JW Insider

The glitch I am speaking of is the following:
(But first some doctrinal history because I know how much certain people here just love doctrinal history.)
Russell left the "1914" doctrine in disarray by predicting so many things for it that failed. And even changing the "End of the Gentile Times" to 1915, and at least once also implying that the "Jewish Year 1915" could run from October 1915 to October 1916. But even Rutherford had continued to create a mess around the 1914 problem by waffling on 1914 for a while, pushing for 1918, then 1925, and only very slowly giving up on the the idea that the "End of the Gentile Times" was still going to be a Jewish mitzvah in Palestine.
It took Rutherford a while to give up on the great pyramid, and the seven or so other evidences for reaching 1914 by using 'divine proofs for 1874' plus the 40-year harvest. Including "parallel dispensations" in Old Testament Israel as the proof of divine origin of our chronology. Although even this last 1914 proof, he had "messed with," by adjusting "1874+40=1914" to 1878 plus a 40-year harvest to reach 1918. (1878+40=1918)The old emphasis on Elijah passing the mantle to Elisha would give Rutherford a more personal sense of scriptural authority, when he moved the date out of Russell's time slot and into the start of his own presidency in 1918. The same idea carried over into the "ns" book when that entire Russell/Rutherford transition was moved from 1918 to 1942 to represent the Rutherford/Knorr-Franz transition where "Elijah" was now the time under Rutherford's presidency and "Elisha" became the transition to the time of the Knorr/[Franz] presidency).
[edited to add: No one should get the idea that 1914 had been downplayed as a doctrine. The war broke out in 1914, and by mid-1915 the doctrine was being explained pretty much as it is now, but still with Zionist overtones, and with the background chronological reasons in question or in flux. By 1916 the "parousia" signs were being added to it. But that old consistent stable basis for 1914 was being shaken a bit. And Daniel 4 had not been utilized very much, even for the 2,520 years. Articles mentioning the 2,520 years did NOT include Daniel 4. I might add an explanation of what I mean here under another topic.]
So when Rutherford died (1942), it was up to F.W.Franz to push hard for the tree dream prophecy again because all those other methods now needed to be dropped completely. Officially Christ's presence was still 1874 right up until about 1943:
*** ka chap. 11 pp. 209-210 par. 55 “Here Is the Bridegroom!” ***
In the year 1943 the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society published the book “The Truth Shall Make You Free.” In its chapter 11, entitled “The Count of Time,” . . .  Naturally this did away with the year 1874 C.E. as the date of return of the Lord Jesus Christ and the beginning of his invisible presence or parousia.
The book just mentioned, "The Truth Shall Make You Free," was the first big push on the chronology of 1914 in quite a while. But this was back before the NWT was available, and we often used the American Standard Version, and Rotherham's translation. This is where and when the first glitch was much more visible, and had to be overcome. Note page 240 of the book:
To whom does Jehovah give the heavenly overlordship over all men of good-will in A.D. 1914? Daniel4: 17 answers: "To the intent that the living may know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men." "One low among men he setteth up over it." (Roth.)
Humiliating Nebuchadnezzar with insanity and making him eat with the beasts was a way of showing just how low and beastly these kingdoms of men really were, but that Jehovah was still so far above them, that almost "on a whim" Jehovah could prove just how "base" these rulers were that he allowed to rule in the kingdom of men.
So this entire parable was not about the Kingdom of God, but about how "base" and "beastly" were these relatively weak and transient humans who thought they were so great in the kingdom of men.
So the first thing to do is get rid of that phrase the "basest of men." Rotherham helped here. If it can apply to Jesus, we could get away with "lowest" instead of "basest" because then we could use Jesus' humility, or his perceived stature by those who were not of honest hearts. Even this is a problem, because Jesus wasn't really "low." It's just that people were mistaken when they considered him "low." (Can anything good come out of Nazareth?" Isn't he the carpenter's son? How can he say he existed before Abraham? etc.)
So page 241 of the same 1943 book goes on:
God has not given the 'kingdom of men" to totalitarian and religious dictators, who are wicked demonized men. Jehovah God has given the heavenly kingdom of the new world to the one whom politicians, commercial traffickers and religious clergy despjse as the "basest of men", namely, Christ Jesus, who was nailed to a tree between two thieves.
Note the deceptive twisting of the Bible's words here. With a kind of sleight of hand, and taking advantage of the negative opening in the sentence, Franz makes the "kingdom of men" represent "the heavenly kingdom." And while Daniel 4 was about a truly vicious beast who needed to be humiliated for his haughtiness, "the basest of men," Jesus is only falsely accused of being the basest of men. There is no need to humiliate Jesus for his haughtiness. Jesus is not a vicious beast. Jesus does not need to be taught a lesson by making him go insane.
So over the years, there has been a near disappearance of this explanation about how Jesus is like the "basest of men." And tricks of language are still being used to try to make the parallel between the return of wicked, pagan, gentile Nebuchadnezzar after 7 years to refer to the return of the Jewish Messianic Kingdom through the enthronement of Jesus Christ, who was not wicked, pagan, or gentile -- after 7 "times."

