JW Insider

When the price dropped for Amazon Dot (Black Friday), I bought one, only after reading that one of its skills would be "Allrecipes" that actually walks you through a recipe step by step, hands free, while you pull out the pots and the ingredients, etc. I couldn't get the Allrecipes skill to come up on the list of Alexa skills for several days, but it finally showed up and I like it.
My wife liked it so much that we bought an Echo for the living room, which replaces the stereo, because Spotifiy plays through either it or the Sonos speakers in the living room. Got one for my parents, but when I called to tell them, they had just bought the Dot, so I gave the Echo to my daughter and son-in-law. But their neighbor also just gave them the Google Home, so who knows what they'll use the most. The Echo was easier for them to make their automatic shades go up and down through a voice command.
I still like the Echo better than Google Home because, believe it or not, Alexa can edit my Google calendar and Google can't.

Looks like a very sensationalist newspaper that tries so hard to be both serious and sensational at the same time that it's a bit funny. I read a few other articles and a lot of their headlines.
I always wonder why a newspaper would focus on the person's religion in the headline instead of saying: "Managing Director of Emsil is wanted for fraud." That headline would be more important to any readers who might have had dealings with Emsilv.
But if it's just a headline going for the "sensational" then it's because it is a surprising thing, which is probably an inadvertent admission that fraud among Nigerian JWs is very rare. (And there are a lot of JWs in Nigeria.)

Yes.
I probably hold a position similar to yours on this issue, and probably even as to how it relates to the question at hand. I believe that we should be humble and admit that we don't really know exactly how and where Jehovah wishes for us to serve him in the future. Those who have a heavenly hope may serve on earth, and those with an earthly hope may serve in heaven for all we know.
(Matthew 8:11) 11 But I tell you that many from east and west will come and recline at the table with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom of the heavens;
All we really know is that our love for Jehovah should motivate us; our faith in him and the gift of Jesus' sacrifice should motivate us to do what is right. But doing what is right is not a means of gaining righteousness in the context of Romans. In fact, we can't do anything to gain righteousness, and only Jehovah and Christ "bring" us to righteousness in the sense that Romans speaks about. It's a condition that we are freely granted (through faith) such that we can approach the righteous heavens in prayer.
This is not about a "place" where we will serve and praise Jehovah in the future. It is about the "place" we are granted before Jehovah's throne today:
(Hebrews 4:16) Let us, then, approach the throne of undeserved kindness with freeness of speech, so that we may receive mercy and find undeserved kindness to help us at the right time.
 

Usually when we refer to the "faithful and discreet slave" parable, we are really referring to the parable of 'the faithful and the unfaithful slave' found in Matthew 24:45-51. In fact, the parable of the "faithful and discreet slave" is also found in Luke, where the expression is changed a bit to "the faithful steward, the discreet one . . . that slave."
(Luke 12:42-48) 42 And the Lord said: “Who really is the faithful steward, the discreet one, whom his master will appoint over his body of attendants to keep giving them their measure of food supplies at the proper time? 43 Happy is that slave if his master on coming finds him doing so! 44 I tell you truthfully, he will appoint him over all his belongings. 45 But if ever that slave should say in his heart, ‘My master delays coming,’ and starts to beat the male and female servants and to eat and drink and get drunk, 46 the master of that slave will come on a day that he is not expecting him and at an hour that he does not know, and he will punish him with the greatest severity and assign him a part with the unfaithful ones. 47 Then that slave who understood the will of his master but did not get ready or do what he asked will be beaten with many strokes. 48 But the one who did not understand and yet did things deserving of strokes will be beaten with few. Indeed, everyone to whom much was given, much will be demanded of him, and the one who was put in charge of much will have more than usual demanded of him.
"That slave" is given the assignment to feed the master's "body of attendants." If he obeys, he gets a promotion, and if he disobeys he is punished. This is the exact same idea as in Matthew 24, except that there are only about 15 words referring to what happens if this slave obeys and 150 words in the section about what happens if the slave disobeys. That's about 10 times as much space given to the idea of disobedience versus obedience. In Matthew it's only about 3 times as much space given to the idea of disobedience.
That might explain why the verses in Matthew are referenced so much more often in Watch Tower publications and talks. The Watchtower has, of course, minimized the idea of any potential disobedience:
*** w13 7/15 p. 24 “Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?” ***
Was Jesus foretelling that there would be an evil slave class in the last days? No. Granted, some individuals have manifested a spirit similar to that of the evil slave described by Jesus. We would call them apostates, whether they were of the anointed or of the “great crowd.” (Rev. 7:9) But such ones do not make up an evil slave class. Jesus did not say that he would appoint an evil slave. His words here are actually a warning directed to the faithful and discreet slave.
  Notice that Jesus introduces the warning with the words “if ever.” One scholar says that in the Greek text, this passage “for all practical purposes is a hypothetical condition.”
This is an adjustment to the doctrine held just up until the change in 2013. Prior to the quote above (originally presented at the Annual Meeting in 2012) the idea about the evil slave was just the opposite: that the "evil slave" came directly from the ranks of the "faithful slave."
*** w04 3/1 p. 13 pars. 2-4 ‘The Faithful Slave’ Passes the Test! ***
The expression “that evil slave” draws our attention to Jesus’ preceding words about the faithful and discreet slave. Yes, the “evil slave” came from the ranks of the faithful slave. How?
3 Before 1914, many members of the faithful slave class had high hopes of meeting with the Bridegroom in heaven that year, but their hopes were not fulfilled. As a result of this and other developments, many were disappointed and a few became embittered. Some of these turned to ‘beating’ their former brothers verbally and consorting with “confirmed drunkards,” religious groups of Christendom.—Isaiah 28:1-3; 32:6.
4 These former Christians came to be identified as the “evil slave,” and Jesus punished them with “the greatest severity.” How? He rejected them, and they lost out on their heavenly hope. They were not, however, immediately destroyed. They first had to endure a period of weeping and gnashing of teeth in “the darkness outside” the Christian congregation. (Matthew 8:12) Since those early days, a few other anointed individuals have shown a similar bad spirit, identifying themselves with the “evil slave.” Some of the “other sheep” have imitated their unfaithfulness. (John 10:16)
Now, of course, the "faithful slave" is made to be the equivalent of the Governing Body since 1919. (The Governing Body has only existed in its current form since the early to mid-1970s.) For this reason, evidently, it would no longer be appropriate to consider or expect that the evil slave might come from the ranks of the Governing Body. Continuing this teaching would likely create a measure of suspicion and questioning of the Governing Body itself.

