JW Insider

Actually this serves to banish boredom.
And in a strange sort of way, I offer this as a Bible teaching tool. Most people quote a verse here or there from Galatians (sometimes I think the guy that invented numbered verses should be hung on a gallows) but if you asked them what the overall book was about, they wouldn’t have a clue. Now they will.
I can picture anyone with sufficient time on his hands reading Galatians 5:12 and saying ‘he said that?’ Of course, he did not, but what he did say was not totally from another planet.

Whenever a new version of Scripture appears that is colloquialized, paraphrased, or just plain dumbed down, the refrain is heard: “If it gets modern people to read God’s Word, it is worth it.” How far you want to take this trend is anyone’s guess. Suffice it to say that the Sinaiticus Sheepngoats pushes the boundaries as they have never been pushed before. It is an incredible find from the dry desert where it has been preserved for thousands of years. (though there are a few critics at the Whitepebble Institute who claim it has only been around two weeks and was discovered in the glove box of Harley’s car)
And yet—and yet—though it takes outrageous liberties and outright manufactures a few things, it does serve to convey the basic idea of the entire Book of Galatians. Is it right to spoil the book for everyone else in the course of getting a good grasp of it yourself? Your guess is as good as mine.
Anyway, here is the text of the Sinaiticus Sheepngoats edition of Galatians:
Chapter 1
Dear Galatians: Hi. Remember me? It’s Paul. How are you? (1:1-5)
The reason I say ‘remember me’ is because I’m not sure that you do! I can’t believe how quickly you are screwing up! Is that chair I used to sit in even cold yet? What is this about louts trying to change the whole narrative? They’re not allowed to do that! Look, even angels are not allowed to do that! (6-9)
You remember what a jerk I was. Nobody made more trouble for you than me. But after God let me hear about it right there on the Damascus road and that other fellow was sent so that I could see again, I went off to Arabia for three years to think about it. (13-17)
Then I came back to Jerusalem and stayed with Peter for a couple of weeks. But no one else—wait, I did see James, but none of the others. Then I went off again. What! You think I am fibbing? For years and years, had you asked those apostles about me, they would have said, “I dunno. Your guess is as good as mine. He used to be the nastiest fellow. Now it looks as though he is on our side. Cool! We’ll take it!” (18-24)
Chapter 2
About 14 years later I figured that maybe I had better give those guys a call. I had Barnabas with me by then, and Titus—fine fellows. I met with them privately, of course, just in case I was not doing something—um, kosher. “You okay with this?” I said to them. “You’re not going to make Titus do that Jewish thing, are you? I don’t see any need for it.” They didn’t either! (2:1-3)
It probably wouldn’t even have come up were it not for those pinheaded louts trying to drag us down, wanting us to everything Jewish that we don’t have to do anymore. We blew right past them, and it was for your sake just as much as for ours. (4-5)
Okay, so I consulted with these ones—I mean, I guess they are important. I wondered if they might try to rein me in, but no!—they said, “Whatever you are doing, keep on doing it. We’ll stick with preaching to Jews, but you—I mean, Peter unlocked that door for the nations, so go for it! Just don’t ignore the poor.” Sure, I can do that. (6-10)
But then Peter came calling later on and suddenly he himself goes all Jewish on me. Oh, sure, he pals around with these new Gentile Christians easy enough, but when his buddies show up, he acts like he doesn’t know them. I said, “I don’t believe it! Here you are living the free life, telling others to be like that, and then the narrow-minded fuddy duddies show up and you get all scaredy cat? (11-14)
Yeah, well he’s a good sort, but he goes a little weak at the knees sometimes. You don’t have to do any of that Jewish stuff! What do you think the Lord is for? (15-21)
Chapter 3
What on earth is wrong with you? How can you be so dumb? You break free but then turn around and go back because you forgot your leg irons? Are you kidding me? (3:1-5)
Don’t pull this Abraham stuff on me. Wait, no. If you want to talk Abraham, let’s talk Abraham. You think he earned anything? No! He “put faith in Jehovah, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” THAT’S what you want to take away from Abraham—his faith, and how he pointed the way for other people to have faith. Not the later Law—that Law did nothing but show you up for the basket cases that you were! Did you manage to keep it? No! All you did was screw up. That’s why when Christ comes along, you are supposed to say, “Exactly what we need! Thank you, thank you, thank you. (6-11)
You don’t go back to the Law again—what’s wrong with you? The Law has nothing to do with faith. Christ pulled us out of that—THAT’S what Abraham was pointing to, and you want to dive back in again? (12-14)
Okay, now look—let’s take this real slow. Take notes if it will help. So Abraham gets a promise that means the Christ will come through his lineup, but how does the Law figure in? It comes 430 years later. Does it change his promise? I don’t think so. (15-18)
Why the Law? It’s because you guys kept messing up, that’s why. And it was supposed to dawn on you that you DID keep messing up and that you’re never (and yes—me, too) going to come out like the champion of Jeopardy. You weren’t supposed to think that dotting all the ‘I’s and crossing all the ‘T’s would get you there—besides, you missed lots of them. (19-22)
Yes, it gave you something to do and kept you off the streets. But now that the real thing has arrived, you can set down your slates. Class is over. You can join in with that promise to Abraham. (23-29)
Chapter 4
It took a long time for you to get to where you are. A lot of work went into it. Don’t mess it up. (4:1-8)
You had real freedom. I mean, real freedom in Christ. And now you want to become law nerds again and focus on dotting ‘I’s and crossing ‘T’s? Really? What! Do I have a death wish or something? What am I doing this for? (9-11)
Remember the good times we used to have? Remember how you used to loan me your specs? You didn’t then stick out your foot to trip me up. What’s gotten into you? (12-16)
Do you think that these pinheaded louts are your friends? They just want to be your bosses. “Meet the new boss—same as the old boss.” (17-20)
Go back to Abraham, you law nerds, and take a point. Two women, remember? One a concubine, one a wife. Hagar gave birth first because Sarah thought she was too old to have a child. No mystery about how Hagar conceived. You see it all the time on TV. But Sarah! THAT’S where God’s promise came in, and she didn’t even believe herself it could happen until it did! 
The two women stand for two groups of people. Hagar, the one of ordinary birth, is mother to the ones of Law (that you want go back to!) Sarah, the one of the promise, is mother to the ones putting their faith in Christ. (21-28)
The Hagar kid made trouble for the Sarah kid back then. It’s the same today with these pinheaded louts trying to force their Law on you. But what does the verse say? “Take this Law and shove it! I ain’t workin here no more!” Keep it that way! (29-31)
Chapter 5
You are free from slavery. Don’t go back to it. Or if you do, you’d better not miss a single one of those ‘I’s or ‘T’s. (5:1-6)
You were doing so well. Who tripped you up? Who made you think you need circumcision? It ain’t me, babe. Those Jews would give me a free pass if they thought I was turning Christianity into just one of their outposts. “Just you wait, enry iggins”—they’ll get theirs. (7-11)
In fact, I have half a mind to come and kick them in the nuts so hard that they won’t qualify to serve in the temple that they want to drag you into! (12)
No, brothers, don’t go there. Just don’t. You don’t need their picayune Law. It all boils down to love anyway—that is the greatest part of it—so if you get you head around that, you’ll do just fine. You start nitpicking at each other over every pissy little thing and you’ll tear each other apart! (13-18)
Don’t do bad things. Do good things. What do you mean, ‘What bad things?’ “No back-biting, no ass-grabbing, you know exactly what I mean!” [thank you, Randy Neuman] It shouldn’t be hard, if you really are following the Christ. Do the best you can, and don’t go thinking that you are better than the other guy. (19-26)
Chapter 6
Okay, let’s wrap this up. Don’t be babies—man up, but pull each other out of the crud when you have to (be sure you don’t fall in yourself). (6:1-5)
Don’t try to Play around with God. You can’t. Keep on keeping on—it will all pay off. Lend a hand where needed. (6-10)
See the large letters I make, all by myself with my own hand? Why? Because I am blind as a bat—that’s why. I dunno—it comes and goes. That’s why I insulted that pompous character before I knew he was the high priest. I asked God to take it away, but he said, “Nah, it keeps you humble.” And it has. It’s not an altogether bad thing to have a thorn in the flesh. (11)
Now, remember—they are pinheaded louts trying to lay their Law on you. And why? They’re just chicken themselves—like Peter might have been, but he saw where he was heading and corrected himself. They don’t want to stand out among their cronies, and they want to find strength in numbers by having you do what they do—it will hide their cowardice. What! You think they do the Law themselves? No way! They just want to do some back-stabbing and ass-grabbing themselves and then throw in a gerbil or something for sacrifice to make it all good again. Come on! Please—you are too smart not to see through them. (12-16)
I’ve suffered for carrying the good news of the Christ. So have you. Don’t turn back to be a law nerd again. Press on ahead. God will back you. So will Christ. (17-18)
***
What a bunch of idiots there at the Whitepebble Institute—tossing this amazing new manuscript in the dumpster! The place has gone right downhill ever since the director, Wayne Whitepebble, took a course on critical thinking and tried to kiss up to the evolutionists by adding an ancient skull to his library alongside the globe and old maps because he heard that is what smart people do but then it turned out that his ancient skull was actually missing evidence in the Mugsy McDougal ax murder case and he got into serious hot water with the authorities.
Plainly, this new find belongs in the Bible canon.

