AlanF

GB members are responsible not only about CSA cases in Organization, but also for many misconceptions on doctrinal matters and interpretations of Bible.
For example, how old humans are. Before few moments TV program on one channel giving documentary about archaeological research in Emirates and how they found place where people lived, not before 10.000 years as they thought previously, but before 125.000 years. Until that moment my JW wife looking with interest on program, but after this "detail" she said, "now they are boring" and switched program on other channel   :))))

I'm already mocking you for your gullibility.
Yes, the world has a lot of potentially fatal problems. But they have nothing to do with anything predicted by the Watchtower Society with regard to its ridiculous interpretations of Matthew, Mark, Luke, Revelation, Daniel, etc. for "the generation of 1914". Indeed, all those interpretations have already proved false.
The 'world' may well end because of man-induced climate warming, but it will have nothing to do with "Bible based" JW predictions of "the end".

She had not been alone in that reasoning. My wife' mother gave same lesson to her ;))) Imagine how many miles Croatia and your country have distance, but The Same Teaching moves around heads of JW's. Tell me someone, please, how is possible that some individual in USA start to make gossips about 1975 and how that wrong idea ended in one little town in one communist Balkan state ???  :)))))
Have in mind how we talking about generation borne in 1961. In 1968/69 they start to go to Grammar school. Here we have 8 years (you have 10) of this school. And 1975 is so close .... There is no chance to finish school before 1975 Armagedon :)))))
Definition of dogmatism
1: the expression of an opinion or belief as if it were a fact : positiveness in assertion of opinion especially when unwarranted or arrogant 2: a viewpoint or system of ideas based on insufficiently examined premises Merriam Webster source   stating your opinions in a strong way and not accepting anyone else's opinions: Cambridge source   Every ideology we facing is dogmatic !!   

Anna said:
I was taught the same thing in the late 1960s about 1975.
I don't believe I said in 2000, but by 2000. If not, that's what I should have said, because that's what the first two references explicitly say: "a work that would be completed in our century" and "within our twentieth century, the "battle in the day of Jehovah" will begin". Can't get any clearer than that.
"Insinuated" is the wrong word for what those charlatans did.
Nope, it's very specific. "Within the decade ending in 2020 Britain will be out of the EU." Nothing open about that.
Two things: Samuel didn't think this up by himself -- the Society taught him. The Society puts 'experiences' like that in its publications for a reason -- to tell JWs what they ought to be thinking.
You keep forgetting what Jesus warned his followers: do not follow anyone who claims to represent him and God, and says "the due time for the end has approached". That's what he meant by "keep on the watch", because his followers could not possibly know in advance when the end had approached. He even said,"if you think you know -- that's not it!"
Sure, after proclaiming every which way that it was God's prediction not his.
Of course it was. Did you read the links I gave you?
Which shows that the Bible Students under Russell did not have God's holy spirit guiding them, even though they claimed they did. Russell even said, using the royal "we": "These are God's dates, not ours."

James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
Those examples don't revise history -- they are history.
But there are hundreds of examples of Watchtower writers revising 'problematic' Watchtower history. I did a study some years ago examining several hundred statements about what the Bible Students believed about 1914 before that date arrived. Only a handful were truthful. Most were deceptive in the sense that they conveyed a wrong view about what was believed, but without a flat-out lie. A couple of dozen just flat-out lied, like "the Bible Students believed that Christ would return in 1914, and that Armageddon would begin then." The truth was that Russell taught that both events had already occurred in 1874, six years before he published an account of 1914 in the 1880 Zion's Watch Tower.
My favorite example of such mealy mouthed deception is from the Proclaimers book (p. 163). Speaking about what Rutherford and company taught in the decade after 1914, it said:
<< As the years passed and they examined and reexamined the Scriptures, their faith in the prophecies remained strong, and they did not hold back from stating what they expected to occur. With varying degrees of success, they endeavored to avoid being dogmatic about details not directly stated in the Scriptures. >>
Note that expression "endeavored to avoid being dogmatic". It doesn't say that they succeeded in avoiding being dogmatic, so the statement is not technically a lie. But it gives the strong impression that the main goal of the Bible Students under Rutherford was to avoid being dogmatic -- which simply reading Watchtower literature beyond 1914 proves is not true. Rutherford actually taught that what was written in The Watch Tower was equal to the Bible in authority, including his 1925 prediction of Armageddon where he self-admittedly "made an ass of" himself.
Exactly what most JWs do when confronted by information like the above.
Of course it is. Tell that to Watchtower leaders.

