JW Insider

And this would be a good thing? 
Have you ever seen a movie where this ends well? 

David Splane and Doing the Math
Do the Math
In the September JW Broadcast David Splane gave a talk on the above title. In it he raised the question whether Noah and Abraham knew each other. He claims that doing the math could help you answer that question. He begins by stating that, according to Insight on the Scriptures, we know for a fact the flood occurred in 2370 B.C.E. He lived for 350 years after the flood so that means he died in 2020 B.C.E. Abram entered Canaan in 1943 B.C.E. At the time he is 75 years old. Add 75 to 1943 means Abram was born in 2018 B.C.E. so, doing the math helps us to establish that Abram was born 2 years after Noah died.
In Genesis Chapter 11, it gives a genealogy from Shem all the way down to Abram.
And it says how old each person was when their son was born. It says that Arpachshad was 35 when his son was born, and Shelah was 30 when his son was born. But what David Splane did not take into consideration is that modern translations of the Bible are translated from the Hebrew Masoretic text, which is not the original Hebrew. But rather, a copy of the Hebrew, called the Leningrad Codex, which was produced in the 11th century A.D. But the Greek Septuagint was translated more than 1,000 years before, in 250 B.C., and would not have been translated from the Hebrew on which the Masoretic Text was based. But rather, from an older Hebrew text, which is no longer available. The Samaritan Pentateuch also pre-dates the Masoretic text and would also have referenced an older copy of the Hebrew. The Jewish historian Josephus agrees with both the Septuagint and the Samaritan Pentateuch.
In the Greek Septuagint it says that Arphaxad was 135. And it says that Shelah was 130. The Greek Septuagint has an extra 100 years on those ages in the six generations from Arphaxad down to Serug. Also, the Masoretic text says that Nahor was 29 years old when he fathered Terah Abrams father. The Septuagint says he was 79.
The Greek Septuagint has an extra 100 years on each one of those ages. But it's not just the Greek Septuagint. The Samaritan Pentateuch includes those extra hundred years and so does Flavius Josephus. That means there is an extra 650 years of history between Arpachshad and Serug. Noah lived 350 years after the flood. (Gen.9:28) Arpachshad was born 2 years after the flood. (Gen. 11:10) According to the Septuagint:
Arphaxad 135 years until Shelah
Shelah 130 years until Eber
Eber 134 years until Phalek
Phalek 130 years until Ragau
Ragau 132 years until Serouch
Serouch 130 years until Nachor
Nachor 79 years until Thara
Thara 27 years until Abram
Adding the above gives us a total of 897 years between Arphaxad and Abram. Adding two years between Arphaxad and the flood gives us 899 years. Subtracting 350 years of Noah’s life after the flood means Noah died, not two years according to Splane, but 549 years before Abram was born. This is the result if you “do the math” based on the Septuagint.
Interestingly, accepting these figures calls into question another statement of David Splane. In a previous broadcast he commented on the age of the Sphinx as dated to 2,550 B.C.E. by historians being wrong because it conflicted with the Bible account of the flood. But that’s only if you accept the Masoretic text figures as being correct.

The word resolution is being used in a more general sense these days. We can always talk about our resolve to resolutely watch our conduct, ministry, etc. At the end of an assembly we can still "resolve" to send a certain amount of contributions to the overall www (word-wide work), or even resolve to use funds for another specified purpose.
But the old use of "resolution" was highlighted because there was a time when Rutherford (especially) fought very hard to keep us from being a "religion." (Religion is a snare and a racket!) His terminology called the congregation a "company," and the ministers were "publishers" and Jesus Christ was even referred to as the Chief Executive Officer (really!!). This is why the old Kingdom Ministry/Kingdom Service was called Bulletin and Informant. When I was baptized we still spoke openly about placement quotas, and shortly before that it was about "selling" the publications, and "sales quotas." A pioneer, opened new "territory" just as door-to-salesmen were offered "territory" in "circuits" and "districts" and "zones" for things like encyclopedia sales, insurance sales, vitamins, Avon, Tupperware, Fuller Brushes, vacuum cleaners, and Carter's Little Liver Pills. Even the old term "colporteur" had no religious connotation, but was the term used by people who sold lots of different things.
The book "Tupperware: The Promise of Plastic in 1950s America" by Alison J. Clarke says this:
Fuller Brush salesmen were encouraged to view themselves as idealistic pioneers . . . 
The book SELL previously sold under the title Professional Selling: A Trust-Based Approach by Thomas N. Ingram and others, says this (p.27):
They sometimes follow a pioneer salesperson and take over the account after the pioneer has made the initial sale. ... We use the case of the territory manager's position with GlaxoSmith Kline Consumer Healthcare
We have Halls instead of Churches. We give door to door presentations, and practice them with demonstrations, and there are dozens of small examples that add up to show how we have historically tried to remove vocabulary that sounded too religious. But there are still examples documented in older WT publications that directly copy ideas about sales techniques and approaches that can be found in parallel literature about selling all types of products. I remember a Bible Study that said our Service Meeting reminded him exactly of Amway meetings with all the sample presentations, offer of the month, how to get the householders attention, when to be brief, when to answer questions, how to overcome objections, etc.
So the point was that resolutions were always an imitation of secular conventions of corporations which asked convention "delegates" to "vote" on resolutions. Secular conventions always had those propositions built on a long list of legalistic "whereas" clauses. Our resolutions always did the same but were usually the envelope for a more religious statement or agreement to stay clear of religion, steer clear of false doctrines of the clergy, uphold Jehovah's standards, declare neutrality with respect to some political idea, declare a condemnation of some religious or political idea, etc.

