Pudgy

Sloppy sloppy. Where do you get your quotations? The above quote is a lie. Here's the actual quote:
*** w68 8/15 p. 499 par. 30 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah’s loving and timely purposes. Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence on earth. It does not necessarily mean that 1975 marks the end of the first 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh creative “day.” Why not? Because after his creation Adam lived some time during the “sixth day,” which unknown amount of time would need to be subtracted from Adam’s 930 years, to determine when the sixth seven-thousand-year period or “day” ended, and how long Adam lived into the “seventh day.” And yet the end of that sixth creative “day” could end within the same Gregorian calendar year of Adam’s creation. It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years.
 

If It’s a profession that you took on voluntarily to interpret the word of God, it’s better to be good at it the first time.
ESPECIALLY if you are collecting money at the same time.
Selling Windows 3, or 4, or 5 is problematic when the very first Windows started at Windows 95.
 

Words so profound and wise you could make a religious symbol.  <==><

I also found great wisdom, understanding and healing in the words of a flexible rubber, battery powered mounted fish on a wall plaque that turned to face me when I pushed the button. The mouth moved and said ….
“You can be happy …. if you want to.“!

Can’t we all just ….. get along?

The problem with apostate literature is that the people that read it, the great majority, do not have the background or analytical skills that most of us here on this forum have.
When I read the book “ 30 Years a Watchtower Slave” l had sufficient experience and background to understand the fallacies of the assumptions and therefore the fallacies of the conclusions that the author drew.
For example, he recounted that before World War I that (paraphrased) “ … the teachings of the Watchtower were taking over all of Europe, and especially Germany … but FORTUNATELY World War I intervened …”.
WOW!
To me, that was encouraging that JWs did in fact have “The Truth”.
If the Watchtower had been successful, perhaps there would have been no World War I … but the author preferred the war.

I agree with Thinking 100%.
Well …. The first paragraph….. not the second paragraph.
I know Bethel is totally hosed, and know at least all the things Thinking knows about the specifics … perhaps even more. I knew these things 40 years ago, when my children were born at 3 year intervals.
Knowing all these things, I recognized that Jehovah’s Witnesses are probably the best bet mankind has to serve God.
Yeah, “new light” is often a joke, and embarrassing to see taught, but ALL THE OTHERS ARE WORSE.
I explained all this to my 3 children in detail when they were young … and encouraged them to full theocratic activity  …. Bethel, pioneering, overseas work … the list is extensive …. anyway!  
 
Of COURSE they viewed me as a rebellious apostate for giving them all that background information, but each of their lives has turned out demonstratively better than my own.
I suppose that is the wish of every parent.
Yeah … Bethel is a nut house, run by nuts … but many men join the Marines, knowing all there is that is wrong with it before they sign up …. and do it anyway!
Apparently Jehovah puts up with a lot of crap about theology, caring more about obedience and a pure heart, than   getting details entirely correct.
I think Jesus said something about that when some group was teaching “Jesus”, and it was not the Apostles, and Jesus said (paraphrased), “leave them alone, those that are not against us are for us …”, or something like that.
 

I was just thinking of that expression "Jehovah allowed it." You might think it flippant for me to say, Jehovah also allowed the Holocaust. But, I once hired a consultant who was a Jewish rabbi, and who also had some specific IT skills we needed. His conversations about religion were usually guarded, but I asked him if he thinks that so many Jews are either atheist or agnostic because of the Holocaust. He said that ha-Shem (God) allowed it as a test to see who would still have faith. To me, that sounded rather distasteful, and I don't know if it's a common belief among Jews. In one sense, we almost have to believe that it's partly true of all bad things that Jehovah allows, but what kind of a test is that?
I think we should still fall back upon the idea that we are all imperfect and not to be trusted, and yet, if an individual or group will gather in Jesus' name to accomplish a ministry with the right heart condition, then their effort will be blessed. And I think that what proved a right heart condition among Russell and early Bible Students included the desire not to kill fellow humans (no war) the desire to see Jehovah as a real approachable and understanding, loving person (no Hellfire, no Trinity), and a desire to spread the good news of the Kingdom. To the extent that this desire was motivated by love, the work was blessed. This blessing is manifested especially in the fact that it attracts more persons of like motivation. 
The failures and imperfections aren't really "tests" so much as they are the natural interaction among highly imperfect persons. True Christianity is set up this way so that our own motivations are made manifest by how we see the conduct and faith of others working out, and our desire to apply spiritual growth in our own lives. It's the idea of pressing on to maturity, chewing solid food, and leaving the milk behind. Yet there are always some of us who are still more comfortable and satisfied with the "milk," and there are always some who will be serving "milk" instead of "solid food." The GB serve both. No matter where we are on this food maturity spectrum, we should be welcoming to all the others no matter where they are on that food spectrum. -- And then, what some obsess over as items of solid food, thinking these are "deep things of God," are probably the milkiest of all.
The most solid food of all, for the most mature, is simply love out of a purely motivated heart.
(1 Timothy 1:4, 5) Really, the objective of this instruction is love out of a clean heart and out of a good conscience and out of faith without hypocrisy.

