JW Insider

Not really. You are mostly quoting what Seybold said, not IBM. The relationship with IBM soured quickly and often. One high-level IBM executive who could interface with IBM was a JW and a local brownstone-style apartment/house was made available to him. Any JWs who had worked for IBM or had programmed in Assembler on IBM Series 1 or IBM 360 equipment were invited to apply to Bethel and lived like all other Bethelites. My own brother who had no interest in applying to Bethel was asked to come in due to his work programming microprocessors and he stayed for 2.5 years. Non-JW IBM experts were called in to meet and discuss the project all along, and they were constantly frustrated by the decisions of Bethel overseers.
Meanwhile there was a separate project going on up in Wallkill creating the pieces of the MEPS typesetting system. I drew up a couple of Greek fonts for it, and three years before they would ever see a part of it, I was even sent (alone) to the Athens Branch to help them set up a small pre-press facility so that they could ramp up to handling their own translating and page preparation there in Athens.
One problem was that MEPS was all proprietary, and neither IBM nor IBM-trained JWs, could ever figure out how to get the IPS to talk to MEPS. After a few years either one could do a few things very well, but IPS (with IBM) faltered - and it was too expensive to get IPS to handle non-Roman fonts. MEPS, which had been assumed by many not to be the ultimate winner, was given free rein, no one to really watch over them, and the "kids" up in Wallkill made their own decisions about it.
In 1977 there was already a non-working MEPS prototype up in the Factory 1 building, on the 9th floor (of an 8 story building) where the new computer department was. Wires fed down to a phototypesetting machine in a darkroom in a graphical arts department on the 8th floor. That never worked, at least not for 4 or 5 more years. But they were still able to use some of what they bought, like a large stat cameras in the darkroom had the ability to manually shine light through a negative with a font on it, which would then enlarge, one letter at a time, onto a piece of film below. So for years we could at least use it to make headlines in all kinds of fonts of any language, including Hebrew, Arabic, Russian, Greek, etc. It's just that it took about 5 to 10 seconds to line up each letter. Until then, fancy fonts were done by hand -- calligraphy and calipers and French curves and Koh-I-Noor ink pens.
It was Seybold, not IBM, who came in to see demonstrations after several years when the equipment became useful. They were rightfully impressed, especially by the MEPS. By 1982, after 5 years, both were useful. IPS had allowed several dozen typesetters to sit in front of terminals instead of hot lead. We were still using molten lead for some typesetting, but that phased out completely by about 1982, I think. It was better than the first commercial hit, Aldus Pagemaker, and ready two years prior. Of course, Pagemaker and other solutions were widely available in 85 and took off with the Macintosh. Much cheaper versions had already been made for Apple II, IIe,  and IBM PCs, but these all suffered from pixelation, as no true raster-based fonts were integrated at that time. By continuing the work on the MEPS we never had to go with a commercial solution.

This is pretty astute. Personal extrapolation is at the root of much of what is "kooky" about the notions held by some Jehovah's Witnesses. I had to persuade one recently that it is unlikely that animals will be included in the resurrection. I thought this was an unusual idea until I met an Anglican clergyman even more recently who believed the same thing, citing Romans 8:22 as scriptural basis for this. My queries about the possibility of being knee-deep in gerbils met with quizzical looks in both cases, but I felt it wasn't something we needed to fall out over.
This idea of commiting the "unforgivable sin" is also subject to personal extrapolation, but with more serious implications than the possibility of a resurrection for one's favourite pet.
@Jack Ryan seems to have been subjected to the idea as a kind of "bogeyman" threat.
@JWInsider has provided some good references on the matter, but forgive me if I say that they still seem to rather skirt than define it.
1 John 5:16 provides food for thought here when saying "There is a sin that does incur death".
Scriptural examples provide the best guide in determining what this "(unforgivable) sin" might be. We can contrast David, Mannaseh, the apostle Peter, and Saul who became Paul with Adam and Eve, the 1st century religious leaders (as a class), Judas, to discern the reasons why some were forgiven and some not.
Paul gets to the heart of it in the letter to the Hebrews at Heb. 6:4-6; 10:26, 27. The key expressions here are:
"For it is impossible......................... to revive them again to repentance,"  Heb 6:4-6
"For if we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left" Heb.10:26
So "willfull practice of sin" , and, particularly, "no repentance" seem to be the key qualifiers here. These descriptors refer to a state rather than a particular action, determination of which is firmly in the hands of "the Judge of all the earth" (Gen 18:25), and "a man who he has appointed" (Acts 17:31).