 
 

*** w54 8/15 p. 502 par. 22 The Power of Hope ***
While the anointed remnant expect to serve on earth for a period after Armageddon, as it pleases Jehovah, and while the other sheep expect to serve Jehovah without a break in life clear through to the end of this system of things at Armageddon and on into the unending time of the new world, yet death due to natural causes or due to keeping integrity may occur before Armageddon.
That idea remained "on the books" until about 1990 and was changed in 2013:
*** w13 7/15 p. 5 “Tell Us, When Will These Things Be?” ***
: One of the events mentioned in these verses is the ‘gathering of the chosen ones.’ (Matt. 24:31) Hence, it appears that all anointed ones who still remain on earth after the initial part of the great tribulation has passed will at some point be raised to heaven before the outbreak of the battle of Armageddon. This adjusts what was stated on this subject in “Questions From Readers” in The Watchtower of August 15, 1990, page 30.
Even in 1990 it was admitted that the Bible didn't say one way or the other, but we speculated that it would happen with a few, at least. It was again, partly based on turning Bible narratives into "prophecies" which was beginning to disappear, especially after Fred Franz became ill and was no longer included in Writing Department approvals. Notice how the following article sort of "lets it down easy" on those who once taught (as in Gilead School) that Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives, all had a parallel to be fulfilled in the New World.
*** w90 8/15 p. 30 Questions From Readers ***
Will some anointed Christians survive the “great tribulation” to live on earth in the new world before being taken to heaven?
Pointedly, the Bible does not say. . . . What of a Bible account that might parallel such survival on earth? One example that has been presented concerns Noah and his family. Noah has been viewed as typifying Jesus in this time of the end. (Genesis 6:8-10; Matthew 24:37) As Noah led his wife and their three sons and daughters-in-law through the end of that ancient system, Christ will provide leadership for the remnant of his bride class and those who become children of the “Eternal Father,” Jesus. Noah’s wife survived the Flood and shared in the renewing of true worship on a cleansed earth. A parallel might be the survival into the new world of a remnant of the bride class.—Isaiah 9:6, 7; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 21:2, 9.
Other Biblical accounts have also been viewed as suggesting that some of the anointed might live into the new world. For example, Jeremiah survived the destruction of Jerusalem; “the man” with the secretary’s inkhorn remained to see the executional work before he went back to give his report.—Ezekiel 9:4, 8, 11.
Comments about the possibility that some of the anointed might survive into the new world are made with good intentions and in the light of Biblical precedents for trying to understand prophecies or patterns that could have later parallels. If it turns out that none of the anointed are left on earth, there will be no reason for dissatisfaction. We already have accepted that Biblical matters are understood better as time passes. For instance, The Watchtower of July 15, 1981, discussed Micah 5:6-9 again and explained that “the remnant of spiritual Israelites have not had to wait until after . . . Har–Magedon in order to be as a ‘dew’ of refreshment to people.” This discussion again offered the possibility that the remnant might survive God’s great war and for a while “continue to be as a refreshing ‘dew’ to the ‘great crowd’ of ‘other sheep.’” We can see, though, that the passing of time and the increase in spiritual light can broaden and alter our understanding of prophecy or of Bible dramas.—Proverbs 4:18.
Notice how these prophetic parallels were again being turned into "interesting possibilities" just like the the 1918 "first resurrection." But they weren't officially dropped, and were still being taught in Gilead School into the 2000's.

Good question. I see you are actually thinking about the topic rather than just being pulled down into the squabbling.
When the end comes, and the judgment comes, we can expect that there will be anointed on earth. To me this seems clear from Paul's account of the end:
(1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:2) 15 For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word, that we the living who survive to the presence of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; 16 because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we will always be with the Lord. 18 So keep comforting one another with these words. 5 Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night.
In other words, at some surprisingly sudden point in time, the dead (anointed) are raised to heaven together with those who are surviving right up to the time of the "parousia of the Lord." The timing has always been a matter of much conjecture. We don't like to use the term rapture, so our previous doctrine here taught that the parousia started in 1914 (as it still teaches, officially) but that the first resurrection (including Paul's resurrection) was supposed to have happened in 1918. This was a leftover from our old parallel dispensation teachings under Barbour, Russell, and early Rutherford. In fact, it was explained that because Jesus appeared as Messiah/Christ in 29 and was resurrected 3.5 years later, that the invisible appearance of Christ in October 1914 would be followed by a resurrection of all the dead saints in the spring of 1918.
But 1918, although it once appeared more often than 1919 in our publications, has now been almost completely removed from our repertoire of prophetic dates, and replaced with dates like 1919 and more recent events. Jesus no longer inspected his temple in 1918, nor do we teach that the first resurrection must have happened in that year. Instead of just making a sudden change to the doctrine, it was changed from an important prophetic date to just "an interesting possibility."
*** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 12 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
At this point, it may be helpful to consider what might be viewed as a Bible parallel. Jesus Christ was anointed as the future King of God’s Kingdom in the fall of 29 C.E. Three and a half years later, in the spring of 33 C.E., he was resurrected as a mighty spirit person. Could it, then, be reasoned that since Jesus was enthroned in the fall of 1914, the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility.
We still liked the idea of starting that resurrection "early in Christ's presence" and especially wanted to have it start before 1935. The article continues:
This means that the first resurrection must have begun early in Christ’s presence, and it continues “during his presence.” (1 Corinthians 15:23) Rather than occurring all at once, the first resurrection takes place over a period of time. . . . “A white robe was given to each of them; and they were told to rest a little while longer, until the number was filled also of their fellow slaves and their brothers who were about to be killed as they also had been.”—Revelation 6:10, 11. . . .  So after war, famine, and pestilence began to ravage the earth, members of the 144,000 who were dead, represented by the blood at the base of the altar, were raised to heavenly life and clothed in symbolic white robes. . . . God’s Word does not disclose a precise date for the first resurrection, but it does reveal that it occurs over a period of time, during Christ’s presence. The first to be resurrected are anointed Christians who died before Christ’s presence began. As Christ’s presence progresses, anointed Christians who faithfully finish their earthly course are changed “in the twinkling of an eye” into powerful spirit creatures. (1 Corinthians 15:52) Will all the anointed receive their heavenly reward before the war of Armageddon? We do not know. We do know, however, that in God’s due time, all the 144,000 will be found standing on the heavenly Mount Zion.
You might notice the mistake that I highlighted. The dead (whose sacrificial blood cries out for justice) are told to wait until the number was filled. But if we place this parousia from 1914 on up through the great tribulation, then we don't really have them all being changed together so that no one group of anointed has to be concerned about going to heaven before another group of anointed. Revelation says they all wait until the number is filled. Thessalonians says they all go together, at the time of that trumpet call. In fact the scripture in 1 Cor 15:52 just referenced says:
(1 Corinthians 15:51, 52) 51 Look! I tell you a sacred secret: We will not all fall asleep in death, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised up incorruptible, and we will be changed.
This sounds very much like the "rapture" teaching that we had avoided for years by using the word "during" Christ's parousia, and "during" the last trumpet. Actually, the Greek in context here provides better support for translating "at his parousia" not "during his parousia." and "at the last trumpet."
So, more recently, the Watchtower stopped discounting the idea about the "rapture." We still don't like the word because it reminds people of some false teachings still associated with the "rapture." But the basic idea of a "rapture" is now accepted. We still look to fit it all into our timeline for the first resurrection, Gog attack, great tribulation, marriage of the Lamb, etc.
*** w15 7/15 pp. 18-19 pars. 14-16 “Your Deliverance Is Getting Near”! ***
This gathering work does not refer to the initial ingathering of anointed ones; nor does it refer to the final sealing of the remaining anointed ones. (Matt. 13:37, 38) That sealing happens before the outbreak of the great tribulation. (Rev. 7:1-4) So, what is this gathering work that Jesus mentions? It is the time when the remaining ones of the 144,000 will receive their heavenly reward. (1 Thess. 4:15-17; Rev. 14:1) This event will take place at some point after the beginning of the attack by Gog of Magog. (Ezek. 38:11) Then these words of Jesus will be fulfilled: “At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.”—Matt. 13:43.
15 Does this mean that there will be a “rapture” of the anointed ones? Many in Christendom believe, according to this teaching, that Christians will be bodily caught up from the earth. Then, they expect that Jesus will visibly return to rule the earth. . . .  So those who will be taken to heaven will first need to be “changed, in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet.” (Read 1 Corinthians 15:50-53.) Therefore, while we do not use the term “rapture” here because of its wrong connotation, the remaining faithful anointed will be gathered together in an instant of time.
16 Once all the 144,000 are in heaven, the final preparations for the marriage of the Lamb can begin. (Rev. 19:9) But something else will happen before that joyous event. Remember, shortly before the remaining ones of the 144,000 are taken to heaven, Gog will attack God’s people. (Ezek. 38:16)
Much more to say, but I hope you can at least see what I meant by including the heavenly anointed in the "sheep and goats" parable.

*** w54 8/15 p. 502 par. 22 The Power of Hope ***
While the anointed remnant expect to serve on earth for a period after Armageddon, as it pleases Jehovah, and while the other sheep expect to serve Jehovah without a break in life clear through to the end of this system of things at Armageddon and on into the unending time of the new world, yet death due to natural causes or due to keeping integrity may occur before Armageddon.
That idea remained "on the books" until about 1990 and was changed in 2013:
*** w13 7/15 p. 5 “Tell Us, When Will These Things Be?” ***
: One of the events mentioned in these verses is the ‘gathering of the chosen ones.’ (Matt. 24:31) Hence, it appears that all anointed ones who still remain on earth after the initial part of the great tribulation has passed will at some point be raised to heaven before the outbreak of the battle of Armageddon. This adjusts what was stated on this subject in “Questions From Readers” in The Watchtower of August 15, 1990, page 30.
Even in 1990 it was admitted that the Bible didn't say one way or the other, but we speculated that it would happen with a few, at least. It was again, partly based on turning Bible narratives into "prophecies" which was beginning to disappear, especially after Fred Franz became ill and was no longer included in Writing Department approvals. Notice how the following article sort of "lets it down easy" on those who once taught (as in Gilead School) that Noah, his wife, his sons, and their wives, all had a parallel to be fulfilled in the New World.
*** w90 8/15 p. 30 Questions From Readers ***
Will some anointed Christians survive the “great tribulation” to live on earth in the new world before being taken to heaven?
Pointedly, the Bible does not say. . . . What of a Bible account that might parallel such survival on earth? One example that has been presented concerns Noah and his family. Noah has been viewed as typifying Jesus in this time of the end. (Genesis 6:8-10; Matthew 24:37) As Noah led his wife and their three sons and daughters-in-law through the end of that ancient system, Christ will provide leadership for the remnant of his bride class and those who become children of the “Eternal Father,” Jesus. Noah’s wife survived the Flood and shared in the renewing of true worship on a cleansed earth. A parallel might be the survival into the new world of a remnant of the bride class.—Isaiah 9:6, 7; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 21:2, 9.
Other Biblical accounts have also been viewed as suggesting that some of the anointed might live into the new world. For example, Jeremiah survived the destruction of Jerusalem; “the man” with the secretary’s inkhorn remained to see the executional work before he went back to give his report.—Ezekiel 9:4, 8, 11.
Comments about the possibility that some of the anointed might survive into the new world are made with good intentions and in the light of Biblical precedents for trying to understand prophecies or patterns that could have later parallels. If it turns out that none of the anointed are left on earth, there will be no reason for dissatisfaction. We already have accepted that Biblical matters are understood better as time passes. For instance, The Watchtower of July 15, 1981, discussed Micah 5:6-9 again and explained that “the remnant of spiritual Israelites have not had to wait until after . . . Har–Magedon in order to be as a ‘dew’ of refreshment to people.” This discussion again offered the possibility that the remnant might survive God’s great war and for a while “continue to be as a refreshing ‘dew’ to the ‘great crowd’ of ‘other sheep.’” We can see, though, that the passing of time and the increase in spiritual light can broaden and alter our understanding of prophecy or of Bible dramas.—Proverbs 4:18.
Notice how these prophetic parallels were again being turned into "interesting possibilities" just like the the 1918 "first resurrection." But they weren't officially dropped, and were still being taught in Gilead School into the 2000's.