Usually when we refer to the "faithful and discreet slave" parable, we are really referring to the parable of 'the faithful and the unfaithful slave' found in Matthew 24:45-51. In fact, the parable of the "faithful and discreet slave" is also found in Luke, where the expression is changed a bit to "the faithful steward, the discreet one . . . that slave."
(Luke 12:42-48) 42 And the Lord said: “Who really is the faithful steward, the discreet one, whom his master will appoint over his body of attendants to keep giving them their measure of food supplies at the proper time? 43 Happy is that slave if his master on coming finds him doing so! 44 I tell you truthfully, he will appoint him over all his belongings. 45 But if ever that slave should say in his heart, ‘My master delays coming,’ and starts to beat the male and female servants and to eat and drink and get drunk, 46 the master of that slave will come on a day that he is not expecting him and at an hour that he does not know, and he will punish him with the greatest severity and assign him a part with the unfaithful ones. 47 Then that slave who understood the will of his master but did not get ready or do what he asked will be beaten with many strokes. 48 But the one who did not understand and yet did things deserving of strokes will be beaten with few. Indeed, everyone to whom much was given, much will be demanded of him, and the one who was put in charge of much will have more than usual demanded of him.
"That slave" is given the assignment to feed the master's "body of attendants." If he obeys, he gets a promotion, and if he disobeys he is punished. This is the exact same idea as in Matthew 24, except that there are only about 15 words referring to what happens if this slave obeys and 150 words in the section about what happens if the slave disobeys. That's about 10 times as much space given to the idea of disobedience versus obedience. In Matthew it's only about 3 times as much space given to the idea of disobedience.
That might explain why the verses in Matthew are referenced so much more often in Watch Tower publications and talks. The Watchtower has, of course, minimized the idea of any potential disobedience:
*** w13 7/15 p. 24 “Who Really Is the Faithful and Discreet Slave?” ***
Was Jesus foretelling that there would be an evil slave class in the last days? No. Granted, some individuals have manifested a spirit similar to that of the evil slave described by Jesus. We would call them apostates, whether they were of the anointed or of the “great crowd.” (Rev. 7:9) But such ones do not make up an evil slave class. Jesus did not say that he would appoint an evil slave. His words here are actually a warning directed to the faithful and discreet slave.
  Notice that Jesus introduces the warning with the words “if ever.” One scholar says that in the Greek text, this passage “for all practical purposes is a hypothetical condition.”
This is an adjustment to the doctrine held just up until the change in 2013. Prior to the quote above (originally presented at the Annual Meeting in 2012) the idea about the evil slave was just the opposite: that the "evil slave" came directly from the ranks of the "faithful slave."
*** w04 3/1 p. 13 pars. 2-4 ‘The Faithful Slave’ Passes the Test! ***
The expression “that evil slave” draws our attention to Jesus’ preceding words about the faithful and discreet slave. Yes, the “evil slave” came from the ranks of the faithful slave. How?
3 Before 1914, many members of the faithful slave class had high hopes of meeting with the Bridegroom in heaven that year, but their hopes were not fulfilled. As a result of this and other developments, many were disappointed and a few became embittered. Some of these turned to ‘beating’ their former brothers verbally and consorting with “confirmed drunkards,” religious groups of Christendom.—Isaiah 28:1-3; 32:6.
4 These former Christians came to be identified as the “evil slave,” and Jesus punished them with “the greatest severity.” How? He rejected them, and they lost out on their heavenly hope. They were not, however, immediately destroyed. They first had to endure a period of weeping and gnashing of teeth in “the darkness outside” the Christian congregation. (Matthew 8:12) Since those early days, a few other anointed individuals have shown a similar bad spirit, identifying themselves with the “evil slave.” Some of the “other sheep” have imitated their unfaithfulness. (John 10:16)
Now, of course, the "faithful slave" is made to be the equivalent of the Governing Body since 1919. (The Governing Body has only existed in its current form since the early to mid-1970s.) For this reason, evidently, it would no longer be appropriate to consider or expect that the evil slave might come from the ranks of the Governing Body. Continuing this teaching would likely create a measure of suspicion and questioning of the Governing Body itself.

I was trying to come up with the most controversial question that Witnesses might ever have to face. This one might appear silly at first, but it also might draw out some of the same controversies that we most often attempt to avoid.
The "Millions" Campaign ran from about 1918 to 1925. It was the primary focus of the Watch Tower sponsored public talks,billboards, assemblies, books and booklets publications from during those years. The primary slogan and talk title was called "Millions Now Living Will Never Die."
Because it started in 1918, and it made a very specific prediction, it seems that as of some time earlier this year, this prediction can no longer come true under any possible circumstances or calculations.
This brings up multiple questions:
Is there any way to interpret the title (slogan) in any way so that it could still turn out to be true? Is the Watchtower, or Watch Tower Society or "Governing Body" or "Faithful and Discreet Slave" always immune from the charge of "false prophecy" no matter what is published and promoted? Is there anything that could ever be said or published that could actually fall into the category of false prophecy? Might it reflect poorly on the heart condition (motivation) of any persons who were drawn to learn more and who then converted to the Bible Students during the period from 1919 to 1925? Is it possible that the Governing Body's claim that the Governing Body was appointed as the "faithful and discreet slave" in 1919 is presumptuous? Indiscreet? Haughty? Self-serving? Or is it possible that the date is just a bit too early? Perhaps 1919 was not an appropriate time? Even if 1914 was the start of the Kingdom, does it have to be 5 years later (1919) that the "slave" was appointed? Why not 6 years, or 16 years? Does it matter? Isn't it just as possible that, even if this was a false prophecy, that the Watch Tower's Governing Body was still appointed as the "faithful and discreet slave" either with the idea that this was not a serious prediction, or it wasn't really a prophecy, or perhaps that Jehovah and Christ Jesus could still see the heart (desire, goal, motivation) of these brothers, and knew that a cleansing operation would produce the correct outcome in time? Is it possible that Jehovah and Jesus approved of this type of promotion of the good news because it was a way to promote the other core doctrines of truth which have not changed much at all through the years? Is it possible that this method of drawing in converts to the faith was just a temporary way to cut through the noise of so many competing voices crying out for attention?