Not necessarily. That's a rough guide, is all. The best guide, I think, is the consensus of competent scholars over a long period of time. Even then, no one can be sure that we really possess the original manuscripts, because there are many examples where, for example, the Masoretic text differs significantly from the LXX, which many argue is based on an older and more authentic Hebrew text. Of course, if a bona fide ancient Hebrew text from 300 BCE or earlier is found, that would throw a big monkey wrench into Biblical textual criticism.

James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
I suspect that this is true in all other language translations.
I completely agree -- in principle. In practice, with the Bible we're dealing with three dead languages, so there exist no fluent speakers. Nevertheless, I think competent scholars still do a pretty good job of translating. That's esecially so when independent scholars arrive at essentially the same translations.
Pretty spotty, I expect.

Anna said:
The Society made direct statements as well as more subtle suggestions. Take a gander:
<< How thrilling that must have been for Paul and Barnabas-sailing to their first foreign assignment! The apostle Paul was spearheading the Christian missionary activity. He was also laying a foundation for a work that would be completed in our century. >> January 1, 1989 Watchtower, p. 12
Note that "in our century" was changed to "in our day" in the bound volume and in the CDROM Library.
Note that when the following statements were made, the Society was teaching that "the generation of 1914" meant the group of people alive in 1914 who survived until "the end".
<< Shortly, within our twentieth century, the "battle in the day of Jehovah" will begin against the modern antitype of Jerusalem, Christendom. >> -- "The Nations Shall Know That I Am Jehovah"-How? - 1971
<< And if the wicked system of this world survived until the turn of the century, which is highly improbable in view of world trends and the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, there would still be survivors of the World War I generation. However, the fact that their number is dwindling is one more indication that “the conclusion of the system of things” is moving fast toward its end. >> -- October 15, 1980 Watchtower, p. 31
<< It has been thrilling to see the fulfillment of Jesus’ sign showing that the Kingdom was established in the heavens in that momentous year 1914. And Jesus has told us to rejoice at seeing the dark storm clouds of Armageddon gathering since that time. He has told us that the “generation” of 1914—the year that the sign began to be fulfilled—”will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Matthew 24:34) Some of that “generation” could survive until the end of the century. But there are many indications that “the end” is much closer than that! >> -- March 1, 1984 Watchtower, pp. 18-19
<< The Time for a Change Is Near!
Carole, from France, has a “marvelous hope” and foresees, for the near future, “something marvelous—not at all like the world we live in.” Samuel, a 15-year-old youth from the same country, also believes in a complete change: “For the year 2000, I visualize a world transformed into a beautiful paradise! But I don’t think that either the present world or its rulers will live to see that day. . . We are living in the last days of the system of things.” Ruth, a German girl of 16, also expresses her confidence in these changes: “I know I’m not smart enough to change the world and make things run right. Only Jehovah, our Creator, can and will do that soon.” >> November 8, 1986 Awake!, pp. 7-8
 

