JW Insider

I think you referenced my opinion here. It's as follows:
We know that Jesus' invisible presence began in the first century, around 33 CE, because, as Jesus said:
(Matthew 18:20) For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst.”
(Matthew 28:20) . . .And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.”
So, Jesus is invisibly present with Christians always from his resurrection UNTIL the conclusion (Gk, synteleia). If the conclusion began in 1914, then Jesus was saying he would be invisibly present with us UNTIL 1914.
But this is not the "parousia" which can also be translated "presence" or "visitation." The scriptures tie the "parousia" to the "glorious manifestation" of Jesus when he is revealed, and "every eye shall see him" and a time of sudden, bright flashing like lightning. (Scripture references available upon request. 😊) Thus, for several years, the following comment was included in the NWT appendix, which has since been removed from the 2013 Revised NWT:
*** Rbi8 p. 1577 5B Christ’s Presence (Parousia) ***
Also, Bauer, p. 630, states that pa·rou·siʹa “became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, esp[ecially] of kings and emperors visiting a province.”
These visitations of royal personages were a spectacle, often with trumpeted fanfare and with the official accompanied by throngs of persons brought with him and joined by spectators alongside the parade. To make sure that the "parousia" went smoothly, the local authorities could even raise a special tax on the local citizens to fix the roads to make straight paths for the king's chariots and horses and entourage on foot. That tax was minted on "parousia" coins, or later "adventus" coins, just as they were in Paul's day. (This can explain why the first Bible translations did not translate "parousia" as presence, while koine (NT) Greek was still a living language. They used a word that meant "advent" or "visitation" focusing, therefore, on the arrival/coming, not the presence that followed.)
It seems obvious that this "parousia" did not start in 1914.
On the issue of when Jesus sat down in his Kingdom, this also seems pretty obvious from the scriptures. Jesus is called "king of kings" in the first century.
(1 Timothy 6:13-15) ...I give you orders 14 to observe the commandment in a spotless and irreprehensible way until the manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 which the happy and only Potentate will show in its own appointed times. He is the King of those who rule as kings and Lord of those who rule as lords,
(Revelation 1:5, 6) . . .and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth.” To him who loves us and who set us free from our sins by means of his own blood— 6 and he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father. . .
Immediately after his resurrection, Jesus said that "ALL authority" had bee given to him in heaven and on earth.
(Matthew 28:18) . . .“All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth.
Trying to minimize this kingdom authority in the first century appears to take away from the scriptures. In the scriptures, Jesus is already "crowned" in the first century.
(Hebrews 2:9) 9 But we do see Jesus, who was made a little lower than angels, now crowned with glory and honor for having suffered death,. . .
(Hebrews 1:3) . . .he sustains all things by the word of his power. And after he had made a purification for our sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
He already has a scepter:
(Hebrews 1:8) 8 But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your Kingdom is the scepter of uprightness.
And "sitting at God's right hand" means the same as "rule as king" as said above:
(1 Corinthians 15:25) . . .For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet.
So with this in mind, I think that 1 Cor 15:23 makes sense:
(1 Corinthians 15:20-26) . . .But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep in death. 21 For since death came through a man, resurrection of the dead also comes through a man. 22 For just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each one in his own proper order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the Christ during his presence. 24 Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power. 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. 26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing.
In other words, Jesus has now been raised from the dead, and he is the first of those to be raised alive "in the Christ." The word "during" is only used here because the NWT translators believe we should focus on a long time period. Most often the word just means "at."
So, first Jesus, then those who belong to him "at his visitation," at his parousia, at his manifestation, at his coming, at his arrival, at his presence, at that day.
(2 Thessalonians 2:8, 9) 8 Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence [parousia].
Also.
(2 Timothy 4:1) I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his manifestation and his Kingdom:
Paul does not ever speak about 1,000 years, specifically, but he makes it appear that there is a resurrection of those "in the Christ" and then the end, when he brings to nothing all government and authority and power. Paul appears to refer to only one single end that includes bringing to nothing all these other governments, and that this results in the end of death. Mission accomplished.
From Paul alone, then, we can't tell where a 1,000 year reign fits in. Paul speaks from the perspective of this particular kingdom of Christ accomplishing its purpose, and in some sense being handed back to God at the point where the final enemy (death) is fully subjected. 

