Noble Berean

Yes, instruction is fine, but with this instruction comes honesty. For years we have bashed the Catholic church for shutting their eyes to child sexual molestation. Although our situation is different to that of the Catholic church,  we are not immune to those in authority using their position to get away with such things as child molestation, wife beating etc. Although not prolific like opposers would make out, still, in the words of our own organization "one molested child is one too many". The facts are; there have been elders and ministerial servants who have sexually molested children, and who have got away with it for a long time because no one would believe something like this could ever happen in our organization, after all we ARE Jehovah's organization! I do not believe the GB should hold our hands, just admitting this problem does exist in Jehovah's organization would suffice. Sooner or later this admission will be made, but the longer it's evaded, the worse the results will be as there will be a lot of publishers who will wonder why this information has been withheld for so long.....

Oh  yes,  dear  @Noble Berean  I  remember  these  MC's  very  good !  With  Kingdom songs  and  many  Talks  too    My  girlfriend  did  the  same  with  her  children  and  they  loved  it  very  much...  That  was  a  good  train  for  bringing  the  truth  into  their  hearts ?
Later,  I  made  many  records  on  Cassettes  and  CD's  for  me  and  also  many  copies  for  interested  Sisters, all  appreciated  that  alot     I  still  have  many  Talks  at  home,  also  of  some  anointed  Brothers.  Very  nice  reminders,  yes.   Thanks  for  your  nice  comment  and  your  pictures.  Best  wishes  from  Germany !

@Noble Berean
All my children grew up with the book and cassette tapes. I have a wonderful memory of my oldest Son sitting on the potty with his book "The Great Teacher", singing away! He did not read by then he was only about 4 years old. 
Thank you for sharing!
????

@Queen Esther I adored "Listening to the Great Teacher" as a child. I loved the speaker's voice on those bright pink cassette tapes!

@Queen Esther I adored "Listening to the Great Teacher" as a child. I loved the speaker's voice on those bright pink cassette tapes!

As far as I'm concerned it has nothing to do with no hellfire, no Trinity, political neutrality, and not going to war for example. I consider the last one (no warfare) a major way in which we show we love our neighbor and even love our enemy. Those Christian concepts are rather difficult to justify by participating directly in warfare.

While I might be willing to discuss some things with those who want to remodel, that does not mean I am willing to discuss them with those who want to demolish. 
Especially when they have neither replacement nor concern over that lack.

Russian JW Punk Rock.....  Now I have heard it all. 

I think they should stick with RED personally. I could be a little biased of course. 

He called me from New York and said: "I'm probably staying here." The news is shocking. The last thing you could expect from a person who sang (and sings): "I was born and grew up on Lenin Street". It's hard to imagine music more Russian than the one that Zero played, and Chistyakov continues to play. A brilliant album "No fools" and a few very strong singles have just come out, he has traveled around the country with concerts, he is at the peak of his form, he is finally all right after twenty years of depression and setbacks. So from what to run (and this is the escape)?
Photo from the archive of Fedor Chistyakov ... The fact that Chistyakov is a member of Jehovah's Witnesses, an organization that has just been recognized as extremist, knew everything, but did not attach importance. It was believed that the rock star has such a fad. Prince was also a Witness. And Madonna is a Kabbalist. And Tom Cruise is a Scientologist ... However, Fedor, although he never spoke about his religion at concerts and very rarely in an interview, takes her seriously. This is not a fad, this is something for which he is ready to fight.
"Witnesses" appeared in his life in the 90's, during the most difficult period. He just served an assassination attempt, went through a psychiatric hospital and was in a terrible state, on the verge of suicide. Now he does not drink, does not smoke and does not sing his old songs, where drugs are mentioned. But at the same time he did not lose the rock-n-roll drive, at the concerts he ignites in a way that few people can now. You can treat the Witnesses differently, but they rescued him, Fedor Chistyakov.
Pressure on the "Witnesses" went for a long time. In 2004, the Moscow court dismissed the Moscow community. In 2011, several criminal cases were opened. And in 2009, the NTV channel showed the film: "Watch out: Jehovah's Witnesses". In addition to the attack on the Witnesses, there was a run-in and personally on Chistyakov. Televischiki represented him in the image of a zombified and seduced sectarian, which is not true by one percent. This can be confirmed by anyone who has been to Fedor's concerts and listened to his recent recordings. The zombies do not sing like that.
The conclusion from the program was clear: look, the murderer and the addict preach the Bible! They, probably, are all like that.
The act is sneaky, whatever one may say, but Chistyakov then restrained himself. He is generally patient, his life has been broken and continues to break, like few people, one must have a strong character in order to survive and not go insane in his circumstances. As the campaign around the Witnesses unfolded, he became gloomy, nervous, but he waited. There were weak chances that it would cost. Now there are no such chances. Since July, his co-religionists and he is outside the law.
"You can regard this interview as my official statement on leaving the country," Fyodor said. "I just had no choice."
- I was not going to emigrate. There are people who for years try to get a green card or somehow get to America. And I never had any thoughts of such, nor of the possibilities. I firmly settled in place, I am already fifty, where to go? Besides, right now everything is developing very well, as a musician I am on the rise: a good band, an established tour system, one after the other albums are out. And so we flew with a tour in the US. And on the eve of the trial, the result of which was the ban of the Witnesses. For me it was a shock. The likelihood that I will not return from the American tour started to increase strongly. And on July 17, when they rejected the appeal, I made the final decision.
- What does this prohibition mean to you personally?
- First and foremost: I can not openly profess my religion. This in itself is a trauma, even if you are not being put, but there are already plantings. In Orel, for example, they took and imprisoned a citizen of Denmark. Russians are not enough for them, they decided to wet it so that the ears rang. There are options for punishment: prison, forced labor, fine. If a person is fined 100,000, and he has a salary of 20, what should he do? After that, by the way, they can plant.
"Such a situation makes any creative activity meaningless. What's the point, if tomorrow can come for you? "
 