That's fine. It wasn't fully clear to me until now that you also reject the WTS interpretation of when Babylon became the new world power replacing Assyria (per INSIGHT). I also believe it was around 607, which was just a couple of years prior to the battle of Carchemish. INSIGHT uses Carchemish as one of the primary events marking the start of the Babylonian world power although, to make 1914 work, the Watchtower dates it to 625 instead of 605 BCE.
You are apparently using the much narrower definition of world power in the Bible when world power often refers to how Jehovah's people were affected. In this case I was asking about Jeremiah 25, which mentions "these nations" in addition to Judea.
No. The prophecy against Tyre came shortly after the fall of Jerusalem in 587/6, but that specific prophecy began fulfillment years later. (This is one of the ways we know that the nations served Babylon for 70 years, but the specific length of any one nation's complete servitude could have been much shorter, less than 40 years for Tyre.) But you already indicated, above, that you rejected the Society's interpretation of this in the "Isaiah's Prophecy" book
(Ezekiel 26:1-9) . . .In the 11th year, on the first day of the moth, the word of Jehovah came to me, saying: 2 “Son of man, because Tyre has said against Jerusalem, . . . 7 “For this is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: ‘Here I am bringing King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon against Tyre from the north; he is a king of kings, with horses, war chariots, cavalrymen, and an army of many soldiers. 8 He will destroy your settlements in the countryside with the sword, and he will build a siege wall and throw up a siege rampart against you and raise up a great shield against you. 9 He will pound your walls with his battering ram, and with his axes he will pull down your towers.
A siege wall is an indication that this did not happen overnight, but may have taken years, and may not have started until years after 587/6.  This is what INSIGHT says, too:
*** INSIGHT-2 p. 531 Tyre ***
Nebuchadnezzar II besieged the city. From a military standpoint, after many years it might have seemed futile to continue. But he persevered until Tyre fell at the end of 13 years, thus fulfilling the Bible prophecy that had named him as its conqueror.—Eze 26:7-12.
According to INSIGHT, the prophecy was fulfilled at least 13 years after Jerusalem fell. But the power of Babylonian domination on the whole region, including Tyre, would have been felt from at least the time of the battle of Carchemish. 
 

