JW Insider

What timing. We overlapped. I had already tried to pull these comments over to a new thread here. If you don't feel like moving all the other comments here, I think it's OK to split this into two topics, or I can move these ones over there, since that would be easier - just two posts.:
 

Getting back to the topic. I think R.Franz is a curious case in point. I do blame him for some of the child abuse problems because I think he was the person who would have invoked the two-witness rule into judicial matters that are too difficult to figure out through external knowledge and common sense alone. He seemed to have been the one assigned to most of the congregational judicial issues related to immorality. Didn't mean it was his decision, but he was the one assigned to find scriptural defenses for the way the rest of the GB had voted to handle things. He should have had the wherewithal to either speak up or leave the organization. Yet he stayed, and remained an elder, a JW in good standing, even after he was asked to resign from the Governing Body.

I should mention that these comments I had made were never made to defend R.Franz. In fact, as I recall, these comments were made under a different topic, and someone apparently moved them here because I happened to mention R.Franz in my response.
But back to your question that starts out with the words, "So if Raymond was a proven liar." I'm not sure what you are referring to. I've never heard anyone claim that R.Franz was a proven liar. If anyone ever said that, I'd be very interested in what they were referring to. It might be very useful to point to something inaccurate* in his book. I'm sure the average Witness who never knew him could easily get the idea he was "liar," but I have never heard anyone who knew him at Bethel ever say that anything in his book was inaccurate. Quite the opposite in fact.
[I found a couple inaccuracies, by the way, such as when in CoC, he mentioned that the Pope and bishops can speak as if they are "infallible" in the minds of Catholics. He should not have said "and bishops" unless he was referring only to previous "bishops of Rome," which are the popes.]
And by the way, R.Franz was an apostate. So if there was even one inaccuracy in any of his books, don't you think the Watchtower Society, or someone at least, should have pointed it out? What he exposed caused a lot of controversy. Pointing out even one inaccuracy would have helped quell the controversy and defend the Society.
But the problem, as best as I can see it, was not that he said anything untrue, but that his motive was to expose the human side of the organization and its decisions. It was to show how the Governing Body worked together at that time, and examples of how decisions and changes were made. And it showed its very human side, with its faults, mistakes, and interactions of personality. If you worked inside Bethel at that time and worked closely with several of the people he speaks about, you'd already know that his descriptions made perfect sense as they matched everything you could know about these persons. What none of us could know about, however, was what it was like inside any of those meetings of the Governing Body. And it turns out that it, if he is correct in his descriptions, then this is exactly what we would have expected anyway, knowing the personalities of these brothers as we saw and heard them acting and speaking on a daily basis. He speaks very kindly and respectfully of many of them. You can tell they were friends, just as you already knew if you were at Bethel at this time. But it becomes easy to understand how key decisions could be delayed or swayed by more outspoken and stronger personalities on the GB.
I don't know what you might mean here. No accounts were ever challenged, as far as I know. At least not by anyone who knew him. Especially not by Fred Franz, who knew him very well. If you have evidence to the contrary you should share it, especially because, as Witnesses, we don't want to be known for making false accusations.
Not at all. I just share what I know and what I think. And you can share what you know and what you think. That's how we learn. That's how forums such as this work. I would never want someone to trust my words and my words only.

