kingdom. 
I doubt that this site is very accurate, but I agree with much of what is said on this wikipedia-style article at https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/United_Nations
It includes among its member nations not only parliamentary democracies, but also human rights abusers mainly concerned with their own power. Because unanimity among the Big 5 (the USA, France, UK, Russia and China) is needed for any action involving the Security Council, things rarely get done, and UN sanctions can be pretty much ignored by all nations great and small. That's okay, though, since the countries like the US that are meant to fund it systematically starve it of funding, so the UN can't do much anyway.[note 1] On some small scale activities, it can do some good, but any attempts at actual peace-keeping usually fall apart. What should then be a cause for peace and brotherhood instead just becomes another bureaucratic nightmare.
. . .
The UN and conspiracy theories
As an international body, the UN has predictably attracted the attention of conspiracy theorists. Due to conservatives' dislike of the institution, the conspiracy theories tend to come from the far-right wingnut camp, although said theories often cross over into the loony left fringes as well.
League of Nations
UN conspiracism grew out of the Paris Peace Conference at the end of the First World War as liberal internationalists like Woodrow Wilson pushed for an international body that would promote global peace and national self-determination. Opponents of the plan, most notably Wilson's nemesis Sen. Henry Cabot Lodge (R-MA), argued that joining the League of Nations would cause the US to become entangled in malignant international politics, that the US might have to commit troops to wars it didn't want to fight, and that the League would infringe on national sovereignty.[4] Despite the fact that the US ultimately failed to join the League of Nations — and that its failure was one of the major causes of World War II — conspiracy theories about world government began to spring up in fringe circles. Often, these were vague murmurings about shadowy international dealings, though some conspiracy theories began to take on racist overtones. Father Coughlin, for example, alleged that the League was a tool of the Jews to prosecute a "sacred war" against the US.
As a side note: One of the few positive things that the League of Nations accomplished was issuing "Nansen Passports," the first internationally recognized form of Refugee Documents for stateless people.[5]
Formation of the UN
Conspiratorial themes about the League of Nations transferred over to the newly formed United Nations during the post-war era. The John Birch Society (JBS) was (and still is) most famous for pushing conspiracy theories about the UN being a front for a communist world take-over. The JBS also implicated the UN in plotting to institute one world religion to supplant Christianity. This was to be done through subtle means, such as a "War on Christmas" in which religious Christmas decorations would be replaced by UN iconography.[6]
The New World Order and other current theories
Current conspiracy theories about the UN usually portray it as the heart of an alleged "New World Order" (NWO), or at least implicate it as a major player in said Order. The UN effectively acts as a Rorschach test for political cranks to project their paranoia onto. Some more recent conspiratorial notions include:
The UN is in cahoots with [insert favored bogeyman here]. (Popular choices include the Jews, the NWO, communists, environmentalists, "globalists", corporo-fascists, Illuminati, the Catholic Church, Freemasons, Reptoids, Them, etc.).
The idea of the UN instituting a world religion or the UN being a vehicle for the Antichrist has become a common trope among the rapture ready set. Jack Chick was fond of this one.[7] This idea is also shared to some extent by Jehovah's Witnesses, who consider UN to be the "image of a wild beast" from Revelation 13 and the "disgusting thing that causes desolation" mentioned in Matthew 24:15, which will soon act to destroy all other religions, and finally turn against JWs. The UN has also been accused of being the Harlot being described as "Sitting atop the Nations, Multitudes, Languages, and Tongues" (sitting atop the tongues, what an image!).
The UN has launched smaller projects such as the "North American Union" to gradually erase national borders.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the UN increasingly became the target of anti-environmentalist conspiracy theories, primarily the notion of a power-grab using climate change as a cover. This is due to the UN's institution of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to produce consensus reports on climate change. Conspiracies vary from the "softer" side (the UN is simply cooking the books to enrich itself) to the extremely alarmist (the UN is angling for world domination via alleged "junk science" and the machinations of Al Gore). Another element in this view is that the commies infiltrated the environmental movement after the fall of the USSR and are now using the UN as a tool via environmental policy.[note 2]Christopher Monckton is a proponent of this theory.[8]
Agenda 21, the most recent UN-related conspiracy theory, also centers on a non-binding environmental agreement. If you want to know more, Glenn Beck wrote the book.[9]
Mix the second and the fourth conspiracies and you get the idea that the UN is attempting to enforce a global Earth-worshiping pagan hippie cult where everyone is forced to sing the praises of Gaia.[10][note 3] This one, at least, could provide some amusement if it were true.
Sometimes related to the environmental conspiracy theories (usually global warming) is the idea that concern about overpopulation is being used as a scare tactic to lay the groundwork for a genocide or eugenics scheme to kill off the "useless eaters." As if the world's population isn't currently growing at an alarming rate.
The UN is under the control of Arab/Muslim states and attempting to (a) enable terrorists, (b) usher in the "global caliphate", (c) subtly insert sharia into the American legal system, or (d) all of the above.[note 4]
The UN Arms Trade Treaty is an attempt of an "end run" around the Second Amendment to take away everyone's guns. Just guess the factual accuracy of that one.[11]
Left-ish circles have their own conspiracy theories. Most common is the claim is that the UN is merely the pawn of the United States and its imperialistic schemes. This sometimes plays into fears about globalization (WTO, duh).[12] This seems to ignore the complete antipathy to the UN and other international organizations that some US administrations have shown in the past.[note 5] The War in Iraq also demonstrated that the US doesn't need no stinkin' UN to carry out imperialistic schemes.

That was partially answered in the previous post. But there were more quotes of course.
The first is from the Watchtower, September 15, 1941, p. 288
Receiving the gift, the marching children clasped it to them, not a toy or plaything for idle pleasure, but the Lord's provided instrument for most effective work in the remaining months before Armageddon.
Sometimes it was even a matter of "days." The following is from Consolation (lka, Awake!) April 27, 1942, p. 13
Proof is now submitted that we are now living at the end of the days, and we may expect to see Daniel and the other mentioned princes any day now!
And the following was already quoted from "Universal War Near," 1935:
. . . during the few remaining months until the breaking of that universal cataclysm the powers that rule the nations of the earth will continue to make treaties and tell the people that by such means they will keep that world peace and bring about prosperity.

