JW Insider

The idea that she hoped they would learn God's Word too is never included in the story. She had obviously given up hope if she already wondered who would replace them in the New System. (At this point in the story, she is already 10 years old.)
Yes. We do. Not all of course, and we don't judge specific individuals, but we definitely teach that there will be persons who will die because they didn't learn the Truth. And it's obvious that it's so common to believe this, that even a member of the Governing Body hadn't considered it wrong to tell a story that centers on exactly this idea. Note that no one is trying to correct the girl for having a misapprehension. The pull of the story is that the little girl died still "knowing" that her parents, in their current situation, would be either killed by Jehovah or forgotten forever by Jehovah.
That's the point. The little girl judged her parents as worthy of death. And no part of the story, as told here, corrects that point. The story works if they were worthy of death UNTIL they learned the Truth after their daughter died. (This, by the way, is seen as child abuse in a psychological sense, which I'm sure we'd be quick to see if it was a Muslim girl with a Muslim Auntie who was being taught this same thing about her Buddhist parents.)
Then you understand why she should not have judged them.
I don't understand this at all. Why would her joy be very great if sadness happened?

They're not being punished for doing the right thing. If the organization's policies were effective, would we be seeing repeated sexual abuse in congregations? It became a big enough issue that child welfare organizations got involved, and the org has faced multiple cases against them. How bad does this issue need to be before it's acknowledged that the policies of the organization have failed in this regard? Sometimes it's best to just to be humble and not let ego get in the way of necessary changes.
The WT organization chooses to be heavily involved in people's lives, so its bears partial responsibility for the continued presence of sexual abuse in the congregation. The organization shouldn't get brownie points for enforcing congregational purity unlike other denominations. That's a give-in if we are to believe this organization is being directed by God. And it's also a misdirection from the fact that this protective system has failed to protect many young JWs.
I think we can both agree that it's the atmosphere of this organization that has led to these legal problems. JWs are taught to rely on the organization to handle issues--the elders and overseers. So, it's no surprise that many JWs come to elders looking for direction on matters of sexual abuse before turning to anyone else. I think elders should always report abuse to police, because that's their moral duty. The hundreds of unreported claims of sexual abuse have left a stain on our organization and God's holy name.

Yes. We had it made!! This book went like hotcakes. It's the expression we heard a lot, and it was true. It was the pioneer's bread and butter somedays. Also, in those days, there was no request to put the "profit" back in the contribution box, because the buyers of the book were not contributing to the Kingdom work, they were actually contributing to our ability to continue pioneering.

Over the years, I bought several hundred of these at only a nickel apiece. Placed them for 25 cents apiece. Every two placed was another gallon of gas for pioneering. Only have about 2 left.
I was baptized the year before it was released.
Since this came out in 1968 it pushed the 1975 date in a couple of places, as a time when the world would reach a peak of crises and catastrophes.  The book was updated in 1981 to get rid of the 1975 date.
This was an excellent style for studying. We didn't spend too long on any subject, and there were a lot of scriptures packed into the material that were just cited and not quoted. So a study could go long or short and still cover the material depending on the preference of the person we were studying with. Millions became Witnesses based on this book, especially former Catholics. But I think it had about equal appeal to people of many backgrounds.

Unfortunately, after my experience, a thief could break down my door, yell "Peace and Security," and I would roll over and go back to sleep.
There's too many ways things can be spun. I leave it to others and focus on the work that is engrossing in its own right. i take the party line without fuss, but always tentatively, for maybe it will change someday.
Meanwhile....oops...sorry - just had to dodge a missile from RocketMan

I know that a few of us have probably "snuck" a listen or two to the televangelists and radio preachers who so often ask (beg) for money. This doesn't bother me as much as those who try to ask for money in more subtle ways like the way they comment on a scripture and repeatedly throw in a phrase like "showing our appreciation for Him by giving to Him in every way possible."
Even more irritating are prayers that are supposed to be to God, but really just continue to preach and obliquely request money through similar ruses: "Oh God, I just know that everyone who can hear this prayer today through this broadcast is ready and willing to show their appreciation for you by giving, in every way possible."
So I kind of cringe when I hear a song (or prayer) to Jehovah that gives the impression that we are bragging to Jehovah about how much money and time we are giving to the building of Kingdom Halls and Assembly Halls. 
"Jehovah . . . from your own hand, we've given all that we offer you . . . . we are grateful . . . you knew what we wanted . . . . So we offer the best of our time and possessions." I'm not saying there is anything wrong with these words. I'm as happy as anyone to give to the ministry in every way possible. It's just that I'm sensitive to the way that others might take some of our songs and see a kind of solicitation in them, in the same way that I have seen it in televangelists. The very song makes me start wondering if we are trying to emphasize "Temple" giving rather than "people" giving.
I start thinking of what it means that we walk by faith not by sight, when I hear a song that says: "For you’ve made our hope reality With this place." And when it says: ". . . But your spirit can here remain. Adorning this center of worship are people who walk in your light." it also reminds me of:
(John 4:21-24) . . . the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. . . . 23 Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth. Of course, this doesn't mean that any of the words are wrong. We can worship in spirit and truth inside a physical place just as we can worship in spirit and truth when we are at home or at work or on vacation. Having a physical place is wonderful, but emphasis on one as "making our hope reality" or "what we wanted" can reach a point where we begin walking by sight, not by faith.

