JW Insider

I think there are only a couple examples of persons who were not anointed, about 13 men in all. Interestingly, Luke (as the writer of Acts), mentions that while not "anointed" Apollos was "aglow with the spirit."
(Acts 18:24-19:7) . . .Now a Jew named A·polʹlos, a native of Alexandria, arrived in Ephʹe·sus; he was an eloquent man who was well-versed in the Scriptures. 25 This man had been instructed in the way of Jehovah, and aglow with the spirit, he was speaking and teaching accurately the things about Jesus, but he was acquainted only with the baptism of John. 26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, and when Pris·cilʹla and Aqʹui·la heard him, they took him into their company and explained the way of God more accurately to him. 27 Further, because he wanted to go across to A·chaʹia, the brothers wrote to the disciples, urging them to receive him kindly. So when he got there, he greatly helped those who through God’s undeserved kindness had become believers; 28 for publicly and with great intensity he thoroughly proved the Jews to be wrong, showing them from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ. 19 In the course of events, while A·polʹlos was in Corinth, Paul went through the inland regions and came down to Ephʹe·sus. There he found some disciples 2 and said to them: “Did you receive holy spirit when you became believers?” They replied to him: “Why, we have never heard that there is a holy spirit.” 3 So he said: “In what, then, were you baptized?” They said: “In John’s baptism.” 4 Paul said: “John baptized with the baptism in symbol of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they got baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul laid his hands on them, the holy spirit came upon them, and they began speaking in foreign languages and prophesying. 7 There were about 12 men in all. Some scholars have assumed that, for many of the early years at least,  Baptists were probably a larger group than the Christians. John had obviously baptized many persons before Jesus got there, and there were already crowds being baptized by John. The similarities of their beliefs might have allowed some to join with Christians and not realize that there was more to being a Christian than just verbal acceptance of a Christian message on top of a Baptist message. Some scholars also believe there is early documented evidence of an ongoing debate or even a competition between followers of John the Baptist and followers of Jesus the Christ.
Interesting, too, is the story that explorers in the Middle East in the 1700's came across one or more Bedouin groups, who explained that they were not Christians but claimed to have been followers of John the Baptist for thousands of years. I'll have to look up the story again to get the exact details. It's possible they were followers of Mandaeism, who see John the Baptist as a more important person than Jesus. 
Some scholars, and I might be using the term loosely, have also thought that the Qumram community (the probable guardians of the Dead Sea Scroll "library") was related to John's preaching, and that most of John's followers would have been Essenes.  
Another aside, but Apollos, by some, is considered a prime candidate to have been the author of the book of Hebrews. Note that he was eloquent, and zealous in preaching to Hebrews about Christ. I think it is a minority of modern scholars who believe that Paul wrote the book of Hebrews. We have no evidence one way or another in scripture itself except style and content, but Paul's "calling" or ministry was not to the Hebrews.
 

Of course, not everyone did, or could. I doubt they expected even such a high percentage as they got. The excitement shows it.
*** km 5/74 p. 3 How Are You Using Your Life? ***
Yes, since the summer of 1973 there have been new peaks in pioneers every month. Now there are 20,394 regular and special pioneers in the United States, an all-time peak. That is 5,190 more than there were in February 1973! A 34-percent increase! Does that not warm our hearts? Reports are heard of brothers selling their homes and property and planning to finish out the rest of their days in this old system in the pioneer service. Certainly this is a fine way to spend the short time remaining before the wicked world’s end.
The specific quote about a future in school is in the Awake! but not in the Watchtower Online Library, but you've probably seen it. Also, a circuit assembly in 1971 influenced me to quit school, but I have no notes on which talk it was.
If the end had come in the mid-70s as expected, no one would have needed professionals. Up until 1975 Bethel HQ had used very few professionals, but in 1976, they accepted computer professionals to start a computer department (my roommate and another friend from St. Louis), electronics professionals (including my brother) to develop some programmable controllers, a second surgeon to live near Bethel to back up Doctor Dixon, etc.
But professionals can always be recruited. Or we could rely on worldly people. Jehovah provides.
Also, I don't think you or I can impute wrong motives of the GB claiming that they wanted dumb people to domineer. Higher education is considered "dangerous" to one's spirituality because, in practice, many Witnesses leave the organization when they go to college. A very high percentage. I understand that there are still some mixed feelings about higher education among the GB.

This sounds correct, and it's an excellent way to explain how the holy spirit would lead them into all truth, yet Paul said that still see incompletely and imperfectly, as if looking into a hazy mirror.
This is why I was a bit disappointed at the implication by GJ that seems limiting when it says that holy spirt created the Bible for us (true) but it seems like the holy spirit is not described as playing a part in the process of helping the GB understand it. It's presented as if the HS has already done its work and congealed itself into the Bible, but reading and rationalizing and remembering how verses might apply is the way the holy spirit "acts." He did mention prayer but gave no connection to the process. It ends up sounding like the way people apply Dylan lyrics to their lives or Shakespeare quotes to describe an experience or a "moral" of a story. (The difference being that the Bible "contains" holy spirit.) 
His analogy to the Bible as a "constitution" was very appropriate for the legal setting, but it too is a bit disappointing in the context of how the Governing Body, in effect acts like a congress to pass new and improved bills (doctrines) based on a majority if not unanimous voting.
And there's that historical problem. If holy spirit is needed to understand (and I thin it is) then what does this say about doctrines that are constantly changed, sometimes back and forth.

ahh, do not worry, this typing errors comes with age and common vision problems  

I sincerely doubt that, too. There seemed to be a time from 1912 through about 1936 when we find surprising links between some Bible Students and the occult, and various loose connections to spiritism and even claimed demonic influences. But I can never see F.Franz as the type. I don't know what years you are talking about here, but Klein was in and out of Writing for several years and would have known that everyone had to defer to F.Franz as the only one who could explain the various prophecies and parables and who the Jehu class or Jephthah class or Gideon class was. That kind of stuff has been tied to demonism since Russell's time.