I think we have always pretty much stated what the Insight Book states:
*** it-2 p. 969 Sin, I ***
Jesus said they had “no excuse for their sin” because they were witnesses of the powerful words and works proceeding from him as the result of God’s spirit on him. (Joh 15:22-24; Lu 4:18) Those who, either in word or by their course of action, willfully and knowingly blasphemed God’s spirit thus manifested would be “guilty of everlasting sin,” with no forgiveness possible. (Mt 12:31, 32; Mr 3:28-30; compare Joh 15:26; 16:7, 8.) This could be the case with some who came to be Christians and then deliberately turned from God’s pure worship. Hebrews 10:26, 27 states that “if we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, but there is a certain fearful expectation of judgment and there is a fiery jealousy that is going to consume those in opposition.” And this from the early 1950's:
*** w52 2/15 p. 126 Questions From Readers ***
What is the unforgivable sin against the holy spirit that Jesus spoke about?—B. E., New York. Jesus had just cured a demon-possessed man who was blind and dumb. The crowds marveled, but the Pharisees scoffed and said Jesus did it by means of Beelzebub. Jesus refuted their claim by showing that if Satan expelled Satan he would be divided against himself and his kingdom could not stand. Also, if Jesus expelled demons by means of Beelzebub, by whose means did their sons expel them? Then he said: “Every kind of sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the spirit will not be forgiven. For example, whoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the holy spirit, it will not be forgiven him, no, not in the present system of things nor in that to come.”—Matt. 12:22-32, NW.  
Therefore, the clearest example would be seeing Jesus perform a miracle, know for sure that such a good evidence of the holy spirit could only have come from the power of God, and then claiming that his power must have come from Satan or his demons. When we think about the only possible motivations for anyone saying such a thing when they KNOW otherwise, we get a sense of how serious the "unforgivable sin" would be.
One could try to extrapolate that the GB are direct proof of the miraculous power and evidence of God's holy spirit. If someone truly believed this and then claimed that the GB's "power" actually comes from Satan or his demons, then I suppose you could stretch the analogy. But since there is no claimed miraculous power, and no claims of direct inspiration from Jehovah's holy spirit, the entire idea seems non-applicable to me. 
Still, I have heard it. It's part of fear of apostates. Some are in mortal fear of learning what an apostate might be thinking or accidentally seeing one of their publications or websites. Pretty much the Witness definition of an apostate is that they are persons who no longer accept what the GB says, and are therefore rejecting the GB as God's only appointed channel. Of course, for some reason Geoffrey Jackson himself said it would be presumptuous if the GB were to claim to be Jehovah's only channel of communication for Christians today. Similar things have been said more recently in Watchtower articles that followed up on this idea. Therefore, by that same definition, if it were true, then a current member of the GB may have just committed the unforgivable sin. The irony is that this was said under circumstances that were quite similar to the following:
(Matthew 10:19, 20) 19 However, when they hand you over, do not become anxious about how or what you are to speak, for what you are to speak will be given you in that hour; 20 for the ones speaking are not just you, but it is the spirit of your Father that speaks by you. So, if we believed that way, we might have to accept that it was the holy spirit that made it clear the GB are not always led by holy spirit.

Regardless of the terminology and methodology we use to logically lay the foundations of what is true or false, with a mistake
or without a mistake, correctly understood or incorrectly understood, and so on ... there is one more thing to be taken into account. That is: self-persuasion and self-deception.
Most of people, of us,  will think/thinks about self with believing that they are among those who are healthy, beautiful, smart, good, ... belonging to the right, true group, religion, politics, family, nation... etc.
And with more self persuasion and self deception we are more sure in fictitious, wrong, err, distorted picture about yourself, who we are, what we are, and by that about other people, who are belong or not belong in "our group" or in "our idea" of how other people should  be look like, think like, act like and all other likes.
Good thing in such "self" can be self confidence and similar "selfie" that help us to survive in society.
Bad thing is this. If we are wrong, and many times we are :)))), we are, because of our self persuasion and self deception in position to deceive other people because they can see our sincerity and our faith in "story" we talking about. Some will be sceptious but some will accept "our faith in truth", but  that is in fact "faith in error, misrepresentation, misunderstanding, mistake, misapplication ...". :))

This is supposedly a doctrine that has been unchanged since 1879, and it's mostly right. But look at the following quote from the Watch Tower, April 1, 1920, p.103:
"The Finished Mystery," as one of the series of seven previously announced by Brother Russell. The doctrines therein set forth are in exact harmony with those announced by the other six. That it contains some mistakes is freely admitted. Even the Bible contains some. Here is another from the Watch Tower April 15, 1928, p. 126:
QUESTION: Is it proper for those who have been in the truth only a short while to go out and sell the Society's books? . . . Sometimes a member of a class will refuse to engage in the canvassing for the books because there are some mistakes in the books, and says his conscience will not permit him to put books in which there are mistakes into the hands of the people. Of course this is another method that the enemy adopts to confuse the minds and furnish an excuse for not being faithful to the Lord. As every one knows, there are mistakes in the Bible and there never has been a book written yet that is perfect that has been written by any human hand. . . .Those who engage in the service work are not supposed to stand on the street and preach, nor to give a technical explanation of the Scriptures.

My elderly parents in Southern California have been attending their beautiful local hall for years and have been asked to go a few more miles to another hall for a few weeks while their own hall is being remodeled. Same situation. They just found out the beautiful hall is being sold and that was the reason for the remodeling. My father is still an elder but his health has now forced him to be the accounts auditor (just a second set of eyes on the accounts). And even he didn't find out the "bad" news until just a couple weeks ago, after it would be too late for the congregation to have any say. I am in the midst of helping them sell their old house and move, but they chose a new place before realizing where the new Hall would be. But it also forces some very odd meeting times, since they are squeezing 4 congregations from their original Hall into 3 nearby Halls. It seems that the new ownership of the Hall allows for decisions to be made without consulting any of the local elders of at least one of the congregations that used the Hall. Don't know if the other congregations were consulted.
The year 2000 was supposed to be a big year for the organization when more experienced legal and management personnel began making financial decisions (instead of the GB who would become ecclesiastical). But according to these videos, the GB is still very much involved. But I saw first-hand in the late 70's early 80's and know experiences through the 90's that indicate some financially bad decisions were made by experienced brothers who were given their decision-making authority for their Bethel (bureaucratic) seniority, not for their minds. Brother Dean Songer was the closest they had to a mathematical mind and was sometimes called the "rocket scientist." But his decisions would be overridden by a Max Larson or Richard Wheelock or Daniel Sydlik. The younger factory overseers were the only ones who were being trained in the modern methods of printing, while some of the older decision-makers thought we should have the biggest presses in the world, but of the obsolete kind of presses they were accustomed to. Literally millions of dollars were wasted as they could never get the Behemoth to work. Then when my friends from IBM back home got brought in to Bethel in the new computer department, they claimed that it was a constant fighting match that wasted millions on bad decisions where the "spiritual" decision-maker who was put in charge (for Bethel seniority) kept using that as his leverage to throw out decisions by IBM managers who warned him of his lack of ability to manage any kind of computer project.
I notice that a place in one video seems to throw Brother Sydlik under the bus for constantly quoting Psalm 50:10 and like verses to indicate that Jehovah will always provide, in spite of our mistakes.
10for every animal of the forest is mine, and the cattle on a thousand hills. . . . for the world is mine, and all that is in it. (NIV) I would say that these were exceptions, but I have also heard fairly good evidence that Barbara Anderson, a former accountant (prior to Bethel) and now ex-JW, was promoted to Research in Writing after exposing to Brother Don Adams that the JW construction companies they were using for windows or other supplies had been stealing hundreds of thousands from the Watchtower. She had seen the same things in her accounting job in the "world."