Don't know whether it's right, but there is a completely different way to understand this verse. You get an idea of it by looking at 1 Thess 5:3 in some other translations:
NLT: When people are saying, “Everything is peaceful and secure,” then disaster will fall on them as suddenly as a pregnant woman’s labor pains begin. And there will be no escape. ESV: While people are saying, “There is peace and security,” then sudden destruction will come upon them as labor pains come upon a pregnant woman, and they will not escape. NET: Now when they are saying, "There is peace and security," then sudden destruction comes on them, like labor pains on a pregnant woman, and they will surely not escape. I think we sometimes get this impression that the final generation of the last days will see almost constant wars and rumors of wars in various places in the world, with very few days of real peace. But then, we seem to figure, that the UN or some political institution or coalition of governments will, for some reason, cry out something to the effect of "Peace and Security!" as if they would like some attention for have finally been instrumental at creating a few weeks of peace amidst the near daily wars around the world. 
But it seems just as likely that the actual meaning, or even the actual translation of the verse should be closer to:
While some people are talking about how everything seems to be peaceful and secure, they will find themselves undergoing sudden disaster, just as unexpectedly as the beginning of a pregnant woman's labor pains. And they won't be able to escape. This is not necessarily a quotation of what they will be saying out loud anywhere. The expression is just one symbolic way of telling us what some people will no doubt be saying and thinking just before the time when Jehovah's judgment day comes upon them just as surprisingly as a thief in the night could come upon them. In context, this is what it seems to be saying. It's about the "PAROUSIA," which is sometimes called the "Day of the Lord" or the "Day of Jehovah." In context, it's about WHAT to expect about the PAROUSIA (presence) and WHEN to expect the PAROUSIA (presence):
(1 Thessalonians 4:15-5:5) . . .For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word, that we the living who survive to the presence [PAROUSIA] of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death [before the PAROUSIA]; 16 because [AT THE PAROUSIA] the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first. 17 Afterward [or, THEN] we the living who are surviving will, together with them [or Greek, AT THE SAME TIME], be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we will always be with the Lord. 18 So keep comforting one another with these words. 5:1 Now as for the times and the seasons [of the PAROUSIA], brothers, you need nothing to be written to you. 2 For you yourselves know very well that Jehovah’s day [the PAROUSIA] is coming exactly as a thief in the night. 3 Whenever it is that they are saying, “Peace and security!” then sudden destruction is to be instantly on them, just like birth pains on a pregnant woman, and they will by no means escape. 4 But you, brothers, you are not in darkness, so that the day should overtake you as it would thieves, 5 for you are all sons of light and sons of day. We belong neither to night nor to darkness. Granted, this isn't the way we currently understand it officially, but it fits all the other scriptures just as well. The expression about saying there is peace and security is a parallel to the idea that the Parousia will come as a thief in the night. It will be surprising, and even painful and disastrous. There will be no way to predict it (by pointing out increasing wars and earthquakes and disasters, for example). Therefore Paul had nothing to say to them about the timing of the Parousia (the times and seasons) -- 1 Thess 5:1. 
This matches the idea that Jesus gave when he said that people would be going on about their daily routines, two men in a field, two women at a grinding mill, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage just as they were in Noah's day. Until suddenly the judgment event (parousia) came upon them as if without any warning.
Peter was saying the same thing when he said that people would ridicule the belief that the Parousia was coming, because things seemed to be going on as they always had been. Peter didn't say that the answer would be that the Parousia was really there all along but just invisible. Instead Peter said:
(2 Peter 3:5-7) 5 For they deliberately ignore this fact, that long ago there were heavens and an earth standing firmly out of water and in the midst of water by the word of God; 6 and that by those means the world of that time suffered destruction when it was flooded with water. 7 But by the same word the heavens and the earth that now exist are reserved for fire and are being kept until the day of judgment and of destruction of the ungodly people. In other words, they are ignoring the fact that just like in Noah's generation, people also likely ridiculed the fact that there was no evidence of an imminent judgment day, yet that judgment event (parousia) came upon them as quickly as Jehovah released the waters upon them. In the same way the current heavens and earth will exist as they are being kept just as they now exist UNTIL THE DAY OF JUDGMENT (until the Parousia).
 

