Anna

To be honest @JOHN BUTLER, I just couldn't be bothered to give you a detailed reply because your reasoning is so out of whack. But here goes:
As far as I am aware there is not much difference between an error and a mistake, they are just synonyms of each other. Once you put the adjective "deliberate"  in front of any of those words, then it changes the meaning to being  ummmm....deliberate, intentional, calculated, wilful etc. And no, I do not think their errors are deliberate. To which you will no doubt say I am brainwashed. It's good to have an opinion John, it doesn't mean someone is brainwashed, to the contrary.
Sure. But ultimately it is God. 
It's still up to God to grant that, not up to the GB. You could be part of the WT/JW etc. and still be disapproved by God. Just being a part of something is no guarantee.
The WT org. didn't foretell anything new, it just repeated what the Bible already foretold.
As for moral standards, you already forgot how high they are. You don't remember if someone is found to be unrepentantly flaunting God's moral standards they are out on their ear? 
Already covered above
Your opinion 
You are reading FAR too much into this! My inconsistency has nothing to do with the intention of twisting anything. Just laziness.
1975 was speculation. To be baptized as JW to be saved is a belief. Armageddon being close is also a belief.
Sorry, can't finish. Got to go. Will carry on later.
 

Good observation and reminder. I think it's always a good idea to keep in mind the "customs" and general attitude of society in times past when judging a situation from the the perspective of the present. It explains a lot of things. For example we can see why the organization was so weary of certain things in the past, which it now accepts. (organ transplants, vaccinations, cooking with aluminium etc.....etc...) We can also better understand things in the Bible, some of which might sound positively traumatic to the "modern" mind.

I've learned it's never a good thing when I see more than 6 notifications, especially if I've been away only a few hours...

There was absolutely no intent at being clever or sly on my part. But you really show your paranoia though. Attributing intent where there was none.

Good observation and reminder. I think it's always a good idea to keep in mind the "customs" and general attitude of society in times past when judging a situation from the the perspective of the present. It explains a lot of things. For example we can see why the organization was so weary of certain things in the past, which it now accepts. (organ transplants, vaccinations, cooking with aluminium etc.....etc...) We can also better understand things in the Bible, some of which might sound positively traumatic to the "modern" mind.

I can understand what Russell was saying. In his mind, he was probably thinking that he made the Bible more readable and understandable. And that as a result it would stick better in people’s minds. I feel his motive was genuine. But that does not mean that his statements were not presumptuous and dangerous. The danger is that as a result many will fixate themselves on every utterance of this “prophet” at the cost of actually checking the Bible itself. Not only that, but gradually people will take what this “prophet” says as gospel truth, no matter what it is, without checking or without a wait and see attitude. And this situation we find ourselves in today. I posted an example of the resulting hysteria above.

This is very true and there is a perfect example of how "obsessed" some can become. Just the other day I noticed a thread on a JW only chat forum, regarding the latest WT study articles (October 2019). There had been a glitch on the jw.library app and only the questions to the articles appeared. (It didn't help that some of those questions were quite provocative). The speculation among the friends was getting so out of hand, so much so that one brother was compelled to make this comment in answer to someone who intelligently remarked that this was obviously just a glitch:


It has to be remembered though that these 30 or so brothers and sisters who make batshit (pardon the expression) crazy comments do not necessarily represent the whole worldwide brotherhood, although maybe it could indicate that on average 2 out if 30 are reasonable, and it appears that 14 of them agreed with the ridiculousness of it once they actually thought about it, and 3 saw the funny side of it.
This whole thread showed how out of hand the friends get with their immature thinking because after the glitch was repaired, and the whole articles appeared, they carried on undeterred in their craziness!
P.S. The WT in question: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-october-2019/
 

Had anyone ever noticed that Russell allowed himself to be identified as the "angel of Jehovah" here?
(1 Kings 19:7) 7 Later the angel of Jehovah came back a second time and touched him and said: “Get up and eat, for the journey will be too much for you.”
This was long before Russell had been identified (in print, at least) as the "angel" of the church at Laodicea, or "the seventh messenger."

You can also use this image to play "Where's Waldo?"

Good observation and reminder. I think it's always a good idea to keep in mind the "customs" and general attitude of society in times past when judging a situation from the the perspective of the present. It explains a lot of things. For example we can see why the organization was so weary of certain things in the past, which it now accepts. (organ transplants, vaccinations, cooking with aluminium etc.....etc...) We can also better understand things in the Bible, some of which might sound positively traumatic to the "modern" mind.