think it is a matter of being practical, balancing what you know with what your audience is able to bear at present. Even of his disciples Jesus said there were things they were not yet able to bear, so what does that say about speaking to non-disciples? A pretty good guess on the 70% - 80%, I think. People’s criteria for “knowing” with certainty will differ. All will agree on the place of safety, however. None will say “all roads lead to heaven.”
As to, “I believe how more JW's try answer this way, because of need to give answer that is more acceptable for non-JW people,” 
Tharcisse Seminega does this in his book No Greater Love—How My Family Survived the Genocide in Rwanda. Proclaiming the superiority of one’s religion comes across as crass in “educated” parts of the world, and it is actually illegal in Russia—that is the pretext used to ban the Jehovah’s Witness organization. The local populace, not being able to get their heads around something so devious as banning a religion’s organization but not the religion itself, conducts itself as though the Witnesses themselves are banned. What sensible person would not?
So Brother Seminega has to self-peddle this part about “religious superiority,” a part that many would say is integral to giving a thorough witness. I don’t blame him for this—it is the only way he can reach his intended audience. Besides, whoever has spent several weeks in the hole, hidden at enormous risk by his spiritual brothers, while others of his tribe are being slaughtered wholesale on the outside, can do whatever he likes.
That he privately has given a thorough witness is clear from the Foreword, written by a fellow academic, John K. Roth, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy Claremont McKenna College: “As a result, the book makes an appeal to folks like me who are not members of that particular community: Embrace and follow the ethical values embedded in the acts that saved the Seminegas. I am grateful for that invitation.” Yet, he does miss the point. He takes away from this book not that people should embrace the religion that stood fast in the face of genocide, but “the ethical value embedded in the acts that saved the Seminegas,” as though such a separation were possible.
Brother Seminega prefers to let others say it, not he himself: He is content to include in an appendix: “Peace and conflict researcher Christian P. Scherrer states: ‘All the churches active in Rwanda, with the exception of the Jehovah’s Witnesses (of whom only a few survived), were involved at least ‘passively’ in the genocide.’ Genocide and Crisis in Central Africa: Conflict Roots, Mass Violence, and Regional War (London: Praeger, 2002), 113.” [Italics mine]
He doesn’t thereafter say, “You see? Our religion is superior!” even though anyone of moral sense can deduce it from the above passage. There are examples in his book, corroborated by international adjudicators, of clergymen purposefully luring Tutsi parishioners to their churches to be slaughtered by the thousands. A passage from his book, that of his wife who was not then a Witness, testifies from her spot of hiding:
“The stifling conditions, lack of sleep, scanty food, and darkness had a numbing effect on our minds. But one thing I knew: I, my husband, and all five of my children were alive because our Jehovah’s Witness friends had repeatedly risked their lives to save us. Their faith was like a rock. They lived for peace. No one could force them to use weapons against their neighbors, even those of a different ethnicity. They would sooner die than harm others. They were Hutu, just like the machete-wielding murderers who spilled rivers of blood. It pained me to think of it, but I knew in my heart that the vast majority of Hutu killers claimed to be Christian. Most of them belonged to my Catholic church.”
Okay? The Witness religion is superior. Yet Brother Seminega is writing to an audience loath to accept that idea. “If he will really say it, the radio won’t play it, unless he lays it between the lines,” so that is what he does. The greater sophisticated world wants to view the atrocity as though there are noble qualities distributed more or less at random among all religions, and in this case, it is but the luck of the draw that they fell to Jehovah’s Witnesses. This is clear in how religionnews.com reviews the book. It does what it can to obscure the conclusion inescapable to anyone of common sense: of the superiority of a religion that alone enabled all members to withstand genocide. (Or maybe it is that I am myself influenced by how that source doesn’t appear to regard Witnesses as a religion, and how such is not necessarily disagreeable to the JW organization.)
It expounds on how “Witnesses had long been oppressed for refusing to take up weapons or participate in politics. Because of this apolitical teaching... ‘Hutu Witnesses were impervious to calls for patriotic Hutu to take part in mass killings’... Professor Seminega says that his family’s rescuers and other Witnesses followed Jesus’ “new commandment”—To love one another just as he loved them, even to the death.”
Note how “new commandment” is in quote marks, as though it is new to the reviewers themselves, or at least an unsophisticated and quaint notion that they know is not one that readers can be expected to quickly get their heads around.
Maybe the professor has something to teach us, is the tone of the review and the Foreword. It cannot hurt that he is a professor. What learned lesson does he, and maybe even the people he has sided with, have to teach us? In fact, Jehovah’s Witnesses do try to teach them—every single day they try—and their attempts are rebuffed. To secure the integrity of the Witnesses, they have to side with the kingdom—and most of them don’t even know what it is. To secure the integrity of the Witnesses, they have to become “no part of the world” (John 17:16), and most of them are fully part of it.
Here, Brother Seminega’s academic connections come in handy, for he is able to trace the historical, political, and religious roots that ultimately triggered the Rwandan sudden slide into barbarism. He, the former Catholic seminarian, writes of the Catholic Church’s deep involvement in “the world,” and of how it abruptly switched sides in the late 20th century, from that of oppressor—the Church had historically been associated with the European colonizers, and as such promoted the “privileged” tribe of the Tutsi—to the oppressed, the “lesser” Hutu. If you embrace the world and its power plays, you eventually embrace its tactics, and the tactics in this case descended to genocide.
It doesn’t happen that often. During most times of normal stress, church teachings and even politics are enough to, after a fashion, ensure acceptable conduct among members. But during times of abnormal stress, they collapse completely. 
Did no one of the greater Rwandan religious community other than Jehovah’s Witnesses act nobly? A small minority did, and this is detailed in the Appendix section. The end of Tharcisse Seminega’s narrative marks only the halfway point of the book. Numerous appendices follow, which start with the same tale told through the eyes of different participants, as though the author has taken a cue from construction of the four Gospels themselves. Thereafter, No Greater Love is the work of a meticulous historian, and he nails down each historical detail of a story and its aftermath that ought never suffer extinction.
The small minority of religious Hutu that did not participate in genocide is enough for a certain church revisionist to write that “church institutions cannot be blamed for the moral failure of individuals who abandoned Christian values.” However, scholar Timothy Longman cuts the Church no slack—the fact that some did it proved they all could have done it, is his position. This dovetails with some digging I did for ‘TrueTom vs the Apostates!’ Perhaps 10% of church Christians refused to support Hitler during Nazi times. Is that good? Of course. But the fact remains that they had to defy their own church to do it, churches that invariably played ball with the dictator. With Jehovah’s Witnesses, the figure is close to 100%. How can anyone state that their religion is not superior, or that the organization that coordinates is not to be lauded?
The greater lesson for the religious scholars that Brother Seminega has is that they should become Jehovah’s Witnesses. There is a collection of core teachings often discussed (two have been cited here: identification with the kingdom and withdrawal from the politicized world) that serve to identify one and only one religion. There is no setting more poignant than 1990’s Rwanda or 1940’s Germany to highlight how vital those teachings are. This is why those “apostates” who vehemently oppose the Witnesses readily slide into hypocrisy. They ignore the vital core teachings—rarely when people leave the faith do I ever hear them referring to such things again—to rail about how the faith impeded their freedom of movement. They ignore the vital core teachings, preferring to put humans under the magnifying glass in a search for dirt. They dig through the diamonds in search of the turds and present revelation of the turds as their version of “good news.”
I like how at the 2019 annual meeting, Mark Sanderson examined Hebrews 2:15, of how “through [Jesus’] death [God] might bring to nothing the one having the means to cause death, that is, the Devil, and that he might set free all those who were held in slavery all their lives by their fear of death.” He then spoke of the Nuremberg trials, in which various Nazis who had committed unspeakable atrocities were asked the simple question, “How could you do those terrible things?” “What did they say?” he asked, and then related the answer they had given: “We had no choice. If we didn’t obey they would put us to death.” 
“Those people could be manipulated,” Sanderson said. “They could be controlled. They could be made to do the most wicked things because they were afraid.” It was true of the Hutu tribe as well. To not join in “the work” of slaughter was enough to be put to death oneself for being disloyal to the cause. Many consciences, religious and otherwise, were cast aside due to fear of death.
That’s manipulation. That’s control. That’s the consequence of—shall we say it?—not being one of Jehovah’s Witnesses and benefiting from the program of spiritual food directed from the Governing Body. Reject it and settle for a genocide every so often when with winds blow just right—history affirms that such will happen.
Professor Roth welcomes No Greater Love, agreeing with the author that it is likely the first book by a Jehovah’s Witnesses writing of his own experience, the first book by someone who was there. It almost didn’t come about. From the Acknowledgments section, Brother Seminega thanks Alexandre Kimenyi, the scholar who invited him to speak and subsequently encouraged him to gather his records for history.
I wrote in Dear Mr. Putin - Jehovah’s Witnesses Write Russia that “books about Jehovah’s Witnesses authored by Jehovah’s Witnesses are not plentiful. This is a shame, for no outsider, even with the best of intentions, can do justice to the faith as can an insider - they miss the nuances, and in some cases, even the facts. Jehovah’s Witnesses are primarily drawn from the ranks of working people, who are not inclined to write books... Why write a book when you can and do look people in the eye and tell them what you have to say?” Professor Seminega is from a class that is inclined to write books, yet he still doesn’t do it until much later, after outside encouragement, because he is used to “looking people in the eye and telling them what he has to say.”
In time, a Russian Jehovah’s Witness will write a book of his experiences at the hands of current persecutors there, and when that happens, his book will rightly vault ahead of mine. Mine is merely a compilation and analysis of worldwide news reports, along with a considerable amount of witnessing along the way, but not so much as to negate its historical value. When that Russian Witness writer appears, he or she will be likely facilitated by the Arnold Liebster Foundation, as has been the case with No Greater Love. This, too, will vault it ahead of mine, because the Foundation at present regards me with a dubious eye. Probably they came across me when I was battling online with the malcontents and said, “What Witness would do that?” They do not know that I subsequently kicked them all to the curb. 
No matter. At the Kingdom Hall, we would straighten it out in two minutes. But the internet is the land of the liars where frauds roam at will, and it can be difficult to distinguish friend from foe. Of course, it is always possible that they regard even taking on the controversial topics that I do as the work of an “indiscreet brother,” and should this be the case, who am I to say that they are not right? Maybe I am the soldier singing atop the Jerusalem wall after Hezekiah has told the troops to zip it.
 

