Srecko Sostar

And now we can see why the Governing Body are frightened and why they tell the Anointed not to gather together or not to contact each other.  Um, 21,182 Anointed.  They could have there own Global Assembly   . 
Another thought crossed my mind. The GB say that we are living in the last part of the last day and yet there are 21 thousand Anointed left on Earth ?  Well maybe only 10,000 True anointed. But ... 
Matthew 24 :22 says  "In fact, unless those days were cut short, no flesh would be saved; but on account of the chosen ones those days will be cut short."
This scripture shows some serious reduction in population. Surely this would include a serious reduction in the quantity of Anointed ones ?  As I've mentioned before, if only half of that figure is real that still means there are over 10,000 True Anointed remnant here on Earth. 
So, what will greatly reduce the population ?   And, how long will it take to greatly reduce the population ? 
And how many of the True Anointed will be left here on Earth at the beginning of the Judgement / Armageddon ? 

Yes, JW's faith has been created, built by "Bible Study" Program, and then with all other "organizational requirements" aka meetings and conventions where they studying WTJWorg publications and by that they suck, hoover, inhale "uninspired spirit" of human doctrines made by leadership.  

An excellent account about one of the key elements in WTJWorg theology - Memorial Partakers aka Anointed. Wherever you look, there is always something wrong with the Organization.
 
 
 

I changed my mind about creating a table of the Jon/Cameron comments and then commenting on various portions. It seemed that it was just a repetition of what we have already gone over, and are still going over elsewhere.
Although this is mostly true, I think a lot of Witnesses don't realize that almost all Bible commentators and scholars count 70 years back from around 537 (plus or minus two years) and end up believing that 607 BCE is acceptable (plus or minus two years). Because of the "controversy" a lot of Witnesses might believe that this general time period for the 70 years is being disputed by ex-Witnesses like AlanF, Ann O'maly, COJ and others. People some might think that Witnesses like Gertoux are disputing the 70 years during this general time period. For myself, I have mentioned that I think that 607 BCE to 537 BCE is just fine for the period of 70 years (plus or minus a couple of years).
Even AlanF believes that the 70 years is within a couple of years of 607 to 537. (Specifically, from 609 to 539).
The reason so many Bible commentators use 539 back to 609 is because this is a 70-year period with actual, definable, and dateable events at each end.
So there is nothing so far off about the date 607 BCE for the beginning of the 70 years. It implies that the actual end date of the 70 years was 537, and although this would only be 2 years off the most Biblically acceptable date, it implies that the Israelites were still serving Babylon even after Babylon was destroyed. But the sense is not impossible in my opinion, because most of the exiles were still in exile in Babylon until Cyrus probably decreed they could go home in the first month of 538. (Arauna has often insisted that the decree MUST have happened in the first month of 538 at the New Year's Akitu festival. This would mean that they were back by the seventh month of 538 (c. October 538) which is actually only a couple months from January 537.)
 