Oh, for crying out loud. My bad. I “took my eye off the ball” and actually thought you were at a convention. 
“Brothers!!! Let us resolve not to be dumbbells like TrueTom!”

She was soaked by the end of the match.

Depends on what you mean by the question. I am using the term "experiences" loosely, and might even be using the title "Sister" loosely, (as opposed to her "tony" tight pants, of course). Her "field" experiences were only about some of the highlights "on the field of play" and these were to ESPN reporters, not anything I heard privately. (I have never met her.)
In Federer's game, I learned that "derision is a swear at a racket." 

And I got to listen to Sister Selena Williams give her experiences. And a lot of recent "court" cases were discussed by everyone who had a chance to speak. There were even a few experiences about how to use the Net.
P.S. The tickets were free. My old company is a major sponsor, but as a retired person, the best I can still get are tickets up to the quarterfinals. When I was still at work, we could take a whole day off including the finals and sometimes even get a courtside seat. High up executives also had skyboxes at the major baseball stadiums and Madison Square Gardens.

I’m at the convention right now and they told us not to use our phones at all. But a lot of people are still taking pictures and texting. 
Also they haven’t finished painting the jw.org logo yet  only the background color at center court  
 

getfvid_56959746_825397327809043_2973141916100591616_n.mp4 Rare to see Chaplin speak. Most of his are silent movies.

I'm finding less and less of that "standard stuff" when you search on names of denominations. There was and still is a lot of talk in some countries of treating the Catholic Church as a "criminal organization" due to the high percentage of child abuse accusations. There were some schools and insitutions within the church where the percentage of accusations was so high that if it were found in any other institution, the entire organization would have been seen as a sex trafficking ring. But the Catholic Church gets a pass because of a traditional, historical reputation of promoting faith and peace (in spite of some pretty big lapses: Inquisition, Trinity, Hell, Purgatory, Hitler, and nearly half this world's wars).
Also, as you mention, religious charities and "life improvements" take the strain off the institutions that try to govern. This is what keeps the beast from turning on those who ride on its back, tax-free. And, of course, the ability of a religion to make an immoral war seem moral to its constituents is a cozy form of payback to the beast, in lieu of taxes. The symbiotic relationship between beast and rider has saved her so far. But there have been exceptions when the religion apparently offers nothing useful in return to the state: no charities, no strain relief, and no help in military recruitment. This is why the Watchtower was one of the religious organizations picked on by the FBI back in 1918. This is why the Scientologists barely escaped the clutches of the beast a few decades ago. With Islam in the last couple decades, too, it's the nature of the beast to overreact.

I'm finding less and less of that "standard stuff" when you search on names of denominations. There was and still is a lot of talk in some countries of treating the Catholic Church as a "criminal organization" due to the high percentage of child abuse accusations. There were some schools and insitutions within the church where the percentage of accusations was so high that if it were found in any other institution, the entire organization would have been seen as a sex trafficking ring. But the Catholic Church gets a pass because of a traditional, historical reputation of promoting faith and peace (in spite of some pretty big lapses: Inquisition, Trinity, Hell, Purgatory, Hitler, and nearly half this world's wars).
Also, as you mention, religious charities and "life improvements" take the strain off the institutions that try to govern. This is what keeps the beast from turning on those who ride on its back, tax-free. And, of course, the ability of a religion to make an immoral war seem moral to its constituents is a cozy form of payback to the beast, in lieu of taxes. The symbiotic relationship between beast and rider has saved her so far. But there have been exceptions when the religion apparently offers nothing useful in return to the state: no charities, no strain relief, and no help in military recruitment. This is why the Watchtower was one of the religious organizations picked on by the FBI back in 1918. This is why the Scientologists barely escaped the clutches of the beast a few decades ago. With Islam in the last couple decades, too, it's the nature of the beast to overreact.