And musical activity is connected with long-term investments. I invest my personal funds in the project, my colleagues and investors are investing. I take on very serious obligations. Concerts are planned for six months, and I have no right to even get sick, I have to play live or dead. But how to work if you can be picked up at any moment? Then you have to change your profession, but I do not want to, I still have many plans.
Last year, my spies were visited by searches of special services. Laptops, computers, hard disks were taken to find evidence of extremism. I was very worried about my home studio. It is absolutely inconceivable that my achievements are carried to an unknown place. So my move is not connected with the fact that I allegedly do not like Russia and sold to the Americans. This is a forced measure aimed at preventing me from disappearing as a creative unit. There was no other way out.
"And so you left." What will happen to the band "Fedor Chistyakov Band"? Is the project closed?
- In no case. Only the place of my physical stay has changed, nothing changes anymore. At least, I hope so. Now we are reshaping the schedules of tours taking into account the fact that I'm flying to them from America. In the near future the bandback of the group "Zero" - November 18, Moscow, "Izvestia Hall." If there is no force majeure, everything will be done. And then the recording of the new album, the material is written, you have to work with it. In addition, an American project is planned, with which I will be speaking, a contract has already been signed.
- Do you plan on singing in English?
"I'm afraid I will not succeed." Russian language, Russian thinking, Russian mentality with the move does not disappear anywhere. This is not the clothes that he took off, put on another and everything is okay. I remain the same as I was, I am still worried about things that are happening in Russia. And of course, I'm focused on the Russian public. But there is still an emigrant audience, it is not very large, but it is. I live in the area of New York, where on the street constantly hear Russian speech. And it's not even Brighton.
- The song from your new single "Time to Live" begins with the words: "There is nothing to do, nothing to do, nothing to do, only to run ..." Just about running away. Coincidence or did you plan?
- Coincidence, I was surprised to him. This is an old song "Zero", it did not have time to finish it in 1992, I do not remember what I meant at the time. Probably, flight from a difficult life situation, but not emigration exactly. We recorded it now together with Nichols, with whom "Zero" started sometime, it is possible with good conscience to consider this record as the new work of "Zero".
https://www.novayagazeta.ru/articles/2017/07/31/73296-pochemu-fedor-chistyakov-pokinul-rossiyu

Looks like one of the protesters we see today on the news. ?

I have written 3 or 4 in the course of 40 years. Each one was answered.

I have written letters to the Society in the past about my concerns, but I have never received any word back from them. I just assume at this point that they pitch any letters that questions their policies. I highly doubt that a letter campaign from JWs would work, because JWs either are ignorant to the problems or wouldn't dare question organizational policy.

