ComfortMyPeople

Of course, Jesus never said anything about these things happening either in greater, more terrifying, or more "concentrated measure." So even if earthquakes, for example, really had started to happen in "concentrated measure" in 1914 (they didn't!) this would still have nothing to do with the sign of Matthew 24. All Jesus said was that great earthquakes, for example, would happen and therefore not to be misled by them, because these are not signs that the end is imminent. ("Do not be misled . . . the end is not yet!").
Of course, what you are talking about would still be the common reasoning, even if we somehow found a way to restart the generation with the start of the Governing Body around 1972, or the apostasy in 1980, or AIDS, or cart witnessing, or the re-assignment of the Governing Body as "guardians of doctrine" around 2000, or even some brand new unexpected event in 2018.
So I brought up the point about the sign in Matthew 24 to propose that we would still be wrong to try to find new reasons to claim that earthquakes and wars were somehow more "concentrated" after a new starting date -- even if they WERE!

I think I've presented the following alternative suggestion before (a couple of times):
It makes sense that when Jesus refers to "all these things" he is referring to the same "all these things" that the disciples asked him about:
(Mark 13:4) 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are to come to a conclusion?” In context, of course, "all these things" referred to the judgment on Jerusalem and therefore the toppling of the Temple buildings.
(Mark 13:1-4) As he was going out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him: “Teacher, see! what wonderful stones and buildings!” 2 However, Jesus said to him: “Do you see these great buildings? By no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.” 3 As he was sitting on the Mount of Olives with the temple in view, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately: 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are to come to a conclusion?” Since the word "synteleia" can refer to a final destruction and the word "parousia" can refer to a final judgment event, the disciples no doubt thought that these events were part of the final parousia/synteleia on the whole world. After all, Jerusalem represented the whole world to them. Therefore, Jesus' words to them started out "Do not be misled." or "Look out that nobody misleads you." For you are going to see a lot of things in this generation that you might think will be a sign of that final end, but remember that all these things are going to take place. A lot of things might fool you into thinking you are seeing that final sign. You will go through a lot of trials and tribulations. But don't be misled. The final end cannot happen until AFTER the only sign, which is what you will see come upon Jerusalem.
Jesus' prophecy about Jerusalem, of course, also contains a lot of good counsel about how easy it would be to also be fooled into thinking that this or that is a sign for the final parousia too. It's also easy for us to be fooled into thinking that wars, and earthquakes, and famines are a "sign" of the final parousia, when really we know that, even though all these things will take place, people will also be talking about peace and security right up to the end. People will be eating and drinking and marrying and going on with their lives right up to the end. People will be ridiculing the fact that all things are still going on just like they have been from the beginning, right up until the final end.

Matthew 24:34 " All the generations, then, from Abraham until David were 14 generations; from David until the deportation to Babylon, 14 generations; from the deportation to Babylon until the Christ, 14 generations". This is counting each person's lifetime as a generation
Insight to the Scriptures under Generation, p917:
A generation commonly refers to all persons who were born about the same time. (Ex 1:6; Mt 11:16)
Associated with this is the meaning “contemporaries.” At Genesis 6:9 it is stated concerning Noah: “He proved himself faultless among his contemporaries [literally, generations...
Length. When the term “generation” is used with reference to the people living at a particular time, the exact length of that time cannot be stated, except that the time would fall within reasonable limits. These limits would be determined by the life span of the people of that time or of that population. The life span of the ten generations from Adam to Noah averaged more than 850 years each. (Ge 5:5-31; 9:29) But after Noah, man’s life span dropped off sharply. Abraham, for example, lived only 175 years. (Ge 25:7) Today, much as it was in the time of Moses, people living under favorable conditions may reach 70 or 80 years of age.....
“This Generation” of Christ’s Prophecies. When Bible prophecy speaks of “this generation,” it is necessary to consider the context to determine what generation is meant. Jesus Christ, when denouncing the Jewish religious leaders, concluded by saying: “Truly I say to you, All these things will come upon this generation.” History recounts that about 37 years later (in 70 C.E.) that contemporary generation personally experienced the destruction of Jerusalem, as foretold.—Mt 23:36.
Later that same day, Jesus again used practically the same words, saying: “Truly I say to you that this generation will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Mt 24:34) In this instance, Jesus was answering a question regarding the desolation of Jerusalem and its temple as well as regarding the sign of his presence and of the conclusion of the system of things. Before his reference to “this generation,” however, he had focused his remarks specifically on his “coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” and the nearness of the Kingdom of God. Immediately afterward, he continued with references to his “presence.” (Mt 24:30, 37, 39; Lu 21:27, 31) Jesus was using the word “generation” with reference to humans whose lives would in some way be associated with the foretold events.—Mt 24.
The people of this 20th-century generation living since 1914 have experienced these many terrifying events concurrently and in concentrated measure—international wars, great earthquakes, terrible pestilences, widespread famine, persecution of Christians, and other conditions that Jesus outlined" (in Matthew mark and Luke).
Dictionary definition of Generation: 1. the entire body of individuals born and living at about the same time: the postwar generation. 2. the term of years, roughly 30 among human beings, accepted as the average period between the birth of parents and the birth of their offspring. 3. a group of individuals, most of whom are the same approximate age, having similar ideas, problems, attitudes, etc. Compare Beat Generation, Lost Generation.   Definition of contemporaries: adjective 1. existing, occurring, or living at the same time; belonging to the same time: Newton's discovery of the calculus was contemporary with that of Leibniz. 2. of about the same age or date: a Georgian table with a contemporary wig stand. 3. of the present time; modern: a lecture on the contemporary novel. noun, plural contemporaries. 4. a person belonging to the same time or period with another or others. 5. a person of the same age as another. However, I do understand the idea that the Slave is trying to present when it says "Contemporaries" rather than generation. But even then, in general, contemporaries also live and die roughly at the same time. As regards the contemporaries of a certain time period, for example the contemporaries of WW, that would surely not include someone who was born in 1960 would it? As for the contemporaries of a certain sign, in this case the "time of the end", well the contemporaries of that time could be as long as the "time of the end" lasted! In view of the different time concepts of humans as opposed to Jehovah, the time of the end could be a 1000 years long! And all those people that lived and died (approx.12 generations), could be counted as generations living in the "time of the end" if we are going to use that formula...
So....I hate to say it, but since I agree with the explanation of the Insight Book, and the dictionary definitions, I have no choice in this stream of time but to question the accuracy of 1914, rather than the logical understanding of Generation...and Contemporaries.  So that's my alternative suggestion @Gone FishingBut of course I could be wrong.
 
 
 
 
 
 

That's actually very simple. Jesus used similar expressions a few times. They even matched the context of Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21.
(Matthew 23:36-38) 36 Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation. 37 “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent to her—how often I wanted to gather your children together the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings! But you did not want it. 38 Look! Your house is abandoned to you. So a judgment day was coming upon Jerusalem, and it would come during the same time period in the lives of people who were contemporaries of Jesus, during the lives of the very same audience he was speaking with, the people who were alive at the same time as Jesus. We know that Jesus said this in about 33 CE and that "all these things" came about just as predicted. Jerusalem's judgment day came in 70 C.E. (which was about 37 years later). A great tribulation for many Christians in Jerusalem started around 66 C.E., which was 33 years later. 
The same idea can be seen in the expressions:
(Matthew 16:28) 28 Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Son of man coming in his Kingdom.” (Mark 9:1) Furthermore, he said to them: “Truly I say to you that there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Kingdom of God already having come in power.”
(Luke 9:27) 27 But I tell you truly, there are some of those standing here who will not taste death at all until first they see the Kingdom of God.”
(Matthew 10:23) 23 When they persecute you in one city, flee to another; for truly I say to you, you will by no means complete the circuit of the cities of Israel until the Son of man arrives.
 