I think the story of Abraham was written down for our instruction. what was the outcome?  Jehovah could find not even 5 righteous people in the city. Their destruction was justified. It teaches us to NOT expect Jehovah t ever be unrighteous and unjust. It is a deviation to question Jehovah's justice. Next step is to deny that Jehovah is just and get some excuse for the wicked. In tonight's bible  study Jehovah told job to study nature to learn more about Jehovah. 
we can end up asking too many questions of Jehovah  before we even think of obeying - that is dangerous ground.
who can stand before Jehovah - not one.  It is Jehovah's mercy and the fact that he keeps in mind that we are mere flesh (and ransom) which allows us to come before him. what does Jehovah expect from us than to be without spot from the world, merciful and just and our clothes washed clean - righteous and in peace with the "mark" of a Christian personality.

I think you referenced my opinion here. It's as follows:
We know that Jesus' invisible presence began in the first century, around 33 CE, because, as Jesus said:
(Matthew 18:20) For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst.”
(Matthew 28:20) . . .And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.”
So, Jesus is invisibly present with Christians always from his resurrection UNTIL the conclusion (Gk, synteleia). If the conclusion began in 1914, then Jesus was saying he would be invisibly present with us UNTIL 1914.
But this is not the "parousia" which can also be translated "presence" or "visitation." The scriptures tie the "parousia" to the "glorious manifestation" of Jesus when he is revealed, and "every eye shall see him" and a time of sudden, bright flashing like lightning. (Scripture references available upon request. 😊) Thus, for several years, the following comment was included in the NWT appendix, which has since been removed from the 2013 Revised NWT:
*** Rbi8 p. 1577 5B Christ’s Presence (Parousia) ***
Also, Bauer, p. 630, states that pa·rou·siʹa “became the official term for a visit of a person of high rank, esp[ecially] of kings and emperors visiting a province.”
These visitations of royal personages were a spectacle, often with trumpeted fanfare and with the official accompanied by throngs of persons brought with him and joined by spectators alongside the parade. To make sure that the "parousia" went smoothly, the local authorities could even raise a special tax on the local citizens to fix the roads to make straight paths for the king's chariots and horses and entourage on foot. That tax was minted on "parousia" coins, or later "adventus" coins, just as they were in Paul's day. (This can explain why the first Bible translations did not translate "parousia" as presence, while koine (NT) Greek was still a living language. They used a word that meant "advent" or "visitation" focusing, therefore, on the arrival/coming, not the presence that followed.)
It seems obvious that this "parousia" did not start in 1914.
On the issue of when Jesus sat down in his Kingdom, this also seems pretty obvious from the scriptures. Jesus is called "king of kings" in the first century.
(1 Timothy 6:13-15) ...I give you orders 14 to observe the commandment in a spotless and irreprehensible way until the manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 which the happy and only Potentate will show in its own appointed times. He is the King of those who rule as kings and Lord of those who rule as lords,
(Revelation 1:5, 6) . . .and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth.” To him who loves us and who set us free from our sins by means of his own blood— 6 and he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father. . .
Immediately after his resurrection, Jesus said that "ALL authority" had bee given to him in heaven and on earth.
(Matthew 28:18) . . .“All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth.
Trying to minimize this kingdom authority in the first century appears to take away from the scriptures. In the scriptures, Jesus is already "crowned" in the first century.
(Hebrews 2:9) 9 But we do see Jesus, who was made a little lower than angels, now crowned with glory and honor for having suffered death,. . .
(Hebrews 1:3) . . .he sustains all things by the word of his power. And after he had made a purification for our sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
He already has a scepter:
(Hebrews 1:8) 8 But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever, and the scepter of your Kingdom is the scepter of uprightness.
And "sitting at God's right hand" means the same as "rule as king" as said above:
(1 Corinthians 15:25) . . .For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet.
So with this in mind, I think that 1 Cor 15:23 makes sense:
(1 Corinthians 15:20-26) . . .But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep in death. 21 For since death came through a man, resurrection of the dead also comes through a man. 22 For just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive. 23 But each one in his own proper order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who belong to the Christ during his presence. 24 Next, the end, when he hands over the Kingdom to his God and Father, when he has brought to nothing all government and all authority and power. 25 For he must rule as king until God has put all enemies under his feet. 26 And the last enemy, death, is to be brought to nothing.
In other words, Jesus has now been raised from the dead, and he is the first of those to be raised alive "in the Christ." The word "during" is only used here because the NWT translators believe we should focus on a long time period. Most often the word just means "at."
So, first Jesus, then those who belong to him "at his visitation," at his parousia, at his manifestation, at his coming, at his arrival, at his presence, at that day.
(2 Thessalonians 2:8, 9) 8 Then, indeed, the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will do away with by the spirit of his mouth and bring to nothing by the manifestation of his presence [parousia].
Also.
(2 Timothy 4:1) I solemnly charge you before God and Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his manifestation and his Kingdom:
Paul does not ever speak about 1,000 years, specifically, but he makes it appear that there is a resurrection of those "in the Christ" and then the end, when he brings to nothing all government and authority and power. Paul appears to refer to only one single end that includes bringing to nothing all these other governments, and that this results in the end of death. Mission accomplished.
From Paul alone, then, we can't tell where a 1,000 year reign fits in. Paul speaks from the perspective of this particular kingdom of Christ accomplishing its purpose, and in some sense being handed back to God at the point where the final enemy (death) is fully subjected. 