It started mostly in Rutherford's acceptance of conspiratorialist half-truths from some anti-Catholic sources back in 1938. There were strong rumors that the Catholic Church wanted to use the opportunities brought about by the war to control the entire world through a kind of Catholic caliphate. Rutherford could easily tie fascist Italy to the Vatican through Mussolini, and Hitler's concord with the Vatican had already been exposed, too. Communist Russia was not perceived as an "Axis" power of course, as it would become the country that would go on to defeat Hitler almost single-handedly, but joining with the "Allied" powers, to complete it. But he looked to information about how Communist party sources were trying to reach a hand out for peace with the Vatican. And he followed rabid anti-Catholic sources to prove that the Catholic church was looking to rule the entire world.
Therefore, in 1938, in the booklet, "Face the Facts" he predicted that the 'Axis' powers and communists would form a Catholic "combine" to finally take over America and Britain.
When Mussolini marched to Rome to take possession thereof he was an avowed atheist, opposed to God and his kingdom, and would not tolerate anyone who supports God's kingdom or advertises the same. He was then opposed to all religious organizations. But in 1929 Mussolini and the pope, the head of that mighty religious organization, entered into an alliance by which temporal power in Italy was restored to the pope, and Mussolini became a devoted Catholic, and therefore a supporter of religion. Likewise the dictator of the totalitarian rule of Germany has entered into an alliance with the pope, and he is an avowed Catholic and supports the Catholic religion, and protects it within that arbitrary government.
Recently Mr. Forbes, executive secretary of the Communist party, proposed mutual co-operation between Communism and the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in state affairs. In answer thereto the pope, acting through his cardinal and authoritative representative (Verdier), at Paris, made reply to the Communist party in these words: "If this gesture of the outstretched hand from your side expresses the wish to become better acquainted with your Catholic brothers in order to give better respect to the religion which inspires them to their convictions, their feelings, their works, then the church will not refuse to carry out this work of enlightenment and you will recognize that this can contribute greatly to the happiness of all." To such generous offer from the pope the Communist party responded in these words: "The outstretched hand of the Communist party to the Catholic people remains outstretched." (New York Times, July 26, 1938) True, the Catholic Press of America, since the Hierarchy's connection with the Fascists was exposed in Australia, in Seattle, Washington, and in other places, has had much to say about a possible break between the pope and the Fascists. Such publication is merely a political trick to keep the people deceived and in the dark while the Totalitarians march on and seize control of America and England.
The indisputable facts are that the Roman Catholic Hierarchy has stooped wholly to political methods to gain control of the world, and concerning such an honest Catholic of New York has written a book entitled "Rome Stoops to Conquer", and therein submits the proof that Vatican City's chief objective is to rule the world in conjunction with radical powers. The Hierarchy has placed its trusted men in the key positions of political office in practically every nation of the world, which men are first Catholic and, regardless of the just rights of the people, always carry out the will of the Hierarchy in political governmental affairs. These facts, which cannot be disputed, disclose the Roman Catholic Hierarchy's determination to act as a kind of spiritual super-government over the dictators of the world, forming a part of the monstrosity, and which violently opposes Jehovah and his kingdom under Christ Jesus. The monstrosity moves onward! . . .
When the totalitarian Catholic combine gains control of the British Isles, which it is certain to do, then all liberties of the people will be at an end. . . .
The totalitarian combine is going to get control of England and America. You cannot prevent it. Do not try. Your safety is on the Lord's side; but there really will be but a short time that the combine will hold sway, because it is written in the Lord's Word, at 1 Thessalonians 5: 3, that when this crowd says, 'We are now at peace and safety,' the Lord sends sudden destruction upon them, and they are at their wits' end, and they shall find no way of escape.
Rutherford spoke of Armageddon coming against a world of totalitarian nations, and this is what he meant. The totalitarian combine would have already taken over England and America when Armageddon arrives. The nearness of this time was expressed in many ways. One of them, in the same booklet, echoed the Millions campaign, which was NOT just about the great crowd, but about the world in general. This time it was more specifically about the "great crowd" [Jonadabs]. The doctrine had changed so that ONLY the Jonadabs would survive Armageddon.
Would it be Scripturally proper for them to now marry and to begin to rear children? No, is the answer, which is supported by the Scriptures. Referring to the prophetic picture: Noah's sons and their wives had no children before or during the flood, and none were born of them until after the flood was dried up, and the record is that it was two years after the flood before children born are mentioned.. . . Those Jonadabs who now contemplate marriage, it would seem, would do better if they wait a few years, until the fiery storm of Armageddon is gone,. . . The only ones who will survive Armageddon will be God's faithful children . . . . .The kingdom is here, and certain and complete victory will crown the King, Christ Jesus, and those who stand with him. The earth is to be filled with a righteous people, and those faithful Jonadabs now living shall not die, but shall have a part in the performance or work of populating the earth with righteous people, and all these things to the eternal praise of Jehovah and the vindication of his name.
Since 1935, Rutherford had been saying that we were in the time "immediately" before Armageddon, and that it would therefore NOT be scriptural to get married and have children either immediately before or immediately after Armageddon. That this meant a matter of only "months" had been made clear, too. This next quote is from the booklet and talk "Universal War Near" from 1935
. . . during the few remaining months until the breaking of that universal cataclysm the powers that rule the nations of the earth will continue to make treaties and tell the people that by such means they will keep that world peace and bring about prosperity. (Universal War Near, 1935, p. 3, 26-27)
For a few years, the idea had been that there would be NO winners of a war before Armageddon, because nations would keep a tentative peace through treaties until Armageddon broke out. But this had changed by 1938 (above) and by December 1941 the idea that the totalitarian (axis) powers would win had been around for about three years. But only in December 1941 had the idea been added that the totalitarian, axis powers (the Catholic Vatican Nazi Fascist combine) had managed to take over Belgium, France, and others, but would be ready to compromise and therefore not gain full control of America and Britain, but would manage their "win" through the taking away of freedoms.
You'll notice too that the idea of a "new League of Nations" was already in quotes from secular sources.
[December 1, 1941 Watchtower, p.357-362]


It was no longer a full "military" victory to be expected by the king of the north. But the king of the north would be the one to extend its rule over all the nations of the earth.

Note that Rutherford concludes the article the same way. He hasn't really given up on the idea that that totalitarian (Axis) rule would still overrun all the nations of the earth.


Only if the totalitarian rule would overrun all the nations of the earth would it be possible for the cry of Peace and Security to come from the "king of the north" rather than the "king of the south." Therefore, it was earlier in the same article where this had been stated (more than once):

 

That was around 1985? The Watchtower ran several Armageddon covers back-to-back that year. The following is from February 1, 1985, p.6.

Also, a lot more of the artwork turned cartoonish and amateurish between 1982 and 1985, for some reason. I was part of the art deparment from 1976 to 1980 and worked on other projects until 1982, so I had nothing to do with the above. Gotta love magenta lightning and those realistic puffs of smoke, though!
I believe the one you are thinking of was in color and focused more specifically on the UN building. I recall it very similarly, but don't remember if it appeared in a booklet or just where. It wasn't in a Watchtower that I remember.