No. [on the topic of never wanting to admit fault]
That comes from R.Franz in CoC. But nothing in CoC has ever been rebutted, and I have spoken to one member of the Governing Body who said that just because everything he said in the book was true, it's still poison, because the intent is to expose weakness, while love covers a multitude of sins. Two members of the Writing Department, not Governing Body, have said approximately the same thing. One said he never should have written the book, even though everything in it was true. Based on these words of people who worked with him, I find the book to be very credible from a factual standpoint. Also a "Public Relations" office person at Bethel, and personal friend of mine, has talked to me about things he said to outsiders (related to slight admissions of guilt on the part of the WTS in the past) that resulted in problems for himself among "higher-ups" at Bethel.
Also, the person supposedly behind this idea in R.Franz' book is the same person behind the exact same sentiment on never admitting a mistake in the area of child abuse, and I do know for a fact that he, this same GB member (Jaracz),  pulled an article from a magazine on the subject after it had gone to the presses, resulting in a delay for the final publication of that same issue with the article replaced.
Also, I was a "special request" tour guide for Bethel tours requested by outsiders who were not JWs, and who therefore might have included reporters unbeknownst to us. Therefore, I was personally given instructions by D.Sydlik and D.Songer and G.Couch about how to respond to questions that might seem like they are coming from someone who has no right to the answer. These included questions about an expensive press that had lost us millions of dollars and which we had finally decided to scrap, a similar situation with the early computer expenditures, and some bad press that the local Brooklyn Heights civic associations were evidently spreading about pollution fines we had to pay. When such questions came up, I was to say I didn't really know anything about these, even if I did, and if they came up more than once, I was to ask the appropriate persons mentioned above if there was a better answer. On the topic of paying fines for pollution from factory smokestacks, I was to say according to one of the brothers mentioned, that all factories, no matter how careful, will go over the limits now and then, but that the Watch Tower Society was scrutinized much more closely because there are those who are looking for bad press to pin on us. (I had no personal knowledge of any pollution, but I had heard the rumors, and the question was actually being asked.) But another person who was on the GB (Sydlik), when he heard about the suggested answer, was livid that it admitted error of any kind.
And, of course, I have previously mentioned an experience, in a rehearsal for Bethel's "Family Night," while sitting approximately between Bert Schroeder and Merton Campbell, when they decided to make an old brother change the quote in his experience from many years earlier when he said that Bethel factories were once given an award for having the second cleanest factories in Brooklyn, with only Squibb Pharmaceuticals coming in first place. For the actual Family Night production, Schroeder had it changed to: "Both factories received a rating of 100%."
The last two or three paragraphs just go to the credibility, in my opinion, of the tendency not to want to admit even the slightest error. This also fits the sometimes comical ways in which we "adjust" and "clarify" past doctrines so that they are more correct, even if they were ridiculously false in prior explanations. In an article about why we were completely dropping over one-hundred former doctrines, the Watchtower described it in typical fashion:
*** w15 3/15 pp. 8-10 pars. 6-10 “This Is the Way You Approved” ***
Third, consider some of our recent refinements in understanding. For example, our clarified understanding of “the faithful and discreet slave,”. . . . As we might expect, over the years Jehovah has helped “the faithful and discreet slave” to become steadily more discreet.  

I hope you get well soon and I hope some Sisters are visiting you to give you help and give you practical and spiritual support.
I've never owned a laptop, not would I. I'm sort of old school, I can only work on a big desktop computer with a big keyboard, and a nice size monitor. As for mobile phones / cell phones, mine only does calls and text, it again is 'old school'. I could never use one with lots of apps etc. I keep saying I'm a simple man of poor education, just being online is a big step for me.
Anna, keep up your prayers to God, and get well soon. 

Sounds like you can only "Do-little" for now, but if you scream to get your doctor double-quick, maybe you'll be off a second later, and get yourself to the Kingdom Hall on time, tomorrow.

I used to think she was singing: "Is that all you blaggards can do?"

*** w13 3/15 p. 23 par. 16 Jehovah—Our Place of Dwelling ***
In what ways will Jehovah prove to be “a real dwelling” during that tumultuous time? We will have to wait and see. But of this we can be sure: Like the Israelites at the time of the Exodus, the “great crowd” will remain organized, ever alert to divine direction. (Rev. 7:9; read Exodus 13:18.) That direction will come theocratically, probably by means of the congregation arrangement. Indeed, the many thousands of congregations around the world appear to be linked to the protective “interior rooms” foretold at Isaiah 26:20. (Read.) Do you value the congregation meetings? Do you act promptly on the direction Jehovah provides through the congregation arrangement?—Heb. 13:17. *** w09 5/15 p. 8 Where Should You Be When the End Comes? ***
Soon the end will come for Satan’s wicked world. How Jehovah will protect his people in the fear-inspiring ‘day of his anger,’ we do not yet know. (Zeph. 2:3) Regardless of where we are and what our situation is at that time, however, we can be sure that our survival will depend on our faith in Jehovah and our obedience to him. Meanwhile, we should cultivate a proper attitude toward what Isaiah’s prophecy refers to as our “interior rooms.”     “Enter Into Your Interior Rooms”     “Go, my people, enter into your interior rooms, and shut your doors behind you,” states Isaiah 26:20. “Hide yourself for but a moment until the denunciation passes over.” This prophecy may have had its first fulfillment in 539 B.C.E. when the Medes and the Persians conquered Babylon. Upon entering Babylon, Cyrus the Persian apparently commanded everyone to stay indoors because his soldiers were ordered to execute any found out-of-doors. In our day, the “interior rooms” of this prophecy could be closely associated with the more than 100,000 congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses around the world. Such congregations play an important role in our lives. They will continue to do so through “the great tribulation.” (Rev. 7:14) God’s people are commanded to go into their “interior rooms” and hide themselves “until the denunciation passes over.” It is vital that we develop and maintain a wholesome attitude toward the congregation and be firmly resolved to stay in close association with it.  