Of course, the Watchtower publications, although they once used 606 to 536 for these dates, do not allow for an adjustment even by a month. Since Jerusalem was destroyed in the summer, it must be October 607 for the start, and since we claim (without any evidence) that Cyrus waited until months after the beginning of the year to make the decree, and therefore NOT at the festival of Akitu and 538, that it must have been the following year 537 in the 7th month (Tishri/October) when the Jews returned. (And we count back a few more months to give them time to prepare and travel, putting the decree as likely in the first month of 537, not 538.)
Here's how INSIGHT puts it:
*** it-1 p. 568 Cyrus ***
In view of the Bible record, Cyrus’ decree freeing the Jews to return to Jerusalem likely was made late in the year 538 or early in 537 B.C.E.
I think a lot of Witnesses don't realize what INSIGHT means by "In view of the Bible record . . ." It has nothing to do with anything written in the Bible about Cyrus or the exile or the return. It means, basically: "In view of our interpretation of Jesus' words in Matthew 24 and Luke 21, Cyrus must have made the decree late enough after the beginning of 538 so that they could not have resettled in 538, otherwise WWI and our interpretation of 1914 would not quite fit, and the "parousia" would have started in 1913."  I'm not kidding in the least about that. Those words are about our interpretation of 1914 and nothing else.
And of course the big difference between any scholars who might start the 70 years in 609/608 and the Watchtower publications is that the Watchtower says that 609/8 is when the siege on Jerusalem began, resulting in it's final destruction in 607. That's Nebuchadnezzar's 18th year. The other scholars and Bible commentators indicate that the archaeological date of 609 is 4 years before Nebuchadnezzar even began his first accession year after his father died, but that it was marked by the Battle of Harran in 609 BCE, not the destruction of Jerusalem which happened about 22 years later. So the Watchtower chronology says 607 is Jerusalem's destruction 18 or 19 years into Nebuchadnezzar's reign, and the archaeologically-supported chronology says 607 is near the end of Nebuchadnezzar's father's reign, more than 20 years different.
Saying that Babylon began dominating the region for 70 years fits the Bible's account, but the Watchtower publications would like an easier explanation of Daniel 4, which requires a different event in 609/608/607. The ending of the Davidic/Messianic kingdom makes for a better event, so the destruction of Jerusalem is arbitrarily changed from 657 to 607. Other commentators note that the death of the last good king Josiah in 609 (archaeological time not Watchtower time) makes for a pretty good demarcation of the 70 years with respect to Judea and Jerusalem. A commentary by Albertz considers the start of the reign Jehoiakim to be the reason that the Chronicler begins discussions of deportations (exiles) in the reign of Jehoiakim which would have started in 609/8 after the death of his father Josiah.
If the Watchtower wanted to save 607 (plus or minus a couple of years), and if they decided to begin using archaeological evidenced chronology instead of arbitrary Watchtower chronology, it could be done with this verse:
(2 Kings 24:1, 2) . . .In Je·hoiʹa·kim’s days King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon came against him, and Je·hoiʹa·kim became his servant for three years. However, he turned against him and rebelled. 2 Then Jehovah began to send against him marauder bands of Chal·deʹans, Syrians, Moʹab·ites, and Amʹmon·ites. He kept sending them against Judah to destroy it, according to Jehovah’s word that he had spoken through his servants the prophets.

I think it resonates through the whole JW Organisation too.  Even JWs on here seem to have no faith in God's Holy Spirit and it's capabilities.  I suppose that is why the GB / Org win over so many people by materialism.  JWs seem to need men, books, magazines and buildings to look up to.  No faith needed there.  But that makes it so easy for the GB to push their own agenda forward. It is such a shame as the Org could serve God if it had the right leadership, the True Anointed remnant. 

And Jesus Christ's teachings,  prove it. 

According to their understanding, they are "guided by spirit". In their understanding about this wording, that means; reading Bible, prayers to God for understanding and working according to Bible aka working to own understanding of Bible (according to WTJWorg theology).
Obviously, as you accented, this what they are doing is not enough. Because they denied possibility that God can and would "inspired" people today, they put themselves in position to deny holy spirit, to stop HS, to insult God and the HS. To not believe in HS and his/her power and will to help people today as it was in the past. 
By openly renouncing the possibility of being inspired by HS (Since the Governing Body is neither inspired ... - WT February 2017), they have no faith in HS and thus HS has no possibility of acting in such an Organization and on such people.

According to their understanding, they are "guided by spirit". In their understanding about this wording, that means; reading Bible, prayers to God for understanding and working according to Bible aka working to own understanding of Bible (according to WTJWorg theology).
Obviously, as you accented, this what they are doing is not enough. Because they denied possibility that God can and would "inspired" people today, they put themselves in position to deny holy spirit, to stop HS, to insult God and the HS. To not believe in HS and his/her power and will to help people today as it was in the past. 
By openly renouncing the possibility of being inspired by HS (Since the Governing Body is neither inspired ... - WT February 2017), they have no faith in HS and thus HS has no possibility of acting in such an Organization and on such people.

There will probably be people reading this who believe that you are claiming that Albertz equates 70 years of Jewish exile beginning with the Fall and ending with the return under Cyrus. Obviously, Albertz does NOT believe the 70 years of Jewish exile begin with the Fall and end with the return under Cyrus. And since it's not true, you are being deceptive if you imply that it is. For example, in one sense Albertz says that Israel is still in the exilic period, "extending down to the present:"

Then notice that Albertz does not consider a "simple" demarcation at the Fall of Jerusalem in 587/6, and most definitely does not end it at the usual demarcation of Cyrus in 539/8:

Read it carefully. He prefers to consider the exilic period from 587/6 but says there was already a golah -- an EXILE -- in 598/7.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/golah
History and Etymology for golah
Hebrew gōlāh exile
That's the same exile the Watchtower dates, not to 607 (or 597), but to 617, because the WTS simply adds 20 years to the date supported by archaeology and NeoBabylonian chronology. 617-20=597. Note that the INSIGHT book also calls this an exile:
*** it-1 p. 795 Ezekiel, Book of ***
In the 25th year of his exile (593 B.C.E.) Ezekiel had a remarkable vision
593 + 25 = 618; and, 618 - 20= 598
*** it-1 p. 1269 Jehoiakim ***
Following the siege of Jerusalem during Jehoiakim’s “third year” (as vassal king), Daniel and other Judeans, including nobles and members of the royal family, were taken as exiles to Babylon
And the INSIGHT book also calls the exile of 582 "an exile" (Although the WTS adds 20 to 582 to make it about 602 or 603 BCE):
*** it-2 p. 481 Nebuchadnezzar ***
Later Exiles of Jews. About three years later, in the 23rd year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, more Jews were taken into exile. (Jer 52:30) This exile probably involved Jews who had fled to lands that were later conquered by the Babylonians.
And INSIGHT even agrees with Albertz, that in one sense, large numbers were still in exile around 20 years after Cyrus, during the time of Zerubbabel's work which INSIGHT gives as 522 to 515 BCE:
*** it-2 p. 489 Nehemiah, Book of ***
Both the book of Ezra (2:1-67) and the book of Nehemiah (7:6-69) list the number of exiles from various families or houses who returned from Babylonian exile with Zerubbabel.
I expect that Ann O'maly and AlanF probably already covered this for you, but you had addressed me with the claim on a previous page where I pointed out that your claim about Bryan and Albertz was wrong. You included this false statement.
The "facts" proved you wrong. But why did you think it necessary to make a big deal out of the fact that COJ doesn't use the term "historiography." And why would you go out on a limb just to be wrong again? I take it you have never read COJ?
Here are some quotes from COJ from GTR4. The main theme of the whole book is about historiography. Since you obviously need to learn some skills about how to search words to avoid spreading untrue statements, I'll leave it to you to find the page numbers:
In his discussions of historiography, he quotes from several different sources about it:
The Watch Tower Society, in its Bible dictionary Insight on the Scriptures (Vol. I, p. 453), devotes only one paragraph to Berossus. Almost the whole paragraph consists of a quotation from A. T. Olmstead’s Assyrian Historiography in which he deplores the tortuous survival history of Berossus’ fragments via Eusebius’ Chronicle (cf. note 6 above). Although this is true, it is, as noted, essentially irrelevant for our discussion
Inscriptions from Assyria and Babylonia show that, in order to break the power and morale of a rebel quickly, the imperial army would try to ruin the economic potential “by destroying unfortified settlements, cutting down plantations and devastating fields” — Israel Eph’al, “On Warfare and Military Control in the Ancient Near Eastern Empires,” in H. Tadmor & M. Weinfield (eds.), History, Historiography and 1nterpretatian (Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 1984), p. 97.
Gregory E. Sterling, Historiography and Self-Definition (Leiden, New York, Köln: E. J. Brill, 1992), pp. 106, 260, 261.
In fact he correctly uses the term historiography in a discussion of the Watchtower's misuse of historiography and misrepresentation of authorities on historiography here:
It has been amply demonstrated above that the Watch Tower Society in its “Appendix” to “Let your Kingdom Come” does not give a fair presentation of the evidence against their 607 B.C.E. date:
(1) Its writers misrepresent historical evidence by omitting from their discussion nearly half of the evidence presented in the first edition of this work (the Hillah stele, the diary BM 32312, and contemporary Egyptian documents) and by giving some of the other lines of evidence only a biased and distorted presentation. They erroneously indicate that priests and kings might have altered historical documents (chronicles, royal inscriptions, etc.) from the Neo-Babylonian era, in spite of the fact that all available evidence shows the opposite to be true.
(2)They misrepresent authorities on ancient historiography by quoting them out of context and attributing to them views and doubts they do not have.
(3)They misrepresent ancient writers by concealing the fact that Berossus is supported by the most direct reading of Daniel 1:1–6, by quoting Josephus when he talks of seventy years of desolation without mentioning that in his last work he changed the length of the period to fifty years, and by referring to the opinion of the second century bishop, Theophilus, without mentioning that he ends the seventy years, not only in the second year of Cyrus, but also in the second year of Darius Hystaspes (as did his contemporary Clement of Alexandria and others), thus confusing the two kings.
I can give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you are not purposely deceiving anyone, and that these mistakes are just evidence of incompetence as a reader. But then, of course, you must be deceitful about your "scholarly" abilities. But perhaps you did lie about reading the book, or lie about how clear it was to you, because if you really had, then your mistakes should have been obvious.
Also, why are you spending so much time on a particular scholar or two who seem to have views that are exceptions to most other scholars? If scholars are so all-important to you in this discussion, you should explain why you have dismissed the supposed authority of the majority of scholars. You cherry-pick one or two scholars, claiming they say a certain thing, and then you misrepresent even these very scholars you wish to rely on. But why so much attention to scholars in the first place?
With a little effort you could learn a lot of this same information without even relying on all these secular scholars.
This doesn't mean I didn't find the Albertz book interesting. I had seen that the WTS had quoted from him before, but I had not ever read (about 70 pages of) his book until now.
Somehow, I must doubt this. I can see that if you really did read it then you are telling untruths about what it says. Whether these are "lies" or not depends on your competence to understand what you claimed to have read. But you are definitely telling things that are not true, saying they are found in his book, and they aren't there.