Perhaps it's misguided, but it's a view from "Witness" that I agree with 100 percent.
Fred Franz was very intelligent, of course. But when I recorded two interviews with him for over an hour each, I was forced to come to my own conclusions about him based on the content of things he said, and certain expressions he used.
I think most of what you need to know about him comes from his September 1975 Gilead Talk which I have already linked to in the past. I'm not talking about his argument against an active Governing Body that would form a committee, or ecclesiastical body of some kind, although even that says something that he would use that opportunity for a political speech directed at the other members of the Governing Body disguised only slightly by working in some awkward references to the Gilead students. (Like, 'And don't you get the idea that you need to form committees in the countries to which you have been assigned!')
The Watchtower summarized his talk with only vague references to what it was really about:
*** w75 11/1 p. 672 Graduates of Gilead’s 59th Class Urged to Stick to the Work ***
Addressing the graduates, F. W. Franz showed why they were not being sent by any ecclesiastical body such as exists in the churches of Christendom. According to the Scriptures, neither Philip nor the apostle Paul, two outstanding evangelizers or missionaries in the first century C.E., received missionary assignments from the apostolic body at Jerusalem. Both men did their work under the direction of the real head of the Christian congregation, Jesus Christ. Paul had, in fact, been directly chosen by Jesus as an apostle to the nations. Later, at the direction of God’s spirit, Paul and his companion Barnabas were sent out from the Antioch congregation. Both men recognized their assignment as having come, not from men, but from Jesus Christ.
I'm referring more to his comments about 1975 in that same talk. The typical anti-JW sites, usually cut off the talk before he gets to these comments because those sites are more concerned with his views against the Governing Body. But I'm sure you can find the whole talk somewhere. It's what he says after he pulls out his Jewish calendar to show how it was now the 2nd day of Tishri 1976, and therefore now, "the 2nd day of the 7th millennium of man's existence here on earth." That statement got what sounded like the biggest cheer of the talk.
I don't know if he intended it, but it recalled the day that C.T.Russell came down to the dining room on October 1st, 1914 per the Watchtower of that time period (and later changed to October 4th, and currently stated as October 2nd) to announce that the 'Gentile Times have ended!'  F.Franz then rambled on about some wonderful, "startling, surprising, happifying things" of numerical significance, since this was the 59th Class, meaning that the 60th was about to start later that year, and "60" should remind us that 6,000 years is 60 centuries. Isn't that amazing!?!?! That this class 59 was only one number away from 60, which somehow gave new significance to 1975.
If you pay close attention to his books on Daniel's prophecy (and others) you will see some of the same types of unspiritual thinking.  For me, F.Franz proved to be a prime example of why we should not put our trust in a man:
(Psalm 146:3) . . . Do not put your trust in . . . a son of man, who cannot bring salvation.
 

If you are looking for reasons not to believe these experiences, it's always easy to find such stories that are told in ways that make them unbelievable. I know there are several Mormon missionary stories that use the idea of two angels protecting someone on his left and right, which also matches a Mormon scripture. A story of 26 angels guarding someone (non-Mormon) was treated by snopes.com, a would-be fact checking site for all kinds of email stories and Internet rumors.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/26-guards/
“Potential victim’s attacker is scared off by guardian angels” is a common glurge theme. (Another widely-circulated tale about a girl who barely avoids becoming the victim of a rapist also draws upon this theme)
In fact, that link to "rapist" is to another snopes debunkable which has been told in versions quite similar to the Witness version: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/alley-oops/
Many non-Witnesses would be happy to believe that such an experience happened to a Witness, but many Witnesses would be troubled by the fact that non-Witnesses have claimed such experiences, too, and would probably doubt those claims.
As you say, however, we cannot question that there may indeed be many cases of divine protection. An thought about why "some and not others" is found in the latter portion of the response to the second link above about the rapist. It's a bit off topic so I won't go into it further, but thought you might find it interesting

On this particular matter anyway. The next line after Prov 3:5,6 is verse 7: "Do not become wise in your own eyes." I think that the majority of witnesses back in the 1970's were already aware that any discussion of prophetic books or chronology was always written by him or was a repetition of ideas he had already written. This goes all the way back to discussions of every Bible book or passage that touched on prophecy since 1942. In the 1968 Watchtower he was actually arguing against points he himself had made in 1955. But books and articles on Isaiah, Jeremiah, Revelation, Daniel, Haggai, etc., along with obscure meanings of Jesus' parables were all from him, and except for his own changes, no one else dared "mess" with those explanations until he died.
These interpretations of prophecy, also, were not written in such a way that they were open to questioning. There was one explanation and it was "the truth" until he changed it.

Which is true. The Bible has been written for everyone's spiritual instruction. The Bible is the instructor. Without reading it, the holy spirit wouldn't be able to bring anything out.  John 14:26  "But the helper, the holy spirit, which the Father will send in my name, that one will teach you all things and bring back to your minds all the things I told you". Jesus was telling his disciples they would recall everything he taught them, and they wrote it down for us, and today the holy spirit will help us to recall what we have read. Holy spirit is also needed to understand what they wrote. Not everyone understands, because if they did, we wouldn't have so many contradictory "Christian teachings" based on the same writings.
In other words:
In context, John was writing about those anointed in the first century. At that time only the Hebrew scriptures were available.  He said the holy spirit would anoint them and guide them into all the truth. They wouldn't need anyone to teach them (perhaps such as the scribes and pharisees?). This is why the apostles were able to write the Christian Greek scriptures. They were under inspiration from the holy spirit. And they were commissioned to spread the good news about the Kingdom and Jesus with the holy spirit helping them.
John, we are going round in circles because we are both talking about two different things. Maybe that’s my fault because I have not explained it very well. Yes, more will be demanded of the one who was given a bigger job. Logically! But that does not change that all people’s LIVES have the same worth. Otherwise you would be saying God discriminates on account of position, that somebody with a higher position has more value in God’s eyes than someone of a lowly position. In fact God has chosen the lowly ones to put the more important ones to shame. Intellect, power, position and wisdom are not deciding factors in whether God approves of them more than another person. God reads hearts.
I was using the word Judge as a verb, not a noun:
Judge  (noun)
1.a public official appointed to decide cases in a court of law.
2.a person who decides the results of a competition or watches for infractions of the rules.
3. a person able or qualified to give an opinion on something.
Judge (verb)
1.form an opinion or conclusion about. come to the conclusion, conclude, decide, determine; consider, believe, think, deem, view;
 
 

LOL. Thanks.  It wasn't by choice, and it's not the first time I have typed "every" for "ever." Among a lot of other mistakes I make is a common one for me where I type "Babylong" for "Babylon" and "imaging" for "imagine." Unfortunately the built in spell-check here will only flag the "Babylong" error.
And for some reason I almost always type "it's" even when it's "its." Another one that rarely gets flagged, so I often neglect to change it.