QUICK REVIEW
So, we have these six words or terms from Matthew 24 (Mark 13 & Luke 21) for which we are trying to evaluate whether we have chosen a more likely meaning of the term, or a less likely meaning in order to arrive at the INVISIBLE PAROUSIA doctrine. It might even be possible to trace how some of the terms were apparently forced into their special meaning after the decision was made to declare that the PAROUSIA had indeed already begun.
BACKGROUND
Most of the persons who set dates for the visible return of Christ in the 19th century just stopped setting them as soon as a date didn't pan out. But some had invested so much time and effort into it that this was apparently impossible. Hundreds of thousands paid close attention to the 1843 date set initially by William Miller. When it failed another 1843 date was set, then an 1844 date, and Miller quit setting dates. (Russell would later claim that this showed that Miller was one of the 'foolish virgins whose lamp ran out of oil,' because Miller had given up on setting dates.)
But others who had invested their life and reputation on it waited right up to the last day of 1844. Then, of course, new "adjustments" were discovered that put Jesus return in the 1850's, then the 1860's. But by now there were only tens of thousands paying attention. The typical thing to do was to show your faith by focusing on the very next date, but N H Barbour, after some study and decisions in 1859, decided to skip all those expectations for the mid-1860's and go straight to his 1873 date. (He did not settle on 1874 until 1873 failed.) 
This means that when the 1860's dates failed, Barbour was already set to gain a following for the 1873 date. Less people were setting dates, there were less to choose from that were still based on the Millerite foundation. (Miller himself had mentioned the possibility of the 1870's date, half a century earlier.) When it failed in 1873, Barbour had spent as much of his life as Miller had on these dates. He changed it to 1874, and when that failed he was truly depressed. One of his contributors, B W Keith, went back to some teachings that had been promoted in the 1820's about a two-stage parousia. The first stage would be invisible, and Benjamin Wilson who also believed in a two-stage parousia had published the "Diaglott" as an aid to supporting this idea. (Later the Watch Tower Society--Russell--bought the rights to reprint Benjamin Wilson's Diaglott so that most available copies today have the Watch Tower's name in them.)
Barbour credited Keith with the two-stage idea in his tract ("magazine") and it got Barbour back on track. Barbour spoke about possibly picking up an extra 5,000 of the Second Adventists each month as new subscribers. He fully expected at least 20,000 of the current number of Second Adventists to subscribe. In 1877, Barbour convinced Russell of the urgency of this chronology, because just 3.5 years after the presence had begun, they expected Christ's bride to be changed and to have gone up to heaven in 1878 while "lesser" Christians awaited heaven at a later date. So the Russells sold off most of the assets of their largest company so that Barbour could distribute his tracts and booklets more widely.
When 1878 failed, subscribers dropped, and trouble also broke out between Barbour and Russell. Barbour blamed it on disagreements with Russell about money. Russell blamed it on a doctrinal disagreement. (Russell had "crazy" views about the ransom that are no longer considered valid, and Barbour had his own "crazy" view.)
By mid-1879 Russell had convinced three major contributors to Barbour to come over to his own new magazine. Russell also sent out an offer to all the Barbour subscribers to switch over to the Watch Tower. And it was also timed to pick up the current subscribers of a Second Adventist magazine from California as that magazine was just running out of money and discontinuing. So Russell printed up 8,000 copies of the first July 1879 issue. In 1879, there was still an urgency again for the next major date, because Russell expected the Bride of Christ to be changed in October 1881. (3.5 years plus 3.5 years from October 1874.) Lesser Christians would remain on earth until around 1914, when the Harvest would be complete.
Because of the failure of 1881, the number of subscribers remained low. (8,000 had been an overestimate.) But the book series, Divine Plan of the Ages (1886), The Time is at Hand (1889), and Thy Kingdom Come (1891), were extremely popular, "proving" the 1874 chronology with charts containing pyramids and diagrams, and pointing to great expectations between then and up to 1914.
Everything was invested into this idea of a two-stage parousia that started invisibly in 1874 and would manifest itself most visibly in the years just prior to 1914 (later adjusted to the year and months just following 1914).
----------------
Most people here are probably already generally aware of this background information, but it is difficult to understand why parts of the 1874 chronology lasted nearly 70 years -- until 1943/1944 without this background. (My father remembers believing in 1874, but says they were mostly calling it 1878 just before he was baptized.) It also can help explain why it was easy to just transfer the explanation of Matthew 24 from an 1874 chronology over to a 1914 chronology when that became necessary. It still remained a "two-stage Parousia" in every case.
Will pick up on another one of the terms in the next post.