Thank you. It's not hard. You should try learning these kinds of skills too ...
... if you can be bothered, of course 😉
I didn't notice that at all. I did notice that he talked about the exilic era consisting of more than one deportation to Babylon. 
Ahh, so you are acknowledging the exile/diaspora of Israel in the 8th century BCE too (p. 2). OK.

Good catch!
This is typical of Watchtower quoting practices. I've found a number of instances where the WTS author claims that some authority said something that it uses to support a point, but it turns out that the "authority" was describing what a third party said. Often the third party has little or no credibility -- which is why the WTS falsely attributed it to a supposed authority.
This practice can be illustrated as follows: Suppose The Watchtower magazine quoted a biologist as saying "Evolution is a fact." Some other author grabs that quotation out of context and writes: "Look! The Watchtower Society now says evolution is a fact!" Either that author -- like many WTS writers -- is either thoroughly stupid or completely dishonest.

When the Oct 1, 2011 WT on p. 26-7 quoted Albertz,
'...the event marked an important turning point in the history of God’s people. One historian said that it led to “a catastrophe, indeed the ultimate catastrophe.”' 
it apparently missed that Albertz was comparing the negative and defeatist viewpoint of the 587/6 destruction and resulting exile by the writer(s) of 1 & 2 Kings with the more positive outlook given by Jeremiah. Therefore, Albertz wasn't expressing his own view of the exile as implied by the way WT used his quote, but the books of Kings' pessimistic view of the exile.
From p. 7 of Albertz's book for context leading up to WT's quote:


I thought I'd just point this out 🙂

Oh, the dichotomy of it all.  Satan promised,  "The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to.”  Luke 4:5-7
Jesus:  “If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.”  John 15:7
"Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13 And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it."  John 14:12-14
Has the GB asked for understanding from Jesus Christ?  Hmmm.   And would Jesus give them this understanding if they have already received authority, splendor and the “kingdoms” (“Gentile” and “Israel”) of the world of JWs?
Clearly, they have succeeded in procuring prominence and riches, and an easy life that doesn’t require personal persecution as Jesus suffered. (Luke 9:23)  Instead of ‘denying themselves’, they have exalted their own names – names that demand obedience with consequences, if it isn’t returned. Like you said, this is the opposite from what Jesus had taught his disciples. 
And, they have failed in providing lasting “fruit” from the vine of Christ.  So, what spirit is inspiring them. 
“Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me.”  John 15:4
Well, they are bearing fruit. But Jesus doesn’t mean just any fruit/teachings.  The fruit must be “good”, full of Holy Spirit, which is truth.  (1 John 4:6) To produce this fruit the GB must be inspired by the Holy Spirit.  Matt 7:18-20
“You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you so that you might go and bear fruit—fruit that will last—and so that whatever you ask in my name the Father will give you.” 
There’s our answer.  Jesus did not choose the GB to be his “faithful and discreet slave” of Matt 24:45, since they have not produced fruit that remains – fruit that contains the living water of Christ…living, never expiring.  (John 7:38) He hasn’t given this lasting truth to them. The evidence is in their continual search for “new light” – scapegoats for errors in teachings, for the bad fruit they have produced. These men have made a pact to receive authority, power and wealth in this life; which for them, is much more satisfying, than the truth from Jesus Christ. There is only one spirit in opposition to Christ, that would indulge men with unlimited earthly desires. 
“We have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us.  And this is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom, but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.
The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. For they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.”   1 Cor 2:12-14
 