Anna said:
It's gross deception. Why? Because it deliberately gives a completely false picture of what the Bible Students said.
That's like saying the Nazi's tried hard not to be dogmatic about Nazism, but didn't always succeed.
Tell me if the statements quoted below about 1918 and 1920 are dogmatic or not.
The Finished Mystery, 1917, pages 62, 64, said with great authority:
<<
The data presented in comments on Rev. 1:1... prove that the Spring of 1918 will bring upon Christendom a spasm of anguish greater even than that experienced in the Fall of 1914.
The awakening of the sleeping saints, A.D. 1878, was just half way (three and one-half years each way) between the beginning of the Times of Restitution in 1874 and the close of the High Calling in 1881. Our proposition is that the glorification of the Little Flock in the Spring of 1918 A.D. will be half way (three and one-half years each way) between the close of the Gentile Times and the close of the Heavenly Way, A.D. 1921.
>>
These predictions failed. More forceful language was used in the predictions of a terrible destruction due to come on Christendom's churches and their members in 1918, with their dead bodies strewn about unburied. Pages 484-485 said:
<< Also, in the year 1918, when God destroys the churches wholesale and the church members by millions, it shall be that any that escape shall come to the works of Pastor Russell to learn the meaning of the downfall of "Christianity." >>
Page 513 said:
<< In the year 1918, when Christendom shall go down as a system to oblivion.... God will cause the nations to shake with gigantic revolutions. >>
The book also predicted stupendous events for 1920. On page 258 it said:
<<
Even the republics will disappear in the fall of 1920...
Every kingdom of earth will pass away, be swallowed up in anarchy...
The three days in which Pharaoh's host pursued the Israelites into the wilderness represent the three years from 1917 to 1920 at which time all of Pharaoh's messengers will be swallowed up in the sea of anarchy.
>>
On page 542 it said:
<< As the fleshly-minded apostates from Christianity, siding with the radicals and revolutionaries, will rejoice at the inheritance of desolation that will be Christendom's after 1918, so will God do to the successful revolutionary movement; it shall be utterly desolated, "even all of it." Not one vestige of it shall survive the ravages of world-wide all-embracing anarchy, in the fall of 1920. >>
How about the following statements about 1925? Were they dogmatic or not?
The book Millions Now Living Will Never Die, 1920 Edition, said on pages 89-90:
<< . . . we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old . . . >>
The May 15, 1922 Watch Tower said:
<<
We have no doubt whatever in regard to the chronology relating to the dates of 1874, 1914, 1918, and 1925.
It was on this line of reckoning that the dates 1874, 1914, and 1918 were located; and the Lord has placed the stamp of his seal upon 1914 and 1918 beyond any possibility of erasure. What further evidence do we need?
Using this same measuring line... it is an easy matter to locate 1925, probably in the fall, for the beginning of the antitypical jubilee. There can be no more question about 1925 than there was about 1914.
>>
I could go on with this for a long time, but here's the link on this that I already gave you: https://critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/part-3-statements-concerning-1918-1925.html
Not dogmatic? Please!
The split is more like 90-10 when it came to anything to do with the Gentile Times stuff the Proclaimers book was discussing.
Believe what you like. Quotes like the above say different.
Time to go beddie-bye.

James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
I suspect that this is true in all other language translations.
I completely agree -- in principle. In practice, with the Bible we're dealing with three dead languages, so there exist no fluent speakers. Nevertheless, I think competent scholars still do a pretty good job of translating. That's esecially so when independent scholars arrive at essentially the same translations.
Pretty spotty, I expect.

TrueTomHarley said:
Again we witness Orwellian crimestop.
The point, Einstein, is that these JWs did not make this nonsense up for themselves, but read the predictions for 2000 in Watchtower publications. Do a little looking on the jwfacts website and you'll find some quotes. Or read some in my response to Anna above.
Yes indeed. That paragon of scholastic aptitude gets all of the Real Soon Now nonsense from the Watchtower Society.
     
Are you really this stupid? 1941, 1975, 2000 and Real Soon Now are certainly within peoples' lifetimes. 1975 is NOT arguable, as the links I posted prove.
Unfortunately, JW leaders' counsel on that has often been accompanied by predictions of specific years to watch out for: 1914, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1941, 1975, 2000.
We continue to witness Orwellian crimestop.
     
