Ann O'Maly

Finally, I've had time to read through this thread. Some observations:
I see that no scriptural support has yet been given for the idea that there will be a resurrection during the 1000 years. Where does the idea come from, then? 
It appears to be based on assumptions, i.e.,
1. that 'Judgment Day' isn't a specific point in time but a long period lasting 1000 years;
2. that there are two groups of Christian believers;
3. that the 'deeds' people will be judged on are those done during the 1000 years and not those done before they died ...
... which comes from the interpretation of Rom. 6:7 that once a person dies, they have been 'acquitted' from their sin ...
... in which case, the resurrected start with a clean slate but are still raised in imperfect bodies that can sin again, and it's really during the 1000 years that they are able to avail themselves of the merit of Christ's sacrifice (paradoxically by working toward perfection) ...
... which means that Christ's sacrifice doesn't atone for their sins committed before death in this present age, as their own deaths paid for their sins ...
... which goes against the gospel message (Rom. 3:21-26).
If Jesus' death does atone for sins committed before a believer's death, then why isn't that individual 'declared righteous for life' like the 'anointed' are? 
And yet, even with regard to the 'anointed' who are regarded as being 'declared righteous for life,' there is judgment based on what they did 'while in the body':
2 Corinthians 5:10 - For we must all appear before the judgment seat of the Christ, so that each one may be repaid according to the things he has practiced while in the body, whether good or bad.
This judgment for the 'anointed' doesn't last for 1000 years, does it? And they are judged according to what they did before they died and were raised as spirit beings, right?
Why the different standards between two groups?
This raises another conundrum because, if Adam died, he was acquitted of his sin too. So why do JWs insist that in his case, his 'Adamic death' doesn't acquit him of his sin? Where is the scriptural support for the idea that he has fast-tracked, without passing 'Go' and collecting $200, straight to the 'second death'?
Melinda mentioned 'willful sin.' Isn't much of our 'sin' 'willful' in some way or another? What about David? Was his adultery with Bathsheba and murder of her husband involuntary, accidental? Manasseh's offenses against God with his child sacrifices and false worship - were those lesser sins than Adam accepting his wife's offer of forbidden fruit to eat? 
Eoin talked about there being a difference between 'immortality' and 'everlasting life,' and that humans cannot be immortal due to their nature. But then, wasn't it argued that angels are not immortal either (one of Melinda's posts)? So what does a being's human nature have to do with it?
And does 'immortality' mean 'cannot die' or simply 'does not die' because the person has been granted a spirit-generated body - whatever the nature? If an immortal person 'cannot die,' doesn't this limit God's power or make the immortal person as indestructible as the Creator? On the other hand, if immortality means one doesn't die, and that life continues indefinitely, forever, or everlastingly, no matter what body the rewarded believer is given, it will always be dependent on God's life-giving spirit, would it not?

What is the point of being on a forum if there is no personal opinion to present? I mean to regurgitate text from any source, without personal input,  does nothing to foster a discussion.  Isn't that what a forum is about? To foster discussion? 

Then "Adamic death" is actually the second death, the one in the lake of fire.  Aren't you saying that's the only death God could have been referring to in regard to Adam and Eve?
 
 

Excuse me, Eoin, you will have to offer some sort of evidence that I have in any way misrepresented JW beliefs in my statement that you are referring to:  Not so with the rest of JWs. Their faith in Jesus evidently doesn't give Jehovah the confidence to grant them immortality and he isn't so sure that they won't ever sin again.
In fact, what you went on to post actually substantiates that what I said is true about the beliefs of JWs, they don't expect to ever have everlasting life (other than their anointed class), they are told they will just have continuing life, for as long as they merit it on their own righteousness.
Having the perfection of Adam and Eve is not being saved. Having the holiness and righteousness of Jesus is what saves us; our belief in him gives us that and all of our sins are forgiven in God's sight because of that. Even the WTS recognizes this as a Bible teaching, it's just that they say it's only for a small segment of believers, numbering only 144,000, and not for any other believer. 
That's why Shiwii's question has still not been answered. There is no scripture that says there's a resurrection that takes place during the 1,000 years.  The resurrection that takes place at the end of the 1,000 years has been moved by the WTS to take place during the 1,000 years; and it has been changed from being a resurrection to being a self-help sort of educational program to teach people how to be as perfect as Adam was before he sinned, so that they can eventually meet all of God's standards mentally, morally, physically, and spiritually, and can then stand before God on their own merit rather than on the merit of Jesus Christ
Holly

Thanks for your reply, Melinda.
But you don't believe "Adamic death" is what Adam suffered, do you? 
The Lord God commanded the man, saying, “From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; 17 but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die.”
When God said to Adam, "you will surely die", was that a reference to what you call "Adamic death"?
Also, "progress to perfection"......where is that in the Bible in reference to the millennium?
 