This claim is about the talk by Knorr in Sept 1942 and the booklet by the same name "Peace - Can It Last?"
Knorr, didn't anticipate it. He knew about the formation of the United Nations because it had already been announced for the past 9 months before the talk. President Roosevelt himself had called it the "United Nations." Knorr even stated in the talk that the name "United Nations" had already been announced by a member of the President's cabinet. Listening to the talk, and reading the booklet, you can see therefore, that this was never a prediction, nor was it presented as a prediction.
It was not spun as a prediction until 1958 when Fred Franz wrote the book "Your Will Be Done On Earth" and this portion implying a prediction was requoted in the 2/1/1960 Watchtower. By July 15, 1960 the claim had become very explicit:
*** w60 7/15 p. 444 par. 19 Staying Awake with the “Faithful and Discreet Slave” ***
. In 1942 the “faithful and discreet slave” guided by Jehovah’s unerring spirit made known that the democracies would win World War II and that there would be a United Nations organization set up. Such wakefulness was concerning events that unerringly took place three years later. At the 1958 Divine Will International Assembly amazing advance information in connection with Daniel’s prophecy was given about events to occur in the immediate future. Such evidence of spiritual foresight is recorded for us in the book “Your Will Be Done on Earth.” Once again the “faithful and discreet slave” has been tipped off ahead of time for the guidance of all lovers of God. Surely one’s present security depends on his staying awake with the “faithful and discreet slave.”
The Watchtower had been predicting that the NON-democracies, the AXIS powers would win WWII, at least up until 9 months before the talk. But then Knorr had also repeated a prior idea that the war would be stopped by treaties with no real winners. Then by the time of the talk, the idea was that the Vatican would compromise but that the win by the Allies would not last long BECAUSE the cry of peace and security after the war would be the immediate end of peace due to Armageddon being triggered. (using 1 Thessallonians 5). Also, this "win" would be declared by the new TOTALITARIAN world order under the totalitarian armies of the UN. The Watchtower was interpreting this situation to support the idea that it would now only be a matter of a very short time for the Kingdom to take over, compared to the length of the war itself. The idea that Armageddon was only MONTHS away, instead of years, was a common theme for the remainder of the war.

False religion today surely includes Vatican City. But I don't limit the symbol of Babylon to what might come out of the literal city limits of Rome (which includes Vatican City). I know that many have thought like this, including Russell and his early associates, even Rutherford. I didn't look it up for an exact quote, but I have read that at least one edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia states:
"It is within the city of Rome, called the city of seven hills, that the entire area of Vatican State proper is now confined."
Again, I would not limit it to Catholicism or even just the false forms of Christianity. I think the Watchtower publications have it right in defining Babylon as a "world empire of false religion."
That makes more sense that it is simply "false religion." But I don't know why the U.N. would carry that message to other nations, telling them that Babylon the Great is simply "false religion." Perhaps you mean that only the U.N. could carry a message demanding some action against religion, in general, or against specific religions. At present, they have no such power to do anything like that. If they did, we already know it would be completely ignored, at least under current world circumstances. Most things done and said by the UN are ignored, or they have simply been overridden by countries with veto power. Therefore waiting on the U.N. to do something, even if it MIGHT happen, is really the same as waiting on some sign. And that particular expectation is based on an interpretation of a book wherein we have changed interpretations dozens of times over the years.
If we are still waiting on world circumstances to change such that such a message could be carried out with any effect by the U.N. then we are contradicting Jesus' words that the end can come as a sudden surprise at any time.
Since we know that it would take something much greater than the U.N. right now, we also must say that this scenario can only play out if we believe that:
*** rr chap. 18 p. 198 par. 18 “My Great Rage Will Flare Up” ***
They will not realize that it was actually God who put the thought into their hearts to get rid of religions that have so grossly misrepresented him.—Rev. 17:16, 17.
If it takes God to put this thought into their hearts, then there is no need to speculate at all about the U.N.
And your question about who can personally carry that message in open forums like this seems wrong. It seems like you are seeing way too much importance in a little "backwater" forum where only about three dozen persons ever speak up about such issues, and where two dozen of them are probably you.

To be clear, I never said that Babylon the Great was Rome, either as a literal city or even specifically the same exact symbol as Rome. But there is definitely a strong tie to Rome, if I am understanding the symbol of Rome correctly. I have proposed that Rome represents the world. Babylon is tied very closely to this same "Rome" as a symbol. Revelation says that this woman with the name "Babylon the Great" has something to do with the "seven hills on which the woman sits."
(Revelation 17:9) “This calls for a mind that has wisdom: The seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top.
(Revelation 17:9, Catholic Jerusalem Bible) . . .“This calls for shrewdness: The seven heads are the seven hills, on which the woman is sitting."
There has been only one city that has had the name "the city on seven hills" for well over 2,200 years. The Latin Vulgate here says: "septem capita septem montes" (seven heads on seven hills[mounts]). Cicero and Plutarch both mention the "septem colles/montes Romae"  (seven hills/mounts of Rome) and both indicate that this term had been used long before Revelation was written. A Wikipedia article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Rome
So any first readers of Revelation, would have just recalled (traumatically) the devastating attack from Rome on Jerusalem, and the continuing persecution of Jews and Christians by Rome. There would be no question how they would immediately identify the Woman as the Great City who sits atop seven hills. 
(Revelation 17:3-18) . . .And I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet-colored wild beast that was full of blasphemous names and that had seven heads and ten horns. . . . On her forehead was written a name, a mystery: “Babylon the Great, the mother of the prostitutes and of the disgusting things of the earth.” 6 And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the holy ones and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus. . . . The seven heads mean seven mountains, where the woman sits on top. .  .  “The waters that you saw, where the prostitute is sitting, mean peoples and crowds and nations and tongues. . . .18 And the woman whom you saw means the great city that has a kingdom over the kings of the earth.”
So this woman is a great city who sits on seven hills. At the time Revelation was written there was only city that sat on seven hills. So, yes, I would say there is some very close connection between the city of Rome and the prostitute named Babylon the Great.
Of course, I made it clear that I don't think the city is literal. But this woman has the name of Babylon and she sits on top of a symbol of Rome. The NWT cross-references Jeremiah 51:8 and Isaiah 21:9 with Revelation 18:4. In fact, the cross-references tell the story exactly in the way any well-read Christian would have read Revelation. It's the contexts of those cross-references, even though they applied to Babylon, that makes it easy to make the same application to Rome. These references explain both a physical and symbolic message that was simple and unavoidable:
(Jeremiah 51:5-10) . . .For Israel and Judah are not widowed from their God, from Jehovah of armies.  . .  6 Flee out of the midst of Babylon, And escape for your life. Do not perish because of her error. For it is the time for Jehovah’s vengeance. He is paying her back for what she has done.  7 Babylon has been a golden cup in the hand of Jehovah; She made all the earth drunk. From her wine the nations have drunk; That is why the nations have gone mad.  8 Suddenly Babylon has fallen and is broken. Wail over her! Get balsam for her pain; perhaps she may be healed.”  9 “We tried to heal Babylon, but she could not be healed. Leave her and let us go, each to his own land. For her judgment has reached to the heavens; It is as high as the clouds. 10 Jehovah has brought about justice for us. Come, let us recount in Zion the work of Jehovah our God.”
(Isaiah 21:9)  9 Look at what is coming: . . . Then he spoke up and said: “She has fallen! Babylon has fallen! All the graven images of her gods he has shattered to the ground!”
The clue is in the idea that all her religious images have proved worthless from Jehovah's judgments against Babylon. Jehovah's people must turn away from any reliance on false gods and turn back completely to Jehovah's pure worship:
(Isaiah 48:20) . . .Go out from Babylon! Flee from the Chal·deʹans! Announce it with a joyful cry! Proclaim it! Make it known to the ends of the earth. Say: “Jehovah has repurchased his servant Jacob.
(Isaiah 52:11) 11 Turn away, turn away, get out of there, touch nothing unclean! Get out from the midst of her, keep yourselves clean, You who are carrying the utensils of Jehovah.
These scriptures were about judgments against Babylon because Babylon had represented the cup of God's judgments against the nations. But, after that fact, for God's people Babylon had now represented the fact that they, in exile, were being held back from restoring the recently destroyed Temple at Jerusalem. Yet they were to restore pure worship in a New Jerusalem. These themes will play out in the rest of Revelation, too.
You had said I am trying to detract from 1919. Not exactly. Getting out of Babylon refers to restoring pure worship. For the WTS, this has been a long process that included positive and correct teachings that Russell had accepted before 1919, including removing "Babylon-like" graven images, which was a hallmark of Catholicism and even several Protestant denominations. There was a cleansing of false doctrines like the Trinity, hell-fire, immortal soul, etc. Rutherford pushed to get rid of several more false ideas that Russell had not removed, including an adjustment to the counsel about participation in war as early as 1917, although  most of the new adjustments came in the years 1927 to 1931, culminating in a name change that helped separate the Bible Students even further from the baggage of nearly 50 years for certain other false teachings and misinterpretations. (Christmas, pyramidology, Zionism)
I don't see anything particularly special about 1919, but I can understand that it was a year when opportunities arose for removing more false teachings. And there were some good new initiatives under Rutherford in 1919 that should be highlighted. (Especially expanded participation by many in door-to-door ministry.) But since 1919 was primarily a really big year for pushing the false teachings about 1925, I would not focus too much on the year 1919 itself. It's really a continuous stream of incremental progress, and the shock of failure over all of the 1914/1915 predictions was probably one of the reasons that so LITTLE progress was made in 1919 itself.
In truth, we as an organization have been blessed with spiritual progress since the late 1800's. There are likely many more blessings of spiritual progress to be made in the near future. We can be happy for this. We are blessed for it. Of course, you (Cesar) apparently hate it that I raise my little, unworthy voice in opposition to the chronology traditions we are still stuck with. That's your right and it's what I would expect from many Witnesses. But my own strongly-held conscientious beliefs include the idea that we would be even more blessed if these "strongly entrenched things" were overturned. It's not like these ideas are my own. In discussions at work while at Bethel have heard a few members of the Governing Body themselves (from about 1977 to 1982) struggle with the 1919 date and related dates. I heard Brother Dan Sydlik himself say that we ought to just scrap all this 1919 stuff and start over from scratch.