As i can recall, publications gave few different ideas about this in my life time. 

Is it fair?
 
 
Is it FAIR.wmv

Because i am one of those who are in opposition to WTJWORG ideology (officially from 2015), do you sure about your conclusion how @JW Insider skillfully deceived me to to join him in the same job? :)))
I have never met JW Insider before this Forum, and we are not in any sort of conspiracy. :))) But, I am gladly to met him and some other participants who gave comments here.   

Good question. I see you are actually thinking about the topic rather than just being pulled down into the squabbling.
When the end comes, and the judgment comes, we can expect that there will be anointed on earth. To me this seems clear from Paul's account of the end:
(1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:2) 15 For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word, that we the living who survive to the presence of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; 16 because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we will always be with the Lord. 18 So keep comforting one another with these words. 5 Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night.
In other words, at some surprisingly sudden point in time, the dead (anointed) are raised to heaven together with those who are surviving right up to the time of the "parousia of the Lord." The timing has always been a matter of much conjecture. We don't like to use the term rapture, so our previous doctrine here taught that the parousia started in 1914 (as it still teaches, officially) but that the first resurrection (including Paul's resurrection) was supposed to have happened in 1918. This was a leftover from our old parallel dispensation teachings under Barbour, Russell, and early Rutherford. In fact, it was explained that because Jesus appeared as Messiah/Christ in 29 and was resurrected 3.5 years later, that the invisible appearance of Christ in October 1914 would be followed by a resurrection of all the dead saints in the spring of 1918.
But 1918, although it once appeared more often than 1919 in our publications, has now been almost completely removed from our repertoire of prophetic dates, and replaced with dates like 1919 and more recent events. Jesus no longer inspected his temple in 1918, nor do we teach that the first resurrection must have happened in that year. Instead of just making a sudden change to the doctrine, it was changed from an important prophetic date to just "an interesting possibility."
*** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 12 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
At this point, it may be helpful to consider what might be viewed as a Bible parallel. Jesus Christ was anointed as the future King of God’s Kingdom in the fall of 29 C.E. Three and a half years later, in the spring of 33 C.E., he was resurrected as a mighty spirit person. Could it, then, be reasoned that since Jesus was enthroned in the fall of 1914, the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility.
We still liked the idea of starting that resurrection "early in Christ's presence" and especially wanted to have it start before 1935. The article continues:
This means that the first resurrection must have begun early in Christ’s presence, and it continues “during his presence.” (1 Corinthians 15:23) Rather than occurring all at once, the first resurrection takes place over a period of time. . . . “A white robe was given to each of them; and they were told to rest a little while longer, until the number was filled also of their fellow slaves and their brothers who were about to be killed as they also had been.”—Revelation 6:10, 11. . . .  So after war, famine, and pestilence began to ravage the earth, members of the 144,000 who were dead, represented by the blood at the base of the altar, were raised to heavenly life and clothed in symbolic white robes. . . . God’s Word does not disclose a precise date for the first resurrection, but it does reveal that it occurs over a period of time, during Christ’s presence. The first to be resurrected are anointed Christians who died before Christ’s presence began. As Christ’s presence progresses, anointed Christians who faithfully finish their earthly course are changed “in the twinkling of an eye” into powerful spirit creatures. (1 Corinthians 15:52) Will all the anointed receive their heavenly reward before the war of Armageddon? We do not know. We do know, however, that in God’s due time, all the 144,000 will be found standing on the heavenly Mount Zion.
You might notice the mistake that I highlighted. The dead (whose sacrificial blood cries out for justice) are told to wait until the number was filled. But if we place this parousia from 1914 on up through the great tribulation, then we don't really have them all being changed together so that no one group of anointed has to be concerned about going to heaven before another group of anointed. Revelation says they all wait until the number is filled. Thessalonians says they all go together, at the time of that trumpet call. In fact the scripture in 1 Cor 15:52 just referenced says:
(1 Corinthians 15:51, 52) 51 Look! I tell you a sacred secret: We will not all fall asleep in death, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised up incorruptible, and we will be changed.
This sounds very much like the "rapture" teaching that we had avoided for years by using the word "during" Christ's parousia, and "during" the last trumpet. Actually, the Greek in context here provides better support for translating "at his parousia" not "during his parousia." and "at the last trumpet."
So, more recently, the Watchtower stopped discounting the idea about the "rapture." We still don't like the word because it reminds people of some false teachings still associated with the "rapture." But the basic idea of a "rapture" is now accepted. We still look to fit it all into our timeline for the first resurrection, Gog attack, great tribulation, marriage of the Lamb, etc.
*** w15 7/15 pp. 18-19 pars. 14-16 “Your Deliverance Is Getting Near”! ***
This gathering work does not refer to the initial ingathering of anointed ones; nor does it refer to the final sealing of the remaining anointed ones. (Matt. 13:37, 38) That sealing happens before the outbreak of the great tribulation. (Rev. 7:1-4) So, what is this gathering work that Jesus mentions? It is the time when the remaining ones of the 144,000 will receive their heavenly reward. (1 Thess. 4:15-17; Rev. 14:1) This event will take place at some point after the beginning of the attack by Gog of Magog. (Ezek. 38:11) Then these words of Jesus will be fulfilled: “At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.”—Matt. 13:43.
15 Does this mean that there will be a “rapture” of the anointed ones? Many in Christendom believe, according to this teaching, that Christians will be bodily caught up from the earth. Then, they expect that Jesus will visibly return to rule the earth. . . .  So those who will be taken to heaven will first need to be “changed, in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet.” (Read 1 Corinthians 15:50-53.) Therefore, while we do not use the term “rapture” here because of its wrong connotation, the remaining faithful anointed will be gathered together in an instant of time.
16 Once all the 144,000 are in heaven, the final preparations for the marriage of the Lamb can begin. (Rev. 19:9) But something else will happen before that joyous event. Remember, shortly before the remaining ones of the 144,000 are taken to heaven, Gog will attack God’s people. (Ezek. 38:16)
Much more to say, but I hope you can at least see what I meant by including the heavenly anointed in the "sheep and goats" parable.

Good question. I see you are actually thinking about the topic rather than just being pulled down into the squabbling.
When the end comes, and the judgment comes, we can expect that there will be anointed on earth. To me this seems clear from Paul's account of the end:
(1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:2) 15 For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word, that we the living who survive to the presence of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; 16 because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we will always be with the Lord. 18 So keep comforting one another with these words. 5 Now as for the times and the seasons, brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day is coming exactly as a thief in the night.
In other words, at some surprisingly sudden point in time, the dead (anointed) are raised to heaven together with those who are surviving right up to the time of the "parousia of the Lord." The timing has always been a matter of much conjecture. We don't like to use the term rapture, so our previous doctrine here taught that the parousia started in 1914 (as it still teaches, officially) but that the first resurrection (including Paul's resurrection) was supposed to have happened in 1918. This was a leftover from our old parallel dispensation teachings under Barbour, Russell, and early Rutherford. In fact, it was explained that because Jesus appeared as Messiah/Christ in 29 and was resurrected 3.5 years later, that the invisible appearance of Christ in October 1914 would be followed by a resurrection of all the dead saints in the spring of 1918.
But 1918, although it once appeared more often than 1919 in our publications, has now been almost completely removed from our repertoire of prophetic dates, and replaced with dates like 1919 and more recent events. Jesus no longer inspected his temple in 1918, nor do we teach that the first resurrection must have happened in that year. Instead of just making a sudden change to the doctrine, it was changed from an important prophetic date to just "an interesting possibility."
*** w07 1/1 p. 28 par. 12 “The First Resurrection”—Now Under Way! ***
At this point, it may be helpful to consider what might be viewed as a Bible parallel. Jesus Christ was anointed as the future King of God’s Kingdom in the fall of 29 C.E. Three and a half years later, in the spring of 33 C.E., he was resurrected as a mighty spirit person. Could it, then, be reasoned that since Jesus was enthroned in the fall of 1914, the resurrection of his faithful anointed followers began three and a half years later, in the spring of 1918? That is an interesting possibility.
We still liked the idea of starting that resurrection "early in Christ's presence" and especially wanted to have it start before 1935. The article continues:
This means that the first resurrection must have begun early in Christ’s presence, and it continues “during his presence.” (1 Corinthians 15:23) Rather than occurring all at once, the first resurrection takes place over a period of time. . . . “A white robe was given to each of them; and they were told to rest a little while longer, until the number was filled also of their fellow slaves and their brothers who were about to be killed as they also had been.”—Revelation 6:10, 11. . . .  So after war, famine, and pestilence began to ravage the earth, members of the 144,000 who were dead, represented by the blood at the base of the altar, were raised to heavenly life and clothed in symbolic white robes. . . . God’s Word does not disclose a precise date for the first resurrection, but it does reveal that it occurs over a period of time, during Christ’s presence. The first to be resurrected are anointed Christians who died before Christ’s presence began. As Christ’s presence progresses, anointed Christians who faithfully finish their earthly course are changed “in the twinkling of an eye” into powerful spirit creatures. (1 Corinthians 15:52) Will all the anointed receive their heavenly reward before the war of Armageddon? We do not know. We do know, however, that in God’s due time, all the 144,000 will be found standing on the heavenly Mount Zion.
You might notice the mistake that I highlighted. The dead (whose sacrificial blood cries out for justice) are told to wait until the number was filled. But if we place this parousia from 1914 on up through the great tribulation, then we don't really have them all being changed together so that no one group of anointed has to be concerned about going to heaven before another group of anointed. Revelation says they all wait until the number is filled. Thessalonians says they all go together, at the time of that trumpet call. In fact the scripture in 1 Cor 15:52 just referenced says:
(1 Corinthians 15:51, 52) 51 Look! I tell you a sacred secret: We will not all fall asleep in death, but we will all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised up incorruptible, and we will be changed.
This sounds very much like the "rapture" teaching that we had avoided for years by using the word "during" Christ's parousia, and "during" the last trumpet. Actually, the Greek in context here provides better support for translating "at his parousia" not "during his parousia." and "at the last trumpet."
So, more recently, the Watchtower stopped discounting the idea about the "rapture." We still don't like the word because it reminds people of some false teachings still associated with the "rapture." But the basic idea of a "rapture" is now accepted. We still look to fit it all into our timeline for the first resurrection, Gog attack, great tribulation, marriage of the Lamb, etc.
*** w15 7/15 pp. 18-19 pars. 14-16 “Your Deliverance Is Getting Near”! ***
This gathering work does not refer to the initial ingathering of anointed ones; nor does it refer to the final sealing of the remaining anointed ones. (Matt. 13:37, 38) That sealing happens before the outbreak of the great tribulation. (Rev. 7:1-4) So, what is this gathering work that Jesus mentions? It is the time when the remaining ones of the 144,000 will receive their heavenly reward. (1 Thess. 4:15-17; Rev. 14:1) This event will take place at some point after the beginning of the attack by Gog of Magog. (Ezek. 38:11) Then these words of Jesus will be fulfilled: “At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.”—Matt. 13:43.
15 Does this mean that there will be a “rapture” of the anointed ones? Many in Christendom believe, according to this teaching, that Christians will be bodily caught up from the earth. Then, they expect that Jesus will visibly return to rule the earth. . . .  So those who will be taken to heaven will first need to be “changed, in a moment, in the blink of an eye, during the last trumpet.” (Read 1 Corinthians 15:50-53.) Therefore, while we do not use the term “rapture” here because of its wrong connotation, the remaining faithful anointed will be gathered together in an instant of time.
16 Once all the 144,000 are in heaven, the final preparations for the marriage of the Lamb can begin. (Rev. 19:9) But something else will happen before that joyous event. Remember, shortly before the remaining ones of the 144,000 are taken to heaven, Gog will attack God’s people. (Ezek. 38:16)
Much more to say, but I hope you can at least see what I meant by including the heavenly anointed in the "sheep and goats" parable.