True, and we may also subconsciously perhaps view it as some kind of central temple, like the one the Israelites had in Jerusalem, and we may even stretch it further by reasoning that Jehovah’s spirit resides there more than it resides in any other building we use for worship.  Brings to mind the verse in Acts 17:24, where Paul is addressing the people of Athens, with the many temples dedicated to various Gods.  So I am hoping that the spirit behind those words will be understood to be more of it being  a small taste of what paradise will be like as regards living together and the  cooperation etc. and that everything done there "is for Jehovah” “ ...."and  because what we do (at Bethel) helps people draw close to Jehovah” as was brought out in last week’s WT study.
P.S. Notice the brother in the front row, (second one of the brothers from the right) is Nicolas King, the guy who sings Jazz professionally.

@JW Insider
Everything we have is Jehovah's and our lives are devoted to Him! Mere money ? to me has little value other than rent food ?. I say what I live whole souled I live for Jehovah, if I die, I die for Jehovah. His blessings are poured out to those who People he has drawn to Him! One day soon money ? will be worthless. 
8 For if we live, we live to Jehovah,*+ and if we die, we die to Jehovah.* So both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah.*
(Romans 14:8)

I know that a few of us have probably "snuck" a listen or two to the televangelists and radio preachers who so often ask (beg) for money. This doesn't bother me as much as those who try to ask for money in more subtle ways like the way they comment on a scripture and repeatedly throw in a phrase like "showing our appreciation for Him by giving to Him in every way possible."
Even more irritating are prayers that are supposed to be to God, but really just continue to preach and obliquely request money through similar ruses: "Oh God, I just know that everyone who can hear this prayer today through this broadcast is ready and willing to show their appreciation for you by giving, in every way possible."
So I kind of cringe when I hear a song (or prayer) to Jehovah that gives the impression that we are bragging to Jehovah about how much money and time we are giving to the building of Kingdom Halls and Assembly Halls. 
"Jehovah . . . from your own hand, we've given all that we offer you . . . . we are grateful . . . you knew what we wanted . . . . So we offer the best of our time and possessions." I'm not saying there is anything wrong with these words. I'm as happy as anyone to give to the ministry in every way possible. It's just that I'm sensitive to the way that others might take some of our songs and see a kind of solicitation in them, in the same way that I have seen it in televangelists. The very song makes me start wondering if we are trying to emphasize "Temple" giving rather than "people" giving.
I start thinking of what it means that we walk by faith not by sight, when I hear a song that says: "For you’ve made our hope reality With this place." And when it says: ". . . But your spirit can here remain. Adorning this center of worship are people who walk in your light." it also reminds me of:
(John 4:21-24) . . . the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father. . . . 23 Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit, and those worshipping him must worship with spirit and truth. Of course, this doesn't mean that any of the words are wrong. We can worship in spirit and truth inside a physical place just as we can worship in spirit and truth when we are at home or at work or on vacation. Having a physical place is wonderful, but emphasis on one as "making our hope reality" or "what we wanted" can reach a point where we begin walking by sight, not by faith.

I don't see how we would ever know when such a new period of time started. As far as we can tell it started immediately after the tribulation in those days. (i.e., immediately after the tribulation on Jerusalem and its final parousia/synteleia in 70 C.E.)