Perhaps it's misguided, but it's a view from "Witness" that I agree with 100 percent.
Fred Franz was very intelligent, of course. But when I recorded two interviews with him for over an hour each, I was forced to come to my own conclusions about him based on the content of things he said, and certain expressions he used.
I think most of what you need to know about him comes from his September 1975 Gilead Talk which I have already linked to in the past. I'm not talking about his argument against an active Governing Body that would form a committee, or ecclesiastical body of some kind, although even that says something that he would use that opportunity for a political speech directed at the other members of the Governing Body disguised only slightly by working in some awkward references to the Gilead students. (Like, 'And don't you get the idea that you need to form committees in the countries to which you have been assigned!')
The Watchtower summarized his talk with only vague references to what it was really about:
*** w75 11/1 p. 672 Graduates of Gilead’s 59th Class Urged to Stick to the Work ***
Addressing the graduates, F. W. Franz showed why they were not being sent by any ecclesiastical body such as exists in the churches of Christendom. According to the Scriptures, neither Philip nor the apostle Paul, two outstanding evangelizers or missionaries in the first century C.E., received missionary assignments from the apostolic body at Jerusalem. Both men did their work under the direction of the real head of the Christian congregation, Jesus Christ. Paul had, in fact, been directly chosen by Jesus as an apostle to the nations. Later, at the direction of God’s spirit, Paul and his companion Barnabas were sent out from the Antioch congregation. Both men recognized their assignment as having come, not from men, but from Jesus Christ.
I'm referring more to his comments about 1975 in that same talk. The typical anti-JW sites, usually cut off the talk before he gets to these comments because those sites are more concerned with his views against the Governing Body. But I'm sure you can find the whole talk somewhere. It's what he says after he pulls out his Jewish calendar to show how it was now the 2nd day of Tishri 1976, and therefore now, "the 2nd day of the 7th millennium of man's existence here on earth." That statement got what sounded like the biggest cheer of the talk.
I don't know if he intended it, but it recalled the day that C.T.Russell came down to the dining room on October 1st, 1914 per the Watchtower of that time period (and later changed to October 4th, and currently stated as October 2nd) to announce that the 'Gentile Times have ended!'  F.Franz then rambled on about some wonderful, "startling, surprising, happifying things" of numerical significance, since this was the 59th Class, meaning that the 60th was about to start later that year, and "60" should remind us that 6,000 years is 60 centuries. Isn't that amazing!?!?! That this class 59 was only one number away from 60, which somehow gave new significance to 1975.
If you pay close attention to his books on Daniel's prophecy (and others) you will see some of the same types of unspiritual thinking.  For me, F.Franz proved to be a prime example of why we should not put our trust in a man:
(Psalm 146:3) . . . Do not put your trust in . . . a son of man, who cannot bring salvation.
 

In fairness, he has downvoted me, and he will no longer have occasion to downvote @James Thomas Rook Jr.. For the next year, James says, we will hear nothing from him...zip...zero...nada...as he writes the successor to Asimov’s trilogy.
Of course, I am keeping a sharp eye out for that work. I may already have spotted it in a recent novel of a mysterious visit from a planet of apostates! “We come in peace,” they say slyly upon deboarding their craft. “See? We have shaved our beards. Take us to your leaders. How many are there of them now? Seven? Eight?” I don’t trust them.
There is a earthing character whom everyone likes named TrueTim. He approaches and extends a hand of welcome, only to be savagely rebuffed. “Get your hands off us, you damned dirty ape!” they bellow. 
 
 

On this particular matter anyway. The next line after Prov 3:5,6 is verse 7: "Do not become wise in your own eyes." I think that the majority of witnesses back in the 1970's were already aware that any discussion of prophetic books or chronology was always written by him or was a repetition of ideas he had already written. This goes all the way back to discussions of every Bible book or passage that touched on prophecy since 1942. In the 1968 Watchtower he was actually arguing against points he himself had made in 1955. But books and articles on Isaiah, Jeremiah, Revelation, Daniel, Haggai, etc., along with obscure meanings of Jesus' parables were all from him, and except for his own changes, no one else dared "mess" with those explanations until he died.
These interpretations of prophecy, also, were not written in such a way that they were open to questioning. There was one explanation and it was "the truth" until he changed it.

I'm saying that all the argumentation was put to use in order to counter the cautionary statements, even cautionary statements of Jesus himself. And look at the expressions and how carefully they were crafted to come as close as possible to saying what people were admittedly thinking. And they were encouraged to think that these conclusions were the ones that God would consider the most appropriate and most fitting and the one that would best fit his loving purpose. Note the question at the bottom of the page for this paragraph in "Life Everlasting:"
30  LIFE EVERLASTING-IN FREEDOM OF THE SONS OF GOD
43 HOW appropriate it would be for Jehovah God
to make of this coming seventh period of a thousand
years a sabbath period of rest and release,
a great Jubilee sabbath for the proclaiming of
liberty throughout the earth to all its inhabitants!
This would be most timely for mankind. It would
also be most fitting on God's part, for, remember,
mankind has yet ahead of it what the last book
of the Holy Bible speaks of as the reign of Jesus
Christ over earth for a thousand years, the millennial
reign of Christ. Prophetically Jesus Christ,
when on earth nineteen centuries ago, said concerning
himself: "For Lord of the sabbath is
what the Son of man is." (Matthew 12:s) It
would not be by mere chance or accident but
would be according to the loving purpose of Jehovah
God for the reign of Jesus Christ, the
"Lord of the sabbath," to run parallel with the
seventh millennium of man's existence.
--------
43. What act on God's part would be most timely for mankind
and most fitting in the fulfillment of Jehovah's purpose?

The answer obviously is that it would be most fitting for God to make this upcoming 7th period of 1,000 years to be the start of the millennial reign of Christ.
Is God going to do something that is NOT the most timely and most fitting thing for him to do? The paragraph started out saying how "appropriate" it would be for Jehovah to do this. Is Jehovah going to do something that is NOT appropriate, or LESS appropriate than what is appropriate for him to do?
It's also pretty clear from this "hubris" why Frederick Franz was sometimes called "the Oracle." This is an expression I heard myself more than once.