I'm glad you think so but that isn't the important thing, as you already know.
I guess your first point was that when I referenced the parable of the sheep being separated from the goats, I mentioned that I thought Jesus was separating two kinds of sheep from the goats.  You requoted a portion of what I said as follows:
I believe that when Jesus separates the sheep from the goats he is separating the anointed sheep as well as other sheep who don't identify themselves as anointed. (Matt 25:32)
You had asked for my opinion, and I told you this was part of my opinion. Absolutely nothing has changed. When Jesus separates the sheep from the goats, these sheep will include anointed sheep and other sheep who do not identify themselves as anointed. Let's assume for example, that you believe you are one of the anointed sheep, and I believe I am one of another class of sheep, as I do not identify myself as anointed. When Jesus comes to separate the sheep from the goats, I am hoping that he favors both of us with a place on his right hand, and that we are not going to be with the goats on his left.
You tried to explain that I meant something like this:
There is actually so much ambiguity in that first sentence that it is difficult to parse your meaning. Perhaps I worded it in a way that confused you, but I can't find the logic in the idea you apparently got out of it. I never said anything about who any of the goats were and where they might come from. I'm including sheep who claim to be anointed and sheep who claim not to be anointed in the sheep category who Jesus will place on his right. I didn't say anything about who the goats are.
I don't see a problem, and I don't see any reason to change, revise or edit anything.
Strange. I take this to be more of the kind of blame-shifting and projection that you have become infamous for. In the past, you have often copied pages from Christendom's commentaries, and pictures of scholarly looking book covers that have titles that appear to support your claims. Then someone points out that the contents of the book show just the opposite of your claim. Then you go twisting and scrambling to make it look like you never made a mistake after all.
I've even seen this type of twisting and scrambling for something as simple as a typo or mistaken definition, or misused vocabulary. When someone pointed it out to you, you doubled-down with some absolutely incredible pseudo-explanation to avoid admitting even a minor mistake. Sometimes, you apparently resort to meaningless word-salads or other types of word-play, and I can't tell if you think it worked to impress others, or to obfuscate. But whenever you get a piece of criticism like this you can be counted on to counter-claim that it is others who use word-play and word-salads, or you go on a temper-rant claiming that people are making fun of you.
I'd recommend that before you start claiming that I say things "in order to confuse" just ask others if they were also confused. Maybe they were, and this means I should rewrite it, but if it's mostly just you who's confused, just ask more questions, and I'll be happy to explain further the things that you might not have understood correctly -- just as I am happy to do now.
You also apparently had a problem with my statement that Zechariah 8 (in context) gives us some good ideas about helping others to become Christians, which should be a goal of our ministry. You requoted a portion here: “My own opinions here are somewhat separate. Although on the matter of Zechariah 8, I think that chapter really does provide an excellent and important image for us to remember about our own attempts to make converts to true Christianity”
Again, I don't see what kind of a problem you would have with this. We want people we meet in our ministry and persons whom we hope to have study the Bible with us become converted to true Christianity. Right? The context of Zechariah 8 had shown how this would be fulfilled in the midst of economic hardships and disappointments and even the incursion of enemies/opposers. I had already pointed this out and also wanted to show how the image of having people come to us can sometimes be more important that us coming to them. If we are true Christians, we will be known by reputation. As Jesus said (and as my very next sentence began after the portion you quoted):
I partially understand why you wish to disagree with me whenever you have a chance, but you very often seem to forget that when you are so anxious to be an opposer, when not careful, you can end up opposing Jesus' own words, too.

I'm glad you think so but that isn't the important thing, as you already know.
I guess your first point was that when I referenced the parable of the sheep being separated from the goats, I mentioned that I thought Jesus was separating two kinds of sheep from the goats.  You requoted a portion of what I said as follows:
I believe that when Jesus separates the sheep from the goats he is separating the anointed sheep as well as other sheep who don't identify themselves as anointed. (Matt 25:32)
You had asked for my opinion, and I told you this was part of my opinion. Absolutely nothing has changed. When Jesus separates the sheep from the goats, these sheep will include anointed sheep and other sheep who do not identify themselves as anointed. Let's assume for example, that you believe you are one of the anointed sheep, and I believe I am one of another class of sheep, as I do not identify myself as anointed. When Jesus comes to separate the sheep from the goats, I am hoping that he favors both of us with a place on his right hand, and that we are not going to be with the goats on his left.
You tried to explain that I meant something like this:
There is actually so much ambiguity in that first sentence that it is difficult to parse your meaning. Perhaps I worded it in a way that confused you, but I can't find the logic in the idea you apparently got out of it. I never said anything about who any of the goats were and where they might come from. I'm including sheep who claim to be anointed and sheep who claim not to be anointed in the sheep category who Jesus will place on his right. I didn't say anything about who the goats are.
I don't see a problem, and I don't see any reason to change, revise or edit anything.
Strange. I take this to be more of the kind of blame-shifting and projection that you have become infamous for. In the past, you have often copied pages from Christendom's commentaries, and pictures of scholarly looking book covers that have titles that appear to support your claims. Then someone points out that the contents of the book show just the opposite of your claim. Then you go twisting and scrambling to make it look like you never made a mistake after all.
I've even seen this type of twisting and scrambling for something as simple as a typo or mistaken definition, or misused vocabulary. When someone pointed it out to you, you doubled-down with some absolutely incredible pseudo-explanation to avoid admitting even a minor mistake. Sometimes, you apparently resort to meaningless word-salads or other types of word-play, and I can't tell if you think it worked to impress others, or to obfuscate. But whenever you get a piece of criticism like this you can be counted on to counter-claim that it is others who use word-play and word-salads, or you go on a temper-rant claiming that people are making fun of you.
I'd recommend that before you start claiming that I say things "in order to confuse" just ask others if they were also confused. Maybe they were, and this means I should rewrite it, but if it's mostly just you who's confused, just ask more questions, and I'll be happy to explain further the things that you might not have understood correctly -- just as I am happy to do now.
You also apparently had a problem with my statement that Zechariah 8 (in context) gives us some good ideas about helping others to become Christians, which should be a goal of our ministry. You requoted a portion here: “My own opinions here are somewhat separate. Although on the matter of Zechariah 8, I think that chapter really does provide an excellent and important image for us to remember about our own attempts to make converts to true Christianity”
Again, I don't see what kind of a problem you would have with this. We want people we meet in our ministry and persons whom we hope to have study the Bible with us become converted to true Christianity. Right? The context of Zechariah 8 had shown how this would be fulfilled in the midst of economic hardships and disappointments and even the incursion of enemies/opposers. I had already pointed this out and also wanted to show how the image of having people come to us can sometimes be more important that us coming to them. If we are true Christians, we will be known by reputation. As Jesus said (and as my very next sentence began after the portion you quoted):
I partially understand why you wish to disagree with me whenever you have a chance, but you very often seem to forget that when you are so anxious to be an opposer, when not careful, you can end up opposing Jesus' own words, too.

Most of us know this, but this case has been noted by many organizations around the world. Here is an example from the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom: https://www.uscirf.gov/dennis-christensen
---------------------remainder of post quotes the article ----------------------
Key Fact: Danish citizen and Jehovah's Witness
Charges: "continuing the activities" of an extremist group (Jehovah’s Witnesses) 
Sentence: 6 years imprisonment
Biography: Dennis Ole Christensen is a Danish citizen who lives in Oryol, Russia. Before his detention, he worked as a carpenter while living with his wife, Irina Christensen, who is a Russian citizen.
As of May 2019, Russian authorities have brought 74 criminal cases against Jehovah's Witnesses across Russia, and are investigating a total of 197 Jehovah's Witnesses.
The current Russian state campaign against the Jehovah's Witnesses began with a crackdown on the faith community's literature and legal entities. Since 2007, Russian courts have banned at least eight local Jehovah's Witnesses organizations. The authorities have also placed over 95 pieces of Jehovah's Witnesses literature on the state list of banned extremist materials.
In June 2006, the Oryol Regional Court determined the local Jehovah's Witnesses group to be "extremist." On May 25, 2017, members of the Federal Security Service (FSB) disrupted a Jehovah's Witnesses prayer service in Oryol. Detaining some 70-80 people wihtin the building for several hours, the authorities held about 20 persons overnight before arresting Dennis Christensen and 15 Russian citizens.
On January 30, 2019, the prosecution demanded Mr. Christensen be sentenced to six and half years under Criminal Code Article 282.2, Part 1 for "continuing the activities" of an extremist group. On February 6, 2019, after appearing over 50 times in court and being detained for over 600 days, Mr. Christensen was sentenced to six years imprisonment. On May 23, the Oryol Regional Court denied Christensen's appeal and upheld the February decision to sentence him to six years in a penal colony.