Sounds like you can only "Do-little" for now, but if you scream to get your doctor double-quick, maybe you'll be off a second later, and get yourself to the Kingdom Hall on time, tomorrow.

I'm not responding coz I'm sick in bed, and can't use my laptop coz it would mean I would have to unplug it, and the battery is dead so it would take ages to reboot and update. And so I am on my phone and its really a pain to type. So I'm just reading everything for now. You just wait! 😀

I appreciate that. And I held the same view for many years. But we should all share our opinions if our intent in sharing is right. "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." And, as Witnesses, we have put ourselves under a certain obligation to share publicly and not hold back, willing to defend our beliefs to anyone who asks.
(Matthew 13:51, 52) . . .” 52 Then he said to them: “That being the case, every public instructor who is taught about the Kingdom of the heavens is like a man, the master of the house, who brings out of his treasure store things both new and old.” I do see a problem in trying to share our concerns in the congregational setting, where it could cause division, but the Internet is already full of comments from all angles on this topic, and adding my own opinion here merely allows someone to evaluate it without the need to concern themselves about whether the opinion need to be given a second thought, unless they are also concerned. For all anyone really knows, this opinion of mine could have come from an opposer, an elder, an apostate, a Bible study, the wife of a GB member, a complete outsider, a newspaper researcher, a "Russian" trying to interfere with a US election, or a concerned publisher.
If anyone wishes, my opinions can be challenged, as they ought to be. If they are worthless, someone can point that out. If they are only partially worthwhile, and partially worthless, someone (like you) can help filter it. To me, if an answer to these objections is obvious from anyone, then any other person's opinion about it is welcome.
(Proverbs 27:17) 17 As iron sharpens iron, So one man sharpens his friend. The public forum of course is as old as elders and judges who were found discussing issues and concerns at the city gates, or the Areopagus in ancient Greece. Having found a public forum here, it doesn't mean I think that a Christian should just publicly expose the sins of others, or constantly tear down. All matters such as these doctrinal issues should be made a matter of serious prayer first, even on a forum such as this.
(Ecclesiastes 3:2-7) A time to plant and a time to uproot what was planted;  3 ... A time to tear down and a time to build up;  4 A time to weep and a time to laugh; ...  5 A time to throw stones away and a time to gather stones together;... 6 A time to search and a time to give up as lost; A time to keep and a time to throw away;  7 A time to rip apart and a time to sew together; A time to be silent and a time to speak;

I think that Jesus understood well that Leaders would naturally appear in all religious organizations and some would position themselves as "high council" "Pope" "Archbishop" "governing bodies" "leadership of the synod" "president of the Sanhedrin" etc. The point of Jesus' illustration of the faithful and unfaithful slaves in the household was a warning about how some of these would begin to "lord it over" the household of faith, trying to actually be "governors of their faith."
I find that the letters of Peter provide an excellent commentary on Matthew 24, and it serves well on this illustration, too. Just after the point about faithful stewards, quoted above from 1 Pet 4:11, there is another point at the start of the next chapter that perfectly explains the Matthew 24:45 parable, including the "reward" for setting the right example, just as in Matthew 24:
(1 Peter 5:1-4) . . .Therefore, as a fellow elder, a witness of the sufferings of the Christ and a sharer of the glory that is to be revealed, I make this appeal to the elders among you: 2 Shepherd the flock of God under your care, serving as overseers, not under compulsion, but willingly before God; not for love of dishonest gain, but eagerly; 3 not lording it over those who are God’s inheritance, but becoming examples to the flock. 4 And when the chief shepherd has been made manifest, you will receive the unfading crown of glory. Still, in the case of the Governing Body, they might not be as averse to questioning as you think, if it is done in a useful and upbuilding way. What they are probably more afraid of is the chaos that a forum like this would dump on them, and the chaos trying to control such ideas from being accepted willy-nilly and randomly. It would be difficult for them to keep up with all the crazy ideas that might be spreading if people were encouraged to speak up.
 