@Kosonen, I agree with much of what @Arauna has said above but I would consider several different factors that get in the way of the NYC identification for BtG.
For one thing, there is what I already mentioned about the idea that Jehovah would "lead" the WTS out of NYC/BtG for a few extra moments of smooth operation and comfort when this tribulation on NYC begins, but not do the same for all the Circuit Overseers, Elders, pioneers, individual anointed ones, and "rank-and-file" Witness families. It makes Jehovah a "respecter of persons" and it makes it appear that Jehovah wants to protect buildings and physical equipment as somehow more important than lowly individuals. Yet Jehovah sees the "sparrow" fall to the ground.
(1 Corinthians 10:13) . . .No temptation has come upon you except what is common to men. But God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear, but along with the temptation he will also make the way out so that you may be able to endure it.
Why would Jehovah make the way out for some, so many years in advance, but not make the way out for others until a related tribulation is right on top of them? Potentially trapping Witnesses in the worst of all situations for 3.5 years.
I understand how you could still defend against this possible contradiction. After all, a major point of the Olivet sermon (Mt24,Mk13,Lk21) was to get Christians out of Jerusalem in time so that would avoid the greatest part of the tribulation, but not send them out so early that they would suffer for years waiting after fleeing to the mountains of Pella, for example. Jehovah made a way out in this case by opening a "window of opportunity" between the attack in 66 CE, and the destruction in 70 CE (which coincidentally [?] happened to be about 3.5 years). And of course, the cutting short of those days of tribulation was on account of the "chosen ones." You could make an argument that the "chosen ones" do not generally include the anointed or other Witnesses outside of NY headquarters, but especially refers to those "chosen ones" at the headquarters in upstate NY.
Through "eisegesis," it is possible to make almost any historical situation fit a Biblical prophecy when the prophecy is written in symbols, or we are overly anxious to see prophecy fulfilled. You mentioned the fact that the WTS makes most of this prophecy fulfilled 100 years ago. In truth, the WT writers could just as easily have found "significant" fulfillments for these prophecies anywhere between 1799 and 2019. Russell found fulfillments in the 1800's. The WT writers in Rutherford's time latched onto the most dramatic thing that ever happened to the WT organization during the time period of "limbo" between 1914 and 1925. As an example the Watch Tower publications promoted ideas like the following that very year in 1919:

   
Of course, these writers were "cut from the same cloth" as those who could write the 1917 book "The Finished Mystery" which contains so many outlandish "fulfillments" of prophecy, such as Revelation 14:20 being prophesied in advance as the distance from Brooklyn to Scranton by way of the Lackawana RR station (p.230). This was a book that could literally find some significance in Brother Russell's hemorrhoids (p.54).

Of course, I'm not comparing your idea to the same foolishness produced in "The Finished Mystery." NYC does more than just "symbolize" a commercial center, a financial center, a foreign relations center (UN), a fashion center, an entertainment center. To some extent it's just about every kind of worldly center except a religious center. 
My main reason for dismissing the significance of NYC as prophetically significant here, however, is because I don't believe we should pin any of our "end-times" expectations on any specific "knowledge" about anything happening in the world today. That includes anything that the UN says no matter how significant it seems. It also means we should give no particular significance to anything that the Pope says, anything that any world council of churches or any other leaders would say -- if we think it means that the end is somehow more imminent because of anything we might think is a sign matching a prophecy in the Bible.
And that's because Jesus warned us that the end would come at a time when it would surprise us. A thief does not give a sign or warning before breaking into a house, therefore we would expect no sign or advance warning. The parousia will come upon the world while people are still thinking there is peace and security, much like the way life was going on as usual before the Flood, or before fire rained down upon Sodom, as if without warning. The circumstances of this speculation about NYC, according to your own explanation, provides a way of extending the end of the system beyond 3.5 years from now. This creates a problem. It creates a window of opportunity for some to say "the master is delaying" and a temptation to use that time to lord it over their fellow slaves. It creates a window of opportunity for the heart to be tempted into a lull, where the love of a great number of Christians could cool off. Jesus told us that it would come as a surprise for a reason. So that we would be ready at all times, not just trying to get our hearts in shape after we see a significant sign.
Also, you pretty much admitted that this NYC scenario provides "no reason to panic" on the one hand and a reason to warn Witnesses in NYC on the other hand, when this scenario is more widely understood.