 

ScholarJW Pretendus Mendacicus Maximus said:
Such liar. Albertz never said that there was only one exile. And you, of course, have not quoted him to support your lie.
I do not yet have Albertz's book, but I found a review of it ( https://www.jstor.org/stable/42614445?seq=1 ) which says, in part (p. 285):
<< [Albertz] places the exilic age from 587/6 to 520 B.C. . . [He] deals with different biblical conceptions of the exile. Albertz refers to the irony that, since there is no coherent description of the exile in the Bible, the Bible itself has only a gap to offer for the period he is going to describe. What we do find are a few short descriptions of the beginning and the end of the exilic period, as well as some sporadic information. It remains a major question why the exile is not portrayed in a more comprehensive manner in the Bible. . . Part two . . . treats specifically the history of the exilic period. Again, Albertz calls attention to the difficulty that the exilic period, similar to the pre-monarchic and the late Persian ones, suffers from a complete lack of sources, and must be regarded as a "dark age" in the history of ancient Israel. . . Albertz then provides us with a short review of the history of the Neo-Babylonian Empire (626-539 B.C.). . . Albertz sets out to discuss the never-ending problem of how many deportations there were, as well as their dates. There were, according to Albertz, three different deportations. They may be dated, respectively, to the years 597 B.C., 587 B.C., and 582 B.C. >>
A deportation, by definition, results in an exile. Therefore Albertz clearly states that there were THREE SEPARATE EXILES. He lumps them together into "the exilic age from 587/6 to 520 B.C." This in no way supports ScholarJW's claim of only "one Exile", because an "exilic age" is by definition a period during which more than one exile occurs.
Apparently ScholarJW Pretendus is both stupid and dishonest enough to claim that Albertz's reference to an "exilic age" means "one Exile". It does not. As a Wikipedia article on "Babylonian captivity" states ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_captivity 😞
<< The Babylonian captivity or Babylonian exile is the period in Jewish history during which a number of people from the ancient Kingdom of Judah were captives in Babylon. . . The dates, numbers of deportations, and numbers of deportees given in the biblical accounts vary. These deportations are dated to 597 BCE for the first, with others dated at 587/586 BCE, and 582/581 BCE respectively. . . After the fall of Babylon to the Persian king Cyrus the Great in 539 BCE, exiled Judeans were permitted to return to Judah. >>
So the Wikipedia article also lumps all of the deportations into one period of exile -- not just "one Exile".
The article displays a chronological chart based on Albertz's book, which lists the above deportation events and also states:
<< [Jehoiakim] began giving tribute to Nebuchadnezzar in 605 BCE. First deportation, purportedly including Daniel. >>
So the Wikipedia article clearly lists FOUR DEPORTATIONS AND FOUR INSTANCES OF EXILE -- just as I, Ann O'Maly, JW Insider and others have clearly documented.
Information similar to the above is found in the Google Books link to Albertz's book given by JW Insider.
Case closed.

"...If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you."
According to this i would conclude how processes in WTJWorg, that suggests how "new light and brighter day" brings "the truth", actually they brings nothing but human error and myths. Ultimately, that means false teachings. If these people or their predecessors were ever branches on the vine, then something happened in the meantime that caused them not to remain in His Word. When they asked for something on their, GB meetings, for "guidance" or for "knowledge and understanding" they obviously don't get that.
Multiple changing or "clarification" of same doctrines is quite strong evidence how "their ask whatever they wish", Father didn't hear and/or did't want to respond. Even theological things that have not changed for a long time are not proof that they are correct. We have the opportunity to see a discussion of the 607 BCE. It’s a really long discussion, but it shows how WTJWorg scholars are wrong in their claims.

But, as much as we talk on here and else where, nothing much seems to be happening.
Will it be a cleansing of the Watchtower / JW Org, or will it be the formation of a new 'organisation', before Judgement time ?   
I use the term 'organisation' in the losest way, but there needs to be a 'coming together' of the True Anointed remnant. That coming together need not be in a physical way though.  Earthwide communication is now so easy that people do not need to gather in person. Besides which, God could communicate through Christ directly if He so wishes... But when and how ?  Are the True Anointed waiting for a 'signal' from God through Christ ?  If indeed there are thousands of True Anointed still living, then they would be a 'great army' of servants of God and Christ.  With the guidance and power of Holy Spirit, nothing could stop them completing any task that is asked of them. 
 