Holly

I guess it would be argued that the jworg icon isn't used as an object of worship like the cross has been. However ...
Re-posting from an older jw-archive thread:
... the frequency of seeing arts, crafts, jewelry, buttons, bags, flower beds and so on with the jwdotorg logo strikes me as obsessive.
Obsessive with ... a website. The focus of attention has become increasingly centered on branding, or on cartoon characters, or on the org's new audio-visual mega-machine.
*** w50 6/15 p. 186 par. 38 A Victory Dedicated to Jehovah’s Honor ***
"There is this to remember concerning organizations generally. When young and growing, fighting their way up, zeal is strong and evangelistic; but when they have won their place and become strong and wealthy and respected they often lose their virile strength and become lax, fat, sluggish, and point with pride to their size, and put their directives above God’s commands. That has happened to the organizations of the big and prosperous, orthodox churches of Christendom. The organization is served and worshiped instead of the one it claims to represent, namely Jehovah God. But this snare will never catch Jehovah’s cleansed people today ... "
"But this snare will never catch Jehovah’s cleansed people today" - 65 years on from those words, and observing the recent trends developing, it appears to me that with all the emphasis on the 'seen' (2 Cor. 4:18; 5:7), JWs are walking headlong into that very snare.

That's because the discussion wasn't about a minor prioritizing working toward dedication over seeking a driving permit. The discussion was about a JW father withholding his child's driving permit to coerce him into getting baptized on the basis that, if he wasn't ready to handle a car, he wasn't ready to make a lifelong dedication/commitment to the Sovereign of the Universe and the Org that claims it exclusively represents Him.
I agree that Anthony Morris III and the father in my scenario are comparing apples and oranges when trying to equate the responsibility that comes with dedication and baptism (or marriage) to that of having a drivers permit ... which makes using that kind of coercive tactic with one's children all the more distasteful - my point all along.
 
 

I can see that. 
You agree that getting married has lesser gravity in the great universal scheme of things than baptism, right?
What if you overheard this conversation between a father and his mid-teen son?
"But dad, while I like the girl and we're friendly, I do not feel ready to make a lifelong commitment to her. I'm too young to get married."
"Oh yeah? Not ready? Well let's hold off on your driver's license, hey?"
"What? Dad? You're kidding, right? I'm 16. I'm ready to drive a car!"
"No, son. You're ready to handle a car but not ready for marriage, huh? You explain that to the girl's family." 
"What the hell, dad?"
Is the father being reasonable with his son?
Isn't the father using some form of coercion or blackmail to induce his son to get married?
If this isn't a form of coercion or blackmail, what is it?

Hi Ann,
Good point and good question.  I always wondered why "come to life" was interpreted so differently by the WTS in this passage..  As you pointed  out, in one instance they say "come to life" means one thing, and in the very next sentence "come to life" means something else.  And actually in the second instance they have it not meaning "resurrected" at all, but more like "self-improvement" (i.e. improving oneself thru study of WT publications until able to meet God's standards mentally, morally, physically, and spiritually---and can thereafter stand before God and continue to live based on ones own merit......continuing to live for as long as they don't sin and get annihilated in the lake of fire.)

I will show you exactly what you said and how you are reading into the scripture something that isn't there: 
 
again in verse 28 you seem to believe this takes place prior to the eradication of death, satan and hades.
Here is YOUR words:
Do you see here where you believe that Satan is still around? last sentence you wrote. 
What part of Satan still being around is everything subjected to Jesus? Its not. You need to go back and think this one through again, or clarify your position better. 
 
yes, however your timeline does not fit the timeline given in Revelation 20. It is only when ALL THINGS are then subject to Jesus does this happen and that is not until Satan, hades and death have been cast away (Rev 20:14), then the kingdom is handed back over. 
 