You are asking how I could say that F.Franz was using deception to get people to think he was saying something he wasn't really saying. And you want to know how, if that was true, I could also say that:
Fred Franz did not endorse the assumption of the end of the world in 1975. I've sometimes been the first to correct that false notion when naive opposers have made such a claim about Fred Franz on this very forum. For Fred Franz it was not about him endorsing 1975. Fred Franz considered it "an appropriate time for God to act" based on the unscriptural idea he held at the time that the creative days must have each been 7,000 years long, and that God's great rest day, should appropriately include the 1,000 year reign and still end end within a very short period of time after the year 2975. (The year 2975 was listed in the chart in the 1966 book, "Life Everlasting -- In Freedom of the Sons of God.")
Very simple. He did not endorse the assumption of the end of the world (or system of things) in 1975 by the fact that he never every claimed that that the end would happen in 1975. As I said, he got people to think he was saying one thing "while not quite saying it."
This is exactly why I said what I did. He knew the assumption that was being made by his listeners. He was creating that assumption by coming as close to saying it without quite saying it. But he would never endorse that assumption. He was not dumb. Far from it. He heard how the audience was laughing and applauding, just as he had heard how the Service Department was responding with statements in the KM about how we might have only have a few short months left, and that it is heart-warming to hear of people selling their homes to spend the rest of this system in the pioneer work. He knew what District and Circuit Overseers were saying about how, if you read the Watchtower carefully, you know what they are really trying to say. "Stay Alive Until '75!" In fact, he knew that this was exactly what people were saying in the 1920s: "Stay Alive Until 1925!"
He knew what people were thinking because he admitted he knew --in the same talk. So he gets the big laugh by talking about all the things that MIGHT happen in 1975, and then adding "but we're not saying." When he says 'and don't any of you go saying' he can tell by the laughter and applause that they are taking it as if they have some secret information that they know because they are entitled to know, but not the rest of the world.
It actually would have been very easy to clarify, but he never did. And I realized that everything he was saying in that talk could be understood ambiguously, and I think this is the same "game" he was playing way back in 1968. For example, he knew that people would be saying: "But what about the scripture where Jesus said, no one knows the day or the hour." Circuit overseers would take this verse and comment, "Yes he said no one would know the day or the hour - but he didn't say we wouldn't know the year!" How had F.Franz handled it? He addressed that verse by saying that "now is not the time to be toying with that verse." What does that mean? Again, ambiguity:
*** w68 8/15 p. 494 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975?
WHAT about all this talk concerning the year 1975? Lively discussions, some based on speculation, have burst into flame during recent months among serious students of the Bible. Their interest has been kindled by the belief that 1975 will mark the end of 6,000 years of human history since Adam’s creation. The nearness of such an important date indeed fires the imagination and presents unlimited possibilities for discussion. . . .
That means, in the fall of the year 1975, a little over seven years from now. . .  it will be 6,000 years since the creation of Adam, the father of all mankind! . . . Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah’s loving and timely purposes.
1975! . . . AND FAR BEYOND!
One thing is absolutely certain, Bible chronology reinforced with fulfilled Bible prophecy shows that six thousand years of man’s existence will soon be up, yes, within this generation! (Matt. 24:34) This is, therefore, no time to be indifferent and complacent. This is not the time to be toying with the words of Jesus that “concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Matt. 24:36) To the contrary, it is a time when one should be keenly aware that the end of this system of things is rapidly coming to its violent end. Make no mistake, it is sufficient that the Father himself knows both the “day and hour”!
36 Even if one cannot see beyond 1975, is this any reason to be less active?
When you make one or two ambiguous expression in the midst of 10 clear ones, it's understandable and you still have clarity. But when 8 out of 10 are ambiguous and only 2 shows clarity (by mentioning speculation, or possibilities). It's easy to reinterpret the clearer expressions about possibility into the ambiguous ones that can be interpreted as expressing a higher level of certainty and confidence.

On this particular matter anyway. The next line after Prov 3:5,6 is verse 7: "Do not become wise in your own eyes." I think that the majority of witnesses back in the 1970's were already aware that any discussion of prophetic books or chronology was always written by him or was a repetition of ideas he had already written. This goes all the way back to discussions of every Bible book or passage that touched on prophecy since 1942. In the 1968 Watchtower he was actually arguing against points he himself had made in 1955. But books and articles on Isaiah, Jeremiah, Revelation, Daniel, Haggai, etc., along with obscure meanings of Jesus' parables were all from him, and except for his own changes, no one else dared "mess" with those explanations until he died.
These interpretations of prophecy, also, were not written in such a way that they were open to questioning. There was one explanation and it was "the truth" until he changed it.

I'm saying that all the argumentation was put to use in order to counter the cautionary statements, even cautionary statements of Jesus himself. And look at the expressions and how carefully they were crafted to come as close as possible to saying what people were admittedly thinking. And they were encouraged to think that these conclusions were the ones that God would consider the most appropriate and most fitting and the one that would best fit his loving purpose. Note the question at the bottom of the page for this paragraph in "Life Everlasting:"
30  LIFE EVERLASTING-IN FREEDOM OF THE SONS OF GOD
43 HOW appropriate it would be for Jehovah God
to make of this coming seventh period of a thousand
years a sabbath period of rest and release,
a great Jubilee sabbath for the proclaiming of
liberty throughout the earth to all its inhabitants!
This would be most timely for mankind. It would
also be most fitting on God's part, for, remember,
mankind has yet ahead of it what the last book
of the Holy Bible speaks of as the reign of Jesus
Christ over earth for a thousand years, the millennial
reign of Christ. Prophetically Jesus Christ,
when on earth nineteen centuries ago, said concerning
himself: "For Lord of the sabbath is
what the Son of man is." (Matthew 12:s) It
would not be by mere chance or accident but
would be according to the loving purpose of Jehovah
God for the reign of Jesus Christ, the
"Lord of the sabbath," to run parallel with the
seventh millennium of man's existence.
--------
43. What act on God's part would be most timely for mankind
and most fitting in the fulfillment of Jehovah's purpose?

The answer obviously is that it would be most fitting for God to make this upcoming 7th period of 1,000 years to be the start of the millennial reign of Christ.
Is God going to do something that is NOT the most timely and most fitting thing for him to do? The paragraph started out saying how "appropriate" it would be for Jehovah to do this. Is Jehovah going to do something that is NOT appropriate, or LESS appropriate than what is appropriate for him to do?
It's also pretty clear from this "hubris" why Frederick Franz was sometimes called "the Oracle." This is an expression I heard myself more than once.