It seems that you believe that the Watchtower Society, or perhaps the Governing Body, representing Jehovah's Witnesses, have already followed the advice of Revelation 18:4 to 'Get out of Babylon the Great.' This happens sometime between the time when the angels say that Babylon has fallen, and before she is burned, and the rest of the world mourns for her from a distance.
We currently teach that Babylon the Great took God's people captive beginning in about the year 100 CE, and that Babylon fell in 1919 CE. But that she will be completely destroyed during the time of the Great Tribulation/Armageddon.
You must think that the Society and/or GB have made this move out of New York City without being fully conscious of Jehovah's leading in this matter. I say this partly because, while they themselves got out of of Babylon the Great, they did not ask all other Witnesses to get out of Babylon the Great (BtG) before it burns and sinks.
Of course, you might say that there is no need for other Witnesses to leave NYC, because when it's time for BtG to burn and sink, Jehovah can and will protect his people. Of course, this implies that Jehovah can protect individuals, but not an organization, or not the individuals in the GB. Then again, you might be implying that it was the temptation to share with her in her sins that made it more important for the WTS/GB to get out of the Great City (NYC), so that they would not be tempted to get involved with the UN in that same city, for example. Perhaps the temptations on the WTS were somehow greater than the same temptations of the Great City on congregations or individual Witnesses.
I see this potential contradiction as a hole in your theory.
Looking forward to your explanation.

At some point over the years they got both character development and the need to be zealous out of balance, emphasing one to the detriment of the other, whereas the scriptures clearly show we need them both. Jesus was zealous and he was gentle.  Zeal for God' house "ate him up".
(John 2:16, 17) 16 And he said to those selling the doves: “Take these things away from here! Stop making the house of my Father a house of commerce!” 17 His disciples recalled that it is written: “The zeal for your house will consume me.”

This scripture shows he was gentle and considerate. We know hundreds of other instances where he showed gentleness,  consideration and deep love for people. For example when he healed the death man, when he healed the woman with the flow of blood, and he said he felt love for the righteous man who wanted to know what else he had to do to please God.
(Matthew 12:18-21) 18 “Look! My servant whom I chose, my beloved, whom I have approved! I will put my spirit upon him, and what justice is he will make clear to the nations. 19 He will not quarrel nor cry aloud, nor will anyone hear his voice in the main streets. 20 No bruised reed will he crush, and no smoldering wick will he extinguish, until he brings justice with success. 21 Indeed, in his name nations will hope.”
** w99 7/1 p. 5 How Can Jesus Change Your Life? ***
Not only did Jesus teach profound truths about how to show love but he also practiced what he taught. For example, he put the interests of others ahead of his own. One day Jesus and his disciples were so busy helping people that they had no time even to eat a meal. Jesus saw the need for his disciples to rest up a bit, and he took them to a lonely place. But when they got there, they found a crowd waiting for them. How would you have responded upon seeing a crowd who expected you to work when you felt that you needed a little break? Well, Jesus “was moved with pity for them” and “started to teach them many things.” (Mark 6:34) This concern for others always moved Jesus to assist them.
That is the spirit that moves us to go to our Bible studies even when something special comes up that we want to do.  We must work with the angels and assist those who need the good news.
Paul, the best example of a person who followed Jesus in an exemplary way and was used by Jesus to write instructions for us, said he was completely spent in doing God's will. We was not wishy washy.
(Philippians 2:17) 17 However, even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and the holy service to which your faith has led you, I am glad and I rejoice with all of you. 
Read Romans 14 and see he had a good conscience in everything. Numerous other scriptures show his parent-like qualities, e.g. like a nursing mother, etc.  These qualities are easy to find throughout his letters. The fact that he was beloved by the brothers shows he had a beautiful Christ-like personality (nevermind that false brothers were jealous and lied about it).
It is all easy to understand and research.

You've been reading too much false information. Russell started the ball rolling but then he and his associates died. But it didn't end there, that is why I said that since then, some scriptures became clearer, and understood better. Knowledge is progressive as I am sure you will agree. It was during Rutherford's time that the Great crowd was identified. Until then it was thought all were going to heaven. When the scripture concerning the great crowd came to be understood, it brought a lot of joy to those who realised they were of the great crowd, because their desire was to live on earth. Everyone at that time had the opportunity for the first time to realise who they were. It must have been thrilling to say the least!
I am in no way saying Russell, Rutherford, or anyone after him didn't make mistakes or immediately got everything right. But I think that has always been your stumbling block. Your insistence that there must be NO mistakes and NO fault, despite knowing that all humans, including the anointed are imperfect, and that all those inspired and God fearing men in Bible times (Hebrew and Greek scriptures) made mistakes, some quite major ones. And still, God used them although he had to discipline them. Those who Jehovah loves he disciplines. If those who Jehovah loves didn't make mistakes, there would be no need for Jehovah to discipline them, would there?
The discipline from Jehovah is ongoing. Perhaps one of these reprimands have been regarding the CSA issue? Although as you know, this problem is complex and no one solution fits all. (You yourself were not sure how to proceed regarding one situation. You were worried about slander and concerns whether reporting to the Police was justified and the right thing to do. You were asking for opinion on here. You said it was because you did not have all the information. Well put yourself in the elders shoes. They do not always have all the information. Just like you, they are worried about barking up the wrong tree.) There have been recent and important clarifications regarding the reporting and handling of CSA. The biggest one is that ALL members of the congregation have been made aware of how to proceed, not just elders like in the past. Everyone can be on the same page now. That is a big improvement and a step forward. In my opinion it was discipline from Jehovah. I will address the other issues you mentioned in another post later....
No, of course I am not saying that. I said that now, the congregations are mostly made up of the earthly class, but that does not mean that the body of Christ (the anointed) has been disturbed, or has no significance just because most congregations have no anointed in them at all.

Whether they are in heaven already as the WT believes, or still asleep in death, it makes no difference to the fact that ALL the anointed have to be in heaven before it can be said that they rule with Christ and are with him physically.
Yes. That is the practical view. That is why I don't think it can be important that they keep in touch with each other, because if it was, it would not be fair on the really old ones trying to work out all these technologies. 4Jah2me mentioned letter writing, well that too has it's limits because some of these older ones have trouble holding a pen (arthritis) or do not see very well anymore. Some younger ones (some are in their 50's) obviously would have no trouble with technology. But then where does that leave the older ones? We can already see that it is virtually impossible for ALL the anointed on earth to be in contact. So how fair would that be if only some were in contact? It would already nullify the idea that in order to be ONE body, they ALL have to be in contact with each other.