Most of us know this, but this case has been noted by many organizations around the world. Here is an example from the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom: https://www.uscirf.gov/dennis-christensen
---------------------remainder of post quotes the article ----------------------
Key Fact: Danish citizen and Jehovah's Witness
Charges: "continuing the activities" of an extremist group (Jehovah’s Witnesses) 
Sentence: 6 years imprisonment
Biography: Dennis Ole Christensen is a Danish citizen who lives in Oryol, Russia. Before his detention, he worked as a carpenter while living with his wife, Irina Christensen, who is a Russian citizen.
As of May 2019, Russian authorities have brought 74 criminal cases against Jehovah's Witnesses across Russia, and are investigating a total of 197 Jehovah's Witnesses.
The current Russian state campaign against the Jehovah's Witnesses began with a crackdown on the faith community's literature and legal entities. Since 2007, Russian courts have banned at least eight local Jehovah's Witnesses organizations. The authorities have also placed over 95 pieces of Jehovah's Witnesses literature on the state list of banned extremist materials.
In June 2006, the Oryol Regional Court determined the local Jehovah's Witnesses group to be "extremist." On May 25, 2017, members of the Federal Security Service (FSB) disrupted a Jehovah's Witnesses prayer service in Oryol. Detaining some 70-80 people wihtin the building for several hours, the authorities held about 20 persons overnight before arresting Dennis Christensen and 15 Russian citizens.
On January 30, 2019, the prosecution demanded Mr. Christensen be sentenced to six and half years under Criminal Code Article 282.2, Part 1 for "continuing the activities" of an extremist group. On February 6, 2019, after appearing over 50 times in court and being detained for over 600 days, Mr. Christensen was sentenced to six years imprisonment. On May 23, the Oryol Regional Court denied Christensen's appeal and upheld the February decision to sentence him to six years in a penal colony.

[Dennis Christensen’s closing statement]
First, I want to thank my wife Irina, who from the very beginning did everything in her power to help and support me. She took care of me, passed me clothes, groceries, medicines and other things that I needed in the SIZO (Pre-Trial Detention Centre). She has supported me emotionally and spiritually with her visits and letters that I have received from her every day.
My dear wife, your strong faith, your great patience, your peace of mind and love for me and for the truth, including your optimism, have all been a great example to me. You should know that I love you very much and that I am very proud of you!
I also want to thank my family in Denmark, especially my elderly father and my sister. You should know that I miss you so much. I love you and appreciate everything you have done for me. During my stay in the SIZO you supported me with your numerous letters and telephone conversations. I am sure that you will never give up and lose hope that we will be able to come together again as a family one day.
I also want to thank all my many friends from all over the world. You supported me with your letters, encouraging thoughts, beautiful drawings and various gifts. All this has helped me to understand that I am not alone, and that I have a large global family.
Dear friends, you should know that every letter, big or small, has encouraged and strengthened me. Please do not be discouraged if I do not have time to respond to your letters. I will find you, thank you and hug you in the future, I promise!
I also want to thank the Embassy of the Kingdom of Denmark in Moscow and all its staff. You attended many court sessions and repeatedly visited me in the SIZO. Your helpful advice, guidance and encouragement mean a lot to me, and I really appreciate your support and the great help that you have given me.
I would also like to thank the Court of Appeal for the fact that I personally was able to attend this court hearing. When I participated in other appellate cases through videoconferencing from the SIZO, it was difficult for me to hear everything that was said. I had to guess half of what was happening there. This is an unworthy way to defend someone. In addition, when using the conference call in the SIZO, you must sit in jail, as if you were an animal in a zoo. I consider this an unworthy, inhuman treatment today, in the 21st century.
At the present, I have already been in the SIZO for almost two years, and this trial has been going on for 15 months. To endure all this, not to give up and not to lose heart, it is extremely necessary to have a certain inner strength. The Bible says - in Philippians, the 4th chapter, the 12th verse - that “I can do everything by him that strengthens me.” In the book of the Prophet Isaiah, the 12th chapter, in verse 2 it is written: “Behold, God is my salvation: I trust in Him and have no fear; for the Lord is my strength, and my song is the Lord; and he has been my salvation. "
Throughout this period, I have felt that my God, Jehovah, has been next to me and has given me the strength to endure all this. The power to not give up, not to lose heart, to be joyful and happy and to continue to smile. I am sincerely grateful to him for this and am proud to serve Him as one of his witnesses, one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
Many people have asked me how this criminal case have affected me. Of course, it is not easy to be in a SIZO for such a long period of time, to be cut off from your wife and from close contact with your family and friends. The last two years I have lived a very closed life. You could say I have just existed. 23 hours a day I have spent in my prison cell of 3 by 6 meters, and for an hour every day I have gone for a walk in the walking yard, also 3 by 6 meters, although under the open sky. During this time, I met various people with whom I had many interesting conversations. And I noticed that many of them are trying to achieve a decent, honest investigation and trial. Most feel that the system does not hear them, and I have also felt a similar feeling in the past two years. I tried to support and encourage them as best I could, because I am sure that Jesus Christ would have done the same.
I made many new friends, some of them were present at a part of the court sessions, and some wrote letters to me. I personally know some of them, but others not yet. Some havethe same faith as I do, others do not, but they still support me, because they cannot tolerate the injustice that is happening here in Russia, the way some here try to make Jehovah’sWitnesses, citizens who love their neighbour as themselves, out to be criminals and call them extremists. This is completely illogical and ridiculous. Many are shocked by the fact that such things happen here, in Russia, in the 21st century.
Someone asked me how this criminal case has affected my faith. Thanks to this criminal case, my faith has only become stronger, and I have experienced what the Bible said in the Epistle of James, the first chapter, in verses 2 through 4: “Take great joy, my brethren, when you meet with various trials, knowing that the test of your faith produces endurance; but endurance must have its action complete, so that you may be complete in its entirety, without any deficiency. ”
I am still far from perfect, but I have learned to be steadfast and remain joyful in my ordeals. And the most important thing I want to emphasize is that I have drawn even closer to my God Jehovah and have received an even more ardent desire to tell others about him and his purposes, an ardent desire to continue preaching the good news of the Kingdom of God, which is the only solution for humanity. A fervent desire to share with others the joyful message from the Bible about the world and eternal life here, in paradise on earth to help them get closer to the Creator and help develop strong faith in him and his promises.
This speech is officially called “the last word in my defence,” and maybe these will be the last words you will hear from me today. Maybe this is the last court hearing in this criminal case, and it will become an end to this last two-year period of my life. But I want to assure you that these are not my last words in this case about the injustice that is happening here in Russia against peaceful and completely innocent people. I have just started, and I have a lot more that I want to tell you publicly. I'm not going to be silent, as if I am guilty and have something to hide. I have a clear conscience, I have not done anything wrong, I have not violated any law of Russia and I have nothing to be ashamed of.
What is being done against me and other Witnesses here in Russia are false accusations of extremism, interrogations, detentions, searches, confiscations, discoveries, threats, and now even torture. This should be shameful. It is of course adisgrace. The truth always becomes apparent, and justice will sooner or later prevail. In the Bible, in Galatians, chapter 6, verse 7, it says: “Do not be deceived: God is not mocked. Whatever a man sows, he will reap. ”
The court of first instance sentenced me to 6 years in prison, but for what? Nothing. There is no evidence that I did something wrong. On the contrary, there is a lot of evidence that I enjoyed the rights granted to me under Article 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. I observe the law of the Russian state and am an honest person. I am a Christian, a believer, a Jehovah's Witness, and I love the Russian people. What are they punishing me for? Why should I be in prison for 6 years? Nothing. This is unfair.
I sincerely hope that the Court of Appeal today will protect what is right and take care that justice prevail. That it will namely stop the persecution of faith, which is happening now in Russia. I very much hope that this court of appeal will send a signal to the whole world that here in Russia there is freedom of religion for all people.
In the near future these words will be fulfilled: “And he, God, will judge many nations, and they will cast their swords into plowshares and their spears into sickles; nation will not raise the sword against nation, and they will no longer learn how to wage war. But each one will sit under his vine and under his fig tree, and no one will frighten them.” The words of Micah, chapter 4, verses 3 and 4.
God always judges justly, and under his rule there will no longer be disagreements, violence and wars. On the contrary, there will be peace, and there will be no anxieties. In other words, there will be true happiness for all of humanity.
Your Honor, with your decision today you can make a big step in this direction, in the direction of justice and peace. A big step towards a world without anxiety, sadness and injustice. And I hope you do that. Thank you in advance!
[The appeal failed. Seemingly, it had already been decided that it would.]
 