You are asking how I could say that F.Franz was using deception to get people to think he was saying something he wasn't really saying. And you want to know how, if that was true, I could also say that:
Fred Franz did not endorse the assumption of the end of the world in 1975. I've sometimes been the first to correct that false notion when naive opposers have made such a claim about Fred Franz on this very forum. For Fred Franz it was not about him endorsing 1975. Fred Franz considered it "an appropriate time for God to act" based on the unscriptural idea he held at the time that the creative days must have each been 7,000 years long, and that God's great rest day, should appropriately include the 1,000 year reign and still end end within a very short period of time after the year 2975. (The year 2975 was listed in the chart in the 1966 book, "Life Everlasting -- In Freedom of the Sons of God.")
Very simple. He did not endorse the assumption of the end of the world (or system of things) in 1975 by the fact that he never every claimed that that the end would happen in 1975. As I said, he got people to think he was saying one thing "while not quite saying it."
This is exactly why I said what I did. He knew the assumption that was being made by his listeners. He was creating that assumption by coming as close to saying it without quite saying it. But he would never endorse that assumption. He was not dumb. Far from it. He heard how the audience was laughing and applauding, just as he had heard how the Service Department was responding with statements in the KM about how we might have only have a few short months left, and that it is heart-warming to hear of people selling their homes to spend the rest of this system in the pioneer work. He knew what District and Circuit Overseers were saying about how, if you read the Watchtower carefully, you know what they are really trying to say. "Stay Alive Until '75!" In fact, he knew that this was exactly what people were saying in the 1920s: "Stay Alive Until 1925!"
He knew what people were thinking because he admitted he knew --in the same talk. So he gets the big laugh by talking about all the things that MIGHT happen in 1975, and then adding "but we're not saying." When he says 'and don't any of you go saying' he can tell by the laughter and applause that they are taking it as if they have some secret information that they know because they are entitled to know, but not the rest of the world.
It actually would have been very easy to clarify, but he never did. And I realized that everything he was saying in that talk could be understood ambiguously, and I think this is the same "game" he was playing way back in 1968. For example, he knew that people would be saying: "But what about the scripture where Jesus said, no one knows the day or the hour." Circuit overseers would take this verse and comment, "Yes he said no one would know the day or the hour - but he didn't say we wouldn't know the year!" How had F.Franz handled it? He addressed that verse by saying that "now is not the time to be toying with that verse." What does that mean? Again, ambiguity:
*** w68 8/15 p. 494 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975?
WHAT about all this talk concerning the year 1975? Lively discussions, some based on speculation, have burst into flame during recent months among serious students of the Bible. Their interest has been kindled by the belief that 1975 will mark the end of 6,000 years of human history since Adam’s creation. The nearness of such an important date indeed fires the imagination and presents unlimited possibilities for discussion. . . .
That means, in the fall of the year 1975, a little over seven years from now. . .  it will be 6,000 years since the creation of Adam, the father of all mankind! . . . Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah’s loving and timely purposes.
1975! . . . AND FAR BEYOND!
One thing is absolutely certain, Bible chronology reinforced with fulfilled Bible prophecy shows that six thousand years of man’s existence will soon be up, yes, within this generation! (Matt. 24:34) This is, therefore, no time to be indifferent and complacent. This is not the time to be toying with the words of Jesus that “concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Matt. 24:36) To the contrary, it is a time when one should be keenly aware that the end of this system of things is rapidly coming to its violent end. Make no mistake, it is sufficient that the Father himself knows both the “day and hour”!
36 Even if one cannot see beyond 1975, is this any reason to be less active?
When you make one or two ambiguous expression in the midst of 10 clear ones, it's understandable and you still have clarity. But when 8 out of 10 are ambiguous and only 2 shows clarity (by mentioning speculation, or possibilities). It's easy to reinterpret the clearer expressions about possibility into the ambiguous ones that can be interpreted as expressing a higher level of certainty and confidence.

Isa 55:8,9; Num 23:19
Fred Franz had more faith in himself, than in God.  Prov 3:5,6

“I was hanging in the suana with Fred thumbing a soggy copy of Ray’s book that Dan had squirreled out of the safe, hoping Albert wouldn’t go off on some spiel on UFOs or whatever, and that he would postpone his latest jetting around the globe gig, where he always made me ride baggage class, when...” uh oh, I’m not that sufficiently gets the job done.

I'm saying that all the argumentation was put to use in order to counter the cautionary statements, even cautionary statements of Jesus himself. And look at the expressions and how carefully they were crafted to come as close as possible to saying what people were admittedly thinking. And they were encouraged to think that these conclusions were the ones that God would consider the most appropriate and most fitting and the one that would best fit his loving purpose. Note the question at the bottom of the page for this paragraph in "Life Everlasting:"
30  LIFE EVERLASTING-IN FREEDOM OF THE SONS OF GOD
43 HOW appropriate it would be for Jehovah God
to make of this coming seventh period of a thousand
years a sabbath period of rest and release,
a great Jubilee sabbath for the proclaiming of
liberty throughout the earth to all its inhabitants!
This would be most timely for mankind. It would
also be most fitting on God's part, for, remember,
mankind has yet ahead of it what the last book
of the Holy Bible speaks of as the reign of Jesus
Christ over earth for a thousand years, the millennial
reign of Christ. Prophetically Jesus Christ,
when on earth nineteen centuries ago, said concerning
himself: "For Lord of the sabbath is
what the Son of man is." (Matthew 12:s) It
would not be by mere chance or accident but
would be according to the loving purpose of Jehovah
God for the reign of Jesus Christ, the
"Lord of the sabbath," to run parallel with the
seventh millennium of man's existence.
--------
43. What act on God's part would be most timely for mankind
and most fitting in the fulfillment of Jehovah's purpose?

The answer obviously is that it would be most fitting for God to make this upcoming 7th period of 1,000 years to be the start of the millennial reign of Christ.
Is God going to do something that is NOT the most timely and most fitting thing for him to do? The paragraph started out saying how "appropriate" it would be for Jehovah to do this. Is Jehovah going to do something that is NOT appropriate, or LESS appropriate than what is appropriate for him to do?
It's also pretty clear from this "hubris" why Frederick Franz was sometimes called "the Oracle." This is an expression I heard myself more than once.