TrueTomHarley said:
I did not start this -- others did.
As the criticisms of fundamental JW beliefs pile up, JW apologists pull out all the stops to avoid discussion.
Here we see TTH sticking his fingers in his ears, shouting La-la-la-la-la! and doing his best to sidestep and deflect issues that show his cult leaders in a truly bad light.

TrueTomHarley said:
Nonsense. The fact is that I'm quite objective about these things, and as a result have strongly disagreed with some critics of the NWT. You're simply too stupid to understand that, as evidenced by your comments below:
Wrong on both counts. A classic instance of the fallacy known as The False Dilemma.
So what?
Franz was insane but brilliant. A sort of idiot savant of religion. Such people are capable of feats far beyond those of mortal men.

James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
Well -- sometimes.
Indeed -- something that high-control-group leaders like the JW Governing Body always forget. They dictate their version of "a good conscience" to the group members and boot out all who disagree. Thus, members either adopt the leaders' conscience, or they shut up.

Srecko Sostar said:
To be more precise, interpretations of 'yohm' are such personal interpretations. The translation itself is not much open to discussion, as virtually all Bible translations use "day".
Quite so. The original NWT Committee was comprised mostly of gophers like Albert Schroeder who did busy-work like making cross references. A Greek name George Gangas helped a bit with the Greek translation, but he had no education, and his Greek was modern Greek, not 1st century Greek.
The only one who more or less knew what he was doing was Fred Franz, who had a year or two of Greek in college before he joined the Bible Students, but had no education at all in Hebrew. He was entirely self-taught in Hebrew. It seems that much of Franz's knowledge of Hebrew came from looking up words in Hebrew-English lexicons and looking at many Bible translations. He also elicited help from a scholarly Jew living in Brooklyn, and from at least one recognized Bible scholar (Goodspeed?) who produced his own partial Bible translation.
In 1994 I met one other actual WTS scholar who seemed competent, but of course he had nothing to do with the original New World Translation. He died about 20 years ago. He was a Romanian named John Albu, who immigrated to the U.S. around 1970, and quickly became a JW, and soon an "anointed one". He soon joined Bethel and worked on translation and chronology stuff. He told me that he was educated in Europe in Hebrew, Greek and other languages. Eventually serious health issues forced him out of Bethel, but he continued to work closely with the Writing Staff. He worked as a doorman for a hotel in Manhattan. It's fairly certain that Albu did much of the research that resulted in the infamous chapter 14 of the 1981 WTS book "Let Your Kingdom Come", written by GB member Lloyd Barry. He told me that part of the reason he became a JW was that the NWT was so fabulously accurate.
I suspect that Franz and Albu would strongly object to the new NWT. While it's far more readable in many areas, it violates Franz's dictum that the NWT should be literal to a fault, being more of a "dynamic translation" in the spirit of the New International Version. Of course, Freddie always skewed his translations in favor of pre-existing Watchtower doctrine, sometimes stretching Hebrew and Greek meanings to their limits, and occasionally past those limits.
My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that on the whole both versions of the NWT are translationally at least as accurate as the best other translations. In a handful of cases I think it's more accurate than most. They all have inaccuracies and various warts, but in different areas. Much of the criticism of the NWT comes from Christian scholars who are obligated by their religions to argue in favor of doctrines like the Trinity, and so often use really bad arguments to criticize the NWT. I think that Fred Franz was a brilliant but insane man who fell into C. T. Russell's cult at an early age and never recovered.