As you point out, the 1920 WT article gives no examples of these.
Copyist and translator error, tampering, falsifications, additions etc. are still a possibility. Also, Luke 4:9-11 could be cited as a bona-fide misapplication. Luke 19:16 and Acts 1:6 are examples of genuine misunderstanding.
The erroneous logic process you refer to is an example in itself of how a mistake can be made, but, in the absence of a response from the writer himself, we can only assume or guess, (educated or otherwise), at what was meant by "misunderstanding or misapplication".
The basic argument in the WT appears to be that mistakes in text or explanation occur in all human writings. This is extended to include the Bible. The existence of such in the so called Vol7 of Studies in the Scriptures was not felt (at the time) to constitute sufficient reason for rejecting it outright, any more than the BIble would be rejected on the same basis due to any (unidentified)"misunderstanding or misapplication" .
On reflection, using the Bible as a basis for this argument without considerable clarification regarding what was meant seems risky. (I would have cited the Encyclopedia Brittannica as an example more easily identified with), but I can see that Rutherford was using a rather extreme example to support his point
An affirmed acceptance of the substance of that Bible study aid was seen at the time as a necessary criteria for those serving in a representative way within the publishing organisation of Bible Students ("The Society"). I believe it was a time when loyalties were being tested, with some similarities to the events recorded at 1Ki.18:1-40.
I have always liked the thought expressed at Ps 119:160 which seems to allow for the accumulation of a "patina" due to human imperfection, even in the transmission of the word of God: 
"The very essence ("substance" NWT 1984) of your word is truth,"
 
 

It does seem serious. Seems probable that the sale of large Brooklyn properties was due at least in part to a debt emergency. The buildings weren't put on the market until the absolute worst time in US History for real estate. They were fortunate in that some didn't go on the market until there was some rebounding. Most publishing houses in the world went through the same type of budget discussions due to the initial expenditures to succeed in Internet marketing as print fades away. Equipment and training and a lot of outside expenditure on a many sub-projects at once would apparently require some debt.
Remember too that it was not just the sale of Kingdom Halls. It was the handing over of the value to a Trust indirectly controlled by the WTS along with a refinancing of a perpetual "loan" that could never be paid off. In other words whatever "maximum" that the congregation had been willing to contribute to the building loan to get the KH in the first place. When they were voting as a congregation to pay back something as quickly as possible along with the excitement of a new or rebuilt hall, the brothers and sisters are typically ready to stretch their budget slightly. That loan payback was dropped, but the new recommended amount to pay INDEFINITELY should now be equal to that maximum: the new contribution goal. Congregations are no longer paying anything back, but paying in perpetuity whether the Kingdom Hall loan would already have paid back or not.
In listening to all the available videos, I was struck by how, except for the scriptural interludes, they sound exactly like every budget and yearly financial meeting I have been to in a large corporation for the last 15 years. All the language and definitions and reasons are the same, and the ideas and recommendations are the same.
Also, I take it there is some future worry based on real pending events. There was some guessing that Geoffrey Jackson had some of this in mind at a recent Assembly Hall dedication where someone claims he made the following points. (I'll give a link, but do NOT recommend any Witness goes there because much of what he says needs to be edited out. I will copy the relevant parts here.)
https://www.reddit.com/r/exjw/comments/8oatmt/geoffrey_jackson_preparing_the_rf/
This weekend in France there was the inauguration of a new Convention Hall. Since it was some "never before seen project" (because done by 3 countries together : France, Switzerland and Italy... wow what an achievement!) they had to do something special. So they Had Geoffrey Jackson giving talks and those being streamed to a lot of congregations. Lots of rank file were invited to the Convention Hall, the rest got to see it over TV. The weekend meeting was cancelled and we had two days of this 2-hour retransmissions. So he made an illustration. He made sure that everyone got the fact that it was an illustration, not an announcement (laughter in the audience, whats funny about it?). Then he said (I'm quoting him best I can remember, but you'll get the idea): "Imagine if next week I go back to US and you see in the news that the whole GB was arrested for no reason. How'd you react? Well, surely you'd say to your coworkers or neighbours: "Jesus warned us. They were arrested for no reason." You would feel bad for us but be proud because you are sure it's persecution from Satan and that we're innocent. Now that's not really possible because in the US because you can't arrest someone with no reason like in Russia. So imagine they would make up false accusations, with false witnesses and false testimonies and all the newspaper would talk about how the GB was arrested for stealing billions of $$ to their followers. How would you react when coworker talk about it? Be ashamed? Would you believe it? Well Satan will attack us using lies. Lying about our high morality. Maybe they will accuse us of covering child sexual abuser. Would you believe it? Surely we know those lies come from Satan." Both issues, the "confiscation" of billions of dollars, and accusations of covering child sexual abuse, might well be based on false accusations, but BOTH these items have already been dangerously close to becoming full-blown legal cases, class action and otherwise.