LOL! You are reverting to the habit Allen Smith was infamous for: trying to use a quotation to prove someone wrong, when that quotation fully supports what you are opposing. It seems like the problem with so many opposers is that they are so anxious to oppose that they are blind to the evidence in front of them, or they forget to look carefully at it.
You really should just take some time and try to deal with the evidence at hand. So far, you have answered none of the items of evidence raised. And so far, every bit of evidence you have produced is exactly in support of what I have been saying all along. I agree 100 percent with your evidence. As usual, it helps make the same points I already made.
In this case, of course, you are quoting from the letter from 1914 that Alex Evans (a "colored" brother from Louisiana) wrote to the St. Paul Enterprise newspaper, in defense of Russell personally holding the title of the "faithful and wise servant." It starts about a third of the way down into this link: https://web.archive.org/web/20160722143304/http://www.heraldmag.org/olb/contents/history/st paul defences.htm
And speaking of opposers, I notice that you have now, on multiple occasions, stated that you believe that Russell actually did hold the office of "faithful and discreet slave."
Can you explain why you think that Russell was the Faithful and Wise Servant when the Watchtower currently teaches that the slave did not come into existence until 1919 (well after Russell had died in 1916)?

...but the most amazing thing G. Washington ever did is arrange to get Barbara Bush's picture on the One Dollar Bill.
... just a little juxtaposition to balance out Billy's equally imaginative  post.
 

I know that George Washington used to sign his letters "Your  Most Humble Obedient Servant - G. Washington", which I suspect was understood as "... which you know damn well I am NOT!".
He also wore a white powdered wig, a lace "blouse" with lace around the cuffs, and skin-tight breeches that left no doubt to his gender.
He also carried a dagger, a sword, and a 55 caliber one shot pistol .... which if you dress like that, is probably a good idea!
 

It's easy to misunderstand Russell's position on this parable, but once you learn more about the historical context, it's easier. Above, you have highlighted "fellow-servants". This might imply to some that Russell did not see himself and as that individual servant. Note, though, that D613 is exactly the footnote that the "Divine Purpose" book gave earlier to show how the once-correct view gave way to seeing Russell himself as "that servant." It's called "D" of course, because D is the fourth letter of the alphabet and it's from Studies in the Scriptures Vol. 4, p.613.
A more careful reading shows that the reason Russell explained the "fellow-servants" was to show how these are plural and yet "that servant" is singular, which to him, he claimed, meant that only one individual would distribute to his fellow servants who would then pass it on to yet others --and therefore, those fellow servants were not the one specially-used individual called "the faithful and wise servant."
Using the current NWT, Russell's explanation was this:
(Matthew 24:45) 45 “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave [Charles Taze Russell, individual, singular] whom his master [Jesus Christ] appointed over his domestics, [fellow-servants, plural; fellow distributors of Watch Towers and Studies in the Scriptures books (Millennial Dawn books)], to give them their food at the proper time?
I'm sure you know that "gentlemen" of the 19th century were famous for "mock humility." It's part of what it meant to be of the "genteel" class, and even the Watch Tower itself praised Russell's "gentlemanly" character. I don't think Russell was exactly like this, but clearly, in keeping with the style of the times, Russell knew that it would not do to just crassly put his own name on this interpretation. A rule of the time was that you get others to praise you; it had to come from the mouth of other people. I don't know if Russell ever had to ask for it, but it was common in the 19th century for a speaker to write up a self-praising introduction about himself for another person to read when introducing him.
Sometimes this made for some "work-arounds" that appear kind of comical today. For example, from the same book you are quoting (Expanded Biblical Comments), we have this from the parallel parable in Luke:
[NTC - Luke 12:42]
. . .
Who then— . . . the Lord would appoint a servant in the household to bring these matters to the attention of all the servants. R3355:6, 2693:6
That faithful—. . .
Wise steward— . . . Not a composite steward, because we are not to recognize a . . . class; and the word "that". . .  implies a particular one. R3356:1 The angel of 1 Kings 19:7, the preparer of the Dawns and Towers. R4211:6*
Same story, here of course. Woodworth (this book was mostly his doing) had to work with contradictory material in using Russell's "Dawns and Towers," as the view had been adjusted in 1896. (Dawns=Millennial Dawn aka Studies in the Scriptures, and Towers=Zion's Watch Tower and later Watch Towers.)
But notice that the idea of ONE individual servant brings matters to the attention all the fellow servants, and it can't be a composite steward or "class" but a particular one. It doesn't name "Russell" but does mention the preparer of "Studies in the Scriptures" and the "Watch Tower." 
I wonder who that could be!