Exact same thing that Allen Smith accused me of stating, too. It's still just as untrue. Fred Franz did not endorse the assumption of the end of the world in 1975. I've sometimes been the first to correct that false notion when naive opposers have made such a claim about Fred Franz on this very forum. For Fred Franz it was not about him endorsing 1975. Fred Franz considered it "an appropriate time for God to act" based on the unscriptural idea he held at the time that the creative days must have each been 7,000 years long, and that God's great rest day, should appropriately include the 1,000 year reign and still end end within a very short period of time after the year 2975. (The year 2975 was listed in the chart in the 1966 book, "Life Everlasting In the Freedom of the Sons of God.") The Watchtower that same year said:
*** w68 8/15 pp. 499-500 pars. 30-33 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah’s loving and timely purposes.
But it was always more about the closeness to 1975, since 1975 marked the 6,000th year of that 7,000 year period. You might be aware that I've been consistent about that point all along on this forum. 1975 got emphasized because of that available point of measurement, yet it was NEVER stated that the world would end in 1975, nor that Armageddon or the end of this system would occur in that year. The point was that it MIGHT, which was a very true statement; we had no reason to believe it couldn't. And we had every reason to be extra alert because we were given many reasons to believe that the end of the system must have been about to occur, not necessarily in 1975, but at least in the decade of the 1970's. From just before the 1970's started, right up until early in the year 1975, the year was emphasized because it was "Biblical" date in a sense, but no one ever said that the end could not come before 1975, or even a few years after 1975.
Combined with our view of world events at the time, this made sense and many statements were made that would convince a normal person that Armageddon could come in 1975 or within a matter of months, not years, beyond 1975.
*** w68 8/15 p. 499 par. 30 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years.
To a careful reader, this statement says that at the most we had about until October 1977 until we entered the last thousand years of that "rest period" which would (appropriately and lovingly and purposefully) run parallel with the thousand year reign of Christ. (Because after 1977 it would now no longer just be a measure of months, but years, in the plural, and we had just been told that it may be weeks or months, but NOT YEARS.) Then a small note in the same Watchtower reminded us that another factor might add or subtract 6 months to that limit. This could potentially have pushed that maximum limit out until April 1978. 
This explains why the talks, the Awake! and Watchtower magazine covers, Circuit Assembly lapel badge messages, and even Watchtower subscription campaigns (in the late 60s and early 70s) made several references to the "mid-70s," "the decade of the 1970's," "What will the 1970's bring?" "Who will conquer the world in the 1970's?" etc.
*** w71 9/15 p. 561 pars. 10-12 Set Apart from the World ***
With populations exploding all over the earth, many nations now stand at the brink of starvation, and disaster is predicted by experts for the mid-1970’s. Rather than fit in with political promises of a bright, materialistic tomorrow, this devastation on earth fits Jehovah’s prophecies on mankind’s waywardness in the “last days.” . . .  And now, as we enter the 1970’s, an astonishing picture presents itself.
*** w69 11/1 p. 668 How to Avoid Regrets ***
Just as we looked back over the past five years, let us look five years into the future. That will be the year 1974. What will we be regretting then? What are we doing right now, or failing to do now, that years from now we will wish we had done or had done differently? Jehovah has provided sufficient information so that we can definitely know the trend of future events. His Word reveals that we are without question fast approaching the end of this entire wicked system of things. (Matt. 24:3-14; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 1 John 2:17) . . .
So when the end of this system of things soon comes, what will be our greatest need?
But it was not even a new point about the end of the 6,000 years ending in the 1970's:
*** w74 8/15 p. 507 No Spiritual “Energy Crisis” for Discreet Ones ***
In 1943 the Watch Tower Society’s book “The Truth Shall Make You Free” did away with the nonexistent extra 100 years in the period of the Judges and placed the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence in the 1970’s. It also fixed the beginning of Christ’s presence, not in 1874, but in 1914 C.E.
Back then (in 1943), the end of 6,000 years was not 1975, but 1976. And it was also not a new point to discuss the gap between Adam's creation and Eve's creation that could effect the expectation of the 1,000 year reign starting immediately that year. The only difference was that all the arguments were for a longer time gap between Adam and Even, and by 1968, all the arguments were for a shorter time gap between Adam and Eve.
*** w55 2/1 p. 95 Questions From Readers ***
. . . six thousand years of God’s rest day would be ending in the fall of 1976. However, from our present chronology (which is admitted imperfect) at best the fall of the year 1976 would be the end of 6,000 years of human history for mankind, 6,000 years of man’s existence on the earth, not 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh seven-thousand-year period. Why not? Because Adam lived some time after his creation in the latter part of Jehovah’s sixth creative period, before the seventh period, Jehovah’s sabbath, began.
Why, it must have taken Adam quite some time to name all the animals, as he was commissioned to do. Further, it appears from the New World Bible Translation that, even while Adam was naming the animals, other family kinds of living creatures were being created for Adam to designate by name. (Gen. 2:19 footnote d, NW) It was not until after Adam completed this assignment of work that his helpmate Eve was created. Since God created nothing new whatever on the seventh day, Eve must have been created on the sixth day; and this the divine record confirms in its account of the sixth day: “God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.”—Gen. 1:27, NW.
The very fact that, as part of Jehovah’s secret, no one today is able to find out how much time Adam and later Eve lived during the closing days of the sixth creative period, so no one can now determine when six thousand years of Jehovah’s present rest day come to an end. Obviously, whatever amount of Adam’s 930 years was lived before the beginning of that seventh-day rest of Jehovah, that unknown amount would have to be added to the 1976 date.
This was the big difference in emphasis about 1975. Note, how every point of "delay" above is refuted just 13 years later:
*** w68 8/15 pp. 499-500 pars. 30-33 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence on earth. It does not necessarily mean that 1975 marks the end of the first 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh creative “day.” Why not? Because after his creation Adam lived some time during the “sixth day,” which unknown amount of time would need to be subtracted from Adam’s 930 years, to determine when the sixth seven-thousand-year period or “day” ended, and how long Adam lived into the “seventh day.” And yet the end of that sixth creative “day” could end within the same Gregorian calendar year of Adam’s creation. It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years.
31 In regard to Adam’s creation it is good to read carefully what the Bible says. Moses in compiling the book of Genesis referred to written records or “histories” that predated the Flood. The first of these begins with Genesis 1:1 and ends at Genesis 2:4 with the words, “This is the history of the heavens and the earth . . . ” The second historical document begins with Genesis 2:5 and ends with verse two of chapter five. Hence we have two separate accounts of creation from slightly different points of view. In the second of these accounts, in Genesis 2:19, the original Hebrew verb translated “was forming” is in the progressive imperfect form. This does not mean that the animals and birds were created after Adam was created. Genesis 1:20-28 shows it does not mean that. So, in order to avoid contradiction between chapter one and chapter two, Genesis 2:19, 20 must be only a parenthetical remark thrown in to explain the need for creating a “helper” for man. So the progressive Hebrew verb form could also be rendered as “had been forming.”—See Rotherham’s translation (Ro), also Leeser’s (Le).
32 These two creation accounts in the book of Genesis, though differing slightly in the treatment of the material, are in perfect agreement with each other on all points, including the fact that Eve was created after Adam. So not until after this event did the sixth creative day come to an end. Exactly how soon after Adam’s creation is not disclosed. “After that [Adam and Eve’s creation] God saw everything he had made and, look! it was very good. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a sixth day.” (Gen. 1:31) After the sixth creative day ends, the seventh one begins.
33 This time between Adam’s creation and the beginning of the seventh day, the day of rest, let it be noted, need not have been a long time. It could have been a rather short one. The naming of the animals by Adam, and his discovery that there was no complement for himself, required no great length of time. The animals were in subjection to Adam; they were peaceful; they came under God’s leading; they were not needing to be chased down and caught. It took Noah only seven days to get the same kinds of animals, male and female, into the Ark. (Gen. 7:1-4) Eve’s creation was quickly accomplished, ‘while Adam was sleeping.’ (Gen. 2:21) So the lapse of time between Adam’s creation and the end of the sixth creative day, though unknown, was a comparatively short period of time. The pronouncement at the end of the sixth day, “God saw everything he had made and, look! it was very good,” proves that the beginning of the great seventh day of the creative week did not wait until after Adam and Eve sinned and were expelled from the Garden of Eden.