@James Thomas Rook Jr.
Perhaps we would discuss the percentage:

Accuracy regarding the prophecies of our day: zero. But hey, I believe that Jesus did not appoint any steward to interpret prophecies,
rather, as stewards, everyone, and especially those who have more authority (the governing body) should feed and care for others. Although I prefer that there is a central doctrinal authority, better than each congregation to believe its own.
But, as others and I have commented previously, I feel very grateful for:
Dismantle the demonic teaching in hell of fire (official doctrine even today of orthodox Judaism, nominal Christianity and Islam, another thing is that ordinary believers do not believe it). Having learned the biblical truth about death, the hereafter, the soul and related subjects. Instead of thinking that God will destroy the Earth, believe rather that Jehovah will create a wonderful paradise, and see how that fits in with the original Purpose. VERY especially, not only knowing the divine name, but having learned the importance of using it, as well as the characteristics of the person and personality of God (as it is not a Trinity, for example) Something that has helped us all, I am sure, is to understand the question of Universal Sovereignty (I have read works of scholars on Job who do not at all convey such precious teaching) This core of teachings, among others, I would say are 90 percent wonderful. Maybe we have 10 percent of "nonsense" in between.
And then there is everything related to the "organization": Bethel houses, branches, the way of dressing of "mature" men and women, the way of exercising authority in the congregation and many similar things ... instead of putting a Percentage (because I am somewhat ashamed to write it) I will only say that I think it happens to us like the apostles when they were impressed by the temple stones. Jesus corrects them by explaining their relative value, in fact, predicting their early destruction.
(let the reader use discernment) Mt 24:15
 

My wife has a cousin who is SDA and she still drops by fairly often, because she travels a long way from her home to a church in the town neighboring ours. She enjoys the religious discussions, although I find her to be a bit sanctimonious about health issues, especially. (She's mostly a vegetarian.) And she seems like she gets it when we speak of their unfavorable E.G.White-related history, and several untenable doctrines (Sabbath, "Trinity," alcohol, etc.). But then she gets re-energized by her church to ignore it all, and she goes right back to how well they are doing in their charities, and growth.
Her SDA church seems to have taken a strong interest in Hebrew/Messianic Jewish outreach, and has several Hebrew-speaking converts. 
But she also point out that they started at a time (and place) very similar to the Watchtower and yet they have grown to twice as many active members. 20 million vs our 8+ million, she claims. I don't know exactly how they measure activity, but they do have a lot of people who are active in outreach to poor people, "missions," etc. Most of her church attend more than one meeting a week.

My wife has a cousin who is SDA and she still drops by fairly often, because she travels a long way from her home to a church in the town neighboring ours. She enjoys the religious discussions, although I find her to be a bit sanctimonious about health issues, especially. (She's mostly a vegetarian.) And she seems like she gets it when we speak of their unfavorable E.G.White-related history, and several untenable doctrines (Sabbath, "Trinity," alcohol, etc.). But then she gets re-energized by her church to ignore it all, and she goes right back to how well they are doing in their charities, and growth.
Her SDA church seems to have taken a strong interest in Hebrew/Messianic Jewish outreach, and has several Hebrew-speaking converts. 
But she also point out that they started at a time (and place) very similar to the Watchtower and yet they have grown to twice as many active members. 20 million vs our 8+ million, she claims. I don't know exactly how they measure activity, but they do have a lot of people who are active in outreach to poor people, "missions," etc. Most of her church attend more than one meeting a week.