That was a contingency fund for just the 2016 service year, but already just about spent, the speaker says. I imagine that they will feel a need for a similar amount every year, so that over 10 years this would be $250,000,000 or a quarter billion. But a contingency is only for the likely percentage of error in forecasting and budgeting the future. It takes longer than planned to wind down a construction project and re-negotiate contracts accordingly. It takes longer to complete projects than predicted. When Trump brags about so many of his projects that were "on time and under budget" it turned out that meant that they were only off by 100% to 200% in scheduling and they only ran over by a few $100,000,000 -- or they were a complete failure and resulted in a half-billion dollars lost. So it's just assumed that "on time and under budget" doesn't really happen in any real life project.
So it could be that a budget line for legal expenses was already considered to need $25,000,000 per year and therefore the contingency budget of ANOTHER $25,000,000 would be spent on legal expenses if those costs and liabilities were higher, or for other areas of mis-judged future expenses.
The WTS had already been paying out many millions in legal expenses for child abuse cases long before the first articles began coming out on Child Abuse in the 1990's. They probably overpaid because they were overly concerned with buying silence prior to learning so many other available maneuvers practiced in more recent cases.

Ask Rick

For many of us it is a fascinating area of interest.
Here are some suggestions. Maybe you can think of more:
Jehovah through Jesus the Head of the Congregation corrects them they get things wrong so correct them  they get things wrong again so correct them again  times change prophecy is fulfilled the world scene changes scientific advancements are made standards of morality deteriorate understanding improves ability to explain improves  understanding of Bible languages improves evidence is unearthed etc. etc. etc. etc. 

Just heard it on A&E -- On Demand. Apparently it's going to be some series on "cults." Evidently there has already been an initial episode and this was the second one. If you're watching "On Demand" be prepared to have something to do after it gets half-way through. The commercials started seeming like 10 in a row back-to-back. And this happened 3 or 4 times. "Romy's" case, depicted, is a case from Fortuna, California. The producers interviewed Barbara Anderson, too, and took Romy to Tennessee to meet with her. It's a terrible case, and I think it's one of those which will happen much less often now that several of the procedures have improved.
I believe that B.Anderson was absolutely right about Leviticus 5:1. For cases like child abuse, the verse apparently says pretty much the opposite of what the WTS has tried to make it say. Many of the best Bible Commentaries would also agree with her.
They wasted their time getting all the supposed "expertise" about the JWs from a "cult expert" who seems to be a "professional" in that she can exaggerate without it sounding like she's exaggerating. I heard B.Anderson make one inaccurate statement. I heard this other "cult professional" make about 10 mistakes. The interviewer/moderator makes a few mistakes too, but it's also obvious that she was in on the agenda, to make sure that it became a supposed story about a cult where no elders can be trusted. It should have been about the common problem of abuse in religious institutions, where power and control is a common element in the crime. It should have focused on what the JWs have done to make things better. And it should have had some words of advice for people who have suffered.
The episode mentions the most recent changes, but gives no credit, as if updated procedures wouldn't change anything anyway. The episode gives the impression that there has been no improvement since the latest changes went into effect. Also contains a very unflattering view of Warwick Headquarters that was completely unfair as they tried to get some dramatic footage.
A strange mistake that "Romy" makes is memorable. She remembered as a girl, or even now, that Armageddon would be a time when people would be up to their necks in urine, out of fear. Obviously she was mis-remembering the blood up to the bridles on the horses.
I would not recommend the episode, except to Witnesses who want to know the type of things the world will be seeing, and prepare for another "ding" in our reputation.

The WT Library CD-ROM list is not intended to be a comprehensive list of doctrinal changes. It's from the "Index of Watch Tower Publications" (since 1985), and its purpose is to show which particular changes happened to be mentioned in print after 1985. Notice that about 110 years of Watch Tower publications (references from 1875-1985) are missing from that list. There was another such list made in the 1935-1985 Index, but again this was not comprehensive, and was intended to mention only the changes that had come up for discussion (in print) during that same period. Also, there were several changes to doctrines made that were not referenced specifically as a change which usually meant that the Index had no reason to mention them.

Yes, I found that on most of the videos. They were not all complete.

I haven't figured out why they say that donations have never been higher, and donations are down at the same time. It was evidently only after the May broadcast that donations of $30,000,000 created a situation where donations have never been higher, yet the general donations settled back to their normal levels around July. So he must have been referring to the service year from Sept 2015 through August 2015. But he adds (in pt 4):
"However, until the general donation picture changes substantially the organization will need to hold to the course set by the Governing Body with respect to spending, not only this year but in the coming years as well." The minimizing of the effect of selling off 3,000 properties that "need" to be sold is surprising considering that the total is on the order of Billions, not Millions.

It's really quite simple .......
Overlapping Donations.