I am building my chicken coop and run as a fortress ... custom designed and built by me ... 100% enclosed, even the wire roof over the entire run, with six strand electric wire around the bottom, and I have already installed the brackets for the weathered wood sign which will read in black stenciled letters "STALAG 17".
If you have not seen the movie "Chicken Run", with the voice of Mel Gibson as the flying cartoon rooster trying to teach all the hens to fly and escape,, it is worth seeing.
That's where I got the idea about naming my Chicken Concentration Camp "Stalag 17".
A "multi-nested" inside joke.

We did this once in Missouri.
My mother actually bought about 48 eggs for incubation, and we mostly kept them on top of our "Warm Morning"TM wood stove when it was too cold, which we tried to keep adjusted to the right temperature. About half of the eggs were "duds," but the other half hatched into "furry" little yellow chicks and we gave them about half an acre for free-ranging. They grew up fending against a local fox we named Herod, and several snakes of various stripes that could always find a way into the chicken shed, mostly for eggs. The surviving hens often slept outside the shed, hopping their way up into a tall cedar tree, and would clumsily "fly" down in the morning (and would sometimes roll when they hit the ground). The roosters must have fought each other to the death because we ended up with only two surviving roosters who wouldn't go near each other. (Our dog would constantly get into fights with the roosters, who would always win by running around to the backside of the dog and pecking on sensitive exposed skin under his tail.)
Ultimately, after some of them had chicks of their own (somewhere outside the shed), we managed to maintain about 40 at all times, from about 1969 to 1975, with lots of eggs, and lots of noise. They were still there when we sold the house and property. For the last 7 years, we've had a green conure parrot.

I could have given them hundreds.  

I thought it was a good talk, TTH ... and you mentioned chickens , I think, FOUR times.
Since my wife bought 18 chickens, I am sensitive about such things .... they are as much fun to watch as parrots ($ 900 to $3,000 ) and the big plus is that chickens ( $1.00 to $1.50 ) do NOT talk.

I've learned it's never a good thing when I see more than 6 notifications, especially if I've been away only a few hours...