Your last line quoted here appears to be a reference to whether or not you think I'm saying that the Governing Body is a principal aspect of an arrangement made by Jehovah to lead his people at a particular time. I think the other side of that same coin is made out to be that if they are not that, then they are therefore self-appointed, and are not therefore a divine provision.
In so many circumstances, the most dangerous thing a human can do is speak about someone's leaders. For most of us, we find our comfort zone when we understand our own fixed place in an ideological hierarchy, and humans have been known to squirm, fight, or even kill when that ideological comfort zone is disturbed or threatened.
So, yes, there may yet be a significant portion of this discussion that needs clarification.
If you are trying to understand my own position on this subject, then I appreciate the opportunity to explain. Unfortunately, we have so much invested in the Watchtower's current explanation of Matthew 24:45 that any different view might prove to be quite difficult to explain without taking a couple more steps back to get a fresh look at the parable. 
I believe I have already stated that bodies of elders should be found in every congregation and they should serve as leading examples, overseers, administrators, teachers, etc. It is therefore inevitable that groups of congregations who work together or share assemblies together will also find a need for different kinds of administrators and leaders, and in effect a body of elders might be found for various groupings of congregations. We have utilized circuit overseers, assembly servants, branch or zone overseers, etc., to form such bodies (or committees) of elders. An even more important leadership role will inevitably be needed over the global set of congregations, and this is, from another perspective, a single congregation, too. It will also have whatever type of body of elders is deemed useful, wise, and important for that particular need. As Fred Franz pointed out in a previously referenced speech, it seems that most major large religious denominations invariably end up with some type of "governing body" even if it's called by another name.
Are they self-appointed? Not really. Remember that we follow the Biblical instructions for qualifications of elders, and therefore elders are appointed by previously appointed elders, who were all apparently approved due to meeting scriptural qualifications. And the very fact that some will reach out for the office of overseer (or qualify as a spiritually mature older man) is a good thing. Some of these men will be better at teaching, some at speaking, some at evangelizing, some at comforting, some at managing, some at visiting the sick, some at looking after orphans and widows in their tribulation, some at judicial matters, some at helping married couples, etc., etc. These are "gifts in men" as we sometimes say. Jehovah has given everyone an opportunity to find areas of sacred service no matter what our personalities. So it would be very unfair to point to the members who have been selected as a committee or body of elders for the overall congregation, and say that they were self-appointed. We need to recognize that the entire orderly arrangement for any congregation is all part of an arrangement from Jehovah. And for our particular type of ministry as Jehovah's Witnesses, there is going to be a strong desire to see men in leadership positions who tend to best represent that ministry to the entire world. We would expect to see good, sincere, faithful examples who are well-spoken, have excellent reputations, understand the scriptures, and have decades of experience in full-time ministry. And this certainly shows up in the selected appointees to the Governing Body. And it is an important part of our preaching and teaching ministry that the Governing Body takes a lead in making choices about the Bible-based publications, Bibles, and various types of Bible-based instruction that the congregations appreciate.
But back to the interpretation of the parable. There is nothing in the parable that says that the faithful and discreet slave prepares spiritual food. There is a faithful and discreet slave that is put in charge of food operations in this household while a master is away. But this is a parable that Jesus says was to point out the different kind of attitude between a faithful slave and an unfaithful slave. It's actually more about the several ways that a slave might show himself to be UNfaithful. The basic idea is that it's easy to imagine how many ways a slave might show himself to be unfaithful if a master puts him in charge of the smooth operation of the household. So the important question is therefore, how will a slave prove himself to be faithful when the master is away and there are so many temptations to get away with things, especially if you don't know how long the master will be gone, and he seems to be delaying. Will food always be served on time? Will the slave let that little bit of power go to his head and start beating his fellow slaves? Will he open up all the wine for himself and start acting like a confirmed drunkard?
Just like the parable of the neighborly and un-neighborly men in the scripture about the good Samaritan, the money given to the innkeeper isn't spiritual money. The beating and the robbery that the victim received was not a spiritual robbery. It was not a spiritual inn or innkeeper. No, it was a practical example about what it means to "love your neighbor" and answer, "Who really is your neighbor?"
In the parable of the faithful and unfaithful slave, we have the same idea before us. A situation is described in practical terms so that we will all understand that we make judgments every day about how we will live and what decisions we will make to prove that we are really being the sort of person who is in expectation that the master will return at any time, no matter how long the delay. It's easy for us to imagine how likely we are to fail in our assigned duties. It was very poignant for a Jewish audience to hear a story about how a Samaritan showed a more neighborly attitude than the complacent Jewish "neighbor" who ignores fellow human suffering. But Jesus taught that Christianity means doing something about the sick, homeless, those lacking clothing, the hungry and the thirsty. And like the Jewish "neighbor" we too might think we are doing enough by preaching and teaching and therefore become complacent. It's easy to imagine the appointed slave falling into trouble perhaps more easily than the others, as he lets power go to his head, or abuses his authority.
Both situations, just as we would expect of Jesus' parables, are about:  (2 Peter 3:11)  what sort of people you ought to be in holy acts of conduct and deeds of godly devotion,
These parables are not about actually staying up all night to keep thieves from breaking into our houses, or actual robbers beating victims, or actual stewards getting drunk or beating up fellow servants. And they are not about spiritual thieves, or spiritual robbers, or spiritual drunkards. They are circumstances to make us think about what we would do in these particular situations, and how these apply to the kingdom.
The idea of food and a house with a master who has gone away is very appropriate, but there is nothing about a small group feeding "spiritual food" to a larger group in the Bible. This was not a question about who would lead. There is nothing in the Bible about any "sole channel" other than Jesus himself. Our food, like Jesus, should be doing the will of our Father. The most important part of the parable of the slave is not about the food but about our response to the circumstance, as indicated above. This is proven, too, by the way that Mark summarizes it in Mark 13:
(Mark 13:32-37) . . .. 33 Keep looking, keep awake, for you do not know when the appointed time is. 34 It is like a man traveling abroad who left his house and gave the authority to his slaves, to each one his work, and commanded the doorkeeper to keep on the watch. 35 Keep on the watch, therefore, for you do not know when the master of the house is coming, whether late in the day or at midnight or before dawn or early in the morning, 36 in order that when he comes suddenly, he does not find you sleeping. 37 But what I say to you, I say to all: Keep on the watch.” In Mark's account there was nothing particularly important about the fact that food was involved. Mark doesn't even mention food, but focuses on the doorkeeper, and the fact that each one of the slaves was authorized to do his work. It was about whether the slaves remained obedient in their assignments, and remained watchful, in expectation of their master's return.
 

What if Jesus told us an illustration about, let's say, a "Good Samaritan" and we said that this didn't apply to us because we know of a specific body of elders within our organization who already identify themselves as the fulfillment of the "Good Samaritan." If that specific body of elders actually becomes known for a ministry that is very much like the good Samaritan of the parable, and they manage such a ministry on a world-wide basis and encourage others to join them and help them, then I'd have to say that they really are fulfilling the role of the "Good Samaritan." 
There would be nothing wrong with such a ministry even if (or especially if) millions of people sincerely followed them, obediently followed the lead of their instructions, displaying a combination of such charity, motivated by love of God, and combined with their confident expressions of faith that indicated that their motivation was heartfelt. There would be nothing wrong with identifying that special body of elders as the "Good Samaritan" class or group or body.
But would it be right to say that only the persons of that group of elders should be identified as the "Good Samaritan" and that Jesus had assigned this particular group of elders to that position? Would it be right to say that Jesus had only this particular group of elders in mind in a prophetic sense and that the phrase "Good Samaritan" can only refer to persons appointed into this group during a specific time period?
This might sound ridiculous, but the two parables actually provide a much closer parallel than might appear at first glance:
With respect to the good Samaritan, Jesus was answering the question:
WHO REALLY IS MY NEIGHBOR?
(Luke 10:29) . . .“Who really is my neighbor?. . .
With respect to the parable of the faithful and the unfaithful slave Jesus was answering the question:
WHO REALLY IS THE FAITHFUL AND DISCREET SLAVE?
(Luke 12:42) . . .“Who really is the faithful steward,. . . (Matthew 24:45) . . .Who really is the faithful and discreet slave. . . For some reason the Watch Tower publications now say that one of these "Who really is..." questions applies to millions of us all around the world, and the other one applies to only about seven of us: only a specific body of elders in New York. 
As I said before, however, this is simply a matter of not yet noticing the contradiction between this explanation and other passages of Scripture. This does not mean there is anything wrong with the "faithful slave" or that the "faithful slave" has turned unfaithful, because the phrase was never intended to identify a small group of seven "New York" residents in the first place. It would really be no different than if the same group had called themselves "The True Neighbor class" or "The Faithful Steward body" or "The Good Samaritan group." It doesn't mean that they don't belong in the group, or that they might even take the lead in trying to represent the group in the most effective way. It does not mean that Jehovah won't bless their endeavors either. They are trying to do the right thing in the best way that they currently understand the scripture. In time however they will probably recognize the contradiction that this understanding produces against several other passages of scripture. This has happened with many other understandings. It's simply a matter of context and conformity with ALL the scriptures on the particular subject.
I'd say that the Watchtower has already come very close to dealing with one of the contradictions, and their conclusion apparently led them to the right answer, in spite of the contradiction. Therefore, this one contradiction was already noticed, but this was not enough yet to overturn the entire entrenched teaching. At least it digs around it a bit. The following Watchtower paragraph deals with the idea that this particular "faithful slave" will become entitled to a greater reward than the rest of the "domestics" whom they were serving. This is the obvious implication of Jesus' parable, yet those who formulated this latest interpretation also realize that it would be a mistake to interpret it in the same way that Jesus implied. It would produce too strong a contradiction with other passages:
*** w13 7/15 p. 25 par. 19 “Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?” *** Does the faithful slave receive a greater reward in heaven than the rest of the anointed? No. A reward promised to a small group in one setting may ultimately be shared by others. For example, consider what Jesus said to his 11 faithful apostles the night before he died. (Read Luke 22:28-30.) Jesus promised that small group of men that a fine reward awaited them for their faithfulness. They would share his throne of kingly authority. But years later, he indicated that all of the 144,000 will sit on thrones and share his rulership. (Rev. 1:1; 3:21) Similarly, as stated at Matthew 24:47, he promised that a small group of men—the anointed brothers who make up the faithful slave—will be appointed over all his belongings. In reality, all of the 144,000 will share his vast heavenly authority.—Rev. 20:4, 6. So what we end up with is this: a small group of men prove faithful until Jesus returns and this particular slave therefore is rewarded with an appointment over ALL the master's belongings. If Jesus returned tomorrow, then these seven elders who make up the Governing Body would therefore be expected to receive a reward much greater than any reward promised to the domestics whom they were serving. The contradiction required an explanation. The explanation correctly shows that there is NO special reward that these 7 elders receive that is any different from 143,993 others who were also included in the domestics. The only explanation is that all of the 144,000 get the EXACT same reward, instead of what Jesus indicates. What the writers hadn't noticed is that the contradiction doesn't need to be rationalized away, because there is no contradiction if we change the premise by accepting the explanation of Matthew 24 that we find in 1 Peter and 2 Peter.
 