 

Actually, I think you are engaging in exaggerated thinking again. I am surely one of many who is very concerned. But not all of us wish to speak up. It's not our nature. The kind of person who goes online to look at a forum such as this is probably already showing a level of concern about others, and the possibility that not all is right and that this could hurt others.
I'm sure there are several here who are also concerned about people like me, too, and they show it by speaking up to make sure that I don't go too far in pushing a view that could stumble others. But if you look closely, almost everyone here, even those most active in defensive of the GB, will show signs of not being 100 percent in agreement with all the current teachings. I'm sorry he's not here to defend himself, but even the famous Allen Smith spoke of ideas he had that he might send in to the Watchtower Society that would adjust a certain defense of their chronology. He even spoke of having addressed a question related to Mexico/Malawi to Raymond Franz about a claim in his book. So I think you are seeing different kinds of Witnesses on this forum that you weren't seeing in your congregation. Hopefully, if you were not satisfied with the level of effort in "making sure of all things" in your own congregation, you might find it in a loosely webbed community such as this. I see a lot more interest in scripture, prophecy, and world events here than I see in the average Witness in the Hall. I think a lot of the interest shows up as "crazy" speculation, but I'm sure that's how my own interests show up to others, too.
Indeed, it's probably a rare thing in most situations. But it has already happened under severe us vs. them circumstances. And I'm sure that as a group we are beyond the majority when it comes to trust of one another, the ability to work with other races, nationalities, and material classes.
(Romans 5:7) 7 For hardly would anyone die for a righteous man; though perhaps for a good man someone may dare to die. I know it's probably not quite as far ahead of others as some of us would like to think, but I've stayed with Witnesses all over the world that I barely knew, and vice versa. I've trusted many Witnesses with material things, and they with me. I hardly give a second thought to the idea of trusting another Witness. (Yes, I know. Please start another thread if you wish to bring up how trust can lead to child sexual abuse.)
I see an unusually successful attempt to show love to others among millions of other persons. It's refreshing to meet and greet others with so much in common, and invariably find people we know in common.
The Revelation book is still very much available on JW.ORG, WOL and the WT-LIB CD/DVD, also available online in desktop format. It's still the truth that these explanations are not considered infallible.
I'm sure much of it will prove false, just as most of everyone's explanation of Revelation in the entire world has proved false when the time for fulfillment of those explanations finally came. We just have to learn not to speculate unless we label it as speculation.
There is a difference in believing that you have a terrible and awesome responsibility, having been asked and assigned to work on the Governing Body, and "pretending" to be God's faithful slave. It's a traditional concept among most JWs that the GB represent the rest of the anointed and that this is Jehovah's only arrangement that makes sense. The types of persons on the GB who ask others to join them as replacements and helpers are exactly the types of persons who also think this is the only arrangement that makes sense - and that they shouldn't even consider the possibility of another arrangement because it would be 'doubting' Jehovah. So it never happens that they are actually 'pretending' they are just believing.

“I get words all day through 
first from him, now from you 
is that all you blighters can do?”

Fair enough. I think it's true that we haven't yet gotten to much that is constructive on this particular topic. But, as there is a time to tear down and a time build up, it probably doesn't make much sense to offer an alternative yet, while so few have tried to explain what's wrong with the current teaching. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, as they say.
As far as "liking to talk" goes, guilty. But I would hope it's that way based on the scripture quoted earlier: "Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." Still, I would hope that some would see all this talk as a labor of love and concern, and even see it for it truly is, in my mind, loyalty to our brotherhood.
I could tell that going back to Russell's view on the signs in the sun, moon and stars seemed irrelevant to you. I'm guessing that you are seeing too many things tied together under a single topic and that many of the items you have seen as off-topic have made it difficult to deal with so many items at once. But it's really true that a misunderstanding of 1914, and a misunderstanding of the "sign" is the foundation issue that, when resolved, resolves the whole "overlapping generation" issue with it.
The fact is that Russell understood Jesus point about NOT looking for a sign. Russell made it clear that wars, earthquakes, and famines were NO part of a sign. He understood this. And that understanding makes sense in the context of the rest of Matthew 24. You won't need a sign if it's going to come without any further warning, like a thief in the night, at an hour you do not think to be it. But the tendency to want a sign, in spite of Jesus counsel, overtook Russell and the Bible Students and they continued to believe in those heavenly signs, as if they were already progressing.
The exact dates were not important, except to show that they fit the idea of "last days" at the time. But the idea that they could find dozens of secular quotes in support of these dates could be another lesson for us. What they missed, however, is that these quotes were not being collected in support of the Bible's warning about looking for a sign. I think we do the same thing today when we collect 1914 quotes. We are trying to overcome the Bible's clear warning not to look for a sign in things like wars, earthquakes, famines, etc. And we end up convincing ourselves.
 