Me, too.
 
I wasn't suggesting that it was haughtiness or self-serving just to use the slogan. (Although that could be true, too.) I was thinking that it could be an indication of haughtiness in several ways:
It's fine to try to fill in the blanks, but why is it necessary to call your current solution and claim that it is the one that is proven to be correct by all the facts and evidence. In the case of the MILLIONS campaign, we made "sure" predictions for 1925 with "incontrovertible proofs." They were claimed to be  even more sure than 1914. Now, it's fine and appropriate to share this knowledge and explain why we believe it is Biblically supported. But it seems quite different (and haughty) to claim that our explanation is the explanation, and that others need to believe it, too. This seems especially odd if we had just failed at 100% of the verifiable predictions for 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, 1915, and 1918. If the "need to finally get one right" influenced the predictions for 1925 then that is also a form of haughtiness.
There is a humble way to explain prophecy and interpretation and a haughty way. There seems to be only one reason that someone says something will happen instead of being discreet and saying that if our understanding is correct, such-and-such may happen. (You might remember that this change from "may" to "will" was exactly what happened with the Millions campaign slogan.)
But there is another way that haughtiness can enter the picture. What if we, personally, kept telling people about our résumé  but always hid or shifted away from anything embarrassing. That's wrong, but probably normal, and there is no reason to shame ourselves. But what if we also made incorrect claims about our history, admitting some things as they happened but making other things sound better than they really were? No matter what the purpose, this is dishonest, but if we keep repeating the history over and over, and focusing on the exaggerated or untrue portions, then it is likely because we want to boost our own ego. (There are about a dozen times, for example, when we have published a "false" claim about what we had predicted for the year 1914, and at least another dozen times, when we published a misleading claim.)
 

I agree. Although there were a couple articles around 1993 and after that came pretty close. I'll have to look them up later.
Of course. I thought we already established agreement on that. Using the agreed-upon definition you provided earlier, I think we can easily establish that Jehovah's Witnesses, or at very least the associated "slave" responsible for interpreting doctrine, easily fits the definition of "one through whom divine will and purpose are made known" which, on its own, is an entirely valid definition of a prophet. Even the second, more traditional definition, fits because of our claim that we are no ordinary announcers, that we have carry a specially revealed message ("good news") for these last days since 1914, and that in this sense we are spokesmen for God, 'men of God,' carrying his inspired message to others.
Therefore the activities befitting the carrying of such warnings, revelations, divine messages, assurances, teachings and pronouncements should be treated as "prophecies."  Perhaps you didn't actually agree with that definition. Or perhaps you only believe that "false prophets" can exist from any source, composite or not, where the teachings and pronouncements serve a false purpose. I assumed that if we can have false prophets, we can have false prophecies, and I also assumed that there was an unavoidable implication through the definition, that true prophets could therefore still exist. I believe that in many ways, the Witnesses have served as true prophets to the world. Our stance on involvement in nationalistic wars, for example. Our stance on trusting in the League of Nations or the United Nations as the only way to peace, for example. Although the interpretation is not so rigid, the idea seems not to have been completely abandoned. I'll check some recent assembly notes and a couple of articles that are from 10 to 20 years back.
Yes. It seems like a harsh connotation. But I don't know how fair it is to put that label on others if we are not willing to take similar responsibility for our own words and proclamations. I know I don't need to quote the scriptures about justice and judgment that form the foundation for this idea. New study book notwithstanding, behind this entire discussion was the motivation that we do all we can to avoid creating another situation that could result in stumbling blocks that have been presented in the past. Fortunately, the problem could be far enough off into the future not to matter, we hope, but the issues surrounding the re-definition of "this generation," for example, are already building towards a similar time limitation. Brother Splane even came up with a new "Chart of the Ages" to explain it.
 