The subject regarding FDS is, have to be, the question of the quality of the characteristics of the individual and the fidelity of the individual to the teachings of Jesus and his instructions. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the "Governing Body" sees itself wrongly and puts itself in the position of Administrative Manager who Governs over people and does so internationally over/above every and each congregation and individual in that congregation.
A man's inclination (in this case a bad inclination) is to rule or govern over others, and to determine for them what and how they should believe and act.
Sharing, giving food by meals does not involve determining how that food should be “digested” by someone. GB brings to the table the food that is not "healthy correct". But they order everyone at the table to eat it because it is the best food in the world. If someone refuses to eat, then they try to convince him that he is wrong, that he is disobedient, that he does not understand enough, that he has no faith, or that he is an apostate who opposes Jesus.
Did Jesus place them over people, the household? No, because it is the opposite of what Jesus taught: So Jesus called them together and said, “You know that those regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their superiors exercise authority over them. But it shall not be this way among you .... - Mat 20, Mark 10
 

The subject regarding FDS is, have to be, the question of the quality of the characteristics of the individual and the fidelity of the individual to the teachings of Jesus and his instructions. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the "Governing Body" sees itself wrongly and puts itself in the position of Administrative Manager who Governs over people and does so internationally over/above every and each congregation and individual in that congregation.
A man's inclination (in this case a bad inclination) is to rule or govern over others, and to determine for them what and how they should believe and act.
Sharing, giving food by meals does not involve determining how that food should be “digested” by someone. GB brings to the table the food that is not "healthy correct". But they order everyone at the table to eat it because it is the best food in the world. If someone refuses to eat, then they try to convince him that he is wrong, that he is disobedient, that he does not understand enough, that he has no faith, or that he is an apostate who opposes Jesus.
Did Jesus place them over people, the household? No, because it is the opposite of what Jesus taught: So Jesus called them together and said, “You know that those regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their superiors exercise authority over them. But it shall not be this way among you .... - Mat 20, Mark 10
 

They state they were appointed as the “faithful and discreet slave”.
A question frequently asked, since they are not inspired, how did they receive this message from God, to know they should appoint themselves in this position?  Use some logical reasoning; they compare themselves to not only the apostles but even Moses – all inspired men, prophets and teachers chosen personally by God and Jesus Christ.  It takes total arrogance to make the assumption that God chose them to lead 8 million people, without inspiration from the Holy Spirit.  It takes total blindness for these people to believe that He has!  (Exod 3:10-12; John 15:16; Acts 9:15) (Mark 4:12; 1 Cor 2:14)
Since they are not inspired, they lean on their “Helpers” to share the workload of putting food on the spiritual table. (Ezek 44:6-9)  Are the Helpers inspired?  Someone has to be, in order to live up to their proclamation that God directs the organization. 
What about the anointed ones in the congregations? (Male or female – God is not partial, Gal 3:28; Rom 2:29)  Could they have some “inspiration” to share?  Do they know truth?  (1 John 2:27)
If they did act on the spirit given them through an anointing, what happens if their heart tells them that the GB are wrong in their teachings? (2 Cor 1:21,22) What happens if they choose to speak up, to defend truth?  To defend Jesus Christ as their Head? (Eph 4:25; 1 Tim 2:5-7)  They are ignored, silenced, and very possibly, disfellowshipped. (Ray Franz, as an example – one of probably thousands over the last century)  (John 16:2; Rev 13:15)  There is a huge army in place to take care of these matters - men, not appointed by God although JWs in general believe that once again, God even directs their appointment. (Dan 7:25; 8:24; Rev 9:4;13:7)  Can’t you see? The appointments by men are preferred over the authentic anointed appointments by God.
Let me tell you why God has nothing to do with appointing elders. When my husband was approached to be an elder, the body wrote the Society of their consideration; but also to let them know he wore a beard for medical reasons. (These men were desperate for help) The letter they received back said it was up to the body of elders to appoint him, and to be aware of possible consequences for their choice.  There was no Holy Spirit involved, no prayer uttered; only the opinion of men from the top, down to the congregation level just like it happens in any other organization.  Up to that point I had believed that the GB actually prayed over each elder appointment, and received the answer from God. In fact, an elder told me this.  Don’t be fooled, JWs.  God would not choose men to serve Him, when His priests were anointed specifically to fill the role as shepherds. (Mal 2:7; John 21:17; Matt 28:16-20; John 15:8; 1 Pet 2:5,9; Rom 12:1; Gal 6:9)  
 “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, a curse be on him!  As we have said before, I now say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you received, a curse be on him!”  Gal 1:8,9
 