*** w13 3/15 p. 23 par. 16 Jehovah—Our Place of Dwelling ***
In what ways will Jehovah prove to be “a real dwelling” during that tumultuous time? We will have to wait and see. But of this we can be sure: Like the Israelites at the time of the Exodus, the “great crowd” will remain organized, ever alert to divine direction. (Rev. 7:9; read Exodus 13:18.) That direction will come theocratically, probably by means of the congregation arrangement. Indeed, the many thousands of congregations around the world appear to be linked to the protective “interior rooms” foretold at Isaiah 26:20. (Read.) Do you value the congregation meetings? Do you act promptly on the direction Jehovah provides through the congregation arrangement?—Heb. 13:17. *** w09 5/15 p. 8 Where Should You Be When the End Comes? ***
Soon the end will come for Satan’s wicked world. How Jehovah will protect his people in the fear-inspiring ‘day of his anger,’ we do not yet know. (Zeph. 2:3) Regardless of where we are and what our situation is at that time, however, we can be sure that our survival will depend on our faith in Jehovah and our obedience to him. Meanwhile, we should cultivate a proper attitude toward what Isaiah’s prophecy refers to as our “interior rooms.”     “Enter Into Your Interior Rooms”     “Go, my people, enter into your interior rooms, and shut your doors behind you,” states Isaiah 26:20. “Hide yourself for but a moment until the denunciation passes over.” This prophecy may have had its first fulfillment in 539 B.C.E. when the Medes and the Persians conquered Babylon. Upon entering Babylon, Cyrus the Persian apparently commanded everyone to stay indoors because his soldiers were ordered to execute any found out-of-doors. In our day, the “interior rooms” of this prophecy could be closely associated with the more than 100,000 congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses around the world. Such congregations play an important role in our lives. They will continue to do so through “the great tribulation.” (Rev. 7:14) God’s people are commanded to go into their “interior rooms” and hide themselves “until the denunciation passes over.” It is vital that we develop and maintain a wholesome attitude toward the congregation and be firmly resolved to stay in close association with it.  

My point was to show the possibility and then some practical reasons that we are told NOT to search for the sign in our day.

*** w13 3/15 p. 23 par. 16 Jehovah—Our Place of Dwelling ***
In what ways will Jehovah prove to be “a real dwelling” during that tumultuous time? We will have to wait and see. But of this we can be sure: Like the Israelites at the time of the Exodus, the “great crowd” will remain organized, ever alert to divine direction. (Rev. 7:9; read Exodus 13:18.) That direction will come theocratically, probably by means of the congregation arrangement. Indeed, the many thousands of congregations around the world appear to be linked to the protective “interior rooms” foretold at Isaiah 26:20. (Read.) Do you value the congregation meetings? Do you act promptly on the direction Jehovah provides through the congregation arrangement?—Heb. 13:17. *** w09 5/15 p. 8 Where Should You Be When the End Comes? ***
Soon the end will come for Satan’s wicked world. How Jehovah will protect his people in the fear-inspiring ‘day of his anger,’ we do not yet know. (Zeph. 2:3) Regardless of where we are and what our situation is at that time, however, we can be sure that our survival will depend on our faith in Jehovah and our obedience to him. Meanwhile, we should cultivate a proper attitude toward what Isaiah’s prophecy refers to as our “interior rooms.”     “Enter Into Your Interior Rooms”     “Go, my people, enter into your interior rooms, and shut your doors behind you,” states Isaiah 26:20. “Hide yourself for but a moment until the denunciation passes over.” This prophecy may have had its first fulfillment in 539 B.C.E. when the Medes and the Persians conquered Babylon. Upon entering Babylon, Cyrus the Persian apparently commanded everyone to stay indoors because his soldiers were ordered to execute any found out-of-doors. In our day, the “interior rooms” of this prophecy could be closely associated with the more than 100,000 congregations of Jehovah’s Witnesses around the world. Such congregations play an important role in our lives. They will continue to do so through “the great tribulation.” (Rev. 7:14) God’s people are commanded to go into their “interior rooms” and hide themselves “until the denunciation passes over.” It is vital that we develop and maintain a wholesome attitude toward the congregation and be firmly resolved to stay in close association with it.  