Not particularly well-veiled. The problem as I see it is that it emboldens those who are already tyrants and bullies. When these become elders, they encourage more of the same cult-like behavior. I'm suspicious of anyone who is inclined to think of himself or any other human more than it is necessary to think. It's the same with the obsessive interest in the historical lint of the organization. If you want to do this with the actual bible, bible history, biblical archaeology and apologetics, then great! But this poking around the septic tank of the organization is unhealthy and unwholesome.

What gets me is when we keep going on about obeying instructions in order to survive Armageddon. This weekends WT study mentioned it agaiin....comparing the GB to Joshuah and Zerubabel. (Otherwise the study was very good). "Sometimes God’s people received direction that did not appear to be practical from a human standpoint but turned out to be lifesaving". 
The WT gave a couple of current examples....just stopping short of mentioning getting vaccinated against covid (thank goodness).
Are we not putting too much emphasis on the organization being the saving power, in other words our salvation being dependent on instructions coming from imperfect men? Whereas salvation is clearly going to come from Jesus, and we may be anywhere doing anything when Jesus saves us. Or is the mark for survival from the secretaries ink horn contingent on having our backpack ready or hunkering down somewhere?? As if Jesus cannot save us uless we listen to these types of instructions. I always thought the criterion was dependent on pure worship. This whole life we live is a test of our loyalty to Jesus and Jehovah. Everything we do today and tomorrow, the choices we make with respect to pure worship is what places that mark on our foreheads. And after all these tests we encounter every day, then there will be another test to see how obedient we are to the GB?? Give me a break! Past Bible examples do show that there were certain procedures the people had to follow in order to survive, BUT the situation at Armageddon will be incomparable, it cannot be said to parallel any other situation before then. I don't know why we keep obsessing that it is the same. It's like regurgitating types and anti types again....drawing parallels where there are none.

Are you kidding me? Who can tolerate that stuff?
Everyone but me, apparently. It’s my bad, I know. But whether it was right or wrong, it’s 100 years old and we’ve long since moved on, either building upon or discarding it. 
I’m glad there are people who take interest in the old stuff, and I won’t say I don’t have any. Yes, I did recently purchase it at the eclectic book store. Yes, I did issue an off-the-cuff remark to Srecko that’d I’d finish it and get back to him. But there are just too many things of higher priority to me.
It’s a little like when Minh offered me a treat he really really enjoyed and it was horrible. “I do like it,” I told the hopeful fellow, “it’s just like I like other things more.”
I may get to it someday, about the same time I read Rud’s book.

It’s okay JWI…I hadn’t actually finished my comment when I posted…and I’m just grateful the teaching has been changed….Jesus was a stumbling block for his own people…..and I beleive the organization at times has been like that with their own…a stumbling block.".the sadness of it at times is just overwhelming for those who dont survive.

Walter:
I realize I am not talking about an apostate book, but which do you think has better survived the last 100 years …. The 20 or so books written by Russel and Rutherford, and others, circa 1914, which if taught now would be considered apostasy, or the writings of Edgar Rice Burroughs, circa 1914, who among about 20 or so books, wrote “Tarzan of the Apes”?
( a town North of Los Angeles was renamed Tarzana, California in honor of Edgar Rice Burroughs, and recently one of the most expensive movies ever made “John Carter” from his book “Princess of Mars”).
I await your promised harsh, negative response.

The qualification “in effect” makes the quote not a direct quote from the Watchtower,  but a comparison of similarity.(?) of Christendom’s sentiments and the Watchtower’s sentiments.
At least that is how I read it.

I suppose JWI will clarify.
I do know that the 9-1/2 years the Society was affiliated with the United Nations as an NGO, there were puff pieces in the Awake! Magazine about the United Nations.