I believe you probably have seen such a list.
But I never made such a list. I could try, but I'd probably only get about 14 of them right. Still, I imagine it would be difficult to track and manage all of these personas without a list of some kind. So I wouldn't doubt your claim. 

Not only did I emphatically state just the opposite about Fred Franz, I happened to be one here who exposed the apostate recording as a manipulated "fake" recording. But the recording I linked to is not manipulated. The recording does not show Fred Franz endorsing the assumption of the end of the world in 1975. It shows how he speaks in such a way that he repeatedly elicits the most vocal response from those who see that he is endorsing the closeness of the end to the year 1975, and even a remaining possibility for the year 1975, but never endorsing the assumption. It does create a deception. But there really is a difference.
Over time, I expect that all the emphasis on 1975 really did shift the focus away from that Adam-to-Even time gap, by minimizing it to a period of only weeks or months and not years. It must have been minimized almost into oblivion because before the year 1975 was even finished, there was suddenly a lot less talk about great urgency and heightened watchfulness. The convention talk titles show this. I just checked the Kingdom Ministry for the use of the word "urgency" for the decade of the 1970's. It was used ZERO times in 1976.
 
You would think, that if anyone still "believed" in the 6,000 year rhetoric after 1975 commenced without evidence, that the word urgency would have doubled and tripled right up through 1978 or even a bit further. But it drops to nearly nothing, in fact completely disappearing between August 1975 and December 1977. Disappearing for 28 months, and just as sparse until the decade of the 1970s runs out. 