I am taking scripture as it is and basing my point upon it. You however still fail in providing scripture to support a resurrection DURING the 1000 year reign. 
This is your get out of jail free card, so you can run away from what scripture says, not me. I'm ok with that, seen it many many times. 

I know what an anomaly is, I just didn't understand your sentence.
David defected to Saul's and Israel's enemy, the Philistines. Wouldn't the establishment have viewed that as disloyal? 
My argument was a simple one: Loyalty to God may mean disloyalty to a religious leadership's actions or beliefs. 
You brought in 1 Sam. 24, and I referenced 1 Sam 27f. which raised the issue about David's loyalties. David's example underlined the point that loyalty to Jehovah comes over and above loyalty to a nation or human ruler, even if that meant one became an outcast in the eyes of God's anointed.
 

Another sweeping generalization. Many of the ones who left retained Bible Student/JW beliefs on these. 
Also, you need to realize that Christians who advocate the Trinity and hellfire have scriptural texts to back them up and would argue that the JW views are non-biblical. It's a matter of perspective.
Stayed 'where' or ... ?
John 6:68: Simon Peter answered him: “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life. 
Do you see the difference? It's not a 'where' but a 'whom.' Religious organizations can come and go and veer off the rails. Christians believe God and His Son are constants through all that and they are the ones who can save a believer in the end - not an organization.

So Moses was not prophesying in this instance, was he? 
 

'Persecution'? You are not being tarred and feathered, are you? Are you being imprisoned and tortured until you renounce Christ? Are you being thrown out of your homes and hounded out of town for being a JW? 
Expressing criticisms, concerns and reporting negative behavior about a religious group (which all will admit is an imperfect one anyway) is hardly 'persecution.' 

Jonah was accurately conveying Jehovah's message which made him a true prophet (cp. Jer. 14:14; 23:21). It was Jehovah who changed his mind about what was to befall Nineveh.
According to the Bible story, when he killed the Egyptian to avenge the abused Israelite (singular), he didn't think he was anointed for any special prophetic service by Jehovah. His commission only happened years later at the 'burning bush' incident.

*** w70 1/15 p. 38 Which Comes First—Your Church or God? ***

Notice that worship in “truth” is a must! It is therefore impossible to worship God acceptably without a deep love of the truth. The true Christian religion must be founded on the truth, not on traditions, creeds, dogmas and articles of faith that are often hard to understand because they defy all the faculties of reasoning with which God created us. Now what is the Christian standard for measuring truth? Is it not the Bible? So if there should prove to be contradiction between the tenets of a church that claims to be Christian and the plain statement of truth found in the Holy Scriptures, which should come first in your worship—your church or God’s Word, the Bible? What will be your answer if you sincerely desire to be “the kind of worshipper the Father wants” [referring to John 4:21-24]? 
 
When people of other religions stand up for what is objectively right or what they believe is right, JWs applaud them. E.g.
*** w05 9/1 pp. 25-26 Mennonites Search for Bible Truth ***

Facing Trials for the Truth
A few days later, the church elders came to the home of Johann’s family with an ultimatum for the interested ones: “We heard that Jehovah’s Witnesses visited you. You must forbid them to return, and unless you hand over their literature to be burned, you face expulsion.” They had had just one Bible study with the Witnesses, so this presented a formidable test.

“We cannot do as you ask,” replied one of the family heads. “Those people came to teach us the Bible.” How did the elders react? They expelled them for studying the Bible! This was a cruel blow indeed. The cart belonging to the colony cheese factory passed by the home of one family without collecting their milk, denying them their only source of income. One family head was dismissed from his job. Another was turned away from buying supplies at the colony store, and his ten-year-old daughter was expelled from school. Neighbors surrounded one home to take away the wife of one of the young men, asserting that she could not live with her expelled husband. Despite all of this, the families who studied the Bible did not give up their search for the truth.
How can you be sure that Jehovah wasn't using a congregation member to correct the Org. or elders? There are plenty of esteemed Bible examples who did just that and bucked against so-called 'theocratic order.'

So basically, Glenn, it looks like you are arguing that the phrase 'came to life' has a different meaning depending on the group. 
One group is resurrected to perfection.
The other group is resurrected to imperfection ... until they've 'achieved' sin-free perfection at the end of the 1000 years.
Where is the scriptural evidence that one group has to 'achieve' perfection during the 1000 years?
If one group is resurrected perfect, why can it not be that the other group is resurrected perfect but at the end of the 1000 years, in harmony with the timing contained in v. 5's parenthesis? 
 