 
What the NGO supporting articles stated was precisely fair and accurate, but the puffery was to fulfill their obligations to the UN to show they supported the IDEALS of the UN.
My guess is the articles by themselves were sent to the UN, and not the whole Awake!.

The problem with apostate literature is that the people that read it, the great majority, do not have the background or analytical skills that most of us here on this forum have.
When I read the book “ 30 Years a Watchtower Slave” l had sufficient experience and background to understand the fallacies of the assumptions and therefore the fallacies of the conclusions that the author drew.
For example, he recounted that before World War I that (paraphrased) “ … the teachings of the Watchtower were taking over all of Europe, and especially Germany … but FORTUNATELY World War I intervened …”.
WOW!
To me, that was encouraging that JWs did in fact have “The Truth”.
If the Watchtower had been successful, perhaps there would have been no World War I … but the author preferred the war.

The qualification “in effect” makes the quote not a direct quote from the Watchtower,  but a comparison of similarity.(?) of Christendom’s sentiments and the Watchtower’s sentiments.
At least that is how I read it.

I suppose JWI will clarify.
I do know that the 9-1/2 years the Society was affiliated with the United Nations as an NGO, there were puff pieces in the Awake! Magazine about the United Nations.

 
What the NGO supporting articles stated was precisely fair and accurate, but the puffery was to fulfill their obligations to the UN to show they supported the IDEALS of the UN.
My guess is the articles by themselves were sent to the UN, and not the whole Awake!.

He might not answer so I will ….probably the books like Tarzan of the apes edgar rice may have outsold  Russell and Ruthfords books. …that’s what Jesus said…not many would listen…and the apostasy you talk of was what they thought was wrong coming out of BTG with all that garbage still on their backs…and just being human I guess…personally if I have found Russell the genteel one and much more humble than  Rutherford ,…Rutherford changed quickly things so important and  spiritually  correct about Jesus and the ark and waters of the flood..represent him to it now representing the org...now one comments on that here but the ramifications of such a massive blunder and probably pride pushed so many good brothers and sister away..
I actually think and I could be wrong the beating of the sheep began then…I’m so relieved the modern day GB returned that to the original understanding,,,,,mind you some things Russel thought and wrote needed to be changed…sorry for butting in..hope that was okay and I hope Walter answers you NICLEY!

For the life of me I do not understand why you are so harsh with regard to my books. They are 100% loyal, entirely devoted to defending the faith from attacks.  
I am not that bad Shultz who teams up with a non-believer. I am not that bad JWI who signals nonalignment with several current beliefs. 
I honestly don’t understand it. You have at least Tom Irregardless and Me. I know you do because I gave you a copy and at the time you were very gracious over it.
What changed?

Pudgy is right. It's not written in the same words. It's written the way I quoted the same sentiment from the February 15, 1919 Watch Tower, p.51. In fact, the timing of that article might even make someone guess that it was a way of showing agreement with the similar, but much more direct, statement from the "Federal Council of Churches" (FCC) just a few weeks earlier. They both praise the objective/purpose of the League, and both convey that it is in line with the kingdom message foretold in the Bible. Also if you read the entire comment from the FCC you see that they also didn't make it the equivalent of God's Kingdom, just a political expression of it. It was very common in those decades for the Watchtower to express agreement with political happenings that they understood to be aligned with the expectations about the Kingdom. This was especially true of Zionism, movements with respect to "capital vs. labor," and various politicians of the time who were even depicted as the near equivalent of "prophets."
Edited to add an example:
For example, the 1924 Golden Age (now Awake!), on page 149, says:
We understand now, why Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, who like Judge Rutherford is permeated with the real Biblical and prophetic spirit, ceases not in his discourse to defy the devil, and throw (morally) an inkwell into his face, as the deceased Luther did. We understand also why the Premier of the Labor Party turns his back on the League of Nations, of which formerly he was an apostle, and draws near to the Americans whose eyes are opened.
Judge Rutherford cites, in addition to prophecies from Isaiah, Ezekiel and Amos, from Mr. MacDonald: "There is neither betterment nor peace in Europe. The governments are powerless. The year 1924 is worse than 1914." Again he [Rutherfod] quotes the prophet David Lloyd George: "A new chapter opens in the history of Europe, with a climax of horror such as the world has never witnessed."