So the idea was that when people who were contemporaries of Jesus heard him make a promise, they would know it would happen in their lifetime, and they could therefore be happy and lift their heads up, knowing that the promise was close enough that most of them would live to see it. In the case of the promise that "some" would live to see Jesus coming in FULL kingdom power, Jesus made this come true for them just a week later through a vision on the "Mount of Transfiguration." But it proves the same point -- that it had to happen within the lifetime of the contemporaries within Jesus audience.
And that's exactly what happened with the promise in Matthew 24 and Luke 21, etc, when the disciples asked about when all these things related to Jerusalem's judgment day would occur. (Every one of the temple buildings' stones being toppled!) They could be happy that it was close enough to be within the lifetime of at least some of those standing there. 
Of course, it would have been some kind of a cruel joke if the prophecy had meant that it would finally get down to just the last few survivors before anyone could see the fulfillment. How could Jesus have said that "when you see these things, lift your heads up because you know that your deliverance is getting near" if he really meant something like this:
I know I said you should lift up your heads, but what I really meant is that almost all of you listeners are going to die first, and perhaps only a couple of people might still be alive when this generation is just about to finally die out. In about 50 years, if Jerusalem has not seen her judgment day by that time, you might want to remember who were the youngest persons in the audience when I made the uplifting promise, and then figure out about how much longer those young persons might live. Let's say there were a couple of 15 year-olds and they might survive until about age 80, which is 65 years after I am making this encouraging and uplifting promise that your deliverance is getting near. This means that, not you, but people who are alive 65 years from now might want to start watching these youngsters very closely in 65 years, when they will be 80 year old, to see just how long they are going to live. When the last one is about to die, you will know that I am just about to bring Jerusalem's judgment day.  If the last one starts to die, you will even at that point know the day and the hour, too! Even though this is ludicrous, for those who might have thought that the words about Jerusalem's judgment day also applied to his full and complete judgment day on the whole world, this could have resulted in something very much like that scenario. In fact, there is a kind of warning not to fall for this kind of thinking. It's at the end of John's gospel:
(John 21:21-23) . . .“Lord, what about this man?” 22 Jesus said to him: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you? You continue following me.” 23 So the saying went out among the brothers that this disciple would not die. However, Jesus did not say to him that he would not die, but he said: “If it is my will for him to remain until I come, of what concern is that to you?” Jesus had already implied that "this generation" could die out completely before the final judgment day on the world. Note:
(Matthew 12:41, 42) 41 Men of Ninʹe·veh will rise up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, because they repented at what Joʹnah preached. But look! something more than Joʹnah is here. 42 The queen of the south will beraised up in the judgment with this generation and will condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solʹo·mon. But look! something more than Solʹo·mon is here. Notice the brilliant way in which Jesus would not tell them that the final judgment would NOT also come in their same generation, but had still been clear that the judgment day on Jerusalem would come within their generation.
 

I'm not speaking for any of the other persons who have questioned it, but the only scripture that was used is this:
(Exodus 1:6) 6 Joseph eventually died, and also all his brothers and all that generation. The problem is that this scripture does not support what Brother Splane is saying. In fact, it more likely says exactly the opposite. Just look at the context to see that "all that generation" refers to Joseph and his brothers and all those who were alive at the same time as all of Joseph's brothers. It did not include all of Joseph's parent's generation, or his children's generation, or his grandchildren's generation. In fact, if you back up just 10 verses in the Pentateuch, you read in Genesis 50:23:
(Genesis 50:23) Joseph saw the third generation of Eʹphra·im’s sons, also the sons of Maʹchir, Ma·nasʹseh’s son. They were born upon Joseph’s knees. The third generation was contemporary with Joseph "born upon Joseph's knees, in fact. But they were not in the same generation as Joseph. They were, just as it says, the "third generation."
But first there is an even clearer reason to see that this explanation is wrong. In fact, Brother Splane accidentally ruined his entire explanation using his own words in the talk. Listen closely to the video above from the point marked 2m:38s to 2m:53s. These fifteen seconds prove that his reasoning is false.
He says:
But now what did Joseph and his brothers all have in common? They were all contemporaries. They had all lived at the same time. They were part of the same generation. So a quick test: Was Joseph Rutherford part of that first group? Was A. H. MacMillan? Was W. E. Van Amburgh? The answer is YES, according to Brother Splane, at the point from 7m:38s to 7m:54s in the video above. Who else was part of that second group? At 11m:16s to 11m:28s, he adds: "...in addition, there are Karl Klein, John Barr, Albert Schroeder. All the current members of the Governing Body are also part of 'this generation.'"
Now it's easy to see what's wrong with this picture, and why Exodus 1:6 actually disproves the currently proposed theory:
Were the current members of the Governing Body contemporaries of Rutherford, MacMillan and Van Amburgh? NO!! Of course, not! Rutherford died in 1942 Brother Sanderson was born February 4, 1965. He was baptized just days after he turned 10, on February 9, 1975. So it's not likely that he became "anointed" (a requirement to be in the second group) until 1975 or after. That's 33 years after Rutherford died! So this alone proves that they were not all contemporaries. The same is true of all members of the current Governing Body. They were not all contemporaries with the persons in the first group. We could paraphrase what Brother Splane said about Exodus 1:6:
But now what did the members of this first and second group of brothers all have in common? They were NOT all contemporaries. They had NOT all lived at the same time. So they were NOT part of the same generation. In order get this flaw in the logic past us without too many people noticing, some "sleight of hand" was necessary. It was important to interrupt the identification of the first group with their obvious contemporaries while still under the definition based on Exodus 1:6  that they ALL had to be contemporaries. Then the word "all" was changed to "some" and was slipped in quickly without any emphasis on the word "some" at the 8m:20s mark. Then the word "some" was slipped in again with just slightly more emphasis at around the 9m:40s mark. Here's how:
He does OK up to 7m:54s while still speaking of real and actual contemporaries in the "first group." Then, at 8m:20s into the video Brother Splane gives away the first clue that shows where the reasoning went wrong. In speaking of the second group and mentioning Knorr, Swingle, Suiter, Henschel and Gangas, he says that "They were anointed contemporaries of some in the first group." He does it again at 9m:40s to 9m:54s, where he says: "In order to be part of this generation, someone would have had to have been anointed before 1992, because he would have to have been a contemporary of some of the first group."

This is the final part of the discussion of the December 3, 1924 advertisement for the "Angels and Women" book where the Golden Age responds to the two letters:
One letter showed concerns about the spiritistic origin of the book and one whole-heartedly endorsed it. The reply is shown in full:
As expected by the order and content of the letters, the Society was going to repeat its current stance and offer a small (dismissive) defense to take care of the slight objection.
We do apparently learn that it was revised under Russell's supervision, but Woodworth (the Golden Age) editor has also claimed that Russell was supervising every aspect of the work since 1916 from beyond the grave (beyond the vail/veil). So we don't really know if Brenisen (Brenneisen) started work on this before 1916 or not. (Later we'll see a reason to believe that Woodworth is referring to Russell supervising the revision after he died: 1916 through 1924.) 
The connection to "The Vow" would seem to be obvious. But note that the answer is that this book is no more wrong than to read books by the "faithful and discreet slave" on the subject of spiritism. Perhaps it was the added appendix with scriptural citations that made this rationalization possible. The book is claimed to have provided "new light" in that it gives a better understanding of the Devil's organization, and gives a clearer vision of "how" Satan overreached the angels and humans.
The street address is not given, just a post office number. This is thought to be Brenisen's publishing company.