So basically, Glenn, it looks like you are arguing that the phrase 'came to life' has a different meaning depending on the group. 
One group is resurrected to perfection.
The other group is resurrected to imperfection ... until they've 'achieved' sin-free perfection at the end of the 1000 years.
Where is the scriptural evidence that one group has to 'achieve' perfection during the 1000 years?
If one group is resurrected perfect, why can it not be that the other group is resurrected perfect but at the end of the 1000 years, in harmony with the timing contained in v. 5's parenthesis? 
 

Another sweeping generalization. Many of the ones who left retained Bible Student/JW beliefs on these. 
Also, you need to realize that Christians who advocate the Trinity and hellfire have scriptural texts to back them up and would argue that the JW views are non-biblical. It's a matter of perspective.
Stayed 'where' or ... ?
John 6:68: Simon Peter answered him: “Lord, whom shall we go away to? You have sayings of everlasting life. 
Do you see the difference? It's not a 'where' but a 'whom.' Religious organizations can come and go and veer off the rails. Christians believe God and His Son are constants through all that and they are the ones who can save a believer in the end - not an organization.

Most of us are not fully aware that Jesus is not our mediator unless we profess to be of the anointed class, the 144,000.
The Watchtower only used the word "mediator" with reference to Jesus Christ once in all of 2015, only a couple of times in 2014, never even once in 2013, once in 2012, and never once in 2011.
*** w15 1/15 p. 16 par. 14 Why We Observe the Lord’s Evening Meal ***
Jesus is the Mediator of the new covenant, and loyal anointed ones taken into it receive a heavenly inheritance.—Heb. 8:6; 9:15.
*** w14 10/15 p. 16 pars. 12-13 You Will Become “a Kingdom of Priests” ***
Moses was the mediator of the former covenant; Jesus is the Mediator of the new one. . . .
13 The new covenant relates to the Kingdom in that it produces a holy nation that has the privilege of becoming kings and priests in that heavenly Kingdom.
*** w13 *** NO MENTION
*** w12 1/15 p. 16 par. 1 Learn From ‘the Framework of Truth’ ***
Paul explained that the tabernacle was merely “a shadow of the heavenly things” and that Jesus became the Mediator of “a better covenant” than that mediated by Moses.
*** w11 *** NO MENTION
Other interesting mentions:
*** w10 3/15 p. 27 One Flock, One Shepherd ***
Jesus is the Mediator of that covenant, not a participant. As the Mediator, he evidently did not partake of the emblems.
*** w09 4/15 p. 27 Appreciating the Greater Moses ***
Value Christ as Mediator
14 Like Moses, Jesus was a mediator. A mediator acts as a bridge between two parties. Moses mediated the Law covenant between Jehovah and the Israelites. . . . In 33 C.E., Jehovah initiated a better covenant with a new Israel, “the Israel of God,” which became a worldwide congregation made up of anointed Christians. (Gal. 6:16) While the covenant mediated by Moses included laws written by God on stone, the covenant mediated by Jesus is superior. . . . Thus, “the Israel of God” is now God’s special property, ‘a nation producing the fruits’ of the Messianic Kingdom. (Matt. 21:43) Members of that spiritual nation are the participants in that new covenant.
*** w08 12/15 pp. 13-14 Appreciate Jesus’ Unique Role in God’s Purpose ***
“The Mediator of a New Covenant”
11 Read 1 Timothy 2:5, 6. Jesus is the “one mediator between God and men.” He is “the mediator of a new covenant.” (Heb. 9:15; 12:24) . . .The original-language word translated “mediator” is a legal term. It refers to Jesus as a legal Mediator (or, in a sense, an attorney) of the new covenant that made possible the birth of a new nation, “the Israel of God.” (Gal. 6:16) This nation is composed of spirit-anointed Christians, who form a heavenly “royal priesthood.” (1 Pet. 2:9; Ex. 19:6) . . . What does Jesus’ role as Mediator involve? Well, Jehovah applies the value of Jesus’ blood to those being brought into the new covenant. In this way, Jehovah legally credits them with righteousness. (Rom. 3:24; Heb. 9:15) God can then take them into the new covenant with the prospect of their becoming heavenly king-priests! As their Mediator, Jesus assists them in maintaining a clean standing before God.—Heb. 2:16.
One morning, at breakfast at Brooklyn Bethel, Brother Franz was exceedingly angry and the subject caught a lot of Bethelites by surprise. I saw a lot of people who were half asleep quickly perk up their heads when he said that there were certain people around who would merge everyone together and make Jesus the mediator of every Tom, Dick and Harry. That's because even most Bethelites thought that Jesus was our mediator. The teaching hadn't changed, but an article had come out just a few weeks earlier that clarified in more explicit terms that that Jesus was NOT the mediator for the "other sheep" (or "great crowd").
This was actually one of Brother Franz' favorite topics. He often reminded us that the Christian Greek Scriptures were only written for the anointed, and not the other sheep. He recalled the time in a similar speech, when only the anointed were called "Jehovah's Witnesses." He often hinted that he had held onto the teaching that the both Jesus and the anointed were "The Christ." This was a teaching that was started around 1879 and not changed officially until around 1961, if I remember right. Jesus was the "head" of the Christ, and the anointed were the "body" of the Christ. But without all 144,001 there was no Christ.
On a personal note, when they stopped mentioning this idea much after 2008, I thought it was about to be changed. (In the past, not mentioning a doctrine for over a year was considered to be a strong hint that a doctrine was about to be changed, or at least was under discussion for a change.) 2008 was the year that a couple of other doctrines were changed, too.
If there have been any recent hints that it would be reconsidered, I have missed them. It looks like a lot of people will remain a bit confused as to why Paul (in 1 Timothy 2:5,6) uses the expression the way he does.
Officially, our teaching is still as follows:
*** w79 4/1 p. 31 Questions From Readers *** 
Is Jesus the “mediator” only for anointed Christians?   At a time when God was selecting those to be taken into that new covenant, the apostle Paul wrote that Christ was the “one mediator between God and men.” (1 Tim. 2:5) Reasonably Paul was here using the word “mediator” in the same way he did the other five times, which occurred before the writing of 1 Timothy 2:5, referring to those then being taken into the new covenant for which Christ is “mediator.” So in this strict Biblical sense Jesus is the “mediator” only for anointed Christians.
 