Your diversionary attack on me does not explain why you indicated above that you are ashamed of the quotes from the Watchtower. I put the quotes there because it's so clear how we can learn from these, how they can apply today, and why it's so important to be honest about our past assumptions and conjecture.
By merely indicating your shame and embarrassment about the Watchtower, you do nothing to show how we can learn from it. If we are merely ashamed, we will be more likely to hide the things we are embarrassed about, or try to claim that they should not be brought up. As you admitted earlier this is a kind of dishonesty when we fail to present key points.
Oh, look, here's some more vote spamming that I missed, just in this topic alone, just in the last few minutes, and just on MY posts here:

That doesn't even include a few other examples of vote spamming. Like this one from just a couple minutes ago, when I agreed with @Space Merchant here about how the JWs will soon hit the 9 million mark in peak and average publishers.

I don't think it's just your shame and embarrassment about things the Watchtower has said. Surely you are not fighting against increased numbers, too. I really can't tell what you have against my statement to @Space Merchant above. If you are not too busy with your ongoing vote spamming campaigns, perhaps you could take some time out of your busy life to explain.
 

@BillyTheKid46, I thought you mostly just employed @Foreigner for vote spamming. I see you are doing some of the dirty work under your own name. And I also see you are nowhere near done yet, because you have added several more just since I copied the two images below.
What's odd, however is that "both" of you have now voted down posts that contained nothing more than scriptures quoted from the NWT, and just above in this same topic, only 4 posts back, you (and Foreigner, of course) downvoted a post that does no more than introduce 3 Watchtower quotes about how long it took Adam to name the animals with surrounding context. Are you really that embarrassed by quotes from the Watchtower that you found it necessary to give two down votes to these Watchtower quotes????

If you would like to understand my skepticism, it should be very simple to understand. But remember, this has nothing to do with you.
Remember we are not talking about persons who are only 95 or even 105 (my grandmother-in-law turns 105 this year). If you look at a list of super-centarians you might begin to see the problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_verified_oldest_people
Between 1957 and 1965, this 116 year old could easily have been the ONLY 116 year old on the face of the entire earth. And even if there was one 116 year old alive, the odds that he was alive in Texas (or somewhere in the United States) and had been in the Civil War makes it even more unlikely. The reason for saying that is that war veterans are often tracked specifically to watch for stories like this. They get published every "Memorial Day." They get veterans benefits. They get a lot of media attention.
In fact, there was a lot of evidence that the oldest Civil War veteran died at the age of 109. There were a couple of people (Walter WIlliams and WIlliam Lundy) who made claims of being older and also in the Civil War, but these two turned out to be likely "hoaxes."
One of them was the Houston, Texas man, Walter Williams, who was the one in a list of "hoaxers" claiming to have been 116:
http://time.com/3877537/civil-war-veterans-hoaxers-photos/
A further explanation for skepticism is the entire article at https://mashable.com/2015/04/10/civil-war-oldest-veterans/
Ancestry.com and newspapers.com were not available to some of the reporters and journalists who did their best to verify such stories when it was so common for people to claim whatever they wanted about having been in the Civil War. Now you can check multiple records and see what matches up in a matter of seconds.
The mashable article points out the following about the two men in question:
There is some debate as to the validity of both Walter Williams' and William Lundy's claims. Walter Williams claimed in 1959 to be the last Civil War veteran alive. Williams said he was 116, but census data discovered more recently suggests that he may have been eleven when the war ended in 1865. William Lundy was born at a similar time, and died in 1957.
The story still becomes possible if he forged papers to join at age 10 or 11, and there is some evidence that a small percentage of boys actually tried this. And you might have been born in 1952 or 1954, which makes it quite possible that you met one of these two men.

Sorry about that. I read almost everything with healthy skepticism, especially stories that include a 116-year-old man. But the story was not impossible, and therefore it would be an amazing story that I hoped you say more about.
Your story also had a 5 year old asking a 116 year old man about an obscure parade from about 45 years earlier that the boy would not likely have known about unless someone else brought it up first. You explained how that happened, and it now makes much more sense.
To be totally honest, I still have a problem with the story, but it's not about you. It's about the man claiming to be 116.