Why the difference? Did those other nations not have exiles to be released from Babylon?
(Jeremiah 46:13-19) . . .This is the word that Jehovah spoke to Jeremiah the prophet regarding the coming of King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon to strike down the land of Egypt: . . . 19 Prepare your baggage for exile, O daughter inhabiting Egypt. For Noph will become an object of horror; It will be set afire and left without an inhabitant.
(Jeremiah 46:24-26) . . .The daughter of Egypt will be put to shame. She will be handed over to the people of the north.’ 25 “Jehovah of armies, the God of Israel, says: ‘Now I am turning my attention to Aʹmon from No, to Pharʹaoh, to Egypt, to her gods, and to her kings—yes, to Pharʹaoh and all those trusting in him.’ 26 “‘And I will hand them over to those seeking to take their life, to King Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar of Babylon and his servants. But afterward she will be inhabited as in times past,’ declares Jehovah.
Can you give the years when Egypt was without an inhabitant?
(Jeremiah 48:4-7) . . .Moʹab has been broken down. Her little ones cry out.  5 On the ascent of Luʹhith they weep continually as they climb. And on the way down from Hor·o·naʹim they hear cries of distress over the catastrophe.  6 Flee, escape for your lives! You must become like a juniper tree in the wilderness.  7 Because you trust in your works and in your treasures, You will also be captured. And Cheʹmosh will go into exile, Together with his priests and his princes. . .
Can you give the years when Moab/Chemosh went into exile?
How can anyone say that a part of the answer is "No" to whether Jeremiah 25 mentions "these nations"? That sounds very evasive when you consider the rest of Jeremiah:
(Jeremiah 48:46-49:6) . . .Woe to you, O Moʹab! The people of Cheʹmosh have perished. For your sons have been taken captive, And your daughters have gone into exile. 47 But I will gather the captives of Moʹab in the final part of the days,’ declares Jehovah. ‘Down to this point is the judgment on Moʹab.’” 49 For the Amʹmon·ites, this is what Jehovah says: “Does Israel have no sons? Does he have no heir? Why has Malʹcam taken possession of Gad? And why are his people living in Israel’s cities?”  2 “‘Therefore look! the days are coming,’ declares Jehovah, ‘When I will cause the alarm signal of war to be heard against Rabʹbah of the Amʹmon·ites. She will become a desolate mound, And her dependent towns will be set on fire.’ ‘And Israel will take possession of those who dispossessed him,’ says Jehovah.  3 ‘Wail, O Heshʹbon, for Aʹi has been destroyed! Cry out, O dependent towns of Rabʹbah. Put on sackcloth. Wail and rove about among the stone pens, For Malʹcam will go into exile, Together with his priests and his princes.  4 Why do you brag about the valleys, About your flowing plain, O unfaithful daughter, Who trusts in her treasures And who says: “Who will come against me?”’”  5 “‘Here I am bringing something dreadful on you,’ declares the Sovereign Lord, Jehovah of armies, ‘From all those around you. You will be dispersed in every direction, And no one will gather those who flee.’”  6 “‘But afterward I will gather the captives of the Amʹmon·ites,’ declares Jehovah.”
 

Good. Three questions.
Maybe now we are getting somewhere. I have so far proposed a couple of dozen questions about the differences between the Watchtower chronology and the Bible chronology. Several of them were directed to you personally and you have either not seen them or ignored all but two of them. So let's start in order. Answer three of the chronology issues I have presented, and I will answer yours, the best I can.
Your several counter-questions were in response to the idea that I wrote as follows:
So let's start from there and see if you will attempt to answer these questions:
Does Jeremiah 25 say that only Judea will serve Babylon for 70 years, or does it say "these nations"?
For reference, I'll quote the verse:
(Jeremiah 25:11, 12) . . .And all this land will be reduced to ruins and will become an object of horror, and these nations will have to serve the king of Babylon for 70 years.”’ 12 “‘But when 70 years have been fulfilled, I will call to account the king of Babylon and that nation for their error,’ declares Jehovah, ‘and I will make the land of the Chal·deʹans a desolate wasteland for all time.
And, if you can see that the answer is "these nations" and not just Judea, then the next question would be:
From what year did Babylon's dominance over these nations start? (or, When did these nations begin their servitude to Babylon?)
and
From what year did Babylon's dominance over these nations end? (or, When did these nations end their servitude to Babylon?)