Yes, I was about to go straight to the word PAROUSIA as the next term to discuss, and to me this is an easy one. But it is so ingrained as the basis for related teachings that I will save it for later. So, instead:
GENTILE TIMES
The NWT and WT now refer to this term as "Appointed Times of the Nations." based on Luke 21:24. Comparing the KJV and the NWT, the verse read as follows:
Luke 21:24 King James Version (KJV)
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
NWT (Luke 21:24) 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled.
This discussion probably won't deal so much with Daniel 4 directly, however, there are numerous Biblical problems with using a type/antitype fulfillment that uses a wicked, pagan, Gentile king Nebuchadnezzar and has him stand in for the Jewish Messianic kingdom under Jesus Christ. The beast-like humiliation of Nebuchadnezzar as a lesson for his haughtiness lasts for "seven times" until he is restored to his throne. That moment when he is restored after seven times is supposed to represent how Jesus restored the Messianic kingdom by sitting back down on the throne after seven times. Of course, the beast-like humiliation of a pagan Gentile king as a lesson for haughtiness makes no sense when applied to Jesus' Messianic kingdom. 
But the 1874 chronology that included a 40 year harvest ending in 1914 had failed. For a while the emphasis shifted to a 40 year harvest from 1878 to 1918, but that was not to last either. The Watch Tower Society finally dropped every vestige of the 1874 chronology and went back to this secondary method of reaching the date 1914. They simply noticed that if you work backwards and count 2,520 years from 1914 you will reach 606 BC, so this date 606 became the new date for the fall of the Jewish Messianic kingdom. It didn't matter that there was absolutely ZERO evidence for Jerusalem being destroyed in that year, but it appeared to be only about 20 years off, so that was considered close enough. It had already been one of the evidences that Barbour had used prior to Russell, although both of them considered other evidence to be better. In 1876, Russell had used Leviticus as the primary scripture for claiming the Gentiles would chastise the Jews for seven times, and he tied the mention of 7 times in Daniel 4 as a support of the scripture in Leviticus:
(Leviticus 26:28) . . .and I myself will have to chastise you seven times for your sins. . .
Later it was noticed that this verse in Leviticus wasn't really about seven periods of time, so the WTS now pinned everything on Daniel 4 (without Leviticus) and it became the new primary support for 1914. We simply said that the 7 times means 7 years, and that 7 years are made up of 2,520 "prophetic" days using 360 days to a year, and 2,520 "prophetic" days must  be thought of as 2,520 solar years (of 365.25 days each). We then say Nebuchadnezzar represented the Messianic kingdom. And, of course, we also needed to start a pseudo-chronology that pretended it was possible to move Jerusalem's destruction by Nebuchadnezzar back 20 years from where all the evidence pointed, so that 2,520 years would land on 1914.
The WTS once claimed that there were about 10 different threads of evidence that all pointed to 1914, and all but one of these came through the date 1874 and added 40 years. The date 1914 now hangs by only this one single thread now based solely on a dream about Nebuchadnezzar's 7 time periods of insanity.
------------
The above is worded truthfully, but clearly in a way that makes it seem unlikely to have been correct. But I'm not trying to say it is impossible. This is just an exercise to see if we have assigned the most likely meaning to it. So is there any way to check ourselves against other scriptures and see if we picked the most likely time period?
Turns out there are at least two scriptures to help here.
One is the verse itself. Note that Luke 21:24 says that they "WILL FALL by the edge of the sword and Jerusalem WILL BE TRAMPLED on by the nations UNTIL the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled."
Note that this action of Jerusalem falling by the edge of the sword is is in the future, and it is directly connected to the trampling that is also placed in the future. We know from history that Jerusalem fell by the edge of the sword in 70 CE, and that Jerusalem was therefore and thereby trampled on by the nations.
The Watch Tower publications have a different view of this scripture. It is understood by the WTS to mean that Jerusalem will continue to be trampled on by the nations from 676 years prior to 70 CE and for another 1844 years after 70 (until 1914). But, if that was true --and important-- why didn't Jesus use the proper tense. Both Aramaic and koine Greek have tenses that cover ongoing action as opposed to simple future action.
Discussions of specific language and tense cannot be definitive, however. There may always be more than one way to read something, and our only goal here is to find evidence for what is likely.
There is another verse however that gives us an indication of an actual time period to attach to these "appointed times of the nations."
When Jesus said "and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled" it would have been nice if he replaced those "times" with an actual amount of time. That would surely get us on the right track. In other words what if Jesus had said
: "the nations, they will trample on Jerusalem until seven times are fulfilled."
or since "seven times" are the same as "seven years" and therefore 2,520 days, we would even accept:
"the nations, they will trample on Jerusalem, the holy city, until 2,520 days are fulfilled"
Or since 2520 days is the same as 84 months of 30 days each, we would accept:
"the nations, they will trample on the holy city for 84 months."
Well, as most of already know, Jesus actually did say something like that when he gave the Revelation to John, and this should clear up why we attach a length of "seven times" to the "times of the nations." In Revelation 11:2, Jesus says:

(Revelation 11:2) . . .the nations, and they will trample the holy city underfoot for 42 months.
Imagine the joy that the Watchtower Society must have felt when it was discovered that Jesus himself had attached a time period to the Gentile Times, and thus cleared up any question about the whether or not it was "likely" that the Gentile Times were actually 84 months long as the Watchtower claims! (84 x 30 = 2520)
In fact, this scripture was the basis for so many Bible chronologists attaching a length of 42 months, or 1,260 days to the Gentile Times. Many of those commentators, especially the ones in the 19th century, therefore attached a period of 1,260 years to the Gentile Times. This included John Aquila Brown, about whom the Watch Tower publications said the following:
*** jv chap. 10 p. 134 Growing in Accurate Knowledge of the Truth ***
As early as 1823, John A. Brown, whose work was published in London, England, calculated the “seven times” of Daniel chapter 4 to be 2,520 years in length. But he did not clearly discern the date with which the prophetic time period began or when it would end. He did, however, connect these “seven times” with the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24. In 1844, E. B. Elliott, a British clergyman, drew attention to 1914 as a possible date for the end of the “seven times” of Daniel, but he also set out an alternate view that pointed to the time of the French Revolution. Robert Seeley, of London, in 1849, handled the matter in a similar manner. At least by 1870, a publication edited by Joseph Seiss and associates and printed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, was setting out calculations that pointed to 1914 as a significant date, even though the reasoning it contained was based on chronology that C. T. Russell later rejected.
These statements contain some misleading and false ideas buried within them. For example, John Aquila Brown did not clearly discern the date with which the prophetic time period began or when it ended. Did Russell clearly discern the beginning and end dates of the period? Russell vacillated between 606 and 607 and finally decided it must be 606 for the beginning --- even though he was about 20 years off from the evidence. Russell vacillated between 1914 and 1915 for the end date, then even indicated that he was willing to dismiss the whole chronology as potentially laughable for a time, and finally came back to 1914 and 1915 after he saw the Great War begin in 1914.
The Proclaimer's book also says that "He [Brown] did, however, connect these "seven times" with the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24."
That statement is absolutely false. Brown always denied any connection between the "seven times" of Daniel with the "Gentile Times" of Luke 21:24. And that's at least partially based on the fact that he knew that Revelation 11:2 had already attached a different time period to the Gentile Times of Luke 21:24.
There are a lot of other funny or ironic claims and ideas to look into from this section of the book. This happens whenever someone tries to present a partially cleaned up history of their own chronology beliefs that already failed in the past.
Even the very definition given to the term "Gentile Times" failed in 1914. And that's the main point of what this discussion is looking for. It was the very meaning that the Watch Tower publications had given to the term Gentile Times that was tied to all the expectations that 1914 and 1915 would bring. All 100% of those expectations failed, and therefore the definition given to term "Gentile Times" must also be considered unlikely.