I believe that these were the very reasons that Jehovah's witnesses have identified themselves as a "prophet."
Either separately or combined, both the statements are considered valid reasons to identify the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses as a "prophet." It's not just the predictions, therefore, but even our work in making known the divine will and purpose that is therefore involved, and should be scrutinized carefully when we say that we are no ordinary announcers, but are spokesmen for God, speaking in Jehovah's name, with his inspired message. 
That was the same point made in the 1972 Watchtower, combined with the related "Ezekiel" book about how the nations would know that a prophet called Jehovah's Witnesses was among them. (This is the favorite article quoted to us, because the wording is very direct, but there are plenty of others.)
*** w72 4/1 p. 197 ‘They Shall Know that a Prophet Was Among Them’ ***
‘They Shall Know that a Prophet Was Among Them’
. . .
A third way of coming to know Jehovah God is through his representatives. In ancient times he sent prophets as his special messengers. While these men foretold things to come, they also served the people by telling them of God’s will for them at that time, often also warning them of dangers and calamities. . . . So, does Jehovah have a prophet to help them, to warn them of dangers and to declare things to come?
IDENTIFYING THE “PROPHET”
These questions can be answered in the affirmative. Who is this prophet?. . . He had a “prophet” to warn them. This “prophet” was not one man, but was a body of men and women. It was the small group of footstep followers of Jesus Christ, known at that time as International Bible Students. Today they are known as Jehovah’s Christian witnesses. They are still proclaiming a warning, and have been joined and assisted in their commissioned work by hundreds of thousands of persons who have listened to their message with belief.
Of course, it is easy to say that this group acts as a “prophet” of God. It is another thing to prove it. The only way that this can be done is to review the record. What does it show?
I think you are right that we wish to avoid the problem of a true prophet being accused of making false prophecies. It's also quite possible that the 1972 quote above was worded so clearly because we wanted to focus on the designation of "prophet" especially during the peak era of the predictions about what the 1970's would bring, and warnings about the remaining months of this system. But even if that was not the reason, we wanted the designation of prophet.
I'm not sure if that means you think that we are no longer to see ourselves as prophets. I don't ever recall the above teachings being changed, which typically means that we are to accept it as the truth, until it's changed. Perhaps you are saying that even if we do consider ourselves to be prophets, we can never be held to be accountable as "false" prophets because we do not claim to be divinely inspired. Of course, I am not promoting the idea that we are, or have ever been, "false prophets." I'm more concerned with whether we should be more honest about admitting that we have delivered "false prophecies." One or more false prophecies should not turn us into a false prophet. These false predictions are only a small part of the overall purpose of our work as a prophet. Jonah, for example, got off-track as a prophet, but after being humbled, he was right back on track.
I should probably note that this particular quote from 1972 was undoubtedly from an anointed member of the Watchtower Society. The same brother who wrote the Ezekiel book. I think we both know who this was. One giveaway is that this brother often kept hints in his writing that he had not accepted that the "other sheep" were "Jehovah's witnesses." That was still a special designation for the anointed, especially in the context of types and antitypes where prophetic work was involved. I only say that because I believe he considered only the spirit-anointed Jehovah's witnesses to be prophets and the "other sheep" to be those who have joined and assisted them: "Today they are known as Jehovah’s Christian witnesses. They are still proclaiming a warning, and have been joined and assisted in their commissioned work by hundreds of thousands of persons who have listened to their message with belief." There are additional Watchtower quotes that indicate that the "anointed" were considered to be prophets. I mention this because I kept using the term "us" and "we" and I do not consider profess to be "anointed." But it also might speak to the idea of the spirit-anointed to deliver the spirit-inspired Biblical message and warning through a spirit-directed organization. The technicality that they are not themselves "divinely inspired" might therefore be a distinction without a distinction.
Again, this post will go on too long if I attempt to comment on all the related Watchtower statements. So back to the point. After doing a lot of research, I'm concerned that we could be much more honest about our history, or else we could just ignore it altogether. I like that we bring up our WTS history a lot in the publications, because I've been a history nerd since 1977. But we shouldn't bring it up just to spin it a certain way, or make claims that aren't true. This exposes us to unnecessary ridicule because the truth about history is so much easier to check these days. I am concerned that such re-writing of history is a sign of ego, haughtiness, presumptuousness, when humility and discretion have a much higher value in Jehovah's eyes.

That's a common answer because we can attach a scripture to it. But we have called others false prophets without any concern over whether or not something was said in Jehovah's name. The context of that same quote from 1981 also discusses religious false prophets and makes the point that all religions are "false prophets" except one.
*** g81 12/8 p. 14 Do You Recognize the Meaning of What You See? ***
. . . all of today’s religious groups outside this one true faith must, according to this standard, be counterfeits, composite “false prophets.”
I think there was also a hint as to the official response an article from 1968.
*** g68 10/8 p. 23 A Time to Lift Up Your Head in Confident Hope *** True, there have been those in times past who predicted an "end to the world," even announcing a specific date. Yet nothing happened. The "end" did not come. They were guilty of false prophesying. Why? What was missing? Missing from such people were God's truths and the evidence that he was guiding and using them.
That idea has the effect, perhaps, of exonerating us from any charge of false prophesying no matter what was ever said because Jehovah's Witnesses always have "God's truths and the evidence that he was guiding and using them." So that would be true even if the Watch Tower Society had predicted an "end to the world" and were "even announcing a specific date." And of course, this is exactly what we were doing in those years. Guilty on both counts. Both in 1914 and 1925, at least. One could argue that we should put quotation marks around end of the world, but the article did that, too. One could argue that we didn't include the month and day, but a year is pretty specific in the overall scheme of things. We don't have a problem with the fact that Daniel's "70 weeks" prophecy pointed to a specific year.  
I was about to respond to Janice with another point that I will place here. I don't have a problem with the fact that we, as an organization were "guilty" of false prophesying. Jehovah's prophets in the past have been guilty of false prophecy and an explanation was given (the prophets of Jehovah around Ahab, except for Micaiah). Perhaps even that explanation in 1 Kings 22 about God sending a lying spirit was really a roundabout way of explaining that these prophets succumbed to wishful thinking (desire to please the king) and therefore the angel was able to "fool" them. That would be more consistent with James' explanation:
(James 1:13, 14) . . .For with evil things God cannot be tried, nor does he himself try anyone. 14 But each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire.
Janice also mentioned the expectations concerning the author of the book we traditionally refer to as the book of John. Might have been their misunderstanding of expressions like:
(John 11:26) . . and everyone who is living and exercises faith in me will never die at all.. . .
(John 8:51)  Most truly I say to you, if anyone observes my word, he will never see death at all.
(Judge* 19 18-25)  Millions now living will never die.
*I half-expected that someone might bring up those verses in defense of the "Millions" campaign, even if they were not related to the original content of the campaign.
But my point again was that we have nothing to fear from honesty about our past teachings. Just being humble and admitting what happened would take some of the "sting" and defensiveness out the equation whenever someone made the accusation.
We often seem to treat our history as so sacrosanct, that we think we can't be completely honest and open about it. I find this to be quite different from the way, for example, that the Bible treats the history of the first Kings, Saul, David, Solomon, the crisis resulting in the split between Israel and Judah, the ups and downs along the way. We don't say that Saul or David or Solomon were not "anointed" because of the errors and even atrocities they committed. Some of their errors were due to the times they lived in and the influences around them, and some were completely inexcusable from any perspective. But the Bible is honest about it, and we appreciate the humility. And it doesn't change a thing about God's love for them, and his ability to get his work accomplished.