You make it sound like fundamental teachings have changed. I wonder what would cause someone to actually say “this is not what I have signed up for”. Maybe you have a few ideas?
I think you are missing the whole point of the Christian congregation. Let’s say that today all the anointed communicated with each other, and each brought something to the table, and each agreed or disagreed on something, which teaching or thought would they decide to stick to? Well, I hate to tell you, but you’ve missed the bus by nearly 2000 years. It’s already been done with the apostles. It’s already all there in writing, in the scriptures for all to see. When the first Bible students got together under Russell, all they did was peel away years of false teachings of Christendom and exposed the grass roots of the Truth.There has really been nothing much new since then, only some views became clearer, and a few were seen as unnecessarily complicated (such as types and antitypes) and were removed altogether .
Paul said about the anointed in Ephesians  4:11 “And he gave some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelizers, some as shepherds and teachers, 12  with a view to the readjustment of the holy ones, for ministerial work, to build up the body of the Christ, until we all attain to the oneness of the faith and of the accurate knowledge of the Son of God, to being a full-grown man, attaining the measure of stature that belongs to the fullness of the Christ”.
Paul shows that some anointed were readjusted (trained) by the other anointed, so that ALL of them together  would attain to the oneness of the faith and accurate knowledge.  So it looks like not all the anointed were given equal tasks. Some were shepherds and teachers of the other anointed, some evidently not. But as an end result, they were all united.
That was the whole point of the Christian congregation, which in those days must have represented the body of Christ because it was composed exclusively of the anointed. Today, the congregation, or body of Christ, remains undisturbed, as Jesus is still their head and the head of the congregation. But it will not be made whole until all the anointed are in heaven with Christ. With the dwindling numbers of anointed, these congregations have been filled with those who are not members of the body of Christ, but there is unity, and it is still Christ’s congregation.  But somehow, you, and @Witness, imply that it is necessary that there should be a segregation of those who are anointed, and those who are not anointed. I cannot find that idea anywhere in the scripture.
So, what do you think your “true anointed” would bring to the table today that hasn’t already been established by Jesus, and recorded by those who wrote the Christian Greek scriptures?  I am sure you must have something in mind. Something that would help all of Jehovah’s Witnesses today.  What is it?
Was in the Jan 2016 WT, but here is the latest, Jan 2020 basically saying the same thing in par 7, as the 2016 WT
https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-january-2020/we-will-go-with-you/
It is not saying anointed ones cannot communicate with each other. It is saying that they wouldn't want to separate themselves from the rest of the congregation.
I am not concerned about it because the true anointed have no need to seek each other in that way. From what I have seen they enjoy the fellowship and mutual encouragement of brothers and sisters of the earthly class while still on earth, and they look forward to being united physically with Christ and the other anointed when they are finally in heaven. 
 
P.S. I need to comment on something you mentioned in one of your previous posts. You said:   "The Anointed are not the same as the Earthly Class. The sooner people get this through their heads the better for everyone. The Anointed are the BODY OF CHRIST. Do you not understand that God has a special use for them even now. Otherwise God could anoint a person when they were on their deathbed".
The problem with that is that the anointed do not fully become the body of Christ until they are in heaven. While on earth they have that hope. But they are still sinful just like the earthly class. Although they have been given the invitation to heaven, their being anointed is no guarantee that they will be there. They will only be there if they have endured faithful to the end. So yes, their final sealing happens when they are on their deathbed. (........ prove yourself faithful even to death, and I will give you the crown of life". Rev 2:10). Some who were anointed in Paul's day fell away, the same can happen today. Paul, when he knew his death was imminent was able to say: "I have fought the fine fight, I have run the race to the finish, I have observed the faith.  From this time on, there is reserved for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will give me as a reward in that day" 

The question was basically about whether a person should do their own research but then just keep quiet about it if they proved to themselves something different than they had accepted at baptism. I thought your answer was excellent.
Those of us who remain in the organization after researching the teachings on 1914 are remaining because this doctrine, even if completely wrong, does not negate the good work the organization is doing for the world in focusing on both the current and future benefits of God's kingdom, taking a stand on God's side, and offering the opportunity to join in with others who also want to share that message with the whole world. Were Peter, James and John still being used in the congregations around Jerusalem and Judea, even though they still had long-standing prejudices and misunderstandings about God's purpose for the Gentiles? (Acts 15 & 21; Gal 1 & 2) Of course they were!
Did teachings coming from those same men stumble others? (Galatians, Barnabas, etc.) According to Paul, people were definitely stumbled by the influence these brothers, but Paul continued to work with them and cooperate with them. Our decision to continue working with the Witnesses should also still make sense if we believe there is no other group that teaches what we believe about various Bible teachings that are important to us (neutrality, conscientious objection two war, teachings about morality/Trinity/hell/soul, etc.).
Also, there are those who might think that it is hypocritical to find something wrong in our personal research and then merely keep quiet about it. I'd say that we would be wrong to bring it up in the context of our congregations. This might cause divisions, and might influence people to choose a side based on "human factors" (who debates the best, who "sounds" more loyal, who "sounds" more intelligent, who has more human authority, the number of people who agree or disagree, etc., etc.)
But, if we recall Matthew 18, the most important thing is to go to the source of the issue. It's not the people in our congregation, or even the elders in our congregation. They are not the source of this teaching. In this case we should go to the brothers who are the publishers and promoters of this teaching, to see what they say in defense of the teaching. As you say, we may not be satisfied, or find that they don't answer, or won't answer, or can't answer. Then we can make up our mind how we might still try to absolve our own conscience on the matter, or make a defense of our own faith on the matter. But we still need NOT go to our local congregation about it, or try to find persons there who will side with us. This will still create unnecessary contentions. It will make it appear that it is a matter of personal ego to be right or prove others wrong. If it were a matter of life and death, this might be different.
If this is the same argument that John Butler often made, then the point is that the context is only about the Hebrew Scriptures, not the Christian Greek Scriptures, much of which had not been written yet. This is already mentioned however in our own publications:
*** ws17 December p. 16 Parents—Help Your Children Become “Wise for Salvation” ***
“YOU HAVE KNOWN THE HOLY WRITINGS”
3 The apostle Paul first visited Lystra in the year 47. This is probably when Timothy, who may have been a teenager, learned about Jesus’ teachings. He applied what he learned, and two years later he began traveling with Paul. About 16 years after that, Paul wrote to Timothy: “Continue in the things that you learned and were persuaded to believe, knowing from whom you learned them and that from infancy you have known the holy writings [the Hebrew Scriptures], which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” (2 Timothy 3:14, 15) Notice that Paul said that Timothy (1) knew the holy writings, (2) was persuaded to believe the things he learned, and (3) became wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. . . . Timothy knew the Hebrew Scriptures “from infancy,” that is, from the time he was very young
The addition of the term "[the Hebrew Scriptures]" is in the original quotation, even though it was put in brackets. However, the Watchtower's emphasis has always been on the fact that since most of these additional book by apostles and other mature men had already been written that the reference is to all the books both OT and NT.
*** w63 11/1 pp. 652-653 pars. 14-15 The Book of “Everlasting Good News” is Beneficial ***
Consequently, when Paul wrote his final letter to Timothy and said: “All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial,” there were doubtless twenty-one inspired books, all addressed to Christians, in addition to the thirty-nine books of the Hebrew Scriptures. (2 Tim. 3:16) Today Paul’s expression “All Scripture is inspired of God” includes the writings of Jude and John, for these also were written under inspiration of God’s holy spirit and were added to the collection of inspired Christian writings, to complete the inspired Holy Bible.
15 Today, therefore, “all Scripture” includes the sixty-six books of the Bible, as it is now divided up in order.
 