The qualification “in effect” makes the quote not a direct quote from the Watchtower,  but a comparison of similarity.(?) of Christendom’s sentiments and the Watchtower’s sentiments.
At least that is how I read it.

I suppose JWI will clarify.
I do know that the 9-1/2 years the Society was affiliated with the United Nations as an NGO, there were puff pieces in the Awake! Magazine about the United Nations.

 
What the NGO supporting articles stated was precisely fair and accurate, but the puffery was to fulfill their obligations to the UN to show they supported the IDEALS of the UN.
My guess is the articles by themselves were sent to the UN, and not the whole Awake!.

The qualification “in effect” makes the quote not a direct quote from the Watchtower,  but a comparison of similarity.(?) of Christendom’s sentiments and the Watchtower’s sentiments.
At least that is how I read it.

I suppose JWI will clarify.
I do know that the 9-1/2 years the Society was affiliated with the United Nations as an NGO, there were puff pieces in the Awake! Magazine about the United Nations.

 
What the NGO supporting articles stated was precisely fair and accurate, but the puffery was to fulfill their obligations to the UN to show they supported the IDEALS of the UN.
My guess is the articles by themselves were sent to the UN, and not the whole Awake!.

The WHO may not be fooling around this time! But that's under another topic. (FWIW, my favorite of theirs was Behind Blue Eyes.)

I think you are right. This was the main issue that the "Stand Fasters" publicized. The Watchtower and Rutherford said that there was no problem in buying War Bonds, because it showed we were "friends" with the United States.
But I notice the date on the pamphlet you posted. January 1919. So this was also just about the exact same time when the Watchtower had declared its basic "support" for the League of Nations. In effect, the Watchtower was calling it 'the political expression of God's Kingdom on earth." Naturally they didn't think it in any way "replaced" God's Kingdom, but thought of it as a kind of expression of God's Kingdom because it had the same shared purpose and goals. The February 1919 Watchtower said:
“We cannot but admire the high principles embodied in the proposed League of Nations, formulated undoubtedly by those who have no knowledge of the great plan of God. This fact makes all the more wonderful the ideals which they express. For instance, it has been made plain by President Wilson and the advocates of his ideas that the proposed League of Nations is more than merely a league to enforce peace. They would not have us consider it to exclusively from the standpoint of politics or of military relations. It should be considered as fully from the economic and social points of view. The President’s idea seems to be that the League of Nations which he proposes would stand for world service rather than mere world regulation in the military sense, and that the very smallest of nations shall be participants in its every arrangement. In other words, his idea undoubtedly is that the league shall not be established merely for the purpose of promoting peace by threat or coercion; but that its purpose, when put into operation, will be to make all nations of earth one great family, working together for the common benefit in all the avenues of national life. Truly this is idealistic, and approximates in a small way that which God has foretold that he will bring about after this great time of trouble.” — Watch Tower,  February 15, 1919,  p.51
l have seen it pointed out that it was also a crazy coincidence that the Watchtower was here "wondering admiringly" at the League, even using the same words about its "wonderful" expressions and that we cannot but "admire" it's high principles. This was an unfortunate use of words when we consider that the 1984 New World Translation translated Revelation 17:8, purportedly about the same League of Nations, as follows:
(Revelation 17:8)  The wild beast that you saw was, but is not, and yet is about to ascend out of the abyss, and it is to go off into destruction. And when they see how the wild beast was, but is not, and yet will be present, those who dwell on the earth will wonder admiringly, but their names have not been written upon the scroll of life from the founding of the world.
The Stand Fasters claimed that Rutherford's attitude and words were compromising toward the world and its politics.

He is many different people, don't you already know that ?  

Please can you tell me where it was written? Ever since I know for myself, and while I was JW, I have been taught in the Congregation that this claim was made by the Catholic Church and how blasphemous it is on their part.
quote from "Revelation book":
As early as December 18, 1918, the body now known as the National Council of the Churches of Christ in America adopted a declaration that declared in part: “Such a League is not a mere political expedient; it is rather the political expression of the Kingdom of God on earth. . . . The Church can give a spirit of good-will, without which no League of Nations can endure. . . . The League of Nations is rooted in the Gospel. Like the Gospel, its objective is ‘peace on earth, good-will toward men.’” - https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/index/r1/lp-e?index-ref=1101988033%3A30%2C1101988033%3A38%2C1101988033%3A44%2C1101988033%3A83