The trick is to make so many that they will choke on them all. 
The first time the entire world goes to war (peace taken away from the earth) AND the end of the Gentile Times coincide, and it is 'just one of those things?' Like you, I think not. I posted once how a great hobby would be collecting 1914 quotations. Many more were offered in my comment section: 
https://www.tomsheepandgoats.com/2010/01/the-1914-collection.html
You could even make a case that all the wavering over 1914 is succumbing to a giant head fake, like the Israelites with their fronts up to the Red Sea and Pharaoh bearing down on them.
It's sarcasm, I know. All that you said was concise and spot-on. Why should I say it again.
Yes!! This even harkens back to something @JOHN BUTLER said about believing without knowing all the details. Nobody would ever do anything with that requirement thrown in. There would be no businesses started, inventions begun, or explorations embarked upon.
One never knows it all. It is enough to see that the basic framework  holds and trust that elucidation will be found along the way.
Yes. A giant head fake at the end. Backs to the wall. It has happened many times in Bible history, and a few times since.
I like the quote from this week's Watchtower study about Habakkuk: "[Jehovah] kindly asks us to trust in him and await patiently for his appointed time..." That doesn't sound too demanding, does it? That doesn't sound too unaccepting of human frailty, does it?

I'm more concerned that it is un-Christian, not just unwise.
Actually, evidence has already been presented in the past, here on this forum and many other places, showing that 1914 was not predicted. Not biblically, not historically, not even by the Watch Tower Society. I'd say the evidence against 1914 is overwhelming, but this is of course just an opinion.
I don't think I have a "more correct" definition than the ones that the Watch Tower publications, and every Greek language resource, and all Bible dictionaries, and other scholarsly resources, already consistently give. So I am basing this "complaint" on the Watchtower's own definition of a generation. And yes it can be established Biblically.
However, we are still discussing point #4 first, which is the one I started with. And, as you can see, a few other side topics have arisen out of that discussion. We haven't got to this point #3 yet. It's imminent, though.
No need to concern ourselves about what apostates and skeptics do. The Bible gives plenty and perfect solutions and alternatives.
Perhaps it isn't based on any belief that people had at any time, but for some reason the Watchtower says that it is. It states that the persons in group one had to have readily discerned the sign they were seeing in 1914. We can easily show that they did not, which shows that there is a crack in the reasoning, or that the teaching was not thought through very carefully before presenting it in public (as Brother Splane has done on JW Broadcasting). In fact, Rutherford published in a later Watchtower, explicitly admitting that they "did not discern" the sign at the time, using his own word "discern." We have already discussed that portion of the issue in a discussion here over a year ago. Perhaps I'll dig out that discussion and see if it adds anything to point #4 before moving on to point #3.
That's quite all right. I'm always anxious to read well thought out responses to anything I say here.
I don't reject that these are the last days, and I don't reject that the changes in the world, especially since 1914, are of utmost concern. These concerns can and should be used in our ministry to help people see that God's Kingdom is the only real solution to mankind's problems.