I didn't hear him say anything about it being a "fantastic novel" as quoted by the original poster, but he definitely recommended it  by saying; "You may want to pick it up and read it" and that "it's very interesting reading" .  
I would like to comment on a lot more but this is a busy two weeks for me work wise, and I am able only to read the comments, and  briefly reply with little snippets that don't require a lot of thought (well, I am blonde)...

In the timeline, the initial announcement and promotion in July 1924, was covered,  and now have begun to discuss the response to the book starting in the December 3, 1924 issue of Golden Age. Next is the positive response. (Again don't miss the signs of marketing within the letter itself.)
 
The first sentence by one appreciative reader somehow speaks for how much pleasure and profit this book has provided to "Truth friends." It's about loyalty and faith in God.
But notice that the second paragraph, highlighted in red above, looks completely like a common marketing ploy. It's merely a rewording and reminder of the original advertisement. And a new reminder that this would make a great Christmas gift, just in time. It's partly rhetorical in that there is no such thing as No for an answer. It's just like those radio ads or cheap TV ads where two persons converse:
Mary: Can you give me some advice John? I have Problem X (x=hair loss, loose gums, 12 toes, etc) John: You are in luck, Mary. There is a wonderful new product that takes care of "Problem X" -- perfect for you! Mary: That's great, and I also love the fact that it's on sale now at my favorite pharmacy for buy 2 get one free! [Fake knowledge that Mary didn't really have, but the ad writers thought sounded better from her.] John: Right you are, Mary! And the sale runs from now until Christmas!!! [jingle, ka-ching! jingle, ka-ching! . . . repeat until fade-out] And of course this new Golden Age advertisement in the guise of a letter is setting up the idea that this is a great witnessing tool as a stepping stone (or "gateway" book) to get them to buy real WATCH TOWER publications.
Again this "one" appreciative reader speaks for the many who would like to get more information regarding these items, apparently knowing all along that such orders will actually need to go to the A. B. Abac Company.
In my next post I'll cover the response to these letters in the same issue of the Golden Age.

I still think the timeline is informative in helping us decide just why this book was promoted in this fashion by the Watch Tower Society. We discussed the initial announcment in the The Golden Age, July 30, 1924 p. 702. For some reason this announcement said nothing about what made the book so important or just how it could help them ward off spiritism. This was the second major book that Woodworth promoted, and both of them tried to play off their close association with Charles T Russell for sales. (Finished Mystery and Angels & Women).
But the actual author of the book Seola was never mentioned. Neither was the reviser named, only that it was a close friend of Russell revising a book that Russell had recommended to his friends. According to Brother Herd, Russell endorsed the book and had written the foreward in the book. Russell did NOT write the foreword in the book, and we only learn second or third hand that Russell had endorsed the book. We know of nothing of the book from Russell himself, or even from Russell's lifetime.
In promoting the book through Watch Tower publications, they never mentioned that the original author was a woman, or that they believed she was acting as a spirit medium. Imagine how surprised you would be if you ordered 2 cartons of these books so that everyone in your congregation (a.k.a., "company") could get this new wonderful information about avoiding spiritism. You open up the book and are anxious to get a glimpse of just how "the faithful and discreet slave" had, in effect, posthumously (again!) provided spiritual food to the household of faith. (Russell was still the "faithful and discreet slave" at this point. Woodworth had proposed a new explanation of a parable that would have made Rutherford the fulfillment of a "steward" from a different parable, but it didn't really "stick" yet.)
So you open up the book "Angels and Women" and you anxiously read the foreword:
"dictated to the woman who wrote by one of the fallen angels who desired to return to divine favor" -- Angels and Women, page 5. In other words, it was dictated by a demon, and endorsed just because the Society held the view that some of the demons were honest and wanted to repent. You'd probably be thinking, "It's no wonder they left this part out of the advertisement." And that's no doubt what must have happened. They got letters. The Watch Tower publications didn't mention it again until December 3, 1924, after as much as 6 months of sales.
In the December 3, 1924 Golden Age they went ahead and printed just one letter of concern, and one enthusiastic letter of support, and then defended their continued endorsement of the book. Note how the concerns are cleverly downplayed:
Notice how she (Davis) is not complaining about buying the book under false pretenses, only that she has somehow learned "that it was a book that a fallen angel dictated to a woman" and that this doesn't sound like the right way to shun spiritism. So she'll still buy the book as long as they can assure her that it really had the approval of Pastor Russell and whether it really has the current approval of The Golden Age, in spite of these facts.
Then, of course, they follow this up with a glowing, enthusiastic letter of appreciation.
Anyone who has worked in marketing (I have) knows exactly why it had to be done this way. It's always a matter of handling objections in such a way that you can still produce an action on the part of the buyer. It says:  "You might have heard that this book is not really a book that helps you avoid spiritism, but that it's actually a book that is the product of spiritism. Perhaps this had made you wary about buying the book. Well guess what? You can rest assured that Pastor Russell himself really did endorse this book and the Watch Tower Society still endorses this book. So what are you waiting for? Have no fear! Buy this book today!"
I'll get to the positive letter in the next post.

There were just so many relevant quotes that I didn't take the time to type out the full month and year, just the page number with the F or R next to it. The F is a reference to the New Creation book, Volume 6 of Studies in the Scriptures. Those other references with just an R next to the number are the Watch Tower Reprint page numbers, which is, of course, the quickest way to refer to the entire set of Zion's Watch Tower and Watch Tower issues from 1879 to 1916. If you need to match them to a month and year, just go to http://www.htdbv8.com/  (Harvest Truth Data Base) and sort "Original Towers" by Ascending Chronological Order. All you have to do is recall a couple of unique words from the original article and it will likely show up on Google on one of the several Russell publication sites. I prefer agsconsulting.com to pick them up from. So ultimately the information is coming from Google searches.
If you are talking about some of the references to our beliefs about Armageddon from the 1940's through the 1970's (99.9% etc, these were recently discussed elsewhere on the forum.)

He did. I found a copy. Attached below. Try from about the 6 minute mark through the 9 minute mark.
Also note this picture from Rutherford's book Religion (1940) p.16. Notice the plumes on the head of the giant on the left?

This came from Seola:
"Mounted upon the back of each huge beast was a black dwarf robed in scarlet and holding a guiding wand in his hand. In front and rear were seen a band of gigantic men, clad also in scarlet, with black plumes upon their heads, and marshalled in battle array. These I knew must be the terrible beings of whom my father had spoken, Darvands, the offspring of angels and women..." (Seola - 1878, Page 63,4). The original Seola had two additional races joining humankind, giants and black dwarfs as slaves (because the author was a little bit racist). A&W got rid of the black slaves, and also got rid of all references to storms, clouds, and rain prior to the Flood, even references to clear skies, and changed them all to references about the hard-to-see-through firmament or "water canopy."
Other references to the giants in Seola describe them with headbands (as shown here and still shown in recent publications) and with leaves (shown here) and with talismans (perhaps shown here as what appears to be a rock in the hand).

Your browser does not support the HTML5 audio tag.