I'll propose one more of the terms to evaluate that we have given a special definition to. It's the term "LIGHTNING."
LIGHTNING
In the development of the "Invisible parousia" doctrine, the Watchtower has offered several different explanations of the meaning of "lightning" in Jesus phrase:
(Matthew 24:27) 27 For just as the lightning comes out of the east and shines over to the west, so the presence [parousia] of the Son of man will be.
(Luke 17:24) 24 For just as lightning flashes from one part of heaven to another part of heaven, so the Son of man will be in his day.
Lightning is one of the most strikingly SUDDEN & VISIBLE phenomenon known to man, and the context of the verse is about how SUDDEN and UNEXPECTED the "parousia" could surprise people.
But early in the years of developing the doctrine of an INVISIBLE PAROUSIA, Bible Students like N H Barbour, B W Keith, and later, C T Russell, knew that none of them had recognized the parousia when it began. No one suddenly understood when it had started. No one spotted it like a flash of lightning when it began. That's because there was an expectation of a sudden, bright and shining event that would start in 1874, but they were confused when it didn't happen. And it may have been a year or more later before it finally dawned on them that maybe they weren't wrong after all, maybe the PAROUSIA really did start in 1874, but it was invisible.
The problem is that they would have to change the meaning of this verse. Here's how C.T.Russell promoted a change in meaning:
1897: Studies in the Scriptures, The Battle of Armageddon, was one of several places that changed it from "lightning" to "the Sun" which fit the theme of "millennial dawn" a little better. The bracketed words are in the original:
"The Sun of Righteousness Shall Arise"
"Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: or behold he is in the secret chamber; believe it not. For as the bright-shiner [the Sun] cometh out of the East and shineth even unto the West, so shall also the presence [Greek parousia] of the Son of Man be." Matt. 24:26,27. 
Here's how this was explained in the Watch Tower, in May 1914, p.5656 reprints, "Messiah's Kingdom To Be Invisible"
"As the lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven, and shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of Man be in His Day."
This astounding statement is better understood when we translate the Greek noun astrape as "shining" instead of "lightning"; for evidently it refers to the sun, which rises in the east and sets in the west, shining out of the one part of the heaven even unto the other. But how will this represent the Son of Man in His Day? How will He be like the sun? We answer that the Day of Christ is a thousand-year Day, the Millennium; and our Lord's statement was one of the "dark sayings" of which Jesus said, "I have many things to tell you, but ye cannot bear them now," and promised that in due time the Holy Spirit would grant them an enlightenment, that all of His words might be clearly understood. This portion, now due to be understood, is therefore becoming clear to those of spiritual discernment. Then, that they might gradually learn that these things belonged to a distant time . . .
So by changing the meaning of the word, they didn't really have to explain why it took them so long for their spiritual insight to allow them to see, only after the fact,  that the parousia really had begun in 1874.
In answer to a letter from 1949, the Watchtower explained that this was changed (actual change was in 1934, but this in 1950 added an additional idea) as follows:
*** w50 8/1 p. 239 Letters ***
The book “The Time Is at Hand”, published in 1889, explained the Greek word “astrapé” in Matthew 24:27 to mean the sun as the ‘bright shiner’, because there Jesus mentioned the “astrapé” as coming out of the east and shining even to the west. (See said book at pages 155-157.) However, never in sacred Scripture nor in classical Greek literature is “astrapé” used to refer to the sun of our solar system. At Luke 17:24 Jesus makes a parallel statement, but does not designate any particular direction from which the lightning flashes, saying: “As the lightning [astrapé], that lighteneth [verb astrápto] out of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of man be in his day.” Notice that expression “under heaven”, which befits lightning which occurs under the sun in the heavens obscured by the clouds.
The Sun was an extremely unlikely translation of the word for lightning, and this article admitted further down that it was wrong and had no basis. The part quoted above also shows that Russell had forgotten to consider parallel verses in Luke and several other scriptures. The parallel in Luke will also be impportant for another reason. Note from above, near the beginning of this post, that the expression in Matthew "parousia of the Son of man" is paralleled with "the Son of man in his day." It's just another of many indicators that the parousia is less likely to refer to the entire "generation" of "last days" but that it more likely refers to the final judgment event.
Note that for a time, the idea of associating "lightning" with clouds so that it could be associated with "INVISIBILITY" was attempted.
In the Watchtower, August 15, 1940, p.241 the explanation was also a bit convoluted, because Jesus was still "present" since 1874, but had "come" in 1918, and both anointed and their companions still look to the future for the "manifestation" of his presence:
Jesus' words cannot mean that zigzag lightning comes
always out of the east and shines unto the west and that
this represents his coming. What his words really mean is
that the lightnings come or appear in one part of the heavens
and are seen by persons at different points and that therefore
the lightning is not confined to a local place. It is seen
by those who are watching. The"statement recorded by Luke
concerning the same thing supports this view: "For as the
lightning, that lighteneth out of the one part under heaven,
shineth unto the other part under heaven; so shall also the
Son of man be in his day."-Luke l.tf: 24.
Lightning originates with Jehovah, says Jeremiah
10: 13. Just so all light upon the divine purpose originates
with Jehovah. When he reveals his light to his anointed
church he does so through the Head of his organization,
Christ Jesus. No human is able to make lightning. Likewise
no human is able to point to the fact that Christ Jesus is at
some local spot on earth. His presence is revealed to those
of God's anointed remnant and their earthly companions
of good will, all of whom look for the manifestation of his
presence. In Matthew 24: 27, "coming'' specifically refers
to his coming to the temple [in 1918] and his presence there for judgment
of the "house of God", which house is composed of
God's anointed and faithful ones and is not a material house
of brick, wood or stone.
Of the more current explanations given, the most common is based on this idea below:
*** w74 12/15 p. 750 Who Will See “the Sign of the Son of Man”? ***
When Christ would return in an invisible presence he would not come as a man on earth. Therefore Christians should not look for him “in the wilderness,” so that they could train with him in some out-of-the-way place for a revolution. Nor would he be in some secret “inner chambers,” where he could conspire against world governments with his followers. No, his presence was to be like lightning, not in its being instantaneous and unexpected, but in its being seen over a wide area, in the open, for everyone to behold. (Luke 17:24; compare Psalm 97:4.) His followers would not keep their knowledge of his invisible presence secret, but would give it widespread proclamation.—Matt. 10:26, 27.
*** ka chap. 16 pp. 321-322 pars. 61-62 Completion of the Foretold “Sign” Nears ***
61 His presence or parousia was to resemble the lightning as to its effects. His parousia was to be like the lightning, not in flashing suddenly, unexpectedly and in the fraction of a second. The emphasis here is not on the lightning’s striking instantaneously unannounced, but on its shining over a broad area, from eastern parts to western parts. (Luke 17:24) The lightning’s illuminative power is like that described in Psalm 97:4: “His lightnings lighted up the productive land; the earth saw and came to be in severe pains.” So, too, the inhabitants of the earth were not to be left in darkness respecting the parousia of the Son of man. From horizon to horizon all the people were to be enlightened concerning his regal parousia. It was to be made as public as is a flash of lightning by its illuminative power, its far-extended shining. To Christ’s disciples today, who are acquainted with his invisible parousia, his words to his apostles nineteen centuries ago apply:
62 “Therefore do not fear them; for there is nothing covered over that will not become uncovered, and secret that will not become known. What I tell you in the darkness, say in the light; and what you hear whispered, preach from the housetops.”—Matthew 10:26, 27.
So the current explanation continues to work with the idea that Jesus did NOT mention lightning because it is sudden and unexpected. Consider how likely this is when considering the further context. In a recent discussion on Matthew 24 note what someone (Gnosis Pithos) said about the very next paragraph in context:
 