Anna said:
The Society made direct statements as well as more subtle suggestions. Take a gander:
<< How thrilling that must have been for Paul and Barnabas-sailing to their first foreign assignment! The apostle Paul was spearheading the Christian missionary activity. He was also laying a foundation for a work that would be completed in our century. >> January 1, 1989 Watchtower, p. 12
Note that "in our century" was changed to "in our day" in the bound volume and in the CDROM Library.
Note that when the following statements were made, the Society was teaching that "the generation of 1914" meant the group of people alive in 1914 who survived until "the end".
<< Shortly, within our twentieth century, the "battle in the day of Jehovah" will begin against the modern antitype of Jerusalem, Christendom. >> -- "The Nations Shall Know That I Am Jehovah"-How? - 1971
<< And if the wicked system of this world survived until the turn of the century, which is highly improbable in view of world trends and the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, there would still be survivors of the World War I generation. However, the fact that their number is dwindling is one more indication that “the conclusion of the system of things” is moving fast toward its end. >> -- October 15, 1980 Watchtower, p. 31
<< It has been thrilling to see the fulfillment of Jesus’ sign showing that the Kingdom was established in the heavens in that momentous year 1914. And Jesus has told us to rejoice at seeing the dark storm clouds of Armageddon gathering since that time. He has told us that the “generation” of 1914—the year that the sign began to be fulfilled—”will by no means pass away until all these things occur.” (Matthew 24:34) Some of that “generation” could survive until the end of the century. But there are many indications that “the end” is much closer than that! >> -- March 1, 1984 Watchtower, pp. 18-19
<< The Time for a Change Is Near!
Carole, from France, has a “marvelous hope” and foresees, for the near future, “something marvelous—not at all like the world we live in.” Samuel, a 15-year-old youth from the same country, also believes in a complete change: “For the year 2000, I visualize a world transformed into a beautiful paradise! But I don’t think that either the present world or its rulers will live to see that day. . . We are living in the last days of the system of things.” Ruth, a German girl of 16, also expresses her confidence in these changes: “I know I’m not smart enough to change the world and make things run right. Only Jehovah, our Creator, can and will do that soon.” >> November 8, 1986 Awake!, pp. 7-8
 

Srecko Sostar said:
To be more precise, interpretations of 'yohm' are such personal interpretations. The translation itself is not much open to discussion, as virtually all Bible translations use "day".
Quite so. The original NWT Committee was comprised mostly of gophers like Albert Schroeder who did busy-work like making cross references. A Greek name George Gangas helped a bit with the Greek translation, but he had no education, and his Greek was modern Greek, not 1st century Greek.
The only one who more or less knew what he was doing was Fred Franz, who had a year or two of Greek in college before he joined the Bible Students, but had no education at all in Hebrew. He was entirely self-taught in Hebrew. It seems that much of Franz's knowledge of Hebrew came from looking up words in Hebrew-English lexicons and looking at many Bible translations. He also elicited help from a scholarly Jew living in Brooklyn, and from at least one recognized Bible scholar (Goodspeed?) who produced his own partial Bible translation.
In 1994 I met one other actual WTS scholar who seemed competent, but of course he had nothing to do with the original New World Translation. He died about 20 years ago. He was a Romanian named John Albu, who immigrated to the U.S. around 1970, and quickly became a JW, and soon an "anointed one". He soon joined Bethel and worked on translation and chronology stuff. He told me that he was educated in Europe in Hebrew, Greek and other languages. Eventually serious health issues forced him out of Bethel, but he continued to work closely with the Writing Staff. He worked as a doorman for a hotel in Manhattan. It's fairly certain that Albu did much of the research that resulted in the infamous chapter 14 of the 1981 WTS book "Let Your Kingdom Come", written by GB member Lloyd Barry. He told me that part of the reason he became a JW was that the NWT was so fabulously accurate.
I suspect that Franz and Albu would strongly object to the new NWT. While it's far more readable in many areas, it violates Franz's dictum that the NWT should be literal to a fault, being more of a "dynamic translation" in the spirit of the New International Version. Of course, Freddie always skewed his translations in favor of pre-existing Watchtower doctrine, sometimes stretching Hebrew and Greek meanings to their limits, and occasionally past those limits.
My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that on the whole both versions of the NWT are translationally at least as accurate as the best other translations. In a handful of cases I think it's more accurate than most. They all have inaccuracies and various warts, but in different areas. Much of the criticism of the NWT comes from Christian scholars who are obligated by their religions to argue in favor of doctrines like the Trinity, and so often use really bad arguments to criticize the NWT. I think that Fred Franz was a brilliant but insane man who fell into C. T. Russell's cult at an early age and never recovered.