It really doesn't matter how nice they make it sound...at the end of the day this "two groups" theory is human extrapolation and it does not have clear, Biblical support. This is the same organization that doesn't use the word "cross" in its translation despite historical records of crucifixion because the Aramaic word "stauros" does not clearly mean cross. And they were correct to do that! Our Bible should be the evidence. Let's not go beyond it. And there is no clear, scriptural evidence that the generation in Matthew 24:34 is two overlapping groups.
Not once did the GB suggest that the generation could be two overlapping groups until after the first theory failed. And the idea that the generation was one group existed for nearly a century. So, is this a case where the generation "evidently" meant two groups, or is it an attempt by the GB to force a square peg in a round hole? Wouldn't it have made more sense to throw out that failed idea and reevaluate our understanding of the prophetic framework? Even if 1914 is a valid prophetic date, why take the risk when it's been interpreted wrong before? In an organization that puts such value on Bible truth, wouldn't it make sense to discontinue a theory that has proven unreliable and has even mislead JWs? The GB did the opposite. They manufactured a new definition for generation that suits their need to keep 1914 a valid date. The GB holds onto 1914/the generation dearly, because it gives people a sense of urgency and makes our organization prophetically significant. Without it, JWs may become disillusioned or not cling to the organization. There are plenty of human motives for keeping this failed theory around, but at the expense of spiritual truth.

Just heard it on A&E -- On Demand. Apparently it's going to be some series on "cults." Evidently there has already been an initial episode and this was the second one. If you're watching "On Demand" be prepared to have something to do after it gets half-way through. The commercials started seeming like 10 in a row back-to-back. And this happened 3 or 4 times. "Romy's" case, depicted, is a case from Fortuna, California. The producers interviewed Barbara Anderson, too, and took Romy to Tennessee to meet with her. It's a terrible case, and I think it's one of those which will happen much less often now that several of the procedures have improved.
I believe that B.Anderson was absolutely right about Leviticus 5:1. For cases like child abuse, the verse apparently says pretty much the opposite of what the WTS has tried to make it say. Many of the best Bible Commentaries would also agree with her.
They wasted their time getting all the supposed "expertise" about the JWs from a "cult expert" who seems to be a "professional" in that she can exaggerate without it sounding like she's exaggerating. I heard B.Anderson make one inaccurate statement. I heard this other "cult professional" make about 10 mistakes. The interviewer/moderator makes a few mistakes too, but it's also obvious that she was in on the agenda, to make sure that it became a supposed story about a cult where no elders can be trusted. It should have been about the common problem of abuse in religious institutions, where power and control is a common element in the crime. It should have focused on what the JWs have done to make things better. And it should have had some words of advice for people who have suffered.
The episode mentions the most recent changes, but gives no credit, as if updated procedures wouldn't change anything anyway. The episode gives the impression that there has been no improvement since the latest changes went into effect. Also contains a very unflattering view of Warwick Headquarters that was completely unfair as they tried to get some dramatic footage.
A strange mistake that "Romy" makes is memorable. She remembered as a girl, or even now, that Armageddon would be a time when people would be up to their necks in urine, out of fear. Obviously she was mis-remembering the blood up to the bridles on the horses.
I would not recommend the episode, except to Witnesses who want to know the type of things the world will be seeing, and prepare for another "ding" in our reputation.

What would you do if you were someone who took very seriously the idea that Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 were speaking about the time we are living in, especially the time surrounding the year 1914? You are someone who believes strongly that the time period you live in is the the one that will see Armageddon, and you believe it's important that others learn this truth, too. How would you go about convincing people?
We know that we, as Jehovah's Witnesses, still carry on the legacy of someone who took that idea very seriously: Charles Taze Russell. I know that his time period produced a lot of people like him, but I was thinking about the sheer unlikelihood that anyone would be able to start a following with his specific beliefs when we compare them to Matthew 24, etc. I think this is why his success is sometimes looked at as proof that God blessed his efforts in spite of his doctrines, not because of them.
He started publishing a magazine, tracts and books that taught that some of the most important events that most Christians had been waiting and praying for, had already occurred, but that they had missed them: He taught that Jesus had already returned in 1874. He taught that this long-awaited PAROUSIA, which they thought to be a bright manifestation like lightning, had actually been invisible to everyone in the world. He taught that Jesus, as King of God's Kingdom, had already begun when Jesus became king and started reigning in 1878. He taught that William Miller, the man who started a movement that ended in the "Great Disappointment," was actually being used by God to begin drawing attention to proper issues of chronology, and to lay a true foundation of this chronology, back in 1844. He taught that since 1799 his contemporaries were in the "last days" and would remain so until the last days ended in 1914. But there were many more specific issues with this religious movement he is credited with starting. These seem so counter-intuitive, as if they were exactly the wrong way to go about starting a following that would be focused so much on Matthew 24, etc. For example:
We can still pray for his Kingdom to Come, but "in truth" it had just come a few years ago and they missed. (see above) Jesus said it would be as visible and surprising as lightning shining from one end of the heavens to the other end, but "in truth" it had been invisible. (see above) Jesus implied that wars, earthquakes, famines and pestilence would be seen during the final generation, but in truth Russell taught that these were not "signs" and that they had nothing to do with the final generation, but were merely the experiences of humans over the last 1,800 years. Jesus implied that a great witness work would lead people out of all nations but "in truth" Russell taught that all the people who would be part of Christ's Bride, the Body of Christ, the Church, the 144,000 had already been selected and the door was shut back in 1881. (Russell thought the preaching work was generally useful for witnessing to only a "lower plane" of Christians who would not serve as kings and priests with Jesus, even though they'd still make it to heaven because that's where all Christians went, according to Russell. But, as odd as these things might have seemed, we can look at even more specific lines in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 to see a few more ways in which Russell, you might think, would have been working against getting people to listen to him. He seemed to purposely go out of his way to "do the opposite." You'd think that this might have turned more people against his teachings. For example:
Matthew 24:45 speaks of a "faithful and discreet slave" and we usually think of someone who is discreet as not just wise, but careful never to come across as haughty or presumptuous. Yet Russell who had seen his former publishing partner try to claim that he, Barbour, was that faithful, discreet slave, Russell soon began publishing material that pointed to only himself as that "faithful and discreet slave." He began publishing letters to himself that addressed him as that faithful and discreet slave, and referred to some of his writings as "food at the proper time" (meat in due season). He called himself "God's mouthpiece" and referred to his writings as more effective than the Bible itself at bringing someone into the truth of God's word, adding that someone who read his works for just a few months would learn the truth, but if a person just read the Bible for a few months they would go back into darkness. Matthew 24:26 said (KJV) "Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not." ASV (and NWT) used the term "inner chambers" instead of "secret chambers." Jesus was evidently helping the disciples to avoid the mistake that would be made if someone said Jesus had indeed returned, but that he was currently not visible to them, yet this person claimed special knowledge about where he actually was. Russell already taught that Jesus Parousia had been invisible, so how could Russell find a further way for people to "believe it not" in this matter? Simple, Russell accepted the idea that God's supernatural witness, his prediction of Jesus' Parousia, had been found in the desert, inside the Great Pyramid. In fact, not just in the desert, but also in the secret, inner chambers of that pyramid. Luke 21:8 in the translations that Russell usually used, says:  "And he said, Take heed that ye be not led astray: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am he; and, The time is at hand: go ye not after them." (ASV).  It was almost like Russell said to himself, "Hmmm . . . Jesus said that no one should go after anyone who says, 'The time is at hand.' " "Hmmm... I got it!" Russell says, "I will write a book to distribute around the world and call it: 'The Time Is At Hand.' " It was one of Russell's best selling books, and it showed how chronology would let people know the times and the seasons, even the very month and year when Christ's presence and kingship began. But how would Russell prove himself to be a person not to be followed based on the first part? Was there any way that Russell could come in the name of Jesus and say "I am he"?  How close could Russell get to saying "I am he" or as the the KJV words it: "I am Christ"?  [The KJV puts the word Christ in italics to indicate that it is not in the original Greek.]
Turns out that he was able to get much closer than most people think. As I'll get to in the next post.
 