I have no problem understanding that these are the last days. Paul warned Timothy that Timothy that (because he was in the last days) he would have to deal with critical times, people who only loved themselves, people who were disloyal, people with no natural affection, etc., and this helped Timothy realize the times he was living in, and what to expect. I have no problem with the idea that many things have gone from bad to worse since that first century, and that this system doesn't seem like it can go on any longer. And all these evidences of the last days make us hope and pray for a new system that ever so much closer.
By the way, when you mention the question "how do we know he is near at the door?" you might realize that you are inadvertently exposing one of the inconsistencies of our interpretation of Matthew 24. In our interpretation, Jesus is already present, and THEN the signs supposedly arrive over the next 104-plus years.
The topic of the "sign" is another one for another discussion. Many persons, including Russell himself, read Matthew 24 to prove that Jesus was warning the disciples that they should NOT look for any advance signs on earth because none would be given. Jesus said that wars and earthquakes, and famine, and pestilence and persecution etc., would continue to go on just as it always had (for the last 18 centuries, per Russell), but that these are NOT signs of the end, and not to be quickly shaken by such things. Russell seemed to ignore, however, that the warning also included not to start listening to people who look at these as signs and will therefore say that Jesus is here or there, but just not visible to them right now. Because when the parousia occurs, it will actually be without any extra warning; it will come as a thief in the night, and it won't be invisible, but suddenly and brightly, as visible as lightning that shines from side of the heavens all the way to the other side. In other words, Matthew 24 is the opposite of a "composite sign."
The actual sign, would appear in the heavens when it was too late to escape. Here is where Russell and Second Adventists, especially, went wrong. They thought that they could already see those signs in the heavens. They saw them in 1780 and 1833, which perfectly fit the belief that the last days had begun in 1799. The rest of this post will be excerpts from Studies in the Scriptures, Vol 4, to show how easy it is to lock in on "signs" and how strongly entrenched these beliefs were, so that the WTS was promoting these specific teachings even until the 1930's. I have skipped about a dozen secular references that Russell quotes to show just how widely recognized these "signs" were from other authorities, much like our more current references to how secular authorities recognize how the world changed in 1914:
And they were given into her power, and she wore out the saints of the Most High for a time, times and a half time--1260 years--until A.D. 1799. And this long persecution, in which "many were purified and made white and tried," and in which the Mother of Harlots was "drunk with the blood of the saints and the martyrs of Jesus" (Rev. 17:6) ended as we have already shown, practically in 1776 and actually in 1799 when the Pope and his authority were humiliated before the World.*
Understanding clearly, then, that it is signs that will follow the tribulation "of those days" that our Lord refers to, we inquire respecting the very definitely described signs--the darkening of the sun and moon, and the falling of the stars. . . .
On May 19, 1780 (still "in those days," the 1260 years of Papal power, but after that power had begun to wane and the brunt of the tribulation had passed) a phenomenal darkening of the sun occurred, for which scientists of that time and since have never been able to account. That this was no ordinary occurrence is sufficiently established by the following competent testimony--
The noted astronomer Herschel, says:
"The dark day in Northern America was one of those wonderful phenomena of nature which will always be read of with interest, but which philosophy is at a loss to explain."
Webster's Dictionary, 1869 edition, under the head of Vocabulary of Noted Names, says:
"The dark day, May 19, 1780--so called on account of a remarkable darkness on that day extending over all New England. In some places, persons could not see to read common print in the open air for several hours together. Birds sang their evening songs, disappeared, and became silent; fowls went to roost; cattle sought the barn-yard; and candles were lighted in the houses. The obscuration began about ten o'clock in the morning, and continued till the middle of the next night, but with differences of degree of duration in different places." . . .
The Falling Stars
Half a century passed before the next sign appeared, the falling of the stars from heaven, as when a fig tree casteth her unripe fruit when shaken of a mighty wind. Our Lord's words found a fulfilment (though not their complete and only fulfilment, as we shall see later) in the wonderful meteoric showers of the early morning of Nov. 13, 1833. Those inclined to quibble by urging that "the fixed stars did not fall" are reminded that our Lord said nothing about fixed stars falling, and that fixed stars could not fall: their falling would prove that they were not fixed. The Scriptures do not distinguish between stars and meteors as is commonly done in our day.
Shooting stars, and even meteoric showers are not uncommon every year, and some years more than others. It is computed that 400,000 small meteors fall to our earth annually. But these are nothing in comparison to the great shower of Nov. 13, 1833, in which millions on millions fell.
 

I appreciate that. And I held the same view for many years. But we should all share our opinions if our intent in sharing is right. "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." And, as Witnesses, we have put ourselves under a certain obligation to share publicly and not hold back, willing to defend our beliefs to anyone who asks.
(Matthew 13:51, 52) . . .” 52 Then he said to them: “That being the case, every public instructor who is taught about the Kingdom of the heavens is like a man, the master of the house, who brings out of his treasure store things both new and old.” I do see a problem in trying to share our concerns in the congregational setting, where it could cause division, but the Internet is already full of comments from all angles on this topic, and adding my own opinion here merely allows someone to evaluate it without the need to concern themselves about whether the opinion need to be given a second thought, unless they are also concerned. For all anyone really knows, this opinion of mine could have come from an opposer, an elder, an apostate, a Bible study, the wife of a GB member, a complete outsider, a newspaper researcher, a "Russian" trying to interfere with a US election, or a concerned publisher.
If anyone wishes, my opinions can be challenged, as they ought to be. If they are worthless, someone can point that out. If they are only partially worthwhile, and partially worthless, someone (like you) can help filter it. To me, if an answer to these objections is obvious from anyone, then any other person's opinion about it is welcome.
(Proverbs 27:17) 17 As iron sharpens iron, So one man sharpens his friend. The public forum of course is as old as elders and judges who were found discussing issues and concerns at the city gates, or the Areopagus in ancient Greece. Having found a public forum here, it doesn't mean I think that a Christian should just publicly expose the sins of others, or constantly tear down. All matters such as these doctrinal issues should be made a matter of serious prayer first, even on a forum such as this.
(Ecclesiastes 3:2-7) A time to plant and a time to uproot what was planted;  3 ... A time to tear down and a time to build up;  4 A time to weep and a time to laugh; ...  5 A time to throw stones away and a time to gather stones together;... 6 A time to search and a time to give up as lost; A time to keep and a time to throw away;  7 A time to rip apart and a time to sew together; A time to be silent and a time to speak;