I think we can probably figure out a rough timeline that Revelation 20 appears to show, and then, compare it to 1 Cor 15. If it doesn't make sense, we can see if our current understanding helps us to make more sense of it. I'm still thinking about it, mostly about whether I should even share what I'm thinking. I had some thoughts that were eerily similar to what TTH shared in the post where he said:
And, as before, my comments on the example of Abraham were a bit different from TTH:
I would have pointed out that if we were really doing what Abraham did when he said then, that we should be questioning this judgment, just as Abraham did. Perhaps that is one of the lessons. If we truly want to be God's friend then we should be ready to "argue" with Him. We should question the numbers, as Abraham did. We should question the sense of justice, as Abraham did. Ultimately, we would never question Jehovah's judgment after the fact, but we should always be thinking and questioning what justice should look like before the fact. It is important that we try to understand Jehovah's justice as best we can.
To that end, I brought up whether we should question the WT's view of Armageddon as it was spelled out from the time when I was still very young. We seem to have backed off on using such numbers, but I know that many JWs still believe these numbers are about right. The following article is on the jw.org website: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1958762
*** w58 10/15 pp. 614-615 What Will Armageddon Mean for You? ***
Armageddon will be greater than any nuclear war fought on a global or even on a “space” scale. The Bible shows that Armageddon will be a war between gods and universal in scope. In it “Jehovah God, the Almighty,” and the “Mighty God,” his Son, Jesus Christ, will do battle with “the god of this system of things,” Satan the Devil. Involved in that battle will be all intelligent creatures, seen and unseen.—Rev. 11:17; Isa. 9:6, AS; 2 Cor. 4:4.
Revelation 9:16 gives us an inkling of the size of Jehovah’s forces when it speaks of him as using, on a certain occasion, cavalry to the number of 200,000,000. And 2 Kings 19:35 tells of just one of these destroying a host of 185,000 warriors in one night. How many demon cohorts Satan has, the Word of God does not indicate, but from the description of the war in heaven at Revelation 12 their number can by no means be insignificant. That Satan’s demons are likewise powerful can be seen from the fact that one of them once hindered an angel of Jehovah for twenty-one days, until the archangel Michael came to his rescue.—Dan. 10:13, 21.
As for humans upon earth, on the side of Jehovah will be all those fully dedicated to him and who are faithfully following Jesus Christ; compared with earth’s billions these are indeed few. They are the few that walk the narrow way or cramped road that leads to life. These will not share in the fighting but will merely sing God’s praises.—2 Chron. 20:20, 21; 2 Cor. 10:4, 5; Matt. 7:13, 14.
On Satan’s side will be all the rest of mankind, more than 99.9 percent, even as we read: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” That includes all the governments of the world together with their supporters, the commercial, religious and social institutions. Even the professedly Christian organizations? Yes, because all such that are friends of the world are making themselves enemies of God.—1 John 5:19; Jas. 4:4.
Yes, today the earth is filled with wickedness, much innocent blood has been and is being shed, both in war and in peace. Godless men are persecuting Jehovah’s servants and ruining the earth. Jehovah will express “indignation against all the nations” and “against all the inhabitants of the earth,” because “there is nought but swearing and breaking faith, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery.” At Armageddon Jehovah “will cause justice to be done” speedily to “his chosen ones who cry aloud to him” because of being persecuted. At that time he will also “bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”—Isa. 34:2; Jer. 25:30; Hos. 4:2, AS; Luke 18:8, 7; Rev. 11:18.
God’s Word likens Armageddon to the Flood, to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and to the battle at Gibeon, where God rained down great blocks of ice upon his enemies. Armageddon will be the worst thing ever to hit this earth in the history of man. It will be marked by shocking surprise, consternation, fright, collapse of government, tremendous upheavals of earth, landslides, cloudbursts, overflowing flash-floods, rain of corrosive liquid fire and terror in the air, on land and in the sea. No wonder that “the slain of Jehovah shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth: they shall not be lamented, neither gathered, nor buried; they shall be dung upon the face of the ground.”—Jer. 25:33, AS.
@César Chávez pointed out that there are about 8 million Witnesses. (When compared to a global population that is nearing 8 billion, this is also just another way of saying that 99.9 percent of the world are not Witnesses.) 
*** w58 6/1 p. 330 Why Dedicate Ourselves to God? ***
Yes, all such would foolishly ignore the instruction Book of their Maker and his “traffic laws” for living. And yet that is the very course that more than 99.9 percent of earth’s population
*** w55 11/1 p. 648 Using Wisely the Reduced Time Left ***
Time spent in trying to accumulate wealth, fame or power or in trying to perpetuate this old system of things is wasted, and that is what more than 99.9 per cent of this earth’s population are doing.
Of course, we don't know. CC has pointed out before that he thinks most Witnesses are not true Witnesses, with true faith. He has also made statements that question faith and loyalty of elders and ministerial servants. So perhaps the percentage of actual survivors is much lower than .1 percent from CC's perspective.