James Thomas Rook Jr. said:
Well -- sometimes.
Indeed -- something that high-control-group leaders like the JW Governing Body always forget. They dictate their version of "a good conscience" to the group members and boot out all who disagree. Thus, members either adopt the leaders' conscience, or they shut up.

Srecko Sostar said:
To be more precise, interpretations of 'yohm' are such personal interpretations. The translation itself is not much open to discussion, as virtually all Bible translations use "day".
Quite so. The original NWT Committee was comprised mostly of gophers like Albert Schroeder who did busy-work like making cross references. A Greek name George Gangas helped a bit with the Greek translation, but he had no education, and his Greek was modern Greek, not 1st century Greek.
The only one who more or less knew what he was doing was Fred Franz, who had a year or two of Greek in college before he joined the Bible Students, but had no education at all in Hebrew. He was entirely self-taught in Hebrew. It seems that much of Franz's knowledge of Hebrew came from looking up words in Hebrew-English lexicons and looking at many Bible translations. He also elicited help from a scholarly Jew living in Brooklyn, and from at least one recognized Bible scholar (Goodspeed?) who produced his own partial Bible translation.
In 1994 I met one other actual WTS scholar who seemed competent, but of course he had nothing to do with the original New World Translation. He died about 20 years ago. He was a Romanian named John Albu, who immigrated to the U.S. around 1970, and quickly became a JW, and soon an "anointed one". He soon joined Bethel and worked on translation and chronology stuff. He told me that he was educated in Europe in Hebrew, Greek and other languages. Eventually serious health issues forced him out of Bethel, but he continued to work closely with the Writing Staff. He worked as a doorman for a hotel in Manhattan. It's fairly certain that Albu did much of the research that resulted in the infamous chapter 14 of the 1981 WTS book "Let Your Kingdom Come", written by GB member Lloyd Barry. He told me that part of the reason he became a JW was that the NWT was so fabulously accurate.
I suspect that Franz and Albu would strongly object to the new NWT. While it's far more readable in many areas, it violates Franz's dictum that the NWT should be literal to a fault, being more of a "dynamic translation" in the spirit of the New International Version. Of course, Freddie always skewed his translations in favor of pre-existing Watchtower doctrine, sometimes stretching Hebrew and Greek meanings to their limits, and occasionally past those limits.
My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that on the whole both versions of the NWT are translationally at least as accurate as the best other translations. In a handful of cases I think it's more accurate than most. They all have inaccuracies and various warts, but in different areas. Much of the criticism of the NWT comes from Christian scholars who are obligated by their religions to argue in favor of doctrines like the Trinity, and so often use really bad arguments to criticize the NWT. I think that Fred Franz was a brilliant but insane man who fell into C. T. Russell's cult at an early age and never recovered.

TrueTomHarley said:
Um, I was alive for 1975, 2000 and Real Soon Now. My mother was alive for them and 1941. Old Freddie Franz was alive for all of those false predictions.
You really have a bad case of pathological lying.
The prediction for 2000 was made at various times from the 1970s through 2000 itself. Real Soon Now started about 1914 and continues.
HAHAHAHAHAHA! JW rules, not the Bibles'.
Ever read Deuteronomy 18? JW leaders have always claimed to speak in God's name and have always made false predictions. Deut. 18 calls such charlatans false prophets.
How about Luke 21:7-8? That's explicit not to follow anyone who claims to speak in God's name and says about the time for "the end": "The due time has approached".
False. The language in Watchtower publications is explicit. You've obviously read the quotes, so your rationalizing comment is yet another outright lie.
Oh? So JWs are supposed to view Watchtower predictions of "the end" as in consequential?
I heard several JWs in the 1980s talking about 2000. In online forums in the late 1990s, many JW apologists threatened: "You'll get yours when 2000 rolls around!"
And today we see Arauna vaguely warning that Real Soon Now world leaders will do all manner of vile deeds. And of course, the Society itself makes this warning at every District Convention.
Not arguable at all. Following Orwellian crimestop principles, you've simply dismissed from your mind what you've read and, on some level, know very well it is what the false prophets known as JW leaders said. For example, the old Aid book and an Awake! article clearly stated Adam and Eve were born in the same year, just months apart. A late 1960s Watchtower had a big spread on 1975 and one article was titled, "Why Are You Looking Forward To 1975?" Do you need a refresher?
Well, here are a couple of refreshers:
https://critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/part-3-statements-concerning-1918-1925.html
https://critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/1975-new-info.html
 