If the GB was directed by Christ’s Holy Spirit, the Spirit would aid in leading the anointed members together, to teach truth.  Jesus performed miracles while on the earth, couldn’t he do the same from heaven?  The GB cannot claim to be a “faithful slave” of Christ, yet also reject their own brotherhood.  (1 Cor 12; 1 John 3:10-12; Matt 24:48-51)
“Be of the same mind toward one another. Do not set your mind on high things, but associate with the humble. Do not be wise in your own opinion.”  Rom 12:16
“God resists the proud,
But gives grace to the humble.”
6 Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time” 1 Pet 5b,6
 Or, are some of these men total imposters in more ways than one.  If anointed, they have become “Israel’s” harlots by transgressing their covenant of life in Christ. (Rev 17:1-6)  Yet, perhaps some are total “Gentile” imposters, never to have been anointed to begin with – never appointed as a priest of God. (1 Pet 2:5,9)
And no -  if they reject their anointed brotherhood, refusing to acknowledge each member as necessary; refusing to acknowledge that this anointed body when working together would soar in speaking God’s truths, they are no longer under the covenant of life.  They have disconnected from the Head and become the “head” of the body they have chosen, the “Gentile” elders.  (Rev 11:1,2)
“ Let no one cheat you of your reward, taking delight in false humility and worship of angels, intruding into those things which he has not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, 19 and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body, nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God.”  Col 2:16-19
Wake up, JWs.   These men have shoved the anointed in Christ, into a back corner. (Isa 51:23)  Selfish power, not love, is their driving force in this organization.  Power over you, and especially over “Israel”. (Ezek 21:21,22,24,25) Deceit, not truth, is the driving spirit behind this organization and its leadership. (Matt 24:24) It is established on the ground, and in the realm where politics, riches, power and authority has become the bedrock of the GB’s “inspiration”. What spiritual entity offers these things? (Luke 4:5-7; Rev 9:1; 13:11) What spiritual entity would just as soon destroy Christ, and those part of his Body? (Rev 12:3,4,7) Can’t you see that this signifies a spiritual war based on deceit? (Eph 6:12;Rev 13:5-7; 16:13-16)  The holy priesthood has been absorbed into a nation and has lost its identity.  It appears that they would rather remain captive to falsehoods, than to open the door for Christ. ( Matt 25:6;Rev 3:18-20) Oh, how I wish all of you would leave darkness behind; and simply, turn to the light and truth of Jesus Christ.  (John 14:6)
The opposition that I usually receive to comments such as this, is in defense of the GB and the organization; whereas the Temple priesthood means little to nothing. (1 Cor 3:16,17; Eph 2:20-22) There is no defense given for Jesus Christ. (Dan 8:25) What sort of heavy spiritual blindness are JWs under that would cause them to exalt a man-made corporation, over a heavenly Temple/House built by God? (Rev 13:1,2,4; 16:13-16) The pride that JWs carry in their heart, in believing that doctrine of men and proven falsehoods can be called truth…believing that God has blessed their efforts through manpower (no inspiration by God remember? Zech 4:6)...while His house/dwelling/Temple of “living stones” lies in ruins, will ultimately bring them to their knees.  (Ezek 21:6,7; Luke 19:41-44; 2 Thess 2:9-12; Rev 18:4-8)
You reside in the “home” of the man of lawlessness – the disgusting thing that “sits” in the Temple of God and “tramples”/rules over the anointed priesthood. How I wish you could perceive this danger.  (Matt 24:15,16; 2 Thess 2:3,4)
“But we have renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. 3 But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, 4 whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them. 5 For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your bondservants for Jesus’ sake. 6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” 2 Cor 4:2-6
Christ's Return - When?