I think we can probably figure out a rough timeline that Revelation 20 appears to show, and then, compare it to 1 Cor 15. If it doesn't make sense, we can see if our current understanding helps us to make more sense of it. I'm still thinking about it, mostly about whether I should even share what I'm thinking. I had some thoughts that were eerily similar to what TTH shared in the post where he said:
And, as before, my comments on the example of Abraham were a bit different from TTH:
I would have pointed out that if we were really doing what Abraham did when he said then, that we should be questioning this judgment, just as Abraham did. Perhaps that is one of the lessons. If we truly want to be God's friend then we should be ready to "argue" with Him. We should question the numbers, as Abraham did. We should question the sense of justice, as Abraham did. Ultimately, we would never question Jehovah's judgment after the fact, but we should always be thinking and questioning what justice should look like before the fact. It is important that we try to understand Jehovah's justice as best we can.
To that end, I brought up whether we should question the WT's view of Armageddon as it was spelled out from the time when I was still very young. We seem to have backed off on using such numbers, but I know that many JWs still believe these numbers are about right. The following article is on the jw.org website: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1958762
*** w58 10/15 pp. 614-615 What Will Armageddon Mean for You? ***
Armageddon will be greater than any nuclear war fought on a global or even on a “space” scale. The Bible shows that Armageddon will be a war between gods and universal in scope. In it “Jehovah God, the Almighty,” and the “Mighty God,” his Son, Jesus Christ, will do battle with “the god of this system of things,” Satan the Devil. Involved in that battle will be all intelligent creatures, seen and unseen.—Rev. 11:17; Isa. 9:6, AS; 2 Cor. 4:4.
Revelation 9:16 gives us an inkling of the size of Jehovah’s forces when it speaks of him as using, on a certain occasion, cavalry to the number of 200,000,000. And 2 Kings 19:35 tells of just one of these destroying a host of 185,000 warriors in one night. How many demon cohorts Satan has, the Word of God does not indicate, but from the description of the war in heaven at Revelation 12 their number can by no means be insignificant. That Satan’s demons are likewise powerful can be seen from the fact that one of them once hindered an angel of Jehovah for twenty-one days, until the archangel Michael came to his rescue.—Dan. 10:13, 21.
As for humans upon earth, on the side of Jehovah will be all those fully dedicated to him and who are faithfully following Jesus Christ; compared with earth’s billions these are indeed few. They are the few that walk the narrow way or cramped road that leads to life. These will not share in the fighting but will merely sing God’s praises.—2 Chron. 20:20, 21; 2 Cor. 10:4, 5; Matt. 7:13, 14.
On Satan’s side will be all the rest of mankind, more than 99.9 percent, even as we read: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” That includes all the governments of the world together with their supporters, the commercial, religious and social institutions. Even the professedly Christian organizations? Yes, because all such that are friends of the world are making themselves enemies of God.—1 John 5:19; Jas. 4:4.
Yes, today the earth is filled with wickedness, much innocent blood has been and is being shed, both in war and in peace. Godless men are persecuting Jehovah’s servants and ruining the earth. Jehovah will express “indignation against all the nations” and “against all the inhabitants of the earth,” because “there is nought but swearing and breaking faith, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery.” At Armageddon Jehovah “will cause justice to be done” speedily to “his chosen ones who cry aloud to him” because of being persecuted. At that time he will also “bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”—Isa. 34:2; Jer. 25:30; Hos. 4:2, AS; Luke 18:8, 7; Rev. 11:18.
God’s Word likens Armageddon to the Flood, to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and to the battle at Gibeon, where God rained down great blocks of ice upon his enemies. Armageddon will be the worst thing ever to hit this earth in the history of man. It will be marked by shocking surprise, consternation, fright, collapse of government, tremendous upheavals of earth, landslides, cloudbursts, overflowing flash-floods, rain of corrosive liquid fire and terror in the air, on land and in the sea. No wonder that “the slain of Jehovah shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth: they shall not be lamented, neither gathered, nor buried; they shall be dung upon the face of the ground.”—Jer. 25:33, AS.
@César Chávez pointed out that there are about 8 million Witnesses. (When compared to a global population that is nearing 8 billion, this is also just another way of saying that 99.9 percent of the world are not Witnesses.) 
*** w58 6/1 p. 330 Why Dedicate Ourselves to God? ***
Yes, all such would foolishly ignore the instruction Book of their Maker and his “traffic laws” for living. And yet that is the very course that more than 99.9 percent of earth’s population
*** w55 11/1 p. 648 Using Wisely the Reduced Time Left ***
Time spent in trying to accumulate wealth, fame or power or in trying to perpetuate this old system of things is wasted, and that is what more than 99.9 per cent of this earth’s population are doing.
Of course, we don't know. CC has pointed out before that he thinks most Witnesses are not true Witnesses, with true faith. He has also made statements that question faith and loyalty of elders and ministerial servants. So perhaps the percentage of actual survivors is much lower than .1 percent from CC's perspective.

I think we can probably figure out a rough timeline that Revelation 20 appears to show, and then, compare it to 1 Cor 15. If it doesn't make sense, we can see if our current understanding helps us to make more sense of it. I'm still thinking about it, mostly about whether I should even share what I'm thinking. I had some thoughts that were eerily similar to what TTH shared in the post where he said:
And, as before, my comments on the example of Abraham were a bit different from TTH:
I would have pointed out that if we were really doing what Abraham did when he said then, that we should be questioning this judgment, just as Abraham did. Perhaps that is one of the lessons. If we truly want to be God's friend then we should be ready to "argue" with Him. We should question the numbers, as Abraham did. We should question the sense of justice, as Abraham did. Ultimately, we would never question Jehovah's judgment after the fact, but we should always be thinking and questioning what justice should look like before the fact. It is important that we try to understand Jehovah's justice as best we can.
To that end, I brought up whether we should question the WT's view of Armageddon as it was spelled out from the time when I was still very young. We seem to have backed off on using such numbers, but I know that many JWs still believe these numbers are about right. The following article is on the jw.org website: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1958762
*** w58 10/15 pp. 614-615 What Will Armageddon Mean for You? ***
Armageddon will be greater than any nuclear war fought on a global or even on a “space” scale. The Bible shows that Armageddon will be a war between gods and universal in scope. In it “Jehovah God, the Almighty,” and the “Mighty God,” his Son, Jesus Christ, will do battle with “the god of this system of things,” Satan the Devil. Involved in that battle will be all intelligent creatures, seen and unseen.—Rev. 11:17; Isa. 9:6, AS; 2 Cor. 4:4.
Revelation 9:16 gives us an inkling of the size of Jehovah’s forces when it speaks of him as using, on a certain occasion, cavalry to the number of 200,000,000. And 2 Kings 19:35 tells of just one of these destroying a host of 185,000 warriors in one night. How many demon cohorts Satan has, the Word of God does not indicate, but from the description of the war in heaven at Revelation 12 their number can by no means be insignificant. That Satan’s demons are likewise powerful can be seen from the fact that one of them once hindered an angel of Jehovah for twenty-one days, until the archangel Michael came to his rescue.—Dan. 10:13, 21.
As for humans upon earth, on the side of Jehovah will be all those fully dedicated to him and who are faithfully following Jesus Christ; compared with earth’s billions these are indeed few. They are the few that walk the narrow way or cramped road that leads to life. These will not share in the fighting but will merely sing God’s praises.—2 Chron. 20:20, 21; 2 Cor. 10:4, 5; Matt. 7:13, 14.
On Satan’s side will be all the rest of mankind, more than 99.9 percent, even as we read: “The whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one.” That includes all the governments of the world together with their supporters, the commercial, religious and social institutions. Even the professedly Christian organizations? Yes, because all such that are friends of the world are making themselves enemies of God.—1 John 5:19; Jas. 4:4.
Yes, today the earth is filled with wickedness, much innocent blood has been and is being shed, both in war and in peace. Godless men are persecuting Jehovah’s servants and ruining the earth. Jehovah will express “indignation against all the nations” and “against all the inhabitants of the earth,” because “there is nought but swearing and breaking faith, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery.” At Armageddon Jehovah “will cause justice to be done” speedily to “his chosen ones who cry aloud to him” because of being persecuted. At that time he will also “bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”—Isa. 34:2; Jer. 25:30; Hos. 4:2, AS; Luke 18:8, 7; Rev. 11:18.
God’s Word likens Armageddon to the Flood, to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and to the battle at Gibeon, where God rained down great blocks of ice upon his enemies. Armageddon will be the worst thing ever to hit this earth in the history of man. It will be marked by shocking surprise, consternation, fright, collapse of government, tremendous upheavals of earth, landslides, cloudbursts, overflowing flash-floods, rain of corrosive liquid fire and terror in the air, on land and in the sea. No wonder that “the slain of Jehovah shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth: they shall not be lamented, neither gathered, nor buried; they shall be dung upon the face of the ground.”—Jer. 25:33, AS.
@César Chávez pointed out that there are about 8 million Witnesses. (When compared to a global population that is nearing 8 billion, this is also just another way of saying that 99.9 percent of the world are not Witnesses.) 
*** w58 6/1 p. 330 Why Dedicate Ourselves to God? ***
Yes, all such would foolishly ignore the instruction Book of their Maker and his “traffic laws” for living. And yet that is the very course that more than 99.9 percent of earth’s population
*** w55 11/1 p. 648 Using Wisely the Reduced Time Left ***
Time spent in trying to accumulate wealth, fame or power or in trying to perpetuate this old system of things is wasted, and that is what more than 99.9 per cent of this earth’s population are doing.
Of course, we don't know. CC has pointed out before that he thinks most Witnesses are not true Witnesses, with true faith. He has also made statements that question faith and loyalty of elders and ministerial servants. So perhaps the percentage of actual survivors is much lower than .1 percent from CC's perspective.