I don't think that we need to worry about the difference in priorities of various aspects of Jehovah's purpose. His thoughts are higher than ours, and it's not up to us to try to prioritize specific things that were not already prioritized for us in the Bible. In fact, all the items listed below are tied together so that we cannot really separate, for example, his  sanctification from the well-being of good angels and good people (and "all creation").
Jehovah's eternal purpose the outworking of His purpose by the Kingdom throughout mankind's history the vindication of His sovereignty the sanctification of Jehovah's name, reputation, righteousness, purpose the explanation for sin, suffering and death in this system the meaning and purpose of the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ the question of motivation for our Christian activities (works); whether reward (hope) or faith and love the central theme of love for both God and neighbor Each of these is tied together. Sometimes, for example. we (JWs) have concerned ourselves over the priority of Jehovah's vindication or his sovereignty. But when we look at the things that the Bible is concerned with prioritizing, these are not included.  Paul prioritized "love" over faith and hope. Jesus prioritized love of God and neighbor over all other commandments in the law. Jesus prioritized mercy over sacrifice.
The entire book of Romans, especially, ties all these together, and just a few examples will remind us of how Paul touched on almost every subject in the list above
(Romans 8:18-25) 18 For I consider that the sufferings of the present time do not amount to anything in comparison with the glory that is going to be revealed in us. 19 For the creation is waiting with eager expectation for the revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but through the one who subjected it, on the basis of hope 21 that the creation itself will also be set free from enslavement to corruption and have the glorious freedom of the children of God. 22 For we know that all creation keeps on groaning together and being in pain together until now. 23 Not only that, but we ourselves also who have the firstfruits, namely, the spirit, yes, we ourselves groan within ourselves while we are earnestly waiting for adoption as sons, the release from our bodies by ransom. 24 For we were saved in this hope; but hope that is seen is not hope, for when a man sees a thing, does he hope for it? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we keep eagerly waiting for it with endurance.
(Romans 5:1-15) . . .Therefore, now that we have been declared righteous as a result of faith, let us enjoy peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we also have obtained access by faith into this undeserved kindness in which we now stand; and let us rejoice, based on hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only that, but let us rejoice while in tribulations, since we know that tribulation produces endurance; 4 endurance, in turn, an approved condition; the approved condition, in turn, hope, 5 and the hope does not lead to disappointment; because the love of God has been poured out into our hearts through the holy spirit, which was given to us. 6 For, indeed, while we were still weak, Christ died for ungodly men at the appointed time. 7 For hardly would anyone die for a righteous man; though perhaps for a good man someone may dare to die. 8 But God recommends his own love to us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. . . . 12 That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because they had all sinned—. 13 For sin was in the world before the Law, but sin is not charged against anyone when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death ruled as king from Adam down to Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the same way that Adam transgressed, who bears a resemblance to the one who was to come. 15 But the gift is not like the trespass. For if by one man’s trespass many died, how much more did the undeserved kindness of God and his free gift by the undeserved kindness of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to many!
Just a quick aside, but was this verse [Romans 5:13] ever used in support of the idea that the Watchtower had taught about persons destroyed at Sodom, for example, when we said that they would still have a chance for a resurrection?

I am continuing from your earlier post.....
Well it depends on what it is and how they feel about it. If a person disagrees with the teaching of 1914 for example, then he has to decide how important that is to him. He can write to the branch, as many have done. If they don't like the reply, or don't agree with it, they have to again decide how important it is to them. Not everything is black and white and there may be something that you or they have overlooked. Is 1914 a life or death question? In my opinion it isn't, but in someone else's opinion it might be. And they may feel that they cannot continue being JW because of it. We don't have to go around telling everyone, because it is a personal opinion. Even if we can find "proof" that we are right, we should respect the opinions of others, just like we would like others to respect out opinion. With something like 1914, we really need to decide the importance of it in light of the big picture. If JW'S have got 1914 wrong, how does that affect how we view everything else we have learned from that same source? Remember, mistakes will be made. I read some of your earlier posts where you are actually defending what you have learned from JWs (God and Jesus being separate, there being no fiery hell, the promise of an earthly paradise, the last days etc.)
It is true, we can have our own opinion on what a scripture means. But usually that is an exception if the scripture is read in context of the chapter AND the whole Bible. A few scriptures can be ambiguous though. Hopefully, before we signed up to become one of JWs we have already cleared that up and accepted the interpretation of JWs.
How do you suggest they should be in contact earth wide?
Yes, you are making a good point there. However in practice, as you know, most anointed are scattered throughout the earth. In the days before the internet communication, to be of any value, would have been difficult. Today, this is surely a lot easier, but not everyone is able to communicate via the internet. Not only that, and this is the point I was trying to make earlier, how would one know if someone was the "true anointed". I joked, and said any True Tom Harley could claim they were anointed. Can you imagine how that would work? It could become a total mess if some "false anointed" communicated whatever they liked. How would one sift what was genuine from what wasn't genuine?  
The GB is not concerned if the anointed communicate with each other., It is everyone's right to communicate with all of the brotherhood. The GB is concerned that the whole brotherhood remains united.
 

I replied above: I am happy that we are now called Jehovahs Witnesses because it brings honor to God's name and  we are therefore distinct from all other  Christian denominations by our loyalty to person of jehovah  God.
I am happy that we do not cling to the cult of persona.  There was a tendency of old for people to do this as in case of Russel and Rutherford.
There is a need to distribute the same choice of "food" to everyone world-wide. A brother in Uzbekistan must have the same food available for meetings  as in Kenya. For this to happen there is a need for central translation  and distribution services.
Practical reasons drove the centralization of services.
 
A Jewish scholar set out to collect extant manuscripts where the pronouncement of jehovahs name is indicated by th point system. So far he has collected over 1000 from museums all over the world where they were hidden.
Many bible names such as Jeho-saphat, jeho-ram etc. also contain the name of the true god. Hallelu-jah. The pronunciation is correct....... but the use of this name is even more important than the pronunciation.
 

Whether they drank blood in Roman times and eat blood sausage in our times does not matter. What matters, is to follow bible instruction.
The first law jehovah gave to Noah after the flood was about blood - it is called the 'everlasting covenant' which was repeated to Israel and also by jesus' disciples.
So what part of the instruction "abstain from blood and fornication"  may we disobey?  If we break the one instruction - is it not as serious as breaking the other one?
One must choose - do you want to obey the bible -  or not. This is not a WT Society issue but one about obedience to God.
 

Whatever happens in a court.  Rutherford did well to change the Name because it brings attention to the name of jehovah. 
I became a witness and left the church I was in BECAUSE the churches stick to traditions that are centuries old.  There is no place for spiritual growth. 
If these IBSA guys still cling to age old ideas and the person of  Russel - no matter how sincere-  their inability to change may be their Achilles heel.  Russel made quite a few mistakes....... because   the light was only starting to shine in the days of the bible students.
As Christian's we need to grow all the time.  Core teachings remain the same but as prophecies go into fulfillment we will definitely see new light. 