At least I have been fully and completely honest. I'll try a little harder to be more unpleasant. 😉 But even when you say I am blatantly lying and lyingly say every sort of untruth and insult about me, I realize where it comes from. It's not really you personally. It's a zeal for God, just not according to accurate knowledge. We must always be learning.

You appear to have the same problem with "projection" as CC. (By the way, I think AlanF really is arrogant, too.) I, too, may have shown some arrogance, but I don't think it has been anything compared to the arrogance you and AlanF and Cesar Chavez and "Scholar JW" have shown. I think that you call "arrogance" anything that shows up the Watchtower chronology as inconsistent.
I have not deviated from the Bible chronology. What apparently bothers you is the fact that the INSIGHT book reveals the inconsistencies through direct quotations, without rephrasing. What you are referring to, of course, is the fact that INSIGHT uses the phrase:
*** it-1 p. 453 Chronology ***
A Babylonian clay tablet is helpful for connecting Babylonian chronology with Biblical chronology.
You take that to mean that there other pieces of evidence that could do this, but which were not related to astronomy. It is true that this tablet is helpful, but there are other tablets, and king lists, and Babylonian chronicles, and inscriptions and contract tablets that are also helpful. It's when the entire chronology and calendar is pieced together that Babylonian chronology is connected with Biblical chronology.
I've already pointed out the problems with your claim about the Olympiads. I might repeat them again if I get a chance.

The Biblical chronology has no problem at all here. The 70 years actually fits the 70 years from around 609 to 539. The Watchtower chronology has a big problem in that it tries to fit 90 years for Babylonian dominance, claiming that Babylon began to dominate between 629 and 625, according to the INSIGHT book, as already quoted several times.
Through increasing lives lost, exiles, taking of treasures from the temple, burning down the Temple, and continuing to take exiles even five years after the Temple was destroyed, it is obvious that Judea suffered through the entire 70 year period.
"Scholar JW" claims that the interpretation is wrong about Jeremiah 25 in the Watchtower publications here:
*** ip-1 chap. 19 p. 253 par. 21 Jehovah Profanes the Pride of Tyre ***
Isaiah goes on to prophesy: “It must occur in that day that Tyre must be forgotten seventy years, the same as the days of one king.” (Isaiah 23:15a) Following the destruction of the mainland city by the Babylonians, the island-city of Tyre will “be forgotten.” True to the prophecy, for the duration of “one king”—the Babylonian Empire—the island-city of Tyre will not be an important financial power. Jehovah, through Jeremiah, includes Tyre among the nations that will be singled out to drink the wine of His rage. He says: “These nations will have to serve the king of Babylon seventy years.” (Jeremiah 25:8-17, 22, 27) True, the island-city of Tyre is not subject to Babylon for a full 70 years, since the Babylonian Empire falls in 539 B.C.E. Evidently, the 70 years represents the period of Babylonia’s greatest domination—when the Babylonian royal dynasty boasts of having lifted its throne even above “the stars of God.” (Isaiah 14:13) Different nations come under that domination at different times. But at the end of 70 years, that domination will crumble.
Finally, "scholar JW" has admitted that he disagrees with the Watchtower's interpretation here. It sounds like you disagree with the Watchtower's interpretation, too.
See the quote from the WTS publication above. No individual nation had to spend 70 years in exile.
Also, how many years was it from the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar until the resumption of the foundation-laying for the rebuilding of the temple?
(Zechariah 7:5-7) . . .‘When you fasted and wailed in the fifth month and in the seventh month for 70 years, did you really fast for me? 6 And when you would eat and drink, were you not eating for yourselves and drinking for yourselves? 7 Should you not obey the words that Jehovah proclaimed through the former prophets, while Jerusalem and her surrounding cities were inhabited and at peace, and while the Negʹeb and the She·pheʹlah were inhabited?’”
The Watchtower chronology would make this period, too, around 90 years, and yet the Bible says it was 70. Who are you going to believe here, the Bible chronology or the Watchtower chronology?
*** pm chap. 14 pp. 234-236 pars. 1-6 Fasting over God’s Executed Judgments Improper ***
IS A TIME of prosperity the proper time for fasting? . . .
2 The time that the above questions came up was in the fourth year of the reign of King Darius I of the Persian Empire, or in the year 518 B.C.E. . . .
3 Now, when the question of fasting and mourning is raised, this time Jehovah answers by his prophet Zechariah. The prophet tells us: “Furthermore, it came about that in the fourth year of Darius the king the word of Jehovah occurred to Zechariah, on the fourth day of the ninth month, that is, in Chislev. . . .Zechariah 8:19.
6 The things commemorated by fasting down to the year 519 B.C.E., namely, the start of the siege of Jerusalem, the breaching of the walls of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, and the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple by the armies of Babylon, were all the execution of the judgments of Jehovah.
The Watchtower says those 70 years Zechariah spoke of would run from 607 to about 519/518 BCE, which would include parts of 90 sequential years. Yet the Biblical chronology (and the standard archaeological chronology) would make that parts of 70 different years from 587 to 518 BCE.