It's not impossible that the meaning of "lightning" here refers to the fact that lightning isn't just in one place, but it shines over extended areas. But it's also impossible to avoid the idea of suddenness and surprise in several places throughout the chapter. And it's also impossible to avoid the fact that Jesus had just spoken about those who claimed that Jesus had returned, but that you just couldn't see him. They would say he had returned, but that he wasn't visible at the moment because he was far off somewhere else, or hidden in a room somewhere.
Our current Watchtower explanation is that the "illumination" is given to those with spiritual insight who can then spread the word of his invisible parousia over a wide area. But the previous verses were about claims by those without spiritual insight, and this was the answer to their claims. In other words, the answer to the claim that Jesus might have returned but that he was just not visible was that Jesus parousia would be as visible as lightning. Claims of an invisible presence were therefore going to be false. It would also be bright and sudden and unmistakable as lightning. It would be like the kind of lightning that is visible from one horizon all the way to the other. 
How likely would it be that Jesus was saying that an INVISIBLE PAROUSIA would be just like something as VISIBLE as lightning that covers the entire sky?

Sure, I'll be happy to start out.
By the end of this discussion we should be able to go through the whole chapter and give a kind of evaluation score to whether we think we have a more likely doctrine or a less likely doctrine. This isn't about whether the meaning we have given a certain idea is impossible, just a way of measuring if the idea is more or less likely.
I'd propose that we have currently been driven to accept a LESS LIKELY definition of the word GENERATION. (Example: "the 1914 generation refers to two groups, where the first group included those whose lifespans overlapped with a second group quite possibly around a point in 1992 or even later, such that we can now add the lifespan of the oldest persons in the second group to the 1914 generation until they might die off in the near future, or perhaps much later, such that the 1914 generation can now include a reference to people born, say in the 1970's or later, living nearly until the year 2050, or even closer to the year 2100.") This has already been discussed elsewhere.
I don't think the definition we give it in the latest Watchtower articles and JW Broadcasting videos is impossible, but it seems very  unlikely. In my experience very few WItnesses will attempt to defend it Biblically. The ones who do make the attempt, have offered scriptures that actually make a much better fit the more common definitions of "generation."  (Exodus 1:6, Genesis 50:23; etc)
Without belaboring the possibility that the current understanding is somehow POSSIBLE, I think almost everyone in the world would agree that it is a LESS LIKELY definition that we are using, than any of the common definitions. (Especially since it can be found in no Bibles, no Bible dictionaries, and no dictionaries.)

I have to agree with you there. Just the other day a sister brought up the subject of the convention and the talk about protecting our children. She is now the third person who absolutely did not think the counsel could apply to anyone being a threat in the congregation. It didn't even cross her mind. Those very few who are aware of this problem, and those who know about the Australia Royal Commission's findings, know exactly why this particular program was included at the convention. It was a response to the problem. However, not many are actually aware of that. I have yet to see a candid admission that we do have this problem among our ranks.
That is the scary part and has been suggested by many an opposer or ex-jw. I do not think much of the public is aware of this problem, as I have yet to meet someone in the ministry who brings it up. However this could change. I think that if this becomes a problem in the ministry, and brothers start reporting it, the GB might do something about it. In the mean time, have you perhaps thought of writing a letter to them, similar in content of what you wrote here? It's possible that if they receive many letters complaining about the lack of transparency regarding this issue it might hurry things along.
P.S. We had hospitality lat month and the brother was telling us about one of his Bible studies, who left the catholic faith because of pedophilia. I thought, oh no, what's he going to do when he finds out we have a similar problem! I know one sister who left the truth because she said she left the Catholics because of this.....

There is no denying that the mishandling of sexual abuse by the JW organization has brought a great reproach upon Jehovah's good name. The response by the GB to these scandals brings even further reproach. I worry that many JWs are completely unaware of how these ongoing legal disputes are destroying public perception of our religion.
It was bad enough that many elders did not report claims of sexual abuse to the police, but when court cases exposed the abuse to the masses the GB should have immediately apologized to the victims for the mishandling and taken steps to make things right. Instead, they made excuses for the abuse and never took accountability. The inability to accept wrongdoing shows a major ego problem and a callousness. Furthermore, the GB has kept JWs in the dark by not addressing the sexual abuse cases. Shouldn't the GB feel a sense of duty to keep JWs informed about a major issue within the organization? 
I worry that saving face is more important to the GB than the safety of our brothers and sisters.