If we take Luke 21:28 to mean that a person might come in Christ's name and claim that he is representing Jesus Christ then I think Russell covered that possibility. After all, as alluded to above, Russell said:
"If the six volumes of SCRIPTURE STUDIES are practically the Bible,  topically arranged with Bible proof texts given, we might not improperly name the volumes THE BIBLE IN AN ARRANGED FORM. That is to say, they are not mere comments on the Bible, but they are practically the Bible itself…Furthermore, not only do we find that people cannot see the divine plan in studying the Bible by itself, but we see, also, that if anyone lays the SCRIPTURE STUDIES aside, even after he has used them, after he has become familiar with them, after he has read them for ten years- if he then lays them aside and ignores them and goes to the Bible alone, though he has understood his Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years he goes into darkness. On the other hand, if he had merely read the SCRIPTURE STUDIES with their references, and had not read a page of the Bible, as such, he would be in the light at the end of two years, because he would have the light of the Scriptures" (Watchtower, September 15, 1910, p.298). Well, if you claim to be speaking for Christ, in his name, that's good start: Tell people that if you read the Bible alone, if you read what Jesus said directly, you won't get the light of the Scriptures, but if you read Russell's books (including "The Time Is At Hand!") and not read a page of the Bible, you'd have the "light of the Scriptures" by the end of two years. And even if you've studied the Bible for 10 years, you will go into darkness within 2 years if you continue to just study the Bible.
But what about taking this further. Is there any way of Russell actually coming closer to saying that he is the Christ? Doesn't seem likely, even if he set himself up as God's mouthpiece and the representative and only channel of the present truth then available to the body of Christ.
Russell made it clear he was the ONLY channel speaking for Jesus:
The Lord at the time indicated would especially use one member of his church as the channel or instrument through which he would send the appropriate messages.” (Watchtower, April 15. 1904, p. 125.) I AM THE CHRIST
Obviously, we aren't going to find Russell using those words, "I am the Christ." But let's look at what he does say about the Christ:
[Next post]
 
 