I get it. But it was very possible to read what you had written about Korah and tie it, in principle, to the actions of the Governing Body in presenting themselves as "the sole channel." Reading your words very literally could give the impression that the Governing Body was like Korah in the sense that they were not satisfied with the idea that Jesus alone is the "sole channel." It was not clear where the "sadness" came from when you said: "Sadly, the real rub here is around the fact that the Governing Body has presented themselves as "the faithful and discreet slave", the sole channel for the dispensing of spiritual food in these last days."
I understand that you have not changed your previously expressed opinions about this, and that you are here clarifying that you believe the Governing Body is the "sole channel." Still, I think that we should admit that there are a lot of weaknesses in this position from a Biblical standpoint. One obvious weakness was that, for well nigh 100 years, this idea was never known to the persons who now claim that they were that "sole channel." All those years, this supposed "sole channel" didn't know who they were until just a few months ago, and had therefore been teaching incorrect doctrine about who the "faithful slave" was for these last "100 years."
As you said, it was a "principal aspect" of this shepherding arrangement, and yet the "sole channel" couldn't teach the correct doctrine about a supposed "principal aspect."
For me, Jesus is the sole channel, and the Governing Body is simply a body of elders making the types of decisions that elders should make over a congregation. In this case it's not a specific local congregation, but the collection of all congregations of Jehovah's Witnesses, i.e., the overall congregation. Paul could have stayed in a specific, local congregation and remained a part of its body of elders, but his ministry called for a different kind of "shepherding" over many congregations, and this often presented the need to make logistical arrangements for his own travels and the appointment of others to travel to these congregations. He often had to make corrections either in writing or in person that were sometimes doctrinal in nature, sometimes financial, and sometimes dealing with "personnel" and personality conflicts. Overall, his purpose toward the overall congregation was the same as elders who presided over local congregations: encouragement, practical application of Jehovah's principles, preaching the good news about Jesus and his heavenly kingdom, and taking the lead by setting a good example for others.
So, as I've said before, I see a lot of value in a body of elders who take on this type of leadership responsibility toward the congregation overall. Elders are appointed for both their personal qualifications and, of course, their spiritual qualifications. By their examples they are leading us, and we should be obedient to that example -- just the same as we look to elders as examples in the local congregation. But there is nothing in the Bible about the body of elders who serve the overall congregation determining doctrines and teachings for the other congregations. I know that people will quickly point to the council at Jerusalem found in Acts 15, but this could very nearly prove the opposite point, as Paul seems to point out in Galatians, and as Fred Franz pointed out in a talk he gave back in 1975. (Ironically, Franz was the most respected member of this "sole channel" at the time when he argued against our current view of the "Governing Body.")
I believe that the Bible clearly proves that this slave is made up of the entire body of Christians. Therefore in the Biblical sense of the "slave" I would agree with what you just said, although I prefer an adjustment to the last portion of what you said here, though. During the days of Paul and the Jerusalem council, the holy spirit had not yet produced what we now know as the completed Christian Greek Scriptures, or New Testament. I think that the very purpose of building on a foundation of apostles and prophets from the first century was to produce inspired writings that reveal to us the "spirit of Christ." The Bible (Jehovah's Word, and through it, "the spirit of Christ") is intervening and directing the congregation at all times, not merely when absolutely necessary. 
The many proofs that, in the last days, all Christians are supposed to be "the faithful slave" or "faithful steward" are found throughout the scriptures. Here's one that gets right to the point.
(1 Peter 4:7-11) 7 But the end of all things has drawn close. Be sound in mind, therefore, and be vigilant with a view to prayers. 8 Above all things, have intense love for one another, because love covers a multitude of sins. 9 Be hospitable to one another without grumbling. 10 In proportion as each one has received a gift, use it in ministering to one another as fine stewards of God’s undeserved kindness expressed in various ways. 11 If anyone speaks, [let him speak] as it were [the] sacred pronouncements of God; if anyone ministers, [let him minister] as dependent on the strength that God supplies. . .
A separate point in the above quote from 1 Peter is that all of us are responsible to serve "spiritual food" in the sense that all of us are to speak as if we are responsible for the sacred pronouncements of God. Never is there a hint that we are dependent on any group of men for these pronouncements.
(Galatians 6:2-6) 2 Go on carrying the burdens of one another, and in this way you will fulfill the law of the Christ. 3 For if anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he is deceiving himself. 4 But let each one examine his own actions, and then he will have cause for rejoicing in regard to himself alone, and not in comparison with the other person. 5 For each one will carry his own load. 6 Moreover, let anyone who is being taught the word share in all good things with the one who gives such teaching.
Therefore, anyone who gives teaching is merely sharing with all the others who give teaching. No one should believe that our (or their) particular teaching is something that another person should "bear." That would be the same as thinking that our teaching carries with it some "authority" when all authority was given to Christ. If any of us thinks that our authority, or the authority of our particular teaching should in any way "govern" another person, then we have done exactly what Jesus warned against when he gave a parable about a faithful slave who 'lords it over' his fellow slaves.
Therefore, I think that the parable of the faithful slave itself is another good place where we find evidence that there should never be any kind of "Governing Body" trying to identify itself as "the faithful and discreet slave." Any attempt to make such an identification is unfaithful and indiscreet. It's exactly that kind of presumptuousness that Jesus spoke of when he said:
(Matthew 23:6-12) . . . . 6 They like the most prominent place at evening meals and the front seats in the synagogues 7 and the greetings in the marketplaces and to be called Rabbi by men. 8 But you, do not you be called Rabbi, for one is your Teacher, and all of you are brothers. 9 Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One. 10 Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ. 11 But the greatest one among you must be your minister. 12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
The specific example that Jesus was using here were the Scribes and Pharisees, about whom Jesus said had done the following:
(Matthew 23:2) “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses."
The Jewish legal system was understood in Jesus' day to have a need for such persons in the "seat of Moses." But the Christian system was to be different. There would be no "seat of Moses" because all of us would be servants to one another. There would be no governing leader except one, the Christ. It was this Biblical rationale, of course, that led me to think that perhaps you really had realized where the "sadness" came from in your reference to Numbers 16, where Korah and others had wanted to put themselves in the seat of Moses, so that they could count themselves in that "sole channel."

(Numbers 16:1-3) 16 Then Korʹah the son of Izʹhar, the son of Koʹhath, the son of Leʹvi, got up together with Daʹthan and A·biʹram the sons of E·liʹab, and On the son of Peʹleth, of the sons of Reuʹben. 2 They rose up against Moses along with 250 Israelite men, chieftains of the assembly, chosen ones of the congregation, prominent men. 3 So they gathered together against Moses and Aaron and said to them: “We have had enough of you! The whole assembly is holy, all of them, and Jehovah is in their midst. Why, then, should you exalt yourselves above the congregation of Jehovah?”
Eoin, You are evidently presenting one of two ideas:
1. Are you saying that Moses pictures the Governing Body and those who speak against the Governing Body as being the sole channel for dispensing spiritual food in these last days are like Korah?
2. Are you saying that Moses pictures Jesus as the sole channel for dispensing truth in these last days, and that the Governing Body is like Korah for wanting to set themselves up as an additional sole channel for dispensing spiritual food?

For what it's worth, my opinion is that @JW Insider works for both sides in a different sense. I like the way Paul put it:
(1 Corinthians 9:19-23) . . .For though I am free from all people, I have made myself the slave to all, so that I may gain as many people as possible. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew in order to gain Jews; to those under law I became as under law, though I myself am not under law, in order to gain those under law. 21 To those without law I became as without law, although I am not without law toward God but under law toward Christ, in order to gain those without law. 22 To the weak I became weak, in order to gain the weak. I have become all things to people of all sorts, so that I might by all possible means save some. 23 But I do all things for the sake of the good news, in order to share it with others. Early Christianity started out in the context of Judaism, which had become steeped in end-of-the-world eschatology, and the legalism of the Pharisees. But end-of-the-world eschatology, although dangerous to Christianity on its own (per Jesus), still naturally drew out crowds of people who sighed and groaned over the injustices of their world. They wanted a new heavens and a new earth, and they wanted it as soon as possible.
So early Christians would be mistaken to focus on eschatology, but many good Christians, desirous of a new heavens and new earth, would naturally come to Christianity through this path.
Jesus gave several illustrations showing why focusing on eschatology was so dangerous to true Christianity, and we have the words of Peter to explain how Christians must transform into those who would be the very same type of person they ought to be, whether the parousia came in their own lifetime, or whether it came 1,000 years after their own lifetime.
Another major focus of Jesus' illustrations and teaching was about legalism. Early Christianity was still steeped in Judaism, and still attempted to put Christians under law, even after it was recognized that the Judaic system didn't apply to gentiles.
Jesus' illustration in Matthew 24:45 of the unfaithful servants --who would beat their fellow slaves and try to lord it over them when the master was gone-- is a good illustration reminding us of the dangers of both eschatology AND the dangers of legalism/Pharisaism.
Paul played both sides of Pharisaism/legalism because he was accused of being an apostate from Judaism. So they asked him to pay for some legalistic customary preparations for the persons going with him to the Temple.
(Acts 21:20-24) . . .but they said to him: “You see, brother, how many thousands of believers there are among the Jews, and they are all zealous for the Law. 21 But they have heard it rumored about you that you have been teaching all the Jews among the nations an apostasy from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or to follow the customary practices. 22 What, then, is to be done about it? They are certainly going to hear that you have arrived. 23 So do what we tell you: We have four men who have put themselves under a vow. 24 Take these men with you and cleanse yourself ceremonially together with them and take care of their expenses, so that they may have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know that there is nothing to the rumors they were told about you, but that you are walking orderly and you are also keeping the Law. So rather than claiming that the GB have gone off track, I believe they are continually getting more and more ON track. I believe they naturally started partly off-track as would be expected with a very eschatological Russell and a very legalistic Rutherford. But all the while, it was the right kind of heart condition being attracted to and joining into the religion -- a religion with a greater focus on the type of person we ought to be for Jehovah, for ourselves and for one another. This was much like the form of Judaism that naturally made persons fit for transformation into Christianity. Legalistic Judaism was like a tutor leading to Christ. But we must still be transformed.
Paul played both sides in order to win more persons over to Christ. To Jews he became a Jew. To Greeks he became a Greek.
Still the core of the religion itself is one that does perhaps the best job of all religions in fighting the machinations of the Devil: avoiding taking one side over another in politics and war, pointing out the unchristian influences on supposedly Christian traditions, and pointing out the value of Christian morality, and unity of purpose in preaching, meeting together, etc. To me these are the most important things. Granted the Pharisaism still keeps us hanging on to rules (like turning in time so that our right hand and our left can distinguish different types of Christian service, and misuse of the two-witness rule so that mercy and protection of children has often been sacrificed, etc.). And eschatology will keep rearing its head now and then, too.
But these things are getting better over time, getting more on-track, not off-track. Pharisees don't want to be questioned, but we must all take our Christian duty and responsibility very seriously. We must question. We must make sure of all things. And we can only expect more questioning as more persons from all walks of life keep coming into the organization. I find that this forum is still a fair enough place to question and get feedback to help test whether those questions are on the right track.

I can understand this completely. I believe that giving such counsel has been much easier for the past couple of decades. However, during those years when our counsel was supposed to be more dogmatic and pharisaic, I also had to give similar counsel to a sister with an unbelieving husband, and a couple where one of them was partially disabled.
However, I still think that it is proper to counsel a couple based on the principle in Romans 1, because it speaks of the "natural use of the body." It's true that we might have charged it with meaning that wasn't intended, but that also means that we might not have. Therefore, if conscience should play a role, then these verses ought to be included in potentially relevant counsel when helping one whose conscience is unclear. This also means that I would make an adjustment to your first and third bullet point. Just because both agree, does not necessarily mean that their conscience should be clear. I'm uncomfortable with using 1 Cor 7 in exactly the way you used it here as if should apply to an entire range of activities that might even push the envelope of what one spouse finds comfortable. It's possible that the verse is being "charged" with meaning that wasn't intended. 
Even if the principle is correct most of the time, I believe that any reasonable Christian couple should keep in mind that the real principle should not be that they simply agree, because agreement can be manipulated by emotion. Therefore, what someone might consent to at one time, might be something they would not have consented to at another time. Just the acknowledgment that this possibility might exist might make a couple think twice before engaging in experimentation that might prove dangerous either literally, or spiritually.
I don't believe we should ever use the Bible as a kind of legalistic book of rules, but every part of it can and should be used for guidance, discipline, encouragement, and training/adjusting our conscience.
I like your exposition of the verse in Proverbs 5:19. So true.