I'm not speaking for any of the other persons who have questioned it, but the only scripture that was used is this:
(Exodus 1:6) 6 Joseph eventually died, and also all his brothers and all that generation. The problem is that this scripture does not support what Brother Splane is saying. In fact, it more likely says exactly the opposite. Just look at the context to see that "all that generation" refers to Joseph and his brothers and all those who were alive at the same time as all of Joseph's brothers. It did not include all of Joseph's parent's generation, or his children's generation, or his grandchildren's generation. In fact, if you back up just 10 verses in the Pentateuch, you read in Genesis 50:23:
(Genesis 50:23) Joseph saw the third generation of Eʹphra·im’s sons, also the sons of Maʹchir, Ma·nasʹseh’s son. They were born upon Joseph’s knees. The third generation was contemporary with Joseph "born upon Joseph's knees, in fact. But they were not in the same generation as Joseph. They were, just as it says, the "third generation."
But first there is an even clearer reason to see that this explanation is wrong. In fact, Brother Splane accidentally ruined his entire explanation using his own words in the talk. Listen closely to the video above from the point marked 2m:38s to 2m:53s. These fifteen seconds prove that his reasoning is false.
He says:
But now what did Joseph and his brothers all have in common? They were all contemporaries. They had all lived at the same time. They were part of the same generation. So a quick test: Was Joseph Rutherford part of that first group? Was A. H. MacMillan? Was W. E. Van Amburgh? The answer is YES, according to Brother Splane, at the point from 7m:38s to 7m:54s in the video above. Who else was part of that second group? At 11m:16s to 11m:28s, he adds: "...in addition, there are Karl Klein, John Barr, Albert Schroeder. All the current members of the Governing Body are also part of 'this generation.'"
Now it's easy to see what's wrong with this picture, and why Exodus 1:6 actually disproves the currently proposed theory:
Were the current members of the Governing Body contemporaries of Rutherford, MacMillan and Van Amburgh? NO!! Of course, not! Rutherford died in 1942 Brother Sanderson was born February 4, 1965. He was baptized just days after he turned 10, on February 9, 1975. So it's not likely that he became "anointed" (a requirement to be in the second group) until 1975 or after. That's 33 years after Rutherford died! So this alone proves that they were not all contemporaries. The same is true of all members of the current Governing Body. They were not all contemporaries with the persons in the first group. We could paraphrase what Brother Splane said about Exodus 1:6:
But now what did the members of this first and second group of brothers all have in common? They were NOT all contemporaries. They had NOT all lived at the same time. So they were NOT part of the same generation. In order get this flaw in the logic past us without too many people noticing, some "sleight of hand" was necessary. It was important to interrupt the identification of the first group with their obvious contemporaries while still under the definition based on Exodus 1:6  that they ALL had to be contemporaries. Then the word "all" was changed to "some" and was slipped in quickly without any emphasis on the word "some" at the 8m:20s mark. Then the word "some" was slipped in again with just slightly more emphasis at around the 9m:40s mark. Here's how:
He does OK up to 7m:54s while still speaking of real and actual contemporaries in the "first group." Then, at 8m:20s into the video Brother Splane gives away the first clue that shows where the reasoning went wrong. In speaking of the second group and mentioning Knorr, Swingle, Suiter, Henschel and Gangas, he says that "They were anointed contemporaries of some in the first group." He does it again at 9m:40s to 9m:54s, where he says: "In order to be part of this generation, someone would have had to have been anointed before 1992, because he would have to have been a contemporary of some of the first group."

True, but not about the people in the picture. It was true of the number of generations in Matthew chapter 1.
14+14+14=42
(Unless these three people are galaxy hitchhikers.)

I don't see how we would ever know when such a new period of time started. As far as we can tell it started immediately after the tribulation in those days. (i.e., immediately after the tribulation on Jerusalem and its final parousia/synteleia in 70 C.E.)

True, but not about the people in the picture. It was true of the number of generations in Matthew chapter 1.
14+14+14=42
(Unless these three people are galaxy hitchhikers.)

Of course, Jesus never said anything about these things happening either in greater, more terrifying, or more "concentrated measure." So even if earthquakes, for example, really had started to happen in "concentrated measure" in 1914 (they didn't!) this would still have nothing to do with the sign of Matthew 24. All Jesus said was that great earthquakes, for example, would happen and therefore not to be misled by them, because these are not signs that the end is imminent. ("Do not be misled . . . the end is not yet!").
Of course, what you are talking about would still be the common reasoning, even if we somehow found a way to restart the generation with the start of the Governing Body around 1972, or the apostasy in 1980, or AIDS, or cart witnessing, or the re-assignment of the Governing Body as "guardians of doctrine" around 2000, or even some brand new unexpected event in 2018.
So I brought up the point about the sign in Matthew 24 to propose that we would still be wrong to try to find new reasons to claim that earthquakes and wars were somehow more "concentrated" after a new starting date -- even if they WERE!

Or get someone to help you lift it up in case you are getting up there.
Well - heavy things are afoot these days in the news. Maybe they will make all other points moot.

It makes one wonder...and we can only hope. But I still think we will all be taken by surprise, because things rarely have a habit of turning out like we thought they would!

Hahaha, too true!

Many interesting comments!
I'll do a bit of analysis later. But.....first impressions, it seems like we are all a bit in the dark!
Like Jesus said: "Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father" Mk 13:32.
Huh! Don't you hate it when someone's always right???

I don't see how we would ever know when such a new period of time started. As far as we can tell it started immediately after the tribulation in those days. (i.e., immediately after the tribulation on Jerusalem and its final parousia/synteleia in 70 C.E.)