Talk: (5 min. or less) w04 5/1 19-20 ¶3-7—Theme: How Were Certain Christians “a Strengthening Aid” to Paul? (Col 4:11, ftn.) (th study 7)
“I know several people who rose in their employment far beyond what their qualifications and education would have seemed to permit. When I investigated, I found that it was because they had deliberately made themselves indispensable. 
“Aw, man, I can’t believe I left my parchments at my apartment,” someone would say. He (or she) would volunteer to get it. “Rats, I left my cloak in the car,” another would say. “I’ll get it,” was his reply.
Of course, those are Bible examples from 2 Tim 4:13, the gist of such will be revisited presently. What they would actually volunteer for is some pain-in-the-neck spreadsheet that had to be done but nobody wanted to do it.
So it is that five obscure characters rose in the ranks in the apostle Paul’s eyes. “Only these are my fellow workers,” he says of Tychicus, Onesimus, Aristarchus, Mark, and Justus, almost as though they formed a cabal. He describes them as a “strengthening aid” (“source of great comfort” - 2013 NWT) and the Greek root word is peregoria, used only once in scripture, which generally has medicinal connotations, hence the two acceptable renderings. Going back several decades, there was the English ‘peregoric,’ an over-the-counter medicine. It had opium in it. It was good for whatever ailed you.
Paul comes across as almost superhuman in his endurance—recall Mark Sanderson at the Gilead gradation referring to the list at 2 Corinthians 11:23 and observing that just one of those experiences would have floored most of us—yet he surely could have used “strengthening” from time to time. Like when enemies try to pin the charge of ‘sedition’ on him—as they did with Jesus—as they have done with Jehovah’s people today—and, far from according him respect as a driving force of an important religion, dismiss him as a “pest” promoting a “sect.” (Acts 24:5)
If someone is described that way—especially if they are under (house) arrest, as was Paul—there is a tendency to keep one’s distance, lest the unsavory accusations rub off. If someone is charged with sedition, you think twice before you say, “That’s my buddy!” If someone is written off as a “pest,” you show whose esteem you are trying to court by whether you identify with that person or not.
Similarly, “they will say every sort of [wicked] thing about you,” Jesus says of his disciples. And ‘if you see how they treat me, then you know how they will treat you.’ (Matthew 5:11, John 15:20) There is a tendency to back away from anyone of whom “every sort of wicked thing” is said, and these five cabal Christians would not do it. It is hard not to think of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Russia right now. As some are being led off to courts and imprisonment, after having personal property confiscated, their brothers, far from laying low, are publicly identifying with them. There is even a scene somewhere of the friends clapping in the aftermath of a trial, as the “guilty” member is being led away. It plays a little odd from a distance, but the idea is to recognize and support those keeping integrity under trial. It is hardly just Russia, however. Everywhere “every sort of wicked thing” is said about Christians, affording ones opportunity to gather round or distance themselves.
Qualifications were not unreachable for those whom Paul would later recognize as a “strengthening aid,” or “source of great comfort”—just stick with him under censure and don’t run like a chicken. One of them even DID run like a chicken at one time (arguably) —Mark, but he later got his act together and identified with Paul in hard times—so if we are chickens, there is yet hope.
The others: “Tychicus, my beloved brother and faithful minister and fellow slave in the Lord, will tell you all the news about me. I am sending him to you so that you will know how we are and that he may comfort your hearts. He is coming along with Onesimus, my faithful and beloved brother, who is from among you; they will tell you all the things happening here.Aristarchus, my fellow captive, sends you his greetings, and so does Mark, the cousin of Barʹna·bas (concerning whom you received instructions to welcome him if he comes to you), and Jesus who is called Justus, who are of those circumcised. Only these are my fellow workers for the Kingdom of God, and they have become a source of great comfort to me.” (Colossians 4:7-11)
Tychicus made himself a conduit and a go-for. Onesimus is the former slave that the educated Paul hung out with—probably freed at his request, since his owner had also become a Christian. Aristarchus—all that is known about him is that he was a jailbird with Paul, and incurred the same slander. Mark, as mentioned, is the reformed chicken. Justus—virtually nothing is known about him. These are not high-profile people and their high praise as Christians is not unreachable for anyone.”
That is how I ended the talk, by observing that anyone could attain that status and that I hoped to be described that way myself someday.

Good talk. I would have changed only . . . . oh, never mind. 😀

This brings to mind when Anna started complaining that I never upvoted anyone, so I searched through her comments and upvoted if she so much as sneezed. 
In no time at all, I had crashed her computer system.

There was absolutely no intent at being clever or sly on my part. But you really show your paranoia though. Attributing intent where there was none.

I can understand what Russell was saying. In his mind, he was probably thinking that he made the Bible more readable and understandable. And that as a result it would stick better in people’s minds. I feel his motive was genuine. But that does not mean that his statements were not presumptuous and dangerous. The danger is that as a result many will fixate themselves on every utterance of this “prophet” at the cost of actually checking the Bible itself. Not only that, but gradually people will take what this “prophet” says as gospel truth, no matter what it is, without checking or without a wait and see attitude. And this situation we find ourselves in today. I posted an example of the resulting hysteria above.

This is very true and there is a perfect example of how "obsessed" some can become. Just the other day I noticed a thread on a JW only chat forum, regarding the latest WT study articles (October 2019). There had been a glitch on the jw.library app and only the questions to the articles appeared. (It didn't help that some of those questions were quite provocative). The speculation among the friends was getting so out of hand, so much so that one brother was compelled to make this comment in answer to someone who intelligently remarked that this was obviously just a glitch:


It has to be remembered though that these 30 or so brothers and sisters who make batshit (pardon the expression) crazy comments do not necessarily represent the whole worldwide brotherhood, although maybe it could indicate that on average 2 out if 30 are reasonable, and it appears that 14 of them agreed with the ridiculousness of it once they actually thought about it, and 3 saw the funny side of it.
This whole thread showed how out of hand the friends get with their immature thinking because after the glitch was repaired, and the whole articles appeared, they carried on undeterred in their craziness!
P.S. The WT in question: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/watchtower-study-october-2019/