Exact same thing that Allen Smith accused me of stating, too. It's still just as untrue. Fred Franz did not endorse the assumption of the end of the world in 1975. I've sometimes been the first to correct that false notion when naive opposers have made such a claim about Fred Franz on this very forum. For Fred Franz it was not about him endorsing 1975. Fred Franz considered it "an appropriate time for God to act" based on the unscriptural idea he held at the time that the creative days must have each been 7,000 years long, and that God's great rest day, should appropriately include the 1,000 year reign and still end end within a very short period of time after the year 2975. (The year 2975 was listed in the chart in the 1966 book, "Life Everlasting In the Freedom of the Sons of God.") The Watchtower that same year said:
*** w68 8/15 pp. 499-500 pars. 30-33 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
Are we to assume from this study that the battle of Armageddon will be all over by the autumn of 1975, and the long-looked-for thousand-year reign of Christ will begin by then? Possibly, but we wait to see how closely the seventh thousand-year period of man’s existence coincides with the sabbathlike thousand-year reign of Christ. If these two periods run parallel with each other as to the calendar year, it will not be by mere chance or accident but will be according to Jehovah’s loving and timely purposes.
But it was always more about the closeness to 1975, since 1975 marked the 6,000th year of that 7,000 year period. You might be aware that I've been consistent about that point all along on this forum. 1975 got emphasized because of that available point of measurement, yet it was NEVER stated that the world would end in 1975, nor that Armageddon or the end of this system would occur in that year. The point was that it MIGHT, which was a very true statement; we had no reason to believe it couldn't. And we had every reason to be extra alert because we were given many reasons to believe that the end of the system must have been about to occur, not necessarily in 1975, but at least in the decade of the 1970's. From just before the 1970's started, right up until early in the year 1975, the year was emphasized because it was "Biblical" date in a sense, but no one ever said that the end could not come before 1975, or even a few years after 1975.
Combined with our view of world events at the time, this made sense and many statements were made that would convince a normal person that Armageddon could come in 1975 or within a matter of months, not years, beyond 1975.
*** w68 8/15 p. 499 par. 30 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years.
To a careful reader, this statement says that at the most we had about until October 1977 until we entered the last thousand years of that "rest period" which would (appropriately and lovingly and purposefully) run parallel with the thousand year reign of Christ. (Because after 1977 it would now no longer just be a measure of months, but years, in the plural, and we had just been told that it may be weeks or months, but NOT YEARS.) Then a small note in the same Watchtower reminded us that another factor might add or subtract 6 months to that limit. This could potentially have pushed that maximum limit out until April 1978. 
This explains why the talks, the Awake! and Watchtower magazine covers, Circuit Assembly lapel badge messages, and even Watchtower subscription campaigns (in the late 60s and early 70s) made several references to the "mid-70s," "the decade of the 1970's," "What will the 1970's bring?" "Who will conquer the world in the 1970's?" etc.
*** w71 9/15 p. 561 pars. 10-12 Set Apart from the World ***
With populations exploding all over the earth, many nations now stand at the brink of starvation, and disaster is predicted by experts for the mid-1970’s. Rather than fit in with political promises of a bright, materialistic tomorrow, this devastation on earth fits Jehovah’s prophecies on mankind’s waywardness in the “last days.” . . .  And now, as we enter the 1970’s, an astonishing picture presents itself.
*** w69 11/1 p. 668 How to Avoid Regrets ***
Just as we looked back over the past five years, let us look five years into the future. That will be the year 1974. What will we be regretting then? What are we doing right now, or failing to do now, that years from now we will wish we had done or had done differently? Jehovah has provided sufficient information so that we can definitely know the trend of future events. His Word reveals that we are without question fast approaching the end of this entire wicked system of things. (Matt. 24:3-14; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 1 John 2:17) . . .
So when the end of this system of things soon comes, what will be our greatest need?
But it was not even a new point about the end of the 6,000 years ending in the 1970's:
*** w74 8/15 p. 507 No Spiritual “Energy Crisis” for Discreet Ones ***
In 1943 the Watch Tower Society’s book “The Truth Shall Make You Free” did away with the nonexistent extra 100 years in the period of the Judges and placed the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence in the 1970’s. It also fixed the beginning of Christ’s presence, not in 1874, but in 1914 C.E.
Back then (in 1943), the end of 6,000 years was not 1975, but 1976. And it was also not a new point to discuss the gap between Adam's creation and Eve's creation that could effect the expectation of the 1,000 year reign starting immediately that year. The only difference was that all the arguments were for a longer time gap between Adam and Even, and by 1968, all the arguments were for a shorter time gap between Adam and Eve.
*** w55 2/1 p. 95 Questions From Readers ***
. . . six thousand years of God’s rest day would be ending in the fall of 1976. However, from our present chronology (which is admitted imperfect) at best the fall of the year 1976 would be the end of 6,000 years of human history for mankind, 6,000 years of man’s existence on the earth, not 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh seven-thousand-year period. Why not? Because Adam lived some time after his creation in the latter part of Jehovah’s sixth creative period, before the seventh period, Jehovah’s sabbath, began.
Why, it must have taken Adam quite some time to name all the animals, as he was commissioned to do. Further, it appears from the New World Bible Translation that, even while Adam was naming the animals, other family kinds of living creatures were being created for Adam to designate by name. (Gen. 2:19 footnote d, NW) It was not until after Adam completed this assignment of work that his helpmate Eve was created. Since God created nothing new whatever on the seventh day, Eve must have been created on the sixth day; and this the divine record confirms in its account of the sixth day: “God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.”—Gen. 1:27, NW.
The very fact that, as part of Jehovah’s secret, no one today is able to find out how much time Adam and later Eve lived during the closing days of the sixth creative period, so no one can now determine when six thousand years of Jehovah’s present rest day come to an end. Obviously, whatever amount of Adam’s 930 years was lived before the beginning of that seventh-day rest of Jehovah, that unknown amount would have to be added to the 1976 date.
This was the big difference in emphasis about 1975. Note, how every point of "delay" above is refuted just 13 years later:
*** w68 8/15 pp. 499-500 pars. 30-33 Why Are You Looking Forward to 1975? ***
Our chronology, however, which is reasonably accurate (but admittedly not infallible), at the best only points to the autumn of 1975 as the end of 6,000 years of man’s existence on earth. It does not necessarily mean that 1975 marks the end of the first 6,000 years of Jehovah’s seventh creative “day.” Why not? Because after his creation Adam lived some time during the “sixth day,” which unknown amount of time would need to be subtracted from Adam’s 930 years, to determine when the sixth seven-thousand-year period or “day” ended, and how long Adam lived into the “seventh day.” And yet the end of that sixth creative “day” could end within the same Gregorian calendar year of Adam’s creation. It may involve only a difference of weeks or months, not years.
31 In regard to Adam’s creation it is good to read carefully what the Bible says. Moses in compiling the book of Genesis referred to written records or “histories” that predated the Flood. The first of these begins with Genesis 1:1 and ends at Genesis 2:4 with the words, “This is the history of the heavens and the earth . . . ” The second historical document begins with Genesis 2:5 and ends with verse two of chapter five. Hence we have two separate accounts of creation from slightly different points of view. In the second of these accounts, in Genesis 2:19, the original Hebrew verb translated “was forming” is in the progressive imperfect form. This does not mean that the animals and birds were created after Adam was created. Genesis 1:20-28 shows it does not mean that. So, in order to avoid contradiction between chapter one and chapter two, Genesis 2:19, 20 must be only a parenthetical remark thrown in to explain the need for creating a “helper” for man. So the progressive Hebrew verb form could also be rendered as “had been forming.”—See Rotherham’s translation (Ro), also Leeser’s (Le).
32 These two creation accounts in the book of Genesis, though differing slightly in the treatment of the material, are in perfect agreement with each other on all points, including the fact that Eve was created after Adam. So not until after this event did the sixth creative day come to an end. Exactly how soon after Adam’s creation is not disclosed. “After that [Adam and Eve’s creation] God saw everything he had made and, look! it was very good. And there came to be evening and there came to be morning, a sixth day.” (Gen. 1:31) After the sixth creative day ends, the seventh one begins.
33 This time between Adam’s creation and the beginning of the seventh day, the day of rest, let it be noted, need not have been a long time. It could have been a rather short one. The naming of the animals by Adam, and his discovery that there was no complement for himself, required no great length of time. The animals were in subjection to Adam; they were peaceful; they came under God’s leading; they were not needing to be chased down and caught. It took Noah only seven days to get the same kinds of animals, male and female, into the Ark. (Gen. 7:1-4) Eve’s creation was quickly accomplished, ‘while Adam was sleeping.’ (Gen. 2:21) So the lapse of time between Adam’s creation and the end of the sixth creative day, though unknown, was a comparatively short period of time. The pronouncement at the end of the sixth day, “God saw everything he had made and, look! it was very good,” proves that the beginning of the great seventh day of the creative week did not wait until after Adam and Eve sinned and were expelled from the Garden of Eden.