A foghorn creates a sound that cuts through the fog. So if you meant that as a compliment, thanks. But that wasn't my intent because I was merely stating something based on Russell's own words. I realize that he distinguished himself from pure "universal salvation" believers. My point was that, if we don't dismiss Russell's own words, we can see that he was much closer to a universal salvation believer than we are (as JWs) and therefore, we shouldn't be surprised that Russell may have expected many demons to repent, even though they were perfect and we tend to view loss of perfection as rebellion. After all, he expected most of humankind to live on the earth, and most Christians (of all varieties) to go to heaven.
Many of us grew up with the very different ideas about salvation that Rutherford started to push and which Fred Franz promoted with numbers attached. Franz gave talks and wrote articles assuring us that BILLIONS would be destroyed forever at Armageddon, even putting the percentage of those who would be slaughtered at 99.9% on the side of Satan. Because of this we might not easily understand that Russell, while not a Universalist, tended to agree with them to an extent quite different from most other Christian religions of his time.
When Russell wrote an article on Universal Salvation he made points that would seem agreeable to many of them: [R 1436,7,8]
UNIVERSAL SALVATION.  "We trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those that believe."--1 Tim. 4:10. It is very generally conceded among Christians that Universalists are the only class of people who have any claim upon, or use for, this text of Scripture; but although we are not Universalists, we also, with Paul, trust in the living God [Jehovah], who is the Savior of all men, especially of those that believe. Thus the Apostle declares that in one sense the salvation which God has promised is to be universal, while in another sense it is to be restricted to believers. . . . But, while thus the Savior of all, there is a particular or special sense in which God is the Savior of those that believe and accept this reconciliation and the opportunity offered of making it everlasting salvation. This salvation is conditional: "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." (Acts 16:31.) This is an unequivocal promise of actual and permanent salvation to every individual who believes, i.e., heartily accepts. To such an one, God not only stands in the attitude of a savior, ready and willing to save, but he will go farther and actually accomplish his salvation; and this is the special sense in which he is the Savior of them that believe. . . . Others, while claiming that God is willing and ready to save all, practically deny it by claiming that the necessary believing must be done in the present life-- which practically excludes three-fourths of the race from any opportunity of sharing in it, since more than that proportion have died without any knowledge of the only name given under heaven or among men, whereby we must be saved. This view contradicts God's Word; because for even one member of the human race to be left unprovided for--to be left without the needful information and opportunity-- would render false the statement which God makes, that he stands as a Savior to all men. The entire matter is clear, however, when viewed from the standpoint of the Plan of the Ages-- which shows that through the redemptive work of Christ God has provided salvation for all from all that "was lost" in Adam; and that the knowledge necessary to the acceptance of this provided gift, while it has reached only the few in the present life, is to be testified to all in due time--in the coming age, in which Christ and his Church shall reign over and bless, with his gracious offer, all the families of the earth. We should keep in mind that Russell (and Rutherford for many years) also had quite a different view of Armageddon than that which developed over time in the Watch Tower publications. Today, many Witnesses fret over what will happen with Hindus and Buddhists, for example, many still thinking that Jehovah must destroy any and all (plus their kids!) who had some opportunity to hear the good news as preached by us, because any who had a good heart condition would surely have rushed over to our side. How else can horses be practically swimming in blood?
Relative to the beliefs we held in the 1940's through the 1970's, Russell was more of a believer in universal salvation.

I notice that none of those quotes you gave indicate that Adam will NOT be resurrected. Most of the time, this idea about Adam being resurrected or at least ransomed and redeemed was "buried" in the expression "Adam and his race" which I will show below. But first there is a very clear expression of it here:
We should not forget that Adam and Eve in some respects foreshadowed Christ and the Church. Jesus personally is the great Savior of mankind, whose death constitutes the Ransom-price for the sins of Adam and the entire race. He is to be the Great Life-Giver, or Father of mankind. During His Millennial Reign He will give back earthly life to Adam and as many of his race as will receive it  -- Watch Tower, December 1912, p.373 R.5141 There are others just as explicit as that one, but most of the time, the reason the point is missed is because of the more complex expressions mentioned above, which I will highlight in some of these below:
Under the divine arrangement the redemption of Adam from condemnation of death will ultimately affect all of his race, to the extent of releasing them from the sentence of death, and to the further extent of furnishing them the light, the knowledge and the opportunity of coming into Christ; but it will be only those who will avail themselves of this privilege, and come into Christ, that will be made alive, in the full, proper sense of that word--lifted up out of death completely. (F698 New Creation) Thus, too, Adam was not given an uncounted experience with sin, but for his first transgression was sentenced so completely that nothing short of a ransom could release him from his sin and its penalty, death.  R1261 He who redeemed or purchased back Adam and his race from the sentence of death R1261 No subject occupies a more important place in God's Word than the resurrection, except those two other doctrines so closely identified with it--the ransom, which is the basis of all hope in a resurrection, and the second coming of the Lord to establish his kingdom, under which the fruit of the ransom (resurrection) shall be extended to Adam and his race in general. R1258 The death which Jesus experienced was exactly the same kind as the one which destroyed Adam-- the soul of Jesus died, as the ransom price for the soul of Adam (including Adam's posterity). R4994 it was necessary for Jesus to become "the second Adam" as a perfect man that as the Second Adam he might give his life a ransom-price for the first Adam, thus redeeming him and incidentally all of his posterity. R4556 There is, however, no sentient being in the sense of consciousness, or knowledge, or appreciation of pain or joy, or of any other experience, but the Divine Creator who first gave being has declared that in the case of Adam and his children it is his purpose to provide a Redeemer through whom all may be restored as completely as before they came under the death sentence.   R4657 Could be 100 more, but I think this should suffice for now. Even though Russell was not always consistent with himself, I have never seen a quote from him that could clearly mean the opposite.
 

I think these first two points got covered. It's interesting that we don't have much information on just what it was that appealed to Russell. Russell apparently came pretty close to believing in "universal salvation" and this would include a number of fallen angels according to his thinking. He seemed sure that Adam, although perfect, would be resurrected to an opportunity to eternal life, although I don't recall if he was ever so sure of Eve's chances. I don't recall this being speculated about much lately, although most JWs will now say that Adam has little chance because he was perfect and was not deceived and therefore rebelled.
There are some Bible Students who claim that this book was sent to Russell in 1878. But right from the start, evidently, Russell saw it as a book that might enlighten his followers about spiritism. If this is true, he could have accepted it as an "automatic writing" book, where the author acted as a spirit medium. At least that's what later Bible Students implied. Some Bible Students evidently say that Russell knew the author, although this could have happened after he read the book and he might have made contact at that point. (The author was the wife of the Governor of Vermont.)
These first two points of the review, however, give no clue about those claims. Only that the book was in striking harmony with the Scriptural account in Genesis. So on to the third point.
The book throws light on the subject of the devil and demons and the influence they exercised both before the flood and and now again in the time period of the books publication: 1878-1924 or thereabouts. Just how it throws light on their influence is not clearly spelled out. The book will also aid those who carefully consider it to avoid the bad effects of spiritism.
If indeed the book came through a spirit medium, it's not clear exactly why Bible Students should buy this book to help them avoid the effects of spiritism. Does the book give us insight into the clever ways that the demons can influence us? Does it tell us something new?
So on to the fourth point:
For anyone who cares, the evidence points to a well-known Bible Student and long time personal friend of Russell named Ed W. Brenneisen, who lived in Dallas based on his letter to the Watchtower in 1900:
MY DEAR BROTHER:--We cannot ever hope to have you and the other dear brethren (who assisted so graciously and unselfishly in making the gathering at this place on Sept. 29, 30, and Oct. 1 such a profitable one for our spiritual growth and upbuilding) fully understand this side the second vail what a deep spirit of gratitude and love fills our hearts for you. In every possible respect has the convention passed beyond our greatest hopes, and to whom but our very present Lord can we ascribe such unmistakeable direction in even the minutest detail? To him and the glorious Father be all the praise and glory, yet we forget not to thank him for the humble, loving instrument he has used of late years, so effectually to dispense and serve present truth to the balance of the household of faith. May the Lord continue to keep and richly bless you as that faithful servant. With much love,   E. W. BRENNEISEN,--Dallas, Texas. In 1909, he was travelling as a convention speaker with Russell, MacMillan and others. The following is from the Nova Scotia convention. Other later (1915) convention reports show him also speaking with Van Ambergh, R.J.Martin, Menta Sturgeon and Rutherford.  Russell was the sole editor of the Watch Tower while he was alive, but listed 5 persons in his Will who would be on an Editorial Committee. These five persons were:
WILLIAM E. PAGE, WILLIAM E. VAN AMBURGH, HENRY CLAY ROCKWELL, E. W. BRENNEISEN, F. H. ROBISON [and if any of them were unable to fulfill they should choose the replacement from a secondary list of five alternate choices] A. E. Burgess, Robert Hirsh, Isaac Hoskins, Geo. H. Fisher (Scranton), J. F. Rutherford, Dr. John Edgar [whose names were never to be attached to any Watch Tower publications after Russell died]. I mention that last point from Russell's will because Brenneisen, being a close friend, might have been alert to the fact that Russell didn't want any of these brothers to attach their name to anything they wrote, which might explain some of the "secrecy" behind the A&W book. Of course, this became moot, because within a couple of days of Russell's death, Van Ambergh immediately sent a letter that started the process of getting members of the Editorial Committee to resign.  Page and Brenneisen both responded with letters announcing their resignation in time for the December 1916 issue, just one month after Russell died. Van Ambergh put the condition that they must live at Bethel to be on the committee, which was evident Page's letter, too. Rutherford and Hirsh immediately replaced them on the Editorial Committee.
I can't really tell what relationship he had with Rutherford, but I have only seen hints that it didn't start out well.
On to point #5:
I have documentation from the Society itself that printing the Finished Mystery was at a cost on the order of 20 cents, even though it was done by outside printers. This book, shorter and lighter, should have been about half that amount, or about 10 cents. I don't know how many were printed, but it must have been expected that this would be purchased by some in groups of 10 or more, meaning that there was an expectation that it would be redistributed in the same way that colporteurs and other book salesman were selling books in those days. Readers of the Golden Age were expected to see a great value in this book to order it in quantities of 10 or more. The profit per box would have been about $8.50 after shipping, but the profit per 10 sold separately would have been a lot more like $16.00 but would have been nearly 10 times the amount of work, and would probably require more marketing in the Golden Age.
It seems like a dirty trick to tell readers of this Watch Tower publication that this A&W book provided a good way to guard yourself from spiritism without admitting the part about it being produced (they believed) through a method that the Watch Tower had defined as spiritism.
I also find it odd that they would see the need to run an advertisement that ends with the words, this is not an advertisement.