Actually, it is not known on the basis of current evidence. So it is really a hiding to nothing or, more graphically, like flogging a dead horse to try and prove definitively what the instrument was on the basis of current evidence. Heroic attempts however, and ingenious argument all round!!

This indicates the sad plight of humans in today's loveless world in that comfort from a stranger is basically seen as something alien.

There is no denying that the mishandling of sexual abuse by the JW organization has brought a great reproach upon Jehovah's good name. The response by the GB to these scandals brings even further reproach. I worry that many JWs are completely unaware of how these ongoing legal disputes are destroying public perception of our religion.
It was bad enough that many elders did not report claims of sexual abuse to the police, but when court cases exposed the abuse to the masses the GB should have immediately apologized to the victims for the mishandling and taken steps to make things right. Instead, they made excuses for the abuse and never took accountability. The inability to accept wrongdoing shows a major ego problem and a callousness. Furthermore, the GB has kept JWs in the dark by not addressing the sexual abuse cases. Shouldn't the GB feel a sense of duty to keep JWs informed about a major issue within the organization? 
I worry that saving face is more important to the GB than the safety of our brothers and sisters.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
Jehovah's organization is giving us many beautiful music gifts.
Sometime we (brothers and sisters from Italy) enjoy to play and to sing some of these songs.
Here are the videos of our covers. This is the link to a PlayList with 26 songs.
We hope you can enjoy them too.
Greetings from Italy
AbelBand

These articles are quite good for Jehovah's people in general because so many actually "hate" gay people. I was sitting in a car with brothers and sisters who got talking about gay people. everything they said was "hateful" of gay people. They had forgotten that it's the act not the person that we should hate. I spoke up and asked, what would happen if a gay person became a brother or sister, would we still talk that way, or would we think they no longer had the desire just because they became a witness. Some said yes quoting "because that's what some of you were." 1 Corinthians 6: 11. It was an awkward discussion, but they only realized how they sounded when someone raised the issue.
On the other side, many gay people may allow the act or even the desire to act to define who they are. 
While we define it as a person who "acts" on the urge and commits such "acts". The world holds the view that if you have even the desire to act you are gay. Most witnesses that I've listened to talking about gay people don't differentiate it either. When you hear it from the platform, it's not differentiated and much of the time it's hate for the people using words like "they are disgusting or filthy." Not the acts they do. This is really unfortunate. And I believe it is our own fault. 
Those whom I have known to have come out of that lifestyle, have really struggled in the truth. From vicious back biting, mockery and isolation. Yet, we preach a message of peace but do not always show it to "all sorts of people." For them, it can be a very lonely place within the organization.
Yes, it is sad that when you call in to see a Bible Student, that they tell you how brother so-and-so told them to be careful of brother x because he is gay. Notice it was not past tense as in "that is what some of you were."
Such, brothers and sister who struggle with same sex attraction would prefer to hide who themselves if they knew the whole congregation viewed them as "unchanged".
I just think, we have a long way to go in many area's, we are not as righteous as we make ourselves out to be at times. I believe this is a big problem at the moment especially with a big focus on it in the last year. That focus has not instilled wise or loving traits in Jehovah's people. Granted not all of us are "hateful" or "malicious" of gay people. But I think we do need to realize some things:
1. For a gay to convert is a really difficult challenge, it cannot be compared to a straight person turning to God.
2. There is a difference between being gay and no longer committing gay acts, it does not mean they stop having gay desires.
3. Many are now our brother's and sister's but they know that if they were open about it that they would be treated badly, so they work hard to hide that side of them to the detriment of the physical and mental health.
We need to be more loving to those who were gay, and realize how hard it is for them to exist in the truth. We should be amazed at their daily struggle to resist the flesh, it cannot be compared to straight people's struggle with sexual desire. If you want to show love, involve them in group socializing. And just so some get to know, it's not the one's that are known that should be worried about. Many "straight looking" brothers may have a struggle as well, they may even persecute or mock those who are known or even be married now, with children. It's not as simple as, that brother looks "camp" so he must be gay or he has a gay voice or likes ballet etc Feminine traits are not always an indicator of gay desire. You don't have to "look" gay to have that desire.
I hope some witnesses will change from a "hateful" disposition toward gay people. We are not the judges. However, this problem is so big it will not likely change over night, sad, but true.
To all you brothers and sisters out there who struggle everyday with gay desire. May the God of peace grant you peace and reward your efforts.
 
 
 

Does the Bible teach that homosexuals are bad people? Can a Christian please God while feeling attracted to the same sex?
Source