This issue was addressed directly at a regional convention. People who struggle with serious doubt need not feel they have to abandon their faith. There was a whole talk about it. Some may struggle with doubt for years before receiving an answer.

I'm more concerned that it is un-Christian, not just unwise.
Actually, evidence has already been presented in the past, here on this forum and many other places, showing that 1914 was not predicted. Not biblically, not historically, not even by the Watch Tower Society. I'd say the evidence against 1914 is overwhelming, but this is of course just an opinion.
I don't think I have a "more correct" definition than the ones that the Watch Tower publications, and every Greek language resource, and all Bible dictionaries, and other scholarsly resources, already consistently give. So I am basing this "complaint" on the Watchtower's own definition of a generation. And yes it can be established Biblically.
However, we are still discussing point #4 first, which is the one I started with. And, as you can see, a few other side topics have arisen out of that discussion. We haven't got to this point #3 yet. It's imminent, though.
No need to concern ourselves about what apostates and skeptics do. The Bible gives plenty and perfect solutions and alternatives.
Perhaps it isn't based on any belief that people had at any time, but for some reason the Watchtower says that it is. It states that the persons in group one had to have readily discerned the sign they were seeing in 1914. We can easily show that they did not, which shows that there is a crack in the reasoning, or that the teaching was not thought through very carefully before presenting it in public (as Brother Splane has done on JW Broadcasting). In fact, Rutherford published in a later Watchtower, explicitly admitting that they "did not discern" the sign at the time, using his own word "discern." We have already discussed that portion of the issue in a discussion here over a year ago. Perhaps I'll dig out that discussion and see if it adds anything to point #4 before moving on to point #3.
That's quite all right. I'm always anxious to read well thought out responses to anything I say here.
I don't reject that these are the last days, and I don't reject that the changes in the world, especially since 1914, are of utmost concern. These concerns can and should be used in our ministry to help people see that God's Kingdom is the only real solution to mankind's problems.

I appreciate that. And I held the same view for many years. But we should all share our opinions if our intent in sharing is right. "Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." And, as Witnesses, we have put ourselves under a certain obligation to share publicly and not hold back, willing to defend our beliefs to anyone who asks.
(Matthew 13:51, 52) . . .” 52 Then he said to them: “That being the case, every public instructor who is taught about the Kingdom of the heavens is like a man, the master of the house, who brings out of his treasure store things both new and old.” I do see a problem in trying to share our concerns in the congregational setting, where it could cause division, but the Internet is already full of comments from all angles on this topic, and adding my own opinion here merely allows someone to evaluate it without the need to concern themselves about whether the opinion need to be given a second thought, unless they are also concerned. For all anyone really knows, this opinion of mine could have come from an opposer, an elder, an apostate, a Bible study, the wife of a GB member, a complete outsider, a newspaper researcher, a "Russian" trying to interfere with a US election, or a concerned publisher.
If anyone wishes, my opinions can be challenged, as they ought to be. If they are worthless, someone can point that out. If they are only partially worthwhile, and partially worthless, someone (like you) can help filter it. To me, if an answer to these objections is obvious from anyone, then any other person's opinion about it is welcome.
(Proverbs 27:17) 17 As iron sharpens iron, So one man sharpens his friend. The public forum of course is as old as elders and judges who were found discussing issues and concerns at the city gates, or the Areopagus in ancient Greece. Having found a public forum here, it doesn't mean I think that a Christian should just publicly expose the sins of others, or constantly tear down. All matters such as these doctrinal issues should be made a matter of serious prayer first, even on a forum such as this.
(Ecclesiastes 3:2-7) A time to plant and a time to uproot what was planted;  3 ... A time to tear down and a time to build up;  4 A time to weep and a time to laugh; ...  5 A time to throw stones away and a time to gather stones together;... 6 A time to search and a time to give up as lost; A time to keep and a time to throw away;  7 A time to rip apart and a time to sew together; A time to be silent and a time to speak;