This stuff is all very new to me. Until tonight I have never read about any spiritists, and the only one I'm learning anything about is Johannes Greber at the moment. If possible, I also plan to learn a bit about what Mary Baker Eddy (Christian Science) may have claimed that made Woodworth draw a comparison between himself and her. Russell and Woodworth seemed to imply that there were some similarities among the claims of "spiritists" so I suppose that any of these groups is a place to start. In the meantime, please tell whatever you think is relevant about this Atlantean Society. 
The following "foundation" material should be long enough that no one who doesn't really want to read it will want to read it.   Also, I normally would try to spend enough time to absorb a few hundred pages of material about the subject before I share anything, but I am getting a lot of the following from some sites I downloaded years ago, and I have not really checked out the material for myself yet. Page numbers for the references may even be off, because I do not own Greber's book and have no access to it. I only have direct access to the Watchtower's side of this story.
Johannes Greber wrote a book called "Communication with the Spirit World" in 1932, in which he claimed that it was a Christian's duty to communicate with the good spirits and be able to distinguish the bad ones.
If, therefore, we, as faithful servants of God, or at any rate, as honest seekers after the truth, try to get into touch with the world of good spirits we are committing no sin, but rather, obeying one of God's commandments; an important commandment, for only through contact with the world of good spirits can we arrive at the truth. There is no other way. . . .  From these fetters of error mankind can be freed only, if God will send his spirits as heralds of the truth. (Page 6, 7) At the same time, even throughout this same year, Rutherford claimed that because the "Holy Spirit" had ceased in 1918 that God was sending his angels as ministers and heralds of the truth for those in the Temple class.
Curiously, we just saw where Russell had spoken about the beliefs of spiritists as to whether the spirit was able to materialize only in the dark or also in the light. Russell said, this in 1911 which Woodworth re-quoted in the Finished Mystery in 1917 along with the idea about repentant fallen angels from Noah's day:
The "chains of darkness" we believe to be a figurative statement signifying that they were no longer permitted to materialize in the light and, generally, not able to materialize at all. (September 1911 Watch Tower) Greber had a lot to say on this very point, also discussing about 6 levels of spiritistic activity (often through mediums) that could include speech, speech through an inspirational medium, automatic writing, seance table tapping and materializing in the dark. Some, they say, could use material or materialized objects.
"It is therefore childish and a sign of your profound ignorance in such matters, to ridicule the fact that many spiritistic phenomena can be produced successfully only in the dark. Some of your scientists even assert that darkness is insisted upon only because it facilitates the concealment of 'spiritistic humbug'." (Page 91) On page 79, 80 of the book Greber discusses the phenomenon that lies behind the E.R.A. machines that the Society once promoted:
[This section of quotes has been moved to a later post; see below.] Greber also claimed that the way to keep from talking to a bad spirit was to have them take the vow. An oath, he called it, in the name of God that they were not lying.
"You know that I am telling you the truth in this, as I have done in all else. You have had plenty of proof of the fact that I am a truthful spirit. For this you have my oath, taken in the name of the Almighty, the true God." (p. 263) Speaking of oaths related to spiritism, "The Vow" that Russell pushed as a kind of loyalty oath was something that the Bethel family repeated every day as part of their morning worship, similar to a daily pledge of allegiance. This was the very item (The Vow) over which Woodworth says he came under the control of the demons, and about which the demons offered him true Biblical and spiritual knowledge. (Because, sometimes the demons tell the truth, he said.) It's what kept Woodworth from accepting that Russell was the Faithful and Discreet Slave, until Russell proved that he really was by pointing out a flaw in Woodworth's reasoning. Here is a portion from the 1975 Yearbook:
*** yb75 pp. 51-52 Part 1—United States of America ***
At Bethel was located C. T. Russell’s study. Downstairs was the dining room, with a long table that would accommodate forty-four persons. The family would assemble here to sing a hymn, read the “Vow” and join in prayer before breakfast. . . .Would you like to hear the vow that was daily impressed on their minds? Entitled “My Solemn Vow to God,” it goes like this: “Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. May thy rule come into my heart more and more, and thy will be done in my mortal body. Relying on the assistance of thy promised grace to help in every time of need, through Jesus Christ our Lord, I register this Vow.. . . “I Vow to thee that I will be on the alert to resist everything akin to Spiritism and Occultism, and that, remembering that there are but the two masters, I shall resist these snares in all reasonable ways, as being of the Adversary. . . .Recitation of this vow was later discontinued among God’s people at Bethel and elsewhere. Another curious parallel between the Watchtower publications and Greber was that the medium Greber communicated with believed that the fallen angels could repent and be saved. On page 297 of Greber's book, he says that even Lucifer would ultimately be saved. The point is also repeated that Lucifer and Christ Jesus were brothers, Christ being made first, then Lucifer second. (Page 267-268). Rutherford also repeated this same point in his own books that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers.