LOL!
Best answer I've ever seen to this question.
My father, originally from Chicago, has a photograph of the sign mentioned in the following experience. They didn't want it for the Proclaimer's book but it had been mentioned in the 1975 Yearbook.
*** yb75 p. 127 Part 2—United States of America ***
Recalling the effect of the “Millions Campaign,” Rufus Chappell writes: “We had offered the publication Millions Now Living Will Never Die in and around Zion [Illinois] and the results were of interest. I remember a large, flashing electric sign over the Waukegan Dry Cleaners building on North Sheridan Road about five miles from Zion, which said, ‘We Dye for the Millions Now Living Who Will Never Die.’ This was a very popular subject at that time, and many people had questioned the phrase and learned the truth from this publication.”
We are all loathe to call the slogan a false prophecy. But that is my point. If someone else had said it, I think it would definitely be one. And, of course, we're only focusing on the slogan itself here. If we were to look at the set of teachings that made up the talks and the publications behind the slogan, we would find dozens of "false teachings" and "false prophecies." It's just that we can't use the term "false prophecy" or even "false teaching" when referring to our past teachings and predictions that turned out not to be true.
Still, we have no problem finding quotes from the older publications that spoke of Russell and even Rutherford as "prophets" in this era. But is it the course of humility or a course of pride to speak of the false teachings of others, but never admit that we could have been guilty of a "false" teaching or a "false" prophecy? I know it's OK to say that a teaching or prediction was "mistaken," or that it was a "old light," or a previous teaching before the "light got brighter," or that it was "the right thing expected at the wrong time" or the "wrong thing expected at the right time." We might even say that it was "untrue." But, for many decades now, we can never bring ourselves to admit that we were teaching a "false" teaching.  We are still quick to pin that label on others though:
*** g81 12/8 p. 14 Do You Recognize the Meaning of What You See? ***
Political leaders often end up being “false prophets” unable to fulfill their promises. Of course, not every ruler turns out to be a “Hitler,” whose promised “thousand-year reich” proved to be a disastrous 12 years of misrule. The danger that one will be a “false prophet” increases, however, in direct proportion to their number. And that number is increasing—rapidly.
A very prominent political “prophet” of our present century was the League of Nations, formed in 1919. It foretold a world of lasting peace. But World War II unceremoniously dumped it into a pit of inactivity. It was replaced in 1945 by the United Nations organization, which doubtless is trying to prevent the outbreak of an atomic World War III. But has it truly ‘maintained international peace and security,’ as its charter prophesied?
It's curious too that it was in 1919 that the Watchtower was one of first organizations to speak about the League of Nations as if it was a political expression of the kingdom of God on earth. When we changed our view on that, just a few months later, we spoke of other religions as being guilty as false prophets for having held that same view.
 

There are complex ways of showing this, but the simplest is found on page 5 of this publication:
https://www.census.gov/prod/2014pubs/p25-1140.pdf
You can multiply by a factor of about 22 to 24 to extrapolate US data for the entire world. But you don't really need to do that. You can also work from estimates such as this one (and then allow for the possibility of error and level of uncertainty):
Under the topic of "Centenarian," Wikipedia quotes sources to show that ". . . thus, in 2012, the UN estimated there to be only 316,600 centenarians worldwide." Because the campaign started in 1918, you actually have to account for 98 and 99 year-olds, in addition to everyone 100 and over.
The link above shows a chart on page 5, and the numbers behind it can be downloaded from the Census Bureau's site. If you look carefully at it, you can see that there are about as many people in the 98 and 99 years-old combined group as there are in the 100+ group. That means that you could double the number of centenarians in the world to get a fairly accurate number of those who are 98 and above. To be safe you should use 2.5 as a factor instead of 2 even though this will give you a much higher number than reality. You can check how data from other countries compares to the U.S. in several places online. (References available upon request.)
What this means is that you could take the 316,600 number from 2012, and adjust it upward towards 400,000 to over-compensate for the higher number of people who are expected to survive into that group as people continue to live longer.  The same chart shows the expectation for the year 2030 and we are already nearly 5 out of the 18 years "into" that increase that the chart shows as the expectation. 400,000 times 2.5 is 1.2 million.
1.2 million is less than the 2 million minimum that would be needed for the Milions prediction to come true, even if all of those 1.2 million were to survive Armageddon.