I'm not saying the individual congregations are not part of the CCJW or the Watchtower, I'm just showing the kinds of legal arguments that must be made to protect the financial part of the current kingdom "interests." It's not that I think that attorneys should not try to do what they can to limit financial exposure either, as long as they are also looking for "fairness" and "justice" for the victims. But all Witnesses should be aware that the material resources that we currently enjoy as part of the organization are not permanent. They are not "promised." In fact, all of us should at all times be willing to walk by faith and not by sight.
A lack of money can result in a breakdown of the lines of communication between a local congregation and various entities in New York. Are we willing to make the best of such a situation and trust in Jehovah? The WTS/CCJW is currently trying to prepare Witnesses for such an eventuality. Will it happen as predicted? Will it happen in a way that doesn't come anywhere close to what is being predicted? What if the GB are taken by some nefarious forces, as you have spoken of? What if they are put in prison for covering up child abuse? They have surely considered these possibilities themselves. What if, instead of the protection expected in an imminent great tribulation, our religion and organization becomes an object of derision for 40 more years? (These are not predictions and have nothing to do with any Bible prophecies that I know of.)
In any particular country, or perhaps even on a more international scale, we have certain expectations bolstered by prophetic interpretations, and we will easily maintain faithfulness if those expectations seem to align with our beliefs about ourselves. But we also need to be prepared for maintaining our faith under completely different circumstances. One of those circumstances might be merely going on for another 50 years as more and more of our brothers lose their enthusiasm, and cannot seem to be goaded any longer by proddings of 'imminence.' We can go back to a Biblical question in Luke 18:8:
Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

Let's assume that the last year of the Civil War was 1865, and that this person forged papers because he was only about 16 or so. This would mean he was about 116 in 1965, when you were about 5. This fits most of what you have claimed elsewhere about your age and experience, and it means that you are about my age.
It reminds me of 1964, when we moved to the Springfield/Joplin, Missouri area to 'serve where the need was greater' and we ended up assigned to a congregation in the Boonville/Versailles, Missouri area. In Missouri we came across several persons up until about 1967 who claimed to remember the Civil War. I never met someone who claimed to fight, but a few who lost their parents or other close relatives. One old man on my "magazine route" as we called it, claimed to have been over 100 and he made "fiddles." He said his father fought but I don't even remember for which side. 
What really impressed me is that, at age 5, you asked him about a "Confederate and Union" parade in New York that happened nearly 45 years before you born. And a seemingly obscure parade, at that! I could hardly find out anything about this particular parade.

I agree on your points with JTR. However, I think several of us would like to know what you are saying on the overlapping generation question. It might be a whole different way than most of us are already looking at it. So I'd love an answer to those questions previously posed:
Thanks.

Now I'm glad I did, because you bring up an interesting point that I might have missed . . .
Are you saying that those in the second group who would have potentially overlapped with those in the first group should be born (or anointed) before 1933?
If so, I can see some of the reasons you might say this. But I'd really like to know if that's what you believe. I guess the best way to ask is to see if you can answer either or both of the following question(s) with a yes or no:
Do you think persons in the second group of the "generation that will not pass away" must be born before 1933 (or perhaps up to 1935)? Do you think persons in the second group of the "generation that will not pass away" must be able to realize their own anointing before 1933 (or perhaps up to 1935)? PBS?

Stipulating 1965 (apparently) can be helpful.
No problem. My skepticism was already well founded and satisfied. But it doesn't mean the story is untrue. Unique and unlikely things have happened to all of us at some time or another. This is what makes the world interesting.
In a similar vein, then, changing the subject to "soldiers of Christ," a person could have been born in 1903, anointed at age 11 before October 1914, then living to be 116, might therefore not die until October 2019. That's this year!! If another 11-year-old person, somewhere in the world, becomes anointed before October 1919, and he or she lives to be 116, that means that the "generation which will not pass away" could potentially pass away in 2124. I think, therefore, we can safely say that this generation will finally pass away just over 100 years from now, if not before. Right?

Brother Jackson did an excellent job under the circumstances. Some of what he said indicated that the GB really would go back and rethink policies that were in place, and I believe it's no coincidence that we have seen more good progress since the ARC hearings.
However, I never heard anyone (who watched Jackson's testimony in its entirety) point out any instances or evidences of humility. Sorry to say it, but his overall demeanor, to me, actually stood out as haughty and smug. I don't think that was just me. And it's not that I think this is how he is, or how the GB usually are, I have seen many instances of the GB showing humility and true concern. But I saw several evidences of the opposite, here.
In fact, I think that McClellan, took notice of Brother Jackson's (who is an Australian citizen) attempts to reposition his testimony as an "opportunity" and something that worked out because he was only there (traveling in Australia) to take care of his elderly father. In fact, I understand that for no other person did Judge McClellan thank someone for their testimony and then add the words he added here at 1:07:41-45. The Judge, with a possible bit of derisive head-shaking of his own adds: ". . . you are now formally excused from your summons." It's even possible to interpret the half-second loss of Brother Jackson's "smirk" to that very remark at 1:07:47.