TrueTomHarley said:
Um, I was alive for 1975, 2000 and Real Soon Now. My mother was alive for them and 1941. Old Freddie Franz was alive for all of those false predictions.
You really have a bad case of pathological lying.
The prediction for 2000 was made at various times from the 1970s through 2000 itself. Real Soon Now started about 1914 and continues.
HAHAHAHAHAHA! JW rules, not the Bibles'.
Ever read Deuteronomy 18? JW leaders have always claimed to speak in God's name and have always made false predictions. Deut. 18 calls such charlatans false prophets.
How about Luke 21:7-8? That's explicit not to follow anyone who claims to speak in God's name and says about the time for "the end": "The due time has approached".
False. The language in Watchtower publications is explicit. You've obviously read the quotes, so your rationalizing comment is yet another outright lie.
Oh? So JWs are supposed to view Watchtower predictions of "the end" as in consequential?
I heard several JWs in the 1980s talking about 2000. In online forums in the late 1990s, many JW apologists threatened: "You'll get yours when 2000 rolls around!"
And today we see Arauna vaguely warning that Real Soon Now world leaders will do all manner of vile deeds. And of course, the Society itself makes this warning at every District Convention.
Not arguable at all. Following Orwellian crimestop principles, you've simply dismissed from your mind what you've read and, on some level, know very well it is what the false prophets known as JW leaders said. For example, the old Aid book and an Awake! article clearly stated Adam and Eve were born in the same year, just months apart. A late 1960s Watchtower had a big spread on 1975 and one article was titled, "Why Are You Looking Forward To 1975?" Do you need a refresher?
Well, here are a couple of refreshers:
https://critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/part-3-statements-concerning-1918-1925.html
https://critiquesonthewatchtower.org/old-articles/2006/02/1975-new-info.html
 

Secondly. Mr Harley has no idea whatsoever, just how many JW 'leaders' are involved in CSA.“
BECAUSE THE GB ARE HIDING PAEDOPHILES IN THE JW ORG BY WITHHOLDING THE 20 PLUS YEARS OF DATABASE INFORMATION FROM THE AUTHORITIES. 
Hope that helps him to understand it. 

TrueTomHarley said:
Another lie. Plenty of cases have been brought (or would have been brought if not for statutes of limitations) where elders were the molesters.
His comments amounts to calling you out on your double standards: You basically say, "We're ok because the world is worse".
A deceptive rationalization. It's saying that Christians are above the world.
Then explain the Governing Body's actions toward homosexual pedophile Leo Greenlees.
LOL at the Orwellian crimestop!

TrueTomHarley said:
I did. She punted.
Let's see: we have 1914, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1941, 1975, 2000, and Real Soon Now.
That's one alright.