*** w79 11/15 pp. 24-25 pars. 12-13 Benefiting from “One Mediator Between God and Men” ***
12 So Jesus Christ in heaven is the Mediator between God and the spiritual Israelites, while these are still in the flesh as men and women. Even within the membership limits of this small “holy nation” the mediatorship of Jesus Christ has expanded, for God has followed a certain order in admitting classes of persons into the new covenant. Thus, for about a year from Pentecost of 33 C.E., Jesus was the Mediator of only those spiritual Israelites who had been fleshly Jews or circumcised Jewish proselytes. About 3,000 of these were added to spiritual Israel on that day of Pentecost, 33 C.E. (Acts 2:10, 37-41) Then, likely in the following year (34 C.E.) as a side effect of the persecution by Saul of Tarsus, the “good news” about the Christ was preached in Samaria and the holy spirit ‘fell upon’ the baptized believers there. (Acts 8:15-17) From then on the mediatorship of Jesus was widened out to benefit spiritual Israelites who had been men and women of Samaria, Samaritans.
13 Two years now pass. Finally, in the autumn of 36 C.E., or three and a half years after Jesus’ death and resurrection, he begins to be mediator to a third class of spiritual Israelites, those taken out from the uncircumcised Gentiles, beginning with the Italian centurion, Cornelius.
*** w79 11/15 p. 26 par. 20 Benefiting from “One Mediator Between God and Men” ***
20 What, then, is Christ’s role in this program of salvation? Paul proceeds to say: “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men [not, all men], a man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all.”—1 Tim. 2:5, 6.
The part I marked in red, is not something added here for this post, but was included in the original 1979 WT (although not in red). This caused a lot of discussion at Bethel, and tended to put a lot of people on the interrogation block. I think that Brother Franz (FWF) reaction to the questions and discussion that came up around this point was probably the core of the "apostasy" and why it affected so many dozens of Bethelites in 1979 and 1980.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