RUSSEL SAYS HE WANTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE TERM "THE CHRIST"
Russell taught a special doctrine called the Mystery Doctrine. The mystery doctrine claimed that Russell along with only a few other Christians alive in his day, were "The Christ". He said that not just Jesus, but that he, Russell, and those who strove to be on the same "higher plane," were also "The Christ," "The Messiah". He said that Jesus himself was NOT the complete Christ, just the Head, and that the Christ, the Messiah, included not just the Head but the Body. There was no complete Christ until the last member of the Church was chosen. Throughout history, Russell included the previously chosen members of the 144,000 including the apostles and early Christian martyrs, as included in "The Christ." He would include men like Waldo, Luther, Tyndale, Wycliffe, etc.
A lot of people don't even know about this teaching, but it's not like they tried to hide it at the time. Here are some examples:
It has also been shown from time to time that the Christ of scripture is a complex being, presented to our minds by the figure of a man—Head and Body— Jesus Himself being the Head and believers being the many members of the one body. This being true it follows that there is a progressive development of Christ from Jesus in the flesh, until the last member of his body is exalted to glory. (Watch Tower, November 1880, p160 R) Very shortly now, this mystery of God, this company of divinely-begotten sons, will be FINISHED—completed: “The church of the first born,” of which Jesus is the head. will soon cease to be, God manifest in the flesh. The entire company shall be glorified together, and “shall shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” (Malt. 13:43.) They shall arise in power and strength to bless all the nations of the earth. (Watch Tower, July 1882, p369 R) [Yes, you heard that right, Russell and company are not just Christ, they are also "God manifest in the flesh" -- that therefore includes Russell -- God manifest in the flesh, along with other specially consecrated believers, not all Christians, of course, but those with the "higher calling."]
Paul declares (Col. 1:27) that this mystery which hath been hid front ages and from generations, now made manifest to his saints, is “CHRIST IN YOU. THE HOPE OF GLORY.” This is the great mystery of God which has been hidden from all previous ages, and is still hidden from all except a special class—the saints, or consecrated believers. But what is meant by ‘Christ in you”? ... the Apostle John says that the anointing, which we (consecrated believers) have received abideth in us. (I John 2:27.) Thus the saints of this Gospel age are an anointed company—anointed to be kings and priests unto God (2 Cor. 1:21, 1 Peter 2:9); and together with Jesus, their chief and Lord, they constitute Jehovah’s anointed—the Christ. ( Divine Plan of the Ages, p.81-82) This was truly a mystery never before thought of—that God intends to raise up not only a deliverer, but a deliverer of many members. This the “high calling” to which the consecrated believers of the Gospel age are privileged to attain. (84) [You can see that Russell never got too far away from a Trinity Doctrine, but his Trinity was that God was made of The Father, The Son and the 144,000 , the rest of God manifest in the Flesh, the consecrated anointed believers of the high calling, the 144,000.]
"this is the mystery mentioned in the scriptures; to wit, that the great Messiah so long promised should be composed of many individuals." (Watch Tower, February 1, 1914, R p5392) ...that is to say, members of the Christ, the anointed, are the Christ. (Convention Report Sermons, p.460). THE promised Messiah, the Deliverer of the World, ...the Great Prophet, Priest and King, ...is not our Lord Jesus Christ alone...but also the little flock...these unitedly are the Christ, the Messiah. (Watch Tower, May 1903, R p.3191) There are literally dozens of other Watchtower articles and publications to this same point, but it's curious that this made Russell claim that he, along with Jesus and the rest of the 144,000 could also go by the name "God manifest in the flesh" "partakers of divine nature" "Everlasting Father" "The Great Prophet" "Immanuel" "Lifegiver" "Gods" (with a capital "g") "The Prophet Like Unto Moses."
We conclude then that the titles, Mighty God, and Everlasting Father, are titles which fully understood, are very appropriate to Our Lord Jesus Christ. And we might add that so perfectly is his Bride--body--church, associated with him, both in filling up the measure of the sufferings-- being joined in sacrifice and also in the Glory that shall follow, that the same titles are applicable to the Church as his body--for "He that hath freely given us Christ, shall he not with him also freely give us all things?" "Therefore all things are yours, and ye are Christ's and Christ is God's." (Watch Tower, October 1881,  R p.298) Under the heading "YE ARE GODS" (Watch Tower, November/December 1881, p.301)
"I have said ye are Gods; and all of you are children of the Most High. But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes" [literally heads]. Psa. 82:6. Our high calling is so great, so much above the comprehension of men, that they feel that we are guilty of blasphemy when we speak of being "new creatures"--not any longer human, but "partakers of the divine nature." When we claim on the scriptural warrant, that we are begotten of a divine nature and that Jehovah is thus our father, it is claiming that we are divine beings--hence all such are Gods. Thus we have a family of Gods, Jehovah being our father, and all his sons being brethren and joint-heirs: Jesus being the chief, or first-born." The Watchtower printed its last article in support of the Trinity doctrine in 1880, but here in 1881 (Nov/Dec), we have a new family of Gods, Jehovah the Father, all his sons and joint-heirs, and Jesus being the chief. Father, Son and 144,000. 144,002 Gods in one family of Gods.

Some do, some don't. There is no prohibition against it. My guess is that, in general, most JWs drink a lot less than people of their same demographic around them. I have a big wine cellar, but I never get around to drinking anything anymore. It takes extra time to choose and serve, but the worse thing is that I end up falling asleep before 2am when I have a glass of wine.

On the other hand, i will tone down the "nobody" to "others did not."
After all it is not my intention to wave a red flag before a bull.

What the Baptist Church is doing here, reminds me of something similar that Jehovah's Witnesses have tried to do wherever it was possible, but on a more local level. U.S. Supreme Court cases include times when Witnesses refused to register under any local law because we wanted to assure our more universal right to go anywhere we could get to. On a nation by nation basis, however, Witnesses register in order to "legally establish" the right to preach there.