This is not rocket science. Pay attention to existing court action. With rare exception it focuses on families in which there was child sexual abuse—often step-families—and elders are involved only in that it was not reported to authorities.
”Secondly. Mr Harley has no idea whatsoever, just how many JW 'leaders' are involved in CSA.“
I know it for everyone else, though. It is every case that comes to trial—and there are no end of them involving leaders of anything.
When was the last time you read of court action against a priest because there was child sexual abuse going on among a family of his parish and he did not stop it? 
When was the last time you read of the Boy Scouts getting sued because there was child sexual abuse going on in a Scout’s family and the Scoutleader did not stop it?
When what the last time you read of child sexual abuse involving the UN that centered around workers discovering CSA in a family and not reporting it?
This one is almost too stupid to answer. How can you be so childish?
“Shining as illuminators in the world” is also comparing Christians to the world. To acknowledge that within your ranks you have the same issues that afflict the rest of mankind, but that overall, they are far less serious (in not involving the leaders, whereas that is the pattern elsewhere) is hardly the evil that you make it out to be. 
It’s “The LORD.” Better get used to saying it. The only ones wanting anything to do with the Name is JWs, which you have left because it is not perfect. Get cracking on your replacement organization—you who have said that God could raise up a “genuine, pure” anointed within about ten years before the end comes. Shoot me a text when that has happened.

Quote @TrueTomHarley  " No. You are preoccupied with this, and @4Jah2me lives and breathes it. But anyone else takes into account that there is no sizable organization on earth where CSA is not an issue, and no one that is not being sued—and in most cases, it is the leaders who are the abusers, something very rare with JWs, whose leaders are just accused of not reporting. "
Lets break this down. Firstly Mr Harley (just like Aurana) likes to compare everything to the 'world'. We all well know that the 'world' belongs to Satan the devil. So in effect Mr Harley likes to compare the GB and it's JW Org to Satan the devil. Wow, great comparison.
Secondly. Mr Harley has no idea whatsoever, just how many JW 'leaders' are involved in CSA. 
The proving point will come WHEN the Paedophile Database of 20 years + is 'opened up'. Whilst the GB and it's lawyers keep that 'can of worms' closed, then there is no way of knowing.
I am of the opinion that Almighty God wants His name (or the name JWs use) made clean.  Therefore all efforts by the GB and their lawyers will eventually fail. That 'can of worms' will be opened up, for all the earth to see. Then and only then, can Mr Harley truly decide, with full facts, exactly what percentage of JW Leaders are guilty of Child Sexual Abuse.  
It would also be interesting to know exactly whom Mr Harley is speaking of when he uses the term 'leaders' when applied to the JW org. For me it is from the GB right down to Ministerial Servants. But I hasten to add that I do not know all the ranks and titles and I think titles change on a yearly basis. 
I think @Srecko Sostar has already covered these above points but i needed to add my concerns. 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separate comment  
Quote @James Thomas Rook Jr.  What if in many cases of the Bible, particularly in Genesis .... what we have translated as year or years ... should have been translated as EPOCH(S)?
What excuse did the Society / JW Org come up with to suddenly wipe out the 7,000 year creative day theory ?  
And if NO ONE IN INSPIRED OF HOLY SPIRIT , then anything could be true or false. To the point that the 'All Scripture is inspired of God.. ' scripture, may only refer to the Hebrew writings, as it was written before the Greek writings were completed and certainly before the Greek writings were gathered together to form one 'book'. 
Hence we truly need a TRUE Anointed Class to be able to receive God's Holy Spirit to give us true 'Food at the proper time' 

You know that, do you?
You're wrong. I told you earlier: Greenlees was a pedophile in 1964 when he was appointed a Director, and before that according to one of his child victims, Mark Palo, who has put his story online. Greenlees was 72 when he was forced off the GB. Pedophiles don't start up at age 72 -- they just keep doing what they've long been doing. And even back in 1984 it was well known that pedophiles are never cured.
Furthermore, if holy spirit had anything to do with the Governing Body -- which formed the judicial committee that found Greenlees guilty of child molestation -- it would never have 'directed' Nathan Knorr to appoint Greenlees as Director in the first place, or it would have seen to it that Greenlees was not appointed a GB member in 1971, or that he was removed long before 1984.
This all proves that holy spirit has nothing to do with appointing the elders of the Governing Body, and by extension, any other elders.