That's not exactly accurate. It is true that we didn't initially quote the Bible as the the "basis" and that's because it was considered to be a direct "revelation" or "flash of light" -- sometimes called "lightning flashes from the holy temple". In fact, for many years the 1935 "revelation" was touted as evidence that Jehovah God and Jesus Christ were using Joseph Rutherford directly, because, just as Rutherford claimed, there was no more "holy spirit" with the organization since 1919. (Jehovah and Jesus were now dealing directly with the anointed in the temple, through the angels.)
For 50 years we sang Kingdom Songs with the words: 
"From God's holy temple / Lightnings flash and shine / That we may be guided / By his light divine."  - Song #63 (1984-2010), and Song #32 (1966-1984), and Song #17 (1950-1966), and Song #22 (1945-1950), Song #68 (1928-1945)
I have a feeling that most of us do not realize that the original "lightnings" doctrine was a replacement for the idea of guidance by the "holy spirit." Rather than bore anyone with the whole doctrine, I'll just quote short snippets. Note the time period of these articles and statements:
“But when the Lord Jesus comes to his temple and gathers his approved ones into the temple, is there any further need for the office of the holy spirit as a helper and advocate?  If not, then the advocacy of the holy spirit would there cease.  Jesus, being in the temple and with his chosen ones, would act for them directly.” (Watchtower, September 1, 1930 p. 263)
 
“It would seem that there would be no necessity for the ‘servant’ to have an advocate such as the holy spirit, because the ‘servant’ to have an advocate is in direct communication with Jehovah and as Jehovah’s instrument, and Christ Jesus acts for the entire body.” (Watchtower, September 1, 1930 p. 263)
 
"All at the temple will realize that their spiritual food comes to them from their Teachers, Jehovah and Christ Jesus..." -- Watchtower, May 1, 1934. p.131. [will explain later why this article is directly important to the discussion.]
 
“The holy spirit that had been the guide of God’s people, having performed its functions, was taken away, and the Lord Jesus himself, being present, represented his people and advocated in their behalf before Jehovah God, that is, in behalf of those who had fallen into distress because of their failure to properly use their lips in proclaiming the truth.” (Salvation, 1939 p. 217)
 
Of course, this is no longer our teaching. We now teach exactly the opposite: that the anointed "servant" has been especially guided by the holy spirit since 1919, even though Rutherford had long denied that this guidance had really been the work of the holy spirit since 1918 and 1919, when Jesus was supposed to have come to the the temple:
*** ip-1 chap. 25 p. 340 par. 20 The King and His Princes *** [Isaiah's Prophecy, 2000]
Happily, since 1919, Jehovah’s spirit has been poured out in abundance upon his people, restoring, as it were, a fruit-bearing orchard of anointed Witnesses, to be followed by an expanding forest of other sheep.
Oddly, this puts Joseph Rutherford, the key member of the "Governing Body" at that time, and therefore the key spokesman for the "faithful and wise servant" (FDS)  in the awkward position of denying the work of the holy spirit. But it was the best explanation for how it was possible to obtain "messages" that revealed truths that were not based on specific Biblical support. Up until about 1934, many Jehovah's Witnesses were still attributing "new light" and "new truths" and "guidance from beyond the veil" to communication with the apostles and other holy ones who had died. Special credit was given to Charles Taze Russell who was supposedly still running every aspect of the harvest work from beyond the grave.
“Though Pastor Russell has passed beyond the veil, he is managing every feature of the harvest work.” -- The Finished Mystery (Seventh Volume of Studies in the Scriptures).
Although Russell was the only one specificially named, we taught others were also supposedly communicating from beyond the grave. Communication with spirits was considered a grave sin for everyone else, but the Watch Tower Society had made an exception for itself because we believed then that the apostles had been resurrected in 1878. (And therefore any anointed who died since 1878 was immediately resurrected, and Russell would have been resurrected on October 31, 1916.) Note:
"And to the saints—‘We hold that it is a most reasonable inference, and one in perfect harmony with all the Lord’s plan, that in the spring of 1878 all the holy Apostles and other ‘overcomers’ of the Gospel Age who slept in Jesus were raised spirit beings, like unto their Lord and Master.'” (Finished Mystery, 1918 edition)
 
Apparently, Rutherford realized that this teaching appeared to be related to "spiritism" and said the following in 1930.
 