Perhaps it was mentioned before in another topic, but i am fascinated how WTJWorg authors of their book "Let your Kingdom come" use common terminology to discredit others who have opposing views. They said: 
From a secular viewpoint, such lines of evidence might seem to establish the Neo-Babylonian chronology with Nebuchadnezzar’s 18th year (and the destruction of Jerusalem) in 587/6 B.C.E. However, no historian can deny the possibility that the present picture of Babylonian history might be misleading or in error. It is known, for example, that ancient priests and kings sometimes altered records for their own purposes. Or, even if the discovered evidence is accurate, it might be misinterpreted by modern scholars or be incomplete so that yet undiscovered material could drastically alter the chronology of the period.
If we want to do this, we can very easily use all these specific terms to describe the way many biblical scholars in WTJWorg work when interpreting Biblical history and the alleged "prophecies" that have "second fulfillment".
 

Or, why not advance from several mistakes to less mistakes? We are not supposed to look for "True Anointed" because this would make us followers of men. Do you assume that Paul and Peter were "True Anointed"? If so, remember that persons in the Christian congregation were NOT supposed to follow them. Peter and Paul and others made serious mistakes. This is why the only "True Anointed" we follow is Jesus Christ.

Okeydokey.
 
Hey, I've been keeping this issue to the fore. You have been ducking and diving away from the obvious conclusion. 😂

I though the same, if only for the simple reason that it's irrelevant to the topic. I was wondering whether I should copy and paste here just the relevant portions so that people don't have to keep referring to the website. Although you probably already mean that you will paste the relevant section and then comment on that. I wish we could find some method that would keep things orderly....that probably won't happen, so perhaps towards the end when it seems that everything has been exhausted, one could have a summary...

At least I have been fully and completely honest. I'll try a little harder to be more unpleasant. 😉 But even when you say I am blatantly lying and lyingly say every sort of untruth and insult about me, I realize where it comes from. It's not really you personally. It's a zeal for God, just not according to accurate knowledge. We must always be learning.

There may have been seeds sown by Dispensationalists before him, but it can pretty much be traced back to John A. Brown's 2-volume work from 1823, Even-tide. There, he applied Dan. 4's 'seven times' to a period of 2,520 years where the Jews would be under the domination of 'four tyrannical monarchies' until their kingdom was restored in 1917. It's also important to note that Brown put the beginning of the time period to Nebuchadnezzar's first regnal year in 604 BCE.
Link to relevant chapter.

How? If you can't answer I assume you just made this up.
You seem to have this idea that you must be right at all costs, and you won't let facts get in the way.
My father always jokes: "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts!"