I know that comment was not to me but to AlanF. I think it reveals your goal. You have pretty well established the fact that you are here to try to provoke chaotic arguments. And as answers are resolved, you will pretend they were not resolved by simply repeating the weaknesses of your argument as if they were strengths. The resulting chaos works. It produces 60 pages of confusion which was obviously the goal all along. It works because it plays on the prejudices of those who were never going to look things up for themselves anyway. I've seen how this same method works in other areas of ideology and propaganda, both online and to a large extent in the media. I've seen revealed documents that show that it is a preferred covert method of government agencies, too. (I.e., when all else fails, create chaos.) 
From chaos, people will pick up from where they started, and will often dig in their heels even a little deeper to the ideas they held before the chaos. And it's not that people never change their views. But, unfortunately, there have even been several studies that show that the "side" with the least facts and least evidence tends to win more adherents after a lengthy argument is observed.
So, we could go on and on. I notice that you often throw out some "bait" which must be intended to keep an argument going. Sometimes you appear to give in and agree when it's too tough to hold your ground. But then a few pages later you'll pretend you hadn't learned a thing, after all. Even when you "walk it back" as you did with your "two exilic scholars" you moved the goalposts and gave two new reasons why you had recommended them. It turns out that it is easy to show that even these new criteria are wrong. You claim they have stated:
But even this is wrong. Fortunately, the first 70 or more pages of Rainer Albertz book "Israel in Exile" is available here for free: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Israel_in_Exile/Xx9YzJq2B9wC?hl=en&gbpv=1
I wrote up a summary, but rather than lengthen the conversation here, I'll leave it to you to figure out where you went wrong.
I think that honest-hearted Witnesses will see through these attempts to cloud the issue. Not everyone will, of course. You might even be some kind of hero to the ones who won't look up things for themselves. There are people here who wish to be right at all costs, and to protect their ideology they project their issues onto anyone else with strong evidence they don't want to deal with. But as bad as it sounds, being right at all costs is still a bit better than being wrong at all costs.

Seeing it all together like that, I feel shamed for responding so directly to his nonsense. But it was the same nonsense that was already answered several times. He simply can't be trusted on this topic.

... it is only an interpretation of Genesis 2:5 and an assumption.
 

I noticed you missed out the first bit. To call it a House of God and to do guided tours, is a form of worship.
The GB expect JWs and possibly others to marval at it. That 'wonderful' construction.  
It really is making it into an idol..   They are really just buildings, built to do a job, but the GB are making them into someting like a temple. Like i have said, Bethel, House of God.  

I don't have an army of elders to "direct" as your GB does.  (Rev 13:11,12)  And, I am no longer drunk on this false prophet/Harlot's wine, as JWs are; who choose the organization over serving God "whole souled".   Rev 18:4-8
"They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen."  Rom 1:25
This is the "beating" the anointed under the GB rule and elder rule, must accept:
"Anointed Christians do not feel that they should spend time only with other anointed ones, as if they were members of a club. They do not try to find other anointed ones so that they can talk about being anointed or meet in groups to study the Bible. (Galatians 1:15-17) The congregation would not be united if anointed ones did this. They would be working against the holy spirit, which helps God’s people to have peace and unity."  wt 16/1 pg 22-23
Why does the GB not want the anointed to meet together as one Body under Christ?  Because the Holy Spirit working within a united anointed Body, is a threat to the power of a wicked slave and its army of drunkards.
"But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth. I do not write to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it and because no lie comes from the truth. "  1 John 2:20,21
"As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him."  1 John 2:27
 
 
 
 
 
 

1 Pet 2:5,9; 1 Cor 3:16,17; Eph 2:20-22 - The anointed priesthood and Temple/House of God
“Representing the royal priesthood are appointed elders, who serve in positions of responsibility in congregations of Jehovah’s people around the earth. These men deserve our respect and wholehearted support, whether they are of the anointed or not. Why? Because, through his holy spirit, Jehovah has appointed the older men to their positions.” w02 8/1 p. 13-14
Are God’s laws contradictive?
"Appoint Aaron and his sons to serve as priests; anyone else who approaches the sanctuary is to be put to death.”  Num 3:10
"Rather than challenge their authority, we truly appreciate our hardworking elders!"
"Say to rebellious Israel, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Enough of your detestable practices, people of Israel! 7 In addition to all your other detestable practices, you brought foreigners uncircumcised in heart and flesh into my sanctuary, desecrating my temple while you offered me food, fat and blood, and you broke my covenant. 8 Instead of carrying out your duty in regard to my holy things, you put others in charge of my sanctuary."  Ezek 44:6-9
"Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.  He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God."  2 Thess 2:3,4
"And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming."  2 Thess 2:8