"The Lord used The Watchtower to announce these truths. Doubtless he used his invisible deputies to have much to do with it. This is not what some may regard as "spiritism", by any means; but it does mean that God can direct his people without any audible communication with them." - Rutherford, J. F., Light book 1, 1930, p. 64
Between 1929 and 1934, Rutherford had changed so many of Russell's teachings that it was apparently difficult to continue crediting Russell as that "deputy." It was time to stop teaching this doctrine. The resurrection of the apostles and "saints" (like Russell) had already been moved 40 years from 1878 to 1918. (Just as Jesus' presence had been moved 40 years from 1874 to 1914. The closing of the door to the kingdom of heavens had been 1881, but instead of 1921/2, this was now about to be moved to 1935. That's why in 1934, Rutherford said, what I started to quote above in the context of the absence of the holy spirit as guide:
“All at the temple will realize that their spiritual food comes to them from their Teachers, Jehovah and Christ Jesus, and not from any man. No one of the temple company will be so foolish as to conclude that some brother (or brethren) at one time amongst them, and who has died and gone to heaven, is now instructing the saints on earth and directing them as to their work.” –The Watchtower, May 1, 1934 p. 131
As of 1934, what Rutherford had himself taught and published since 1917, was now "foolish." 50-some years later our more recent book, "Revelation - Its Grand Climax at Hand" (1988 & 2006) didn't seem to get the memo, and went right back to allowing for communication with spirit creatures again. But notice that this is considered to be related to the same explanation for 1935 and the "lightning flashes." (I didn't include them, but several of the older references to "lightning flashes in Jehovah's temple" were with reference to the 1935 doctrine, probably because it was not a doctrine with a Biblical reference to back it up.)
“From the time of the apostle John and on into the Lord’s day, anointed Christians were puzzled as to the identity of the great crowd. It is fitting, then, that one of the 24 elders, representing anointed ones already in heaven, should stir John’s thinking by raising a pertinent question. “And in response one of the elders said to me: ‘These who are dressed in the white robes, who are they and where did they come from?’ So right away I said to him: ‘My lord, you are the one that knows.’” (Revelation 7:13, 14a) Yes, that elder could locate the answer and give it to John. This suggests that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today. For their part, those of the John class on earth got to learn the identity of the great crowd by closely observing what Jehovah was performing in their midst. They were quick to appreciate the dazzling flash of divine light that emblazoned the theocratic firmament in 1935, at Jehovah’s due time.” –Revelation: Its Grand Climax at Hand! p. 124-125
Using a kind of circular reasoning, this idea is expanded as proof of the first resurrection sometime between 1914 and 1935:
*** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 11 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
11 What, then, can we deduce from the fact that one of the 24 elders identifies the great crowd to John? It seems that resurrected ones of the 24-elders group may be involved in the communicating of divine truths today. Why is that important? Because the correct identity of the great crowd was revealed to God’s anointed servants on earth in 1935. If one of the 24 elders was used to convey that important truth, he would have had to be resurrected to heaven by 1935 at the latest. That would indicate that the first resurrection began sometime between 1914 and 1935. Can we be more precise? -- Watchtower, January 1, 2007, p. 28.
More recently, of course, we have said that we cannot be more precise, and in fact have stated that there is no direct evidence that the first resurrection has occurred yet, but will have to have occurred some time prior to Armageddon. This was already hinted at back in 2007.
*** w07 1/1 p. 27 par. 9 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
Reasonably, then, anointed ones who die before Armageddon are resurrected sometime between 1914 and Armageddon.
Therefore, we now teach that the resurrection has already occurred -- most likely prior to 1935. But Biblically, we can only state that it happens sometime before Armageddon. (I mention this because it is this kind of continued reliance on the 1935 date, even recently, that has led some Witnesses to believe that 1935 is still part of the official teaching about when the "door was closed" to the heavenly kingdom, and that after this date only "replacements" for those who proved unfaithful prior to 1935 would be chosen. If we held to this belief now, we would soon be in danger of replacing the entire number of pre-1935 anointed Bible Students and Jehovah's Witnesses with "new anointed" since 1935, and that would imply that ALL of the pre-1935 anointed had proven unfaithful. In spite of the content of the article, there are similarly many Witnesses who still believe that the first resurrection took place in 1918, but that the Watchtower didn't want to sound dogmatic to the public because, just like 1935, there was no specific Scripture. But the article changed it from a "fact" prior to 2007, to merely "an interesting possibility":
the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility.
Just one last point. The 1935 doctrine was finally turned into a scriptural doctrine as the fulfillment of a prophecy. This is something that Ann has already pointed out with references:
*** w07 5/1 pp. 30-31 Questions From Readers ***
From the late 1800’s until 1931, the main thrust of the preaching work was the gathering of the remaining members of the body of Christ. In 1931 the Bible Students took the Bible-based name Jehovah’s Witnesses, and in the November 15, 1933, issue of The Watchtower, the thought was expressed that this unique name was the “denarius” referred to in Jesus’ parable recorded at Matthew 20:1-16. The 12 hours mentioned in the parable were thought to correspond to the 12 years from 1919 to 1931. For many years after that, it was believed that the call to the heavenly Kingdom had ended in 1931 and that those called to be joint heirs with Christ in 1930 and 1931 were “the last” called. (Matthew 20:6-8) However, in 1966 an adjusted understanding of that parable was presented, and it became clear that it had nothing to do with the end of the calling of the anointed.
In 1935 the “great crowd” of Revelation 7:9-15 was understood to be made up of “other sheep,” Christians with an earthly hope, who would appear on the world scene in “the last days” and who as a group would survive Armageddon. (John 10:16; 2 Timothy 3:1; Revelation 21:3, 4) After that year, the thrust of the disciple-making work turned to the gathering in of the great crowd. Hence, especially after 1966 it was believed that the heavenly call ceased in 1935. This seemed to be confirmed when almost all who were baptized after 1935 felt that they had the earthly hope. Thereafter, any called to the heavenly hope were believed to be replacements for anointed Christians who had proved unfaithful.
(The replacement of the "unfaithful" theory had also been used as late as the 1920's to explain how the heavenly door had been shut in 1881, yet newly anointed were still showing up. I have a copy of one of the Society's letters to a Watchtower reader from 1922 stating this.)
The time period for the end of the heavenly calling had previously been considered to be 1881, and then 1931-1935. For the 30 years prior to 1966 the date was considered variably from 1931 to 1935. From 1966 to about 2007 it was almost always spoken of as just "1935." But back when that date was 1931, it was considered to be fulfilled by the "prophecy" in Matthew 20:1-16 based on the not-so-well-known formula of "one hour equals one year." Each hour/year from 1919 would lead to 1919+12=1931. Voila!! Biblical evidence!
 