I was trying to come up with the most controversial question that Witnesses might ever have to face. This one might appear silly at first, but it also might draw out some of the same controversies that we most often attempt to avoid.
The "Millions" Campaign ran from about 1918 to 1925. It was the primary focus of the Watch Tower sponsored public talks,billboards, assemblies, books and booklets publications from during those years. The primary slogan and talk title was called "Millions Now Living Will Never Die."
Because it started in 1918, and it made a very specific prediction, it seems that as of some time earlier this year, this prediction can no longer come true under any possible circumstances or calculations.
This brings up multiple questions:
Is there any way to interpret the title (slogan) in any way so that it could still turn out to be true? Is the Watchtower, or Watch Tower Society or "Governing Body" or "Faithful and Discreet Slave" always immune from the charge of "false prophecy" no matter what is published and promoted? Is there anything that could ever be said or published that could actually fall into the category of false prophecy? Might it reflect poorly on the heart condition (motivation) of any persons who were drawn to learn more and who then converted to the Bible Students during the period from 1919 to 1925? Is it possible that the Governing Body's claim that the Governing Body was appointed as the "faithful and discreet slave" in 1919 is presumptuous? Indiscreet? Haughty? Self-serving? Or is it possible that the date is just a bit too early? Perhaps 1919 was not an appropriate time? Even if 1914 was the start of the Kingdom, does it have to be 5 years later (1919) that the "slave" was appointed? Why not 6 years, or 16 years? Does it matter? Isn't it just as possible that, even if this was a false prophecy, that the Watch Tower's Governing Body was still appointed as the "faithful and discreet slave" either with the idea that this was not a serious prediction, or it wasn't really a prophecy, or perhaps that Jehovah and Christ Jesus could still see the heart (desire, goal, motivation) of these brothers, and knew that a cleansing operation would produce the correct outcome in time? Is it possible that Jehovah and Jesus approved of this type of promotion of the good news because it was a way to promote the other core doctrines of truth which have not changed much at all through the years? Is it possible that this method of drawing in converts to the faith was just a temporary way to cut through the noise of so many competing voices crying out for attention?

I would agree. And I think this is more important than might think. Russell may have envisioned his associates to be from a very gentlemanly class, and appeared most comfortable around well-spoken, soft-spoken, deeply religious persons. In some ways he thought of the Bride class as very elite. Note what he anticipated in his first major publication, a 64 page booklet, "Object and Manner" (p.42):
"No; the "little flock," -- the bride -- is a very select company. There will be so few taken from the present generation that they will not be much missed."
The great crowd were a second-class group, and for a while were treated as second-class citizens, often criticized and sometimes insulted and always considered less spiritually-minded. But these were obviously humble persons who were sure of the primary truths and the rationality of the Watchtower's message. But they felt less worthy. (Even the context of the quote above reminded them that the 144,000 were granted their white robes but that the great crowd had to wash them.)  Of course, at the time -- and for the next 58 years -- they were still considered anointed, and were still going to heaven, just not as part of Christ's Bride. But their sense of humility and unworthiness helped them to understand and accept that earthly Paradise was held out for them as the most appropriate hope. For so many years, the teaching was that all Christians would be in heaven, and non-Christians would be resurrected to the earth. The quickness with which the change came was amazing, and is one of the reasons this doctrine is so often associated with "lightning" and "flashes of light."
*** w85 3/1 p. 14 par. 12 Shedding Forth Light Amidst Earth’s Gloom ***
These flashes of prophetic light prepared the ground for the historic discourse on “The Great Multitude,” given May 31, 1935, by the president of the Watch Tower Society, J. F. Rutherford, at the Washington, D.C., convention of Jehovah’s Witnesses. What a revelation of divine truth that was!
*** w92 3/1 pp. 20-21 par. 17 The Day to Remember ***
The brilliant flashes of spiritual light that came through The Watchtower in the 1920’s and 1930’s indicate that the gathering of the remnant of anointed ones was practically completed during that period. Those ‘washing their robes and making them white in the blood of the Lamb’ since then have a different joyful hope.
*** w95 5/15 p. 20 par. 18 Part 1—Flashes of Light—Great and Small ***
In 1935 a bright flash of light revealed that the great crowd mentioned at Revelation 7:9-17 was not a secondary heavenly class. It had been thought that the ones mentioned in those verses were some of the anointed who had not been fully faithful
*** re chap. 20 p. 125 par. 17 A Multitudinous Great Crowd ***
They were quick to appreciate the dazzling flash of divine light that emblazoned the theocratic firmament in 1935, at Jehovah’s due time.
And many more!
 

While at Bethel my table head shared a lot of really negative stories about Brother Rutherford. I had no idea if they were correct at the time, but I listened carefully to a lot of other brothers who knew Rutherford, and I even recorded several hours of interviews with older Bethelites and some of them volunteered information about him. These tapes were for use when I traveled to other congregations to give public talks, because they made giving a public talk very easy. I had a lot of material that I could not use without editing because two of them gave a much more negative view than the publications give. The brothers and sister interviewed were F.W.Franz, Grace DeCecca, Maxwell Friend, Sam Friend, and Bert Schroeder.
 
But another side of Rutherford also shows up, not just in the interviews, but also in his own speeches and writing. Most of the brothers credit Rutherford as the one who promoted the changes made to doctrines single-handedly. He was fearless when he thought he was right. There were dozens of doctrinal changes made between 1927 and 1931, and a large number of those who were active in the organization decided to leave during that time period. But I believe that while he lost a majority for a while, he had an attitude that one brother likened to Judge Gideon, his all-time favorite Bible character. It didn't matter how many persons left the organization, if the change was the right thing to do. (Gideon went from 32,000 to 10,000 and after a final test ended up with only 300 faithful with whom he would fight the battle against Midian.)
 
With that in mind he wanted to root out "creature worship" from the organization. This was his word for the "cult of Pastor Russell" wherein people wanted to dress like him, look like him, talk like him, carry his picture, name their kids after him, etc. Rutherford did not want such a thing for himself, and knew he was the person with the "faith" to get rid of it, even if it meant the majority of Bible Students would leave. It was in effect, the "sword of Jehovah and Rutherford."
 
Also, there were very few progressive changes under Russell. Very early on they had already set a solid doctrinal course when it came to Trinity, Hell-fire, Immortal Soul, Ransom, Restitution, Salvation, Morality, Christian Character, but only a very few changes, except where these were forced upon them in the area of chronology. Rutherford, from the start, turned the Bible Students into a progressive organization that came to expect change, and that very soon would constantly looked forward positively to more changes. Naturally, he got a few things wrong, but I believe a majority of the changes reflected the Bible more accurately.
 