Or, why not advance from several mistakes to less mistakes? We are not supposed to look for "True Anointed" because this would make us followers of men. Do you assume that Paul and Peter were "True Anointed"? If so, remember that persons in the Christian congregation were NOT supposed to follow them. Peter and Paul and others made serious mistakes. This is why the only "True Anointed" we follow is Jesus Christ.

Or, why not advance from several mistakes to less mistakes? We are not supposed to look for "True Anointed" because this would make us followers of men. Do you assume that Paul and Peter were "True Anointed"? If so, remember that persons in the Christian congregation were NOT supposed to follow them. Peter and Paul and others made serious mistakes. This is why the only "True Anointed" we follow is Jesus Christ.

And I'm sure you had in mind, too, that Jesus said:
(Luke 21:24) 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled.
It's another bit of language manipulation, imo, to say that although Jesus said it would be in the future, that he actually meant it "will" start in the past.

I was harsh, because the more I study it, the more I believe that one MUST use deception to keep any kind of "prophetic chronology" going. I see the way that F.W.Franz toyed with language to keep people hyped up about 1975. I see the way that Rutherford was using deceptive language to keep people hyped up about 1925. And then looking back at Miller and Barbour I see the same thing. I just read some of Harold Camping's predictions for May 21, 2011 and I see the same exact style. And, as I started to write up what I saw in the Jon & Cameron conversation, I saw some of the same.
This doesn't mean the deception is on purpose. We "inherit" our beliefs about chronology, just as Russell "inherited" them from Nelson Barbour. Just as I expect that you personally believed this material about 1914 when you were a Witness because you "inherited" it from your teachers, a combination of the person who studied with you, and the Watchtower publications, and from the platform, as it were. You weren't being purposely deceptive when you shared this with others. But you were using the same deceptive language, highlighting innuendos and skipping inconsistencies. It's just one of those traditions, in my opinion, that makes the word of God invalid. (I say this because this particular tradition does indeed invalidate the very counsel of the Scriptures.)
But that inherited tradition about chronology doesn't invalidate all the other teachings. It just means that we have to prove to ourselves and make sure of all things. It was the same principle Jesus taught his audience:
(Matthew 23:1-3) . . .Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying: 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses. 3 Therefore, all the things they tell you, do and observe,. . .
The Scribes and Pharisees were incorrect about several things, and yet Jesus could tell his audience to do and observe all the things they tell you. Jehovah reads hearts and judges us individually before the judgment seat.
 

That was the point: that Daniel does NOT allow room for both views here. How could Jehovah be bringing a king low for his haughtiness and braggadocio, and it still makes sense that Jehovah was also bringing him low for his humble attitude and his being lowly in heart and disposition? There was not room for both views.

That was the point: that Daniel does NOT allow room for both views here. How could Jehovah be bringing a king low for his haughtiness and braggadocio, and it still makes sense that Jehovah was also bringing him low for his humble attitude and his being lowly in heart and disposition? There was not room for both views.

And I'm sure you had in mind, too, that Jesus said:
(Luke 21:24) 24 And they will fall by the edge of the sword and be led captive into all the nations; and Jerusalem will be trampled on by the nations until the appointed times of the nations are fulfilled.
It's another bit of language manipulation, imo, to say that although Jesus said it would be in the future, that he actually meant it "will" start in the past.