 
 
 
Anyway, I think that's the most complete and honest way to respond to points brought up by Ann, Jesus.defender, and Manuel Boyet Manicola
 
 
 
 

I was reading this week's study article on remaining loyal to Jah. Found an interesting contradiction on shunning. They cite two experiences. In one a JW shuns her mom and her example is posted as a positive one of someone doing the right thing. The second example however of a JW being shunned by his non-JW family is labeled as an injustice. Here's first one:

So, the example above demonstrates the supposed loyal faith of a daughter that refused to talk to the woman that gave birth to her, raised her and surely sacrificed so much for her. This, the Watchtower claims, is an example of love and loyalty. Now let's see the second example cited in the same article in a latter paragraph:

In this example, the non-JW family members were cruel, because they "opposed his association" and "forbid him to visit them for years". Yet, isn't this exactly what the JW daughter from the first experience was doing to her mother? only in reverse?
- Sanchy

No it didn't. Neither did the Nazis and Fascists 'grab Switzerland.' Look more closely at what Rutherford claimed and to whom he attributed his insights:

No, this was 1941 in the middle of the war. Look up the quote for yourself.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5jNoZSyIWQWZWtHUm8zdkw3OVE/view
If a GB member said that the new release was the 'Lord's provided instrument for most effective work in the remaining months before Armageddon,' what would you conclude about when Armageddon was coming?
The article's theme Scripture was Dan. 2:44 - you know, the one about how God's kingdom would smash all the human kingdoms to smithereens? It wasn't only the Nazi Fascist hierarchy that was to be destroyed but all the earthly governments. Check out the article for yourself - same link as above. Nazi rule ended, but all the other 'kingdoms' remained. 
 

Right about what? Each teaching has to be judged on its scriptural and evidentiary merits ... or otherwise. And who knows what the org will be teaching in 5 years time!

Really? So where did they get the idea from? How did they come to the 'logical conclusion' that 1935 was when the heavenly calling ended?