True. But a few things have been repeated from that Law for Christians to benefit from as principles and truths.
I can't. But I think it might have even been a wider principle than just refraining from drinking human or animal blood directly. It might refer to abstaining from bloodguilt, which can be brought upon ourselves by reckless driving, reckless use of a firearm, parachute diving for pleasure, etc.
Both. Not even God's law should override the value of a life, according to Jesus:
(Matthew 12:3-7) 3 He said to them: “Have you not read what David did when he and the men with him were hungry? 4 How he entered into the house of God and they ate the loaves of presentation, something that it was not lawful for him or those with him to eat, but for the priests only? 5 Or have you not read in the Law that on the Sabbaths the priests in the temple violate the Sabbath and continue guiltless? 6 But I tell you that something greater than the temple is here. 7 However, if you had understood what this means, ‘I want mercy and not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the guiltless ones.
I believe that Paul understood that even the "laws" that the Jerusalem Council came up with could be ignored if conscience allowed. He didn't think those idols that the meat had been sacrificed to meant anything, so he said a person could eat it if his conscience allowed. James and Peter had said NO!
 

You still seem to have the idea that persons who are truly anointed will be inspired by God's holy spirit and not let personal viewpoints get in the way. Look again at Acts 15:
(Acts 15:2) . . .But after quite a bit of dissension and disputing by Paul and Barʹna·bas with them,. . .
(Acts 15:6, 7) 6 So the apostles and the elders gathered together to look into this matter. 7 After much intense discussion had taken place,. . .

I wanted to stay out of this because of the way the answer might sound worse than I hope it sounds. I think the real answer should acknowledge both of your ideas.
Because I think the policy changed on account of a belief by some that the original policy showed "hardheartedness" in the face of "doubts" at the level of a primary policymaker. Not so much F.Rusk/Dr.Dixon, but mostly from the research by G.Smalley (Writing Dept) which had "earned" him a larger say in the policy. Too many people were dying, and because of doubts about the overall policy, these deaths seemed unnecessary. The more that the "hardhearted," older generation, wanted to speak of "martyrs," the more that the soft-hearted younger generation wanted to see the entire blood policy thrown out. I believe that allowing fractions was a compromise between the "old guard" and the new. Even some Witness doctors were called in to HQ to discuss it. And without committing to any changes in policy with them, the direction was clear that some compromises on blood fractions could be potentially justified when one looked at the details of blood fractions and how they were being used to save lives.
I haven't talked to Brother Smalley about this, but was told by a Bethel elder who has known him well, that he was willing to change the entire blood policy (for scriptural reasons, not financial) but that this would be seen as a Catholic "Fish on Friday" "No Fish on Friday" -- the flip flop on fish. It would devastate the Witness families who had lost a child, parent, relative or close friend to the blood policy in the past, and for this reason he was happy to go along with the fractions compromise which could at least reduce the number of deaths greatly. I've heard JTR assume this was a move by lawyers to reduce financial exposure. But I know that even Brother Rusk was aware of both financial exposure and that there were several questions about the scripturalness of the policy as he had dealt with those arguments before. (But as soft and gentle and loving as this brother was to my wife and me, and all persons we knew, he was very much a "hard-liner" on the original blood policy and never gave an inch to those arguments. I don't know that he was ever really OK with the fractions compromise. I think I've mentioned before that he was best friends with my wife, and gave the key portion of our wedding talk.)
BTW, my iPhone identifies a goodly portion (badly portion) of my calls as "Fraud Risk" and I always glance at it with the thought that I just got a call from "Fred Rusk" although he died a few years ago.
Yes, there are probably "14 ways from Sunday" to look at the matter "legitimately", not just two. (The term "legitimate" seems out of place when we are comparing law with conscience.) Some of these ways are fully scriptural; some are based on science; some are a mix. I was in full agreement with JTR strictness in my own personal policy (based on conscience) until a couple of years ago, while participating on this forum. I would neither take blood nor fractions, and I would have been willing to die before knowingly accepting a transfusion of any kind. The only difference I had (conscientiously) with the Society's position, however, is that for the last 10 years at least, I would never impose my conscience about either whole blood or blood fractions on any of my own children before they were baptized or 18, whichever came first. I would try to work with doctors as best I could, but if I were convinced that their survival depended on a blood transfusion, I would not impose my conscience, and would accept any consequences. And of course I would give no recommendations for unbaptized youngsters or babies in the congregation either. I felt the issue was too serious to even accidentally impose my own conscience on another. Fortunately, it has never come up.
But when I learned of Brother Smalley's policy-making issues, even though I didn't confirm them with him personally, the brother who told me about it gave me another contact who might confirm. This was another one of Smalley's friends who was close enough to him even recently to know if he had said anything of the sort to him. This contact was reluctant, because I had never contacted him before, but after I told him of my concern based on the information from the Bethel elder whom he knew, he understood how important an issue I thought it was. This new contact gave me some additional information I have already included above. To be fair, I should also mention that I very recently talked to another friend who had worked with Smalley in the Writing Department back in the 70s and 80s, and he sounded incredulous about all of this.

Thanks for saying this. 
Jesus was the first to obtain immortality and incorruptability from Jehovah as a reward for remaining faithful to him until death. Jesus was like the other angels before he came to earth.  His everlasting life depended on him staying loyal to God.   Read Hebrews 1 in its entirety.
Satan was an angel (like jesus) and became disobedient..... he will be destroyed.  
The lie was told by Satan to Adam when he said: you will not die.  People still believe this lie. They believe that humans have a soul that goes out and it is immortal.......ecclesiastes 9: 5& 10.  Eccl 3: 19 & 20 shows that the soul knows nothing and humans die like an animal. They do not have an immortal soul. Adam would have lived forever while he obeyed God.
The bible clearly shows that the soul dies at death.  We will be recreated at time of resurrection. SO WHAT has this to do with Jesus?  Prophecy indicates in Isaiah 53 : last verses that Jesus will put his "soul" in death to pay for our souls as randsom.  Eze 18:4  says: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.   So our souls die and Jesus put his souls willingly in death to save us.
Abraham offered up his son..... this was a prophecy of what jehovah would do for us. Isaac could have pushed his father away but he willingly allowed his father to sacrifice him because he believed God could resurrect him - give him life again like when He opened his old mothers womb to give birth to him.  God was kind to Abraham because he substituted isaac with an animal but had to go the whole way with Jesus. Jesus willingly came to earth and knew beforehand  that he would go into non-existence for three days.  This is the example of obedience to death.  For dying unjustly while being perfect, jehovah granted him immortality and incorruptability.
Jesus really died - his soul died. Churches who teach that Jesus is God do not really understand the randsom sacrifice. They talk about the blood of jesus but do not understand the depth of the sacrifice of Jesus.   They do not really believe that he died.  If you are immortal - you cannot die.