I was harsh, because the more I study it, the more I believe that one MUST use deception to keep any kind of "prophetic chronology" going. I see the way that F.W.Franz toyed with language to keep people hyped up about 1975. I see the way that Rutherford was using deceptive language to keep people hyped up about 1925. And then looking back at Miller and Barbour I see the same thing. I just read some of Harold Camping's predictions for May 21, 2011 and I see the same exact style. And, as I started to write up what I saw in the Jon & Cameron conversation, I saw some of the same.
This doesn't mean the deception is on purpose. We "inherit" our beliefs about chronology, just as Russell "inherited" them from Nelson Barbour. Just as I expect that you personally believed this material about 1914 when you were a Witness because you "inherited" it from your teachers, a combination of the person who studied with you, and the Watchtower publications, and from the platform, as it were. You weren't being purposely deceptive when you shared this with others. But you were using the same deceptive language, highlighting innuendos and skipping inconsistencies. It's just one of those traditions, in my opinion, that makes the word of God invalid. (I say this because this particular tradition does indeed invalidate the very counsel of the Scriptures.)
But that inherited tradition about chronology doesn't invalidate all the other teachings. It just means that we have to prove to ourselves and make sure of all things. It was the same principle Jesus taught his audience:
(Matthew 23:1-3) . . .Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying: 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses. 3 Therefore, all the things they tell you, do and observe,. . .
The Scribes and Pharisees were incorrect about several things, and yet Jesus could tell his audience to do and observe all the things they tell you. Jehovah reads hearts and judges us individually before the judgment seat.
 

PROJECTION:
If we include Allen Smith##, Billy the Kid, etc., in the count, I think you just reached example number 1,000!!
We should have some kind of celebration.
Wikipedia:
Psychological projection is a defense mechanism in which the ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves by attributing them to others.[1] . . .  It incorporates blame shifting and can manifest as shame dumping.[2]

I was harsh, because the more I study it, the more I believe that one MUST use deception to keep any kind of "prophetic chronology" going. I see the way that F.W.Franz toyed with language to keep people hyped up about 1975. I see the way that Rutherford was using deceptive language to keep people hyped up about 1925. And then looking back at Miller and Barbour I see the same thing. I just read some of Harold Camping's predictions for May 21, 2011 and I see the same exact style. And, as I started to write up what I saw in the Jon & Cameron conversation, I saw some of the same.
This doesn't mean the deception is on purpose. We "inherit" our beliefs about chronology, just as Russell "inherited" them from Nelson Barbour. Just as I expect that you personally believed this material about 1914 when you were a Witness because you "inherited" it from your teachers, a combination of the person who studied with you, and the Watchtower publications, and from the platform, as it were. You weren't being purposely deceptive when you shared this with others. But you were using the same deceptive language, highlighting innuendos and skipping inconsistencies. It's just one of those traditions, in my opinion, that makes the word of God invalid. (I say this because this particular tradition does indeed invalidate the very counsel of the Scriptures.)
But that inherited tradition about chronology doesn't invalidate all the other teachings. It just means that we have to prove to ourselves and make sure of all things. It was the same principle Jesus taught his audience:
(Matthew 23:1-3) . . .Then Jesus spoke to the crowds and to his disciples, saying: 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses. 3 Therefore, all the things they tell you, do and observe,. . .
The Scribes and Pharisees were incorrect about several things, and yet Jesus could tell his audience to do and observe all the things they tell you. Jehovah reads hearts and judges us individually before the judgment seat.
 

Just wanted to add a consideration of a very odd (to me) use of Daniel 4:17 as a way, not to prove that Jesus was humble, but as if Daniel 4:17 was a reference to the way Jesus' enemies viewed Jesus. The exact logic of this Watchtower article still escapes me:
*** w05 10/15 p. 27 par. 6 Cultivate Genuine Humility ***
That was the greatest example of humility and love ever set by one of God’s creatures. Not all appreciated Jesus’ humility, his enemies even considering him to be “the lowliest one of mankind.” (Daniel 4:17)
And yet here, it was humility:
*** w90 10/15 p. 18 par. 15 Be Thankful—Jehovah’s Messianic Kingdom Rules ***
Only one person came to be qualified in all respects to be called “the lowliest one of mankind.” The only-begotten Son of God proved himself to be such by willingly leaving his heavenly glory to be born as a human, as Jesus, who suffered the most humiliating and cruel death at Satan’s hand. (Philippians 2:3, 5-11)