For example, if we were to solely give Rutherford the credit for being the author of these changes, we'd have to admit that he got the following right:
Getting rid of Pyramidology. Getting rid of Creature Worship Getting rid of almost all the complexities and methodologies of the old Barbour/Second Adventist chronology Ultimately turning a system that included 539 C.E. (not BCE) 1799, 1844, 1859, 1873, 1874, 1878, 1881, 1910, 1914, and 1915 into a simpler system that still included most of those dates but focused almost exclusively on just 3 or 4 dates. He put the organization on a road to a more consistent political neutrality including the view that flag salute was a form of idolatry helped true Christians see the folly of involvement in divisive wars and social movements helped Christians recognize political and religious hypocrisy He pushed for legal freedom of speech, and freedom of religion before the world was even ready for it, and these battles were hard-won. He also prompted true Christians seriously consider the relationship between national and religious holidays and their unchristian origins. He promoted the wider use of Jehovah's name Didn't hold back from using the "Old Testament" for life lessons Set an example as a strong personality, full of strong commitment, without mincing words, or pulling punches Prepared the congregations for persecution so that they were not surprised and not weakened Look at how well JWs handled persecution in many countries, not just Germany under Hitler Organized a very efficient organization in terms of ability to publicize and mobilize with the message Made use of all available technologies and venues to spread the word to large assemblies and audiences Organized for growth, envisioned and prepared for expansion Promoted practical, active Christian conduct and morality, but not the mere, quiet internalized form of worship Promoted a purpose and identity that helps Witnesses produce an international brotherhood that transcend class, nationality, and race. Lots of doctrinal specifics are left out to avoid too many off-topic doctrinal discussions, but even where disagreement exists, the bulk of most publications drove more attention to the Bible, Jesus, Jehovah, and Bible characters that we could learn from as examples in our daily lives  
And from the perspective of "executive leadership" he was both serious and successful with these changes. The numbers he lost from Russell's time were gained back again and multiplied a couple of times over before Rutherford died. Outsiders have been impressed with the levels of activity, and participation, and therefore the levels of growth and conversion over the years. Ultimately, a very strong and powerful organization has been built that rivals the Mormons and the Seventh Day Adventists in terms of its current size, rate of growth and stability. And those religions, for the most part, had a bit of a head start in the 19th century. It outpaces most other religions in terms of publications distributed internally, and definitely outpaces every religion when it comes to publications distributed externally. Most of the foundation for the current organization was made workable under Rutherford's watch. This has created an excellent foundation for an international brotherhood where people show love and generosity and good works toward one another and which continues to bring teachings into closer harmony with the Bible.
 

(Colossians 2:16) 16 Therefore, do not let anyone judge you about what you eat and drink or about the observance of a festival or of the new moon or of a sabbath.
I think that this would mean that even a Christian, at least in the first century, should not feel too badly about celebrating Chanukkah with their family, assuming their family is steeped in Jewish tradition and they do not wish to offend them, or actually believe themselves that there was still some value to the Jewish tradition that should be respected.
I don't apply this to Christmas in any way, but at least I don't think it means we need to harshly judge those persons who believe Christmas is wonderful time to enjoy family, food and gifts, etc.
 

There are a couple of at least neutral examples of dogs, although the vast majority are very negative. Pigs fare a little worse.
Another example is the fact that an indoor bathroom is only mentioned as being used by a pagan, and the one time it was mentioned, someone was murdered there.
(Judges 3:20-25) 20 And Eʹhud came to him as he was sitting in his cool roof chamber that he had to himself. And Eʹhud went on to say: “A word of God I have for you.” At that he rose up from his throne. 21 Then Eʹhud thrust in his left hand and took the sword off his right thigh and plunged it into his belly. 22 And the handle kept going in also after the blade so that the fat closed in over the blade, for he did not draw the sword out of his belly, and the fecal matter began to come out. 23 And Eʹhud proceeded to go out through the air hole, but he closed the doors of the roof chamber behind him and locked them. 24 And he himself went out. And his servants came and began looking, and there the doors of the roof chamber were locked. So they said: “He is just easing nature in the cool interior room.” 25 And they kept waiting until they were ashamed, and, look! there was no one opening the doors of the roof chamber. At this they took the key and opened them, and, look! their lord was fallen to the earth dead!
Christians should therefore avoid indoor bathrooms.

@Nicole @John Houston
BTW, it is very common for Jehovah's Witnesses and many other religious people to get involved in MLM (multi-level marketing) which can be the same as "pyramid marketing" and many types of "network marketing." One reason it is attractive is that people in churches (and Kingdom Halls) and extended families have access to a quick "layer" of family, friends and acquaintances who can be expected to "share the wealth" while "enriching" the primary drivers of MLM even more.
Personally, I believe (maybe wrongly) that MLM is a kind of a religion. There will be some who make enough money to be the "examples" of leaders that others will want to follow. It is almost always less sustainable than it appears, because optimism is preached as a necessary ingredient for success. Therefore, adherents to the religion of MLM are constantly dismissing the failures of some as merely a temporary anomaly, due to their temporary inability to give as much to the MLM effort that should be required. If you fail, you probably just need to allow yourself to invest more into it, or you need to feel guilty that you gave too much emphasis on a 'get rich quick' mentality because you expected too much, too quickly, without putting enough real practical effort behind it. In other words, your own guilt can drive you further into losing money, although you still have the examples that are always given all the attention and fanfare at MLM meetings. It is apostasy to look into the MLM doctrines too deeply where you will notice that the math/evidence does not support sustainability at all the levels of marketing that you will be trying to convert people to join. The religious beliefs in MLM make it continue to work for more years than the math can actually support, and those extra years provide more time to find just enough working, positive examples because money blinds the minds of the believers.
Hope no one is offended by my views on it. They could be wrong, but I have seen people lose so much money over these "schemes." And because it's based on a positive, optimistic "religion" that everyone wants to believe in, those who fail at one type of pyramid scheme are almost always happy to join a new one that is marketed as something very different than the last one that failed for them. And they are bound to repeat their sins.  