Sometimes, the Watchtower publications have pointed back to a time when the Watchtower predicted World War One (WWI) in 1914 and then also predicted that the United Nations would rise up to replace the League of Nations. These two "predictions" have even been paired together and presented nearly back-to-back in our publications. They were even brought up again at the 2014 convention and the 2009 convention. The reason the Watchtower has reviewed these two ideas from our history is probably already obvious and clear, and it has been clearly stated, too.
One of the most recent reviews of the history of Jehovah's Witnesses contains very similar claims, and is found in one of the videos, now also available on tv.jw.org: https://tv.jw.org/#en/mediaitems/VODOrgHistory/pub-ivfa2_x_VIDEO
These online transcripts appear fairly accurate:
Video Transcript Jehovah's Witnesses Faith in Action Part 1 Out of Darkness.pdf Video Transcript Jehovah's Witnesses Faith in Action Part 2 Let the Light Shine.pdf Here is the relevant part about 1914:
—Geoffrey W. Jackson—
They realized that 1914 had a significance, —Gerrit Lösch—
When World War I broke out in July, they felt vindicated and it strengthened their faith in the Bible, and in Jehovah’s prophetic Word. Also, it enhanced their trust that Jehovah was using Brother Russell and his friends to explain truth to others. —Anthony Morris III—
Just looking at the sign of the times that Jesus told us to look at is enough, but it's still significant that they could pinpoint that year. That's phenomenal. Here is the relevant part about the UN and League of Nations:
—Narrator—
. . . And soon, they would boldly proclaim a Bible prophecy that pointed to the outcome of that war. ——Chapter 4: "Taught By Jehovah"——
—Narrator—
The year was 1941. Having taken the lead for 25 momentous years, J. F. Rutherford had become seriously ill and was about to make his final public appearance. . . . The second World War was raging. Some felt that these events could lead directly into Armageddon. In spite of this, in 1942, Nathan H. Knorr—the one next appointed to take the lead among Jehovah's Witnesses—spoke at a convention about a Bible prophecy that indicated that significant events had to occur first. —Knorr (reenactment)—
This international war is not 'the battle of the great day of God Almighty.' Before Armageddon comes, the Scriptures show, a peace must come. —John Wischuk—
There was no peace on the horizon, and yet we said, "Peace—Can It Last?" —Narrator—
Knorr centered attention on Revelation 17:8, which indicates that a figurative wild beast would come into existence, would cease to exist, but then would come back to life. Knorr then drew his listeners' attention to the defunct League of Nations. —Knorr (reenactment)—
The League is in effect in a state of suspended animation and needs to be revived if it is ever to live again. It has gone into the abyss of inaction and ineffectiveness. It "is not." Will the League remain in the pit? Again the Word of God gives answer: The association of worldly nations will rise again. —Narrator—
That association did rise again three years later as the United Nations. —Anthony Morris III—
They didn't know it was going to be called the United Nations, and we don't make that claim. But they knew it was coming out.  
[Should be noted that Morris is claiming something that they "KNEW" in advance but he is also correcting a common claim that not only did Knorr predict the rise of the League of Nations three years ahead of time, but that he even used the term "United Nations." As one person writes on a website "Knorr prophesied in 1942 that the League of Nations would rise out of the abyss. Knorr used the expression 'United Nations.' How could he have known the exact name of the new incarnation, when it wasn't established until 1945?"]
Witnesses got these ideas about a correctly predicted prophecy from an article published a few years later under Knorr's administration in 1960. These quotes should be compared with the actual transcript of the speech Knorr made on September 20, 1942, which was made available as a booklet, and can be found here: http://www.strictlygenteel.co.uk/booklets/peace.html
The July 15, 1960 Watchtower, page 444, said this:
"In 1942 the “faithful and discreet slave” guided by Jehovah’s unerring spirit made known that the democracies would win World War II and that there would be a United Nations organization set up." You can also see a reference to the 1942 event in the Revelation book (p.248) on WOL at jw.org: https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101988034
You can also read the following about it in the April 15, 1989 Watchtower, p.14 https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101988034
By divine providence, Jehovah’s Witnesses received enlightenment on that mystery in 1942. . . . Nathan H. Knorr, president of the Watch Tower Society, gave the public talk, “Peace—Can It Last?” Therein he reviewed Revelation 17:8, . . . . Was that Bible-based forecast fulfilled? Truly it was! In 1945 the international “wild beast” emerged from its abyss of inactivity as the United Nations. See also the Kingdom Come book  kc chap. 17 pp. 162-173 and and interesting version of events found in a 1981 Watchtower about why this "insight" was given w81 12/15 pp. 28-30
The Proclaimers book states it like this on page 192-3 (  jv chap. 14 pp. 188-201 )
This time, it involved the United Nations, successor to the League. While World War II was still under way, in 1942, Jehovah’s Witnesses had already discerned from the Bible, at Revelation 17:8, that the world peace organization would rise again, also that it would fail to bring lasting peace. This was explained by N. H. Knorr, then president of the Watch Tower Society, in the convention discourse “Peace—Can It Last?” Boldly Jehovah’s Witnesses proclaimed that view of the developing world situation. In 1993 the idea was stated as follows:
“The Disgusting Thing” 12, 13. What was “the disgusting thing,” and—as foreseen by the faithful and discreet slave—when and how was it reestablished? 12 When the end of the second world war was in sight, there was another development. “They will certainly put in place the disgusting thing that is causing desolation.” (Daniel 11:31b) This “disgusting thing,” which Jesus also mentioned, had already been recognized as the League of Nations, the scarlet-colored wild beast that according to Revelation went into the abyss. (Matthew 24:15; Revelation 17:8; see Light, Book Two, page 94.) It did this when World War II broke out. However, at the New World Theocratic Assembly of Jehovah’s Witnesses in 1942, Nathan H. Knorr, third president of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society, discussed the prophecy of Revelation 17 and warned that the beast would rise again from the abyss. 13 History bore out the truth of his words. Between August and October 1944, at Dumbarton Oaks in the United States, work was begun on the charter of what would be called the United Nations. The charter was adopted by 51 nations, including the former Soviet Union, and when it came into force on October 24, 1945, the defunct League of Nations in effect came out of the abyss. There are several more examples, but this should suffice. I am struck by how often the point is emphasized that these were Knorr's words, "his words" and that they were a Bible-based forecast "foreseen" and "discerned" and "known" in advance through "divine providence" and "enlightenment" and men being "guided by Jehovah's unerring spirit." This is an odd focus on the insights and discernment of men. These expressions are also dangerously presumptuous in that they are so often applied to the one or two times when it seems something was foreseen correctly, but there is no balanced way of discussing the reasons that literally dozens of predictions were made incorrectly and have been dropped as "old light."
But, as many Witnesses already know, there is something even deeper that is wrong with these claims of accuracy in discernment. The claims are inaccurate! It turns out that this was not really even predicted in advance. A close look at the original transcript of Knorr's talk actually solves the mystery of why he used the term United Nations in his speech. It's because he gave the speech AFTER official work on the United Nations had already begun.