I've seen a lot of love and long-lasting friendships. I've seen some awful things too, and heard about many more. But the congregations I have been in over many years (from age 0 to 66) have had very few of these problems.
I thought there had not been any cases of CSA in any congregation I had personally been in, but there was a huge commotion at a recent funeral of a local elder when several tales of his abuse were exposed by family members for the first time AT THE FUNERAL itself. Several (including me) were shocked and surprised.
But this is far from the norm. I've worked in the sound "A/V" booth at many assemblies/conventions since I was a teenager, and have made friends from all over the world. Then, when traveling, I have often met up with these friends. Perhaps I assume that this has been the norm for most Witnesses.
I know that there has been a trend toward more problems, although that's also just my opinion. But I hear about more problems and also see attendance down in several places.
We'd all like to see CSA eliminated from everywhere. I don't believe that we will ever be immune from problems the rest of the world has. But I'd hate to think that it's just as common with us as it is in some other religious institutions. But I don't blame the two-witness rule for the crime, but I do blame it for the slow wheels of congregational justice. And who knows? I think people like Raymond Franz had a chance to fix that part of the problem much earlier, and yet he was evidently blind to it.
I have a feeling that both CSA and shunning will both be "fixed" to the best of the organization's ability from a procedural/rules perspective within a couple of years. It will still happen, of course, but the policies will be adjusted to conform to something more loving. I heard a well known brother in a responsible position at Bethel say that there were only two things that needed to change to nearly remove all the "deserved" animus against us: our shunning policy and our blood policy. He thought both of them should be changed for scriptural reasons. I'm sure he hadn't realized how big the CSA problem would be when more fully exposed.
Local squabbling will always be a problem when brothers see titles as positions of "power" for their ego, instead of opportunities to serve one another more efficiently. I've seen a share of it, and assumed it didn't happen as much elsewhere. I was in a place to hear some yelling and screaming back in the 70's and 80's at Bethel, and a friend tells me that he thinks all the GB get along very well, but that the "helpers" have been known to squabble loudly. Perhaps some things are worth squabbling about. (and most things probably aren't) The apostle Paul speaks of such things even in his own life as a Christian.
Well, you probably know that I don't try to defend everything that's wrong, and I think that everything that's wrong should actually be exposed in the city gates. Exposure actually reduces bad behavior. I've seen it happen directly a few times. Perhaps even bad doctrines and bad decisions and bad policy can be revisited if enough people raise questions publicly. I heard a brother in the Writing Department say that he'd like to see all the things fixed right away that Raymond Franz exposed, and he lamented that some would not be easy to fix. But many of them have already, by now, been fixed.

I am adding more here to give the simplest view of what the "Governing Body" believes about those who claim to be anointed.
The most recent article that explains the scripture makes this point by asking a seemingly silly question.
*** ws16 January p. 21 “We Want to Go With You” ***
DO WE NEED TO KNOW THE NAMES OF ALL TODAY WHO ARE ANOINTED?
. . . . This means that the Jew is not just one person but represents the whole group of anointed ones. The other sheep know this, and they serve Jehovah along with that group. They do not need to know the names of every member of that group and follow each one of them.
No one thinks that the truly anointed are ONLY in the Governing Body. However, the only anointed that we are asked to follow cannot practically be ALL the anointed all around the world. In fact we are warned against giving too much attention to "just any" member of the anointed. And, by the same token, any member of the anointed would be out of place to ask for special attention. This might seem wrong, but that is clearly going to help avoid schisms, power struggles, and help drive peace and unity in the congregation.
The article goes on to point this out:
*** ws16 January p. 22 par. 6 “We Want to Go With You” ***
Jehovah’s holy spirit helps his servants to be humble, not proud. (Colossians 3:12) So anointed ones do not think that they are better than others. They know that Jehovah does not necessarily give anointed ones more holy spirit than he gives his other servants. And they do not feel that they can understand Bible truths more deeply than anyone else.
*** ws16 January p. 22 par. 7 “We Want to Go With You” ***
Although anointed ones feel that it is an honor to be invited to go to heaven, they do not expect others to treat them in a special way. .... So an anointed person is not surprised if some do not believe right away that he has been anointed. He realizes that the Bible tells us not to be quick to believe someone who says that God has given him a special responsibility.
*** ws16 January p. 22 par. 8 “We Want to Go With You” ***
Anointed Christians do not feel that they should spend time only with other anointed ones, as if they were members of a club. They do not try to find other anointed ones so that they can talk about being anointed or meet in groups to study the Bible. (Galatians 1:15-17) The congregation would not be united if anointed ones did this. They would be working against the holy spirit, which helps God’s people to have peace and unity.—Read Romans 16:17, 18.
The article actually offers some reasons why we would not immediately trust that someone who claims to be anointed truly is anointed. Ultimately, this all points to reasons to focus our attention on the Governing Body (faithful and discreet slave) as the identified representatives of the anointed.
*** ws16 January pp. 23-25 “We Want to Go With You” ***
DO WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE NUMBER?
12 For many years, the number of those who ate the bread and drank the wine at the Memorial kept going down. But recently, that number has been going up every year. Do we need to worry about this? No. Let us see why not.
13 “Jehovah knows those who belong to him.” (2 Timothy 2:19) Unlike Jehovah, the brothers who count the number of people eating the bread and drinking the wine at the Memorial do not know who truly is anointed. So the number includes those who think that they are anointed but are not. For example, some who used to eat the bread and drink the wine later stopped. Others may have mental or emotional problems and believe that they will rule with Christ in heaven. Clearly, we do not know exactly how many anointed ones are left on earth.
. . .  During the last days, Jehovah has continued to choose people who will be part of the 144,000. (See endnote.) So if God decides to choose some of these just before the end, surely we would not doubt that he is doing the right thing. (Isaiah 45:9; Daniel 4:35; read Romans 9:11, 16.) (See endnote.) We must be careful not to react like the workers who complained about the way their master treated those who started working in the last hour.—Read Matthew 20:8-15.
16 Not all who have the hope of living in heaven are part of “the faithful and discreet slave.” (Matthew 24:45-47) Just as in the first century, Jehovah and Jesus today are using a few people to feed, or teach, many. Only a few anointed Christians in the first century were used to write the Christian Greek Scriptures. And today, only a few anointed Christians have the responsibility to give God’s people “food at the proper time.”
Clearly "some of these" claimants are considered truly anointed. But we have no way of knowing who is and who isn't. And even if we did, we would not give them special attention, nor would they give each other special attention, even if they have been known to serve faithfully for long periods of time.
One of the reasons for the emphasis on the Governing Body is so that we can say we have identified the truly anointed persons who can properly represent the other anointed persons, and therefore by following and hanging onto their "robe" we (the other sheep) are properly hanging onto the skirt of the Jew.
I know you, John, don't believe that the GB represent the "Jew" in the Zechariah prophecy, or that they represent "Christ's brothers" in Matthew. But I think you can see why it makes perfect sense to most Witnesses. It makes sense historically in a way that no other religion can point to in their recent past. And it makes sense practically if one accepts the belief that a Governing Body should represent all the rest of the anointed.
I am not claiming that this is the only way to look at it. (For reasons I can explain later.) But I do think we should acknowledge the reasons it makes so much sense to most Witnesses.
Your own arguments against it, I think, boil down to the fact you say that the GB have "allowed" child sexual abuse by not doing enough about it, and that the shunning doctrine is unchristian, and that some (much?) of the provided spiritual food has been not good spiritually. But since you have not been able to discover another anointed person or group that non-anointed should "take hold of," then Witnesses would simply respond with 'where else should they go?' Do you really know a group that represents something better? If it were just a matter of a few who feel this way leaving the JWs, what would that accomplish exactly? 

I think the Watchtower's interpretation is clear. In many ways it matches up with yours, John.
The WT interpretation is that the "Jew" is the truly anointed class of Christians, and the "ten men" are persons out of all the nations who are not of the anointed class but who look to them for guidance, a good example, etc. These non-anointed are shown joining with these anointed in some way.
Historically, if we were to accept that the truly anointed persons were represented by the 'governing leaders' of the Bible Students / Jehovah's Witnesses in the last century or so, then the very fact that they were joined (beginning especially around 1935) by a much larger group who then identified themselves as non-anointed seems like a perfect fulfillment.
It is easy to see why, in that 2012 life experience article, a person of the "great crowd" who was obviously very enamored with his periodic association with members of the anointed, felt that he was seeing this prophecy fulfilled in his own case. Several of those anointed with whom he had repeated contact served on the Governing Body, or would later serve on the Governing Body. This was clearly a sub-theme of the 2012 Watchtower article based on the following quotes/excerpts:
but also several anointed brothers, including Pryce Hughes, Edgar Clay, and Jack Barr, who became a member of the Governing Body. One of my fellow students, Lloyd Barry; one of the instructors, Albert Schroeder; and John Booth, overseer of Kingdom Farm (where Gilead School was located) later became members of the Governing Body. During that time, I got to know such pillars as Milton Henschel, Karl Klein, Nathan Knorr, T. J. (Bud) Sullivan, and Lyman Swingle, all of whom once served on the Governing Body. I have had the privilege of periodically returning to world headquarters in New York. During those visits, I received good advice from different members of the Governing Body. So, while the "Jew" represents the anointed class, we are subtly reminded that the anointed class is represented by the Governing Body, considered to be the core representatives of "Christ's brothers."
In the past, of course, when one said "Christ's brothers are the faithful slave" it meant all of the anointed.
*** w09 10/15 p. 16 par. 15 “You Are My Friends” ***
Therefore, the primary way that those with the earthly hope demonstrate their desire to be friends with Christ is by supporting the faithful slave class.
Technically, the "Jew" in Zechariah still does mean all of the anointed, not just the GB. But even before the doctrinal change making them the same entity, the Governing Body had already pointed to themselves as the ones  representing the faithful slave. 
*** ws11 7/15 p. 24 par. 9 Have You Entered Into God’s Rest? ***
They show us that Jehovah is using the faithful and discreet slave to teach us the truth. Sometimes the Governing Body, who represents the faithful and discreet slave, reviews how we understand certain truths.
So the "Jew" in Zechariah 8 is not just another representation of the Governing Body. But based on the above, it is still intended to be the practical conclusion, when it comes to defining who, we, the "other sheep" firmly hang onto for guidance and direction.

And here I thought it was other types of sinning you desired . . .
https://www.theworldnewsmedia.org/forums/topic/79686-a-circuit-overseer-states-your-faith-is-garbage-and-needs-to-be-torn-down/page/2/#comments