I think MMM in this case refers specifically to Mavrodi Mondial Moneybox (MMM), right?  (aka, Mondial Mavrodial Movement and variations)
 

@Nicole @John Houston
BTW, it is very common for Jehovah's Witnesses and many other religious people to get involved in MLM (multi-level marketing) which can be the same as "pyramid marketing" and many types of "network marketing." One reason it is attractive is that people in churches (and Kingdom Halls) and extended families have access to a quick "layer" of family, friends and acquaintances who can be expected to "share the wealth" while "enriching" the primary drivers of MLM even more.
Personally, I believe (maybe wrongly) that MLM is a kind of a religion. There will be some who make enough money to be the "examples" of leaders that others will want to follow. It is almost always less sustainable than it appears, because optimism is preached as a necessary ingredient for success. Therefore, adherents to the religion of MLM are constantly dismissing the failures of some as merely a temporary anomaly, due to their temporary inability to give as much to the MLM effort that should be required. If you fail, you probably just need to allow yourself to invest more into it, or you need to feel guilty that you gave too much emphasis on a 'get rich quick' mentality because you expected too much, too quickly, without putting enough real practical effort behind it. In other words, your own guilt can drive you further into losing money, although you still have the examples that are always given all the attention and fanfare at MLM meetings. It is apostasy to look into the MLM doctrines too deeply where you will notice that the math/evidence does not support sustainability at all the levels of marketing that you will be trying to convert people to join. The religious beliefs in MLM make it continue to work for more years than the math can actually support, and those extra years provide more time to find just enough working, positive examples because money blinds the minds of the believers.
Hope no one is offended by my views on it. They could be wrong, but I have seen people lose so much money over these "schemes." And because it's based on a positive, optimistic "religion" that everyone wants to believe in, those who fail at one type of pyramid scheme are almost always happy to join a new one that is marketed as something very different than the last one that failed for them. And they are bound to repeat their sins.  

Is there evidence for this idea? I didn't see it from the picture. I've seen police come right up to the carts and show interest. I studied with a policeman and his family of 4 (who I met in door-to-door service). He and his wife were baptized together, and the children about 10 years later.

In the 1970's, we were still using blue binders with 24 "spokes" to collect the magazines, but bound volumes were being printed. 
I remember that it was long after I was baptized that I even noticed that Jesus (in Matt 5:5) was actually quoting Psalm 37 when he said the meek would inherit the earth. Today, I think there is much less emphasis on nit-picking whether a verse had to be specially applied to the anointed before we could speak about a general application to the "other sheep." I don't think anyone would say anything if you said that Jesus was speaking to people who would inherit the earth by living on it forever. I remember an article that I'm looking for now where David was originally applying the verse to the ideal situation with the Kingdom of Israel wherein they would continue to inhabit the promised land forever, and therefore inherit the earth by living on it forever if they kept up their end of the Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic covenants with Jehovah. It struck me as odd that the original idea was that they would inherit it forever by living and dying on the land, for the next generation to inherit.
This matches what Eoin said about the absence of a resurrection hope.
*** w74 6/15 pp. 377-378 pars. 13-14 Serve with Eternity in View ***
13 In Psalm 37:11, 29 David wrote: “The meek ones themselves will possess the earth, . . . The righteous themselves will possess the earth, and they will reside forever upon it.” In saying this he evidently drew upon what should have been the case with regard to the Promised Land in his days and in the following generations. According to God’s covenant with Abraham, the wicked pagans who had lived in the land should be cleared out. (Gen. 15:18-21; 17:8; Deut. 7:22; Josh. 21:43-45) Thus each successive generation of righteous worshipers making up the nation of Israel could have resided on the land, the portion of the earth that God gave to them. (Deut. 30:20) We know, however, that the majority of the Israelites proved unfaithful, and so they did not carry out God’s purpose in that regard. In fact, finally God let the Assyrians and Babylonians conquer and depopulate the land temporarily.
14 What David wrote in Psalm 37, though, was also a glimmering of the prospect that Christians today can have. That David’s words had a broader, large-scale application to the Kingdom rule of the entire earth is seen in the fact that at Matthew 5:5 Jesus quoted from Psalm 37. Did Christ say that its fulfillment was all in the past? No, for he projected it into the future, saying that the ‘mild-tempered will inherit the earth.’ Yes, those mild-tempered ones who are to be with Christ in his heavenly kingdom will rule over this earth. (Rev. 5:9, 10) Jesus knew that the Kingdom would rule the earth in righteousness forever. So, the earth itself will be populated by “righteous” ones who will “reside forever upon it.” Thus, by inspiration, David had described what the finale will be when Jehovah carries out his purpose for our earth. Christians can rejoice that the things of which David saw just glimmerings, and could personally share in only by means of a future resurrection, they can experience. Those whom the Lord puts on his right hand as “sheep” have the opportunity to “reside forever” on a paradise earth governed forever from heaven.
 

@JW Insider   The  true  point  for  us  is  our  GOAL....  thats  the  WAY !  Never  mind,  when  Jehova's  day  will  come.  Thats  a  nice  sign  for  Jehovah,  we  want  love  and  serve  him  everlasting ❤  without  dates  and  any  calculating. --  ;-)

True. Note also that there is a fact that seems to keep escaping our notice: the verse, in fact, states two ideas, adding an idea that is not in the original Psalm being quoted.
Idea #1: one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years Idea #2: "and a thousand years as one day." (2 Peter 3:8) 8 However, do not let this escape your notice, beloved ones, that one day is with Jehovah as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day.
We tend to look only at Idea #2. But "Idea #1" says that what is one day to us is 365,242 days.
Therefore the "infographic" at the top could just have well have said:
 
One Day to Us is
as 1,000 years to Jehovah.
______________________
2,191,452,000 years ago
Adam and Eve appeared on the scene
and sinned .... etc....etc
_______________