I don't mind bringing it back to its A&W roots here. Angels and Women (A&W) was already discussed around these parts once, and I think you had apparently done some good research on it, if I remember right. I don't think it does much good to guess what was going on in the minds of Russell, Woodworth and Rutherford, but Allen pointed to the particular Golden Age magazine that provides an explanation for a start.
I think we can start there or even go back a little farther. (To the first announcement in The Golden Age, July 30, 1924, p. 702.) I have numbered some sentences and paragraphs of that article so I can reference them.
Review of Book    "ANGELS AND WOMEN" is the title of a book just off the press. It is a reproduction and revision of the novel, "Seola" which was written in 1878, and which deals with conditions prior to the flood. Pastor Russell read this book with keen interest, and requested some of his friends to read it because of its striking harmony with the Scriptural account of the sons of God described in the sixth chapter of Genesis. Those sons of God became evil, and debauched the human family prior to, and up to, the time of the great deluge. We call attention to this book because we believe it will be of interest to Bible Students, who are familiar with the machinations of the devil and the demons and the influence exercised by them prior to the flood and also now in this evil day. The book throws light on the subject and is believed, will aid those who carefully consider it to avoid the baneful effects of spiritism, now so prevalent in the world. The book is revised and published by a personal friend of Pastor Russell, and one who was close to him in his work. It is published by the A. B. Abac Company, New York city. The publishers advise that the regular price of the book is $2.00; but to all subscribers to The Golden Age, it will furnished at $1.00 per volume, when ordered in lots of ten or more. This is not an advertisement, but a voluntary comment. Remember that this is from the first announcement in July. It wasn't until December 1924 that they started explaining what they thought was most important about the book. The original book was written in 1878, which brings up an interesting question (speculative) about whether Russell read it prior to a point he made in the very first Watchtower in July 1879 when he said that truth is truth even if it comes from Satan. This was a phrase that both Rutherford and Woodworth re-quoted from Russell on occasion.
But Russell said more on the subject. I don't want to skip too much from context so I will only deal with this first point from the numbered paragraphs above in this post:
In a 1911 Watch Tower, with the same idea repeated again in 1914, Russell claimed that some of the "fallen angels" were probably already being judged in fulfillment of Paul's words saying "Do you not know that we will judge angels?" Russell thought these would be the same angels held in Tartarus in bonds of dense darkness. But now released with a higher degree of freedom. Depending on how they handled this freedom, some would no doubt be repentant and gain forgiveness. The following is from the September 1911 Watch Tower in the article: "The Judgment of the Angels." Keep in mind that the theory behind the promotion of the book "Angels and Women" was that it was dictated in 1878 by one of the fallen angels who had repented and desired to do God's will. Since about this time, the anointed might even have currently (since 1878 at least) held some kind of power over them and might be involved in judging them.
-------------------------rest of this post is a long quotation from the 1911 Watchtower--------------------------
THEIR JUDGMENT PROBABLY NOW
We have answered in previous issues of THE WATCH TOWER that this trial will be, we believe, at the very beginning of this Great Day. And why at the beginning? For the reason that there is only one way, so far as we can see, in which these fallen angels can have a trial, their trial consisting in having a fuller opportunity to sin, if they so desire, or an opportunity to show, if they wish, that they are sick of sin and desire to return to harmony with God. . . .
THEY ARE CONFINED TO EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE
The Apostles Peter and Jude tell us that after their wrong course these angels were separated from association with the heavenly and holy angels, who were in harmony with God, and were cast down to tartarus, to our earth's atmosphere, "to be reserved in chains of darkness until the Judgment of the Great Day." What does that expression mean? The "chains of darkness" we believe to be a figurative statement signifying that they were no longer permitted to materialize in the light and, generally, not able to materialize at all. But of late spiritists claim, and we believe truthfully, that these spirits can now materialize in as real and tangible flesh as any human being possesses. As they state, and as the facts prove, this can be done only under certain circumstances; they still have a great deal of difficulty in materializing in the light. The "chains of darkness" still seem to be on them to some extent.
Spiritists further claim, however, that the spirits are breaking these bonds and that gradually they will be able to do fully in the light everything that they can now do in the dark, and even more than this. The Bible corroborates what the spiritists claim, only that the spiritists teach that these things are done by the dead; who, the spirits tell, are more alive after death than before. Spiritists assert that it is the spirits of dead human beings that materialize. But the Bible takes the opposite position and says that these spirits are the fallen angels, and that so far as humanity are concerned, the dead are totally dead and must remain so until the resurrection.
So, then, the Bible and the Spiritists are in decided conflict; and yet there is this harmony that we speak of, namely, that at the time of the Judgment of the Great Day we may expect the bonds restraining these spirits to be loosened. Of course God could hold them in restraint; but He will now permit these fallen angels to have a great lease of liberty. Then will come to them a great trial and testing, or judgment, in respect to their willingness or unwillingness to do according to the Divine will.
SOME OF THEM PROBABLY REPENTANT
It would not surprise us if some of the fallen angels who sinned in the past have repented and have had long centuries of experience with the unrepentant ones; and that these have suffered persecutions from those of evil mind. And so there may thus be two classes among the fallen angels; the one class desirous of doing the will of God and the other class, like Satan himself, wilfully opposed to the will of God. The trial time will prove each of these angels and manifest to which class each belongs.
We think, too, that we see in the Scriptures a passage which we had not seen with the same force before --a Scripture that seems to give a thought along this very line. It seems to imply that at a very near date probably these fallen angels will have wonderful power, such as they have never had since the days of the flood, and that this wonderful power will be used in a very malevolent manner, to stir up mankind to evil doing; and that this will be the key, the secret connected with the awful time of trouble which the Bible tells us will mark the conclusion of this Age and which will constitute the forerunner or beginning of the New Dispensation.
. . .
The Bible says that Satan is the Prince of the Power of the Air, that he is the Prince of Demons. (Eph. 2:2; Matt. 9:34.) Therefore we understand that in this symbolical sense "the powers of the air" are the demons; that these powers of the air that are being held until the saints of God shall have been sealed in their foreheads, are these fallen angels. As soon as the power that is now controlling them shall be removed, we shall have a reign of evil all over the earth. The evil spirits will do all the evil that is in their power, and this will constitute the trial of all the fallen angels--the lifting of the restraints to see whether they will go contrary to the Divine will. All who thus manifest their alliance with evil in any way will become subjects of the Second Death; while others who show their loyalty to God will mark themselves as worthy, presumably, of everlasting life.
It may be something in connection with the saints that will constitute the test of these angels. However, we need not wait many years until we shall know.
 
 

There is nothing wrong with the single idea that the due time is near. Even if it is 1,000 years in the future, it is nearer now than when we first became believers. The book of Revelation appears intended to bring that day "close in mind." It makes it easier to imagine by giving us imagery and symbols that make us desirous of getting through the "pangs of distress" as @John Houston mentioned, and finally reaching the "new heavens and new earth" of Revelation 21 and 22. Revelation itself mentions that the "due time is near."
(Revelation 1:1-3) 1 A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John, 2 who bore witness to the word God gave and to the witness Jesus Christ gave, even to all the things he saw. 3 Happy is he who reads aloud and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and who observe the things written in it; for the appointed time is near. Peter provides a good commentary that fits both Revelation and Jesus' revelation in Matthew 24 and Luke 21. Peter gives us a practical way to view these revelations about Christ's parousia.
(1 Peter 4:7-10) 7 But the end of all things has drawn close. Therefore, be sound in mind, and be vigilant with a view to prayers. 8 Above all things, have intense love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins. 9 Be hospitable to one another without grumbling. 10 To the extent that each one has received a gift, use it in ministering to one another as fine stewards of God’s undeserved kindness that is expressed in various ways. (2 Peter 3:11-13) 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 of the day of Jehovah, through which the heavens will be destroyed in flames and the elements will melt in the intense heat! 13 But there are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell. 2 Peter 1 pointed out that Christ's parousia could be 1,000 years off, or even on the order of 1,000's of years off. People would even be ridiculing Christians for the fact that things are still going on as they always were, so that it was obvious that the parousia had not yet begun. They were already doing that when the letters of 2 Peter and Jude were being written. People were still doing that in the year 1000 C.E. and 2000 C.E, and although it gets harder to see how things could go one, Jehovah might even allow things to go on to 3000 C.E. But this does not mean that the end is not "near" or "close." Then end of all things, the day of the Lord, could arrive tonight at 6:30 p.m. But for all of us , it is as near as the end of our own lifetime, after which our very next thought or breath would be in the "new heavens and new earth." No matter what, that's how Christians should live their lives.