On the other hand, the percentage of Ninevite citizens who survived is pretty high, though it initially displeased Jonah. I have no doubt that the examples you cite are the ones that will carry the day, but they are tempered by accounts like that of Jonah. I just don’t like to be overly dogmatic—it’s a displeasing quality, and one that is not necessary. I have even taken to saying lately of Tom Pearlsandswine that “that brother knows how to put the dog into dogmatic!”

I don’t even pretend to know how this works. I know what is the place of safety. I know what is my obligation to publicize it. Everything else involves matters “too great for me.” 
Can you be some distance from the place of safety or not on millimeter? Dunno. “Is it only Jehovah’s Witnesses who will be saved?” someone asked my daughter, a need-greater. “Well—I’m not Jesus, and I don’t know,” she replied. What of the verse that you will by no means complete the circuit of Israel before the son of man arrives? How does that factor in? Will Jehovah pull some last minute trick like he did with Jonah?
It is enough to know that he can read hearts. I’ll just do an Abraham and say, “is not the God of the entire earth going to do what is right?” After Armageddon, (let us assume that I find myself on the other side of it) I will look around, see who I see, and say, “I guess that is what’s right.”
All we can do is what we can do. Between house-to-house, carts, internet, and just plain zeal, what we have done is a lot. Is the kingdom the burning issue in everyone’s mind that they consciously approve or reject, as much of our material would suggest? Or is it that people are consumed with the day-to-day and “take no note” of what is happening around them, as also much of our material would suggest? What is the interplay between the two?
The issue is do people prefer government by God or government by men. The GB would be negligent to not continually stress the place of safety and call attention to verses that indicate you’d better be there. They would be negligent to not urge those there to prioritize their lives so as to join Christ in saying “Come,” They have not been negligent. Imitate them, says 2 Thess 3:7-9. Imitate their faith, says Heb 13:17, a faith that has manifested itself as deeds, because faith without works is dead.
That is enough for me to go on. You don’t have to know every little thing. Not a sparrow falls to the ground unseen by the Father. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t fall. How many will fall, and why, and how many will stand?
 

Last night my mother called and said that they just had the circuit overseer who asked a question: Which Bible character was confined to his own place for a long time?
I said, don't tell me, let me guess. Uzziah?
She said, no. But wasn't he the one who steadied the ark?
I said, no that was Uzzah. King Uzziah had to be confined at home for leprosy.
She said, well it wasn't Uzziah. It was Noah. And that the circuit overseer said that at least we don't have to be confined with a bunch of stinky animals.
And I said, "Says you!" (We have two dogs, two cats, 10 fish. I was not, repeat not, referring to any son of mine who hasn't cleaned his room in over two weeks.)
And then, I added that Noah steadied the Ark, too. He had to keep the elephants and hippos at the four corners to keep it balanced, then "steady as she goes!!"

We have had the same problem when questioned about Armageddon, especially when we know there has been so little chance to make headway in many countries where no one has heard anything positive about JWs, if they've heard of us at all. And the jw.org site still has articles on it that go back to a time when we claimed that 99.9% of the world's population would die at Armageddon.
 
I decided to wait before I say anything more about the 1,000 years and Revelation 20. Maybe tomorrow.

True. But typically a very large indeterminate amount. As it came up in the Joel/Revelation discussion in the closed club, it seems like a second Armageddon. We have come to expect that a majority of mankind could die at Armageddon. The "rivers of blood" imagery in Revelation would seem to support this. But, as always, there are other ways to understand such symbols, we just have to be careful that we are not allowing sentimentality to color our views, if the scripture is trying to give us a sense of proportion here.
But if we expect, let's say, 20 billion "unrighteous" to be resurrected, it would seem most disturbing, yet if a majority of them were to die in a second judgment at the end of 1,000 years, that's more than 10 billion. Of course, they would apparently be resurrected to what appears like a much better chance for understanding Jehovah's purpose than the current 7 to 8 billion. There can be as much as half a million grains of sand just by scooping up a large handful. More than the visible number of stars in the sky. But the grains of sand on just the seashores of Judah and Israel would still be trillions of times the number of people who have ever lived.
And then we have the question that Abraham would have asked Jehovah, about the justice of Jehovah killing a majority of people at Armageddon if they didn't have the same opportunity to know Jehovah's purpose as the majority of people who might be killed by Jehovah at the end of the 1,000 years.
It's a little less disturbing, I think, to imagine that there is only one judgment day, at Armageddon, and that this is the one where the nations are gathered. It is difficult to imagine "nations" rising up against Jehovah's and his people a second time.
I have just read Revelation 20 a couple more times and I realize something else that I might have previously dismissed too early. It's the context that immediately follows the 1,000 year discussion. Next post.
 

Did your wife come home, look at it, then look at you pecking away at the keyboard, and say, “I don’t believe this”?