Of course, Jesus never said anything about these things happening either in greater, more terrifying, or more "concentrated measure." So even if earthquakes, for example, really had started to happen in "concentrated measure" in 1914 (they didn't!) this would still have nothing to do with the sign of Matthew 24. All Jesus said was that great earthquakes, for example, would happen and therefore not to be misled by them, because these are not signs that the end is imminent. ("Do not be misled . . . the end is not yet!").
Of course, what you are talking about would still be the common reasoning, even if we somehow found a way to restart the generation with the start of the Governing Body around 1972, or the apostasy in 1980, or AIDS, or cart witnessing, or the re-assignment of the Governing Body as "guardians of doctrine" around 2000, or even some brand new unexpected event in 2018.
So I brought up the point about the sign in Matthew 24 to propose that we would still be wrong to try to find new reasons to claim that earthquakes and wars were somehow more "concentrated" after a new starting date -- even if they WERE!

I think I've presented the following alternative suggestion before (a couple of times):
It makes sense that when Jesus refers to "all these things" he is referring to the same "all these things" that the disciples asked him about:
(Mark 13:4) 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are to come to a conclusion?” In context, of course, "all these things" referred to the judgment on Jerusalem and therefore the toppling of the Temple buildings.
(Mark 13:1-4) As he was going out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him: “Teacher, see! what wonderful stones and buildings!” 2 However, Jesus said to him: “Do you see these great buildings? By no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.” 3 As he was sitting on the Mount of Olives with the temple in view, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately: 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are to come to a conclusion?” Since the word "synteleia" can refer to a final destruction and the word "parousia" can refer to a final judgment event, the disciples no doubt thought that these events were part of the final parousia/synteleia on the whole world. After all, Jerusalem represented the whole world to them. Therefore, Jesus' words to them started out "Do not be misled." or "Look out that nobody misleads you." For you are going to see a lot of things in this generation that you might think will be a sign of that final end, but remember that all these things are going to take place. A lot of things might fool you into thinking you are seeing that final sign. You will go through a lot of trials and tribulations. But don't be misled. The final end cannot happen until AFTER the only sign, which is what you will see come upon Jerusalem.
Jesus' prophecy about Jerusalem, of course, also contains a lot of good counsel about how easy it would be to also be fooled into thinking that this or that is a sign for the final parousia too. It's also easy for us to be fooled into thinking that wars, and earthquakes, and famines are a "sign" of the final parousia, when really we know that, even though all these things will take place, people will also be talking about peace and security right up to the end. People will be eating and drinking and marrying and going on with their lives right up to the end. People will be ridiculing the fact that all things are still going on just like they have been from the beginning, right up until the final end.

did you see their towel? never leave home without one

I think I've presented the following alternative suggestion before (a couple of times):
It makes sense that when Jesus refers to "all these things" he is referring to the same "all these things" that the disciples asked him about:
(Mark 13:4) 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are to come to a conclusion?” In context, of course, "all these things" referred to the judgment on Jerusalem and therefore the toppling of the Temple buildings.
(Mark 13:1-4) As he was going out of the temple, one of his disciples said to him: “Teacher, see! what wonderful stones and buildings!” 2 However, Jesus said to him: “Do you see these great buildings? By no means will a stone be left here upon a stone and not be thrown down.” 3 As he was sitting on the Mount of Olives with the temple in view, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately: 4 “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are to come to a conclusion?” Since the word "synteleia" can refer to a final destruction and the word "parousia" can refer to a final judgment event, the disciples no doubt thought that these events were part of the final parousia/synteleia on the whole world. After all, Jerusalem represented the whole world to them. Therefore, Jesus' words to them started out "Do not be misled." or "Look out that nobody misleads you." For you are going to see a lot of things in this generation that you might think will be a sign of that final end, but remember that all these things are going to take place. A lot of things might fool you into thinking you are seeing that final sign. You will go through a lot of trials and tribulations. But don't be misled. The final end cannot happen until AFTER the only sign, which is what you will see come upon Jerusalem.
Jesus' prophecy about Jerusalem, of course, also contains a lot of good counsel about how easy it would be to also be fooled into thinking that this or that is a sign for the final parousia too. It's also easy for us to be fooled into thinking that wars, and earthquakes, and famines are a "sign" of the final parousia, when really we know that, even though all these things will take place, people will also be talking about peace and security right up to the end. People will be eating and drinking and marrying and going on with their lives right up to the end. People will be ridiculing the fact that all things are still going on just like they have been from the beginning, right up until the final end.