The topic bellow is not accepting any further comments so I have no choice but to start another topic, although this thread will probably be really short...
I  wanted to comment on this remark made by @Alessandro Corona : "Russell was also involved in the distribution of a book written by a demon through automatic/angel writing called seola, later renamed to of angels and women. Samuel Herd has even come out and said it was a fantastic novel. So you can see the type of judgment the leadership of bethel really has".
That the book was written through automatic angel writing is mere speculation and not based on any know facts.  The publishers Leopold Classic Library commented on its re- print: ....."our view is that this is a significant literary work, which deserves to be brought back into print after many decades...... We hope that you will enjoy this wonderful classic book”  I have the book, and agree with both Leopold publishing and Br. Herd (if he really said anything like what was quoted). It is a romantic novel of the caliber of well known classics and if you can get a hold of it (Amazon has it) then I recommend it for your library.
I think the rumour originally got started because it was said that  Ms. Ann Eliza Smith, the author, had never read the Bible and despite that, her observations regarding that time (antediluvian) were remarkably accurate so much so that is was deemed she must have had this information communicated to her via an angel. I find it unlikely that she didn’t know anything about the Bible since most people at that time did, and one of her other novels (From dawn to sunrise) apparently deals with “the historical and philosophical religious ideas of mankind”. She herself says that : “the theory upon which the story is founded is in strict accordance with the sacred writings of the Hebrews and traditions of other ancient nations”.
Anyway, for those who want to know more about the novel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seola
Note what the footnote says about the music that she said had inspired her: “A book review publisher called, "Good Company-Sunday Afternoon: A magazine for the household" released an article on the novel Seola in 1878. The magazine believed the compositions that motivated Smith to write the novel was the prelude to the “Creation”, one of Strauss’s waltzes, a scrap of a symphony of Saint Saens, and Wagner’s Centennial March, all played simultaneously in a small room”. 
Also note the reason Br. Russell recommended the book was because: "we believe it will be of interest to Bible Students, who are familiar with the machinations of the devil and the demons and the influence exercised by them prior to the flood and also now in this evil day. The book throws light on the subject and is believed, will aid those who carefully consider it to avoid the baneful effects of spiritism, now so prevalent in the world".
Of course this kind of reasoning was very popular at the time because as was said "spiritism was now so prevalent in the world"*. However now, we would just consider the novel an interesting read as any other, well written story, (that was made up but based on facts), would be.
*It seems the popularity of spiritism (called spiritualism by wikipedia) got it's modern start in Europe and the USA in the late 1800's with the "help" of the Fox sisters: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_sisters
 
 
 
 

Important for the appointment of elders
The Australian government will also decide on the appointment of the elderly.
New enforcement act requires the bodies of the elderly to be legally examined if the new possible appointments are free of charge of paedophilia.
Only if the ruling reports that the person has no criminal record of problems with children, he may receive the new card that allows him to deal with children.
Among other things, it is ascertained whether there is a criminal record and the person in the past was already noticeable in the treatment of children. This method is based on the recommendations of the royal commission which had been investigated by Jehovah's witnesses in 2017 in July 2015 and March.
Until now the only question to the candidate on the issue of appointments was: " have you ever harassed or sexually abused a child?" And of course, the answer depends on sincerity.
The appointed elders or service assistants who have successfully passed the check will receive a pass to enable them to work with children. If the appointees act without this card, this results in extreme fines. Possibly even a prison sentence.
This review also applies to the elderly and previously appointed service workers. On Wednesday, 13 September, during a meeting in Sydney, the appointment of a ministerial servant was announced, with the reference to the working with children check.
Known by public and Brother Elders Letter 
Will this spread to the rest of the civilized world?

I imagine the US government would do the same if New England tried to secede. 

I know that the counsel about not exposing dirty laundry is sincere, and for this I thank you. As far as I can tell, such counsel should not apply to this particular situation. Obviously, then, we see our duty in this regard quite differently, and so, in the spirit of 1 Peter 3:15,  I feel I should explain. 
The dirty laundry is already hung up for everyone to see. This is the Internet. Anyone can simply Google the information claimed in the original post of this topic, and they will discover that there is plenty more information out there. As usual, some of it is true and some of it is false.
So we are back to discussing the old dilemma about whether we should reveal truth in response to falsehood, or just ignore it. For the most part, we just ignore it. But there are times when it is obvious that the person posting does not necessarily know that the claims contain false charges. Or perhaps they know for sure that the information is skewed toward the false but that there is still some truth in it, and yet, other people who read the skewed information may not know what to believe. Perhaps they think it's all true, or all false. Perhaps their first instinct is to call the whole thing "rubbish." But what if calling something "rubbish" is not really honest either, because perhaps it contains more truth than falsehood? Is there any value to pointing out the error? What if an interested person who has Googled the information now sees us as a people who are just too anxious to cover up facts?
Through private messaging on this forum someone just asked me why I think JWs have so much turnover. I know that we are always anxious to say that our moral standards and expectations are very high and we are expected to judge those people who leave on their own as persons who just didn't want to live up to those expectations. But in speaking to many of these persons, we often come away with a different picture. I think it's more of a matter of realizing that nothing is quite as perfect as it appears at first. When people first study and are baptized, it is with the understanding that we have the only true religion in the entire earth. Therefore, it is expected to be the most perfect. Even though they are warned that it isn't perfect, it still sets up the highest expectations. Then they learn that not all the brothers and sisters live up to the moral standards as well as they expected. They learn about or perhaps see examples of lack of love, or even racism, shunning, child abuse, or gossip. When they are disappointed, they often start to believe that there is no religion that is really what it claims to be, and they often leave all religion altogether. In spite of the focus of ex-JWs online, I think it's rarely about past JW or IBSA history, or related issues with doctrine.
If this were merely about the error of a brother or sister who made a false step in the past, then we would do best to just ignore it. Love covers a multitude of sins. But what if the errors are being denied specifically because it would reflect on the trustworthiness of current doctrine?
That last question reminds me of your own statement here:
Does telling the truth about the past undermine respect for information we now get from the same channel? What you said appears to be an inadvertent admission that it does. If it does, then it is probably all the more important that we offer a true and honest perspective. I should mention that personally, I don't even see much real importance in wallowing in the problems of yesterday or last week, much less the problems of 100 years ago. This applies to the Governing Body, too. I know that one person here often comments that no one should try to use the past examples of Bible Students to shed light on our current beliefs as JWs, even if we consider the same "Governing Body" to have begun in 1919. But I don't even consider the Governing Body of last year to be the exact same "channel" as the Governing Body of this year, even if they be the same persons. That's partly because none of us are expected to be the same from day to day:
(2 Corinthians 4:16-18) 16 . . .  certainly the man we are inside is being renewed from day to day. . . . 18 while we keep our eyes, not on the things seen, but on the things unseen. For the things seen are temporary, but the things unseen are everlasting. On the other hand, it must necessarily be the case that if an honest approach to the Governing Body's past can undermine the respect for the present Governing Body, then this is almost a direct admission that both the present and the past is being misrepresented. And, of course, it's easy to show that we regularly misrepresent our past almost every time we print a book about it or make a claim about it. We do it as individual humans and we do it as an organization. It's a common human failing to want to be seen as better than we really are. It's what's behind the instinct to call something "obviously rubbish" and "nonsensical gobbledygook" even if it's more true than false. (That's the reason that I included that paragraph about Rutherford that you reviewed as you did. In fact, there was a lot more truth to it than falsehood. Not just as a Bible Student, but as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, Rutherford really did believe that the holy spirit was no longer available to us after 1918, and that new truths could now be revealed with the direct help of angels. And the idea that Jehovah's throne was in Alcyone, the brightest star of Pleiades, was still being promoted and taught from the 1880's into the 1930's, and not dropped officially until well into Knorr's presidency in November 1953. Details available upon request.)
One of the most dangerous problems among many Witnesses that we can see today is the equivalence that is made between the Governing Body and Jehovah. Surely this is what serves the same interests of the one behind spiritism. Idolatry is also something Jehovah hates.
On this forum, several persons who have presented themselves as sincere Witnesses have recently said that the way we "follow the Lamb wherever he goes," is to follow the Governing Body wherever they go. They have said that they would rather follow the Governing Body into KNOWN ERROR than to accept the Bible where it is known to differ from the current teachings of the Governing Body. The slave has become greater than his master. Witnesses here have defended having this kind of faith in men even where they KNOW personally that something is amiss.
This is a good reason to be completely honest, and not try to whitewash either the present or the past. I think it's important to show that we are not trying to please men, and to make it clear why we should NOT put our faith in princes, nobles, or any humans, where we feel that faith is related to salvation:
(Psalm 146:3) “Do not put your trust in nobles, nor in the son of earthling man, to whom no salvation belongs." (Luke 16:15) “. . .For what is considered exalted by men is a disgusting thing in God’s sight."