Last night my mother called and said that they just had the circuit overseer who asked a question: Which Bible character was confined to his own place for a long time?
I said, don't tell me, let me guess. Uzziah?
She said, no. But wasn't he the one who steadied the ark?
I said, no that was Uzzah. King Uzziah had to be confined at home for leprosy.
She said, well it wasn't Uzziah. It was Noah. And that the circuit overseer said that at least we don't have to be confined with a bunch of stinky animals.
And I said, "Says you!" (We have two dogs, two cats, 10 fish. I was not, repeat not, referring to any son of mine who hasn't cleaned his room in over two weeks.)
And then, I added that Noah steadied the Ark, too. He had to keep the elephants and hippos at the four corners to keep it balanced, then "steady as she goes!!"

It's not unwelcome at all. I think that most of us have seen this idea in service and and in commentaries. And most of us have probably considered it (and dismissed it). It is such a big break from a "workable" understanding of Revelation and 1 Corinthians 15, that I dismiss it before I get very far into it. And that's because I see some potential contradictions among ALL the possibilities, but the idea that we are now in the 1,000 year reign seemed unworkable.
I'm fine with trying to work it through again since it's been so long. I don't have any time to do this today, but I'll put a few thoughts out here to at least show why I had a problem with it.
You believe that the 1,000 year reign of Christ began at the time he began to reign in the first century. So when does it end? At the time of tribulation/judgment/resurrection? When does Jesus hand back the Kingdom to his Father? When was/is Satan cast down, and angry for a short period of time? When was/is he abyssed? Are these the same periods. When is/was he let loose from the abyss? Yes, I believe that Jesus began to reign when he sat down at the right hand of God. 1 Cor 15:25 as much as says this. And, yes, we know from Col 1:13 that Christ already began gathering subjects to that Kingdom as soon as he was resurrected.
My problem with it is that the 1,000 years appears to be a literal time in history with a beginning and an end. Otherwise the scriptures could not say "the rest of the dead did not come to life until the 1,000 years were ended." If it has a beginning and an end, then why not see it as a special, literal time period during the time of the otherwise everlasting kingdom.
(Revelation 11:15) . . .The seventh angel blew his trumpet. And there were loud voices in heaven, saying: “The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever.”
I believe that this kingdom of the world did already become the Kingdom of God and Christ beginning when Jesus sat at the right hand of the throne of Majesty, at about the time of his resurrection, when "ALL authority was given him" and he could be called "King of Kings."
(1 Timothy 6:15) . . .He is the King of those who rule as kings . . .
But the biggest problem I have with claiming that we are already in the 1,000 year reign is that Jesus gave an indication that the end could come at any time, and that people could expect it, even in the first century. Paul said that the congregations could expect it at any time, even in the first century. He did not know if he or others alive at the time would live to see a "rapture" or if he or others would die first and be resurrected into the heavenly kingdom. 
What kind of "1,000 year reign" could have started around 33, when Jesus was resurrected, but then might have ended at a judgment day, perhaps only 70 years later?
Do you think that the 1,000 year reign is so symbolic that it refers to an unlimited time? If so, why does Revelation speak of the time when it is over, and why does Corinthians speak of a time when Jesus hands back the kingdom to his Father?
I know that Russell thought he was already living in the 1,000 year reign, which is why his books were called "Millennial Dawn." But he thought that the 1,000 year reign began around 1874. When this was changed, it made sense to think of the thousand years as a time to prepare for, and accept billions of resurrected persons into the new earth (including the unrighteous). Practically it makes sense. If Satan had not yet been completely destroyed, it makes sense that in the overall scheme of showing Satan the verdict of his false claim, that this "court case" is completed with Satan witnessing his own failure before meeting his final fate.
So there is a certain "practicality" to the 1,000 year reign as a special time when God through Christ takes his great power and begins ruling as king, even though he has always been king, and Christ too will be king from long before and eternally after. It becomes one of those special times when one can say in a special way:
(1 Chronicles 16:31) 31 Let the heavens rejoice, and let the earth be joyful; Declare among the nations: ‘Jehovah has become King!’
I understand that Satan could be destroyed at Armageddon and this same scenario could play out. I also know that your point of view removes the problem of the "second Armageddon" at the end of the 1,000 year reign.
But we still have this, which can produce an issue for both points of view, but I think it is harder for your point of view:
(Revelation 20:4, 5) . . .And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for 1,000 years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the 1,000 years were ended.) This is the first resurrection.

It's not unwelcome at all. I think that most of us have seen this idea in service and and in commentaries. And most of us have probably considered it (and dismissed it). It is such a big break from a "workable" understanding of Revelation and 1 Corinthians 15, that I dismiss it before I get very far into it. And that's because I see some potential contradictions among ALL the possibilities, but the idea that we are now in the 1,000 year reign seemed unworkable.
I'm fine with trying to work it through again since it's been so long. I don't have any time to do this today, but I'll put a few thoughts out here to at least show why I had a problem with it.
You believe that the 1,000 year reign of Christ began at the time he began to reign in the first century. So when does it end? At the time of tribulation/judgment/resurrection? When does Jesus hand back the Kingdom to his Father? When was/is Satan cast down, and angry for a short period of time? When was/is he abyssed? Are these the same periods. When is/was he let loose from the abyss? Yes, I believe that Jesus began to reign when he sat down at the right hand of God. 1 Cor 15:25 as much as says this. And, yes, we know from Col 1:13 that Christ already began gathering subjects to that Kingdom as soon as he was resurrected.
My problem with it is that the 1,000 years appears to be a literal time in history with a beginning and an end. Otherwise the scriptures could not say "the rest of the dead did not come to life until the 1,000 years were ended." If it has a beginning and an end, then why not see it as a special, literal time period during the time of the otherwise everlasting kingdom.
(Revelation 11:15) . . .The seventh angel blew his trumpet. And there were loud voices in heaven, saying: “The kingdom of the world has become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will rule as king forever and ever.”
I believe that this kingdom of the world did already become the Kingdom of God and Christ beginning when Jesus sat at the right hand of the throne of Majesty, at about the time of his resurrection, when "ALL authority was given him" and he could be called "King of Kings."
(1 Timothy 6:15) . . .He is the King of those who rule as kings . . .
But the biggest problem I have with claiming that we are already in the 1,000 year reign is that Jesus gave an indication that the end could come at any time, and that people could expect it, even in the first century. Paul said that the congregations could expect it at any time, even in the first century. He did not know if he or others alive at the time would live to see a "rapture" or if he or others would die first and be resurrected into the heavenly kingdom. 
What kind of "1,000 year reign" could have started around 33, when Jesus was resurrected, but then might have ended at a judgment day, perhaps only 70 years later?
Do you think that the 1,000 year reign is so symbolic that it refers to an unlimited time? If so, why does Revelation speak of the time when it is over, and why does Corinthians speak of a time when Jesus hands back the kingdom to his Father?
I know that Russell thought he was already living in the 1,000 year reign, which is why his books were called "Millennial Dawn." But he thought that the 1,000 year reign began around 1874. When this was changed, it made sense to think of the thousand years as a time to prepare for, and accept billions of resurrected persons into the new earth (including the unrighteous). Practically it makes sense. If Satan had not yet been completely destroyed, it makes sense that in the overall scheme of showing Satan the verdict of his false claim, that this "court case" is completed with Satan witnessing his own failure before meeting his final fate.
So there is a certain "practicality" to the 1,000 year reign as a special time when God through Christ takes his great power and begins ruling as king, even though he has always been king, and Christ too will be king from long before and eternally after. It becomes one of those special times when one can say in a special way:
(1 Chronicles 16:31) 31 Let the heavens rejoice, and let the earth be joyful; Declare among the nations: ‘Jehovah has become King!’
I understand that Satan could be destroyed at Armageddon and this same scenario could play out. I also know that your point of view removes the problem of the "second Armageddon" at the end of the 1,000 year reign.
But we still have this, which can produce an issue for both points of view, but I think it is harder for your point of view:
(Revelation 20:4, 5) . . .And they came to life and ruled as kings with the Christ for 1,000 years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the 1,000 years were ended.) This is the first resurrection.