How do you understand Br. Jackson’s summary?
 
I didn’t think it was relevant to the topic, but I can give an example of fallibility, again using what Br. Jackson said in the previous quote: “and it could be that in our initial discussions there was something that maybe we were missing and then in another discussion that would come to light"
 
I am not questioning that God has the “power” to use whichever avenue he chooses to communicate, even today.  I am saying that it is reasonable to conclude that the avenue he is using today is his inspired Word, because with it “the man of God is fully equipped”  and needs nothing else. (2 Tim. 3:16,17). Anything we as JWs have ever taught always goes back to the Bible, even if our understanding of some of it has been erroneous in the past.
This brings me to your next question
We all have the Bible, and we can all pray for holy spirit. Which means we can all be guided by it, by means of the Bible, similarly to the GB. “Therefore, if you, although being wicked, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more so will the Father in heaven give holy spirit to those asking him!”( Luke 11:13), “for the holy spirit will teach you in that very hour the things you should say.” (Luke 12:12)  etc.
WT 12/1/15 mentions:  Making Study Time More Enjoyable and Productive
“The first step to take is to pray. (Ps. 42:8) Why? We should consider the study of God’s Word to be part of our worship. Therefore, we need to ask Jehovah to put us in the proper frame of mind and to give us his holy spirit. (Luke 11:13) Says Barbara, a longtime missionary: “I always pray before I read or study the Bible. After that, I feel that Jehovah is with me and that he approves of what I am doing.” Prayer before study opens our mind and heart to accept fully the abundant spiritual food that is before us”.
There are thousands more examples of how we all have the same capability, all you need to do is enter “holy spirit” , "Bible" and  "prayer" into the word search in your WT library….
When Jesus talks about the Slave in Matthew 24:45 “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave whom his master appointed over his domestics, to give them their food at the proper time”  I notice  that Jesus never says they will have some special understanding  that no one else will be capable of, or that they will have an exclusive channel of communication or means of getting information other than the Bible. Jesus merely says that the Slave will be in charge of dispensing the spiritual food. Jesus also said he, not the Slave or any other man, will be with all of us as the head of the Christian congregation. 
So, where the slave differs to us is that they are anointed, and charged with the dispensing of spiritual food to the domestics, of which they are also a part. (Of course we know that the anointing itself isn’t a guarantee that the person will stay anointed forever, that can change).
 
 
 

Well,....the Awake #3  in the topic IS THE BIBLE REALLY FROM GOD?  “INSPIRED”—WHAT DOES IT MEAN? states: .....the expression “inspired of God” means that the Source of the information in those writings is God......... Some Bible writers actually heard God’s message conveyed audibly by an angel. Others saw visions from God. In some cases, God communicated his message in the form of dreams   
The Insight book  p. 1206  says this: Inspiration The quality or state of being moved by or produced under the direction of a spirit from a superhuman source…….. “Inspired Expressions”—True and False. The Greek word pneu′ma (spirit) is used in a special manner in some apostolic writings. At 2 Thessalonians 2:2, for example, the apostle Paul urges his Thessalonian brothers not to get excited or shaken from their reason “either through an inspired expression [literally, “spirit”] or through a verbal message or through a letter as though from us, to the effect that the day of Jehovah is here.” It is clear that Paul uses the word pneu′ma (spirit) in connection with means of communication, such as the “verbal message” or “letter.” For this reason Lange’s Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (p. 126) says on this text: “By this the Apostle intends a spiritual suggestion, pretended prediction, utterance of a prophet.” (Translated and edited by P. Schaff, 1976) Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament states: “By spirit. By prophetic utterances of individuals in Christian assemblies, claiming the authority of divine revelations.” (1957, Vol. IV, p. 63) Thus, while some translations simply render pneu′ma in this and similar cases as “spirit,” other translations read “message of the Spirit” (AT), “prediction” (JB), “inspiration” (D’Ostervald; Segond [French]), “inspired expression” (NW)".
So, the Slave is not inspired i.e. does not receive any communications from the spirit realm. But they are spirit directed (as we all are to a certain extend) and there is a difference.
I will let Br. Jackson explain what it means being spirit directed:
Q By what mechanism would you understand God's spirit to direct your decisions?
Br. Jackson:  "Well, what I mean by that is, by prayer and using our constitution, God's word, we would go through the scriptures and see if there was any biblical principle at all that would influence our decision - and it could be that in our initial discussions there was something that maybe we were missing and then in another discussion that would come to light.  So we would view that as God's spirit motivating us because we believe the Bible is God's word and came by means of holy spirit". Source: ARC public hearing
So in summary, to say that one of the anointed may have received some kind of communication from one of the anointed in heaven regarding the great crowd is not in line with anything we believe regarding that kind of communication happening IN OUR DAY. The way Jehovah communicates with us today is through the Bible.

@AllenSmith I don't know why you quoted most of
the the WT. The problem is not when the resurrection to heaven was to have taken place but these assumptions:
and
Both these statements are speculative.
This is basically saying that Rutherford was contacted by one of the resurrected anointed and told (in a vision or a dream perhaps?) who the great crowd was. Is this likely, considering that Jehovah does not communicate like this with anyone on earth today? It makes no logical sense. We know the Slave is not inspired, and we also know communication with the spirit world, except with Jehovah, through Jesus, by means of prayer, is forbidden.  So the idea about communication between the anointed in heaven and earth TODAY is not Scriptural at all. The only thing that leads us today is the holy spirit, Jehovah's active force, and as we know, anyone can ask for it and receive it, and it is not a person.

I know. This is the craziest idea ever put in writing in any of our magazines. When I read it at the time I couldn't believe it...especially when used to support the identity of the great crowd and in turn to support the resurrection occurring between 1914 and 1935.  I wonder who came up with that idea and how it could have been sanctioned. This is the kind of reasoning I would expect in Russell's day, not 10 years ago! I think I've already had a rant about this somewhere, if yes, sorry for the repetition