Last night my mother called and said that they just had the circuit overseer who asked a question: Which Bible character was confined to his own place for a long time?
I said, don't tell me, let me guess. Uzziah?
She said, no. But wasn't he the one who steadied the ark?
I said, no that was Uzzah. King Uzziah had to be confined at home for leprosy.
She said, well it wasn't Uzziah. It was Noah. And that the circuit overseer said that at least we don't have to be confined with a bunch of stinky animals.
And I said, "Says you!" (We have two dogs, two cats, 10 fish. I was not, repeat not, referring to any son of mine who hasn't cleaned his room in over two weeks.)
And then, I added that Noah steadied the Ark, too. He had to keep the elephants and hippos at the four corners to keep it balanced, then "steady as she goes!!"

This is correct. Those two concepts can be very different, although as @Anna has pointed out, in both cases one lives forever. And in both cases, Jehovah has the final say about the "rules" of immortality. The main point was that there is no scripture that says the "other sheep" will not also have that same immortality as the other sheep who will have heavenly bodies. There is one faith, one hope, one baptism.

This is correct. Those two concepts can be very different, although as @Anna has pointed out, in both cases one lives forever. And in both cases, Jehovah has the final say about the "rules" of immortality. The main point was that there is no scripture that says the "other sheep" will not also have that same immortality as the other sheep who will have heavenly bodies. There is one faith, one hope, one baptism.

I hope so - but if not, I am content to obey and live forever.... 

Even in peacetime. My town did a heavy spray for mosquitoes a couple years ago, and estimated that hundreds of thousands of mosquitoes died. We probably won't find out for 15 years how it affected humans.

Out of detail did animals eat each other before Adam and Eve creation, or will they do it again in New World and after, it seems how this World living in two parallel reality. People got imperfection and living "imperfect life in imperfect World, after "sin". But animal continued to live as "perfect creatures" in own spiritual and literal "paradise" until now, but in dangerous from human.

For me, if I must stay up that late, the tree of life becomes the coffee bean tree.

(John 10:2-18) 2 But the one who enters through the door is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 The doorkeeper opens to this one, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 When he has brought all his own out, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice. . . . . 9 I am the door; whoever enters through me will be saved, and that one will go in and out and find pasturage. 10 . . . I have come that they may have life and have it in abundance. 11 I am the fine shepherd; the fine shepherd surrenders his life in behalf of the sheep. . . . 14 I am the fine shepherd. I know my sheep and my sheep know me, 15 just as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I surrender my life in behalf of the sheep. 16 “And I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; those too I must bring in, and they will listen to my voice, and they will become one flock, one shepherd.
Sometimes we think of expressions like "life in abundance" or "life in themselves" as only applying to the "little flock." But there is nothing that specifically says that the other sheep do not also attain "life in abundance" or even "immortality." (And yes, I realize it is not a WT teaching that the other sheep may attain immortality.)
It has long been applied especially to the "other sheep."
*** w73 6/15 p. 380 A Way of Life Opened to Mankind ***
“Whoever drinks from the water that I will give him will never get thirsty at all, but the water that I will give him will become in him a fountain of water bubbling up to impart everlasting life.”—John 4:14.  Does this everlasting life that Jesus gives mean that all who live everlastingly must go to heaven? By no means. For the prophecy at Revelation says of the crystal-clear water of the river of life: “The spirit and the bride keep on saying: ‘Come!’” Now, the bride is the Christian congregation of which Christ is husbandly Head. (Col. 1:18; Eph. 5:23; 2 Cor. 11:2) These who share heavenly life with Jesus Christ number 144,000 persons. (Rev. 14:1, 3) The ‘water of life’ is offered by the spirit and the bride to yet others. It therefore symbolizes God’s provision for earthly life, everlasting human life in perfection on an earth transformed into a paradise, suitable for perfect humans.
Paul speaks of the those who are changed in the "rapture" and those also resurrected to heavenly bodies as "immortal" and "incorruptible." But the "incorruptible" nature appears to refer to the type of body they have, not necessarily that they can never be destroyed if unfaithful.
(1 Corinthians 15:53-55) 53 For this which is corruptible must put on incorruption, and this which is mortal must put on immortality. 54 But when this which is corruptible puts on incorruption and this which is mortal puts on immortality, then the saying that is written will take place: “Death is swallowed up forever.” 55 “Death, where is your victory? Death, where is your sting?”
And we already believe that "flesh and blood" cannot inherit the kingdom for the "other sheep" too, at least in the following sense:
(Galatians 6:8) 8 because the one sowing with a view to his flesh will reap corruption from his flesh, but the one sowing with a view to the spirit will reap everlasting life from the spirit.
I don't think it's worth speculating that any will actually rebel, especially after the 1,000 years settles the great legal case against Satan, and will have proven the stupidity and fruitlessness of rebellion. But my point is that there is no scripture that claims that the other sheep or great crowd will not have immortality and eternal life. Even those terms (eternal life and immortality) are not really distinguished in the Bible, only in our doctrine.
I see nothing wrong with our doctrine, and I think it makes sense, but we should always be careful to distinguish interpretation imposed from the Bible and interpretation imposed on the Bible.

Yes only humans have eternity in their hearts.  But at present the entire creation is suffering due to Adam's sin. Animals are abused etc.
Animals have been having babies and doing their thing for millennia - almost perfectly.  But when their mitochondria die - they die. Humans have added stress to the animals. To see genetic defects amongst them used to be rare but it is now becoming more and more prevalent due to pollution in the environment and other stressors.  Their environments are being destroyed by man and they are being used as a commodity - for medicine etc.